1 1 COPYRIGHTED BY ROLLAND ELWELL STEVENS 1952 THE. USE OF LIBRARY MATERIALS IN DOCTORAL RESEARCH: A STUDY OF THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENCES IN RESEARCH METHOD BY ROLLAND ELWELL STEVENS A.B., Washington University, 1939 A.M., University of Illinois, 1943 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN LIBRARY SCIENCE IN THE GRADUATE COLLEGE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS, 19B1 URBANA, ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS THE GRADUATE COLLEGE Align at 17, 19-51. T HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE THESIS PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION BY Holland-TC. Stymie ENTITLED The URC of Library Materials In Doctoral Reaearch; A Study of Th« Bffwrtt rsf D<ffflrftWy».flB In Rfteaarnh Met.frnri BE ACCEPTED* AS FULFILLING THIS PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Doctor of Philosophy In Library Science In Charge of Thesis "KA^.pj^r^g Head of Department Recommendation concurred inf ncupLJ L)/^zw^ Committee C.Vkj, ^ W, on Final Examinationf * Subject to successful final examination in the case of the doctorate. t Required for doctor's degree but not for master's. 6M—12-48—40199K ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author "wishes to acknowledge, and to express h is thanks' for, t he help and guidance of his advisors, Dr. Herbert Goldhor and Dr. Rose Phelps. Dr. Goldhor gave a great amount of time and thought in assisting the author in the selection of a problem, in the framing of the hypothesis, in the methodology of the study, and in many aspects of the writing. Dr. Phelps gave much helpful criticism of fche subject matter of the d i s s e r t a t i o n. The author is also indebted bo Dr. Thelma Eaton, Dr. Robert Downs, Dr. Arthur McAnally, Dr. Robert Bierstedt, and Dr. C. Walb er Stone, a ll of the University of I l l i n o is faculty/ f or their careful reading of the dissertation in a preliminary draft and f or their helpful criticism. ' The manuscript , was also read c r i t i c a l ly by Mr. James Skipper, to whom the writer is grateful. Thanks are due also to Dr. Edith Jones, Dr. Theodore 3estor, Dr. Arthur G. Vestal, Mr.-Ralph McCoy, and Mr. James Ranz, all of the University of I l l i n o is faculty, and to Miss Swift, Miss ptellhorn, and Miss Gordon, a ll of the Washington University Library _ J staff, for their assistance in judging the researph types of the iis,sertations examined. The author wishes to express his thanks to pr. Warner Rice, Director of the Univeraity of Michigan Library, and o Dr. Jerrold Orne, Director of Washington University Library, for bermission to do part of the research in those libraries. Finally, ;he author wishes to acknowledge the great help of his wife, who 6Vid nuch of the proofreading and verifying of statistical work in the lissertation. ii <5 N_ TABLE OF CONTENTS * Page LIST OF Chapter I. PRORT.T-.MS OF TCYPATtfTTTMf!- RTT:5VRARHTT T/TRR AKTRS - 1 The Problem Technological Solutions Divisional Solutions^ Limits on the Collection of All Library Materials Needed in Research Hypothesis - Summary I I. / Kinds of Reported Evidence Examined / Title-Dispersion of Subject Literatures The Adequacy of the Library in Supporting Research Questions Needing Further Investigation Summary I I I. i Use of the Doctoral Dissertation / Selection of Institutions Selection of Dissertations / .. - Procedure / Summary / i i IV. COMPARISON OF HISTORICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH . . 43' Plan of Investigation The Ascriptive Hypothesis i The Relational Hypothesis on the Level of Titles Summary i V. THE USE OF INFREQUENTLY CITED REFERENCES IN RESEARCH . 79 ' / The Relational Hypothesis on the Level of Disserta- ti ons • Matched Dissertations Alternative Hypotheses Summary VI. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH . . . 102 1 - Summary Implications Need for Further Research ---.. • - tfr " l ii Page {Appendix A. LIST OP DISSERTATIONS USED 120 B. CLASSIFICATION OP DISSERTATIONS 131 C. STATISTICAL METHOD 137 blBLIOGRAPHY . . . . 143 IVITA ." 149 N lv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Dispersion of Subject Literatures 19 2. Scholarly Use of Libraries in Belgium 26 3. Size of Selected Libraries -. 31 4. Number of Dissertations Selected from Each Institution. 32 5. Summary of Statistics by Type of Research . .' 35 6. Research Types of Dissertations Taken from Each Institu tion . 40 7. Difference in the Mean Number of NIL Titles Cited in Each Type of Research ..' 47 8. Number of NIL Titles Cited in Each Type of Research . • 48 9. Proportion of NIL Titles Cited in Each Type of Research 49 10, Difference in the Mean Number of Fringe Titles Cited by Each Type of Research 50 11. Number of Fringe Titles Cited by Each Type of Research. 51 12. Proportion of Fringe Titles Cited by Each Type of Research . . . . . .. 5 1' 13, Number of Fringe Titles for- Each Type of Researcn: Core Title - Cited by Three or More Dissertations 52 14• Number of Fringe Titles for Each Type of Research: Core Title - Cited by Four or More Dissertations 53 15. Number of Fringe Titles for Each Type of Research: Core Title - Cited by Five or More Dissertations 53 16. Distribution of Titles by Frequency of Demand and by Availability in Collection . . . . .. 55 17. Percentage of Fringe and: Core Titles That Are Not in the Library . . . . . . .. 55 18. Distribution of Fringe Titles by Availability According to Library 57 x 19. Availability of Titles Cited in University of Illinois Dissertations 58 20. Availability of Titles Cited in University of Michigan Dissertations •• 58 V I *_ Table -Pag© 21. Availability of Titles Cited in Washington University Dissertations . . . . .. .• 58 22. Proportion of Fringe Titles in Library • . .' 60 23.- Proportion of Core Titles in Library 60 24. Differences by Library between Proportion of NIL Fringe Titles and Proportion of NIL Core Titles . 60 25. Proportion of Fringe Titles in the Library by Subject Field of Dissertation 62 26. Proportion of Core Titles In the Library by Subject , Field of Dissertation • 62 27. Differences by Subject between Proportion of NIL Fringe Titles and Proportion of NIL Core Titles 63 28. Proportion of Fringe Titles by Subject in the, University of Illinois Library 65 29. Proportion of Core Titles by Subject in the University of Illinois Library 65 30. Differences by Subject between Proportion of NIL Fringe Titles and Proportion of NIL Core Titles at the Univer sity of Illinois • 66 31. Proportion of Fringe Titles by Subject in the Univer sity of Michigan Library 66 32. Proportion of Core Titles by Subject In the University of~Michigan Library • . .—•—.—i~~.—.—.—i- v^i—.—.—*—.—i—.- 67 ^33. Differences by Subject between Proportion of NIL Fr^cige Titles and Proportion of NIL Core Titles at the'Univer sity of Michigan 67 34. 'Proportion of Fringe Titles by Subject in the Washington University Library • 68 35. Proportion of, Core,Titles by Subject in the Washington University Library •• 68 36. Differences by Subject between Proportion of NIL Fringe Titles and Proportion of NIL Core Titles at Washington University • 69 37. Proportion of Fringe Titles by Type of Research In the Library . . ' . . • "71 38. Proportion of Core Titles by Type of Research in the Library • 71 vi Table < Page \39« Differences by1 Type of Research' between Proportion of NIL \ Fringe Titles and Proportion, of NIL Core Titles . . .. 71 \ 40.\ Proportion of Fringe Titles by Type of Research In the \University of Illinois Library 72 \ 41. proportion of Core Titles by Type of Research in the University of Illinois Library 73 \ 42. Differences by Type of Research between Proportion of NIL Fringe Titles and Proportion of NIL Core Titles at the^ University of Illinois 73 i 43. Proportion of Fringe Titles by Type of Research in the University of Michigan library .- • 73 \ 44. Proportion of Core Titles by Type of Research In the University of Michigan Library •• 74 45. Differences by Type of Research between Proportion of NIL Fringe Titles and Proportion of N>IL Core Titles at the University of Michigan . " 74 46. Proportion of Fringe -Titles by Type of Research In the Washington University Library 75 47. Proportion of Core Titles by Type of Research in the Washington University Library . . . ._ 75 48. Differences by Type of Research between Proportion of NIL Fringe Titles and Proportion of NIL Core Titles at Washington University 76 49. Number of NIL Titles Cited by Dissertations Compared ^with Number of Fringe Titles Cited "80 5Cf. Correlation of NIL Titles Cited with Fringe Titles Cited 83 t 51. Difference between Matched Groups of Dissertations In Number of NIL Titles Cited 85 52. Difference between Historical and Experimental Types of Education Dissertations in the Number of Fringe Titles Cited 89 53. Difference between Historical and Experimental Types of Education Dissertations in the Number of NIL Titles Cited 90 54. Difference between Historical and Textual Types of Classics Dissertations in the Number of Fringe Titles Cited * 91 v%. vii Table Page 55. Differences between Historical and Textual Types o£ Classics Dissertations in the Number of NIL Titles Cited 91 56. Difference between Historical Dissertations in Educa tion and Classics In the Number of Fringe Titles Cited. 94 57. Difference between Historical Dissertations in Educa t i on and Classics in the Number of NIL Titles Cited . • 94 58. Difference between Experimental Dissertations In Botany and Psychology in the Number of Fringe Titles Cited • 95 59. Difference between Experimental Dissertations in Botany and Psychology in the Number of NIL Titles Cited . .. 96 60. Correlation of NIL Titles Cited with Total Titles Cited 99 61* General Analysis of Titles Cited in the Dissertations Examined - 128 \ \ \ \ \ * viir