The comparative importance of books: clinical psychology in the health sciences library.

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.

[1]  Bluma C. Peritz,et al.  The use of libraries by graduate students in psychology as indicated by citations , 1990 .

[2]  Charles E. Osgood,et al.  Bibliographical citation characteristics of the psychological journal network in 1950 and in 1960. , 1967 .

[3]  Maurice B. Line.  The Influence of the Type of Sources used on the Results of citation analyses , 1979, J. Documentation.

[4]  Robin B. Devin,et al.  The Serial/Monograph Ratio in Research Libraries: Budgeting in Light of Citation Studies , 1990 .

[5]  D. Shontz.  The Serial/Monograph Ratio in Psychology: Application at the Local Level. , 1992 .

[6]  A. Butler,et al.  Citation patterns in the health sciences: implications for serials/monographic fund allocation. , 1993, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association.

[7]  B. Vickery,et al.  SOCIAL SCIENCE LITERATURE USE IN THE UK AS INDICATED BY CITATIONS , 1969 .

[8]  Michael H. MacRoberts,et al.  Problems of citation analysis: A critical review , 1989, JASIS.

[9]  Joy Thomas,et al.  Graduate Student Use of Journals , 1993 .

[10]  William G. Madow,et al.  The Literature of the Social Sciences. , 1960 .

[11]  W. M. Cox,et al.  Frequent citations in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology during the 1970s. , 1978 .

[12]  L. Cohen.  The research readership and information source reliance of clinical psychologists. , 1979 .

[13]  Louise S. Zipp.  Thesis and Dissertation Citations as Indicators of Faculty Research Use of University Library Journal Collections , 1996 .

[14]  Arthur P. Young,et al.  Citation as a Form of Library Use , 1994 .

[15]  Barbara Frame.  The Citation Maze: A Beginner’s Guide , 1996 .

[16]  David Nicholas,et al.  Literature usage and interrelationships in the social sciences as shown by citations in monographs , 1978 .

[17]  Schloman Bf.  Mapping the literature of allied health: project overview. , 1997 .

[18]  B. Schloman,et al.  Mapping the literature of allied health: project overview. , 1997, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association.

[19]  Maurice Bernard Line.  The structure of social science literature as shown by citations , 1979 .

[20]  Robert D. Stueart,et al.  Collection Development in Libraries: A Treatise , 1980 .