Thomas E. Nisonger

The Benefits and Drawbacks of Impact Factor for Journal Collection Management in Libraries

Abstract An overview and analysis of the Journal Citation Reportsimpact factor is provided here. The historical development, calculation of, and alternatives to impact factor are briefly described. Nine general uses of impact factor, including library collection management decisions, journal rankings, journal decision models, and full-text database evaluation, are discussed. Ten benefits, such as its well-established authority, are listed. Finally, more than a dozen criticisms of citation data in general (e.g., self-citations are counted) and impact factor specifically (e.g., problems with the formula for its calculation) are analyzed. The author concludes that impact factor, if used appropriately and in combination with other criteria, is a valid tool that can assist journal collection management decisions in research libraries.

The “80/20 Rule” and Core Journals

ABSTRACT This column examines the 80/20 rule, also termed a Pareto distribution, and explains these terms historical origins. The column focuses on this pattern in the use of print serials, downloads from electronic databases, and citations to journals. The rules relationship to Bradfords Law is explored, and some of the research pertaining to the 80/20 rule is reviewed. The patterns utility for defining the core collection and serials collection management is discussed, whereas a number of limitations are pointed out. Some questions for further research are suggested. It is concluded that the 80/20 ratio (80% of use is derived from 20% of the titles), when found as an approximate pattern, is a valid method for determining the core concept in journal collection management.

A methodological issue concerning the use of Social Sciences Citation Index Journal Citation Reports impact factor data for journal ranking

Following a brief introduction of citation-based journal rankings as potential serials management tools, the most frequently used citation measure-impact factor-is explained. This paper then demonstrates a methodological bias inherent in averaging Social Sciences Citation Index Journal Citation Reports (SSCI JCR) impact factor data from two or more consecutive years. A possible method for correcting the bias, termed adjusted impact factor, is proposed. For illustration, a set of political science journals is ranked according to three different methods (crude averaging, weighted averaging, and adjusted impact factor) for combining SSCI JCR impact factor data from successive years. Although the correlations among the three methods are quite high, one can observe noteworthy differences in the rankings that could impact on collection development decisions.

The rowing collection in the free library of philadelphia OPAC : A checklist evaluation

Abstract An evaluation of the Free Library of Philadelphias (FLP) rowing collection by the checklist method is reported. A literature review demonstrates that the checklist method has been used for multiple purposes for over a century and a half, but no evaluations of library rowing collections by the checklist or any other method were identified. In this study, an ad hoc70-item list, compiled by a rowing expert, was checked against the FLPs OPAC from a remote location in Indiana. The FLP held 53% of the listed items and no fewer than 40% in any of six topical categories. A keyword search found that the FLP holds over 100 fiction and nonfiction rowing books. An analysis of those titles by publication date shows considerable depth in the FLP collection and a correspondence between its collecting patterns and broader trends in publishing and rowing. It is concluded that the FLP has an in-depth, high quality rowing collection. A number of problems encountered while searching the OPAC are discussed and questions for further research are proposed.

Approaches, Techniques, and Criteria for Serials Evaluation in the Electronic Environment

Abstract An overview of traditional methods of evaluating serials collections and serial titles is presented and applied to electronic resources. Traditional methods such as holdings, checklist, conspectus, availability studies, document delivery studies, citation studies and use studies used for the evaluation of serials collections in print can be modified for the evaluation of electronic serials collections. Issues, problems and challenges associated with electronic serials evaluation are then outlined, and conclusions that emphasize the continuing importance of serials evaluation in the electronic environment are drawn.

A Review of “Renewing Professional Librarianship: A Fundamental Rethinking”

Many people now question the relevance and even the future existence of libraries. For some, a Google search has already replaced the library. Many library and information science education programs are perceived as marginalizing traditional library science, and one hears reports that previously professional-level library positions are now being filled by paraprofessionals without a master of library science degree (MLS). This book proposes a remedy for these issues. Its objective, as explained in chapter 1 (which serves as the introduction) is to offer “an exploration of how professional librarianship can be safeguarded and enhanced in the new millennium.” Crowley argues that librarianship must be reconfigured from the present focus on conveying information (termed the information model or business model) to an emphasis on supporting patron lifelong learning, education, and reading (termed life cycle librarianship). In chapter 3, he presents a historical sketch of North American library and information science (LIS) education and practice to demonstrate a traditional educational role for libraries dating as far back as the 1852 Boston Public Library report. He discusses a 2005 OCLC study titled Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources, based on information from more than 3,000 worldwide survey respondents, that indicates that people use Google rather than libraries to access electronic information but view the library as “a place to learn . . . a place to read.” He does not think libraries will vanish: “Americans still love their libraries, particularly their public libraries. These institutions will survive.” But Crowley is concerned about the decline of library professionalism. His prime culprit is library and information science education and the “ . . . dominance of information over library in programs accredited by [the] American Library Association” [ALA]. Crowley uses the model of scientific/intellectual movements by Scott Frickel and Neil Gross in American Sociological Review (April 2005) to explain this phenomenon. He also asserts that “‘regulatory capture’ . . . defined as control of the ALA accreditation system by the very educational programs it is supposed to regulate . . . is in the