Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Mann, T."
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Mann, T.: Teaching Library of Congress Subject Headings (2000) 0.00
    0.001823924 = product of:
      0.003647848 = sum of:
        0.003647848 = product of:
          0.007295696 = sum of:
            0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 5919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007295696 = score(doc=5919,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041389145 = queryNorm
                0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5919, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5919)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    An understanding of the workings of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is one of the most valuable conceptual tools a researcher can have. The subject heading system is by no means obvious or self-evident, however; it must be taught, explained, and exemplified by librarians. Several points must be covered explicitly. The cross-reference notation of UF, BT, RT, SA, and NT has to be explained; the importance of choosing the most specific heading available, rather than a general term, must also be emphasized. There are four ways to find the most specific LCSH terms for a particular topic; two of them come from using the red books, two from using the online catalog itself. All four ways are important; none is obvious. Each must be taught
    Type
    a
  2. Mann, T.: 'Cataloging must change!' and indexer consistency studies : misreading the evidence at our peril (1997) 0.00
    0.0015795645 = product of:
      0.003159129 = sum of:
        0.003159129 = product of:
          0.006318258 = sum of:
            0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006318258 = score(doc=492,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041389145 = queryNorm
                0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 492, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=492)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    An earlier article ('Cataloging must change' by D. Gregor and C. Mandel in: Library journal 116(1991) no.6, S.42-47) has popularized the belief that there is low consistency (only 10-20% agreement) among subject cataloguers in assigning LCSH. Because of this alleged lack og consistency, the article suggests, cataloguers 'can be more accepting in variations in subject choices' in copy cataloguing. Argues that this inference is based on a serious misreading of previous studies of indexer consistency. The 10-20% figure actually derives from studies of people trying to guess the same natural language key words, precisely in the absence of vocabulary control mechanisms such as thesauri or LCSH. Concludes that sources cited fail support their conclusion and some directly contradict it. Raises the concern that a naive acceptance by the library profession of the 10-20% claim can only have negative consequences for the quality of subject cataloguing created, and accepted throughout the country
    Type
    a
  3. Mann, T.: Reference and informational genres (2009) 0.00
    9.11962E-4 = product of:
      0.001823924 = sum of:
        0.001823924 = product of:
          0.003647848 = sum of:
            0.003647848 = weight(_text_:a in 3869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.003647848 = score(doc=3869,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041389145 = queryNorm
                0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 3869, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3869)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a