Objectivity and Subject Access in the Print Library

Viewpoints in indexing term assignment

“…According to Marshall and others, the presence of prejudiced terms was not necessarily due to the personal viewpoint of heading writers, but reflects the opinions and terminology of a certain population of “average” users in a certain time. To partially remedy this type of bias, Naun () and Knowlton () promote the requirement that the indexer give expression to all viewpoints.…”

“…Far from adopting no viewpoint, proper indexing requires the indexer to grapple with a multiplicity of viewpoints, values, and sources of meaning, with the indexer's own viewpoint serving as a necessary basis for navigating among them. Along these lines, Naun () requires that the indexer arbitrates among competing points of view on a given topic. Common to all these alternative approaches is that it is not enough—or even desirable—to set aside one's personal views, and not realistic or desirable to adopt no‐view.…”

“…Common to all these alternative approaches is that it is not enough—or even desirable—to set aside one's personal views, and not realistic or desirable to adopt no‐view. Rather, in these approaches the indexer arbitrates between opinions, seeking consensus, and prioritizing where consensus is absent (Naun, ).…”

“…Many indexing guidelines include the idea that common usage, or the views of experts, and especially the views and terminology of the majority of users, should guide the selection of terms (Naun, ). The idea of considering users is so basic that when Mai () contrasts document‐oriented with user‐oriented approaches to indexing, even the document‐oriented approach requires this.…”