Theories of knowledge organization — theories of knowledge (original) (raw)

Relationship Between Authors and Main Subject Categories in the Knowledge Organization Domain: A Bibliometric Approach

2012

This is a study about the relationships between authors and the main thematic categories in the papers published in the last five International ISKO Conferences, held between 2002 and 2010. The aim is to map the domain as ISKO conferences are considered the most representative forum in the field. The published papers are considered to indicate the relationships between authors and themes. The Classification Scheme for Knowledge OrganizationError! Bookmark not defined. Literature (CSKOL) was used to categorize the papers. The theoretical and methodological foundations of the study can be found in the concept of domain analysis proposed by Hjørland. The analysis of the papers (n=146) led to the identification of the most productive authors, the networks representing the relationships between the authors as also the categories that constitute the primary areas of research. Knowledge Organization: A Bibliometric Analysis The domain of KO has for its foundation the philosophical framework of Dahlberg"s concept theory (1993), the author considered to be the pioneer in the field of studies related to KO. She is also mainly responsible for forming ISKO. The construction of classificatory and thesauri systems have been structured based on this conception, which demonstrates that the concepts theory is widely accepted in the area. It can therefore be said that Dahlberg"s theory plays an important role in the process of cognitive institutionalization of the discipline. Based on the concepts theory, Dahlberg (1993) has developed Classification Scheme for Knowledge Organization Literature (CSKOL) at ISKO, which groups the main concepts under ten primary categories: C0 Form Divisions; C1 Theoretical Foundations and General Problems; C2 Classification Systems and Thesauri (CS&T): Structure and Construction;

A Formal Taxonomy of Knowledge Organization: Meta-Analysis and Facet Analysis

Knowledge Organization, 2020

Nearly fifty years after the incorporation of the International Society for Knowledge Organization and the introduction of its formal scientific journal Knowledge Organization, a comprehensive encyclopedia of the domain appeared. The practice of domain analysis for knowledge organization, twenty years after its introduction as a core methodology, has created the largest corpus of theoretical knowledge in the domain analysis of knowledge organization itself. A substantial body of research data, therefore, is available in the corpus of articles and conference papers reporting on the epistemological and ontological pillars of the science of knowledge organization. This paper is a report on the evolution of a formal taxonomy of knowledge organization, which is a product of an exhaustive meta-analysis of the KO domain. Our team compiled the corpus of twenty-nine formal published analyses together with key formative historical documents. We then analyzed the corpus thematically, bibliogra...

The Relationship between Authors and Main Thematic Categories in the Field of Knowledge Organization: A Bibliometric Approach

2012

This is a study about the relationships between authors and the main thematic categories in the papers published in the last five International ISKO Conferences, held between 2002 and 2010. The aim is to map the domain as ISKO conferences are considered the most representative forum in the field. The published papers are considered to indicate the relationships between authors and themes. The Classification Scheme for Knowledge OrganizationError! Bookmark not defined. Literature (CSKOL) was used to categorize the papers. The theoretical and methodological foundations of the study can be found in the concept of domain analysis proposed by Hjørland. The analysis of the papers (n=146) led to the identification of the most productive authors, the networks representing the relationships between the authors as also the categories that constitute the primary areas of research.

A new paradigm in the organization of knowledge

Futures, 1994

The contemporary situation of knowledge points to a change in paradigm, if looked at from the perspective of a confluence of its essential elements, instead of as a dispersion of its often incongruous developments. The novelty comes from the emergence of the non-material order in the area of the material paradigm, for which it substitutes-only in this sense can one speak of substitution here-as an ordering paradigm of knowledge and of its transmission and circulation. Since the main models of the organization of the fields of knowledge suggested in the past century and a half were inspired by a material/energy matrix of science, we propose an alternative model strategically more adapted to the present situation and heuristically more interesting for the analysis of its problems.

Knowledge Organization in Sciences – As a Classificatory Performance and Classification Design Model for Humanities

Knowledge Organization for a Sustainable World: Challenges and Perspectives for Cultural, Scientific, and Technological Sharing in a Connected Society, 2016

The paper provides an overview of natural science classification scheme development with major control of classification criteria presented in the Linnaean taxonomy. Based on natural laws, the Linnaean taxonomy has been accepted worldwide. Unlike the indexing of the natural sciences items that follows the logic and systematics of natural laws-a real challenge still exists in classification of documents originating from human intellectual activity.Items, produced as a human output are a particular phenomenon and as such, follow no common rules. This lack of evident natural law as a basis for a common classification can be substituted by practices of facet classifications and Information Coding Classification (ICC) [1] that advances to the field of classifying literature. Their common feature is to analyse the information content with a set of categorical questions and to express the answers in exact terms, concepts and notations. The ensuing categorizations are certainly both concise and unequivocal: essentially Linnaean, or better!

Epistemology, theory, and methodology in knowledge organization: toward a classification, metatheory, and research framework

2008

This paper proposes a preliminary classification of knowledge organization research, divided amongepistemology, theory, and methodology plus three spheres of research: design, study, and critique. Thiswork is situated in a metatheoretical framework, drawn from sociological thought. Example works are presented along with preliminary classification. The classification is then briefly described as a comparisontool which can be used to demonstrate overlap and divergence in cognate discourses of knowledgeorganization (such as ontology engineering).

Categories in Knowledge Organization

The categorial approach was formulated by Ranganathan in the 1930s in his Colon Classification and its conceptual and theoretical basis was laid down in his Prolegomena. This view influenced significantly the search for a new approach to knowledge organization that would overcome the rigidity and limitations of enumerative models. The categorical approach or the facet-analytical approach has since become the single most predominant approach in knowledge organization leading to the development of a number of special classification schemes for micro-subjects, new general classification schemes such as BSO (and revision of existing schemes, e.g. BC2), indexing systems such as PRECIS and POPSI, revision and / or development of controlled vocabularies to conform to the faceted approach, emergence of new tools such as the Thesaurofacet and Classaurus, and in recent years, facet analysis has even been used in website design. This paper explores some schemas and raises a few questions as to the relevance of these in the digital environment.

Organization, management and engineering of knowledge: rivals or complements?

20 Anos Del Capitulo Espanol De Isko Actas Del X Congreso Isko Espana Ferrol 30 De Junio 1 De Julio De 2011 2012 Isbn 978 84 9749 535 6 Pags 541 551, 2012

Knowledge Organization is a discipline that has its origin in the library field and was extended by new documentation and information tasks. Thought it claims to encompass all kinds and aspects of knowledge storage and retrieval it is bound more or less to the idea to express the structure of knowledge which is behind a scientific collection of objects and their descriptions. Its aim is to facilitate the exchange between scientists and their knowledge. Knowledge Management instead deals with the elicitation, processing and diffusion of economically important information. Knowledge gets here the main notion of competitive intelligence for a limited target and community. Knowledge Engineering is the technique of making cognitive units and links machine readable and processable. It achieves its advantage over human interaction and understanding with the growth of the data bases and the speed of numerical based decisions. Though rather surprising information mining might be possible by Knowledge Engineering a qualitative or ethical inference remains nearly unsolved. If one contrasts Knowledge Organization, Knowledge Management and Knowledge Engineering to each other these knowledge disciplines get a clearer shape and their special claims, contributions and limitations have to be taken into account. On the other hand it becomes obvious that facing the typical problems and solutions of all knowledge disciplines will result in better outcome in each. Thus practical solutions will always have to take into account these three aspects of knowledge at least.

Knowledge-sociological and information-sociological aspects of knowledge organization (1)

2013

years ago knowledge organization, the develop- ment of scientific concepts and arrangements, has been seen as a logical and thus universal problem. Older approaches accordingly see areas of knowledge as naturally given and organically grown. At latest with the constructivism has entered a 'turn', which sees knowledge organization as a social con- vention and accordingly regards universal standards skeptical. Simultaneously in the sciences came up a stronger concern with historical and sociological stud- ies of its foundations and in philosophy of science the return to different kinds of relativizations has gained more importance. In this paper, some single classical sociological positions are discussed, conclusions are drawn for knowledge and information as well as for science and knowledge organization and objections are designated.