The foundation of information science: one world or three? A discussion of Gnoli (2018)

Hjørland, Birger

doi:10.1108/jd-06-2018-0100

Cited by 6 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This paper outlines the MFSM based on four levels of signification, which encompass physical and abstract objects of the world, based on the tenets of information science (Gnoli and Ridi, 2014;Hjørland, 2019). In relation to the research questions presented at the beginning of this paper (What are the levels of semantic modeling capable of linking objects, with the domains in which they are related?…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The model advanced in this paper brings the following practical implications: its four signification levels can be used to analyze and classify any modeling tool; it can be used for a comprehensive modeling of any portion of reality, encompassing both abstract and physical objects; the four-level approach is a useful tool for specifying KOS to store, search and retrieve documents (Bošnjak and Podgorelec, 2016;Hjørland, 2019;Jindal et al, 2014); (also due to the use of physical and abstract objects), the MFSM opens up avenues to extend information science beyond the traditional boundaries of abstract documents, by applying its basic concepts to classify physical objects within a view that considers physical objects as documents (ICM, 2019;Dijkshoorn et al, 2018;Farrokhnia, 2013). This paper presents some limitations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The contextualization of an object in different domains becomes increasingly important in search processes in which users are not seeking a specific object (Hider, 2006(Hider, , 2017Ruggeri et al, 2019) but, rather, an object in a given domain and category (e.g., "a book about lean manufacturing," or a "conference article about lean manufacturing," etc.). The classification of objects according to physical or abstract follows the basic assumptions in the recent works of Gnoli and Ridi (2014) and Hjørland (2019), which present alternative views about the ontological aspects of objects, a crucial aspect in information science. Considering the literature reviewed (Table I), some articles concomitantly recognize these two basic types of objects.…”

Section: A Comparative Analysis Of the Mfsm With Current Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The knowledge management process has been of central interest to knowledge-organization systems (KOS), which permit the description, indexation, ordering and posterior retrieval of documents in different contexts (Hider, 2006(Hider, , 2017Hjørland, 2003Hjørland, , 2008. The basic purpose of these systems is to afford the user higher efficiency in their search for documents (Bošnjak and Podgorelec, 2016;Hjørland, 2019;Jindal et al, 2014;Li et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The clear difference between objects and their representation (Ellestrõm, 2014) through classes of entities enables us to deduce two different yet basic levels of modeling of a given domain: the level of objects (see Figure 1), which comprises the lowest modeling level composed by the representation of the objects themselves (abstract or physical) (Hjørland, 2019), and the level of classes of entities, which indicates the representation of objects in categories (e.g. books, clients, cars and houses).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A multi-layer framework for semantic modeling

Silva¹,

Reis²,

Fernandes

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce a multi-level framework for semantic modeling (MFSM) based on four signification levels: objects, classes of entities, instances and domains. In addition, four fundamental propositions of the signification process underpin these levels, namely, classification, decomposition, instantiation and contextualization. Design/methodology/approach The deductive approach guided the design of this modeling framework. The authors empirically validated the MFSM in two ways. First, the authors identified the signification processes used in articles that deal with semantic modeling. The authors then applied the MFSM to model the semantic context of the literature about lean manufacturing, a field of management science. Findings The MFSM presents a highly consistent approach about the signification process, integrates the semantic modeling literature in a new and comprehensive view; and permits the modeling of any semantic context, thus facilitating the development of knowledge organization systems based on semantic search. Research limitations/implications The use of MFSM is manual and, thus, requires a considerable effort of the team that decides to model a semantic context. In this paper, the modeling was generated by specialists, and in the future should be applicated to lay users. Practical implications The MFSM opens up avenues to a new form of classification of documents, as well as for the development of tools based on the semantic search, and to investigate how users do their searches. Social implications The MFSM can be used to model archives semantically in public or private settings. In future, it can be incorporated to search engines for more efficient searches of users. Originality/value The MFSM provides a new and comprehensive approach about the elementary levels and activities in the process of signification. In addition, this new framework presents a new form to model semantically any context classifying its objects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Comparative Analysis Of the Mfsm With Current Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A multi-layer framework for semantic modeling

Silva¹,

Reis²,

Fernandes

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Expanding the current tacit/explicit knowledge dichotomy encompassing situated and theoretical/normative knowledge: a phenomenological perspective

Silva

Silva²

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis article introduces a model of knowledge creation in consciousness, the creation of explicit knowledge in six forms and its register and organisation in documents.Design/methodology/approachAssuming the premise of three realms of reference to knowledge and two forms of reference to entities, this article, through a phenomenological perspective, deduces a model of the creation of knowledge in consciousness and the creation of explicit knowledge in six forms and its register in documents.FindingsTwo basic types of knowledge are introduced: situated knowledge and theoretical/normative knowledge. Considering three realms of reference of knowledge – the space–time realm, subjectivity realm and linguistic realm – six general types of knowledge are deduced. Finally, three layers of knowledge organisation are presented: classification and mapping documents, theoretical/normative documents and documents of situations.Practical implicationsThis article can contribute to the development of more efficient forms of creation of explicit knowledge, its register in documents and the development of more efficient knowledge organisation and management systems.Originality/valueRelying on established perspectives of the realms where subjectivity is immersed, this article discusses how knowledge is created in consciousness and registered in documents. It also presents a novel perspective of types of knowledge through the combination of dimensions, realms of reference and forms of reference to entities.

show abstract

Domain analytic paradigm: a quarter century exploration of fundamental ideas in information science

Lin

Qiu

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe conditions that domain analysis becomes an academic school of information science (IS) are mature. Domain analysis is one of the most important foundations of IS. The purpose of this paper is to analyze and discuss metatheoretical and theoretical issues in the domain analytic paradigm in IS.Design/methodology/approachThis paper conducts a systematic review of representative publications of domain analysis. The analysis considered degree theses, journal articles, book chapters, conference papers and other materials.FindingsDomain analysis maintains that community is the new focus of IS research. Although domain analysis centers on the domain and community, theoretical concerns on the social and individual dimensions of IS are inherent in it by its using sociology as its important approach and socio-cognitive viewpoint. For these reasons domain analysis can integrate social–community–individual levels of IS discipline as a whole. The role of subject knowledge in IS is discussed from the perspective of domain analysis. Realistic pragmatism that forms the philosophical foundation of domain analysis is argued and the implications of these theories to IS are presented.Originality/valueThe intellectual evolving landscape of domain analysis during a quarter century is comprehensively reviewed. Over the past twenty-five years, domain analysis has established its academic status in the international IS circle. Being an important metatheory, paradigm and methodology, domain analysis becomes the theoretical foundation of IS research. This paper assesses the current state of domain analysis and shows the contributions of domain analysis to IS. It also aims to inspire further exploration.

show abstract

The foundation of information science: one world or three? A discussion of Gnoli (2018)

Cited by 6 publications

References 21 publications

A multi-layer framework for semantic modeling

A multi-layer framework for semantic modeling

Expanding the current tacit/explicit knowledge dichotomy encompassing situated and theoretical/normative knowledge: a phenomenological perspective

Domain analytic paradigm: a quarter century exploration of fundamental ideas in information science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About