Diese Datenbank enthält über 40.000 Dokumente zu Themen aus den Bereichen Formalerschließung – Inhaltserschließung – Information Retrieval.
© 2015 W. Gödert, TH Köln, Institut für Informationswissenschaft / Powered by litecat, BIS Oldenburg (Stand: 28. April 2022)
1Sugimoto, C.R. ; Weingart, S.: ¬The kaleidoscope of disciplinarity.
In: Journal of documentation. 71(2015) no.4, S.775-794.
Abstract: Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify criteria for and definitions of disciplinarity, and how they differ between different types of literature. Design/methodology/approach This synthesis is achieved through a purposive review of three types of literature: explicit conceptualizations of disciplinarity; narrative histories of disciplines; and operationalizations of disciplinarity. Findings Each angle of discussing disciplinarity presents distinct criteria. However, there are a few common axes upon which conceptualizations, disciplinary narratives, and measurements revolve: communication, social features, topical coherence, and institutions. Originality/value There is considerable ambiguity in the concept of a discipline. This is of particular concern in a heightened assessment culture, where decisions about funding and resource allocation are often discipline-dependent (or focussed exclusively on interdisciplinary endeavors). This work explores the varied nature of disciplinarity and, through synthesis of the literature, presents a framework of criteria that can be used to guide science policy makers, scientometricians, administrators, and others interested in defining, constructing, and evaluating disciplines.
Inhalt: Vgl.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JD-06-2014-0082.
2Ekbia, H. ; Mattioli, M. ; Kouper, I. ; Arave, G. ; Ghazinejad, A. ; Bowman, T. ; Suri, V.R. ; Tsou, A. ; Weingart, S. ; Sugimoto, C.R.: Big data, bigger dilemmas : a critical review.
In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.8, S.1523-1545.
(Advances in information science)
Abstract: The recent interest in Big Data has generated a broad range of new academic, corporate, and policy practices along with an evolving debate among its proponents, detractors, and skeptics. While the practices draw on a common set of tools, techniques, and technologies, most contributions to the debate come either from a particular disciplinary perspective or with a focus on a domain-specific issue. A close examination of these contributions reveals a set of common problematics that arise in various guises and in different places. It also demonstrates the need for a critical synthesis of the conceptual and practical dilemmas surrounding Big Data. The purpose of this article is to provide such a synthesis by drawing on relevant writings in the sciences, humanities, policy, and trade literature. In bringing these diverse literatures together, we aim to shed light on the common underlying issues that concern and affect all of these areas. By contextualizing the phenomenon of Big Data within larger socioeconomic developments, we also seek to provide a broader understanding of its drivers, barriers, and challenges. This approach allows us to identify attributes of Big Data that require more attention-autonomy, opacity, generativity, disparity, and futurity-leading to questions and ideas for moving beyond dilemmas.
Inhalt: Vgl.: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23294/abstract.
Themenfeld: Data Mining