认知权威:实证研究范围综述。信息科学与技术年度评论》(ARIST)论文

IF 2.8 2区 管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Noora Hirvonen, Anna‐Maija Multas, Tuula Nygård, Maija‐Leena Huotari
{"title":"认知权威:实证研究范围综述。信息科学与技术年度评论》(ARIST)论文","authors":"Noora Hirvonen, Anna‐Maija Multas, Tuula Nygård, Maija‐Leena Huotari","doi":"10.1002/asi.24942","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a scoping review of 25 years of research on the notion of cognitive authority (CA), examining its conceptualization and empirical examination. The review follows the PRISMA statement and its extension for scoping reviews. Peer‐reviewed journal articles on CA were identified through database searching with the specific search term “cognitive authorit*” in the title or abstract and covering work published in 2022 or earlier. In total, 235 unique references were identified, and their abstracts and then selected full texts were screened according to predetermined exclusion criteria. In total, 40 articles were included in the review, extracted, and analyzed with qualitative content analysis focusing on the conceptualization of CA, the methodological approach taken to examine it, and the different spheres of knowledge and levels of activity the research addressed. Based on this analysis, four parallel lines of research were identified including studies conceptualizing CA: (1) as an indicator of information source quality, (2) as discursively constructed, (3) as situated in social mechanisms and settings, and (4) as institutional legitimacy of science and professions. This body of research has extended Wilson's (1983; <jats:italic>Second‐hand knowledge: An inquiry into cognitive authority</jats:italic>. Greenwood Press) original work contributing to our understanding of CA at individual, communal, and societal levels.","PeriodicalId":48810,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive authority: A scoping review of empirical research. An Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) paper\",\"authors\":\"Noora Hirvonen, Anna‐Maija Multas, Tuula Nygård, Maija‐Leena Huotari\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/asi.24942\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article provides a scoping review of 25 years of research on the notion of cognitive authority (CA), examining its conceptualization and empirical examination. The review follows the PRISMA statement and its extension for scoping reviews. Peer‐reviewed journal articles on CA were identified through database searching with the specific search term “cognitive authorit*” in the title or abstract and covering work published in 2022 or earlier. In total, 235 unique references were identified, and their abstracts and then selected full texts were screened according to predetermined exclusion criteria. In total, 40 articles were included in the review, extracted, and analyzed with qualitative content analysis focusing on the conceptualization of CA, the methodological approach taken to examine it, and the different spheres of knowledge and levels of activity the research addressed. Based on this analysis, four parallel lines of research were identified including studies conceptualizing CA: (1) as an indicator of information source quality, (2) as discursively constructed, (3) as situated in social mechanisms and settings, and (4) as institutional legitimacy of science and professions. This body of research has extended Wilson's (1983; <jats:italic>Second‐hand knowledge: An inquiry into cognitive authority</jats:italic>. Greenwood Press) original work contributing to our understanding of CA at individual, communal, and societal levels.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24942\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24942","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文对 25 年来有关认知权威(CA)概念的研究进行了概括性综述,考察了其概念化和实证研究。本综述遵循 PRISMA 声明及其范围界定综述的扩展。通过数据库检索,在标题或摘要中使用特定检索词 "认知权威*",并涵盖 2022 年或更早发表的有关 CA 的同行评审期刊论文。总共确定了 235 篇独特的参考文献,并根据预先确定的排除标准筛选了这些文献的摘要和所选全文。总共有 40 篇文章被纳入综述,并进行了提取和定性内容分析,重点关注 CA 的概念化、研究 CA 所采用的方法以及研究涉及的不同知识领域和活动水平。在分析的基础上,确定了四条平行的研究路线,包括将 CA 概念化的研究:(1) 作为信息源质量的指标,(2) 作为话语建构,(3) 位于社会机制和环境中,(4) 作为科学和专业的机构合法性。这一系列研究扩展了威尔逊(1983;二手知识:An inquiry into cognitive authority.格林伍德出版社)的原创性工作,有助于我们理解个人、社区和社会层面的 CA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cognitive authority: A scoping review of empirical research. An Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) paper
This article provides a scoping review of 25 years of research on the notion of cognitive authority (CA), examining its conceptualization and empirical examination. The review follows the PRISMA statement and its extension for scoping reviews. Peer‐reviewed journal articles on CA were identified through database searching with the specific search term “cognitive authorit*” in the title or abstract and covering work published in 2022 or earlier. In total, 235 unique references were identified, and their abstracts and then selected full texts were screened according to predetermined exclusion criteria. In total, 40 articles were included in the review, extracted, and analyzed with qualitative content analysis focusing on the conceptualization of CA, the methodological approach taken to examine it, and the different spheres of knowledge and levels of activity the research addressed. Based on this analysis, four parallel lines of research were identified including studies conceptualizing CA: (1) as an indicator of information source quality, (2) as discursively constructed, (3) as situated in social mechanisms and settings, and (4) as institutional legitimacy of science and professions. This body of research has extended Wilson's (1983; Second‐hand knowledge: An inquiry into cognitive authority. Greenwood Press) original work contributing to our understanding of CA at individual, communal, and societal levels.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
8.60%
发文量
115
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) is a leading international forum for peer-reviewed research in information science. For more than half a century, JASIST has provided intellectual leadership by publishing original research that focuses on the production, discovery, recording, storage, representation, retrieval, presentation, manipulation, dissemination, use, and evaluation of information and on the tools and techniques associated with these processes. The Journal welcomes rigorous work of an empirical, experimental, ethnographic, conceptual, historical, socio-technical, policy-analytic, or critical-theoretical nature. JASIST also commissions in-depth review articles (“Advances in Information Science”) and reviews of print and other media.
×
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