Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Publishing partners
  4. Facet Publishing
  5. Content Listing

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

6023 results in Facet Publishing

Page 152 of 302

  • 4 - Information seeking and acquisition are key components of information behaviour

  • from PART 2 - WHAT DO WE KNOW OF INFORMATION BEHAVIOUR?
  • Nigel Ford
  • Book:
    Introduction to Information Behaviour
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2015, pp 49-76

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Information seeking is only one component in the broader concept of information behaviour, which (as we have seen in Chapter 3) includes behaviours such as information avoidance – the converse of information seeking – as well as information evaluation and use. However, it has formed the basis for much work in information behaviour over many years, and it continues to be a major element of study. Indeed, in her review of trends in information behaviour research between 2012 and 2014, Greifeneder (2014) concludes that ‘information seeking is still the major topic of interest’. The following sections introduce some of the major milestones in our understanding of information seeking.

    People may seek information in many different ways, using very different strategies, and the choice of strategy made by people and groups may be influenced by many factors. These can relate to their psychological make-up, the nature of their goals, their attitudes and their perceptions, and the context within which they are operating. The present chapter focuses on describing the nature of these strategies. Factors affecting the adoption of particular strategies will be discussed in Chapter 6.

    Basic information-seeking processes and activities

    A number of writers have proposed simple models of the information-seeking process entailing a cycle of actions, including identification of an information need, formulation of a query to a search tool and inspection of the search results – in the light of which the query may be reformulated, looping into a fresh query. Sutcliffe and Ennis’ (1998) model, for example, consists of four main activities:

  • • problem identification

  • • articulation of information need

  • • query formulation

  • • results evaluation.

    • Marchionini and White (2007) expand these basic activities to include:

  • • Recognition of a need for information (cognitive) This is an intellectual (cognitive) stage in which a need is perceived.

  • • Acceptance of the challenge to take action to fulfil the need This stage is motivational in that it entails an affective (emotional) commitment to do something about the perceived need.

  • • Problem formulation This stage entails figuring out the nature of the need (what it comprises, and what are its boundaries), thinking about the kind of information that will be required to satisfy the need, and identifying potential sources of information.

  • 8 - Research approaches

  • from PART 3 - DISCOVERING AND USING KNOWLEDGE OF INFORMATION BEHAVIOUR
  • Nigel Ford
  • Book:
    Introduction to Information Behaviour
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2015, pp 171-194

  • Summary

    Introduction

    In the previous chapter, we explored the notions of models and theories, which essentially derive from research. As information professionals, students or enthusiasts, we derive new understanding from research that may help us improve connections and interactions between people (ourselves as well as others). We all read the results of the research conducted by others, and many of us will engage in research ourselves, whether as part of educational courses to achieve a qualification, or as an aspect of our professional activity as we strive to improve the services we offer. This chapter is designed to provide an overview of key issues that it is important to know about, whether we are reading or conducting research.

    Research is basically an attempt to generate new understanding of something. High-quality research adheres to certain procedures and standards so that the understanding that is generated is based on evidence rather than prejudice, bias or whim. However, what constitutes ‘evidence’ – indeed, what constitutes ‘understanding’ – may be subject to differing interpretations – and the associated procedures and standards may differ accordingly.

    As a reader of research, you may consider the findings of some investigations more relevant and useful than those of others. For example, if your view of what constitutes acceptable evidence emphasizes the need for research findings to be based on large samples of people and strong statistical analysis, you may consider the findings of a small-scale qualitative study based on interviews with 20 people, with no statistics to back them up, to be inconsequential in terms of influencing what you think about the topic, or in terms of influencing your behaviour or professional activity. You may, on the other hand, find that a large-scale statistical survey you have read about – whilst providing a very convincing and apparently watertight statistical analysis – nevertheless lacks an appreciation of real-life complexities to the extent that it lacks relevance and potential application to your own situation. Similar differences in conceptions of what is and is not convincing and potentially useful evidence may influence researchers in their choice of methodological approach to a particular project – and even in the nature of their research questions.

  • 5 - Information behaviour can be collaborative

  • from PART 2 - WHAT DO WE KNOW OF INFORMATION BEHAVIOUR?
  • Nigel Ford
  • Book:
    Introduction to Information Behaviour
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2015, pp 77-98

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Although working together has always been central to work across the natural and social sciences and the arts and humanities, collaborative information behaviour is becoming increasingly common and important. Karunakaran, Reddy and Spence (2013) note that:

    … organizations have become information-intensive, but information is also fragmented across multiple actors, artifacts, and systems (Hansen and Järvelin, 2000, 2005). Therefore, collaboratively seeking, retrieving, and using workrelated information have become common practices within organizations (Reddy and Dourish, 2002).

    Yet Reddy and Jansen in their 2008 review of research concluded that relatively little attention had been paid to collaborative as opposed to individual aspects of information behaviour. Most models of information behaviour have related to the individual. Also, many information systems designed to support information seeking have operated on the model of the individual user, and are not well suited to supporting collaborative activity in organizations.

    The sharing of information is by definition an act of collaboration. However, the degree to which ‘sender’ and ‘receiver’ of shared information actually engage in collaboration over and above sending and receiving the information may vary greatly. In one sense information is shared if it is published and other people can access it. However, ‘information sharing’ is used in this chapter to indicate sharing within an actual collaboration as defined below.

    Before we go on to explore collaborative information behaviour in more detail, it is worth noting that as an increasing number of research studies focus on information behaviour as a collaborative social activity, it is important to acknowledge the complementary nature of both individual and social aspects and perspectives. Ultimately, as noted by Bawden and Robinson (2011, 128), ‘information behaviour is, by definition, individual’. This is not to deny the usefulness of studying the effects on information behaviour of social forces and influences, and seeking knowledge of the characteristics of shared information behaviour insofar as it might differ from individual information behaviour. Bawden and Robinson later asserted that:

    What we emphasize is the uniqueness and individuality of each person, which should not be minimized, even in view of the pragmatic advantages of studying information behavior primarily in group and social terms, and a recognition of the importance on many occasions of social context and collaboration. This is not at all inconsistent with a desire to identify and study interesting emergent information behaviors that are not predicable from individual cases.

  • Appendix: Defining ‘information’ and ‘information behaviour’

  • Nigel Ford
  • Book:
    Introduction to Information Behaviour
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2015, pp 245-248

  • Summary

    It was noted in Chapter 2 that many existing definitions in the literature of the key terms ‘data’, ‘information’, ‘knowledge’, ‘behaviour’ and ‘information behaviour’ leave room for uncertainty, in that there is sometimes variation between them, and often they do not provide sufficient elaboration to enable the reader to answer the sort of more probing questions necessary for a robust understanding of the precise extent and limits of each. Such questions include the following:

  • • Many definitions specify that ‘information’ is data that is structured and interpreted to render it meaningful. But when we gather and analyse ‘interview data’ this is surely not devoid of structure and meaning, so why do we not speak of ‘interview information’? Why does what is a widely accepted definition of ‘data’ and ‘information’ seem to break down here?

  • • Cloud patterns and the sound of rain are data capable of being meaningfully interpreted – for example, to indicate current and future weather. As such they constitute potential information. But does ‘information behaviour’ include behaviour relating to potential information (i.e. data with potential to be meaningfully interpreted) as well as actual information (data that has been meaningfully interpreted)? If so, does this mean that information behaviour is concerned with processing all items of data that are potentially capable of being meaningfully interpreted which reach our senses? This would imply that information behaviour includes mental processes including seeing, hearing, touching, feeling, perceiving and thinking. How then does it differ from basic psychology?

  • • Many definitions contrast ‘information’ and ‘knowledge’, information being external to a person (often existing in recorded form such as text or pictures), which the person processes and internalizes as knowledge (i.e. integrates within their own knowledge structure). Yet many definitions include ‘information use’ as a component of information behaviour. To the extent that a person has to understand information (internalize it) before being able meaningfully to use it (as opposed simply to repeating it without understanding) it is surely knowledge rather than information. So does ‘using information’ imply only unthinking verbatim use? Surely we should rather talk of ‘using knowledge’? But if we do, this can include almost any aspect of our thinking and acting, since anything we think entails using our knowledge. Should information behaviour thus embrace any field of intellectual activity? How is it different from, say, politics, history, psychology or engineering?

  • 3 - Changing conceptions of information needs

  • from PART 1 - BASIC CONCEPTS
  • Nigel Ford
  • Book:
    Introduction to Information Behaviour
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2015, pp 29-46

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Much research into information behaviour has focused on seeking information to satisfy some ‘information need’. The typical scenario is one in which a person becomes aware that they need to know something to help solve a problem or learn about some topic of interest, and this leads them to engage in information behaviour in order to acquire relevant information. Although (as will be explored in the Summary at the end of the chapter) there are starting points and drivers of information behaviour other than ‘information needs’, they have nevertheless formed the focus of a considerable body of research over many years which has provided useful insights into information behaviour.

    In much early research into ‘user studies’, information needs were inferred from the types of information sources particular groups of people made use of. Later researchers became much more interested in the psychology of information needs – particularly in the intellectual (cognitive) processes underlying them. Even more recently, there has been a bourgeoning interest in sociological aspects of information behaviour, which brings a different and complementary perspective to what constitutes information needs. There has also been increasing interest in information behaviour that is not geared to satisfying a need for information, but rather to avoiding information. As will be discussed in the Summary, such needs are still related to information but not in the sense of needing or seeking it.

    Information needs

    Early Theorists

    An early writer on information needs was Taylor. His seminal work (Taylor, 1962; 1968) is particularly interesting in that he distinguished between four different levels of information needs and their articulation. These continue to inform current research, including that of Cole (2012), whose recent work on information needs will be introduced in the next section, ‘Information-related needs’. Taylor differentiated between four levels of need:

  • A person's actual (underlying) information need (independent of whether s/he is aware of it).

  • The person's general idea of what it is that s/he needs to know (which may be relatively vague).

  • A rationale and precise description of the question requiring an answer.

  • A formal query made to an information system (such as a search engine), in the language the person thinks is required by the system.

  • 9 - Research methodologies in action

  • from PART 3 - DISCOVERING AND USING KNOWLEDGE OF INFORMATION BEHAVIOUR
  • Nigel Ford
  • Book:
    Introduction to Information Behaviour
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2015, pp 195-216

  • Summary

    Introduction

    The purpose of this chapter is not to list and discuss the range of methodologies and associated methods available, but rather to present three case studies which illustrate fundamental dimensions of difference in approach, giving a flavour of what they can offer and what might be their limitations. The first is a hypothesis-testing approach in which numerical data is quantitatively analysed in order deductively to test a predefined hypothesis. The second entails a qualitative analysis of textual data in order inductively to explore a phenomenon in a more open-ended way.

    Hypothesis testing: a deductive quantitative study

    Anand and Gomez-Mejia (2014) report a study that sought to test a number of specific hypotheses that had been developed based on a review of relevant theory and previous research. The study focused on the information-seeking behaviour of the members of top management teams in a selection of small American entrepreneurial firms. In particular, they sought to investigate the effects of types of reward structure on the seeking of information from outside ‘affiliate’ organizations (customers and vendors). The researchers hypothesized that:

  • • The higher the proportion of income that is made up of cash incentive payments (relative to base pay) the more top managers will engage in information seeking from external affiliate sources. This effect will be more pronounced in higher-technology-intensive firms.

  • • Base rates of pay will have a moderating effect. This moderating effect will be stronger in the case of higher-technology-intensive firms.

  • • Information seeking from external affiliate sources will decrease when cash incentives are linked to aggregate performance.

    • The reasoning behind these hypotheses was built on risk-bearing theory, and was as follows:

  • • The larger the proportion of cash incentives relative to base pay, the greater the risk for executives in that they are more dependent on immediate and short-term performance for their payment. They are therefore more likely to ‘play it safe’ and focus on ‘harvest’ strategies which emphasize maximizing income from existing popular products (as opposed to engaging in more fundamental or revolutionary but risky developments).

  • • Information from affiliate sources is most likely to be helpful in supporting harvest strategies and maximizing short-term performance rather than leading to more fundamental longer-term changes.

  • 6 - Factors influencing information behaviour

  • from PART 2 - WHAT DO WE KNOW OF INFORMATION BEHAVIOUR?
  • Nigel Ford
  • Book:
    Introduction to Information Behaviour
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2015, pp 99-140

  • Summary

    Introduction

    In the previous chapters we have explored a variety of types of information behaviour ranging from relatively active to more passive, and relatively focused to less directed forms of information seeking and acquisition, as well as serendipitous information encountering.

    An important area of research is to explore what factors influence people to adopt particular types of information behaviour. Clearly, different tasks may require different information-seeking strategies, and specific types of information evaluation and use. But there is also evidence that different people may engage in very different types of information behaviour even when faced with apparently similar tasks and circumstances.

    Understanding such influences may be helpful in a number of ways. If we can identify factors that may lead to relatively ineffective behaviour, then we may be able to exert counter-influences – whether in the form of training, education and self-understanding, or devising information systems that can help and support people as they search for, evaluate and use information. Research into information behaviour can help us not only identify factors that may constrain the effectiveness of the behaviour of individuals, groups and organizations, but also identify factors associated with particularly successful behaviour which we can use in attempting to lessen the influence of constraining influences.

    There is a multiplicity of factors which can affect our information behaviour. Research suggests that an individual's information behaviour may be determined and influenced by a wide range of factors, both internal and external to that individual (Figure 6.1). ‘Internal’ includes:

  • • demographic factors, such as age and gender

  • • cognitive factors, including their level of knowledge in a topic which is the focus of their information behaviour, levels of experience of searching, evaluating and using information, linguistic ability and flexibility of mind, and learning/problem solving style

  • • affective factors (feelings and emotions), such as level of anxiety relating to a topic which is the subject of their information behaviour.

    • Factors ‘external’ to the individual refer here to features of the contexts in which they are operating, which include:

  • • work

  • • education

  • • leisure

  • 2 - What is information behaviour and why do we need to know about it?

  • from PART 1 - BASIC CONCEPTS
  • Nigel Ford
  • Book:
    Introduction to Information Behaviour
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2015, pp 7-28

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Human information behaviour is all about how we need, find, process, and use information. But we do this all the time. So why do we need to study and research it?

    Well, it's a bit like studying nutrition and the human body. The more we understand how the body works, what nutrients it needs and the different effects of different foods (for better or for worse) the more we can teach and advise people about healthy diets, train up elite sportsmen and women, and identify, treat and prevent disorders. Information is nutrition for the mind. It is the fuel of learning, and the basis of our knowledge. Like food, we need a constant supply. And information has its fast food, gourmet and highperformance diet equivalents.

    To take one example, research into the information behaviour of people affected by HIV/AIDS has generated insights that are directly useful to those who provide information on both prevention of and living with the disease. Such information must be accurate, reliable, authoritative, up to date and easily available. But research suggests that other factors are also highly influential in determining whether people successfully find and engage with information they need. Accurate, reliable, authoritative and up-to-date information may be readily available. Yet some HIV/AIDS sufferers may ignore or avoid – even hide or destroy – information which possesses these desirable qualities. Information behaviour research suggests that it is one thing to make HIV/AIDS information readily available in, say, a city's public library, but quite another thing for a person who fears or has experienced stigma and discrimination relating to the disease to risk being seen accessing and reading it in such a public location. Also, information may not necessarily be timely in terms of a person's readiness to accept it. What might objectively be accurate, reliable and authoritative information may be ignored, not understood or rejected by some HIV/AIDS sufferers who, for a time after learning of their diagnosis, may simply be unreceptive due to being in a state of shock, anxiety or even denial. The more that information providers (in this case, medical and social workers, support organizations and information professionals) are aware of such difficulties and complexities, the greater is their chance of being able effectively to bring people into contact with the information they need.

  • 1 - Introduction

  • Nigel Ford
  • Book:
    Introduction to Information Behaviour
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2015, pp 1-4

  • Summary

    This book is about an activity that pervades every aspect of our lives. Constantly as we traverse the landscape of people, things and places making up our lives – and even as we dream – we are constantly processing information.

    Information is the raw material of knowledge: used effectively it can lead to wisdom. It is the intellectual equivalent of our food. And just as our eating habits and nutritional intake can be good or bad, with concomitant good and bad effects on our physical health, so can the quality of information we acquire, and the effectiveness with which we process it, affect the quality and effectiveness of our intellectual health.

    We are constantly bombarded with information – and misinformation. The ability to seek out quality information and to subject it to careful critical scrutiny is more important than ever. More than ever we live in an information-rich environment, with online access to vast stores and the ability of all of us easily to contribute to these stores. But whilst we may all be incredibly information-rich, this does not equate to being knowledge-rich.

    The intensity and scope of research into information behaviour has expanded considerably since the 1960s when research interest in how people go about finding information began to take off (Greifeneder, 2014; Wilson, 2010). Since then the use of qualitative to complement quantitative research approaches has grown, as has the scope of the research field more holistically to embrace not only the seeking of information but also its evaluation and use – as well as other kinds of information-related activity such as information avoidance.

    The contexts in which information behaviour occurs – and the types of information included in research studies – have also grown in scope to include information behaviour relating to social media, everyday and leisure information use to complement more traditional contexts such as academic, health and commerce and more formal types of recorded information. Parts 1 and 2 of this book attempt to map out major themes relating to what information behaviour is and what we know about it.

    However, despite the volume and range of research studies into this complex phenomenon, and the substantial progress made over the years in our understanding of it, much remains to be learned. In particular, we need to develop robust understanding based on a strong combination of quantitative and qualitative studies.

  • 21 - Faceted classification

  • Vanda Broughton
  • Book:
    Essential Classification
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 July 2015, pp 299-326

  • Summary

    Even in the 21st century you won't encounter many libraries organized by a faceted classification, yet faceted classification is probably the most important development in classification theory of the last hundred years.

    Facet analysis has influenced the structure and development of all the general classification schemes, and today there are few classifications that don't show some evidence of that influence. The identification of precise relationships between classes, the use of synthetic notations, and ideas such as facet indicators, the consistent application of citation order, and schedule inversion all come from faceted classifications, and all are to be found in the more recent revisions of (originally) nonfaceted classifications.

    Because the methodology of faceted classification (what we shall call facet analysis) provides very clear principles for the organization of concepts, first into categories and then into a linear sequence, it produces very predictable and robust structures. These structures are particularly good at accommodating compound subjects at any level of complexity, and their internal logic makes them very suitable for use in automated systems. The much better structure of a faceted scheme explains why the general systems of classification have been keen to import these methods into their own revision processes.

    The nature of faceted classification

    Before we go further with the discussion of faceted classification, let's deal with some common misapprehensions about it.

    Firstly, although there are classification schemes that are faceted, faceted classification itself is not a particular scheme or system, but rather a method for making a classification. You can see elements of faceted structure in schemes that are not themselves completely faceted. UDC in particular has some completely faceted main classes now, and some of the recent revisions of DDC have sections that are plainly based on facet analysis. As we look at the various aspects of facet analysis, we'll see illustrations from a range of schemes, not just the fully faceted ones.

    There is also quite a widespread belief that any scheme with analyticosynthetic features is a faceted scheme. This is particularly the case among computer scientists who've become interested in classification, and is also sometimes encountered in the US literature. Most schemes allow some measure of classmark building, but this doesn't make them faceted schemes.

  • 1 - What is copyright?

  • Tim Padfield
  • Book:
    Copyright for Archivists and Records Managers
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 July 2015, pp 1-16

  • Summary

    Introduction

    To quote theOxford English Dictionary, copyright is ‘the exclusive right given by law for a certain term of years to an author … to print, publish or sell copies of his work’. Clearly, it is not merely the right to copy. Rather, the word ‘copyright’ derives from another meaning of copy, as in an advertiser's ‘copy’, his or her material for the printer. In this context, a copy is, as Dr Johnson put it in his Dictionary(1810), ‘the autograph; the original; the archtype; that from which any thing is copied’. Copyright, then, is the right in the ‘copy’, the author's original work.

    The right to enjoy copyright protection is regarded internationally as arising from natural justice, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, which says that ‘everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author’. Copyright also exists in order to benefit society generally, by providing an incentive for creativity as an encouragement for learning and the arts. It originated, though, with the much more immediately practical purpose of giving printing monopolies as a form of government censorship. Then, in statutory form it replaced the individual monopolies with a regime designed to outlaw the piracy of publications. In the UK, therefore, it has always been regarded as primarily an economic property right: the right of the owner to benefit from the fruits of his or her skill, judgement and labour. This is the ‘common law’ approach exported from the UK to Ireland, the Commonwealth and the USA, as distinct from the ‘civil law’, ‘author's right’ approach of most other European countries, which emphasizes the protection of the author's personality as expressed in his or her work.

    In all jurisdictions, an attempt is made to limit the rights of copyright owners in the public interest. The countries that are parties to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) (see 1.2.6) Copyright Treaty recognize ‘the need to maintain a balance between the rights of the author and the larger public interest, particularly education, research and access to information’. Very little is entirely new so all authors use the works of their predecessors in one way or another: copyright must reward but it must not stifle creativity and innovation.

  • 22 - Managing classification

  • Vanda Broughton
  • Book:
    Essential Classification
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 July 2015, pp 327-338

  • Summary

    So far we have looked at a number of aspects of the theory of classification, at the central activity of applying particular schemes, and, of course, at how the two are related. Another important factor is the management of the scheme, both at the editorial level and in the local situation.

    The management and maintenance of schemes

    It's important for the institutional user to be aware of the arrangements in place for the upkeep of the classification system. The classification is a major tool in the organization of the library (more important than is generally acknowledged) and you need to be assured that it will be maintained and kept current, and that its editors will respond to the changing needs of collections and to developments in technology. We'll consider the different publication formats in some detail below, but the broader concerns of the currency and stability of the classification are independent of any particular version.

    The general management of classifications

    Most schemes are managed by an institution or organization that ensures its continued existence. The larger and more stable this organization, the more likely it is to support the classification well. The biggest classifications, such as DDC and LCC, have a considerable machine behind them that can accommodate the general running of the classification, its publication, the dissemination of information to users, the promotion of the scheme, the creation of training materials, the provision of bibliographic services, and research into the theory and applications of classification. The availability of all these secondary features can make the classification more attractive to the end-user and greatly enhance its usefulness. All of them additionally serve to create a sense of community among users and to promote loyalty to the system – they're all good public relations exercises.

    Revision and maintenance

    The most important of these operations, as far as the classification itself is concerned, is the ongoing upkeep of the scheme, particularly the revision of the scheme to accommodate new subjects. It's absolutely essential to have robust mechanisms for identifying and incorporating new topics in the literature, and for informing users about such additions and amendments. The reverse process, the pruning of obsolete terms, and, in some cases, removing biased or politically incorrect terminology and structures, needs also to be in place.

  • 10 - Controlled indexing languages

  • Vanda Broughton
  • Book:
    Essential Classification
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 July 2015, pp 89-96

  • Summary

    So far we've looked at why we need to organize documents, at some of the fundamental problems in the process of organization and at how to decide on the subjects of documents. In the next part of the book we shall look at the tools which we need to bring those two operations together in the formal processes of classification and subject cataloguing.

    Natural language indexing and searching

    Indexing, classifying and the subject description of documents are on the whole very labour-intensive (and intellectually arduous) processes. This is one of the reasons why abstracting and indexing services, and bibliographic databases, are so very expensive to subscribe to. An obvious question is whether we really need to use complicated artificial systems of classification and indexing to describe documents. Why not use the language of our everyday speech, since surely this would make the assignment of the keywords much quicker and easier? And the titles of documents or the text itself could provide us with the terms that are needed for indexing. In any event, whatever cataloguers do, the endusers will choose search terms out of their own heads, and not from a classification scheme which they have never seen or heard of.

    On the face of it, it would appear to be much easier to use this natural language approach to index documents, both for the initial indexing, and also for the retrieval process, particularly where machines can help with the process. When automation began to be used more widely in libraries in the 1970s it was generally thought that the immense power of the computer to scan the whole of a large store of information in a few seconds would obviate the need for all this expensive and exhausting brain work. Free-text searching and natural language indexing became the norm, classification and indexing were seen as moribund and pointless, and the study of classification disappeared from many library school curricula during the 1970s and 1980s.

    Initially, the advent of the world wide web reinforced this attitude, since even the information illiterate can search and retrieve masses of information using only natural language. On the other hand, any acquaintance with web searching will have shown you how inefficient natural language searching can be, because the web is an information store so large that the juggernaut techniques of the early automated systems cannot solve the problems that searchers encounter.

  • Key points

  • Tim Padfield
  • Book:
    Copyright for Archivists and Records Managers
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 July 2015, pp xv-xviii

  • Summary

    There are some points about copyright which it might be helpful to set out in advance, though they are also covered in detail later in this book. Some of these points answer common, elementary questions about copyright, so it is worth studying them carefully first:

  • • Copyright arises automatically: a work is in copyright as soon as it is created, and no registration or formality is required though an assertion of one of the moral rights is necessary (see 1.1.5, 8.1.5).

  • • Copyright protects original works (see 1.1.6) of the mind or ‘authorial works’ (original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, and films) and ‘entrepren - eurial works’ (sound recordings, broadcasts and typographical arrangements of published editions) (see 1.1.3–4). It does not protect ideas or facts (see 2.1.4–5). There are also separate but related rights, such as moral rights, database right and performers’ rights (see 1.1.3, 8.1, 8.2, 8.5).

  • • More than one copyright may subsist in a single work, and frequently do so in an archival file (see for instance 2.1.2, 7.9.1). A primary question is, what work or works am I dealing with? If there is written material, might there be more than one work (an introduction by another author, for instance)? Is there a copyright in the typographical arrangement (see 2.6.15)? Identify each artistic work (maps, photographs, drawings). A film is bound to consist of many different works (see 2.4.6).

  • • The first owner of copyright in an authorial work is usually the author, the creator (see 2.1.17–18, 3.2.1). The first owner of copyright in an entrepreneurial work is usually the person or body that financed it (see 1.1.6, 2.4.4, 2.5.4–5, 2.6.7–9, 2.6.12, 2.6.16, 8.2.8).

  • • If the author of an authorial work is an employee and creates the work in the course of employment, the first owner of the copyright is the employer, whether an individual, a company or some other organization (see 3.2.12–16).

  • • A volunteer worker is not an employee and so is the first owner of the copyright in his or her work (see 3.2.21). A record office would be well advised to obtain assignments of copyright (see 3.3.8) from all volunteers before they start work so that the copyright in the results of their efforts (for instance catalogues) belongs to the record office.

Page 152 of 302