There are two major problems in the field of information use today—the quantity of material produced and its quality. Quality is of two kinds—innovation or newness of the results, and the validity of the results. This paper is concerned with the problem of validity and how to screen the literature using this criterion as a filter. Various quality filtering systems are dis cussed, including peer review and expert panels, and the prob lems associated with them delineated. It is proposed that the information analyst (defined anew herein) be used as a filter to identify quality research papers, especially using the validity criterion. A discussion of the pros and cons of the recom mendation is initiated. The paper has two objectives: (1) to establish a definition of one of the jobs in the information field, and (2) to present an idea that will increase our ability to identify and control the quality scientific literature.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Charles Babbage, Reflections on the Decline of Science in England (Fellowes , London, 1830) ( Repnnt: Farnborough, Gregg, 1969 ).
2.
M. Bonitz, Evidence for the invalidity of the Bradford law for the single scientist, Scientometrics2 (1980) 203-214.
3.
Bert R. Boyce and Mark Funk, Bradford's law and the selection of high quality papers, Library Resources and Technical Services22 (1978) 390-401.
4.
Bert R. Boyce and JanetSue Pollens, Citation-based impact measures and the Bradfordian selection criteria, Collection Management4 (1982) 29-36.
5.
Bert R. Boyce and Danny P. Wallace, In defense of ignorant drivel, American Libraries18 (1987) 652-660.
6.
William Broad and Nicholas Wade, Betrayers of the Truth (Simon & Schuster, New York, 1982).
7.
John T. Bruer , The search for quality information: schistosomiasis literature, in: Kenneth S. Warren, ed., Selectivity in Information Systems: Survival of the Fittest (Praeger, New York, 1985 ) 144-153.
8.
Bonnie(Talmi) Carroll and Betty F. Maskewitz, Information analysis centers, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology15 (1980) 147-189.
9.
Daryl Chubin and Sheila Jasinoff, Peer review and public policy, Science, Technology, and Human Values10 (1985) 3-86.
10.
Jonathan R. Cole and Stephen Cole , Experts' "consensus" and decision-making at the National Science Foundation, in: Kenneth S. Warren, ed., Selectivity in Information Systems: Survival of the Fittest (Praeger, New York , 1985) 27-63.
11.
John T. Dickman and Gerard O. Plateau, The recruiting of chemists for chemical abstracting and indexing service, Journal of Documentation44 (1988 ) 42-52.
12.
David T. Durack, The weight of medical knowledge, New England Journal of Medicine298 ( 1978) 73-775.
13.
William Goffman and Kenneth S. Warren, Scientific Information and the principle of selectivity (Praeger, New York , 1980).
14.
William D. Garvey , Communication: the Essence of Science (Pergamon, Oxford, 1979 ).
15.
W.O. Hagstrom , Competition in science, American Sociological Review39 (1974) 1-18.
Ideas. Science and deception, Parts 1-4, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Toronto (1982) (No. 4-ID-001; transcript available from the CBC, Box 500, Station A, Toronto, Ont. M5W 1E6).
18.
Alexander Kohn, False Prophets (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1986).
19.
Maurice B. Line, The influence of the type of sources used on the results of citation analysis, Journal of Documentation35 (1979) 265-284.
20.
Kenneth O. May, Growth and quality of the mathematical literature , ISIS59 (1968 ) 363-371.
21.
A.J. Meadows , Communication in Science ( Butterworths, London, 1974).
22.
R.K. Merton , Singletons and multiples in scientific discovery: a chapter in the sociology of science, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society105 ( 1961) 470-486.
23.
Nick Moore , The employment market for libranans and information specialists, Journal of Information Science13 (1987) 327-333.
24.
Francis Narin , Evaluative Bibliometrics: The Use of Publication and Citation Analysis in the Evaluation of Scientific Activity (National Science Foundation, Washington, DC, 1976) (N.T.I.S. PB 252-339).
25.
S.D. Neill , The dilemma of the subjective in information organisation and retrieval, Journal of Documentation43 (1987) 193-211.
26.
Jose Ortega y Gasset, The mission of the librarian ( Hall, Boston, MA, 1961) (Repnnted from The Antioch Review21, 1961, 133-154.)
27.
Douglas P. Peters and Stephen J. Ceci, Peer-review practices of psychological journals: the fate of published articles—submitted again, The Behavioral and Brain Sciences5 (1982) 187-255.
28.
J. Pontigo andF.W. Lancaster, Qualitative aspects of the Bradford distribution, Scientometrics9 (1986) 59-70.
29.
Nicholas Rescher, Scientific progress (University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, PA, 1978).
30.
Michael Rogers Rubin and Mary Taylor Huber, The knowledge industry in the United States 1960-1980 (Princeton University Press , Pnnceton, NJ, 1986).
31.
Eugene P. Sheehy, comp., Guide to reference books, 9th ed. (AmencanLibrary Association, Chicago, IL, 1976) xiv-xv.
32.
A.B. Stafford , Is the rate of invention declining?American Journal of Sociology57 ( 1952) 539-545.
33.
David H. Stam , Concluding unscientific postscript: reflections on selectivity from a nontechnical perspective, in: Kenneth S. Warren, ed., Selectivity in Information Systems: Survival of the Fittest (Praeger, New York, 1985) 166-170.
34.
Jean Tague , Jamshid Beheshti and Lorna Rees-Potter, The law of exponential growth: evidence, implications and forecasts, Library Trends30 (1981) 125-145.
35.
The New Republic, The case for book burning , The Editors, The New Republic, Sept. 14; 21 (1987) 7-10.
36.
Danny P. Wallace, The relationship between journal productivity and obsolescence, Journal of the American Society for Information Science37 (1986) 136-145.
37.
Kenneth S. Warren , Selectivity within the ecosystem of scientific communication, in: Kenneth S. Warren, ed., Selectivity in Information Systems: Survival of the Fittest (Praeger, New York, 1985 ) 3-9.
38.
John W. Williamson, Improving MedicalPractice and Health Care: a Bibliographic Guide to Information Management in Quality Assurance and Continuing Education (Ballinger, Cambridge, MA, 1977).
39.
Patrick Wilson , Second-hand Knowledge: an Inquiry into Cognitive Authority (Greenwood Press, Westport, CT, 1983).
40.
John Ziman, From parameters to portents and back, in: Yehuda Elkana et al. eds., Towards a Metric of Science: the Advent of Science Indicators (Wiley, New York, 1978) 261-284.
