The author aims to review the status of information science (IS) as a discipline, with particular focus on the UK. A consideration of the discipline begins by comparing definitions of IS. Two visions of the impact of IS are presented to illustrate a key problem area addressed by the discipline. Indicators of a discipline are summarized and Biglan's categorization of disciplines is explained. The author provides a critique of opinions on the nature of IS as a discipline, using Biglan's categories as a framework. The author contrasts the views of those who see the discipline as problematically fragmented and those who envision a discipline of fruitfully interlinked specialisms. This section of the paper concludes by considering disciplinary boundaries and the international scope of the discipline. The last section of the paper reviews the state of IS in the UK, drawing on evidence and on personal experience. Factors considered are: evidence of networks and communities of practice; the name and standing of academic departments and courses; artefacts and personal identification. The author concludes by identifying particular challenges for IS in the UK and indicates areas for research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
[1] A.J. Meadows , Introduction. In: A.J. Meadows (ed.), The Origins of Information Science ( London, Taylor Graham , 1987), pp. 1-10.
2.
[2] F. Machlup and U. Mansfield , Cultural diversity in studies of information. In: F. Machlup and U. Mansfield (eds), The Study of Information: Interdisciplinary Messages ( Wiley, New York , 1983), pp. 3-59.
3.
[3] T. Stonier , Towards a new theory of information , Journal of Information Science17(5) (1991) 257-263 .
4.
[4] F. Machlup , Semantic quirks in study of information. In: F. Machlup and U. Mansfield (eds), The Study of Information: Interdisciplinary Messages ( Wiley, New York , 1983), pp. 641-671.
5.
[5] M. Buckland , Information as Thing , Journal of the American Society for Information Science42(5) (1991) 351-360 .
6.
[6] R. Capurro and B. Hjørland , The concept of information. In: B. Cronin (ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), Vol. 37 ( Information Today, Medford , 2003), pp. 343-411.
7.
[7] Institute of Information Scientists , Criteria for information science , Inform188 (1996) 3 .
8.
[8] M.K. Buckland and Z. Liu , History of information science. In: M.E. Williams (ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), Vol. 30 ( Information Today for ASIS, Medford , 1995), pp. 385-416.
9.
[9] B.C. Vickery and A. Vickery , Information Science in Theory and Practice ( Butterworths, London , 1987).
10.
[10] J. Farradane , Knowledge, information and information science , Journal of Information Science2 (1980) 75-80 .
11.
[11] P. Ingwersen , Information Retrieval Interaction ( Taylor Graham, London , 1992).
12.
[12] B. Hjørland and H. Albrechtsen , Towards a new horizon in information science: domain analysis , Journal of the American Society for Information Science46(6) (1995) 400-425 .
13.
[13] B. Hjørland and H. Albrechtsen , Information science education from the point of view of domain analysis . In: M. Hancock-Beaulieu and N.O. Pors (eds), Proceedings: the 1st British-Nordic Conference on Library and Information Studies (Royal School of Librarianship, Copenhagen, 1995), pp. 115-120 .
14.
[14] H.D. White and K.W. McCain , Visualizing a discipline: an author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972-1995 , Journal of the American Society for Information Science49(4) (1998) 327-355 .
15.
[15] B. Cronin , Preface and introduction. In: B. Cronin (ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), Vol. 36 ( Information Today, Medford , 2002), pp. vii-xiii.
16.
[16] The Royal Society of London , The Scientific Information conference , Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London6(1) (1948) 1-7 . Available at: http://uk.jstor.org/
17.
[17] R. Wakeford , A golden jubilee revisited , Inform188 (1996) 3 .
18.
[18] W.B. Rayward , The history and historiography of information science: some reflections , Information Processing and Management32(1) (1996) 3-17 .
19.
[19] J. Warner , W(h)ither information science?/!Library Quarterly71(2) (2001) 243-255 .
20.
[20] T. Saracevic , Information science , Journal of the American Society for Information Science50(12) (1999) 1051-1063 .
21.
[21] J.D. Bernal , Scientific communication. In: A.J. Meadows (ed.), The Origins of Information Science ( Taylor Graham, London , 1987), pp. 167-191.
22.
[22] Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung , Information vernetzen: Wissen aktivieren: Strategisches Positionspapier des Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung zur Zukunft der wissenschaftlichen Information in Deutschland ( BfBF, Bonn , 2002).
23.
[23] G. Wersig , Information science: the study of postmodern knowledge usage , Information Processing and Management29 (1993) 229-239 .
24.
[24] M. Buckland , The landscape of information science: the American Society for Information Science at 62 , Journal of the American Society for Information Science50(11) (1999) 970-974 .
25.
[25] A. Newell , Reflections on the structure of an interdiscipline. In: F. Machlup and U. Mansfield (eds), The Study of Information: Interdisciplinary Messages ( Wiley, New York , 1983), pp. 99-109.
26.
[26] T. Becher and P.R. Trowler , Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Culture of Disciplines, 2nd edn ( Society of Research into Higher Education and Open University Press, Milton Keynes , 2001).
27.
[27] L.B. Heilprin , The library community at a technological and philosophical crossroads: necessary and sufficient conditions for survival , Journal of the American Society for Information Science42(8) (1991) 566-573 .
28.
[28] A.M. Schrader , In search of a name: information science and its conceptual antecedents , Library and Information Science Research6 (1984) 227-271 .
29.
[29] H.D. White , Scientist-poets wanted , Journal of the American Society for Information Science50(12) (1999) 1052-1053 .
30.
[30] T. Becher , Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Culture of Disciplines ( Society of Research into Higher Education and Open University Press, Milton Keynes , 1989).
31.
[31] N. Ford , The growth of understanding of information science: towards a developmental model , Journal of the American Society for Information Science50(12) (1999) 1141-1152 .
32.
[32] B. Crowley , The control and direction of professional education , Journal of the American Society for Information Science50(12) (1999) 1127-1135 .
33.
[33] J. Pfeffer , Barriers to the advance of organizational science: paradigm development as a dependent variable , Academy of Management Review18(4) (1993) 599-620 .
34.
[34] M. Enright , Marketing and conflicting dates for its emergence , Journal of Marketing Management18 (2002) 445-461
35.
[35] J.R. Rossiter , What is marketing knowledge? Stage I: Forms of marketing knowledge , Marketing Theory1(1) (2001) 9-26 .
36.
[36] M. Evanset al. , Future marketers: future curriculum: future shock? , Journal of Marketing Management18(5-6) (2002) 579-596 .
37.
[37] ELMAR (Email List for Marketing Academic Researchers) discussion list archives; www.columbia.edu/*pbp1/elmar/
38.
[38] B.C. Brookes , The foundations of information science. Part I: philosophical aspects , Journal of Information Science2 (1980) 125-133 .
39.
[39] R. Summerset al. , Information science in 2010: a Loughborough University view , Journal of the American Society for Information Science50(12) (1999) 1153-1162 .
40.
[40] B. Hjørland , Theory and metatheory of information science: a new interpretation , Journal of Documentation54 (1998) 606-621 .
41.
[41] I. Cornelius , Theorizing information science. In: B. Cronin (ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), Vol. 36 ( Information Today, Medford , 2002), pp. 393-425.
42.
[42] K.E. Pettigrew and L.E.F. McKechnie , The use of theory in information science research , Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology52(1) (2001) 62-73 .
43.
[43] R.T. Bottle , Information science. In: J. Feather and P. Sturges, International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science ( Routledge, London , 1997), pp. 212-214.
44.
[44] J.H Shera , Librarianship and information science. In: F. Machlup and U. Mansfield (eds), The Study of Information: Interdisciplinary Messages ( Wiley, New York , 1983), pp. 379-388.
45.
[45] J.-M. Griffiths , Back to the future: information science for the new Millennium , Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science26(4) (2000) 24-26 .
46.
[46] S. Hornby , Pandas, predators, players and other wild-life: library and information education in a changing world . In: M. Klasson, B. Loughridge and S. Lööf, New Fields for Research in the 21st Century: Proceedings of the 3rd British-Nordic Conference on Library and Information Studies (University College of Borås, Borås, 1999), pp. 330-344 .
47.
[47] S. Hannabuss , Kinds of knowledge , Library Review40(4) (1991) 27-34 .
48.
[48] D. Ellis , D. Allen and T. Wilson , Information science and information systems: conjunct subjects disjunct disciplines , Journal of the American Society for Information Science50(12) (1999) 1095-1107 .
49.
[49] F. Machlup and U. Mansfield (eds), The Study of Information: Interdisciplinary Messages ( Wiley, New York , 1983).
50.
[50] D.T. Hawkins , Information science abstracts: tracking the literature of information science. Part 1: Definition and map , Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology52(1) (2001) 44-53 .
51.
[51] D. Kraft , President's page , Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology29(1) (2002) 3 .
52.
[52] T.D. Wilson , New fields for research in the 21st century . In: M. Klasson, B. Loughridge and S. Lööf. New Fields for Research in the 21st Century: Proceedings of the 3rd British-Nordic Conference on Library and Information Studies (University College of Borås, Borås,1999), pp. 345-352 .
53.
[53] B.-A. Lipetz , Aspects of JASIS authorship through five decades , Journal of the American Society for Information Science50(11) (1999) 994-1003 .
54.
[54] W. Koehler , Information Science as `little science': the implications of a bibliometric analysis of the Journal of the American Society for Information Science , Scientometrics51(1) (2001) 117-132 .
55.
[55] E. Bonnevie , A multifaceted portrait of a library and information science journal: the case of the Journal of Information Science , Journal of Information Science29(1) (2003) 11-23 .
56.
[56] S. Webber , Teaching of marketing and quality management in schools of library and information science (LIS) in the UK: a review and report of findings. In: R. Savard (ed.), Education and Research for Marketing and Quality Management in Libraries ( KG Saur, Munchen , 2002), pp. 43-65.
57.
[57] J. Elkin and T. Wilson (eds), The Education of Library and Information Professionals in the UK ( Mansell, London , 1997).
58.
[58] R. Barnett , University knowledge in an age of super-complexity , Higher Education40 (2000) 409-422 .
59.
[59] E. Wenger , Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity ( Cambridge University Press, Cambridge , 1998).
60.
[60] J.S. Brown and P. Duguid , The Social Life of Information ( Harvard Business School Press, Boston , 2000).
61.
[61] A.J. Meadows (ed.), The Origins of Information Science ( Taylor Graham, London , 1987).
62.
[62] J. Warner , Writing and literary work in copyright: a binational and historical analysis , Journal of the American Society for Information Science44(6) (1993) 307-321 .
63.
[63] M. Bates , The invisible substrate of information science , Journal of the American Society for Information Science50(12) (1999) 1043-1050 .
64.
[64] P. Vakkari and B. Cronin , Conceptions of Library and Information Science: Historical, Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives ( Taylor Graham, London , 1992).
65.
[65] Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals , CILIP in the Knowledge Economy: a Leadership Strategy ( CILIP, London , 2002).
66.
[66] J. Broady-Preston , The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) and subject review: the viewpoint of the assessor , Libri52(4) (2002) 195-198 .
67.
[67] J. Harrison , Going for gold , Libri52(4) (2002) 199-203 .
68.
[68] Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education , Librarianship and Information Management ( Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, Gloucester , 2000). Available at: www.qaa.ac.uk/
69.
[69] M. Huckle , Driving change in the profession: subject benchmarking in UK library and information management , Libri52(4) (2002) 209-213 .
70.
[70] Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals , Accreditation Instrument: Procedures for the Accreditation of Courses ( CILIP, London , 2002).
71.
[71] J. Elkin , The UK research assessment exercise 2001 , Libri52(4) (2002) 204-208 .
72.
[72] P. Enser , Beating the bounds of LIS . In: M. Hancock-Beaulieu and N.O. Pors (eds), Proceedings: the 1st British-Nordic Conference on Library and Information Studies (Royal School of Librarianship, Copenhagen, 1995), pp. 81-97 .
73.
[73] University and Colleges Admission System (UCAS);www.ucas.ac.uk/
74.
[74] Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals , Where to Study in the UK ( CILIP, London , 2003). Available at: www.cilip.org.uk/qualifications/where.html
75.
[75] P. Enser and K. Wood , New approaches to the professional accreditation of library and information science education . In: M. Klasson , B. Loughridge and S, Lööf (eds), New Fields for Research in the 21st Century: Proceedings of the 3rd British-Nordic Conference on Library and Information Studies (University College of Borås, Borås, 1999), pp. 19-26 .
[77] B. Cronin and D. Shaw , Banking (on) different forms of symbolic capital , Journal of the American Society for Information Science53(14) (2002) 1267-1270 .
