Fundamentos ontológicos de la organización del conocimiento: la teoría de los niveles integrativos aplicada al orden de cita

The field of knowledge organization (KO) can be described as composed of the four distinct but connected layers of theory, systems, representation, and application. This paper focuses on the relations between KO theory and KO systems. It is acknowledged how the structure of KO systems is the product of a mixture of ontological, epistemological, and pragmatical factors. However, different systems give different priorities to each factor. A more ontologically-oriented approach, though not offering quick solutions for any particular group of users, will produce systems of wide and long-lasting application as they are based on general, shareable principles. I take the case of the ontological theory of integrative levels, which has been considered as a useful source for general classifications for several decades, and is currently implemented in the Integrative Levels Classification system. The theory produces a sequence of main classes modelling a natural order between phenomena. This order has interesting effects also on other features of the system, like the citation order of concepts within compounds. As it has been shown by facet analytical theory, it is useful that citation order follow a principle of inversion, as compared to the order of the same concepts in the schedules. In the light of integrative levels theory, this principle also acquires an ontological meaning: phenomena of lower level should be cited first, as most often they act as specifications of higher-level ones. This ontological principle should be complemented by consideration of the epistemological treatment of phenomena: in case a lower-level phenomenon is the main theme, it can be promoted to the leading position in the compound subject heading. The integration of these principles is believed to produce optimal results in the ordering of knowledge contents.El campo de la organización del conocimiento puede ser descrito como compuesto de cuatro capas: teoría, sistemas, representación y aplicación. Esta ponencia se centra en las relaciones entre la teoría y los sistemas de organización del conocimiento. Se reconoce que la estructura de los sistemas de organización del conocimiento es producto de una mezcla de factores ontológicos, epistemológicos y pragmáticos. Sin embargo, sistemas diferentes asignan prioridades diferentes a cada factor. Un enfoque más ontológico, aunque no ofrece soluciones rápidas para los grupos particulares de usuarios, sí producirá sistemas de aplicación amplia y de larga duración, al basarse en principios generales y compartidos. Se plantea el caso de la teoría ontológica de los niveles de integración, que ha sido considerada una fuente útil para las clasificaciones generales durante varias décadas, y está siendo actualmente implementada en el sistema Clasificación de Niveles Integradores. Esta teoría produce una secuencia de clases principales modelando un orden natural en los fenómenos. Este orden tiene efectos interesantes también en otras características del sistema, como el orden de cita de los conceptos dentro de los compuestos. Como muestra la teoría analítica de facetas, es útil que el orden de cita siga el principio de inversión, respecto al orden de las tablas. A la luz de la teoría integradora de los niveles, este principio también adquiere un significado ontológico, no solo para las facetas sino también para las relaciones de fase: los fenómenos de nivel superior deberían ser citados primero, pues son relevantes a un mayor nivel de generalidad, mientras que los niveles inferiores frecuentemente juegan el papel de sus componentes. Este principio general, sin embargo, debería complementarse con la noción de tema principal, permitiendo que se pueda promover un fenómeno de nivel inferior a la posición principal en los casos en los que sea el foco principal de documento. La integración de estos principios debería producir resultados óptimos en la ordenación de contenidos de conocimiento

Power of Position

How biodiversity classification, with its ranking of species, has social and political implications as well as implications for the field of information studies. The idea that species live in nature as pure and clear-cut named individuals is a fiction, as scientists well know. According to Robert D. Montoya, classifications are powerful mechanisms and we must better attend to the machinations of power inherent in them, as well as to how the effects of this power proliferate beyond the boundaries of their original intent. We must acknowledge the many ways our classifications are implicated in environmental, ecological, and social justice work—and information specialists must play a role in updating our notions of what it means to classify. In Power of Position, Montoya shows how classifications are systems that relateone entity with other entities, requiring those who construct a system to value an entity's relative importance—by way of its position—within a system of other entities. These practices, says Montoya, are important ways of constituting and exerting power. Classification also has very real-world consequences. An animal classified as protected and endangered, for example, is protected by law. Montoya also discusses the Catalogue of Life, a new kind of composite classification that reconciles many local (“traditional”) taxonomies, forming a unified taxonomic backbone structure for organizing biological data. Finally, he shows how the theories of information studies are applicable to realms far beyond those of biological classification

A machine learning taxonomic classifier for science publications

Dissertação de mestrado integrado em Engineering and Management of Information SystemsThe evolution in scientific production, associated with the growing interdomain collaboration of knowledge and the increasing co-authorship of scientific works remains supported by processes of manual, highly subjective classification, subject to misinterpretation. The very taxonomy on which this same classification process is based is not consensual, with governmental organizations resorting to taxonomies that do not keep up with changes in scientific areas, and indexers / repositories that seek to keep up with those changes. We find a reality distinct from what is expected and that the domains where scientific work is recorded can easily be misrepresentative of the work itself. The taxonomy applied today by governmental bodies, such as the one that regulates scientific production in Portugal, is not enough, is limiting, and promotes classification in areas close to the desired, therefore with great potential for error. An automatic classification process based on machine learning algorithms presents itself as a possible solution to the subjectivity problem in classification, and while it does not solve the issue of taxonomy mismatch this work shows this possibility with proved results. In this work, we propose a classification taxonomy, as well as we develop a process based on machine learning algorithms to solve the classification problem. We also present a set of directions for future work for an increasingly representative classification of evolution in science, which is not intended as airtight, but flexible and perhaps increasingly based on phenomena and not just disciplines.A evolução na produção de ciência, associada à crescente colaboração interdomínios do conhecimento e à também crescente coautoria de trabalhos permanece suportada por processos de classificação manual, subjetiva e sujeita a interpretações erradas. A própria taxonomia na qual assenta esse mesmo processo de classificação não é consensual, com organismos estatais a recorrerem a taxonomias que não acompanham as alterações nas áreas científicas, e indexadores/repositórios que procuram acompanhar essas mesmas alterações. Verificamos uma realidade distinta do espectável e que os domínios onde são registados os trabalhos científicos podem facilmente estar desenquadrados. A taxonomia hoje aplicada pelos organismos governamentais, como o caso do organismo que regulamenta a produção científica em Portugal, não é suficiente, é limitadora, e promove a classificação em domínios aproximados do desejado, logo com grande potencial para erro. Um processo de classificação automática com base em algoritmos de machine learning apresenta-se como uma possível solução para o problema da subjetividade na classificação, e embora não resolva a questão do desenquadramento da taxonomia utilizada, é apresentada neste trabalho como uma possibilidade comprovada. Neste trabalho propomos uma taxonomia de classificação, bem como nós desenvolvemos um processo baseado em machine learning algoritmos para resolver o problema de classificação. Apresentamos ainda um conjunto de direções para trabalhos futuros para uma classificação cada vez mais representativa da evolução nas ciências, que não pretende ser hermética, mas flexível e talvez cada vez mais baseada em fenómenos e não apenas em disciplinas

Classification design : understanding the decisions between theory and consequence

Classification systems are systems of terms and term relationships intended to sort and gather like concepts and documents. These systems are ubiquitous as the substrate of our interactions with library collections, retail websites, and bureaucracies. Through their design and impact, classification systems share with other technologies an unavoidable though often ignored relationship to politics, power, and authority (Fleischmann & Wallace, 2007). Despite concern among scholars that classification systems embody values and bias, there is little work examining how these qualities are built into a classification system. Specifically, we do not adequately understand classification construction, in which classification designers make decisions by applying classification theory to the specific context of a project (Park, 2008). If systems embody values— particularly values that might either cause harm (Berman, 1971) or provide an additional means of communicating the creator’s position (Feinberg, 2007)— we must understand how and when the system takes on these qualities. This dissertation bridges critical classification theory with design-oriented classification theory. Where critical classification theory is concerned with the outcomes of classification system design, design-oriented classification theory is concerned with the correct processes by which to build a classification system. To connect the consequences of classification system design to designers’ methods and intentions, I use the research lens of infrastructure studies, particularly infrastructural inversion (Star & Ruhleder, 1996) or making visible the work behind infrastructures such as classification systems. Accordingly, my research focuses on designers’ decisions and rethinks our assumptions regarding the factors that classification designers consider in making their design decisions. I adopted an ethnographic approach to the study of classification design that would make visible design decisions and designers’ consideration of factors. Using this approach, I studied the daily design work of volunteer classification designers who maintain a curated folksonomy. Using the grounded theory method (Strauss & Corbin, 1998), I analyzed the designers’ decisions. My analysis identified the implications of the designers’ convergences and divergences from established classification methods for the character of the system and for the connection between classification theory and classification methods. I show how the factors—and the prioritization of factors—that these designers considered in making their decisions were consistent with the values and needs of the community. Therefore, I argue that classification designers have an important role in creating the values or bias of a classification system. In particular, designers’ divergence from universal guidelines and designers’ choices among sources of evidence represent opportunities to align a classification system to its community. I recommend that classification research focus on such instances of divergence and choice to understand the connection between classification design and the values of classification systems. The Introduction motivates the problem space around values in classification systems and outlines my approach in focusing on classification design. The Literature Review outlines the dominant theories in classification scholarship according to three elements of classification design: what decisions designers make, what information designers use in their decisions, and what skills designers apply to their decisions. In the Methods chapter, I introduce the site of my ethnographic research (The Fanwork Repository), detail my ethnographic methods, summarize the types of data I collected, and describe my grounded analysis. Three findings chapters examine one type of complex decision each: Names, Works, and Guidelines, respectively. In the fourth findings chapter, Synthesis, I define 10 factors designers considered across these complex design decisions. I then discuss how the factors figured into complex design decisions, how the factors overlapped and conflicted in design decisions, and how designers understood their role in making complex design decisions. In the Discussion chapter I connect the findings from the site of my ethnography to classification scholarship. In the Conclusion, I consider the contribution of examining classification systems as infrastructure, highlight the differences in accounts of classification design decisions made visible through classification theory and infrastructure studies approaches, and present suggestions for future research in classification design and the study of classification systems as infrastructure.Informatio

Cross-channel retail services as a remedy for retailer switching?: An investigation of retailer switching and potential of cross-channel retail services

This cumulative dissertation consists of four papers that investigate retailer switching and identify potential and threat of cross-channel retail services (CCRS) for retail businesses. The first, conceptual paper compares different theories and models of retail quality. It derives the concept of retailer aspects as a framework to measure retailer quality and further discusses how CCRS can serve as a tool to enhance those retailer aspects. The second paper discusses results from a consumer panel survey and quantifies the influence of satisfaction with retailer aspects on retailer switching during webrooming behavior. The findings of this second paper present the two retailer aspects assurance of delivery and competitive product pricing as key determinants for retailer switching. The third paper defines CCRS and outlines a conceptual classification scheme for CCRS assessments – the CCRS Pentagon. The fourth paper quantifies the impact of CCRS adoption and retailer aspect preferences on CCRS-induced retailer switching based on a second consumer panel survey. Results from this second study affirm the existence of CCRS-induced retailer switching. The paper concludes that CCRS can serve as a retailer’s lock-in mechanism, but that the availability of CCRS in retail environments also threatens retail businesses. In sum, the dissertation provides academic contributions and suggestions for further academic research as well as practical implications and management tools for application in retail businesses.:I. Introduction II. Enhancing Multi-Channel Retail Quality through Cross-Channel Services III. What Drives Competitive Webrooming? The Roles of Channel and Retailer Aspects IV. Cross-Channel Retail Services: A Service Classification Along The Retail Function V. Service-induced Retailer Switching – Power of Cross-Channel Retail Services VI. Conclusion Appendix A: Estimated parameters in baseline-category logit model Appendix B: Conditional marginal effects and conditional probability Appendix C: T-Tests for retailer aspects per service exampl

Rethinking the Role of Classification in Project Management Research

RÉSUMÉ : La vision universelle du projet, longtemps entretenue dans les cadres normatifs, cède peu à peu la place à une approche différenciée, où la notion de classification devient prépondérante. Toutefois, il semble bien que la communauté scientifique tarde à s’y intéresser; ce thème reste largement sous-étudié dans la littérature contemporaine dédiée à la gestion de projet. Il s’en suit une certaine confusion sémantique au sein de la communauté, touchant à la fois les postures philosophiques, mais aussi la terminologie et les processus qui y sont reliés. Cette thèse vise à établir la classification des projets comme sujet de recherche spécifique. À cette fin, et sur la base des contributions issues de plusieurs domaines scientifiques, ce projet doctoral propose une réflexion sur le processus de classification selon une perspective cognitiviste. Le premier article de cette thèse porte sur les différents processus cognitifs pouvant être sollicités par des acteurs organisationnels lors de la construction de systèmes de classification de projets. Le second article poursuit l’analyse en examinant empiriquement la compréhension que détiennent différents groupes vis-à-vis certaines catégories de projet. Ensemble, ces deux premiers articles ouvrent donc la "boîte noire" du processus cognitif de classification, et offrent une analyse sur la façon dont les classifications de projet sont établies par les chercheurs et les praticiens. Ce faisant, elles permettent de réduire la confusion et les multiples interprétations relatives aux catégories de projet, et qui ont longtemps constitué des freins à l’utilisation efficace de systèmes de classification, tant en recherche qu’en pratique. Dans le troisième article, la distinction entre les notions de classification et de typologie est analysée. On y soutient que la classification devrait constituer une condition préalable pour définir des types de projet et pour établir des théories "de portée intermédiaire (middle-range)"; on y défend également l’idée qu’une typologie de projet bien développée peut elle-même être considérée comme une théorie. En plus de proposer des retombées pratiques et concrètes pour les milieux de pratique, l’ensemble des articles de cette thèse permettent de jeter les bases d’un programme de recherche au sein de la communauté scientifique; ils contribuent également aux efforts actuels visant à consolider les bases théoriques de la gestion de projet. Mots clés: Classification du projet, catégorisation du projet, typologie des projets, taxonomie des projets, réussite du projet, théorie de portée intermédiaire, théorie de la gestion de projet----------ABSTRACT : Moving away from a universal view of projects, classification of projects has been recognized as an essential requirement for any investigation of project management. Yet classification as an independent topic of research has been understudied and undervalued in the project management literature. This issue has resulted in the development of semantic confusion among the project management researchers, with regard to philosophical stands, terminology, processes and implications of project classification. By rethinking the role of classification in a project management context, this dissertation aims to address this issue and establish project classification as an independent research topic. To that end and to keep up with recent advancements in classification research in other fields, this dissertation focuses more on evaluating the process of classification from a cognitive perspective. Accordingly, in the first article, different cognitive processes that individuals might apply to construct their project classification schemes are discussed. Delving further, the second article empirically examines the shared understanding of different groups vis-à-vis project categories. By opening the black box of the cognitive process of classification, the first two articles shed light on how and why different researchers or practitioners developed their project classification schemes. Thus, they reduce the ambiguities, inconsistencies and multiple interpretations of project categories, which have been identified as a main obstacle to the effective use of project classification systems in both research and practice. In the third article, the distinction between the definitions and implications of classification and typology is discussed. In particular, it is argued that classification should be a prerequisite to delimit project types and build up middle-range theories and that a well-developed project typology itself can be regarded as a theory. The collection of articles in this dissertation not only has important practical implications but, by laying the groundwork for establishing project classification as a research topic, fosters the theory development in the project management field. Keywords: Project classification, project categorization, project typology, project taxonomy, project success, middle-range theory, project management theor