Browse > Article

Comparison of User-generated Tags with Subject Descriptors, Author Keywords, and Title Terms of Scholarly Journal Articles: A Case Study of Marine Science  

Vaidya, Praveenkumar (Department of Studies in Library and Information Science, University of Mysore, Tolani Maritime Institute)
Harinarayana, N.S. (Department of Studies in Library and Information Science, University of Mysore)
Publication Information
Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice / v.7, no.1, 2019 , pp. 29-38 More about this Journal
Information retrieval is the challenge of the Web 2.0 world. The experiment of knowledge organisation in the context of abundant information available from various sources proves a major hurdle in obtaining information retrieval with greater precision and recall. The fast-changing landscape of information organisation through social networking sites at a personal level creates a world of opportunities for data scientists and also library professionals to assimilate the social data with expert created data. Thus, folksonomies or social tags play a vital role in information organisation and retrieval. The comparison of these user-created tags with expert-created index terms, author keywords and title words, will throw light on the differentiation between these sets of data. Such comparative studies show revelation of a new set of terms to enhance subject access and reflect the extent of similarity between user-generated tags and other set of terms. The CiteULike tags extracted from 5,150 scholarly journal articles in marine science were compared with corresponding Aquatic Science and Fisheries Abstracts descriptors, author keywords, and title terms. The Jaccard similarity coefficient method was employed to compare the social tags with the above mentioned wordsets, and results proved the presence of user-generated keywords in Aquatic Science and Fisheries Abstracts descriptors, author keywords, and title words. While using information retrieval techniques like stemmer and lemmatization, the results were found to enhance keywords to subject access.
Web 2.0; social tagging; information retrieval; Jaccard similarity; subject descriptors;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Lee, D.H., & Schleyer, T. (2012). Social tagging is no substitute for controlled indexing: A comparison of Medical Subject Headings and CiteULike tags assigned to 231,388 papers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(9), 1747-1757.   DOI
2 Lu, C., Park, J., & Hu, X. (2010). User tags versus expertassigned subject terms: A comparison of LibraryThing tags and Library of Congress Subject Headings. Journal of Information Science, 36(6), 763-779.   DOI
3 Lu, C., Zhang, C., & He, D. (2016). Comparative analysis of book tags: A cross-lingual perspective. The Electronic Library, 34(4), 666-682.   DOI
4 Lu, K., & Kipp, M. E. I. (2014). Understanding the retrieval effectiveness of collaborative tags and author keywords in different retrieval environments: An experimental study on medical collections. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(3), 483-500.   DOI
5 Mathes, A. (2004). Folksonomies: Cooperative classification and communication through shared metadata. Retrieved July 30, 2018 from
6 Mohammad, F. (2018). Is preprocessing of text really worth your time for online comment classification? ArXiv:1806.02908. Retrieved July 30, 2018 from
7 Neveol, A., Dogan, R. I., & Lu, Z. (2010). Author keywords in biomedical journal articles. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings, 2010, 537-541.
8 Niwattanakul, S., Singthongchai, J., Naenudorn, E., & Wanapu, S. (2013). Using of Jaccard coefficient for keywords similarity. In Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists, March 13-15, 2013. Hong Kong.
9 Rafferty, P. M. (2017). ISKO Encyclopedia of knowledge organization: Tagging. Retrieved July 30, 2018 from
10 Peters, I., Kipp, M. E. I., Heck, T., Gwizdka, J., Lu, K., Neal, D., & Spiteri, L. (2011). Social tagging & folksonomies: Indexing, retrieving... and beyond? Proceedings of the 74th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48(1), 1-4.
11 Risueno, T. (2018). What is the difference between stemming and lemmatization? Retrieved August 29, 2018 from
12 Stan, J., & Maret, P. (2017). Social bookmarking or tagging. In R. Alhajj, & J. Rokne (Eds.), Encyclopedia of social network analysis and mining. New York: Springer.
13 Strader, C. R. (2009). Author-assigned keywords versus Library of Congress Subject Headings: Implications for the cataloging of electronic theses and dissertations. Library Resources & Technical Services, 53(4), 243-251.   DOI
14 Syn, S. Y., & Spring, M. B. (2010). Tags as keywords: Comparison of the relative quality of tags and keywords. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 46(1), 1-19.
15 Wal, T. V. (2004). You down with folksonomy? Retrieved July 30, 2018 from
16 Syn, S. Y., & Spring, M. B. (2013). Finding subject terms for classificatory metadata from user-generated social tags. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(5), 964-980.   DOI
17 Thada, V., & Jaglan, V. (2013). Comparison of Jaccard, dice, cosine similarity coefficient to find best fitness value for web retrieved documents using genetic algorithm. International Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology, 2(4), 202-205.
18 Thomas, M., Caudle, D. M, & Schmitz, C. (2010). Trashy tags: Problematic tags in LibraryThing. New Library World, 111(5-6), 223-235.   DOI
19 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2017). The current status of ocean science around the world. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
20 Voorbij, H. (1998). Title keywords and subject descriptors: A comparison of subject search entries of books in the humanities and social sciences. Journal of Documentation, 54(4), 466-476.   DOI
21 Wu, D., He, D., Qiu, J., Lin, R., & Liu, Y. (2013). Comparing social tags with subject headings on annotating books: A study comparing the information science domain in English and Chinese. Journal of Information Science, 39(2), 169-187.   DOI
22 Heymann, P., & Garcia-Molina, H. (2009). Contrasting controlled vocabulary and tagging: Do experts choose the right names to label the wrong things? Paper presented at the Second ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM), Barcelona, Spain.
23 Anfinnsen, S., Ghinea, G., & de Cesare, S. (2011). Web 2.0 and folksonomies in a library context. International Journal of Information Management, 31(1), 63-70.   DOI
24 Ansari, M. (2005). Matching between assigned descriptors and title keywords in medical theses. Library Review, 54(7), 410-414.   DOI
25 Davarpanah, M. R., & Iranshahi, M. (2005). A comparison of assigned descriptors and title keywords of dissertations in the Iranian dissertation database. Library Review, 54(6), 375-384.   DOI
26 Engelson, L. (2013). Correlations between title keywords and LCSH terms and their implication for fast-track cataloging. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 51(6), 697-727.   DOI
27 Furner, J. (2010). Folksonomies. In M. J. Bates, & M. N. Maack (Eds.), Encyclopedia of library and information sciences (3rd ed.). New York: Taylor and Francis.
28 Golder, S. A, & Huberman, B. A. (2006). Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science, 32(2), 198-208.   DOI
29 Guy, M., & Tonkin, E. (2006). Folksonomies: Tidying up tags? D-Lib Magazine, 12(1). Retrieved July 30, 2018 from
30 Hotho, A., Jaschke, R., Schmitz, C., & Stumme, G. (2006). Information retrieval in folksonomies: Search and ranking. In Y. Sure & J. Domingue (Eds.), The semantic web: Research and applications (pp. 411-426). Berlin/Heidelberg:Springer.
31 Kipp, M. E. I. (2006). Exploring the context of user, creator and intermediary tagging. Retrieved July 30, 2018 from
32 Kipp, M. E. I. (2007). Tagging practices on research oriented social bookmarking sites. Retrieved July 30, 2018 from
33 Kipp, M. E. I. (2011a). Tagging of biomedical articles on CiteULike: A comparison of user, author and professional indexing. Knowledge Organization, 38(3), 245-261.   DOI
34 Lee, D. H., & Schleyer, T. (2010). A comparison of meSH terms and CiteULike social tags as metadata for the same items. Paper presented at the 1st ACM International Health Informatics Symposium, Arlington, VA, USA.
35 Kipp, M. E. I. (2011b). User, author and professional indexing in context: An exploration of tagging practices on CiteULike. Canadian Journal of Library and Information Science, 35(1), 17-48.   DOI