Search (75 results, page 1 of 4)

0.12262751 = product of:
  0.24525502 = sum of:
    0.061313756 = product of:
      0.18394126 = sum of:
        0.18394126 = weight(_text_:3a in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18394126 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3927445 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.18394126 = weight(_text_:2f in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18394126 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3927445 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Politische Meinung. 381(2001) Nr.1, S.65-74 [https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dgfe.de%2Ffileadmin%2FOrdnerRedakteure%2FSektionen%2FSek02_AEW%2FKWF%2FPublikationen_Reihe_1989-2003%2FBand_17%2FBd_17_1994_355-406_A.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2KcbRsHy5UQ9QRIUyuOLNi]

0.10315709 = product of:
  0.20631418 = sum of:
    0.16195239 = weight(_text_:social in 703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16195239 = score(doc=703,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.87672204 = fieldWeight in 703, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=703)
    0.04436178 = product of:
      0.08872356 = sum of:
        0.08872356 = weight(_text_:aspects in 703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08872356 = score(doc=703,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.42373765 = fieldWeight in 703, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=703)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper introduces the concept of 'social quality' as a measure of quality-of-life and it sets out a framework for identifying social indicators of the relationship between information and social quality. Social quality has four elements: socio - economic security, social inclusion, social cohesion and empowerment. Illustrative indicators are identified at both national (Demos) and community (Ethnos) level for four different aspects of each social quality element: input, process, outcome and impact. Then the distribution of information and social quality between Demos and Ethnos levels is investigated. It is concluded that usable indicators of all aspects of each element of social quality can be identified and that analysis of informational social quality at Demos and Ethnos level can add to knowledge about information provision and policy, particularly with reference to minority and marginal communities.

0.09021294 = product of:
  0.18042588 = sum of:
    0.13021462 = weight(_text_:social in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13021462 = score(doc=4368,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.704911 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
    0.050211266 = product of:
      0.10042253 = sum of:
        0.10042253 = weight(_text_:22 in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10042253 = score(doc=4368,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

13. 7.2008 19:22:28

0.06290762 = product of:
  0.12581524 = sum of:
    0.099674806 = weight(_text_:social in 1896) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.099674806 = score(doc=1896,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.5395851 = fieldWeight in 1896, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1896)
    0.026140431 = product of:
      0.052280862 = sum of:
        0.052280862 = weight(_text_:aspects in 1896) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052280862 = score(doc=1896,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 1896, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1896)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to understand the information phenomenon through the means of informational practice - the way of acting that gives identity to a group - in a social field and knowledge domain. Design/methodology/approach - By relating Pierre Bourdieu's sociology of culture to the domain analysis approach of Birger Hjørland, the intention was to achieve a comprehensive interpretation of the structure which generates the discourse communities and, also, of the social structure from which they are derived. All of these form the conditions for understanding the efforts, objectives and interests of the actors in the social field that causes them to develop determined informational practices. The field of architecture was elected for analysis. Findings - The conclusions show that both the products and subjects of a domain of knowledge, inserted in social fields, are expressions of their informational practice. Research limitations/implications - The authors believe the theoretical model based on Bourdieu and Hjørland's concepts, here built to analyze the architecture domain, may be used to analyze other domains. Originality/value - Domain analysis is employed as an approach to the study of the information aspects but here supported by the sociological concepts of Bourdieu. Thus, it is possible to understand what, how and why the informational practices are constituted inside a domain of knowledge, and, fundamentally, interpret the historical, cultural, and social dimensions that influence the construction of information.

0.044017762 = product of:
  0.088035524 = sum of:
    0.05696889 = weight(_text_:social in 2746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05696889 = score(doc=2746,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 2746, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2746)
    0.031066636 = product of:
      0.06213327 = sum of:
        0.06213327 = weight(_text_:22 in 2746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06213327 = score(doc=2746,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 2746, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2746)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Fundamental forms of information, as well as the term information itself, are defined and developed for the purposes of information science/studies. Concepts of natural and represented information (taking an unconventional sense of representation), encoded and embodied information, as well as experienced, enacted, expressed, embedded, recorded, and trace information are elaborated. The utility of these terms for the discipline is illustrated with examples from the study of information-seeking behavior and of information genres. Distinctions between the information and curatorial sciences with respect to their social (and informational) objects of study are briefly outlined.

Date

22. 3.2009 18:15:22

0.043009825 = product of:
  0.08601965 = sum of:
    0.06510731 = weight(_text_:social in 4320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06510731 = score(doc=4320,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.3524555 = fieldWeight in 4320, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4320)
    0.020912344 = product of:
      0.041824687 = sum of:
        0.041824687 = weight(_text_:aspects in 4320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041824687 = score(doc=4320,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.19975184 = fieldWeight in 4320, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4320)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

"Information Literacy lies at the core of lifelong learning. It empowers people in all walks of life to seek, evaluate, use and create information effectively to achieve their personal, social, occupational and educational goals. It is a basic human right in a digital world and promotes social inclusion of all nations. Lifelong learning enables individuals, communities and nations to attain their goals and to take advantage of emerging opportunities in the evolving global environment for shared benefit. It assists them and their institutions to meet technological, economic and social challenges, to redress disadvantage and to advance the well being of all.
Information literacy - comprises the competencies to recognize information needs and to locate, evaluate, apply and create information within cultural and social contexts; - is crucial to the competitive advantage of individuals, enterprises (especially small and medium enterprises), regions and nations; - provides the key to effective access, use and creation of content to support economic development, education, health and human services, and all other aspects of contemporary societies, and thereby provides the vital foundation for fulfilling the goals of the Millennium Declaration and the World Summit on the Information Society; and - extends beyond current technologies to encompass learning, critical thinking and interpretative skills across professional boundaries and empowers individuals and communities. Within the context of the developing Information Society, we urge governments and intergovernmental organizations to pursue policies and programs to promote information literacy and lifelong learning. In particular, we ask them to support. ..."

0.042979553 = product of:
  0.08595911 = sum of:
    0.056384586 = weight(_text_:social in 838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056384586 = score(doc=838,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.30523545 = fieldWeight in 838, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=838)
    0.029574523 = product of:
      0.059149045 = sum of:
        0.059149045 = weight(_text_:aspects in 838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059149045 = score(doc=838,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.28249177 = fieldWeight in 838, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=838)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

As an answer to the humanistic, socially oriented critique of the information-processing paradigms used as a conceptual frame for library information science, this article formulates a broader and less objective concept of communication than that of the information-processing paradigm. Knowledge can be seen as the mental phenomenon that documents (combining signs into text, depending on the state of knowledge of the recipient) can cause through interpretation. The examination of these "correct circumstances" is an important part of information science. This article represents the following developments in the concept of information: Information is understood as potential until somebody interprets it. The objective carriers of potential knowledge are signs. Signs need interpretation to release knowledge in the form of interpretants. Interpretation is based on the total semantic network, horizons, worldviews, and experience of the person, including the emotional and social aspects. The realm of meaning is rooted in social-historical as well as embodied evolutionary processes that go beyond computational algorithmically logic. The semantic network derives a decisive aspect of signification from a person's embodied cultural worldview, which, in turn, derives from, develops, and has its roots in undefined tacit knowledge. To theoretically encompass both the computational and the semantic aspects of document classification and retrieval, we need to combine the cybernetic functionalistic approach with the semiotic pragmatic understanding of meaning as social and embodied. For such a marriage, it is necessary to go into the constructivistic second-order cybernetics and autopoiesis theory of von Foerster, Maturana, and Luhmann, on the one hand, and the pragmatic triadic semiotics of Peirce in the form of the embodied Biosemiotics, on the other hand. This combination is what I call Cybersemiotics.

0.039468158 = product of:
  0.078936316 = sum of:
    0.05696889 = weight(_text_:social in 2790) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05696889 = score(doc=2790,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 2790, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2790)
    0.021967428 = product of:
      0.043934856 = sum of:
        0.043934856 = weight(_text_:22 in 2790) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043934856 = score(doc=2790,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2790, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2790)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Survivors of intimate partner violence face more than information gaps; many face powerful barriers in the form of information myths. Triangulating data from in-depth interviews and community bulletin board postings, this study incorporates insights from survivors, police, and shelter staff to begin mapping the information landscape through which survivors move. An unanticipated feature of that landscape is a set of 28 compelling information myths that prevent some survivors from making effective use of the social, legal, economic, and support resources available to them. This analysis of the sources, contexts, and consequences of these information myths is the first step in devising strategies to counter their ill effects.

Date

22. 3.2009 19:16:44

0.037068475 = product of:
  0.07413695 = sum of:
    0.056384586 = weight(_text_:social in 3012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056384586 = score(doc=3012,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.30523545 = fieldWeight in 3012, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3012)
    0.017752362 = product of:
      0.035504725 = sum of:
        0.035504725 = weight(_text_:22 in 3012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035504725 = score(doc=3012,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.21886435 = fieldWeight in 3012, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3012)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

When we were all facing the turn of the century and the somewhat larger turn of the millennium, we left behind epochs of colonialism, imperialism, capitalism, nazism and racialism. Not that the ideologies mentioned does no longer exist, but their impact as grand narratives has gone and they now exist as fragmented discursive parts of their former, illusive hegemony. Parts that have been thrown into the pits of post modern complexity. The 21st century holds no answers, no new meaning, at most it provides human communication a certain self reflectivity due to the increasing egocentrism and individuality of people (i.e. still mostly western people). Another symptom of the loss of grand narratives is a feeling of loss of meaning in everyday life, as well as the state of democracies around the world. Democracy shivers in its void between anarchy and repressive dictatorship. The description 'information age' provides the times we are in with a useful sticker. It tents both back in time e.g. the late 20, century digitalisation and forward in time by givingr origin to the contemporary discourse of social semantics i.e. Dream society, Knowledge society, Post modern society, Risk society, Hypercomplex society etc. The phrase 'information age' implied the introduction of a paradigm shift, and now it is still here showing that paradigms do not shift, they slide. This paper outlines a manifest for librarians and librarianship of the information age. The information age puts the spotlight on the librarian, both regarding classical tasks such as classification and cataloguing as well as new tasks such as systems analysis and design or database searching.
Complexity establishes a paradox between the tasks of preserving old knowledge (memory function) and facilitate cognitive dissonance in order to challenge established knowledge claims and create new knowledge (catalyser function). Through complexity all social systems organisations, discourse communities, ideologies) face an environment (or surrounding) that is characterised through its instability and contingency. What is real, or presumable real from one point of view can appear completely different from another point of view. Different discourses of meaning and significance float, blend and separates themselves form each other the arena of communication. The library has to both keep record of what has happened, as well as take part in the ongoing battles for new discursive hegemonies. The unity of the paradox of memory and catalysing is described as managing complexity and requires a conscious and constant oscillation between order and chaos, stability and change. The role of the librarian is defined through an analysis of contemporary social semantics as well as the technical, ethical, cultural and epistemological challenges facing us as librarians and information specialists.

Date

22. 7.2009 11:23:22

0.033829853 = product of:
  0.067659706 = sum of:
    0.04883048 = weight(_text_:social in 479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04883048 = score(doc=479,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.26434162 = fieldWeight in 479, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=479)
    0.018829225 = product of:
      0.03765845 = sum of:
        0.03765845 = weight(_text_:22 in 479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03765845 = score(doc=479,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 479, 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=479)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Anthropological inquiry suggests that all societies classify animals and plants in similar ways. Paradoxically, in the same cultures that have seen large advances in biological science, citizenry's practical knowledge of nature has dramatically diminished. Here we describe historical, cross-cultural and developmental research on how people ordinarily conceptualize organic nature (folkbiology), concentrating on cognitive consequences associated with knowledge devolution. We show that results on psychological studies of categorization and reasoning from "standard populations" fail to generalize to humanity at large. Usual populations (Euro-American college students) have impoverished experience with nature, which yields misleading results about knowledge acquisition and the ontogenetic relationship between folkbiology and folkpsychology. We also show that groups living in the same habitat can manifest strikingly distinct behaviors, cognitions and social relations relative to it. This has novel implications for environmental decision making and management, including commons problems.

Date

23. 1.2022 10:22:18

0.033475082 = product of:
  0.066950165 = sum of:
    0.04603782 = weight(_text_:social in 2968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04603782 = score(doc=2968,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.24922368 = fieldWeight in 2968, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2968)
    0.020912344 = product of:
      0.041824687 = sum of:
        0.041824687 = weight(_text_:aspects in 2968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041824687 = score(doc=2968,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.19975184 = fieldWeight in 2968, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2968)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Die Informationswissenschaft, die sich am klarsten über ihren Informationsbegriff von ihren Nachbardisziplinen absetzt, ist ausgehend von der Zeit ihrer fruchtbarsten Definitionsphase in den siebziger und achtziger Jahren eng mit den Sozialwissenschaften verbunden. Welches ihr Anteil an der Informationswissenschaft ist, und - umgekehrt - wie der Informationsbegriff und die damit verbundenen Problemstellungen sich in den heutigen Sozialwissenschaften-vor allem in der Soziologie -widerspiegeln, das soll im Folgenden geklärt werden. Wersig dient hierbei als Ausgangspunkt. Er behandelte mit seiner Informationssoziologie vor dreißig Jahren - wenn auch sehr zeitbezogen-bis heute gültige Weichenstellungen. Für eine Sicht aus dem Blickwinkel der Soziologie bietet sich die Diskussion um die Informationsgesellschaft an, die mit Castells den bisher klarsten theoretisch-methodischen Ausdruck fand. Im Kern geht es bei diesen Fragen immer um den "praktischsten" und ertragreichsten Blickwinkel auf die Gestaltung von Informationssystemen und deren Folgen für uns alle, die wir die Gesellschaft im soziologischen Sinn bilden. Es geht aber auch um wissenschaftsorganisatorische Ansprüche und Abgrenzungen. Gegenüber der technischen und informationstheoretischen Sicht auf Information verwenden Informationswissenschaftler kommunikative Vorgänge als Ausgangspunkt einer Begriffsklärung (von Daten, Information, Wissen) und definieren für Information einen "pragmatischen Primat", um für ihren zentralen Begriff einen eigenständigen Ansatz als Leitprinzip der Forschung zu gewinnen. Information im Sinne der Informationswissenschaft entsteht erst benutzerseitig in einer spezifischen Anwendungssituation (vgl. Kap. A 1). Kuhlen, auf den die programmatische Formel "Information ist Wissen in Aktion" zurückgeht, weist darauf hin, dass die Informationswissenschaft "claims to reflect upon the use of information in social environments". Er will "people make sensitive to the fact that information is, above and beyond its technical or computational aspects, a social phenomenon". Aber was genau soll das bedeuten, vor allem für die praktische Entwicklungs- und Forschungsarbeit? Wo hört die Informationswissenschaft auf und wo beginnen die Sozialwissenschaften, speziell die Soziologie? Wie lassen sich ihre fachspezifischen Sichtweisen der Informationsgesellschaft aufeinander beziehen?

0.02510631 = product of:
  0.05021262 = sum of:
    0.034528363 = weight(_text_:social in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034528363 = score(doc=5079,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.18691775 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
    0.015684258 = product of:
      0.031368516 = sum of:
        0.031368516 = weight(_text_:aspects in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031368516 = score(doc=5079,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.14981388 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The concept of information as we use it in everyday English, in the sense of knowledge communicated, plays a central role in contemporary society. The development and widespread use of computer networks since the end of World War II, and the emergence of information science as a discipline in the 1950s, are evidence of this focus. Although knowledge and its communication are basic phenomena of every human society, it is the rise of information technology and its global impacts that characterize ours as an information society. It is commonplace to consider information as a basic condition for economic development together with capital, labor, and raw material; but what makes information especially significant at present is its digital nature. The impact of information technology an the natural and social sciences in particular has made this everyday notion a highly controversial concept. Claude Shannon's (1948) "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" is a landmark work, referring to the common use of information with its semantic and pragmatic dimensions, while at the same time redefining the concept within an engineering framework. The fact that the concept of knowledge communication has been designated by the word information seems, prima facie, a linguistic happenstance. For a science like information science (IS), it is of course important how fundamental terms are defined; and in IS, as in other fields, the question of how to define information is often raised. This chapter is an attempt to review the status of the concept of information in IS, with reference also to interdisciplinary trends. In scientific discourse, theoretical concepts are not true or false elements or glimpses of some element of reality; rather, they are constructions designed to do a job in the best possible way. Different conceptions of fundamental terms like information are thus more or less fruitful, depending an the theories (and in the end, the practical actions) they are expected to support. In the opening section, we discuss the problem of defining terms from the perspective of the philosophy of science. The history of a word provides us with anecdotes that are tangential to the concept itself. But in our case, the use of the word information points to a specific perspective from which the concept of knowledge communication has been defined. This perspective includes such characteristics as novelty and relevante; i.e., it refers to the process of knowledge transformation, and particularly to selection and interpretation within a specific context. The discussion leads to the questions of why and when this meaning was designated with the word information. We will explore this history, and we believe that our results may help readers better understand the complexity of the concept with regard to its scientific definitions.
Discussions about the concept of information in other disciplines are very important for IS because many theories and approaches in IS have their origins elsewhere (see the section "Information as an Interdisciplinary Concept" in this chapter). The epistemological concept of information brings into play nonhuman information processes, particularly in physics and biology. And vice versa: the psychic and sociological processes of selection and interpretation may be considered using objective parameters, leaving aside the semantic dimension, or more precisely, by considering objective or situational parameters of interpretation. This concept can be illustrated also in physical terms with regard to release mechanisms, as we suggest. Our overview of the concept of information in the natural sciences as well as in the humanities and social sciences cannot hope to be comprehensive. In most cases, we can refer only to fragments of theories. However, the reader may wish to follow the leads provided in the bibliography. Readers interested primarily in information science may derive most benefit from the section an "Information in Information Science," in which we offer a detailed explanation of diverse views and theories of information within our field; supplementing the recent ARIST chapter by Cornelius (2002). We show that the introduction of the concept of information circa 1950 to the domain of special librarianship and documentation has in itself had serious consequences for the types of knowledge and theories developed in our field. The important question is not only what meaning we give the term in IS, but also how it relates to other basic terms, such as documents, texts, and knowledge. Starting with an objectivist view from the world of information theory and cybernetics, information science has turned to the phenomena of relevance and interpretation as basic aspects of the concept of information. This change is in no way a turn to a subjectivist theory, but an appraisal of different perspectives that may determine in a particular context what is being considered as informative, be it a "thing" (Buckland, 1991b) or a document. Different concepts of information within information science reflect tensions between a subjective and an objective approach. The concept of interpretation or selection may be considered to be the bridge between these two poles. It is important, however, to consider the different professions involved with the interpretation and selection of knowledge. The most important thing in IS (as in information policy) is to consider information as a constitutive forte in society and, thus, recognize the teleological nature of information systems and services (Braman, 1989).

0.022747558 = product of:
  0.09099023 = sum of:
    0.09099023 = weight(_text_:social in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09099023 = score(doc=5589,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.49257156 = fieldWeight in 5589, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5589)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - To develop a unified research framework that synthesizes similarities between cognitive science and information studies, particularly language. This framework is proposed and explored as useful for future information study research. Design/methodology/approach - Analysis is conducted of two contemporary developments in the distinct disciplines of information studies and cognitive science. The theories of extended cognition and social constructionism are explored, focusing on the issue of context in each of the arguments. The complementarity argument is presented as the strongest argument for extended cognition, while Sanna Talja's work is offered as representative of social constructionism in information studies. The philosophical similarities between extended cognition and social constructionism are then integrated at points of similarity. Findings - Cognitive science and information studies have a number of unexpected similarities both in broad and specific terms. The opportunity to develop a synchronized research framework is presented as both feasible and mutually beneficial. Additionally, cognitive science is suggested as useful tool in bridging the gap between the frameworks of cognitivism and social constructionism in information studies. Research limitations/implications - The philosophic discussion borders on technical at times possibly limiting it to those familiar with or interested in the philosophy or meta-theory within cognitive science and information studies. Practical implications - The conclusion points to future research between cognitive science and information studies that can be conducted in further research projects. The arguments also move toward continuing discussions of interdisciplinarity in information studies. Originality/value - Cognitive science is being frequently employed in information studies research and practice. This paper presents an alternative take on how the two can relate and possible benefits, while also exploring very particular movements within each discipline.

0.022553235 = product of:
  0.04510647 = sum of:
    0.032553654 = weight(_text_:social in 3008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032553654 = score(doc=3008,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.17622775 = fieldWeight in 3008, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3008)
    0.012552816 = product of:
      0.025105633 = sum of:
        0.025105633 = weight(_text_:22 in 3008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025105633 = score(doc=3008,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3008, 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=3008)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The project Information Pricing was carried out during the summer semester 2004 by four students and two lecturers. Aim of the project was to develop a new product- and pricing concept for the research centre of the Public Library Cologne. The intention was to increase its competitiveness, especially in the business customer segment. The initiating factor for the project was the significant decrease in requests from 1997 to 2001. This paper describes the development of different attributes of information, analysing various pricing concepts of private and public information providers as well as the development of a pricing concept which is aligned to the requirements and performance of the research centre. The final result was an improved pricing system for an enhanced range of products. The first step was getting more familiar with the characteristics of information and the methods that can be used to measure the value of information. One of the key issues to consider is the value of information for a customer and the question how this value can be charged. In order to be capable of evaluating all issues of information pricing and to develop a solid pricing system, it was essential to analyse and assess pricing modules based on their intension of use. For example, the differentiation of the pricing concept with regard to certain user segments like business or private users as well as members and non-members. Another option is to define prices dependant on the requested response times for research tasks and thereby reflect the urgency of those tasks directly in the pricing concept. Furthermore, the qualitative and quantitative differentiation of information has to be taken into account. All described approaches - and also combinations of these - should be considered when developing a new pricing system. It is also important to recognize the special role of the research centre as a part of the public library. Libraries fulfil a public contract for their users. In this case it has to be ensured that people of all social backgrounds have the chance to gain access to all kind of information. While presenting results to the Public library Cologne some problems arose, mainly the gap between theoretical and practical feasibility. The final result was a practical pricing system, which is easy to implement for the research centre and which is described in the paper.

Date

22. 7.2009 9:24:59

0.020921927 = product of:
  0.041843854 = sum of:
    0.028773637 = weight(_text_:social in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028773637 = score(doc=1323,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.1557648 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
    0.0130702155 = product of:
      0.026140431 = sum of:
        0.026140431 = weight(_text_:aspects in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026140431 = score(doc=1323,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.1248449 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The Turn analyzes the research of information seeking and retrieval (IS&R) and proposes a new direction of integrating research in these two areas: the fields should turn off their separate and narrow paths and construct a new avenue of research. An essential direction for this avenue is context as given in the subtitle Integration of Information Seeking and Retrieval in Context. Other essential themes in the book include: IS&R research models, frameworks and theories; search and works tasks and situations in context; interaction between humans and machines; information acquisition, relevance and information use; research design and methodology based on a structured set of explicit variables - all set into the holistic cognitive approach. The present monograph invites the reader into a construction project - there is much research to do for a contextual understanding of IS&R. The Turn represents a wide-ranging perspective of IS&R by providing a novel unique research framework, covering both individual and social aspects of information behavior, including the generation, searching, retrieval and use of information. Regarding traditional laboratory information retrieval research, the monograph proposes the extension of research toward actors, search and work tasks, IR interaction and utility of information. Regarding traditional information seeking research, it proposes the extension toward information access technology and work task contexts. The Turn is the first synthesis of research in the broad area of IS&R ranging from systems oriented laboratory IR research to social science oriented information seeking studies. TOC:Introduction.- The Cognitive Framework for Information.- The Development of Information Seeking Research.- Systems-Oriented Information Retrieval.- Cognitive and User-Oriented Information Retrieval.- The Integrated IS&R Research Framework.- Implications of the Cognitive Framework for IS&R.- Towards a Research Program.- Conclusion.- Definitions.- References.- Index.

0.020141546 = product of:
  0.08056618 = sum of:
    0.08056618 = weight(_text_:social in 4852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08056618 = score(doc=4852,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.43614143 = fieldWeight in 4852, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4852)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article examnies information theory from the aspect of its 'conduit metaphor'. A historical approach and a close reading of certain texts by Warren Weaver and Norbert Wiener shows how this metaphor was used to construct notions of language, information, information theory, and information science, and was used to extend the range of the notions across social and political space during the period of the Cold War. This article suggests that this legacy remains with us today in certain notions of information and information theory, and that this has affected not only social space in general, but in particular, the range and possibilities of information studies

0.016276827 = product of:
  0.06510731 = sum of:
    0.06510731 = weight(_text_:social in 1857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06510731 = score(doc=1857,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.3524555 = fieldWeight in 1857, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1857)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Bericht über die Tagung und Kurzreferate zu den 18 Beiträgen (u.a. BELKIN, N.J.: A classification of interactions with information; INGWERSEN, P.: Cognitive perspectives of document representation; HJOERLAND, B.: Principia informatica: foundational theory of the concepts of information and principles of information services; TUOMINEN, K. u.a.: Discourse, cognition and reality: towards a social constructionist meta-theory for library and information science

0.016276827 = product of:
  0.06510731 = sum of:
    0.06510731 = weight(_text_:social in 827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06510731 = score(doc=827,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.3524555 = fieldWeight in 827, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=827)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Concepts and technologies of information and communication are discussed in the context of political philosophy and ontology. The questions of what is the meaning and sense of "information" and "communication" in modern political philosophy and what are the roles of technologies of such are discussed in regard to two notions of power and community: constitutional and constituent. The responsibility of designing and using information and communication technologies in response to an ontologically primary "social net" is discussed. One, ethical-political, role of the relation of philosophy to information is discussed.

0.0142422225 = product of:
  0.05696889 = sum of:
    0.05696889 = weight(_text_:social in 825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05696889 = score(doc=825,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 825, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=825)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Three problems in relation to Luciano Floridi's work on the Philosophy of Information (PI) and the relationship of PI to Library and Information Science (LIS) are considered: the claim that LIS is a materials-based discipline, Floridi's claim about Information as a message transfer system, and his downgrading of Social Epistemology to be a subset of PI. The recent history of LIS and the practice of professional library work are examined for evidence of the basis for making claims about LIS. A view of information based on individual interpretations is preferred to Floridi's account, which is found to be too innocent of LIS practice to be accepted without revision, as is his view of LIS as an applied PI.

0.0142422225 = product of:
  0.05696889 = sum of:
    0.05696889 = weight(_text_:social in 560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05696889 = score(doc=560,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 560, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=560)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Imprint

Sydney : University of Technology / Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences