Search (90 results, page 5 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Indexierungsstudien"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Shoham, S.; Kedar, R.: ¬The subject cataloging of monographs with the use of keywords (2001) 0.00
    0.0014416494 = product of:
      0.0072082467 = sum of:
        0.0072082467 = weight(_text_:a in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0072082467 = score(doc=5442,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13482209 = fieldWeight in 5442, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5442)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Report on a discussion forum of the ALCTS SAC Subcommittee an Metadata and Subject Analysis
    Content
    The overall objective of this study was to examine the implementation of a different approach to the expression of the subject content of monographs in the cataloging record, i.e., the use of a post-coordinate, thesaurus of keywords, using inter-indexer consistency testing and in-depth analysis of mistakes in indexing. A sample of 50 non-fiction monographs was subject cataloged by 16 library science students (non-experienced indexers) using the new Hebrew Thesaurus of Indexing Terms (1996). The 800 indexing records of the non-experienced indexers were compared to the "correct indexing records" (prepared by a panel of three experienced indexers). Indexing consistency was measured using two different formulas used in previous inter-indexer studies. A medium level of inter-indexer consistency was found. In the analysis of mistakes, it was found that the most frequent mistake was the assignment of indexing terms to minor subject matter (i.e., subjects that were less than 20% of the content of the book). Among possible explanations offered for these finding are: sparseness of scope notes in the thesaurus, the priority given by Israeli public libraries to Hebrew language materials in the development of their non-fiction collection, and the size of the output of the Israeli publishing industry of non-fiction materials in Hebrew. The results of the consistency tests and the mistakes analysis were also examined in light of several factors: (1) the number of indexing terms assigned; (2) the length of the monographs (number of pages); and (3) subject area of each monograph. The same examinations were carried out for the subject cataloging records prepared by the Israeli Center for Libraries (ICL) for these monographs.
    Type
    a
  2. Mann, T.: 'Cataloging must change!' and indexer consistency studies : misreading the evidence at our peril (1997) 0.00
    0.0014156717 = product of:
      0.007078358 = sum of:
        0.007078358 = weight(_text_:a in 492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007078358 = score(doc=492,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = 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)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    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. McCarthy, C.: ¬The realibility factor in subject access (1986) 0.00
    0.0013622305 = product of:
      0.0068111527 = sum of:
        0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 2271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0068111527 = score(doc=2271,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 2271, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2271)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Type
    a
  4. Tinker, F.F.: Imprecision in meaning measured by inconsistency of indexing (1966-68) 0.00
    0.0013622305 = product of:
      0.0068111527 = sum of:
        0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 2275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0068111527 = score(doc=2275,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 2275, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2275)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Type
    a
  5. Connell, T.H.: Use of the LCSH system : realities (1996) 0.00
    0.0013485396 = product of:
      0.0067426977 = sum of:
        0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 6941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067426977 = score(doc=6941,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 6941, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6941)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Explores the question of whether academic libraries keep up with the changes in the LCSH system. Analysis of the handling of 15 subject headings in 50 academic library catalogues available via the Internet found that libraries are not consistently maintaining subject authority control, or making syndetic references and scope notes in their catalogues. Discusses the results from the perspective of the libraries' performance, performance on the headings overall, performance on references, performance on the type of change made to the headings,a nd performance within 3 widely used onlien catalogue systems (DRA, INNOPAC and NOTIS). Discusses the implications of the findings in relationship to expressions of dissatisfaction with the effectiveness of subject cataloguing expressed by discussion groups on the Internet
    Type
    a
  6. Boll, J.J.: DDC classification rules : an outline history and comparison of two sets of rules (1988) 0.00
    0.0013485396 = product of:
      0.0067426977 = sum of:
        0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067426977 = score(doc=404,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 404, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=404)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Melvil Dewey provided generally applicable classification guidelines or rules with his classification schedules, beginning with the second edition of his scheme. Many cataloging textbooks have adopted these guidelines. Recent editions of the DDC, however, provide considerably changed, quite intricate, and edition-specific rules. The resulting two different sets of classification rules are similar in theory but very different in application. Classifiers must be aware of both sets. They are summarized in two decision charts that are intended to illustrate the differences and similarities between the two sets of rules and to encourage consistent classification decisions. The need is expressed for a parallel, end-user-oriented searching code
    Type
    a
  7. Biagetti, M.T.: Indexing and scientific research needs (2006) 0.00
    0.0013485396 = product of:
      0.0067426977 = sum of:
        0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 235) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067426977 = score(doc=235,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 235, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=235)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a global learning society: Proceedings of the 9th International ISKO Conference, 4-7 July 2006, Vienna, Austria. Hrsg.: G. Budin, C. Swertz u. K. Mitgutsch
    Type
    a
  8. Chan, L.M.: Alphabetical arrangement and subject collocation in Library of Congress Subject Headings (1977) 0.00
    0.0010897844 = product of:
      0.005448922 = sum of:
        0.005448922 = weight(_text_:a in 2268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005448922 = score(doc=2268,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2268, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2268)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Type
    a
  9. Iivonen, M.: ¬The impact of the indexing environment on interindexer consistency (1990) 0.00
    0.0010897844 = product of:
      0.005448922 = sum of:
        0.005448922 = weight(_text_:a in 4779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005448922 = score(doc=4779,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 4779, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4779)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Type
    a
  10. Gretz, M.; Thomas, M.: Indexierungen in biomedizinischen Literaturdatenbanken : eine vergleichende Analyse (1991) 0.00
    9.5356145E-4 = product of:
      0.004767807 = sum of:
        0.004767807 = weight(_text_:a in 5104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004767807 = score(doc=5104,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 5104, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5104)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Type
    a

Authors

Languages