"Garbage" in, "refuse and refuse disposal" out: Making the most of the subject authority file in the OPAC

Library Resources and Technical Services

Volumn 46, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 92-102

  Horn, Marguerite E ^a  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036657559     PISSN: 00242527     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5860/lrts.46n3.92     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Aanonson, John. 1987. A comparison of keyword subject searching on six British university OPACs. Online Review 11, no. 5: 303-13.
2. Basista, Thomas, H. Mary Micco, and Linda Rambler. 1991. Designing the OPAC user interface to improve access and retrieval. Microcomputers for Information Management 8, no. 2: 87-103.
3. Bodoff, David, and Ajit Kambil. 1998. Partial coordination I: The best of pre-coordination and post-coordination. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 49, no. 14: 1,254-69.
4. Borgman, Christine L. 1996. Why are online catalogs still hard to use? Journal of the American Society for Information Science 47, no. 7: 493-503.
5. Cherry, Joan M. 1992. Improving subject access in OPACs: An exploratory study of conversion of users' queries. Journal of Academic Librarianship 18, no. 2: 95-99.
6. Cochrane, Pauline A. 1985. Redesign of catalogs and indexes for improved online subject access: Selected papers of PaulineA. Cochrane. Phoenix, Adz.: Oryx.
7. Drabenstott, Karen M. 1998. Understanding subject headings in library catalogs. Ann Arbor: School of Information, University of Michigan.
8. Drabenstott, Karen M., and Diane Vizine-Goetz. 1994. Using subject headings for online retrieval: Theory, practice, and potential. San Diego: Academic.
9. Drabenstott, Karen M., and Marjorie S. Weller. 1996. Failure analysis of subject searches in a test of a new design for subject access to online catalogs. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 47, no. 7: 519-37.
10. _. 1995. Testing a new design for subject access to online catalogs. Ann Arbor: School of Information and Library Studies, University of Michigan.
11. Frost, Carolyn O. 1989. Title words as entry vocabulary to LCSH: Correlation between assigned LCSH terms and derived terms from tides in bibliographic records with implications for subject access in online catalogs. Cataloging and Classification Quarterly 10, no. 1/2: 165-79.
12. Greenberg, Jane. 1997. Reference structures: Stagnation, progress, and future challenges. Information Technology and Libraries 16, no. 3: 108-19.
13. Hildreth, Charles R. 1997. The use and understanding of keyword searching in a university online catalog. Information Technology and Libraries 16, no. 2: 52-62.
14. Jamieson, Alexis J., Elizabeth Dolan, and Luc Declerck. 1986. Keyword searching vs. authority control in an online catalog. Journal of Academic Librarianship 12, no. 5: 277-83.
15. Markey, Karen. 1988. Integrating the machine-readable Lcsh into online catalogs. Information Technology and Libraries 7, no. 3: 299-312.
16. Maner, Jonathan C. 1993. Measuring the success of keyword search strategy in an online catalog. Technical Services Quarterly 11, no. 2: 1-11.
17. Matthews, Joseph R. 1997. Time for new OPAC initiatives: An overview of landmarks in the literature and introduction to Wordfocus. Library Hi Tech 15, no. 1/2: 111-22.
18. Micco, Mary. 1991. The next generation of online public access catalogs: A new look at subject access using hypermedia. Cataloging and Classification Quarterly 13, no. 3/4: 103-32.
19. Rada, Roy, et al. 1988. Creating and evaluating entry terms. Journal of Documentation 44, no. 1: 19-41.
20. Smith, Elizabeth H. 1991. Enhancing subject accessibility to the online catalog. Library Resources and Technical Services 35, no. 1: 109-13.
21. Tillotson, Joy. 1995. Is keyword searching the answer? College and Research Libraries 56, no. 3: 199-206.
22. Yee, Martha M., and Sara Shatford Layne. 1998. Improving online public access catalogs. Chicago: ALA.