Volume 27, Issue 1 (5-2021)
Research on Information Science and Public Libraries 2021, 27(1): 135-157 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Gasempour S, Abam Z, Baradar R. Identifying and Ranking the Important Textual and Paratextual Elements in Fiction Retrieval. Research on Information Science and Public Libraries 2021; 27 (1) :135-157
URL: http://publij.ir/article-1-2265-en.html
URL: http://publij.ir/article-1-2265-en.html
Alzahra University , zoya.abam@alzahra.ac.ir
Abstract: (1932 Views)
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to identify the textual and paratextual elements in retrieving fiction from the readers’ perspective in order to provide the most appropriate access points for the readers and to improve access to fictions based on the readers’ needs.
Method: The current research is an applied study in terms of purpose, applying a mixed method that was conducted using the sequential exploratory strategy. The statistical population in both stages of the study were readers of fiction literature who were selected by purposive sampling strategy. In the first stage of the study, 14 fiction readers participated in a semi-structured interview. The collected data were coded and analyzed based on the six-step content analysis framework of Brown and Clark using MAXQDA software (2018 version). In the second stage, the opinions of 12 experts in the field of fiction were used to weigh and determine the importance of each textual and paratextual element. The data collection tool at this stage was a pairwise comparison questionnaire designed based on a 9-point scale. Expert Choice software (version 11) was used to analyze the data in this stage.
Findings: According to the results of the first stage of this study, 24 textual and paratextual elements in the form of 6 main themes were identified by a thematic analysis of the interviews. Then, according to experts, 19 of these extracted elements were selected as important elements in fiction retrieval. In general, the results confirmed that from the readers’ point of view, textual and paratextual elements could be useful in understanding, evaluating, determining and selecting sources, and help fiction readers to find relevant fictions. By use of textual and paratextual elements of fiction to enrich library catalogues and create several access points, we can improve fiction retrieval. Therefore, it is suggested that these elements be used in the design and development of retrieval systems in libraries in order to increase the efficiency of these systems and enable successful search and retrieval for fiction readers.
Originality/value: The results of this study provide a starting point for the development and design of fiction search and retrieval systems based on the needs of the reader. By using both textual and paratextual elements of fiction to enrich library catalogs and create several access points, we can develop and improve search and retrieval systems and increase the efficiency of this systems in retrieving fictions which readers want.
Method: The current research is an applied study in terms of purpose, applying a mixed method that was conducted using the sequential exploratory strategy. The statistical population in both stages of the study were readers of fiction literature who were selected by purposive sampling strategy. In the first stage of the study, 14 fiction readers participated in a semi-structured interview. The collected data were coded and analyzed based on the six-step content analysis framework of Brown and Clark using MAXQDA software (2018 version). In the second stage, the opinions of 12 experts in the field of fiction were used to weigh and determine the importance of each textual and paratextual element. The data collection tool at this stage was a pairwise comparison questionnaire designed based on a 9-point scale. Expert Choice software (version 11) was used to analyze the data in this stage.
Findings: According to the results of the first stage of this study, 24 textual and paratextual elements in the form of 6 main themes were identified by a thematic analysis of the interviews. Then, according to experts, 19 of these extracted elements were selected as important elements in fiction retrieval. In general, the results confirmed that from the readers’ point of view, textual and paratextual elements could be useful in understanding, evaluating, determining and selecting sources, and help fiction readers to find relevant fictions. By use of textual and paratextual elements of fiction to enrich library catalogues and create several access points, we can improve fiction retrieval. Therefore, it is suggested that these elements be used in the design and development of retrieval systems in libraries in order to increase the efficiency of these systems and enable successful search and retrieval for fiction readers.
Originality/value: The results of this study provide a starting point for the development and design of fiction search and retrieval systems based on the needs of the reader. By using both textual and paratextual elements of fiction to enrich library catalogs and create several access points, we can develop and improve search and retrieval systems and increase the efficiency of this systems in retrieving fictions which readers want.
Type of Study: qualitative |
Subject:
Information Retrieval
Received: 2020/09/7 | Accepted: 2020/10/31 | Published: 2021/05/31
Received: 2020/09/7 | Accepted: 2020/10/31 | Published: 2021/05/31
References
1. Adkins, D., & Bossaller, E. (2007). Fiction access points across computer-mediated book information sources: A comparison of online bookstores, reader advisory databases, and public library catalogs. Library & Information Science Research, 29(3), 354-368. [DOI:10.1016/j.lisr.2007.03.004]
2. Beghtol, C. (1994). The Classification of Fiction: The development of a system based on theoretical principles. London: Scarecrow.
3. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. [DOI:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa]
4. Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). An expanded typology for classifying mixed methods research into designs. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, 209-240.
5. Dali, K. (2014). From book appeal to reading appeal: Redefining the concept of appeal in readers' advisory. The Library Quarterly, 84(1), 22-48. [DOI:10.1086/674034]
6. de Moraes, E., & Batista, J. (2012). Aboutness in fiction: Methodological Perspectives for Knowledge Organization. Categories, Contexts and Relations in Knowledge Organization, 13(1), 242-248. [DOI:10.5771/9783956504402-242]
7. Genette, G. (1997). Paratexts: Thresholds of interpretation. Cambridge University Press.
8. Koolen, M., Bogers, T., Van Den Bosch, A., & Kamps, J. (2015, March). Looking for books in social media: An analysis of complex search requests. In European Conference on Information Retrieval (pp. 184-196). Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16354-3_19 [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-16354-3_19.]
9. Mikkonen, A., & Vakkari, P. (2016). Finding fiction: Search moves and success in two online catalogs. Library & Information Science Research, 38(1), 60-68. [DOI:10.1016/j.lisr.2016.01.006]
10. Ooi, K., & Liew, C. L. (2011). Selecting fiction as part of everyday life information seeking. Journal of Documentation, 67(5), 748-772. [DOI:10.1108/00220411111164655]
11. Reuter, K. (2007). Assessing aesthetic relevance: Children's book selection in a digital library. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(12), 1745-1763. [DOI:10.1002/asi.20657]
12. Saarinen, K., & Vakkari, P. (2013). A sign of a good book: readers' methods of accessing fiction in the public library. Journal of Documentation, 69(5), 736-754. [DOI:10.1108/JD-04-2012-0041]
13. Saricks, J. (2009). The Readers' Advisory Guide to Genre Fiction (2nd ed.). American Library Association.
14. Saarti, J. (2000). Taxonomy of novel abstracts based on empirical findings. Knowledge Organization, 27(4), 213-220.
15. Saarti, J. (2019). Fictional Literature, Classification and Indexing. Knowledge Organization, 46(4), 320-332. [DOI:10.5771/0943-7444-2019-4-320]
16. Šauperl, A. (2013). Four views of a novel: Characteristics of novels as described by publishers, librarians, literary theorists, and readers. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 51(6), 624-654. [DOI:10.1080/01639374.2013.773953]
17. Spiteri, L. F., Pecoskie, J., & Tarulli, L. (2016). In the readers' own words: how user content in the catalog can enhance readers' advisory services. Reference and User Services Quarterly, 56(2), 91-95. [DOI:10.5860/rusq.56n2.91]
18. Trott, B., & Novak, V. (2006). A house divided? Two views on genre separation. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 46(2), 33-38. [DOI:10.5860/rusq.46n2.33]
19. Vakkari, P., & Pöntinen, J. (2015, June). Result List Actions in Fiction Search. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (pp. 7-16). [DOI:10.1145/2756406.2756911]
20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2007.03.004. [DOI:10.1016/j.lisr.2007.03.004]
21. Vakkari, P., Luoma, A., & Pöntinen, J. (2014, August). Books' interest grading and dwell time in metadata in selecting fiction. In Proceedings of the 5th Information Interaction in Context Symposium (pp. 28-37).
https://doi.org/10.1145/2637002.2637008 [DOI:10.1145/2637002.2637008.]
22. Weisburg, H. K. (2013). The Dewey debate. Knowledge Quest, 42(2), 8-10.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
