The Management of the Information Department (Book Review)
Jata S. Ghosh · College & Research Libraries · 1978
large project of the American Psychological Association, which studied the structure and use of the literature of that subject in the 1950s and early 1960s.The first part of the book is devoted to definitions, classifi'cation, and discussion of the problems involved in using various bibliographic elements in the analysis of primary and secondary literatures.This discussion merely focuses on bibliometrics information already familiar to anyone who has done library cataloging.The middle part, beginning with chapter five on the size and growth of the literature, is the meat of the book, because it deals with specific applications of bibliometrics.The final part is a review of standard statistical methods, including the application of computers, graphic presentations, and sampling.An appendix includes a glossary, a list of suggestions for projects in the field (which is also a useful summary of the scope of the subject), a list of references cited in the text, and a brief list of suggested further reading.The list of DISISS research reports (p.179) is useful inasmuch as libraries may have missed acquiring some or all of these rather fugitive research reports.Although one might have wished for a more detailed text (the treatment of content analysis, for example, is inadequate), most research libraries will wish to have this book.Interest in bibliometrics extends well beyond library and information science.The authors are of the opinion-and this reviewer agrees-that statistical methods of literature analysis are spreading from the sciences and social sciences to the humanities.In the field of history, the rise of cliometric analysis will certainly involve the allied field of bibliometrics.Bibliometric analysis of Nicholas and Ritchie's book would be difficult and probably unrewarding inasmuch as only twentyeight references are cited.One would come to the invalid conclusion that nothing was done in this field between Hulme's work in 1923 and Louittit' s in 1955.The numerous citation studies done at the Graduate Library School by, for example, Fussier in chemistry and physics (1948), McAnally in history (1951), and Hintz in botany (1952) are ignored.Nor is the more recent work (1971) by Lamb at Case Western Reserve