Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom (DIKW): A Semiotic Theoretical and Empirical Exploration of the Hierarchy and its Quality Dimension

Abstract

What exactly is the difference between data and information? What is the difference between data quality and information quality; is there any difference between the two? And, what are knowledge and wisdom? Are there such things as knowledge quality and wisdom quality? As these primitives are the most basic axioms of information systems research, it is somewhat surprising that consensus on exact definitions seems to be lacking. This paper presents a theoretical and empirical exploration of the sometimes directly quoted, and often implied Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom (DIKW) hierarchy and its quality dimension. We first review relevant literature from a range of perspectives and develop and contextualise a theoretical DIKW framework through semiotics. The literature review identifies definitional commonalities and divergences from a scholarly perspective; the theoretical discussion contextualises the terms and their relationships within a semiotic framework and proposes relevant definitions grounded in that framework. Next, rooted in Wittgenstein's ordinary language philosophy, we analyse 20 online news articles for their uses of the terms and present the results of an online focus group discussion comprising 16 information systems experts. The empirical exploration identifies a range of definitional ambiguities from a practical perspective.

Knowledge translation status and barriers

“…In addition, there are discussions about the knowledge to be transferred and the roles of key players, such as translators, partici pants, brokers or facilitators of knowl edge, and policy makers (governmen tal). Baskarada and Kronios restate Falkenberg et al when they say: "There is a growing concern.. .about the present situation, where too many fuzzy or ill-defined concepts are used...Scientific as well as practicerelated communication is severely distorted and hampered, due to this fuzziness" [16],…”

“…The knowledge is socially constructed and situation based [16], is interactive and meaningful within the context [21], and yields different results in different situations [22], Therefore, the KT process differs depending upon the situation, con text, and users' orientation. In this regard, an integrated dynamic accu mulation of knowledge ("knowl edgebase"), which is reflexive to the situation and context and is adapt able and scalable to orientations and needs [23], would be ideal.…”

Learning Styles and Use of Clinical Knowledge Sources among Junior Doctors

“…(1-3) A distinction should be made between data, information and knowledge with a sequential order. (4)(5)(6) These concepts can be defined in the terms of each other. (5) Data by itself is of no value if it is not put into context and must be organised to become interpretable.…”

Konsep Data, Information, Knowledge dan Wisdom (DIKW) Hierarchy pada Manajemen Kearsipan

“…Saat informasi bersinggungan dengan pengalaman dan gagasan dari penggunanya maka informasi ini berubah menjadi pengetahuan yang nantinya akan mempengaruhi keputusan (Zins, 2007). Tercapainya istilah pengetahuan dan kebijaksanaan, perlu dicatat bahwa hal itu bergantung pada data dan informasi (yaitu pengetahuan adalah kumpulan dari data atau informasi), dan bahwa kebijaksanaan harus membantu orang untuk membuat keputusan yang baik (Baskarada, dan Koronios, 2013).…”