More than Lip Service

J. Winberry
{"title":"More than Lip Service","authors":"J. Winberry","doi":"10.33137/IJIDI.V5I2.34806","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social justice is increasingly identifiable within library and information science (LIS) research and practice. However, numerous scholars have raised the concern that social justice has been commodified in order to benefit the powerful and therefore the possibility of actual and constructive change has been minimized in numerous cases. In response, this researcher undertook a literature review of self-identified “social justice” research in 2 large academic databases—Library Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA) and Library and Information Science Source (LISS)—in order to identify the types of social justice research in LIS. The result of the review identified 247 records and included results from peer reviewed journals, books, and conference proceedings from which a typology of 2 research types (e.g., knowledge and practice) and 8 sub-types (e.g., metatheoretical, theoretical, ideational, methodological, empirical, narrative, professional, and pedagogical) was identified. Identification of this typology is helpful for organizing existing social justice research within LIS, assisting in the examination of connections between theories and methods, and contributing to a broader goal of arguing that social justice is an emerging sub-discipline within LIS. Future research is needed to grow this typology and increase research in areas that remain understudied such as LIS-centered metatheoretical, theoretical, and methodological social justice research.","PeriodicalId":232185,"journal":{"name":"The International Journal of Information, Diversity, & Inclusion (IJIDI)","volume":"77 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International Journal of Information, Diversity, & Inclusion (IJIDI)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33137/IJIDI.V5I2.34806","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Social justice is increasingly identifiable within library and information science (LIS) research and practice. However, numerous scholars have raised the concern that social justice has been commodified in order to benefit the powerful and therefore the possibility of actual and constructive change has been minimized in numerous cases. In response, this researcher undertook a literature review of self-identified “social justice” research in 2 large academic databases—Library Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA) and Library and Information Science Source (LISS)—in order to identify the types of social justice research in LIS. The result of the review identified 247 records and included results from peer reviewed journals, books, and conference proceedings from which a typology of 2 research types (e.g., knowledge and practice) and 8 sub-types (e.g., metatheoretical, theoretical, ideational, methodological, empirical, narrative, professional, and pedagogical) was identified. Identification of this typology is helpful for organizing existing social justice research within LIS, assisting in the examination of connections between theories and methods, and contributing to a broader goal of arguing that social justice is an emerging sub-discipline within LIS. Future research is needed to grow this typology and increase research in areas that remain understudied such as LIS-centered metatheoretical, theoretical, and methodological social justice research.
不只是说说而已
社会公正在图书馆和信息科学(LIS)的研究和实践中越来越明显。然而,许多学者提出了一种担忧,即社会正义已被商品化,以使权势者受益,因此在许多情况下,实际和建设性变革的可能性已被最小化。为此,本研究在图书馆信息科学与技术文摘(LISTA)和图书馆信息科学来源(LISS)两个大型学术数据库中对自我认同的“社会公正”研究进行了文献综述,以确定图书馆信息科学与技术文摘中社会公正研究的类型。评审结果确定了247份记录,包括同行评审期刊、书籍和会议论文集的结果,从中确定了2种研究类型(例如,知识和实践)和8种研究类型(例如,元理论、理论、观念、方法、经验、叙事、专业和教学)。识别这一类型学有助于组织现有的社会正义研究,有助于检查理论和方法之间的联系,并有助于实现更广泛的目标,即社会正义是美国法律中一个新兴的子学科。未来的研究需要发展这一类型学,并在以lis为中心的元理论、理论和方法论社会正义研究等尚未得到充分研究的领域增加研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信