Showing papers in "Journal of Information Ethics in 2008"

The Digital Person: Technology and Privacy in the Information Age

Abstract: The Digital Person: Technology and Privacy in the Information Age Daniel J. Solove. New York: New York University Press, 2006. 290 pp. $29.95.Daniel J. Solove, like most contemporary writers on privacy, offers a sky-is-falling perspective on privacy in the modern paperless, transactional age. Due in part to the rise of so-called "digital dossiers" and perhaps, in the opinion of the reviewer, due in part to apathy, Solove observes recent developments as a new paradigm of the privacy problematic. The goal is "to rethink longstanding notions of privacy to grapple with the consequences of living in an information age" (p. 2). Much of what is covered here is not new. As Solove comments in his introduction: "There are hundreds of companies that are constructing gigantic databases of psychological profiles, amassing data about an individual's race, gender, income, hobbies, and purchases" (p. 2). Although the combination of private and public information "has long been viewed as problematic" (p. 6), Solove never adequately explains why or moves beyond the obvious: Marketing, credit, and related research companies have been engaging in such practices for years; in fairness to Solove, perhaps the difference is capacity to collect, to share, to compile, etc. This is the power of "aggregation" which contributes to the inability to assign adequate value to personal information. Though Solove does not make the connection, this may be a key to understanding the power of apathy or more kindly the unawareness that immobilizes individual responses to personal privacy protection. What is new is that "beyond articulating a new understanding of contemporary privacy problems" Solove attempts "to demonstrate the ways that the problems can be solved" (p. 6). After observing traditional conceptualizations such as big brother (Orwellian, pp. 29-35), secrecy and invasion (though he uses the idea of invasion to describe both), Solove claims to use a new Kafkaesque metaphor of irresponsible bureaucracy (pp. 36-41).On the way to this metaphor, Chapter 2 recounts the rise of public and private sector databases and the new uses of the web as a point and source of data collection. Chapter 3 reviews various metaphors and views the ultimate harm as one affecting human dignity through misjudgments, diminished capacity to participate, and unfairness (perhaps unevenness is more descriptive) in the collection of information. Chapter 4 reviews the inadequacy of the private (traditional tort and more recent statutory sector by sector approaches) and public law of privacy in the United States. …

Encyclopedia of Information Ethics and Security

Abstract: Find loads of the encyclopedia of information ethics and security book catalogues in this site as the choice of you visiting this page. You can also join to the website book library that will show you numerous books from any types. Literature, science, politics, and many more catalogues are presented to offer you the best book to find. The book that really makes you feels satisfied. Or that's the book that will save you from your job deadline.

Burning Books and Leveling Libraries: Extremist Violence and Cultural Destruction

Abstract: Burning Books and Leveling Libraries: Extremist Violence and Cultural Destruction Rebecca Knuth. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2006. 233 pp. $39.95.One of the most sobering photographs from the London Blitz is of a bombed-out library. Men in their fedoras, homburgs, and woolen winter coats stand in the rubble reading books that have survived the blast and fire. Ring- ing them are still-standing walls with scorched shelves of books, reaching almost to a roof that no longer exists. The books and the men are exposed to a gray, leaden sky. The men are engrossed in what they are reading, their faces tautly somber, almost oblivious to their circumstances, but perhaps conscious of the incalculable loss.Rebecca Knuth's Burning Books and Leveling Libraries is also a sobering, tautly written account of how and why books and libraries have perished as a result of war, civil upheaval, and totalitarianism. The problem with Knuth's book is that it is basically written from a sociological premise, its power undercut by innervating and uneconomical sociological language. One cannot doubt Knuth's concern about the consequences of biblioclasm, that is, of book burning, the destruction of libraries and museums, and censorship by state policy or anarchic mob violence; she obviously feels very strongly about it. But the constant employment of sociological jargon throughout skews an otherwise thorough delving into the causes of "extremist" violence against knowledge and enfeebles her arguments against such destruction.The Oxford Dictionary definition of sociology is, "The science or study of the origin, history, and constitution of human society; social science." The Britannica Concise Encyclopedia adds "interaction" and "collective behavior" to the definition. Sociology, in short, treats individuals as though they were mere reactive ciphers inhabiting a larger organism, "society"; it minimizes the role of volition and value choices. Its basic measure, as far as I can ascertain, is the statistic.The chief culprit in this respect is the term "extremist," which occurs in the title and is used throughout Knuth's book. An "extremist" ideology or philosophy-as opposed to what? A "moderate" one? The sex act could be deemed an "extremist" manifestation of flirting. A favorite charge today is that reason need not be taken to "extremes"; that it has not been accounts for the growing rule in the world of unreason, reason's "extremist" antipode. The term "extremism" and its derivatives today are pejoratives for something complete, whole, or uncompromised, but nonetheless unwelcome, signifying that it is beyond a "norm." But what is the norm of anything? No moral evaluation of extremism is ever expressed by Knuth, just a fearful disapproval.Politically, for Knuth, the norm is pluralism (not to be confused with value-negating multiculturalism, but that is another issue), a term also frequently employed in her book. The American Heritage Dictionary defines it as "a condition of society in which numerous distinct ethnic, religious or cultural groups coexist within one nation." Pluralism is the abstract, "intellectual" expression of Rodney King's plaintive "Can't we all just get along?" How? By what rules or standards? How can these groups coexist without falling into civil strife if reason is neither respected by any of the groups nor enforced by authorities charged with maintaining the rule of law?"Pluralism" is a secondary consequence, not a cause of civil society under the rule of law. It is reason and the rule of law that have, for example, permitted Baptists, Presbyterians, and atheists to live side by side in the U.S. without either group plotting another's persecution or decimation. These reflect the Enlightenment values that Knuth often cites as threatened or usurped by biblioclasm. However, the absence of reason, for example, underscores the failure of the U.S.'s attempt to create a "pluralistic" Iraq composed of Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds, age-old religious and ethnic enemies. …

Professional Values and Ethics in Knowledge Organization and Cataloging

Abstract: IntroductionEthics "tell people how to act in ways that meet the standard our values set for us" (http://www.ethics.org/faq.html#eth_what. Accessed May 21, 2005), and applied ethics is a field that "attempts to deal with specific realms of human action and to craft criteria for discussion of issues that might arise within those realms" (http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/cavalier/80130/part2/II_preface.html. Accessed March 23, 2005). Professional ethics falls within the domain of applied ethics, and a profession may be defined as "a number of individuals in the same occupation voluntarily organized to earn a living by openly serving a certain moral ideal in a morally-permissible way beyond what law, market, and morality would otherwise require" (Davis, 2002, p. 3). In this context, professional codes of ethics provide guidelines for helping members of the profession develop ethical policies for their work and their workplace. These codes of applied ethics enunciate important general principles, but they do not necessarily help individuals deal with a specific ethical problem. According to Beyerstein (1993), professional codes of ethics reflect the consensus of the professionals for whom they are written, and for that reason cannot also help resolve ethical cases on which no consensus exists. Thus, professional codes can only help in judging obvious cases in which no particular ethical difficulties arise.In the library and information science professions, the codes of the professional associations include ethical statements that clearly apply to the practice of knowledge organization and cataloging (e.g., IFLA, ALA, ALCTS). These codes are subject to the constraint that Beyerstein (1993) recognized. That is, they consist of statements on "motherhood" issues to which no one in the profession would object. For example, all three professional codes include statements enshrining the professional ideal of access to information. IFLA suggests that library associations "emphasize the obligation of the professional to facilitate the unhindered flow of information and ideas...and emphasize the obligation of members to protect and promote the rights of every individual to have free and equal access to sources of information" (http://www.ifla.org/VII/s40/ pub/devpol-e.htm. Accessed March 23, 2005). Similarly, access to information is one of ALA's core values: "All information resources that are provided directly or indirectly by the library regardless of technology, format, or methods of delivery, should be readily and equitably accessible to all library users" (http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/statementspols/corevaluesstatement/corevalues. htm. Accessed March 21, 2005). Likewise, the ALCTS supplement to the ALA code of ethics states that "an ALCTS member strives to provide...broad and unbiased access to information" (http://www.ala.org/ala/alctscontent/alctspubsbucket/alctsresources/general/alctsethics/ethics. Accessed March 23, 2005). At the global level, the right of access to information is part of the United Nations' Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) (1948) (http://www.un.org/Over view/rights.html. Accessed April 3, 2005). More detail and discussion about the right of access to information at the global level appears in Beghtol (2002).Despite the existence of an ideal for which such strong global and professional consensus exists, ethical problems for knowledge organization and cataloging may not be easy to identify and ethical decisions may not be easy to implement in any particular situation. In a study of 37 information association ethical codes, Koehler and Pemberton (2000) found that five groups of people needed to participate in discussions of information ethics in general: users, employers, practitioners, the community, and society at large. The participation of the same five groups of people is presumably equally needed in cases of knowledge organization and cataloging ethics. …

China: A Case Study regarding Transplant Publishing Issues

Abstract: IntroductionOrgan transplantation is somewhat of a stealth activity in China. There are no public databases that disclose China's transplant statistics such as number of transplants performed, source of organ (living versus deceased donor), donor and recipient demographics, or survival statistics. Unlike the US Freedom of Information Act, there is no Chinese equivalent that would require the Chinese government to disclose information about the transplants occurring in its country. Noteworthy, however, is the fact that the websites of Chinese transplant centers frequently boast of their transplant volumes and short waiting times for recipients, as well as even solicit foreigners to come to China to undergo solid organ transplantation. Although organs are in short supply in the US and elsewhere, in China, a steady supply seems to create a foreign demand. This raises the question, who are the donors?Outlawed in China in 1999, Falun Gong refers to five sets of meditation exercises (four standing and one sitting) and spiritual teachings related to Buddhism and Taoism.1 It is believed that up to 70 million people currently practice Falun Gong world-wide, including several thousand practitioners in the United States.2 China has labeled Falun Gong an "evil cult" and views it as a threat to its communist philosophy and government social control.3 There have been numerous allegations that the Chinese government has imprisoned, tortured, and killed known and suspected Falun Gong practitioners.4 These allegations also include live organ retrieval prior to death.5 Human rights organizations such as Amnesty International have published reports denouncing these practices6; yet, to date, the Chinese Government denies such live organ removal occurs.7 It does, however, admit to allowing organ removal after prisoners have been executed.8 Also, Chinese-American patients have admitted to obtaining organs from executed prisoners in China.9In July 2006, two Canadian human rights attorneys prepared a report of their research into the allegations of live organ retrieval from Falun Gong practitioners in China.10 Specifically, their investigation involved taping and transcribing telephone conversations with personnel at eight transplant hospitals in China. All hospitals admitted to either current or past use of organs from Falun Gong practitioners. In the wake of the Matas-Kilgour Report, we further investigated organ transplantation in China by exploring physician publishing practices. Journal articles are a tool by which transplant centers promote their programs; thus, publication of clinical or research data obtained via unethical practices propels the work of these programs. We sought to answer the following questions: Are journals publishing the work of hospitals with ethically problematic transplant practices? What are the characteristics of these journals? What ethics criteria do these journals employ?MethodsFigure 1 presents a research methods pictorial. Specifically, PubMed (1966-August 2006) was searched for all articles reporting cases of solid organ transplantation that were authored by physicians affiliated with the eight hospitals in the Matas-Kilgour telephonic investigation. China was the country of focus in this study as, to the best of our knowledge, it is the only country in which multiple hospitals have admitted to participating in transplant atrocities (refer to Matas-Kilgour report). Articles were excluded if they were topical review articles that did not report transplants performed at their facility. The articles obtained were reviewed for content pertaining to the donor organ source and donor/family consent. Also, the characteristics (location, language, impact factor) of the journals that published these articles were reviewed as well as the ethics components (authorship, informed consent, research board approval, conflict of interest, data integrity) of their publication policies ("Instructions for Authors"). …

A Social Contract for Health Information

Abstract: Knowledge and PrivacyAs U.S. health care slowly moves toward an integrated system of electronic health records, questions of justice with respect to the use of health information become more pressing (Safran et al., 2006). Better information should mean more knowledgeable providers and patients. But it also will mean more knowledgeable insurers, which in the U.S. gives health insurers greater selectivity about whose coverage to deny or whose premiums to increase. This paper argues that from a social contract point of view of health information, such risk selection by insurers is unjust. The argument is based on the definitive work of John Rawls (1971; 1996; 2001). The injustice of risk selection can easily be remedied by regulation.It is misleading to view moral issues about health information as entirely about "privacy." A morally significant idea of privacy depends on the situation in which information is used (Havani, 2007). In health care and in insurance, sharing information on health risks is a necessary and normal part of management. The 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, for instance, reflects this by giving the entities covered by this law permission to disclose protected health information, if this disclosure is part of "treatment, payment, or health care operations" (45 CFR 164.502[a][1][ii]). This reasonable exception for health care operations, however, is quite broad and includes insurers.Suppose that a patient checks into a hospital and gives consent for relevant information to be shared among care providers, but then the patient is found to have another condition requiring treatment by other providers; for example, the patient has an infection but is found to have HIV. No one would want to impose a barrier to the provision of care, even if the patient is incapacitated and unable to give consent.But payment for care is also part of health care operations. As is explained below, in nearly every case this must be done by some form of health insurance, whether public or private. It is inevitable and necessary to share information with health insurers. The important moral question is what insurers do with this information. This paper argues that there are clear moral limits on this.Health InsuranceInjustice with respect to access to health insurance is especially pressing because, in nearly all cases, health care must be distributed by means of insurance, either public or private. It is worth noting, however, why this point may not have always seemed important, and has not figured in the literature on health care justice. Moral problems about health insurance are superficial in contrast with the morally deeper problem of prioritizing care. Access to health insurance coverage does not determine what is covered and in what order of priority. So this paper will leave untouched the deeper problem of health care justice.But for a social contract theory of health justice it is helpful to distinguish the issue of health insurance access from the deeper issues. Moral questions about health insurance resemble the questions about equity with respect to class and wealth that motivate social contract theories. It is helpful to see that this part of the problem of health care justice can be treated in this familiar way. The leading social contract theorist of health care justice, Norman Daniels (1985), overlooks the possibility of this partial solution to the problem of health care justice, perhaps in part because the deeper problem of prioritization is not addressed this way.This paper, however, does not deal with the issue of income distribution because equity in wealth and income is already a central issue in any social contract theory. This paper moves beyond this issue by assuming that if any of the parties does not have enough money to make insurance payments, wealth or income is redistributed to make these payments on that party's behalf. This paper then argues that the problem of health insurance access can be reduced to the familiar problem of equity with respect to wealth. …

Ethical, Unethical, or Benign: Technical Services Decisions and Access to Information

Abstract: No matter what libraries do in the way of information architecture (Morville, 2000), they are always engaged from the start in developing, maintaining, and cultivating a selective collection of resources for a specified library community. A library, like a corporation, a non-profit association, or an educational institution, will endeavor to fulfill a proposed mission and state this publicly-it usually does not try to be more than it is. How the library delivers the content of its collection, whether through books on shelves or through electronic databases, may have consequences for patrons. Some of these consequences can be a direct result of Technical Services decisions about purchases, cataloging, or even technology used in the provision of resources.The one glitch in considering ethical questions regarding libraries and access to information is that every library is unique and different, and meant to be that way. Each library, whether public, special, or academic, has its own particular vision and purpose, its own particular collection, its own library community, its own budget, and its own technical services department. It might be easier to think in terms of the physical library. One library's newspapers and journals are on the main floor, and another locates its serials on the second floor. Each makes decisions to best serve its library patrons, and each makes these decisions with pre-existing conditions. The main floor seems like easier access, but maybe the second floor is quieter. If the library is an old building with no elevator, handicapped individuals will not enjoy the same privacy in browsing if they need to ask a staff member for help in retrieving an item from the upper floors. Additionally, public libraries struggle with providing full Internet access in an environment that must consider the needs of adults and children (and requirements for federal funding). Trying to compare different libraries and information access is almost impossible. Still, librarians from all types of libraries continually meet in a wider arena and work at establishing benchmarks and "best practices" in their efforts to be the best they can be.Librarians, like other professionals, agree on standards to perform their duties in a professional and ethical way. Often a profession (e.g., law, medicine, psychology) will emphasize standards of conduct, or confidentiality, or consent, or human rights. Librarians do follow the "Code of Ethics of the American Library Association" (American Library Association, 1995). But technical services departments and catalogers in particular work toward uniformity in library practices to afford patrons easy access to information, and so use the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules and the Library of Congress Subjects Headings, for example. A library could be compared to a news "source" in that it strives for objectivity and aims to provide patrons access to information to research, interpret, and analyze. A library would never want to consider itself a "gatekeeper" of information, although by its very nature (it very purposefully develops a collection) it certainly is. However, in technical services, the emphasis is on providing access to all information and resources the library has in its collection. It never asks, "Should we provide access?," it only asks, "how can we best provide access?" What is the alternative? "While Google's ambitious project could help millions of Internet users gain access to information once buried deep in library stacks, some question whether a forprofit company should be a gatekeeper for such vast storehouses of knowledge" (Swartz, 2005).Within the limits of its mission, a library could be found to be succeeding or failing its patrons in its "competency in supplying adequate or correct information" (Froehlich, 2004). The decisions of a technical services department do affect how or whether information is accessed, and the results could be seen as unethical or negligent. …

Dangerous Questions at the Reference Desk: A Virtue Ethics Approach

Abstract: The study of ethical dilemmas (even if they are only hypothetical) is an effective way of identifying the potential contrast between individual interests, moral commitments, and professional expectations. Once such competing directives are brought to light, the student of such dilemmas can begin the uncomfortable but (it is to be hoped) edifying work of adopting a plan for bringing such divergent claims to a satisfactory resolution should she ever find herself in a similar situation.For reference librarians, the "granddaddy" of such dilemmas was posed by Robert Hauptman. He approached the desk staff at thirteen different libraries and asked for information on the construction of an explosive device of sufficient power to destroy "a normal suburban house" (1976, p.626).1 Hauptman provided no further indication of how he intended to use this information. None of the librarians refused to comply with Hauptman's request on moral grounds, nor did they make serious attempts at further probing of Hauptman's intentions, although two found unrelated excuses for being less than helpful. It is very likely that these helpful librarians understood themselves to be fulfilling professional expectations of how librarians are supposed to respond to patron requests. Such expectations find expression in the American Library Association's statements on intellectual freedom (http://www.ala. org/Template.cfm?Section=censorship). These statements can be interpreted to mean that it is the librarian's duty to help the inquiring patron find any information that is available on any subject. To refuse service amounts to an unwarranted restriction of the patron's "freedom to read." Hauptman criticizes the philosophy that lies behind such policies as an abdication of responsibility on the part of the librarian with regard to whom they help and to what extent. The response of the librarians in this study shows a disturbing lack of concern for the consequences of their actions.2 If library policies and training are such that library employees consistently value providing helpful reference service over refusing to cooperate in the endangerment of others, something is seriously amiss with such policies and training.Whether one agrees with Hauptman's criticisms or not, it is apparent that the situation he has constructed brings many divergent ethical considerations to the fore. Should conformity to library policy be the primary concern in librarians' interactions with patrons who ask "dangerous questions"? Should the librarian refuse service on the grounds that assisting the patron may result in harm to the patron and to others? Should the patron's "freedom to read" be protected or promoted no matter what the cost? What should the librarian do when his appraisal of the situation differs from that encouraged by his ors and by policies that they set forth?If one turns to theoretical ethics for guidance in understanding and resolving the situation, one's choice of theories will determine which aspects of the situation will appear most morally salient. For consequentialists, the potential harm accompanying each possible course of action will figure most prominently. For formalist deontologists, selecting a course of action consistent with universally applicable moral rules will be most crucial. The Kantian imperative to treat others as ends in themselves rather than as means to one's own ends springs to mind, but what precisely would that entail in this situation? For For social contract theorists, the central issue will be observing those social conventions deemed essential for peaceful, mutually beneficial coexistence with one another. To have librarians dispense information liberally is a beneficial social convention, but so is refraining from the destruction of property and the endangerment of others. For students of virtue ethics, the quality of the traits of character exhibited by one's actions will be of foremost concern.If one had to select a single approach from among the choices above,3 virtue ethics would be the best candidate, since it is sufficiently flexible to accommodate each of the moral demands presented when patrons approach the reference desk with dangerous questions. …

Cuba's Independent Library Movement Reconsidered

Abstract: The Meaning of Intellectual FreedomLibrarians have traditionally defended "intellectual freedom," the idea that truth is best assessed by an ongoing, open process weighing all ideas and information, and that libraries exist to foster this process, not to bias its outcome by censorship. Since intellectual freedom is inherently welcoming to new ideas and corrosive of prescriptive tradition, it has come to be associated with the "Left," so librarians also tend to identify with that label. But using labels can come to replace thinking, and ideas can turn into mere slogans whose meaning is forgotten.Many librarians naturally want to support both "intellectual freedom" and any regime that calls itself "leftist" or "progressive," but if that regime censors inconvenient information and dissenting viewpoints, the potential conflict between the two loyalties is obvious. In practice, for many, the solution is simply to change our definition of "intellectual freedom." In its revised version, we subconsciously qualify it so that it protects only "progressive" viewpoints and information, but not "regressive" ideas and "dangerous" information. We seldom think about the new definition, let alone formulate it in writing; it is a defensive reflex, ready to kick in whenever a leftist government is challenged for censorship.This dichotomy is easy to apply only if all controversial writings group themselves neatly at opposite ends of a Left/Right polarity. Cuban censorship of the non-Marxist Left and of "deviationist" Marxists along with centrists and the Right, and the condemnation of the Cuban repression by the Socialist International (Socialist International, 2003) suggest that reality is more complicated. But more importantly, such a dichotomy betrays the essential meaning of intellectual freedom. Even the leadership of the Inquisition agreed that there should be complete freedom to propagate "truth." If the first defenders of intellectual freedom had proposed it only as a defense for their tribal version of "truth," it would have been nothing new. What made it radically new is its granting of freedom also to ideas with which its defenders do not agree. In the words of the ALA Freedom to Read Statement: "It is in the public interest ... to make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those that are unorthodox, unpopular, or considered dangerous by the majority" (ALA, 2004)."Freedom" only for approved viewpoints is not "freedom" at all. Redefining it as such repudiates, rather than defends, our traditional professional ideals. We can choose ultimate loyalty to anything labeled "left," even when that requires defending censorship, ultimate loyalty to intellectual freedom; and your choice need not be the same as mine. But we cannot simultaneously choose both; and the sooner we recognize this, the sooner we bring clarity to this discussion.Cuba's Economic/Political SituationCuban dissent exists in a context which is far from a "worker's paradise": Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Cuba has been going through what it calls the "Special Period" ... energy consumption is drastically reduced, oxen are put to work in the fields, people get around on bicycles, and food rations are slashed to a minimum survival level. Once recognized as one of the best in the Third World, the health care system in Cuba today is such that patients must bring their own bedsheets to the hospital, and surgeons are given one bar of soap per month with which to wash their hands.... In ironic contrast to the living conditions of the locals, tourists in Cuba enjoy the best of accommodations, food, and drink. For the tourist, nothing is lacking.... The ration under the Special Period consists of a piece of bread per person per day, three eggs per week, and a portion of fish or chicken per month. A family of four gets one small bottle of cooking oil four times a year, and milk is available only for children under the age of eight. …

The Institutional Review Board

Abstract: Processing of applications requiring either expedited or full board review will end on the last day of the Summer semester, August 5, and resume at the beginning of the Fall semester, August 29. Protocols eligible for exempt and non-human subjects research determinations will continue to be reviewed during the 3-week break between semesters. The first meeting of the IRB for the academic year is reserved for IRB member training. Protocols requiring full board review and received by September 9 will be scheduled for presentation at the September 23 meeting. The schedule of IRB meetings and submissions deadlines for AY 2016-17 is posted on the IRB web site.

Citation Ethics : Practical Ethics on How and When to Cite Sources in Articles

Abstract: I. How to Cite SourcesConventional wisdom has it that the way one cites sources is purely a matter of style, that is, of aesthetics. Since one of the key notions in aesthetics is symmetry-those who follow the conventional wisdom value consistency- which editors call parallelism -above all. This conventional wisdom is almost universally shared, with each discipline having its own conventional style. As one source puts it, "[A]rtists and artisans have worked creatively within the tight constraints imposed by strictly interpreted symmetry principles."1 This view, shared by most editors and publishers, does not distinguish between the artist and the artisan, between what R. G. Collingwood called "art" and "craft."2I do not share this view, but consider almost all writing of the expository or argumentative sort-most definitely including today's academic writing- to be craft, rather than art. Success at the craft of this sort of writing is plicity and which, unlike graceful or elegant writing of the literary type, is most successful if it goes entirely unnoticed. When the reader starts to consciously attend to the writing-or, as we shall soon discuss, the citations-it is an almost certain sign that something is seriously amiss with how the text is written, focused, or structured. As DeWitt H. Parker writes: Althoughevery one hears, no one attends to the sound of the voice in ordinary conversation; one looks through it, as through a glass, to the thought or emotion behind. In our routine perceptions of nature, we are not interested in colors and shapes on their own account, but only in order that we may recognize the objects possessing them; in a scientific woodcut also, they are indifferent to us, except in so far as they impart correct information about the objects portrayed. Outside of art, sensation is a mere transparent means to the end of communication and recognition. Compare the poem, the piece of music, the artistic drawing or painting. There the words or tones must be not only heard but listened to; the colors and lines not only seen but held in the eye; of themselves, apart from anything they may further mean, they have the power to awaken feeling and pleasure. And this is no accident. For the aesthetic expression is intended to possess worth in itself and is deliberately fashioned to hold us to itself, and this purpose will be more certainly and effectively accomplished if the medium of the expression has the power to move and please. We enter the aesthetic expression through the sensuous medium; hence the artist tries to charm us at the start and on the outside; having found favor there, he wins us the more easily to the content lying within. Ifthe medium, moreover, instead of being a transparent embodiment of the artist's feelings, can express them in some direct fashion as well, the power of the whole expression will gain. This is exactly what the sound of the words of a poem or the colors and lines of a painting or statue can do. As mere sound and as mere color and line, they convey something of the feeling tone of the subject which, as symbols, they are used to represent.3 Accordingto the conventional view, the view held by virtually all editors and publishers, with some form of consistency paramount, citations are variants on one of three good old standbys: the in-text (author, date: page) style, the traditional footnote style, and either a numbered bibliography at the end or a similar structure using endnotes, in both cases with the number appearing in-text. Some have argued that an alphabetical bibliography be present in addition to in-text citations (which mandate a bibliography at the close), and footnotes or endnotes (which do not so mandate), a practice we will henceforth follow in all articles prepared for this journal.* *TheWe take an entirely different view of writing and, therefore, of citation methods, the teleological view that harks back to Plato4 and Aristotle. …

The Ethics of Self-Citation : Good Reasons and Bad to Cite Oneself

Abstract: Pioneering information scientist Eugene Garfield lists among the reasons one (should) cite(s) others "homage to pioneers" and "homage to peers."1 We differ; articles are addressed to readers; homage is for a dedication or, perhaps, an acknowledgment. Garfield, of course, founded ISI, which derives its income in some positive correlation to the number of citations in the articles it indexes. This is not to call Garfield's motives into question: Most successful entrepreneurs believe in their enterprises, and Garfield is no exception. That's all.Even Garfield, however, would no doubt agree that paying homage to oneself is ignoble. In this brevity, we consider how rules 1, 2, and 3, in the essay following this column (see p. 54ff, below), are to be applied, with this caution in mind.Rule 1. If it is for the readers, it stays in, even if the source is oneself.Exception: If, however, it is merely an example used to illustrate a point and not itself related to the argument, it should be omitted, if not from the body of the article, then at least from the references that PsycInfo, Sociological Abstracts, ISI's databases, etc., will record.To illustrate this, let me give several examples-from my own work. I choose my own work for several reasons: (a) As I remark in the succeeding essay about editors and referees who routinely suggest that their own work be cited, they do so no doubt for the reason I do: I, like them, am most familiar with my own work. (b) Moreover, I have what philosophers call "privileged access" to my own thoughts. I know exactly why I chose to cite or not cite particular references (at least for my more recent work). (c) Com- ments, including critical comments, cannot be taken by the author as subjecting his work at random to a microscope, perhaps displaying small particles not visible at the macroscopic level. This last reason, then, has an ethical component.On to the examples: (1) In "Multiple Publication Reconsidered" (this journal, Fall 1998), I cited myself 13 times. The entire argument-that in some cases multiple publication is constructive, even ethically imperative- was made by example* in that piece: Without the examples, there was no paper at all! Moreover, many claims supporting the constructive and ethical purposes of multiple publication were advanced, none of which the scholar (i.e., the intended reader) could verify without full bibliographic citations. The one other self-citation, to prior work, was a reference to the idea that publication itself is ethically imperative, for one cannot argue that multiple publication can be ethically imperative, if publication itself is not, and it is better to cite oneself than to repeat an article under circumstances that themselves clearly do not meet the criteria for multiple publication!(2) In "Peer Review: Three Suggestions in the Spirit of 'Mend It, Don't End It'" (this journal, Fall 2007), I referred to both a large and a small contrarian idea that had difficulty getting published in peer-reviewed journals. The large idea was creationism; the small idea was the assertion that virtually all uses of the conditional in ordinary English have truth-functional semantics. For the former, I gave the name of the journal that finally broke the ice; for the latter-my own contrarian views-I gave no specifics. Since the purpose of that piece was to provide suggestions for mending the peer-review process, it would have been entirely out-of-place to list the arguments and the references giving my views on this other subject. And, if readers doubted that contrarian views do have difficulty getting past the hurdle of peer review, they were referred to a more general article on just that subject by another scholar. Here, it would clearly have been inappropriate to cite myself. (Although when a reader asked me why I did not do so, I promptly sent him a list of references.)(3) In "What Happens When an Author Does Not Provide an Abstract" (Journal of Scholarly Publishing, January 2006), I again made an argumentby-example, an inductive rather than analytic, approach. …

Tensions in Cataloging : Observations on Standards and Implementation

Abstract: IntroductionIt is usually agreed that the general objectives for the creation of library catalogs as stated by Cutter in 1876 (1889) and Lubetzky in 1961 (1963, 139, 1st objective) are still valid and relevant, despite the fact that these bibliographic tools are constantly evolving and transforming. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records model (FRBR) requires that bibliographic data allow end-users to find, identify, select and obtain documents that correspond to expressed search criteria (IFLA, 1998, 8-9). A library catalog can be described as a type of bibliographic file that has the distinctive feature to gather descriptive records for a given library collection, be it physical or virtual. Thus the principal function of a library catalog is to provide bibliographic control for a collection of documents, i.e., to perform the operations by which the information is organized and structured according to one or several established standards in order to render this information easily identifiable and available. The two fundamental objectives of catalogs, identification and retrieval, are usually achieved by creating standardized descriptions by analyzing the content in order to describe the intellectual content, by classifying the items in order to group them in meaningful categories, by adding a variety of controlled access keys, and indexing, in total or in part, the textual content of these descriptions. The fulfillment of these objectives is undoubtedly guided by the creation and the maintenance of bibliographic description and encoding standards (AACR, LCSH, MARC), but is also influenced by the development of new features of online information retrieval systems. As a result, even if the objectives for the creation of library catalogs remain more or less stable over the years, the means available to fulfill these objectives evolve rapidly. Recently, the improvement of text information retrieval techniques and the development of hypertextual interfaces have facilitated the development of more and more sophisticated retrieval features in library catalogs.Coordinating the development and the application of bibliographic dards, on one hand, and the development of text retrieval systems, on the other, is not a small task. The encounter of these two worlds is fairly recent and greatly suffers from a lack of communication and understanding. The rapid developments in the world of text information retrieval bring new opportunities to information systems designers and allow greater freedom to system managers for the local implementation of these systems. Adding new retrieval features often improves the search capabilities in online catalogs. It also seems that the implementation of these new retrieval functions can sometimes have a negative impact on the quality of retrieval, because these features are not always specifically designed for the type of data contained in library catalogs. Unfortunately, these retrieval features are not standardized and may vary considerably from one system to another. It is not possible to adapt bibliographic standards according to every system's design. Nevertheless, there has been an attempt in past years to develop minimal display standards for bibliographic records in catalogs to provide a standard to guide system designers and managers in their work (IFLA, 2003). The perfect system does not exist and it is always necessary to adapt bibliographic standards locally in order to comply with the constraints and restrictions imposed by the system. The parameters selected and applied during the local implementation of these systems will also have an impact on the manner that data are displayed and used, and this in turn may also require internal modifications to the local metadata creation procedures. We are in an evolutionary environment that focuses increasingly on data exchange and collaboration between organizations, where data and system system interoperability is crucial. …

Research in Society : Valuing Research in Concept but Not Always in Practice

Abstract: IntroductionThe discussion of access to information is relevant to professions such as library and information science-a profession that values the importance of information-and is based on fostering access and supporting research and innovation As is the case with professions, such as journalism, library and information science has as its basis the support of the principles of a democratic society, as defined by the founders to include the role of an informed citizenry, which is capable of full participation in society, the support for research and innovation, and some measure of transparency of governmentIn this regard, full participation in society necessarily includes participation in the political and policy making processes and in overall civic engagement, including informed decision making in these contexts, as well as in the individual's private and professional life Consistent with the principle of access to information is the concern of the conduct of research for a range of purposes and the presentation of data and the results of analysis in the education and preparation of individuals to be informed consumers to support their full participation in societyResearch is conducted by scholars and professionals, such as scientists, as well as humanists and social scientists and journalists, among many others In the context of a society that has gone from published research in print in monographs and periodicals, including newspapers, and fifteen minute news broadcasts before the Vietnam War to online books, journals, and other web resources, and 24-hour news, from three networks to network, cable, international, and online news and blogs, access to and the scrutiny of research has expanded dramatically In addition, although research can be produced and presented more quickly, there are also documented examples of flawed research in many formsWith exemplars from a range of sectors and societal contexts, the conflicted position over research from the individual, organizational, and societal perspective can be documented The rationale for conducting and communicating the results of research, the role of individuals as consumers of research on their own behalf or in their professional roles, the factors that contribute to public apprehension about and mistrust of research, and innovative models of presenting research in the complex environment of the knowledge economy provide the context for this discussion and analysisResearch in SocietyIt is necessary to consider the rationale for conducting research and for communicating the results To a large extent, the historic basis for the conduct of research was that of testing conventional wisdom and rules of thumb in order to enhance work in organizations, foster scientific progress, and to address societal concerns In a general sense, research can be defined as systematic inquiry and a search for new knowledge The purpose of research is to further the understanding of an issue or phenomenon and, potentially, to enhance decision making Original research, in particular, is intended to answer research questions or test hypotheses Secondary research, enhanced by some level of analysis, presumably, provides the opportunity for consideration and application of research results in additional areas of inquiry and practice Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner, authors of the New York Times bestseller Freakonomics, have addressed the role and importance of research, with a particular focus on the value of quantitative research: "Knowing what to measure and how to measure it makes a complicated world much less so If you learn to look at data in the right way, you can explain riddles that might otherwise have seemed impossible Because there is nothing like the sheer power of numbers to scrub away layers of confusion and contradiction" (p 12)A number of current and historical examples indicate the bases for fostering access to research and information, in support of informed participation in society, either through education, the media, or government itself, including public institutions such as libraries …