Data representation factors and dimensions from the quality function deployment (QFD) perspective

Journal of Information Science

Volumn 32, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 116-130

  Pinto, Maria ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Abstracting quality; Data quality; Data representation; Information quality; Quality function deployment; Representation processes; Total data quality managemen

Indexed keywords

DATA PROCESSING; INFORMATION THEORY; OPTIMIZATION; STRATEGIC PLANNING;

ABSTRACTING QUALITY; DATA QUALITY; DATA REPRESENTATION; INFORMATION QUALITY; REPRESENTATION PROCESSES; TOTAL DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT;

EID: 33644902075     PISSN: 01655515     EISSN: 17416485     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0165551506062325     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. M.J. Norton, Knowledge discovery in databases, Library Trends 48 (1) (1999) 9 - 21.
2. C. Fox, A. Levitin and T.C. Redman, The notion of data and its quality dimensions, Information Processing & Management 30 (1) (1994) 9 - 19.
3. S. Adams, Information quality, liability, and corrections, Business Source Premier 27 (5) (2003) 16 - 22.
4. Y. Salaün and K. Flores, Information quality: meeting the needs of the consumer, International Journal of Information Management 21 (2001) 21 - 37.
5. V. Yoo, P. Aiken and T. Guimaraes, Managing organizational data resources: quality dimensions, Information Resources Management Journal 13 (3) (2000) 5 - 13.
6. R.S. Taylor, Value-added Processes in Information Systems ( Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ, 1986 ).
7. S.Y. Rieh, Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the web, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53 (2) (2002) 145 - 161.
8. J. Rowley and J. Farrow, Organizing Knowledge: an Introduction to Managing Access to Information ( Burlington, Ashgate, 2002 ).
9. G. Shankaranarayan, M. Ziad and R.Y. Wang, Managing data quality in dynamic decision environments: an information product approach, Journal of Database Management 14 (4) (2003) 14 - 32.
10. J. Rowley, Managing quality in information services, Information Services & Use 16 (1996) 51 - 61.
11. K. Bergquist and J. Abeysekera, Quality function deployment (QFD) - a means for developing usable products, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics (18) (1996) 269 - 275.
12. P. Brophy and K. Coulling, Quality Management for Information and Library Managers ( Gower, London, 1997 ).
13. A. Gilchrist, Quality issues in the information sector: an international perspective with particular reference to the European scene. In: R. Basch (ed.), Electronic Information Delivery: Ensuring Quality and Value (Gower, Aldershot, 1995) 245 - 259.
14. C.J. Armstrong, Database quality: label or liable. In: P. Wressel (ed.), Proceedings of the 1st Northumbria International Conference on Performance Measurement in Libraries and Information Services (Information North, Newcastle upon Tyne, 1995) 203 - 206.
15. R.Y. Wang, W. Chung and C. Fisher, What skills matter in data quality? In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Information Quality (2002) 331 - 342.
16. R. Juntunen, E. Mickos and T. Jalkanen, Evaluating the quality of Finnish databases. In: R. Basch (ed.), Electronic Information Delivery. Ensuring Quality and Value (Gower, Aldershot, 1995) 205 - 219.
17. P. Jacso, Content evaluation of databases, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 32 (1997) 231 - 267.
18. C. Tenopir, Priorities of quality. In: R. Basch (ed.), Electronic Information Delivery, Ensuring Quality and Value (Gower, Aldershot, 1995) 119 - 146.
19. M. Ritberger and W Ritberger, Measuring quality in the production of databases, Journal of Information Science 23 (1) (1997) 25 - 37.
20. T. Ravichandran and A. Rai, Quality management in systems development: an organizational system perspective, MIS Quarterly 24 (3) (2000) 381 - 416.
21. T.D. Wilson, Information needs and uses: fifty years of progress. In: B.C. Vickery (ed.), Fifty Years of Information Progress: a Journal of Documentation Review (Aslib, London, 1994) 15 - 51.
22. R.Y. Wang, A product perspective on total data quality management, Communications of the ACM 41 (2) (1998) 58 - 65.
23. B. Lawrence and T. Lenti, Application of TQM to the continuous improvement of database production. In: R. Basch (ed.), Electronic Information Delivery: Ensuring Quality and Value (Gower, Aldershot, 1995) 69 - 87.
24. Y.W. Lee, L. Pipino, D. Strong and R.Y. Wang, Processembedded data integrity, Journal of Database Management 15 (1) (2004) 87 - 103.
25. R.Y. Wang, V.C. Storey and C.P. Firth, A framework for analysis of data quality research, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 7 (4) (1995) 623 - 640.
26. K. Orr, Data quality and systems theory, Communications of the ACM 41 (2) (1998) 66 - 71.
27. L. Berry and A. Parasuraman, Listening to the customer - the concept of a service-quality information system, Sloan Management Review (Spring 1997) 65 - 76.
28. R.B. Woodruff, Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25 (2) (1997) 139 - 153.
29. Y. Akao, Quality Function Deployment: Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Design ( Productivity Press, Portland, OR, 1990 ).
30. C.P.M. Govers, QFD not just a tool but a way of quality management, International Journal Production Economics 69 (2001) 151 - 159.
31. K. Chin, K. Pun, W. Leung and H. Lau, A quality function deployment approach for improving technical library and information services, Library Management 22 (4/5) (2001) 195 - 204.
32. P. Hernon and J.R. Whitman, Delivering Satisfaction and Service Quality: a Customer Based Approach for Libraries ( American Library Association, Chicago, 2001 ).
33. G. Burchill and C.H. Fine, Time versus market orientation in product concept development: empiricallybased theory generation, Management Science 43 (4) (1997) 465 - 478.
34. C.P. McLaughlin and J.K. Stratman, Improving the quality of corporate technical planning: dynamic analogues of QFD, R&D Management 27 (3) (1997). 269 - 279.
35. S. Henezel, Creating user profiles, Business Source Premier 28 (3) (2004) 30-30.
36. B. Hjørland, Domain analysis in information science - eleven approaches - traditional as well as innovative, Journal of Documentation 58 (4) (2002) 422 - 462.
37. PAI (Plan Andaluz de Investigación), Junta de Andalucía, Dirección General de Universidades(2001). Available at: www.juntadeandalucia.es/innovacioncienciayempresa/ceydt/indexPadre.asp (accessed 21 September 2005).
38. M. Tottie and T. Lager, QFD - linking the customer to the product development process as a part of the TQM concept, R&D Management 25 (3) (1995) 257 - 267.
39. C. Beghtol, A proposed ethical warrant for global knowledge representation and organization systems, Journal of Documentation 58 (5) (2002) 507 - 532.
40. E.K. Jacob and D. Shaw, Sociocognitive perspectives on representation, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 33 (1999) 131 - 185.
41. M. Pinto, Abstracting/abstract adaptation to digital environments: research trends, Journal of Documentation 59 (5) (2003) 581 - 608.
42. J. Zhang, External representations in complex information processing tasks, Encyclopaedia of Library and Information Science 68 (31) (2001) 164 - 180.
43. E.K. Jacob, and H. Albrechtsen, When essence becomes function: post-structuralist implications for an ecological theory of organizational classification systems. In: T.D. Wilson and D.K. Allen (eds), Exploring the Context of Information Behaviour (Taylor Graham, London, 1999) 519 - 534.
44. T. Bardini, Bridging the gulfs: from hypertext to cyberspace, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 3 (2) (1997). Available at: http://jcmc.indiana. edu/vol3/issue2/bardini.html%23Footnote1 (accessed 14 December 2005).
45. T.B. Sheridan and W.R. Ferrell, Man-Machine Systems: Information, Control and Decision Models of Human Performance ( MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1974 ).
46. R.M. Losee, Minimizing information overload: the ranking of electronic messages, Journal of Information Science 15 (3) (1989) 179 - 189.
47. S.E. Robertson, The probability ranking principle in IR, Journal of Documentation 33 (4) (1977) 294 - 304.
48. R. Fidel and M. Crandall, The role of subject access in information filtering. In: P. Atherton and E.H. Johnson (eds), Visualizing Subject Access for 21st Century Information Resources (Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 1998) 16 - 27.
49. A. Foster and N. Ford, Serendipity and information seeking: an empirical study, Journal of Documentation 59 (3) (2003) 321 - 340.
50. S. Attfield and J. Dowell, Information seeking and use by newspaper journalists, Journal of Documentation 59 (2) (2003) 187 - 204.
51. C. Kuhlthau, Inside the search process: information seeking from the user's perspective, Journal of the American Society for Information Science 42 (5) (1991) 361 - 371.
52. S.E. MacMullin and R.S. Taylor, Problem dimensions and information traits, The Information Society 3 (1984) 91 - 111.
53. P. Prekop, A qualitative study of collaborative information seeking, Journal of Documentation 58 (5) (2002) 533 - 547.
54. E. Beutler, Assuring data integrity and quality: a database producer's perspective. In: R. Basch (ed.), Electronic Information Delivery: Ensuring Quality and Value (Gower, Aldershot, 1995) 59 - 68.
55. D.S Brandt, Relevancy and searching the Internet, Computers in Libraries 16 (8) 1996 35 - 38.
56. A. Spink, T. Wilson, D. Ellis and N. Ford, Modeling users' successive searches in digital environments, DLib Magazine (1998). Available at: www.dlib.org/dlib/april98/04spink.html (accessed 11 September 2005).
57. T.J. Froehlich, Relevance reconsidered - towards an agenda for the 21st century: introduction to special topic issue on relevance research, Journal of the American Society for Information Science 45 (3) (1994) 124 - 134.
58. D.L. Howard, Pertinence as reflected in personal construct, Journal of the American Society for Information Science 45 (3) (1994) 172 - 185.
59. E. Sormunen et al., Document text characteristics affect the ranking of the most relevant documents by expanded structured queries, Journal of Documentation 57 (3) (2001) 358 - 376.
60. P. Vakkari and N. Hakala, Changes in relevance criteria and problem stages in task performance, Journal of Documentation 56 (5) (2000) 540 - 562.
61. R. Lehtokangas and K. Järvelin, Consistency of textual expression in newspaper articles: an argument for semantically based query expansion, Journal of Documentation 57 (4) (2001) 535 - 548.
62. T.D. Wilson, EQUIP: a European survey of quality criteria for the evaluation of databases, Journal of Information Science 24 (5) (1998) 345 - 357.
63. T. Liang, The basic entity model, Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science 60 (1997) 23 - 44.
64. M. Pinto and F.W. Lancaster, Abstract and abstracting in knowledge discovery, Library Trends 48 (1) (1999) 234 - 248.
65. S. Divorski and M.A. Scheirer, Improving data quality for performance measures: results from a GAO study of verification and validation, Evaluation and Program Planning 24 (2001) 83 - 94.
66. C. Fox, A. Levitin and T.C. Redman, Data and data quality, Encyclopaedia of Library and Information Science 57 (Sup.20) (1996) 100 - 122.
67. A.J. Peels, N.J. Janssen and W. Nawijn, Document architecture and text formatting, ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems 3 (4) (1985) 347 - 369.
68. M. Pinto, Engineering the production of meta-information: the abstracting concern, Journal of Information Science 29 (5) (2003) 405 - 417.
69. L.A. Pitschmann, Building Sustainable Collections of Free Third-Party Web Resources ( Digital Library Federation, Washington, DC, 2001 ).
70. S.L. Jarvenpaa and D.S. Staples, Exploring perceptions of organizational ownership of information and expertise, Journal of Management Information Systems 18 (1) (2001) 151 - 183.
71. D. Bawden, Progress in documentation information and digital literacies: a review of concepts, Journal of Documentation 57 (2) (2001) 218 - 259.
72. American Library Association, Presidential committee on Information Literacy, Final report (American Library Association, Chicago, 1989). Available at: www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/whitepapers/progressreport.htm (accessed 11 September 2005).
73. American Library Association, Information literacy standards for student learning. In: Information Power: Building Partnerships for Learning (American Library Association, Chicago, 1998). Available at: www.ala.org/ala/aasl/ aaslproftools/informationpower/InformationLiteracyStandards_final.pdf (accessed 14 December 2005).
74. National Research Council. Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications. Committee on Information Technology Literacy, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board, Being Fluent with Information Technology (National Academy Press, Washington DC, 1999). Available at: www.nap.edu/books/030906399X/html/ (accessed 11 September 2005).
75. P. Bharati and D. Berg, Managing information systems for service quality: a study from the other side, Information Technology & People 16 (2) (2003) 183 - 202.
76. J.A. Hoxmeier, A Framework for Assessing Database Quality (2003). Available at: http://osm7.cs.byu.edu/ER97/workshop4/jh.html (accessed 11 September 2005)
77. V.C. Storey and D. Dey, A methodology for learning across application domains for database design systems, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 14 (1) (2002) 13 - 28.