Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Library thing
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Library thing

164

Published on

1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
164
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Presented by Lisa, Jessica, Ozan, Tegan and Annik
  • 2. What is LibraryThing? • An online site for social sharing • Online since 2005 • Specifically design to catalogue books • The creator built the site to catalogue his own books • Finds links to the item on other website • Price comparison • Where to buy online • Local bookstore where to find the item
  • 3.  Description Type of content  Books, DVDs, CDs and more  Multiple languages  English and French mostly  User-generated with approved submission  Results come from other sources Target audience  People who want to keep a list of the books, DVDs and/or CDs  People who would like to have recommendation based on what they like  Via the website or other users  Libraries so they can shared their own collection
  • 4.  Description Tagging  Non-consistent and no control vocabulary  Left to the users  Limited per item  Tags or more personal then useful  Users tags for themselves rather then everybody  Not very useful for the other users Design and user interface  Design is outdated with to much scrolling  Not mobile compatible  Connects/links to Facebook and Twitter  Can use a scanner to scan barcodes and find books  Recommendations given are accurate
  • 5.  Tagging
  • 6.  Design and user interface
  • 7.  Design and user interface
  • 8.  Purpose To examine the “messiness” of social tagging in LibraryThing in relation to their use for search and retrieval in a library catalogue using a quantitative analysis. Highlights of the article: “Trashy tags: problematic tags in LibraryThing”
  • 9.   Chose LibraryThing because it closely resembles a library catalogue.  Quantitative analysis  Used ten books, the data was collected in September and October 2008  Excluded personal tags, i.e. “to read,” “box 1”  40% of tags were excluded  Studied a total of 7,653 tags Methodology • The Da Vinci Code • The God Delusion • The Screwtape Letters • The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People • Million Little Pieces • Lonesome Dove • Heather Has Two Mommies • Sin City • I’m a Soldier, Too • Martha Stewart’s Wedding Cakes
  • 10.  Findings Titles Spelling Foreign language Non- alphabetic characters Dates Abbrev., acronyms, initialisms Sentence paragraphs Articles Tags Da Vinci Code 182 278 782 176 360 99 27 3,049 God Delusion 56 74 178 45 103 8 6 1,174 Screwtape Letters 44 25 245 73 140 5 4 1,059 Seven Habits … 59 29 269 34 147 5 2 952 Million Little … 41 16 145 50 54 27 4 668 Lonesome Dove 13 3 122 39 80 19 9 536 Heather… 5 0 29 5 20 0 0 119 Sin City 1 2 4 1 3 0 0 52 I Am a Soldier… 0 0 4 3 3 0 0 37 Martha Stewart’s… 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 Totals 401 427 1,778 426 911 163 52 7,653 % of total tags 5.24 5.58 23.23 5.57 11.90 2.13 0.68
  • 11.  Findings Titles Jargon Slang Nouns Plural Singular Both Variations Tags Da Vinci Code 129 168 1,246 167 1,044 34 1,121 3,049 God Delusion 52 14 665 100 556 9 342 1,174 Screwtape Letters 42 22 505 70 423 12 402 1,059 Seven Habits … 95 13 465 73 378 15 380 952 Million Little … 27 30 307 33 269 5 206 668 Lonesome Dove 30 8 299 42 253 5 193 536 Heather… 12 7 74 39 34 1 52 119 Sin City 4 3 28 3 25 0 8 52 I Am a Soldier… 5 1 25 2 23 0 12 37 Martha Stewart’s… 0 0 5 0 5 0 2 7 Totals 396 266 3,619 529 3,010 81 2,718 7,653 % of total tags 5.17 3.48 47.29 6.91 39.33 1.06 35.52 % of nouns 14.62 83.17 2.24
  • 12.   Folksonomies can enhance controlled vocabularies like LCSH  They are messy and inconsistent  Variations among tags is the biggest problem  Could be fixed by offering suggestions and recommendations, giving guidelines and allowing the editing and combining of tags  But don’t want to discourage users from creating tags  “The charm of tagging is its open and unstructured form, and this is a strength of the resultant folksonomy” Conclusions
  • 13.  Background information LibraryThing for Libraries (LTFL) is a series of enhancements that can be embedded into a library’s online catalogue. Adds a tag cloud of LibraryThing tags directly to catalogue records. Highlights of the article: “Tags in the catalogue: Insights from a usability study of LibraryThing For Libraries” (Pirmann, 2012)
  • 14. Example of LibraryThing for Libraries Logan Library (Utah): http://library.loganutah.org/
  • 15.  Research question What is the utility of tags as a means of enhancing subject access and discovery of items in library catalogues? Methodology  Major research university library  13 participants  Usability test • Open-ended searches • Known-item searches • Unknown-item searches  Screen capture software & webcam  “Think aloud” technique  Semistructured interviews Methodology
  • 16.  Findings
  • 17.  Findings
  • 18.  Tags can be useful for finding materials in library catalogues However, there are several problems with the LTFL tag browser: • Displays maximum of 30 tags • Relevancy ranking of results • Not seamlessly integrated in the catalogue Conclusions
  • 19.  Value of Site for Subject Retrieval Pros Variety of Content and Social Creations
  • 20. Variety of content Books, movies, music, board games Many languages (including translations) Author and publisher information Data on collections Similar content and recommendations ISBN and BINC number searches Growing collection Quick Links; Get this Book: price comparisons from Bookfinder.com
  • 21. Social Creation User-generated, admin approved submissions Boardgamegeek: http://boardgamegeek.com/user/jesslynch Making and sharing lists Connecting to users with similar interests Forums and groups Suggestions for site improvements Links to Facebook and Twitter External searches: Library of Congress Catalogue, Overcat, Amazon.com
  • 22.  Value of Site for Subject Retrieval Cons No Search Limiters and Lack of Helpful Search Advice
  • 23. Search Site
  • 24. Tagmash
  • 25. Add books
  • 26.   LibraryThing is a great idea that needs work  Seems outdated  Hard to navigate  Tagging strategies are lacking  It is more adapted for some context and users  Smaller libraries  Devoted users To Summarize
  • 27.  Bates, J., & Rowley, J. (2011). Social reproduction and exclusion in subject indexing: A comparison of public library OPACs and LibraryThing folksonomy. Journal of Documentation, 67(3), 431-448. doi: 10.1108/00220411111124532  DeZelar-Tiedman, C. (2011). Exploring User-Contributed Metadata's Potential to Enhance Access to Literary Works: Social Tagging in Academic Library Catalogs. Library Resources & Technical Services, 55(4), 221-233. Retrieved February 3, 2014, from https://login.proxy.bib.uottawa.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=llf&AN=525501497&site=ehost- live  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. doi: 10.1177/0165551510386173  O'Neill, J. (2007). LibraryThing: Cataloging for the (social) masses. Information Today, 24(8), 23. Retrieved February 3, 2014, from https://login.proxy.bib.uottawa.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/57648651?accountid=14701  Pirmann, C. (2012). Tags in the catalogue: Insights from a usability study of LibraryThing for libraries. Library Trends, 61(1), 234-247. doi: 10.1353/lib.2012.0021  Richards, A., & Sen, B. (2013). An investigation into the viability of LibraryThing for promotional and user engagement purposes in libraries. Library Hi Tech, 31(3), 493-519. doi: 10.1108/LHT-03-2013-0034  Starr, J. (2007). LibraryThing.com: The Holy Grail of Book Recommendation Engines. Searcher, 15(7), 25-32. Retrieved February 3, 2014, from https://login.proxy.bib.uottawa.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=llf&AN=502919069&site=ehost- live  Thomas, M., Caudle, D. M., & Schmitz, C. (2010). Trashy tags: Problematic tags in LibraryThing. New Library World, 111(5-6), 223-235. doi: 10.1108/03074801011044098  Voorbij, H. (2012). The value of LibraryThing tags for academic libraries. Online Information Review, 36(2), 196-217. doi: 10.1108/14684521211229039 Bibliography

×