- Isto Huvila, Department of ALM, Uppsala University (email@example.com)
- Jennifer Douglas, School of Information, University of British Columbia, (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Tim Gorichanaz, College of Computing & Informatics, Drexel University (email@example.com)
- Kyungwon Koh, School of Information Sciences, The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Anna Suorsa, Research Unit of History, Culture and Communication, Faculty of Humanities, University of Oulu (email@example.com)
Traditionally, information science research has focused much less attention on information creation than on many other aspects of information behaviour and practices. It has been typically acknowledged as part of the life-cycle of information and an aspect of the totality of information behaviour (Bates, 2010). It has also been represented to varying degrees in classic models of information processes and activities (Gorichanaz, 2019), and acknowledged as an existing albeit under-researched area in information science research (Trace, 2007) and practice (e.g. Huvila, 2011; Woxland et al., 2017). Nevertheless, the topic of how information is created, made or produced has remained both conceptually and empirically underdeveloped. Only recently, a new body of research has started to explore diverse facets of information creation at the same time as information creation has been acknowledged as a key aspect of information literacy (ACRL, 2015). Increasingly, scholars and practitioners alike are recognizing how the usefulness and relevance of the information being sought and retrieved are dependent on the conditions and process of its creation.
Information creation has been approached so far from different empirical and theoretical directions. Conceptually it covers a field of research investigating diverse activities of creating, making and producing information in different forms. Under the broad umbrella of information creation fits also activities conceptualised in the literature sometimes as knowledge creation, knowledge production, records creation, information making, documentation and document creation, information production and records creation, information-creating behavior, and making and maker spaces.
The aim of this special issue is to gather and publish articles highlighting and pushing forward the current state-of-the-art in information creation research. The issue continues the work started as a part of the panel “Conceptualising and studying information creation: from production and processes to makers and making” (Huvila et al, 2020) organised by the editors of this issue at the 2020 ASIS&T Annual Meeting.
Relating to information creation, this special issue is particularly interested in:
- empirical studies of (e.g.) information, knowledge, data, documents and records creation, making and production pointing to new empirical or conceptual understanding or lines of inquiry in the field
- expansion, evolution, development and exploration of theories and models relevant to information creation
- studies inquiring into the implications of information creation for other practices
This issue seeks relevant and rigorous submissions in the above areas. Submissions that offer a descriptive analysis only – and not a contribution to a general understanding of information creation – will not be considered for review. Submissions will be evaluated using the criteria set out in LISR.
- Initial submissions due January 10, 2022
- Peer reviews sent to authors by April 4, 2022
- Revised submissions due June 6, 2022
- Projected publication of first articles by early/mid July, 2022
References and literature
- ACRL. (2015). Framework for information literacy for higher education. Chicago, IL: American Library Association. http://www.ala.org/acrl/files/issues/infolit/framework.pdf
- Bates, M. J. (2010). Information Behavior. In Encyclopedia of library and information sciences, third edition (pp. 2381–2391). Boca Raton: CRC Press. http://doi.org/10.1081/E-ELIS3-120043263
- Blum-Ross, A., Kumpulainen, K., & Marsh, J. (Eds.) (2019). Enhancing Digital Literacy and Creativity. London: Routledge.
- Buckland, M. K. (1997). What is a "document"? JASIS, 48(9), 804–809.
- Douglas, J. (2018). A call to rethink archival creation: exploring types of creation in personal archives. Archival Science, 18(1), 29–49.
- Faniel, I. M., Frank, R. D., & Yakel, E. (2019). Context from the data reuser’s point of view. JDOC, 75(6), 1274–1297.
- Foscarini, F. (2010). Understanding the context of records creation and use: Hard versus soft approaches to records management. Archival Science, 10(4), 389–407.
- Foster, J.; Benford, S. & Price, D. (2013). Digital Archiving as Information Production: Using Experts and Learners in the Design of Subject Access. JDOC, 69(6), 773-785.
- Fourie, I., & Meyer, A. (2015). What to make of makerspaces: Tools and DIY only or is there an interconnected information resources space? Library Hi Tech, 33(4), 519–525.
- Gorichanaz, T. (2017). Understanding art-making as documentation. Art Documentation, 36(2), 191–203.
- Gorichanaz, T. (2019). A first-person theory of documentation. JDOC, 75(1), 190–212.
- Henttonen, P. (2015). Dimensions of contextual records management classifications. Knowledge Organization, 42(7), 477–485.
- Huvila, I. (2011). The Complete Information Literacy? Unforgetting Creation and Organisation of Information. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 43(4), 237–245.
- Huvila, I. (2018). Ecology of archaeological information work. In Huvila, I. (Ed.), Archaeology and Archaeological Information in the Digital Society (pp. 121–141). London: Routledge.
- Huvila, I., Douglas, J., Gorichanaz, T., Koh, K. & Suorsa, A. (2020). Conceptualising and studying information creation: from production and processes to makers and making. Proceedings of the 2020 ASIS&T Annual Meeting.
- Ingold, T. (2013). Making: anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture. London: Routledge.
- Kelleher, C. (2017). Archives without archives:(re) locating and (re) defining the archive through post-custodial praxis. Journal of Critical Library and Information Studies, (2).
- Koh, K. (2013). Adolescents’ information-creating behavior embedded in digital media practice using scratch. JASIST, 64(9), 1826–1841. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22878
- Koh, K., Snead, J. T., & Lu, K. (2019). The processes of maker learning and information behavior in a technology‐rich high school class. JASIST, 70(12), 1395–1412. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24197
- Koskela, L. (2000). An exploration towards a production theory and its application to construction. (Published doctoral dissertation). Helsinki University of Technology, Espoo.
- Lund, N.W. (2004). Documentation in a Complementary Perspective. In W. B. Rayward (Ed.), Aware and responsible (SCAR-LID) (pp. 93–102). Lanham: Scarecrow Press.
- McKemmish, S. (2001). Placing Records Continuum Theory and Practice. Archival Science, 1(4), 333–359.
- McKenzie, P. J., Davies, E., & Williams, S. (2014). Information creation and the ideological code of managerialism in the work of keeping track. Information Research, 19(2).
- Peppler, K., Halverson, E., & Kafai, Y. B. (2016a). Makeology: Makers as Learners (Vol. 2). Routledge.
- Peppler, K., Halverson, E., & Kafai, Y. B. (2016b). Makeology: Makerspaces as learning environments (Vol. 1). Routledge.
- Savolainen, R. (2009). Information use and information processing: Comparison of conceptualizations. JDOC, 65(2), 187–207.
- Suorsa, A., & Huotari, M.-L. (2014). Knowledge creation and the concept of a human being: A phenomenological approach. JASIST, 65(5), 1042–1057.
- Trace, C. B. (2007). Information creation and the notion of membership. JDOC, 63(1), 142–164.
- von Krogh, G., Nonaka, I., & Rechsteiner, L. (2012). Leadership in organizational knowledge creation: A review and framework. Journal of Management Studies, 49(1), 240–277.
- Wilson, T. (2000). Human Information Behavior. Informing Science, 3(2), 49–55.
- Woxland, C., Cochran, D., Davis, E., & Lundstrom, K. (2017). Communal and student-centered: Teaching information creation as a process with mobile technologies. Reference Services Review, 45(1), 79–99.