Words Theoretical development of information science: a brief history Birger Hjørland
Download 225.5 Kb.
|
10. Conclusion It matters how the history of a scholarly domain is depicted. As Joseph Spear wrote in an analysis of another field: The problem, of course, is that the outcome of this story has real and important implications for the distribution of organizational resources. If indeed every dean, every granting agency, and every department head “knows” that there has been a cognitive revolution […], then where does that leave the claims of those who do not identify themselves with cognitive psychology […]? There is much at stake in how the history of psychology [and information science] is told. (Spear, 2007, p. 377)13
Both White and McCain (1998) and Åström (2002) were explicit about which journals they used in their studies. However, the claim put forward here is that they did not make explicit arguments for how the journals were selected in relation to their conception of the field. It is as if the authors’ view of what information science is and should be is considered “obvious” or of no consequence. As a result, their selection of journals is not based on arguments about which aspects of information science are being favored and which are being suppressed. (Hjørland, 2013a, p. 1322) Tuomaala, Järvelin and Vakkari (2014) based their study on “a purposive selection … of core journals” with library and information science. However, to consider the full content of a given journal, such as Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (JASIST), a representation of a LIS is problematic, because, as demonstrated by Chua and Yang (2008), “Top authors [in JASIST] have grown in diversity from those being affiliated predominantly with library/information-related departments to include those from information systems management, information technology, business, and the humanities.” Therefore, bibliometric maps based on JASIST cannot simply be taken to represent the library/information field without further examination. In spite of its claim to investigate “what approaches, research strategies, and methods have been applied during the span of time under review” Tuomaala, Järvelin and Vakkari (2014) can neither confirm nor disconfirm that a social and cultural turn is taking place in information science. Their methodology seems not fit to describe changes at the metatheoretical level. We have seen that Saracevic distinguished two traditions of research in IR: a systems-centered tradition (in computer science) and a user-centered tradition (in information science). By not considering such distinctions Tuomaala, Järvelin and Vakkari (2014) is unable to illuminate whether important parts of IR-research has immigrated from LIS to computer science. We have a kind of hermeneutic circle: How can we identify a field by a set of journals, a set of departments, a set of scholars, etc., unless we already know the field? And how can we know the field unless we know its journals, its research institutions, and its leading scholars? The answer is that it requires an iterative process. And such arguments, I claim, shows that “subjective” histories of science like the one presented in this paper is a prerequisite for more quantitative studies. References Åström, F. (2002). Visualizing library and information science concept spaces through keyword and citation based maps and clusters. In H. Bruce, R. Fidel, P. Ingwersen & P. Vakkari (Eds.), Emerging frameworks and methods: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS4) (pp. 185–197). Greenwood Village: Libraries Unlimited. Andersen, H. (2012). Scientific concepts and conceptual change. In: Kindi, V. and Arabatzis, T. (Eds), Kuhn’s structure of scientific revolutions revisited. (pp. 179-204). New York: Routledge. Armstrong T, Moat A, Webber W and Zobel J. (2009). Improvements that don’t add up: Ad-hoc retrieval results since 1998. In: Cheung DWL, Song IY, Chu WW, Hu X and Lin JJ (eds.) Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on Information and knowledge management, CIKM ’09. New York: ACM, pp. 601–610. Arnold D. (2013). Traditions of systems theory: Major figures and contemporary developments. London: Routledge. (Routledge Studies in Library and Information Science) Baeza-Yates, R. and Ribeiro-Neto, B. (2011). Modern information retrieval: the concepts and technology behind search. 2nd edition. Haelow, England: Pearson. Bates, M.J. (2005). An introduction to metatheories, theories, and models. In: Fisher KE, Erdelez S and McKechnie EF (eds.) Theories of information behavior (pp. 1-24). Medford, NJ : Information Today, 2005, pp. 1-24. Bates, M.J and Maack, M.J. (Eds.). (2010). Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, Third Edition, Vol. I-VII. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Bawden, D. (1990). User-oriented evaluation of information systems and services. Aldershot, England: Gower. Bawden, D., Robinson, L. and Siddiqui, T. (In press). “Potentialities or possibilities”: Towards quantum information science? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, DOI: 10.1002/asi.23192 Bazerman, C. (2012). The orders of documents, the orders of activity, and the orders of information. Archival Science, 12(4), 377-388. Becker J. (1968). Information storage and retrieval: The field. In: Sills, DL (ed.) International encyclopedia of the social sciences. New York: The Macmillan Company & The Free Press, Vol. 7, pp. 301-304. Blegvad M, Elberling BV, Johnsen E & Rode M. (eds.) (1957). Videnskabens kommunikationsproblemer [Communication problems in science]. Nordisk Sommeruniversitet 1956. København: Munksgaard, 1957. Belkin, N.J. (1984). Cognitive models and information transfer. Social Science Information Studies, 4, 111–129. Belkin, N.J. (1990). The cognitive viewpoint in information science. Journal of Information Science, 16(1), 11-15. Belkin, N.J. (2005). Anomalous State of Knowledge. In: Fisher KE, Erdelez S and McKechnie EF (eds.) Theories of information behavior: A researchers’ guide. Medford, NJ: Information Today, pp. 44–48. Belkin, N.J., Oddy, R.N. and Brooks, H.M. (1982). ASK for information retrieval: part 1: background and theory. Journal of Documentation, 38(2): 61-71. Booth, A. & Brice, A. (Eds.). (2004). Evidence-based practice for information professionals: A handbook. London: Facet Publishing. Borlund, P. (2003). The Concept of Relevance in IR. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(10), 913–925. Bourdieu, P. (2004). Science of science and reflexivity. Cambridge: Polity. Brier, S. (2008). Cybersemiotics: Why information is not enough! Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Briet S. (1951). Qu´est-ce que la documentation? Paris: Documentaires Industrielles et Techniques. Brookes, B.C. (1980). The foundations of information science: part I: philosophical aspects, Journal of Information Science, 2(3- 4), 125-133. Bruner J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bry, I. (1968). Information storage and retrieval: V: Bibliographic issues in the behavioral sciences. In: Sills, DL (ed.) International encyclopedia of the social sciences. New York: The Macmillan Company & The Free Press, Vol. 7, pp. 326–331. Buckland, M.K. (1991a). Information and information systems. New York: Greenwood Press. Buckland, M.K. (1991b). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5): 351–360. Buckland, M.K. (2005). Review of ‘The philosophy of Information’ (Herold, ed. 2004). Journal of Documentation 2005; 61(5): 684– 686. Buckland, M.K. (2012). What kind of science can information science be? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(1): 1–7. Capurro, R. & Holgate, J. (Eds.). (2011). Messages and Messengers. Angeletics as an Approach to the Phenomenology of Communication. Von Boten und Botschaften. Die Angeletik als Weg zur Phänomenologie der Kommunikation, ICIE Schrifenreihe Bd. 5, München: Fink. Cawkell, A.E. (1990). The boundaries of information science: Information theory is alive and well. Journal of Information Science, 16, 215–216. Chew, E.; Bader, B. W.; Helmreich, S.; Abdelali, A. and Verzi, S.J. (2011). An information-theoretic, vector-space-model approach to cross-language information retrieval. Natural Language Engineering, 17(1), 37–70. Chua, A. Y. K., & Yang, C. C. (2008). The shift towards multi-disciplinarity in information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(13), 2156–2170. Cleverdon, C.W. (1970). The effect of variations in relevance assessments in comparative experimental tests of index languages. Cranfield, UK: Cranfield Institute of Technology. (Cranfield Library Report No. 3) Cleverdon, C.W., Mills, J. & Keen, E.M. (1966). Factors determining the performance of indexing systems. Cranfield, UK: Aslib Cranfield Research Project, College of Aeronautics. (Volume 1: Design; Volume 2: Results) Collin, F. (2013). Two kinds of social epistemology.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 2(8), 79-104. http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-Ul Cronin, B. (2008). The sociological turn in information science. Journal of Information Science, 34(4), 465–475. Day, R.E. (2011). Death of the user: Reconceptualizing subjects, objects, and their relations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 78-88. Dewey, J. (1910). The influence of Darwin on philosophy and other essays on contemporary thought. New York: Holt. Egan, M.E. and Shera, J.H. (1952). Foundations of a theory of bibliography. Library Quarterly, 22(2), 125–137. Einstein A. (1949). Remarks concerning the essays brought together in this co-operative volume. In: Schlipp PA (ed.) Albert Einstein, philosopher-scientist. New York: Tudor Publishers, 1949, pp. 663-688. Ellis, D. (1992a). Paradigms and proto-paradigms in information retrieval research. In: Vakkari P and Cronin B (eds.) Conceptions of Library and Information Science. Historical, empirical and theoretical perspectives. London: Taylor Graham, pp. 165- 186. Ellis, D. (1992b). The physical and cognitive paradigms in information retrieval research. Journal of Documentation, 48(1): 45-64. Farradane, J. E. L. (1953). Information service in industry. Research, 6(8), 327-330. Farradane, J.E.L. (1955). Professional education of the information scientist. In: Congrès International des bibliothéques et des centres de documentation, Brusselles, 11–18 septembre, Vol. Iib. La Haye: Martin Nijhoff, 1955, pp. 76-81. Faux, R. (2014). Cognitive theory. In: Teo T (ed.) Encyclopedia of critical psychology. New York: Springer, Vol. 1, pp. 249-253. Fisher, K.E., Erdelez, S. and McKechnie, L. (eds.). (2005). Theories of information behavior. Medford, NJ: Information Today. Fjordback Søndergaard T, Andersen J and Hjørland B. (2003). Documents and the communication of scientific and scholarly information: Revising and updating the UNISIST model. Journal of Documentation, 59(3): 278–320. Frohmann B. (2004). Deflating information: From science studies to documentation. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Fuchs, C. (2011). Foundations of critical media and information studies. London: Routledge. Furner, J. (2002). Shera's social epistemology recast as psychological bibliology. Social Epistemology, 16(1): 5–22. Furner J. (2004). Information studies without information. Library Trends, 52(3): 427–446. Gärdenfors, P. (1999). Cognitive science: From computers to anthills as models of human thought. Human IT, 3(2): 9-36. www.hb.se/bhs/ith/2-99/pg.htm Goguen, J.A. (1997). Towards a social, ethical theory of information. In: Bowker G, Star SL, Gasser L and Turner W (eds.) Social science research, technical systems and cooperative work: Beyond the great divide. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 27–56. Fiske, J. (2011). Introduction to communication studies. 3rd ed. New York: Routledge. Haigh, T. (2001). Inventing information systems: The systems men and the computer, 1950–1968. Business History Review, 75(1), 15–61. Hedlund, T.; Pirkola, A. & Järvelin, K. (2001). Aspects of Swedish morphology and semantics from the perspective of mono- and cross-language information retrieval. Information processing and management. 37, 147-161. Hessels, LK and van Lente, H. (2008). Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda. Research Policy, 37, 740-760. Hjørland B. (1991). Det kognitive paradigme i biblioteks- og informationsvidenskaben. Biblioteksarbejde, #33: 5-37 [In Danish]. Retrieved from http://biblioteksarbejde.dk/art/BA33/hjoerland(1991).pdf Hjørland B. (2000). Documents, memory institutions, and information science. Journal of Documentation, 56(1): 27–41. Hjørland B. (2002). Principia Informatica. Foundational Theory of Information and Principles of Information Services. In: Bruce H, Fidel R, Ingwersen P and Vakkari P (eds.) Emerging Frameworks and Methods. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS4). Greenwood Village, Colorado, USA: Libraries Unlimited, pp. 109-121. Hjørland, B. (2010). The foundation of the concept of relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(2): 217-237. Hjørland, B. (2013a). Citation analysis: A social and dynamic approach to knowledge organization. Information Processing and Management, 49(6), 1313–1325. Hjørland, B. (2013b). Facet analysis: The logical approach to knowledge organization. Information Processing & Management, 49(2): 545–557. Hjørland, B. (2013c). Information science and its core concepts: Levels of disagreement. In: lbekwe-SanJuan F and Dousa T (eds.) Fundamental notions of information communication and knowledge. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 205–235. Hjørland B. (2013d). Theories of knowledge organization—Theories of knowledge. Knowledge Organization, 40(3): 169–181. Hjørland B. (2013e). User-based and cognitive approaches to knowledge organization: A theoretical analysis of the research literature. Knowledge Organization, 40: 11–27. Hjørland B. (In Press, a). Classical databases and knowledge organization: A case for Boolean retrieval and human decision-making during searches. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (published as Early View). DOI: 10.1002/asi.23250 Hjørland B. (In Press, b). Informetrics needs a foundation in the theory of science. In: Cassidy R. Sugimoto (ed.), Theories of Informetrics. Festschrift in honor of Blaise Cronin. To be published by De Gruyter Press, Berlin. Hjørland, B. (In Press, c). The phrase ‘information storage and retrieval’ (IS&R): A historical note. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. DOI: 10.1002/asi.23226 Hjørland B. and Albrechtsen, H. (1995). Domain analysis: toward a new horizon in information science, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(6): 400-425. Ingwersen, P. (1982). Search procedures in the library: Analysed from the cognitive point of view. Journal of Documentation, 38(3), 165–191. Ingwersen, P. (1992). Information retrieval interaction. London: Taylor Graham. Ingwersen, P. (1996). Cognitive perspectives of information retrieval interaction: Elements of a cognitive IR theory. Journal of Documentation, 52(1): 350. Ingwersen, P. & Järvelin, K. (2005). The turn. Integration of information seeking and retrieval in context. Berlin : Springer. Jörgensen, C. (2003). Image Retrieval. Theory and Research. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press. Kantor, P. B. (2010). Information Theory. In: Bates, M.J and Maack, M.J. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, Third Edition, Vol. IV, 2717- 2726. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Kline, R.L. (2004). What is information theory a theory of? Boundary work among information theorists and information scientists in the United States and Britain during the Cold War. In: Rayward WB and Bowden ME (eds.) The history and heritage of scientific and technical Information Systems: Proceedings of the 2002 conference, Chemical Heritage Foundation. Medford, NJ: Information Today, pp. 15-28. Kuhn, T.S. (1979). Metaphor in science. In A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor in science (pp. 409-419). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leckie, G.J, Given, L.M. and Buschman, J.E. (eds.). (2010). Critical theory for library and information science: Exploring the social from across the disciplines. Westport, Conn: Libraries Unlimited. Lewin, K. (1943). Forces behind food habits and methods of change. Bulletin of the National Research Council, 108, 35-65. Lindsay, P.H. and Norman, D.A. (1977). Human information processing: An introduction to psychology. 2nd. ed. New York: Academic Press. Lund, N.W. (2008). Document theory. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 43: 399–432. Machlup, F. and Mansfield, U. (1983). Cultural diversity in studies of information. In Machlup F and Mansfield U (eds.). The study of information: Interdisciplinary messages. New York: Wiley, pp. 3-59. Martyn, J. and Lancaster, F.W. (1981). Investigative methods in library and information science: an introduction. Washington, D.C.: Information Resources Press. Mitchell, R.E. (1968). Information storage and retrieval: II: Information services. In: Sills, DL (ed.) International encyclopedia of the social sciences. New York: The Macmillan Company & The Free Press, Vol. 7, pp. 304–314. Nagel, T. (1986). The view from nowhere. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality. San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman. Nöth, W. (2013). Human communication from the semiotic perspective. In: lbekwe-SanJuan F and Dousa T (eds.) Fundamental notions of information communication and knowledge. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 97-119. Norman, D.A. and Rumelhard, D.E. (eds.). (1975). Explorations in Cognition. San Francisco: Freeman. Ørom A. (2007). The concept of information versus the concept of document. In: Skare R, Lund NW and Vårheim A (eds.) Document (re)turn: Contributions from a research field in transition. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 53-72. Oxford English dictionary: The definitive record of the English language. Third edition [Online]. Simpson J (ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2010 Quarterly update. Retrieved from http://www.oed.com/ Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble. What the Internet is hiding from you. London: Viking Proffitt, M. (2010). Information (Word stories). Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://public.oed.com/aspects-of-english/word-stories/information/ Ratner, C. (2002). Cultural psychology: Theory and method. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Ratner, C. (2008). Methodological holism versus individualism. In: Given LM (ed.) The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, pp. 514-517. Robertson, Stephen (2000). On retrieval system theory. Presented at: The ISKO UK Second Biennial Conference, 4th-5th July 2011, London. In: A Gilchrist and J Vernau (eds.), Facets of Knowledge Organization. Emerald, 2012. (pp. 3-10). http://www.iskouk.org/conf2011/papers/robertson.pdf Robinson, L. and Bawden, D. (2013). 'So wide and varied': The origins and character of British information science. Journal of Information Science, 39(6), 754–763. Saracevic, T. (1999). Information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(12), 1051–1063. Saracevic, T. (1975). Relevance: A review of and a framework for the thinking on the notion in information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 26(6): 321–343. Schamber, L., Eisenberg, M.B., & Nilan, M.S. (1990). A re-examination of relevance: Toward a dynamic, situational definition. Information Processing & Management, 26, 755–775. Schwartz, CA. (1997). The rise and fall of uncitedness. College & Research Libraries, 58(1), 19-29. Shannon, C.E. (1948). A Mathematical Theory of Communication. The Bell System Technical Journal 1948; 27(3): 379–423, 623–656. Retrieved from http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Shapiro, F.R. (1995). Coinage of the term Information Science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(5): 384–385. Shera, J.H. (1968). Information storage and retrieval: III: Libraries. In: Sills, DL (ed.) International encyclopedia of the social sciences. New York: The Macmillan Company & The Free Press, Vol. 7, pp. 314–318. Shera, J.H. (1970). Sociological Foundations of Librarianship. New York: Asia Publishing House. Sills, D.L. (1968). (ed.) International encyclopedia of social sciences. New York: Macmillan and the Free Press, 1968, Vol. 1-18. Skinner, Q. (1985). The Return of Grand Theory in the Human Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Spang-Hanssen, H. (2001). How to teach about information as related to documentation. Human IT, 5(1), 125–143. [Manuscript written in 1970]. Retrieved from http://etjanst.hb.se/bhs/ith/1-01/hsh.htm Spear, J.H. (2007). Prominent schools or other active specialties? A fresh look at some trends in psychology. Review of General Psychology, 11(4): 363-380. Retrieved from: http://www.jmu.edu/socanth/sociology/wm_library/Spear_gpr-11-4- 363.pdf Stock, W.G. and Stock, M. (2013). Handbook of information science. Berlin: De Gruyter. Su, L.T. (1992). Evaluation measures for interactive information retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 28(4), 513-516. Talja, S. (1997). Constituting "information" and "user" as research objects. A theory of knowledge formations as an alternative to the information man -theory. In: Vakkari P, Savolainen R and Dervin B. (eds.) Information Seeking in Context . London: Taylor Graham, pp. 67-80. Talja, Sanna (2010). Science and Technology Studies. In: Bates, M.J and Maack, M.J. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, Third Edition, (Vol. VI, 4604-4612). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Talja, S., Tuominen, K. and Savolainen, R. (2005). ‘Isms’ in information science: Constructivism, collectivism and constructionism. Journal of Documentation, 61(1), 79–101. Todd, R.J. (2005). Information Intents. In: Fisher KE, Erdelez S and McKechnie EF (eds.) Theories of information behavior. Medford, NJ: Information Today, 2005, pp. 198-203. Tuomaala, O., Järvelin, K. and Vakkari, P. (2014). Evolution of library and information science, 1965–2005: Content analysis of journal articles. Download 225.5 Kb. Share with your friends:
|