A Study of Applying Folksonomy to Archaelogical Artifacts:How Do the Fifth Grade Students Tag the Artifacts in the Shihsanhang Museum of Archaeology
Date Issued
2009
Date
2009
Author(s)
Chang, Tzu-Yu
Abstract
With the highly improved computer and network technology, a number of museums have started to put their digitized collections on the Internet. This renders the users to be able to access their collections via the net. However, some scholars found that it was not easy for users to retrieve the items they need. One reason is that the descriptive terms used by the museums might be different from the search terms used by users. Thus, some researchers suggested that the application of folksonomy might help to minimize the problems. Based on the results of the Steve project and other similar studies, researchers confirmed that the user vocabularies indeed are different from what the museums use to describe the collections. They also noticed that these user vocabularies might help to increase the effectiveness of retrieval. The findings of the previous studies inspire the author to explore whether the application of folksonomy to archaeological artifacts is plausible or not. As a docent working in the Shihsanhang Museum of Archaeology, the author notices that many visitors do not have a basic understanding about the nature of archaeological artifacts. So, using the artifacts of the Shihsanhang Museum of Archaeology as an example, the author intends to investigate the applicability of applying folksonomy to archaeological artifacts.ecause the fifth grade students have been one of the main visitor groups of the museum, 118 fifth graders from 4 classes were invited to participate in this study. They were asked to tag 8 pictures of the archaeological artifacts selected from the Museum. In addition, 15 participants were each invited to participate in a follow-up interview to explain the meanings behind the tags and the factors that affected their selection of tags. he results show that the tags given by these 5th graders were mainly based on their observation and experience. They tried to assign certain names to each artifact based on the material, shape, or function of that artifact. Their vocabularies were general and common terms acquired from daily life experience. Although their vocabularies were different from the jargons or scientific terms used by archaeologists or professionals, the approaches they employed to examine the artifacts were quite similar. It would be helpful for users if the labels for the archaeological metadata elements as well as the description given the metadata could be more general and common. This will help them to find the artifacts they want and to understand the metadata description more easily.n general, the factors that affect their assignment of tags could be grouped into four types: the artifact itself (such as its shape, function, or material), previous experience, other materials accompanied with the artifact, and the concern for retrieval. The results suggest that these layperson vocabularies might be somewhat useful in increasing the effectiveness of retrieval. However, the point is how to link the layperson vocabularies and the professional metadata created for each artifact. Moreover, some portion of these tags were incorrect or not usable. This indicates a critical issue for those who want to apply folksonomy to archaeological artifacts. Since it is necessary to have certain archaeological knowledge in order to correctly describe an archaeological artifact, it is understandable that the vocabularies given by laypersons would present some problems. Thus, more studies would be needed to investigate the applicability of applying folksonomy to archaeological artifacts.
Subjects
folksonomy
social tagging
tagging
the Shihsanhang Museum of Archaeology
archaeological artifacts
Type
thesis
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
Name
ntu-98-R95126002-1.pdf
Size
23.53 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum
(MD5):90b9553206ec85564275389c1b9117c8