Re: Does More Mean More?

[Janellyn P Kleiner <jkleiner@lsu.edu>]

I have surveyed academic faculty for more than a decade asking 
them to name specific titles needed for research and instruction. 
I have also retained use data (circulation, browse, and 
ILL/document delivery requests) for more than ten years. I've 
found minimal correlation between what is used and what faculty 
say they need. In my opinion, this lack of correlation may be due 
in part to the excess of information now available. In the past, 
pre the electronic information boom, faculty depended on specific 
journals. That doesn't appear to be true any longer. The data 
proves that. They now have access to a broad array of electronic 
indexes/abstracts and full-text journals. This has opened doors 
for them to a world of information. If it's available 
electronically and reputable, they will use it and they do.

Jane Kleiner Associate Dean of Libraries for Collection Services 
The LSU Libraries Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 
70803 Phone: 225-578-2217 Fax: 225-578-6825 E-Mail: 
jkleiner@lsu.edu


>Peter Banks wrote:
>
>I think scholars do tell us what they need. I've done a fair 
>amount of reader research over the years, and it is never the 
>case that scholars tell us "the more original research, the 
>better."
>
>For example, I once surveyed the readers of Diabetes Care with
>this question: "What percentage of pages do you feel should be
>devoted to each of the following five categories?" (answers are
>based on 474 responses to a survey that had a return rate of
>51.3%)
>
>* Original peer-reviewed research 34.7%
>
>* Articles analyzing and interpreting original research
>   (editorials, commentary, etc.) 18.7%
>
>* Artcles that illustrate problems in clinical care (case
>   reports, clinical practice observations, etc.)  23.9%
>
>* Position and consensus statements  12.7%
>
>* News from scientific meetings 10.0%
>
>The conclusion I draw from this and other research I've done is 
>that scholars are drowning in information, and seeking tools to 
>interpret and make use of it.