Art and Architecture terms in the retrieval of archival records
Abstract
The purpose is to determine if the Art and Architecture Thesaurus terms aid in the retrieval of archival catalog records. Research conducted on AAT include training and best practices, not not on the actual usefulness of these terms in bibliographic records.
A dependent group will conduct a pre-search in the library catalog for archival material records without AAT terms, and a post test with these terms added. An independent group will also conduct a a pre and post search, both without AAT terms, qualifying the effect of the inclusion of AAT terms in the dependent group.
Introduction
While cataloging is the foundation of library services, it is often criticized for being inefficient and archaic. This is particularly true for archival cataloging. Using Describing Archives, instead of AACR2 as a cataloging standing, many libraries will create far more detailed metadata than other types of material; and hense, will spend more time creating that metadata.
This paper will look specifically at one type of additional metadata added to archival records: controled thesauri. Many catalogers will add Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT) terms to these records. This research will explore if adding AAT terms is seen as as useful to archival researchers. The purpose is to determine if the AAT terms aid in the retrieval of archival catalog records.
Literature Review
In general, previous research on the AAT concern it's application to specific media types, it's integration with integrated library systems and transmission standards such as MARC, and the teaching/introduction of AAT in practice.
When AAT was first published in 1990, many introductory articles and textbooks were written on AAT to train catalogers and archivists in the philosophy behind AAT, and it's introduction of MARC records. They may include popular terms, or examples of MARC records. One common example in the literature is reports of workshops (Warren 1992).
Much research has been done on AAT application to specific types of materials. This include specific terms related to folk art (Benedetti 2000), Islamic architecture (Mutusz 2005), visual art (Molhot 1993), and artifact collections (Taylor 1996). While this isn't a comprehensive list, it does illustrate that authors are focusing on particular uses of the thesaurus. In many ways, these are “best practice” guides.
Articles have also focused on technical aspects of integrating the AAT in the ILS, and issues of cataloging. This includes Stanley's article specifically discussing AAT and the MARC format (1989), and Waddington's article discussing it's introduction into the RLIN database (which later was integrated with Worldcat).
While interesting, these articles only have a cursory effect here. This paper is concerned about the usefulness of AAT terms; and for that, not much work has been done. One particular interesting was a user survey published by Busch in 1989. While AAT terms were being developed as early as the 1970, the official publication did not come until 1990. It would seem, then, this survey cannot account for the vast majority of institution. Other articles have focused on its international applications, such as a Spanish-language version (Nagel 2005).
Finally, Benedette (2000) wrote a defense in using AAT terms. Yet, research has not been conducted concerning it's actual usefulness; “Do researchers find AAT terms useful in their research”. This research will focus on that aspect.
Methodology
Research
A pretest-post test control group design. Both groups will conduct catalog searches on records without AAT terms. Both groups will conduct a second search; one group on records to which AAT terms have been added.
This method was chosen specifically to identify the differences in search results between records with AAT terms and those without them. Only then can one understand the effects of AAT inclusion.
Sample
The sample consist of researchers from special collections from various institutions from the United States and Canada, including academic, public, and research libraries; and museums, as other countries tend to use other thesauri (such as the “United Kingdom Archival Terms”). It is believed that this sample recognizes the wide range of research who use archival and primary resources.
Process
For the pre and post-test, each record in the catalog will register how many hits it received. The tests will be compared to see if records saw more traffic with AAT terms included. If so, one would deduce that these terms could have been the cause of that increased traffic.
Researchers will also be asked to provide their own impression. For the pre- and post-test, they will be asked to print out the records which may be useful to their research. If researchers find more useful records after AAT terms have been included, one could also deduce that AAT terms contributed to those records being found.
Reliability and validity issues
One particular problem revolves around the nature of archival use. Researchers are not regular patrons; they may use an institution only once. It may be difficult, therefore, to identify “researchers”. Also, because because this research involve only U.S. and Canadian institutions, it will not identify any particular issues relating to areas outside of those countries.
Validity issues surround the assumption that greater hits on records results in greater access. Researchers may very well find the necessary records in other ways such as indexes and bibliographies, or additional searching.
Concluding Remarks
This research explored the usefulness of AAT terms in archival research by the retreivability of archival records in the library catalog. One would expect AAT terms increase retrieval to records. If this is indeed the case, catalogers could justify the cost and expect of adding AAT terms to records. If not, then catalogers could stop adding these terms.
Additional research which this paper suggests includes the place of education users in techniques for retrieving archival resources, and effects of combing thesauri in a records (such as Library of Congress Subject Headings and AAT).
References Cited
Benedetti, J. M. (2000). Words, Words, Words: Folk Art Terminology--Why It (Still) Matters. [Feature]. Art Documentation, 19(1), 14-21.
Busch, J. A. (1989). AAT [Art and architecture thesaurus] user survey. [Feature]. Art Documentation, 8, 26.
Matusz, S. A. (2005). A Comparison of the Art and Architecture Thesaurus and the Thesaurus for Graphic Materials for the Subject Cataloging of Islamic Architecture Images.
Molholt, P. A., &;; Petersen, T. (1993). The role of the @Art and architecture thesaurus' in communicating about visual art. [Feature]. Knowledge Organization, 20(1), 30-34.
Nagel, L. (2005). The Spanish-Language Version of the Art &;; Architecture Thesaurus: History, Current Status, Implementation, and Dissemination. [Feature]. Visual Resources Association Bulletin, 32(2), 30-34.
Petersen, T. (1990). Developing a new thesaurus for art and architecture. [Feature]. Library Trends, 38, 644-658.
Rouse, S. r. (1996). Art &;; architecture thesaurus (Book Review); Guide to indexing and cataloging with the Art &;; architecture thesaurus (Book Review), The American Archivist v. 59 no. 3 (Summer 1996) p. 367-70.
Stanley, J. (1989). Symposium: implementing the Art and architecture thesaurus--controlled vocabulary in the extended MARC format. [Feature]. Art Documentation, 8, 121+.
Taylor, B. L. (1996). Chenhall's Nomenclature, the Art and architecture thesaurus, and issues of access in America's artifact collections. [Feature]. Art Documentation, 15(2), 17-23.
Waddington, M. (1989). The AAT [Art and architecture thesaurus] application protocol, Art Documentation v. 8 (Winter 1989) p. 178-80.
Warren, S. (1992). Workshop--using the AAT Art and architecture thesaurus: practical applications. [Feature]. Art Documentation, 11, 63.
;
;