IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/amedoc/v16y1965i4p323-328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indexing process evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Charles L. Bernier

Abstract

The process of subject indexing is difficult to describe and evaluate. The indexer provides guides to subjects reported to authors. The result is an index to subjects—a subject index. He selects subjects, paraphrases and chooses guides to them, and translates the guides into standard index language. The concept of “subject” is elusive. The author controls the number of complexity of subjects and, thus, the indexing density. Guidance among index entries is by cross references. Qualifications of indexers are education in the subject and training in indexing. Differentiation between generalization for brevity and that warranted by the author is important in indexing to the maximum specificity. Weighting of terms in manipulative systems enables increased selectivity upon retrieval. The most common rules for indexing are listed. Teaching and mechanics of indexing are described. Alternatives are contrasted with subject indexing. Indexer‐computer collaboration can lead to improved indexing.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles L. Bernier, 1965. "Indexing process evaluation," American Documentation, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 323-328, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:amedoc:v:16:y:1965:i:4:p:323-328
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.5090160407
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090160407
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.5090160407?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:amedoc:v:16:y:1965:i:4:p:323-328. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.