Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Data Science as an Interdiscipline: Historical Parallels from Information Science Cover

Data Science as an Interdiscipline: Historical Parallels from Information Science

Data Science Journal
Volume 22 (2023): Issue 1
By: Matthew S. Mayernik  
Open Access
|Jun 2023

References

  1. 1Academic Data Science Alliance. 2023. ADSA vision, mission, and values. Available at https://academicdatascience.org/data-science/mission/.
    Back to article
  2. 2Agre, PE. 1995. Institutional circuitry: Thinking about the forms and uses of information. Information Technology and Libraries, 14(4): 225–230.
    Back to article
  3. 3Agre, PE. 1997. Toward a critical technical practice: Lessons learned in trying to reform AI. In: Bowker, G, Star, SL and Turner, B, Social Science, Technical Systems, and Cooperative Work: Beyond the Great Divide. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. pp. 130–157.
    Back to article
  4. 4Agre, PE. 2003. Information and institutional change: The case of digital libraries. In: Bishop, AP, Van House, NA and Buttenfield, BP, Digital Library Use: Social Practice in Design and Evaluation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. pp. 219–240.
    Back to article
  5. 5Aragon, C, Guha, S, Kogan, M, Muller, M and Neff, G. 2022. Human-Centered Data Science: An Introduction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    Back to article
  6. 6Aspray, WF. 1985. The scientific conceptualization of information: A survey. IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, 7(2): 117–140. DOI: 10.1109/MAHC.1985.10018
    Back to article
  7. 7Bates, MJ. 1999. The invisible substrate of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(12), 1043–1050. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:12<;1043::AID-ASI1>3.0.CO;2-X
    Back to article
  8. 8Bates, MJ. 2004. Information science at the University of California at Berkeley in the 1960s: A memoir of student days. Library Trends, 52(4): 683–701. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/1693.
    Back to article
  9. 9Bates, MJ. 2015. The information professions: Knowledge, memory, heritage. Information Research, 20(1): paper 655. Available at http://InformationR.net/ir/20-1/paper655.html.
    Back to article
  10. 10Beaton, B, Acker, A, Di Monte, L, Setlur, S, Sutherland, T and Tracy, SE. 2017. Debating data science: A roundtable. Radical History Review, 2017(127): 133–148. DOI: 10.1215/01636545-3690918
    Back to article
  11. 11Berman, F, Rutenbar, R, Christensen, H, Davidson, S, Estrin, D, Franklin, M, Hailpern, B, Martonosi, M, Raghavan, P, Stodden, V and Szalay, A. 2016. Realizing the Potential of Data Science: Final Report from the National Science Foundation Computer and Information Science and Engineering Advisory Committee Data Science Working Group. National Science Foundation Computer and Information Science and Engineering Advisory Committee Report. Available at https://www.nsf.gov/cise/ac-data-science-report/CISEACDataScienceReport1.19.17.pdf.
    Back to article
  12. 12Bezuidenhout, L, Drummond-Curtis, S, Walker, B, Shanahan, H and Alfaro-Córdoba, M. 2021. A school and a network: CODATA-RDA data science summer schools alumni survey. Data Science Journal, 20(1): 1–10. DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2021-010
    Back to article
  13. 13Blanchette, JF. 2012. Computing as if infrastructure mattered. Communications of the ACM, 55(10): 32–34. DOI: 10.1145/2347736.2347748
    Back to article
  14. 14Blei, DM and Smyth, P. 2017. Science and data science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(33): 8689–8692. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1702076114
    Back to article
  15. 15Borgman, CL. 2015. Big Data, Little Data, No Data: Scholarship in the Networked World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/9963.001.0001
    Back to article
  16. 16Borko, H. 1968. Information science: What is it? American Documentation, 19(1): 3–5. DOI: 10.1002/asi.5090190103
    Back to article
  17. 17Bowne-Anderson, H. 2018. What data scientists really do, according to 35 data scientists. Harvard Business Review, August 15, 2018. Available at https://hbr.org/2018/08/what-data-scientists-really-do-according-to-35-data-scientists.
    Back to article
  18. 18Buckland, M. 2012. What kind of science can information science be? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(1): 1–7. DOI: 10.1002/asi.21656
    Back to article
  19. 19Burke, C. 2007. History of information science. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41(1): 3–53. DOI: 10.1002/aris.2007.1440410108
    Back to article
  20. 20Burke, CB. 2018. America’s Information Wars: The Untold Story of Information Systems in America’s Conflicts and Politics from World War II to the Internet Age. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
    Back to article
  21. 21Burnett, K and Bonnici, LJ. 2013. Rhizomes in the iField: What does it mean to be an iSchool? Knowledge Organization, 40(6): 408–413. DOI: 10.5771/0943-7444-2013-6-408
    Back to article
  22. 22Bush, V. 1945. Science, the Endless Frontier: A Report to the President. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
    Back to article
  23. 23Callaghan, S and Darbyshire, T. 2020. The first piece of the pattern. Patterns, 1(1): 100020. DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2020.100020
    Back to article
  24. 24Cao, L. 2017. Data science: A comprehensive overview. ACM Computing Surveys, 50(3): 1–42. DOI: 10.1145/3076253
    Back to article
  25. 25Cao, L. 2018a. Data science challenges. In: Data Science Thinking. Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing. pp. 93–128. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-95092-1_4
    Back to article
  26. 26Cao, L. 2018b. Data science education. In: Data Science Thinking. Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing. pp. 329–348. DO: 10.1007/978-3-319-95092-1_11
    Back to article
  27. 27Capurro, R and Hjørland, B. 2003. The concept of information. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37(1): 343–411. DOI: 10.1002/aris.1440370109
    Back to article
  28. 28Carroll, SR, Garba, I, Figueroa-Rodríguez, O, et al. 2020. The CARE principles for Indigenous data governance. Data Science Journal, 19(1): 1–12. DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2020-043
    Back to article
  29. 29Carroll, SR, Herczog, E, Hudson, M, Russell, K and Stall, S. 2021. Operationalizing the CARE and FAIR principles for Indigenous data futures. Scientific Data, 8(1). DOI: 10.1038/s41597-021-00892-0
    Back to article
  30. 30Carson, C, et al. 2016. Data Science Planning Initiative Faculty Advisory Board Report. Berkeley: University of California. Available at https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8gpOw0SuKG4cGR1NTZpTzBQRGM.
    Back to article
  31. 31Carter, D and Sholler, D. 2016. Data science on the ground: Hype, criticism, and everyday work. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(10): 2309–2319. DOI: 10.1002/asi.23563
    Back to article
  32. 32Chambers, JM. 1993. Greater or lesser statistics: A choice for future research. Statistics and Computing, 3: 182–184. DOI: 10.1007/BF00141776
    Back to article
  33. 33Cleveland, WS. 2001. Data science: An action plan for expanding the technical areas of the field of statistics. International Statistical Review, 69(1): 21–26. DOI: 10.2307/1403527
    Back to article
  34. 34CODATA. 2012. CODATA Constitution (Statutes and By-Laws). Paris: CODATA. Available at http://www.codata.org/uploads/Constitution%202012%20Revised%20Final%20(2).pdf.
    Back to article
  35. 35Conway, D. 2010. The data science Venn diagram. Available at http://drewconway.com/zia/2013/3/26/the-data-science-venn-diagram.
    Back to article
  36. 36Conway, D. 2018. DataFramed. #15 Building Data Science Teams. March 25, 2018. Available at https://podcastaddict.com/episode/49574942.
    Back to article
  37. 37Cornelius, I. 2002. Theorizing information for information science. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36(1): 392–425. DOI: 10.1002/aris.1440360110
    Back to article
  38. 38Cox, RJ, Mattern, E, Mattock, L, Rodriguez, R and Sutherland, T. 2012. Assessing iSchools. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 53(4): 303–316. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43686923.
    Back to article
  39. 39Craig Finlay, S, Ni, C and Sugimoto, C. 2018. Different mysteries, different lore: An examination of inherited referencing behaviors in academic mentoring. Library & Information Science Research, 40(3–4): 277–284. DOI: 10.1016/j.lisr.2018.09.010
    Back to article
  40. 40Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J, et al. 2017. Five ways consortia can catalyse open science. Nature, 543(7647): 615–617. DOI: 10.1038/543615a
    Back to article
  41. 41Davenport, TH and Patil, DJ. 2012. Data scientist: The sexiest job of the 21st century. Harvard Business Review, October 2012. Available at https://hbr.org/2012/10/data-scientist-the-sexiest-job-of-the-21st-century.
    Back to article
  42. 42Day, RE. 2000. The “conduit metaphor” and the nature and politics of information studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(9): 805–811. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(2000)51:9<;805::AID-ASI30>3.0.CO;2-C
    Back to article
  43. 43Day, RE. 2009. Information explosion. In: Bates, MJ and Niles Maack, M (eds.), Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, 3rd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 2416–2420. DOI: 10.1081/E-ELIS3-120044391
    Back to article
  44. 44De Solla Price, DJ and Beaver, D. 1966. Collaboration in an invisible college. American Psychologist, 21(11): 1011–1018. DOI: 10.1037/h0024051
    Back to article
  45. 45De Veaux, RD, et al. 2017. Curriculum guidelines for undergraduate programs in data science. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, 4: 15–30. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-statistics-060116-053930
    Back to article
  46. 46Demchenko, Y, et al. 2016. EDISON Data Science Framework: A foundation for building data science profession for research and industry. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science (CloudCom). December 12–15, 2016, Luxembourg. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE. pp. 620–626. DOI: 10.1109/CloudCom.2016.0107
    Back to article
  47. 47Donoho, D. 2017. 50 Years of data science. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 26(4): 745–766. DOI: 10.1080/10618600.2017.1384734
    Back to article
  48. 48EDISON Project. 2017. EDISON Data Science Framework (EDSF). Available at http://edison-project.eu/edison/edison-data-science-framework-edsf.
    Back to article
  49. 49Farkas-Conn, IS. 1990. From Documentation to Information Science: The Beginnings and Early Development of the American Documentation Institute–American Society for Information Science. New York: Greenwood Press.
    Back to article
  50. 50Fayyad, U and Hamutcu, H. 2022. From unicorn data scientist to key roles in data science: Standardizing roles. Harvard Data Science Review, 4(3). DOI: 10.1162/99608f92.008b5006
    Back to article
  51. 51Feder, T. 2016. Data science can be an attractive career for physicists. Physics Today, 69(8): 20–22. DOI: 10.1063/PT.3.3261
    Back to article
  52. 52Finzer, W. 2013. The data science education dilemma. Technology Innovations in Statistics Education, 7(2): 1–9. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7gv0q9dc. DOI: 10.5070/T572013891
    Back to article
  53. 53Floridi, L. 2005. Is semantic information meaningful data? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 70(2): 351–370. DOI: 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2005.tb00531.x
    Back to article
  54. 54Floridi, L and Taddeo, M. 2016. What is data ethics? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 374(2083): 20160360. DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2016.0360
    Back to article
  55. 55Fowler, R. 2015. Visualizing data science. GeoSpace blog. December 22, 2015. American Geophysical Union. Available at https://blogs.agu.org/geospace/2015/12/22/visualizing-data-science/.
    Back to article
  56. 56Fox, G, Maini, S, Rosenbaum, H and Wild, D. 2015. Data science and online education. In: 2015 IEEE 7th International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science (CloudCom). November 30, 2015–December 3, 2015, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/CloudCom.2015.82
    Back to article
  57. 57Fox, P and Hendler, J. 2014. The science of data science. Big Data, 2(2): 68–70. DOI: 10.1089/big.2014.0011
    Back to article
  58. 58Frické, M. 2019. The knowledge pyramid: The DIKW hierarchy. Knowledge Organization 49(1): 33–46. Also available in Hjørland, B and Gnoli, C (eds.), ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization. Available at http://www.isko.org/cyclo/dikw. DOI: 10.5771/0943-7444-2019-1-33
    Back to article
  59. 59Frohmann, B. 2004. Deflating Information: From Science Studies to Documentation. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. DOI: 10.3138/9781442673779
    Back to article
  60. 60Furner, J. 2004. Information studies without information. Library Trends, 52(3): 427–446. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/1684.
    Back to article
  61. 61Furner, J. 2016. “Data”: The data. In: Kelly, M and Bielby, J, Information Cultures in the Digital Age: A Festschrift in Honor of Rafael Capurro. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 287–306. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-658-14681-8
    Back to article
  62. 62Furner, J. 2017. Philosophy of data: Why? Education for Information, 33(1): 55–70. DOI: 10.3233/EFI-170986
    Back to article
  63. 63Geiger, RS, Cabasse, C, Cullens, CY, Norén, L, Fiore-Gartland, B, Das, D and Brady, H. 2018. Career Paths and Prospects in Academic Data Science: Report of the Moore-Sloan Data Science Environments Survey. Berkeley,, CA: UC-Berkeley Institute for Data Science. DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/xe823
    Back to article
  64. 64Geoghegan, BD. 2008. Historiographic conceptualization of information: A critical survey. IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, 30(1): 66–81. DOI: 10.1109/MAHC.2008.9
    Back to article
  65. 65Gil, Y. 2017. Thoughtful artificial intelligence: Forging a new partnership for data science and scientific discovery. Data Science, 1(1–2): 119–129. DOI: 10.3233/DS-170011
    Back to article
  66. 66Gorichanaz, T. 2017. Applied epistemology and understanding in information studies. Information Research, 22(4): paper 776. Available at http://InformationR.net/ir/22-4/paper776.html.
    Back to article
  67. 67Gray, J, Gerlitz, C and Bounegru, L. 2018. Data infrastructure literacy. Big Data & Society, 5(2): 205395171878631. DOI: 10.1177/2053951718786316
    Back to article
  68. 68Green, B. 2018. Data Science as Political Action: Grounding Data Science in a Politics of Justice. arXiv:1811.03435. Ithaca,, NY: Cornell University. https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.03435.
    Back to article
  69. 69Hammarfelt, B. 2019. Discipline. In: Hjørlan B and Gnoli, C, Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization. International Society of Knowledge Organization. Available at https://www.isko.org/cyclo/discipline.
    Back to article
  70. 70Hendler, J, Ding, Y and Mons, B. 2019. A journal for human and machine. Data Intelligence, 1(1): 1–5. DOI: 10.1162/dint_e_00001
    Back to article
  71. 71Herner, S. 1984. Brief history of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 35(3): 157–163. DOI: 10.1002/asi.4630350308
    Back to article
  72. 72Hildreth, CR and Koenig, M. 2002. Organizational realignment of LIS programs in academia: From independent standalone units to incorporated programs. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 43(2): 126–133. DOI: 10.2307/40323973
    Back to article
  73. 73Hjørland, B. 2013. Information science and its core concepts: Levels of disagreement. In: lbekwe-SanJuan, F and Dousa, T, Theories of Information, Communication and Knowledge. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol. 34. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 205–235. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-6973-1_9
    Back to article
  74. 74Hjørland, B. 2018. Data (with big data and database semantics). Knowledge Organization, 45(8): 685–708. Also available in Hjørland, B and Gnoli, C (eds.), ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization. Available at http://www.isko.org/cyclo/data. DOI: 10.5771/0943-7444-2018-8-685
    Back to article
  75. 75Huutoniemi, K, Klein, JT, Bruun, H and Hukkinen, J. 2010. Analyzing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators. Research Policy, 39(1): 79–88. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2009.09.011
    Back to article
  76. 76Iwata, S. 2008. Editor’s note: Scientific “agenda” of data science. Data Science Journal, 7: 54–56. DOI: 10.2481/dsj.7.54
    Back to article
  77. 77Jacobs, JA. 2013. In Defense of Disciplines: Interdisciplinarity and Specialization in the Research University. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226069463.001.0001
    Back to article
  78. 78Johnson, NR. 2017. Rhetoric and the Cold War politics of information science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(6): 1375–1384. DOI: 10.1002/asi.23866
    Back to article
  79. 79Keegan, B. 2016. Journalism as a professional model for data science. Blog post, February 9, 2016. Available at https://www.brianckeegan.com/2016/02/journalism-as-a-professional-model-for-data-science/.
    Back to article
  80. 80Keller, SA, Shipp, SS, Schroeder, AD and Korkmaz, G. 2020. Doing data science: A framework and case study. Harvard Data Science Review, 2(1). DOI: 10.1162/99608f92.2d83f7f5
    Back to article
  81. 81King, JL. 2006. Identity in the I-School movement. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 32(4). Available at http://asis.org/Bulletin/Apr-06/king.html. DOI: 10.1002/bult.2006.1720320406.
    Back to article
  82. 82Klein, JT. 1996. Crossing Boundaries: Knowledge, Disciplinarities, and Interdisciplinarities. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
    Back to article
  83. 83Kline, R. 2004. What is information theory a theory of? Boundary work among information theorists and information scientists in the United States and Britain during the Cold War. In: Rayward, WB and Bowden, ME, Conference on the History and Heritage of Scientific and Technological Information Systems. Medford, NJ: Information Today. pp. 15–28.
    Back to article
  84. 84Knorr-Cetina, KD. 1991. Epistemic cultures: Forms of reason in science. History of Political Economy, 23: 105–122. DOI: 10.1215/00182702-23-1-105
    Back to article
  85. 85Kross, S and Guo, PJ. 2019. Practitioners teaching data science in industry and academia: Expectations, workflows, and challenges. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’19). May 4–9, 2019, Glasgow, Scotland. New York: ACM. DOI: 10.1145/3290605.3300493
    Back to article
  86. 86Kross, S, Peng, RD, Caffo, BS, Gooding, I and Leek, JT. 2019. The democratization of data science education. American Statistician, 74(1): 1–7. DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2019.1668849
    Back to article
  87. 87Larsen, RL. 2008. History of the iSchools. Available at https://ischoolsinc.wildapricot.org/resources/Documents/Member_Info_Resources/Coorporate%20Documents/History-of-the-iSchools-2009.pdf.
    Back to article
  88. 88Lenoir, T. 1997. Instituting Science: The Cultural Production of Scientific Disciplines. Stanford,, CA: Stanford University Press. DOI: 10.1515/9781503616059
    Back to article
  89. 89Leonelli, S. 2015. What counts as scientific data? A relational framework. Philosophy of Science, 82(5): 810–821. DOI: 10.1086/684083
    Back to article
  90. 90Lide, DR and Wood, GH. 2012. CODATA @ 45 Years: The Story of the ICSU Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA) from 1966 to 2010. Paris: CODATA. Available at http://www.codata.org/publications/codata-history.
    Back to article
  91. 91Ma, X. 2023. Data science for geoscience: Recent progress and future trends from the perspective of a data life cycle. In: Ma, X, Mookerjee, M, Hsu, L and Hills, D, Recent Advancement in Geoinformatics and Data Science. Boulder, CO: Geological Society of America. DOI: 10.1130/2022.2558(05)
    Back to article
  92. 92Maack, MN. 1997. Toward a new model of the information professions: Embracing empowerment. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 38(4): 283–302. DOI: 10.2307/40324190
    Back to article
  93. 93Madsen, D. 2016. Liberating interdisciplinarity from myth: An exploration of the discursive construction of identities in information studies. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(11): 2697–2709. DOI: 10.1002/asi.23622
    Back to article
  94. 94Madsen, D. 2017. Conspicuous by presence: The empty signifier “interdisciplinarity” and the representation of absence. In: Schröter, M and Taylor, C, Exploring Silence and Absence in Discourse. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. pp. 359–390. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-64580-3_13
    Back to article
  95. 95Manyika, J, Chui, M, Brown, B, Bughin, J, Dobbs, R, Roxburgh, C and Byers, AH. 2011. Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. McKinsey Global Institute, May 1, 2011. Available at http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/mgi/research/technology_and_innovation/big_data_the_next_frontier_for_innovation.
    Back to article
  96. 96Marchionini, G. 2023. Information and data sciences: Context, units of analysis, meaning, and human impact. Data and Information Management, 7(1). DOI: 10.1016/j.dim.2023.100031
    Back to article
  97. 97Mattmann, CA. 2013. Computing: A vision for data science. Nature, 493: 473–475. DOI: 10.1038/493473a
    Back to article
  98. 98Mayernik, MS. 2016. Research data and metadata curation as institutional issues. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(4): 973–993. DOI: 10.1002/asi.23425
    Back to article
  99. 99McQuillan, D. 2018a. Data science as machinic Neoplatonism. Philosophy & Technology, 31: 253–272. DOI: 10.1007/s13347-017-0273-3
    Back to article
  100. 100McQuillan, D. 2018b. People’s councils for ethical machine learning. Social Media + Society, 4(2). DOI: 10.1177/2056305118768303
    Back to article
  101. 101Meng, XL. 2019. Data science: An artificial ecosystem. Harvard Data Science Review, 1(1). DOI: 10.1162/99608f92.ba20f892
    Back to article
  102. 102Mezey, PG, Warburton, P, Jako, E and Szekeres, Z. 2001. Dimension concepts and reduced dimensions in toxicological QShAR databases as tools for data quality assessment. Journal of Mathematical Chemistry, 30(4): 375–387. DOI: 10.1023/A:1015138426162
    Back to article
  103. 103Miller, S and Hughes, D. 2017. The Quant Crunch: How the Demand for Data Science Skills is Disrupting the Job Market. Boston: Burning Glass Technologies. http://www.bhef.com/sites/default/files/bhef_2017_quant_crunch.pdf.
    Back to article
  104. 104Monroe-White, T. 2022. Emancipating data science for Black and Indigenous students via liberatory datasets and curricula. IASSIST Quarterly, 46(4): 1–8. DOI: 10.29173/iq1007
    Back to article
  105. 105Moore-Sloan Data Science Environments. 2018. Creating Institutional Change in Data Science. Available at http://msdse.org/files/Creating_Institutional_Change.pdf.
    Back to article
  106. 106NASEM. 2017. Envisioning the Data Science Discipline: The Undergraduate Perspective: Interim Report. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. DOI: 10.17226/24886
    Back to article
  107. 107NASEM. 2018. Data Science for Undergraduates: Opportunities and Options. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. DOI: 10.17226/25104
    Back to article
  108. 108Ortiz-Repiso, V, Greenberg, J and Calzada-Prado, J. 2018. A cross-institutional analysis of data-related curricula in information science programmes: A focused look at the iSchools. Journal of Information Science, 44(6): 768–784. DOI: 10.1177/0165551517748149
    Back to article
  109. 109Ostler, LJ, Dahlin, TC and Willardson, JD. 1995. The Closing of American Library Schools: Problems and Opportunities. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
    Back to article
  110. 110Phillips, CJ. 2019. The bases of data. Harvard Data Science Review, 1(2). DOI: 10.1162/99608f92.5c483119
    Back to article
  111. 111Pierre, J. 2019. Building a digital family: Examining social media and social support in the development of youth “at-risk.” Unpublished thesis (PhD), University of California, Los Angeles, CA. Available at https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6c70b07v.
    Back to article
  112. 112Poirier, L. 2021. Reading datasets: Strategies for interpreting the politics of data signification. Big Data & Society, 8(2). DOI: 10.1177/20539517211029322
    Back to article
  113. 113Pournaras, E. 2017. Cross-disciplinary higher education of data science—beyond the computer science student. Data Science, 1(1/2): 1–17. DOI: 10.3233/DS-170005
    Back to article
  114. 114Press, G. 2013. A very short history of data science. Forbes, May 28, 2013. Available at https://www.forbes.com/sites/gilpress/2013/05/28/a-very-short-history-of-data-science/.
    Back to article
  115. 115Rayward, WB. 1996. The history and historiography of information science: Some reflections. Information Processing & Management, 32(1): 3–17. DOI: 10.1016/0306-4573(95)00046-J
    Back to article
  116. 116Ribes, D. 2018. STS, meet data science, once again. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 44(3): 514–539. DOI: 10.1177/0162243918798899
    Back to article
  117. 117Richards, PS. 1994. Scientific Information in Wartime: The Allied-German Rivalry, 1939–1945. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
    Back to article
  118. 118Rosenberg, D. 2013. Data before the fact. In: Gitelman, L, “Raw Data” Is an Oxymoron. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. pp. 15–40.
    Back to article
  119. 119Rumble, J. 2023. Thoughts on Starting the CODATA Data Science Journal. Data Science Journal, 22: 13, 1–4. DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2023-013
    Back to article
  120. 120Saltz, J, Shamshurin, I and Connors, C. 2017. Predicting data science sociotechnical execution challenges by categorizing data science projects. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(12): 2720–2728. DOI: 10.1002/asi.23873
    Back to article
  121. 121Saracevic, T. 1997. Users lost: Reflections on the past, future, and limits of information science. ACM SIGIR Forum, 31(2): 16–27. DOI: 10.1145/270886.270889
    Back to article
  122. 122Scheider, S, Nyamsuren, E, Kruiger, H and Xu, H. 2020. Why geographic data science is not a science. Geography Compass, 14(11): 1–15. DOI: 10.1111/gec3.12537
    Back to article
  123. 123Shannon, CE and Weaver, W. 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
    Back to article
  124. 124Shaw, R. 2019. The missing profession: Towards an institution of critical technical practice. Information Research, 24(4): paper colis1904. http://InformationR.net/ir/24-4/colis/colis1904.html.
    Back to article
  125. 125Shera, JH. 1970. Sociological Foundations of Librarianship. Bombay, India: Asia Publishing House.
    Back to article
  126. 126Smith, FJ. 2006. Data science as an academic discipline. Data Science Journal, 5: 163–164. DOI: 10.2481/dsj.5.163
    Back to article
  127. 127Smith, FJ. 2023. The Launch of the Data Science Journal in 2002. Data Science Journal, 22: 11, 1–5. DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2023-11
    Back to article
  128. 128Soergel, D. 1999. The rise of ontologies or the reinvention of classification. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(12): 1119–1120. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:12<;1119::AID-ASI12>3.0.CO;2-I
    Back to article
  129. 129Spang-Hanssen, H. 1970/2001. How to teach about information as related to documentation? HumanIT, 5(1). https://humanit.hb.se/article/view/168.
    Back to article
  130. 130Srinivasan, R. 2017. Whose Global Village? Rethinking How Technology Shapes Our World. New York: New York University Press.
    Back to article
  131. 131Stanton, J, Palmer, CL, Blake, C and Allard, S. 2012. Interdisciplinary data science education. In: Xiao, N and McEwen, LR, Special Issues in Data Management. ACS Symposium Series 1110. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. pp. 97–113. DOI: 10.1021/bk-2012-1110.ch006
    Back to article
  132. 132Statistics Views. 2013. Nate Silver: What I need from statisticians. Statistics Views, August 23, 2013. Available at https://www.statisticsviews.com/article/nate-silver-what-i-need-from-statisticians/.
    Back to article
  133. 133Stodden, V. 2020. The data science life cycle. Communications of the ACM, 63(7): 58–66. DOI: 10.1145/3360646
    Back to article
  134. 134Stoyanovich, J and Lewis, A. 2019. Teaching Responsible Data Science: Charting New Pedagogical Territory. arXiv: 1912.10564. DOI: 10.1145/3360646
    Back to article
  135. 135Szostak, R. 2013. The state of the field: Interdisciplinary research. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 31: 44–65. http://hdl.handle.net/10323/4479.
    Back to article
  136. 136Tang, R and Sae-Lim, W. 2016. Data science programs in U.S. higher education: An exploratory content analysis of program description, curriculum structure, and course focus. Education for Information, 32(3): 269–290. DOI: 10.3233/EFI-160977
    Back to article
  137. 137Van House, N and Sutton, SA. 1996. The panda syndrome: An ecology of LIS education. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 37(2): 131–147. DOI: 10.2307/40324268
    Back to article
  138. 138Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511803932
    Back to article
  139. 139White, HD and McCain, KW. 1998. Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4): 327–355. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(19980401)49:4<;327::AID-ASI4>3.0.CO;2-4
    Back to article
  140. 140Wiggins, A and Sawyer, S. 2012. Intellectual diversity and the faculty composition of iSchools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(1): 8–21. DOI: 10.1002/asi.21619
    Back to article
  141. 141Wilkerson, MH and Polman, JL. 2019. Situating data science: Exploring how relationships to data shape learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 29(1): 1–10. DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2019.1705664
    Back to article
  142. 142Willems, K. 2017. The periodic table of data science. DataCamp Official Blog, April 12, 2017. https://web.archive.org/web/20220116104729/https://www.datacamp.com/community/blog/data-science-periodic-table.
    Back to article
  143. 143Wing, JM and Banks, D. 2019. Highlights of the inaugural data science leadership summit. Harvard Data Science Review, 1(2). DOI: 10.1162/99608f92.e45fcb79
    Back to article
  144. 144Wing, JM, Janeja, VP, Kloefkorn, T and Erickson, LC. 2018. Data Science Leadership Summit: Summary Report. New York: Columbia University. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13710.61764
    Back to article
  145. 145Zhang, Y, et al. Forthcoming. Data science curriculum in the iField. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. DOI: 10.1002/asi.24701
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2023-016 | Journal eISSN: 1683-1470
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Mar 11, 2021
Accepted on: Mar 17, 2023
Published on: Jun 14, 2023
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
data science,
information science,
interdiscipline,
metadiscipline,
disciplines

© 2023 Matthew S. Mayernik, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 22 (2023): Issue 1Next article