A Review of Boundary Objects in Classification Research

Abstract

The goal of this paper is to explore the empirical aptness of a conceptual framework for the study of an international standard classification system by considering epistemological assumptions underlying its use in classification research to date. I survey reviews and empirical inquiry in LIS that feature the concept boundary object, (Star & Griesemer, 1989) and discuss some implications for classification research. I discuss the problems posed when predominant discourses concerning classification research inhibit our understanding of classification practices as socially, historically and culturally constructed. I conclude with proposing inquiry into international standard occupational classification as away of exploring the limits of the boundary object concept within the context of globalized standards and localpractices.

Transforming Taxonomic Interfaces

“…Several other researchers have similarly considered classification systems as boundary objects (e.g. [4,37,63,71]); but again, they do not necessarily focus on the work of creating the classification system itself, but rather, how others use the classification system to do other work. As we noted above, the field of library and information science has extensively considered the work of classification maintenance, examining work-centered (e.g.…”

Boundary objects in information science

“…Instead, we set out to identify relevant theoretical extensions and conceptual refinements of the concept in order that we may assess and discuss its influence on the theoretical discourse of our fields. Our overview stretches from knowledge organization (Albrechtsen & Jacob, 1998;Jansen, 2013) to information practices and work research (e.g., Huvila, 2013;, document studies (e.g., Huvila, 2011Huvila, , 2012aHuvila, , 2016Lund, 2009), social and community informatics (e.g., Fleischmann, 2006;Westbrook & Finn, 2012;Worrall, 2013), and computer-supported cooperative work (e.g., Light & Anderson, 2009;Roth & McGinn 1998).…”

“…In a shift beyond bibliographic classifications, Campbell (2003) invokes the concept to explore a statistical classification of industries, taking a discursive approach similar to examinations of bibliographic organization. Eva Jansen's forthcoming study of standard occupational classification (Jansen, 2013;Howarth & Hourihan Jansen, 2014) engages ethnographic methods more frequently taken up in research described in the later sections of this paper. The extent to which the boundary object concept contributes to theoretical extension in the literature of Knowledge Organization is apparent and the limits remain an open question.…”

“…Instead, we set out to identify relevant theoretical extensions and conceptual refinements of the concept in order that we may assess and discuss its influence on the theoretical discourse of our fields. Our overview stretches from knowledge organization (Albrechtsen & Jacob, 1998;Jansen, 2013) to information practices and work research (e.g. McKenzie & Davies, 2010;Huvila, 2013), document studies (e.g.…”

Boundary objects in information science research: An approach for explicating connections between collections, cultures and communities

“…McKenzie & Davies 2010), knowledge organisation (Albrechtsen & Jacob 1998;Jansen 2013), community information (e.g. West-brook & Finn 2012) and social informatics (e.g.…”