Domain Analysis

  • Richard P. Smiraglia
Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

Knowledge organization, as we have seen, is the attempt to ascertain both the natural orderings of knowledge in every domain and the attempt to ascertain the most useful orderings of recorded knowledge for retrieval. We have seen that the concept—a named and defined idea—is the atomist entity for knowledge organization. That is, both the science of knowledge organization and the activity of developing systems for knowledge organization rely on the concept at the core. Therefore the most critical aspect of the field is determining those concepts that are to be ordered in knowledge systems. Domain analysis is the activity, or the methodology, by which the conceptual content and natural or heuristic orderings can be discovered and mapped in discrete knowledge domains. Increasingly, domain-analytic studies are being used to compare domains as well as to track their evolution. We will review these tools and some examples from recent research to see just how domain analysis can be successfully employed in the design of KOS.

Keywords

Domain Analysis Citation Analysis Knowledge Organization Thematic Cluster Core Ontology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Albrechtsen, Hanne, Pejtersen, Annelise Mark and Cleal, Bryan. 2002. Empirical work analysis of collaborative film indexing. In Bruce, Harry, Raya Fidel, Peter Ingwersen, and Pertti Vakkari, eds., Emerging frameworks and methods: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science. Greenwood Village, CO: Libraries Unlimited, pp. 85–108.Google Scholar
  2. Albrechtsen, Hanne and Pejtersen, Annelise Mark. 2003. Cognitive Work Analysis and work centered design of classification schemes. Knowledge organization 30: 213–27.Google Scholar
  3. De Bellis, Nicola. 2009. Bibliometrics and citation analysis: from the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow.Google Scholar
  4. Hartel, Jenna. (2003). The serious leisure frontier in library and information science: hobby domains. Knowledge organization 30: 228–38.Google Scholar
  5. Hartel, Jenna. 2010. Managing documents at home for serious leisure: a case study of the hobby of gourmet cooking. Journal of documentation 66: 847–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hjørland, Birger. 2002. Domain analysis in information science: eleven approaches – traditional as well as innovative. Journal of documentation 58: 422–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. McCain, Katherine W. 1990. Mapping authors in intellectual space: a technical overview. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 41: 433–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mai, Jens-Erik. 2008. Design and construction of controlled vocabularies: analysis of actors, domain, and constraints. Knowledge organization 35(1), 16–29.Google Scholar
  9. Marchese, Christine. 2012. Impact of organizational environment on knowledge representation and use: cognitive work analysis of a management consulting firm. Ph.D. dissertation. Long Island University.Google Scholar
  10. Marchese, Christine, and Richard P. Smiraglia. 2013. Boundary objects: CWA, an HR Firm, and emergent vocabulary. Knowledge organization 40: 254–59.Google Scholar
  11. Rasmussen, Jens, Annelise Mark Pejtersen and L.P. Goodstein. 1994. Cognitive systems engineering. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Smiraglia, Richard P. 2009a. Modulation and specialization in North American knowledge organization: visualizing pioneers. In Jacob, Elin K. and Barbara Kwasnik, eds., Pioneering North American contributions to knowledge organization, Proceedings of the 2d North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization, June 17–18, 2009, pp. 35–46 http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/2630/
  13. Smiraglia, Richard P. 2009b. Redefining the ‘S’ in ISMIR: visualizing the evolution of a domain. In Rothbauer, Paulette, Siobhan Stevenson, and Nadine Wathen, eds. Mapping the 21st century information landscape: borders, bridges and byways: Proceedings of the 37th Annual CAIS/ACSI Conference, May 28–30, 2009, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. http://www.cais-acsi.ca/proceedings/2009/Smiraglia_2009.pdf
  14. Smiraglia, Richard P. 2012. Epistemology of Domain Analysis. In Smiraglia, Richard P. and Hur-Li Lee eds. 2012. Cultural frames of knowledge. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, pp. 111–24.Google Scholar
  15. Smiraglia 2014a. Meta-analysis: the epistemological dimension of knowledge organization. IRIS Revista de Informação, Memória e Tecnologia. forthcoming.Google Scholar
  16. Smiraglia 2014b. II Congresso Brasileiro em Representação e Organização do Conhecimento: Knowledge Organization in Rio 2013—An Editorial. Knowledge organization 42: 105–12.Google Scholar
  17. Tennis, Joseph T. 2002. Subject ontogeny: subject access through time and the dimensionality of classification. In María José Lopez-Huertas, ed. Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: integration of knowledge across boundaries: Proceedings of the Seventh International ISKO Conference, Granada, 10–13 July 2002. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, pp. 54–59.Google Scholar
  18. Tennis, Joseph T. 2003. Two axes of domains for domain analysis. Knowledge organization 30: 191–5.Google Scholar
  19. Tennis, Joseph T. 2007. Scheme versioning in the semantic web. Cataloging & classification quarterly 43 no. 3: 85–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard P. Smiraglia
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Wisconsin-MilwaukeeMilwaukeeUSA

Personalised recommendations