Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.017909043 = product of:
  0.035818085 = sum of:
    0.035818085 = sum of:
      0.01838175 = weight(_text_:p in 69) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.01838175 = score(doc=69,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045500398 = queryNorm
          0.11235977 = fieldWeight in 69, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=69)
      0.017436337 = weight(_text_:22 in 69) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.017436337 = score(doc=69,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045500398 = queryNorm
          0.109432176 = fieldWeight in 69, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=69)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

327.12 22

DDC

327.12 22

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 58(2007) no.2, S.303-305 (L. Hayden): "Part history and part call to action, Covert and Overt examines the relationship between the disciplines of intelligence service and information science. The book is significant in that it captures both the rich history of partnership between the fields, and because it demonstrates clearly the incomplete nature of our understanding of that partnership. In the post-9/11 world, such understanding is increasingly important, as we struggle with the problem of transforming information into intelligence and intelligence into effective policy. Information science has an important role to play in meeting these challenges, but the sometimesambiguous nature of the field combined with similar uncertainties over what constitutes intelligence, makes any attempt at definitive answers problematic. The book is a collection of works from different contributors, in the words of one editor "not so much a created work as an aggregation" (p. 1). More than just an edited collection of papers, the book draws from the personal experiences of several prominent information scientists who also served as intelligence professionals from World War II onward. The result is a book that feels very personal and at times impassioned. The contributors attempt to shed light on an often-closed community of practice, a discipline that depends simultaneously on access to information and on secrecy. Intelligence, like information science, is also a discipline that finds itself increasingly attracted to and dependent upon technology, and an underlying question of the book is where and how technology benefits intelligence (as opposed to only masking more fundamental problems of process and analysis and providing little or no actual value).
This book is a successful and realistic examination of the current state of inquiry into the relationship between intelligence and information science, and does not flinch from the limits of this inquiry to date. The book can be viewed as a deliberate attempt to stimulate further interest in these studies, and serves as an excellent roadmap for future researchers (like this reviewer) who also have moved from intelligence service into information science. Many of the stories and studies in the book could easily provide fresh and vital avenues of research to new and veteran scholars. If there are limitations to the impact of the book, most must be viewed in the context of the lack of literature from which to draw. Contributions come from a variety of sources and although some new studies are included, for the most part, the chapters are not original to this publication. This results at times in a sense of the editors taking what they could get on the topic. The reader must determine whether this is viewed as a flaw or as reinforcement of the editors' conclusion that more research into the subject matter is important and necessary. It becomes a question of whether or not one wishes to answer the call. One interesting limitation, however, is the lack of a critical stance on the part of most of the contributors. The chapters tend to describe the relationship between intelligence and information science, but few question the nature of that relationship, the social construction of the two disciplines, or moral and ethical concerns associated with spying and information operations. In general, a reader is left with the impression that intelligence service is a good thing, and that information science as a discipline can both improve it as well as learn from it. Little insight is offered into the value and direction of intelligence in the 21 st century, or the impact that our technologies may have. One exception comes from Colin Burke who, in his chapter, "Intelligence Agencies, Librarians, and Information Scientists," touches on some of these issues with his claim that library and information science practitioners must "help bring the information advances from the intelligence communities to an industry that can be committed to distributing information at the lowest cost to the most people" (p. 112). Nevertheless, no serious questions regarding issues of control, power, or resistance are raised. Given recent debates over surveillance, privacy, and the erosion of civil liberties in the wake of 9-11, it would seem that this is an area of intelligence and information studies that also deserves attention. Covert and Overt is an excellent historical overview of the close relationship between intelligence and information science. The book is also intriguing and timely in its argument for further research and study into these areas. Despite the limitations of subject matter and the challenges that come with the disciplines that it explores, it is required reading for practitioners in either world who wish to gain a greater understanding of the operations of the other."

0.0070352983 = product of:
  0.014070597 = sum of:
    0.014070597 = product of:
      0.028141193 = sum of:
        0.028141193 = weight(_text_:p in 577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028141193 = score(doc=577,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.17201507 = fieldWeight in 577, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=577)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Angesichts des skizzierten Umbruchs kann HIB wohl akzeptiert werden, doch ist es - wie dieses Buch zu suggerieren trachtet - wirklich notwendig, daneben auch noch IBEC (information behaviour in everyday contexts), ELIS (everyday life information seeking), HIOB (human information organizing behaviour), CIB (collaborative information behaviour), CIS&R (collaborative information seeking & retrieval) und HICB (human information co-ordinating behaviour) zu verwenden? Wohl kaum, doch wer wird bzw. kann ein solches Spamming verhindern? Würde der akademische Ernst nicht jede Schadenfreude verbieten, so könnte man konstatieren, dass diese Akronymenflut zu unnötigen Druckfehlern führt (z.B. p.172, wo sogar in einer Zwischenüberschrift "HIBO" statt "HIOB" zu lesen ist). In herausgeberischer Hinsicht ist weiter zu bemängeln, dass die meist ansehnlichen und sich naheliegenderweise zum Teil überschneidenden Literaturverzeichnisse der einzelnen Beiträge besser in einer Gesamtbibliographie mit konsistentem Zitierstil zu vereinen gewesen wären, zumal sie in der vorliegenden Form auch etwas inkonsistent und nicht fehlerfrei sind. In diese Richtung zu investieren wäre sinnvoller gewesen als in die Erstellung eines geradezu erbärmlichen Sachregisters (dessen Verriss den Rahmen dieser Besprechung sprengen würde), welches auf Herausgeber bzw. Lektorat - falls es letzteres überhaupt noch gibt - ein eher fahles Licht wirft. Abgesehen davon fielen mir nur einige fehlerhafte bzw. unvollständige Angaben der Institutszugehörigkeiten am Beginn der einzelnen Kapitel (z.B. p.113, p.203) sowie die nicht ganz homogen gestalteten Kurzbiographien der Verfasser/innen am Ende des Buches auf. Der Band selbst ist von gewohnt solider Springer-Machart und zielt schon aufgrund seines hohen Preis wohl nur auf institutionelle Käufer ab."

0.00649893 = product of:
  0.01299786 = sum of:
    0.01299786 = product of:
      0.02599572 = sum of:
        0.02599572 = weight(_text_:p in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02599572 = score(doc=439,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.15890071 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST. 58(2007) no.4, S.606-607 (L.E. Harris): "Spanning is not a methodological "how-to"; rather it is a "how-tothink" book, intended for academicians and practitioners, on developing useful theory. Each chapter opens with a brief scenario, generally derived from Crowley's extensive personal experience as a librarian, university professor, and consultant, exemplifying the theme for that chapter. In chapter one, "Theorizing for Diverging Contexts: Why Research Results and Theory Development are So Little Used Outside the Campus," Crowley describes a doctoral candidate's experience in presenting her research at a national conference of working professionals. When the presentation is negatively received, the student's mentor rationalized the response by stating, "You have to remember, most of the people in the audience only have a master's degree" (p. 2). From this example, a cogent argument is distilled on how pervasive the theorypractice divide is in various academic domains, such as business, law, sociology, and LIS. What is useful research and theory for academicians seeking career and professional advancement does not translate into for practitioners engaged in specific institutional/organizational environments. Cultural pragmatism is introduced as an aid to researchers in both camps for its inclusion of context specificity and the need for testing a theory's usefulness through continually analyzed experience. Herein, the structural foundation for the bridge is constructed in the section on communication. The development of an interlanguage between academicians and practitioners will minimize incommensurability, "the perceived inability of humans to communicate effectively with one another due to a lack of common standards for meaning and other shared foundations" (p. 15). In this vein, Crowley presents five maxims, based on the works of John Stuart Mill, for developing useful, real world theory. The chapter ends, as do several others, addressing the divide specifically in the LIS domain. One of the most thought-provoking chapters is "Developing a Research Philosophy," which includes sections on inductive reasoning, how people really think, and a discussion of the battle between intellectual formations and internalized models. As a teacher of experienced and/or mature students in an LIS program, I instantly recognized the description of a reoccurring classroom event: what happens when introducing theory or research results that contradict students' experiences, and therefore, their internalized models of "how things really work in the field." Crowley suggests that in seeking a research philosophy, persuasion should not be a primary concern. This simple suggestion encouraged me to reconsider my posture when faced with this classroom issue. However, this chapter may be considered one of the weakest in the book, because of its rather slim treatment of considerations for selecting a useful research philosophy, despite the emphasis on the importance of the concept. Nevertheless, this chapter is foundational to the work presented in the remaining chapters.
In "The Revival of Pragmatism," the distinction between theory (how things work) and paradigm (how we look at the world) forms the basis for the exposition on competing paradigms. From Kuhn's traditional scientific paradigm (empiricism) to classical pragmatism, to the variants of modernism, specifically critical theory and feminism, the ability of cultural pragmatism to bridge the divide is promoted. The twelve core assertions and the role of religious beliefs in the creation of classical pragmatism are surely the stuff of which debates are made. While I was readily able to accept the first ten assertions, the eleventh ("Humans have the most opportunity to develop their capabilities in a democracy.") and twelfth ("Scientific and other knowledge progresses best in a democratic context that encourages freedom of inquiry.") certainly gave me pause (p. 60). Even Crowley admits, later in the text, that these two assertions may not be verifiable and indeed may conflict with the principle of freedom in research. In defining the applicability of cultural pragmatism to bridging the theory-practice gap, Crowley relates John Dewey's desire to rename his Experience and Nature to read Culture and Nature as a tribute to the power of readers' ability to understand the meaning of culture versus experience. Drawing on the work of Charles Sanders Peirce, cultural pragmatism treats "truth" as agreed-upon opinion, which is therefore continually tested and revised. The concepts of interlanguage and incommensurability are revisited, as they apply to the need to transcend cultural norms and create cross-cultural understandings. The increased complexity of modern work, partially related to the pervasiveness of technology, is established as an obvious factor. As a result, the validity and reliability of generalizing in a global environment is called into question. Cultural pragmatism does not demand an adherence to an objective reality. "For pragmatism, cultural complexity can be an intellectual positive, offering a seemingly endless source of remarkably interesting research questions" (p. 82). This chapter is highly recommended for LIS professionals interested in a brief yet coherent overview of the prevailing paradigms discussed and utilized in the field, as well as those who like to stir up lively discussions. A description of how the Maryland Division of Library Developments improved reference service by turning tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge opens the next chapter, "Tacit Knowledge: Bridging the Theory-Practice Divide." This example illustrates concretely the impact of an interlanguage on communication effectiveness within a library setting and as part of a research project. The role of time in the transformation of tacit into explicit knowledge, however, is apparent yet not fully explored. In this chapter, Crowley directly addresses the "how-to-think" issues and the role of a research philosophy as structural components of the bridge. Tacit knowledge becomes an integral component which researchers must recognize if they are to construct useful research and theory. The discussion of Georg Simmel's stranger as an analytical tool, however, seemed out of place.

0.00649893 = product of:
  0.01299786 = sum of:
    0.01299786 = product of:
      0.02599572 = sum of:
        0.02599572 = weight(_text_:p in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02599572 = score(doc=1639,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.15890071 = fieldWeight in 1639, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1639)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.006164676 = product of:
  0.012329352 = sum of:
    0.012329352 = product of:
      0.024658704 = sum of:
        0.024658704 = weight(_text_:22 in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024658704 = score(doc=566,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Section 1 Context and purpose of knowledge architecture -- 1 Making the case for knowledge architecture -- 2 The landscape of knowledge assets -- 3 Knowledge architecture and design -- 4 Knowledge architecture reference model -- 5 Knowledge architecture segments -- Section 2 Designing for availability -- 6 Knowledge object modeling -- 7 Knowledge structures for encoding, formatting, and packaging -- 8 Functional architecture for identification and distinction -- 9 Functional architectures for knowledge asset disposition and destruction -- 10 Functional architecture designs for knowledge preservation and conservation -- Section 3 Designing for accessibility -- 11 Functional architectures for knowledge seeking and discovery -- 12 Functional architecture for knowledge search -- 13 Functional architecture for knowledge categorization -- 14 Functional architectures for indexing and keywording -- 15 Functional architecture for knowledge semantics -- 16 Functional architecture for knowledge abstraction and surrogation -- Section 4 Functional architectures to support knowledge consumption -- 17 Functional architecture for knowledge augmentation, derivation, and synthesis -- 18 Functional architecture to manage risk and harm -- 19 Functional architectures for knowledge authentication and provenance -- 20 Functional architectures for securing knowledge assets -- 21 Functional architectures for authorization and asset management -- Section 5 Pulling it all together - the big picture knowledge architecture -- 22 Functional architecture for knowledge metadata and metainformation -- 23 The whole knowledge architecture - pulling it all together

0.004061831 = product of:
  0.008123662 = sum of:
    0.008123662 = product of:
      0.016247325 = sum of:
        0.016247325 = weight(_text_:p in 438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016247325 = score(doc=438,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.099312946 = fieldWeight in 438, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=438)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Like Daniel Bell, the author of The Coming of Post-Industrial Society (1973), who used aspects of Marx's thinking as the basis for his social forecasting models, Warner uses Marxist thought as a tool for social and historical analysis. Unlike Bell, Warner's approach to Marx tends to be doctrinaire. As a result, "An Information View of History" and "Origins of the Human Brain," two of the essays in which Warner sets out to establish the connections between information science and information technology, are less successful. Warner argues, "the classic source for an understanding of technology as a human construction is Marx," and that "a Marxian perspective an information technology could be of high marginal Utility," noting additionally that with the exception of Norbert Wiener and John Desmond Bernal, "there has only been a limited penetration of Marxism into information science" (p. 9). But Warner's efforts to persuade the reader that these views are cogent never go beyond academic protocol. Nor does his support for the assertion that the second half of the 19th century was the critical period for innovation and diffusion of modern information technologies. The closing essay, "Whither Information Science?" is particularly disappointing, in part, because the preface and opening chapters of the book promised more than was delivered at the end. Warner asserts that the theoretical framework supporting information science is negligible, and that the discipline is limited even further by the fact that many of its members do not recognize or understand the effects of such a limitation. However cogent the charges may be, none of this is news. But the essay fails most notably because Warner does not have any new directions to offer, save that information scientists should pay closer artention to what is going an in allied disciplines. Moreover, he does not seem to understand that at its heart the "information revolution" is not about the machines, but about the growing legions of men and women who can and do write programming code to exert control over and find new uses for these devices. Nor does he seem to understand that information science, in the grip of what he terms a "quasi-global crisis," suffers grievously because it is a community situated not at the center but rather an the periphery of this revolution."