User’s Attitudes about the Implementation of Dynamic Social Cataloging in the OPAC of National Library of Iran

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Ph.D Candidate in Information Science Department of Information Science Faculty of Education and Psychology Alzahra University,Tehran,Iran

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this research is to investigate the interest of the users of the National Library of Iran towards participation in cataloging or social cataloging approach, especially in assigning the subject keywords or tagging; and then implementation of dynamic social cataloging in the OPAC of the National Library of Iran.
Methodology: This research is an applied and quantitative research. It has been done by survey method and researcher-made questionnaire with available sampling method from the users of National Library of Iran. In order to analyze the data in this research, the data analysis tool of the questionnaire of this research has been done with SPSS statistical software. Also, SPSS SAMPLE POWER software has been used to determine the sample population. The sample population for this research is 153 people. The reliability of the research instrument was also confirmed based on Cronbach's alpha test for the research questionnaire (0.75).
Findings: According to the findings, 39.9 percent of the users have searched through the subject field and 32.7 percent of them have searched through the advanced search using the combined search method in the cataloging records of their book. Usefulness of the subject headings listed in the cataloging records of bibliographic database of the National Library of Iran is satisfactory and helps the users to find the resources they are looking for. Users of National Library of Iran tend to participate in cataloging, specially assigning subject keywords and tagging in the cataloging records and they are eligible to participate in reviews, comments and suggestions on cataloging records. 81.7 percent of users were inclined to include subject keywords in cataloging records and only 18.3 percent expressed their opposition. 83 percent of users were interested in commenting on the cataloging records, and only 17 percent expressed opposition. 56.9 percent of users use the website www.librarything.com and 88.9 percent of users wanted to dedicate a section called "My Library" to each of them and only 11.1 percent expressed their opposition. The rate of improvement of retrieval results with the help of social cataloging is higher than average "3" and is desirable and will help the users of the National Library in improving the retrieval results in finding the resources they are looking for.
Conclusion: Based on the results, it can be stated that more than half of the users of the National Library of Iran are interested in participating in the cataloging of resources or social cataloging. Due to the unintentional mistakes of catalogers in cataloging, such as assigning the subject to resources, etc., it is clear that the participation and use of collective wisdom is needed, because using collective wisdom will reduce unintentional mistakes. Due to expression of user’s interest for social cataloging approach, the implementation of the dynamic social cataloging in OPAC of the National Library of Iran will greatly improve the quality of cataloging records and better retrieval of resources and more interaction with users. Combining aspects of social networks with traditional cataloging to achieve the goals of interactive OPAC or OPAC 2 will result in user satisfaction and improved retrieval results.

Keywords

References

حسنی، محمدرضا؛ موسوی چلک، افشین؛ شریف مقدم، هادی؛ سلامی، مریم (1398). فهرست‌نویسی اجتماعی آری یا نه؟ یک مرور نظام‌مند. کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی، 4(88)، 101-118.
حسنی، محمدرضا؛ موسوی چلک، افشین؛ شریف مقدم، هادی؛ سلامی، مریم (1398). نگرش فهرست‌نویسان ایرانی نسبت به فهرست‌نویسی اجتماعی (1398). مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازماندهی اطلاعات، 30(1)، 155-136.
References
Adler, M. (2009). Transcending library catalogs: A comparative study of controlled terms in Library of Congress Subject Headings and user-generated tags in LibraryThing for transgender books. Journal of web librarianship, 3(4), 309-331.
Ahmad, H., Mushtaq, M., & Imran, S. M. (2012). The Use of Search Strategies in OPAC: A Comparative Study of Central Library, IIT Delhi; PK Kelkar Library, IIT Kanpur and Allama Iqbal Library, Kashmir University. International Research: Journal of Library and Information Science, 2(2).
Baek, J. W. (2015). A Comparative Study on the Library and Social Cataloging: Focusing on the Cataloging Rules. Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for Library and Information Science, 26(4), 221–244.
Berget, G. (2022). The use and promotion of adapted books in Norwegian public libraries. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 54(1), 108-120.
Chang, H. C. (2009). Emotion barometer of reading: user interface design of a social cataloging website. In CHI'09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 3371-3376.
Chen, S. (2011). Can blogging help cataloging? Library Resources & Technical Services, 53(4), 251-260.
Choi, N., & Joo, S. (2016). Booklovers’ world: an examination of factors affecting continued usage of social cataloging sites. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(12), 3022-3035.
Hassani, M., Mousavi Chelak, A., Sharif Moghaddam, H., & Salami, M. (2019). Social cataloging yes or no? A systemaic review. Library and information science, 4(88), 101-118 (in persian).
Hassani, M., Mousavi Chelak, A., Sharif Moghaddam, H., & Salami, M. (2019). Iranian cataloger’s attitudes toward social cataloging. National studies on Librarianship and information organization, 30(1),136-155 (in persian).
Haider, S. (2022). Library Cataloging, Classification, and Metadata Research: A Bibliography of Doctoral Dissertations - A Supplement, 2021. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 1-6.
 Heymann, P., & Garcia-Molina, H. (2009). Contrasting controlled vocabulary and tagging: Do experts choose the right names to label the wrong things? In Proceedings of the Second ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM), February 09 -12, 1-4. New York: ACM.
Hider, P., Steele, G., & Smeaton, A. (2021). Disciplinary Differences in Social Cataloging: A Comparison of LibraryThing Tagging of Works in Literature, History and Business. Technical Services Quarterly, 38(4), 367-376.
Hider, P., & Steele, G. (2021). LibraryThing and Literary Works Revisited: Are Social and Library Cataloging Just as Complementary as they were a Decade Ago? Library Resources & Technical Services, 65(3), 113.
Hvass, A. (2008). Cataloguing with LibraryThing: as easy as 1, 2, 3!.  Library Hi Tech News.
Jeffries, S. (2008). Social cataloging tools: a comparison and application for librarians, Library Hi Tech News, 25(10), 1-4.
Jetty, S., Anbu, K.  J. P., Jain, P. K., & Hopkinson, A. (2011). Towards the next generation of online library catalogues. In international conference of Asian special libraries, Tokyo. available at: https://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/7964/.
Lim, H., & Kim, H. J. (2017). Item recommendation using tag emotion in social cataloging services. Expert Systems with Applications, 89, 179-187.
McFadden, S., & Venker Weidenbenner, J. (2010). Collaborative tagging: traditional cataloging meets the “wisdom of crowds”. The Serials Librarian, 58(1-4), 55-60.
   Miksa, S. (2013). Social Cataloging; Social Cataloger, New Directions in Information Organization. Library and Information Science, 7, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, 91-106.
  Mohammadbeigi, F., Zarei, A., & Isfandyari-Moghaddam, A. (2018). Identifying the Components of International Social Cataloging Sites in users and experts’ perspective.  Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 
Mugheri, S., Rahoo, L. A., Asif, M., & Sahito, Z. H. (2022). Web OPAC services and barriers users’ face while searching information in public and private sector university libraries in Pakistan. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal).
Noorhidawati, A., Hanum, N. F., & Zohoorian-Fooladi, N. (2013). Social Tagging in a Scholarly Digital Library Environment: Users' Perspectives. Information Research: An International Electronic Journal, 18(3), 3.
Noruzi, A. (2018). Social library and Social catalog. Retrieved August 17.
Pirmann, C. (2012). Tags in the catalogue: insights from a usability study of librarything for libraries. Library trends, 61(1), 234-247.
Razikin, K., Goh, D. H. L., Chua, A. Y., & Lee, C. S. (2008). Can social tags help you find what you want? In International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries. 50-61, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Richards, A., & Sen, B. (2013). An investigation into the viability of LibraryThing for promotional and user engagement purposes in libraries. Library Hi Tech.
  Spiteri, L. F. (2009). The impact of social cataloging sites on the construction of bibliographic    records in the public library catalog. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 47(1), 52–73.
Syn, S. Y., & Spring, M. B. (2013). Finding subject terms for classificatory metadata from user‐generated social tags. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(5), 964-980.
Vaidya, P., & Harinarayan, N. S. (2016). The comparative and analytical study of LibraryThing tags with Library of Congress Subject Headings. KO KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION, 43(1), 35-43.
  Voorbij, H. (2012). The value of LibraryThing tags for academic libraries. Online information review.
Thomas, M., Caudle, D. M., & Schmitz, C. (2010). Trashy tags: problematic tags in LibraryThing. New Library World.
Westcott, J., Chappell, A., & Lebel, C. (2009). LibraryThing for libraries at Claremont. Library Hi Tech.
 Xia, X., Zhang, S., & Li, X. (2010). A personalized recommendation model based on social tags. In 2010 2nd International Workshop on Database Technology and Applications, 1-5. IEEE.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics