2016
DOI: 10.1080/01639374.2016.1141133
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Disciplinary Differences: LCSH and Keyword Assignment for ETDs from Different Disciplines

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Besides improving the retrieval of theses and dissertations by optimizing access points, it is also important to develop practices that take advantage of the keywords and metadata provided by the authors. Strader (2009), Zavalina (2014), Han et al (2016) and Maurer and Shakeri (2016) dealt with this topic. These authors consider that libraries now face metadata created by noncataloguers, who often use subject terms not available in established controlled vocabularies.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Besides improving the retrieval of theses and dissertations by optimizing access points, it is also important to develop practices that take advantage of the keywords and metadata provided by the authors. Strader (2009), Zavalina (2014), Han et al (2016) and Maurer and Shakeri (2016) dealt with this topic. These authors consider that libraries now face metadata created by noncataloguers, who often use subject terms not available in established controlled vocabularies.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regardless, catalogers recognize that their work within the library catalog entails optimizing the bibliographic record for keyword searches by the user." Maurer & Shakeri (2016, p. 217) Despite the importance of keywords for information access, and for ETDs access, Maurer and Shakeri (2016) stress that there is little research on the number of keywords provided by student-authors and on the differences of author-assigned keywords for ETD in different disciplines.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Subject analysis seems to present the biggest challenge in the processing of TDs. Maurer and Shakeri (2016), Hoover (2005) and Wolverton et al (2011) have researched extensively on the subject. In a beginners guide to TDs in the Hard Sciences, Hoover (2005) observes that TDs in these disciplines present an even bigger challenge since they contain new concepts that may be unfamiliar to the cataloguer from a social sciences background.…”
Section: Subject Cataloguingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The authors' use of jargon or terminologies specific to the discipline compounds the problem further. Additionally, Maurer and Shakeri (2016) maintain that Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSHs) do not adequately cover science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Hoover's (2005) guide offers useful tips on determination of the TDs content, strategies for searching for appropriate LCSHs and evaluation of the appropriateness of the heading in the hard sciences.…”
Section: Subject Cataloguingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The assignment of LC subject headings and keywords to ETD records in different disciplines was investigated by Maurer and Shakeri (2016), who limited their research to the Kent State University Library catalog. They found that more cataloger-assigned LC subject headings and more author-assigned keywords were found in ETD records in the arts and humanities as opposed to ETD records in the sciences, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines and the social sciences.…”
Section: Enhancing Access To Dissertationsmentioning
confidence: 99%