One of the underlying (and false) presumptions of the Semantic Web is that users have a uniform understanding of the world. One that matches the understanding of ontology authors.
The failure of that presumption was demonstrated over a decade ago in rather remarkable research conducted by Karen Drabenstott (now Marley) on user understanding of Library of Congress subject headings.
Despite the use of Library of Congress subject headings for almost a century, no one before Drabenstott had asked the fundamental question: Does anyone understand Library of Congress subject headings? The study, Understanding Subject Headings in Library Catalogs found that:
Overall percentages of correct meanings for subject headings in the original order of subdivisions were as follows: children, 32%, adults, 40%, reference 53%, and technical services librarians, 56%.
The conclusions one would draw from such a result are easy to anticipate but I will quote from the report:
The developers of new indexing systems especially systems aimed at organizing the World-Wide Web should include children, adults, librarians, and even subject-matter experts in the establishment of new terms and changes to existing ones. Perhaps there should be separate indexing systems for children, adults, librarians, and subject-matter experts. With a click of a button, users could choose the indexing system that works for them in terms of their understanding of the subject matter and the indexing system’s terminology.
Hmmm, users “…choose the indexing system that works for them…,” what a remarkable concept. Topic maps anyone?
[…] the stats on using Library of Congress subject headings I posted under Subject Headings and the Semantic Web: Overall percentages of correct meanings for subject headings in the original order of subdivisions […]
Pingback by Blame Google? Different Strategy: Let’s Blame Users! (Not!) « Another Word For It — September 15, 2012 @ 3:32 pm
[…] Most users can’t use LCSH so perhaps the lack of utility will go unnoticed. (Subject Headings and the Semantic Web) […]
Pingback by Linked Data for Holdings and Cataloging « Another Word For It — February 25, 2013 @ 5:45 am
[…] already know from Karen Drabenstott’s work (Subject Headings and the Semantic Web) that library classification systems are too complex for the average user and even most […]
Pingback by Semantic Computing of Moods… « Another Word For It — August 16, 2013 @ 4:46 pm