The gap between users and cataloguers: perception of importance of bibliographic data for required reading and leisure reading

Mihela Pauman Budanović, Katarina Švab, Maja Žumer


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15291/libellarium.v1i1.322

Abstract


This paper provides some insight into cataloguers’ and end users’ perception of the importance of bibliographic data for fiction for two purposes: required reading for school and leisure reading. To obtain information about opinion of cataloguers and users, we used multiple data collection methods: observation, think aloud protocol and in-depth interviews. Four studies were conducted: among 30 cataloguers in June 2014 and 32 cataloguers in February and March 2016, and among 105 high school students in November 2011 and 108 adults in July 2012. The focus was on Slovenian catalogers and users. The results revealed similarities between users’ and cataloguers’ view of the most important bibliographic data for fiction. Finally, we propose attributes, considered as important from cataloguers’ as well as users’ standpoint. Most of them could be included in the bibliographic record, regardless of the cataloguing rules and practice.

Keywords


bibliographic data, cataloguers, information need, library catalogue, users

Full Text:

HTML

References


Aalberg, Trond, and Žumer, Maja. 2013. “The value of MARC data, or, challenges of frbrisation.” Journal of Documentation, no. 6: 851-72.

Applegate, Rachel. 2008. “Whose decline? Which academic libraries are" deserted" in terms of reference transactions?. “Reference & User Services Quarterly 48, no. 2: 176-189.

Boydston, Jeanne. M. K., and Leysen, Joan M. 2006. “Observations on the Catalogers' Role in Descriptive Metadata Creation in Academic Libraries.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 43, no. 2: 3-17.

Calhoun, Karen, Cantrell, Joanne, Gallagher, Peggy, and Janet Hawk. 2009. Online Catalogs: What Users and Librarians Want: An OCLC Report. Dublin, OH: OCLC Online Computer Library Center.

Calhoun, Karen. 2006. “The Changing Nature of the Catalog and its Integration with Other Discovery Tools (Final Report)”. Accessed May 3, 2018. http://www.loc.gov/ catdir/calhoun-report-final.pdf.

Chercourt, Mina, and Lauren Marshall. 2013. “Making keywords work: Connecting patrons to resources through enhanced bibliographic records.” Technical Services Quarterly 30, no. 3: 285-295.

Christensen, Anne. 2013. “Next-generation catalogues: what do users think?.” In Catalogue 2.0: The Future of the Library Catalogue, edited by Sally Chambers, 1-15. London: Facet Publishing.

Diao, Junli, and Hernández, Mirtha A. 2014. “Transferring Cataloging Legacies into Descriptive Metadata Creation in Digital Projects: Catalogers’ Perspective.” Journal of Library Metadata 14, no. 2: 130-45.

Dinkins, Debbi, and Kirkland, Laura N. 2006. “It’s what’s inside that counts: adding contents notes to bibliographic records and its impact on circulation.” College & Undergraduate Libraries, 13(1), 59–71.

Goodall, Deborah. 1989. Browsing in public libraries. Loughborough: Library and Information Statistics Unit.

Hider, Philip, and Tan, Kah-Ching. 2008. “Constructing Record Quality Measures Based on Catalog Use.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 46, no. 4: 338-361.

Hider, Philip. 2008. “Catalogue use at the State Library of Victoria.” Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 39, no. 1: 14-25.

Hypén, Kaisa. 2014. “Kirjasampo: Rethinking metadata.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 52, no. 2: 156-80.

Kalan, Pavle. 1967. Abecedni imenski katalog. Ljubljana: Društvo bibliotekarjev Slovenije ter Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica.

Kanič, Alenka. 2014. “Cataloguing Rules and their Changes - current situation in Slovenia,” Organizacija znanja, no. 2: 49-53.

Lewandowski, Dirk. 2010. “Using Search Engine Technology to Improve Library Catalogs.” In Advances in Librarianship, edited by Anne Woodsworth, 35-54. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Merčun, Tanja. 2014. “Čas za spremembe: prihodnost knjižničnega kataloga.” Šolska knjižnica 24, no. 3-4: 144-155.

Mi, Jia, and Weng, Cathy. 2008. “Revitalizing the Library OPAC: Interface, Searching, and Display Challenges.” Information Technology & Libraries 27, no.1: 5-22.

Mikkonen, Anna, and Vakkari, Pertti. 2012. “Readers' search strategies for accessing books in public libraries.” In Proceedings of the 4th IIIX Symposium, 214-33. New York: ACM.

Novotny, Eric. 2004. “I don’t think I click: a protocol analysis study of use of a library online catalog in the internet age,” College and Research Libraries, no. 6: 532.

Petrucciani, Alberto. 2015. “Quality of Library Catalogs and Value of (Good) Catalogs.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 53, no. 3-4: 303-313.

Prekat: pravilnik za enostavno uporabo katalogizacijskih pravil. 2001. Ljubljana: NUK.

Riva, Pat, Le Boeuf, Patrick, and Žumer, Maja. 2017. IFLA Library Reference Model: A Conceptual Model for Bibliographic Information. Haag: IFLA.

Rose, Mary Z. 2012. “The Ship Has Sailed and We Aren't On It: How Catalogers Could Support User Tasks and Why We Won’t.” Journal of Library Metadata, no: 2-3: 128.

Snow, Karen. 2017. “Defining, Assessing, and Rethinking Quality Cataloging.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 55, no. 7-8: 438-55.

Spiteri, Louise F. 2009. “The impact of social cataloguing sites on the construction of bibliographic records in the public library catalogue.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 47, no. 1: 52-73.

Strader, Rockelle C. 2017. “From User Tasks to User Services: Placing the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records Models Into a Larger Framework.” Technical Services Quarterly, no. 4: 347-368.

Švab, Katarina, and Žumer, Maja. 2016. “Izbira leposlovja–še vedno izziv za knjižnice?: kriteriji, ki so pomembni za uporabnike / Selection of fiction-still a challenge for libraries?: important criteria for users.” Knjižnica 60 (2-3): 127-149.

Tosaka, Yuji, and Weng, Cathy. 2011. “Reexamining content-enriched access: Its effect on usage and discovery.” College & Research Libraries 72, no. 5: 412-427.

Verona, Eva. 1983. Pravilnik i priručnik za izradbu abecednih kataloga. Dio 2, Kataložni opis. Zagreb: Hrvatsko bibliotekarsko društvo.

Verona, Eva. 1986. Pravilnik i priručnik za izradbu abecednih kataloga. Dio 1, Odrednice i redalice (2. izmijenjeno izd.). Zagreb: Hrvatsko bibliotekarsko društvo.

Xiaojuan, Zhai, and Na, Nie. 2012. “The Gap between Users and Cataloging - Description and Analysis of Survey Data in Chinese Academic Library.” Accessed January 7, 2018. https://www.ifla.org/past-wlic/2012/80-zhai-en.pdf.

Yee, Martha. 2006. “Beyond the OPAC: Future Directions For Web-Based Catalogues”. Accessed May 3, 2018. https://www.nla.gov.au/acoc/beyond-the-opac-future-directions-for-web-based-catalogues.

ZNAČKA: priročnik za določanje značnic pri katalogizaciji. 2001. Ljubljana: Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15291/libellarium.v1i1.322

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.
X


Bookmark and Share


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Libellarium (Online). ISSN 1846-9213 © 2008

ERIH PLUS
 doaj.png


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.