Information: data that has been interpreted, translated, or
transformed to reveal the underlying meaning; from
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/cfsscf/science/prodserv/kmglossary_e.html#0009
Digital library: a collection of a very large number of digital
objects, comprising all types of material and media, that are
stored in distributed information repositories and accessed
through national computer networks;
1. information science, informatics, information processing, IP - (the sciences concerned with gathering and manipulating and
storing and retrieving and classifying recorded information)
[Princeton’s Cog Sci] from http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgibin/webwn?stage=1&word=information+science
Info Sci Institute, USC Viterbi School of Engineering: “…
research and development of advanced computer and communications
technologies.” from: www.isi.edu/
www2.sis.pitt.edu/
A core intellectual construct of the DLIM concentration will be
the notion of knowledge representation. As library functionality
has moved into the web environment, and in other ways has become
increasingly digitized, knowledge representation is the core
technology that will support increasingly powerful and
sophisticated approaches to organizing, classifying, retrieving,
analyzing, summarizing and otherwise utilizing information and
knowledge. Thus the traditional classification systems of library
science will be extended and supplemented with technologies such
as automated ontologies and description logics.
Library and information science
Library and information science (LIS) is the study of issues
related to libraries. This includes academic studies (most often
surveys) about how library resources are used and how people
interact with library systems. These studies tend to be specific
to certain libraries at certain times. The organization of
knowledge for efficient retrieval of relevant information is also
a major research goal of LIS. Basic topics in library science
include the acquisition, classification and preservation of
library materials. In a more present-day view, a fervent
outgrowth of LIS is information architecture. LIS should not be
confused with information theory, the mathematical study of the
concept of information.
Library science is distinct from librarianship, which is the
practical services rendered by librarians in their day-to-day
attempt to meet the needs of library patrons. Librarianship tends
not to create new knowledge, nor to strive to advance any field
or discipline. Librarians only rarely engage in library science,
and then usually outside their jobs as librarians. But the study
of library science is part of the requisite training of
librarians.
The term library and information science should not be broken
into these separate pieces. Library and information science is a
hybrid academic field that grew from library schools' fight for
survival in the electronic age. The politics of academia, issues
of status and prestige, issues of perceived obsolescence and
other forces created these programs. Programs in library and
information science are interdisciplinary, overlapping with the
fields of systems' analysis, computer science, statistics and
various parts of the social sciences.
The field of library and information science is not defined by
its output of information specialists, but by the "information
specialists" who remain in academia teaching and doing research,
by its literature, its journals and all the other ways in which
an academic discipline is defined, the study of which, by the
way, falls within the scope of library and information science!
Information Science in 2003: A Critique
Webber S.
Journal of Information Science, 2003, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 311330(20)
SAGE Publications
Bates, M. J. (1999). The invisible substrate of information
science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science
50, #12 (1999) 1043-1050.
What is Information Science?
Bates, Marcia J. 1999. The Invisible Substrate of Information
Science. Journal of The American Society for Information Science
50 (12):1043-1050. Also available from Prof. Bates' web page.
The explicit, above-the-water-line paradigm of information
science is well known and widely discussed. Every disciplinary
paradigm, however, contains elements that are less conscious and
explicit in the thinking of its practitioners. The purpose of
this article is to elucidate key elements of the below-the-waterline portion of the information science paradigm. Particular
emphasis is given to information science's role as a meta-science
-- conducting research and developing theory around the
documentary products of other disciplines and activities. The
mental activities of the professional practice of the field are
seen to center around representation and organization of
information rather than knowing information. It is argued that
such representation engages fundamentally different talents and
skills from those required in other professions and intellectual
disciplines. Methodological approaches and values of information
science are also considered.
Saracevic, Tefko. 1999. Information science. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science, 50 (12): 1051-1063.
Also available from Prof. Saracevic's home page.
This essay is a personal analysis of information science as a
field of scientific inquiry and professional practice that has
evolved over the past half-century. Various sections examine the
origin of information science in respect to the problems of
information explosion; the social role of the field; the nature
of "information" in information science; the structure of the
field in terms of problems addressed; evolutionary trends in
information retrieval as a major branch of information science;
the relation of information science to other fields, most notably
librarianship and computer science; and educational models and
issues. Conclusions explore some dominant trends affecting the
field.
White, Howard D., and Kate W. McCain. 1998. Visualizing A
Discipline: An Author Co-citation Analysis of Information
Science, 1972-1995. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science 49 (4):327-355.
This study presents an extensive domain analysis of a discipline
- information science - in terms of its authors. Names of those
most frequently cited in 12 key journals from 1972 through 1995
were retrieved from Social Scisearch via DIALOG. The top 120 were
submitted to author co-citation analyses, yielding automatic
classifications relevant to histories of the field. Tables and
graphics reveal: (1) The disciplinary and institutional
affiliations of contributors to information science; (2) the
specialty structure of the discipline over 24 years; (3) authors'
memberships in 1 or more specialties; (4) inertia and change in
authors' positions on 2-dimensional subject maps over 3 8-year
subperiods, 1972-1979, 1980-1987, 1988-1995; (5) the 2 major
subdisciplines of information science and their evolving
memberships; (6) canonical authors who are in the top 100 in all
three subperiods; (7) changes in authors' eminence and influence
over the subperiods, as shown by mean co-citation counts; (8)
authors with marked changes in their mapped positions over the
subperiods; (9) the axes on which authors are mapped, with
interpretations; (10) evidence of a paradigm shift in information
science in the 1980s; and (11) evidence on the general nature and
state of integration of information science. Statistical routines
include ALSCAL, INDSCAL, factor analysis, and cluster analysis
with SPSS; maps and other graphics were made with DeltaGraph.
Theory and methodology are sufficiently detailed to be usable by
other researchers.
Hawkins, Donald T., Signe E. Larson, and Bari Q. Caton. 2003.
Information Science Abstracts: Tracking the Literature of
Information Science. Part 2: A New Taxonomy for Information
Science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science
and Technology 54 (8):771-781.
This article continues earlier research on the development of a
new definition of the field of information science and the
creation of a "map" of the field showing subjects central to it
and their relationships to those on the periphery. A case study
describes the creation of a new classification structure
(taxonomy) for the Information Science Abstracts (ISA) database,
aiming to reflect and accommodate the rapid and continued
technological and market changes affecting the information
industry today and into the future. Based on a sample of some
3,000 ISA abstracts, two validation experiments were conducted by
a three-member team comprising a database editor, a reference
librarian, and an abstractor-indexer, who represent three of the
major communities within the information science field. In the
first experiment, the sample of abstracts was classified
according to the proposed new taxonomy; after analysis of the
data and revision of the taxonomy, it was revalidated and fine
tuned in a second experiment. Indexer consistency measures
obtained in this study were significantly higher than those found
in previous studies. The taxonomy resulting from this research
employs the concepts, definition, and map of information science
previously developed. It presents them in an organized
hierarchical view of the field and thus makes a significant
contribution to information science.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------