Fabiola Rubim Silva

Centro de Difusão do Conhecimento. Universidade Federal de Juiz de Forahttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-8786-7819

Paula Regina Dal’Evedove

Departamento de Ciência da Informação. Universidade Federal de Säo Carloshttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1521-2201

Abstract: This research identifies and describes initiatives that create and update subject heading lists and thesauri considering social justice and equity, based on literature from the sociocultural dimension of Knowledge Organization. Using a scoping review, this qualitative applied research identifies 27 initiatives: eight initiatives for gender, eight for indigenous groups, five for LGBTQIA+ community, five for race and ethnicity, and one for miscellaneous. The research identifies successful initiatives for constructing and updating subject heading lists and thesaurus to promote social justice and equity, particularly those involving indigenous communities. However, the representation of cultural, social and linguistic diversity is still incipient in many contexts, including in Latin America. Additionally, restricted access to some systems emerges as a significant obstacle to the broader dissemination of these initiatives.

Keywords: Knowledge organization; Subject heading lists; Thesauri; Equity; Social justice.

Título: LISTAS DE ENCABEZADOS DE MATERIAS E INICIATIVAS DE TESAURO PARA LA EQUIDAD Y LA JUSTICIA SOCIAL: IDENTIFICACIÓN Y CARACTERIZACIÓN.

Resumen: Esta investigación identifica y describe iniciativas para crear y actualizar listas de encabezamientos de materias y tesauros considerando la justicia y la equidad social, a partir de la literatura de la dimensión sociocultural de la Organización del Conocimiento. A través de una revisión de alcance, este estudio cualitativo y aplicado identifica 27 iniciativas: ocho iniciativas de género, ocho de grupos indígenas, cinco de grupos LGBTQIA+, cinco de raza y etnia y una de varios. Destaca los esfuerzos exitosos en el desarrollo de listas de encabezamientos de materia y tesauros que fomentan la justicia social y la equidad, especialmente aquellos enfocados en las comunidades indígenas. Sin embargo, la incorporación de la diversidad cultural, social y lingüística sigue siendo limitada en varios contextos, incluyendo América Latina. Además, el acceso restringido a algunos sistemas se considera un obstáculo significativo para la amplia difusión de estas iniciativas.

Palabras clave: Organización del conocimiento; Listas de encabezamientos de materias; Tesauros; Equidad; Justicia social.

Copyright: © 2025 Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia. Este es un artículo de acceso abierto distribuido bajo los términos de la licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.es).

Datos de edición: Recibido 1ª versión: 05-02-2024; 2ª versión: 18-04-2024; Aceptado: 22-05-2025.

Knowledge Organization (KO) is a field that aims to describe, represent and organize the knowledge produced by society through knowledge organization processes and systems. Knowledge organization processes (KOP) include cataloguing, subject analysis, indexing and classification, while knowledge organization systems (KOS) are the tools used to carry out these processes, such as classification systems, subject headings, thesaurus, ontologies and other metadata systems (Hjørland, 2016). According to Broughton et al. (2005), KO performs basic functions, such as facilitating information retrieval in catalogs and navigation structures for online resources, providing information about documents to help users decide which ones meet their demands and help ordering documents on shelves or other arrangements.

However, KO and representations embedded within KO processes and systems can give rise to negative political and social consequences when they involve people, social groups, events and identity issues. These instances can limit the diversity of portrayed perspectives, perpetuate hegemonic narratives and producing distortions or biases concerning historically marginalized individuals and groups.

Several factors contribute to the presence of distortions and biased representations in KO. The influence of the worldview of those who design KOS has been highlighted in specialized literature in the fields of Librarianship and Information Science (Olson, 2002; Mai, 2013; Milani and Pinho, 2021). Additionally, Broughton (2019) identifies other factors, such as the uneven provision of terminology or notation, failure to acknowledge certain groups or perspectives, and the inherent bias from language itself, which often favours one particular perspective or culture.

In this sense, the scientific research in KO has been dedicated to addressing the problems and examining political and social implications of KO processes and systems, known as the sociocultural dimension of KO. In this regard, Watson’s (2021) research has provided recommendations for advancing KO in the direction of social justice and equity. Such recommendations include the use of multiple or alternative vocabularies or classifications, the practice of cultural competence when addressing identities or historical groups, the use of ethical considerations when dealing with identities, items or groups that are still alive, the modification, subversion, extension or replacement of the dominant classification or cataloguing practices at the local level, and giving voice to the subjects being described. Similar solutions were proposed twenty years ago by Olson and Schlegl (2001), who highlighted KOS adaptation at the local level as the key to more equitable access to different user groups, and they recommended the use of alternative standards and creativity and subversion to improve the thematic representation. Both Watson (2021) and Olson and Schlegl (2001) give special emphasis to the notion of local in their recommendations.

These recommendations suggest a direction towards alternative knowledge organization systems committed to the representation of local culture and values. Local initiatives to develop and update subject headings in individual libraries and library consortia/systems have been reported in various parts of the world, such as the University of Alberta (Canada), Iowa State University (United States) and the Māori Subject Headings Project developed between the National Library of New Zealand, the Association of Libraries of New Zealand and the national association of the Māori people (Farnel et al. 2018; Campbell et al. 2022; Lilley, 2015). These initiatives indicate the efforts of KO researchers and professionals to foster social justice and equity within KOSs.

Therefore, the objective of this research is to identify and describe initiatives of subject heading lists and thesaurus directed to social justice and equity based on the literature on the sociocultural dimension of KO. The research is based on a scoping review to identify local initiatives for the construction and updating of subject headings and thesaurus oriented towards equity and social justice, reported in scientific publications in general and specialized databases in the area. The research aims to contribute to the understanding of practices and strategies employed in the construction of fairer and more equitable knowledge organization systems, which prioritize diverse perspectives and historically marginalized groups. Understanding these initiatives is crucial for advancing KO towards more inclusive and democratic representation.

This applied qualitative study utilizes bibliographic and documentary data collection to identify and describe initiatives concerning subject heading lists and thesaurus aimed at promoting social justice and equity. It employs systematic literature mapping, or a scoping review, as its primary data collection procedure, facilitated by the software tools StArt and Excel. StArt (State of the Art through Systematic Review) was developed by the Laboratory of Research on Software Engineering (LaPES) at the Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar).

Scoping review is an approach that enables comprehensive coverage of the literature on a given topic, facilitating the identification of patterns and research trends (Rumrill; Fitzgerald and Merchant, 2010). The choice to employ scoping review is justified by its potential to provide an overview of the concepts, evidence and available studies, as well as its rigorous procedures for eliminating bias. Proença Júnior and Silva (2016) emphasize that the objective of scoping review is to provide, as a result, the state of the literature on a specific subject, with essential advantage being the responsibility and ethical commitment in obtaining the literature.

To ensure transparency and reproducibility in scoping review, a protocol was developed based on the five-step structure proposed by Colquhoun et al. (2014) was created: research question identification, search for relevant studies, study selection, data mapping and summary, and reporting of results. The protocol is available in Appendix A. The guiding question of the study is: what are the initiatives for the construction and updating of subject heading lists and thesaurus, aiming at achieving equitable and socially just instruments?

The search for relevant studies was carried out in Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA) and Information Science & Technology Abstracts (ISTA) databases, as detailed in Appendix A. Search strings applied to each database are available in Appendices B to E.

Spanish, English, and Portuguese were defined as accepted languages, and the search strategy was designed using terms in all three languages. The works of Vital et al. (2019) and Watson (2021) and Díaz-Jatuf (2021) contributed to the survey of keywords in Portuguese, English, and Spanish, respectively. The “Diccionario de organización del conocimiento: clasificación, indización, terminología” of Barité et al. (2015) was used to establish the equivalence of terms between the three languages.

In the initial phase of the mapping, the selection was recovered 3697 documents. The total records recovered on database was 1484 at Scopus, 425 at WoS, 1117 on the LISTA, and 671 on ISTA. After eliminating duplicates (1377) and applying exclusion/inclusion criteria from the reading of summaries (2047), 273 publications were initially selected. The high percentage of rejected documents (2047) is related to the scope of the search strategy formulated, seeking a diversity of perspectives.

The second stage, the extraction, consisted of a detailed analysis with the reading of the introductory section of each document, 171 being rejected after new application of the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and 4 more duplicate articles were eliminated. The reasons for elimination include not addressing the sociocultural dimension of subjects and specifically thesaurus heading lists (113), specifically addressing distinct knowledge organization systems from subject heading lists and thesaurus (26), of publications different from those defined in the protocol (10), being unavailable (21) in full text, or in languages not contemplated in the protocol (1).

The final data set consists of 98 accepted documents. Regarding the database distribution, the final set contains 28 Scopus publications, 14 WoS and 56 of the LISTA. No publication of the ISTA was selected for the final set; eliminated by duplicate in relation to the LISTA, due to the same supplier, EBSCO, and the recovery of almost the same sources of information.

The scoping review methodological process is visually represented by the flowchart shown in Figure 1. This flowchart, adapted from Prisma Statement, has been elaborated according to the flow of Start software.

Figure 1: Flowcharts.

Of the 98 documents mapped, 86 consist of research and theoretical discussions on different aspects of the sociocultural dimension of subject heading lists and thesaurus, whereas 12 documents describe 11 initiatives1

Notes

In fact, there are 12 publications with reports of initiatives to prepare and update subject heading lists and thesauri, but only 11 initiatives, as two publications refer to the same initiative: the thesaurus Sexual Nomenclature of the Kinsey Institute, addressed by Zhou (2003) and Drucker (2017).

Knowledge organization systems vary according to their scope, and they can be universal, multidisciplinary or specialized (Barité, 2011). Based on this typology, the 27 initiatives were assessed and classified. As such, subject heading lists and thesaurus specialized in gender, indigenous peoples, LGBTQIA+ community, ethnic and racial groups, and miscellaneous will be described.

The analysis of the initiatives identified that eight initiatives are specialized in gender, eight in different indigenous peoples, five in LGBTQIA+ community representation, five in the representation of certain ethnic and racial groups and one was categorized in miscellaneous. The initiatives by category are described below.

This research mapped and reported initiatives to develop and update subject heading lists and thesaurus focused on social justice and equity. Among the initiatives, those aimed at indigenous communities stand out for their cultural sensitivity and the involvement of these communities in elaborating the systems. Most of the identified and presented initiatives for subject heading lists and thesaurus aimed at representing indigenous peoples sought to improve information representation and retrieval of indigenous peoples in local contexts and reflect an indigenous perspective, a practice consistent with equity and social justice.

The study's results suggest a partial implementation of Watson's (2021) recommendations for promoting social justice and equity in Knowledge Organization. Adhering to these recommendations is crucial to enhance inclusion and participation of the represented people and groups in the construction of subject heading lists and thesaurus, which is directly related to the idea of social justice. Initiatives such as those reported by Metoyer and Littletree (2015), Bone and Lougheed (2018), and Farnel et al. (2018) incorporated this recommendation. We highlight successful initiatives such as the locally created subject headings at the Association of Manitoba Archives and Iowa State University, the Māori Subject Headings, Mashantucket Pequot Thesaurus, AIATSIS Thesauri and IWC Thesaurus, which promote community participation and their inclusion.

However, it also underscores the ongoing challenge of limited access to these systems. This limitation poses a barrier to the broader dissemination and utilization of such initiatives. We highlight that the representation of cultural, social and linguistic diversity is still incipient in many contexts, including in Latin America. It is essential to develop initiatives that represent the plurality of these regions and that have the active collaboration of their communities, to ensure that their voices and experiences are properly represented. It is necessary to overcome the lack of updates to existing initiatives, such as the Thesaurus for Gender Studies and Women in Brazil and the thesaurus “Mujer” in Spain and encourage the creation of new initiatives that contemplate diversity in a broader and more inclusive way. In this sense, KO practices must continue to evolve towards greater equity and social justice, to ensure representativeness and inclusion for all.

Bardenheier, P., Wilkinson, E. H., & Dale, H. (2015). Ki te Tika te Hanga, Ka Pakari te Kete: With the right structure we weave a strong basket. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53(5–6), 496–519. 10.1080/01639374.2015.1008716

Barité, M. (2011). Sistemas de organización del conocimiento: una tipología actualizada. Informação & Informação, 16(2), 122–139. 10.5433/1981-8920.2011v16n2p122

Barité, M., Colombo, S., Duarte Blanco, A., Simón, L., Cabrera Castromán, G., Odella, M., & Vergara, M. (2015). Diccionario de organización del conocimiento: clasificación, indización, terminología. Ediciones Universitarias. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12008/9028

Bone, C., & Lougheed, B. (2018). Library of Congress Subject Headings related to Indigenous peoples: Changing LCSH for use in a Canadian archival context. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 56(1), 83–95. 10.1080/01639374.2017.1382641

Broughton, V., Hansson, J., Hjørland, B., & López-Huertas, M. (2005). Knowledge organization. In L. Kajberg & L. Lorring (Eds.), European curriculum reflections on education in library and information science. Royal School of Library and Information Science. https://www.repository.unipr.it/bitstream/1889/1704/1/EUCLID%20European%20LIS%20curriculum.pdf

Broughton, V. (2019). The respective roles of intellectual creativity and automation in representing diversity: Human and machine generated bias. Knowledge Organization, 46(8), 596–606. 10.5771/0943-7444-2019-8-596

Bullard, J., Dierking, A., & Grundner, A. (2020). Centring LGBT2QIA+ subjects in knowledge organization systems. Knowledge Organization, 47(5), 393–403. https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/library_sp/68/

Campbell, H. M., Dieckman, C. S., Teal, W., & Wintermute, H. E. (2022). Improving subject headings for Iowa Indigenous peoples. Library Resources & Technical Services, 66(1), 48–59. 10.5860/lrts.66n1.48

Chansanam, W., Kwiecien, K., Buranarach, M., & Tuamsuk, K. (2021). A digital thesaurus of ethnic groups in the Mekong River Basin. Informatics, 8(3). 10.3390/informatics8030050

Colquhoun, H. L., Levac, D., O’Brien, K. K., Perrier, L., Kastner, M., & Moher, D. (2014). Scoping reviews: Time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(12), 1291–1294. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.013

Cunha, I. M. R. F. (1987). Documentação africanista: linguagem e ideologia. Ciência da Informação, 16(1). https://revista.ibict.br/ciinf/article/view/268

Díaz-Jatuf, J. (2022). Indizar la disidencia afectivo-sexual en bibliotecas: Buenas prácticas en el tratamiento de la información para la comunidad GLTTIBQ (gay, lésbicas, transexual, travesti, intersexual, bisexual, queer). En Encuentro Nacional de Catalogadores (Buenos Aires). https://www.bn.gov.ar/resources/conferences/encuentroVIII/1LUNES/9_JATUFTEXTO.pdf

Digital Transgender Archive. (1997). Homosaurus: An international LGBTQ+ linked data vocabulary. https://homosaurus.org/

Doyle, A. M., Lawson, K., & Dupont, S. (2015). Indigenization of knowledge organization at the Xwi7xwa Library. Journal of Library and Information Studies, 13(2), 107–134. http://hdl.handle.net/2429/54261

Drenthe, G. (1993). The Dutch women's thesaurus: A tool for cooperation between women's collections in the Netherlands and Belgium. Women’s Studies International Forum, 16(4), 437–444. 10.1016/0277-5395(93)90037-A

Drucker, D. J. (2017). How subjects matter: The Kinsey Institute’s Sexual Nomenclature: A Thesaurus (1976). Information & Culture, 52(2), 207–228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/658180

Farnel, S., Koufogiannakis, D., Laroque, S., Bigelow, I., Carr-Wiggin, A., Feisst, D., & Lar-Son, K. (2018). Re-thinking representation. The International Journal of Information, Diversity, and Inclusion, 2(3), 9–25. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48644435

Gerhardt, T. E., Silveira, D. T., Neis, I. A., Abreu, S. P. R., & Rosany, S. (2009). Métodos de pesquisa. Editora da UFRGS. https://lume.ufrgs.br/handle/10183/52806

Hardesty, J., & Nolan, A. (2021). Mitigating bias in metadata: A use case using Homosaurus linked data. Information Technology and Libraries, 40(3), 1–14. 10.6017/ital.v40i3.13053

Hjørland, B. (2016). Knowledge organization (KO)? Knowledge Organization, 43(6), 475–484. 10.5771/0943-7444-2016-6-475

Johnson, M. (2010). Transgender subject access: History and current practice. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 48(8), 661–683. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639370903534398

Khurshid, Z. (2002). Arabic script materials: Cataloging issues and problems. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 34(4), 67–75. 10.1300/J104v34n04_07

Lee, D. (2011). Indigenous knowledge organization: A study of concepts, terminology, structure and (mostly) Indigenous voices. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, 6(1), 1–33. 10.21083/partnership.v6i1.1427

Lilley, S. C. (2015). Ka Pō, Ka Ao, Ka Awatea: The interface between epistemology and Māori subject headings. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53(5–6), 479–495. 10.1080/01639374.2015.1009671

López-Huertas, M. J., & Ramírez, I. de T. (2007). Gender terminology and indexing systems: The case of woman’s body, image and visualization. Libri, 57(1), 34–44. 10.1515/LIBR.2007.34

Mai, J.-E. (2013). Ethics, values and morality in contemporary library classifications. Knowledge Organization, 40(4), 242–253. 10.5771/0943-7444-2013-4-242

Metoyer, C. A., & Littletree, S. (2015). Knowledge organization from an Indigenous perspective: The Mashantucket Pequot thesaurus of American Indian terminology project. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53(5–6), 640–657. 10.1080/01639374.2015.1010113

Milani, S. O., & Pinho, F. A. (2021). Organização do conhecimento crítica: Reflexões sobre representação e homossexualidade. En I. Amorin & R. Sales (Eds.), Ensaios em organização do conhecimento (pp. 187–210). UDESC.

Olson, H. A., & Schlegl, R. (2001). Standardization, objectivity, and user focus: A meta-analysis of subject access critiques. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 32(2), 61–80. 10.1300/J104v32n02_06

Olson, H. A. (2002). The power to name: Locating the limits of subject representation in libraries. Springer.

Olson, H. A. (2007). How we construct subjects: A feminist analysis. Library Trends, 56(2), 509–541. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2008.0007

Proença Júnior, D., & Silva, É. R. (2016). Contexto e processo do mapeamento sistemático da literatura no trajeto da pós-graduação no Brasil. Transinformação, 28(2), 233–240. 10.1590/2318-08892016000200009

Rogers, M. N. (1993). Are we on equal terms yet? Subject headings concerning women in LCSH, 1975–1991. Library Resources & Technical Services, 37(2), 181–196.

Rumrill, P. D., Fitzgerald, S. M., & Merchant, W. R. (2010). Using scoping literature reviews as a means of understanding and interpreting existing literature. Work, 35(3), 399–404. 10.3233/WOR-2010-0998

Soglasnova, L., & Hanson, M. (2015). Socially responsive design and evaluation of a workers’ compensation thesaurus for a community organization with selective application of cognitive work analysis: A case study. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53(8), 905–926. 10.1080/01639374.2015.1044632

Vital, L. P., Hernandez, B. F., & dos Santos, A. (2019). Análise de conteúdo da produção científica da organização do conhecimento em sua dimensão política e social no Brasil. Informação & Informação, 24(3), 1–27. 10.5433/1981-8920.2019v24n3p1

Watson, B. M. (2021). Advancing equitable cataloging. In North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization Proceedings (pp. 1–28). University of Washington. 10.7152/nasko.v8i1.15887

Zhou, L. (2003). Characteristics of material organization and classification in the Kinsey Institute Library. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 35(3–4), 335–353. 10.1300/J104v35n03_04

Appendix A - Scoping review protocol

Appendix B – Scopus database search string

TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {subject access} OR {subject analysis} OR {subject headings} OR {subject catalog} OR "indexing language*" OR {documentary language} OR {knowledge organization} OR {information organization} OR {knowledge representation} OR {subject representation} OR {knowledge organization systems} OR thesaur* OR {vocabulary control} OR {controlled vocabulary} OR {analise de assunto} OR "cabeçalho* de assunto" OR {catalogação de assunto} OR "linguage* de indexação" OR "linguage* documentaria*" OR {organização do conhecimento} OR {organização da informação} OR {representação da informação} OR {representação do conhecimento} OR {representação de assunto} OR {representação tematica} OR {sistemas de organização do conhecimento} OR tesauro* OR {tratamento temático da informação} OR "vocabulario* controlado*" OR {acceso tematico} OR {analisis de temas} OR {encabezamientos de materia} OR {catalogacion por materias} OR {catalogo por materias} OR "lenguaje* de indizacion" OR "lenguaje* documentario*" OR {organizacion del conocimiento} OR {organizacion bibliografica} OR {organizacion de la informacion} OR {representacion de la informacion} OR {representacion del conocimiento} OR {representacion tematica} OR {sistemas de organizacion del conocimiento} OR {control de vocabulario} OR {descriptores tematicos} OR "lenguaje* controlado*" OR {terminos tematicos} ) AND ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( identit* OR homosexuali* OR {social dimension} OR {cultural dimension} OR ethic* OR {cultural diversity} OR {social justice} OR children OR bias* OR prejudice OR glbt OR queer OR bisexual OR transgen* OR {trans people} OR gay OR lesbian OR gender OR ethni* OR race OR disabilit* OR women OR {cultural competency} OR {cultural warrant} OR poverty OR poor OR {native people} OR religi* OR identidad* OR ideolog* OR homossexualidade OR {dimensão social} OR {dimensão politica e social} OR {dimensão cultural} OR sociocultura* OR etic* OR "diversidad* cultural" OR {justiça social} OR criança* OR desvio* OR discrimina* OR preconceito* OR marginaliza* OR exclus* OR lgbt OR lesbica OR bissexual OR transexua* OR genero OR *sexuali* OR minori* OR etni* OR racism* OR raça OR racial OR acessibili* OR deficiencia* OR inclus* OR femini* OR mulher* OR multicultural* OR {garantia cultural} OR descoloniza* OR decoloni* OR pobre* OR indigen* OR indio OR {povos originarios} OR aborig* OR {dimension social} OR {dimension cultural} OR {dimension politica y social} OR {justicia social} OR niño* OR sesgo* OR perjuicio OR margina* OR gltt OR lgtb OR {personas trans} OR lesbiana OR raza OR accesibilidad* OR discapacidad* OR mujer* OR {pueblos originarios} ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( SUBJAREA, "SOCI" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( SUBJAREA, "ARTS" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( SUBJAREA, "MULT" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( SUBJAREA, "Undefined").

Executed in 31/03/22

Appendix C –WoS database search string

“subject access” OR “subject analysis” OR “subject headings” OR “subject catalog” OR “indexing language” OR “documentary language” OR “knowledge organization” OR “information organization” OR “knowledge representation” OR “subject representation” OR “knowledge organization systems” OR thesaur* OR “vocabulary control” OR “controlled vocabulary” OR “analise de assunto” OR “cabeçalho* de assunto” OR “catalogação de assunto” OR “linguage* de indexação” OR “linguage* documentaria*” OR “organização do conhecimento” OR “organização da informação” OR “representação da informação” OR “representação do conhecimento” OR “representação de assunto” OR “representação tematica” OR “sistemas de organização do conhecimento” OR tesauro OR “tratamento temático da informação” OR “vocabulario* controlado*” OR “acceso tematico” OR “analisis de temas” OR “encabezamientos de materia” OR “catalogacion por materias” OR “catalogo por materias” OR “lenguaje* de indizacion” OR “lenguaje documentario” OR “organizacion del conocimiento” OR “organizacion bibliografica” OR “organizacion de la informacion” OR “representacion de la informacion” OR “representacion del conocimiento” OR “representacion tematica” OR “sistemas de organizacion del conocimiento” OR “control de vocabulario” OR “descriptores tematicos” OR “lenguaje controlado” OR “terminos tematicos” (Tópico) or “subject access” OR “subject analysis” OR “subject headings” OR “subject catalog” OR “indexing language” OR “documentary language” OR “knowledge organization” OR “information organization” OR “knowledge representation” OR “subject representation” OR “knowledge organization systems” OR thesaur* OR “vocabulary control” OR “controlled vocabulary” OR “analise de assunto” OR “cabeçalho* de assunto” OR “catalogação de assunto” OR “linguage* de indexação” OR “linguage* documentaria*” OR “organização do conhecimento” OR “organização da informação” OR “representação da informação” OR “representação do conhecimento” OR “representação de assunto” OR “representação tematica” OR “sistemas de organização do conhecimento” OR tesauro OR “tratamento temático da informação” OR “vocabulario* controlado*” OR “acceso tematico” OR “analisis de temas” OR “encabezamientos de materia” OR “catalogacion por materias” OR “catalogo por materias” OR “lenguaje* de indizacion” OR “lenguaje documentario” OR “organizacion del conocimiento” OR “organizacion bibliografica” OR “organizacion de la informacion” OR “representacion de la informacion” OR “representacion del conocimiento” OR “representacion tematica” OR “sistemas de organizacion del conocimiento” OR “control de vocabulario” OR “descriptores tematicos” OR “lenguaje controlado” OR “terminos tematicos” (Título) AND identit* OR homosexuali* OR “social dimension” OR “cultural dimension” OR ethic* OR “cultural diversity” OR “social justice” OR children OR bias* OR prejudice OR GLBT OR queer OR bisexual OR transgen* OR “trans people” OR gay OR lesbian OR gender OR ethni* OR race OR disabilit* OR women OR “cultural competency” OR “cultural warrant” OR poverty OR poor OR “native people” OR religi* OR identidad* OR ideolog* OR homossexualidade OR “dimensão social” OR “dimensão politica e social” OR “dimensão cultural” OR sociocultural* OR etic* OR “diversidad* cultural” OR “justiça social” OR criança OR desvio OR discrimina* OR preconceito OR marginaliza* OR exclus* OR LGBT OR lesbica OR bissexual OR transexua* OR genero OR sexuali* OR minori* OR etni* OR racism* OR raça OR racial OR acessibili* OR deficiencia OR inclus* OR femini* OR mulher* OR multicultural* OR “garantia cultural” OR descoloniza* OR decoloni* OR pobre* OR indigen* OR indio OR “povos originarios” OR aborig* OR “dimension social” OR “dimension cultural” OR “dimension politica y social” OR “justicia social” OR niño OR sesgo OR perjuicio OR margina* OR GLTT OR LGTB OR “personas trans” OR lesbiana OR raza OR accesibilidad OR discapacidad OR mujer OR “pueblos originarios” (Tópico) or identit* OR homosexuali* OR “social dimension” OR “cultural dimension” OR ethic* OR “cultural diversity” OR “social justice” OR children OR bias* OR prejudice OR GLBT OR queer OR bisexual OR transgen* OR “trans people” OR gay OR lesbian OR gender OR ethni* OR race OR disabilit* OR women OR “cultural competency” OR “cultural warrant” OR poverty OR poor OR “native people” OR religi* OR identidad* OR ideolog* OR homossexualidade OR “dimensão social” OR “dimensão politica e social” OR “dimensão cultural” OR sociocultural* OR etic* OR “diversidad* cultural” OR “justiça social” OR criança OR desvio OR discrimina* OR preconceito OR marginaliza* OR exclus* OR LGBT OR lesbica OR bissexual OR transexua* OR genero OR sexuali* OR minori* OR etni* OR racism* OR raça OR racial OR acessibili* OR deficiencia OR inclus* OR femini* OR mulher* OR multicultural* OR “garantia cultural” OR descoloniza* OR decoloni* OR pobre* OR indigen* OR indio OR “povos originarios” OR aborig* OR “dimension social” OR “dimension cultural” OR “dimension politica y social” OR “justicia social” OR niño OR sesgo OR perjuicio OR margina* OR GLTT OR LGTB OR “personas trans” OR lesbiana OR raza OR accesibilidad OR discapacidad OR mujer OR “pueblos originarios” (Título).

Executed in 04/04/22

Appendix D –LISTA database search string

((TI identit* OR homosexuali* OR “social dimension” OR “cultural dimension” OR ethic* OR “cultural diversity” OR “social justice” OR children OR bias* OR prejudice OR GLBT OR queer OR bisexual OR transgen* OR “trans people” OR gay OR lesbian OR gender OR ethni* OR race OR disabilit* OR women OR “cultural competency” OR “cultural warrant” OR poverty OR poor OR “native people” OR religi* OR identidad* OR ideolog* OR homossexualidade OR “dimensão social” OR “dimensão politica e social” OR “dimensão cultural” OR sociocultural* OR etic* OR “diversidad* cultural” OR “justiça social” OR criança OR desvio OR discrimina* OR preconceito OR marginaliza* OR exclus* OR LGBT OR lesbica OR bissexual OR transexua* OR genero OR sexuali* OR minori* OR etni* OR racism* OR raça OR racial OR acessibili* OR deficiencia OR inclus* OR femini* OR mulher* OR multicultural* OR “garantia cultural” OR descoloniza* OR decoloni* OR pobre* OR indigen* OR indio OR “povos originarios” OR aborig* OR “dimension social” OR “dimension cultural” OR “dimension politica y social” OR “justicia social” OR nino OR sesgo OR perjuicio OR margina* OR GLTT OR LGTB OR “personas trans” OR lesbiana OR raza OR accesibilidad OR discapacidad OR mujer* OR “pueblos originarios” OR SU identit* OR homosexuali* OR “social dimension” OR “cultural dimension” OR ethic* OR “cultural diversity” OR “social justice” OR children OR bias* OR prejudice OR GLBT OR queer OR bisexual OR transgen* OR “trans people” OR gay OR lesbian OR gender OR ethni* OR race OR disabilit* OR women OR “cultural competency” OR “cultural warrant” OR poverty OR poor OR “native people” OR religi* OR identidad* OR ideolog* OR homossexualidade OR “dimensão social” OR “dimensão politica e social” OR “dimensão cultural” OR sociocultural* OR etic* OR “diversidad* cultural” OR “justiça social” OR criança OR desvio OR discrimina* OR preconceito OR marginaliza* OR exclus* OR LGBT OR lesbica OR bissexual OR transexua* OR genero OR sexuali* OR minori* OR etni* OR racism* OR raça OR racial OR acessibili* OR deficiencia OR inclus* OR femini* OR mulher* OR multicultural* OR “garantia cultural” OR descoloniza* OR decoloni* OR pobre* OR indigen* OR indio OR “povos originarios” OR aborig* OR “dimension social” OR “dimension cultural” OR “dimension politica y social” OR “justicia social” OR nino OR sesgo OR perjuicio OR margina* OR GLTT OR LGTB OR “personas trans” OR lesbiana OR raza OR accesibilidad OR discapacidad OR mujer* OR “pueblos originarios” OR AB identit* OR homosexuali* OR “social dimension” OR “cultural dimension” OR ethic* OR “cultural diversity” OR “social justice” OR children OR bias* OR prejudice OR GLBT OR queer OR bisexual OR transgen* OR “trans people” OR gay OR lesbian OR gender OR ethni* OR race OR disabilit* OR women OR “cultural competency” OR “cultural warrant” OR poverty OR poor OR “native people” OR religi* OR identidad* OR ideolog* OR homossexualidade OR “dimensão social” OR “dimensão politica e social” OR “dimensão cultural” OR sociocultural* OR etic* OR “diversidad* cultural” OR “justiça social” OR criança OR desvio OR discrimina* OR preconceito OR marginaliza* OR exclus* OR LGBT OR lesbica OR bissexual OR transexua* OR genero OR sexuali* OR minori* OR etni* OR racism* OR raça OR racial OR acessibili* OR deficiencia OR inclus* OR femini* OR mulher* OR multicultural* OR “garantia cultural” OR descoloniza* OR decoloni* OR pobre* OR indigen* OR indio OR “povos originarios” OR aborig* OR “dimension social” OR “dimension cultural” OR “dimension politica y social” OR “justicia social” OR nino OR sesgo OR perjuicio OR margina* OR GLTT OR LGTB OR “personas trans” OR lesbiana OR raza OR accesibilidad OR discapacidad OR mujer* OR “pueblos originarios” OR KW identit* OR homosexuali* OR “social dimension” OR “cultural dimension” OR ethic* OR “cultural diversity” OR “social justice” OR children OR bias* OR prejudice OR GLBT OR queer OR bisexual OR transgen* OR “trans people” OR gay OR lesbian OR gender OR ethni* OR race OR disabilit* OR women OR “cultural competency” OR “cultural warrant” OR poverty OR poor OR “native people” OR religi* OR identidad* OR ideolog* OR homossexualidade OR “dimensão social” OR “dimensão politica e social” OR “dimensão cultural” OR sociocultural* OR etic* OR “diversidad* cultural” OR “justiça social” OR criança OR desvio OR discrimina* OR preconceito OR marginaliza* OR exclus* OR LGBT OR lesbica OR bissexual OR transexua* OR genero OR sexuali* OR minori* OR etni* OR racism* OR raça OR racial OR acessibili* OR deficiencia OR inclus* OR femini* OR mulher* OR multicultural* OR “garantia cultural” OR descoloniza* OR decoloni* OR pobre* OR indigen* OR indio OR “povos originarios” OR aborig* OR “dimension social” OR “dimension cultural” OR “dimension politica y social” OR “justicia social” OR nino OR sesgo OR perjuicio OR margina* OR GLTT OR LGTB OR “personas trans” OR lesbiana OR raza OR accesibilidad OR discapacidad OR mujer* OR “pueblos originarios”) AND (S1 AND S2).

Executed in 31/03/22

Appendix E –ISTA database search string

TI ( “subject access” OR “subject analysis” OR “subject headings” OR “subject catalog” OR “indexing language” OR “documentary language” OR “knowledge organization” OR “information organization” OR “knowledge representation” OR “subject representation” OR “knowledge organization systems” OR thesaur* OR “vocabulary control” OR “controlled vocabulary” OR “analise de assunto” OR “cabecalho* de assunto” OR “catalogacao de assunto” OR “linguage* de indexacao” OR “linguage* documentaria*” OR “organizacao do conhecimento” OR “organizacao da informacao” OR “representacao da informacao” OR “representacao do conhecimento” OR “representacao de assunto” OR “representacao tematica” OR “sistemas de organizacao do conhecimento” OR tesauro OR “tratamento tematico da informacao” OR “vocabulario* controlado*” OR “acceso tematico” OR “analisis de temas” OR “encabezamientos de materia” OR “catalogacion por materias” OR “catalogo por materias” OR “lenguaje* de indizacion” OR “lenguaje documentario” OR “organizacion del conocimiento” OR “organizacion bibliografica” OR “organizacion de la informacion” OR “representacion de la informacion” OR “representacion del conocimiento” OR “representacion tematica” OR “sistemas de organizacion del conocimiento” OR “control de vocabulario” OR “descriptores tematicos” OR “lenguaje controlado” OR “terminos tematicos” ) OR SU ( “subject access” OR “subject analysis” OR “subject headings” OR “subject catalog” OR “indexing language” OR “documentary language” OR “knowledge organization” OR “information organization” OR “knowledge representation” OR “subject representation” OR “knowledge organization systems” OR thesaur* OR “vocabulary control” OR “controlled vocabulary” OR “analise de assunto” OR “cabecalho* de assunto” OR “catalogacao de assunto” OR “linguage* de indexacao” OR “linguage* documentaria*” OR “organizacao do conhecimento” OR “organizacao da informacao” OR “representacao da informacao” OR “representacao do conhecimento” OR “representacao de assunto” OR “representacao tematica” OR “sistemas de organizacao do conhecimento” OR tesauro OR “tratamento tematico da informacao” OR “vocabulario* controlado*” OR “acceso tematico” OR “analisis de temas” OR “encabezamientos de materia” OR “catalogacion por materias” OR “catalogo por materias” OR “lenguaje* de indizacion” OR “lenguaje documentario” OR “organizacion del conocimiento” OR “organizacion bibliografica” OR “organizacion de la informacion” OR “representacion de la informacion” OR “representacion del conocimiento” OR “representacion tematica” OR “sistemas de organizacion del conocimiento” OR “control de vocabulario” OR “descriptores tematicos” OR “lenguaje controlado” OR “terminos tematicos” ) OR AB ( “subject access” OR “subject analysis” OR “subject headings” OR “subject catalog” OR “indexing language” OR “documentary language” OR “knowledge organization” OR “information organization” OR “knowledge representation” OR “subject representation” OR “knowledge organization systems” OR thesaur* OR “vocabulary control” OR “controlled vocabulary” OR “analise de assunto” OR “cabecalho* de assunto” OR “catalogacao de assunto” OR “linguage* de indexacao” OR “linguage* documentaria*” OR “organizacao do conhecimento” OR “organizacao da informacao” OR “representacao da informacao” OR “representacao do conhecimento” OR “representacao de assunto” OR “representacao tematica” OR “sistemas de organizacao do conhecimento” OR tesauro OR “tratamento tematico da informacao” OR “vocabulario* controlado*” OR “acceso tematico” OR “analisis de temas” OR “encabezamientos de materia” OR “catalogacion por materias” OR “catalogo por materias” OR “lenguaje* de indizacion” OR “lenguaje documentario” OR “organizacion del conocimiento” OR “organizacion bibliografica” OR “organizacion de la informacion” OR “representacion de la informacion” OR “representacion del conocimiento” OR “representacion tematica” OR “sistemas de organizacion del conocimiento” OR “control de vocabulario” OR “descriptores tematicos” OR “lenguaje controlado” OR “terminos tematicos” ) OR KW ( “subject access” OR “subject analysis” OR “subject headings” OR “subject catalog” OR “indexing language” OR “documentary language” OR “knowledge organization” OR “information organization” OR “knowledge representation” OR “subject representation” OR “knowledge organization systems” OR thesaur* OR “vocabulary control” OR “controlled vocabulary” OR “analise de assunto” OR “cabecalho* de assunto” OR “catalogacao de assunto” OR “linguage* de indexacao” OR “linguage* documentaria*” OR “organizacao do conhecimento” OR “organizacao da informacao” OR “representacao da informacao” OR “representacao do conhecimento” OR “representacao de assunto” OR “representacao tematica” OR “sistemas de organizacao do conhecimento” OR tesauro OR “tratamento tematico da informacao” OR “vocabulario* controlado*” OR “acceso tematico” OR “analisis de temas” OR “encabezamientos de materia” OR “catalogacion por materias” OR “catalogo por materias” OR “lenguaje* de indizacion” OR “lenguaje documentario” OR “organizacion del conocimiento” OR “organizacion bibliografica” OR “organizacion de la informacion” OR “representacion de la informacion” OR “representacion del conocimiento” OR “representacion tematica” OR “sistemas de organizacion del conocimiento” OR “control de vocabulario” OR “descriptores tematicos” OR “lenguaje controlado” OR “terminos tematicos”).

Executed in 31/03/22