-
Sauperl, A.: Subject determination during the cataloging process : the development of a system based on theoretical principles (2002)
0.04
0.044206224 = sum of:
0.02606526 = product of:
0.10426104 = sum of:
0.057175197 = weight(_text_:author's in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057175197 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
0.256686 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.22274372 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
0.047085848 = weight(_text_:asked in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047085848 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23293972 = queryWeight, product of:
6.0984654 = idf(docFreq=269, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.20213749 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.0984654 = idf(docFreq=269, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
0.018140964 = sum of:
0.0026156905 = weight(_text_:e in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0026156905 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.04764253 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
0.015525274 = weight(_text_:22 in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015525274 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13375746 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
- Date
- 27. 9.2005 14:22:19
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.2, S.114-115 (M. Hudon); "This most interesting contribution to the literature of subject cataloguing originates in the author's doctoral dissertation, prepared under the direction of jerry Saye at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. In seven highly readable chapters, Alenka Sauperl develops possible answers to her principal research question: How do cataloguers determine or identify the topic of a document and choose appropriate subject representations? Specific questions at the source of this research an a process which has not been a frequent object of study include: Where do cataloguers look for an overall sense of what a document is about? How do they get an overall sense of what a document is about, especially when they are not familiar with the discipline? Do they consider only one or several possible interpretations? How do they translate meanings in appropriate and valid class numbers and subject headings? Using a strictly qualitative methodology, Dr. Sauperl's research is a study of twelve cataloguers in reallife situation. The author insists an the holistic rather than purely theoretical understanding of the process she is targeting. Participants in the study were professional cataloguers, with at least one year experience in their current job at one of three large academic libraries in the Southeastern United States. All three libraries have a large central cataloguing department, and use OCLC sources and the same automated system; the context of cataloguing tasks is thus considered to be reasonably comparable. All participants were volunteers in this study which combined two datagathering techniques: the think-aloud method and time-line interviews. A model of the subject cataloguing process was first developed from observations of a group of six cataloguers who were asked to independently perform original cataloguing an three nonfiction, non-serial items selected from materials regularly assigned to them for processing. The model was then used for follow-up interviews. Each participant in the second group of cataloguers was invited to reflect an his/her work process for a recent challenging document they had catalogued. Results are presented in 12 stories describing as many personal approaches to subject cataloguing. From these stories a summarization is offered and a theoretical model of subject cataloguing is developed which, according to the author, represents a realistic approach to subject cataloguing. Stories alternate comments from the researcher and direct quotations from the observed or interviewed cataloguers. Not surprisingly, the participants' stories reveal similarities in the sequence and accomplishment of several tasks in the process of subject cataloguing. Sauperl's proposed model, described in Chapter 5, includes as main stages: 1) Examination of the book and subject identification; 2) Search for subject headings; 3) Classification. Chapter 6 is a hypothetical Gase study, using the proposed model to describe the various stages of cataloguing a hypothetical resource. ...
- Language
- e
-
Pejtersen, A.M.: Design of a classification scheme for fiction based on an analysis of actual user-librarian communication, and use of the scheme for control of librarians' search strategies (1980)
0.03
0.030234942 = product of:
0.060469884 = sum of:
0.060469884 = sum of:
0.008718968 = weight(_text_:e in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008718968 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.15880844 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
0.051750917 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051750917 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13375746 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 5. 8.2006 13:22:44
- Language
- e
-
Beghtol, C.: Toward a theory of fiction analysis for information storage and retrieval (1992)
0.02
0.024187954 = product of:
0.04837591 = sum of:
0.04837591 = sum of:
0.006975175 = weight(_text_:e in 5830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006975175 = score(doc=5830,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.12704675 = fieldWeight in 5830, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5830)
0.041400734 = weight(_text_:22 in 5830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041400734 = score(doc=5830,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13375746 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5830, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5830)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 5. 8.2006 13:22:08
- Language
- e
-
Raieli, R.: ¬The semantic hole : enthusiasm and caution around multimedia information retrieval (2012)
0.02
0.020476453 = product of:
0.040952906 = sum of:
0.040952906 = sum of:
0.004359484 = weight(_text_:e in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004359484 = score(doc=4888,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
0.036593422 = weight(_text_:22 in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036593422 = score(doc=4888,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13375746 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2012 13:02:10
- Language
- e
- Source
- Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.1, S.13-22
-
Beghtol, C.: ¬The classification of fiction : the development of a system based on theoretical principles (1994)
0.02
0.019727737 = sum of:
0.016676098 = product of:
0.13340878 = sum of:
0.13340878 = weight(_text_:author's in 3413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13340878 = score(doc=3413,freq=2.0), product of:
0.256686 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.51973534 = fieldWeight in 3413, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3413)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.0030516388 = product of:
0.0061032777 = sum of:
0.0061032777 = weight(_text_:e in 3413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0061032777 = score(doc=3413,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.1111659 = fieldWeight in 3413, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3413)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The work is an adaptation of the author's dissertation and has the following chapters: (1) background and introduction; (2) a problem in classification theory; (3) previous fiction analysis theories and systems and 'The left hand of darkness'; (4) fiction warrant and critical warrant; (5) experimental fiction analysis system (EFAS); (6) application and evaluation of EFAS. Appendix 1 gives references to fiction analysis systems and appendix 2 lists EFAS coding sheets
- Language
- e
-
Weimer, K.H.: ¬The nexus of subject analysis and bibliographic description : the case of multipart videos (1996)
0.02
0.018140964 = product of:
0.03628193 = sum of:
0.03628193 = sum of:
0.005231381 = weight(_text_:e in 6525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005231381 = score(doc=6525,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 6525, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6525)
0.031050548 = weight(_text_:22 in 6525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031050548 = score(doc=6525,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13375746 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6525, 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=6525)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- e
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.2, S.5-18
-
Chen, S.-J.; Lee, H.-L.: Art images and mental associations : a preliminary exploration (2014)
0.02
0.018140964 = product of:
0.03628193 = sum of:
0.03628193 = sum of:
0.005231381 = weight(_text_:e in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005231381 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 1416, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1416)
0.031050548 = weight(_text_:22 in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031050548 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13375746 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1416, 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=1416)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- e
- Source
- Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
-
White, M.D.; Marsh, E.E.: Content analysis : a flexible methodology (2006)
0.02
0.018140964 = product of:
0.03628193 = sum of:
0.03628193 = sum of:
0.005231381 = weight(_text_:e in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005231381 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 5589, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5589)
0.031050548 = weight(_text_:22 in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031050548 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13375746 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5589, 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=5589)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- e
- Source
- Library trends. 55(2006) no.1, S.22-45
-
Andersson, R.; Holst, E.: Indexes and other depictions of fictions : a new model for analysis empirically tested (1996)
0.02
0.017992944 = sum of:
0.014293799 = product of:
0.11435039 = sum of:
0.11435039 = weight(_text_:author's in 473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11435039 = score(doc=473,freq=2.0), product of:
0.256686 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 473, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=473)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.0036991453 = product of:
0.0073982906 = sum of:
0.0073982906 = weight(_text_:e in 473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0073982906 = score(doc=473,freq=4.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.13475344 = fieldWeight in 473, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=473)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this study descriptions of a novel by 100 users at 2 Swedish public libraries, Malmö and Molndal, Mar-Apr 95, were compared to the index terms used for the novels at these libraries. Describes previous systems for fiction indexing, the 2 libraries, and the users interviewed. Compares the AMP system with their own model. The latter operates with terms under the headings phenomena, frame and author's intention. The similarities between the users' and indexers' descriptions were sufficiently close to make it possible to retrieve fiction in accordance with users' wishes in Molndal, and would have been in Malmö, had more books been indexed with more terms. Sometimes the similarities were close enough for users to retrieve fiction on their own
- Language
- e
-
Clavier, V.; Paganelli, C.: Including authorial stance in the indexing of scientific documents (2012)
0.02
0.01690949 = sum of:
0.014293799 = product of:
0.11435039 = sum of:
0.11435039 = weight(_text_:author's in 320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11435039 = score(doc=320,freq=2.0), product of:
0.256686 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 320, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=320)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.0026156905 = product of:
0.005231381 = sum of:
0.005231381 = weight(_text_:e in 320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005231381 = score(doc=320,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 320, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=320)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article argues that authorial stance should be taken into account in the indexing of scientific documents. Authorial stance has been widely studied in linguistics and is a typical feature of scientific writing that reveals the uniqueness of each author's perspective, their scientific contribution, and their thinking. We argue that authorial stance guides the reading of scientific documents and that it can be used to characterize the knowledge contained in such documents. Our research has previously shown that people reading dissertations are interested both in a topic and in a document's authorial stance. Now, we would like to propose a two-tiered indexing system. Dissertations would first be divided into paragraphs; then, each information unit would be defined by topic and by the markers of authorial stance present in the document.
- Language
- e
-
Bade, D.: ¬The creation and persistence of misinformation in shared library catalogs : language and subject knowledge in a technological era (2002)
0.02
0.016017798 = sum of:
0.003923821 = product of:
0.031390566 = sum of:
0.031390566 = weight(_text_:asked in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031390566 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23293972 = queryWeight, product of:
6.0984654 = idf(docFreq=269, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.13475832 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.0984654 = idf(docFreq=269, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.012093977 = sum of:
0.0017437937 = weight(_text_:e in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0017437937 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.031761687 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.010350184 = weight(_text_:22 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010350184 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13375746 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = 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)
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Footnote
- Rez. in JASIST 54(2003) no.4, S.356-357 (S.J. Lincicum): "Reliance upon shared cataloging in academic libraries in the United States has been driven largely by the need to reduce the expense of cataloging operations without muck regard for the Impact that this approach might have an the quality of the records included in local catalogs. In recent years, ever increasing pressures have prompted libraries to adopt practices such as "rapid" copy cataloging that purposely reduce the scrutiny applied to bibliographic records downloaded from shared databases, possibly increasing the number of errors that slip through unnoticed. Errors in bibliographic records can lead to serious problems for library catalog users. If the data contained in bibliographic records is inaccurate, users will have difficulty discovering and recognizing resources in a library's collection that are relevant to their needs. Thus, it has become increasingly important to understand the extent and nature of errors that occur in the records found in large shared bibliographic databases, such as OCLC WorldCat, to develop cataloging practices optimized for the shared cataloging environment. Although this monograph raises a few legitimate concerns about recent trends in cataloging practice, it fails to provide the "detailed look" at misinformation in library catalogs arising from linguistic errors and mistakes in subject analysis promised by the publisher. A basic premise advanced throughout the text is that a certain amount of linguistic and subject knowledge is required to catalog library materials effectively. The author emphasizes repeatedly that most catalogers today are asked to catalog an increasingly diverse array of materials, and that they are often required to work in languages or subject areas of which they have little or no knowledge. He argues that the records contributed to shared databases are increasingly being created by catalogers with inadequate linguistic or subject expertise. This adversely affects the quality of individual library catalogs because errors often go uncorrected as records are downloaded from shared databases to local catalogs by copy catalogers who possess even less knowledge. Calling misinformation an "evil phenomenon," Bade states that his main goal is to discuss, "two fundamental types of misinformation found in bibliographic and authority records in library catalogs: that arising from linguistic errors, and that caused by errors in subject analysis, including missing or wrong subject headings" (p. 2). After a superficial discussion of "other" types of errors that can occur in bibliographic records, such as typographical errors and errors in the application of descriptive cataloging rules, Bade begins his discussion of linguistic errors. He asserts that sharing bibliographic records created by catalogers with inadequate linguistic or subject knowledge has, "disastrous effects an the library community" (p. 6). To support this bold assertion, Bade provides as evidence little more than a laundry list of errors that he has personally observed in bibliographic records over the years. When he eventually cites several studies that have addressed the availability and quality of records available for materials in languages other than English, he fails to describe the findings of these studies in any detail, let alone relate the findings to his own observations in a meaningful way. Bade claims that a lack of linguistic expertise among catalogers is the "primary source for linguistic misinformation in our databases" (p. 10), but he neither cites substantive data from existing studies nor provides any new data regarding the overall level of linguistic knowledge among catalogers to support this claim. The section concludes with a brief list of eight sensible, if unoriginal, suggestions for coping with the challenge of cataloging materials in unfamiliar languages.
- Language
- e
-
Jens-Erik Mai, J.-E.: ¬The role of documents, domains and decisions in indexing (2004)
0.02
0.015942419 = sum of:
0.013476322 = product of:
0.10781058 = sum of:
0.10781058 = weight(_text_:author's in 2653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10781058 = score(doc=2653,freq=4.0), product of:
0.256686 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.42000958 = fieldWeight in 2653, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2653)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.0024660968 = product of:
0.0049321936 = sum of:
0.0049321936 = weight(_text_:e in 2653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0049321936 = score(doc=2653,freq=4.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.08983562 = fieldWeight in 2653, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2653)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- 1. Introduction The document at hand is often regarded as the most important entity for analysis in the indexing situation. The indexer's focus is directed to the "entity and its faithful description" (Soergel, 1985, 227) and the indexer is advised to "stick to the text and the author's claims" (Lancaster, 2003, 37). The indexer's aim is to establish the subject matter based an an analysis of the document with the goal of representing the document as truthfully as possible and to ensure the subject representation's validity by remaining neutral and objective. To help indexers with their task they are guided towards particular and important attributes of the document that could help them determine the document's subject matter. The exact attributes the indexer is recommended to examine varies, but typical examples are: the title, the abstract, the table of contents, chapter headings, chapter subheadings, preface, introduction, foreword, the text itself, bibliographical references, index entries, illustrations, diagrams, and tables and their captions. The exact recommendations vary according to the type of document that is being indexed (monographs vs. periodical articles, for instance). It is clear that indexers should provide faithful descriptions, that indexers should represent the author's claims, and that the document's attributes are helpful points of analysis. However, indexers need much more guidance when determining the subject than simply the documents themselves. One approach that could be taken to handle the Situation is a useroriented approach in which it is argued that the indexer should ask, "how should I make this document ... visible to potential users? What terms should I use to convey its knowledge to those interested?" (Albrechtsen, 1993, 222). The basic idea is that indexers need to have the users' information needs and terminology in mind when determining the subject matter of documents as well as when selecting index terms.
- Language
- e
-
Chu, C.M.; O'Brien, A.: Subject analysis : the critical first stage in indexing (1993)
0.01
0.014387152 = sum of:
0.011771462 = product of:
0.094171695 = sum of:
0.094171695 = weight(_text_:asked in 6472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.094171695 = score(doc=6472,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23293972 = queryWeight, product of:
6.0984654 = idf(docFreq=269, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.40427497 = fieldWeight in 6472, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.0984654 = idf(docFreq=269, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6472)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.0026156905 = product of:
0.005231381 = sum of:
0.005231381 = weight(_text_:e in 6472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005231381 = score(doc=6472,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 6472, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6472)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Studies of indexing neglect the first stage of the process, that is, subject analysis. In this study, novice indexers were asked to analyse three short, popular journal articles; to express the general subject as well as the primary and secondary topics in natural laguage statements; to state what influenced the analysis and to comment on the ease or difficulty of this process. The factors which influenced the process were: the subject discipline concerned, factual vs. subjective nature of the text, complexity of the subject, clarity of text, possible support offered by bibliographic apparatus such as title, etc. The findings showed that with the social science and science texts, the general subject could be determined with ease, while this was more difficult with the humanities text. Clear evidence emerged of the importance of bibliographical apparatus in defining the general subject. There was varying difficulty in determining the primary and secondarx topics
- Language
- e
-
Sauperl, A.: Catalogers' common ground and shared knowledge (2004)
0.01
0.01409124 = sum of:
0.011911498 = product of:
0.09529199 = sum of:
0.09529199 = weight(_text_:author's in 2069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09529199 = score(doc=2069,freq=2.0), product of:
0.256686 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.3712395 = fieldWeight in 2069, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2069)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.002179742 = product of:
0.004359484 = sum of:
0.004359484 = weight(_text_:e in 2069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004359484 = score(doc=2069,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 2069, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2069)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The problem of multiple interpretations of meaning in the indexing process has been mostly avoided by information scientists. Among the few who have addressed this question are Clare Beghtol and Jens Erik Mai. Their findings and findings of other researchers in the area of information science, social psychology, and psycholinguistics indicate that the source of the problem might lie in the background and culture of each indexer or cataloger. Are the catalogers aware of the problem? A general model of the indexing process was developed from observations and interviews of 12 catalogers in three American academic libraries. The model is illustrated with a hypothetical cataloger's process. The study with catalogers revealed that catalogers are aware of the author's, the user's, and their own meaning, but do not try to accommodate them all. On the other hand, they make every effort to build common ground with catalog users by studying documents related to the document being cataloged, and by considering catalog records and subject headings related to the subject identified in the document being cataloged. They try to build common ground with other catalogers by using cataloging tools and by inferring unstated rules of cataloging from examples in the catalogs.
- Language
- e
-
Sauperl, A.: Subject cataloging process of Slovenian and American catalogers (2005)
0.01
0.01409124 = sum of:
0.011911498 = product of:
0.09529199 = sum of:
0.09529199 = weight(_text_:author's in 4702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09529199 = score(doc=4702,freq=2.0), product of:
0.256686 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.3712395 = fieldWeight in 4702, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4702)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.002179742 = product of:
0.004359484 = sum of:
0.004359484 = weight(_text_:e in 4702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004359484 = score(doc=4702,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 4702, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4702)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - An empirical study has shown that the real process of subject cataloging does not correspond entirely to theoretical descriptions in textbooks and international standards. The purpose of this is paper is to address the issue of whether it be possible for catalogers who have not received formal training to perform subject cataloging in a different way to their trained colleagues. Design/methodology/approach - A qualitative study was conducted in 2001 among five Slovenian public library catalogers. The resulting model is compared to previous findings. Findings - First, all catalogers attempted to determine what the book was about. While the American catalogers tried to understand the topic and the author's intent, the Slovenian catalogers appeared to focus on the topic only. Slovenian and American academic library catalogers did not demonstrate any anticipation of possible uses that users might have of the book, while this was important for American public library catalogers. All catalogers used existing records to build new ones and/or to search for subject headings. The verification of subject representation with the indexing language was the last step in the subject cataloging process of American catalogers, often skipped by Slovenian catalogers. Research limitations/implications - The small and convenient sample limits the findings. Practical implications - Comparison of subject cataloging processes of Slovenian and American catalogers, two different groups, is important because they both contribute to OCLC's WorldCat database. If the cataloging community is building a universal catalog and approaches to subject description are different, then the resulting subject representations might also be different. Originality/value - This is one of the very few empirical studies of subject cataloging and indexing.
- Language
- e
-
Arastoopoor, S.; Fattahi, R.: Users' perception of aboutness and ofness in images : an approach to subject indexing based on Ervin Panofsky's theory and users'' view (2012)
0.01
0.011989295 = sum of:
0.009809553 = product of:
0.07847642 = sum of:
0.07847642 = weight(_text_:asked in 872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07847642 = score(doc=872,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23293972 = queryWeight, product of:
6.0984654 = idf(docFreq=269, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.33689582 = fieldWeight in 872, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.0984654 = idf(docFreq=269, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=872)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.002179742 = product of:
0.004359484 = sum of:
0.004359484 = weight(_text_:e in 872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004359484 = score(doc=872,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 872, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=872)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- It is widely accepted that subject indexing of an image is based on a two-dimensional approach. The first is the ofness and the second focuses on aboutness of the image. Assigning a suitable set of subject tags based on these two groups depends, to a great deal, on users' perception of the image. This study aims at analyzing users' perception of aboutness and ofness of images. 25 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted in two phases. In the first phase a collection of 10 widely known photographs were given to the interviewees and they were asked to assign subject tags (as many as they wanted) to each image. In the second phase some facts regarding each image were given to him / her to assign further tags (again as many as they wanted) or even modify their previous tags. The results show that the interviewees do focus both on ofness and aboutness in subject tagging; but it seems that they emphasize more on aboutness in describing images. On the other hand, as soon as the interviewees were able to distinguish the iconographical ofness, they could speak of iconographical and iconological aboutness. The results also show that subject indexers must focus on the iconographical level, especially regarding those tags which represent the ofness at this level.
- Language
- e
-
Hauff-Hartig, S.: Automatische Transkription von Videos : Fernsehen 3.0: Automatisierte Sentimentanalyse und Zusammenstellung von Kurzvideos mit hohem Aufregungslevel KI-generierte Metadaten: Von der Technologiebeobachtung bis zum produktiven Einsatz (2021)
0.01
0.010350184 = product of:
0.020700367 = sum of:
0.020700367 = product of:
0.041400734 = sum of:
0.041400734 = weight(_text_:22 in 251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041400734 = score(doc=251,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13375746 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 251, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=251)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 5.2021 12:43:05
-
Fairthorne, R.A.: Temporal structure in bibliographic classification (1985)
0.01
0.008454745 = sum of:
0.0071468996 = product of:
0.057175197 = sum of:
0.057175197 = weight(_text_:author's in 3651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057175197 = score(doc=3651,freq=2.0), product of:
0.256686 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.22274372 = fieldWeight in 3651, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3651)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.0013078452 = product of:
0.0026156905 = sum of:
0.0026156905 = weight(_text_:e in 3651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0026156905 = score(doc=3651,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.04764253 = fieldWeight in 3651, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3651)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper, presented at the Ottawa Conference an the Conceptual Basis of the Classification of Knowledge, in 1971, is one of Fairthorne's more perceptive works and deserves a wide audience, especially as it breaks new ground in classification theory. In discussing the notion of discourse, he makes a "distinction between what discourse mentions and what discourse is about" [emphasis added], considered as a "fundamental factor to the relativistic nature of bibliographic classification" (p. 360). A table of mathematical functions, for example, describes exactly something represented by a collection of digits, but, without a preface, this table does not fit into a broader context. Some indication of the author's intent ls needed to fit the table into a broader context. This intent may appear in a title, chapter heading, class number or some other aid. Discourse an and discourse about something "cannot be determined solely from what it mentions" (p. 361). Some kind of background is needed. Fairthorne further develops the theme that knowledge about a subject comes from previous knowledge, thus adding a temporal factor to classification. "Some extra textual criteria are needed" in order to classify (p. 362). For example, "documents that mention the same things, but are an different topics, will have different ancestors, in the sense of preceding documents to which they are linked by various bibliographic characteristics ... [and] ... they will have different descendants" (p. 363). The classifier has to distinguish between documents that "mention exactly the same thing" but are not about the same thing. The classifier does this by classifying "sets of documents that form their histories, their bibliographic world lines" (p. 363). The practice of citation is one method of performing the linking and presents a "fan" of documents connected by a chain of citations to past work. The fan is seen as the effect of generations of documents - each generation connected to the previous one, and all ancestral to the present document. Thus, there are levels in temporal structure-that is, antecedent and successor documents-and these require that documents be identified in relation to other documents. This gives a set of documents an "irrevocable order," a loose order which Fairthorne calls "bibliographic time," and which is "generated by the fact of continual growth" (p. 364). He does not consider "bibliographic time" to be an equivalent to physical time because bibliographic events, as part of communication, require delay. Sets of documents, as indicated above, rather than single works, are used in classification. While an event, a person, a unique feature of the environment, may create a class of one-such as the French Revolution, Napoleon, Niagara Falls-revolutions, emperors, and waterfalls are sets which, as sets, will subsume individuals and make normal classes.
- Language
- e
-
Wilson, P.: Subjects and the sense of position (1985)
0.01
0.008392505 = sum of:
0.006866686 = product of:
0.05493349 = sum of:
0.05493349 = weight(_text_:asked in 3648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05493349 = score(doc=3648,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23293972 = queryWeight, product of:
6.0984654 = idf(docFreq=269, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.23582706 = fieldWeight in 3648, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.0984654 = idf(docFreq=269, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3648)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
0.0015258194 = product of:
0.0030516388 = sum of:
0.0030516388 = weight(_text_:e in 3648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0030516388 = score(doc=3648,freq=2.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.05558295 = fieldWeight in 3648, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3648)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- One knows one is in the presence of "theory" when fundamental questions of a "why" nature are asked. Too often it happens that those involved in the design of bibliographic information systems have no time for brooding. It is thus noteworthy when someone appears an the bibliographic scene who troubles to address, and pursue with philosophic rigor, fundamental questions about the way we organize information. Such a person is Patrick Wilson, formerly philosophy professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, and since 1965, an the faculty of the School of Library and Information Studies, University of California, Berkeley. Bibliographic control is the central concept of Wilson's book Two Kinds of Power. It is represented as a kind of power-a power over knowledge. That power is of two kinds: descriptive and exploitive. Descriptive power is the power to retrieve all writings that satisfy some "evaluatively neutral" description, for instance, all writings by Hobbes or all writings an the subject of eternat recurrence. Descriptive power is achieved insofar as the items in our bibliographic universe are fitted with descriptions and these descriptions are syndetically related. Exploitive power is a less-familiar concept, but it is more important since it can be used to explain why we attempt to order our bibliographic universe in the first place. Exploitive power is the power to obtain the best textual means to an end. Unlike the concept of descriptive power, that of exploitive power has a normative aspect to it. Someone possessing such power would understand the goal of all bibliographic activity; that is, he would understand the diversity of user purposes and the relativity of what is valuable; he would be omniscient both as a bibliographer and as a psychologist. Since exploitive power is ever out of reach, descriptive power is used as a substitute or approximation for it. How adequate this approximation is is the subject of Wilson's book. The particular chapter excerpted in this volume deals with the adequacy of subject access methods. Cutter's statement that one of the objects of a library catalog is to show what the library has an a given subject is generally accepted, as though it were obvious what "being an a given subject" means. It is far from obvious. Wilson challenges the underlying presumption that for any document a heading can be found that is coextensive with its subject. This presumption implies that there is such a thing as the (singular) subject of a document and that it can be identified. But, as Wilson Shows in his elaborate explication, the notion of "subject" is essentially indeterminate, with the consequence that we are limited in our attempts to achieve either descriptive or exploitive power.
- Language
- e
-
Mai, J.-E.: Deconstructing the indexing process (2000)
0.00
0.0049321936 = product of:
0.009864387 = sum of:
0.009864387 = product of:
0.019728774 = sum of:
0.019728774 = weight(_text_:e in 4696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019728774 = score(doc=4696,freq=4.0), product of:
0.054902427 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03819645 = queryNorm
0.3593425 = fieldWeight in 4696, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4696)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- e
