The comparative importance of books: clinical psychology in the health sciences library.
AUTOR(ES)
Wehmeyer, J M
RESUMO
Clinical psychology has received little attention as a subject in health sciences library collections. This study seeks to demonstrate the relative importance of the monographic literature to clinical psychology through the examination of citations in graduate student theses and dissertations at the Fordham Health Sciences Library, Wright State University. Dissertations and theses were sampled randomly; citations were classified by format, counted, and subjected to statistical analysis. Books and book chapters together account for 35% of the citations in clinical psychology dissertations, 25% in nursing theses, and 8% in biomedical sciences theses and dissertations. Analysis of variance indicates that the citations in dissertations and theses in the three areas differ significantly (F = 162.2 with 2 and 253 degrees of freedom, P = 0.0001). Dissertations and theses in biomedical sciences and nursing theses both cite significantly more journals per book than the dissertations in clinical psychology. These results support the hypothesis that users of clinical psychology literature rely more heavily on books than many other users of a health sciences library. Problems with using citation analyses in a single subject to determine a serials to monographs ratio for a health sciences library are pointed out.
ACESSO AO ARTIGO
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=226557Documentos Relacionados
- Moving the collections of an academic health sciences library.
- Evaluation of monograph selection in a health sciences library.
- Implementation of the Integrated Library System: University of Maryland Health Sciences Library.
- Evaluation of a clinical medical librarianship program at a university Health Sciences Library.
- Using the Health Sciences Library. I. The Card Catalog