Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Indexierungsstudien"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Gil-Leiva, I.; Alonso-Arroyo, A.: Keywords given by authors of scientific articles in database descriptors (2007) 0.01 
    0.014778158 = product of:
  0.029556315 = sum of:
    0.029556315 = product of:
      0.11822526 = sum of:
        0.11822526 = weight(_text_:authors in 211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11822526 = score(doc=211,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.23472176 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.50368255 = fieldWeight in 211, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=211)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In this article, the authors analyze the keywords given by authors of scientific articles and the descriptors assigned to the articles to ascertain the presence of the keywords in the descriptors. Six-hundred forty INSPEC (Information Service for Physics, Engineering, and Computing), CAB (Current Agriculture Bibliography) abstracts, ISTA (Information Science and Technology Abstracts), and LISA (Library and Information Science Abstracts) database records were consulted. After detailed comparisons, it was found that keywords provided by authors have an important presence in the database descriptors studied; nearly 25% of all the keywords appeared in exactly the same form as descriptors, with another 21% though normalized, still detected in the descriptors. This means that almost 46% of keywords appear in the descriptors, either as such or after normalization. Elsewhere, three distinct indexing policies appear, one represented by INSPEC and LISA (indexers seem to have freedom to assign the descriptors they deem necessary); another is represented by CAB (no record has fewer than four descriptors and, in general, a large number of descriptors is employed). In contrast, in ISTA, a certain institutional code exists towards economy in indexing because 84% of records contain only four descriptors.
  2. Neshat, N.; Horri, A.: ¬A study of subject indexing consistency between the National Library of Iran and Humanities Libraries in the area of Iranian studies (2006) 0.01 
    0.0122077195 = product of:
  0.024415439 = sum of:
    0.024415439 = product of:
      0.048830878 = sum of:
        0.048830878 = weight(_text_:22 in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048830878 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    4. 1.2007 10:22:26
  3. Taniguchi, S.: Recording evidence in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata (2005) 0.01 
    0.010463759 = product of:
  0.020927519 = sum of:
    0.020927519 = product of:
      0.041855037 = sum of:
        0.041855037 = weight(_text_:22 in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041855037 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3565, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3565)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    18. 6.2005 13:16:22
  4. Leininger, K.: Interindexer consistency in PsychINFO (2000) 0.01 
    0.010463759 = product of:
  0.020927519 = sum of:
    0.020927519 = product of:
      0.041855037 = sum of:
        0.041855037 = weight(_text_:22 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041855037 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    9. 2.1997 18:44:22
  5. Subrahmanyam, B.: Library of Congress Classification numbers : issues of consistency and their implications for union catalogs (2006) 0.01 
    0.0087198 = product of:
  0.0174396 = sum of:
    0.0174396 = product of:
      0.0348792 = sum of:
        0.0348792 = weight(_text_:22 in 5784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0348792 = score(doc=5784,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5784, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5784)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  6. Ansari, M.: Matching between assigned descriptors and title keywords in medical theses (2005) 0.01 
    0.007389079 = product of:
  0.014778158 = sum of:
    0.014778158 = product of:
      0.05911263 = sum of:
        0.05911263 = weight(_text_:authors in 4739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05911263 = score(doc=4739,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23472176 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 4739, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4739)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Purpose - To examine the degree of exact and partial match between the assigned descriptors and title keywords of medical theses written in Farsi and submitted for a PhD degree.Design/methodology/approach - A sample population of 506 theses in Pediatrics, Gynecology, Cardiology and Psychiatry was randomly picked out of a total of 909 indexed in the Indexing Department of the Central Library of the Iran University of Medical Science and Health Care Services. The results obtained are compared with those reported for other documents written in Farsi and English. Where applicable, the influence of the foreign language and its structure is commented on.Findings - It is shown that the degree of match between the assigned descriptors and the title keywords is greater than 70 per cent, equaling those reported for Farsi books and Michigan University Library catalogue in USA. It is also shown that the frequency of the match has increased since 1982, indicating that the authors have become more attentive in their choice of title.Research limitations/implications - Detailed analysis of results, however, shows significant differences between the degree of exact match amongst the four categories, with psychiatry theses that use more common terms showing highest exact match findings (50 per cent).Originality/value - This paper highlights the need for a closer collaboration with medical institutions for definition of approved terms and their incorporation in indexation in order to improve findings in various medical categories.
  7. Olson, H.A.; Wolfram, D.: Syntagmatic relationships and indexing consistency on a larger scale (2008) 0.01 
    0.007389079 = product of:
  0.014778158 = sum of:
    0.014778158 = product of:
      0.05911263 = sum of:
        0.05911263 = weight(_text_:authors in 2214) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05911263 = score(doc=2214,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23472176 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 2214, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2214)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this article is to examine interindexer consistency on a larger scale than other studies have done to determine if group consensus is reached by larger numbers of indexers and what, if any, relationships emerge between assigned terms. Design/methodology/approach - In total, 64 MLIS students were recruited to assign up to five terms to a document. The authors applied basic data modeling and the exploratory statistical techniques of multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) and hierarchical cluster analysis to determine whether relationships exist in indexing consistency and the coocurrence of assigned terms. Findings - Consistency in the assignment of indexing terms to a document follows an inverse shape, although it is not strictly power law-based unlike many other social phenomena. The exploratory techniques revealed that groups of terms clustered together. The resulting term cooccurrence relationships were largely syntagmatic. Research limitations/implications - The results are based on the indexing of one article by non-expert indexers and are, thus, not generalizable. Based on the study findings, along with the growing popularity of folksonomies and the apparent authority of communally developed information resources, communally developed indexes based on group consensus may have merit. Originality/value - Consistency in the assignment of indexing terms has been studied primarily on a small scale. Few studies have examined indexing on a larger scale with more than a handful of indexers. Recognition of the differences in indexing assignment has implications for the development of public information systems, especially those that do not use a controlled vocabulary and those tagged by end-users. In such cases, multiple access points that accommodate the different ways that users interpret content are needed so that searchers may be guided to relevant content despite using different terminology.
  8. Bade, D.: ¬The creation and persistence of misinformation in shared library catalogs : language and subject knowledge in a technological era (2002) 0.00 
    0.00348792 = product of:
  0.00697584 = sum of:
    0.00697584 = product of:
      0.01395168 = sum of:
        0.01395168 = weight(_text_:22 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01395168 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05

Authors

Types

Themes