ALAO 2008 Conference1 Uncorking the Varietals: Social Tagging, Folksonomies & Controlled Vocabularies Margaret Maurer, Associate Professor Head, Catalog

ALAO 2008 Conference 1

Uncorking the Varietals: Social Tagging, Folksonomies & Controlled Vocabularies

Margaret Maurer, Associate Professor

Head, Catalog and Metadata

Kent State University Libraries and Media Services


In wine making - What is a varietal?

A wine made from a single, named grape variety.

Cabernet Sauvignon wines are made from cabernet sauvignon grapes

Chardonnay wines are made from chardonnay grapes


In information seeking …

On the Web or in the catalog

Access systems may be controlled by librarians–controlled vocabularies

Access systems may be dynamically generated by users–social tagging, folksonomies

These are different varieties of access systems


Table of contents Controlled vocabularies Social Tagging Folksonomies My recommendations

First we’ll talk about the cabernet sauvignons – the controlled vocabs


Purpose of a controlled vocabulary

To create sets of objects To serve as a bridge between the searcher’s

language and the author’s language To provide consistency To improve precision and recall


Controlled vocabularies

Features a single, authorized form of heading

Often features a syndetic structure of cross-references

Based on belief that the successful use of the catalog is based on the quality of the individual records


The authority record structure

Records the standardized form Ensures the gathering together of records via

that access point Enables standardized catalog records Documents decisions taken Records all other heading forms

and provides links from them to

the standardized form


Benefits of controlled vocabularies

Promote discovery generally Promote discovery when the aboutness of

something has nothing to do with words in the resource or its representation Imaginative literature (Genre headings) Humanities

Promote pre-coordinated displays expand access–http://cinema.library.ucla.edu


Benefits of Controlled Vocabularies

Keywords hook into strings of terms Users can be routed by pre-

coordinated strings Support for faceted catalogs


Authority control outside the catalog

Data critical mass tipping point? Homogeneity of data in terms of subject

matter Requirements within data community’s

users for specificity Size Computing power

Wikipedia’s “disambiguation”


Repurposing our authority files

National Library of Australia’s People Australia Projecthttp://www.nla.gov.au/initiatives/peopleaustralia/

Wikipedia Persondata-Tool

http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla73/papers/113-Danowski-en.pdf

OCLC’s Terminology Services http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/termservices/


Weaknesses of controlled vocabs

Artificially controlled language is not necessarily natural language—Cookery anyone?

Subject searches are the most problematic for users

It may work better in theory than in practice It is costly to perform necessary maintenance Cost is seen to outweigh the benefits by many

administrators


Is ontology overrated?

Physicality requires ontologies for searching, but systems with hyperlinks do not

Browse versus search may eliminate the need for creating lists of authorized headings


Ontologies versus links

Works well when the domain to be organized is small, has formal categories, has stable entities, is restricted and has clear edges

Does not work well when the domain to be organized is large, has no formal categories, is unstable, is unrestricted and has no clear edges


Ontologies and users

Works well when the participants are expert catalogers, authoritative sources of judgement, coordinated users or expert users

Does not work well when the participants are uncoordinated, armature, naïve or non-authoritative


A different varietal

The Chardonnays – Social tagging and folksonomies


What are tags?

Keywords or terms associated with or assigned to a piece of information

They enable keyword-based classification and search of information


Basic model for tagging

USER

TAGS

RESOURCES




Tags versus keywords

Keywords are behind the scenes, tags are often visibly aggregated for use and browsing

Keywords can not be hyper-linked Keywords imply searching, tags imply linking Full-text searching is passive, tagging is

active It’s more about connecting items rather than

categorizing them.


Tags can be…

Descriptions of the subject matter Where the item is located The intended use of the item Individual (gift from mom)

Different people have different tagging patterns

Tagging systems encourage differences


Tags are

Non-hierarchical A way to create links between items by

the creation of sets of objects A means of connecting with others

interested in the same things


Tagging Systems Define

Who can tag What can be tagged What kinds of tags can be used

Tagging systems may result in the creation of a “folksonomy”


Types of Tagging Systems

Tagging systems are used to: Manage personal information For social bookmarking Collect and share digital objects Improve the e-commerce experience


Why is tagging so popular?

It is easy and enjoyable It has a low cognitive cost It is quick to do It provides self and social feedback

immediately


Putting the social in tagging

Tags allow for social interaction because when we navigate by tags we are directly connecting with others

People tag for their own benefit


Tags (and therefore social tags) are

Dynamic categorization systems Often created on-the-fly Chosen as relevant to the user – not to

the creator, cataloger or researcher A social activity (more on this later) Hopefully one small step toward a more

interactive and responsive library system


What is a folksonomy?

Folksonomy refers to an “emergent, grassroots taxonomy” An aggregate collections of tags A bottom-up categorical structure

development An emergent thesaurus

A term coined by Thomas Vander Wal


Why do folksonomies work?

The searcher defines the access, but The aggregation of the terms has

public value It’s a typically messy democratic

approach


What makes them popular?

Their dynamic nature works well with dynamic resources

They’re personal They lower barriers to cooperation


They work best when

It’s easy to do It’s not commercial in nature Taggers have ownership Taggers are more likely to tag their

own stuff than they are your stuff It has been shown to work

well on the Web


Terminological consensus

The unexpected development: Collective action yields common terms Stabilization may be caused by

imitation and shared knowledge The wisdom of the crowd


Your tagging / my tagging

Is your tagging influenced by my tagging? Of course it is! People are beginning tag in ways that

make it easier for others to find like stuff Shared meaning consequently evolves

for tags Most used tags become most visible


Strengths of folksonomies

Cost-effective way to organize Internet Social benefits It’s inclusive For many environments, they work

well


Collocation issues

They do not yield the level of clarity that controlled vocabularies do

Term ambiguity – words with multiple meanings

No synonym control


Issues with specificity

Variable specificity for related terms Broadness of terms impacts precision

– terms are often imprecise Mixed perspectives


Issues with structure

Singular and plural forms create redundant headings

No guidelines for the use of compound headings, punctuation, word order

No scope notes No cross references


Issues with accuracy

Collective ‘wisdom’ of the tagging community

How does wrong information impact retrieval

Conflicting cultural norms Sometimes authority counts


“Spagging” and other problems

Opening doors to opinion tags Tagging wars “Spagging” Spam tagging


Tidying up the tags…?

Lists of tagging norms have been developed

Are there programmatic solutions? Users know they are looking at tags By tidying, do we destroy the essence of

why this works? Do we realistically have the resources?


Recommendations

Don’t assume that one size fits all Retain controlled vocabularies in the catalog Invite controlled vocabularies to the party on

the internet Invite folksonomies to the party in the

catalog Explore ways to combine the two systems


Recommendations

Invite folksonomies into the catalog strategically, and carefully

Don’t put the terms in a controlled vocabulary’s index

Find ways to associate terms applied across editions of works

Need for mediation, or at least observation The crowd is not necessarily the best arbiter

of specific terminology


Recommendations

Always remember why people tag

People tag things because they want to find them, not because they want others to find them

This will impact the quality of the terms, and their frequency


Recommendations

Improving the use of controlled vocabularies Subject structures are underutilized in the

ILS Controlled vocabularies that exist are not

being exported to the Web Well-connected terms foster discovery -

Index those cross references where available

OPAL Conference, August 2008

46

Questions?

Margaret Maurer

[email protected]