The coverage of information science and knowledge organization in the<i>Library of Congress Subject Headings</i>

Furner, Jonathan; Hjørland, Birger

doi:10.1108/jd-11-2022-0256

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 47 publications

(75 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In their recent work, Furner and Hjørland (2023) employ a similar methodology to examine the LCSH in regard to terms related to LIS; they discuss key subject headings and represent their LCSH entries with tables, then compare this with their own expert knowledge of LIS. In the present study we instead represent the LCSH by visually mapping how key terms relate to one another, allowing for a more robust understanding of subject heading relationships.…”

Section: Methods: Subject and Domain Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our conclusions indicate that the interdisciplinary field of environmental science is not well represented by LCSH, which leads us to question which other complex fields are misrepresented in the controlled vocabulary. Furner and Hjørland (2023) have determined that LCSH does not accurately describe LIS, another wide-reaching and interconnected discipline. In domains such as these, how can controlled vocabularies such as LCSH adapt to and keep up with highly interconnected and rapidly changing/expanding subjects and therefore subject headings?…”

Section: Findings: Domain and Lcsh Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

LCSH and Environmental Science

Purcell,

Bullard

2023

NJLIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The environmental sciences are characterized by their boundless interdisciplinarity and cannot be discussed independently from other scientific fields such as ecology, engineering, and climatology. The complex nature of the discipline leads to challenges in placing it within a controlled vocabulary such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH). However, the placement of a term within a thesaurus hierarchy has potential repercussions for the discoverability of materials assigned that subject heading. As the environmental sciences are rapidly expanding due to global climate change, accurate representation of this discipline within a widely used vocabulary is crucial. In this paper we employ a visual mind mapping technique to examine how the environmental sciences are represented by codified language within the LCSH, then complete a domain analysis of the field to determine how environmental science represents itself. In comparing these two analyses we determine that the LCSH subject headings do not capture the interdisciplinary nature of the field in two primary ways; the term Environmental sciences is not sufficiently connected to the terms representing other major scientific subjects essential for a foundational understanding of environmental science, and key forward-looking topics of concern to environmental scientists such as Climatology are not in direct relationships with Environmental sciences. Correcting these issues is an important task, as ensuring that researchers are able to access a full range of environmental science materials will aid in finding sustainable climate solutions for our planet.

show abstract

Section: Methods: Subject and Domain Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Findings: Domain and Lcsh Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

LCSH and Environmental Science

Purcell,

Bullard

2023

NJLIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, a more general conclusion seems to be that much of information science has lost contact with subject specialists and subject knowledge and tends to develop its own theory and practice based on challenging assumptions (see, e.g., Furner & Hjørland's, 2023 criticism of the Library of Congress Subject Headings). This criticism is not only relevant for the humanities, as examined by Dahlgren, but equally so for all domains of knowledge.…”

Section: Metadatamentioning

confidence: 99%

Description: Its meaning, epistemology, and use with emphasis on information science

Hjørland

2023

Asso for Info Science & Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the concept of “description” and its theoretical foundations. The literature about it is surprisingly limited, and its usage is vague, sometimes even conflicting. Description should be considered in relation to other processes, such as representation, data capturing, and categorizing, which raises the question about what it means to describe something. Description is often used for any type of predication but may better be limited to predications based on observations. Research aims to establish criteria for making optimal descriptions; however, the problems involved in describing something have seldom been addressed. Specific ideals are often followed without examine their fruitfulness. This study provides evidence that description cannot be a neutral, objective activity; rather, it is a theory‐laden and interest‐based activity. In information science, description occurs in processes such as document description, descriptive metadata assignment, and information resource description. In this field, description has equally been used in conflicting ways that mostly do not evince a recognition of the value‐ and theory‐laden nature of descriptions. It is argued that descriptive activities in information science should always be based on consciously explicit considerations of the goals that descriptions are meant to serve.

show abstract

The coverage of information science and knowledge organization in theLibrary of Congress Subject Headings

Cited by 2 publications

References 47 publications

LCSH and Environmental Science

LCSH and Environmental Science

Description: Its meaning, epistemology, and use with emphasis on information science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About