Articlegreen2003

Two Axes of Domains for Domain Analysis

61 citations0/0 files storedResearchWorks at the University of Washington (University of Washington)

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Qualitative Research Methods and Applications Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration Business Strategies and Management Research

Abstract

This paper adds two analytical devices to domain analysis. It claims that in order for domain analysis to work cumulatively transferable definitions of domains must be written. In order to establish this definition the author provides two axes to consider: Areas of Modulation and Degrees of Specialization. These axes may serve as analytical devices for the domain analyst to delineate what is being studied and what is not being studied in a domain analysis. 1.1. BACKGROUND -- WAYS OF DEFINING A DOMAIN Domain analysis is done in many ways and by many people in Information Science. But what is domain analysis and what is a domain? The act of analyzing a domain seems easier to define than its object of investigation -- the domain itself. As a consequence what constitutes a domain both for domain analysis (Hjrland, 2002) and for the various researchers in this field stands as an open research question. This is evident from the great deal of activity that goes into domain analysis and its corollary pursuits. The academic study of domains must answer this basic question -- what is a domain? Hjrland and Albrechtsen define domains as "thought or discourse communities, which are parts of society's division of labor" (Hjrland and Albrechtsen, 1995, p. 400). A domain can be seen, according to these authors, as a type of discourse community. Thus, the term domain is not the same as discourse community. They go on to review the literature that uses the concept of domain under many terms. They cite "speciality/discipline/domain/environment" (Hjrland and Albrechtsen, 1995 p. 401) as the unit of study. As a consequence, the definition and its boundaries are muddied. It can be noted that for Hjrland (1995, 1998, 2002) , it seems more important to define the domain analytic paradigm tha...

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 61 citations exist upstream.

References

1998The Concept of “Ba”: Building a Foundation for Knowledge Creation 2002Complex acts of knowing: paradox and descriptive self‐awareness 2002Organizational knowledge and communities of practice 1968Two Kinds of Power 2005Psychometric evaluation of the restructured clinical scales of the MMPI-2.2001The Concept of Situation in Information Science.

Cited by

2013Two Kinds of Power: Insight Into The Legacy Of Patrick Wilson 2014The Network Pattern of Journal Knowledge Transfer in Library and Information Science in China

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.