INDIANA UNIVERSITY-PURDUE UNIVERSITY

The Social Foundations of

Informatics
An Analysis of Informatics in the Context of Society
C.L. Kiess
12/5/2008

Considers the definition of Informatics as a profession in both an academic and professional context while analyzing
how the social foundations not only relate to the primary definitions but also provide a shape and definition of their
own that is complimentary to where the profession currently is and where the future of the profession may be found.
Introduction
In considering the social foundations of any discipline,
it is inevitable that one must consider the definition or
definitions outlining and directing the profession. In
considering these definitions, we must also consider
what we believe to be the core foundations of the
profession. Without an understanding of the core
foundations of Informatics, we cannot hope to have
an understanding of the social foundations. Thus, the
first portion of this paper explores the basic definitions
and foundations of informatics as a whole, while the
subsequent portions focus on primarily the social
foundations.
The Problem of Defining Informatics
Defining Informatics can be a daunting task. What is it
that makes Informatics different? It is an elusive field
to attempt to pin with frameworks, models, definitions
and such. Informatics, as an academic discipline, can
only be traced back to the mid-eighties. Currently,
there is a varying degree of agreement on just what
the definition of Informatics is and in some instances
the controversy or problematic nature of defining
certain aspects of the field have been highlighted and
discussed.1-12 With many disciplines this elusiveness
can be problematic – less so with the traditional
academic fields than with newly formed or transitional
fields. These vague or cloudy definitions and
disagreements pose problems in new fields for
several reasons. One, the definition of a discipline is a
primary driving factor in the direction of the
profession, which is preceded by the curriculum
development for academic programs preparing future
professionals for the field. Two, as one professional in
the field stated, the discipline is not perceived as
advancing as a result of being unable to articulate
what it is.5 In academics, a discipline should
contribute to its advancement through research that
clearly differentiates it in practice and forms the
foundation of a new base of knowledge or at the very
least a distinct knowledge set. Finally, it is possible
that without clear direction, definition and purpose a
discipline can be eventually (or in some cases very
quickly) labeled as a passing fad.
Strict definitions or profiles for Informatics
become difficult because of the evolving nature of the
subject matter and the levels of stratification within
the discipline. Most schools of Informatics term
themselves as an I-School – a membership of 19
information schools with curriculums designed to
explore the relationships between people, information
and technology.13,14 As of yet there does not seem to
be clear consensus on what coursework should be
completed or exactly how the degree should be titled
[see table 1]. The University of Michigan titles their
degree an MSI (Master of Science in Information)
and requires core coursework exploring social
systems and the flow of information.15 The University
of Illinois Urbana-Champaign has a special track
exploring informatics (both organizational and social)
and titles their degree an MS.16 The University of
Pittsburgh titles their degree an MSIS (Master of
Science and Information Science) and probably has
the closest curriculum resembling Indiana
University’s.17 Nonetheless, there is no clear trend
resembling what Informatics is and each school has a
curriculum pointing in a slightly different direction.
Indeed, many I-Schools do not even use the term
Informatics begging the question of whether
Shakespeare may have been right when he wrote,
“That which we call a rose/By any other name would
smell as sweet.”18 One primary point to note
concerning all of the I-Schools – information remains
a primary focal point. But, we could ask, in what
capacity?
Ferreting out the central components of
Informatics becomes an important endeavor for it is
these central components that – while they may not
actually define or aid us in identifying the social
foundations of the field – help us understand both the
tradition and the future of the field through their
synergistic interaction. A quick survey of the literature,
curriculums or professional accomplishments in the
field of Informatics gives us three primary disciplines
Informatics is rooted in Computer Science,
Information Science and to a lesser degree Library
Science. The literature in each of these disciplines
has attempted in some way to define or set out to
explain what makes informatics different. However,
the literature is thin concerning definitions and
differentiations. And the problem of defining
Informatics becomes more complex when one
considers the numerous sub-disciplines within
Informatics – Bio-Informatics, Health Informatics,
Nursing Informatics, Medical Informatics, Business
Informatics, Organizational Informatics, Social
Informatics, Consumer Health Informatics and even
Human Computer Interaction (HCI). It is, indeed, rare
to see the term “Informatics” treated as its own
subject. It is almost always coupled with another
discipline – perhaps a testament to the
transdisciplinary nature of the discipline. However,
ferreting out the central components of the field is
quite different from listing the disciplines that
comprise Informatics. In almost every definition, one
will find a listing of other disciplines that are integrated
to comprise Informatics. The groupings generally
concentrate in three primary areas – technology,
humans and information. And, informatics is
described in many instances as an intersection of not
only different disciplines, but concepts.4,5,19-21
But, simply combining disciplines does not a
new discipline make. And, there are several different
types of practice which bring new disciplines together.
Transdisciplinary practice is one of them and it “takes
us beyond disciplines by weaving a new kind of
knowledge.”22 This is more than simply the gluing
together of computer science and information science
– a multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary effort –
because a new knowledge is formed synergistically
when the two disciplines begin operating in unison
with one another – an intersection of philosophies. It
is a coupling or even a tripling of professions that
allows the informatics professional to move beyond
what the three disciplines could do individually and
instead perform as a single entity with a clear
understanding of each different component that
comprises the problem.
What Does Informatics Do? Practice
vs. Theory and Practicing What We
Preach
One of the primary difficulties in exploring the
literature in the field of Informatics is that what is
published in trade journals differs markedly from what
is hypothesized in definitions and theories concerning
what the social foundations of the discipline are.
Moving from theory to practice always loses some
concepts in translation. However, one should not see
a marked difference between what one would
consider core foundations and those same
foundations leading professional practice. For
example, librarianship is ripe with literature predicting
new beginnings,23 different foundations19,23,24 and
even new professions within the profession.25 But, a
survey of practice and the core foundations of the
profession bears little change over time.26,27 We
essentially have a profession acting as their own
3
mouthpiece in many aspects, which lends a bit of
discredit to the credence of the discipline. Librarians,
as a profession, have sadly changed very little in the
past several decades. The American Library
Association describes the profession much as it
would have been described in the mid-twentieth
century28 and the core competencies do not match
what we hear professionals asserting in the
literature.29
Does Informatics practice what it preaches?
The discipline proposes to be something new. But,
when one peruses the adjacent professions, their
core curriculums and their literature, the differences
are not so marked. Information Science, for example,
can lead to several different professions. Indiana
University lists several occupations on their website
for the MIS degree to include Intranet Manager,
Systems & Programming Project Manager, Web
Master or Web Architect.30 All of these occupations
clearly involve information science, but also integrate
some form of computer science. By contrast, the
Indiana University School of Informatics Website lists
occupations such as Database Manager, Technical
Writer, Web Designer, System Administrator, Network
Manager and Software Developer.31 What, we might
ask, would be the difference between a System
Administrator trained in one of these schools versus
one trained in the other? Perhaps very little were we
to concede these two programs are most certainly in
competition with one another. Moreover, they are
both members of the I-School colloquium14 with
strikingly similar approaches in profession. The
Indiana University School of Library and Information
Science and the Indiana University School of
Informatics both stress a new approach to integrating
computers, software and information technology in
the workplace.31,32 But, were we to compare these two
programs with the traditional approach in Computer
Science, we might find the differences therein. People
become a primary focus in the former schools and not
as important in the latter. A second element of
importance or difference is knowledge and the stress
on knowledge as an outcome of practice. This is not
to suggest some Computer Science programs do not
take a different approach to people or knowledge. We
are merely considering Computer Science in the
traditional sense. It may be much easier to find the
differences between a discipline such as Computer
Science and Informatics. The differences between
Informatics with Information Science are subtle in
relation. I would propose a final point of differentiation

Figure148
for the field of informatics – the
transdisciplinary approaches taken in the field. We’ll
cover each of the three topics – people, knowledge
and transdisciplinary practice – in detail below.
However, it is not a single point that provides
differentiation. It is a series of points moving in
tandem with one another synergistically creating a
new discipline.
I propose the foundations of the discipline of
Informatics are founded in the social foundations and
the social approach utilized in professional
application. The professions noted above from the IU
School of Informatics - Database Managers,
Technical Writers, Web Designers, System
Administrators, Network Managers and Software
Developers – have no more or less in common with a
Computer Science major than an Information Science
major. The difference is not the end occupation or
career path. The difference is the approach. An
Information Science major could very well adopt the
same approach with the same end achievement as
an Informatics major.
The three concepts we explore below all
have social tenets to them and represent what I see
as the social foundations of Informatics. They signify
a change in approach, a change in the way we think
about people and technology and a change in the
way we now look upon the profession anew. These
concepts represent the social foundations on more
than a single level as well. There are two levels to the
social tenets – social tenets in application and social
tenets within the practice of the profession. An
4
example of the difference would be ensuring a
system meets usability requirements (an
application of social tenets) and the
communication across disciplines to understand
our practice in the profession (a social tenet within
practice). In the end, the pinnacle of difference is
the approach on every level.
People
It should be noted at the outset the reference to
“people” in the heading above is meant to
encompass numerous concepts related to people.
What makes people special or, perhaps, different
from other animals is our social nature – our
ability to express, which may be related to
intelligence. Art, for example, is unique to humans
and represents our expressions, reactions and
perpetual dialogue with the world around us. Thus we
cannot consider people as a single entity. We must
also consider the sociopolitical aspects of being
human, psychology, cognition and the genuine
ingenuity of humans. Moreover, if there is a single
distinguishing factor that marks Informatics as a
profession, it is the shift in focus upon people.
Donald Norman may be one of the foremost
writers – and at the very least, a pioneer – of the
concepts surrounding design and human interaction
with design to include Human-Computer Interaction
(HCI). Norman’s landmark book, Emotional Design,33
explores how we react to designs emotionally and
how our cognition can either promote or deter the use
of a product. Not only does Norman explore the
simple use of a product or how it may be deterred
through poor design, but how design can lead to
unintended consequences and sometimes dangerous
outcomes. This is not a topic exclusive to Norman’s
work and has been extensively written about in the
medical literature.34-45 The problem is one of human
behavior and cognition coupled with new tools. In this
scenario, many aspects of a dynamic interaction
become important. We are not simply talking about
developing the right programs, the right design or
even the right tools for the process in a linear fashion.
The Waterfall Model for Software Development46,47 is
a prime example of development in a linear fashion
[see figure 1].
The problem with the above model is that it is linear in
nature allowing for little interaction between the end-
user and the development team. With Informatics –

Figure 248
and specifically in HCI – the process flows in two
directions. An example of this can be seen in the
Iterative Development Model [see figure 2] where
software development flows in more than one
direction.46,49
The change in the models was one spawned by the
deficit found in the Waterfall Model, which did not
adequately compensate or account for the end-user’s
needs requirement redesign (or ending in failed
design).46 Again, the primary differentiating factor
within the discipline of Informatics is a focus on
humans and how they interact with design – a social
foundation. However, as stated above: This is only
one piece of a larger order of moving pieces.
We can become more concrete in using
examples. Workarounds are a common topic in the
medical literature and an example of an unintended
consequence of technology implementation.34,35,44,45 It
is common for the development of a system to result
in healthcare professionals finding some method or
loophole allowing them to bypass the process
involved in using the system sparing time or effort on
their part. Thus, it is clear that a classic approach will
not suffice in providing a solution or adding to the
efficiency of a work task. By a classic approach I
mean, simply approaching the problem from a
software development stance (Computer Science) or
simply from an Information Science approach. In
either scenario the focus would be on the application
of the given science and not the human aspect. This
is not to say neither of these disciplines could not
include a psychological or sociological approach, but
5
just that they normally would not.
Above, we have a problem
including a wide grouping of
elements, which a number of
disciplines could provide insight
into. For example, a simple
redesign of the software or
interface could be appropriate and
initiated via a Computer Science,
Informatics or HCI approach. The
issue could be of a sociological
nature or require the interventions
of organizational psychology.
There could be issues in the
information organization requiring an Information
Architect or Information Science approach. And of
course, there are an entire slew of medically-related
topics that could be addressed. Workarounds could
be a combination of design and social or behavioral
issues. The approach taken would investigate both
aspects and this is where the Informatics Professional
and their training take an active role. This is also one
part of what differentiates the Informatics approach
and discipline from others.
With Informatics, the question moves from
how can we design a better system to how can we
better fit the artifact to the person.50 Donald Norman
asks this question in his book, Things That Make Us
Smart. Fitting the artifact to the person or even
solving another information-related problem involves
a number of different disciplines and approaches.
Information visualization can often be a consideration
when working with representation of data. Human
Information Behavior and Information Design are two
fields that concern themselves with human cognition
in performing a given task or interpreting information.
Mental models can become a concern. Does the end-
user truly understand how the product or interface is
supposed to work and how it does what it does? Does
the technology provide unintended consequences
through workarounds or making the user think
differently? Norman cites a well-known law in the
world of HCI – Grudin’s Law,51 which states if those
who benefit the most from a technology are not those
doing the work, the technology will surely fail or be
subverted.50 The user must always remain the focus,
for it is the user that initiates the creation of a given
technology.
Knowledge
Data, information and knowledge – they seem as
though they are simple concepts. But, take some time
to truly evaluate how they are different. It is not as
simple as it seems on the surface and, yet, the
differences are so very important to a profession
working with all three. Information Science primarily
concerns itself with information, how it stored,
designed and processed. Computer Science is largely
concerned with data, data processing and perhaps
database management. Informatics is also concerned
with all of the preceding examples and has an
inherent goal to ensure data and information are
translated to knowledge. But, perhaps a short
definition of the three concepts is in order prior to
moving forth.
Data is raw bits and pieces of information
and can be arranged and rearranged to provide
different information. Information is obviously a
conglomerate of data and in some instances can be
considered knowledge – explicit knowledge. Explicit
knowledge is knowledge that has been extracted and
prepared in a written form (or codified), is tangible or
is able to be captured. Conversely, tacit knowledge is
knowledge that is elusive, intangible or difficult to
capture.52 Generally, information cannot be
considered knowledge until it is applied. For example,
a librarian can have mountains of information within
the library, but it cannot truly be knowledge unless it
is retained by a collective whole of persons (or a
person) and actually applied. The differences
between explicit and tacit knowledge can also be
debated. Is explicit knowledge really knowledge or
simply information? Consider a recipe: A recipe can
be explicit knowledge. One can capture the
ingredients, put them on paper and later refer to them
in order to bake a pie, for example. Yet any culinary
expert could testify that two chefs could conceivably
make the same recipe for a pie and make different
pies. This can be attributed to tacit knowledge. Tacit
knowledge relies on experience and simply knowing
how the filling should be spiced, whether the dough
might need a little more water or flour, etc. Tacit
knowledge is the knowledge of experience – retained
knowledge and simply knowing. Knowledge – as a
whole we might say – is information applied or
learned and retained.
In medicine, it takes 17 years to transfer 14
percent of original research to practice or to a point
where a patient can actually benefit from the
6
research.53 This is a concrete example of the
difference between knowledge, information and data.
Much research is in the form of data (statistics) and
later turned into information in the form of a medical
journal article. At this point in the publishing process it
is knowledge to someone, but it is not collective
knowledge in the medical community.
Technology is one aspect of Knowledge
Management – an aspect that can enable knowledge
mobility. Using medical informatics, it is possible to
diffuse a guideline or standard much more quickly
through automation.19 It is possible to alert a
physician to a guideline they, perhaps, did not know
about through an automated computer program or a
clinical reminder. Traditional Information Science was
concerned with classifying the information and placing
it in a system where it could potentially wait in its
hierarchical structure to be found. Informatics has a
focus of pushing that information so that it can be
delivered at a point of need. Need precedes learning
or use of information and were we to look at
Prochaska’s stages of change54 we’ll find most
humans do not readily adopt new behavior even
when they know the information or behavior is sound.
In light of this information it becomes even more
important to develop methods of presenting
information at a time of need so that it can be
assimilated and become applied – knowledge. This is
when a technology comes the closest to truly
augmenting human intelligence.
Thus far our discussion of knowledge has
evaded two primary concerns – learning and the
discipline of knowledge management. Learning
anything is the first step to knowing. However,
learning does not take place in a vacuum and is
largely a community activity.50,55,56 Learning is to
assimilate information and transfer it to knowledge –
something we know. The discipline of knowledge
management comes into play when we attempt to
manage what we know in an organization, manage
what we learn and shape the future through actively
steering the knowledge and learning process in an
organization. John Doyle, a top executive at Hewlett-
Packard was once quoted as saying, “If only HP knew
what HP knows”57 in reference to the problems
involved in organizing information and knowledge
within his company. Communities of Practice are a
breeding ground for knowledge.55,56,58 The concept
was first used by Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger to
describe the tight knit communities in organizations
where learning and knowledge sharing takes place.55
This is often the staff-level employees. Thus, a first plays a dominant role in the first two aspects of
step in beginning to manage what an organization knowledge management and a lesser role in the
knows is to map the knowledge and relationships latter. Most organizations have moved many of their
between knowledge. Social network analysis can resources from a paper-based system to an electronic
provide a method of understanding where system. The information, in electronic form, must be
relationships (knowledge exchange) exist, where they able to be found and located at the time of need.
don’t exist (where they should) and where Development of the appropriate systems, the
relationships are the strongest and weakest.59 The architecture, the usability testing, the organization of
following is an example of a social network analysis the information, taxonomy development and
for an academic department and identifies clusters, maintenance are all parts of an Information
groupings and knowledge pathways within the Professional’s tasks. All of these tasks address the
department: first two aspects of knowledge management in part.
Yet, there is the human factor still to consider. Even
the best designs and greatest systems will not always
ensure system use. The
cognitive and behavioral
factors of the end-user
are a consideration that
runs the gamut from
conception to
implementation and
evaluation. A quick
perusal of the
Knowledge
Management literature
will show a bare spot in
this particular area. A
good percentage of the
Informatics literature is
still primarily focused on
building a better system
for the end-user and not
focusing on how to
change and/or shape
human behavior. In
many instances, the
behavioral barriers are
Figure 359
where we see these articles stop. Yet some sources
concede a differentiating factor of Informatics is the
manner in which it views information as “a social
A detailed analysis of what knowledge management
phenomenon.”10 Information is, indeed, social and not
is and what it entails is beyond the scope of this a stagnant entity. And, to manage the vast amounts
paper and worthy of its own separate analysis.
of information in a given organization requires
However, for the sake of space, knowledge technology. The coupling of social sciences and
management has at the very least a three-pronged technology become essential in any recipe for
approach in practice – the organization of information
success and clearly point the way toward the blending
within the organization (information management),
of disciplines.
methods to ensure the transfer of organized
information to knowledge (knowledge management)
and methods employed to disseminate the knowledge
(education and knowledge management). Informatics

7
Transdisciplinary Sciences
Several weeks ago, I sat in a meeting with a number
of brilliant minds. The objective of the meeting was to
attempt to discern how we could tap into the
knowledge at the Indiana University School of
Medicine and translate the research done here into
practice. It became readily apparent to me after a
short time in the meeting that no one truly understood
their role in the grander scheme of medical research.
Many of the professionals were so focused on their
own research they could not fathom what happens
beyond their labs or offices. The model for translating
research into practice (TRIP) looks like this:
The different phases of TRIP are represented in T1,
T2, and T3. Each of these phases are designed to
move research from a biological or microbiological
model (T1) to an inquiry of how it can benefit patients
(T2) and finally the implementation of standards and
guidelines (T3).60 A system such as this involves a
number of different disciplines from biomedical
research to bedside nurses. Moving information
across disciplines and ensuring research continues to
move forward towards practice becomes a challenge.
Informatics can play a role in TRIP through
building systems that both analyze and enable the
movement of research. The social networking
diagram above [figure 3] is one method of analysis
concerning the knowledge flow within a related or
Figure 460
8
semi-related group. Systems can also be built to
facilitate the flow of information across and between
disciplines. But, the systems are not a single solution
to the problem. The usability of the systems must be
assessed. The behavior and habits of the working
groups must be addressed as well as the structure of
the organization. Of the disciplines involved in
providing a solution to this particular example, the list
might look something like this:
Computer Science – programming
Information Science – managing the
information
HCI – usability and design
Medicine, biomedicine, nursing
Behavioral sciences
Organizational psychology
Education
Knowledge management
If informatics is to truly make an attempt to provide a
solution to this problem, a number of other disciplines
will need to be understood by the professional and
consulted. Simply programming and designing a good
system will clearly not work.
The transdisciplinary sciences attempt to
move across disciplines and even beyond them to
create a new knowledge.22 The Informatics
professional must adopt approaches beyond the
subject matter of their profession and the profession
they are working in. The final differentiating factor of
the informatics profession is that it is or strives to be
truly transdisciplinary bringing many parts together to
create a new whole. If this is not the present of the
profession, it is certainly the future. Indeed, if we were
to compare informatics to other professions, one point
to note is that we see the informatics professional
working closely with staff in organizations from
healthcare to businesses. They are not isolated in
their particular departments, but generally are working
with the professionals they support.
Why Informatics is Needed
Disciplines arise from a need within a given society.
Information Science was a response to the digital age
of information. Computer Science has been the
answer to the rise of computers and related
technologies in society. And, Knowledge
Management has addressed the need to manage
more than simple information within an organization.
Informatics is a response to a number of different
issues arising from the implementation of technology
in society to how to use that technology to encourage
knowledge development while still remaining aware of
the social issues surrounding such changes.
In looking just to medicine, the oft cited
Institutes of Medicine study lists medical errors as
being a major cause of injury to Americans.61 One of
the four primary reasons for this is our inability to
effectively and efficiently exploit information.61 Given
the advent of the Internet and the exponential growth
in technology, one of two things must happen. Either
our current paradigms in Computer Science,
Information Science, or Information Technologies
must change or we need to develop a new discipline
that can evolve with technology to address the
underlying issues we have in not just medicine, but
many other industries. Informatics is an attempt to
address these issues. Definitions, standards and
concept analysis become difficult because of the
evolving nature of the subject matter and the levels of
stratification within the discipline. Moreover, the
problem is difficult. Informatics attempts to bring a
number of disciplines together for the sole purpose of
managing information and knowledge. Information,
alone, can become a slippery concept to grasp. There
are many levels of information within and without of
an organization. There are linguistic variations to
account for in language. Information Design,
Information Visualization, HCI and Human Information
Behavior can all become concepts worthy of
9
consideration in terms of how users utilize the
information presented to them.
If it is true disciplines arise from changes or
a need in society, then Informatics is arising from a
new need to help users manage the intelligence and
information we’ve amassed as a society and species.
There is something of an irony to this. As a brief
example, in today’s organization, everyone is a
content provider and the company intranet quickly
becomes a black-hole of knowledge. In many
instances, the poor design of these systems is
exacerbated by the fact that more and more
organizations force the end-user to use them by
denying them access to the antiquated method of
obtaining the information they need whether it is a
simple form or an application. We have, in a sense,
become so intelligent we need systems to manage
the intelligence and flow of information. Unfortunately,
it seems we are not yet intelligent enough to master
this task.
Is it a matter of simply developing the correct
algorithm? Or maybe it’s the right software program
with the right interface. While these all might be part
of the puzzle, helping a nurse find a guideline, helping
a physician make a clinical decision or simply helping
an employee find that presentation given at lunchtime
last Friday will require more than a simple
mathematical formula or programming. These
problems rely on understanding the topic, the user
and the technology. Understanding those elements
requires a human-centered approach aware of the
social issues in the interaction between humans and
technology. It requires an approach that focuses on a
just-in-time concept for knowledge – what it is and
when it is needed. And, it requires an approach that
moves across, between and within different
disciplines to truly understand the information, the
problem and the professional end-user.
Discussion
In exploring what exactly it is that defines the
field of informatics we have first considered the
definitions – that which defines the discipline.
However troublesome this act may be, it is a
necessary step in understanding 1) where the
discipline’s origins lie 2) the discipline in practice 3)
and the primary social foundations that both shape
and truly define Informatics as a profession. The
social foundations are what truly differentiates
Informatics – people-centered, knowledge-focused
and transdisciplinary. Without the social foundations
as a portion of the defining factors, Informatics would
bear little difference from Computer Science or
Information Science. It is a complex, but natural
transition that marks the development of our ability to
augment our intelligence and move information more
efficiently. Two decades ago we were asking if X was
possible. We have not stopped asking that question in
the sciences. But, we have begun to understand that
when X is possible, the job is not complete. The
Informatics professional now becomes part of the
process in developing that possibility into a system
that incorporates and considers the end-user in
context. The Informatics professional is now a part of
the process within the working unit or organization.
Informatics in solitude has not a face nor identity. The
discipline only maintains its identity as part of another
profession or discipline providing firm testament to its
transdisciplinary nature. A profession may employ
someone in Nursing Informatics, Business Informatics
or Bio-Informatics, but the term Informatics has little
meaning beyond the context or coupling of another
profession.
As we note the social nature of knowledge,
information and learning to include their
interdependent nature, the social nature of people
and social coupling of Informatics with other
disciplines it is inevitable that we conclude the social
foundations of Informatics are the very entities that
both give it an identity and become the primary
defining factors to a profession still evolving.
10
1. Blumenthal JL, Mays BE, Weinfeld JM, Banks MA,
Shaffer J. Defining and assessing medical informatics
competencies. Med Ref Serv Q. 2005;24(2):95-102.
2. He S. Informatics: a brief survey. The Electronic
Library. 2003;21(2):117-122.
3. Kay DG, Hoek AVD, Richardson DJ. Informatics: a
focus on computer science in context. SIGCSE Bull.
2005;37(1):551-555.
4. Hannah KJ, Ball MJ, Edwards MJ. Introduction to
Nursing Informatics (Health Informatics) 3rd edition.
3rd ed. Springer; 2005.
5. Musen MA. Medical informatics: searching for
underlying components. Methods Inf Med.
2002;41(1):12-9.
6. Mathieu L. Nursing informatics: developing
knowledge for nursing practice. Can J Nurs Res.
2007;39(1):15-9.
7. Saba VK. Nursing informatics: yesterday, today
and tomorrow. International Nursing Review.
2001;48(3):177-187.
8. Kukafka R. Public Health Informatics: The Nature
of the Field and Its Relevance to Health Promotion
Practice. Health Promot Pract. 2005;6(1):23-28.
9. Staggers N, Thompson CB. The Evolution of
Definitions for Nursing Informatics: A Critical Analysis
and Revised Definition. J Am Med Inform Assoc. .
2002;9(3):255–261.
10. Dahlbom B. The new informatics. Scand. J. Inf.
Syst. 1996;8(2):29-47.
11. What is Informatics? Available at:
http://www.informatics.indiana.edu/overview/what_is_i
nformatics.asp [Accessed November 23, 2008].
12. Hersh W. Who are the Informaticians? What We
Know and Should Know. J Am Med Inform Assoc.
2006;13(2):166-170.
13. What Are the iSchools? Available at:
http://www.ischools.org/oc/field.html [Accessed
December 1, 2008].
14. List of I-Schools - Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia. Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_I-Schools
[Accessed December 1, 2008].
15. School of Information - University of Michigan:
The iSchool at Michigan. Available at:
http://si.umich.edu/ [Accessed December 1, 2008].
16. University of Illinois Graduate School of Library
and Information Science. Available at:
http://www.lis.uiuc.edu/ [Accessed December 1,
2008].
17. School of Information Sciences University of
Pittsburgh. Available at: http://www.ischool.pitt.edu/
[Accessed December 1, 2008].
18. Bartlett J, Kaplan J. Bartlett's Familiar Quotations.
2002:1431.
19. Candy P, Bali RK, Dwivedi AN. Healthcare
Knowledge Management: Issues, Advances and
Successes. 1st ed. Springer; 2006.
20. Wang Y. Cognitive Informatics: A New
Transdisciplinary Research Field. Available at:
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/bram/200
3/00000004/00000002/00470186 [Accessed
December 2, 2008].
21. Wang Y. On Cognitive Informatics. In:
Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Conference
on Cognitive Informatics. IEEE Computer Society;
2002:34-42. Available at:
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=674024
[Accessed December 2, 2008].
22. McGregor SLT. The Nature of Transdisciplinary
Science.
Available at:
http://www.kon.org/hswp/archive/transdiscipl.pdf
[Accessed November 23, 2008].
23. Scherrer CS, Jacobson S. New measures for new
roles: defining and measuring the current practices of
health sciences librarians. J Med Libr Assoc.
2002;90(2):164-72.
24. Clemmons NW, Clemmons SL. Five years later:
medical reference in the 21st century. Med Ref Serv
Q. 2005;24(1):1-18.
25. Winning MA, Beverley CA. Clinical librarianship: a
systematic review of the literature. Health Info Libr J.
2003;20 Suppl 1:10-21.
26. Rubin RE. Foundations of library and information
science. Journal of Academic Librarianship. 1998;24.
27. Rubin RE. Foundations of Library and Information
Science. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology.
2006;57(9):1279-1280.
28. ALA Types of Jobs.
Available at:
http://www.ala.org/ala/educationcareers/careers/librar
ycareerssite/typesofjobs.cfm [Accessed December 2,
2008].
29. ALA Core Competencies. Available at:
http://www.ala.org/ala/educationcareers/careers/corec
omp/index.cfm [Accessed December 2, 2008].
11
30. MIS Career Opportunities. Available at:
http://www.slis.indiana.edu/degrees/mis/career.html
[Accessed November 23, 2008].
31. IU Informatics Careers in Informatics. Available
at:
http://www.informatics.indiana.edu/careers/careers_in
_informatics.asp [Accessed November 23, 2008].
32. MIS Career. Available at:
http://www.slis.indiana.edu/degrees/mis/misinfo.html
[Accessed November 23, 2008].
33. Norman DA. Emotional Design.; 2005:272.
34. Azad B, King N. Enacting computer workaround
practices within a medication dispensing system. Eur
J Inform Syst. 2008;17(3):264-278.
35. Saleem JJ, Patterson ES, Militello L, et al.
Exploring barriers and facilitators to the use of
computerized clinical reminders. J Am Med Inform
Assoc. 2005;12(4):438-47.
36. Saleem JJ, Patterson ES, Militello L, et al. Impact
of clinical reminder redesign on learnability, efficiency,
usability, and workload for ambulatory clinic nurses. J
Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007;14(5):632-40.
37. Sittig D, Ash J, Zhang J, Osheroff J, Shabot M.
Lessons from "Unexpected increased mortality after
implementation of a commercially sold computerized
physician order entry system". Pediatrics.
2006;118(2):797-801.
38. Ash JS, Berg M, Coiera E. Some unintended
consequences of information technology in health
care: the nature of patient care information system-
related errors. J Am Med Inform Assoc.
2004;11(2):104-12.
39. Ash J, Sittig D, Poon E, et al. The extent and
importance of unintended consequences related to
computerized provider order entry. J Am Med Inform
Assoc. 2007;14(4):415-423.
40. Campbell E, Sittig D, Ash J, Guappone K, Dykstra
R. Types of unintended consequences related to
computerized provider order entry. J Am Med Inform
Assoc. 2006;13(5):547-556.
41. Han Y, Carcillo J, Venkataraman S, et al.
Unexpected increased mortality after implementation
of a commercially sold computerized physician order
entry system. Pediatrics. 2005;116(6):1506-1512.
42. Harrison MI, Koppel R, Bar-Lev S. Unintended
consequences of information technologies in health
care--an interactive sociotechnical analysis. J Am
Med Inform Assoc. 2007;14(5):542-9.
43. Saleem JJ, Patterson ES, Militello L, et al. Using
human factors methods to design a new interface for
an electronic medical record. AMIA Annu Symp Proc.
2007:640-4.
44. Halbesleben J, Wakefield D, Wakefield B. Work-
arounds in health care settings: Literature review and
research agenda. Health Care Manage R.
2008;33(1):2-12.
45. Koppel R, Wetterneck T, Telles J, Karsh B.
Workarounds to barcode medication administration
systems: Their occurrences, causes, and threats to
patient safety. J Am Med Inform Assoc.
2008;15(4):408-423.
46. Sharp H, Rogers Y, Preece J, Preece J.
Interaction Design. 2nd ed. Wiley; 2007.
47. Waterfall model - Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia. Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfall_model
[Accessed November 29, 2008].
48. Image:Iterative development model V2.jpg -
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Iterative_developm
ent_model_V2.jpg [Accessed November 29, 2008].
49. Iterative and incremental development -
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iterative_development
[Accessed November 29, 2008].
50. Norman D, Dunaeff T. Things That Make Us
Smart: Defending Human Attributes In The Age Of
The Machine. Basic Books; 1994.
51. Grudin J. Social evaluation of the user interface:
Who does the work and who gets the benefit. In:
Proceedings of Interact. 87:805-811.
52. Nonaka I, Takeuchi H. The Knowledge-Creating
Company: How Japanese Companies Create the
Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press,
USA; 1995.
53. Balas EA, Boren SA, Brown GD. Information
Technology Strategies from the United States and the
European Union. 1st ed. IOS Press; 2000.
54. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, Rossi JS, et al.
Stages of change and decisional balance for 12
problem behaviors. Health Psychol. 1994;13(1):39-
46.
55. Wenger E. Communities of Practice: Learning,
Meaning, and Identity. 1st ed. Cambridge University
Press; 1999.
56. Brown JS, Duguid P. The Social Life of
Information. 1st ed. Harvard Business School Press;
2002.
12
57. Sieloff CG. “If only HP knew what HP knows??:
the roots of knowledge management at Hewlett-
Packard Charles G. Sieloff The Authors. Journal of
Knowledge Management. 1999;3(1):47-53.
58. Krogh GV, Ichijo K, Nonaka I. Enabling
Knowledge Creation: How to Unlock the Mystery of
Tacit Knowledge and Release the Power of
Innovation. Oxford University Press, USA; 2000.
59. Merrill J, Hripcsak G. Using social network
analysis within a department of biomedical informatics
to induce a discussion of academic communities of
practice. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 15(6):780-2.
60. The "3T's" Road Map to Transform US Health
Care: The "How" of High-Quality Care. 2008.
Available at: http://jama.ama-
assn.org/cgi/content/extract/299/19/2319 [Accessed
November 29, 2008].
61. America COQOHCI, Medicine IO. Crossing the
Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st
Century. 1st ed. National Academies Press; 2001. 62.
The iSchool at Drexel University. Available at:
http://www.ischool.drexel.edu/ [Accessed December
1, 2008].
63. The Florida State University College of
Information. Available at: http://ci.fsu.edu/graduate/
[Accessed December 1, 2008].
64. College of Computing. Available at:
http://www.cc.gatech.edu/ [Accessed December 1,
2008].
65. SCILS, Rutgers University. Available at:
http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/ [Accessed December 1,
2008].
66. The School of Information Studies. Available at:
http://ischool.syr.edu/ [Accessed December 2, 2008].
67. UC Berkeley School of Information | Home.
Available at: http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/
[Accessed December 1, 2008].
68. department of informatics @ the university of
california, irvine. Available at:
http://www.ics.uci.edu/informatics/ [Accessed
December 1, 2008].
69. UCLA Department of Information Studies: MLIS
Program. Available at:
http://is.gseis.ucla.edu/programs/degrees/mlis_progra
m.htm [Accessed December 1, 2008].
70. SLIS. Available at:
http://www.slis.ua.edu/drupal5/ [Accessed December
2, 2008].
71. Welcome to the School of Health Information
Sciences at Houston, School of Health Information
Sciences. Available at: http://www.shis.uth.tmc.edu/
[Accessed December 2, 2008].
72. College of Information Studies, University of
Maryland, iSchool@UMD. Available at:
http://ischool.umd.edu/ [Accessed December 1,
2008].
13
73. UNC School of Information and Library Science.
Available at: http://sils.unc.edu/ [Accessed December
1, 2008].
74. Information School, University of Washington.
Available at: http://www.ischool.washington.edu/
[Accessed December 1, 2008].
Table 1: A Sampling of I-School Degrees & Curriculums

University School Name Degree Conferred Core Requirements

Drexel62 College of Information & MSIS1 Information Systems

Technology Networks
Databases
Business
Computer Programming

Florida State College of Information MS LIS 5271 Research Methods in Information

University63 Studies (3 credits)OR
LIS 5203 Assessing Information Needs (3
credits)AND
LIS 5411 Introduction to Information Policy (3
credits)OR
LIS 5020 Foundations of the Information
Professions (3 credits)AND
LIS 5408 Management of Information
Organization (3 credits)AND
LIS 5703 Information Organization (3 credits)

Georgia College of Computing MS in HCI2 [MS in HCI only]

Tech64 MS in Information Security CS/PSYC 6750 Human-Computer Interaction
PhD in Bioinformatics PSYC 6018 Principles of Research Design
PSYC 7101 Engineering Psychology I: Methods

Rutgers65 School of MLIS Courses vary – 6 tracks are offered

Communication,
Information & Library
Studies

Syracuse School of Information MSIM IST 601 Information and Information

University66 Studies Environments (1 credit)
IST 621 Introduction to Information Management:
Concepts, Contexts, and Career Options
(gateway course)
IST 614 Management Principles for Information
Professionals
IST 618 Survey of Telecommunications and
Information Policy

1 Masters of Science in Information Systems

2 Masters of Science in Human Computer Interaction

14
UC Berkley67 School of Information MIMS3 202 Information Organization and Retrieval

206 Distributed Computing Applications and

infrastructure
203 Social and Organizational Issues of
Information and Society
205 Information Law and Policy
209 Professional Skills Workshop

UC Irvine68 School of Information & MS in Computer Science Varying tracks

Computer Sciences w/emphasis in Informatics

UCLA69 School of Information & MLIS4 No core courses listed; UCLA utilizes a track
Education Studies method

University of School of Library & MLIS LS 500 Organization of Information

Alabama70 Information Studies LS 501 Introduction to Library and Information
Studies
LS 502 Research Methods
LS 507 Information Sources and Services
LS 560 Information Technologies

University of College of Technology No Masters offered – n/a

Huston71 BS in Information Systems
Technology

University of Graduate School of MS in Community Informatics Coursework varies between the two tracks
Illinois Library & Information MS in Biological Informatics
Urbana- Science
Champaign16

University of College of Information MIM5 INFM 600 Information Environments (3 credits)

Maryland72 Studies INFM 603 Information Technology and
Organizational Context (3 credits)
INFM 605 Users and Use Context (3 credits)
*Individual tracks allow for specialization beyond
the core courses.

University of School of Information MSI6 Information in Social Systems

Michigan15 Contextual Inquiry & Project Management
Networked Computing
Management Distribution course (choice)
Research Methods Course (choice)

3 Masters of Information Management and Systems

4 Masters of Library & Information Science
5 Master of Information Management
6 Master of Science in Information

15
University of School of Information & MSIS INLS 520 (150): Organization of Information
North Library Science INLS 509 (172): Information Retrieval
Carolina73 INLS 500 (180): Human Information Interactions
INLS 582 (162): Systems Analysis
INLS 780 (201): Research Methods
INLS 585 (131): Management for Information
Professionals

University of School of Information MSIS Six credits of course work in the Mathematical
Pittsburgh17 Sciences and Formal Foundations area (INFSCI 2000
required unless exempted by advisor)
Eighteen credits of course work in the Systems
and Technology areas (either INFSCI 2500 or
INFSCI 2592 required)
Six credits of course work in the Cognitive
Science area.
Six credits of electives. Students may pursue a
thesis or a practicum as one of the elective
options. Students should know that a thesis is
not a requirement of the MSIS degree program.

University of Information School MSIM Technology Core (any 2)

Washington74 IMT540 (Design)
INFX542 (XML)
INFX543 (Databases)
INFX544 (IR)
Information Core (3)
IMT510 (Human Information Behavior)
IMT520 (Information Services & Resources)
IMT530 (Organization of Information)
Management Core (3)
IMT580 (Mgmt of Information Organizations)
IMT581 (Information & the Mgmt of Change)
IMT550 (Info Policy)

16