Análise das metodologias de avaliação de tesauros: categorização dos critérios qualitativos de avaliação

Abstract

Introduction to the topic: The thesaurus is an instrument composed of a controlled set of terms, descriptors and non-descriptors, which are related to each other through semantic relationships. Result of modeling a knowledge domain, which, in turn, is dynamic, must be periodically evaluated and updated so that it does not become obsolete. Justification and Problem: The evaluation of a thesaurus must be carried out following an evaluation methodology that contains scientific and normative criteria. There are evaluation methodologies proposed by classical scholars in the field, however, it is possible to observe that other methodologies, on the national and international scene, have since been proposed. The literature points out that they evaluate the instrument using different approaches and types of evaluation. However, after observation, it was identified that the definition of the types of thesaurus evaluation is not clear in the literature on the subject. Regarding the evaluation criteria, no studies were found in the literature that bring together and organize these criteria in any way. General Objective: In this scenario, it aims to propose a categorization of the evaluation criteria of qualitative thesaurus evaluation methodologies. Theoretical Framework: The theoretical framework, in order to verify the state of the art of the problem to be studied and to provide support to meet the research objectives, is divided into three sections, namely: “Knowledge Organization Systems”, “Thesauruses ”, “Thesaurus Evaluation”. Methodology: Regarding the approach, it is considered qualitative. It has an basic nature, in terms of objectives it is exploratory and, in relation to procedures, it is a bibliographical research. It presents a methodological path, in four stages, which aims to answer the research questions and meet the proposed objectives. To this end, a portfolio was created supported by the completion of a Search Conduct Protocol. The protocol presents, among the fields, descriptive and subject criteria for the selection of works. The portfolio consists of fifteen works. It also presents the process of creating categories for classifying the evaluation criteria. This process was designed in five steps. Results: Three evaluation approaches, twelve types of evaluation and eighteen thesaurus evaluation methodologies were identified in the national and international literature. The approaches and types were presented alphabetically, according to their respective definitions, authors who proposed or synthesized them and with examples of the criteria. The methodologies were analyzed according to authorship, year of publication, country of publication, type of publication, evaluation approach, type(s) of evaluation. Of the total methodologies, thirteen are qualitative in approach and constitute the focus of the research. The qualitative criteria were counted, reaching a total of 141 criteria. The criteria, numbered 141, were classified into nine categories proposed by the research author. The criteria analysis consisted of a general analysis and an individual analysis of the categories. In order to identify the issues occurring in the evaluation categories, the 141 criteria were indexed, reaching a total of 120 topics represented. This result highlights the variety of subjects covered in each category and, consequently, the variety of aspects that can be evaluated in a thesaurus. Final considerations: The research answered the proposed research questions and the proposed objectives. Limitations and difficulties were encountered during the research and research themes were proposed for future work. Finally, the research contributes to the areas of knowledge studied by building theoretical-methodological foundations regarding the theme of thesaurus evaluation; gather and present the methodologies in a classified, structured and synthetic way; systematize and present definitions of approaches and types of thesaurus evaluation; and, by proposing new classification categories for evaluation criteria.