Perceived Helpfulness of Dublin Core Semantics: An Empirical Study

  • Mohammad Yasser Chuttur
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 390)


In an experimental study, 120 participants randomly assigned to two groups were asked to rate the helpfulness of the Dublin Core elements definitions and guidelines while creating metadata records. In contrast to previous studies, findings reveal that participants had problems understanding definitions for the whole element set specified by Dublin Core. This study also reveals that careful attention should be given to the clarity of guidelines as well to ensure correct application of Dublin Core elements.


Dublin Core creating metadata record best practice guideline dc element definition 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Crystal, A., Greenberg, J.: Usability of metadata creation application for resource authors. Library & Information Science Research 27(2), 177–189 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dalton, J.: Scholarly articles featuring projects using Dublin Core. Journal of Internet Cataloging 7(3), 59–84 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. Godby, C.J., Smith, D., Childress, E.: Two paths to interoperable metadata. Paper Presented at the DC-2003 Supporting Communities of Discourse and Practice-Metadata Research and Applications, Seattle, Washington, September 28-October 2 (2003), (retrieved April 10, 2010)
  4. Greenberg, J., Pattueli, M., Parsia, B., Robertson, W.: Author-generated Dublin Core metadata for web resources: A baseline study in an organiza-tion. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Application, Tokyo, Japan, October 24-26, pp. 38–45 (2001)Google Scholar
  5. Hillmann, D.: Using Dublin Core (2005), (retrieved April 12, 2010)
  6. Jackson, A.S., Han, M., Groetsch, K., Mustafoff, M., Cole, T.W.: Dublin Core metadata harvested through OAI-PMH. Journal of Library Metadata 8(1), 5–21 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ma, J.: Metadata, Spec kit 298. Association of Research Libraries, Washington, DC (2007)Google Scholar
  8. Palmer, C.L., Zavalina, O.L., Mustafoff, M.: Trends in metadata practices: A longitudinal study of collection federation metadata. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 386–395 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. Park, J.: Semantic Interoperability and Metadata Quality: An analysis of metadata item records of digital image collection. Knowledge Organization 33(1), 20–34 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. Park, J., Childress, E.: Dublin Core metadata semantics: an analysis of the perspectives of information professionals. Journal of Information Science 35(6), 727–739 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Shreeves, S., Knutson, E., Stvilia, B., Palmer, C., Twidale, M., Cole, T.: Is ‘quality’ metadata ‘shareable’ metadata? The implications of local metadata practices for federated collections. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference of the Association of College and Research Libraries, pp. 223–237. Association of College and Research Libraries, Chicago (2005)Google Scholar
  12. Shreeves, S.L., Riley, J., Hagedorn, K.: DLF/NSDL Working Group on OAI PMH Best Practices. Best practices for OAI PMH data provider implementations and shareable metadata. Digital Library Federation, Washington, DC (2007)Google Scholar
  13. Smith-Yoshimura, K.: RLG programs descriptive metadata practices survey results. OCLC Programs and Research, Dublin (2007)Google Scholar
  14. Taylor, A.: The organization of information, 2nd edn. Libraries Unlimited, Westport (2004)Google Scholar
  15. Weibel, S., Koch, T.: The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative: mission, current activities, and future directions. D-Lib Magazine 6(12) (2000), (retrieved May 27, 2010)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Yasser Chuttur
    • 1
  1. 1.University of MauritiusReduitMauritius

Personalised recommendations