Nodes and Arcs: Concept Map, Semiotics, and Knowledge Organization.

Purpose – The purpose of the research reported here is to improve comprehension of the socially-negotiated identity of concepts in the domain of knowledge organization. Because knowledge organization as a domain has as its focus the order of concepts, both from a theoretical perspective and from an applied perspective, it is important to understand how the domain itself understands the meaning of a concept. Design/methodology/approach – The paper provides an empirical demonstration of how the domain itself understands the meaning of a concept. The paper employs content analysis to demonstrate the ways in which concepts are portrayed in KO concept maps as signs, and they are subjected to evaluative semiotic analysis as a way to understand their meaning. The frame was the entire population of formal proceedings in knowledge organization – all proceedings of the International Society for Knowledge Organization’s international conferences (1990-2010) and those of the annual classification workshops of the Special Interest Group for Classification Research of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (SIG/CR). Findings – A total of 344 concept maps were analyzed. There was no discernible chronological pattern. Most concept maps were created by authors who were professors from the USA, Germany, France, or Canada. Roughly half were judged to contain semiotic content. Peirceian semiotics predominated, and tended to convey greater granularity and complexity in conceptual terminology. Nodes could be identified as anchors of conceptual clusters in the domain; the arcs were identifiable as verbal relationship indicators. Saussurian concept maps were more applied than theoretical; Peirceian concept maps had more theoretical content. Originality/value – The paper demonstrates important empirical evidence about the coherence of the domain of knowledge organization. Core values are conveyed across time through the concept maps in this population of conference paper

Peirce's sign theory as an open-source R package.

Throughout Peirce’s writing, we witness his developing vision of a machine that scientists will eventually be able to create. Nadin (2010) raised the question:Why do computer scientists continue to ignore Peirce’s sign theory? A review of the literature on Peirce’s theory and the semiotics machine reveals that many authors discussed the machine;however, they donot differentiate between a physical computer machine and its software. This paper discusses the problematic issues involved in converting Peirce’s theory into a programming language, machine and software application. We demonstrate this challenge by introducing Peirce’s sign theory as a software application that runs under an open-source R environmen

Understanding Art-Making as Documentation

Though typically arts information professionals are concerned with the documentation of artwork, this conceptual paper explores how art-making itself can be considered a form of documentation and finished artworks as documents in their own right. On this view, artwork references something outside itself as part of a broader system, and exposes how it references. The implications of this perspective are discussed, springing from a historical discussion of document epistemology, research on the information behavior of artists and the philosophy of Nelson Goodman. This discussion provides a framework for conceptualizing artistic information behavior along the entire information chain. Framing art-making in the terms of information science in this way may help arts information professionals assist artists, and it provides grounds for deeper co-understandings between artists and information scientists. Additionally, once information scientists consider art as a document, we can begin to see that even non-artistic documents perhaps never were as "objective" or "factual" as they seemed

Some thoughts on the importance of open source and open access for emerging digital scholarship

Both the open source and the open access movements have their roots in the ‘hard’ sciences rather than in the social Sciences and Humanities (SSH). They have been concerned, traditionally, with open access to source code for computational data processing and with open access to scienti?c information published as journal articles. Still, the basic assumption of the present contribution is that there is a specific open source and open access agenda within the SSH and that this may affect these disciplines—once such an agenda is fully in place — in a way hardly conceivable in the ‘hard’ sciences. However, understanding the full impact and potential of such approaches in the SSH requires reflection upon broader methodological issues. Two vectors or primary oppositions are of specific interest in this respect: the scholarly information continuum as a whole and its evolution from print based to electronic working paradigms and the revolutionary changes that can be foreseen as a consequence the speci?c difference of the SSH as opposed to the Science-TechnologyMedicine (STM) culture of relating signi?ers to signi?cates and the specific impact of the digital revolution resulting from this specific difference. Exploring these two vectors this contribution will try to indicate constituent elements of an ‘open’ agenda for the digital humanities

Still minding the gap? Reflecting on transitions between concepts of information in varied domains

This conceptual paper, a contribution to the tenth anniversary special issue of information, gives a cross-disciplinary review of general and unified theories of information. A selective literature review is used to update a 2013 article on bridging the gaps between conceptions of information in different domains, including material from the physical and biological sciences, from the humanities and social sciences including library and information science, and from philosophy. A variety of approaches and theories are reviewed, including those of Brenner, Brier, Burgin and Wu, Capurro, Cárdenas-García and Ireland, Hidalgo, Hofkirchner, Kolchinsky and Wolpert, Floridi, Mingers and Standing, Popper, and Stonier. The gaps between disciplinary views of information remain, although there has been progress, and increasing interest, in bridging them. The solution is likely to be either a general theory of sufficient flexibility to cope with multiple meanings of information, or multiple and distinct theories for different domains, but with a complementary nature, and ideally boundary spanning concepts

WHAT IS INFORMATION SUCH THAT THERE CAN BE INFORMATION SYSTEMS?

Information systems, as a discipline, is concerned with the generation, storage and transmission of information, generally by technological means. As such, it would seem to be fundamental that it has a clear and agreed conceptualization of its core subject matter – namely “information”. Yet, we would claim, this is clearly not the case. As McKinney and Yoos point out, in a recent survey of the term information within information systems: “This is the IS predicament – using information as a ubiquitous label whose meaning is almost never specified. Virtually all the extant IS literature fails to explicitly specify meaning for the very label that identifies it.” We live in an information age and the vast majority of information (whatever it may be) is made available through a wide range of computer systems and one would expect therefore that information systems would in fact be one of the leading disciplines of the times rather than one that appears to hide itself in the shadows. Governments nowadays routinely utilize many academic experts to advise them in a whole range of areas but how many IS professors ever get asked? So, the primary purpose of this paper is to stimulate a debate within IS to discuss, and try to establish, a secure foundation for the discipline in terms of its fundamental concept – information. The structure of the paper is that we will firstly review the theories of information used (generally implicitly) within IS. Then we will widen the picture to consider the range of theories available more broadly within other disciplines. We will then suggest a particular approach that we consider most fruitful and discuss some of the major contentious issues. We will illustrate the theories with examples from IS

Polysemy in Advertising

The article reviews the conceptual foundations of advertising polysemy – the occurrence of different interpretations for the same advertising message. We discuss how disciplines as diverse as psychology, semiotics and literary theory have dealt with the issue of polysemy, and provide translations and integration among these multiple perspectives. From such review we draw recurrent themes to foster future research in the area and to show how seemingly opposed methodological and theoretical perspectives complement and extend each other. Implications for advertising research and practice are discussed.Advertising;Polysemy;Semiotics

Building a Socio-technical Perspective of Community Resilience with a Semiotic Approach

Situated in the diversity and adversity of real-life contexts facing crisis situations, this research aims at boosting the resilience process within communities supported by digital and social technology. In this paper, eight community leaders in different parts of the world are invited to express their issues and wishes regarding the support of technology to face social challenges. Methods and artefacts based on the Organisational Semiotics (OS) and the Socially-Aware computing have been applied to analyse and consolidate this data. By providing both a systemic view of the problem and also leading to the identification of requirements, the analysis evidences some benefits of the OS-based approach to consolidate perspectives from different real-life scenarios towards building a socio-technical solution

Teaching Peirce to Undergraduates

Fourteen philosophers share their experience teaching Peirce to undergraduates in a variety of settings and a variety of courses. The latter include introductory philosophy courses as well as upper-level courses in American philosophy, philosophy of religion, logic, philosophy of science, medieval philosophy, semiotics, metaphysics, etc., and even an upper-level course devoted entirely to Peirce. The project originates in a session devoted to teaching Peirce held at the 2007 annual meeting of the Society for the Advancement of American Philosophy. The session, organized by James Campbell and Richard Hart, was co-sponsored by the American Association of Philosophy Teachers