JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for JISC-REPOSITORIES Archives


JISC-REPOSITORIES Archives

JISC-REPOSITORIES Archives


JISC-REPOSITORIES@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

JISC-REPOSITORIES Home

JISC-REPOSITORIES Home

JISC-REPOSITORIES  March 2006

JISC-REPOSITORIES March 2006

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Use of Navigational Tools in a Repository

From:

John Sack <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

John Sack <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 18 Mar 2006 07:20:32 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (79 lines)

Leslie,

Sorry to be responding just now to this thread, which I find interesting.

In a former career, in the mid 1980s, I was responsible for the 
implementation of Stanford libraries' first online catalog.  After the 
implementation, we looked at the server logs with great interest to see 
what types of searches patrons were actually doing.  My recollection -- 
very vague now -- is that the use of subject indexes (such as Library of 
Congress subject headings) was somewhere in the range you have quoted here: 
10+ percent.  But we also noticed that perhaps half the searches were 
actually "subject" searches rather than "known item" searches; that is, 
keywords that were general subject terms ("world war I") were being used to 
search things like the title index.  And we also noticed that explicit 
Boolean search -- which we had spent a great deal of time on in our 
implementation -- was under 1% and could probably be accounted for mostly 
by librarians' own use.

Google seems to have realized all this in its very simple interface.

It would be interesting to discover that reader/researcher habits haven't 
changed much in 20 years.

John

--On Thursday, March 09, 2006 12:37 AM +0000 Leslie Carr 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> A recent discussion between some colleagues on the utility (or
> otherwise) of subject classification in repositories prompted me to
> undertake a brief investigation whose results I present here. (I'll  also
> send this to AMSCI, so apologies for any duplicate copies that  you see.)
> The discussion has broadly been between computer scientists  and
> librarians over whether subject classification schemes offer  advantages
> over Google-style text retrieval; the study below looks at  the evidence
> as demonstrated in the usage of one particular  repository. As such it
> doesn't address the intrinsic value of  classification, but it does offer
> some insight into the effectiveness  of navigational tools (including
> subject classification) in the  context of a repository.
>
> ----------------
> The University of Southampton Institutional Repository has been in
> operation for a number of years and an official (rather than
> experimental or pilot) part of its infrastructure for just over a  year.
> As part of its capabilities, it includes lists of most recently
> deposited material, various kinds of searches, a subject tree based  on
> the upper levels of the Library of Congress Classification scheme  and an
> organisational tree listing the various Faculties, Schools and  Research
> Groups in the University and a list of articles broken down  by year of
> publication. These all provide what we hope are useful  facilities for
> helping researchers find papers (ie by time, subject,  affiliation or
> content).
>
> Over a period of some 29.5 hours from 0400 GMT on March 7th 2006,  1978
> "abstract" pages (ie eprints records) were downloaded from the
> repository (ignoring all crawlers, bots and spiders).
>
> Of the 1978 downloaded pages, the following URL sources (referrers,  in
> web log speak) were responsible:
>    439  - (direct URL, perhaps cut and paste into a browser or  clicked
> on from an email client)
>    225  EPRINTS SOTON pages
>      25  OTHER SOTON WEB pages
> 1264 EXTERNAL SEARCH ENGINES
>      21  EXTERNAL WEB PAGES
>
> ie the local repository facilities, including subject views and
> searches, led to only 225/1978 = 11% of all downloads.
>




-------------------
John Sack, Director
         HighWire Press, Stanford University
         Phone: 650-723-0192; fax: 650-725-9335
         http://highwire.stanford.edu/~sack
         [log in to unmask]

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JISCMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
November 2005
October 2005


WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager