Classification of frontier objects in the knowledge organization and the role of ontologies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18617/liinc.v14i2.4314Abstract
Boundary objects have been approached in the area of Information Science as objects (concrete or abstract) used as bridges of contact between communities or groups, facilitating their communication and understanding. Several types of boundary objects are exemplified in the literature, each playing a specific role within the more general role of articulating understanding and knowledge exchange among communities that share some common goal. However, this differentiation of roles is not always clear, making it difficult to understand the purpose and utility of such instruments according to their characteristics and the problem they are intended to solve. Especially when the same boundary object can assume more than a role according to its use, as is the case of ontologies. The objective of this work is to investigate different types of frontier objects, based on a literature review, and to propose a categorization based on its characteristics and purposes. From this categorization, it is proposed to situate the different roles that ontologies can assume as border objects, discussing their use as such. As a result, we present a conceptual map of boundary object types and an exemplification of the role of ontologies according to their use in this context.
References
ABRAHAM, R. Development of Design Principles for Boundary Objects in Enterprise Transformation. Tese de Doutorado. University of St. Gallen, 2015.
BENTON, T.; CRAIB, I. Philosophy of Social Science: The Philosophical Foundations of Social Thought. 2nd. Edition, Palgrave and Macmillan, New York, NY, 2010.
BLUMER, H. Simbolic Interactionism. New Jersey: Ed. Prentice-Hall, 1969.
BOWKER, G. C., BAKER, K. S., MILLERAND, F., RIBES, D. Towards information infrastructure studies: Ways of knowing in a networked environment. In J. Hunsinger, M. Allen, & L. Klasrup (Eds.), International Handbook of Internet Research. Springer, 2010.
BOWKER, G. C.,; STAR, S. L. Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.
BOWKER, G. C.,; STAR, S. L.; TURNER, W.; GASSER L. Introduction. In: Social Science, Technical Systems, and Cooperative Work: Beyond the Great Divide. Psychology Press, New York, NY, USA, 2014.
BOWKER G C; TIMMERMANS, S.; CLARKE, A. BALKA, E. (eds). Boundary Objects and Beyond: Working with Leigh Star. Cambridge, Massachusetts : The MIT Press, 2016.
BRÄSCHER, M.; CAFÉ, L. Organização da Informação ou Organização do Conhecimento? In: ENCONTRO NACIONAL DE PESQUISA EM CIÊNCIA DA INFORMAÇÃO, 9, São Paulo, Anais, 2008.
São Paulo: ANCIB, 2008. CALLON, M. Struggles and negotiations to define what is problematic and what is not: the sociology of translation. In: KNORR-CETINA, K.; KROHN, R.; WHITLEY, R. (Eds.). The social process of scientific investigation. Dordrecht, Holanda: Ridel, . p.197-220, 1980.
CAMPOS, L.M.; CAMPOS, M.L.A. Aplicação de dados interligados abertos apoiada por ontologia. ENCONTRO NACIONAL DE PESQUISA EM CIÊNCIA DA INFORMAÇÃO, BELO HORIZONTE, MG, Anais ..., 2014.
CARLILE P.R A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, v.13, n.4, p. 442–55, 2002.
CARTER, M. J.; FULLER, C. Symbolic Interactionism. Sociopedia.isa. Northridge: ISA; 2015. Disponível em: < http://www.sagepub.net/isa/resources/pdf/ Symbolic%20interactionism.pdf >. Acesso em: 20 mai. 2017.
CLARKE, A.; STAR, S.L. The social worlds framework: A theory/methods package. In Edward Hackett, Olga Amsterdamska, Michael Lynch & JudyWajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT PressCOHEN, L.; MANION. L.; MORRISON, K. Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge, p.113-139, 2008.
CORDEIRO, K.F. et al.. An approach for managing and semantically enriching the publication of Linked Open Governmental Data. In: WORKSHOP IN APPLIED COMPUTING FOR ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT, 3., Florianópolis. Proceedings…, Florianópolis: WCGE, 2011.
DAHLBERG, I. Conceptual compatibility of ordering systems. Internacional Classification, v.10, n.2, p.5-8, 1983.
HUANG, E. Y. ; HUANG, T. K. Antecedents and outcomes of boundary objects in knowledge interaction in the context of software systems analysis. In: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 44TH ANNUAL HAWAII INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEM SCIENCES, 2011;
KALLINIKOS, J.; LEONARDI, P. M; NARDI, B. A. The challenge of materiality: origins, scope and prospects. In: Leonardi, Paul M., Nardi, Bonnie A. and Kallinikos, Jannis, (eds.) Materiality and Organizing: Social Interaction in a Technological World. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, p. 3-22, 2012.
LAMBE, P. Organizing knowledge: taxonomies, knowledge and organization effectiveness. Oxford: Chandos, 2007.
LAMONT, M.; MOLNAR, V. The study of boundaries in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, p. 167-196, 2002.
LE MOIGNE. Qu’est – ce qu’un Modèle? Confrontations Psychiatriques, numero especial dedicado a los modelos. Francia, 1987.
LATOUR, B. Ciência em Ação. São Paulo: UNESP, 1997.
LAW, J. A sociology of monsters, essays on power, technology and domination. London: Routedge, 1991.
LEONARDI, P.M. Crossing the implementation line: the mutual constitution of technology and organizing across development and use activities. Communication Theory, v.19, n.3, p.278-310, 2009.
LEONARDI, P. M., Materiality, Sociomateriality, and Socio-Technical Systems: What Do These Terms Mean? How are They Related? Do We Need Them?. In P. M. Leonardi, B. A. Nardi, & J. Kallinikos (Eds.), Materiality and Organizing: Social Interaction in a Technological World Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 25-48, 2012.
MONGILI, A.; , PELLEGRINO, G. Information Infrastructure(s): Boundaries, Ecologies, Multiplicity. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 380 p., 2014.
PAPADIMITRIOU, PELLEGRIN, 2007
PETRAKOU A. Design for places of collaboration. Dissertation, 195 p. School of Computing. Doctoral Dissertation Series No. 2011:08. Karlskrona: Blekinge Institute of Technology, 2011.
SAPSED, J.; SALTER, A. Postcards from the Edge: Local Communities, Global Programs and Boundary Objects. Organization Studies - ORGAN STUD. n.25, p.1515-1534, 2004.
STAR, S.L. The History and Boundaries of Boundary Objects, Conference at the workshop “Boundary Object, Boundary work”, Grenoble University, 2007.
STAR, S.L. This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept Science, Technology & Human Values, v.35, p. 601-617, 2010.
STAR, S.L, GRIESEMER, J.R. Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39, Social Studies of Science, 19, p.387-420, 1989.
STOYTCHEVA, S. Boundary Objects: A Field Guide, Part 1. What is a boundary object? 2013. Disponível em: <http://scalar.usc.edu/works/boundary-objects-guide/boundary-objects-that-learn>. Acesso em 16 jan 2017.
STRAUSS, A. A Social World Perspective. In N. K. Denzin (Ed.), Studies in Symbolic Interaction 1. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, p. 119-128, 1978.
TOIKKA, ARAMO-IMMONEN, 2013
TROMPETTE, P.; VINCK, D. Revisiting the notion of Boundary Object , Revue d'anthropologie des connaissances , v. 3, n. 1, p. 3-25, 2009.
WINDECK, D.; WEBER, J.; STRAUSS, E. Enrolling managers to accept the business partner: the role of boundary objects. Journal of Management and Governance, 2013.
WENGER, E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Linair Maria Campos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant Liinc em Revista the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors have permission and are encouraged to deposit their manuscripts and versios of record (VoR) in their personal web pages or institutional repositories, generic repositories etc., before (pre-print) or after (post-print) the publication in Liinc em Revista, according to its open access depositing policy registered in the Directory of Editorial Policies of Brazilian Journals (DIADORIM), kindly providing a link to the article published on Liinc's website.
Liinc em Revista, published by Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License – CC BY 4.0 
