College and Research Libraries BOOK REVIEWS Crowley, Terence, and Childers, Thomas. Information Service in Public Librar- ies: Two Studies. pref. by Ralph Blas- ingame, Jr. 210p. index. bibliog. appen- dix. Metuchen, N.J., Scarecrow, 1971. ISBN 0-81808-0406-9 LC 77-154298 One might well question the propriety of reviewing Terence Crowley and Thomas Childers' book, Information Services in Public Libraries: Two Studies, in a jour- nal devoted to academic libraries. How- ever, what professors Crowley and Chil- ders have done in exploring devices and methods applicable to the measurement of information services has serious and im- portant consequences for college and re- search libraries. One of the most difficult of a library's functions to measure and quantify for performance evaluation is the information services provided to its client groups. While this work addresses the need to know how effective and correct the in- formation disseminated by reference de- partments and personnel is, a farther reach- ing effect is the model or style of measure- ment developed by these two researchers that has application in academic libraries as well as public libraries. Hence, their ob- jective formulation, problem solving meth- odologies, and controlled data gathering and testing devices should be carefully considered by any academic librarian in- terested in reference service. The two studies in this work are se- quential in nature and explore the feasi- bility of developing and applying quan- titative methods and statistical methodolo- gy in the assessment of information ser- vices. While the superficial nature of the studies might well lead one to conclude that the principal thrust was on the cor- rectness or effectiveness of the information response mechanisms and the role of tele- phone reference, the substantive aspects of these studies lie in the 'intellectually con- Recent Publications ceived approach to the problem, the con- ceptual development of an investigatory scheme that would not change what was being measured (generally conceived as the Hawthorne effect) and the logical framework of the research undertaken. Numerous conditions and factors were reviewed and considered by professors Crowley and Childers in the deliberation of what methodology for measurement would be needed~ Factors such as per cap- ita dollar amounts available to the various target libraries for books and professional staff, nonprofessional staff, and other ex- penditures in related areas were included in an interwelding of support conditions that a library might marshall to provide reference services. It was the provision of information services based upon the rela- tionship between a high degree of support and the actual ability of the library to de- liver factual and correct information that Crowley and Childers researched with a high degree of success. The control of vari- ables to correspond to the researchers' orig- inal contentions and hypotheses coupled with the tactics and instruments devised for these studies should have general ap- plicability in academic libraries. Obviously certain techniques used by other researchers were employed, such as the use of standardized questions with a scale of difficulty, the use of anonymous callers and questioners, and a control target group of equal or near equal libraries. As such Crowley and Childers' study bor- ders 'very near to what Lowell Martin did in his study of the public service sections of the Chicago Public Library. What is of some interest is the similarity of results that Crowley and Childers received when compared to that of Lowell Martin's. Just in the area of accuracy of information ser- vices provided, only thirty-six percent of Crowley's questions were correctly an- swered. Childers did somewhat better as fifty-four percent of his questions were correctly . answered. To add insult to in- / 411 412 I College & Research Libraries • September 1972 jury, Crowley's poor showing was explained by the fact that he included current event questions that required up-to-date sources for answers and some form of current awareness service to up-date the informa- tion resources of librarians and library sup- port staff. While the results of the two studies are depressing, a very positive approach to the study of qualitative measurement makes this book highly worthwhile. All academic librarians interested in the effectiveness and performance of their information ser- vice units would do well to study these research methods and begin to ask, "are we failing in one of our principal library tasks in not providing correct or valid in- formation?" I recommend this book high- ly.-Robert P. Haro, University of Southern California, Los Angeles. Kruzas, Anthony T., ed. Encyclopedia of Information Systems and Services. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Edwards Brothers, 1971. 1109 pages. $67.50. Why does the editor choose not to men- tion the connection of this publication with its predecessor, Directory of Special Li- braries and Information Centers (2d ed., 1968)? In many ways it is very similar. The content of the descriptions for each or- ganization listed is similar (seventeen cate- gories of information in the Directory, eighteen in the Encyclopedia) . The format is different: in the former, the listings run several to a page with abbreviations and codes to conserve space; in the latter, each organization has a full page, with each category of information labeled. Some 13,000 organizations are listed in the for- mer; 833 in the latter. The arrangement is slightly different: in 1968, U.S. organiza- tions are separated from Canadian; some effort has been made in 1971 to include in- novative services and . exclude commercial services or traditional special libraries. The substantive differences between the two publications exist in the indexes. In the Encyclopedia the different types of services or systems (e.g., abstracting and indexing services, Selective Dissemination of Infor- mation (SDI) Services, serials publications, micrographic applications and services, etc.) are indexed separately. Both editions have personal name and subject indexes. The Encyclopedia contains an "Acronyms and Initialisms Dictionary." Is a directory an encyclopedia or a dic- tionary? Can the permuted indexes created from directory information legitimately qualify a directory to be called an encyclo- pedia? I think not, but the indexes to this new edition of a directory of innovative, ex- perimental, computerized information cen- ters, networks, and data banks could have been useful indicators of the applications of new technologies in the field of informa- tion services if they were better done. Pity that the indexes are so poor. The subject index is especially poor, with many incon- gruous stylistic aberrations and a totally in- adequate syndetic structure. Not only will these flaws frustrate and confuse the user of this book as a directory, but it will limit its usefulness as an analytic tool to study the availability of information systems for given subject areas. There are too many in- stances to cite, but perhaps these examples will suffice: (1) In Subject Index, Handi- capped Children has no "see also" refer- ences; Gifted Children has "see also Ex- ceptional Children"; Exceptional Children does not send the reader to Handicapped Children, Gifted Children, Blind, Brain- Diseases, and so on; ( 2) Two entries ap- pear for the same ERIC Clearinghouse on Exceptional Children (pages 125 and 739 of the directory) . Both appear in the Sub- ject Index under Exceptional Children, but only one of each appears under Gifted Children or Handicapped Children. The eight separate indexes for special- ized features or services are merely an al- phabetic listing of the organizations who have responded affirmatively to certain questions on the survey insbument. There is no attempt to analyze, for instance, what kind of computer application or service is provided, or for that matter if the abstract- ing and indexing services are complete for the collection held, published or available on request. There is no classified index by computer system or micrographic equip- ment used. As a directory, this is a useful update of the 1968 edition of the Directory. As an encyclopedia, it is a poor first try. Recom- mended for libraries in need of information