An Analytical Study of Online Public Access Catalogues in Comparison with Features of Amazon and Google: A Checklist Approach

H. Kalilur Rahman; J. Dominice

doi:10.51983/ajist-2012.2.1.37

Authors

H. Kalilur Rahman Library, Caledonian College of Engineering, Sultanate of Oman
J. Dominice University Library, Karunya University, Coimbatore - 641 114, Tamil Nadu, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51983/ajist-2012.2.1.37

Keywords:

Accessibility, Content Enrichment, Online Public Access Catalogue (OPAC), Relevancy, Searching of Information, User Participation and Sharing of Information

Abstract

Recent researches in the field of cataloguingconfirmed that the library catalogue is losing its importance and its service cannot match the level of Google, Google Scholar, Google Books and Amazon. Ultimately it made the library users to bypass the library catalogue for their information requisites. The scenario asserts the need of major shifts in cataloguing in various aspects and compels to examine the current status of library catalogues. Online Public Access Catalogues (OPAC) of twenty eight libraries are taken for this investigation. A checklist has been prepared for the same. Features of Amazon and Google including Google Scholar and Google Books were contemplated for this evaluative study, as the research studies revealed that all these have made great impact on library cataloguing. This investigation finds the weaker sections such as accessibility, content enrichment, and information sharing capability in OPACs; and suggests that it should be integrated into OPAC. In addition, the ongoing developments in OPACs have been discussed in this paper. The researchers aim to identify the problematic areas in OPACs which will certainly be the base for developing the prototype.

References

V Fast Karl and D Grant Campbell, “I Still Like Google”: University Student Perceptions of Searching OPACs and the Web, Proceedings of the 67th ASIS&T Annual Meeting, Vol 41. 2004.

J. Law, “Academic libraries and the struggle to remain relevant: Why research is conductedelsewhere”, 2009. Paper retrieved fromhttp://www.serialssolutions.com/downloads/John-Law-Sydney- Online-2008.pdf

Helle Lauridsen and John Law, “How do you follow Google? Providing a High Quality Library search Experience”, presented at IATUL Conference, 2009.

Jan Brophy and David Bawden, “Is Google Enough? Comparison of An Internet Search Engine With Academic Library Resources”, ASLIB Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, Vol. 57, No. 6, pp.498-512, 2005.

D. Byrum John, “Recommendations for urgently needed improvement of OPAC and the Role of the National Bibliographic Agency in Achieving it”, 71th IFLA General Conference, Norway, Aug 14th-18th, 2005.

JiaMi and Cathy Weng, “Revitalizing the Library OPAC: Interface, Searching, and Display Challenges”, Information Technology and Libraries, pp.5-22,March 2008.

Holly Yu and Margo Young, “The impact of Web Search Engines on Subject Searching in OPAC”, Information Technology and Libraries, Vol.23, No.4, pp.168-180, 2004.

E. Novotny, “I Don't Think I Click: A Protocol Analysis Study of Use of A Library Online Catalog in The Internet Age”, College and Research Libraries, Vol. 65 No. 6, pp.525-563, 2004.

D.D. Blecic, J.L.Dorsch, M.H.Koenig “A Longitudinal Study of The Effects of OPAC Screen Changes on Searching Behaviour and Searcher Success”, College & Research Libraries, Vol. 60, No. 6, pp.515-30, 1999.

Tanja Mercun, MajaŽumer, “New Generation of Catalogues For The New Generation of Users: A Comparison of Six Library Catalogues”, Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, Vol. 42, No.3, pp.243-261, 2008.

Steve Coffman, “Building Earth's Largest Library: Driving into the Future”, Searcher, Vol.7, No.3. 1999.

Maja Zumer, “Amazon: Competition or complement to OPACs”, Textosuniversitarisdebiblioteconomia i documentació, No.19, Dec2007.

Alenka Sauperl and Jerry D. Saye, “Speculation in Documentation: Have We Made Any Progress? Catalogues Of The Future Revisited”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 65, No.3, pp.500-514, 2009.

Janine Schmidt, “Promoting Library Services in a Google World”, Library Management, Vol.28, No.6/7, pp.337-346, 2007.

Michelle Woodcroft and Coffs Harbour, “Establishing Guidelines For The Effective Evaluation of Web-Based Periodical Bibliographic and Full-Text Databases Search Interfaces”, 10thVALA Biennial Conference, 2000.

Alireza Isfandyari-Moghaddam and ZohrehBahari-Movaffagh, “Evaluating And Comparing Search Features of Web Meta Searchengines: A Checklist-Based Approach”, Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, Vol. 15, No.2 pp.1-17, August 2010.

Howard Greisdorf, “Relevance Thresholds: A Multi-Stage Predictive Model of How Users Evaluate Information”, Information Processing and Management, Vol.39, pp. 403-423, 2003.

Karen A. Coombs, SUNY Cortland, “Making the Web OPAC More Accessible, View This Presentation at:http://www.library webchic.net/presentations/naaug2004(Accessed on 04th June 2011)

Jenny Walker, “New Resource Discovery Mechanisms” The EResources Management Handbook, pp78-89, 2010.

Ahmed Elhaifz Ibrahim,“Displays of Arabic Script on Web-based OPACs in GCC Institutions”, The Electronic Library, Vol.23, No.4, pp.419-432, 2005.

Roderic Vassie, “Improving Access in Bilingual Biscript Catalogues through Arabised Authority Control”, Online Information Review, Vol.24, No.6, pp.420-429, 2000.

H. Kalilur Rahman and J Dominic, “Studies on Features of Online Public Access Catalogues of Academic Libraries in Gulf Cooperation Council Nations”, presented at International Conference on Innovation – Driven Librarianship: Expectations of Librarians and Library Users, ISBN 9788184652123, pp.351-357, 2010.

Functional Accessibility Evaluator 1.1, a tool developed by University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign(Accessed on the Website: http://fae.cita.uiuc.edu/ on 04-June-2011)