Search (240 results, page 1 of 12)

0.11802683 = product of:
  0.23605366 = sum of:
    0.23605366 = sum of:
      0.1381116 = weight(_text_:theory in 4545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1381116 = score(doc=4545,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.6432185 = fieldWeight in 4545, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4545)
      0.097942054 = weight(_text_:22 in 4545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.097942054 = score(doc=4545,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4545, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4545)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.1996 10:51:56

0.060206853 = product of:
  0.120413706 = sum of:
    0.120413706 = sum of:
      0.0854344 = weight(_text_:theory in 4900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0854344 = score(doc=4900,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.39788827 = fieldWeight in 4900, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4900)
      0.034979306 = weight(_text_:22 in 4900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034979306 = score(doc=4900,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4900, 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=4900)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Contents: Manfred Klenner / Henriette Visser: Introduction - Khurshid Ahmad: Writing Linguistics: When I use a word it means what I choose it to mean - Jürgen Handke: 2000 and Beyond: The Potential of New Technologies in Linguistics - Jurij Apresjan / Igor Boguslavsky / Leonid Iomdin / Leonid Tsinman: Lexical Functions in NU: Possible Uses - Hubert Lehmann: Practical Machine Translation and Linguistic Theory - Karin Haenelt: A Contextbased Approach towards Content Processing of Electronic Documents - Petr Sgall / Eva Hajicová: Are Linguistic Frameworks Comparable? - Wolfgang Menzel: Theory and Applications in Computational Linguistics - Is there Common Ground? - Robert Porzel / Michael Strube: Towards Context-adaptive Natural Language Processing Systems - Nicoletta Calzolari: Language Resources in a Multilingual Setting: The European Perspective - Piek Vossen: Computational Linguistics for Theory and Practice.

0.050582923 = product of:
  0.101165846 = sum of:
    0.101165846 = sum of:
      0.059190683 = weight(_text_:theory in 773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059190683 = score(doc=773,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.27566507 = fieldWeight in 773, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=773)
      0.041975167 = weight(_text_:22 in 773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041975167 = score(doc=773,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 773, 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=773)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Inhalt: Keynote address - Order and KO - Conceptology in KO - Mathematics in KO - Psychology and KO - Science and KO - Problems in KO - KOS general questions - KOS structure and elements, facet analysis - KOS construction - KOS Maintenance, updating and storage - Compatibility, concordance, interoperability between indexing languages - Theory of classing and indexing - Taxonomies in communications engineering - Special KOSs in literature - Special KOSs in cultural sciences - General problems of natural language, derived indexing, tagging - Automatic language processing - Online retrieval systems and technologies - Problems of terminology - Subject-oriented terminology work - General problems of applied classing and indexing, catalogues, guidelines - Classing and indexing of non-book materials (images, archives, museums) - Personas and institutions in KO, cultural warrant - Organizing team - List of contributors

Date

22. 2.2013 12:09:34

0.048829824 = product of:
  0.09765965 = sum of:
    0.09765965 = product of:
      0.1953193 = sum of:
        0.1953193 = weight(_text_:theory in 7406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1953193 = score(doc=7406,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.90964836 = fieldWeight in 7406, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7406)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This issue devoted to theory and foundation of information retrieval comprises 7 papers

0.048328992 = product of:
  0.096657984 = sum of:
    0.096657984 = product of:
      0.19331597 = sum of:
        0.19331597 = weight(_text_:theory in 406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19331597 = score(doc=406,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.9003184 = fieldWeight in 406, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=406)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Discusses the often lamented lack of a theory of citations, and the lack of a sociological theory in particular. Draws attention to one proposed theory and discusses the potential reasons why it has not been generally accepted as the theory of citations, despite its merits in explaining many phenomena in the citation behaviour of scientists. This theory has been expounded by B. Latour and presented, in particular, in his book entitled 'Science in action'

0.041854136 = product of:
  0.08370827 = sum of:
    0.08370827 = product of:
      0.16741654 = sum of:
        0.16741654 = weight(_text_:theory in 7360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16741654 = score(doc=7360,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.7796986 = fieldWeight in 7360, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7360)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A special section devoted to dynamic social impact theory and its relationship to human communication

0.039714742 = product of:
  0.079429485 = sum of:
    0.079429485 = sum of:
      0.065437764 = weight(_text_:theory in 2047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.065437764 = score(doc=2047,freq=22.0), product of:
          0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.3047592 = fieldWeight in 2047, product of:
            4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
              22.0 = termFreq=22.0
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2047)
      0.013991722 = weight(_text_:22 in 2047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.013991722 = score(doc=2047,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 2047, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2047)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

2. 1.2004 10:35:22

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.1, S.40-42 (J.-E. Mai): "Introduction: This is a collection of papers presented at the National Seminar an Classification in the Digital Environment held in Bangalore, India, an August 9-11 2001. The collection contains 18 papers dealing with various issues related to knowledge organization and classification theory. The issue of transferring the knowledge, traditions, and theories of bibliographic classification to the digital environment is an important one, and I was excited to learn that proceedings from this seminar were available. Many of us experience frustration an a daily basis due to poorly constructed Web search mechanisms and Web directories. As a community devoted to making information easily accessible we have something to offer the Web community and a seminar an the topic was indeed much needed. Below are brief summaries of the 18 papers presented at the seminar. The order of the summaries follows the order of the papers in the proceedings. The titles of the paper are given in parentheses after the author's name. AHUJA and WESLEY (From "Subject" to "Need": Shift in Approach to Classifying Information an the Internet/Web) argue that traditional bibliographic classification systems fall in the digital environment. One problem is that bibliographic classification systems have been developed to organize library books an shelves and as such are unidimensional and tied to the paper-based environment. Another problem is that they are "subject" oriented in the sense that they assume a relatively stable universe of knowledge containing basic and fixed compartments of knowledge that can be identified and represented. Ahuja and Wesley suggest that classification in the digital environment should be need-oriented instead of subjectoriented ("One important link that binds knowledge and human being is his societal need. ... Hence, it will be ideal to organise knowledge based upon need instead of subject." (p. 10)).
AHUJA and SATIJA (Relevance of Ranganathan's Classification Theory in the Age of Digital Libraries) note that traditional bibliographic classification systems have been applied in the digital environment with only limited success. They find that the "inherent flexibility of electronic manipulation of documents or their surrogates should allow a more organic approach to allocation of new subjects and appropriate linkages between subject hierarchies." (p. 18). Ahija and Satija also suggest that it is necessary to shift from a "subject" focus to a "need" focus when applying classification theory in the digital environment. They find Ranganathan's framework applicable in the digital environment. Although Ranganathan's focus is "subject oriented and hence emphasise the hierarchical and linear relationships" (p. 26), his framework "can be successfully adopted with certain modifications ... in the digital environment." (p. 26). SHAH and KUMAR (Model for System Unification of Geographical Schedules (Space Isolates)) report an a plan to develop a single schedule for geographical Subdivision that could be used across all classification systems. The authors argue that this is needed in order to facilitate interoperability in the digital environment. SAN SEGUNDO MANUEL (The Representation of Knowledge as a Symbolization of Productive Electronic Information) distills different approaches and definitions of the term "representation" as it relates to representation of knowledge in the library and information science literature and field. SHARADA (Linguistic and Document Classification: Paradigmatic Merger Possibilities) suggests the development of a universal indexing language. The foundation for the universal indexing language is Chomsky's Minimalist Program and Ranganathan's analytico-synthetic classification theory; Acording to the author, based an these approaches, it "should not be a problem" (p. 62) to develop a universal indexing language.
SELVI (Knowledge Classification of Digital Information Materials with Special Reference to Clustering Technique) finds that it is essential to classify digital material since the amount of material that is becoming available is growing. Selvi suggests using automated classification to "group together those digital information materials or documents that are "most similar" (p. 65). This can be attained by using Cluster analysis methods. PRADHAN and THULASI (A Study of the Use of Classification and Indexing Systems by Web Resource Directories) compare and contrast the classificatory structures of Google, Yahoo, and Looksmart's directories and compare the directories to Dewey Decimal Classification, Library of Congress Classification and Colon Classification's classificatory structures. They find differentes between the directories' and the bibliographic classification systems' classificatory structures and principles. These differentes stem from the fact that bibliographic classification systems are used to "classify academic resources for the research community" (p. 83) and directories "aim to categorize a wider breath of information groups, entertainment, recreation, govt. information, commercial information" (p. 83). NEELAMEGHAN (Hierarchy, Hierarchical Relation and Hierarchical Arrangement) reviews the concept of hierarchy and the formation of hierarchical structures across a variety of domains. NEELAMEGHAN and PRADAD (Digitized Schemes for Subject Classification and Thesauri: Complementary Roles) demonstrate how thesaural relationships (NT, BT, and RT) can be applied to a classification scheme, the Colon Classification in this Gase. NEELAMEGHAN and ASUNDI (Metadata Framework for Describing Embodied Knowledge and Subject Content) propose to use the Generalized Facet Structure framework which is based an Ranganathan's General Theory of Knowledge Classification as a framework for describing the content of documents in a metadata element set for the representation of web documents. CHUDAMANI (Classified Catalogue as a Tool for Subject Based Information Retrieval in both Traditional and Electronic Library Environment) explains why the classified catalogue is superior to the alphabetic cata logue and argues that the same is true in the digital environment.
PARAMESWARAN (Classification and Indexing: Impact of Classification Theory an PRECIS) reviews the PRECIS system and finds that "it Gould not escape from the impact of the theory of classification" (p. 131). The author further argues that the purpose of classification and subject indexing is the same and that both approaches depends an syntax. This leads to the conclusion that "there is an absolute syntax as the Indian theory of classification points out" (p. 131). SATYAPAL and SANJIVINI SATYAPAL (Classifying Documents According to Postulational Approach: 1. SA TSAN- A Computer Based Learning Package) and SATYAPAL and SANJIVINI SATYAPAL (Classifying Documents According to Postulational Approach: 2. Semi-Automatic Synthesis of CC Numbers) present an application to automate classification using a facet classification system, in this Gase, the Colon Classification system. GAIKAIWARI (An Interactive Application for Faceted Classification Systems) presents an application, called SRR, for managing and using a faceted classification scheme in a digital environment. IYER (Use of Instructional Technology to Support Traditional Classroom Learning: A Case Study) describes a course an "Information and Knowledge Organization" that she teaches at the University at Albany (SUNY). The course is a conceptual course that introduces the student to various aspects of knowledge organization. GOPINATH (Universal Classification: How can it be used?) lists fifteen uses of universal classifications and discusses the entities of a number of disciplines. GOPINATH (Knowledge Classification: The Theory of Classification) briefly reviews the foundations for research in automatic classification, summarizes the history of classification, and places Ranganathan's thought in the history of classification.
Discussion The proceedings of the National Seminar an Classification in the Digital Environment give some insights. However, the depth of analysis and discussion is very uneven across the papers. Some of the papers have substantive research content while others appear to be notes used in the oral presentation. The treatments of the topics are very general in nature. Some papers have a very limited list of references while others have no bibliography. No index has been provided. The transfer of bibliographic knowledge organization theory to the digital environment is an important topic. However, as the papers at this conference have shown, it is also a difficult task. Of the 18 papers presented at this seminar an classification in the digital environment, only 4-5 papers actually deal directly with this important topic. The remaining papers deal with issues that are more or less relevant to classification in the digital environment without explicitly discussing the relation. The reason could be that the authors take up issues in knowledge organization that still need to be investigated and clarified before their application in the digital environment can be considered. Nonetheless, one wishes that the knowledge organization community would discuss the application of classification theory in the digital environment in greater detail. It is obvious from the comparisons of the classificatory structures of bibliographic classification systems and Web directories that these are different and that they probably should be different, since they serve different purposes. Interesting questions in the transformation of bibliographic classification theories to the digital environment are: "Given the existing principles in bibliographic knowledge organization, what are the optimum principles for organization of information, irrespectively of context?" and "What are the fundamental theoretical and practical principles for the construction of Web directories?" Unfortunately, the papers presented at this seminar do not attempt to answer or discuss these questions."

0.039460458 = product of:
  0.078920916 = sum of:
    0.078920916 = product of:
      0.15784183 = sum of:
        0.15784183 = weight(_text_:theory in 3887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15784183 = score(doc=3887,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.7351069 = fieldWeight in 3887, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3887)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.039460458 = product of:
  0.078920916 = sum of:
    0.078920916 = product of:
      0.15784183 = sum of:
        0.15784183 = weight(_text_:theory in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15784183 = score(doc=245,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.7351069 = fieldWeight in 245, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=245)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.034979306 = product of:
  0.06995861 = sum of:
    0.06995861 = product of:
      0.13991722 = sum of:
        0.13991722 = weight(_text_:22 in 3704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13991722 = score(doc=3704,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 3704, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=3704)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Serials librarian. 22(1992), nos.3/4

0.034627747 = product of:
  0.06925549 = sum of:
    0.06925549 = product of:
      0.13851099 = sum of:
        0.13851099 = weight(_text_:22 in 4698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13851099 = score(doc=4698,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.76602525 = fieldWeight in 4698, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4698)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Issue

Vol.22.

Signature

78 BAHH 1089-22

0.03381591 = product of:
  0.06763182 = sum of:
    0.06763182 = product of:
      0.13526364 = sum of:
        0.13526364 = weight(_text_:theory in 822) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13526364 = score(doc=822,freq=94.0), product of:
            0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.6299549 = fieldWeight in 822, product of:
              9.69536 = tf(freq=94.0), with freq of:
                94.0 = termFreq=94.0
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=822)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in JASIST 54(2003) no.4, S.358-359 (D.O. Case): "Having recently written a chapter an theories applied in information-seeking research (Case, 2002), I was eager to read this issue of Library Trends devoted to "Current Theory." Once in hand I found the individual articles in the issue to be of widely varying quality, and the scope to be disappointingly narrow. A more accurate title might be "Some Articles about Theory, with Even More an Bibliometrics." Eight of the thirteen articles (not counting the Editor's brief introduction) are about quantifying the growth, quality and/or authorship of literature (mostly in the sciences, with one example from the humanities). Social and psychological theories are hardly mentioned-even though one of the articles claims that nearly half of all theory invoked in LIS emanates from the social sciences. The editor, SUNY Professor Emeritus William E. McGrath, claims that the first six articles are about theory, while the rest are original research that applies theory to some problem-a characterization that I find odd. Reading his Introduction provides some clues to the curious composition of this issue. McGrath states that only in "physics and other exact sciences" are definitions of theory "well understood" (p. 309)-a view I think most psychologists and sociologists would content-and restricts his own definition of theory to "an explanation for a quantifiable phenomenon" (p. 310). In his own chapter in the issue, "Explanation and Prediction," McGrath makes it clear that he holds out hope for a "unified theory of librarianship" that would resemble those regarding "fundamental forces in physics and astronomy." However, isn't it wishful thinking to hope for a physics-like theory to emerge from particular practices (e.g., citation) and settings (e.g., libraries) when broad generalizations do not easily accrue from observation of more basic human behaviors? Perhaps this is where the emphasis an documents, rather than people, entered into the choice of material for "Current Theory." Artifacts of human behavior, such as documents, are more amenable to prediction in ways that allow for the development of theorywitness Zipf's Principle of Least Effort, the Bradford Distribution, Lotka's Law, etc. I imagine that McGrath would say that "librarianship," at least, is more about materials than people. McGrath's own contribution to this issue emphasizes measures of libraries, books and journals. By citing exemplar studies, he makes it clear that much has been done to advance measurement of library operations, and he eloquently argues for an overarching view of the various library functions and their measures. But, we have all heard similar arguments before; other disciplines, in earlier times, have made the argument that a solid foundation of empirical observation had been laid down, which would lead inevitably to a grand theory of "X." McGrath admits that "some may say the vision [of a unified theory] is naive" (p. 367), but concludes that "It remains for researchers to tie the various level together more formally . . . in constructing a comprehensive unified theory of librarianship."
However, for well over a century, major libraries in developed nations have been engaging in sophisticated measure of their operations, and thoughtful scholars have been involved along the way; if no "unified theory" has emerged thus far, why would it happen in the near future? What if "libraries" are a historicallydetermined conglomeration of distinct functions, some of which are much less important than others? It is telling that McGrath cites as many studies an brittle paper as he does investigations of reference services among his constellation of measurable services, even while acknowledging that the latter (as an aspect of "circulation") is more "essential." If one were to include in a unified theory similar phenomena outside of libraries-e.g., what happens in bookstores and WWW searches-it can be seen how difficult a coordinated explanation might become. Ultimately the value of McGrath's chapter is not in convincing the reader that a unified theory might emerge, but rather in highlighting the best in recent studies that examine library operations, identifying robust conclusions, and arguing for the necessity of clarifying and coordinating common variables and units of analysis. McGrath's article is one that would be useful for a general course in LIS methodology, and certainly for more specific lectures an the evaluation of libraries. Fra going to focus most of my comments an the remaining articles about theory, rather than the others that offer empirical results about the growth or quality of literature. I'll describe the latter only briefly. The best way to approach this issue is by first reading McKechnie and Pettigrew's thorough survey of the "Use of Theory in LIS research." Earlier results of their extensive content analysis of 1, 160 LIS articles have been published in other journals before, but is especially pertinent here. These authors find that only a third of LIS literature makes overt reference to theory, and that both usage and type of theory are correlated with the specific domain of the research (e.g., historical treatments versus user studies versus information retrieval). Lynne McKechnie and Karen Pettigrew identify four general sources of theory: LIS, the Humanities, Social Sciences and Sciences. This approach makes it obvious that the predominant source of theory is the social sciences (45%), followed by LIS (30%), the sciences (19%) and the humanities (5%) - despite a predominance (almost 60%) of articles with science-related content. The authors discuss interdisciplinarity at some length, noting the great many non-LIS authors and theories which appear in the LIS literature, and the tendency for native LIS theories to go uncited outside of the discipline. Two other articles emphasize the ways in which theory has evolved. The more general of three two is Jack Glazier and Robert Grover's update of their classic 1986 Taxonomy of Theory in LIS. This article describes an elaborated version, called the "Circuits of Theory," offering definitions of a hierarchy of terms ranging from "world view" through "paradigm," "grand theory" and (ultimately) "symbols." Glazier & Grover's one-paragraph example of how theory was applied in their study of city managers is much too brief and is at odds with the emphasis an quantitative indicators of literature found in the rest of the volume. The second article about the evolution of theory, Richard Smiraglia's "The progress of theory in knowledge organization," restricts itself to the history of thinking about cataloging and indexing. Smiraglia traces the development of theory from a pragmatic concern with "what works," to a reliance an empirical tests, to an emerging flirtation with historicist approaches to knowledge.
There is only one article in the issue that claims to offer a theory of the scope that discussed by McGrath, and I am sorry that it appears in this issue. Bor-Sheng Tsai's "Theory of Information Genetics" is an almost incomprehensible combination of four different "models" wich names like "Möbius Twist" and "Clipping-Jointing." Tsai starts by posing the question "What is it that makes the `UNIVERSAL' information generating, representation, and transfer happen?" From this ungrammatical beginning, things get rapidly worse. Tsai makes side trips into the history of defining information, offers three-dimensional plots of citation data, a formula for "bonding relationships," hypothetical data an food consumption, sample pages from a web-based "experts directory" and dozens of citations from works which are peripheral to the discussion. The various sections of the article seem to have little to do with one another. I can't believe that the University of Illinois would publish something so poorly-edited. Now I will turn to the dominant, "bibliometric" articles in this issue, in order of their appearance: Judit Bar-Ilan and Bluma Peritz write about "Informetric Theories and Methods for Exploring the Internet." Theirs is a survey of research an patterns of electronic publication, including different ways of sampling, collecting and analyzing data an the Web. Their contribution to the "theory" theme lies in noting that some existing bibliometric laws apply to the Web. William Hood and Concepción Wilson's article, "Solving Problems ... Using Fuzzy Set Theory," demonstrates the widespread applicability of this mathematical tool for library-related problems, such as making decisions about the binding of documents, or improving document retrieval. Ronald Rosseau's piece an "Journal Evaluation" discusses the strength and weaknesses of various indicators for determining impact factors and rankings for journals. His is an exceptionally well-written article that has everything to do with measurement but almost nothing to do with theory, to my way of thinking. "The Matthew Effect for Countries" is the topic of Manfred Bonitz's paper an citations to scientific publications, analyzed by nation of origin. His research indicates that publications from certain countries-such as Switzerland, Denmark, the USA and the UK-receive more than the expected number of citations; correspondingly, some rather large countries like China receive much fewer than might be expected. Bonitz provides an extensive discussion of how the "MEC" measure came about, and what it ments-relating it to efficiency in scientific research. A bonus is his detour into the origins of the Matthew Effect in the Bible, and the subsequent popularization of the name by the sociologist Robert Merton. Wolfgang Glänzel's "Coauthorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980-1998)" is, as the title implies, another citation analysis. He compares the number of authors an papers in three fields-Biomedical research, Chemistry and Mathematics - at sixyear intervals. Among other conclusions, Glänzel notes that the percentage of publications with four or more authors has been growing in all three fields, and that multiauthored papers are more likely to be cited.
Coauthorship is also the topic in Hildrun Kretschmer's article an the origins and uses of "Gestalt Theory." The explanation of the theory is fascinating but the application of it, involving threedimensional graphics depicting coauthorship in physics and medicine, seems somewhat distant from Gestalt Theory and the importance of the results is hard to appreciate. Henk Moed, Marc Luwel, and A.J. Nederhof apply bibliometrics to the evaluation of research performance in the humanities, specifically, Flemish professors of law. Their attempts to classify and measure research output appear rather specific to the population they studied, with little contribution to a more general bibliometric theory. The final contribution is by Peter Vinkler. He offers a comprehensive model of the growth and institutionalization of scientific information. Since it could be viewed as an overview of the concerns of scientometrics, Vinkler's article might best be read before some of the others described above. To conclude, this issue of Library Trends has a schizophrenic quality about it. "Theory" is defined broadly in those initial articles "about" theory (especially in those by McKechnie and Pettigrew, and by Glazier and Grover), but most of the remainder of the pieces consider theory narrowly in the context of bibliometric analysis. This is unfortunate an two counts. First, while bibliometric investigations have uncovered fascinating and useful statistical regularities in the growth, authorship and citation of literature, they are often short an the sort of explanation that we would expect from a well-developed theory. That is, why do the statistical distributions (of publications, citations, etc.) appear as they do? Second, information science studies people at least as much as it does documents. Appropriately, then, most of our theory comes from the social sciences (as the McKechnie and Pettigrew article convincingly demonstrates). However, this source of theory is virtually ignored in the issue of Library Trends an "current theory." What a shame."

0.03372195 = product of:
  0.0674439 = sum of:
    0.0674439 = sum of:
      0.039460458 = weight(_text_:theory in 7286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039460458 = score(doc=7286,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.18377672 = fieldWeight in 7286, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=7286)
      0.027983444 = weight(_text_:22 in 7286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027983444 = score(doc=7286,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 7286, 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=7286)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

WEINBERG, B.H.: A theory of relativity for catalogers; ANDERSON, N.: The non-neutrality of descriptive cataloging; BERMAN, S.: Cataloging tools and 'copy': the myth of acceptability - a public librarian's viewpoint; SINN, S.: The development of classification and subject heading systems for medicine; WHITEHEAD, C.: The art & architecture thesaurus as an alternatice to LCSH; PARR, M.: Standard cataloging data and the academic library: the technical services manager's point of view; BISHOFF, L. u. G. PATTON: Master bibliographic record vs. local bibliographic record - who needs what?: an OCLC perspective; GLAZIER, E.: The display and indexing of customized catalog records in RLIN; BYRUM, J.: Standard cataloging data: the view from the Library of Congress; INTNER, S.: Rejecting standard cataloging copy: implications for the education of catalogers; ELLIOTT, P. u. C. BAKKE: Special collections and cataloging standards: issues and compromises at the Steinbeck Research Center and the Center for Beethoven Studies; Whitlow, C.: Music sound recordings: subject retrieval, analysis and access in Online Public Access Catalogs; OLSON, H.: Subject access to women's studies materials; KIM, S.-H.: Volume/date designation and serials holdings; ARMINTOR, B.: 'Marrying' college catalog data with the library's online catalog: enhancing access to nonprint materials at Pikes Peak Community College; LAI, P.C. u. M.-K. WONG: Problems in the cataloging of digital cartographic databases; THOMAS, A.R.: Options in the arrangement of library materials and the new edition of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 20(1993) no.2, S.100-105 (J.M. Perreault); International cataloguing and bibliographic control 22(1993) no.2, S.35 (M. Norman)

0.0330965 = product of:
  0.066193 = sum of:
    0.066193 = sum of:
      0.05220128 = weight(_text_:theory in 3964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05220128 = score(doc=3964,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.24311376 = fieldWeight in 3964, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3964)
      0.013991722 = weight(_text_:22 in 3964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.013991722 = score(doc=3964,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 3964, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3964)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Devadason, F.J., N. Intaraksa u. P. Patamawongjariya u.a.: Faceted indexing application for organizing and accessing internet resources; Nicholson, D., S. Wake: HILT: subject retrieval in a distributed environment; Olson, T.: Integrating LCSH and MeSH in information systems; Kuhr, P.S.: Putting the world back together: mapping multiple vocabularies into a single thesaurus; Freyre, E., M. Naudi: MACS : subject access across languages and networks; McIlwaine, I.C.: The UDC and the World Wide Web; Garrison, W.A.: The Colorado Digitization Project: subject access issues; Vizine-Goetz, D., R. Thompson: Towards DDC-classified displays of Netfirst search results: subject access issues; Godby, C.J., J. Stuler: The Library of Congress Classification as a knowledge base for automatic subject categorization: subject access issues; O'Neill, E.T., E. Childress u. R. Dean u.a.: FAST: faceted application of subject terminology; Bean, C.A., R. Green: Improving subject retrieval with frame representation; Zeng, M.L., Y. Chen: Features of an integrated thesaurus management and search system for the networked environment; Hudon, M.: Subject access to Web resources in education; Qin, J., J. Chen: A multi-layered, multi-dimensional representation of digital educational resources; Riesthuis, G.J.A.: Information languages and multilingual subject access; Geisselmann, F.: Access methods in a database of e-journals; Beghtol, C.: The Iter Bibliography: International standard subject access to medieval and renaissance materials (400-1700); Slavic, A.: General library classification in learning material metadata: the application in IMS/LOM and CDMES metadata schemas; Cordeiro, M.I.: From library authority control to network authoritative metadata sources; Koch, T., H. Neuroth u. M. Day: Renardus: Cross-browsing European subject gateways via a common classification system (DDC); Olson, H.A., D.B. Ward: Mundane standards, everyday technologies, equitable access; Burke, M.A.: Personal Construct Theory as a research tool in Library and Information Science: case study: development of a user-driven classification of photographs

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 31(2004) no.2, S.117-118 (D. Campbell): "This excellent volume offers 22 papers delivered at an IFLA Satellite meeting in Dublin Ohio in 2001. The conference gathered together information and computer scientists to discuss an important and difficult question: in what specific ways can the accumulated skills, theories and traditions of librarianship be mobilized to face the challenges of providing subject access to information in present and future networked information environments? The papers which grapple with this question are organized in a surprisingly deft and coherent way. Many conferences and proceedings have unhappy sessions that contain a hodge-podge of papers that didn't quite fit any other categories. As befits a good classificationist, editor I.C. McIlwaine has kept this problem to a minimum. The papers are organized into eight sessions, which split into two broad categories. The first five sessions deal with subject domains, and the last three deal with subject access tools. The five sessions and thirteen papers that discuss access in different domains appear in order of in creasing intension. The first papers deal with access in multilingual environments, followed by papers an access across multiple vocabularies and across sectors, ending up with studies of domain-specific retrieval (primarily education). Some of the papers offer predictably strong work by scholars engaged in ongoing, long-term research. Gerard Riesthuis offers a clear analysis of the complexities of negotiating non-identical thesauri, particularly in cases where hierarchical structure varies across different languages. Hope Olson and Dennis Ward use Olson's familiar and welcome method of using provocative and unconventional theory to generate meliorative approaches to blas in general subject access schemes. Many papers, an the other hand, deal with specific ongoing projects: Renardus, The High Level Thesaurus Project, The Colorado Digitization Project and The Iter Bibliography for medieval and Renaissance material. Most of these papers display a similar structure: an explanation of the theory and purpose of the project, an account of problems encountered in the implementation, and a discussion of the results, both promising and disappointing, thus far. Of these papers, the account of the Multilanguage Access to Subjects Project in Europe (MACS) deserves special mention. In describing how the project is founded an the principle of the equality of languages, with each subject heading language maintained in its own database, and with no single language used as a pivot for the others, Elisabeth Freyre and Max Naudi offer a particularly vivid example of the way the ethics of librarianship translate into pragmatic contexts and concrete procedures. The three sessions and nine papers devoted to subject access tools split into two kinds: papers that discuss the use of theory and research to generate new tools for a networked environment, and those that discuss the transformation of traditional subject access tools in this environment. In the new tool development area, Mary Burke provides a promising example of the bidirectional approach that is so often necessary: in her case study of user-driven classification of photographs, she user personal construct theory to clarify the practice of classification, while at the same time using practice to test the theory. Carol Bean and Rebecca Green offer an intriguing combination of librarianship and computer science, importing frame representation technique from artificial intelligence to standardize syntagmatic relationships to enhance recall and precision.
The papers discussing the transformation of traditional tools locate the point of transformation in different places. Some, like the papers an DDC, LCC and UDC, suggest that these schemes can be imported into the networked environment and used as a basis for improving access to networked resources, just as they improve access to physical resources. While many of these papers are intriguing, I suspect that convincing those outside the profession will be difficult. In particular, Edward O'Neill and his colleagues, while offering a fascinating suggestion for preserving the Library of Congress Subject Headings and their associated infrastructure by converting them into a faceted scheme, will have an uphill battle convincing the unconverted that LCSH has a place in the online networked environment. Two papers deserve mention for taking a different approach: both Francis Devadason and Maria Ines Cordeiro suggest that we import concepts and techniques rather than realized schemes. Devadason argues for the creation of a faceted pre-coordinate indexing scheme for Internet resources based an Deep Structure indexing, which originates in Bhattacharyya's Postulate-Based Permuted Subject Indexing and in Ranganathan's chain indexing techniques. Cordeiro takes up the vitally important role of authority control in Web environments, suggesting that the techniques of authority control be expanded to enhance user flexibility. By focusing her argument an the concepts rather than an the existing tools, and by making useful and important distinctions between library and non-library uses of authority control, Cordeiro suggests that librarianship's contribution to networked access has less to do with its tools and infrastructure, and more to do with concepts that need to be boldly reinvented. The excellence of this collection derives in part from the energy, insight and diversity of the papers. Credit also goes to the planning and forethought that went into the conference itself by OCLC, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section, and the Program Committee, headed by editor I.C. McIlwaine. This collection avoids many of the problems of conference proceedings, and instead offers the best of such proceedings: detail, diversity, and judicious mixtures of theory and practice. Some of the disadvantages that plague conference proceedings appear here. Busy scholars sometimes interpret the concept of "camera-ready copy" creatively, offering diagrams that could have used some streamlining, and label boxes that cut off the tops or bottoms of letters. The papers are necessarily short, and many of them raise issues that deserve more extensive treatment. The issue of subject access in networked environments is crying out for further synthesis at the conceptual and theoretical level. But no synthesis can afford to ignore the kind of energetic, imaginative and important work that the papers in these proceedings represent."

0.029902037 = product of:
  0.059804074 = sum of:
    0.059804074 = product of:
      0.11960815 = sum of:
        0.11960815 = weight(_text_:theory in 1446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11960815 = score(doc=1446,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.55704355 = fieldWeight in 1446, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1446)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält u.a. die Beiträge: VICKERY, B.C.: The nature of information science; FOSKETT, D.J.: The contribution of classification to a theory of librarianship; KOCHEN, M.: Referential consulting networks; GOFFMAN, W.: On information retrieval systems; BOOTH, A.D.: On a fallacy in the use of computing machines for automated dictionary retrieval; MORSE, P.M.: Browsing and search theory; FAIRTHORNE, R.A.: The symmetries of ignorance; RICHMOND, P.A.: A thesaurus within a thesaurus: a study in ambiguity; METCALFE, J.: When is a subject not a subject?; DUNKIN, P.S.: From pig to man; TAUBER, M.F. u. H. FEINBERG: Book catalogs; MENZEL, H.: Informal communication in science: its advantages and its formal analogues; KUNZE, H.: On the professional image and the education of the librarian

0.029806275 = product of:
  0.05961255 = sum of:
    0.05961255 = sum of:
      0.034878444 = weight(_text_:theory in 207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034878444 = score(doc=207,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.1624372 = fieldWeight in 207, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=207)
      0.024734104 = weight(_text_:22 in 207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024734104 = score(doc=207,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 207, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=207)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

025.3/071 22

DDC

025.3/071 22

Footnote

The eternal debate in the teaching of cataloging over theory versus practice emerges in this volume. As Li Si suggests in describing cataloging education in the People's Republic of China, the matter might be laid at the door of the faculty, stating, "Although the majority of teaching faculty members in the library and information science programs have a solid theoretical foundation from their school education and training, they do not normally possess practical work experience in their field of specialty and they are not familiar with the application of technologies in the field. In order to enhance their practical skills, these faculty members should be given the opportunity to work in libraries... This way, they would be able to put theory into practice and gain rich, practical field experience, thus improving the relevance and quality of their teaching (p. 97)." One wonders how warmly faculty members would welcome that kind of opportunity! On the other hand, in many places, onthe-job training is weak, as Shoichi Taniguchi describes it in Japan, "on the job training and continuing education are neither encouraged nor promoted (p. 132)." Among the most interesting and important aspects of this book are the tables of hard data it presents. Almost every chapter reports on surveys done by the authors on the state of library education in general and/or the kinds of offerings in cataloging and classification available within their countries. Some authors also include statistics on the numbers of persons receiving certificates, diplomas, and/or master's degrees, which is useful in understanding the different levels of expertise being developed over time. While one could argue that there are gaps in coverage, with large, influential countries such as France and Italy in Europe, Brazil, Bolivia, and Chile in South America, and Thailand and Myanmar in Asia, left out of the book, for the most part there is good representation from different parts of the globe. Education for Library Cataloging is a good choice as a textbook for coursework in International Librarianship as well as a primer in what to expect if one's information center is affiliated with partners outside the United States and Canada. This book should be seen as an important "must read" for all library students and practitioners concerned about issues of increasing globalization in bibliographic control. It is highly recommended."

0.029806275 = product of:
  0.05961255 = sum of:
    0.05961255 = sum of:
      0.034878444 = weight(_text_:theory in 2392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034878444 = score(doc=2392,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.1624372 = fieldWeight in 2392, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2392)
      0.024734104 = weight(_text_:22 in 2392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024734104 = score(doc=2392,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 2392, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2392)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

323.44/5 22 (GBV;LoC)

DDC

323.44/5 22 (GBV;LoC)

Footnote

Part III, "Privacy and Information Control," has four articles and three discussion cases beginning with an 1890 article from the Harvard Law Review, "The Right to Privacy," written by Samuel A Warren and Louis D. Brandeis. Moore then includes an article debating whether people own their genes, an article on caller I.D., and an article on computer surveillance. While all four articles pose some very interesting questions, Margaret Everett's article "The Social Life of Genes: Privacy, Property, and the New Genetics" is incredible. She does a great job of demonstrating how advances in genetics have led to increased concerns over ownership and privacy of genetic codes. For instance, if someone's genetic code predisposes them to a deadly disease, should insurance companies have access to that information? Part IV, "Freedom of Speech and Information Control," has three articles and two discussion cases that examine speech and photography issues. Moore begins this section with Kent Greenawalt's "Rationales for Freedom of Speech," which looks at a number of arguments favoring free speech. Then the notion of free speech is carried over into the digital world in "Digital Speech and Democratic Culture: A Theory of Freedom of Expression for the Information Society" by Jack M. Balkin. At 59 pages, this is the work's longest article and demonstrates how complex the digital environment has made freedom of speech issues. Finally, Part V, "Governmental and Societal Control of Information," contains three articles and three discussion cases which provide an excellent view into the conflict between security and privacy. For instance, the first article, "Carnivore, the FBI's E-mail Surveillance System: Devouring Criminals, Not Privacy" by Griffin S. Durham, examines the FBI's e-mail surveillance program called Carnivore. Durham does an excellent job of demonstrating that Carnivore is a necessary and legitimate system used in limited circumstances and with a court order. Librarians will find the final article in the book, National Security at What Price? A Look into Civil Liberty Concerns in the Information Age under the USA Patriot Act by Jacob R. Lilly, of particular interest. In this article, Lilly uses historical examples of events that sacrificed civil liberties for national security such as the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II and the McCarthyism of the Cold War era to examine the PATRIOT Act.
The book also includes an index, a selected bibliography, and endnotes for each article. More information on the authors of the articles would have been useful, however. One of the best features of Information Ethics is the discussion cases at the end of each chapter. For instance, in the discussion cases, Moore asks questions like: Would you allow one person to die to save nine? Should a scientist be allowed to experiment on people without their knowledge if there is no harm? Should marriages between people carrying a certain gene be outlawed? These discussion cases really add to the value of the readings. The only suggestion would be to have put them at the beginning of each section so the reader could have the questions floating in their heads as they read the material. Information Ethics is a well thought out and organized collection of articles. Moore has done an excellent job of finding articles to provide a fair and balanced look at a variety of complicated and far-reaching topics. Further, the work has breadth and depth. Moore is careful to include enough historical articles, like the 1890 Warren article, to give balance and perspective to new and modern topics like E-mail surveillance, biopiracy, and genetics. This provides a reader with just enough philosophy and history theory to work with the material. The articles are written by a variety of authors from differing fields so they range in length, tone, and style, creating a rich tapestry of ideas and arguments. However, this is not a quick or easy read. The subject matter is complex and one should plan to spend time with the book. The book is well worth the effort though. Overall, this is a highly recommended work for all libraries especially academic ones."

0.029680926 = product of:
  0.059361853 = sum of:
    0.059361853 = product of:
      0.118723705 = sum of:
        0.118723705 = weight(_text_:22 in 7578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.118723705 = score(doc=7578,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 7578, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7578)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2000 18:22:14

0.029680926 = product of:
  0.059361853 = sum of:
    0.059361853 = product of:
      0.118723705 = sum of:
        0.118723705 = weight(_text_:22 in 670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.118723705 = score(doc=670,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05163523 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 670, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=670)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2000 18:22:27

0.02962387 = product of:
  0.05924774 = sum of:
    0.05924774 = sum of:
      0.039460458 = weight(_text_:theory in 55) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039460458 = score(doc=55,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.21471956 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.18377672 = fieldWeight in 55, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=55)
      0.019787284 = weight(_text_:22 in 55) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.019787284 = score(doc=55,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18081778 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05163523 = queryNorm
          0.109432176 = fieldWeight in 55, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=55)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Held for the first time in the United States, the Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS4) is the fourth in the series of international conferences that bring together leading researchers from around the world. CoLIS4 provides a forum for critically exploring and analyzing library and information science as a discipline and as a field of research from historical, philosophical, theoretical, and methodological perspectives. The papers in this volume cover a wide variety of topics, presenting the latest research and information on new developments and new approaches to conceptual frameworks and methods in library and information science. Papers range from a re-examination of the core concepts to empirical studies, analyzing such areas as Web searching, information retrieval, informetrics, information behavior, aspects of learning, business intelligence, and information processing mechanisms. As library and information science is closely associated with a variety of other disciplines and its practice employs technologies that are changing rapidly, presenters focus on the old and the new, address theory and practice, and bridge diverse intellectual areas. From challenging existing approaches and proposing new ones to establishing models and reviewing methods-the presenters lead the way to change and further exploration.

Content

To encourage a spirit of deeper reflection, the organizing committee invited 20-minute paper presentations, each followed by 10 minutes of discussion. (There were no separate, concurrent tracks.) This approach encouraged direct follow-up questions and discussion which carried forward from session to session, providing a satisfying sense of continuity to the overall conference theme of exploring the interaction between conceptual and empirical approaches to LIS. The expressed goals of CoLIS4 were to: - explore the existing and emerging conceptual frameworks and methods of library and information science as a field, - encourage discourse about the character and definitions of key concepts in LIS, and - examine the position of LIS among parallel contemporary domains and professions likewise concerned with information and information technology, such as computer science, management information systems, and new media and communication studies. The keynote address by Tom Wilson (University of Sheffield) provided an historical perspective on the philosophical and research frameworks of LIS in the post-World War II period. He traced the changing emphases on the objects of LIS study: definitions of information and documents; information retrieval, relevance, systems, and architectures; information users and behaviors. He raised issues of the relevance of LIS research to real-world information services and practice, and the gradual shift in research approaches from quantitative to qualitative. He concluded by stressing the ongoing need of LIS for cumulative, theory-based, and content-rich bodies of research, meaningful to practitioners and useful to contemporary LIS education.
Themes and questions threaded throughout the conference papers and panels addressed the uniqueness of LIS as a contemporary "intersection of information, technology, people, and society" (CoLIS Proceedings Preface). Papers by Birger Hjørland and by Sanna Talja, Kimmo Tuominen, and Reijo Savolainen directly addressed the essential nature and metatheory of LIS as a field of inquiry by reviewing its theoretical models and epistemological perspectives, such as the information transfer model and socio-cognitive theory. The cognitive grounding of much LIS research was present in Pertti Vakkari's and Mikko Pennanen's study linking university students' concept formation with their search processes and task performances while preparing research proposals, as well as in Peter Ingwersen's analysis of the cognitive conception of document polyrepresentation (multiple ways of representing documents) applied to information retrieval. A number of papers presented empirically and theoretically derived taxonomies of the fundamental characteristics of information bearers (documents and systems) and information behaviors (both individual and collaborative). These mark a contemporary effort to enumerate and classify the elements that LIS researchers should be examining and with which they should be building systems and generating theory. Nicholas Belkin and Colleen Cool reported on field research with which they are constructing a taxonomy of interactions in information seeking and communication behavior, to be used to inform information system building. Rong Tang presented her taxonomic study of Web searching query patterns and argued for the need to link these to user cognitive operations and search tasks. Linda Cooper explored school children's categorizations and knowledge of information organization in libraries by having them arrange books and topics visually and spatially on "virtual" bookshelves. Kartriina Byström and Preben Hansen proposed a nested typology of the concepts of work tasks, information seeking tasks, and information retrieval tasks as units of analysis for LIS research. Work task and domain analysis figured importantly in several papers, reflecting a increasing application of information context research approaches. In addition to Byström and Hansen's theoretical study of the concepts of tasks in general, the work reported by researchers at Risø National Laboratory, Denmark (Annelise Mark Pejtersen, Bryan Cleal, Morten Hertzum, Hanne Albrechtsen) demonstrated the application of the Cognitive Work Analysis (CWA) framework used to inform the design of a virtual "collaboratory" used by three European film archives. Birger Hjørland asserted that domain analysis, including the study of the interests, goals, values, and consequences of information use and users in specific subject and work domains, is central to the practice of LIS.

Date

22. 2.2007 18:56:23
22. 2.2007 19:12:10