Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.024468219 = product of:
  0.073404655 = sum of:
    0.073404655 = weight(_text_:electronic in 2682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.073404655 = score(doc=2682,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.37407395 = fieldWeight in 2682, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2682)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The new electronic environments pose a threat and challenge to the theory and practice of knowledge organization. Documents can be approached in electronic retrieval activities in ways not dependent an 'classical' knowledge organization activities such as indexing or classification. Accordingly, an argument stating the qualitative difference of knowledge organization in the new electronic environments must show that knowledge organization is worth pursuing and that it is a valuable support to users of information retrieval (IR) systems. In this paper the qualitative difference of knowledge organization and its role in scholarly communication is framed as a question of ascribing cognitive authority to documents. The concem is to examine and discuss how and to what extent knowledge organization as an epistemic instrument in scholarly communication can contribute to ascribe cognitive authority to scholarly documents. The paper is structured in the following way. Initially, a brief examination of the appearance of cognitive authority in knowledge organization, and how that affects an argument stating the qualitative difference of knowledge organization shall be presented. Secondly, the theoretical approach will be outlined and discussed. Then the empirical analysis applying the theory will be presented. The last part will point to the benefits, limitations, and possibilities of the proposed theoretical approach in relation to the conception of knowledge organization as an epistemic activity in scholarly communication.

0.014126732 = product of:
  0.042380195 = sum of:
    0.042380195 = weight(_text_:electronic in 2043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042380195 = score(doc=2043,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.21597168 = fieldWeight in 2043, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2043)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In this article the relationship between communication technologies and the LIS concept of knowledge organization will be examined from a medium-theory perspective. The purpose of the medium-theory perspective is to trace the historicity of the LIS concept of knowledge organization, that is, an examination of which tradition has produced the concept. The perspective will help to reveal the condition of possibilities of knowledge organization and its strong connection with communication technologies, and their constitution of the social organization of society. The means and modes of communication fundamentally alter existing ways of thinking and of producing, communicatiog and organizing knowledge. The LIS concept of knowledge organization will be analyzed in relation to the storing and communication of knowledge in oral cultures, written cultures, print culture, and electronic cultures. Through this, it will be argued that the narrow LIS concept of knowledge organization is subordinated and in interaction with a broader social organization of knowledge in society. Further, it will be argued that the rise of the Internet as a source of knowledge and information must be understood in relation to and in continuation of this interaction. Among other things, it will be concluded that a relevant socio-historical background and framework for the LIS concept of knowledge organization is how humans have organized their intellectual activities throughout history in terms of particular means and modes of communication. Medium theory can provide part of this background and framework.

0.014126732 = product of:
  0.042380195 = sum of:
    0.042380195 = weight(_text_:electronic in 4452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042380195 = score(doc=4452,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.21597168 = fieldWeight in 4452, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4452)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In 1971 UNISIST proposed a model for scientific and technical communication. This model has been widely cited and additional models have been added to the literature. There is a need to bring this model to the focus of information science (IS) research as well as to update and revise it. There are both empirical and theoretical reasons for this need. On the empirical side much has happened in the developments of electronic communication that needs to be considered. From a theoretical point of view the domain-analytic view has proposed that differences between different disciplines and domains should be emphasised. The original model only considered scientific and technical communication as a whole. There is a need both to compare with the humanities and social sciences and to regard internal differences in the sciences. There are also other reasons to reconsider and modify this model today. Offers not only a descriptive model, but also a theoretical perspective from which information systems may be understood and evaluated. In addition to this provides empirical exemplification and proposals for research initiatives.