바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

Article Contents

Prev
e-Submission

Vol.28 No.1
Citation Share

A Study on Quantitative Measurement of Metadata Quality for Journal Articles

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management / Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, (P)1013-0799; (E)2586-2073
2011, v.28 no.1, pp.309-326
https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2011.28.1.309


& (2011). A Study on Quantitative Measurement of Metadata Quality for Journal Articles. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 28(1), 309-326, https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2011.28.1.309
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

Most metadata quality measurement employ simple techniques by counting error records. This study presents a new quantitative measurement of metadata quality using advanced weighting schemes in order to overcome the limitations of exiting measurement techniques. Entropy, user tasks, and usage statistics were used to calculate the weights. Integrated weights were presented by combining these weights and were applied to actual journal article metadata. Entropy weights were found to reflect the characteristics of the data itself. User tasks presented the required metadata elements to solve user's information need. Integrated weights showed balanced measures without being affected by the influence of error elements, This finding indicates the new method being suitable for quantitative measurement of metadata quality.

keywords
메타데이터 품질, 계량화 방법, 엔트로피, 이용자 과업, 이용통계, metadata quality, quantitative measurement, entropy, user task, usage statistics, metadata quality, quantitative measurement, entropy, user task, usage statistics

Reference

1.

김태수. (2008). 목록의 이해:한국도서관협회.

2.

사공철. (2001). 정보학사전:문헌정보처리연구회.

3.

윤구호. (2001). 색인 초록:한국도서관협회.

4.

이응봉. (2001). 과학기술 분야 데이터베이스의 품질향상을 위한 품질평가 연구. 한국문헌정보학회지, 35(2), 110-132.

5.

이제환. (2002). 공동목록 DB의 품질평가와 품질관리:KERIS의 종합목록 DB를 중심으로. 한국문헌정보학회지, 36(1), 61-89.

6.

Caplan, P. (2003). Metadata Fundamentals for all Librarians:Chicago, IL: ALA Editions.

7.

Caplan, P. (2004). 메타데이터의 이해:대구 태일사.

8.

Delsey, T. (2002). Functional Analysis of the MARC 21 Bibliographic and Holdings Formats. http://www.loc.gov/marc/marc-fun ctional-analysis/functional-analysis.ht ml.

9.

Haynes, D. (2004). Metadata for information management and retrieval:Facet Publishing.

10.

Hufford, J. (1991). Elements of the bibliographic record used by reference staff members at three ARL academic libraries. College and Research Libraries, 52(1), 54-64.

11.

IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records. (2003). 서지레코드의 기능상의 요건 최종보고서. 서울 국립중앙도서관.

12.

Intner, S. (2006). Metadata and its impact on libraries:Westport, Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited.

13.

Ochoa, X. (2006). Quality Mertrics for Learning Ojbejct Metadata (1004-1011). Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications.

14.

Stvilia, B. (2008). Value-based metadata quality assessment. Library and Information Science Research, 30(1), 67-74.

15.

Stvilia, B. (2007). A framework for information quality assessment. Journal of American Society of Information Science and Technolgy, 58(12), 1720-1733.

16.

Stvilia, B. (2004). Metadata quality for federated collections (111-125). Proceedings of ICIQ04 - 9th International Conference on Information Quality.

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management

e-Submission OA Policy