AZ EGYETEMI KÖNYVTÁR ÉVKÖNYVEI 4. (Budapest, 1968)

Könyvtári gyakorlat - Déri Miklósné: Catalogue use in the University Library (Summary)

- ИЩИ И I- . Ill Щ Щ I III I 2.52 nyelvtudás 2.521 csak magyar nyelvű anyagra volt szükség 2.53 a címek, alcímek fogalmazása 2.54 a kiadási év 2.55 jelentős szerző művei 2.56 bibliográfiai jegyzet 2.57 illusztráció 2.58 egyéb 2.6 volt a tárgykörre vonatkozó anyag 2.7 nem volt a tárgykörre vonatkozó anyag 3. segítséget kért a könyvtárostól 4.1 használó megjegyzései 4.2 kérdező megjegyzései IRODALOM Jackson. S. L.: Catalog use study: director'report. Ed. by V. Mostecky. Chicago, 1958. Nádvornik, M.: Proc ctenaf menasel knihu, = Knihovnik. 1964. 1. No. 18-19. p. Penalosa, F.

: An investigation of the manner in which students of the University of Denver use the card catalog. (Diss. Univ. of Denver, School of Librananship.) 1949. Spalding, С S.: The use of catalog entries at the Library of Congress. = Journal of Cataloging and Classification. 1950. 4. No. 95-100. p. Tate E. L.: Main entries and citations: one test of the revised cataloging code. = The Library Quarterly. 1963. 2. No. 172-191. p. CATALOGUE USE IN THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY (Summary) The purpose of the inquiry underlying this paper is to ascertain first, the demands of the users on the three most frequently used catalogues of the library (main author-title catalogue, readers author-title catalogue, detached alphabetical subject catalogue), and secondly, the measure in which the catalogues do meet these demands. The interview method based on questionnaires was being connected with personal observations. Although the latter did not yeald measurable values their results proved, nevertheless, very important. The investigations embraced altogether 254 visitors. The number known-item searches was a little higher than that of subject searches (54 and 46 per cent). Qualification and expertness influenced searching; higher qualified people used the aplhabetical subject catalogue less often than other patrons, specialists chose the subject approach chiefly when in need of literature outside of their respective special fields. Joint examination of the searches with positive and negative results discloses that - in contradiction to wide-spread beliefs - it is not at all more difficult for readers to find their way in the alphabetical subject catalogue than in the author-title catalogue. But while the failure on known-item searches was entailed first of all by mistaken attitudes of readers (inadequate understanding of the catalogue system, inadequate informations about the book sought), the cause of failure on subject searches was in a majority of cases the insufficiency of the catalogue (not sufficiently specific subject headings, lacking cross-references). A^A^nffi,, As the purposes of the search one may distinguish five diverse groups. Abouth two-third of the readers needed books for their studies. The others looked for books they needed m scholarly work, or asked for literature they were interested in, or read for their own amusement, or for practical purposes. 23