Making the connection between processing and access: Do cataloging decisions affect user access?

Library Collections, Acquisition and Technical Services

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 443-458

  Rodman, Ruey L ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Access; Cataloging; Collections; Searching; Shelf position

Indexed keywords

EID: 0042230876     PISSN: 14649055     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1464-9055(00)00171-8     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. El-Sherbini M, Stalker JC. A study of cutter number adjustments at the Ohio State University Libraries. Library Resources & Technical Services, 40 (October 1996):320.
2. Osborn AD. From Cutter and Dewey to Mortimer Taube and beyond: a complete century of change in cataloguing and classification. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 12 (1991):36.
3. Massey SA, Malinconico SM. Cutting cataloging costs: accepting LC classification call numbers from OCLC cataloging copy, Library Resources & Technical Services, 41 (January 1997):38.
4. Broadbent E. The Online Catalog: Dictionary, Classified, or Both? Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 12 (1991):108.
5. Drabenstott KM , et al. Analysis of a bibliographic database enhanced with a library classification, Library Resources & Technical Services, 34 (April 1990):179.
6. Hill JS. Online classification number access: some practical considerations, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 10 (March 1984):21.
7. Huestis JC. Clustering LC classification numbers in an online catalog for improved browsability, Information Technology and Libraries, 7 (December 1988):383.
8. Losee RM. The relative shelf location of circulated books: a study of classification, users, and browsing, Library Resources & Technical Services, 37 (April 1993):197-8.
9. Cochrane PA, Markey K. Preparing for the use of classification in online cataloging systems and in online catalogs, Information Technology and Libraries, 4 (June 1985):108-9.
10. Williamson NJ. The role of classification in online systems. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 10 (1989):99.
11. Epple M, Ginder B. Online catalogs and shelflist files: a survey of ARL Libraries, Information Technology and Libraries, 6 (December 1987):294.
12. Chan LM. Library of Congress class numbers in online catalog searching, RQ 28 (Summer 1989):536.
13. Koh GS. Options in classification available through modern technology. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 19 (1995):196.
14. McCue J, Weiss PJ, Wilson M. An analysis of cataloging copy: Library of Congress vs. selected RLIN Members. Library Resources & Technical Services, 35 (1991):73.
15. Taylor AG, Simpson CW. Accuracy of LC copy: a comparison between copy that began as CIP and other LC cataloging, Library Resources & Technical Services, 30 (October/December 1986):377.
16. Jones KS. Some thoughts on classification for retrieval, Journal of Documentation, 26 (June 1970):91.
17. Davis CC. Results of a survey on record quality in the OCLC database. Technical Services Quarterly, 7 (1989):44.
18. Hyman R.J. Access to library collections an inquiry into the validity of the direct shelf approach, with special reference to browsing . 1972;2 Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, NJ.
19. Wallace PM. How do patrons search the online catalog when no one's looking? Transaction log analysis and implications for bibliographic instruction and system design, RQ, 33 (1993):239.
20. Tagliacozzo R, Rosenberg L, Kochen M. Access and recognition: from user's data to catalog entries, Journal of Documentation, 26 (September 1970):248.
21. Hancock M. Subject searching behavior at the library catalog and at the shelves: implications for online interactive catalogues, Journal of Documentation, 43 (December 1987):306.
22. Mann T. Library Research Models a Guide to Classification, Cataloging, and Computers . 1993;91 Oxford, New York.
23. Langridge DW. Classification: Its Kinds, Elements, Systems, and Applications. London: Bowker-Sauer. 1992.
24. LeBlanc J. Classification and shelflisting as value added: some remarks on the relative worth and price of predictability, serendipity, and depth of access, Library Resources & Technical Services, 39 (July 1995):302.