Dilemmas in information science (IS) and information retrieval (IR): Recurring challenges or new solutions?

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyse the extent to which understanding information science (IS) and information retrieval (IR) as disciplines characterised by intractable dilemmas is a useful conceptual framework through reviewing and re‐evaluating an important contribution to the field in light of more recent developments.Design/methodology/approach – This paper reviews the discussion of central dilemmas within IS and IR, through literature review and conceptual analysis. It assesses the extent to which they remain intractable problems or whether improved solutions have been developed and discusses the implications of these ongoing challenges. The main problem addressed is, in Neill's terminology, “the dilemma of the subjective in information organisation and retrieval” which is understood as the problem of how the meaning of documents can be represented to meet the needs of the user.Findings – Many of the dilemmas discussed within IS and IR remain fairly intractable primarily because inform...

[1]  S. Benford,et al.  Acknowledgements , 1966 .

[2]  Patrick Wilson,et al.  Dilemmas in the Study of Information: Exploring the Boundaries of Information Science , 1992 .

[3]  David Bawden,et al.  The Turn: Integration of Information Seeking and Information Retrieval in Context , 2007, J. Documentation.

[4]  Michael McGill,et al.  Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval , 1983 .

[5]  Cyril W. Cleverdon,et al.  Factors determining the performance of indexing systems , 1966 .

[6]  Karen Spärck Jones.  Some thoughts on classification for retrieval , 1970, J. Documentation.

[7]  Michael Keen,et al.  ASLIB CRANFIELD RESEARCH PROJECT FACTORS DETERMINING THE PERFORMANCE OF INDEXING SYSTEMS VOLUME 2 , 1966 .

[8]  Nigel Ford.  The Growth of Understanding in Information Science: Towards a Developmental Model , 1999, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[9]  Forbes Gibb,et al.  A dialectical approach to information retrieval , 2007, J. Documentation.

[10]  Pia Borlund,et al.  Experimental components for the evaluation of interactive information retrieval systems , 2000, J. Documentation.

[11]  D. C. Blair,et al.  Language and Representation in Information Retrieval , 1990 .

[12]  Karen Spärck Jones.  Further reflections on TREC , 2000, Inf. Process. Manag..

[13]  Ben-Ami Lipetz,et al.  Dilemmas in the study of information: Exploring the boundaries of information science , 1993 .

[14]  David C. Blair,et al.  Wittgenstein, Language and Information: "Back to the Rough Ground!" , 2006, CoLIS.

[15]  David Ellis,et al.  Progress and problems in information retrieval , 1996 .

[16]  Peer review and fraud , 2006, Nature.

[17]  Tim O'Reilly,et al.  What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software , 2007 .

[18]  Tefko Saracevic,et al.  Information science: What is it? , 1968 .

[19]  J. Farradane,et al.  Information Science , 1971, Nature.

[20]  S. D. Neill,et al.  The Dilemma of the Subjective in Information Organisation and Retrieval , 1987, J. Documentation.

[21]  Michael K. Buckland,et al.  Information and information systems , 1991 .