Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2005. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 122-126).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Drexel University, 1985. / Vita. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 182-185).

No description available.

This mixed-method study explored cataloger’s judgment through the presence of text as entered by catalogers for the 11 electronic resource items during the National Libraries test for Resource Description and Access (RDA). Although the literature discusses cataloger’s judgment and suggests that cataloging practice based on new cataloging code RDA will more heavily rely on cataloger’s judgment, the topic of cataloger’s judgment in RDA cataloging was not formally studied. The purpose of this study was to study the differences and similarities in the MARC records created as a part of the RDA National Test and to determine if the theory of bounded rationality could explain cataloger’s judgment based on the constructs of cognitive and temporal limits. This goal was addressed through a content analysis of the MARC records and various statistical tests (Pearson’s Chi-square, Fisher’s Exact, and Cramer’s V). Analysis of 217 MARC records was performed on seven elements of the bibliographic record. This study found that there were both similarities and differences among the various groups of participants, and there are indications that both support and refute the assertion that catalogers make decisions based on the constructs of time and cognitive ability. Future research is needed to be able to determine if bounded rationality is able to explain cataloger’s judgment; however, there are indicators that both support and refute this assertion. The findings from this research have implications for the cataloging community through the provision of training opportunities for catalogers, evaluating workflows, ensuring the proper indexing of bibliographic records for discovery, and recommended edits to RDA.

Authority control provided by Digital Commons is basic. Other than author names, Digital Commons does not provide much in the way of authority control for other fields, such as faculty advisor/mentor names or department names. Standardizing name fields has several benefits, not least of which is the increased precision of reports that institutions can create to highlight the impact of faculty mentorship activities as well as the scholarship output of departmental entities on campus. Institutions that want to ensure the consistency of names across submissions to their Digital Commons repository, especially for self-submitted submissions, must develop their own methods for maintaining authority control. The presenter, a librarian wearing many hats in her position at Eastern Kentucky University Libraries, will talk about strategies she has developed for streamlining authority control work in EKU Libraries’ Digital Commons repository, Encompass Digital Archive.

This is a presentation to the Strong Start program (new MLS students) at the University of Arizona on 19 August 2002. There are 32 slides. Contents: Definitions, Assumptions, Limitations; What are Information Environments? The Roles We Play; Knowledge Organization (KO); The Cataloging/Metadata Process; Metadata â standards, types, initiatives; Q & A; Discussion; Resources. Interestingly, dLIST is mentioned and volunteers solicited!

This paper begins by discussing the various meanings of metadata both on and off the Web, and the various uses to which metadata has been put. The body of the paper focuses on the Web and the roles that metadata has in that environment. More specifically, the primary concern here is for metadata used in resource discovery, broadly considered. Metadata for resource discovery is on an evolutionary path with bibliographic description as an immediate predecessor. Its chief exemplar is the Dublin Core and its origins, nature and current status will be briefly discussed. From this starting point, the paper then considers the uses of such metadata in the Web context, both currently and those that are planned for. The critical issues that need addressing are its weaknesses for achieving its purposes and alternatives. Finally, the role of libraries in creating systems for resource discovery is considered, from the perspective of the gains made to date with the Dublin Core, the difficulties of merging this effort with traditional bibliographic description (aka MARC and AACRII), and what can be done about the gap between the two. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dervin and Nilanâ s (1986) article, â Information needs and uses,â has been an influential article in Library and Information Science (LIS), because it calls for a paradigm shift in LIS away from research that focuses on systems and standards to research that focuses on users. This article also has been influential on library and information practice. Librarians and other information workers are called on to be user-centered and place users at the center of library programs and services. Conforming to the user-centered paradigm, however, has been problematic for broad representational systems, like library cataloging, that must meet the diverse needs of global users. Despite calls to focus on users, the cataloging field has not taken a user-centered approach in research or in the development of cataloging standards. Instead, the responsibility to meet usersâ needs has been placed on cataloging practitioners, who are encouraged to customize bibliographic records to meet their local usersâ needs. Dissertation research by Hoffman (2008) suggests that catalogers are limited in their ability to customize bibliographic records, because catalogers do not know who their users are and cannot identify their usersâ needs. In addition, library administrators discourage customization in favor of efficient cataloging processes. There are limits to LISâ s user-centered paradigm in the area of cataloging, and perhaps it needs to examined and reconsidered. Is the user-centered paradigm still applicable to cataloging? How should cataloging meet usersâ needs? This paper will examine the problems of the user-centered paradigm in cataloging.

Faithful aggregated accounts of the advancement of science are invaluable for those setting scientific policy as well as scholars of the history of science. As science develops the scholarly communityiÌ s determination of the accepted knowledge undergoes shifts. Within medicine these shifts include our understanding of what can cause disease and what defines specific disease entities. Shifts in accepted medical knowledge are captured in the medical literature. The Index Catalogue of the Library of the Surgeon GeneraliÌ s Office, United States Army, published from 1880 -1961, is an extremely large index to medical literature. The newly digitized form of this index, referred to as the IndexCat, allows us a way to generate faithful accounts of the development of medical science during the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-centuries. My data looks at shifts within the IndexCat surrounding three disease entities: syphilis, Huntington's chorea, and beriberi, and their interactions with two disease causation theories: germ and hereditary, from 1880-1930. Temporal changes in the prominent subject heading words and title words within the literature of these diseases and disease theories corroborate qualitative accounts of this same literature, which reports the complex and sometimes oblique process of knowledge accretion. Although preliminary, my results indicate that the IndexCat is a valuable tool for studying the development of medical knowledge.

This paper provides an overview of how technology has changed the relationships between the library catalogue, the catalogue user, alternative sources of bibliographic data, and the resources described in the catalogue. It looks--from a technical perspective--at what those changes mean for the way we support various interfaces to the catalogue, and it highlights changes in approach that will be needed in order to maintain and enhance the effectiveness of those interfaces in an evolving networked environment.