Foundations of Information Science and Technology — Notes (Ch. 2–3)

2.2. Defining Terms

  • Information (as a broad concept)

    • Buckland (1991): Things can be informative; e.g., a tree stump’s rings contain information about age and past climate. Any object can be informative.

    • Objective vs. subjective views of information:

    • Parker (1974): Information is the pattern of organization of matter and energy (objective).

    • Bateson (1972): Information is "a difference that makes a difference" (subjective, for somebody or something or from a specific perspective).

    • Both views agree that a pattern of organization may inform somebody and thus count as information.

    • Implications:

    • If information is objective, representation is independent of context/purpose.

    • If information is subjective, representation in information systems must consider who is to be informed and about what.

    • Paradigms in information science:

    • Physical paradigm (Ellis, 1992): information as an object independent of user context.

    • Cognitive paradigm (Ellis, 1992): information depends on users’ cognitive processes.

    • Socio-cognitive approach (Hjørland, 1997): information users are individuals in concrete social contexts; understanding is conditioned by society and culture.

  • Data, information, knowledge (and their relations)

    • Data:

    • Data is the plural of datum; from Latin dare (to give); means "something given".

    • Machlup (1983): Data are the things given to the analyst or solver; can be numbers, words, records, assumptions, etc. Data can be facts or input depending on perspective.

    • Data is relative: what some consider input may be output from another perspective; important to represent data background, reception, and theoretical assumptions.

    • Spang-Hanssen (2001): information about a physical property is incomplete without information about data precision and data collection conditions; results from different investigations may not be comparable without background information.

    • Information (as contextualized data): data becomes information when provided with context or meaning.

    • Knowledge: interpretation and meaning added by people; relates to the ability to act on information.

    • Data–Information–Knowledge–Wisdom (DIKW) hierarchy (Ackoff, 1989):

    • 1) Data: facts resulting from observations.

    • 2) Information: collections of facts with context.

    • 3) Knowledge: meaning supplied by people to information.

    • 4) Wisdom: insights shared and embedded in collective understanding.

    • Example illustrating DIKW (Web map):

      1. Web contributors post empirical results or insights (data).

      2. Tracing links yields a structure/map of the web (information).

      3. Analyzing links reveals hubs and link densities (knowledge of structure).

      4. Many inbound links suggest value/utility (wisdom; fuels search engine ranking like Google).

    • Braganza (2004): top-down perspective—start with knowledge creation/communication rather than bottom-up from data.

    • Historical perspective on information models:

    • The pyramid mirrors a historical shift from data-centric to knowledge-centric views.

    • Shannon–Weaver model (1949) focused on transmission (technical level) but later researchers added semantic and social dimensions.

  • The Shannon–Weaver model and information aspects

    • Context: Shannon (Bell Labs) analyzed message transmission; identified a theoretical bandwidth limit due to noise.

    • Shannon & Weaver (1949/1964): three aspects of information:

    • Technical: problems of transmission.

    • Semantic: meaning and truth of a message.

    • Influential: how a message affects human behavior.

    • In their theory, information is defined at the technical level (the base of the pyramid).

    • Critique: conduit metaphor emphasis on channel rather than source/destination.

    • Evolution of focus:

    • 1980s: semantic aspects gained ground; different people may interpret the same item differently.

    • Cognitive aspects: mental processes of knowing and assessment of information (Machlup & Mansfield, 1983).

    • Social/socio-cognitive: how information understanding is influenced by language, history, and interactions (Hjørland, 2002).

  • 2.3. Disseminating Information

    • Documents and documentation history: before the field was renamed information science, it was called documentation.

    • Buckland (1991) on the concept of documents:

    • The term sought to include not just texts but also natural objects, artifacts, models, human activities, etc.

    • Latin roots: docere (to teach or inform) + suffix -ment (a tool).

    • Modern definition of document (Briet, 1951, cited by Buckland):

    • A concrete or symbolic indication preserved or recorded for reconstructing or proving a phenomenon, whether physical or mental.

    • Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs):

    • Term evolution from information technology to ICTs to reflect the broader role of telephones, cables, satellites in information handling.

    • Figure 2.3 (US data, 1950–2006) shows adoption rates of various ICTs over time; technologies include radio, telephone, TV, cable, VCR, computers, Internet, broadband.

    • Alan Kay’s definition of technology: “anything that was invented after you were born” (captures rapid pace of change).

    • Implications for design and evaluation: acknowledge rapid new developments while recognizing the long tail of older technologies; some users view older tech as novel or challenging even as others accept them as part of life.

  • 2.4. Information Science

    • Emergence: information science as a field around 1960.

    • Institutional history:

    • Institute of Information Scientists (1958).

    • American Documentation Institute → American Society for Information Science (ASIS) in 1968; renamed ASIS&T in 2000.

    • Core task definitions:

    • Borko (1968): information science involves origination, collection, organization, storage, retrieval, interpretation, transmission, transformation, and utilization of information.

    • Reitz (2007): systematic study/analysis of sources, development, collection, organization, dissemination, evaluation, use, and management of information in all forms, including channels and technologies used to communicate it.

    • Informatics as a related term:

    • Independently proposed by Bauer and Dreyfus (1962).

    • Redmond-Neal & Hlava (2005): informatics = conjunction of information science and information technology.

    • WordNet (2006): informatics and information science defined as the sciences concerned with gathering, manipulating, storing, retrieving, and classifying recorded information.

    • Subfields: geographic information science, bioinformatics (application of information tech to biological data).

  • 2.5. Intellectual Foundations of Information Science and Technology

    • Varied descriptors of the field’s origins: interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary, metadisciplinary, multidisciplinary.

    • Machlup & Mansfield (1983): The Study of Information—Interdisciplinary Messages; debates on origins across bibliography, library science, documentation, and 1950s developments in handling scientific documentation.

    • Early developments in information science history (Western perspective): printing era foundational shifts.

    • Major historical milestones in early information handling:

    • Orality to literacy shift (Ong, 2002): learning literacy technologies was the first fundamental shift in thought and information processing.

    • Pre-18th century: archives and libraries existed but management principles were minimal.

    • Gesner (Bibliotheca Universalis, 1545): principles of inclusion, arrangement, and indexing.

    • Naudé (Advice on Establishing a Library, 1627): indexing, cataloging, bibliography principles.

    • Philosophers’ aims to organize all human knowledge: Bacon (1620) (world knowledge classification), Leibniz (1646–1716) (classification system for world knowledge).

    • Diderot & d’Alembert (1713–1784, 1717–1783): encyclopedia efforts to compile knowledge.

    • 18th century library arts advances: national/subject bibliographies, printed catalogs, subject arrangement schemes, shelf classification principles; museums opened to the public (British Museum 1753; Louvre 1793).

    • 19th century library expansion:

      • Martin Schrettinger (1772–1851): first to use term library science (Bibliothekswissenschaft, 1808).

      • Ebert (1791–1834) and Molbech (1783–1857): emphasized organization and administration; librarianship as theory and practice.

      • Serapeum (1840): first journal on library management concerns.

      • 1876: American Library Association founded; Cutter’s Rules for a Dictionary Catalog; Dewey Decimal Classification; common card catalogs; Library Journal founded.

      • 1877: Library Association of the United Kingdom founded; École des Chartes (1821) improved librarian/archivist training; Dziatzko (1886) in Germany offered library education classes.

      • Tensions between scholarly librarian vs. practical/centered approaches; Dewey’s practice-centered philosophy dominates; education shifts from apprenticeship to formal training.

    • Early 20th century: rising need to manage exploding scientific literature; National archives influence; Chicago PhD in library science (1926).

    • Otlet & LaFontaine (late 19th–early 20th): International Institute of Bibliography; “documentation” and systematic indexing/classification; Universal Decimal Classification; mongraphic principle (indexing at various textual units); information services via mail/phone.

    • Post-WWII: Suzanne Briet expands documentation concepts to a broader view of documents as indexical signs in networks (semiotic view).

    • Library science becomes established as a university-level discipline; Columbia University model spreads; professional education shifts toward theory and practice.

    • 20th century: explosion of scientific documentation leads to machine-assisted indexing, abstracting, machine translation, remote searching; informat ion retrieval emerges as a field.

    • Influence of Vannevar Bush’s Memex and Shannon–Weaver’s information theory on early information science; lack of consensus on a single definition; emerging cross-disciplinary activity involving CS, linguistics, psychology, mathematics, and communications.

    • Late 20th century: bifurcation and melding of library/information science with computer science; focus shifts toward information seeking/behavior, policy, classification theory, bibliographic control; convergence around the Internet and electronic documents.

    • Key takeaways about origins and discipline status:

    • Information science has deep ties to libraries, documentation, bibliography, archival science, museums, and early information technologies.

    • Debates persist on whether it is narrow or broad, whether it is a true discipline, and how its focus should be defined.

    • Rayward (1997) emphasizes that the ultimate foundation lies in the interactions between information and society.

3.1. Information Behavior

  • Scope of information behavior research

    • Part of the behavioral sciences; linked to activity theory; some critique of behaviorist approaches.

    • Bruner (1990) suggested using the term human acts rather than human behavior to emphasize meaningful, purposive actions; connects with activity theory.

    • Information behavior includes more than information seeking: encompasses accidental encounters and avoidance (non-seeking behaviors).

    • Historical shift in focus: from library use and institutional search to how individuals encounter and make sense of their environment.

  • Components of information behavior

    • Includes information seeking, unintentional/passive behaviors (glimpsing, incidental encounters), and purposive behaviors that do not involve seeking (avoidance).

    • Whittaker (2011) expands coverage to information curation practices: decisions about what to keep and how to find it.

  • Theoretical landscape

    • Many theories and concepts relevant to information behavior (Fisher, Erdelez, & McKechnie, 2005): overview of ~72 theories.

    • Bates (2002) identifies four modes of information acquisition:

    • Directed action: seeking particular information that can be specified to some degree.

    • Undirected exposure: random or incidental exposure to information.

    • Active: actively doing something to acquire information.

    • Passive: being passively available to absorb information without active seeking.

    • Bates (2002) also notes:

    • Humans absorb up to about 80% of our knowledge simply by being aware (cell d in Figure 3.1).

    • Browsing is the complementary opposite of monitoring.

  • Real-world relevance and implications

    • Understanding information behavior informs design of information retrieval systems, user interfaces, and information services.

    • Recognizes that information needs are shaped by context, social norms, and personal goals, not purely by objective data.

  • Connections to foundational principles

    • DIKW pyramid and information processing models inform how information is generated (data), contextualized (information), interpreted (knowledge), and applied (wisdom).

    • The socio-cognitive view underlines the importance of social context in information seeking, retrieval, and use.

  • Ethical and practical implications

    • Information sharing and access are mediated by social conventions, language, and policy—raising questions about equity, privacy, and bias.

    • Design choices in information systems should consider diverse user contexts and cognitive processes to avoid misinterpretation or information overload.

(Notes draw on the provided transcript excerpts from Chapters 2 and 3, including discussions of information definitions, the DIKW hierarchy, Shannon–Weaver theory, document concepts, ICT adoption trends, historical foundations, and information behavior frameworks.)