Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  • × theme_ss:"OPAC"
  1. Alonso Lifante, M.P.; Molero Madrid, F.J.: Enhancing OPAC records : evaluating and fitting within cataloguing standards a new proposal of description parameters for historical astronomical resources (2015) 0.09
    0.09352444 = product of:
      0.14028665 = sum of:
        0.11950293 = weight(_text_:resources in 2611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11950293 = score(doc=2611,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.6402335 = fieldWeight in 2611, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2611)
        0.020783724 = product of:
          0.04156745 = sum of:
            0.04156745 = weight(_text_:22 in 2611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04156745 = score(doc=2611,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2611, 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=2611)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Enhancing content description of specialized resources, particularly astronomical resources, is a matter that is still unresolved in library and information science. In this paper, the authors outline deficiencies in some fields and elements of cataloging standards for description of historical astronomical resources, mainly star atlases and catalogs. Furthermore, they review their recent proposal of astronomical parameters for a better description and propose an approach for accommodating these parameters in the current criteria of MARC 21, the International Standard Bibliographic Description, and Resource Description and Access. Fourteen new parameters are considered, and recommendations are provided to standards developers for the addition of elements to accommodate attributes of celestial cartographic resources. This would improve bibliographic records for such resources in astronomical libraries' OPACs, which will have a beneficial effect on information retrieval.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 59(2015) no.4, S.140-161
  2. Bates, J.; Rowley, J.: Social reproduction and exclusion in subject indexing : a comparison of public library OPACs and LibraryThing folksonomy (2011) 0.03
    0.025093256 = product of:
      0.075279765 = sum of:
        0.075279765 = weight(_text_:resources in 4541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075279765 = score(doc=4541,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.40330917 = fieldWeight in 4541, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4541)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to highlight limits to the dominant model of social inclusion under which UK public libraries operate, to analyse how and to what extent processes of socio-cultural exclusion emerge in the subject representation and discoverability of "non-dominant" resources in public library OPACs, and to consider folksonomy as a solution to any issues raised. Design/methodology/approach - The paper first develops a critique of the dominant model of "inclusion" within UK public libraries, drawing on feminist and critical theories of identity. It then considers how this critique overlaps with and offers fresh insights into major debates within subject indexing, and develops a theoretical rationale for considering the potential of folksonomy to intervene in more inclusive subject-indexing design. A user-based critical interpretive methodology which understands OPACs as texts open to multiple interpretations is developed, and a comparative reading of standard OPACs and LibraryThing folksonomy is undertaken to evaluate the discoverability and subject representation of LGBTQ and ethnic minority resources. Findings - LibraryThing folksonomy offers benefits over LCSH subject indexing in the discoverability and representation of LGBTQ resources. However, the folksonomy is dominated by US taggers, and this impacts on the tagging of ethnic minority resources. Folksonomy, like traditional indexing, is found to contain its own biases in worldview and subject representation. Originality/value - The importance of subject indexing in developing inclusive library services is highlighted and a new method for evaluating OPACs is developed.
  3. Willson, R.; Given, L.M.: ¬The effect of spelling and retrieval system familiarity on search behavior in online public access catalogs : a mixed methods study (2010) 0.01
    0.012546628 = product of:
      0.037639882 = sum of:
        0.037639882 = weight(_text_:resources in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037639882 = score(doc=4042,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.20165458 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Although technology can often correct spelling errors, the complex tasks of information searching and retrieval in an online public access catalog (OPAC) are made more difficult by these errors in users' input and bibliographic records. This study examines the search behaviors of 38 university students, divided into groups with either easy-to-spell or difficult-to-spell search terms, who were asked to find items in the OPAC with these search terms. Search behaviors and strategy use in the OPAC and on the World Wide Web (WWW) were examined. In general, students used familiar Web resources to check their spelling or discover more about the assigned topic. Students with difficult-to-spell search terms checked spelling more often, changed search strategies to look for the general topic and had fewer successful searches. Students unable to find the correct spelling of a search term were unable to complete their search. Students tended to search the OPAC as they would search a search engine, with few search terms or complex search strategies. The results of this study have implications for spell checking, user-focused OPAC design, and cataloging. Students' search behaviors are discussed by expanding Thatcher's (2006) Information-Seeking Process and Tactics for the WWW model to include OPACs.
  4. Ramdeen, S.; Hemminger, B.M.: ¬A tale of two interfaces : how facets affect the library catalog search (2012) 0.01
    0.012546628 = product of:
      0.037639882 = sum of:
        0.037639882 = weight(_text_:resources in 87) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037639882 = score(doc=87,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.20165458 = fieldWeight in 87, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=87)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In the summer of 2008 all University of North Carolina libraries switched from a traditional library catalog interface supporting text-based searching (TextOnly) to a text and facet-based interface (TextFacet) to improve users' search experiences. This study seeks to understand the differences between these two interfaces and how they affect the search experience of the novice user. In this study, 40 participants were asked to search for resources using both interfaces. Their search times and accuracy were measured across three types of search tasks (known, partially known, and exploratory). After completing the searches, they were asked a series of questions about their experiences. The data were analyzed in order to identify strengths and weaknesses in both search interfaces. Thirty-six out of 40 participants preferred the TextFacet interface to the TextOnly interface. Using three dependent variables-time, accuracy, and rating-the two interfaces were compared and interactions were tested with the three task types. Search times for the TextFacet were shorter and participants preferred the TextFacet search interface over the TextOnly search interface. Performances across the three task types were different in terms of search time. The partially known and exploratory task types showed similar distributions for rating and accuracy. These distributions were distinctly different from the known task type. The results of this study may assist libraries in developing improved library catalog search interfaces that utilize facets as well as text searching.
  5. Casson, E.; Fabbrizzi, A.; Slavic, A.: Subject search in Italian OPACs : an opportunity in waiting? (2011) 0.01
    0.012546628 = product of:
      0.037639882 = sum of:
        0.037639882 = weight(_text_:resources in 1801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037639882 = score(doc=1801,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.20165458 = fieldWeight in 1801, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1801)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Subject access to bibliographic data supported by knowledge organization systems, such as subject headings and classification, plays an important role in ensuring the quality of library catalogues. It is generally acknowledged that users have a strong affinity to subject browsing and searching and are inclined tofollow meaningful links between resources. Research studies, however, show that library OPACs are not designed to support or make good use of subject indexes and their underlying semantic structure. A project entitled OPAC semantici was initiated in 2003 by a number of Italian subject specialists and the Italian "Research Group on Subject Indexing" (GRIS) with a goal to analyse and evaluate subject access in Italian library catalogues through a survey of 150 OPACs. Applying the same methodology, a follow-up survey to assess whether any improvement had taken place was conducted five years later, in spring 2008. Analysis of these two surveys indicated that there was a slight improvement. The authors discuss the results of these two surveys, analyse the problems in subject searching in OPACs and explain the recommendations for subject searching enhancement put forward by GRIS. Using the example of Italian OPACs, the authors will attempt to outline some requirements for a subject searching interface and explain how this can be achieved through authority control.
  6. Rodríguez Bravo, B.; Travieso Rodríguez, C.; Simões, M.G. de M.; Freitas, M.C.V. de: Evaluating discovery tools in Portuguese and Spanish academic libraries (2014) 0.01
    0.0069279084 = product of:
      0.020783724 = sum of:
        0.020783724 = product of:
          0.04156745 = sum of:
            0.04156745 = weight(_text_:22 in 1467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04156745 = score(doc=1467,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1467, 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=1467)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    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
  7. Jäger-Dengler-Harles, I.: Informationsvisualisierung und Retrieval im Fokus der Infromationspraxis (2013) 0.01
    0.0069279084 = product of:
      0.020783724 = sum of:
        0.020783724 = product of:
          0.04156745 = sum of:
            0.04156745 = weight(_text_:22 in 1709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04156745 = score(doc=1709,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1709, 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=1709)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    4. 2.2015 9:22:39
  8. Rieh, S.Y.; Kim, Y.-M.; Markey, K.: Amount of invested mental effort (AIME) in online searching (2012) 0.01
    0.005348703 = product of:
      0.016046109 = sum of:
        0.016046109 = product of:
          0.032092217 = sum of:
            0.032092217 = weight(_text_:management in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.032092217 = score(doc=2726,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 48(2012) no.6, S.1136-1150
  9. Seeliger, F.: ¬A tool for systematic visualization of controlled descriptors and their relation to others as a rich context for a discovery system (2015) 0.00
    0.0042789625 = product of:
      0.0128368875 = sum of:
        0.0128368875 = product of:
          0.025673775 = sum of:
            0.025673775 = weight(_text_:management in 2547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025673775 = score(doc=2547,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 2547, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2547)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The discovery service (a search engine and service called WILBERT) used at our library at the Technical University of Applied Sciences Wildau (TUAS Wildau) is comprised of more than 8 million items. If we were to record all licensed publications in this tool to a higher level of articles, including their bibliographic records and full texts, we would have a holding estimated at a hundred million documents. A lot of features, such as ranking, autocompletion, multi-faceted classification, refining opportunities reduce the number of hits. However, it is not enough to give intuitive support for a systematic overview of topics related to documents in the library. John Naisbitt once said: "We are drowning in information, but starving for knowledge." This quote is still very true today. Two years ago, we started to develop micro thesauri for MINT topics in order to develop an advanced indexing of the library stock. We use iQvoc as a vocabulary management system to create the thesaurus. It provides an easy-to-use browser interface that builds a SKOS thesaurus in the background. The purpose of this is to integrate the thesauri in WILBERT in order to offer a better subject-related search. This approach especially supports first-year students by giving them the possibility to browse through a hierarchical alignment of a subject, for instance, logistics or computer science, and thereby discover how the terms are related. It also supports the students with an insight into established abbreviations and alternative labels. Students at the TUAS Wildau were involved in the developmental process of the software regarding the interface and functionality of iQvoc. The first steps have been taken and involve the inclusion of 3000 terms in our discovery tool WILBERT.
  10. Waschatz, B.: Schmökern ist schwierig : Viele Uni-Bibliotheken ordnen ihre Bücher nicht - Tipps für eine erfolgreiche Suche (2010) 0.00
    0.0034639542 = product of:
      0.010391862 = sum of:
        0.010391862 = product of:
          0.020783724 = sum of:
            0.020783724 = weight(_text_:22 in 3206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020783724 = score(doc=3206,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3206, 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=3206)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    3. 5.1997 8:44:22