Otherness in Library Organization Systems vs. Social Tagging

Document Type : Research َ Article

Authors

1 PhD Candidate in knowledge and Information Science, University of Isfahan, Isfahan

2 PhD in Knowledge and Information Science, Professor, University of Isfahan, ,

3 PhD in Communication and Information Science, Associate Professor, University of Isfahan, Isfahan

4 PhD in Knowledge and Information Science, Doctoral School of Business Informatics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary, Associate Professor, University of Isfahan, Isfahan,

Abstract

Purpose: To uncover the phenomenon of otherness in assigning subjects to library materials by the Library of Congress.
Methodology: 384 titles on the subjects of Islam catalogued between 2016 to 2019 were retrieved from LC’s OPAC and compared with the tags assigned to them by users in the website of LibraryThing.
Findings: Average number of subjects assigned by social tagging to each title was around 15, much higher than the average 3.5 by LCHS. In addition, 83% of the tags did not match either conceptual or linguistic with the subject headings assigned. Around 68% of the tags which did not match the subject heading were taken from the content of titles.
Conclusion: The structure of subject headings has resulted in marginalizing some subjects, whereas tags provide an opportunity to representation others views.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

دریدا، ژاک (1384). جهان وطنی و بخشایش، ترجمة امیرهوشنگ افتخاری راد. تهران: نشر گام نو.
خادمیان، مهدی (1395). امکان جایگزینی یا تکمیل سرعنوان‌های موضوعی کتابخانه کنگره با برچسب‌های اجتماعی‌‌ ‌لایبرری‌تینگ در حوزه‌های علوم انسانی، علوم اجتماعی و علوم طبیعی. پایان­نامه دکتری، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز.
Bates, J. & Rowley, J. (2011). Social reproduction and exclusion in subject indexing: a comparison of public library OPACs and librarything folksonomy. Journal of Documentation, 62)2(, 431-448. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411111124532
Deodato, J. (2010). Deconstructing the Library with Jacques Derrida: Creating Space for the “Other” in Bibliographic Description and Classification. In Critical Theory for Library and Information Science: Exploring the Social from Across the Disciplines. 2nd ed. Edited
Gloria J. Leckie, Lisa M. Given, and John E. Buschman. (pp. 75-88). Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
Fox, M.J. (2012). Communities of practice, gender and social tagging. Tenth International ISKO Conference, 4-7 August 2012, Mysore, India.
Fox, M. J., & Reece, A. (2014). The impossible decision: social tagging and Derrida’s deconstructed hospitality. knowledge organization, 40(4), 260-265. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2013-4-260
Green, R. (2015). Indigenous Peoples in the US, Sovereign Nations, and the DDC. Knowledge organization, 42(4), 211-221. 10.5771/0943-7444-2015-4-211
Hajibayova, L., & Buente, W. (2017). Representation of Indigenous cultures: Considering the Hawaiian hula. Journal of Documentation, 73(6), 1137-1148.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-01-2017-0010
Hajibayova, L., Buente, W., Quiroga, L., & Valeho‐Novikoff, S. (2016). Representation of Kanaka Maoli (Hawaiian) culture: A case of hula dance. In Proceedings of the 79th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Creating Knowledge, Enhancing Lives through Information & Technology, ASIST ’16. Silver Springs, MD, USA: American Society for Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2016.14505301128
Johansson, S., & Golub, K. (2019). LibraryThing for Libraries: How Tag Moderation and Size Limitations Affect Tag Clouds.‌‌‌‌ ‌‌Knowledge organization, 46(4), 245-259.
10.5771/0943-7444-2019-4-245
Kemp, R. B. (2007). Classifying marginalized people, focusing on natural disaster survivors. Knowledge organization, 1(1), 44-54.
 LibraryThing (2020). LibraryThing Concepts. Retrieved May, 12 2020 from: https://www.librarything.com/concepts.
Lu, C., Park, J., & Hu, X. (2010). User tags versus expert-assigned subject terms: a comparison of librarything tags and Library of Congress Subject Headings. Journal of Information Science, 36 (6), 763-779.      10.1177/0165551510386173
Murphy, Pauline Rafferty, (2015). Is there nothing outside the tags?: Towards a poststructuralist analysis of social tagging, Journal of Documentation, 71(3), 477-502. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-02-2013-0026
Olson, H. A. (1998). Mapping beyond Dewey's boundaries: Constructing classificatory space for marginalized knowledge domains. Library Trends, 47 (2), 233–54.
Olson, H. A., & Schlegl, R. (2001). Standardization, objectivity, and user focus: A meta-analysis of subject access critiques. Cataloging & classification quarterly, 32(2), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.1300/J104v32n02_06
Olson. H. A.,‌‌‌‌ ‌‌(2001). Patriarchal Structures of subject access and subversive techniques for change. Canadian journal of information and library science, 26(2), 1-29.
Rolla, P. J. (2009). User tags versus subject headings: can user-supplied data improve subject access to library collections?. Library Resources and Technical Services, 53 (3),174-184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.53n3.174
Smith, T. (2007). Cataloging and you: Measuring the efficacy of a folksonomy for subject analysis. In J., Lussky (Ed.) Proceedings of the 18thWorkshop of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Special Interest Group in Classification Research, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 26 June 2020
  • Revise Date: 26 August 2020
  • Accept Date: 26 August 2020

Share

How to cite

Statistics