MetaMetrics: prototype for visualizing the quality of metadata in Latin American scientific journals published in the Open Journal System

Authors

  • Manuel Alejandro Flores Chávez Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Dirección General de Bibliotecas y Servicios Digitales de Información

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22201/dgbsdi.0187750xp.2023.1.1466

Keywords:

Metadata quality, Data visualization, Journals, Latin America, metadata harvesting, Open Journal System (OJS)

Abstract

MetaMetrics is an interactive data dashboard that generates reports on the quality of metadata in scientific journals, based on three characteristics identified by previous research: sufficiency, precision and consistency. For its development, 26,453 records harvested from the Open Journal System (OJS) of 716 journals belonging to institutions of the Network of Macrouniversities of Latin America and the Caribbean (Red de Macrouniversidades de América Latina y el Caribe) were used. The data was evaluated using regular expressions in Google Sheets following the character pattern defined by the orthographic, syntactic and semantic rules of the OpenAIRE Guidelines for Literature Repositories v3. Data visualization applied to the metadata domain facilitates the identification of errors in the bibliographic description that hinder the process of indexing journals in international indexes.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Manuel Alejandro Flores Chávez, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Dirección General de Bibliotecas y Servicios Digitales de Información

Dirección General de Bibliotecas y Servicios Digitales de Información (DGBSDI) Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Correo-e: mafloresc@dgb.unam.mx ORCID 0000-0002-2465-0724

References

Bellini, E. y Nesi, P. (2013). Metadata Quality Assessment Tool for Open Access Cultural Heritage Institutional Repositories. En P. Nesi y R. Stantucci (eds.), Information Technologies for Performing Arts, Media Access, and Entertainment: Second International Conference, eclap 2013 Porto, Portugal, April 2013. Revised Selected Papers. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40050-6_9

Dushay, N. y Hillmann, D. I. (2003). Analyzing Metadata for Effective Use and Re-Use. International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Application, 161-170. https://dcpapers.dublincore.org/ pubs/article/view/744

Elouataoui, W., El Alaoui, I. y Gahi, Y. (2022). Metadata Quality in the Era of Big Bang and Unstructured Content. En Y. Maleh, M. Alazab, N. Gherabi, L. Tawalbeh, A. A. Abd El-Latifs (eds.), Advances in Information, Communication and Cybersecurity. ici2c 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 357. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91738-8_11

Google. (s.f.). Directrices para el uso de expresiones regulares. https://support.google.com/a/ answer/1346938

Harper, C. A. (2016). Metadata Analytics, Visualization, and Optimization: Experiments in statistical analysis of the Digital Public Library of America (dpla). Code{4}lib Journal, (33). https://journal. code4lib.org/articles/11752

Hughes, B. (2004). Metadata Quality Evaluation: Experience from the Open Language Archives Community: 7th International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries, ICADL 2004, Shanghai, China, December 13-17, 2004, Proceedings. En Z. Chen, H. Chen, Q. Miao, Y. Fu, E. Fox y E. Lim (eds.), Digital Libraries: International Collaboration and Cross-Fertilization (pp. 320-329). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30544-6_34

Isenberg, P., Heimerl, F., Koch, S., Isenberg, T., Xu, P., Stolper, C. D., Sedlmair, M., Chen, J., Möller, T. y Stasko, J. (2017). Vispubdata.org: A Metadata Collection About IEEE Visualization (VIS) Publication. ieee Transacticions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 23(9), 2199- 2206. http://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2016.2615308

Jackson, A. S., Han, M. J., Groetsch, K., Mustafoff, M. y Cole, Timothy W. (2008). Dublin Core Metadata Harvested Through OAI-PMH. Journal of Library Metadata, 8(1), 5-21. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/32962578

Kim, J., Yakel, E. y Faniel, I. M. (2019). Exposing Standardization and Consistency Issues in Repository Metadata Requirements for Data Deposition. College & Research Libraries, 80(6), 843-875. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.80.6.843

Király, P. et al. (2019). Evaluating Data Quality in Europeana: Metrics for Multilinguality. En E. Garoufallou, F. Sartori, R. Siatri, M. Zevras (eds.), Metadata and Semantic Research. mtsr 2018. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 846. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14401-2_19

Nichols, D. M., McKay, D. y Twidale, M. B. (2008). A Lightweight Metadata Quality Tool. En Proceedings of the 8th acm/ieee-cs joint conference on Digital libraries (jcdl ‘08) (pp. 25-28). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/1378889.1378894

Ochoa, X. y Duval, E. (2009). Automatic evaluation of metadata qualityin digital Repositories. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 10(2-3), 67-91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-009-0054-4

Palavitsinis, N. (2013). Metadata Quality Issues in Learning Repositories [Tesis de doctorado, Universidad de Alcalá]. e_Bu@h. Biblioteca Digital Universidad de Alcalá. http://hdl.handle. net/10017/20664

Park, J. R. (2009). Metadata Quality in Digital Repositories:A Survey of the Current State of the Art. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 47(3-4), 213-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639370902737240

Ramos Eclevia, M., Vinzon, M. R., Balbas, Y. A. y Janio, R. V. (2019). Creative Ways of Demonstrating Your Value Using a Library Dashboard. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries (qqml), 8(4), 535-546. http://qqml-journal.net/index.php/qqml/ article/view/586

Shankaranarayanan, B. Z. (2021). Enhancing decision-making with quality metadata. Journal of System and Information Technology, 23(2), 199-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ JSIT-08-2020-0153

Shreeves, S. L., Knutson, E. M., Stvilia, B., Palmer, C. L., Twidale, M. B. y Cole, T. W. (7 de abril de 2005). Is “Quality” Metadata “Shareable” Metadata? The Implications of Local Metadata Practices for Federated Collections [Ponencia]. acrl Twelfth National Conference, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Estados Unidos de América. https://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/conferences/pdf/shreeves05.pdf

Tani, A., Candela, L. y Castelli, D. (2013). Dealing with metadata quality: The legacy of digital library efforts. Information Processing & Management, 49(6), 1194-1205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2013.05.003

Tsiflidou, E. y Manouselis, M. (2013). Tools and Techniques for Assessing Metadata Quality. En E. Garoufallou y J. Greenberg (eds.), Metadata and Semantics Research: 7th International Conference (pp. 99-110). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03437-9_11

Artículo 2

Published

2023-08-02

How to Cite

Flores Chávez, M. A. (2023) “MetaMetrics: prototype for visualizing the quality of metadata in Latin American scientific journals published in the Open Journal System”, Biblioteca Universitaria, 26(1). doi: 10.22201/dgbsdi.0187750xp.2023.1.1466.

Issue

Section

Articles