Michael K. Buckland

Information as thing

Three meanings of “information” are distinguished: “Information‐as‐process”; “information‐as‐knowledge”; and “information‐as‐thing,” the attributive use of “information” to denote things regarded as informative. The nature and characteristics of “information‐as‐thing” are discussed, using an indirect approach (“What things are informative?”). Varieties of “information‐as‐thing” include data, text, documents, objects, and events. On this view “information” includes but extends beyond communication. Whatever information storage and retrieval systems store and retrieve is necessarily “information‐as‐thing.” These three meanings of “information,” along with “information processing,” offer a basis for classifying disparate information‐related activities (e.g., rhetoric, bibliographic retrieval, statistical analysis) and, thereby, suggest a topography for “information science.”

What is a “document”?

Ordinarily the word “document” denotes a textual record. Increasingly sophisticated attempts to provide access to the rapidly growing quantity of available documents raised questions about what should be considered a “document.” The answer is important for any definition of the scope of Information Science. Paul Otlet and others developed a functional view of “document” and discussed whether, for example, sculpture, museum objects, and live animals, could be considered “documents.” Suzanne Briet equated “document” with organized physical evidence. These ideas appear to resemble notions of “material culture” in cultural anthropology and “object-as-sign” in semiotics. Others, especially in the U.S.A. (e.g., Jesse Shera and Louis Shores) took a narrower view. New digital technology renews old questions and also old confusions between medium, message, and meaning.

The relationship between recall and precision

Empirical studies of retrieval performance have shown a tendency for Precision to decline as Recall increases. This article examines the nature of the relationship between Precision and Recall. The relationships between Recall and the number of documents retrieved, between Precision and the number of documents retrieved, and between Precision and Recall are described in the context of different assumptions about retrieval performance. It is demonstrated that a tradeoff between Recall and Precision is unavoidable whenever retrieval performance is consistently better than retrieval at random. More generally, for the Precision–Recall trade-off to be avoided as the total number of documents retrieved increases, retrieval performance must be equal to or better than overall retrieval performance up to that point. Examination of the mathematical relationship between Precision and Recall shows that a quadratic Recall curve can resemble empirical Recall–Precision behavior if transformed into a tangent parabola. With very large databases and/or systems with limited retrieval capabilities there can be advantages to retrieval in two stages: Initial retrieval emphasizing high Recall, followed by more detailed searching of the initially retrieved set, can be used to improve both Recall and Precision simultaneously. Even so, a tradeoff between Precision and Recall remains.

What kind of science can information science be

During the 20th century there was a strong desire to develop an information science from librarianship, bibliography, and documentation and in 1968 the American Documentation Institute changed its name to the American Society for Information Science. By the beginning of the 21st century, however, departments of (library and) information science had turned instead towards the social sciences. These programs address a variety of important topics, but they have been less successful in providing a coherent explanation of the nature and scope of the field. Progress can be made towards a coherent, unified view of the roles of archives, libraries, museums, online information services, and related organizations if they are treated as information-providing services. However, such an approach seems significantly incomplete on ordinary understandings of the providing of information. Instead of asking what information science is or what we might wish it to become, we ask instead what kind of field it can be given our assumptions about it. We approach the question by examining some keywords: science, information, knowledge, and interdisciplinary. We conclude that if information science is concerned with what people know, then it is a form of cultural engagement, and at most, a science of the artificial.

Documentation, information science, and library science in the U.S.A.

Abstract Three related questions are addressed: why was the work of the European documentalists largely ignored in the U.S.A. before the Second World War? What was the “information science vs library science” argument about? Technological innovation was a vital force in library science in the late 19th century and again after 1950. Why was it not a vital force inbetween? Examination of the technological background and of the Graduate Library School, University of Chicago, suggests that there was a temporary paradigm change away from design and technological innovation. Arguments over “information science” reflected a reversal of that paradigm.

The landscape of information science: the American society for Information Science at 62

Founded in 1937 as the American Documentation Institute, the American Society for Information Science is 62 years old. Information Science includes two fundamentally different traditions: a “document” tradition concerned with signifying objects and their use; and a “computational” tradition of applying algorithmic, logical, mathematical, and mechanical techniques to information management. Both traditions have been deeply influenced by technological modernism: Technology, standards, systems, and efficiency enable progress. Both traditions are needed. Information Science is rooted in part in humanities and qualitative social sciences. The landscape of Information Science is complex. An ecumenical view is needed.

Emanuel Goldberg, electronic document retrieval, and Vannevar Bush's Memex

Vannevar Bushs famous article, “As We May Think” (1945), described an imaginary information retrieval machine, the Memex. The Memex is usually viewed, unhistorically, in relation to subsequent developments using digital computers. This study reconstructs the little-known background of information retrieval in and before 1939 when “As We May Think” was originally written. The Memex was based on Bushs work during 1938–1940 in developing an improved photoelectric microfilm selector, an electronic retrieval technology pioneered by Emanuel Goldberg of Zeiss Ikon, Dresden, in the 1920s. Visionary statements by Paul Otlet (1934) and Walter Schurmeyer (1935) and the development of electronic document retrieval technology before Bush are examined.

Information retrieval of more than text

Information retrieval has been primarily concerned with text and text‐like data. Image‐handling reminds us that information retrieval should have a broader scope, and it did in the neglected work of European pioneers such as Paul Otlet and Suzanne Briet. The terminology of “multimedia” needs attention to distinguish phenomena, facts, representations, forms of expression, and physical medium.

Obsolescence in subject description

Purpose – The paper aims to explain the character and causes of obsolescence in assigned subject descriptors.Design/methodology/approach – The paper takes the form of a conceptual analysis with examples and reference to existing literature.Findings – Subject description comes in two forms: assigning the name or code of a subject to a document and assigning a document to a named subject category. Each method associates a document with the name of a subject. This naming activity is the site of tensions between the procedural need of information systems for stable records and the inherent multiplicity and instability of linguistic expressions. As languages change, previously assigned subject descriptions become obsolescent. The issues, tensions, and compromises involved are introduced.Originality/value – Drawing on the work of Robert Fairthorne and others, an explanation of the unavoidable obsolescence of assigned subject headings is presented. The discussion relates to libraries, but the same issues arise i...

Methodological problems in assessing the overlap between bibliographical files and library holdings

Abstract During 1970–1971 the University of Lancaster Library Research Unit carred out a study of the extent to which leading British research libraries tend to duplicate rather than complement each others holdings. This investigation was commissioned in order to provide pertinent background information for the staff of the National Libraries ADP Study[1]. The investigation was in two parts, “National Catalogue Coverage Study” which estimated the overlap in holdings [2] and a “Foreign Books Acquisitions Study” which estimated the extent of duplication in the acquisition of non-British imprints [3]. The authors of this paper collaborated in the design and direction of the investigation. Several methodological problems were encountered. The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss methodological difficulties in this specialist type of library survey. Examples of findings from the British study and from subsequent surveys in Indiana are given by way of illustration. The initial impetus was a major study of the overlap in holdings between 23 British libraries including the leading national and academic libraries. It became apparent that there were severe methodological problems involved. Since then it has seemed increasingly clear that: (i) When formulated in a general way. overlap is a widely occurring parameter in the bibliographical area whether in automated information processing or manual, (ii) The overlap parameter is likely to often be a critical one from the management point of view, especially in ascertaining the probable costs and benefits of automation, collaboration or, most of all, in collaboration in automation, (iii) Overlap studies are becoming more frequent on account of (i) and (ii). Therefore this paper has been prepared with the emphasis on the methodological aspects rather than the results of either of the actual surveys.