Search (25 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Olson, H.A."
  1. Olson, H.A.: Wind and rain and dark of night : classification in scientific discourse communities (2008) 0.09 
    0.085732274 = product of:
  0.24005036 = sum of:
    0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028549349 = score(doc=2270,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
    0.050928485 = product of:
      0.10185697 = sum of:
        0.10185697 = weight(_text_:bliss in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10185697 = score(doc=2270,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21478812 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.4742207 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.10185697 = weight(_text_:bliss in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10185697 = score(doc=2270,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21478812 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4742207 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
    0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030166224 = score(doc=2270,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
    0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028549349 = score(doc=2270,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
  0.35714287 = coord(5/14)
    Content
    Classifications of natural phenomena demonstrate the applicability of discourse analysis in finding the importance of concepts such as warrant for categorization and classification. Temperature scales provide a body of official literature for close consideration. Official documents of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) reveal the reasoning behind choices affecting these standards. A more cursory scrutiny of the Saffir-Simpson Scale through scholarly publications and documentation from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (KIST) indicates the potential of this form of analysis. The same holds true for an examination of the definition of what is a planet as determined by the International Astronomical Union. As Sayers, Richardson, and Bliss have indicated, there seem to be principles and a reliance on context that bridge the differences between natural and artificial, scientific and bibliographic classifications.
  2. Olson, H.A.: Cultural discourse of classification : indigeous alternatives to the tradition of Aristotle, Durkheim, and Foucault (2001) 0.06 
    0.0620288 = product of:
  0.21710078 = sum of:
    0.074478 = weight(_text_:classification in 1594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.074478 = score(doc=1594,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.7788835 = fieldWeight in 1594, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1594)
    0.03324832 = product of:
      0.06649664 = sum of:
        0.06649664 = weight(_text_:schemes in 1594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06649664 = score(doc=1594,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.41386467 = fieldWeight in 1594, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1594)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.074478 = weight(_text_:classification in 1594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.074478 = score(doc=1594,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.7788835 = fieldWeight in 1594, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1594)
    0.034896467 = product of:
      0.069792934 = sum of:
        0.069792934 = weight(_text_:texts in 1594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069792934 = score(doc=1594,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16460659 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.42399842 = fieldWeight in 1594, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1594)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    Abstract
    The paper explores the cultural construction of classification by identifying fundamental characteristics of classification and examining how these fit with other cultures. Foucault's method of discourse analysis is applied to selected texts an classification in two areas. The first area is classification originated in the dominant Western culture. The second area is classifications from indigenous cultures. It is concluded that classification research needs to have an increasing awareness of the cultural construction of classification schemes and to work with alternatives to approaches of fundamental universal principles of classification.
    Source
    Advances in classification research, vol.10: proceedings of the 10th ASIS SIG/CR Classification Research Workshop. Ed.: Albrechtsen, H. u. J.E. Mai
  3. Olson, H.A.: How we construct subjects : a feminist analysis (2007) 0.04 
    0.044263113 = product of:
  0.12393671 = sum of:
    0.042435654 = weight(_text_:subject in 5588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042435654 = score(doc=5588,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.39516178 = fieldWeight in 5588, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5588)
    0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 5588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023791125 = score(doc=5588,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 5588, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5588)
    0.0237488 = product of:
      0.0474976 = sum of:
        0.0474976 = weight(_text_:schemes in 5588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0474976 = score(doc=5588,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.2956176 = fieldWeight in 5588, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5588)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 5588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023791125 = score(doc=5588,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 5588, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5588)
    0.010170003 = product of:
      0.020340007 = sum of:
        0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 5588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020340007 = score(doc=5588,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5588, 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=5588)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.35714287 = coord(5/14)
    Abstract
    To organize information, librarians create structures. These structures grow from a logic that goes back at least as far as Aristotle. It is the basis of classification as we practice it, and thesauri and subject headings have developed from it. Feminist critiques of logic suggest that logic is gendered in nature. This article will explore how these critiques play out in contemporary standards for the organization of information. Our widely used classification schemes embody principles such as hierarchical force that conform to traditional/Aristotelian logic. Our subject heading strings follow a linear path of subdivision. Our thesauri break down subjects into discrete concepts. In thesauri and subject heading lists we privilege hierarchical relationships, reflected in the syndetic structure of broader and narrower terms, over all other relationships. Are our classificatory and syndetic structures gendered? Are there other options? Carol Gilligan's In a Different Voice (1982), Women's Ways of Knowing (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Tarule, 1986), and more recent related research suggest a different type of structure for women's knowledge grounded in "connected knowing." This article explores current and potential elements of connected knowing in subject access with a focus on the relationships, both paradigmatic and syntagmatic, between concepts.
    Date
    11.12.2019 19:00:22
  4. Milani, S.O.; Chaves Guimarães, J.A.; Olson, H.A.: Bias in subject representation : convergences and divergences in the international literature (2014) 0.04 
    0.042411767 = product of:
  0.11875295 = sum of:
    0.036007844 = weight(_text_:subject in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036007844 = score(doc=1443,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.33530587 = fieldWeight in 1443, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1443)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=1443,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 1443, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1443)
    0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030166224 = score(doc=1443,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 1443, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1443)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=1443,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 1443, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1443)
    0.0122040035 = product of:
      0.024408007 = sum of:
        0.024408007 = weight(_text_:22 in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024408007 = score(doc=1443,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1443, 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=1443)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.35714287 = coord(5/14)
    Abstract
    Terms chosen to represent document subjects, the classification notations assigned to them, the abstracts and indices contain biases in two contexts. In a negative context, document surrogates are constructed with bias when they leave out diverse features, disenfranchise groups and topics outside an accepted norm (Olson, 2002). In this way, these document surrogates would convey inclinations, or prejudices. In a positive context, slanting or tendency (Hjørland, 2008a, McIlwaine, 2003) conveyed by the document surrogates to ensure specificity to particular discursive communities or knowledge domains can be observed. Considering that topics related to biases are scarce in the Information Organization literature, this paper proposes a discussion on the characteristics and occurrences of bias in subject representation. This study is exploratory and bibliographic, and adopts an inductive method.
    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
  5. Olson, H.A.: Social influences on classification (2010) 0.03 
    0.028010517 = product of:
  0.13071574 = sum of:
    0.04758225 = weight(_text_:classification in 4702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04758225 = score(doc=4702,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49761042 = fieldWeight in 4702, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4702)
    0.035551235 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035551235 = score(doc=4702,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.30414405 = fieldWeight in 4702, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4702)
    0.04758225 = weight(_text_:classification in 4702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04758225 = score(doc=4702,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49761042 = fieldWeight in 4702, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4702)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The social and cultural influences on classification are evident in both the content and structure of classifications. In content, warrant, the basis on which content is determined, is most significant. Warrant is related to the purpose of the classification and has varied historically from the classical Greeks to the present. Warrant, whether it be what is written or published on a topic, what is taught, natural phenomena, or other factors is susceptible to all of the biases of the society that produces a classification. Biases of race, gender, orientation, geography, culture, language, and other factors are well-documented in relation to bibliographic classification. Bias occurs not only as a result of the warrant that determines content, but also as a result of classificatory structure. Classificatory structure may be culturally specific and the hierarchy typical of western classificatory structure can convey social influence through hierarchical force, ghettoization, and diasporization. Jesse Shera suggests the social importance of librarians and their role in classification. Combining Shera's theoretical stance with the historical/philosophical record and the empirical evidence of numerous studies in bibliographic classification, the link between society and classification is robust and of significance to the field of library and information science.
  6. Lee, H.-L.; Olson, H.A.: Hierarchical navigation : an exploration of Yahoo! directories (2005) 0.02 
    0.024801936 = product of:
  0.11574237 = sum of:
    0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 3991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02546139 = score(doc=3991,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 3991, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3991)
    0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 3991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045140486 = score(doc=3991,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 3991, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3991)
    0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 3991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045140486 = score(doc=3991,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 3991, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3991)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Although researchers have theorized the critical importance of classification in the organization of information, the classification approach seems to have given way to the alphabetical subject approach in retrieval tools widely used in libraries, and research an how users utilize classification or classification-like arrangements in information seeking has been scant. To better understand whether searchers consider classificatory structures a viable alternative to information retrieval, this article reports an a study of how 24 library and information science students used Yahoo! directories, a popular search service resembling classification, in completing an assigned simple task. Several issues emerged from the students' reporting of their search process and a comparison between hierarchical navigation and keyword searching: citation order of facets, precision vs. recall, and other factors influencing searchers' successes and preferences. The latter included search expertise, knowledge of the discipline, and time required to complete the search. Without a definitive conclusion, we suggest a number of directoons for further research.
  7. Olson, H.A.: Sameness and difference : a cultural foundation of classification (2001) 0.02 
    0.020533837 = product of:
  0.09582457 = sum of:
    0.04079328 = weight(_text_:classification in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04079328 = score(doc=166,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
    0.04079328 = weight(_text_:classification in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04079328 = score(doc=166,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
    0.014238005 = product of:
      0.02847601 = sum of:
        0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02847601 = score(doc=166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 166, 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=166)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The idea of sameness is used to gather material in classifications. However, it is also used to separate what is different. Sameness and difference as guiding principles of classification seem obvious but are actually fundamental characteristics specifically related to Western culture. Sameness is not a singular factor, but has the potential to represent multiple characteristics or facets. This article explores the ramifications of which characteristics are used to define classifications and in what order. It explains the primacy of division by discipline, its origins in Western philosophy, and the cultural specificity that results. The Dewey Decimal Classification is used as an example throughout.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  8. Olson, H.A.: Difference, culture and change : the untrapped potential of LCSH (2000) 0.02 
    0.019095682 = product of:
  0.089113176 = sum of:
    0.042009152 = weight(_text_:subject in 5610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042009152 = score(doc=5610,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 5610, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5610)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=5610,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5610, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5610)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=5610,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5610, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5610)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The Library of Congress Subject Headings have traditionally attempted to reflect reality neutrally. The result is bias in representing cultural margins. While neutrality is one of the ethical stances espoused by librarianship, another is universal and equitable access to information for the betterment of humanity. This paper views LCSH as a potential tool for cultural change using Homi Bhabha's postcolonial concept of a Third Space as a model. LCSH functions as a Third Space where the meanings of documents are constructed and enunciated for library users. Therefore, it is in LCSH that there is potential for instigating change
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.29, nos.1/2
    Source
    The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T. Stone
  9. Olson, H.A.; Ward, D.B.: Mundane standards, everyday technologies, equitable access (2003) 0.02 
    0.019095682 = product of:
  0.089113176 = sum of:
    0.042009152 = weight(_text_:subject in 3959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042009152 = score(doc=3959,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 3959, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3959)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 3959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=3959,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 3959, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3959)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 3959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=3959,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 3959, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3959)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The problem of access to marginalized knowledge using general subject access standards is well-established, but few successful solutions have been developed. This paper surveys four different approaches to ameliorating bias: revision of general standards, adaptation of general standards, specialized standards for particular knowledge domains and specialized standards for particular situations. lt then examines their technological alternatives and institutional barriers to solutions. The analysis of standards, technologies and barriers is addressed through Ursula Franklin's interpretation of the real world of technology.
    Source
    Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  10. Olson, H.A.: ¬The ubiquitous hierarchy : an army to overcome the threat of a mob (2004) 0.02 
    0.018810362 = product of:
  0.08778169 = sum of:
    0.033948522 = weight(_text_:subject in 833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033948522 = score(doc=833,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.31612942 = fieldWeight in 833, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=833)
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=833,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 833, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=833)
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=833,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 833, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=833)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    This article explores the connections between Melvil Dewey and Hegelianism and Charles Cutter and the Scottish Common Sense philosophers. It traces the practice of hierarchy from these philosophical influences to Dewey and Cutter and their legacy to today's Dewey Decimal Classification and Library of Congress Subject Headings. The ubiquity of hierarchy is linked to Dewey's and Cutter's metaphor of organizing the mob of information into an orderly army using the tool of logic.
  11. Olson, H.A.; Schlegl, R.: Standardization, objectivity, and user focus : a meta-analysis of subject access critiques (2001) 0.02 
    0.01810185 = product of:
  0.0844753 = sum of:
    0.044100422 = weight(_text_:subject in 5428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044100422 = score(doc=5428,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 5428, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5428)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=5428,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5428, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5428)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=5428,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5428, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5428)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Critiques of subject access standards in LIS literature have addressed biases of gender, sexuality, race, age, ability, ethnicity, language and religion as limits to the representation of diversity and to effective library service for diverse populations. The current study identifies and analyzes this literature as a basis for ameliorating systemic bias and to gather the existing literature for wider accessibility. The study analyzes five quantitative variables: standards discussed, categories of problems, marginalized groups and topics discussed, date, and basis of conclusions (research or experience). Textual analysis reveals that basic tenets of subject access-user-focused cataloguing, objectivity, and standardization-are problematized in the literature and may be the best starting point for future research. In practice, librarians can work to counteract systemic problems in the careful and equitable application of standards and their adaptation to local contexts.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 32(2001) no.2, S.61-80
  12. Olson, H.A.: ¬The power to name : locating the limits of subject representation in libraries (2002) 0.02 
    0.017376479 = product of:
  0.081090234 = sum of:
    0.0474445 = weight(_text_:subject in 2573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0474445 = score(doc=2573,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4418043 = fieldWeight in 2573, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2573)
    0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 2573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016822865 = score(doc=2573,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 2573, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2573)
    0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 2573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016822865 = score(doc=2573,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 2573, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2573)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The names we give things colour the ways we perceive them. Those in a position to name hold the power to construct others' perceptions and realities. This book looks at the pervasive naming of information that libraries undertake as a matter of course through representation of subjects. It examines the 19th century foundations, current standards, and canonical application of internationally used classification (Melvil Dewey and his decimal scheme) and subject headings (Charles Cutter and the Library of Congress Subject Headings). A feminist poststructural critique is used to reveal the presumption that these standards are universally applicable even though their marginalizations and exclusions are well-documented. The book will be of interest to librarians, information scholars and professionals, researchers interested in representation and the construction of meaning, and anyone who uses a library. TOC: Preface.- 1. Naming is Power.- 2. Armies, Railroads and Procrustean Beds.- 3. The Iterability of the Public and Efficiency.- 4. The Authority to Name.- 5. Ite/Arating Women.- 6. Toward Eccentric Techniques.- Notes.- Index.
    RSWK
    Bibliothek / Inhaltserschließung / Dewey-Dezimalklassifikation / Library of Congress Subject Headings / Geschichte
    Subject
    Bibliothek / Inhaltserschließung / Dewey-Dezimalklassifikation / Library of Congress Subject Headings / Geschichte
  13. Olson, H.A.: Classification or organization : what's the difference (2001) 0.02 
    0.015380906 = product of:
  0.107666336 = sum of:
    0.053833168 = weight(_text_:classification in 4525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053833168 = score(doc=4525,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 4525, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4525)
    0.053833168 = weight(_text_:classification in 4525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053833168 = score(doc=4525,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 4525, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4525)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
  14. Martínez-Ávila, D.; San Segundo, R.; Olson, H.A.: ¬The use of BISAC in libraries as new cases of Reader-Interest Classifications (2014) 0.01 
    0.013458293 = product of:
  0.09420805 = sum of:
    0.047104023 = weight(_text_:classification in 1973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047104023 = score(doc=1973,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 1973, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1973)
    0.047104023 = weight(_text_:classification in 1973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047104023 = score(doc=1973,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 1973, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1973)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    In the recent years, several libraries in the United States have been experimenting with Book Industry Standards and Communications (BISAC), the classification system of the book industry, as an alternative to the Dewey Decimal Classification. Although rarely discussed, these cases of implementation of BISAC arguably resemble other past cases of replacement of traditional classifications that received the name of reader-interest classifications. In this article, a comparison of the BISAC cases to the previous cases of reader-interest classifications is taken in order to determine if the current application of BISAC to libraries is susceptible to the same problems, dangers, and ends as occurred in the past.
    Object
    Reader interest classification
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.2, S.137-155
  15. Olson, H.A.: Hegel's epistemograph, classification, and Spivak's postcolonial reason (2010) 0.01 
    0.01153568 = product of:
  0.08074976 = sum of:
    0.04037488 = weight(_text_:classification in 3510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04037488 = score(doc=3510,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 3510, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3510)
    0.04037488 = weight(_text_:classification in 3510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04037488 = score(doc=3510,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 3510, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3510)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    A major characteristic of classification is teleology interpreted as a linear progression toward knowledge. G.W.F. Hegel's three stages of knowledge development: Being (Sein), Essence (Wesen), and Idea (Begriff), explicated in his Science of logic form such a progression. Feminist postcolonial critic Gayatri Spivak calls this kind of progression as an "epistemograph". Classification is a manifestation of Western logic and the sequence of main classes is illustrative of the progression that reflects Hegel's epistemograph. DDC and UDC between them represent library classification globally and use a sequence of main classes derived from Hegel and indirectly from Bacon. The lingering consequences of this heritage still create dilemmas in our organization of knowledge.
  16. Olson, H.A.; Boll, J.J.: Subject analysis in online catalogs (2001) 0.01 
    0.011029012 = product of:
  0.07720308 = sum of:
    0.042009152 = weight(_text_:subject in 6113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042009152 = score(doc=6113,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 6113, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6113)
    0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035193928 = score(doc=6113,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 6113, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6113)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 28(2001) no.4, S.206-208 (C. Arsenault):"Overall, this is an excellent work, on an ever increasingly pertinent topic. This long-awaited second edition provides a thorough and comprehensive update of an already important text. I very highly recommend it to professionals and academics alike ; both neophytes and veterans will find it valuable. It is a fundamental work that cannot be ignored in the field of subject analysis and retrieval for all bibliographic systems, including online catalogs."
  17. Kublik, A.; Clevette, V.; Ward, D.; Olson, H.A.: Adapting dominant classifications to particular contexts (2003) 0.01 
    0.009990192 = product of:
  0.06993134 = sum of:
    0.03496567 = weight(_text_:classification in 5516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03496567 = score(doc=5516,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 5516, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5516)
    0.03496567 = weight(_text_:classification in 5516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03496567 = score(doc=5516,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 5516, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5516)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    This paper addresses the process of adapting to a particular culture or context a classification that has grown out of western culture to become a global standard. The authors use a project that adapts DDC for use in a feminist/women's issues context to demonstrate an approach that works. The project is particularly useful as an interdisciplinary example. Discussion consists of four parts: (1) definition of the problem indicating the need for adaptation and efforts to date; (2) description of the methodology developed for creating an expansion; (3) description of the interface developed for actually doing the work, with its potential for a distributed group to work on it together (could even be internationally distributed); and (4) generalization of how the methodology could be used for particular contexts by country, ethnicity, perspective or other defining factors.
    Content
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Knowledge organization and classification in international information retrieval"
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 37(2003) nos.1/2, S.13-31
  18. Olson, H.A.: Earthly order and the oneness of mysticism : Hugh of Saint Victor and medieval classification of wisdom (2010) 0.01 
    0.009990192 = product of:
  0.06993134 = sum of:
    0.03496567 = weight(_text_:classification in 3479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03496567 = score(doc=3479,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 3479, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3479)
    0.03496567 = weight(_text_:classification in 3479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03496567 = score(doc=3479,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 3479, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3479)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Hugh of St. Victor's Didascalicon is a twelfth-century classification of knowledge, or as Hugh would put it, of Wisdom, written in the context of medieval, Christian mysticism. This study reads the text through its cultural and intellectual context, including medieval themes of the problem of universals and the importance of numerology. The study addresses the question of whether or not Hugh's classification is part of the Aristotelian tradition of classificatory structure characterized by mutually exclusive categories, teleological progress toward a goal, and hierarchy, which is still with us today. It also examines the role of the liberal arts in Hugh's pedagogy and philosophy as exhibited in the Didascalicon.
  19. Olson, H.A.: Mapping beyond Dewey's boundaries : constructing classification space for marginalized knowledge domains (1998) 0.01 
    0.009613066 = product of:
  0.06729146 = sum of:
    0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03364573 = score(doc=858,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 858, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=858)
    0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03364573 = score(doc=858,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 858, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=858)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Classifications are bounded systems that marginalize some groups and topics by locating them in ghettoes, diasporized across the system. Other marginalized groups and topics are totally excluded from these systems, being outside of their territorial limits. Because classifications are locational systems, spatial analyses borrowed from various disciplines have potential to identify and address their problems. The philosophical basis for the analysis in this article is Lorraine Code's (1995) conception of "rhetorical spaces" as sites where topics can be taken seriously as legitimate subjects for open discussion. In existing classifications, there is rhetorical space for most mainstream social and scholarly knowledge domains but not for marginalized knowledge domains. Geography offers concepts for building a theoretical framework to ameliorate the biases of classification. This article describes such a framework and how it is applied using techniques such as Gillian Rose's (1993) "paradoxical spaces," which are simultaneously or alternately in the center and at the margin, same and other, inside and outside to develop a more complex and meaningful classification for women and other marginalized groups. The project described here operationalizes these theoretical openings by applying them to the Dewey Decimal Classification as both critique and as techniques for change.
  20. Olson, H.A.; Ward, D.B.: Charting a journey across knowledge domains : feminism in the Dewey Decimal Classification (1998) 0.01 
    0.009516451 = product of:
  0.06661515 = sum of:
    0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 70) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033307575 = score(doc=70,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 70, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=70)
    0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 70) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033307575 = score(doc=70,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 70, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=70)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    This paper addresses problems of representing marginalized knowledge domains in general and feminist or women's studies in particular in the Dewey Decimal Classification. The authors develop and apply a theoretical framework that makes the classification's limits permeable. A variety of approaches are proposed to create paradoxical spaces, places that accommodate the margins and the mainstream simultaneously. The resulting changes, expansions and options proposed for DDC are accessible through a user interface designed for the purpose

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 22
  • m 3

Themes