Knowledge-Based Policing: Augmenting Reality with Respect for Privacy - Discrimination and Privacy in the Information Society - page 169

Information
Taking an interpretive-constructivist perspective (cf. Orlikowski 2002; Tsoukas
2000), information is viewed primarily from the perspective of informing. The
process of informing may be intentional or unintentional, successful or not suc-
cessful. For example, accidentally overhearing a conversation of your neighbors
may inform you about an event (unintentional); a report designed to inform a
management team about the state of affairs may inform some, but leave others in
confusion (unsuccessful); observing your colleague may inform you about his
mood today, but may as well leave you wondering (unintentional and unsuccess-
ful), et cetera. In all cases the information process involves the transmission of
signals (or data) from an information source (e.g. person, text, images, or sounds),
and the registration and interpretation of these signals by a receiver (Shannon
1948). While these signals or data may be informational to some, they may be
non-informational or even confusing to others, or interpreted in another fashion
than intended by the sender. Reasons may include differences in idiosyncratic per-
spectives on reality, a lack of interest or attention, and the lack of knowledge or
trained senses to notice the difference between the various signals or data. More-
over, the meaning, intent, or validity of data sent more then once might shift
(Shannon 1948). Thus, information is highly idiosyncratic, context specific, and
dynamic. It is based in differences that make a difference (Bateson 1979) for a
given person or group in a given context at a given time. Moreover, it represents
that selection of the data that modifies our state of knowing (Boisot and Li 2005)
and informs action (Orlikowsi 2002).
Knowledge
Following an interpretive-constructivist perspective, knowledge is viewed from
the perspective of knowing to emphasize the role of know-how (Dean et al. 2008;
Orlikowski 2002; Tsoukas 2000) in addition to know-what and know-why in ac-
quiring and using knowledge through practice and experience (Dean et al. 2008;
Gottschalk et al. 2009). In this perspective knowing how and practice are mutually
constitutive, thus dynamically co-evolve through time (Nissen 2006; Orlikowski
2002). For example, knowing how to recognize a criminal in action may include
the identification of a number of indicators that may be used to augment reality.
As many officers will confirm, however, as soon as criminals learn about these in-
dicators, they will try to conceal them or change their modus operandi all together.
As a result, the recognition of criminals in action is to be regarded as a highly dy-
namic and knowledge-intensive game of 'cat and mouse'. As experience-records
are idiosyncratic, so is the knowledge gained (and forgotten) in the process. It can
only in part be encoded in generalized knowledge-rules. Moreover, some forms of
knowledge (also called ecological knowledge (Walsh and Ungson 1991)) can only
be remembered through direct interaction with the environment (one may recog-
nize the case of a forgotten pin-code which may be remembered by visualizing the
keyboard and remembering the pattern while typing it). Thus, knowledge is highly
idiosyncratic, context specific, and dynamic.