190 likes | 217 Views
Mental models and the bibliographic universe. Jan Pisanski Maja Žumer LIDA 2007. Overview. FRBR – conceptual model of bibliographic universe (What?, Why?, Why not?) Comparing mental models and conceptual model of bibliographic universe (What? Why? How?) Proposed research.
E N D
Mental models and the bibliographic universe Jan Pisanski Maja Žumer LIDA 2007
Overview • FRBR – conceptual model of bibliographic universe (What?, Why?, Why not?) • Comparing mental models and conceptual model of bibliographic universe (What? Why? How?) • Proposed research
Bibliographic universe • “totality of bibliographic entities and their relationships” (Fattahi, 1997) • Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) • study (IFLA’s Study Group), final report (1998), conceptual(E-R)model • NOT a data model, NOT a standard
FRBR Entities • Entities (3 groups), relationships between these entities and their attributes • Group 1 entities • Work (a distinct intellectual or artistic creation) • Expression (an intellectual or artistic realization of a work) • Manifestation (a physical embodiment of an expression) • Item (a single exemplar of a manifestation)
FRBR (Item and Manifestation) • Item (a single exemplar of a manifestation) My copy, my library’s copy… • Manifestation (a physical embodiment of an expression) Doubleday, 2003
FRBR (Expression and Work ) • Expression (an intellectual or artistic realization of a work) Brown’s original English text • Work (a distinct intellectual or artistic creation) The Da Vinci code by Dan Brown
Importance of a conceptual model of bibliographic universe • Improves cataloguing and catalogs (it was done in order to cut the costs, to better satisfy user needs…) • An example of end-user benefit • Present displays too chaotic, relationships not explicit • For works with numerous editions • In union catalogues, national bibliographies, portals (aggregation)
Benefits of FRBR (example) • The European Library (TEL) portal • EDLproject (a Targeted Project funded by the European Commision under the eContentplus programme) (WP2, Task 6) • Explore options of interoperability with other cultural heritage communities • Test the use of FRBR – a small exploratory study of “frbrization” (extracting FRBR structure from existing bibliographic records)
But…potential problem of FRBR (+) User-focused but… (-) NO user studies (to save time and money) (-) “FRBR models what we do, not what we should do” (P.LeBoeuf) - current cataloguing practice (+) Based on experience (incl. previous user studies) / world-class experts / long revision process No formal confirmation of validity of FRBR
What can be looked at? “Frbrized” OPACs In practice: not using full FRBR structure (result of cataloguing practice -> FRBR does not model what we should do nor what we do?) Our answer: MENTAL MODELS of BIBLIOGRAPHIC UNIVERSE
Mental models • Various definitions (sometimes mutually exclusive, e.g. static : change over time), various concepts • Norman : “the models people have of themselves, others, the environment, and the things they interact with”
Mental models vs. conceptual models • Usually how mental models match conceptual model, but… • Should conceptual models be questioned? • Carlyle: FRBR not true or false – does it serve its purpose? • But can it be improved?
Possible traps • Mental models of bibliographic universe: very abstract • Mental models may be influenced by present catalogue design and cataloguing practice
Mental model elicitation • Various methods (observations, interviews, verbal protocols, repertory grid technique,…) • Card sorting
Card sorting • Non-verbal • 15-30 participants • Generative (good for domain modeling)
Card sorting • Set of cards with descriptions (of instances of Group 1 entities), • Non-library terminology, e.g. “Dan Brown’s novel the Da Vinci Code” or “The Da Vinci Code, published by Doubleday in 2003” – limit the effect of current cataloguing practice
Card sorting • At least 3 groups • Criterion: concrete/abstract nature of the instance of the example on the card (too complicated?) • Asked to name the groups • Subsequent informal semi-structured interviews • Concept mapping (What-comes-out-of-what?) – Do mental models change?
P1 P3 P2 FRBR What comes out of what?
Very abstract concepts Results - valid only for small population: More FRBR user studies are needed (including studies of prototypes)!!!! THANK YOU! ANY QUESTIONS? E-mail: jan.pisanski@nuk.uni-lj.si The parting shot