-
Hjoerland, B.: Science, Part I : basic conceptions of science and the scientific method (2021)
0.03
0.03109455 = product of:
0.0621891 = sum of:
0.03931248 = weight(_text_:processing in 594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03931248 = score(doc=594,freq=2.0), product of:
0.175792 = queryWeight, product of:
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 594, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=594)
0.02287662 = product of:
0.06862986 = sum of:
0.06862986 = weight(_text_:science in 594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06862986 = score(doc=594,freq=34.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.59997743 = fieldWeight in 594, product of:
5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
34.0 = termFreq=34.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=594)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- This article is the first in a trilogy about the concept "science". Section 1 considers the historical development of the meaning of the term science and shows its close relation to the terms "knowledge" and "philosophy". Section 2 presents four historic phases in the basic conceptualizations of science (1) science as representing absolute certain of knowledge based on deductive proof; (2) science as representing absolute certain of knowledge based on "the scientific method"; (3) science as representing fallible knowledge based on "the scientific method"; (4) science without a belief in "the scientific method" as constitutive, hence the question about the nature of science becomes dramatic. Section 3 presents four basic understandings of the scientific method: Rationalism, which gives priority to a priori thinking; empiricism, which gives priority to the collection, description, and processing of data in a neutral way; historicism, which gives priority to the interpretation of data in the light of "paradigm" and pragmatism, which emphasizes the analysis of the purposes, consequences, and the interests of knowledge. The second article in the trilogy focus on different fields studying science, while the final article presets further developments in the concept of science and the general conclusion. Overall, the trilogy illuminates the most important tensions in different conceptualizations of science and argues for the role of information science and knowledge organization in the study of science and suggests how "science" should be understood as an object of research in these fields.
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Special issue on 'Science and knowledge organization' mit längeren Überblicken zu wichtigen Begriffen der Wissensorgansiation.
-
Hjoerland, B.: Theories of knowledge organization - theories of knowledge (2017)
0.03
0.026511624 = product of:
0.1060465 = sum of:
0.1060465 = sum of:
0.023303263 = weight(_text_:science in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023303263 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
0.04155854 = weight(_text_:29 in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04155854 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15275662 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
0.041184697 = weight(_text_:22 in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041184697 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15206799 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3494, 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=3494)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Pages
- S.22-36
- Source
- Theorie, Semantik und Organisation von Wissen: Proceedings der 13. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und dem 13. Internationalen Symposium der Informationswissenschaft der Higher Education Association for Information Science (HI) Potsdam (19.-20.03.2013): 'Theory, Information and Organization of Knowledge' / Proceedings der 14. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB) Passau (16.06.2015): 'Lexical Resources for Knowledge Organization' / Proceedings des Workshops der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) auf der SEMANTICS Leipzig (1.09.2014): 'Knowledge Organization and Semantic Web' / Proceedings des Workshops der Polnischen und Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) Cottbus (29.-30.09.2011): 'Economics of Knowledge Production and Organization'. Hrsg. von W. Babik, H.P. Ohly u. K. Weber
-
Hjoerland, B.: Citation analysis : a social and dynamic approach to knowledge organization (2013)
0.02
0.022430437 = product of:
0.044860873 = sum of:
0.03931248 = weight(_text_:processing in 2710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03931248 = score(doc=2710,freq=2.0), product of:
0.175792 = queryWeight, product of:
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 2710, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2710)
0.005548396 = product of:
0.016645188 = sum of:
0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 2710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016645188 = score(doc=2710,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 2710, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2710)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Knowledge organization (KO) and bibliometrics have traditionally been seen as separate subfields of library and information science, but bibliometric techniques make it possible to identify candidate terms for thesauri and to organize knowledge by relating scientific papers and authors to each other and thereby indicating kinds of relatedness and semantic distance. It is therefore important to view bibliometric techniques as a family of approaches to KO in order to illustrate their relative strengths and weaknesses. The subfield of bibliometrics concerned with citation analysis forms a distinct approach to KO which is characterized by its social, historical and dynamic nature, its close dependence on scholarly literature and its explicit kind of literary warrant. The two main methods, co-citation analysis and bibliographic coupling represent different things and thus neither can be considered superior for all purposes. The main difference between traditional knowledge organization systems (KOSs) and maps based on citation analysis is that the first group represents intellectual KOSs, whereas the second represents social KOSs. For this reason bibliometric maps cannot be expected ever to be fully equivalent to scholarly taxonomies, but they are - along with other forms of KOSs - valuable tools for assisting users' to orient themselves to the information ecology. Like other KOSs, citation-based maps cannot be neutral but will always be based on researchers' decisions, which tend to favor certain interests and views at the expense of others.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 49(2013) no.6, S.1313-1325
-
Hjoerland, B.: Facet analysis : the logical approach to knowledge organization (2013)
0.02
0.022430437 = product of:
0.044860873 = sum of:
0.03931248 = weight(_text_:processing in 2720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03931248 = score(doc=2720,freq=2.0), product of:
0.175792 = queryWeight, product of:
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 2720, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2720)
0.005548396 = product of:
0.016645188 = sum of:
0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 2720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016645188 = score(doc=2720,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 2720, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2720)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- The facet-analytic paradigm is probably the most distinct approach to knowledge organization within Library and Information Science, and in many ways it has dominated what has be termed "modern classification theory". It was mainly developed by S.R. Ranganathan and the British Classification Research Group, but it is mostly based on principles of logical division developed more than two millennia ago. Colon Classification (CC) and Bliss 2 (BC2) are among the most important systems developed on this theoretical basis, but it has also influenced the development of other systems, such as the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and is also applied in many websites. It still has a strong position in the field and it is the most explicit and "pure" theoretical approach to knowledge organization (KO) (but it is not by implication necessarily also the most important one). The strength of this approach is its logical principles and the way it provides structures in knowledge organization systems (KOS). The main weaknesses are (1) its lack of empirical basis and (2) its speculative ordering of knowledge without basis in the development or influence of theories and socio-historical studies. It seems to be based on the problematic assumption that relations between concepts are a priori and not established by the development of models, theories and laws.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 49(2013) no.2, S.545-557
-
Hjoerland, B.: Towards a theory of aboutness, subject, topicality, theme, domain, field, content ... and relevance (2001)
0.01
0.012419055 = product of:
0.04967622 = sum of:
0.04967622 = product of:
0.07451433 = sum of:
0.03295579 = weight(_text_:science in 6032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03295579 = score(doc=6032,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 6032, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6032)
0.04155854 = weight(_text_:29 in 6032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04155854 = score(doc=6032,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15275662 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 6032, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6032)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Theories of aboutness and theories of subject analysis and of related concepts such as topicality are often isolated from each other in the literature of information science (IS) and related disciplines. In IS it is important to consider the nature and meaning of these concepts, which is closely related to theoretical and metatheoretical issues in information retrieval (IR). A theory of IR must specify which concepts should be regarded as synonymous concepts and explain how the meaning of the nonsynonymous concepts should be defined
- Date
- 29. 9.2001 14:03:14
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.9, S.774-778
-
Hjoerland, B.: Domain analysis (2017)
0.01
0.01235463 = product of:
0.04941852 = sum of:
0.04941852 = product of:
0.07412778 = sum of:
0.0266323 = weight(_text_:science in 3852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0266323 = score(doc=3852,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 3852, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3852)
0.047495477 = weight(_text_:29 in 3852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047495477 = score(doc=3852,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15275662 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 3852, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3852)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The domain-analytic approach to knowledge organization (KO) (and to the broader field of library and information science, LIS) is outlined. The article reviews the discussions and proposals on the definition of domains, and provides an example of a domain-analytic study in the field of art studies. Varieties of domain analysis as well as criticism and controversies are presented and discussed.
- Date
- 29. 9.2017 19:09:20
-
Hjoerland, B.; Christensen, F.S.: Work tasks and socio-cognitive relevance : a specific example (2002)
0.01
0.010747994 = product of:
0.042991977 = sum of:
0.042991977 = product of:
0.064487964 = sum of:
0.023303263 = weight(_text_:science in 5237) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023303263 = score(doc=5237,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 5237, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5237)
0.041184697 = weight(_text_:22 in 5237) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041184697 = score(doc=5237,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15206799 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5237, 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=5237)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 21. 7.2006 14:11:22
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 53(2002) no.11, S.960-965
-
Hjoerland, B.: ¬The importance of theories of knowledge : indexing and information retrieval as an example (2011)
0.01
0.010591499 = product of:
0.042365994 = sum of:
0.042365994 = product of:
0.06354899 = sum of:
0.02824782 = weight(_text_:science in 4359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02824782 = score(doc=4359,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.24694869 = fieldWeight in 4359, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4359)
0.035301168 = weight(_text_:22 in 4359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035301168 = score(doc=4359,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15206799 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4359, 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=4359)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- A recent study in information science (IS), raises important issues concerning the value of human indexing and basic theories of indexing and information retrieval, as well as the use of quantitative and qualitative approaches in IS and the underlying theories of knowledge informing the field. The present article uses L&E as the point of departure for demonstrating in what way more social and interpretative understandings may provide fruitful improvements for research in indexing, knowledge organization, and information retrieval. The artcle is motivated by the observation that philosophical contributions tend to be ignored in IS if they are not directly formed as criticisms or invitations to dialogs. It is part of the author's ongoing publication of articles about philosophical issues in IS and it is intended to be followed by analyzes of other examples of contributions to core issues in IS. Although it is formulated as a criticism of a specific paper, it should be seen as part of a general discussion of the philosophical foundation of IS and as a support to the emerging social paradigm in this field.
- Date
- 17. 3.2011 19:22:55
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.1, S.72-77
-
Hjoerland, B.: User-based and cognitive approaches to knowledge organization : a theoretical analysis of the research literature (2013)
0.01
0.008826248 = product of:
0.035304993 = sum of:
0.035304993 = product of:
0.05295749 = sum of:
0.023539849 = weight(_text_:science in 629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023539849 = score(doc=629,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 629, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=629)
0.029417641 = weight(_text_:22 in 629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029417641 = score(doc=629,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15206799 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 629, 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=629)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- In the 1970s and 1980s, forms of user-based and cognitive approaches to knowledge organization came to the forefront as part of the overall development in library and information science and in the broader society. The specific nature of user-based approaches is their basis in the empirical studies of users or the principle that users need to be involved in the construction of knowledge organization systems. It might seem obvious that user-friendly systems should be designed on user studies or user involvement, but extremely successful systems such as Apple's iPhone, Dialog's search system and Google's PageRank are not based on the empirical studies of users. In knowledge organization, the Book House System is one example of a system based on user studies. In cognitive science the important WordNet database is claimed to be based on psychological research. This article considers such examples. The role of the user is often confused with the role of subjectivity. Knowledge organization systems cannot be objective and must therefore, by implication, be based on some kind of subjectivity. This subjectivity should, however, be derived from collective views in discourse communities rather than be derived from studies of individuals or from the study ofabstract minds.
- Date
- 22. 2.2013 11:49:13
-
Hjoerland, B.: Classical databases and knowledge organisation : a case for Boolean retrieval and human decision-making during search (2014)
0.01
0.008826248 = product of:
0.035304993 = sum of:
0.035304993 = product of:
0.05295749 = sum of:
0.023539849 = weight(_text_:science in 1398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023539849 = score(doc=1398,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 1398, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1398)
0.029417641 = weight(_text_:22 in 1398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029417641 = score(doc=1398,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15206799 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1398, 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=1398)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- This paper considers classical bibliographic databases based on the Boolean retrieval model (for example MEDLINE and PsycInfo). This model is challenged by modern search engines and information retrieval (IR) researchers, who often consider Boolean retrieval as a less efficient approach. This speech examines this claim and argues for the continued value of Boolean systems, which implies two further issues: (1) the important role of human expertise in searching (expert searchers and "information literacy") and (2) the role of knowledge organization (KO) in the design and use of classical databases, including controlled vocabularies and human indexing. An underlying issue is the kind of retrieval system for which one should aim. It is suggested that Julian Warner's (2010) differentiation between the computer science traditions, aiming at automatically transforming queries into (ranked) sets of relevant documents, and an older library-orientated tradition aiming at increasing the "selection power" of users seems important. The Boolean retrieval model is important in order to provide users with the power to make informed searches and have full control over what is found and what is not found. These issues may also have important implications for the maintenance of information science and KO as research fields as well as for the information profession as a profession in its own right.
- Source
- Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
-
Hjoerland, B.: ¬The controversy over the concept of information : a rejoinder to Professor Bates (2009)
0.01
0.0058491547 = product of:
0.023396619 = sum of:
0.023396619 = product of:
0.035094928 = sum of:
0.020386107 = weight(_text_:science in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020386107 = score(doc=2748,freq=12.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.17821985 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
0.014708821 = weight(_text_:22 in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014708821 = score(doc=2748,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15206799 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Content
- References Bates, M.J. (2005). Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science. Information Research, 10(4), paper 239. Available at http://InformationR.net/ir/10-4/paper239.html. Bates, M.J. (2006). Fundamental forms of information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(8), 1033-1045. Bates, M.J. (2008). Hjorland's critique of Bates' work on defining information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(5), 842-844. Hjoerland, B. (2000). Documents, memory institutions, and information science. Journal of Documentation, 56, 27-41. Hjoerland, B. (2007). Information: Objective or subjective-situational? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(10), 1448-1456. Karpatschof, B. (2000). Human activity. Contributions to the anthropological sciences from a perspective of activity theory. Copenhagen: Dansk Psykologisk Forlag. Retrieved May 14, 2007, from http://informationr.net/ir/ 12-3/Karpatschof/Karp00.html.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 18:13:27
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.3, S.643
-
Hjoerland, B.: ¬The nature of information science and its core concepts (2014)
0.00
0.00470797 = product of:
0.01883188 = sum of:
0.01883188 = product of:
0.05649564 = sum of:
0.05649564 = weight(_text_:science in 1318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05649564 = score(doc=1318,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.49389738 = fieldWeight in 1318, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1318)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Series
- Studies in history and philosophy of science ; 34
-
Hjoerland, B.: Information seeking and subject representation : an activity-theoretical approach to information science (1997)
0.00
0.004403903 = product of:
0.017615613 = sum of:
0.017615613 = product of:
0.052846834 = sum of:
0.052846834 = weight(_text_:science in 6963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052846834 = score(doc=6963,freq=14.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.4619987 = fieldWeight in 6963, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6963)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Information science has for a long time been drawing on the knowledge produced in psychology and related fields. This is reasonable, for the central issue in information science concerns individual users navigating information spaces such as libraries, databases, and the Internet, Thus, informations seeking is the fundamental problem in information science, while other problems, such as document representation, are subordinate. This book proposes a general theory of information seeking as a theoretical basis for information science
- Content
- Introduction - information seeking and subject representation - subject searching and subject representation data - subject analysis and knowledge organization - the concept of subject or subject matter and basic epistemological positions - methodological consequences for information science - science, discipline, and subject field as a framework for information seeking - information needs and cognitive and scientific development
-
Hjoerland, B.: Library and information science and the philosophy of science (2005)
0.00
0.0040772217 = product of:
0.016308887 = sum of:
0.016308887 = product of:
0.04892666 = sum of:
0.04892666 = weight(_text_:science in 4404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04892666 = score(doc=4404,freq=12.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.42772767 = fieldWeight in 4404, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4404)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this article is to introduce the special issue of Journal of Documentation about library and information science (LIS) and the philosophy of science. Design/methodology/approach - The most important earlier collected works about metatheories and philosophies of science within LIS are listed. Findings - It is claimed that Sweden probably is the country in which philosophy of science has the highest priority in LIS education. The plan of the guest editor was that each epistemological position should be both introduced and interpreted in a LIS context together with a review of its influence within the field and an evaluation of the pros and cons of that position. This was only an ideal plan. It is argued that it is important that such knowledge and debate are available within the LIS-literature itself and that the answers to such questions as "What is positivism?" are not trivial ones. Originality/value - The introduction is written to assist readers overviewing the issue and share the thoughts of the editor in planning the issue.
-
Hjoerland, B.: Information: objective or subjective/situational? (2007)
0.00
0.0040772217 = product of:
0.016308887 = sum of:
0.016308887 = product of:
0.04892666 = sum of:
0.04892666 = weight(_text_:science in 5074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04892666 = score(doc=5074,freq=12.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.42772767 = fieldWeight in 5074, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5074)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- This article contrasts Bates' understanding of information as an observer-independent phenomenon with an understanding of information as situational, put forward by, among others, Bateson, Yovits, Spang-Hanssen, Brier, Buckland, Goguen, and Hjorland. The conflict between objective and subjective ways of understanding information corresponds to the conflict between an understanding of information as a thing or a substance versus an understanding of it as a sign. It is a fundamental distinction that involves a whole theory of knowledge, and it has roots back to different metaphors applied in Shannon's information theory. It is argued that a subject-dependent/ situation specific understanding of information is best suited to fulfill the needs in information science and that it is urgent for us to base Information Science (IS; or Library and Information Science, LIS) on this alternative theoretical frame.
- Content
- Bezugnahme auf: Bates, M.J.: Fundamental forms of information. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(2006), no.8, S.1033-1045 und Bates, M.J.: Information and knowledge: an evolutionary framework for information science. In: Information research, 10(2005) no.4.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.10, S.1448-1456
-
Albrechtsen, H.; Hjoerland, B.: Information seeking and knowledge organization : the presentation of a new book (1997)
0.00
0.0038838773 = product of:
0.015535509 = sum of:
0.015535509 = product of:
0.046606526 = sum of:
0.046606526 = weight(_text_:science in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046606526 = score(doc=310,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Recently, a new book on knowledge organization has been published by Greenwood Press. The title is 'Information seeking and subject representation: an activity-theoretical approach to information science'. This book presents a new general theory for information science and knowledge organization, based on a theory of information seeking. The author is Dr. Birger Hjørland, Royal School of Library and Information Science. In 1994, he presented his work on theory for KO at the 3rd International ISKO conference in Copenhagen. The book aims to provide both a new understanding for the foundations of information science and knowledge organization, and to provide new directions in research and teaching within these fields. KO (Hanne Albrechtsen) has interviewed Birger HjÝrland in Copenhagen about his views on knowledge organization and subject representation
-
Hjoerland, B.; Kyllesbech Nielsen, L.: Subject access points in electronic retrieval (2001)
0.00
0.0038838773 = product of:
0.015535509 = sum of:
0.015535509 = product of:
0.046606526 = sum of:
0.046606526 = weight(_text_:science in 3826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046606526 = score(doc=3826,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 3826, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3826)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 35(2001), S.249-298
-
Hjoerland, B.: Theory and metatheory of information science : a new interpretation (1998)
0.00
0.0038838773 = product of:
0.015535509 = sum of:
0.015535509 = product of:
0.046606526 = sum of:
0.046606526 = weight(_text_:science in 4723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046606526 = score(doc=4723,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 4723, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4723)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Epistemological theories of information science have a fundamental impact on theories about users, their cognition and information seeking behaviour, on subject analysis, and on classification. They also have a fundamental impact on information retrieval, on the understanding of 'information', on the view of documents and their role in communication, on information selection, on theories about the functions of information systems and on the role of information professionals. Asserts that information science must be based on epistemological knowledge, which avoids blind alleys and is not outdated. Shows limitations in the dominant approaches to information science and proposes alternative viewpoints
-
Hjoerland, B.: Answer to Professor Szostak (concept theory) (2010)
0.00
0.0038440418 = product of:
0.015376167 = sum of:
0.015376167 = product of:
0.0461285 = sum of:
0.0461285 = weight(_text_:science in 3323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0461285 = score(doc=3323,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.40326554 = fieldWeight in 3323, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3323)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Content
- Bezug zu: Hjoerland, B.: Concept theory. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.8, S.1519-1536.
- Footnote
- Erwiderung zu: Szostak, R.: Comment on Hjørland's concept theory Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.5, S.1076-1077.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.5, S.1078-1080
-
Hjoerland, B.: Theory of information science : Reply to Professor Gernot Wersig (1998)
0.00
0.0033290375 = product of:
0.01331615 = sum of:
0.01331615 = product of:
0.03994845 = sum of:
0.03994845 = weight(_text_:science in 403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03994845 = score(doc=403,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.043425296 = queryNorm
0.34923816 = fieldWeight in 403, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=403)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
