Buchanan, 'Interdisciplinarity in Historical Studies: Citation Analysis of the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_', LIBRES v4n02-3 URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/stacks/serials/libres/libres-v4n02-3-buchanan-interdisciplinarity LIBRES: Library and Information Science Research Electronic Journal __________________________________________________________________ ISSN 1058-6768 August 28, 1994 Volume 4 Issue 2/3 Quarterly LIBRE4N2 BUCHANAN Interdisciplinarity in Historical Studies: Citation Analysis of the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ Authors: Anne L. Buchanan, Assistant Management and Economics Librarian at Purdue University, holds a B.S. in Business Administration from Marian College, a M.L.S. from Indiana University, and a M.A. in Public Administration from Mankato State University. Jean-Pierre V.M. Herubel, Philosophy and Political Science Bibliographer at Purdue University, holds a B.A. and M.A. in European History from Penn State University and a Ph.D. in European Intellectual and Cultural History and a M.L.S. from Kent State University. INTRODUCTION Historical research and scholarship examines the human past. Until recently, professional history was written by scholars interested in specific areas of human activity--political events and the actions of elites (Hamerow, 1987). Today, such is not the case. During the last twenty-five years, academic historians around the world have seen a massive change in the manner in which historical studies are practiced (Kammen, 1980). Historical scholarship has moved beyond earlier concerns of politics, war, diplomatic maneuverings, and narrative history. In the United States, academic historians have opened new areas of interest, often utilizing innovative techniques and methodologies. To be certain, not all have welcomed these changes nor have all historians joined the various interests spawned by new approaches to historical research. But one thing is certain: historical studies have undergone a seachange, and as innovation and methodological technique continue to evolve, so shall historical studies and its scholarship reflect that evolution. Historical scholarship follows many of the tenets and familiar scholarly norms practiced by other disciplines. Unlike many disciplines in the social sciences and the humanities, history straddles both social science and humanities in that it is claimed by both major spheres of disciplinary activity (Peters, 1990). Depending upon an historian's intellectual preference or specialization, methodology used, historiographic orientation, or subject matter, history may function more as a humanities or social science discipline. Intellectual and cultural history may be analytical or narrative and utilize the most sophisticated postmodern thinking, social history, statistical analysis, and anthropological theory. History is indeed a mansion with many rooms and can be better understood through a systematic analysis of its citations. Citation analysis isolates the characteristics of historical research and provides insights into a diverse discipline. LITERATURE REVIEW Since history is complex and casts its net in hopes of comprehending the past _in toto_, it is desirable to examine its intellectual structure. With the advent of citation studies, their contributions to the examination of characteristics of scholarly literatures has been useful in grasping the contours of disciplinary literature (Lawani, 1981). Research agendas of various disciplines, as well as their citation practices, have been mapped. A number of citation studies focused on historical scholarship, some of which illustrated the degree to which citation studies have been applied to this literature (McAnally, 1950). These effectively point the direction in which most of these citation studies have proceeded. Researchers have been conducting citation analysis of specific aspects of historical research. McAnally studied the literature cited by American historians studying American history. He found the Price Index (a measure of obsolescence used to measure the hardness or softness of a discipline and more thoroughly defined in section Discussion--Price Index) was 10.4%, monographs constituted 45.6% and serials 21.4% of cited items, with approximately 75% of subjects cited appearing in history and the social sciences. This indicated American history did not conform to the Price Index as it relates to social scientific literature. Peters (1990) discussed the relationship of monographs to serials as a measure of the hardness and the softness of disciplines. Generally, science disciplines relied upon serials as the major communication vehicle. The social sciences used slightly more books than serials, and the humanities depended more upon monographs than serials. Thus one can classify the sciences as a hard discipline, the humanities as a soft discipline, and the social sciences between the two disciplines (Table I). Table I Books vs. Serials Discipline Books % Serials % ---------------------------------------------------------------- Science (mean) 15.0 84.1% Social Sciences (general) 58.0 37.7 Humanities (mean) 61.4 29.8 --------------------------------------------------------------- (Data from Peters, 1990, pp. 43, 62, 74) Jones, et al. (1972) examined the literature in British history cited by British historians and found 36.4% were to monographs and 21.5% to serials, and approximately 25% of journals provided 75% of journal citations. Further, over 90% of all citations were to English-language items which indicated British History is a humanities discipline as opposed to a social sciences discipline and is decidedly monolingual. Alston's work centered on historians at the University of Chicago and found monographs constituted over twice the percentage of serials usage. Moreover, subject dispersion indicated 35.1% and 55.4% were to history and social sciences references respectively, substantiating that University of Chicago practiced American history as a humanities. Herubel's 1991 study on the evolution of garden history as a subfield of art history indicated garden history adhered to all the scholarly attributes characteristic of mainstream historical studies. Monographs constituted 45.21% and serials 11.64% of cited items. Additionally, primary sources, so crucial to historical research, made up 45.9% of cited items, demonstrating garden history was quite primary-sources-grounded--a strong signal it was firmly situated in the historian's purview of what constitutes bonafide historical research. Herubel's 1990 study indicated subject dispersion was growing in certain fields of history, such as social history and economic history. From these studies it can be seen that interdisciplinarity, among other phenomena, defined the rapidly growing fields of social, intellectual/cultural, and the newly emerging political history. Thus one can conclude citation studies are a resourceful tool to understanding the changing contours of historical research. Citation studies outside the discipline of historical studies provide further examples of successful measurements of interdisciplinarity. For example Choi (1988) analyzed intradiscplinary and interdisciplinary communication patterns of anthropology with the results indicating heavily cited disciplines included history, sociology, and biomedical sciences, and they were mutually exclusive. Itzchaky (1979) examined Biblical and Ancient Near East Studies to determine a core literature and found them to be interdisciplinary. McCain (1984) mapped the structure of macroeconomics literature. Estabrook (1981) examined library science literature to measure the impact of sociology upon the interdisciplinary nature of library science. METHODOLOGY To consider interdisciplinarity in historical research in the main, the authors chose the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ from 1970 to 1992 as the target journal. The _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ was first published in 1970 and purported to entertain a wide spectrum of historical research. Accordingly, "We will be catholic both conceptually and geographically. We are interested in publishing articles influenced by or emphasizing the techniques of other fields, whether they be anthropology, philology, paleopathology, psychoanalysis, zoology, art criticism, or numismatics. We want to encourage historians to look elsewhere for assistance in solving their problems, and we will publish not only the results of such research, but also descriptions of the methods employed" (Rotberg & Rabb, 1970). Fyfe's description of the journal supported the editors' claims. She described the quarterly as publishing "methodological and substantive articles devoted to the application of other disciplines and branches of learning to research in history, without geographical or chronological limits" (1986, 11). Numbers from a random table determined which issues in each volume were to be used for the analysis. Only citations from articles, review essays, technical notes, and reports were collected with year of publication and journal title noted. Once the authors identified journals producing two or more citations, several steps were taken to determine the cited journals' subject classifications. Disciplinary dispersion (scatter) was established by noting the cited journals' academic or societal disciplinary affiliation as stated in _Ulrich's International Periodicals Directory 1993-94_ . Further, _de visu_ examination of title pages of journals were corroborated with Library of Congress subject headings and cataloging data. Each journal's statement of purpose was considered to further establish disciplinary affiliation. Additionally, because obsolescence of research literature can be an indicator of scientific and social scientific characteristics, data was measured against the Price Index. Historical research is either disciplinary or interdisciplinary. Often, subdisciplinary interests develop and evolve into bonafide fields with particular methodologies, normative practices, and research subjects (Herubel & Buchanan, 1993). The nomenclature surrounding disciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and subdisciplinarity has been difficult to adequately define and is still undergoing definition. The operative definitions used for this study are 1) Disciplinarity--a construction of accepted topics, methodologies, and procedures in a scholarly pursuit; 2) Subdisciplinarity--a subset of a discipline tightly focused around unique subjects and following accepted subject-dependent methodologies and procedures; 3) Interdisciplinarity--the nexus of two or more disciplines or subdisciplines where subjects under examination and focused methodologies meld and function as a synthesis. With these definitions at hand, interdisciplinary analysis of historical research proceeded with a degree of veracity. DISCUSSION--Disciplinary Dispersion The _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ 1970-1992 yielded 1,070 citations, and when examined, interesting and specific phenomena emerged. Citation patterns conforming to social science and humanities research literature were observed to be operating, but with several qualifications. Unlike mainstream history, that is, scholarship appearing in such organs as _American Historical Review_ or _Journal of American History_, and specialized journals such as _French Historical Studies_ or _Pennsylvania History_, interdisciplinary history appearing in _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ cited a greater range of disciplines. From the data available, it was instructive to see cited journals ranging from political science to medicine. Social science journals comprised a greater proportion of journals cited and represented the interdisciplinary reading and knowledge strength exhibited by historians working in interdisciplinary history. Specific examination of characteristics of this data led to other phenomena which best characterized those historians publishing in _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_. It is critical to point out the _de visu_ examination of articles indicated an intellectual link exists between the substantive nature of the manuscript's subject and the disciplinary nature of journals cited. This may hold true for other journals as well; however, when the present data was tied to disciplinary affiliation, the following picture emerged (Table II). Table II Disciplinary Dispersion: Two or Above Citations Discipline Number % of 2+ citations ------------------------------------------------------------------- History 575 56.15 Interdisciplinary 114 11.13 Political Science 76 7.42 Economics 60 5.90 Demography 58 5.66 Sociology 32 3.13 Anthropology 20 1.95 Political Economy 16 1.56 Statistics 9 .88 Psychology 8 .78 Geography 7 .68 Science 7 .68 Alcohol Studies 6 .59 Psychoanalysis 6 .59 Folklore 5 .49 Biology 4 .39 Education 4 .39 General 3 .293 Actuarial Science 2 1.95 Archaeology 2 1.95 Computer Science 2 1.95 Medicine 2 1.95 Sexology 2 1.95 Total 1024 98.78 ----------------------------------------------------------- The % column does not equal 100 due to rounding. This group comprised 95.70% of the total 1,070 citations. Unlike disciplinary history, interdisciplinary activity of journal titles cited two or more times indicated history was being cited 54.25%. With increasing frequency, social science journals comprised the majority of the citations. Statistics, medicine, biology and sexology, computer science, general science, and alcohol studies comprised the remainder of the titles. The breadth of substantive subjects indicated the wide range of research represented in these articles. Disciplinary affiliation became more pronounced as the sample of highly cited journal titles became more refined. When disciplinary affiliation was refined to journals producing five or more citations and to journals producing ten or more citations, the universe of interdisciplinary scholarship being tapped by historians was highly articulated (Tables III and IV). Table III Disciplinary Dispersion: Five or Above Citations Discipline Number % of5+ citations ------------------------------------------------------------------- History 441 58.96 Interdisciplinary 76 10.16 Political Science 64 8.56 Demography 58 7.75 Economics 47 6.28 Sociology 29 3.88 Political Economy 16 2.14 Alcohol Studies 6 0.80 Psychology 6 0.80 Geography 5 0.67 Total 748 100.00 ----------------------------------------------------------- This group comprised 71% of the total 1,070 citations. Table IV Disciplinary Dispersion: Ten or Above Citations Discipline Number % of 10+ citations ------------------------------------------------------------------- History 377 65.22 Demography 58 10.03 Interdisciplinary 46 7.96 Political Science 42 5.88 Sociology 29 5.02 Economics 26 4.98 Total 578 100.3% ------------------------------------------------------------------- The % column does not equal 100% due to rounding. This group comprised 54.02% of the total 1,070 citations. History still dominated, but the journals cited represented discrete subdisciplines in historical research. Such journals as _Ambix_, _Isis_, _Historical Methods Newsletter_, _Agricultural History_, _Business History Review_, _Ethnohistory_, or _Journal of Urban History_ represented the diversity of specialized historical scholarship influencing interdisciplinary history. Moreover, such history journals as _Hispanic American Historical Review_, _Journal of Family History_, and the _Journal of Social History_ indicated diverse geographical area interests, as well as, specific specializations. DISCUSSION--Influences of Disciplinary Research Activity Specific disciplines, along with their respective focus, methodological approach, and normative interests and conventions have influenced the course of research activity. For example, geography has concerned itself with both human and physical aspects of space and location. Geographical research necessarily conformed to established approaches of the study of spatial phenomena. Consequently, specific geography journals devoted themselves to certain research topics as well as specific methodological approaches. In regards to historical studies, these influences were especially noticeable in the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_. A specific strength of the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ was demographic history. Demographic research was well represented in all three samples of disciplinary affiliation. Its research and techniques have been critical to the historians researching intricacies of populations and their nuanced interactions within wider socio-economic conditions. When studying Latin American peasants relations with distribution of wealth, or land tenure among the Tuscan farmers in Renaissance Italy, or even the developing economic linkages with state and church authorities, demographic scholarship brought vitality to the historical framework. Among the most cited disciplines was economics with its particular orientation to economic forces and processes. Within the context of time and space, economics provided a sophisticated measure of social activity which bore heavily upon social and political history. Commercial development, i.e. banking and private concerns and the rise of industrial economies, were better understood via econometric models and analysis. Such journals as _Economica_, _Economic Development and Cultural Change_, _Quarterly Journal of Economics_, or _Economic Journal_ form the bulk of citations to economics literature. Journals such as the _Journal of Land Economics_ or _Journal of Economics and Business_ represented more specialized knowledge and approaches to historical conditions than those represented by the more mainstream economics journals. The most important finding was the use of economic history which crossed a variety of subjects. Economic history journals comprised 16.17% of history journals cited. When articles were pursued for content, social history and economic topics interrelated and possibly included such topics as familial structure and subsistence farming, banking innovations and anthropological modeling of civic life, or birth control and peasant life-course experience. Economic forces were extremely important to interdisciplinary research and seemed to inform the larger social historical context presented in _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_. _Journal of Economic History_, _Explorations in Economic History_, and _Economic History Review_ represented key journals in this sample. When examined the authors found these specialized journals provided the statistical and economic modeling used by economists. Often, borrowed methodological rigor enhanced the analysis of group dynamics evident in past societal constructions. As an example, a complementing discipline to economic history was sociology. Sociology's particular methodological perspective on group dynamics, collective behavior, theory, and modeling have impacted upon the economic historical research carried out by interdisciplinary historians. The presence of sociology to interdisciplinary history crossed all three samples; its contribution was decidedly more methodological than substantive knowledge. Historical sociology laid its claim to social history as it modified social historical topics and approaches to those topics. For instance, peasant movements could be better understood when viewed through the lens of sociological analysis; group dynamics of peasant culture could then be placed within specific and general historical context. A natural complementary discipline to sociology was anthropology. Its particular significance to interdisciplinary history was its theoretical foundations and methodological approaches to cultures. Especially interesting here was its influence upon the history of social groupings and interaction with differing religious sensibilities. Early Modern Europe was especially conducive to such historical analysis. Among the majors disciplinary influences exhibited by interdisciplinary history was political science. Although not as heavily or systematically cited as economics or history journals, political science journals reflected the changes occurring in political history. Formally concerned with political elites and maneuverings, political history today is more expansive and has entertained new approaches to political phenomena and processes. From voting behavior and interest group politics, to comparative government and international relations modeling, political history incorporated newly evolving techniques and theory derived from political science. The political science journals cited represented such diverse subdisciplines as political theory and philosophy, public administration and public policy, and even mainstream journals where all subfield interests were represented. These political science journals were_Journal of Politics, American Political Science Review_, or the _Journal of Conflict Resolution_ and constituted indicators of disciplinary dispersion (scatter). As various disciplines fed into interdisciplinary history, it was understood that highly defined approaches would be available to the historian. A significant number of interdisciplinary journals were represented in the sample. From thoughtful opinion journals, (i.e. _Daedalus_ and _Encounter_ ) to _Millbank Memorial Fund Quarterly_ and _Journal of Politics and Military Sociology_, interdisciplinary activity was pronounced. Often, these journals represented an area studies orientation where various disciplines explored a geographic region or particular culture or period of human activity. Journals such as _Journal of Latin American Studies_, _Journal of Ethiopian Studies_, _Journal of Southeast Asian Studies_ and _Journal of Asian Studies_ offered historians knowledge and perspectives not generally found in historical journals. At a significant 10.75%, 9.93 %, and 7.96 % of two, five, and ten citations per journal cited, interdisciplinary journals offered the historian a rich and diverse spectrum of substantive knowledge and methodological experimentation. DISCUSSION--Price Index A necessary complement to and intellectual extension of citation study and disciplinary dispersion was the Price Index (Table V). The Price Index measures obsolescence, and in equation form, it is defined as Price Index=Percentage of references dated in last the 5 years. Once calculated, the range 22% to 39% would categorize the literature as scientific or social scientific in nature. It is theorized most humanities literature will be older than five years, therefore making the Price Index less than 22% (Price, 1986, pp. 166-167, 171; Itzchaky, 1979). Obsolescence is pertinent to the normative functioning of a discipline. Importantly, scholarship appearing in the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ conformed to the Price Index, thus emulating research in the social sciences. With an average of 36.52 %, interdisciplinary historical research was well within the parameters set by the Price Index. Interdisciplinary implications for historical research were seen against this phenomenon. Table V Price Index for _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ Year Price Index % ------------------------------------- 1970 68.42 1971 48.97 1972 47.50 1973 33.33 1974 23.08 1975 43.75 1976 47.73 1977 39.74 1978 40.38 1979 42.86 1980 26.67 1981 30.77 1982 37.84 1983 50.94 1984 36.59 1985 31.25 1986 33.78 1987 24.18 1988 27.91 1989 33.33 1990 22.09 1991 31.18 1992 17.74 -------------------------- Total 840.03 DISCUSSION--Major Producers Important as disciplinary dispersion and the relationship to the Price Index are, it was instructive to establish the major citation producing journals. From this sample another profile emerged which clearly defined the disciplines and respective subdisciplines influencing interdisciplinary history (Table VI). Clearly, specific high-citation-yielding journals were responsible for the intellectual configuration characterizing interdisciplinary history. Here, specific journal titles were isolated and examined for their disciplinary affiliation and influence. _Journal of Economic History_, _Economic History Review_, and _Explorations in Economic History_ were seen exercising influence. _Population Studies_, _Population_, and _Demography_ dominated demographic history. Surprisingly, for a mainstream general historical journal, _American Historical Review_ was well- represented. Where social scientific modeling and theorizing was important, _Annales, Social Science History_, _Historical Methods Newsletter_, and the _Journal of Social History_ comprised a significant locus of influence. Except for a subject-based anomaly represented by _Pennsylvania German Society_ and the _Journal of Southeast Asian Studies_, other journals, (e.g., _Comparative Studies in Society and History_ or _Economica_ ) conformed to the disciplines identified in Table II. True to self-citation practice, the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ conformed to the citing phenomenon that a journal tends to cite itself at a higher rate than it cites other journals. Table IV Major Journal Citation Producers From Ten and Above Citations Journal Number ------------------------------------------------------------------- Journal of Interdisciplinary History 75 Journal of Economic History 39 American Historical Review 38 Economic History Review 37 Population Studies 33 William & Mary Quarterly 33 Annales 29 American Political Science Review 26 Past & Present 24 Journal of Social History 22 Historical Methods Newsletter 18 Social Science History 18 American Sociological Review 17 Journal of Political Economy 16 Explorations in Economic History 15 Journal of African History 15 Annales de demographique historique 14 Demography 14 Economica 14 Comparative Studies in Society and History 13 American Economic Review 12 American Journal of Sociology 12 Daedalus 12 Pennsylvania German Society 11 Population 11 Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 10 ------------------------------------------------------------------- CONCLUSION If the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ is a viable venue for the publication of interdisciplinary historical research, then this examination pointed to several key characteristics of interdisciplinary research. First, historians who consider their scholarship to be interdisciplinary were quite different in their approach to historical studies from historians working within disciplinary boundaries. The data demonstrated their reliance upon disciplines other than history. Their use of other social science disciplinary knowledge may indicate methodological borrowings as well. The authors' research indicated historians were interested in problem-centered history and were asking questions of a social scientific nature. Substantively, their interest incorporated all aspects of past human existence which was reflected in their choice of subject and in their approaches. Significantly, quantitative analysis (regression analysis, etc.) ethnomethodology, art historical methods, sociological theory, and archaeological and anthropological reports and modeling constituted a major characteristic of this kind of scholarship. Additionally, the narrative quality of writing was subsumed under the hypothesis oriented history undertaken by the historian. A number of questions remain to be further explored that were not touched upon in this study. What happens to the Price Index for individual journal titles cited in this sample? Do certain titles respond to the Price Index more than others? Do certain disciplines respond significantly stronger to the Price Index when used in historical research? These obsolescence questions could be pertinent to the evolving nature of historical scholarship if older materials are not being cited and are not forming the intellectual basis for further research. Another question is whether over the entire run of _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ the characteristics described in this study hold true. Keeping these questions in mind, this study concludes with a final observation. As historical research evolves and develops sophisticated approaches, techniques, and other scholarly apparatus, what will be the contours of historical research? As diverse social science and humanities perspectives become part of the historian's repertoire, how shall historical research change to accommodate the problem- centered view of social science scholarship and theory? Through citation analysis some of these questions can be partially raised and answered. Since the _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_ represents the voice for such activity, it is possible that an examination of citations will reveal the hidden nature of this interdisciplinary phenomenon. REFERENCES Alston, Annie May. (1952). Characteristics of materials used by a selected group of historians in their research in United States History_. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL. Buchanan, A.L. & Herubel, J.-P. V.M. _Interdisciplinarity: The case of historical geography through citation analysis_. Manuscript. Choi, J.M. (1988). An analysis of authorship in anthropology journals, 1963 & 1983. _Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian_, _6_ (3-4), 65-84. Estabrook, L. (1981). Sociology and library research. _Library Trends_, _32_ (4), 461-476. Fyfe, J.F. (comp.) (1986). _History journals and serials: An analytical guide_. New York: Greenwood Press. Hamerow, T.S. (1987). _Reflections on history and historians_. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Herubel, J.-P. V.M. (1990). The nature of three history journals: A citation experiment. _Collection Management_, _12_ (3/4), 57-67. Herubel, J.-P. V.M. (1991). Materials used in historical scholarship: A limited citation analysis of the _Journal of Garden History_. _Collection Management_, _14_ (1/2), 155-162. Herubel, J.-P. V.M. & Buchanan, A.L. (1993). Tracing interdisciplinarity in contemporary historiography using _SSCI_: The case of Toynbee, McNeill, and Braudel. _Collection Building_, _13_ (1), 1-5. Herubel, J.-P. V.M. & Buchanan, A.L. (forthcoming). Disciplinary, interdisciplinary, and subdisciplinary linkages in historical studies journals. _Science and the Science of Science_. Itzchaky, Moshe. (1979). The structure and citation patterns of the international research literature of Biblical and Ancient Near-East Studies; A bibliometric approach to the development of a discipline. (Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey). _Dissertation Abstracts International_, _40_, 5231A. Jones, C., Chapman, M., & Woods, P.C. (1972). The characteristics of materials used by historians. _Journal of Librarianship_, _4_ (3), 137-156. Kammen, M. (1980). Introduction: The historian's vocation and the state of the discipline in the United States. In M. Kammen (Ed.), _The past before us: Contemporary historical writing in the United States_ (pp. 45-46). Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Lawani, S.M. (1981). Bibliometrics: its theoretical foundations, methods, and applications. _Libri_, _31_ (3), 294-315. McAnally, A.M. (1950). Characteristics of materials used in research in United States History. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, 1950). Nisonger, T.E. (1992). _Collection evaluations in academic libraries: A literature guide and annotated bibliography_. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited. Peters, S.H. (1990). Characteristics of the sources used by American historians writing on the history of modern Germany. (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1990). _Dissertation Abstracts International_, _ 52_, 330A . Price, D.J. de Solla. (1986). _Little science, big science...and beyond_. New York: Columbia University Press. Rotberg, R.I. & Rabb, T.K. (1970). Editorial. _Journal of Interdisciplinary History_, _1_ (1), 4. Smith, L.C. (1981). Citation analysis. _Library Trends_, _30_ (1), 83-106. _____ Articles and Sections of this issue of _LIBRES: Library and Information Science Research Electronic Journal_ may be retrieved via anonymous ftp to cc.curtin.edu.au or via e-mail message addressed to LISTSERV@KENTVM or LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU (instructions below) Papers may be submitted at anytime by email or send/file to: Andy Exon, Ph.D. Editor-in-Chief, _LIBRES: Library and Information Science Research Electronic Journal, EDITORS@KENTVM.KENT.EDU _________________________________ *Copyright Declaration* Copyright of articles published by LIBRES: Library and Information Science Electronic Journal is held by the author of a given article. If an article is re-published elsewhere it must include a statement that it was originally published in LIBRES. The LIBRES Editors reserve the right to maintain permanent archival copies of all submissions and to provide print copies to appropriate indexing services for for indexing and microforming. _________________________________ ____________________________ GOPHER Instructions ____________________________ GOPHER will be available for future Issues. ____________________________ Anonymous FTP Instructions ____________________________ ftp cc.curtin.edu.au login: anonymous password: guest cd LIB-RESEARCH get filename (where filename = exact name of file in Table of Contents quit LISTSERV Retrieval Instructions _______________________________ Send e-mail addressed to LISTSERV@KENTVM (Bitnet) or LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU Leave the subject line empty. The message must read: GET LIBRE4N1 CONTENTS Use this file to identify particular articles or sections then send e-mail to LISTSERV@KENTVM or LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU with the command: GET where is LIBRE#N# name) and is the name of the author