Exploring User-Contributed Metadata's Potential to Enhance Access to Literary Works
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.55n4.221Abstract
Academic libraries have moved toward providing social networking features, such as tagging, in their library catalogs. To explore whether user tags can enhance access to individual literary works, the author obtained a sample of individual works of English and American literature from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries from a large academic library catalog and searched them in LibraryThing. The author compared match rates, the availability of subject headings and tags across various literary forms, and the terminology used in tags versus controlled-vocabulary headings on a subset of records. In addition, she evaluated the usefulness of available LibraryThing tags for the library catalog records that lacked subject headings. Options for utilizing the subject terms available in sources outside the local catalog also are discussed.
References
Karen Smith-Yoshimura, '“Social Metadata for Libraries, Archives, and Museums”' () (presentation, DLF Fall Forum, Palo Alto, California, 2010), nJim Michalko, '“Things That Happen Elsewhere—User Studies Say,”' () online posting, June 5, 2009, hangingtogether.org, nThomas Vander Wal, '“Folksonomy Coinage and Definition,”' () (accessed Dec. 29, 2010).nLois Mai Chan, '“Interindexer Consistency in Subject Cataloging,”' Information Technology & Libraries 8 no. 4 (1989): 349-58nMarkus Heckner, Suzanne Mühlbacher, Christian Wolff, '“Tagging Tagging: A Classification Model for User Keywords in Scientific Bibliography Management Systems”' () (presentation, Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services, 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, 2007), nJennifer Trant, '“Exploring the Potential for Social Tagging and Folksonomy in Art Museums: Proof of Concept,”' New Review of Hypermedia & Multimedia 12 no. 1 (June 2006): 83-105nScott A Golder, Bernardo H Huberman, '“Usage Patterns of Collaborative Tagging Systems,”' Journal of Information Science 32 no. 2 (2006): 198-208nJoseph B Dalton, J Trant Ed., D Bearman Ed., '“Can Structured Metadata Play Nice with Tagging Systems? Parsing New Meanings from Classification-Based Descriptions on Flickr Commons,”' Museums and the Web 2010: Proceedings (2010) (accessed Aug. 30, 2010).n () LibraryThing, Zeitgeist Overview, n 'FAQs: General' () (accessed Dec. 29, 2010).nIbid.nChristine DeZelar-Tiedman, () “Doing the LibraryThing™ in an Academic Library Catalog,” poster abstract in
Metadata for Semantic and Social Applications, DC-2008, Berlin, Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Application, 22– 26 September 2008
, ed. Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Lkas (Singapore: Dublin Core Metadata Initiative; Gottingen: Universitatsverlag Gottingen, 2008): 211, nChristine DeZelar-Tiedman, '“Subject Access to Fiction: An Application of the
Guidelines
,”' Library Resources & Technical Services 40, no 3 (1996): 203-10nSusan M Hayes, '“Use of Popular and Literary Criticism in Providing Subject Access to Imaginative Literature,”' Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 32 no. 4 (2002): 71-97n 'Resources and Technical Services Division, Cataloging and Classification Section, Subject Analysis Committee; Subcommittee on Subject Access to Individual Works of Fiction, Drama, etc.,' Guidelines on Subject Access to Individual Works of Fiction, Drama, etc (Chicago: ALA 1990)nMary Dabney Wilson, '“The Relationship between Subject Headings for Works of Fiction and Circulation in an Academic Library,”' Library Collections, Acquisitions & Technical Services 24 no. 4 (2000): 459-65n 'Cataloging and Classification Section; Subject Analysis Committee, Subcommittee on the Revision of the Guidelines on Subject Access to Individual Works of Fiction, Drama, etc.' Guidelines on Subject Access to Individual Works of Fiction, Drama, etc. (Chicago: ALA 2000)n 'Cataloging Policy and Support Office' Subject Cataloging Manual: Subject Headings (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress 1996–)n(): Hayes, “Use of Popular and Literary Criticism in Providing Subject Access to Imaginative Literature,” 95.nEmma Tonkin, '“Collaborative and Social Tagging Networks,”' Ariadne 54 (Jan. 2008): (accessed Aug. 10, 2010).www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue54/tonkin-et-alnMargaret EI Kipp, '“Complementary or Discrete Contexts in Online Indexing: A Comparison of User, Creator, and Intermediary Keywords,”' Canadian Journal of Information & Library Science 29 no.4 (Dec. 2005): 419-36nLouise F Spiteri, '“The Structure and Form of Folksonomy Tags: The Road to the Public Library Catalog,”' Information Technology & Libraries 26 no.3 (Sept. 2007): 13-25nRob Hidderley, Pauline Rafferty, '“Democratic Indexing: An Approach to the Retrieval of Fiction,”' Information Services & Use 17 no. 2/3 (1997): 103nPauline Rafferty, Rob Hidderley, '“Flickr and Democratic Indexing: Dialogic Approaches to Indexing,”' Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives 59 no. 4/5 (2007): 397-410nTimme Bisgaard Munk, Kristian Mørk, '“Folksonomy, the Power Law and the Significance of the Least Effort,”' Knowledge Organization 34 no. 1 (2007): 19nLada A Adamic, '“Zipf, Power Laws, and Pareto: A Ranking Tutorial”' (Palo Alto, Calif.: Information Dynamics Lab 2002) (accessed Dec. 29, 2010).n(): Munk and Mørk, “Folksonomy,” 28–29.n(): Golder and Huberman, “Usage Patterns of Collaborative Tagging Systems,” 204.nMichelle Springer, For the Common Good: The Library of Congress Flickr Pilot Project (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress 2008) (accessed Aug. 10, 2010).nIbid., iv.nIbid., 2.nTrant, Jennifer Trant Ed., '“Exploring the Potential for Social Tagging and Folksonomy in Art Museums”' Tagging, Folksonomy and Art Museums: Results of steve.museum's Research (Toronto, Ontario: Archives & Museum Informatics 2009)nBrian Matthews, '“An Evaluation of Enhancing Social Tagging with a Knowledge Organization System,”' Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives 62 no. 4/5 (2010): 447-65nMikael Wetterstrom, '“The Complementarity of Tags and LCSH: A Tagging Experiment and Investigation into Added Value in a New Zealand Library Context,”' New Zealand Library & Information Management Journal, Ng Prongo 50 no. 4 (2008): 296-310nC Rockelle Strader, '“Author-Assigned Keywords versus Library of Congress Subject Headings: Implications for the Cataloging of Electronic Theses and Dissertations,”' Library Resources & Technical Services 53 no. 4 (Oct. 2009): 243-50nPeter J Rolla, '“User Tags versus Subject Headings: Can User-Supplied Data Improve Subject Access to Library Collections?”' Library Resources & Technical Services 53 no. 3 (July 2009): 174-84nMatt Weaver, '“Contextual Metadata: Faceted Schemas in Virtual Library Communities,”' Library Hi Tech 25 no. 4 (2007): 579-94nRobert V Krejcie, Daryle W Morgan, '“Determining Sample Size for Research Activities,”' Educational & Psychological Measurement 30 (Autumn 1970): 607-10n(): Smith-Yoshimura, “Social Metadata for Libraries, Archives, and Museums,” 1.n 'MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data' () 653—Index Term-Uncontrolled (R) (2/26/2008), n 'MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data' () 69X—Local Subject Access Fields (R), nMargaret Beecher Maurer, '“Social Tagging, Folksonomies and Controlled Vocabularies—Can't They Just be Friends?”' TechKNOW 15 no. 1 (June 2009): 9-13n OCLC White Paper on the Information Habits of College Students: How Academic Librarians Can Influence Students’ Web-Based Information Choices (: June 2002) (accessed Mary 24, 2011).n
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC-BY-NC 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after it has been accepted for publication. Sharing can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
