Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

Collection Services Policy and Procedure Manual: Integrating Resources

General Information

Information on Integrating Resources cataloging and classification practices.

 

IR came to be in AACR2 in 2002.  Looseleafs used to be coded as “m” for monograph but now are coded “I” for Integrating Resources.  Here is information gleaned from an 2011 AALL annual meeting workshop on Integrating Resources.

 

‐ We [all of us] have a mix of records coded as both monographs and integrating resources in OCLC and of course in our own catalogs; this can affect retrieval of IRs depending on how your OPAC limits by “monograph” or “serial.” Depending on the type of search we do in OCLC when we search for cataloging copy, we may also miss records coded as one or the other in our pre‐cataloging discovery process.

‐‐ IRs are cataloged by both serial and monograph catalogers, and sometimes the records reflect the approach, background and experience of one or the other.

‐‐ This is in general a really good thing, because the IR record is such an interesting mix of monograph and serial that all expertise is appreciated, especially in a cooperative cataloging environment where we all build on, and benefit from, one another’s efforts.

That being said, however, there are a few things that one notices in records created or edited by people who are very focused on either a monograph or serial way of life:

‐‐ Monographic : Detailed description, notes and added entries vs. linking fields.

‐‐ Serial: Spartan description, cavalier approach to personal authors, notes in numerical (not AACR2) order; however, as to that last point: According to guidelines in the IR manual, institutions are allowed the flexibility of providing notes in either order.

Here are the most important characteristics of a record for an integrating resource:

‐‐ IRs fall under the umbrella term of “Continuing resource” in AACR2, along with serials.

‐‐ Unlike serials, which are cataloged based on the first or earliest available issue, IRs are cataloged based on the latest iteration available. ** This entry convention is called “integrated entry” and is coded in the 008/34 or the 006/17, depending on the primary nature of the resource being cataloged. For print IRs, we usually receive them immediately upon publication, so although our cataloging is technically based on the latest iteration, we may still be describing the first (and, as of yet, only) iteration.

‐‐ Also unlike serials, all title changes for integrating resources, whether major or minor, are recorded in one record. Major title changes that for a serial would require the creation of a new record are reflected in title added entries (247 field) in a record for an IR.

‐‐ The most important characteristic of IRs, and one that they do share with serials, is that as long as a title is still being published/issued, you will probably have to update the bibliographic record that describes it.

** Iteration is defined in AACR2 as “an instance of an integrating resource, either as first published or after it has been updated.”

As mentioned on the previous slide, since the description for an IR is based on the current iteration, changes in the publication that occur over time need to be recorded in the bibliographic record. Sometimes significant changes get missed until the publication ceases and/or a whole new edition arrives, which makes it difficult to piece together the publication history. This accounts for why sometimes there are so many duplicate bib records in shared databases, because catalogers literally can’t recognize records that do not match what they have in hand. It is also difficult to update a record for changes if you don’t have a clear picture of what came before.

All that being said, here are some of the fields that are usually changed or added as a publication changes. We will be showing more specific MARC 21 tagging in our cataloging examples.

The LC/PCC guidelines for creating multiple 260s can be found on the CONSER Web site at:

http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/260field.pdf

 

Most changes in subsequent iterations of an integrating resource do not require a new record, including gradual replacement editions. Here are some situations that do:

‐‐ A publication changing from a loose‐leaf to an annual bound serial is an example of a change in the mode of issuance.

‐‐ A publication ceasing in print and continuing only online is an example of a change in the physical medium. (More often we encounter simultaneous publication of print and online, but this may change in the future.)

‐‐ An “in toto” replacement toto replacement, often (but not always) accompanied by a change in edition statement, is probably the most common situation requiring a new record. Sometimes the change of edition also involves a change of authorship. Many of us have recently cataloged 3rd and 4th editions of loose‐leafs, and will probably soon be cataloging 5th editions.

‐‐ IR.16 provides guidance about the types of changes that require a new record. LCRI 21.3B also contains an extensive discussion of LC/PCC practice regarding “in toto” replacements and when to treat them as new resources.

‐‐ After creating a new record, you will need to update the existing related record, and also link the two. We will show some related and linked records in our cataloging examples

 

I printed off pages 19 – 29 of examples of cataloging.

 

 

 Nancy

 

800 N. Harvey Oklahoma City, OK 73102 405.208.5271