Dissertation Information for Arlene G. Taylor
- Arlene G. Taylor
- (Alias) Arlene Taylor
- (Alias) Arlene Taylor Dowell
- Library and Information Science
- University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (USA) (1981)
- Lester E. Asheim
- Ray Warren Carpenter
- Lawrence Oliver Kline
- Robert N. Broadus
- Joe A. Hewitt
MPACT Status: Fully Complete
Title: A FIVE-YEAR PROJECTION OF THE IMPACT OF THE RULES FOR FORM OF HEADING IN THE ANGLO-AMERICAN CATALOGUING RULES, SECOND EDITION, UPON SELECTED ACADEMIC LIBRARY CATALOGS
Abstract: This study explored differences between the name, uniform title, and series headings constructed according to AACR 2 and those constructed according to earlier codes. This comparison was undertaken to determine the conflicts that would be caused over a five-year period in the catalogs of three academic libraries of widely varying sizes, thus giving library administrators a more precise basis for estimating costs of implementing AACR 2.
Major findings included: In the small, medium-sized, and large libraries, respectively, only 9.0%, 20.6%, and 12.5% of the sample cataloging records had imprint dates for the year from which the samples were taken, and at least 25% of the sample records in each library was over five years old. According to the Library of Congress' implementation of AACR 2, 15.3%, 17.4%, and 18.2% of the sample headings would be different. However, some of these different headings would be going into the catalogs for the first time; thus the rates at which the headings would conflict with entries already in the catalog were lower: 7.4%, 8.7%, and 12.8%. The type of heading with the highest rate of conflict within its subgroup was the subgroup of corporate names; but because there were so many more personal names than any other type in the samples, personal names accounted for the greatest number of all conflicts. The conflict rate for serials was twice as great as that for monographs. Headings on foreign imprints had conflict rates somewhat higher than those for headings on United States imprints. Headings for materials published before the advent of AACR 1 had higher conflict rates than headings assigned to more current imprints.
Five-year projections indicated that in the second year the conflict rate would drop by one-fourth in the small library and by just over half in the other two, if every heading used after January 1, 1981, were made to conform to AACR 2. The rates would drop steadily, though less dramatically, thereafter. If LC copy were accepted without change, the conflict rates the first year would be 0.5%, 2.9%, and 3.6% and would drop steadily thereafter except in the small library where the rate would rise through Year 3 and then drop.
Categorizing the headings by type of difference, such as "punctuation difference only," demonstrated that between 47.2% and 68.9% of the differences reasonably could be interfiled in a manual catalog. Use of this method combined with changing some entries and creating split files for others would mean that the number of split files created by the end of five years would represent less than one percent of a catalog's unique headings.
Major conclusions included the following: Difference rates for headings in academic libraries will likely be between 14% and 20%. The conflict rate will be between half and two-thirds the difference rate. The large library in the study will have a higher conflict rate than will the small or medium-sized libraries. A majority of headings changed under AACR 2 repeat themselves in a catalog quickly, thus bringing a drop in conflict rate after the first year. Because many conflicts can be resolved by interfiling, the implementation of AACR 2 does not require the closing of catalogs. Finally, it was concluded tht because libraries use LC copy to such a great extent and because such a small proportion of a year's cataloging bears imprint dates for that year, whenever a new code is adopted, much of the copy used for several years afterward will have been created according to a previous code, and planning must take this into account.
MPACT Scores for Arlene G. Taylor
A = 12
C = 3
A+C = 15
T = 15
G = 2
W = 12
TD = 13.5
TA = 1
calculated 2008-01-31 06:19:46
Advisors and Advisees Graph