Basic-level Concepts and the Assessment of Subject Relevance: Are They Really Relevant?

Abstract

Studies of user-generated tagging vocabularies have suggested a preference for basic- level terms in tagging vocabularies (e.g., Golder and Huberman, 2006; Munk and Mork, 2007). A high proportion of basic-level terms has also been observed in systems of knowledge organization (Green, 2006). This study addresses the relevance of basic-level terms in knowledge representation and organization systems from the perspective of theories of relevance assessment proposed by Saracevic (1975, 2007a, 2007b) and Hjorland (2010) and argues that domain knowledge and expertise, which are thought to be central in the assessment of relevance, may be based on the subordinate level of conceptualization rather than the basic or superordinate levels seemingly favored in representational systems.