No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
The actual importance of RDA elements in supporting key user tasks
Abstract
The Resource Description & Access (RDA) cataloguing standard stipulates sets of core elements for cataloguers to include in their description of information resources and in the resources' associated content and agents. The elements RDA deems core were selected according to their relative utility in meeting key user tasks, such as finding, selecting and identifying items and works, and finding and identifying persons and bodies associated with items and works. However, this selection was not based on empirical evidence, but on expert opinion. A study by Hider and Tan (2008) which investigated the relative value of various elements in catalogue records suggests that the RDA core elements may require revision. This new study examines the validity of the RDA core sets in more depth, employing think-aloud usability testing techniques and sets of typical bibliographic tasks, to gauge which of all the RDA elements are the most critical in a university library context. The results provide guidance on the adoption of the RDA standard and its elements, and on the value of fully implementing the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD) models on which RDA is based.
... As mentioned earlier, Hider (2009aHider ( , 2009b studied how RDA terms for content, media, and carrier types did not necessarily correspond to end-user categorizations of library resources. Hider and Liu (2011) examined how academic library users perceived the relative value of various RDA elements and found that what RDA designated as core did not always match what they found useful. Since the convenience of the user has always been the key principle in the cataloging community, there is a critical need for user validations of the new cataloging code. ...
Resource Description & Access (RDA) is intended to provide a flexible and extensible framework that can accommodate all types of content and media within rapidly evolving digital environments while also maintaining compatibility with the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition (AACR2). The cataloging community is grappling with practical issues in navigating the transition from AACR2 to RDA; there is a definite need to evaluate major subject areas and broader themes in information organization under the new RDA paradigm. This article aims to accomplish this task through a thorough and critical review of the emerging RDA literature published from 2005 to 2011. The review mostly concerns key areas of difference between RDA and AACR2, the relationship of the new cataloging code to metadata standards, the impact on encoding standards such as Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC), end user considerations, and practitioners' views on RDA implementation and training. Future research will require more in-depth studies of RDA's expected benefits and the manner in which the new cataloging code will improve resource retrieval and bibliographic control for users and catalogers alike over AACR2. The question as to how the cataloging community can best move forward to the post-AACR2/MARC environment must be addressed carefully so as to chart the future of bibliographic control in the evolving environment of information production, management, and use.
Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to consider the nature of community information (CI) and proposes a data model, based on the entity-relationship approach adopted in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), which may assist with the development of future metadata standards for CI systems.
Design/methodology/approach
– The two main data structure standards for CI, namely the element set developed by the Alliance of Information and Referral Systems (AIRS) and the MARC21 Format for CI, are compared by means of a mapping exercise, after which an entity-relationship data model is constructed, at a conceptual level, based on the definitions of CI found in the literature.
Findings
– The AIRS and MARC21 data structures converge to a fair degree, with MARC21 providing for additional detail in several areas. However, neither structure is systematically and unambiguously defined, suggesting the need for a data model. An entity-relationship data modelling approach, similar to that taken in FRBR, yielded a model that could be used as the basis for future standards development and research. It was found to effectively cover both the AIRS and MARC21 element sets.
Originality/value
– No explicit data model exists for CI, and there has been little discussion reported about what data elements are required to support CI seeking.
The paper will discuss the application of Resource Description and Access (RDA), the emerging successor to the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, as a content standard for metadata encoded in UNIMARC. RDA is designed for international application in a digital environment, and is not aligned with any specific bibliographic record encoding format, although work is ongoing to develop its application to MARC21 and Dublin Core formats. The paper will also discuss the implications of making components of RDA and associated models such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD) compatible with the Semantic Web.
An online questionnaire survey was distributed amongst the Petherick Readers of the National Library of Australia, a user group of scholars and researchers. The survey asked questions about the readers’ use and appreciation of the NLA catalogue. This group of users clearly appreciated the library catalogue and demonstrated that there are still library patrons who make extensive use of the sophisticated bibliographic access to a collection that it provides, despite the popularity of other information retrieval tools such as Web search engines.
A questionnaire survey conducted at the State Library of Victoria indicates that users in general, and not just scholars, value the standard elements of bibliographic data found in the Library's catalogues, and consider all these elements useful for finding, identifying and selecting items. Rather than making do with less, users wanted more bibliographic data, including more content details and additional elements, such as reviews. They considered all kinds of cataloguing error to be significant, but were able to differentiate between those that were likely to have most impact on their catalogue use. (Contains 9 tables and 3 notes.)
Approaches to the measurement of catalog record quality are discussed. The systematic application of specific evaluation criteria may be more reliable than expert opinion, if not necessarily more accurate, and the construction of an error weightings table based on empirical investigation into catalog use is described. Although this process proved to be complex, and involved significant methodological problems, it was shown to be readily achievable. As catalog use may in many cases be insufficiently uniform across libraries to allow for generic evaluation criteria, it is proposed that cataloging managers construct their own set by studying the impact that record quality has on the particular use of their own catalogs. Thus more empirical research into catalog use is advocated, in order to supplement expert opinion and to build toward a practice of evidence-based cataloging.