Search (1006 results, page 2 of 51)

0.06624585 = product of:
  0.2649834 = sum of:
    0.2649834 = weight(_text_:heading in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2649834 = score(doc=654,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.661607 = fieldWeight in 654, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=654)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Assigned topical and geographic subject headings from a sample of 3.814 bibliographic records in the University of Michigan Library's catalog were analyzed to determine the degree of match with LCSH, 10th edition and to idetify types of heading conflicts that lend themselves to automatic subject authority control. The findings showed a surprising degree of agreement: 44 percent of headings matched LCSH 10th completely. For headings without subdivisions, the match was 88,4 percent. Since 93,6 percent of the topical subdivisions that did not match LCSH were found on the free-floating lists, some consideration should be given to developing a machine-readable file of free-floating subdivisons for matching purposes.

0.06624585 = product of:
  0.2649834 = sum of:
    0.2649834 = weight(_text_:heading in 417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2649834 = score(doc=417,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.661607 = fieldWeight in 417, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=417)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Southeast Asia is an important and populous region with an extensive literature. Many libraries in the United States and Canada have large or moderate collections of Southeast Asia materials. Yet the Library of Congress has not provided sufficient subject heading period subdivisions for the area. Additional subdivisons are proposed in detail for: Asia, Southeastern; Indonesia; Malaysia; Singapore; Philippines; Thailand; Indochina; Vietnam; Cambodia; Laos; and Burma. The historical and/or logical justification for the proposed additions follow each area. The function of the essay is not to present absolute answer, but to promote awareness of the problem and to suggest reasonable alternatives.

0.06624585 = product of:
  0.2649834 = sum of:
    0.2649834 = weight(_text_:heading in 501) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2649834 = score(doc=501,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.661607 = fieldWeight in 501, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=501)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

An examination of subject heading practices in the card catalogs of libraries in one New York State county and an analysis of selected subject headings found that only the largest libraries were able to provide any kind of subject authority control. Furthermore, not even the largest libraries were able to provide the "See Also" references upon which the Library of Congress assignment of subject headings is based. Changes in LCSH headings resulted in great confusion and a dispersal of resources in the smaller libraries. Is this situation typical of practices at other libraries in other parts of the United States? If so, the implications could be very serious. The study offers no answers, but raises important questions.

0.06624585 = product of:
  0.2649834 = sum of:
    0.2649834 = weight(_text_:heading in 507) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2649834 = score(doc=507,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.661607 = fieldWeight in 507, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=507)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Cataloging departments must weigh the goal of high quality cataloging against the need to make materials available to the patron in a timely, cost effective fashion. Many cataloging departments still review and revise subject headings assigned by OCLC member libraries to achieve quality cataloging for their libraries. This study evaluates this procedure and compares the number of subject heading revisions made to OCLC cooperative cataloging copy input by research, academic and public libraries. Percentages of revisions did not differ greatly among the three types of libraries and were lower than expected. A reassessment of the library's procedures was recommended and several issues that all libraries should consider were enumerated.

0.065566376 = product of:
  0.2622655 = sum of:
    0.2622655 = weight(_text_:heading in 4634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2622655 = score(doc=4634,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.6548211 = fieldWeight in 4634, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4634)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In the continuing search for criteria for determining the form of compound headings (i.e., headings containing more than one word), many authors have attempted to deal with the problem of entry element and citation order. Among the proposed criteria are Cutter's concept of "significance," Kaiser's formula of "concrete/process," Prevost's "noun rule," and Farradane's categories of relationships*' (q.v.). One of the problems in applying the criteria has been the difficulty in determining what is "significant," particularly when two or more words in the heading all refer to concrete objects. In the following excerpt from Subject Catalogues: Headings and Structure, a widely cited book an the alphabetical subject catalog, E. J. Coates proposes the concept of "term significance," that is, "the word which evokes the clearest mental image," as the criterion for determining the entry element in a compound heading. Since a concrete object generally evokes a clearer mental image than an action or process, Coates' theory is in line with Kaiser's theory of "concrete/process" (q.v.) which Coates renamed "thing/action." For determining the citation order of component elements in a compound heading where the elements are equally "significant" (i.e., both or all evoking clear mental images), Coates proposes the use of "term relationship" as the determining factor. He has identified twenty different kinds of relationships among terms and set down the citation order for each. Another frequently encountered problem related to citation order is the determination of the entry element for a compound heading which contains a topic and a locality. Entering such headings uniformly under either the topic or the locality has proven to be infeasible in practice. Many headings of this type have the topic as the main heading, subdivided by the locality; others are entered under the locality as the main heading with the topic as the subdivision. No criteria or rules have been proposed that ensure consistency or predictability. In the following selection, Coates attempts to deal with this problem by ranking the "main areas of knowledge according to the extent to which they appear to be significantly conditioned by locality." The theory Coates expounded in his book was put into practice in compiling the British Technology Index for which Coates served as the editor from 1961 to 1977.

0.05678215 = product of:
  0.2271286 = sum of:
    0.2271286 = weight(_text_:heading in 5599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2271286 = score(doc=5599,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.5670917 = fieldWeight in 5599, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5599)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Library of Congress subject heading policy has been frequently criticized for using obsolete and biased terminology, for not providing subject analysis in depth, and for being overly research library oriented. While both PRECIS and the Subject Analysis Project offer possible solutions, fiscal considerations make their adoptions unlikely. By using existing computer technology, individual libraries could improve subject access by improved subject searching capabilities and by implementations of subject authority files which could tailor LC subject headings to the individual libraries' needs and provide an individualized cross-reference structure. For its part, the Library of Congress should provide an uptatable machine readable file of its complete cross-reference structure. This file should contain all references used in the Library of Congress Public Catalog since much of LC's subject heading practice is based upon its cross-reference structure. With such improvements, LC subject headings could provide much better subject access at an acceptable cost

0.053534724 = product of:
  0.2141389 = sum of:
    0.2141389 = weight(_text_:heading in 893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2141389 = score(doc=893,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 893, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=893)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.053534724 = product of:
  0.2141389 = sum of:
    0.2141389 = weight(_text_:heading in 1059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2141389 = score(doc=1059,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 1059, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1059)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.053534724 = product of:
  0.2141389 = sum of:
    0.2141389 = weight(_text_:heading in 512) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2141389 = score(doc=512,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 512, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=512)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Describes the application of the CDS/ISIS software package (version 1.0) for the creation of a subject index to the National Union Catalogue of Scientific Periodicals in India (NUCSSI) data base. The subject index helps the user to find the titles available under particular subjects covered by the data base. The subject index has a subject code, UDC number and subject heading selected from the key title of the periodical

0.053534724 = product of:
  0.2141389 = sum of:
    0.2141389 = weight(_text_:heading in 446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2141389 = score(doc=446,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 446, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=446)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper traces the history of the concept of intellectual level in cataloging and classification in the United States. Past cataloging codes, subject-heading practice, and classification systems have provided library users with little systematic information concerning the intellectual level or intended audience of works. Reasons for this omission are discussed, and arguments are developed to show that this kind of information would be a useful addition to the catalog record of the present and the future.

0.053534724 = product of:
  0.2141389 = sum of:
    0.2141389 = weight(_text_:heading in 466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2141389 = score(doc=466,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 466, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=466)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper discusses some common problems which catalogers of Slavic materials may encounter in establishing Slavic headings under AACR2. Three categories of headings have been selected: geographical, corporate and personal names concerned with the Soviet Union. Emphasis is placed upon cases where a cataloger may apply the rules correctly, but still establish an incorrect heading. Sources of these types of problems are identified and suggestions are made for dealing with them.

0.053534724 = product of:
  0.2141389 = sum of:
    0.2141389 = weight(_text_:heading in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2141389 = score(doc=526,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 2904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=2904,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 2904, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2904)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Defines the subject scope of ASSIA and the key areas covered and describes the principles for material selection, the service structure, indexing techniques, and future development. ASSIA differs structurally from the majority of other abstracting services in that the various entries are not numbered, and hence a single alphabetical sequence is possible combining bibliographical citations under the main subject headings, cross references, and related headings. This facilitates the publication of a 1-sequence annual volume, enabling the user to locate all the material under a given subject heading, which appeared in the 6 bimonthly issues.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 2524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=2524,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 2524, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2524)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

United States libraries use classification to provide subject browsing in open stacks. The DDC used by 85% of American libraries, is a theoretical, universal attempt to organize all knowledge. The LCC lacks intellectual consistency since it was based upon library warrant to organize materials in one collection. Many academic libraries use LCC because the Library of Congress' shared bibliographic records with the LCC call numbers reflect the collecting interests of academic libraries. LCC is more hospitable to change than DDC whoese phoenix schedules have encountered resistance throughout the world. Classification currently receives less attention than subject headings since United States librarians place great hope in the computer to resolve subject heading problems while remaining conservative about classification

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=451,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 451, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=451)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Authority control is discussed from two viewpoints: The need for bibliographic records relating to a name to be brought together under one form of the name; and the need for cross references to direct a user to a heading from variant forms of the name. Data from two research projects that support the need for choosing one form of name are summarized. The author's study of user requests that resulted in no "hits" in an online catalog is described. Data are given to show that for only 6.4% of these requests would our current methods of cross referencing in authority records have been helpful, and that two system programs would have given much greater assistance.

0.046842884 = product of:
  0.18737154 = sum of:
    0.18737154 = weight(_text_:heading in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18737154 = score(doc=533,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

As an illustration of the general concern about how bibliographic records for graphic materials can be integrated most effectively with records for works in other media, this article presents problems associated with applying existing AACR2 guidelines for choice of entry. Characteristics of original items and historical collections of pictures, the role of corporate bodies in creating such materials, and the degree to which AACR2 provisions for entry under the heading for a corporate body accommodate these features are examined. Recommendations regarding extending AACR2 Rule 21.1B2 and, more generally, regarding the need to examine the meaning and objectives of integrating bibliographic records for various media and actors affecting this process, are made.

0.040151045 = product of:
  0.16060418 = sum of:
    0.16060418 = weight(_text_:heading in 324) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16060418 = score(doc=324,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.40099442 = fieldWeight in 324, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=324)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In subject cataloging of audiovisual materials generic terms like 'documentary' or 'absolute film' facilitate the work of users and librarians. On the concrete level the study shows 4 ways to make a list of generic terms for the application in general libraries. The heuristic function of the study is to offer methods towards the solution of problems in the field of subject cataloguing of non-book materials. (1) The formal subject heading in library science corresponds to generic terms; Anglo-American and German rules for subject cataloging, however, provide no list that is directly applicable. (2) The terminology of institutions administering many audiovisual documents has been examined; general libraries have to find a common denominator with medium depth of classification and balanced representation of fiction and nonfiction terms. (3) From encyclopedic definitions of generic terms 8 dimensions have been extracted characterizing the terms in question individually. (4) The contribution of communication science has been discussed explaining a research project

0.040151045 = product of:
  0.16060418 = sum of:
    0.16060418 = weight(_text_:heading in 474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16060418 = score(doc=474,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.40099442 = fieldWeight in 474, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=474)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A broad and diverse compendium of underutilized information is available in pamphlet format in the academic library. Its enhanced use is impeded by the lack of an effective means of catalog access. The traditional library practice of accessing pamphlets by a single subject heading assignment/arrangement greatly limits accessibility. The alternative of full cataloging regularly accorded books is generally provided only for selected pamphlets for reasons of cost. It is suggested that the provision of AACR2 first level of description may be a desirable and practical compromise between single subject assignment and full cataloging. The availability and ease of access to the information required for inclusion in cataloging of this type is examined based on a survey of pamphlets cataloged for the collections of the University Libraries at California State University, Northridge.

0.040151045 = product of:
  0.16060418 = sum of:
    0.16060418 = weight(_text_:heading in 548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16060418 = score(doc=548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.40099442 = fieldWeight in 548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=548)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This study analyzes the Library of Congress (LC) class numbers and the LC subject headings which LC has assigned to 164 works of history and criticism of literature (belles lettres) related to women's studies. These books were classed in more than one hundred different class numbers and spans of numbers. Less than half of these books were assigned to class numbers in PA-PT whose captions contain either the word "women" or another word which points to women's studies, but slightly more than half were assigned "literature" subject headings which contain the words "women," "feminism," "feminist," or "sex role." The subject heading "Women in literature" was assigned to forty of these books, while the words "women authors" appear in a series of different subject headings assigned to forty-five of these books.

0.040151045 = product of:
  0.16060418 = sum of:
    0.16060418 = weight(_text_:heading in 574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16060418 = score(doc=574,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.40051475 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06621197 = queryNorm
        0.40099442 = fieldWeight in 574, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=574)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Central to subject searching is the match between user vocabulary and the headings from Library of Congress Subject-Headings (LCSH) used in a library catalog. This paper evaluates previous matching studies, proposes a detailed list of matching categories, and tests LCSH in a study using these categories. Exact and partial match categories are defined for single LCSH and multiple LCSH matches to user expressions. One no-match category is included. Transaction logs from ORION, UCLA's online Information system, were used to collect user expressions for a comparison of LCSH and user language. Results show that single LCSH headings match user expressions exactly about 47% of the time; that single subject heading matches, including exact matches, comprise 74% of the total; that partial matches, to both single and multiple headings, comprise about 21% of the total; and that no match occurs 5% of the time.