LIBRES
Index
Volume 4 Number 2/3 1994
Buchanan, 'Interdisciplinarity in Historical Studies: Citation Analysis of the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_', LIBRES v4n02-3
URL = ftp://ftp.lib.ncsu.edu/pub/stacks/libres/libres-v4n02-3-buchanan-interdisciplinarity
LIBRES: Library and Information Science Research Electronic Journal
__________________________________________________________________
ISSN 1058-6768 August 28, 1994 Volume 4 Issue 2/3
Quarterly LIBRE4N2 BUCHANAN
Interdisciplinarity in Historical Studies: Citation Analysis of the
_Journal of Interdisciplinary History_
Authors:
Anne L. Buchanan, Assistant Management and Economics Librarian at
Purdue University, holds a B.S. in Business Administration from
Marian College, a M.L.S. from Indiana University, and a M.A. in
Public Administration from Mankato State University.
Jean-Pierre V.M. Herubel, Philosophy and Political Science
Bibliographer at Purdue University, holds a B.A. and M.A. in
European History from Penn State University and a Ph.D. in European
Intellectual and Cultural History and a M.L.S. from Kent State
University.
INTRODUCTION
Historical research and scholarship examines the human past.
Until recently, professional history was written by scholars
interested in specific areas of human activity--political events and
the actions of elites (Hamerow, 1987). Today, such is not the case.
During the last twenty-five years, academic historians around the
world have seen a massive change in the manner in which historical
studies are practiced (Kammen, 1980). Historical scholarship has
moved beyond earlier concerns of politics, war, diplomatic
maneuverings, and narrative history. In the United States, academic
historians have opened new areas of interest, often utilizing
innovative techniques and methodologies. To be certain, not all
have welcomed these changes nor have all historians joined the
various interests spawned by new approaches to historical research.
But one thing is certain: historical studies have undergone a
seachange, and as innovation and methodological technique continue
to evolve, so shall historical studies and its scholarship reflect
that evolution.
Historical scholarship follows many of the tenets and familiar
scholarly norms practiced by other disciplines. Unlike many
disciplines in the social sciences and the humanities, history
straddles both social science and humanities in that it is claimed
by both major spheres of disciplinary activity (Peters, 1990).
Depending upon an historian's intellectual preference or
specialization, methodology used, historiographic orientation, or
subject matter, history may function more as a humanities or social
science discipline. Intellectual and cultural history may be
analytical or narrative and utilize the most sophisticated
postmodern thinking, social history, statistical analysis, and
anthropological theory. History is indeed a mansion with many rooms
and can be better understood through a systematic analysis of its
citations. Citation analysis isolates the characteristics of
historical research and provides insights into a diverse discipline.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Since history is complex and casts its net in hopes of
comprehending the past _in toto_, it is desirable to examine its
intellectual structure. With the advent of citation studies, their
contributions to the examination of characteristics of scholarly
literatures has been useful in grasping the contours of
disciplinary literature (Lawani, 1981). Research agendas of various
disciplines, as well as their citation practices, have been mapped.
A number of citation studies focused on historical scholarship, some
of which illustrated the degree to which citation studies have been
applied to this literature (McAnally, 1950). These effectively
point the direction in which most of these citation studies have
proceeded.
Researchers have been conducting citation analysis of specific
aspects of historical research. McAnally studied the literature
cited by American historians studying American history. He found
the Price Index (a measure of obsolescence used to measure the
hardness or softness of a discipline and more thoroughly defined in
section Discussion--Price Index) was 10.4%, monographs constituted
45.6% and serials 21.4% of cited items, with approximately 75% of
subjects cited appearing in history and the social sciences. This
indicated American history did not conform to the Price Index as it
relates to social scientific literature.
Peters (1990) discussed the relationship of monographs to
serials as a measure of the hardness and the softness of
disciplines. Generally, science disciplines relied upon serials as
the major communication vehicle. The social sciences used slightly
more books than serials, and the humanities depended more upon
monographs than serials. Thus one can classify the sciences as a
hard discipline, the humanities as a soft discipline, and the social
sciences between the two disciplines
(Table I).
Table I
Books vs. Serials
Discipline Books % Serials %
----------------------------------------------------------------
Science (mean) 15.0 84.1%
Social Sciences (general) 58.0 37.7
Humanities (mean) 61.4 29.8
---------------------------------------------------------------
(Data from Peters, 1990, pp. 43, 62, 74)
Jones, et al. (1972) examined the literature in British history
cited by British historians and found 36.4% were to monographs and
21.5% to serials, and approximately 25% of journals provided 75% of
journal citations. Further, over 90% of all citations were to
English-language items which indicated British History is a
humanities discipline as opposed to a social sciences discipline and
is decidedly monolingual.
Alston's work centered on historians at the University of
Chicago and found monographs constituted over twice the percentage
of serials usage. Moreover, subject dispersion indicated 35.1% and
55.4% were to history and social sciences references respectively,
substantiating that University of Chicago practiced American history
as a humanities.
Herubel's 1991 study on the evolution of garden history as a
subfield of art history indicated garden history adhered to all the
scholarly attributes characteristic of mainstream historical
studies. Monographs constituted 45.21% and serials 11.64% of cited
items. Additionally, primary sources, so crucial to historical
research, made up 45.9% of cited items, demonstrating garden history
was quite primary-sources-grounded--a strong signal it was firmly
situated in the historian's purview of what constitutes bonafide
historical research. Herubel's 1990 study indicated subject
dispersion was growing in certain fields of history, such as social
history and economic history.
From these studies it can be seen that interdisciplinarity,
among other phenomena, defined the rapidly growing fields of social,
intellectual/cultural, and the newly emerging political history.
Thus one can conclude citation studies are a resourceful tool to
understanding the changing contours of historical research.
Citation studies outside the discipline of historical studies
provide further examples of successful measurements of
interdisciplinarity. For example Choi (1988) analyzed
intradiscplinary and interdisciplinary communication patterns of
anthropology with the results indicating heavily cited disciplines
included history, sociology, and biomedical sciences, and they were
mutually exclusive. Itzchaky (1979) examined Biblical and Ancient
Near East Studies to determine a core literature and found them to
be interdisciplinary. McCain (1984) mapped the structure of
macroeconomics literature. Estabrook (1981) examined library
science literature to measure the impact of sociology upon the
interdisciplinary nature of library science.
METHODOLOGY
To consider interdisciplinarity in historical research in the
main, the authors chose the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_
from 1970 to 1992 as the target journal. The _Journal of
Interdisciplinary History_ was first published in 1970 and purported
to entertain a wide spectrum of historical research. Accordingly,
"We will be catholic both conceptually and geographically. We are
interested in publishing articles influenced by or emphasizing
the techniques of other fields, whether they be anthropology,
philology, paleopathology, psychoanalysis, zoology, art
criticism, or numismatics. We want to encourage historians to look
elsewhere for assistance in solving their problems, and we will
publish not only the results of such research, but also
descriptions of the methods employed" (Rotberg & Rabb, 1970).
Fyfe's description of the journal supported the editors' claims.
She described the quarterly as publishing "methodological and
substantive articles devoted to the application of other disciplines
and branches of learning to research in history, without
geographical or chronological limits" (1986, 11).
Numbers from a random table determined which issues in each
volume were to be used for the analysis. Only citations from
articles, review essays, technical notes, and reports were collected
with year of publication and journal title noted. Once the authors
identified journals producing two or more citations, several steps
were taken to determine the cited journals' subject classifications.
Disciplinary dispersion (scatter) was established by noting the
cited journals' academic or societal disciplinary affiliation as
stated in _Ulrich's International Periodicals Directory 1993-94_ .
Further, _de visu_ examination of title pages of journals were
corroborated with Library of Congress subject headings and
cataloging data. Each journal's statement of purpose was considered
to further establish disciplinary affiliation. Additionally,
because obsolescence of research literature can be an indicator of
scientific and social scientific characteristics, data was measured
against the Price Index.
Historical research is either disciplinary or
interdisciplinary. Often, subdisciplinary interests develop and
evolve into bonafide fields with particular methodologies, normative
practices, and research subjects (Herubel & Buchanan, 1993). The
nomenclature surrounding disciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and
subdisciplinarity has been difficult to adequately define and is
still undergoing definition. The operative definitions used for
this study are 1) Disciplinarity--a construction of accepted topics,
methodologies, and procedures in a scholarly pursuit; 2)
Subdisciplinarity--a subset of a discipline tightly focused around
unique subjects and following accepted subject-dependent
methodologies and procedures; 3) Interdisciplinarity--the nexus of
two or more disciplines or subdisciplines where subjects under
examination and focused methodologies meld and function as a
synthesis. With these definitions at hand, interdisciplinary
analysis of historical research proceeded with a degree of veracity.
DISCUSSION--Disciplinary Dispersion
The _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ 1970-1992 yielded
1,070 citations, and when examined, interesting and specific
phenomena emerged. Citation patterns conforming to social science
and humanities research literature were observed to be operating,
but with several qualifications. Unlike mainstream history, that
is, scholarship appearing in such organs as _American Historical
Review_ or _Journal of American History_, and specialized journals
such as _French Historical Studies_ or _Pennsylvania History_,
interdisciplinary history appearing in _Journal of Interdisciplinary
History_ cited a greater range of disciplines. From the data
available, it was instructive to see cited journals ranging from
political science to medicine. Social science journals comprised a
greater proportion of journals cited and represented the
interdisciplinary reading and knowledge strength exhibited by
historians working in interdisciplinary history. Specific
examination of characteristics of this data led to other phenomena
which best characterized those historians publishing in _Journal of
Interdisciplinary History_.
It is critical to point out the _de visu_ examination of
articles indicated an intellectual link exists between the
substantive nature of the manuscript's subject and the disciplinary
nature of journals cited. This may hold true for other journals as
well; however, when the present data was tied to disciplinary
affiliation, the following picture emerged (Table II).
Table II
Disciplinary Dispersion: Two or Above Citations
Discipline Number % of 2+ citations
-------------------------------------------------------------------
History 575 56.15
Interdisciplinary 114 11.13
Political Science 76 7.42
Economics 60 5.90
Demography 58 5.66
Sociology 32 3.13
Anthropology 20 1.95
Political Economy 16 1.56
Statistics 9 .88
Psychology 8 .78
Geography 7 .68
Science 7 .68
Alcohol Studies 6 .59
Psychoanalysis 6 .59
Folklore 5 .49
Biology 4 .39
Education 4 .39
General 3 .293
Actuarial Science 2 1.95
Archaeology 2 1.95
Computer Science 2 1.95
Medicine 2 1.95
Sexology 2 1.95
Total 1024 98.78
-----------------------------------------------------------
The % column does not equal 100 due to rounding.
This group comprised 95.70% of the total 1,070 citations.
Unlike disciplinary history, interdisciplinary activity of
journal titles cited two or more times indicated history was being
cited 54.25%. With increasing frequency, social science journals
comprised the majority of the citations. Statistics, medicine,
biology and sexology, computer science, general science, and alcohol
studies comprised the remainder of the titles. The breadth of
substantive subjects indicated the wide range of research
represented in these articles.
Disciplinary affiliation became more pronounced as the sample
of highly cited journal titles became more refined. When
disciplinary affiliation was refined to journals producing five or
more citations and to journals producing ten or more citations, the
universe of interdisciplinary scholarship being tapped by historians
was highly articulated (Tables III and IV).
Table III
Disciplinary Dispersion: Five or Above Citations
Discipline Number % of5+ citations
-------------------------------------------------------------------
History 441 58.96
Interdisciplinary 76 10.16
Political Science 64 8.56
Demography 58 7.75
Economics 47 6.28
Sociology 29 3.88
Political Economy 16 2.14
Alcohol Studies 6 0.80
Psychology 6 0.80
Geography 5 0.67
Total 748 100.00
-----------------------------------------------------------
This group comprised 71% of the total 1,070 citations.
Table IV
Disciplinary Dispersion: Ten or Above Citations
Discipline Number % of 10+ citations
-------------------------------------------------------------------
History 377 65.22
Demography 58 10.03
Interdisciplinary 46 7.96
Political Science 42 5.88
Sociology 29 5.02
Economics 26 4.98
Total 578 100.3%
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The % column does not equal 100% due to rounding.
This group comprised 54.02% of the total 1,070 citations.
History still dominated, but the journals cited represented
discrete subdisciplines in historical research. Such journals as
_Ambix_, _Isis_, _Historical Methods Newsletter_, _Agricultural
History_, _Business History Review_, _Ethnohistory_, or _Journal of
Urban History_ represented the diversity of specialized historical
scholarship influencing interdisciplinary history. Moreover, such
history journals as _Hispanic American Historical Review_, _Journal
of Family History_, and the _Journal of Social History_ indicated
diverse geographical area interests, as well as, specific
specializations.
DISCUSSION--Influences of Disciplinary Research Activity
Specific disciplines, along with their respective focus,
methodological approach, and normative interests and conventions
have influenced the course of research activity. For example,
geography has concerned itself with both human and physical aspects
of space and location. Geographical research necessarily conformed
to established approaches of the study of spatial phenomena.
Consequently, specific geography journals devoted themselves to
certain research topics as well as specific methodological
approaches. In regards to historical studies, these influences were
especially noticeable in the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_.
A specific strength of the _Journal of Interdisciplinary
History_ was demographic history. Demographic research was well
represented in all three samples of disciplinary affiliation. Its
research and techniques have been critical to the historians
researching intricacies of populations and their nuanced
interactions within wider socio-economic conditions. When studying
Latin American peasants relations with distribution of wealth, or
land tenure among the Tuscan farmers in Renaissance Italy, or even
the developing economic linkages with state and church authorities,
demographic scholarship brought vitality to the historical
framework.
Among the most cited disciplines was economics with its
particular orientation to economic forces and processes. Within the
context of time and space, economics provided a sophisticated
measure of social activity which bore heavily upon social and
political history. Commercial development, i.e. banking and private
concerns and the rise of industrial economies, were better
understood via econometric models and analysis. Such journals as
_Economica_, _Economic Development and Cultural Change_, _Quarterly
Journal of Economics_, or _Economic Journal_ form the bulk of
citations to economics literature. Journals such as the _Journal of
Land Economics_ or _Journal of Economics and Business_ represented
more specialized knowledge and approaches to historical conditions
than those represented by the more mainstream economics journals.
The most important finding was the use of economic history
which crossed a variety of subjects. Economic history journals
comprised 16.17% of history journals cited. When articles were
pursued for content, social history and economic topics interrelated
and possibly included such topics as familial structure and
subsistence farming, banking innovations and anthropological
modeling of civic life, or birth control and peasant life-course
experience. Economic forces were extremely important to
interdisciplinary research and seemed to inform the larger social
historical context presented in _Journal of Interdisciplinary
History_. _Journal of Economic History_, _Explorations in Economic
History_, and _Economic History Review_ represented key journals in
this sample. When examined the authors found these specialized
journals provided the statistical and economic modeling used by
economists.
Often, borrowed methodological rigor enhanced the analysis of
group dynamics evident in past societal constructions. As an
example, a complementing discipline to economic history was
sociology. Sociology's particular methodological perspective on
group dynamics, collective behavior, theory, and modeling have
impacted upon the economic historical research carried out by
interdisciplinary historians.
The presence of sociology to interdisciplinary history crossed
all three samples; its contribution was decidedly more
methodological than substantive knowledge. Historical sociology
laid its claim to social history as it modified social historical
topics and approaches to those topics. For instance, peasant
movements could be better understood when viewed through the lens of
sociological analysis; group dynamics of peasant culture could then
be placed within specific and general historical context.
A natural complementary discipline to sociology was
anthropology. Its particular significance to interdisciplinary
history was its theoretical foundations and methodological
approaches to cultures. Especially interesting here was its
influence upon the history of social groupings and interaction with
differing religious sensibilities. Early Modern Europe was
especially conducive to such historical analysis.
Among the majors disciplinary influences exhibited by
interdisciplinary history was political science. Although not as
heavily or systematically cited as economics or history journals,
political science journals reflected the changes occurring in
political history. Formally concerned with political elites and
maneuverings, political history today is more expansive and has
entertained new approaches to political phenomena and processes.
From voting behavior and interest group politics, to comparative
government and international relations modeling, political history
incorporated newly evolving techniques and theory derived from
political science. The political science journals cited represented
such diverse subdisciplines as political theory and philosophy,
public administration and public policy, and even mainstream
journals where all subfield interests were represented. These
political science journals were_Journal of Politics, American
Political Science Review_, or the _Journal of Conflict Resolution_
and constituted indicators of disciplinary dispersion (scatter).
As various disciplines fed into interdisciplinary history, it
was understood that highly defined approaches would be available to
the historian. A significant number of interdisciplinary journals
were represented in the sample. From thoughtful opinion journals,
(i.e. _Daedalus_ and _Encounter_ ) to _Millbank Memorial Fund
Quarterly_ and _Journal of Politics and Military Sociology_,
interdisciplinary activity was pronounced. Often, these journals
represented an area studies orientation where various disciplines
explored a geographic region or particular culture or period of
human activity. Journals such as _Journal of Latin American
Studies_, _Journal of Ethiopian Studies_, _Journal of Southeast
Asian Studies_ and _Journal of Asian Studies_ offered historians
knowledge and perspectives not generally found in historical
journals. At a significant 10.75%, 9.93 %, and 7.96 % of two, five,
and ten citations per journal cited, interdisciplinary journals
offered the historian a rich and diverse spectrum of substantive
knowledge and methodological experimentation.
DISCUSSION--Price Index
A necessary complement to and intellectual extension of
citation study and disciplinary dispersion was the Price Index
(Table V). The Price Index measures obsolescence, and in equation
form, it is defined as Price Index=Percentage of references dated in
last the 5 years. Once calculated, the range 22% to 39% would
categorize the literature as scientific or social scientific in
nature. It is theorized most humanities literature will be older
than five years, therefore making the Price Index less than 22%
(Price, 1986, pp. 166-167, 171; Itzchaky, 1979). Obsolescence is
pertinent to the normative functioning of a discipline.
Importantly, scholarship appearing in the _Journal of
Interdisciplinary History_ conformed to the Price Index, thus
emulating research in the social sciences. With an average of
36.52 %, interdisciplinary historical research was well within the
parameters set by the Price Index. Interdisciplinary implications
for historical research were seen against this phenomenon.
Table V
Price Index for _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_
Year Price Index %
-------------------------------------
1970 68.42
1971 48.97
1972 47.50
1973 33.33
1974 23.08
1975 43.75
1976 47.73
1977 39.74
1978 40.38
1979 42.86
1980 26.67
1981 30.77
1982 37.84
1983 50.94
1984 36.59
1985 31.25
1986 33.78
1987 24.18
1988 27.91
1989 33.33
1990 22.09
1991 31.18
1992 17.74
--------------------------
Total 840.03
DISCUSSION--Major Producers
Important as disciplinary dispersion and the relationship to
the Price Index are, it was instructive to establish the major
citation producing journals. From this sample another profile
emerged which clearly defined the disciplines and respective
subdisciplines influencing interdisciplinary history (Table VI).
Clearly, specific high-citation-yielding journals were
responsible for the intellectual configuration characterizing
interdisciplinary history. Here, specific journal titles were
isolated and examined for their disciplinary affiliation and
influence. _Journal of Economic History_, _Economic History
Review_, and _Explorations in Economic History_ were seen exercising
influence. _Population Studies_, _Population_, and _Demography_
dominated demographic history. Surprisingly, for a mainstream
general historical journal, _American Historical Review_ was well-
represented. Where social scientific modeling and theorizing was
important, _Annales, Social Science History_, _Historical Methods
Newsletter_, and the _Journal of Social History_ comprised a
significant locus of influence. Except for a subject-based anomaly
represented by _Pennsylvania German Society_ and the _Journal of
Southeast Asian Studies_, other journals, (e.g., _Comparative
Studies in Society and History_ or _Economica_ ) conformed to the
disciplines identified in Table II. True to self-citation practice,
the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ conformed to the citing
phenomenon that a journal tends to cite itself at a higher rate than
it cites other journals.
Table IV
Major Journal Citation Producers
From Ten and Above Citations
Journal Number
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Journal of Interdisciplinary History 75
Journal of Economic History 39
American Historical Review 38
Economic History Review 37
Population Studies 33
William & Mary Quarterly 33
Annales 29
American Political Science Review 26
Past & Present 24
Journal of Social History 22
Historical Methods Newsletter 18
Social Science History 18
American Sociological Review 17
Journal of Political Economy 16
Explorations in Economic History 15
Journal of African History 15
Annales de demographique historique 14
Demography 14
Economica 14
Comparative Studies in Society and History 13
American Economic Review 12
American Journal of Sociology 12
Daedalus 12
Pennsylvania German Society 11
Population 11
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 10
-------------------------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION
If the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ is a viable
venue for the publication of interdisciplinary historical research,
then this examination pointed to several key characteristics of
interdisciplinary research. First, historians who consider their
scholarship to be interdisciplinary were quite different in their
approach to historical studies from historians working within
disciplinary boundaries. The data demonstrated their reliance upon
disciplines other than history. Their use of other social science
disciplinary knowledge may indicate methodological borrowings as
well.
The authors' research indicated historians were interested in
problem-centered history and were asking questions of a social
scientific nature. Substantively, their interest incorporated all
aspects of past human existence which was reflected in their choice
of subject and in their approaches. Significantly, quantitative
analysis (regression analysis, etc.) ethnomethodology, art
historical methods, sociological theory, and archaeological and
anthropological reports and modeling constituted a major
characteristic of this kind of scholarship. Additionally, the
narrative quality of writing was subsumed under the hypothesis
oriented history undertaken by the historian.
A number of questions remain to be further explored that were
not touched upon in this study. What happens to the Price Index for
individual journal titles cited in this sample? Do certain titles
respond to the Price Index more than others? Do certain disciplines
respond significantly stronger to the Price Index when used in
historical research? These obsolescence questions could be
pertinent to the evolving nature of historical scholarship if older
materials are not being cited and are not forming the intellectual
basis for further research. Another question is whether over the
entire run of _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ the
characteristics described in this study hold true. Keeping these
questions in mind, this study concludes with a final observation.
As historical research evolves and develops sophisticated
approaches, techniques, and other scholarly apparatus, what will be
the contours of historical research? As diverse social science and
humanities perspectives become part of the historian's repertoire,
how shall historical research change to accommodate the problem-
centered view of social science scholarship and theory? Through
citation analysis some of these questions can be partially raised
and answered. Since the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_
represents the voice for such activity, it is possible that an
examination of citations will reveal the hidden nature of this
interdisciplinary phenomenon.
REFERENCES
Alston, Annie May. (1952). Characteristics of materials used by a
selected group of historians in their research in United States
History_. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Chicago,
Chicago, IL.
Buchanan, A.L. & Herubel, J.-P. V.M. _Interdisciplinarity: The case
of historical geography through citation analysis_. Manuscript.
Choi, J.M. (1988). An analysis of authorship in anthropology
journals, 1963 & 1983. _Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian_,
_6_ (3-4), 65-84.
Estabrook, L. (1981). Sociology and library research. _Library
Trends_, _32_ (4), 461-476.
Fyfe, J.F. (comp.) (1986). _History journals and serials: An
analytical guide_. New York: Greenwood Press.
Hamerow, T.S. (1987). _Reflections on history and historians_.
Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Herubel, J.-P. V.M. (1990). The nature of three history journals:
A citation experiment. _Collection Management_, _12_ (3/4), 57-67.
Herubel, J.-P. V.M. (1991). Materials used in historical
scholarship: A limited citation analysis of the _Journal of Garden
History_. _Collection Management_, _14_ (1/2), 155-162.
Herubel, J.-P. V.M. & Buchanan, A.L. (1993). Tracing
interdisciplinarity in contemporary historiography using _SSCI_:
The case of Toynbee, McNeill, and Braudel. _Collection Building_,
_13_ (1), 1-5.
Herubel, J.-P. V.M. & Buchanan, A.L. (forthcoming). Disciplinary,
interdisciplinary, and subdisciplinary linkages in historical
studies journals. _Science and the Science of Science_.
Itzchaky, Moshe. (1979). The structure and citation patterns of the
international research literature of Biblical and Ancient Near-East
Studies; A bibliometric approach to the development of a discipline.
(Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey).
_Dissertation Abstracts International_, _40_, 5231A.
Jones, C., Chapman, M., & Woods, P.C. (1972). The characteristics
of materials used by historians. _Journal of Librarianship_, _4_
(3), 137-156.
Kammen, M. (1980). Introduction: The historian's vocation and the
state of the discipline in the United States. In M. Kammen (Ed.),
_The past before us: Contemporary historical writing in the United
States_ (pp. 45-46). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Lawani, S.M. (1981). Bibliometrics: its theoretical foundations,
methods, and applications. _Libri_, _31_ (3), 294-315.
McAnally, A.M. (1950). Characteristics of materials used in
research in United States History. (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Chicago, 1950).
Nisonger, T.E. (1992). _Collection evaluations in academic
libraries: A literature guide and annotated bibliography_.
Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Peters, S.H. (1990). Characteristics of the sources used by
American historians writing on the history of modern Germany.
(Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1990). _Dissertation
Abstracts International_, _ 52_, 330A .
Price, D.J. de Solla. (1986). _Little science, big science...and
beyond_. New York: Columbia University Press.
Rotberg, R.I. & Rabb, T.K. (1970). Editorial. _Journal of
Interdisciplinary History_, _1_ (1), 4.
Smith, L.C. (1981). Citation analysis. _Library Trends_, _30_
(1), 83-106.
_____
Articles and Sections of this issue of _LIBRES: Library and Information
Science Research Electronic Journal_ may be retrieved via anonymous ftp
to cc.curtin.edu.au or via e-mail message addressed to LISTSERV@KENTVM
or LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU (instructions below)
Papers may be submitted at anytime by email or send/file to:
Andy Exon, Ph.D. Editor-in-Chief, _LIBRES: Library and Information
Science Research Electronic Journal, EDITORS@KENTVM.KENT.EDU
_________________________________
*Copyright Declaration*
Copyright of articles published by LIBRES: Library and Information
Science Electronic Journal is held by the author of a given article.
If an article is re-published elsewhere it must include a statement
that it was originally published in LIBRES.
The LIBRES Editors reserve the
right to maintain permanent archival copies of all submissions and
to provide print copies to appropriate indexing services for
for indexing and microforming.
_________________________________
____________________________
GOPHER Instructions
____________________________
GOPHER will be available for future Issues.
____________________________
Anonymous FTP Instructions
____________________________
ftp cc.curtin.edu.au
login: anonymous
password: guest
cd LIB-RESEARCH
get filename (where filename = exact name of file in Table of Contents
quit
LISTSERV Retrieval Instructions
_______________________________
Send e-mail addressed to LISTSERV@KENTVM (Bitnet) or
LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU
Leave the subject line empty. The message must read:
GET LIBRE4N1 CONTENTS
Use this file to identify particular articles or sections then send e-mail
to LISTSERV@KENTVM or LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU with the command:
GET
where is LIBRE#N#
name) and is the name of the author