El análisis de dominio como perspectiva teórico-metodológica en la organización del conocimiento: un análisis de aspectos teórico
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26512/rici.v17.n3.2024.53674Palabras clave:
Análisis de dominio, Organización del Conocimiento, Ciencia de la Información, Análisis de contenidoResumen
El análisis de dominio (DA) permite identificar y analizar conocimientos significativos en un campo de conocimiento (tendencias, patrones, procesos, agentes y sus relaciones), constituyendo una importante fuente metodológica para la Organización del Conocimiento (CO) en el campo de la Ciencia de la Información. Esto presupone una interpretación, que sólo puede aplicarse y comprenderse en un contexto determinado, porque los dominios tienen su propio sistema para crear y estructurar nuevos conocimientos, teorías y metodologías. Con el objetivo de analizar la literatura internacional producida en inglés sobre cuestiones teóricas del DA en el contexto del CO, utiliza la Metodología de Análisis de Contenido para categorizarla y sistematizarla con el fin de representar una perspectiva teórico-metodológica para el área. Los Resultados resaltaron aspectos relacionados con: Orígenes, Definición, Naturaleza, Objeto, Importancia/ Aportes/ Efectos, Enfoques, Paradigmas, Parámetros/ Ejes, Etapas/ Fuentes/ Dimensiones, Posturas Epistémicas, Carácter Interdisciplinario y Teorías/Disciplinas de Apoyo, que condujeron a la conclusión de que el DA ocupa una posición central en el CO, brindándole un marco teórico-metodológico para el desarrollo de procesos, la construcción y aplicación de instrumentos y la generación de productos desde una perspectiva sociocultural, en el tiempo y el espacio y, hoy en día, con el desafío del conocimiento multi, inter y transdisciplinario, que requerirá algunas reformulaciones teóricas.
Descargas
Citas
ABRAHAMSEN, K. T. Indexing of musical genres. Knowledge Organization, v. 30, n. 3/4, p. 144-169, 2003.
ALBRECHTSEN, H. This is Not Domain Analysis. Knowledge Organization, v. 42, n. 8, p. 557-561, 2015.
ALBRECHTSEN, H., PEJTERSEN, A. M. Cognitive work analysis and work centered design of classification schemes. Knowledge Organization, v. 30, n. 3/4, p.213-227, 2003.
ALMEIDA, C. C.; FUJITA, M. S. L.; REIS, D. M. Peircean semiotics and subject indexing: contributions of speculative grammar and pure logic. Knowledge Organization, v. 40, n. 4, p. 225-241, 2013.
ARANGO, G.; PRIETO-DIAZ, R. and overview: domain analysis concepts and research directions. In Prieto-Diaz, R.; Arango, G., (Eds.) Domain analysis and software systems modeling. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, 1991, p. 9-26.
BARDIN, L. L´analyse de contenu. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2013.
BARITÉ, M. Diccionario de Organización del Conocimiento: Classificación, indización, Terminología. 5. ed. Montevideo: PRODIC, 2013.
BARITÉ, M. Organizacion del conocimiento: un nuevo marco teorico-conceptual en bibliotecologia y documentacion. In: Carrara, K. (Ed.). Educação, universidade e pesquisa. Marília : Unesp, FAPESP, 2001. p. 35-60.
BARITÉ, M. Terminología de urgencia y garantías para la representación temática: elementos para el análisis de dominios de emergencia súbita (DES). Informação & Informação, v. 25, n. 3, 2020.
BARITÉ, M.; RAUCH, M. Terminological studies as domain analysis: a critical exploration. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: research trends, v. 16, e02140, 2022.
BEGHTOL, C. Universal concepts, cultural warrant, and cultural hospitality. In: LÓPEZ-HUERTAS, M.J. (ed.). Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the first century.: integration of knowledge across boundaries. Wurzburg: Ergon, 2002b. p. 45-49.
BEGHTOL, C. A proposed ethical warrant for global knowledge representation and organization systems. Journal of Documentation, v. 58, n.5, p.507-532, 2002.
BEGHTOL, C. Domain analysis, literary warrant, and consensus: the case of fiction studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v. 46, n. 1, p. 30-44, 1995.
BEGHTOL, C. Ethical decision-making for knowledge representation and organization systems for global use. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 56, n. 9, p. 903-912, 2005.
BERMAN, S. Prejudices and antipathies: a tract of Library of Congress Subjects Headings concerning people. Metuchen: Scarecrow Press, 1971.
BLEICHER, J. Contemporary hermeneutics: hermeneutics as method, philosophy and critique. New York: Routledge, 1980.
BLISS, H. E. The Organization of Knowledge and the System of the Sciences. New York: Henry Holt, 1929.
BLISS, H. E. The Organization of Knowledge in Libraries and the Subject Approach to Books. New York: Henry Holt, 1933.
BUDD, J. An epistemological foundation for library and information science. Library Quartely, v. 65, n. 3, p. 295-318, 1995.
BUFREM, L. S.; GABRIEL JUNIOR, R. F.; OLIVEIRA, E. F. T. Dialogues between sociological studies and information science in Brazil: domain analysis. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: research trends, v. 16, e02154, 2022.
CAMPBELL, D. G. et al. The Terminological Polyhedron in LGBTQ Terminology: Self-Naming as a Power to Empower in Knowledge Organization. Knowledge Organization. Wurzburg: Ergon, v. 44, n. 8, p. 586-591, 2017.
CAMPBELL, D. G. Queer Theory and the Creation of Contextualized Subject Access Tools for Gay and Lesbian Communities. Knowledge Organization, n. 27, v. 3, p. 122-131, 2000.
CAPONE, V. L. P. B.; CORDEIRO, R. I. N. Domain analysis, discourse community and literary and semantic warrants: a study of the Brazilian rural landscape. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: research trends, v. 16, e02136, 2022.
CHAUDHRY, A.S., LING, G.H. Building taxonomies using organizational resources: A case of business consulting environment. Knowledge Organization, v. 32, n. 1, p. 25-46, 2005.
CHAUDHRY, A.S., LING, G.H. Building taxonomies using organizational resources : a case of business consulting environment. Knowledge Organization, v. 32, n.1 , p. 25-46, 2005.
CHIU, T.-H. Attributes and Factors Affecting the Organization of Knowledge Resources: A Case Study of the Library and Information Service Industry in Taiwan. Knowledge Organization, v. 32, n. 3, p. 128-134, 2005.
CRANE, D. Invisible colleges: diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972.
DANUELLO, J. C. Produção científica docente em tratamento temático da informação no Brasil: uma abordagem métrica como subsídio para a análise do domínio. Marília: Unesp, 2007. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciência da Informação).
DEOKATTEY, S. ; NEELAMEGHAN, A.; KUMAR,V. A Method for Developing a Domain Ontology: A Case Study for a Multidisciplinary Subject. Knowledge Organization, v. 37, n. 3, p. 173-184, 2010.
EVANGELISTA, I. V.; GRÁCIO, M. C. C.; GUIMARÃES, J. A. C. The Concepts of Domain, Discourse Community and Epistemic Community affinities and specificities. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: research trends, v. 16, e02138, 2022.
EVANGELISTA, I.V. et al. Domain analysis of the literature on COVID-19 in Information Science’s national context. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: Research trends, v. 16, Dossiê Análise de Domínio, 2022, e02137. DOI: 10.36311/1981-1640.2022.v16.e02137
GARCIA GUTIERREZ, A. Knowledge organization from a “culture of the border”: towards a transcultural ethics of mediation. In: In: LÓPEZ-HUERTAS, M.J. (ed.). Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the first century.: integration of knowledge across boundaries. Wurzburg; Ergon, 2002. p. 516-522.
GAZAN, R. Metadata as a realm of translation. Knowledge Organization, v. 30, n. 3/4, p. 182-190, 2003.
GHENO, T. C. Análise de Domínio: um estudo das publicações científicas brasileiras. Orientadora: Marisa Brascher. 2017. 83 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciência da Informação) – Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, 2017.
GRANT, M. J.; BOOTH, Andrew. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information Library Jornal, v. 26, n. 1, p. 91-108, 2009.
GUIMARÃES, J. A. C Análise de domínio como perspectiva metodológica em organização da informação. Ciência da Informação, v. 41, n. 1, p. 13-21, 2014.
GUIMARÃES, J. A. C.; DODEBEI, V. Desafios e perspectivas científicas para a organização e representação do conhecimento na atualidade. Marília: ISKO-Brasil : FUNDEPE, 2012. 285p. Disponível: https://isko.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Proceedings-ISKO-Brasil-2011.
GUIMARÃES, J. A. C.; TOGNOLI, N. B. Provenance as a domain analysis approach in archival knowledge organization. Knowledge Organization, v. 42, n. 8, p. 562-569, 2015.
GUIMARÃES, J.A.C. et al. Ethics in the knowledge organization environment: an overview of values and problems in the LIS literature. In: ARSENAULT, C.; TENNIS, J. T.. (Org.). Culture and identity in knowledge organization. Würzburg: Ergon, 2008, v. , p. 361-366.
GUIMARÃES, J.A.C.. Ciência da Informação, Arquivologia e Biblioteconomia: em busca do necessário diálogo entre o universo teórico e os fazeres profissionais. In: FUJITA, M. S. L.; GUIMARAES, J. A. C.. (Org.). Ensino e Pesquisa em Biblioteconomia no Brasil: a emergência de um novo olhar. São Paulo: Cultura Academica, 2008, p. 33-44.
HAAS, P. M. Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, v. 46, n. 1, p. 01-35, 1992.
HÅKANSON, L. The firm as an epistemic community: the knowledge-based view revisited. Industrial and Corporate Change, v. 19, n. 6, p. 1801-1828, 2010.
HARTEL, J. The Serious Leisure Frontier in Library and Information Science: Hobby Domains. Knowledge Organization, v. 30, n. 3/4, p. 228-238, 2003.
HJORLAND, B. Concept theory. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 60, n. 9, p. 1519-1536, 2009.
HJØRLAND, B. Domain analysis in information science: eleven approaches-traditional as well as innovative. Journal of Documentation, v. 58, n. 4, p. 422-462, 2002.
HJØRLAND, B. Domain Analysis. In: ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization. 2017. http://www.isko.org/cyclo/domain_analysis
HJØRLAND, B. Domain analysis: a socio-cognitive orientation for Information Science research. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 30, n. 3, 2004.
HJØRLAND, B. What is knowledge organization. Knowledge organization, v. 35, n. 2–3, p. 86-101, 2008.
HJØRLAND, B. Domain Analysis: A Socio-Cognitive Orientation for Information Science Research. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 30, n. 3, p.17–21, 2003.
HJØRLAND, B.; ALBRECHTSEN, H. Toward a new horizon in information science: domain-analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v. 46, n. 6, p. 400-425, 1995.
HJØRLAND, B.; HARTEL, J. Afterword: Ontological, Epistemological and Sociological Dimensions of Domains. Knowledge Organization, v. 30, n. 3/4, p. 239-245, 2003b.
HJØRLAND, B.; HARTEL, J. Introduction to a Special Issue on Domain Analysis. Knowledge Organization, v. 30, n. 3/4, p. 125-127, 2003a.
KAIPAINEN, M.; HAUTAMAKI, A. Epistemic Pluralism and Multi-Perspective Knowledge Organization: Explorative Conceptualization of Topical Content Domains. Knowledge Organization, v. 38, n. 6, p. 503-514, 2011.
KAIPAINEN, M.; HAUTAMAKI, A. Epistemic Pluralism and Multi-Perspective Knowledge Organization: Explorative Conceptualization of Topical Content Domains. Knowledge Organization, v. 38, n. 6, p. 503-514, 2011.
KERR, E. S. Ketib: um processo de representação de informações para textos complexos. 2003. Dissertação (Mestrado Profissional em Ciência da Computação)- Instituto de Computação, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, 2003. Disponível em: https://repositorio.unicamp.br/Acervo/Detalhe/297456
KHALIDI, M. A. Natural categories and human kinds: classification in the natural and social sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
KNORR-CETINA, K. Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press, 1999.
LLORENS, J. et al. Automatic generation of domain representations using thesaurus structures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 55, n. 10, p. 846-858, 2004.
LÓPEZ-HUERTAS, M.J. Domain Analysis for Interdisciplinary Knowledge Domains. Knowledge Organization, v. 42, n. 15, p. 570-580, 2015.
MAI, J.-E. Analysis in indexing: Document and domain centered approaches. Information processing and management, n. 41, p. 599-611, 2005.
MAI, J-E. Semiotics and Indexing: An Analysis of the Subject Indexing Process. Journal of Documentation, v. 57, n. 5, p. 591-622, 2001.
MARTELETO, R. M.; CARVALHO, L. dos S. Health as a Knowledge Domain and Social Field: Dialogues with Birger Hjørland and Pierre Bourdieu. Knowledge Organization, v. 42, n. 8, p. 581-590, 2015.
MARTELETO, R.M.. Science, knowledge and society in times of pandemic: info-communication configurations in the health field. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: Research trends. v. 16, Dossier Domain Analysis, 2022, e02139. DOI:10.36311/1981-1640.2022.v16.e02139
MCCAIN, R. Reusable Software Component Construction: A Product-Oriented Paradigm. In: Proceedings of the 5th AIAA/ACM/NASA/IEEE Computers in Aerospace Conference, Long Beach, Cal., Oct. 1985. p. 125–135.
MERTON, R. K. The Matthew effect in science, ii: cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. Isis, v. 79, n. 4, p. 606-623, 1988.
MEYER, M.; MOLINEUX-HODGSON, S. Introduction: the dynamics of epistemic communities. Sociological Research Online, v. 15, n.2, p.109-115, 2010.
MUSTAFA EL HADI, W.; ELBEELY, S.H.; ABDELWAHAB, S.A. How Racism Leads to Epistemicide or Murder of Knowledge? A Case Study of Tangible and Cultural Heritage of the Nile Valley in Sudan . Knowledge Organization, v. 50, n. 6, p. 391-406, 2023.
NASCIMENTO, D. M. A abordagem sócio-cultural da informação. Informação & Sociedade: Estudos, v. 16, n. 2, 2006.
NEIGHBORS, J. M. Software Construction Using Components. University of California, Irvine, 1981. (Doctoral Dissertation). Department of Information and Computer Science.
OLSON, H. A. The power to name: locating the limits of subject representation in libraries. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2002.
ØROM, A. Knowledge organization in the domain of art studies. Knowledge Organization, v. 30, n. ¾, p. 128-143, 2003.
PAISLEY, W. The role of invisible colleges in scientific information transfer. Educational Researcher, v. 1, n. 4, p. 5-8+18, 1972.
PRIETO-DIAZ, R. Domain Analysis for Reusability. In: Proceedings of COMPSAC'87, Tokyo, 23-29 Oct. 1987.
PRIETO-DIAZ, R. Domain analysis: an introduction. Software Engineering Notes, v. 15, n. 2, p. 47-54, 1990.
RAGHAVAN, K.S.; APOORVA, K.H.; JIVRAJANI, A. Information retrieval as a domain: visualizations based on two data sets. Knowledge Organization, v. 42, n. 8, p. 591-601, 2015.
RITZER, G. Metatheorizing in Sociology. Lexington: Lexington Books, 1991.
ROBINSON, L. Information Science: communication chain and domain analysis. Journal of Documentation, v. 65, n. 4, p. 578-591, 2009.
SHAPERE, D. Scientific theories and their domains. In: Suppe, F. (Ed.). The structure of scientific theories. 2md ed. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1977, p. 518-565.
SILVA, A. G. M.; CORUJO, L. M. N.; RIAS-REVEZ, J. M. Domain analysis as an approach to the classification of cinematographic documents. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: research trends, v. 16, e02141, 2022.
SILVA, C. G. T.; BAX, M. P. Domain Analysis to assess the sustainability of construction projects using semantic technologies. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: research trends, v. 16, e02144, 2022.
SMIRAGLIA, R. P. The domain analysis clinic: a singular advance in domain analysis for knowledge organization. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: research trends, v.16, e02160, 2022.
SMIRAGLIA, R. P. ; LÓPEZ-HUERTAS, M. J. Domain analysis redux: an introduction. Knowledge Organization, v. 42, n. 8, p. 553-556, 2015.
SMIRAGLIA, R. P. Domain analysis of domain analysis for knowledge organization: observations on an emergent methodological cluster. Knowledge Organization, v. 42, n. 8, p. 602-611, 2015.
SMIRAGLIA, R. P. Domain coherence within Knowledge Organization: people, interacting theoretically, across geopolitical and cultural boundaries. In: MCKENZIE, P.; JOHNSON, K.; STEVENS, S. (ed.). Exploring interactions of people, places and information, Proceedings of the 39th Annual CAIS/ACSI Conference, University of New Brunswick, Canada, jun. 2011.
SMIRAGLIA, R. P. Epistemology of domain analysis. In: SMIRAGLIA, R.P.; LEE, H.-L. (Eds.) Cultural frames of knowledge. Wurzburg: Ergon, 2012, p. 111-124.
SMIRAGLIA, R. P. The elements of knowledge organization. Springer International Publishing, 2014.
SMIRAGLIA, R. P. The Epistemological Dimension of Knowledge Organization. Dobedei, V.; Guimarães, J.A.C. (Eds.). Complexidade e organização do conhecimento: desafios de nosso século. Marília: ISKO-Brasil; Fundepe, 2013. p. 17-25.
SOLLA PRICE, D. J de.; BEAVER, D. Collaboration in an invisible college. American Psychologist, v. 21, n. 11, 1011–1018, 1966.
SOLLA PRICE, D. J. de. Little Science, Big Science. New York: Columbia University Press, 1963.
SUNDIN, O. Towards an understanding of symbolic aspects of professional information: an analysis of the nursing knowledge domain. Knowledge Organization, v. 30, n. 3/4, p. 170-181, 2003.
SVENONIUS, E. The epistemological foundations of knowledge representations. Library trends, v.52, n. 3, p. 571–587, 2004.
SWALES, J. The concept of discourse community. In: Genre analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Boston: Cambridge University Press, 1990. p. 466-480.
TENNIS, J. T. Epistemology, theory, and methodology in knowledge organization: toward a classification, metatheory, and research framework. Knowledge Organization, v. 35, n. 2/3, p. 102-112, 2008.
TENNIS, J. T. Two axes of domain analysis. Knowledge Organization, v. 30, n. 3/4, p. 191-195, 2003.
TENNIS, J. T. What does a domain analysis look like in form, function, and genre? Brazilian Journal of Information Science, v. 6, n.1, 2012.
THELLEFSEN, M., THELLEFSEN, T.; SØRENSEN, B. A pragmatic semiotic perspective on the concept of information need and its relevance for knowledge organization. Knowledge Organization, v.4, n. 40, p. 213-224, 2013.
THELLEFSEN, T.I.; THELLEFSEN, M. M. Pragmatic semiotics and knowledge organization. Knowledge Organization, v. 31, n. 2, p. 177-187, 2004.
TRIQUES, M.L.; ALBUQUERQUE, A.C.; ARAKAKI, A.C.S. Domain analysis of curatorial activities in Brazilian information science. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: research trends, v. 16, e02157, 2022.
VICKERY, B. Metatheory and information Science. Journal of Documentation, v. 53, n. 5, p. 457-476, 1997.
ZINS, C.; GUTTMAN, D. Domain analysis of social work. Knowledge Organization, v. 30, n. 3/4, p. 196-212, 2003.
ZUCCALA, A. Modeling the invisible college. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v.5 7, n. 2, p. 152-168, 2006.
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2024 José Augusto Chaves Guimarães
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Aviso de derechos de autor/a
Los autores que publican en esta revista concuerdan con los siguientes términos:
Los autores mantiene los derechos autorales y conceden a la revista el derecho de primera publicación, con el trabajo simultáneamente licenciado bajo Creative Commons - Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0), permitiendo el reparto del trabajo con reconocimiento de la autoría y la publicación inicial en esta revista. Los autores tienen autorización para asumir contratos adicionales separadamente, para la distribución no-exclusiva de la versión del trabajo publicada en esta revista (p.ej.: distribuir en el repositório institucional o publicar como capítulo de libro), con reconocimiento de la autoría y la publicación inicial en esta revista. Los autores tienen permiso y son apoyados a distribuir su trabajo online (p.ej.: en repositórios institucionales o en su página personal) a cualquier punto antes o durante el proceso editorial, ya que eso puede generar efectos productivos, así como aumentar el impacto y la citación del trabajo publicado.
