Search (22 results, page 1 of 2)

0.025868988 = product of:
  0.03880348 = sum of:
    0.015323205 = weight(_text_:information in 1384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015323205 = score(doc=1384,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1384, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1384)
    0.023480278 = product of:
      0.046960555 = sum of:
        0.046960555 = weight(_text_:systems in 1384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046960555 = score(doc=1384,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.29405114 = fieldWeight in 1384, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1384)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper studies knowledge organization (KO) in media archives, focusing on the presence of subjectivity in the core tasks of mass media knowledge organizers (MKOS) dealing with press, radio and TV records, such as classification, representation, and any other process related to content analysis and organization in news information systems. Far from rejecting subjectivity and ideological bias in these operations - since they coparticipate in the media construction of reality-the authors consider MKOS to be genuine ideological and cultural mediators with the right and social responsibility to explicitly state the results of their "objectifiable" work (obtained through KO protocols and procedures determined by the media/company, classifications, thesauri, ontologies, etc.) and differentiate them from those of their political, ideological, cultural and, in sum, subjective stances. In order to achieve this, we propose the application of critical operators that should be followed by technical, collaborative and even technological actions geared to investing information systems with the capacity to consider those stances and allowing users to distinguish them. In short, it is the theoretical recognition of the subjective and biased presence of media knowledge organization operators in a job that is usually considered neutral, banal and even objective, and the initial development of tools for critical, self-critical, technical, and technological training keyed to its practical solution. This paper outlines the lines of work of a broader research study on the critical function of KO in the field of global media memory.

0.025861707 = product of:
  0.038792558 = sum of:
    0.010616227 = weight(_text_:information in 1158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010616227 = score(doc=1158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1158, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1158)
    0.028176332 = product of:
      0.056352664 = sum of:
        0.056352664 = weight(_text_:systems in 1158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056352664 = score(doc=1158,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.35286134 = fieldWeight in 1158, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1158)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Acknowledging the importance of classification not only for library and information science but also for the study and mapping of the world phenomena, in this paper we revisit and systematize the main types of classifications and focus on the species of classification mainly drawing on the work of S. R. Ranganathan. We trace the evolution of library classification systems by their structures and modes of design of various shades of classification systems and make a comparative study of enumerative and faceted species of library classifications. The value of this paper is to have a picture of the whole spectrum of existing classifications, which may serve for the study of future developments and constructions of new systems. This paper updates previous works by Comaromi and Ranganathan and is also theoretically inspired by them.

0.02409055 = product of:
  0.036135826 = sum of:
    0.015013612 = weight(_text_:information in 2358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015013612 = score(doc=2358,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2358, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2358)
    0.021122215 = product of:
      0.04224443 = sum of:
        0.04224443 = weight(_text_:22 in 2358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04224443 = score(doc=2358,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2358, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2358)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

A naïve user seeking introductory information on a topic may perceive a domain as it is shown by the search results in a database; however, inconsistencies in indexing can misrepresent the full picture of the domain by including irrelevant documents or omitting relevant ones, sometimes inexplicably. A bibliometric analysis was conducted on the domain of ethics in knowledge organization in the World of Science (WoS) and Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA) databases to discern how it is being presented by search results in those databases and to attempt to determine why inconsistencies occurred.

Date

17. 2.2018 16:50:22

0.022414736 = product of:
  0.033622105 = sum of:
    0.010616227 = weight(_text_:information in 894) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010616227 = score(doc=894,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 894, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=894)
    0.023005879 = product of:
      0.046011757 = sum of:
        0.046011757 = weight(_text_:systems in 894) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046011757 = score(doc=894,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.28811008 = fieldWeight in 894, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=894)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Several authors emphasize the need for a change in classification theory due to the influence of a dogmatic and monistic ontology supported by an outdated essentialism. These claims tend to focus on the fallibility of knowledge, the need for a pluralistic view, and the theoretical burden of observations. Regardless of the legitimacy of these concerns, there is the risk, when not moderate, to fall into the opposite relativistic extreme. Based on a narrative review of the literature, we aim to reflectively discuss the theoretical foundations that can serve as a basis for a realist position supporting pluralistic ontological classifications. The goal is to show that, against rather conventional solutions, objective scientific-based approaches to natural classifications are presented to be viable, allowing a proper distinction between ontological and taxonomic questions. Supported by critical scientific realism, we consider that such an approach is suitable for the development of ontological Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS). We believe that ontological perspectivism can provide the necessary adaptation to the different granularities of reality.

Source

Journal of information science. 54(2023) no.x, S.xx-xx

0.022225678 = product of:
  0.033338517 = sum of:
    0.01978217 = weight(_text_:information in 85) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01978217 = score(doc=85,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 85, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=85)
    0.013556344 = product of:
      0.027112689 = sum of:
        0.027112689 = weight(_text_:systems in 85) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027112689 = score(doc=85,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 85, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=85)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In a new globalized scenario, the traditional activities of information organization agents in libraries have tended to converge with those from the book industry under the presumption that most traditional library practices are not adequate for the new globalized situation. This article analyzes the nature and consequences for libraries of the links between agents from the book industry and the organizations in charge of the main library information organization systems, both at an international level and in Spain. Some of the agents whose discourses were analyzed include OCLC, the UDC Consortium, BISG, BIC, EDItEUR, DILVE, Google and Amazon. We conclude that there is evidence of an incursion of book industry practices into the information organization practices of OCLC and that collaboration between both sectors will result in an increase in universality and homogenization in library information organization practices without consideration for the nature and specific characteristics of the library and how it differs from the bookstore.

0.021158962 = product of:
  0.03173844 = sum of:
    0.010616227 = weight(_text_:information in 1409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010616227 = score(doc=1409,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1409, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1409)
    0.021122215 = product of:
      0.04224443 = sum of:
        0.04224443 = weight(_text_:22 in 1409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04224443 = score(doc=1409,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1409, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1409)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The connection between epistemology, knowledge organization and the production/organization/use of knowledge is discussed in the context of the Digital Age and its media. The new characteristics of this new age and the conditions for the production/dissemination of knowledge contribute to the hegemony of the digital medium and the emergence of new epistemological changes that are also affecting knowledge organization and the construction of scientific knowledge. The new virtual realities are affecting/becoming the construction of the reality. In this new scenario full of new structures of information and knowledge to organize, dynamic organization models seem to be the best solution to avoid exclusions and invisibility, and to pursue a necessary model of integration and transculture.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.017632468 = product of:
  0.0264487 = sum of:
    0.008846856 = weight(_text_:information in 1410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008846856 = score(doc=1410,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1410, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1410)
    0.017601846 = product of:
      0.03520369 = sum of:
        0.03520369 = weight(_text_:22 in 1410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03520369 = score(doc=1410,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1819777 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1410, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1410)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper aims to study the conceptual dimension of Knowledge Organization (KO) in the ISKO proceedings (1990-2012) domain. After analyzing a corpus of 71 papers that presented the term "knowledge organization" in their titles, using the methodology of Bardin's content analysis, it was possible to obtain a set of 11 definitions of KO which were studied using the following categories: nature, object, tools, processes, and perspectives/approaches. These categories act as a basis to identify the communities of authors that interact in the domain under different conceptual perspectives. The results show that KO has been mainly understood as an area or field of knowledge whose objects are recorded knowledge and conceptual structures, and whose main processes are classification and indexing, as well as information retrieval. The nature of KO is mostly linked to the construction of specialized discourses and the methodological dimension of such area is related to the systematization of recorded scientific knowledge.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.012652587 = product of:
  0.03795776 = sum of:
    0.03795776 = product of:
      0.07591552 = sum of:
        0.07591552 = weight(_text_:systems in 5166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07591552 = score(doc=5166,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.47535738 = fieldWeight in 5166, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5166)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Knowledge organization systems have been studied in several fields and for different and complementary aspects. Among the aspects that concentrate common interests, in this article we highlight those related to the terminological and conceptual relationships among the components of any knowledge organization system. This research aims to contribute to the critical analysis of knowledge organization systems, especially ontologies, thesauri, and classification systems, by the comprehension of its similarities and differences when dealing with concepts and their ways of relating to each other as well as to the conceptual design that is adopted.

0.007077485 = product of:
  0.021232454 = sum of:
    0.021232454 = weight(_text_:information in 422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021232454 = score(doc=422,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 422, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=422)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The changing role of libraries demands examination of the impact of the 21st century book market. Traditionally, public libraries have provided access to information in a physical form, but the purpose of the library has remained unchanged, that of providing access to information for all users. The increasing emphasis on electronic collections has led librarians to consider the issues involved with electronic sources. Changes in the book market, including globalization and the inclusion of the ebook affect libraries in many ways. This paper will examine the effect of globalization on the library and its relationship with publishers and publisher groups.

Content

Beitrag aus einem Themenheft zu den Proceedings of the 2nd Milwaukee Conference on Ethics in Information Organization, June 15-16, 2012, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Hope A. Olson, Conference Chair. Vgl.: http://www.ergon-verlag.de/isko_ko/downloads/ko_39_2012_5_a.pdf.

0.0063262936 = product of:
  0.01897888 = sum of:
    0.01897888 = product of:
      0.03795776 = sum of:
        0.03795776 = weight(_text_:systems in 2823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03795776 = score(doc=2823,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 2823, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2823)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper focuses on the methodological configuration of critical theories in the knowledge organization domain. We present these critical theories as a response to the ethical problems that affect particular groups in universal classification systems. We analyze the epistemological stances and methodological implications of three instances of critical theories applied to knowledge organization. As a result, we present a framework of methodological dynamics composed of three steps: 1) aporetics; 2) theoretical framework; and 3) proposition. We conclude that certain epistemologies (such as pragmatism) present a more developed methodology according to this framework.

0.0054225377 = product of:
  0.016267613 = sum of:
    0.016267613 = product of:
      0.032535225 = sum of:
        0.032535225 = weight(_text_:systems in 832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032535225 = score(doc=832,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.159702 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 832, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=832)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In the context of Knowledge Organization (KO) the ontological focus is sometimes overlooked in studies related to the nature of the concept. This study presents an analysis with this purpose, questioning possible modes of existence of concepts (such as mental representations, cognitive abilities or abstract objects), framed in four different readings: a linguistic one, the psychological one, the epistemological one, and the ontological one; and focuses on the two first ones. The suitability of using the concept as an elementary unit of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) is analyzed according to the different perspectives. From a mental entity, passing to another one that exists in a non-mental realm, although also non-physical, moving on to another one with an objective linguistic existence.

0.0050045373 = product of:
  0.015013612 = sum of:
    0.015013612 = weight(_text_:information in 2372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015013612 = score(doc=2372,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2372, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2372)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Global and Local Knowledge Organization conference was held in Copenhagen, Denmark, on August 12, 2015. This one-day conference was chaired by Jens-Erik Mai, University of Copenhagen, Denmark, and coorganized by members from four other countries: José Augusto Chaves Guimarães (São Paulo State University (UNESP), Brazil), Sam Oh (Sungkyunkwan University, Korea), Shigeo Sugimoto (University of Tsukuba, Japan), and Joseph T. Tennis (University of Washington, United States). Delegates from these and other countries (including registered participants from Italy, Sweden and United Kingdom, and distinguished professors such as Richard P. Smiraglia and Birger Hjørland among others) engaged in fruitful conversations on the tension between the global information structures and the meaning and ethics of information in localized contexts, as well as the tension between global and local knowledge organization.

0.0047183232 = product of:
  0.01415497 = sum of:
    0.01415497 = weight(_text_:information in 4704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01415497 = score(doc=4704,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4704, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4704)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira

0.0047183232 = product of:
  0.01415497 = sum of:
    0.01415497 = weight(_text_:information in 4753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01415497 = score(doc=4753,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4753, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4753)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira

0.0047183232 = product of:
  0.01415497 = sum of:
    0.01415497 = weight(_text_:information in 4781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01415497 = score(doc=4781,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4781, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4781)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira

0.004170448 = product of:
  0.012511344 = sum of:
    0.012511344 = weight(_text_:information in 5457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012511344 = score(doc=5457,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5457, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5457)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss the literature on concept theory in library and information science (LIS) from an epistemological perspective, ascribing each paper to an epistemological family and discussing their relevance in the context of the knowledge organization (KO) domain. Design/methodology/approach This paper adopts a hermeneutic approach for the analysis of the texts that compose the corpus of study following contingency and categorical analyses. More specifically, the paper works with Bardin's contingency analysis and follows Hjørland's families of epistemologies for the categorization. Findings The analysis corroborates the observations made for the last ten years about the scarcity of studies on concept theory in LIS and KO. However, the study also reveals an epistemological turn on concept theory since 2009 that could be considered a departure from the rationalist views that dominated the field and a continuation of a broader paradigm shift in LIS and KO. All analyzed papers except two follow pragmatist or historicist approaches. Originality/value This paper follows-up and systematizes the contributions to the LIS and KO fields on concept theory mainly during the last decade. The epistemological analysis reveals the dominant views in this paradigm shift and the main authors and trends that are present in the LIS literature on concept theory.

0.0035387424 = product of:
  0.010616227 = sum of:
    0.010616227 = weight(_text_:information in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010616227 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

After two decades in the 21st Century, and despite all the advances in the area, some very important names from past centuries still do not have the recognition they deserve in the global history of library and information science and, specifically, of knowledge organization. Although acknowledged in British librarianship, the name of James Duff Brown (1862-1914) still does not have a proper recognition on a global scale. His contributions to a free and more democratic library had a prominent place in the works and projects he developed during his time at the libraries of Clerkenwell and Islington in London. Free access to the library shelves, an architecture centered on books and people, and classifications that are more dynamic were dreams fulfilled by Brown. With this biographical article, we hope to live up to his legacy and pay homage to a true librarian and an advocate of the public library and subject classification.

0.0035387424 = product of:
  0.010616227 = sum of:
    0.010616227 = weight(_text_:information in 1132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010616227 = score(doc=1132,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1132, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1132)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenheftes: 4th International Conference on the Ethics of Information and Knowledge Organization, June 8-9, University of Lille, France.

0.0023591616 = product of:
  0.007077485 = sum of:
    0.007077485 = weight(_text_:information in 2321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007077485 = score(doc=2321,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 2321, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2321)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss and shed light on the following questions: What is an author? Is it a person who writes? Or, is it, in information, an iconic taxonomic designation (some might say a "classification") for a group of writings that are recognized by the public in some particular way? What does it mean when a search engine, or catalog, asks a user to enter the name of an author? And how does that accord with the manner in which the data have been entered in association with the names of the entities identified with the concept of authorship? Design/methodology/approach - The authors use several cases as bases of phenomenological discourse analysis, combining as best the authors can components of eidetic bracketing (a Husserlian technique for isolating noetic reduction) with Foucauldian discourse analysis. The two approaches are not sympathetic or together cogent, so the authors present them instead as alternative explanations alongside empirical evidence. In this way the authors are able to isolate components of iconic "authorship" and then subsequently engage them in discourse. Findings - An "author" is an iconic name associated with a class of works. An "author" is a role in public discourse between a set of works and the culture that consumes them. An "author" is a role in cultural sublimation, or a power broker in deabstemiation. An "author" is last, if ever, a person responsible for the intellectual content of a published work. The library catalog's attribution of "author" is at odds with the Foucauldian discursive comprehension of the role of an "author." Originality/value - One of the main assets of this paper is the combination of Foucauldian discourse analysis with phenomenological analysis for the study of the "author." The authors turned to Foucauldian discourse analysis to discover the loci of power in the interactions of the public with the named authorial entities. The authors also looked to phenomenological analysis to consider the lived experience of users who encounter the same named authorial entities. The study of the "author" in this combined way facilitated the revelation of new aspects of the role of authorship in search engines and library catalogs.

0.0023591616 = product of:
  0.007077485 = sum of:
    0.007077485 = weight(_text_:information in 3873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007077485 = score(doc=3873,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051966466 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 3873, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3873)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper uses Hope Olson's concept of "the power to name" to explore the terminological practices of the LGBTQ community in the Cariri region of Brazil in the years between 2006 and 2013. LGBTQ communities can seize back the "power to name," traditionally exerted by a heteronormative society upon marginalized groups, by organizing their cultural and practical knowledge from within, and by exercising the power to name themselves and their specific domains and cultural practices. The study showed that knowledge organization - the act of defining entities and categories and assigning specific names to them - is a gesture of self-empowerment on many different levels. The "power of self-naming" in this LGBTQ community is a polyhedron in which some facets are frequent, such as the power to empower or affirm an identity. On the one hand, the names and categories break through gender, geographical and temporal specificity to embrace terms, names, and idioms drawn from a range of different countries, traditions, languages, and time periods. On the other hand, these names and categories work to reinforce and affirm the geographical and cultural specificity of the Cariri region itself, embedding its pride and self-affirmation within the varied languages and heteronormative history of Portuguese colonization in that region. In selecting terms and categories to name, organize and celebrate their identities, the LGBTQ people of Cariri have taken the power to name: not as information intermediaries striving for objectivity and neutrality, but as committed members of a marginalized but vital community.