FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2009674902> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2009674902 endingPage "5" @default.
• W2009674902 startingPage "1" @default.
• W2009674902 abstract "acting vs. thinking (Todd, 1999) “knowledge for action” vs. “knowledge for understanding” (Rich, 1977) technical vs. discursive utilization (Knorr, 1977). This paper focuses on informational use of information (IUI), because it is an easier first topic to tackle than practical use of information (PUI). The cause of this may be that there appears to have been less research on PUI than IUI. Conceptually, IUI involves two kinds of information (or knowledge): source information and target information. Source information means the information which is used, whereas target information refers to the information on which the source information is used. In a given study, both source and target information can be just about any sort of information, but usually it is sensible to delimit one or both to a specific variety of information. The source information in my current research, for instance, is spiritual information, while the target information has been left open. The article at hand presents a theoretical synthesis of the informational uses of information. It does so by first reviewing central scientific literature relevant to the subject. Only easily available publications were obtained, so one or more core sources could have been missed. Then a new, combined typology of IUIs is constructed by means of tabular comparison. […] Sources - Information use is seen as finding information located in information sources. […] Processes - Information use is seen as initiating [an information] process [which is located anywhere between formulating an information need and applying the found information to practice]. […] Knowledge base - Information use is seen as building a personal knowledge base for various purposes. (Maybee, 2006, p. 81.) The concretization and storage of knowledge […] The interpretation and processing of information […] Accessing indigenous information […] Communication in the oral tradition[.] (Meyer, 2003, pp. 110–116.) socialization[:] from tacit knowledge to tacit knowledge; externalization[:] from tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge; combination[:] from explicit knowledge to explicit knowledge; internalization[:] from explicit knowledge to tacit knowledge. (Nonaka et al., 2001, p. 16.) Nonaka and the others (ibid.) actually call those “the four modes of knowledge conversion”, but their affinity with the other classifications above is so obvious that they can easily be seen as IUIs, too. The different outlines above describe the informational uses of information in quite disparate terms, making it seemingly difficult to reconcile them. missing; e.g. Kari (2001) does not include information acquisition in his classification split (into two parts); e.g. Leckie and Pettigrew (1997) divide communication into “providing” and “sharing” information bloated; Maybee's (2006) type “processes” covers the whole spectrum. However, the commonalities between the various categorizations clearly outweigh their differences, and thus it was not so hard to integrate them, after all. It is quite interesting, albeit somewhat surprising, to discover that IUIs apparently boil down to just three basic types: internalizing information, processing information/knowledge and externalizing knowledge. When internalizing, the actor (e.g. individual) incorporates outside information into itself. Processing entails considering or transforming either information objects (e.g. texts) or one's own knowledge (what one knows). Finally, externalizing means that the actor distributes some of its information objects to other entities, or expresses some of its knowledge to them. information science: information seeking vs. information sharing (information behavior) semiotics: decoding vs. encoding computing & economics: input vs. output. In theoretically understanding the informational uses of information better, it would be beneficial to draw on those conceptualizations. There is a need to examine the relationship between IUI and information behavior in particular, as they are the closest concepts. Of course, the details and dynamics of IUIs as such should be studied, as well. One logical step would be to also analyse and synthesize practical uses of information in the same manner as the informational uses in this article. To summarize, the concept and typology of informational information use looks like a promising ‘seed crystal’ for truly systematic and holistic research on information use which has long suffered from theoretical obscurity. At the conference, the main content of this paper is presented as a cross-shaped poster consisting of five parts or pages. The center, which forms the core of the exhibit, describes the three synthesized types of informational uses of information. The horizontal dimension of the poster depicts the process of developing the concepts, so that the earlier categorizations are positioned on the left side of the center piece, and the possible future directions are on the right. The vertical dimension represents the various levels of abstraction, so that the higher-level constructs lie above the center piece, and the more concrete classes of use are below. Therefore, the whole constitutes a chart with two dimensions. This kind of simple but efficient presentation should help the audience quickly grasp the major points." @default.
• W2009674902 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2009674902 creator A5057995798 @default.
• W2009674902 date "2008-01-01" @default.
• W2009674902 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2009674902 title "Informational uses of information: A theoretical synthesis" @default.
• W2009674902 cites W1501448174 @default.
• W2009674902 cites W1981069393 @default.
• W2009674902 cites W2046834899 @default.
• W2009674902 cites W2080304206 @default.
• W2009674902 doi "https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.2008.1450450326" @default.
• W2009674902 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W2009674902 type Work @default.
• W2009674902 sameAs 2009674902 @default.
• W2009674902 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2009674902 countsByYear W20096749022015 @default.
• W2009674902 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2009674902 hasAuthorship W2009674902A5057995798 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C111919701 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C119599485 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C124101348 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C124103261 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C136197465 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C136764020 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C180198813 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C190275765 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C19165224 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C194695470 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C23123220 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C2522767166 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C2777855551 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C2778095710 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C29848774 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C33326189 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C4554734 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C45983554 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C75795011 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C78999398 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConcept C98045186 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C105795698 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C111919701 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C119599485 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C124101348 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C124103261 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C127413603 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C136197465 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C136764020 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C144024400 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C154945302 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C180198813 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C190275765 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C19165224 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C194695470 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C23123220 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C2522767166 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C2777855551 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C2778095710 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C29848774 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C33326189 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C33923547 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C41008148 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C4554734 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C45983554 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C75795011 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C78999398 @default.
• W2009674902 hasConceptScore W2009674902C98045186 @default.
• W2009674902 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2009674902 hasLocation W20096749021 @default.
• W2009674902 hasOpenAccess W2009674902 @default.
• W2009674902 hasPrimaryLocation W20096749021 @default.
• W2009674902 hasRelatedWork W1513175210 @default.
• W2009674902 hasRelatedWork W167671094 @default.
• W2009674902 hasRelatedWork W2009674902 @default.
• W2009674902 hasRelatedWork W2359991533 @default.
• W2009674902 hasRelatedWork W2419283673 @default.
• W2009674902 hasRelatedWork W2593666265 @default.
• W2009674902 hasRelatedWork W3146636249 @default.
• W2009674902 hasRelatedWork W3178401401 @default.
• W2009674902 hasRelatedWork W760637995 @default.
• W2009674902 hasRelatedWork W2345560554 @default.
• W2009674902 hasVolume "45" @default.
• W2009674902 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2009674902 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2009674902 magId "2009674902" @default.
• W2009674902 workType "article" @default.