Concept theory

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Concept theory. / Hjørland, Birger.

In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 60, No. 8, 2009, p. 1519-1536.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Hjørland, B 2009, 'Concept theory', Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 60, no. 8, pp. 1519-1536. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21082

APA

Hjørland, B. (2009). Concept theory. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1519-1536. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21082

Vancouver

Hjørland B. Concept theory. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2009;60(8):1519-1536. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21082

Author

Hjørland, Birger. / Concept theory. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2009 ; Vol. 60, No. 8. pp. 1519-1536.

Bibtex

@article{030d7c5cb26f404784e3299c9f0bf2e8,
title = "Concept theory",
abstract = "  Concept theory is an extremely broad, interdisciplinary and complex field of research related to many deep fields with very long historical traditions without much consensus. However, information science and knowledge organization cannot avoid relating to theories of concepts. Knowledge organizing systems (e.g. classification systems, thesauri and ontologies) should be understood as systems basically organizing concepts and their semantic relations. The same is the case with information retrieval systems. Different theories of concepts have different implications for how to construe, evaluate and use such systems. Based on {"}a post-Kuhnian view{"} of paradigms this paper put forward arguments that the best understanding and classification of theories of concepts is to view and classify them in accordance with epistemological theories (empiricism, rationalism, historicism and pragmatism). It is also argued that the historicist and pragmatist understandings of concepts are the most fruitful views and that this understanding may be part of a broader paradigm shift that is also beginning to take place in information science.  The importance of historicist and pragmatic theories of concepts for information science is outlined. ",
keywords = "begrebsteori",
author = "Birger Hj{\o}rland",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1002/asi.21082",
language = "English",
volume = "60",
pages = "1519--1536",
journal = "American Society for Information Science and Technology. Journal",
issn = "2330-1635",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "8",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Concept theory

AU - Hjørland, Birger

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 -   Concept theory is an extremely broad, interdisciplinary and complex field of research related to many deep fields with very long historical traditions without much consensus. However, information science and knowledge organization cannot avoid relating to theories of concepts. Knowledge organizing systems (e.g. classification systems, thesauri and ontologies) should be understood as systems basically organizing concepts and their semantic relations. The same is the case with information retrieval systems. Different theories of concepts have different implications for how to construe, evaluate and use such systems. Based on "a post-Kuhnian view" of paradigms this paper put forward arguments that the best understanding and classification of theories of concepts is to view and classify them in accordance with epistemological theories (empiricism, rationalism, historicism and pragmatism). It is also argued that the historicist and pragmatist understandings of concepts are the most fruitful views and that this understanding may be part of a broader paradigm shift that is also beginning to take place in information science.  The importance of historicist and pragmatic theories of concepts for information science is outlined.

AB -   Concept theory is an extremely broad, interdisciplinary and complex field of research related to many deep fields with very long historical traditions without much consensus. However, information science and knowledge organization cannot avoid relating to theories of concepts. Knowledge organizing systems (e.g. classification systems, thesauri and ontologies) should be understood as systems basically organizing concepts and their semantic relations. The same is the case with information retrieval systems. Different theories of concepts have different implications for how to construe, evaluate and use such systems. Based on "a post-Kuhnian view" of paradigms this paper put forward arguments that the best understanding and classification of theories of concepts is to view and classify them in accordance with epistemological theories (empiricism, rationalism, historicism and pragmatism). It is also argued that the historicist and pragmatist understandings of concepts are the most fruitful views and that this understanding may be part of a broader paradigm shift that is also beginning to take place in information science.  The importance of historicist and pragmatic theories of concepts for information science is outlined.

KW - begrebsteori

U2 - 10.1002/asi.21082

DO - 10.1002/asi.21082

M3 - Journal article

VL - 60

SP - 1519

EP - 1536

JO - American Society for Information Science and Technology. Journal

JF - American Society for Information Science and Technology. Journal

SN - 2330-1635

IS - 8

ER -

ID: 47056423