정보관리학회지 (Journal of the Korean Society for information Management)

  • 제27권2호
  • /
  • Pages.225-239
  • /
  • 2010
  • /
  • 1013-0799(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2586-2073(eISSN)
한국정보관리학회 (Korean Society for Information Management)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

디지털 도서관을 위한 소셜 태깅의 의미: 이용자 협력을 활용한 디지털 지식 생성

Implications of Social Tagging for Digital Libraries: Benefiting from User Collaboration in the Creation of Digital Knowledge

  • Choi, Yun-Seon (Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
  • 투고 : 2010.05.27
  • 심사 : 2010.06.12
  • 발행 : 2010.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 이용자 협력에 의한 소셜 태깅(social tagging)이 웹 자원을 위한 디지털 지식 생성에 활용될 수 있으며, 태깅의 양질성(quality)과 효율성이 실증적으로 증명될 수 있는가를 다루었다. 이 논고는 특별히 소셜 태깅의 색인 일관성(indexing consistency)을 평가하고 전문가들의 색인 일관성과 비교하여 분석하였다. 많은 수의 색인자들 간의 색인 일관성을 측정하기 위해 벡터 공간 모델(Vector Space Model)에 기반한 두 가지의 유사성 측정 공식을 사용하였다. 본 연구는 웹자원 관리에 있어서 소셜 태깅의 활용성 증진에 공헌하며, 디지털 도서관 환경에서 새롭게 생성되는 자료들에 대한 보다 적합한 어휘를 개발하는 데에 있어 소셜 지식을 적극적으로 수용할 필요가 있다고 주장한다. 또한 두 가지 공식에 의한 비교분석은 두 공식에서의 비슷한 색인 경향을 보여주면서 보다 신뢰적인 결과를 제공하였다.

This study aims to answer whether social tagging through user collaboration could be utilized for the creation of digital knowledge of the web, and whether we could verify the quality and efficacy of social tagging to obtain benefits from it. In particular, this paper examines the inter-indexer consistency of social tagging in comparison to professional indexing. It employs two different similarity measures, both of which are based on the Vector Space Model to deal with numerous indexers. It contributes to the utilization of social tagging in the organization of the web, and encourages to adopt social knowledge in developing suitable vocabularies for resources newly generated in the digital library environment. Furthermore, the comparative analysis with two different measures produced more credible results by illustrating a similar pattern of indexing tendency in both measures.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Cooper, W. S. 1969. “Is interindexer consistency a hobgoblin?” American Documentation, 20(3): 268-278. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630200314
  2. Fidel, R. 1991. “Searchers’ selection of search keys: II. Controlled vocabulary or free-text searching.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(7): 501-514. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199108)42:7<501::AID-ASI5>3.0.CO;2-V
  3. Gold, J. 1996. “Introducing a new service from BUBL” [Libraries of Networked Knowledge]. The Serials Librarian, 30(2): 21-26. https://doi.org/10.1300/J123v30n01_03
  4. Golder, S. and B. A. Huberman. 2006. “The structure of collaborative tagging systems.” Journal of Information Science, 32(2): 198-208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551506062337
  5. Golub, Koraljka. 2006. “Using controlled vocabularies in automated subject classification of textual web pages, in the context of browsing.” IEEETCDL Bulletin, 2(2): 1-11.
  6. Joint Information Systems Committee. (JISC). .
  7. Knapp, Sara D., Laura B. Cohen, and D. R. Juedes. 1998. “A natural language thesaurus for the Humanities: The need for a database search aid.” The Library Quarterly, 68(4): 406-430. https://doi.org/10.1086/603001
  8. Leonard, L. E. 1977. Inter-indexer consistency studies, 1954-1975: a review of the literature and summary of results. University of Illinois, Graduate School of Library Science Cham- paign, IL. Occasional Papers. No.131, De- cember 1977. 51.
  9. Lin, X., J. E. Beaudoin, Y. Bui, and K. Desai. 2006. “Exploring characteristics of social classification.” 17th ASIS&T SIG/CR Classification Research Workshop.
  10. Macgregor, G. and E. McCulloch. 2006. “Collaborative tagging as a knowledge organization and resource discovery tool.” Library Review, 55(5): 291-300. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242530610667558
  11. Mai, J.-E. 2004. “Classification of the Web: challenges and inquiries.” Knowledge Organization, 31(2): 92-97.
  12. Merholz, P. 2004. Metadata for the Masses, adaptive path. [cited 2010.6.4]. .
  13. Nicholson, D. et al. 2001. HILT: High Level Thesaurus Project: Final Report. [cited 2010.6.4]. .
  14. Nowick, E. A. and M. Mering. 2003. “Comparisons between Internet users' free-text queries and controlled vocabularies: a case study in water quality.” Technical Services Quarterly, 21(2): 15-32. https://doi.org/10.1300/J124v21n02_02
  15. Peterson, E. 2006. “Beneath the Metadata: Some philosophical problems with folksonomy.” D-Lib Magazine, 12(11).
  16. Quintarelli, E. 2005. “Folksonomies: power to the people.” Proceedings of the 1st International Society for Knowledge Organization (Italy) (ISKOI), [cited 2010.6.4]. .
  17. Rolling, L. 1981. “Indexing consistency, quality and efficiency.” Information Processing & Management, 17: 69-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(81)90028-5
  18. Salton, G., A. Wong, C. S. Yang. 1975. “A vector space model for automatic indexing.” Communications of the ACM, 18(11): 613-620. https://doi.org/10.1145/361219.361220
  19. Sen, S. et al. 2006. “Tagging, communites, vocabulary, evolution.” Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on Computer supported cooperative work.
  20. Smith, G. 2004. Folksonomy: social classification. Atomiq/information Architecture [blog]. [cited 2010.6.4]. .
  21. Spiteri, L. 2005. Controlled Vocabularies and Folksonomies. Presentation at Canadian Metadata Forum, Ottawa, ON, September 27, 2005. 23.
  22. Tennis, Joseph T. 2006. “Social Tagging and the Next Steps for Indexing.” In Furner, Jonathan and Tennis, Joseph T, Eds. Proceedings of the 17th Workshop of the American Society for Information Science and Technology Special Interest Group in Classification Re- search, Austin, Texas.
  23. Trant, J. 2009. “Studying Social Tagging and Folksonomy: A Review and Framework.” Journal of Digital Information, 10(1).
  24. University of Kent. 2009. Library Services Subject Guides. [cited 2010.6.4]. .
  25. Weber, J. 2006. Folksonomy and controlled vocabulary in Library Thing. Unpublished Final Project, University of Pittsburgh.
  26. Wikipedia: The free encyclopedia. 2009. FL: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. [cited 2010.6.4]. .
  27. Wolfram, D., and H. A. Olson. 2007. “A Method for Comparing Large Scale Inter-indexer Consistency Using IR Modeling.” Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Canadian Association for Information Science.
  28. Zunde, P., and M. E. Dexter. 1969. “Indexing consistency and quality.” American Documentation, 20(3): 259-267. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630200313

피인용 문헌

  1. Design and Implementation of Tag Coupling-based Boolean Query Matching System for Ranked Search Result vol.29, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2012.29.4.101