Search (29 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Szostak, R."
  1. Szostak, R.: Speaking truth to power in classification : response to Fox's review of my work; KO 39:4, 300 (2013) 0.00 
    0.0038012876 = product of:
  0.032310944 = sum of:
    0.0074902223 = weight(_text_:in in 591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0074902223 = score(doc=591,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 591, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=591)
    0.02482072 = product of:
      0.04964144 = sum of:
        0.04964144 = weight(_text_:22 in 591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04964144 = score(doc=591,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.106921025 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030532904 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 591, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=591)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11764706 = coord(2/17)
    Date
    22. 2.2013 12:35:05
  2. Szostak, R.: Classifying science : phenomena, data, theory, method, practice (2004) 0.00 
    0.0034931 = product of:
  0.02969135 = sum of:
    0.0062105646 = weight(_text_:in in 325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062105646 = score(doc=325,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.14953499 = fieldWeight in 325, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=325)
    0.023480786 = product of:
      0.046961572 = sum of:
        0.046961572 = weight(_text_:katalogisierung in 325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046961572 = score(doc=325,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17489795 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030532904 = queryNorm
            0.2685084 = fieldWeight in 325, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=325)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11764706 = coord(2/17)
    Abstract
    Classification is the essential first step in science. The study of science, as well as the practice of science, will thus benefit from a detailed classification of different types of science. In this book, science - defined broadly to include the social sciences and humanities - is first unpacked into its constituent elements: the phenomena studied, the data used, the theories employed, the methods applied, and the practices of scientists. These five elements are then classified in turn. Notably, the classifications of both theory types and methods allow the key strengths and weaknesses of different theories and methods to be readily discerned and compared. Connections across classifications are explored: should certain theories or phenomena be investigated only with certain methods? What is the proper function and form of scientific paradigms? Are certain common errors and biases in scientific practice associated with particular phenomena, data, theories, or methods? The classifications point to several ways of improving both specialized and interdisciplinary research and teaching, and especially of enhancing communication across communities of scholars. The classifications also support a superior system of document classification that would allow searches by theory and method used as well as causal links investigated.
    BK
    06.70 Katalogisierung
    Classification
    06.70 Katalogisierung
    Content
    Inhalt: - Chapter 1: Classifying Science: 1.1. A Simple Classificatory Guideline - 1.2. The First "Cut" (and Plan of Work) - 1.3. Some Preliminaries - Chapter 2: Classifying Phenomena and Data: 2.1. Classifying Phenomena - 2.2. Classifying Data - Chapter 3: Classifying Theory: 3.1. Typology of Theory - 3.2. What Is a Theory? - 3.3. Evaluating Theories - 3.4. Types of Theory and the Five Types of Causation - 3.5. Classifying Individual Theories - 3.6. Advantages of a Typology of Theory - Chapter 4: Classifying Method: 4.1. Classifying Methods - 4.2. Typology of Strengths and Weaknesses of Methods - 4.3. Qualitative Versus Quantitative Analysis Revisited - 4.4. Evaluating Methods - 4.5. Classifying Particular Methods Within The Typology - 4.6. Advantages of a Typology of Methods - Chapter 5: Classifying Practice: 5.1. Errors and Biases in ScienceChapter - 5.2. Typology of (Critiques of) Scientific Practice - 5.3. Utilizing This Classification - 5.4. The Five Types of Ethical Analysis - Chapter 6: Drawing Connections Across These Classifications: 6.1. Theory and Method - 6.2. Theory (Method) and Phenomena (Data) - 6.3. Better Paradigms - 6.4. Critiques of Scientific Practice: Are They Correlated with Other Classifications? - Chapter 7: Classifying Scientific Documents: 7.1. Faceted or Enumerative? - 7.2. Classifying By Phenomena Studied - 7.3. Classifying By Theory Used - 7.4. Classifying By Method Used - 7.5 Links Among Subjects - 7.6. Type of Work, Language, and More - 7.7. Critiques of Scientific Practice - 7.8. Classifying Philosophy - 7.9. Evaluating the System - Chapter 8: Concluding Remarks: 8.1. The Classifications - 8.2. Advantages of These Various Classifications - 8.3. Drawing Connections Across Classifications - 8.4. Golden Mean Arguments - 8.5. Why Should Science Be Believed? - 8.6. How Can Science Be Improved? - 8.7. How Should Science Be Taught?
    Footnote
    Rez. in: KO 32(2005) no.2, S.93-95 (H. Albrechtsen): "The book deals with mapping of the structures and contents of sciences, defined broadly to include the social sciences and the humanities. According to the author, the study of science, as well as the practice of science, could benefit from a detailed classification of different types of science. The book defines five universal constituents of the sciences: phenomena, data, theories, methods and practice. For each of these constituents, the author poses five questions, in the well-known 5W format: Who, What, Where, When, Why? - with the addition of the question How? (Szostak 2003). Two objectives of the author's endeavor stand out: 1) decision support for university curriculum development across disciplines and decision support for university students at advanced levels of education in selection of appropriate courses for their projects and to support cross-disciplinary inquiry for researchers and students; 2) decision support for researchers and students in scientific inquiry across disciplines, methods and theories. The main prospective audience of this book is university curriculum developers, university students and researchers, in that order of priority. The heart of the book is the chapters unfolding the author's ideas about how to classify phenomena and data, theory, method and practice, by use of the 5W inquiry model. . . .
    Weitere Rez. in: JASIST 57(2006) no.14, S.1977-1978 (Y. Su); KO 39(2012) no.4, S.300-303 (M.J. Fox)
  3. Szostak, R.: Skepticism and knowledge organization (2014) 0.00 
    0.0028527998 = product of:
  0.0242488 = sum of:
    0.009770045 = weight(_text_:in in 1404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009770045 = score(doc=1404,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 1404, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1404)
    0.014478754 = product of:
      0.028957509 = sum of:
        0.028957509 = weight(_text_:22 in 1404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028957509 = score(doc=1404,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.106921025 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030532904 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1404, 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=1404)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11764706 = coord(2/17)
    Abstract
    The key argument of this paper is that the field of knowledge organization can potentially provide a powerful - and indeed the only powerful - response to the skeptical claims that are common in the contemporary academy. Though skeptical arguments have an important place in our field - the present author readily confesses to having learned much in responding to such arguments - it would be unfortunate if the field of knowledge organization were to assume the correctness of a skeptical outlook. Rather, the field should essay to combat the sources of skepticism. Strategies for doing so are outlined.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol. 14
    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
  4. Szostak, R.; Gnoli, C.: Classifying by phenomena, theories and methods : examples with focused social science theories (2008) 0.00 
    6.295616E-4 = product of:
  0.010702548 = sum of:
    0.010702548 = weight(_text_:in in 2250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010702548 = score(doc=2250,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.2576908 = fieldWeight in 2250, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2250)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Content
    This paper shows how a variety of theories employed across a range of social sciences could be classified in terms of theory type. In each case, notation within the Integrated Level Classification is provided. The paper thus illustrates how one key element of the Leon Manifesto that scholarly documents should be classified in terms of the theory(ies) applied can be achieved in practice.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.11
    Source
    Culture and identity in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Tenth International ISKO Conference 5-8 August 2008, Montreal, Canada. Ed. by Clément Arsenault and Joseph T. Tennis
  5. Szostak, R.: ¬A grammatical approach to subject classification in museums (2017) 0.00 
    5.747085E-4 = product of:
  0.009770045 = sum of:
    0.009770045 = weight(_text_:in in 4136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009770045 = score(doc=4136,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 4136, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4136)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Abstract
    Several desiderata of a system of subject classification for museums are identified. The limitations of existing approaches are reviewed. It is argued that an approach which synthesizes basic concepts within a grammatical structure can achieve the goals of subject classification in museums while addressing diverse challenges. The same approach can also be applied in galleries, archives, and libraries. The approach is described in some detail and examples are provided of its application. The article closes with brief discussions of thesauri and linked open data.
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Knowledge Organization within the Museum Domain.
  6. Szostak, R.: ¬The basic concepts classification (2012) 0.00 
    5.1925366E-4 = product of:
  0.008827312 = sum of:
    0.008827312 = weight(_text_:in in 821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008827312 = score(doc=821,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 821, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=821)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.13
    Source
    Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan
  7. Szostak, R.: Facet analysis using grammar (2017) 0.00 
    5.1925366E-4 = product of:
  0.008827312 = sum of:
    0.008827312 = weight(_text_:in in 3866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008827312 = score(doc=3866,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 3866, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3866)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Abstract
    Basic grammar can achieve most/all of the goals of facet analysis without requiring the use of facet indicators. Facet analysis is thus rendered far simpler for classificationist, classifier, and user. We compare facet analysis and grammar, and show how various facets can be represented grammatically. We then address potential challenges in employing grammar as subject classification. A detailed review of basic grammar supports the hypothesis that it is feasible to usefully employ grammatical construction in subject classification. A manageable - and programmable - set of adjustments is required as classifiers move fairly directly from sentences in a document (or object or idea) description to formulating a subject classification. The user likewise can move fairly quickly from a query to the identification of relevant works. A review of theories in linguistics indicates that a grammatical approach should reduce ambiguity while encouraging ease of use. This paper applies the recommended approach to a small sample of recently published books. It finds that the approach is feasible and results in a more precise subject description than the subject headings assigned at present. It then explores PRECIS, an indexing system developed in the 1970s. Though our approach differs from PRECIS in many important ways, the experience of PRECIS supports our conclusions regarding both feasibility and precision.
    Content
    Beitrag bei: NASKO 2017: Visualizing Knowledge Organization: Bringing Focus to Abstract Realities. The sixth North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization (NASKO 2017), June 15-16, 2017, in Champaign, IL, USA.
  8. Szostak, R.: ¬A pluralistic approach to the philosophy of classification : a case for "public knowledge" (2015) 0.00 
    5.140348E-4 = product of:
  0.008738592 = sum of:
    0.008738592 = weight(_text_:in in 5541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008738592 = score(doc=5541,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 5541, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5541)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Abstract
    Any classification system should be evaluated with respect to a variety of philosophical and practical concerns. This paper explores several distinct issues: the nature of a work, the value of a statement, the contribution of information science to philosophy, the nature of hierarchy, ethical evaluation, pre- versus postcoordination, the lived experience of librarians, and formalization versus natural language. It evaluates a particular approach to classification in terms of each of these but draws general lessons for philosophical evaluation. That approach to classification emphasizes the free combination of basic concepts representing both real things in the world and the relationships among these; works are also classified in terms of theories, methods, and perspectives applied.
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Themenheft: 'Exploring Philosophies of Information'.
  9. Szostak, R.: Applied Knowledge Organization and the history of the world (2018) 0.00 
    5.087626E-4 = product of:
  0.008648965 = sum of:
    0.008648965 = weight(_text_:in in 4699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008648965 = score(doc=4699,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 4699, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4699)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.16
    Source
    Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira
  10. Szostak, R.; Scharnhorst, A.; Beek, W.; Smiraglia, R.P.: Connecting KOSs and the LOD cloud (2018) 0.00 
    5.087626E-4 = product of:
  0.008648965 = sum of:
    0.008648965 = weight(_text_:in in 4794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008648965 = score(doc=4794,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 4794, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4794)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.16
    Source
    Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira
  11. Smiraglia, R.P.; Szostak, R.: Converting UDC to BCC : comparative approaches to interdisciplinarity (2018) 0.00 
    5.087626E-4 = product of:
  0.008648965 = sum of:
    0.008648965 = weight(_text_:in in 4795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008648965 = score(doc=4795,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 4795, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4795)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.16
    Source
    Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira
  12. Szostak, R.; Lee, D.: Classifying musical genres : building musical form and genre into BCC: repurposing LCGFT terms for music into the Basic Concepts Classification (2022) 0.00 
    5.087626E-4 = product of:
  0.008648965 = sum of:
    0.008648965 = weight(_text_:in in 227) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008648965 = score(doc=227,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 227, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=227)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Abstract
    We investigate how the Basic Concepts Classification (BCC) can best incorporate schedules addressing musical form, genre, and type. We show that the synthetic possibilities within the BCC facilitate the classification of form/genre/type. In particular, many challenges identified in the literature on musical classification are addressed. The BCC also serves to make evident various connections between music and other schedules in BCC.
  13. Szostak, R.: Classifying the humanities (2014) 0.00 
    4.926073E-4 = product of:
  0.008374324 = sum of:
    0.008374324 = weight(_text_:in in 1084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008374324 = score(doc=1084,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 1084, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1084)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Abstract
    A synthetic and universal approach to classification which allows the free combination of basic concepts would better address a variety of challenges in classifying both humanities scholarship and the works of art (including literature) that humanists study. Four key characteristics of this classificatory approach are stressed: a universal non-discipline-based approach, a synthetic approach that allows free combination of any concepts but stresses a sentence-like structure, emphasis on basic concepts (for which there are broadly shared understandings across groups and individuals), and finally classification of works also in terms of the theories, methods, and perspectives applied. The implications of these four characteristics, alone or (often) in concert, for many aspects of classification in the humanities are discussed. Several advantages are found both for classifying humanities scholarship and works of art. The se four characteristics are each found in the Basic Concepts Classification (which is briefly compared to other faceted classifications), but each could potentially be adopted elsewhere as well.
  14. Szostak, R.: Classifying for social diversity (2014) 0.00 
    4.926073E-4 = product of:
  0.008374324 = sum of:
    0.008374324 = weight(_text_:in in 1378) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008374324 = score(doc=1378,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 1378, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1378)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Abstract
    This paper argues that a new approach to classification best supports and respects social diversity. We should want a classification that facilitates communication both within groups and across groups. We should also want no group to be privileged within the classification. These goals are best accomplished through a truly universal classification, grounded in basic concepts, that classifies works in terms of authorial perspective. Strategies for classifying perspective are discussed. The paper then addresses issues of classification structure. It follows a feminist approach to classification, and shows how a web-of-relations approach can be instantiated in a classification. Finally the paper turns to classificatory process. The key argument here is that much (perhaps all) of the concern regarding the possibility that classes can be subdivided into subclasses in multiple ways, each favored by different groups or individuals, simply vanish es within a web-of-relations approach. The reason is that most of these supposed ways of subdividing classes are in fact ways of subdividing different relationships among classes.
  15. Szostak, R.: Classification, interdisciplinarity, and the study of science (2008) 0.00 
    4.4968686E-4 = product of:
  0.0076446766 = sum of:
    0.0076446766 = weight(_text_:in in 1893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0076446766 = score(doc=1893,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.18406484 = fieldWeight in 1893, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1893)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper aims to respond to the 2005 paper by Hjørland and Nissen Pedersen by suggesting that an exhaustive and universal classification of the phenomena that scholars study, and the methods and theories they apply, is feasible. It seeks to argue that such a classification is critical for interdisciplinary scholarship. Design/methodology/approach - The paper presents a literature-based conceptual analysis, taking Hjørland and Nissen Pedersen as its starting point. Hjørland and Nissen Pedersen had identified several difficulties that would be encountered in developing such a classification; the paper suggests how each of these can be overcome. It also urges a deductive approach as complementary to the inductive approach recommended by Hjørland and Nissen Pedersen. Findings - The paper finds that an exhaustive and universal classification of scholarly documents in terms of (at least) the phenomena that scholars study, and the theories and methods they apply, appears to be both possible and desirable. Practical implications - The paper suggests how such a project can be begun. In particular it stresses the importance of classifying documents in terms of causal links between phenomena. Originality/value - The paper links the information science, interdisciplinary, and study of science literatures, and suggests that the types of classification outlined above would be of great value to scientists/scholars, and that they are possible.
    Content
    Bezugnahme auf: Hjoerland, B., K.N. Pedersen: A substantive theory of classification for information retrieval. In: Journal of documentation. 61(2005) no.5, S.582-597. - Vgl. auch: Hjoerland, R.: Core classification theory: : a reply to Szostak. In: Journal of documentation. 64(2008) no.3, S.333 - 342.
  16. Szostak, R.: Basic Concepts Classification (BCC) (2020) 0.00 
    4.4968686E-4 = product of:
  0.0076446766 = sum of:
    0.0076446766 = weight(_text_:in in 5883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0076446766 = score(doc=5883,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.18406484 = fieldWeight in 5883, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5883)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Abstract
    The Basics Concept Classification (BCC) is a "universal" scheme: it attempts to encompass all areas of human understanding. Whereas most universal schemes are organized around scholarly disciplines, the BCC is instead organized around phenomena (things), the relationships that exist among phenomena, and the properties that phenomena and relators may possess. This structure allows the BCC to apply facet analysis without requiring the use of "facet indicators." The main motivation for the BCC was a recognition that existing classifications that are organized around disciplines serve interdisciplinary scholarship poorly. Complex concepts that might be understood quite differently across groups and individuals can generally be broken into basic concepts for which there is enough shared understanding for the purposes of classification. Documents, ideas, and objects are classified synthetically by combining entries from the schedules of phenomena, relators, and properties. The inclusion of separate schedules of-generally verb-like-relators is one of the most unusual aspects of the BCC. This (and the schedules of properties that serve as adjectives or adverbs) allows the production of sentence-like subject strings. Documents can then be classified in terms of the main arguments made in the document. BCC provides very precise descriptors of documents by combining phenomena, relators, and properties synthetically. The terminology employed in the BCC reduces terminological ambiguity. The BCC is still being developed and it needs to be fleshed out in certain respects. Yet it also needs to be applied; only in application can the feasibility and desirability of the classification be adequately assessed.
    Series
    Reviews of concepts in knowledge organization
  17. Szostak, R.: Classifying relationships (2012) 0.00 
    4.451673E-4 = product of:
  0.007567844 = sum of:
    0.007567844 = weight(_text_:in in 1923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007567844 = score(doc=1923,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 1923, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1923)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Abstract
    This paper develops a classification of relationships among things, with many potential uses within information science. Unlike previous classifications of relationships, it is hoped that this classification will provide benefits that exceed the costs of application. The major theoretical innovation is to stress the importance of causal relationships, albeit not exclusively. The paper also stresses the advantages of using compounds of simpler terms: verbs compounded with other verbs, adverbs, or things. The classification builds upon a review of the previous literature and a broad inductive survey of potential sources in a recent article in this journal. The result is a classification that is both manageable in size and easy to apply and yet encompasses all of the relationships necessary for classifying documents or even ideas.
  18. Szostak, R.: Comment on Hjørland's concept theory (2010) 0.00 
    4.1540293E-4 = product of:
  0.00706185 = sum of:
    0.00706185 = weight(_text_:in in 5107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00706185 = score(doc=5107,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 5107, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5107)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    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 darauf: Hjørland, B.: Answer to Professor Szostak (concept theory) in: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.5, S.1078-1080.
  19. Szostak, R.: Universal and domain-specific classifications from an interdisciplinary perspective (2010) 0.00 
    4.1540293E-4 = product of:
  0.00706185 = sum of:
    0.00706185 = weight(_text_:in in 3516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00706185 = score(doc=3516,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 3516, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3516)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.12
    Source
    Paradigms and conceptual systems in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Eleventh International ISKO Conference, 23-26 February 2010 Rome, Italy. Edited by Claudio Gnoli and Fulvio Mazzocchi
  20. Szostak, R.: Employing a synthetic approach to subject classification across galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (2016) 0.00 
    4.1540293E-4 = product of:
  0.00706185 = sum of:
    0.00706185 = weight(_text_:in in 4930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00706185 = score(doc=4930,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04153252 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030532904 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 4930, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4930)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.15
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei

Authors

Years

Types

Themes

Subjects

Classifications