S701

Indiana University Bloomington. School of Library and Information Science

S701 : Introduction to Doctoral Research in Information Science

COURSE SYLLABUS Version 1.4

November 10, 2008

Research is the currency of the academic world. The conduct of research and contribution to knowledge in the field is essential to your future. This course is intended to introduce you to established and emerging areas of scholarly research in information studies and to help you identify a research agenda that will guide your research efforts and contribute to your scholarly productivity across your career.

Over the semester we will explore research traditions in information science, discuss key issues in the conduct of research in the field, critically evaluate key concepts in library and information science (LIS), examine the range of approaches taken by LIS researchers, and discuss research ethics.

This course is intended to provide an introduction to the foundations of, approaches to, and current nature of research in information science; to encourage the critical analysis of disciplinary and interdisciplinary scholarship in LIS; and to facilitate the student's ability to effectively evaluate potential research problems, theoretical frameworks and research methodologies. By the end of this course, students will

be familiar with both established and emerging areas of scholarly research in information studies;

understand the main theoretical and methodological approaches used by LIS scholars;

be acquainted with the ongoing research and scholarly pursuits of SLIS faculty;

be able to identify research problems in LIS and the relevant sources of evidence;

understand basic requirements of the doctoral program and be aware of important milestones;

have passed the Protection of Human Research Participants Certification Test.

Although this course incorporates guest lectures by SLIS faculty, students, and staff, the course will have a seminar format. Thus the success of the course depends on active engagement of all class members. For each class session, each student will prepare an informative abstract of one required reading to be shared with other class members. The abstract should cover the major ideas, arguments, methods and findings of the article. Abstracts of required readings are to be posted to the S701 Oncourse site at least two days before the class meets.

Each session will provide an introduction to a research area in information studies. There will also be practical instruction designed to prepare you for success in SLIS's doctoral program: writing abstracts and annotations; reading, writing and publishing research reports; constructing and maintaining a curriculum vita; preparing the annual doctoral student progress report; using citation research; working with advisors and mentors; preparing human subjects research forms; and introducing guest speakers.

Readings have been selected to represent a range of approaches to information studies and to encourage class discussions. The Schedule of Topics, Readings and Assignments identifies required texts as well as required and recommended readings for each class session. All readings are subject to amendment by the instructors. Many of these readings are available online, either on the Web or through electronic reserves. The url for electronic reserves is

The password necessary to access the list of readings will be provided in class. Copies of required and recommended readings that are not available electronically will be on reserve in hard copy format in the Kent Cooper Room.

Grading

Each student's final course grade will be computed on the basis of grades earned for the annotated bibliography (35%), the problem paper (25%), leading two class sessions (20%), and class participation (20%). In order to receive a final course grade, each student must also submit documentation demonstrating that he/she has successfully passed the Protection of Human Research Participants Certification Test.

Satisfactory fulfillment of the minimum course requirements as outlined in this syllabus will constitute a grade of B (see "Grading Scale", below). Grades of A will be assigned only when the intellectual quality of a student's work surpasses expectations.

The annotated bibliography will constitute 40% of your final course grade. It will be graded in two parts. The preliminary annotated bibliography (5%) will be submitted in both hard copy and electronic format on 25 September 2008 and will include, at a minimum, all required readings for Sessions 1 through 4. The final annotated bibliography (35%) is to be submitted in both hard copy and electronic format on 11 December 2008. The final bibliography will include, at a minimum, all required readings for Sessions 1 thru 14 and all materials you researched for your problem paper. You are encouraged to include any relevant readings completed across the semester, whether for this or another course.

The problem paper will constitute 40% of your final course grade. The problem paper will investigate a research problem or puzzle of interest to you. It will address why this research problem is important to the field of information science and will include the theoretical frameworks, methodologies and empirical evidence used to investigate this problem area. The content, format and schedule for the problem paper will be discussed in greater detail in class.

Over the course of the semester, you will be required to act as discussion leader for two class sessions. During the first class session, each student will select two dates on which he/she will lead class discussions: one from Sessions 3 through 8 and one from Sessions 9 through 14.

As the session discussion leader, you will be responsible for introducing the session topic, for presenting the core readings, and for facilitating subsequent in-class discussion. In order to seed discussion, you should prepare four to six general questions that focus attention on the most significant or controversial ideas addressed in the session's required and/or recommended readings. These questions should be posted to the S701 Oncourse site at least 24 hours before the class meets. Although you will not be required to submit any materials for review, you may find it helpful to create an outline for your session as well as notes regarding the major points you intend to raise. You may also want to prepare a handout summarizing your presentation for the other class members.

The success of the seminar approach requires substantive and meaningful contributions from all students. The class participation grade will constitute 20% of the final grade and will be assessed on the basis of the student's class attendance; summarization of required readings; evidence of preparation, including familiarity with required and recommended readings; contributions to seminar discussions; and demonstration of respect for the ideas, opinions and feelings of other class members.

Each student must submit documentation demonstrating that he/she has successfully passed the Protection of Human Research Participants Certification Test. This test is available at <https://www.indiana.edu/~rcr/>. The Office of Research Compliance at Indiana University Bloomington provides two web-based tutorials that meet Federal requirements for human subjects research: one for biomedical research and one for non-biomedical research. Both tutorials are available at <http://www.indiana.edu/~rcr/index.php>. Because of the broad coverage of the human research certification test, students should plan to review both tutorials before attempting the test.

Late Submissions

In fairness to students who turn in assignments on time, late papers will be penalized by lowering the earned grade one level for each day that the paper is late. For example, a problem paper with an earned grade of A- will receive a grade of B+ if it is one day late, a grade of B if it is two days late, etc.

Incompletes

Each student is expected to complete all coursework by the end of the term. A grade of incomplete [ I ] will be assigned only when exceptional circumstances warrant. Decisions about granting incompletes will generally not be made until the last three weeks of the course.

As Dr. Alice Robbin observes in her Fall 2006 syllabus for SLIS L509, there is more to avoiding plagiarism than simply citing a reference. Dr. Robbin points out that, in order to aid students both in recognizing plagiarism and in avoiding the appearance of plagiarism, Indiana University's Writing Tutorial Services has prepared a short guide entitled "Plagiarism: What it is and how to recognize and avoid it". This guide is available at:

The guide provides explicit examples of plagiarism and offers strategies for avoiding it. Each student should be familiar with this document and use it as a guide when completing assignments.

Dr. Robbin also offers tips on avoiding inadvertent plagiarism that she gleaned from Ralph Brower, a colleague at Florida State University:

Policies on academic dishonesty have been established by Indiana University and the School of Library and Information Science. These policies, which have been set out in the Code of Student Ethics, will be adhered to in this class. Any assignment that contains plagiarized material or indicates any other form of academic dishonesty will receive, at a minimum, a grade of F. A second instance will result in an automatic grade of F for the course. Penalties may be harsher depending on the severity of the offense.

If you are a student with a special need, please feel free to discuss it with the instructors.

Grading Scale

All grades will be assigned according to the SLIS Grading Policy for Master's and Specialist Level Students. This policy was defined by student and faculty members of SLIS's Curriculum Steering Committee and was adopted by the Faculty of the School of Library and Information Science, Indiana University, on November 11, 1996, as an aid in evaluation of student performance:

NOTE: For each class session, the following schedule includes a session topic and a list of required readings as well as a guest speaker, assignment due, how-to topic and list of recommended readings when appropriate. Required readings are listed in the order in which they should be read. Recommended readings are ordered alphabetically and may be read in any order at any time across the semester. All readings are subject to amendment by the instructors.

Cronin, B. (2006). Bloomington days: Town and gown in middle America. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse.

Cronin, B. (2005). The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.

Zerubavel, E. (1991). The fine line: Making distinctions in everyday life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cronin, B. (2006). Bloomington days: Town and gown in middle America. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse.

Jacob, E.K., & Robbin, A. R. (2008). Course syllabus: S701 Introduction to Doctoral Research in Library and Information Science. Bloomington, IN: School of Library and Information Science.

Indiana University. School of Library and Information Science. (2007). Ph.D. handbook: Draft revision (August 2007). Bloomington, IN: School of Library and Information Science. Retrieved August 24, 2008, from http://www.slis.indiana.edu/degrees/phd/forms/PhD_Handbook_2007.doc

Jacob, E. K. (2007). Representations & annotations. Bloomington, IN: School of Library and Information Science.

Jacob, E. K. (1997). Writing abstracts. Bloomington, IN: School of Library and Information Science.

Jacob, E. K. (2008). Fidel & Randi: Sample abstracts. Bloomington, IN: School of Library and Information Science.

Jacob, E. K. (2007). Tibbo: Sample abstrtacts. Bloomington, IN: School of Library and Information Science.

Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The nature of normal science (pp. 23-34). Normal science as puzzle-solving (pp. 35- 42). The priority of paradigms (pp. 43-51). In The structure of scientific revolutions, second edition, enlarged. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Dennis, A., & Valacich, J. (2001). Conducting research in information systems. Communications of AIS, 7(5), 1-41.

Gerring, J. (2004). What is a case study and what is it good for? American Political Science Review, 98(2), 341-354.

Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3-15.

Wildemuth, B. M., de Bliek, R., Friedman, C. P., & File, D. D. (1995). Medical students' personal knowledge, searching proficiency, and database use in problem solving. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(8), 590-607.

Robbin, A., & Buente, W. (in press). Internet information and communication behavior during a political moment: The Iraq war, March 2003. Journal of the American Society for Information Science.

Arganoff, R. (2007). Public networks. In Managing within networks: Adding value to public organizations (pp. 1-22). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Borner, K., Maru, J., & Goldstone, R. (2004). The simultaneous evolution of author and paper networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(Suppl. 1), 5266-5273.

Cronin, B., & Shaw, D. (2002). Identity-creators and image-makers: Using citation analysis and thick description to put authors in their place. Scientometrics, 54(1), 31-49.

Dillon, A., & Schaap, D. (1996). Expertise and the perception of shape in information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(10), 786-788.

Drabenstott, K.M., Simcox, S., & Fenton, E.G. (1999). End-user understandings of subject headings in library catalogs. Library Resources & Technical Services 43(3), 140-160.

Jacob, E. K. (1994). Classification and crossdisciplinary communication: Breaching the boundaries imposed by classificatory structure. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Knowledge organization and quality management: Advances in knowledge organization, vol. 4 (p. 101-108). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Vaughan, M. W., & Dillon, A. (2006). Why structure and genre matter for users of digital information: A longitudinal experiment with readers of a web-based newspaper. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64, 502-526.

Bean, J. C. (2001). Chapter 8: Helping students read difficult texts. In Engaging ideas: The professor's guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom (pp. 133-148). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Cronin, B. (2005). Hyperauthorship. In The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards (pp. 41-70). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.

Cronin, B. (2005). Scientometric spectroscopy. In The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards (pp. 193-197). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow

Fidel, Raya. (1986). Writing abstracts for free-text searching. Journal of Documentation, 42(1), 11-21.

Frost, P. J., & Stablein, R. E. (Eds.). (1992). Doing exemplary research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Montgomery, S. L. (2003). The Chicago guide to communicating science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Randi, J. (1996). Investigating miracles, Italian-style. Scientific American (February 1996), 136.

Tibbo, H, R. (1992). Abstracting across the disciplines: A content analysis of abstracts from the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities with implications for abstracting standards and online information retrieval. Library & Information Science Research, 14. 31-56.

Gilchrist, A. (2008). Editorial. Journal of Information Science, 34(4), 395-396.

Saracevic, T. (1992). Information science: Origin, evolution, and relations. In K. Vakkari & B. Cronin (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference: Conceptions of Library and Information Science: Historical, Empirical and Theoretical Perspective, University of Tampere, Finland, 26-28 August 1991 (pp. 5-27). London: Taylor Graham.

Cronin, B. (2005). Scholars and scripts. In The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards (pp. 1-9). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.

Cronin, B. (2005). Epistemic cultures. In The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards (pp. 11-39). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.

Cronin, B. (2005). Information space. In The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards (pp. 71-94). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.

Cronin, B. (2005). Intellectual collaboration. In The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards (pp. 95-115). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.

Cronin, B. (2005). The attention economy. In The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards (pp. 167-191). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.

Bates, M. J. (1999). The invisible substrate of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 50(12), 1043-1050. (This entire issue is devoted to "paradigms, models, and methods of information science.").

Saracevic, T. (1999). Information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 50(12), 1051-1063.

Buckland, M. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42, 351-360.

Bates, M. J. (2006). Fundamental forms of information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57(8), 1033–1045.

Hjorland, B. (2007). Information: Objective or subjective/situational? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58(10), 1448-1456.

Bates, M. J. (2008). Hjorland 's critique of Bates' work on defining information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(5), 842-844

Day, R. (2001). Introduction: Remembering "information" (pp. 1-6). Conclusion:"Information" and the role of critical theory (pp. 114-120). In The modern invention of information: Discourse, history, and power. Carbondale IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Nunberg, G. (2002). Farewell to the information age. Retrieved August 24, 2008, from http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~nunberg/farewell.pdf

Frohmann, B. (2004). Scientists and other information users. In Deflating information: From science studies to documentation (pp. 53-91). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Moore, J. L., Erdelez, S., and He, W. (2007). The search experience variable in information behavior research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58(10), 1529-1546.

Capurro, R., & HjÃƒÂ¸rland, B. (2003). The concept of information. In B. Cronin (Ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37, 343–411.

Bates, M. J. (2005). An introduction to metatheories, theories, and models. In K.E. Fisher, S. Erdelez, & L. McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 1–24). Medford, NJ: Information Today.

Bates, M. J. (2005). Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science. Information Research, 10(4), Paper 239. Available on the web at: http://InformationR.net/ir/10-4/paper239.html

Case, D. O. (2002). The concept of information. In Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs and behavior (pp. 40-63). Amsterdam: Academic Press.

Blackwell Publishing. (2008). Author services (What would you like to know? Other resources). BlackwellPublishing.com. Available at: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/bauthor/

Robbin, A. (2008, June). Keynote address. Presented at the ICTs and Society Network Launch meeting, Salzburg, Austria.

Dourish, P. (2004). What we talk about when we talk about context. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 8(1), 19-30. Retrieved August 24, 2008, from http://www.ics.uci.edu/~jpd/publications/2004/PUC2004-context.pdf

Kling, R., McKim, G., & King, A. (2003). A bit more to it: Scholarly communication forums as socio-technical interaction networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 54(1), 47-67.

Galesici, M., & Tourangeau, R. (2007). What is sexual harassment? It depends on who asks! Framing effects on survey responses. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(2), 189-202.

Contu, A., & Willmott, H. (2003). Re-embedding situatedness: The importance of power relations in learning theory. Organization Science, 14(3), 283-296.

Indiana University. School of Library and Information Science. (2007). University Graduate School 2007-2008 Academic Bulletin. Retrieved August 24, 2008, from http://www.indiana.edu/~bulletin/iu/grad/2007-2008/

Indiana University. University Graduate School. (2008). Ph.D. handbook: Draft revision (August 2007). Retrieved August 24, 2008, from http://www.slis.indiana.edu/degrees/phd/

Blackwell Publishing. (2008). Author services (What would you like to know? Other resources). BlackwellPublishing.com. Available at: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/bauthor/

Dourish, P., Bellotti, V., Mackay, W. & Ma, C.-Y. (1993). Information and context: Lessons from a study of two shared information systems. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Organisational Computing Systems COOCS'93, Milpetas, CA (pp. 42-51). New York: ACM.

Feldman, D. C. (2004). Being a developmental reviewer: Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2), 161-164.

Feldman, D. C. (2004). Negotiating the revision process. Journal of Management, 30(3), 305-307.

Feldman, D. C. (2004). The devil is in the details: Converting good research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1), 1-6.

Feldman, D. C. (2005). Conversing with editors: Strategies for authors and reviewers. Journal of Management, 31(5), 649-658.

Feldman, D. C. (2005). Writing and reviewing as sadomasochistic rituals. Journal of Management, 31(3), 325-329.

Lamb, R., King, J. L., & Kling, R. (2003). Informational environments: Organizational contexts of online information use. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 54(2), 97-114.

Kuhn, T. S. (1970). Postscript--1969. In The structure of scientific revolutions, second edition, enlarged (pp. 174-210). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Zerubavel, E. (1991). The fine line: Making distinctions in everyday life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Jacob, E. K., & Albrechtsen, H. (1999). When essence becomes function: Post-structuralist implications for an ecological theory of organisational classification systems. In T.D. Wilson & D.K. Allen (Eds.), Exploring the contexts of information behaviour. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, 13-15 August 1998, Sheffield, UK (pp. 519-534). London: Taylor Graham.

Blair, D. C. (1990). Chapter 4: Language and representation: The central problem in information retrieval. In Language and representation in information retrieval (pp. 121-175). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. [Footnotes for this reading are on pp. 213-239.]

Reddy, M.J. (1979). The conduit metaphor -- a case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284-297 only). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bannon, L. & BÃƒÂ¸dker, S. (n.d.). Constructing common information spaces. Retrieved February 9, 1999, from http://www.ul.ie/~idc/library/papersreports/LiamBannon/ECSCW.htm

Buckland, M. (1999). Vocabulary as a central concept in library and information science. In T. Arpanac et al. (Eds.), Digital libraries: Interdisciplinary concepts, challenges, and opportunities. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science [CoLIS3], May 23-26, 1999, Dubrovnik, Croatia, (pp. 3-12). Zagreb: Lokve. Available from http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~buckland/colisvoc.htm

Hammond, T.H. (1993). Toward a general theory of hierarchy: Books, bureaucrats, basketball tournaments and the administrative structure of the nation-state. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 3(1), 120-145.

Jacob, E. K. (1994). Classification and crossdisciplinary communication: Breaching the boundaries imposed by classificatory structure. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Knowledge organization and quality management: Advances in knowledge organization, vol. 4 (p. 101-108). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Shera, J. H. (1965/1957). Pattern, structure, and conceptualization in classification for information retrieval. In Libraries and the organization of knowledge (pp. 112-128). Hamden, CT: Archon.

Froehlich, T. J. (1989). The foundations of information science in social epistemology. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 306-315). Washington, D.C.: IEEE Computer Science Press.

Jacob, E.K., & Albrechtsen, H. (1997). Constructing reality: The role of dialogue in the development of classificatory structures. In I. C. McIlwaine (Ed.), Knowledge organization for information retrieval: Proceedings of the 6th International Study Conference on Classification Research, 14-16 June 1997, London (pp. 42-50). The Hague, Netherlands: International Federation for Documentation.

Frohmann, B. (1994). The social construction of knowledge organization: The case of Melvil Dewey. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Knowledge organization and quality management: Advances in knowledge organization, vol. 4 (pp. 109-117). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Jacob, E. K. (1991). Classification and categorization: Drawing the line. In B. H. Kwasnik and R. Fidel (Eds.), Advances in classification research, vol. 2 (pp. 67-83). Washington D.C.: American Society for Information Science.

Olson, H. (1994). Universal models: A history of the organization of knowledge. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Knowledge organization and quality management: Advances in knowledge organization, vol. 4 (pp. 72-80). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Shera, J. H. (1965/1961). The dignity and advancement of Bacon. In Libraries and the organization of knowledge (pp. 143-150). Hamden, CT: Archon.

Shera, J. H. (1965/1950). Classification as the basis of bibliographic organization. In Libraries and the organization of knowledge (pp. 77-96). Hamden, CT: Archon.

Duval, E., Hodgins, W., Sutton, S., & Weibel, S. L.. (2002). Metadata principles and practicalities. D-Lib Magazine 8(4). Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april 02/weibel/04weibel.html

Mizoguchi, R. (2003). Tutorial on ontological engineering. Part 1: Introduction to Ontological Engineering. New Generation Computing 21(4), 365-384. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.ei.sanken.osaka-u.ac.jp/pub/miz/Part1-pdf2.pdf

Mizoguchi, R. (2003). Tutorial on ontological engineering. Part 2: Ontology development, tools and languages. New Generation Computing 22(1), 61-96. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.ei.sanken.osaka-u.ac.jp/pub/miz/Part2V3.pdf

Peterson, E. (2006). Beneath the metadata: Some philosophical problems with folksonomy. D-Lib Magazine, 12(11). Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november06/peterson/11peterson.html

Shirky, C. (2005). Ontology is overrated: Categories, links, and tags. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.shirky.com/writings/ontology_overrated.html

Gruber, T. (2005). Ontology of folksonomy: A mash-up of apples and oranges. Republished in 2007 in International Journal on Semantic Web & Information Systems, 3(2). Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://tomgruber.org/writing/ontology-of-folksonomy.htm

Jacob, E. K. (2003). Ontologies and the Semantic Web. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 29(4), 19-22.

Levy, D. M. (1995). Cataloguing in the digital order: Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://csdl.tamu.edu/DL95/papers/levy/levy.html

Mathes, A. (2004). Folksonomies: cooperative classification and communication through shared metadata. Retrieved August 31, 2008, from http://www.adammathes.com/academic/computer-mediated-communication/folksonomies.html

Milstead, J., & Feldman, S. (1999). Metadata: cataloging by any other name Ã¢Â¦. Online (January 1999). Retrieved August 31, 2008, from http://www.iicm.tugraz.at/thesis/cguetl_diss/literatur/Kapitel06/References/Milstead_et_al._1999/metadata.html

Mizoguchi, R. (2004). Tutorial on ontological engineering. Part 3: Advanced course of ontological engineering. New Generation Computing 22(2), 198-220. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.ei.sanken.osaka-u.ac.jp/pub/miz/Part3V3.pdf

National Information Standards Organization. (2004). Understanding metadata. Retrieved August 31, 2008, from http://www.niso.org/publications/press/UnderstandingMetadata.pdf

Vander Wal, T. (2007). Folksonomy coinage and definition. vanderwal.net. Retrieved August 31, 2008, from http://vanderwal.net/folksonomy.html

Indiana University. Office of the Vice Provost for Research. (2008). Welcome to the Indiana University Bloomington Human Subject Office. Retrieved August 24, 2008, from http://research.iu.edu/rschcomp/hmpg.html

Indiana University. Office of the Vice Provost for Research. (2008). Education on the Protection of Human Research Participants. Retrieved August 24, 2008, from http://www.indiana.edu/~rcr/index.php

Indiana University. Office of the Vice Provost for Research. (n.d.). Protection of human subjects in research. Retrieved August 24, 2008, from http://www.indiana.edu/~rcr/files/hspt.pdf

Indiana University. Office of Research Compliance. (2006). Protection of human subjects in non-biomedical research. Retrieved August 24, 2008, from http://www.indiana.edu/~rcr/files/hspt-nbm.pdf

Yang, K. (2002). Overview of traditional IR. Doctoral dissertation (pp. 7-22). Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://elvis.slis.indiana.edu./kiyang/dissertation/litrev_allir.pdf

Salton, G. Wong, A. & Yang, C.S. (1975). A vector space model for automatic indexing. Communications of the ACM, 18(11), 613-620. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://www.psychology.adelaide.edu.au/personalpages/staff/simondennis/LexicalSemantics/SaltonWongYang75.pdf

Yang, K. (2005). Information retrieval on the Web. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 39, 33-80. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://elvis.slis.indiana.edu/docs/webir_arist.pdf

Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., & Winograd, T. (1998). The PageRank citation ranking: Bringing order to the Web. Technical report, Stanford University Database Group. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/cache/papers/cs/7144/http:zSzzSzwww-db.stanford.eduzSz~backrubzSzpageranksub.pdf/page98pagerank.pdf

Yang, K., Yu, N., & Zhang, H. (2008). WIDIT in TREC2007 Blog track: Combining lexicon-based methods to detect opinionated blogs. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://trec.nist.gov/pubs/trec16/papers/indianau.blog.final.pdf

Batty, D. (1998). WWW -- wealth, weariness or waste: Controlled vocabulary and thesauri in support of online information access. D-Lib Magazine, 4(November, 1998). Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november98/11batty.html

Berry, M. W., & Browne, M. (2005). Understanding search engines: Mathematical modeling and text retrieval, second edition. Philadelphia, PA: SIAM [Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics].

Blair, D.C., & Maron, M.E. (1985). An evaluation of retrieval effectiveness for a full-text document retrieval system. Communications of the ACM, 28(3), 280-299.

Blair, D.C., & Maron, M.E. (1990). Full-text information retrieval: Further analysis and clarification. Information Processing and Management, 26, 437-447.

Borner, K. (2000). Searching for the perfect match: A comparison of free sorting results for images by human subjects and by latent semantic analysis. In Information Visualisation 2000, Symposium on Digital Libraries, 19-21 July 2000, London, England (pp. 192-197).

Cleverdon, C.W. (1967). The Cranfield tests on index language devices. Aslib Proceedings, 19, 173-192.

Dubin, D. (2004). The most influential paper Salton never wrote. Library Trends, 52(4), 748-764.

Ellis, D. (1989). A behavioural model for information retrieval systems design. Journal of Information Science, 15, 237-247.

Ellis, D. (1992). The physical and cognitive paradigms in information retrieval research. Journal of Documentation, 48, 45-64.

Landauer, T., Foltz, P.W., & Laham, D. (1998). An introduction to Latent Semantic Analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259-284. Retrieved December 4, 2007, from http://lsa.colorado.edu/papers/dp1.LSAintro.pdf

Losee, R. (1998). Text retrieval and filtering: Analytic models of performance. Boston: Kluwer.

Mostafa, J. M. (2004). How do internet search engines work? Scientific American (2004, November 29). Retrieved August 39, 2008, from http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=how-do-internet-search-en Also retrieved August 14, 2007, from http://lair.indiana.edu/publications/pdf/How_do_Internet_Search_Engines_Work.pdf

Paolillo, J.C., & Wright, E.L. (2006). Social network analysis on the Semantic Web: Techniques and challenges for visualizing FOAF. In V. Geroimenko & C. Chen (Eds.), Visualizing the Semantic Web: XML-based internet and information visualization (pp. 229-242). London: Springer. Retrieved November 28, 2007, from http://www.blogninja.com/vsw-draft-paolillo-wright-foaf.pdf

Salton, G. & Lesk, M. E. (1967). Computer evaluation of indexing and text processing. In K. Sparck Jones & P. Willett (Eds.), Readings in information retrieval (pp. 60-84). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

Salton, G., & McGill, M. J. (1983). The SMART and SIRE experimental retrieval systems. In K. Sparck Jones & P. Willett (Eds.), Readings in information retrieval (pp. 381-399). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

Sebastiani, F. (2002). Machine learning in automated text categorization. ACM Computing Surveys, 34, 1-59. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://elvis.slis.indiana.edu/fetched/paper/0210.pdf

Sparck Jones, K., & Willett, P. (1997). Overall introduction (pp. 1-4). History (pp. 9-13). Key concepts (pp. 85-91). Evaluation (pp. 167-174). Models (pp. 257-261). Techniques (pp. 305-310). Systems (pp. 375-379). Readings in information retrieval. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

Turtle, H., & Croft, W. B. (1989). Inference networks for document retrieval. In J. L. Vidick (Ed.), Proceedings of the 13th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 5-7 September 1990, Brussels, Belgium (pp. 1-24). New York: ACM.

Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st centuryÃ¢Â”A review. Journal of Informetrics, 2(1), 1-52.

Cronin, B., & Meho, L. I. (2008). Applying the Author Affiliation Index to library and information science journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1861-1865.

Cronin, B., & Meho, L. I. (2008). The shifting balance of intellectual trade in information studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(4), 551-564.

Meho, L. I., & Yang, K. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2105-2125.

MacRoberts, M. H., & MacRoberts, B. R. (1996). Problems of citation analysis. Scientometrics, 36(3), 435-444.

Cronin, B., & Meho, L. I. (2006). Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(9), 1275-1278.

Meho, L. I., & Rogers, Y. (2008). Citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of human-computer interaction researchers: A comparison between Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1711-1726.

Borgman, C. L., & Furner, J. (2002). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. In B. Cronin (Ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36 (pp. 3-72).

Kleinberg, J. M. (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 46(5), 604-632.

Lawrence, S., Giles, C. L., & Bollacker, K. (1999). Digital libraries and autonomous citation indexing. Computer, 32(6), 67-71.

Nerur, S.P., Rasheed, A.A., & Natarajan, V. (2008). The intellectual structure of the strategic management field: an author co-citation analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 29(3), 319-336.

Small, H. (1999). Visualizing science by citation mapping. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(9), 799-813.

White, H. D., & McCain, K. W. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972-1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4), 327-355.

Wilson, C. S. (1999). Informetrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 34, 107-247 (read pages 107-117 only).

Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2008). Information science during the first decade of the Web: An enriched author cocitation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 916-937.

How to review a grant proposal. Guest speaker Associate Dean Howard Rosenbaum

Ledford, H. (2008, July 28). Stats reveal bias in NIH grant review. naturenews. naturenews. doi:10.1038/news.2008.988. Retrieved July, 31 2008, from http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080728/full/news.2008.988.html

Markin, K.M. (2008). How to become a grant reviewer. Chronicle of Higher Education (June 2, 2008). Retrieved August 31, 2008, from http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2008/06/2008060201c.htm

National Science Foundation. (2004). Chapter III: NSF proposal processing and review. In Grant proposal guide. Retrieved August 31, 2003 from http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/nsf04_23/3.jsp

National Science Foundation. (2007). Why you should volunteer to serve as an NSF reviewer. Retrieved August 31, 2008, from http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/meritreview/reviewer.jsp

Brown, D.S. (nd). Grant proposals: One reviewer's ideas on how to get the reviewer's attention (and the money). The International Center for Disability Resources on the Internet. Retrieved August 31, 2008, from http://www.icdri.org/DSB/granpropdsb.htm

Boyack, K.W., Klavans, R., & Börner, K. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics, 64(3), 351-374.

Klavans, R., & Boyack, K.W. (2006). Identifying a better measure of relatedness for mapping science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(2), 251-263.

Börner, K., Chen, C., & Boyack, K. (2003). Visualizing knowledge domains. In B. Cronin (Ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37 (pp. 179-255). Medford, NJ: Information Today. Retrieved September 27, 2007, from https://www.slis.indiana.edu/faculty/arobbin/COURSES/S701/

Börner, K., Dall'Asta, L., Ke, W., & Vespignani, A. (2005). Studying the emerging global brain: Analyzing and visualizing the impact of co-authorship teams. Complexity, 10(4), pp. 58-67.

Herr, B. W., Huang, W., Penumarthy, S., & Börner, K. (2007) Designing highly flexible and usable cyberinfrastructures for convergence. In W. S. Bainbridge & M. C. Roco (Eds.), Progress in convergence: Technologies for human wellbeing (pp. 161-179). Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1093. Boston: New York Academy of Science. Retrieved August 7, 2007, from http://cishell.org/papers/06-cishell.pdf

Topic: Information and communication technologies (ICTs) and society.

Kling, R. (2007). What is social informatics and why does it matter? The Information Society, 23(4), 205-220.

Horton, K., Davenport, E., & Harper, T. W. (2005). Exploring sociotechnical interaction with Rob Kling: Five big ideas. Information Technology & People, 18(1), 50-67.

Bijker, W. E. (2001). Social construction of technology. In N. J. Smelser & P.B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, Vol 23. (pp. 15522-15527). Oxford: Elsevier Science.

Hara, N., & Hew, K. F. (2007). Knowledge sharing in an online community of health-care professionals. Information Technology & People, 20(3), 235-261.

Hara, N. (2007). IT support for communities of practice: How public defenders learn about winning and losing in court. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(1), 76-87.

Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, K.Y. A. (2004). The internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573-590.

Lamb, R., & Sawyer, S. (2005). On extending social informatics from a rich legacy of networks and conceptual resources. Information Technology & People, 18(1), 9-20.

Kling, R., Rosenbaum, H., & Sawyer, S. (2005). Understanding and communicating social informatics: A framework for studying and teaching the human contexts of information and communication technologies. Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc.

Robbin, A. (2007). Rob Kling in search of one good theory: The origins of computerization movements. The Information Society, 23, 235-250.

Clark, A. (2003). Natural-born cyborgs: Mind, technologies, and the future of human intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Chapters 1, 2, 6 only: pp. 13-59 & 145-165).

Suchman, L. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions, 2nd expanded edition. New York: Cambridge University Press. (Chapters 4-6 only: pp. 33-84).

Harrison, S., Sengers, P., & Tatar, D. (2007). The three paradigms of HCI. In CHI 2007, April 28 – May 3, 2007, San Jose, USA: ACM. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://people.cs.vt.edu/~srh/Downloads/TheThreeParadigmsofHCI.pdf

Rogers, Y. (2006). Moving on from Weiser's vision of calm computing: Engaging UbiComp experiences. In P. Dourish and A. Friday (Eds.), Ubicomp 2006, LNCS 4206 (pp. 404-421). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. Available from: http://www.slis.indiana.edu/faculty/yrogers/papers/Rogers_Ubicomp06.pdf

Chalmers, M. and Galani, A. (2004). Seamful interweaving: Heterogeneity in the theory and design of interactive systems. DIS2004, August 1–4, 2004, Cambridge, MA: ACM. Available from:http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~matthew/papers/DIS2004v3.pdf

Hockey, S. (2004). The history of humanities computing. In S. Schreibman, R. Siemans, & J. Unsworth (Eds.), A Companion to Digital Humanities. Oxford: Blackwell. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/view?docId=blackwell/9781405103213/9781405103213.xml&chunk.id=ss1-2-1&toc.depth=1&toc.id=ss1-2-1&brand=9781405103213_brand

McGann, J. (2008). The future is Digital. Journal of Victorian Culture, 13, 80-88.

O'Gorman, M. (2006). Introduction. The canon, the archive, and the remainder: Reimaging scholarly discourse. In E-Crit: Digital Media, Critical Theory, and the Humanities (pp. xiii-16). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Palmer, C. L. (2004). Thematic research collections. In S. Schreibman, R. Siemans, & J. Unsworth (Eds.), A Companion to Digital Humanities. Oxford: Blackwell. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/view?docId=blackwell/9781405103213/9781405103213.xml&chunk.id=ss1-4-5&toc.depth=1&toc.id=ss1-4-5&brand=9781405103213_brand&query=burrows#16

Ramsay, S. (2003). Toward an algorithmic criticism. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 18, 167-74.

Walsh, J. A. (2007). Multimedia and multitasking: A survey of digital resources for nineteenth-century literary studies. In S. Siemans & R. Siemans (Eds.), A Companion to Digital Literary Studies, (pp. 121-138). Oxford: Blackwell. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~jawalsh/tmp/walsh_2007.pdf

Busa, R. A. (2004). Foreword: Perspectives on the digital humanities. In S. Schreibman, R. Siemans, & J. Unsworth (Eds.), A Companion to Digital Humanities. Oxford: Blackwell. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/view?docId=blackwell/9781405103213/9781405103213.xml&chunk.id=ss1-1-2&toc.depth=1&toc.id=ss1-1-2&brand=default

Schreibman, S., Siemans, R. & Unsworth, J. (2004). The digital dumanities and dumanities computing: An introduction. In S. Schreibman, R. Siemans, & J. Unsworth (Eds.), A Companion to Digital Humanities. Oxford: Blackwell. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/view?docId=blackwell/9781405103213/9781405103213.xml&chunk.id=ss1-1-3&toc.depth=1&toc.id=ss1-1-3&brand=9781405103213_brand

Willett, P. (2004). Electronic texts: Audiences and purposes. In S. Schreibman, R. Siemans, & J. Unsworth (Eds.), A Companion to Digital Humanities. Oxford: Blackwell. Retrieved August 30, 2008, from http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/view?docId=blackwell/9781405103213/9781405103213.xml&chunk.id=ss1-3-6&toc.depth=1&toc.id=ss1-3-6&brand=9781405103213_brand

Introduction: The Semantic Web dates from late 1990s as the original vision of the WWW inventor Tim Berners-Lee. The power of the Semantic Web lies in the potential for interoperability through well-defined metadata in machine understandable format with logic reasoning support. Layered design principle of the Semantic Web paves the way for reuse. Web 2.0 currently provides a scalable information sharing platform, while the Semantic Web adds valuable machine understandable metadata to enable efficient and automatic methods of information sharing and cross-portal communication and collaboration. The combination of the Semantic Web with Web 2.0 forms a new momentum for the next web weave coined as Web 3.0 in the New York Times. This talk will go through the footprints of the web evolution and highlight semantics on the Web. -- Ying Ding

Berners-Lee, T., Hall, W., Hendler, J., Shadbolt, N., & Weitzner, D. (2006). Creating a science of the web. Science, 313(5788), 769-771.

Shadbolt, N., Hall, W., & Berners-Lee. T. (2006). The Semantic Web revisited. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(3), 96-101. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/1261 4/1/Semantic_Web_Revisted.pdf

Mika, P. (2005). Social networks and the Semantic Web: The next challenge. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 20(1), 82-85. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://www.cs.vu.nl/~pmika/research/papers/IEEE-TrendsAndControversies.pdf

Suchanek, F. M., Kasneci, G. & Weikum, G. (2007). YAGO: A core of semantic knoweldge unifying WordNet and Wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 2007 International Conference on the World Wide Web 2007 (pp. 697-706). Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://www.mpi-inf.mpg.de/~suchanek/publications/www2007.pdf

Rodriguez, M. A., Bollen, J. & Van de Sompel, H. (2007). A practical ontology for the large-scale modeling of scholarly artifacts and their usage. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL'07), June 17–22, 2007, Vancouver, British Columbia (pp. 278-287). Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.1150

Bar-Ilan, J. (2005). What do we know about links and linking? A framework for studying links in academic environments. Information Processing and Management, 41, 973-986.

Barjak, F., & Thelwall, M. (2008). A statistical analysis of the web presences of European life sciences research Teams. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(4), 628-643.

Cronin, B., Snyder, H. W., Rosenbaum, H., Martinson, A., & Callahan, E. (1998). Invoked on the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 49(14), 1319-1328.

Ding, C., He, X., Husbands, P., Zha, H., Simon, H. (2002). Pagerank, HITS and a unified framework for link analysis: LBNL Tech Report 49371. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University of California. Retrieved August 31, 2008, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.20.3595

Gibson, D., Kleinberg, J., & Raghavan, P. (1998). Inferring Web communities from link topology. In Proceedings of the Ninth ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia: Links, objects, time and space---structure in hypermedia systems, June 20-24, 1998, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (pp. 225-234). New York: ACM. Retrieved August 31, 2008, from http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/kleinber/ht98-comm.pdf

Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2007). Google Scholar citations and Google Web/URL citations: A multi-discipline exploratory analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 1055-1065.

Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2007). How is science cited on the Web? A classification of Google unique web citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(11), 1631-1644.

Shibata, N., Kajikawa, Y., & Matsushima, K. (2007). Topological analysis of citation networks to discover the future core articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(6), 872-882.

Thelwall, M. (2006). Interpreting social science link analysis research: A theoretical framework. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(1), 60-68.

Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2008). Online presentations as source of scientific impact? An analysis of powerpoint files citing academic journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(5), 805-815.

Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2007). Can citation analysis of Web publications better detect research fronts? Journal of the American Society for information science and technology, 58(9), 1285-1302.