The Quiet Politics of Voice: A Comparative Study of Classification and Information Infrastructure

非常庞大的信息系统包含着无形的价值，这些价值根植于基础设施的各个层面，影响着人们的生活，但往往无法进入公共辩论。 该项目分析了两个这样的基础设施工具，试图了解他们的政治，价值观，以及他们如何将基础设施，工作和知识联系在一起。 为了了解价值观是如何以及在哪里嵌入这些系统的，研究人员将进行系统的比较。 首先，他们将研究两个分类系统的设计，开发和使用，即国际疾病分类（ICD）和护理干预分类（NIC）。 第一个大约有一百年的历史，而第二个起源于20多年前。 为了进行比较和深入分析，该小组将研究图书馆和种族分类方案的类似发展。 信息编码的常规、甚至是无聊的方面可能会产生重要的公共和科学后果，只有仔细关注这些程序及其结果才能发现这些后果。 调查人员从几个来源获得经验材料。 他们从世卫组织和联合国档案中收集了关于《疾病分类》的档案材料，并从世卫组织和美国公共卫生署的文件中收集了二级材料。 对于NIC，他们一直在与其设计者和开发者，爱荷华州大学的护理研究人员进行持续的民族志调查。 他们收集了访谈和实地记录的记录和电子公告板材料，并将其存档。 这项研究将使他们能够完成数据收集和分析，并进行系统的比较。 结果将包括一本专著以及文章和介绍给观众在科学研究，图书馆和信息科学，护理和信息学。

Very large information systems embody invisible values, embedded in layers of infrastructure, that impact on people's lives yet are often inaccessible to public debate. This project analyzes two such infrastructural tools, seeking to understand their politics, values, and how they tie together infrastructure, work and knowledge. In order to understand how and where values are embedded into these systems, the investigators will conduct systematic comparisons. Primarily, they will examine the design, development and use of two classification systems, the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and the Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC). The first is about one hundred years old, while the second originated only 20 some years ago. For comparative purposes and depth of analysis, the team will look at similar developments in library and racial classification schemes. Routine, even boring aspects of information encoding may have important public and scientific consequences that can only be identified by careful attention to these procedures and their outcomes. The investigators draw empirical material from several sources. They have collected archival material on the ICD from WHO and UN archives and secondary material from WHO and USPHS documents. For NIC, they have been conducting an ongoing ethnographic investigation with its designers and developers, nursing researchers at the University of Iowa. They have collected and archived interview and fieldnote transcripts and electronic bulletin board material. This research will allow them to conplete data collection and analysis and conduct systematic comparisons. Results will include a monograph as well as articles and presentations to audiences in science studies, library and information science, nursing and informatics.