MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W345371815

Fundamentals of Information Studies: Understanding Information and Its Environment

2008· article· en· W345371815 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePartnership The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTable of contentsSubject (documents)Scope (computer science)Library scienceIndex (typography)Resource (disambiguation)Computer scienceTask (project management)World Wide WebEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lester, June and Wallace C. Koehler, Jr. Fundamentals of Studies: Understanding and Its Environment. 2nd Edition. New York, NY: Neal-Schuman Publishers, 2007. 444 pp. 65.00 USD. ISBN-13: 978-1-55570-594-7. 8 We live in the age, but what is, how it is created and used is only beginning to be explored in earnest. This exploration is generating new subdisciplines, with theories, methods and applications. How then do we attempt to tie up all this activity with a bow and present it comprehensibly to our students? This is the ambitious task that Lester and Koehler have attempted with Fundamentals of Studies, now in its second edition. The scope of this survey work is broad as surmised from the six LC subject headings attached to the work, covering the science of information, in society, resources, services, technology and policy. Not surprisingly, the text itself spans fourteen chapters and over 400 pages. It includes a detailed table of contents, index and glossaries of terms and acronyms. Each chapter includes a reference list, and additional helpful resource lists. These references and resource lists are by necessity representative and the authors do not state why they include certain works and not others. For those familiar with the previous edition, there are several additions. There is a new chapter on needs and seeking behaviour and a chapter on analyzing power and information. Aids to teaching have also been added to each chapter as guide and idea components. We are told that this is intended to be an introductory textbook for undergraduate and graduate courses thus accounting for the layout of the chapters. The new learning guides introduce key ideas and learning outcomes for each chapter. Most of these outcomes relate to foundational knowledge (understand, define, identify) and only a few relate to application (analyze, assess). There are discussion questions at the end of each chapter that do encourage reflection and synthesis. I found the style of writing to be accessible and the book itself was a relatively quick read. The authors stated that they attempt to trace several themes throughout the book but identified the most prominent as the impact of the development of technology on the access and use of information (p. xv). Other themes which surface later are as commodity and authorship. I did find that technology issues loomed large and even when dealing with interpersonal or policy, a discussion about technological influences was rarely more than a page away. At times I found the chapter divisions in the book to be somewhat arbitrary. For instance, I found it baffling that the printing press would merit only a sentence in History of Technology (Chapter 4) but received detailed coverage in the chapter on Societal Institutions (Chapter 6). In social science survey texts it can be difficult to separate concepts into distinct topics resulting in overlap and repetition. This was the case here. The instructor will need to note the interconnections within these chapters lest the student be left thinking didn't we already cover this? Although I commend the authors for including the new chapter on Information Needs and Seeking Behaviour (Chapter 3), I found it somewhat thin. The authors introduce several key figures in the field, but I felt they failed to present a clear overview of the field's history, theories and directions before departing into a discussion of organization. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.243
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.210
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it