Classification, interdisciplinarity, and the study of science

Journal of Documentation

Volumn 64, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 319-332

  Szostak, Rick ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Classification; Curricula; Information retrieval

Indexed keywords

EID: 42649097894     PISSN: 00220418     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/00220410810867551     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Anderson, H. (2002), “The development of scientific taxonomies”, in Ed. Magnani, L. (Ed.), Modelbased Reasoning: Science, Technology, Values, Kluwer Academic, New York, NY, pp. 95111.
2. Beghtol, C. (1995), “Facets as undiscovered public knowledge: S.R. Ranganathan in India and S. Guttman in Israel”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 194224.
3. Bryant, R. (2000), Discovery and Decision: Exploring the Metaphysics and Epistemology of Scientific Classification, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, Madison, WI.
4. Bulick, S. (1982), Structure and Subject Interaction, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY.
5. Dahlberg, I. (1994), “Domain interaction: theory and practice”, in Ed. Albrechtson, H. and Ed. Oernager, S. (Eds), Knowledge Organization and Qualitative Management, INDEKS Verlag, Frankfurt, pp. 6071.
6. Gnoli, C. (2004), “Naturalism vs pragmatism in knowledge organization”, in Ed. McIlwaine, I. (Ed.), Knowledge Organization and the Global Information Society: Proceedings of the 8th ISKO Conference, Ergon, Würzburg, pp. 263268.
7. Gnoli, C. (2006), “The meaning of facets in nondisciplinary classification”, in Ed. Budin, G., Ed. Swertz, C. and Ed. Mitgutsch, K. (Eds), Knowledge Organization for a Global Learning Society: Proceedings of the 9th ISKO Conference, Ergon, Würzburg, pp. 1118.
8. Gnoli, C. and Poli, R. (2004), “Levels of reality and levels of representation”, Knowledge Organization, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 151160.
9. Gower, B. (1997), Scientific Method: An Historical and Philosophical Introduction, Routledge, London.
10. Hjørland, B. (2005), “Library and information science and philosophy of science”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 510.
11. Hjørland, B. and Nissen Pedersen, K. (2005), “A substantive theory of classification for information retrieval”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 61 No. 5, pp. 582595.
12. Kirkehei, I. (2004), “Forslag til nye perspektiver i information retrieval: udvikling af IRalgoritmer med focus på kvalitative og kultyurrelative aspekter: Teoritske og praktiske overveljeser”, unpublished Masters thesis (in Danish).
13. Klein, J.T. (1990), Interdisciplinarity, Wayne State University Press, Detroit, MI.
14. LópezHuertas, M. (2006), “Thematic map of interdisciplinary domains based on their terminological representation: gender studies”, in Ed. Budin, G., Ed. Swertz, C. and Ed. Mitgutsch, K. (Eds), Knowledge Organization for a Global Learning Society: Proceedings of the 9th ISKO Conference, Ergon, Würzburg, pp. 331338.
15. Marcella, R. and Newton, R. (1994), A New Manual of Classification, Gower, Aldershot.
16. Palmer, C.L. (1996), “Information work at the boundaries of science: linking library services to research practices”, Library Trends, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 165191.
17. Palmer, C.L. (2001), Work at the Boundaries of Science: Information and the Interdisciplinary Research Process, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
18. Repko, A. (2006), “Interdisciplinary practice: a student guide to research and writing”, manuscript under review.
19. Rey, G. (1998), “Concepts”, in Ed. Craig, E. (Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol. 2, Routledge, London, pp. 505517.
20. Rowley, J.E. (1992), Organizing Knowledge, 2nd ed., Ashgate, Aldershot.
21. Salter, L. and Hearn, A. (1996), Outside the Lines: Issues in Interdisciplinary Research, McGillQueen's University Press, Montreal.
22. Spärck Jones, K. (2005), “Some thoughts on classification for retrieval”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 61 No. 5, pp. 571581, (originally published, 1970).
23. Sundin, O. and Johannisson, J. (2005), “Pragmatism, neopragmatism, and sociocultural theory”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 2341.
24. Szostak, R. (2003), “Classifying scholarly theories and methods”, Knowledge Organization, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 2035.
25. Szostak, R. (2003), “Comprehensive curricular reform: providing students with an overview of the scholarly enterprise”, Journal of General Education, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 2749.
26. Szostak, R. (2003), A Schema for Unifying Human Science: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Culture, Susquehanna University Press, Selinsgrove, PA.
27. Szostak, R. (2004), Classifying Science: Phenomena, Data, Theory, Method, Practice, Springer Publishers, Dordrecht.
28. Wallace, R.A. and Wolf, A. (2006), Contemporary Sociological Theory: Expanding the Classical Tradition, 6th ed., HarperCollins, New York, NY.
29. Weinberg, B.H. (1988), “Why indexing fails the researcher”, The Indexer, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 36, available at: http://people.unt.edu/∼skh0001/wein1.htm
30. Wikgren, M. (2005), “Critical realism as a philosophy and social theory in information science?”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 1122.