General
A study reported in 1971 of 3,905 Indonesian authors listed in 5 different Indonesian bibliographies over varying time periods showed thatmost names were entered under the last element of the name, while only 648 (18%) were entered under the first element of the name. Of these 648 names, 90% are Indonesian names of Chinese origin, where the first element of the name is the surname. (Source)
A survey in 1974 of the 47 charter members of the OCLC network, including site visits and interviews (148) with all levels of library personnel in member libraries, showed that49% of surveyed libraries held books in the cataloging department until cards were received, while 51% sent books on for final processing and shelving directly after cataloging at the terminal. (Source)
Ibid…. showed that6 libraries continued to check the complete shipment of catalog cards to determine if every card for every title was received, although they reported finding very few errors. (Source)
Ibid…. showed thatreorganization did not necessarily follow from the implementation of online cataloging. After 3 years only 9 libraries (20%) had reorganized the departmental structure of technical services, although the tendency was strongest in the larger libraries. (Source)
A survey reported in 1981 of chief administrators of U.S. theater collections concerning methods of cataloging nonbook theatrical memorabilia (survey size: 40 libraries; responding: 26; usable: 25 or 62.5%) showed that:
22 (88%) libraries reported having no complete accessing tools to the nonbook items in the collection;
22 (88%) libraries reported that their cataloging system was designed by the library staff for their particular collection (however, 6 or 24% libraries reported that they had adopted a pre-established system for the collection). (Source)
Academic
A survey reported in 1966 of 68 libraries in colleges related to a church and having church historical materials in their collection (57 or 83.8% responding; usable replies: 48 or 70.6%) showed that22 libraries reported cataloging all church historical materials, 19 cataloged part of them, and 7 did not catalog any of them. (Source)
A 1970 study at the Washington University School of Medicine Library, investigating the correlation between National Library of Medicine classification numbers and medical subject headings based on cataloging records of 8,137 books cataloged at Washington University during the period 1965-70, showed thatannotating the subject list with classification numbers might be a helpful procedure. Specifically, out of 8,449 unique subject heading terms, 6,013 (71.2%) terms were associated with a classification number used more than once. (Source)
A 1975 survey of North American medical school libraries concerning subject cataloging practices (survey size: 134 libraries; responding: 114 or 85%) showed thatthe form of the local subject authority file was as follows:
separate card file 55 (48%) libraries
checking off terms used in the authority 26 (23%) libraries
public catalog 25 (22%) libraries
book catalog compiled by library 3 (3%) libraries
no response 5 (4%) libraries (Source)
Ibid…. showed that, of 78 respondents who used MeSH as the primary authority for subject headings and who also had divided catalogs, 69 (89%) reported using the National Library of Medicine authority for language and geographic subheadings, 5 (7%) reported using “other,” and 4 (5%) reported using no authority. (Source)
Ibid…. showed that, of 78 respondents who used MeSH as the primary authority for subject headings and who also had divided catalogs, the following practices were followed when National Library of Medicine subject cataloging copy was available:
follow NLM with minor variations 55 (70%) libraries
follow NLM without exception 14 (18%) libraries
follow NLM with many changes 3 (4%) libraries
other 4 (5%) libraries
no response 2 (3%) libraries (Source)
A 1977 survey of U.S. law libraries over 10,000 volumes taken from the 1976 Directory of Law Libraries (sample size: 1,080; responding: 373 or 35%) showed that, of 123 academic law libraries and 250 remaining law libraries, 98% of the academic law libraries and 66% of the remaining law libraries reported using the Anglo-American Cataloging rules, while 78% of the academic law libraries and 61% of the remaining law libraries reported using the ALA filing rules. (Source)
A survey reported in 1977 concerning university libraries’ handling of doctoral and master’s theses generated locally, based on a stratified sample of universities offering the doctoral degree (survey size: 100; responding: 90 or 90%), showed that, of 89 respondents, 67 (75.3%) reported receiving the theses in an unbound state, 19 (21.3%) received bound theses, 2 (2.2%) received master’s theses bound and the doctoral theses unbound, and 1 (1.1%) received microfilm copy only. (Source)
Ibid…. showed that, of the 88 respondents that reported formal thesis format regulations, the library alone was responsible for establishing the format standards in 1 (1.1%) case, while the library cooperated in establishing standards with other unviersity bodies in 13 (14.8%) cases. As far as checking the format was concerned, of the 90 respondents the library alone was responsible for such checking in 3 (3.3%) cases, while the library shared responsibility for format checking in 17 (18.9%) cases. (Source)
A 1977 survey of academic libraries with collections of 300,000 volumes or more that were also OCLC members concerning cataloging practices (survey size: 147 libraries; responding: 121 or 82.3%) showed thatthe following local authority files were used by libraries (large libraries = 900,000 volumes or more; small libraries = less than 900,000 volumes):
name authority file 78.1% large; 59% small libraries
subject authority file 64.9% large; 50% small libraries
series authority file 88.1% large; 97% small libraries
other (usually geographic names) 5.9% large; 2% small libraries (Source)
A 1978 survey of law school libraries listed in the 1977 AALS Directory of Law Teachers (population: 167; responding: 158 or 95%) showed that19 (12%) of the law school libraries had their materials cataloged in the university library. This compares to 15% reported in a 1973 survey and 24% reported in a 1937 survey. (Source)
A 1979 survey of U.S. community college libraries selected from the 1978 Community, Junior and Technical College Directory (sample size: 98; responding: 52; usable: 48 or 48.98%) showed that, of 46 respondents, 39 (84.8%) reported that they did not participate in computerized cataloging networks. Of the 39, 23 (59.0%) reported they did not plan to join such a network, while 7 (17.9%) said they did, 8 (20.5%) said they were undecided, and 3 (7.7%) did not respond. Of the 7 libraries that did participate in such networks, 6 (85.7%) used OCLC, while 1 (14.3%) used the Washington Library Network. (Source)
A 1979 study at Memphis State University concerning errors in the OCLC data base and based on all error reports generated at Memphis State over a 2-month period (175 error reports) showed thatthe cost (labor only) of reporting the 175 OCLC data base errors was $184.07 for 175 error reports. (Source)
A survey in 1979 of 119 major academic business libraries (responding: 89 or 75%; usable: 86) showed that, out of 85 responses, 45% of the libraries indicated that they catalog working papers. Of those that did catalog the papers, 17 cataloged them as monographs, 19 as serials, and 10 as either. (Source)
Ibid…. showed that, of the faculty responding, 38 of the Illinois faculty (48.7%) and 33 of the Purdue faculty (80.5%) felt that the library should catalog all working papers. (Source)
Ibid…. showed thatof 82 respondents the treatment of imperfect copies was as follows:
collate and correct 40 (48.8%) libraries
return to student, department, or school 15 (18.3%) libraries
not dealt with by catalogers 12 (14.6%) libraries
describe as received 9 (11.0%) libraries
do not collate but try to correct flaws 6 (7.3%) libraries (Source)
A study reported in 1981 at Washington State University comparing the costs of an automated network system (Washington Library Network) and a local manual system of cataloging and book processing showed thatthe automated system was “almost 20%” less expensive than the manual system based on derived monthly costs. The higher costs of the manual system were “essentially staff costs.” Even in the automated system the nonstaff costs of cataloging and book processing only accounted for 27% of the total. (Source)
Public
A 1969 survey of Canadian public libraries serving populations of more than 10,000 people as well as all county and regional libraries belonging to the Canadian Library Association concerning holdings and use of non-English collections (survey size: 203; responding: 83 or 41%) showed that, of 74 respondents, 56 (75.7%) libraries reported they fully cataloged books in non-English languages. In 52 (70.3%) libraries the cataloging was handled by library staff. (Source)
A 1981-82 study of media cataloging practices in 932 public libraries (responding: 466 or 50%; usable: 488 or 48%) across the U.S. serving communities of all sizes showed that83% catalog their nonprint holdings. A further 21 (4.7%) reported that they cataloged part of their nonprint holdings. (Source)
Ibid…. showed that46% of responding libraries were using AACR 2 for nonprint cataloging (compared to 57% using AACR 2 for print materials). Of those not using AACR 2 for cataloging, 54% reported no plans for adopting it for printed materials, and 71% reported no plans for adopting it for nonprint use. (Source)
Ibid…. showed that, although 96+% of respondents used Dewey classification for print materials, only about one-third used it for nonprint materials. (Source)
Special
A 1970 study at the Washington University School of Medicine Library, investigating the correlation between National Library of Medicine classification numbers and medical subject headings based on cataloging records of 8,137 books cataloged at Washington University during the period 1965-70, showed thatannotating the subject list with classification numbers might be a helpful procedure. Specifically, out of 8,449 unique subject heading terms, 6,013 (71.2%) terms were associated with a classification number used more than once. (Source)
A study reported in 1974 of U.S. libraries that had switched to the National Library of Medicine classification system between 1959 and 1973 (survey size: 25 libraries; responding: 25 or 100%) showed thatthe 3 main reasons given for switching were (multiple responses allowed): to take advantage of the NLM cataloging service (13 or 52%), to provide better shelf arrangement for the library’s books (11 or 44%), and found classification easier with the NLM system (10 or 40%). (Source)
Ibid…. showed that24 (96%) libraries used the Library of Congress classification system for subjects outside the scope of the NLM classification, while 1 (4%) did not. Of those 24, 9 reported use of selected broad LC class numbers, while 16 reported use of specific LC class numbers. (Source)
A 1975 survey of North American medical school libraries concerning subject cataloging practices (survey size: 134 libraries; responding: 114 or 85%) showed thatthe form of the local subject authority file was as follows:
separate card file 55 (48%) libraries
checking off terms used in the authority 26 (23%) libraries
public catalog 25 (22%) libraries
book catalog compiled by library 3 (3%) libraries
no response 5 (4%) libraries (Source)
Ibid…. showed that, of 78 respondents who used McSH as the primary authority for subject headings and who also had divided catalogs, 69 (89%) reported using the National Library of Medicine authority for language and geographic subheadings, 5 (7%) reported using “other,” and 4 (5%) reported using no authority. (Source)
Ibid…. showed that, of 78 respondents who used MeSH as the primary authority for subject headings and who also had divided catalogs, the following practices were followed when National Library of Medicine subject cataloging copy was available:
follow NLM with minor variations 55 (70%) libraries
follow NLM without exception 14 (18%) libraries
follow NLM with many changes 3 (4%) libraries
other 4 (5%) libraries
no response 2 (3%) libraries (Source)
A survey reported in 1975 of subject heading use in a wide range of law libraries selected from the 1972 edition of the American Association of Law Libraries Directory of Law Libraries (sample size: 256; responding: 204; usable: 200 or 78.1%) showed that respondents used the following subject heading lists:
Library of Congress list (with modification) 46 (23.0%) respondents
Library of Congress list (with no modification) 33 (16.5%) respondents
responding library’s own list 27 (13.5%) respondents
Ellinger list (with modification) 16 (8.0%) respondents
Ellinger list (with no modification) 5 (2.5%) respondents
Columbia list 5 (2.5%) respondents
some other published list 2 (1.0%) respondents
combination of above lists (including Northwestern list) 66 (33.0%) respondents (Source)
Ibid…. showed that, of 129 respondents using modified lists, the 2 main changes were: changes in the subject headings starting with the word “law” including subdivisions, such as “law and legislation” (87 or 67.4% respondents) and establishment of new subject headings at the responding library (e.g., when LC is slow in establishing them) (73 or 56.6% respondents). (Source)
Ibid…. showed that79 (39.5%) respondents kept their subject heading list as a “marked copy of a published list,” 50 (25%) kept their subject heading list as a card file, 30 (15%) used more than 1 way of keeping their subject heading list, 28 (14%) used looseleaf format, and 2 (1%) used miscellaneous other formats. 8 (4%) respondents reported they had no subject authority file, and 3 (1.5%) did not respond. (Source)
Ibid…. showed that148 (74%) respondents reported they did not keep auxiliary subject heading records, while (multiple responses allowed) 25 (12.5%) reported keeping subject subdivision files, and 17 (8.5%) kept geographic name files. 15 (7.5%) other responses were not considered appropriate for the purposes of this question. (Source)
Ibid…. showed thatthe following cross-reference structure was kept in the public card catalog:
full structure (see and see also references) 97 (48.5%) respondents
see references and selected see also references 71 (35.5%) respondents
see references only 20 (10.0%) respondents
none 12 (6.0%) respondents (Source)
Ibid…. showed that50 (25%) respondents were satisfied with the subject heading list they were using, 80 (40%) were somewhat satisfied, 7 (3.5%) were dissatisfied, and 63 (31.5%) had no opinion. (Source)
A 1977 survey of U.S. law libraries over 10,000 volumes taken from the 1976 Directory of Law Libraries (sample size: 1,080; responding: 373 or 35%) showed that, of 123 academic law libraries and 250 remaining law libraries, 65% of the academic law libraries and 57% of the remaining law libraries reported using authority files for subject headings, 39% of the academic law libraries and 20% of the remaining law libraries reported using authority files for personal and corporate names, and 63% of the academic law libraries and 23% of the remaining law libraries reported using authority files for series. (Source)
Ibid…. showed that, of 123 academic law libraries and 250 remaining law libraries, 94% of the academic law libraries and 84% of the remaining law libraries reported using “see references,” while 76% of the academic law libraries and 67% of the remaining law libraries reported using “see also references.” (Source)
Ibid…. showed that, of 123 academic law libraries and 250 remaining law libraries, 98% of the academic law libraries and 66% of the remaining law libraries reported using the Anglo-American Cataloging rules, while 78% of the academic law libraries and 61% of the remaining law libraries reported using the ALA filing rules. (Source)
A 1978 survey of law school libraries listed in the 1977 AALS Directory of Law Teachers (population: 167; responding: 158 or 95%) showed that19 (12%) of the law school libraries had their materials cataloged in the university library. This compares to 15% reported in a 1973 survey and 24% reported in a 1937 survey. (Source)
A study reported in 1983 investigating consistency of indexing in MEDLINE, based on 760 articles published between 1974 and 1980 that were indexed twice in INDEX MEDICUS, showed that MeSH headings and subheadings were applied with more consistency to central concepts than to peripheral points, that the addition of subheadings to main headings lowered consistency, and that “floating” subheadings were more consistent than attached subheadings. The degree of consistency for different types of headings and subheadings was as follows:
checktags 74.7% consistency
central concept main headings 61.1% consistency
geographies 56.6% consistency
descriptors 55.4% consistency
central concept subheadings 54.9% consistency
subheadings 48.7% consistency
main headings 48.2% consistency
central concept main headings/subheadings combinations 43.1% consistency
main heading/subheading combinations 33.8% consistency (Source)
Ibid…. showed that inconsistency in the use of geographic terms was not caused by different geographic terms applied to the same item but whether a geographic term was used at all. In other words, some indexers would use a geographic heading for an article and some would not. In order to retrive all relevant articles, therefore, care should be taken when using a geographic heading. (Source)
Ibid…. showed thatlength of article, language of article, and journal indexing priority had no statistically significant effect on consistency. Further, in all 9 categories of index terms the average number of terms used (depth of indexing) showed no statistically significant differences. (Source)
