1 mental models and the bibliographic universe jan pisanski maja Žumer lida 2007

1

Mental models and the bibliographic

universe

Jan PisanskiMaja ŽumerLIDA 2007

2

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

3

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

4

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)

5

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

6

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

7

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)

8

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)

9

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

10

What can be looked at?“Frbrized” OPACsIn 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

11

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”

12

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?

13

Possible traps Mental models of bibliographic universe:

very abstract Mental models may be influenced by

present catalogue design and cataloguing practice

14

Mental model elicitation

Various methods (observations, interviews, verbal protocols, repertory grid technique,…)

Card sorting

15

Card sorting Non-verbal

15-30 participants

Generative (good for domain modeling)

16

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

17

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?

18

What comes out of what?

19

The parting shotVery 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