根据实地报告的考古信息制作活动

IF 2.4 3区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Library & Information Science Research Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.lisr.2022.101171
Isto Huvila, Lisa Börjesson, Olle Sköld
{"title":"根据实地报告的考古信息制作活动","authors":"Isto Huvila,&nbsp;Lisa Börjesson,&nbsp;Olle Sköld","doi":"10.1016/j.lisr.2022.101171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Accounts of how scholarly information is produced are crucial for understanding and using the information yet they are often criticized for being incomprehensive or even non-existent. This article aims to increase the understanding of how scholarly information-making is conceived and documented by information-makers. By analyzing how a set of archaeological field reports describe different aspects of the information-making activities (cf. Activity Theory) pertaining to the research documented in the reports, the study suggests that scholars might have a tendency to focus on reporting tools, outcomes and physical location of activities while descriptions of especially rules/norms, community factors and division of labour are rare and expected to be known tacitly. The findings suggest also that the descriptions of information-making activities become comprehensible in relation to their related activities. Therefore, an increased emphasis on explicating their underpinning social factors and how activity systems and their elements link to other activity systems could improve the comprehensiveness of documentation and decrease the need of tacit contextual knowledge.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47618,"journal":{"name":"Library & Information Science Research","volume":"44 3","pages":"Article 101171"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740818822000342/pdfft?md5=b0865c8f19d6fafe5042e78b7591b903&pid=1-s2.0-S0740818822000342-main.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Archaeological information-making activities according to field reports\",\"authors\":\"Isto Huvila,&nbsp;Lisa Börjesson,&nbsp;Olle Sköld\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.lisr.2022.101171\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Accounts of how scholarly information is produced are crucial for understanding and using the information yet they are often criticized for being incomprehensive or even non-existent. This article aims to increase the understanding of how scholarly information-making is conceived and documented by information-makers. By analyzing how a set of archaeological field reports describe different aspects of the information-making activities (cf. Activity Theory) pertaining to the research documented in the reports, the study suggests that scholars might have a tendency to focus on reporting tools, outcomes and physical location of activities while descriptions of especially rules/norms, community factors and division of labour are rare and expected to be known tacitly. The findings suggest also that the descriptions of information-making activities become comprehensible in relation to their related activities. Therefore, an increased emphasis on explicating their underpinning social factors and how activity systems and their elements link to other activity systems could improve the comprehensiveness of documentation and decrease the need of tacit contextual knowledge.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47618,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Library & Information Science Research\",\"volume\":\"44 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 101171\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740818822000342/pdfft?md5=b0865c8f19d6fafe5042e78b7591b903&pid=1-s2.0-S0740818822000342-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Library & Information Science Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740818822000342\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Library & Information Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740818822000342","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

关于学术信息如何产生的描述对于理解和使用信息至关重要,但它们经常被批评为不全面甚至不存在。本文旨在增进对信息制造者如何构思和记录学术信息制作的理解。通过分析一组考古实地报告如何描述与报告中记载的研究有关的信息生成活动的不同方面(参见活动理论),该研究表明,学者们可能倾向于关注报告工具、结果和活动的物理位置,而对规则/规范、社区因素和劳动分工的描述则很少,预计会被默认。研究结果还表明,对信息生成活动的描述与相关活动的关系变得容易理解。因此,加强对其基础社会因素的解释,以及活动系统及其要素如何与其他活动系统相联系,可以提高文献的全面性,减少对隐性背景知识的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Archaeological information-making activities according to field reports

Accounts of how scholarly information is produced are crucial for understanding and using the information yet they are often criticized for being incomprehensive or even non-existent. This article aims to increase the understanding of how scholarly information-making is conceived and documented by information-makers. By analyzing how a set of archaeological field reports describe different aspects of the information-making activities (cf. Activity Theory) pertaining to the research documented in the reports, the study suggests that scholars might have a tendency to focus on reporting tools, outcomes and physical location of activities while descriptions of especially rules/norms, community factors and division of labour are rare and expected to be known tacitly. The findings suggest also that the descriptions of information-making activities become comprehensible in relation to their related activities. Therefore, an increased emphasis on explicating their underpinning social factors and how activity systems and their elements link to other activity systems could improve the comprehensiveness of documentation and decrease the need of tacit contextual knowledge.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Library & Information Science Research
Library & Information Science Research INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
6.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Library & Information Science Research, a cross-disciplinary and refereed journal, focuses on the research process in library and information science as well as research findings and, where applicable, their practical applications and significance. All papers are subject to a double-blind reviewing process.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Virtual reality training for crisis communication: Fostering empathy, confidence, and de-escalation skills in library and information science graduate students Beyond surface: Chinese youth's digital reading motivation explored via laddering and the interpretative structural modeling method (ISM) “O brave new world”1: A case study of a social worker in the public library Privacy protection framework for open data: Constructing and assessing an effective approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1