Subject Heading Systems: House Hippos and Special Education Teachers
Subject heading systems make it easier to access information based on keywords within a subject of interest. By using lead-in terms, creators allow for a wide variety of vocabulary to be represented through select keywords. With this, users are able to access relevant information no matter how they approach the subject. Creators attempt to make it easier for users to find information relating to their initial query by linking terms together through term relationships and thoughtful organization (for example, alphabetical order or the selection of lead-ins) that increases the usability of the system.
For our group, designing and revising two subject heading systems illustrated concepts brought up in lectures and class discussions. In particular, we noticed how biases become embedded in the systems creators design and how defining terms and their relationships can both impede and promote the user’s understanding of the system. We created a subject heading system for the imaginary North American House Hippo (HHSH) while the system we revised was designed for Special Education Teachers (SETSH). Both systems were created to provide access to the contents of five children’s books for their respective user groups. During this process, we noted differences in the challenges between creating and revising a subject heading system.
In addition to the different user groups, it was apparent that the book selections, which varied between the two systems, guided the process of creating the systems and dictated the group’s choice of terms and relationships. This raised a concern for the comprehensiveness of subject heading systems given that a system will always be a reflection of what resources it was designed to index and thus can hardly ever be fully inclusive. As a result, subject heading systems will always require continuous growth or adaptation. We noticed that, despite our diverse backgrounds, our similar mindsets may have impacted our thinking process in both the development and assessment of the systems we worked on. 
By working in an echo chamber, the system we designed likely lacked the scope and depth that could have been achieved if we had more diverse perspectives. If we found ourselves in a similar situation in the future, it would likely be useful to designate a group member to actively challenge our ideas to ensure we engage in a critical dialogue.
While revising and expanding the SETSH, we noticed that we made our decisions based on our understanding of the Canadian education system, which was not necessarily indicative of the intended audience. 
With our understanding of the intended user group, we argued that the use of academic terms would necessitate that the SETs translate the headings into more familiar terms for their students. Thus we felt that common terms should be used as preferred terms. By creating an ‘Anthropomorphism USE Human-like’ heading, the users are guided to the same, unique point in the SETSH without the added work of translation. In our system (HHSH), selecting a preferred term led to difficulties as it often forced us to choose one term over another. The constraints of the assignment meant that we were forced to make some tough calls and remove terms that may have allowed for greater accessibility. Some of the terms removed were lead-in terms, for which we re-engineered their relationships from lead-in to narrower terms, a mechanical error which caused an imbalance in the total number of lead-in terms.
In a sense, a subject heading system is like a trail through a nefarious forest. Created correctly, the path should be free and clear of pitfalls, guiding users with relative ease. However, if the pathway is broken or littered with roadblocks, it can lead to dead-ends, frustrating the user along the way. Considering this, when developing both the HHSH and SETSH, we noted that in terms of the adaptability and usability of the subject heading systems, clear scope notes and user group descriptions would provide insight into the thinking behind the system and also support future expansion. In their writings about thesauri, Aitchison, Gilchrist, and Bawden (2000) note that "Dextre Clarke makes the point that the Standard rules on thesaurus relationships are not always meticulously applied. Such inconsistencies, both between and within thesauri, may be attributable ‘not to carelessness, but to pragmatic and subjective decisions about what will serve human users best." (p. 49)
From a user’s perspective, a system that lacks coherent scope notes may frustrate the user by creating broken pathways. For example, during the assessment of the SETSH, we debated about the relationship between ‘Friendship’ and ‘Fear’, two keywords that had previously been linked as related terms. 
Without a working scope note attached to the ‘Friendship’ subject heading it was difficult to understand why ‘Fear’ had been designated as a related term. Therefore, we made the decision to remove the relationship from the revised system.
In addition to the issues mentioned above, we learned that it is necessary to ensure that the indexing under each subject heading is unique. An overlap in indexing can cause problems in navigating the system but can be corrected by separating the indexing into more suitable pathways. In particular, we worked to avoid confusion while indexing ‘Emotion’, by modifying the Scope Note for the term in the SETSH. The change we introduced allowed for exclusive indexing of the term and its narrower terms.
While developing thesauri is intended to be post-coordinated and comprehensive, subject heading systems are meant to be pre-coordinated and adaptable; though both systems should be hospitable to new collections and user groups. In creating and assessing subject headings, we noted the importance of versatility and organization within the structure in maintaining the integrity of the subject heading system. This is important both for user accessibility, and the hospitality of the system’s ability to include future materials.
Subject heading systems can aid in satisfying information needs when used correctly, but can also inhibit information-seeking behaviours if they are incomplete or structured incorrectly. As such, the application of well-defined scope notes can help to guide the user through the system while also allowing for greater ease in developing the system for future use. The use of broader and narrower terms to create relationships between keywords allows for cultivated pathways to develop within the system, working hand-in-hand with lead-in terminology to enhance accessibility and usability for the intended end-user.
References
Aitchison, J., Gilchrist, A., & Bawden, D. (2000). Section F: Structure and Relationships. In Thesaurus
Construction and Use: A Practical Manual, 4th ed.(pp. 49-83). New York: Europa Publications.
Concerned Children's Advertisers. [ccacanada]. (2008, May 21). House Hippo [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9hJK4fCq4U.
Learning Significance