A contribution to the development of a philosophical foundation for the data information knowledge wisdom hierarchy
2011
- 361Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage361
- Abstract Views202
- Downloads159
Article Description
This paper seeks to establish a philosophical basis for the investigation into a flaw of the data information knowledgewisdom (DIKW) hierarchy. This flaw is typified by the requirement that knowledge be used to differentiate data frominformation prior to the hierarchy's own formation of knowledge. The DIKW hierarchy underlies much of the knowledgemanagement (KM) research. However, while applications of the hierarchy have been examined extensively, the validity ofthe hierarchy itself has not been much undertaken. This paper illustrates that the analytic/synthetic distinction, as well asconsideration of a priori and a posteriori knowledge, will contribute to the development of a philosophical framework viawhich the hierarchy itself might be examined. Using these concepts, the process of information formation and thehierarchical flaw are examined. Finally, the paper addresses how its resolution might be used in conjunction with variousKM research programs.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know