College and Research Libraries ganizes, and translates published literature is sometimes called an information depart- ment for reasons of prestige and/or to get the librarian into a higher pay classification. More often than not, however, the informa- tion department handles internal as well as external (published) literature and has tech- nical writing and editing functions. T h e broader definition of an information depart- ment is accepted in this book. T h e intro- ductory survey-type chapter lists and briefly describes operations in a special library and gives some budget data. T h e other chapters range from the "how-to-do" type (the four chapters on patent searching, technical writ- ing, illustrating, and editing) to theoretical discussions (the three chapters on linguistics, language and terminology, indexing and classification). There are also chapters on operations research as applied to informa- tion work, the organization of internal re- search records and classified patent collec- tions, mechanical aids for proper presenta- tion, punched card techniques, translating and abstracting, and the training of litera- ture scientists. Since the entire gamut of information ac- tivity is covered in a relatively thin though expensive book, it is not surprising that most of the subjects included are covered in greater detail someplace else. This is par- ticularly true with technical writing, tech- nical editing, and punched card techniques. T h e chapter on the organization of research records is a notable exception in that it is more extensive than anything which has been seen by this reviewer thus far. No cor- respondingly comprehensive articles on ab- stracting and translating are available. T h e two chapters in this book are a good start; it is hoped that a more definitive work will soon be forthcoming. After reading many books and articles in this field many of us are left with the im- pression that all this is very interesting but it does not really apply to our specific prob- lems. T h e reader of this book is likely to come to the same conclusion, but he will also be exposed to a number of stimulating ideas and will have excellent bibliographies available on most of the subjects covered. It is for these two reasons that the book is recommended to special librarians in indus- try as well as in public, university, and gov- ernment libraries.—Gerald Jahoda, Tech- nical Information Division, Esso Research and Engineering Co. Mass Communications Research Introduction to Mass Communications Re- search. Edited by Ralph O. Nafziger and David M. White. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1958. 244p. $5.00. Even after reading the book, the tempta- tion is great to quote extensively from the preface, in which the editors so well de- scribe their intent, for the reader's judg- ment of their success in fulfilling that intent will vary inversely with his own prior knowledge of and experience with scientific research methodology in the social sciences. Eschewing quotation, it is at least necessary to note that this volume is a lineal successor to the earlier (1949) An Introduction to Journalism Research, also sponsored by the Council on Communications Research of the Association for Education in Journalism. T h e title was broadened from "journalism" to "mass communications," even as the scope was narrowed from all of research method- ology to "concentrate on research methods in mass communication from a behavioral point of view." T h e intent is to acquaint new graduate students in the field of journalism with the research methodology now available for approaching the many and expanding prob- lems in the field; to an extent the book is also an outline of procedure from the in- ception of a problem, through its planning, to the statistical interpretation of the data. As such it will also be useful to students in librarianship bent on following and broad- ening the trail blazed by Waples and Berel- son. T h e volume contains seven essays by as many authors on such topics as planning; experimental, field, and statistical methods; and " T h e Challenge to Communication Re- search." Since all of the authors are work- ing over pretty much the same material from individual points of view, there is a goodly amount of repetition, which, for 162 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH L I B R A R I E S - neophytes in a very technical field, is not at all bad. It was not the intent of the editors or au- thors to provide a handbook of procedure, statistical or otherwise; their job was rather to suggest ways of approaching research, pos- sible refinements, relevant statistical proce- dures, all of which are carefully documented in extensive notes and footnote references to which the interested reader may go for further, more detailed information. T o apply the cliche "mine of information" would be misleading; the volume is rather of the nature of a detailed report of the activities of an assay office. T h e suggestions of how and where to dig are there; the digging the student will have to do for himself.—LeRoy Charles Merritt, University of California. F l o w of Scientific Information The Flow of Information among Scientists: Problems, Opportunities, and Research Questions. Prepared by Columbia Univer- sity, Bureau of Applied Social Research, May 1958. New York: T h e Bureau, 1958. 202p. (mimeographed). This pilot study, prepared for the Na- tional Science Foundation, was undertaken to explore the possible contributions of re- search by interview methods to the problems of exchange of scientific information. Its purpose was to formulate questions and to identify heretofore undefined categories of phenomena. Special attention was, there- fore, devoted to the more obscure of the services performed by the scientific com- munication system, and on the unplanned and apparently accidental mechanisms for performing them. Seventy-seven scientists at one university were interviewed, including biochemists, chemists, and zoologists in substantially equal numbers. T h e interview outline was revised continuously during the study and its final version is included as an appendix. Average interview time was just under two hours. T h e sample was so limited as to make sophisticated statistical analysis ridiculous, so the analysis of the data in the report is essentially qualitative and discursive. T h e scope set for the study was all the channels through which scientists exchange and gather information, and all functions which scientific communication facilities are called upon to perform. Since so much emphasis has been placed upon means for finding answers to specific questions, special emphasis is laid, in this study, on instances in which scientists se- cured answers to specific questions in ways other than those designed for this purpose. Twenty-eight reports were obtained on in- formation sought outside the "regular chan- nels of search," primarily by asking other people. Of these about two-thirds dealt with details of procedure. A few involved per- formance of experiments or expert judg- ments but most of the remaining two-thirds were materials of the type that should nor- mally appear in the literature and about half actually did involve asking someone else to provide the literature citations. T h e first chapter suggests as projects for further research: (1) to determine how adequately information from personal sources is avail- able; (2) should more varieties of informa- tion be securable in print, or should in- formal channels be made more widely us- able? (3) how can informal (i.e. personal) channels be made more widely usable? (4) should more be made available through print (a) by having more printed or (b) by making what is printed easier to find? (5) what makes published information hard to locate? (6) why is information of certain types seldom published? Chapter II, dealing with the problem of keeping scientists abreast of current develop- ments in their specialties, reports only read- ing and personal contacts, with reading of journals in the specialty as the primary tool of two-thirds of those reporting. T h e ques- tions proposed for future research are: (1) Does any significant amount of current in- formation fail to appear in the literature? (2) Why are published items missed? (3) In what fields are published items most likely to be missed? (4) What are the forms of personal communication that work? (5) How much access do scientists in varying positions have to personal communications? (6) What clues to pertinence of articles are lacking? MARCH 1959 163