Article Summary for Lecture # 4 - Carlyle

Understanding FRBR As a Conceptual Model

FRBR and the Bibliographic Universe

Allyson Carlyle, in her article, examines FRBR’s status as a model, and seeks to clarify what it is, what it is not, and what it attempts to do. In essence, FRBR is a conceptual model (or a model of a model – if one considers that a bibliographic record is a representation of a document). Carlyle begins with the deconstruction by reviewing the multiple definitions of “model”. A model can be:

1)      a representation of something (sometimes on a smaller scale)

2)      a schematic description of a system, theory, or phenomenon that accounts for its known or inferred properties and may be used for further study of its characteristics: a model of generative grammar; a model of an atom; an economic model

3)      a simplified description of a complex entity or process

4)      a preliminary work or construction that serves as a plan from which a final product is to be made: a clay model ready for casting.

           Being a conceptual model (sometimes referred to as an abstract model), it is entirely theoretical. This is a major strength, because it helps to facilitate understanding and allows manipulation of complex entities by making them less complex. Conceptual models can also model just about anything, and FRBR is a great way to make something that is abstract into something that is concrete. For example, trying to model love – an abstract concept. In order to make a model of love, we need to operationalize it. How many times two people kiss each other, how much time do they spend together, or whether or not they live together can be observable items that help model love.

        The FRBR Group 1 entities work and expression are abstract ideas that have a lot in common with love. In order to verify the existence of work and expression we need to know:

1)      What documents say about themselves and what others say about them

2)      What people say when they want to find a document – for example:

a.       Do you have Seamus Heaney’s translation of Beowulf? (expression)

b.      Do you have Stephen Hawking’s A Brief History of Time? (work)

Since FRBR is such a specific type of conceptual model, it can be referred to as an entity-relationship (ER) model. Carlyle describes ER modeling as a technique that specifies the structure of a conceptual model (i.e. the kinds of things that have to be in it and the properties those things may have). For FRBR, and an ER model, three things are allowed in it: entities (things – either physical or abstract), attributes (properties or characteristics of entities and relationships), and relationships (interactions among entities). 

       The developers of FRBR aimed to “produce a framework that would provide a clear, precisely stated, and commonly shared understanding of what it is that the bibliographic record aims to provide information about.” However, to clearly understand FRBR, it pays to look at other models.

•  One Entity Model – the only entity recognized it “item” or ‘copy”
• Two-Entity Model – recognizes editions as well as copies
• Three-Entity Model – recognizes editions, copies, and “literary unit” (a.k.a. work)
•  Four-Entity Model – recognizes editions, copies, works, and “text”

FRBR is new and different from these models in that it identifies and defines four entities, recognizes four entities simultaneously, and present a cataloging model using an ER modeling technique. However, according to Carlyle, one of the greatest challenges in implementing FRBR in a code of rules is determining which items will be assigned by catalogers to which set. In the implementation process, decisions about the boundaries of the abstract entities work and expression must be made. (e.g. will a movie version of an original textual work be considered an expression of that work, or will it be considered to be a new work with a derivative relationship to the original?

      Ultimately, Carlyle concludes that successful implementation of FRBR will help patrons successfully perform searches by presenting information about complex works in helpful and intelligent ways, and encourages the viewing of FRBR as a continuation/natural extension of cataloging models used over the centuries cataloging has been around. I would agree with her summarization and emphasis of embracing FRBR. As I have said in previous posts, the job of an information organizer to get quality information into the hands of users through the easiest means. FRBR takes complex entries, and helps break down the information (entities) in such a way retrieval is easy. If you are interested in FRBR, or think you should try and figure out what FRBR is about or clarify a muddy view of the model, this is the perfect article for you!

_________________________________________________________________________________

If you want to read more about this topic, be sure to check out the whole article (citation below)!
Carlyle, A. (2006). Understanding FRBR as a conceptual model: FRBR and the bibliographic universe. Library Resources & Technical Services 50:264-73