Search results

An examination of the retrieval from two databases which cover philosophical materials, Philosopher's Index and FRANCIS, revealed that each database retrieved unique relevant items. A philosopher is likely to get relevant ‘hits’ from Philosopher's Index. At the same time, one is likely to miss at least some relevant items if one searches only that database. Some items are included in only one of them, e.g. theses and special issues of journals appear only in FRANCIS. Philosopher's Index, containing the larger collection of philosophical materials, often requires a more restrictive search strategy in order to retrieve relevant items but not large numbers of irrelevant items. There were some ‘misses’ that seemed to be due to journals not being regularly or ever indexed, and some ‘misses’ due simply to indexer error. Among items missed by Philosopher's Index were items in recognizably important journals, items by important figures in the discipline, and important kinds of articles.

The traditional role of the controlled vocabulary has been to bring together items scattered by a multiplicity of natural language terms. Therefore, it was considered a recall device. The file structure of current online structure systems now leads to the use of such vocabularies as a precision device. Because of the levels of specificity in the controlled vocabulary, the search for broader concepts means several terms may be ncessary. In this case, the file structure of the retrieval systems requires that for efficient searching the entry points be analyzed and minimized. Complete, rather than partial, entry of controlled terms appears to be inefficient.

Searchers need to develop a set of heuristics (a variety of problem solving tactics and operations) for searching full‐text databases. Those heuristics which have evolved for searching bibliographic databases are often not effective when applied to full‐text. Presented here are methods which can be helpful in increasing precision when searching full‐text journal files for items on a given topic at BRS. Mead Data Central and Dialog. All of the techniques are based on achieving some repetition of central concepts as expressed in natural language. Research in automatic indexing and in full‐text retrieval provides a theoretical justification for a heuristic of this type. Schematic representations of strategies and sample searches which represent application of the techniques on each of the three systems are provided.

A comparison of the indexing on Eric and Lisa of the three journals devoted to online searching, Online, Online Review and Database, revealed some differences, but a greater number of similarities. On average, Lisa assigned more terms/document but Eric indexed more concepts/document. A critical subset of the vocabulary which distinguished online searching (a small number of terms used frequently) did emerge for each, but there were no exact matches in the terminology of the two systems. Several words within the multi‐ word phrases, however, were the same. For both systems, at least one term from the critical subset had been assigned to more than half the articles in the sample. Further, in each system, a single term had been assigned to more than eighty percent of the sample.

With any new skill, the time comes when one must put together the various steps that have been practiced and actually ‘play the game’. For many students of library and information science, online searching is a new search for a ‘real world’ client. This paper describes some problems these novice searchers have in putting it all together.

The physics librarian today faces a complex and fast‐moving discipline and an almost overwhelming array of resources. Beginning selectors in physics are often perplexed. How does research in physics proceed? What kinds of information do physicists seek? Where can this information be found and what is the most effective way of providing it? How are increases in costs and volume of publication affecting collecting in physics? What do new technologies and cooperative arrangements have to offer the physics librarian? This essay, directed especially to the novice selector, seeks first to define physics research and the information needs of physics researchers. It then surveys the trends in technology and in the market‐place that are profoundly altering the way we build research collections in physics.

Rapid technological change has become a fact of life in the libraries of the 1990s. While this change touches all parts of the library organization, nowhere is it more visible, or are its effects more keenly felt, than in reference departments. Consider these “snapshots”—fictional, but real enough:

With the continuing increases in computer processing and storage capabilities, the barriers to and benefits of electronic access to more information content are becoming serious issues in information science research. The experiments described in this article, which address the value of content‐enriched access, are important to continued progress in information retrieval. Well‐selected content components and full‐text materials in electronic systems must be linked with improved search methodologies, better computer interfaces, and greater understanding of the structure and use of knowledge. Content‐enriched records, augmented by these other developments, will enhance the probability of users identifying the information they require.