Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.019528544 = product of:
  0.04882136 = sum of:
    0.027030373 = weight(_text_:study in 325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027030373 = score(doc=325,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1448085 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044537213 = queryNorm
        0.18666288 = fieldWeight in 325, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=325)
    0.021790987 = product of:
      0.043581974 = sum of:
        0.043581974 = weight(_text_:teaching in 325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043581974 = score(doc=325,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24199244 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.433489 = idf(docFreq=524, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044537213 = queryNorm
            0.18009642 = fieldWeight in 325, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.433489 = idf(docFreq=524, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=325)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Classification is the essential first step in science. The study of science, as well as the practice of science, will thus benefit from a detailed classification of different types of science. In this book, science - defined broadly to include the social sciences and humanities - is first unpacked into its constituent elements: the phenomena studied, the data used, the theories employed, the methods applied, and the practices of scientists. These five elements are then classified in turn. Notably, the classifications of both theory types and methods allow the key strengths and weaknesses of different theories and methods to be readily discerned and compared. Connections across classifications are explored: should certain theories or phenomena be investigated only with certain methods? What is the proper function and form of scientific paradigms? Are certain common errors and biases in scientific practice associated with particular phenomena, data, theories, or methods? The classifications point to several ways of improving both specialized and interdisciplinary research and teaching, and especially of enhancing communication across communities of scholars. The classifications also support a superior system of document classification that would allow searches by theory and method used as well as causal links investigated.

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 32(2005) no.2, S.93-95 (H. Albrechtsen): "The book deals with mapping of the structures and contents of sciences, defined broadly to include the social sciences and the humanities. According to the author, the study of science, as well as the practice of science, could benefit from a detailed classification of different types of science. The book defines five universal constituents of the sciences: phenomena, data, theories, methods and practice. For each of these constituents, the author poses five questions, in the well-known 5W format: Who, What, Where, When, Why? - with the addition of the question How? (Szostak 2003). Two objectives of the author's endeavor stand out: 1) decision support for university curriculum development across disciplines and decision support for university students at advanced levels of education in selection of appropriate courses for their projects and to support cross-disciplinary inquiry for researchers and students; 2) decision support for researchers and students in scientific inquiry across disciplines, methods and theories. The main prospective audience of this book is university curriculum developers, university students and researchers, in that order of priority. The heart of the book is the chapters unfolding the author's ideas about how to classify phenomena and data, theory, method and practice, by use of the 5W inquiry model. . . .
Despite its methodological flaws and lack of empirical foundation, the book could potentially bring new ideas to current discussions within the practices of curriculum development and knowledge management as weIl as design of information systems, an classification schemes as tools for knowledge sharing, decision-making and knowledge exploration. I hesitate to recommend the book to students, except to students at advanced levels of study, because of its biased presentation of the new ideas and its basis an secondary literature."

0.009862903 = product of:
  0.024657257 = sum of:
    0.015605992 = weight(_text_:study in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015605992 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1448085 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044537213 = queryNorm
        0.10776986 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
    0.009051266 = product of:
      0.018102532 = sum of:
        0.018102532 = weight(_text_:22 in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018102532 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15596174 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044537213 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Zins, C.: Knowledge map of information science: issues, principles, implications. - Lin, X., S. Aluker u. W. Zhu u.a.: Dynamic concept representation through a visual concept explorer. - Kohlbacher, F.: Knowledge organization(s) in Japan: empirical evidence from Japanese and western corporations. - Beghtol, C.: The global learning society and the iterative relationship between theory and practice in knowledge organization systems. - Tennis, J.T.: Function, purpose, predication, and context of information organization frameworks. - Doyle, A.: Naming and reclaiming knowledges in public intersections of landscapes and experience. - Qin, J., P. Creticos u. W.Y. Hsiao: Adaptive modeling of workforce domain knowledge. - Gnoli, C.: The meaning of facets in non-disciplinary classifications. - Loehrlein, A., E.K. Jacob u. S. Lee u.a.: Development of heuristics in a hybrid approach to faceted classification. - Thellefsen, M.: The dynamics of information representation and knowledge mediation. - LaBarre, K.: A multi faceted view: use of facet analysis in the practice of website organization and access. - Smiraglia, R.P.: Empiricism as the basis for metadata categorisation: expanding the case for instantiation with archival documents. - Bean, C.A.: Hierarchical relationships used in mapping between knowledge structures. - Friedman, A.: Concept mapping a measurable sign. - Naumis Pena, C.: Evaluation of educational thesauri. - Biagetti, M.T.: Indexing and scientific research needs. - Robert, C.A., A. Davis: Annotation and its application to information research in economic intelligence. - Mcllwaine, I.C., J.S. Mitchel: The new ecumenism: exploration of a DDC / UDC view of religion. - Hajdu Barát, A.: Usability and the user interfaces of classical information retrieval languages. - Eito Brun, R.: Uncovering hidden clues about geographic visualization in LCC. - Williamson, N.J.: Knowledge structures and the Internet progress and prospects. - Pajarillo, E.J.Y.: A classification scheme to determine medical necessity: a knowledge organization global learning application. - López-Huertas, M.J.: Thematic map of interdisciplinary domains based on their terminological representation: the gender studies. - Rodriguez Bravo, B.: The visibility of women in indexing languages. - Beall, J., D. Vizine-Goetz: Finding fiction: facilitating access to works of the imagination scattered by form and format. - Kwasnik, B.H., Y.L. Chun u. K. Crowston u.a.: Challenges in ceating a taxonomy of genres of digital documents. - Simon, J.: Interdisciplinary knowledge creation: using wikis in science. - Gabel, J.: Improving information retrieval of subjects through citation-analysis: a study. - Lee, H.L.: Navigating hierarchies vs. searching by keyword: two cultural perspectives. - Loehrlein, A., R. Martin u. E.L. Robertson: Integration of international standards in the domain of manufacturing enterprise. -

Date

27.12.2008 11:22:36