-
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)
0.06
0.05563023 = product of:
0.11126046 = sum of:
0.11126046 = sum of:
0.06217414 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06217414 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.30480546 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
0.049086317 = weight(_text_:22 in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049086317 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = 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)
- Date
- 4. 1.2007 10:22:26
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 43(2006) no.1, S.67-76
-
Taniguchi, S.: Recording evidence in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata (2005)
0.05
0.047683053 = product of:
0.095366105 = sum of:
0.095366105 = sum of:
0.053292118 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053292118 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 3565, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3565)
0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042073987 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = 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)
- Abstract
- In this article recording evidence for data values in addition to the values themselves in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata is proposed, with the aim of improving the expressiveness and reliability of those records and metadata. Recorded evidence indicates why and how data values are recorded for elements. Recording the history of changes in data values is also proposed, with the aim of reinforcing recorded evidence. First, evidence that can be recorded is categorized into classes: identifiers of rules or tasks, action descriptions of them, and input and output data of them. Dates of recording values and evidence are an additional class. Then, the relative usefulness of evidence classes and also levels (i.e., the record, data element, or data value level) to which an individual evidence class is applied, is examined. Second, examples that can be viewed as recorded evidence in existing bibliographic records and current cataloging rules are shown. Third, some examples of bibliographic records and descriptive metadata with notes of evidence are demonstrated. Fourth, ways of using recorded evidence are addressed.
- Date
- 18. 6.2005 13:16:22
-
Subrahmanyam, B.: Library of Congress Classification numbers : issues of consistency and their implications for union catalogs (2006)
0.04
0.039735876 = product of:
0.07947175 = sum of:
0.07947175 = sum of:
0.0444101 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0444101 = score(doc=5784,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.21771818 = fieldWeight in 5784, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5784)
0.035061657 = weight(_text_:22 in 5784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035061657 = score(doc=5784,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = 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)
- Abstract
- This study examined Library of Congress Classification (LCC)-based class numbers assigned to a representative sample of 200 titles in 52 American library systems to determine the level of consistency within and across those systems. The results showed that under the condition that a library system has a title, the probability of that title having the same LCC-based class number across library systems is greater than 85 percent. An examination of 121 titles displaying variations in class numbers among library systems showed certain titles (for example, multi-foci titles, titles in series, bibliographies, and fiction) lend themselves to alternate class numbers. Others were assigned variant numbers either due to latitude in the schedules or for reasons that cannot be pinpointed. With increasing dependence on copy cataloging, the size of such variations may continue to decrease. As the preferred class number with its alternates represents a title more fully than just the preferred class number, this paper argues for continued use of alternates by library systems and for finding a method to link alternate class numbers to preferred class numbers for enriched subject access through local and union catalogs.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Gregor, D.; Mandel, C.: Cataloging must change! (1991)
0.04
0.03768322 = product of:
0.07536644 = sum of:
0.07536644 = product of:
0.15073287 = sum of:
0.15073287 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15073287 = score(doc=1999,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.73896 = fieldWeight in 1999, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1999)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Vgl. auch die Erwiderung von T. Mann in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 23(1997) nos.3/4, S.3-45
-
Bellamy, L.M.; Bickham, L.: Thesaurus development for subject cataloging (1989)
0.03
0.032634623 = product of:
0.06526925 = sum of:
0.06526925 = product of:
0.1305385 = sum of:
0.1305385 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1305385 = score(doc=2262,freq=12.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.63995814 = fieldWeight in 2262, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2262)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The biomedical book collection in the Genetech Library and Information Services was first inventoried and cataloged in 1983 when it totaled about 2000 titles. Cataloging records were retrieved from the OCLC system and used as a basis for cataloging. A year of cataloging produced a list of 1900 subject terms. More than one term describing the same concept often appears on the list, and no hierarchical structure related the terms to one another. As the collection grew, the subject catalog became increasingly inconsistent. To bring consistency to subject cataloging, a thesaurus of biomedical terms was constructed using the list of subject headings as a basis. This thesaurus follows the broad categories of the National Library of Medicine's Medical Subject Headings and, with some exceptions, the Guidelines for the Establishment and Development of Monolingual Thesauri. It has enabled the cataloger in providing greater in-depth subject analysis of materials added to the collection and in consistently assigning subject headings to cataloging record.
-
Chan, L.M.: Inter-indexer consistency in subject cataloging (1989)
0.03
0.025122147 = product of:
0.050244294 = sum of:
0.050244294 = product of:
0.10048859 = sum of:
0.10048859 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10048859 = score(doc=2276,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.49264002 = fieldWeight in 2276, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2276)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The purpose of the current study has been twofold: (1) to develop a valid methodology for studying indexing consistency in MARC records and, (2) to study such consistency in subject cataloging practice between non-LC libraries and the Library of Congress
-
Mann, T.: 'Cataloging must change!' and indexer consistency studies : misreading the evidence at our peril (1997)
0.02
0.023076165 = product of:
0.04615233 = sum of:
0.04615233 = product of:
0.09230466 = sum of:
0.09230466 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09230466 = score(doc=492,freq=6.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.45251876 = fieldWeight in 492, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, 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
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 23(1997) nos.3/4, S.3-45
-
Svenonius, E.; McGarry, D.: Objectivity in evaluating subject heading assignment (1993)
0.02
0.021981878 = product of:
0.043963756 = sum of:
0.043963756 = product of:
0.08792751 = sum of:
0.08792751 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08792751 = score(doc=5612,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 5612, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5612)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Recent papers have called attention to discrepancies in the assignment of LCSH. While philosophical arguments can be made that subject analysis, if not a logical impossibility, at least is point-of-view dependent, subject headings continue to be assigned and continue to be useful. The hypothesis advanced in the present project is that to a considerable degree there is a clear-cut right and wrong to LCSH subject heading assignment. To test the hypothesis, it was postulated that the assignment of a subject heading is correct if it is supported by textual warrant (at least 20% of the book being cataloged is on the topic) and is constructed in accordance with the LoC Subject Cataloging Manual: Subject Headings. A sample of 100 books on scientific subjects was used to test the hypothesis
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 16(1993) no.2, S.5-40
-
Boll, J.J.: DDC classification rules : an outline history and comparison of two sets of rules (1988)
0.02
0.021981878 = product of:
0.043963756 = sum of:
0.043963756 = product of:
0.08792751 = sum of:
0.08792751 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08792751 = score(doc=404,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 404, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=404)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 8(1988) no.2, S.49-70
-
Kedar, R.; Shoham, S.: ¬The subject cataloging of monographs with the use of a thesaurus (2003)
0.02
0.01884161 = product of:
0.03768322 = sum of:
0.03768322 = product of:
0.07536644 = sum of:
0.07536644 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07536644 = score(doc=2700,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.36948 = fieldWeight in 2700, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2700)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper presents the findings of a study of indexing procedure with the use of a thesaurus for post-coordination. In the first phase of the study, the indexing records of 50 books, prepared by a central cataloging service (the Israeli Center for Libraries), were compared with the indexing records for these books prepared by three independent indexers. In the second phase, indexing records for three books prepared by 51 librarians were studied. In both phases, indexing records were analyzed for mistakes and possible reasons for these mistakes are offered.
-
Wilson, P.: ¬The end of specifity (1979)
0.02
0.01776404 = product of:
0.03552808 = sum of:
0.03552808 = product of:
0.07105616 = sum of:
0.07105616 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07105616 = score(doc=2274,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.3483491 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Recently announced subject cataloging practices at the Library of Congress, calling for systematic duplication of entries at specific and generic levels, are in direct violation of the rule of exclusively specific entry, hitherto accepted by LC. It is argued that if the new practices are justified, consistency calls for their general application, which results in abandonment of the rule. But the new practices do not accomplish their ostensible goals, do not reveal more of the content of LC's collections, do introduce new inconveniences, do constitute a pointless enlargement of catalogs, and hence should be abandoned
-
Shoham, S.; Kedar, R.: ¬The subject cataloging of monographs with the use of keywords (2001)
0.02
0.01776404 = product of:
0.03552808 = sum of:
0.03552808 = product of:
0.07105616 = sum of:
0.07105616 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07105616 = score(doc=5442,freq=8.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.3483491 = fieldWeight in 5442, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5442)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 33(2001) no.2, S.29-54
-
Edwards, S.: Indexing practices at the National Agricultural Library (1993)
0.02
0.01776404 = product of:
0.03552808 = sum of:
0.03552808 = product of:
0.07105616 = sum of:
0.07105616 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07105616 = score(doc=555,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.3483491 = fieldWeight in 555, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=555)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 16(1993) no.3, S.89-97
-
Connell, T.H.: Use of the LCSH system : realities (1996)
0.02
0.015543535 = product of:
0.03108707 = sum of:
0.03108707 = product of:
0.06217414 = sum of:
0.06217414 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 6941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06217414 = score(doc=6941,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.30480546 = fieldWeight in 6941, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6941)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 23(1996) no.1, S.73-98
-
Veenema, F.: To index or not to index (1996)
0.01
0.014024663 = product of:
0.028049326 = sum of:
0.028049326 = product of:
0.05609865 = sum of:
0.05609865 = weight(_text_:22 in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05609865 = score(doc=7247,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7247, 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=7247)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Canadian journal of information and library science. 21(1996) no.2, S.1-22
-
Booth, A.: How consistent is MEDLINE indexing? (1990)
0.01
0.012271579 = product of:
0.024543159 = sum of:
0.024543159 = product of:
0.049086317 = sum of:
0.049086317 = weight(_text_:22 in 3510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049086317 = score(doc=3510,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3510, 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=3510)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Health libraries review. 7(1990) no.1, S.22-26
-
Ballard, R.M.: Indexing and its relevance to technical processing (1993)
0.01
0.011102525 = product of:
0.02220505 = sum of:
0.02220505 = product of:
0.0444101 = sum of:
0.0444101 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0444101 = score(doc=554,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.21771818 = fieldWeight in 554, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=554)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 16(1993) no.3, S.79-88
-
Leininger, K.: Interindexer consistency in PsychINFO (2000)
0.01
0.010518497 = product of:
0.021036994 = sum of:
0.021036994 = product of:
0.042073987 = sum of:
0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042073987 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = 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
-
White, H.; Willis, C.; Greenberg, J.: HIVEing : the effect of a semantic web technology on inter-indexer consistency (2014)
0.01
0.008765414 = product of:
0.017530829 = sum of:
0.017530829 = product of:
0.035061657 = sum of:
0.035061657 = weight(_text_:22 in 1781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035061657 = score(doc=1781,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1781, 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=1781)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of the Helping Interdisciplinary Vocabulary Engineering (HIVE) system on the inter-indexer consistency of information professionals when assigning keywords to a scientific abstract. This study examined first, the inter-indexer consistency of potential HIVE users; second, the impact HIVE had on consistency; and third, challenges associated with using HIVE. Design/methodology/approach - A within-subjects quasi-experimental research design was used for this study. Data were collected using a task-scenario based questionnaire. Analysis was performed on consistency results using Hooper's and Rolling's inter-indexer consistency measures. A series of t-tests was used to judge the significance between consistency measure results. Findings - Results suggest that HIVE improves inter-indexing consistency. Working with HIVE increased consistency rates by 22 percent (Rolling's) and 25 percent (Hooper's) when selecting relevant terms from all vocabularies. A statistically significant difference exists between the assignment of free-text keywords and machine-aided keywords. Issues with homographs, disambiguation, vocabulary choice, and document structure were all identified as potential challenges. Research limitations/implications - Research limitations for this study can be found in the small number of vocabularies used for the study. Future research will include implementing HIVE into the Dryad Repository and studying its application in a repository system. Originality/value - This paper showcases several features used in HIVE system. By using traditional consistency measures to evaluate a semantic web technology, this paper emphasizes the link between traditional indexing and next generation machine-aided indexing (MAI) tools.
