Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Publishing partners
  4. Facet Publishing
  5. Content Listing

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

5856 results in Facet Publishing

Page 241 of 293

  • 11 - ‘All the things we cannot articulate’: colonial leprosy archives and community commemoration

  • from Part 5 - Building a community archive
    • By Ricardo L. Punzalan, assistant professor at the School of Library and Information Studies at the University of the Philippines.
  • Edited by Jeannette A. Bastian, Ben Alexander
  • Book:
    Community Archives
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    01 November 2009, pp 197-220

  • Summary

    Are there cases in which records contain practical information, but in which the real significance is larger and more symbolic? O'Toole, 1993, 238

    Introduction

    In recent years archival scholars have pondered the complex association between archives and collective memory (see, for example, Taylor, 1982; Foote, 1990; Brown and Davis-Brown, 1998; Brothman, 2001; Craig, 2002; Schwartz and Cook, 2002; Jimerson, 2003; Piggott, 2005a; Piggott, 2005b; Rosen, 2008). Some have examined this relationship in a critical fashion, emphasizing the inherent problems of the claim while dispelling the almost automatic and often unexamined assertion of their synonymity. Calls for more nuanced characterization of archives’ relationship with memory and their communities have gained much attention. Assertions of the archives–memory relationship vary from the critical – ‘connecting archives with memory is, of course, in one important respect, misleading’ (Harris, 2001, 5; Craig, 2002, 278) – to the convinced – ‘Memory, like history, is rooted in archives. Without archives, memory falters, knowledge of accomplishments fades, pride in a shared past dissipates’ (Schwartz and Cook, 2002, 18). The various articulations of the problematic contexts and apparent limitations of records, archives and archivists either as evidence, sources, inspiration, shapers or mediators of memory prompt further reflection. They also underscore the need to find more evidence of how archives (as both social institutions and collections of records), archivists and record-keeping functions might figure in the construction and remembrance of the past by societies, groups or communities.

    A few terms have been suggested in the attempt to illustrate this association. Among these are Laura Millar's (2006) ‘touchstones’ which refers to how records function to trigger memories and the recollection of past events. Margaret Hedstrom uses ‘interface’, a term often associated with computing technology, to describe the capacity of archivists as intermediaries between documents and their users that ‘enable, but also constrain, the interpretation of the past’ (Hedstrom, 2002, 22). Similarly, Robert McIntosh puts forward the notion of archival ‘authorship’ to emphasize the mediating role of archivists in memory creation as they ‘practice a politics of memory, a determination of what will be remembered’ (McIntosh, 1998, 18). Ref lecting on the archival experiences in South Africa in its transition from apartheid to democracy, Verne Harris concludes that records comprise mere ‘archival slivers’ of the events and processes that they are supposed to embody and reveal.

  • Preface

  • Sheila Pantry, Peter Griffiths
  • Book:
    How to Give Your Users the LIS Services They Want
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    01 November 2009, pp ix-x

  • Summary

    THIS BOOK AIMS to help library and information services (LIS) workers at all levels and in all industry sectors in the UK and globally to survive and thrive in the 21st century. ‘All levels’ include those in careers spread across all sectors of library and information work (such as local government, private or ‘special’ and academic libraries) and electronic information related posts such as webmasters and knowledge managers. We intend that – like our other titles – this book will be useful to an international audience.

    We believe that there is still a lot of potential to reach users through changing methods of communication, and electronic information workers and digital librarians have some more work to do. You can track people through websites, but it is more difficult to understand why they navigate the way they do as well as seeing where they navigate.

    Keep in touch with any new user or user group and track their behaviour to see if new patterns of behaviour are forming. Watch what other industries such as publishing are doing to make their users come to them. Expand your activities to cover online networks, digital libraries and other forms of social networking.

    We encourage all information workers to constantly think ‘out of the LIS box’ – looking at your LIS with new eyes and new knowledge at all times, and find out how to stay ahead of the game.

  • 3 - What is the current knowledge about your users and their needs – is it really predictable?

  • Sheila Pantry, Peter Griffiths
  • Book:
    How to Give Your Users the LIS Services They Want
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    01 November 2009, pp 33-44

  • Summary

    In this chapter we look at:

  • ➡ discovering your users – who are they and where are they?

  • ➡ identifying and allocating the different categories of user, e.g. students, lecturers, and business, technical, scientific and medical users

  • ➡ levels of user expectations

  • ➡ whether you can predict what your users want.

    • The task of the LIS manager is to achieve defined objectives. A simplistic statement, perhaps, but it is rare that such objectives are set out in any terms other than the broadest – for example, ‘to meet the needs of its users’. In fact, the definition of objectives in any service organization is likely to be an iterative process that adds precision to and takes account of emerging requirements such as those produced by emerging technologies. But however these changing requirements are handled, the explicit responsibility to meet users’ needs requires the manager and his or her staff to examine user behaviour as a first step to determining policy.

    Who and where are your users?

    The introduction of electronic services widens the scope of the customer base for any LIS. The information user is no longer obliged to visit the service to interact directly, for example by browsing the shelves (which as digital resources become the norm house a rapidly diminishing proportion of the library's total stock) or meeting the staff face to face. The customers of any LIS are likely to be anyone who has access to a computer or other electronic terminal with the right software to gain entry to the remote information system and who is not excluded by your access controls.

    The traditional pattern of service has been based on separate services each with a target audience, often defined by membership of another group. Thus in a single city, a public library, university library and various special libraries may have co-existed for many years. Eligibility to use the services of each would be defined by referring to certain characteristics of the users, such as where they live or work (public library), where they are educated (school or university library) or where they work (special libraries). Although in some cases permission to use another library could be created through co-operative schemes like the UK's SINTO or HATRICS, generally eligibility and membership were clearly defined and usually exclusive.

  • 10 - Co-creation of the Grateful Dead sound archive: control, access and curation communities

  • from Part 4 - Online communities: how technology brings communities and their records together
    • By David A. Wallace, Lecturer IV and Research Investigator at the School of Information, University of Michigan
  • Edited by Jeannette A. Bastian, Ben Alexander
  • Book:
    Community Archives
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    01 November 2009, pp 169-194

  • Summary

    A lot of what we are selling is community. That is our main product …

    Band lyricist John Perry Barlow, quoted in McNally, 2002, 386

    Introduction

    The Grateful Dead (‘Dead’) represents a 30-year travelling experiment in improvisational music and audience-band co-creation. Between 1965 and 1995 the band performed over 36,000 songs during 2317 concerts in nearly 300 cities. Beyond band member commitment, the Dead's longevity and yield also resulted from the loyalty of an ever-expanding base of supporters (‘Deadheads’) who symbiotically fuelled the band's renowned creative process. Hand in glove with this performative arc was the creation of ‘two’ complementary archives of enormous size, scope and distribution: the band's official recordings, and a much larger body of permitted and illicit in-concert audience recordings. Over the decades the band was forced to evolve its position on audience recordings. Initial disinterest and hostility gave way to a tentative acceptance, and finally to the sanctioning of an ‘Official Taper's Section’ (OTS) in 1984.

    Early audience recordings were made on reel-to-reel tapes and traded hand-to-hand and through the postal system. These humble beginnings sparked ever-expanding systems of reproduction through sharing that occurred alongside the shift from analogue to digital to network technologies. All contributed to an aggregated-disaggregated taper and trader community that was in full flourish when the band disintegrated in 1995 with the death of co-founder Jerry Garcia. The rise of the internet and the world wide web caused and continues to cause seismic shifts in the scale, availability, reproduction and curation of the band's formal and informal sound archive. Nearly 15 years after the band's demise, the ongoing voluntary efforts of the taping and trading community ensure unprecedented access to performances and their metadata.

    This chapter charts the history and continuing evolution of the taping and trading community, now in its fifth decade. It briefly describes the band's performance philosophy and the taping and trading sub-culture it triggered within the broader Deadhead community. A discussion of the band's institutional audio recording and archiving is followed by a more detailed analysis of the taping and trading community and its practices. This leads to an examination of the revolutionary impact of the internet and the world wide web on trading, documentation and curation.

  • Appendix 2 - Where to go for further information

  • Sheila Pantry, Peter Griffiths
  • Book:
    How to Give Your Users the LIS Services They Want
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    01 November 2009, pp 173-186

  • Summary

    Professional bodies

    The following list includes brief descriptions, contact details and other information about a range of national and international professional bodies that can help to provide you with relevant news and research that will keep your knowledge and skills up to date. A number of them provide access to their professional resources and publishing, either selectively or by providing free access after a period of time (typically 2–3 years after publication). Members may have additional access, for example, CILIP members are provided with electronic access to a range of professional journals through Emerald, and to two refereed journals, which are hosted by Sage.

    UK

    Aslib, The Association for Information Management

    207 Davina House

    137–49 Goswell Road

    London EC1V 7ET

    Tel: +44 (0) 20 7253 3349

    Fax: +44 (0) 20 7490 0577

    E-mail: aslib@aslib.com

    www.aslib.co.uk

    Offers corporate, affiliate and student membership and group and branches that form an international network of information professionals in every sector of the information world.

    Publications include: Journal of Documentation, Aslib Proceedings, Program (available through the Emerald aggregation platform www.emeraldinsight.com), Managing Information (www. managinginformation.com).

    Offers Aslib Management Knowledge Resource, a tailored version of Emerald ManagementFirst website designed to meet the needs of Aslib's corporate members.

    British Library (BL)

    St Pancras

    96 Euston Road

    London NW1 2DB

    Tel: +44 (0) 870 444 1500

    E-mail: Customer-Services@bl.uk

    www.bl.uk

    The British Library (BL)

    Boston Spa

    Wetherby

    West Yorkshire LS23 7BQ

    British Library Newspapers

    Colindale Avenue

    London NW9 5HE

    There is an extensive list of specific contact details at www.bl.uk/aboutus/contact/index.html.

  • Appendix 1 - Reading list and references

  • Sheila Pantry, Peter Griffiths
  • Book:
    How to Give Your Users the LIS Services They Want
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    01 November 2009, pp 137-172

  • Summary

    Chapter 1 Why this book?

    CIBER (2008) Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future [executive summary], University College London, www.ucl.ac.uk/infostudies/research/ciber/downloads/ggexecutive. pdf.

    Nicholas, D. and Rowlands, I. (eds) (2008) Digital Consumers: reshaping the information professions, Facet Publishing, ISBN 978-1-85604-651-0.

    OCLC (2006) College Students’ Perceptions of the Libraries and Information Resources: a report to the OCLC membership, Online Computer Library Center.

    Shirky, C. (2008) Every Piece of Information is a Latent Community: Online 2008, address. Given 2 December 2008 at Olympia Grand Hall, London, UK, http://theshiftedlibrarian.com/archives/2008/12/02/clay-shirkeyonline-information-keynote.html.

    Verlejs, J. (1988) Information Seeking: basing services on users’ behaviour, McFarland, ISBN 978-0-89950254-0.

    Chapter 2 Understanding users – the what, why, where, when, how and who

    Bawden, D. and Vilar, P. (2006) Digital Libraries: to meet or manage user expectations, Aslib Proceedings, 58 (4), 346–54.

    Björneborn, L. (2006) Libraries as Integrative Interfaces –tracking users’ information interaction in context, Royal School of Library and Information Science, Copenhagen, Denmark, Working paper, version 3.

    This working paper outlines an ongoing exploratory research project concerned with how users interact with the physical interior of public libraries.

    CIBER (2008) Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future [executive summary], University College London, www.ucl.ac.uk/infostudies/research/ciber/downloads/ggexecutive.pdf.

    Curzon, S. C. (2006) Managing Change: a how-to-do-it manual for librarians, Facet Publishing, ISBN 978-1-85604-601-5.

    Dempsey, L. (2006) The (Digital) Library Environment: ten years after, Ariadne, 46 (February), www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue46/dempsey/. Dempsey, L. (2008, 2009) Always On: libraries in a world of permanent connectivity. In Needham, G. and Ally, M. (eds) M-libraries: libraries on the move to provide virtual access, Facet Publishing, xxv–lii; slightly revised version published in First Monday, 14 (1–5), January 2009, http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2291/2070.

    Dorner, D. G. and Gorman, G. E. (2010) Analysing What Your Users Need: a guide for librarians and information managers, Facet Publishing, ISBN 978-1-85604-484-4 (in press).

    Ealing Library and Information Service (1995) [Evidence to the DNH Public Library Review], http://panizzi.shef.ac.uk/library-review/london/ealin.html.

    Frand, J. (2006) The Information Mindset: changes in students and implications for higher education, EDUCAUSE Review, March/April, 15.

    Hyams, E. (2001) Nursing the Evidence: The Royal College of Nursing information strategy, Library Association Record, 103 (12), 747–9.

  • 6 - The sociological turn in information science

  • Edited by Alan Gilchrist
  • Book:
    Information Science in Transition
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    30 April 2009, pp 109-128

  • Summary

    Abstract

    This paper explores the history of ‘the social’ in information science. It traces the influence of social scientific thinking on the development of the field's intellectual base. The continuing appropriation of both theoretical and methodological insights from domains such as social studies of science, science and technology studies, and socio-technical systems is discussed.

    Introduction: an inter-discipline?

    I first published in the Journal of Information Science (JIS) in 1980 [1]. My gossamer paper – that was how I described it to the then editor – most certainly did not set the world alight, nor did it languish in the capacious dustbin of the uncited, though, truth be told, it probably deserved such a fate. ‘Some reflections on citation habits in psychology’ was a (very) brief communication containing three references, one of which was to Jack Meadows’ estimable book, Communication in Science [2]. The two other cited works were articles in American Psychologist and Social Studies of Science. It seems appropriate, this being the Ruby anniversary that never was, to take as my starting point that first foray into print with the official organ of the late lamented Institute of Information Scientists (IIS); doubly so, given that it was, in retrospect at least, an early indicator of my long-standing interest in the intersection of information science and social scientific thinking and practice.

    For almost three decades I have been reading and drawing upon the literature of the social and behavioral sciences, specifically sociology of science, science and technology studies (STS) and, more recently, the somewhat amorphous domain of social informatics. By way of illustration, many of the references in both my earliest and most recent books, The Citation Process [3] and The Hand of Science [4], are to monographs and articles sourced from these and cognate fields. It strikes me as inconceivable that the issues which define the sub-fields of information science in which I primarily work – scholarly communication, citation analysis, scientometrics – could have evolved and matured to the extent they have without appropriating insights, both theoretical and methodological, from the social sciences, not least of which is sociology.

  • Preface

  • Edited by Alan Gilchrist
  • Book:
    Information Science in Transition
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    30 April 2009, pp xv-xvi

  • Summary

    Why publish a monograph of papers that have already appeared in journal format? There are two answers to that question: the first is that the previous publication, which constituted a special issue of the Journal of Information Science, was so well received that it was thought to be both useful and permissible to broadcast the contents to a wider readership; and second, but less importantly, those libraries that already subscribe to the Journal may find it convenient to be able to shelve the monograph separately.

    The special issue was first published in 2008 to commemorate the founding of the UK Institute of Information Scientists fifty years previously. Its aim was to review a wide range of topics under the broad banner of information science, showing how the core concepts had evolved to the point where, as Jack Meadows says in his paper, ‘…information science activities developed over the past 50 years have triumphed, but information science as a separate activity may be on the wane. If so, its final epitaph might well be that of Sir Christopher Wren in St Paul's Cathedral: “If you want a monument, look around you”’. In fact, as traditional information science increasingly merges with information technology, the word ‘informatics’ is coming back into fashion and ‘information sciences’ are referred to in the plural. Institutions come and go, but even as the web-dominated information world evolves there is still much to be learnt from the past.

    Information Science in Transition is an exact reproduction of the original papers, and there is only one minor correction to be made. The Editorial stated that Jason Farradane, co-founder of the Institute, was a Polish immigrant. In fact, it was his father who emigrated to England, and Jason was born in Hampstead.

    I should like to record my thanks to Facet Publishing and Helen Carley for producing this publication.

  • 4 - On the history of evaluation in IR

  • Edited by Alan Gilchrist
  • Book:
    Information Science in Transition
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    30 April 2009, pp 63-94

  • Summary

    Abstract

    This paper is a personal take on the history of evaluation experiments in information retrieval. It describes some of the early experiments that were formative in our understanding, and goes on to discuss the current dominance of TREC (the Text REtrieval Conference) and to assess its impact.

    Introduction

    The foundation of the Institute of Information Scientists in the UK in 1958 coincides closely with the beginning of the notion of experimental evaluation of information retrieval systems. Although there had been some earlier attempts, we usually mark the start of the tradition as the Cranfield experiments, which ran from 1958 to 1966. Information retrieval is commonly regarded as a core component of information science, and systematic empirical evaluation of IR systems probably represents the strongest claim that information science can make to being a science in any traditional sense. There is a nice irony here: the founder of the empirical tradition in IR, the Cranfield librarian Cyril Cleverdon, was not at all a supporter of the Institute. But more of this anon.

    As for the present, and despite the concerns of the founders of the Institute, academic information science is now quite closely associated with the former library schools, many of which have adopted titles which include the word ‘information’. However, a lot of current work in IR, theoretical and experimental, takes place elsewhere, mainly in computer science departments, though several other academic domains are represented. It probably comes as a considerable surprise to a current PhD student, working on (say) a machine learning optimization technique applied to search engine ranking, that he or she is in thrall to an experimental tradition founded by a librarian, working with card indexes, a half-century ago.

    Thus the history that is the subject of this paper is not too readily defined in terms of institutional or academic boundaries – or national ones. Despite this, it can be seen as a remarkably coherent development of a set of principles and methods. Like all academic subjects it generates argument and disagreement and heated disputation, but there remains a relatively stable common core, which has, despite its limitations (I will argue), served us well over the last 50 years. Furthermore, while its present international status developed out of a US dominance for a large part of that period, the strength of the UK contribution has been remarkable.

  • 11 - Information policies: yesterday, today, tomorrow

  • Edited by Alan Gilchrist
  • Book:
    Information Science in Transition
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    30 April 2009, pp 249-282

  • Summary

    Abstract

    This article presents a brief history of the development of ideas about national and organizational information policies, from the first establishment of a UK Ministry of Information in the First World War to the present day. The issues and tensions that have characterized attempts to develop and implement policies on the national and organizational scale are discussed, with particular reference to: the power relations between the parties to them; the relative significance accorded to information technology and information content; the transition from formulating policy to acting on it; and the threats to the survival of those policies that get as far as implementation. In conclusion, the contribution to date of information science to the theory and practice of information policies is assessed, and suggestions are offered on directions for future efforts, in the light of the past of this interesting field.

    Introduction

    I have to begin this article with a confession: up till now, I have always avoided writing about national information policies. Over the years, I have read much of what others have written on the subject and admired a good deal of it; but in my own work I have concentrated on trying to help organizations to develop information policies for themselves, by working with them and writing for them. It offers some chance of producing at least some visible effect within a reasonable time, while observation suggests that governments do not take much notice of what information scientists write about national information policies, even on those rare occasions when they actually invite their advice on the subject.

    So when I was invited to contribute a paper on information policies to this special issue, my first inclination was to write only on organizational policies. But when I started re-reading the literature and thinking about the article, it became clear that national information policy was the essential context for organizational policies and strategies, which could not be properly understood without it.

    Tackling the subject I had tried to avoid turned out to be worthwhile, because I began to see a coherent story, with some dominant themes that relate these two aspects of information policy.

  • 10 - The evolution of visual information retrieval

  • Edited by Alan Gilchrist
  • Book:
    Information Science in Transition
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    30 April 2009, pp 221-248

  • Summary

    Abstract

    This paper seeks to provide a brief overview of those developments which have taken the theory and practice of image and video retrieval into the digital age. Drawing on a voluminous literature, the context in which visual information retrieval takes place is followed by a consideration of the conceptual and practical challenges posed by the representation and recovery of visual material on the basis of its semantic content. An historical account of research endeavours in content-based retrieval, directed towards the automation of these operations in digital image scenarios, provides the main thrust of the paper. Finally, a look forwards locates visual information retrieval research within the wider context of content-based multimedia retrieval.

    The context of visual information retrieval

    The retrieval of images or image sequences that are relevant to a query is a long-established activity which has evolved quite remarkably during the last 50 years, from the special preserve of a relatively few professional practitioners to the forefront of research in computer vision and a leading edge domestic application of information technology. This extension of traditional information retrieval activity includes both still and moving images, the former usually characterized in the literature as ‘image retrieval’, the latter as ‘video retrieval’, and the two in combination, sometimes, as ‘visual information retrieval’ [1,2].

    The literature of visual information retrieval has grown at a stupendous rate. To quote Jörgensen, in her landmark text within the field:

    Adjectives such as ‘vast’ are often applied to the various literatures … related to image processing, but even this designation is an understatement [3: p. 199].

    More remarkable still is the fact that almost all of that growth has taken place since the early 1990s, and reflects those technological advances which brought the digital image to the attention of the computer scientist. Greatly increased availability of images via the internet, then via mobile platforms, and most recently as an aspect of the social networking phenomenon, has been said to place us

    on the hinge of an important historical swing back towards to what may be called the primacy of the image [3: p. ix].

  • 5 - The information user: past, present and future

  • Edited by Alan Gilchrist
  • Book:
    Information Science in Transition
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    30 April 2009, pp 95-108

  • Summary

    Abstract

    The emergence of research on various aspects of ‘information behaviour’ is explored and its growth as a subject of academic research is documented. The origin of the field as a potential aid to the development of library and information services is noted, as is the transition from this status to that of a subject for research at PhD level and beyond. The development of the field has thus led to a division between the needs of academia for theoretically grounded work, and the needs of the field of practice for guidance for service development. There is, today, a disconnection between research and practice, to a significant extent: early research was undertaken by practitioners but today academic research dominates the scene. Suggestions are made as to how this disconnection can be repaired.

    Introduction

    The ‘user’ has been of interest in librarianship and information science for much longer than either has existed as a focus for research. Virtually every development in the field has been concerned with making it easier for the user to access documents or information. Thus, the first ‘union catalogue’ in England was devised to make it easier for the scholar monks to locate wanted manuscripts in monastery libraries:

    In the late thirteenth century a union catalog was constructed, which included a unified list of holdings of English monastery libraries, ‘Registrum librorum Angliae’… [1: p. 126].

    Charles Ami Cutter's ‘shelf marks’ [2] were designed to make easier the location of a specific book on the shelf, ‘open access’ [see, e.g., 3] was devised to make it easier for the library visitor to get the book he or she wanted without undue delay, Kaiser's ‘systematic indexing’ [4] was devised to enable the rapid location of wanted pieces of information, and so on throughout the history of libraries and information centres.

    It took some time, however, before the ‘user’ as a living, breathing person became the focus of attention in information research. Initially, the focus was on the system used, how it was used and by whom. Thus, the first library surveys were designed to discover what categories of persons used libraries, not what those persons did when they were in a library nor what life or work issues were behind their library use.

Page 241 of 293