Esse trabalho coletivo incorpora onze posicoes sobre as implicacoes do “Mapa do Conhecimento da Ciencia da Informacao”, um estudo critico Delphi conduzido de 2003 a 2005 e publicado em uma serie de quatro artigos (ZINS, 2007a, b, c, d). O estudo Delphi capturou as deliberacoes de 57 lideres academicos em Ciencia da Informacao de 16 paises para fornecer: 1) definicoes de conceitos fundamentais de dados, informacao, conhecimento e mensagem; 2) concepcoes alternativas em relacao ao dominio da Ciencia da Informacao; 3) diferentes mapeamentos classificatorios da area; e 4) mapeamento compreensivo da Ciencia da Informacao. Em geral, o Mapa do Conhecimento fornece um diagnostico atual da area, retratando as questoes do Seculo XXI, que pode auxiliar o desenvolvimento de pesquisas futuras, programas educacionais, publicacoes e outras perspectivas profissionais e academicas. Esse tipo de pesquisa de mapeamento sobre a Ciencia da Informacao deveria ser feito periodicamente, incluindo estudos Delphi e avaliacoes do grau de expansao da area e provavel divisao em subareas. Metodologias alternativas para mapear a expansao do universo da Ciencia da Informacao e suas sinergias com outras areas do conhecimento, tambem, deveriam ser exploradas.

Esse trabalho coletivo incorpora onze posições sobre as implicações do “Mapa do Conhecimento da Ciência da Informação”, um estudo crítico Delphi conduzido de 2003 a 2005 e publicado em uma série de quatro artigos (ZINS, 2007a, b, c, d). O estudo Delphi capturou as deliberações de 57 líderes acadêmicos em Ciência da Informação de 16 países para fornecer: 1) definições de conceitos fundamentais de dados, informação, conhecimento e mensagem; 2) concepções alternativas em relação ao domínio da Ciência da Informação; 3) diferentes mapeamentos classificatórios da área; e 4) mapeamento compreensivo da Ciência da Informação. Em geral, o Mapa do Conhecimento fornece um diagnóstico atual da área, retratando as questões do Século XXI, que pode auxiliar o desenvolvimento de pesquisas futuras, programas educacionais, publicações e outras perspectivas profissionais e acadêmicas. Esse tipo de pesquisa de mapeamento sobre a Ciência da Informação deveria ser feito periodicamente, incluindo estudos Delphi e avaliações do grau de expansão da área e provável divisão em subáreas. Metodologias alternativas para mapear a expansão do universo da Ciência da Informação e suas sinergias com outras áreas do conhecimento, também, deveriam ser exploradas.

This collective paper incorporates eleven position papers on implications of the "Knowledge Map of Information Science,” a Critical Delphi study conducted in 2003-2005 and published as a series of four articles (ZINS, 2007 a, b, c, d). The Delphi study captured the deliberations of 57 leading information science scholars from 16 countries to provide (1) definitions of the fundamental concepts of data, information knowledge and message, (2) alternative conceptions of the broad information science domain, (3) different classificatory mappings of the field, and (4) comprehensive mappings of information science. Overall, the Knowledge Map provides an early 21st century snapshot of the field that should help guide future research, educational programming, publishing, and other professional and scholarly thrusts. Future information science mapping research should be done periodically, including additional Delphi studies and assessments of the degree of the field’s expansion and probable division into sub-fields. Alternative methodologies for mapping the expanding information science universe and its synergies with other fields of knowledge should also be explored.

To the present authors, the I-Conference represented a very significant event in the evolution of eclectic thinking about higher education and multidisciplinary symbiosis in the information arena. Few, if any, information-oriented conferences we attended over the last several decades came even close to hosting so effectively such a wide variety of disciplinary and professional perspectives. These perspectives included those from what have been traditionally labeled as computer science, information science, library science, telecommunications, information technology, management information systems, informatics, instructional technology, software engineering, computer engineering, archives and others. Attendees also brought forth their respective orientations from the humanities and social and natural sciences. In spite of such disciplinary diversity, there seemed to be an openness and sense of modesty among these variegated attendees. There were Frequent expressions of realization that their various home disciplinary or professional areas have become, by themselves, no longer adequate to confront contemporary and emergent local and global information requirements. That is, it has become difficult to identify or otherwise confront the problems and complexities normally addressed separately by areas traditionally named by such labels as computing, communication, information technology or management information systems. The tone of conference discussions can accordingly be characterized as open-ended, eclectic, exploratory, non-territorial, inclusive and driven by curiosity and questioning. There was a genuine quest for common ground and identity. During plenary sessions, there were a number of attempts to define the key parameters of common identity among I-Schools. In their quest for historical precedents during plenary sessions, some attendees referred to Information Science: Search for Identity: Proceedings of the 1972 NATO Advanced Study Institute in Information Science (Debons, 1974). The lead author, as the organizer of this NATO conference and two others, was accordingly called on (and the co-author invited) to assess the I-Conference retrospectively, in relation to other activities held in the past with similar objectives. Obviously, such historical comparisons are tricky and often highly simplistic, given the complex of multiple precedents, tributaries, events and forces that combine to form a disciplinary or professional field. The relatively large set of areas provisionally encompassed by various I-School amalgams (such as computation, management information systems, software engineering, telecommunications and library science) makes historical analysis particularly challenging and at best partial. Obviously, the NATO Institutes and other past events are only a very small part of the provisional gestalt represented by the I-School movement. Nevertheless, a few historical comparisons and contrasts might possess some relevance to current deliberations. Perhaps a few “then” and “now” comparisons and contrasts are in order. First, the I-Conference that has just taken place was essentially a national (United States) multidisciplinary conference that sought to address a host of educational, epistemo-logical and professional issues. The conference was funded by a number of U.S. I-Schools and was also partially funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation. In contrast, the three NATO Advanced Study Institutes (Debons, 1974; Debons & Cammeron, 1975; Debons & Larson, 1983) were international, multidisciplinary institutes, supported by the Science Division of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Attendees included individuals from the United States, Britain and other NATO countries. This national/international contrast motivated the present authors to ask whether or not similar I-School movements are occurring abroad. If so, what lessons might be learned or what productive international liaisons might be established in the future? Second, like the I-Conference, the NATO Institutes brought together participants from a broad range of disciplines: computer scientists, library scientists, psychologists, management information specialists, linguists, logicians, communication scientists, computer engineers, philosophers and others. Multidisciplinary coalitions at these NATO Institutes addressed questions that were remarkably similar to many of those addressed at the I-Conference: the fundamental nature of information; its use, processing and impact in various social, institutional and geographical contexts; the design, development and deployment of systems; the individual and social impact of information; the parameters of a science of information; the nature of information professionalism; educational curricula and problems. All in all, the questions addressed at the NATO Institutes and the I-Conference were strikingly similar and thus perhaps focused on some basic and enduring information issues. Third, in contrast to the I-Conference, which focused heavily on the formation of successful, multidisciplinary amalgams, the NATO Institutes were focused on forming a successful disciplinary amalgam, that of a science of information. NATO Institute senior scientists who served as lecturers tended to view information science as a newly emergent discipline. All participants attempted to formalize information science as a discipline, identify its roots and codify its foundations. In the process, they searched for an appropriate academic home for information science within such pre-established fields as library science, computer science, communications, management and philosophy. One might say that the newly hatched field needed to find proper parentage or at least a fitting academic home. By and large, information science programs in the 1960s and 1970s were absorbed or at least tacked on to pre-existing schools and departments. That is, information science needed to be subsumed under different traditional areas to survive. Academicians and professionals alike tended to view information science through the lenses of legacy disciplines or disciplinary groupings, often arguing that information science was essentially a social science, a natural science, an applied engineering field or even merely an extension of library science or documentation. The emergent area of information science tended to be identified through older lenses, rather than according to its originality or uniqueness. Fourth, in contrast, I-Conference attendees tended to view I-Schools as multidisciplinary hosts of one kind or another, depending on such factors as their different visionary preferences, funding, parent institutional leadership and the identification or re-identification of collective constituent requirements. Attempts were made at the I-Conference to identify appropriate disciplinary components, such as computer science, management information systems, communications, economics, library science, education and so on, and to offer these relatively mature fields a new home. The I-Schools tend clearly to subsume pre-existing fields through their provision of a relatively timely locus, one centered on information phenomena and technology. In a reversal of fortune, I-Schools are seen as playing the host (or hostess) roles by providing multidisciplinary homes for pre-existing, elderly fields, as it were. The information field is no longer viewed as a newly hatched orphan, but as a parent home providing the foundation for experiments with different disciplinary amalgams. The risk has shifted away from the prior task of getting a fledging information discipline accepted into some established home in the academy during the 1960s and 1970s to the present risk of deciding what disciplinary thrusts in I-Schools to include, which to exclude and how to do so. There appears to be as much intellectual ferment, confusion and even chaos today as there was in the old days, which indicates that closure about the ultimate nature of information or its science has not been achieved. Nor has a universal, definitive mission for I-Schools been realized. But this lack of closure, with its attendant ambiguity, can for the time be regarded as a healthy sign, given the need for provisional postures in the face of rapid socio-technical change, globalization and other forces. The major difference seen at the I-School conference was that information science did not tend to be identified so much via legacy concepts. Debates centered more on which legacy areas were relevant to the encompassing I-School framework and what role these older disciplines might play in the newer, but more flexible and provisional I-School gestalts. Here, the old tended to be revised and even redefined via new. Fifth, in comparison to the I-Conference, the NATO Institutes centered on the important question: What should students (albeit from all nations) of information science (however defined) be provided with to guide their careers? Not unlike the stated objectives of the I-Conference, the NATO Institutes were directed to understanding the critical issues and challenges attendant to the information explosion, shifting modes of communication, the nature of decision-making and problem solving and an increasing portfolio of applications and user demands. These important challenges persist and continue to press on today's educational programs. Sixth, in contrast to the I-Conference, systems theory possessed an allure of its own and played a slightly larger role in NATO Institute deliberations. Systems theory held promise as a potential integrative framework for the information sciences. As it turned out, systems theory was taught in many information science schools, but its translation into a cohesive, interrelated set of constructs that would have meaning and significance in practical applications did not prevail (Churchman, 1979). Systems theory, as thought and taught, became somewhat marginalized and ephemeral through the years and, unfortunately, has remained so to the present. This outcome is somewhat alarming when one considers the dangers that are inherent in the denial of systems thinking to oper-ational effectiveness or intellectual prowess. A future major challenge for I-Schools appears to be to revive systems theory and to appreciate its nature and potential for theory development and testing and operational problem solving. James Grier Miller's Living Systems (Miller, 1978 & 1995) provides a detailed account of the various properties of all systems, including their information processing subsystems. The living systems metaphor, and its counterpart metaphor of chaos, could aid the student in her/his search for a sense of system that translates to actual object systems and areas of chaotic randomness in all environments. Seventh, in contrast to the I-Conference, the NATO Institutes were more concerned with imparting and developing metaphorical reasoning throughout the educational and professional arenas; perhaps this focus was because information phenomena were less well understood at the time and metaphorical reasoning was more necessary. Metaphors serve to shape and direct attention to specific aspects of science and society. Obviously, metaphorical reasoning can help students, researchers and professionals to guide their quests to learn, develop theory or solve operational problems (Stafer, 2005). Eighth, in contrast to the I-Conference, the NATO Institutes placed a relatively greater emphasis on mapping entire sets of concepts and visualizing the entities or concepts and their interrelations in a holistic fashion. The mapping metaphor served to develop what were then the rudimentary dimensions of the formative science of information. At present, conceptual mapping might be applied more extensively to formative conceptualizations of the multidisciplinary platforms that serve to guide I-School enterprise. The map, as metaphor, can serve as a perceptual marker during student attempts to discern order and purpose within various multidisciplinary forests. For example, Chaim Zins will soon be publishing a series of mappings of the information science area obtained through his extensive critical Delphi study; these mappings include a Knowledge Map of Information Science and Classification Schemes of Information Science (Zins, in press-b; Zins, in press-a). The Zins mappings provide an integrated, contemporary picture of numerous perceptions of the information field. Such mappings can be of value in negotiating the vast array of alternative conceptualizations of the information field. It might even be seen that the ubiquitous quality of information appears to call for fluid rather than fixed definitions, for dynamic rather than static conceptualizations and for the dialectic reconciliation of opposite characteristics. Ninth and last, the I-Conference and the NATO Institutes focused on a host of other similar themes: the need for coherent theory and the creative mobilization of approaches and insights from multiple disciplines; a quest for optimal system design, with due recognition of user contexts, constraints and behavioral propensities; a need to study creativity as a phenomenon and to apply it to the education of system designers, developers and users (Debons and Larson, 1983). To conclude, there were many notable comparisons and contrasts between the thrusts of the 2005 I-Conference and the three NATO Information Science Institutes held in the 1970s. But it must be emphasized that the NATO Institutes are merely one part of a much larger and more complex array of relevant historical concerns. The discipline-oriented members of numerous I-School communities possess valuable lessons to bring to their respective multidisciplinary tables, as do information-oriented members of numerous other communities. Moreover, given the rapid pace of socio-technical change, the development of sound forecasts and scenarios of the future might better serve the I-School community than their looking backwards. Perhaps the best way to predict the future is to chart it well and then make it happen.

The panel will discuss the findings of a two year (2003–2005) study conducted by Dr. Chaim Zins, Bar-Ilan University, Israel and supported by the Israel Science Foundation. The purpose of the study was to identify the various concepts of Information Science towards the goal of developing a knowledge map (ontology) of the science. Towards this end, the objective of the research was identify and sharpen disagreements and hopefully neutralize biases. The Critical Delphi method was used to map the various concepts that permeate the field. The study consisted of three successive round of structured, comprehensive questionnaires that were sent to 40 international leading scholars in the field of Information Science. The attempt to develop an encompassing concept that would define the objectives and properties of information science has a long history. There are two different approaches that can be differentiated as the result of the research. One approach centers its attention on the necessary and sufficient properties of the science (metaphysical vs. non- metaphysical). This approach attempts to identify the intrinsic properties of the science in contrast to the extrinsic (functional) properties. There is general agreement as to the inherent difficulties that are encountered in defense of this approach. The study focused on non-metaphysical approaches. The non-metaphysical approach directed its attention to information as being a property of all organisms. The focus on this approach is that Data, information, knowledge are properties of human, mental phenomena. In this approach there is direct attention to the distinction among various types of knowledge as practical, acquaintance, propositional, inferential and non-inferential - Few respondents to the survey relate Information Science to biological phenomena but most ignored it. - Most respondents did not respond to differential terminological distinctions applied to knowledge. Yet, interest centered on propositional knowledge vs. all other distinctions. Survey revealed a general acceptance of data, information and knowledge as personal, inherent mental properties of humans in contrast to data, information and knowledge as embodied in physical objects. These findings suggest four models that can be applied for the construct of meaning of data, information and knowledge, both in the subjective and objective domain that could have permeated the attention of the respondents: -Data can be both internal and external phenomena; knowledge internal -Data and Information as external; knowledge-internal phenomena. -Data are external; information and knowledge internal phenomena. - Data-information-Knowledge in the subjective and objective domain, as internal phenomena. Concept of Information Science. Fifty responded to this section of the survey (explored phenomena). The findings of this segment of the survey may be considered important in addressing the functional prominence of information science as resting on documentation vs. computation. Distinction between the words “data”, “information”, “knowledge” and “meaning” is unclear in their usage. Domain: The domain of the science is uncertain. This relates to the points of emphasis of the science as to its attention to theoretical and functional objectives (technological managerial applications; library and information management systems, ethic, privacy, etc). Scope: Does the science of information attempt to understand the importance in the distinctions in the terminology and applications which concern day to day activity, or, does it concern itself with the broader aspects of Information Science, as a science, and its relationship to other sciences? Six views, as properties of information science, emerged from the data collected from the survey. These are provided in Figure 1: The author of this research subscribes to the culture model. From the survey data collected, eight categories describe the knowledge map of Information Science: Foundations Resources Environments Organizations Contents Technologies Operations and Processes Users A Map of Conceptions of Information Science Among the various issues that the panel will discuss are the following. The conceptions of IS; The interraltions of IS and related fields(e.g., library science, and computer science); The classification of IS knowledge domain into key facts; The disciplines that establish the theoretical foundations of IS(e.g., anthropology, communications, computer science, economics.linguistics, mathematics, philosophy(epistemology, ethics, and philosophy of science),psychology, and sociology); Taxonomies of IS research methodologies; Toxemias of information resources, media, and information technologies; Taxonomies of information environments; and information organizations; Taxonomies of users; and Taxonomies of search strategies, methods, and tactics. The thirst for the ideal model of Information Science serves to aid not only in the understanding of the nature and purpose of Information Science but also in developing research programs and education. This report of the survey conducted by Dr. Chaim Zins and presented to the panel for scrutiny is an attempt in that direction. The knowledge map that was developed identified 30 classifications schemes that include eight major categories. This suggests the broad scope of the science.

Forty years of teaching Information Science at both the undergraduate and graduate levels has revealed that there is in fact a fundamental definition that can be used to describe the field and guide its development in the years to come. In short, that definition states "Information Science is the scholarly occupation that attempts to establish the principles and laws that govern the augmentation of human capacities through technology. This concept can be conveyed in teaching through the use of the EATPUTr system model. My long experience in the field has also revealed several basic requirements in the education of Information Science. These requirements are discussed within the paper.

Forty years of teaching Science at both the undergraduate and graduate levels has revealed that there is in fact a fundamental definition that can be used to describe the field and guide its development in the years to come. In short, that definition states Information Science is the scholarly occupation that attempts to establish the principles and laws that govern the augmentation of human capacities through technology. This concept can be conveyed in teaching through the use of the EATPUTr system model. My long experience in the field has also revealed several basic requirements in the education of Science. These requirements are discussed within the paper.

Una definizione di base della Scienza dell'informazione risulta essenziale in una fase di sviluppo della civilta in cui informazione, scienza e tecnologia pervadono integralmente ogni aspetto del vissuto. In breve, si puo descriverla come quella disciplina che cerca di definire i principi e le leggi che governano l'implementazione delle capacita umane per mezzo della tecnologia, laddove il termine chiave e proprio implementazione. Come e noto, tale settore di ricerca si e andato sviluppando a partire dalla seconda guerra mondiale, trovando un forte impulso nei numerosi progetti statunitensi degli anni '60 nel campo aeronautico e spaziale (C2 system, ARPA, ecc.), e nelle collaborazioni pionieristiche di ben noti scienziati, il tutto in quel contesto fortemente interdisciplinare che avrebbe attraversato anche la struttura teorica dei primi programmi accademici di insegnamento specifico della disciplina, a partire dal 1967. Ma e solo attraverso la cibernetica, con la codificazione della struttura sistemica Data-Information-Knowledge (DIK), e il relativo processo di incremento delle capacita cognitive e funzionali degli organismi viventi attraverso la tecnologia Augmented Data, Information and Knowledge (ADIK), che viene individuata una efficace base teorica, al fine di rendere i programmi di insegnamento della materia rispondenti alle innumerevoli sollecitazioni esterne e in grado di costituire valido strumento, all'interno di molteplici istituzioni, nel supportare sviluppo e benessere. Tale struttura concettuale puo essere ulteriormente esaminata e descritta grazie all'applicazione del modello EATPUTr, costituito dall'elemento centrale, l'evento (EVENT-E), che definisce l'obiettivo del sistema e specifica la funzione dell'attivita complessiva del sistema ADIK e dai sensori (sia umani che tecnologici) in grado di acquisire (ACQUIRE-A) l'energia dall'evento, energia che una volta formalizzata e codificata va a costituire l'insieme dei dati raccolti e viene trasmessa (TRANSMITTED-T) a un processore (PROCESSING-P) che fornisce le informazioni relative all'evento stesso. Tali sistemi di informazione consentono di utilizzare (UTILIZE-U) le molteplici conoscenze in precedenza acquisite, in generale in tutti i procedimenti di sviluppo, e nello specifico nella risoluzione dei problemi e nei processi decisionali inerenti all'evento, cosi da poter tradurre (TRANSFERRED-T) tali risoluzioni e decisioni in azioni di risposta e chiudere il ciclo in modalita strettamente circolare. Il modello consente agli studenti di individuare chiaramente il rapporto e i nessi esistenti tra biblioteconomia, informatica, scienze delle comunicazioni e altre discipline correlate e dimostra la propria fungibilita rispetto a eventi e situazioni molteplici.

The terrorist attacks of September 11th on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have had profound implications for many aspects of American and global society. This essay explores the many implications for library and information science schools educating the next generation of information professionals. The essay considers an array of opinions by the faculty located in one such school regarding how to reflect on the aftermath of the attacks for basic aspects of teaching, research, and curriculum design in library and information science schools. Topics examined include disaster preparedness and recovery, knowledge management, workplace design and location, technology and the human dimension, ethics and information policy, information security, information economics, memorializing and documenting the terrorist attacks, the role of the Internet, and preservation.

This report offers an interrogative-based approach to differentiating and quantifying information and knowledge within text. We examine the work of Popper, Shannon, Weaver, Brookes, and Debons on information and knowledge. We offer a new synthesis of their perspectives, which provides the theoretical background for Interrogative Theory. Interrogative Theory suggests that text is a heterogeneous mixture of data, information, and knowledge, which can be separated and quantified through the interrogatives. Several exploratory research efforts based on this interrogative paradigm have been undertaken, including a study of the effects of differentiated information and knowledge on problem solving. Data are presented from these studies. Applications of this approach are described including information system design, problem solving and decision making, text indexing, information overload, meta-data, and knowledge management.

AbstractThe sections in this article areHistoryProfessional Structure of Information ScienceProfessional ActivityProfessional PublicationsTheoretical Structure of Information Science

The proceedings of NATO Advanced Study Institutes provide invaluable data, information, and knowledge to scholars and students of a wide spectrum of theoretical and applied areas of interest. Given the educational objectives of the NATO Institutes, the proceedings represent a rich resource that can be used as reference and as texts for instruction. If this objective is to be achieved, one major task of the directors of these institutes is to assemble, assess, correlate, align, juxtapose the content of the formal presentations, deliberations and discourses in a manner that aids arriving at a synthesis of the intellectual content of the activity. The objective of this paper is to provide a method that can be used for this purpose.

Journal of the American Society for Information ScienceVolume 43, Issue 10 p. 681-682 Letter to the Editor Rejoinder to A. A. Shpackov's letter Anthony Debons, Corresponding Author Anthony Debons Professor Emeritus, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260Professor Emeritus, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260Search for more papers by this author Anthony Debons, Corresponding Author Anthony Debons Professor Emeritus, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260Professor Emeritus, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260Search for more papers by this author First published: December 1992 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199212)43:10<681::AID-ASI8>3.0.CO;2-KAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume43, Issue10December 1992Pages 681-682 RelatedInformation

Information may be something contained in a conveyer, which can be objects such as paper packages, film, electronic devices or even humans, who hold such facts and news in their heads. This chapter describes the nature and science of information, and theory of foundations. Determining the essence of information is secondary to more practical concerns, which involve the determination of the most efficient and effective way to access, store, use and disseminate the record of human experience. These concerns also represent the focus for the education of future scholars and professionals, and continue to be influenced by advances in technology, particularly computers, the use of which has permeated a wide range of public and private institutions. These advances have tended to emphasize the vital role that the access to information and knowledge has in institutional operations, particularly in decision making and problem solving. Tackling with the logistics of such commodities permeates the writings and interests of many scholars and professionals in the field. As it now stands, information science is a field whose basic principles, theories, and laws lie in many disciplines, both applied and theoretic. In its attempt to obtain a definition of form, namely, the principles governing information and knowledge that link human and technological potentials, a metascience could come out with the power to serve all disciplines.