Advertisement

The Errors of Our Ways: Using Metadata Quality Research to Understand Common Error Patterns in the Application of Name Headings

  • Katherine M. Wisser
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 478)

Abstract

Using data culled during a metadata quality research project for the Social Network and Archival Context (SNAC) project, this article discusses common errors and problems in the use of standardized languages, specifically unambiguous names for persons and corporate bodies. Errors such as misspelling, qualifiers, format, and miss-encoding point to several areas where quality control measures can improve aggregation of data. Results from a large data set indicate that there are predictable problems that can be retrospectively corrected before aggregation. This research looked specifically at name formation and expression in metadata records, but the errors detected could be extended to other controlled vocabularies as well.

Keywords

Metadata Quality assessment Authority control Data utilization MARC Encoded Archival Description Encoded Archival Context-Corporate Bodies Persons and Families 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cole, T.W., Shreeves, S.L.: Search and Discovery Across Collections: the IMLS Digital Collections and Content Project. Library Hi Tech 22(3), 307–322 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hearn, S.: Comparing Catalogs: Currency and Consistency of Controlled Headings. LRTS 53(1), 25–40 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Intner, S.S.: Much ado about nothing: OCLC and RLIN cataloging quality. Library Journal 114(2), 38–40 (1989)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jeng, L.H.: Why authority? Why control? Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 34(4), 91–97 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moen, W.E., Benardino, P.: Assessing Metadata Utilization: An Analysis of MARC Content Designation Use. In: 2003 Dublin Core Conference: Supporting Communities of Discourse and Practice – Metadata Research and Application, Seattle, Wash. (2003), http://www.unt.edu/wmoen/publications/MARCPaper_Final2003.pdf
  6. 6.
    Moen, W.E.: Examining MARC records as Artifacts that Reflect Metadata Utilization Decisions. First Monday 11(8) (2006), http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_8/moen/index.html
  7. 7.
    Shreeves, S.L., Riley, J., Milewicz, L.: Moving towards Shareable Metadata. First Monday 11(8) (2006), http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_8/shreeves/index.html
  8. 8.
    Social Network and Archival Context, http://socialarchive.iath.virginia.edu/index.html
  9. 9.
    Yasser, C.M.: An Analysis of Problems in Metadata Records. Journal of Library Metadata 11, 51–62 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katherine M. Wisser
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Library and Information ScienceSimmons CollegeBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations