College and Research Libraries DANIEL O'CONNOR AND PHYLLIS VAN ORDEN Getting into Print Editors of thirty-three national library periodicals were surveyed to identify the number of unsolicited manuscripts received and published annually . The review process to select manuscripts for publication was also examined. Our findings reveal a high manuscript rejection rate (77.3 percent ) with little re- liance on external judges to review potential articles. journal editors are en- couraged to publish the purpose and scope of their periodical, as well as the method and criteria used to review unsolicited manuscripts. RAMPANT CRITICISM on the quality of li- brary literature is so pervasive that we could be fearful that Katz's Best of 1978 might contain only one or two articles. This old question of quality has extensive roots , and it generated a renewed concern during the 1950s through the activities of the ALA Library Periodicals Round Table. At one meeting, Bell commented that reputable authors , "plus the maintenance of a standard of selectivity in articles printed, are the basic ingredients for attaining the much needed respect that a publication re- quires in order to flourish. "1 A sustained and growing concern about quality is evident in articles selected from the past twenty years : "Dullness in Library Journals " (1953) ;2 " Standards for Library Periodicals" (1955); 3 "A Look at Library Literature" (1961);4 " Popular or Scholarly" (1962); 5 and "The Library Press" (1969). 6 Moon makes a typical observation , " The dearth, the paucity of quality , is most noticeable if you examine only one element among the features of the library press: the articles. " 7 The topic has been important enough to merit attention at workshops and Daniel O'Connor is assistant professor, Grad- uate School of Library Service, Rutgers Univer- sity, New Brunswick, New jersey , and Phyllis Van Orden is professor, School of Library Sci- ence, Florida State University , Tallahassee. This research was conducted while both authors were on the faculty at Rutgers University , and the au- thors acknowledge the support of the Graduate School of Library Service there and the assis- tance of Thomas H . . Mott, Jr. , Shirley Fitzgib- bons, and Ruth Katz . conferences. Examples include a conference held at Brandeis University in 19758 and a program of the Library Research Round Table held during the 1972 Annual Confer- ence of ALA . 9 These activities, however, address neither the question of the opportunity to publish nor the treatment that unsolicited manu- scripts receive. If prospective authors are unaware of publication policies and criteria for selection , such ignorance may per- petuate the submission of manuscripts that will continue to generate criticism. Though "quality" is bandied about, it cannot come from situations where authors do not know criteria or where editors face copy deadlines with questionable manuscripts on hand. Sharing of criteria with prospective authors as well as with those involved in the review- ing process might serve as one concrete means of raising quality. FOCUSING IN ON Two ASPECTS Because of these basic issues, selected na- tional library journals were polled during fall 1976 to identify an author's chances of having an unsolicited manuscript published. An equally important aspect of the investi- gation was describing the way in which un- solicited manuscripts are presently reviewed to determine how articles are selected for publication. Librarians publish, ideally, from their de- sire to communicate ideas with colleagues. There are growing pressures facing library school faculty and academic librarians to ad- vance professionally through this activity. Such individuals need to have available to I 389 390 I College & Research Libraries • September 1978 them statements of the scope, policies, and criteria used by journals in selection of arti- cles. The opportunities of individuals to share their research is also contingent upon the number of unsolicited manuscripts that can be accepted for publication each year. Besides knowing the appropriate journal for their manuscript, writers need to know the manuscript reviewing process and how much time this takes. These factors are of great significance to any potential author, especially one who is under pressure to es- tablish publishing credit. Thirty-three English language journals published in the United States and Canada were selected, as ones that accept contribu- tions from members of the field, are in- dexed in Library Literature, and attract na- tional audiences of librarians . Excluded were publications that are internal newslet- ters, agency or association publications that focus on regional or state activities, publica- tions used as a vehicle for informal ex- change of ideas , and national journals that consist solely of solicited articles. Forty journals originally met our criteria for inclusion in the study. However, three journals were excluded after we realized · that one changed its scope (to a newsletter), another ceased publication , and the third was only infrequently indexed in Library Literature. Two journals, Drexel Library Quarterly and Library Trends, consist solely of solicited articles. In addition, we were not able to reach two journal editors by either mail or telephone. Based on these criteria, several excellent journals were excluded from the study. However , the importance of investigating practices in nationally based publications outweighed the advantages of a more thor- ough examination of all library periodicals. The journals selected vary widely in their subject matter and in the audiences that they attract; they range from subsidized as- sociation publications to commercial en- deavors published by profit-making organi- zations. IDENTIFYING THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUBUSH The opportunity to publish depends on three basic considerations: (1) the author's interest in matching the subject and scope of a journal, (2) the approximate rate of ac- ceptance of unsolicited manuscripts, and (3) the ratio of unsolicited to solicited articles published by the journal. Another impor- tant factor is the total number of articles published annually. The responses to these considerations are provided in table 1. As an example, the journal American Archivist reports receiving forty unsolicited manuscripts each year, of which 50 percent are accepted for publica- tion . These accepted manuscripts represent approximately 75 percent of the total number of articles published in the journal each year. The range of subjects dealt with by the journals in this study is diverse. Many jour- nal titles suggest the key interests of their readers. Although an analysis by subject was outside the focus of this study , we did request copies of the information sent to prospective authors. Unfortunately, most of this information directs authors in matters of bibliographic format rather than identify- ing the scope of t~e journal. · A noticeable exception is Information Processing and Management , which specifies its purpose, scope, typical key words, and related jour- nals . The overall findings of the opportunity to publish include: 1. An unsolicited manuscript stands about one chance in four of being published. 2. After an article is submitted, authors should anticipate a two-month delay before receiving an acceptance or rejection no- tification. 3. If the manuscript is accepted, an additional five months pass before the arti- cle is published. 4. The number of individuals who par- ticipate in the evaluation of a manuscript can vary from a single editor to a consensus from a group of individuals who review manuscripts without knowing the identity of the author. In fact, the most common pat- tern is that two to four readers will review a manuscript to determine if it is suitable · for publication. 5. Unsolicited manuscripts account for more than two-thirds of the total articles published by· the thirty-three journals iden- tified in this study. Nevertheless, manuscripts are not mailed to average journals. Instead, they are sent to a specific periodical, and its practices de- termine the opportunity of authors to see their ideas in print. Table 1 identifies for each journal the number of unsolicited manuscripts received annually, their acceptance rate, and the percent of total articles generated from un- solicited manuscripts. It is common knowl- edge that many rejected manuscripts even- tually appear as news items or as articles in other journals. 10 The average acceptance rate for unsolicited manuscripts is 33.8 per- cent. This is a misleading figure given the extremes in the number of articles selected by different journals. For example, Argus reports a 100 percent acceptance rate, but only three manuscripts are involved. Li- brary Journal, which receives 650 unsolic- ited manuscripts, reports an acceptance rate of 10 percent-or sixty-five articles. By computing the actual number of accepted manuscripts for all thirty-three journals, there was a total of 7 46 published articles from a pool of 3,292 unsolicited sub- missions, which represents an overall accep- tance rate of 22.7 percent. This unexpectedly high rejection rate of 77.3 percent surprised us when compared to the average rejection rates in other fields. In a review of the refereeing process, Meadows states that, "Only about a quarter of the papers submitted to U.S. science journals are rejected, though in some 'fringe' areas-such as mathematics and anthropology-the rejection rates rise to 50 percent. In arts subjects, on the other hand, over three-quarters of submitted arti- cles may be refused. " 11 This raises the old question of where our field stands in relation to the disciplines. At the present time we obviously reflect the pattern of the arts. If we accept Meadows' analysis, then our more quantitative jour- nals would be expected to have lower rejec- tion rates than less quantitative ones. This point is borne out in table 1 when looking at the acceptance rates of such jour- nals as Bulletin of the Medical Library As- sociation (50 percent), Information Process- ing and Management (60 percent), Journal of the American Society for Information Science (50 percent), and Special Libraries (49 percent). The reasons for this may not be obvious, unless one realizes that scien- Getting into Print I 391 tific journals often accept articles that con- tribute minor or esoteric advances in the field. The implications of this raise a provoca- tive question: Should librarians who publish for their own professional advancement in journals with high acceptance rates be re- quired to produce more publications than those who publish in journals with low ac- ceptance rates? Another important consideration is the ratio of unsolicited to solicited manuscripts, which comprise the published articles in a library periodical volume. Column 4 of table 1 lists this publication rate for unsolic- ited manuscripts. These figures represent great variations in practice, and there are no discernible patterns to account for this in terms of subject area, manuscript reviewing process, or type of journal (i.e., association or commercial). Questionnaire items relating to table 1 asked for the editor's best estimate; as such, publication rate is highly suspect. Ideally, the number of articles published annually by each journal could be obtained from table 1 by mutiplying column 2 times col- umn 3 and then dividing the result by col- umn 4. For some journals, this process yielded highly inaccurate numbers when compared to actual counts of articles pub- lished. We surmised that this was due to erroneous publication rate figures. From actual counts and several estimates, the total number of articles published by these thirty-three journals during 1975 was 1,095. Of these, 746, or 68.1 percent, came from unsolicited manuscripts, and the re- maining 349 originated from solicited manu- scripts. Thus it is safe to say that about two-thirds of the articles in our national journals come from unsolicited manuscripts. Given the severe rejection rate mentioned earlier, this publication rate constitutes an important commentary on the composition of our national journals: Both the editors of these publications and their respective au- diences are dependent upon unsolicited manuscripts for communicating research among librarians. Paradoxically, it is extremely difficult to have an unsolicited manuscript accepted for publication in a national library periodical, yet these journals are mostly comprised of TABLE 1 OPPORTUNITY TO P UBLISH UNSOLICITED MAN USC RIPTS American Archivist American Libraries Argus Audiovisual Instruction j ournal Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science Bulletin of the Medical Library Association Canadian Library Journal Catholic Library World College & Research Libraries Film Library Quarterly Hom Book Information : Reports/Bibliography Information Processing and Management J oumal of Academic Librarianship Journal of Education for Librarianship Journal of the American Society for Information Science Journal of Library Automation Journal of Library History, Philosophy and Comparative Librarianship Journal of Micrographics Law Library Journal Learning TOday Library Journal Library Resources & Technical Services Library Quarterly Microform Review Music Library Association Notes Quarterly Journal of the Library of Congress :s.ool Library Journal School Media Quarterly Special Libraries Top of the News Wilson Library Bulletin • Actual acceptance rate is 22. 7%. See article for explanation. tActual publication rate is 68.1 %. See article for explanation . Total .Vumher Received Number of un so· licited manu- scripts received a nnuall y 40 200 3 250 10 95 45 30 135 25 100 10 70 150 150 75 50 55 15 15 50 650 40 85 10 14 30 100 300 20 170 50 250 3292 Acceptance Rate Perce nt of unsolicited manuscripts ac- cep ted for pub- lication Average 50 5 100 50 20 50 50 20 25 20 10 10 60 24 10 50 40 30 95 33 20 10 50 15 80 40 50 20 ·3 10 49 13 5 33 .8%* w ~ Publication Rate 1.\:) Of total articles published annually, (] percent which come from Q.. un solicite d manuscripts ~ 75 O"c: (':) 60 ~ 5 :;:x:, 99 (':) 5 "" (':) 50 ~ "i 50 (") ;::s-o 25 t""' 95 s:. 15 ~ 25 "i ~- 6 "" 80 85 CJ) (':) 88 ~ 80 ~ 95 3 <::t' 100 (':) "i 40 ...... 33 (0 20 ~ 50 85 70 50 40 50 95 5 10 100 50 30 Average 53.5%t articles that originate from this source. Fur- thermore, editors still complain about the quality of manuscripts they receive. The fol- lowing examination of the reviewing and re- fereeing process sheds some light on this di- lemma. REVEALING THE REVIEWING AND REFEREEING PROCESS A rejection rate of 77.3 percent provides evidence that the article selection process is a tough and vigorous one. Previous treat- ments of this topic tend to concentrate on the quality of manuscripts submitted to journal editors and not on the closely re- lated editorial review and selection process. In these days of performance objectives, ac- countability, and evaluation, it seems only fair that editors identify for prospective au- thors the complex process by which unsolic- ited manuscripts are reviewed and selected. Confronted here are two fundamental is- sues: objectivity in reviewing manuscripts and the criteria used in selecting articles to be published. The concept of objectivity in reviewing unsolicited manuscripts addresses the de- gree of a reviewer's impartiality in the selection process. Theoretically, objectivity in selecting manuscripts for publication exists on a continuum that can range from no evaluation (i.e., anything received is au- tomatically published) to evaluation of a manuscript where an independent reviewer and a prospective author do not know each other's identity (frequently described as "double-blind refereeing"). · From an a priori listing of nine discrete possibilities within this reviewing con- tinuum, six emerged as patterns of practice in selecting manuscripts for publication. There were no journals that automatically publish anything received, and thus all manuscripts receive some degree of review. For most of the journals, this review is usu- ally performed by members of an editorial or advisory board who know the identities of prospective authors. Table 2 lists by journal the six reviewing practices used by nationally based library periodicals; also included are the number of individuals involved in unsolicited manu- script review as well as the time it takes to perform this activity. As a journal moves Getting into Print I 393 from high internal control by an editor to double-blind refereeing, there should be a corresponding increase in the objectivity with which manuscripts are selected for publication. Although refereeing does not guarantee the production of quality manuscripts, it does inject independence and impartiality into the selection process. Ideally, a referee is an outside expert who judges anonymous manuscripts for their intrinsic worth; the referee also provides substantive sugges- tions to potential authors to help them im- prove the quality of their contributions. Though there appears to be movement to- ward refereeing, only six journals employed a full refereeing system, while the remain- ing twenty-seven periodicals relied primar- ily on editors, advisory staffs, and editorial boards to review and select manuscripts for publication. (Several editors indicated that multiple reviewing practices were used. The assign- ment. of a journal to a level in table 2 was based on the first category that an editor checked.) For the ten level one journals, where the editor makes the selection, the sheer vol- ume of this work is staggering: seventeen editors evaluate 784 unsolicited manuscripts annually, which amounts to an average of forty-six manuscripts per editor. This is in addition to preparing, coordinating, or evaluating features, editorials, theme issues, regular columns, and solicited manuscripts. Furthermore, many of the association publi- cations have unpaid editors who perform these activities in addition to their regular jobs. Refereeing is no immediate panacea that ensures the production of quality articles. For science journals, where this practice is widely used, the more prevalent negative aspects of refereeing include: time increases between receipt of manuscript and publica- tion decision; use of different evaluation standards by different referees; difficulties in masking the identities of authors; and an occasional robbing of an author's idea by an unscrupulous referee. 12 Nonetheless, the important consideration here is how these disadvantages of refereeing compare to the present systems of editorial control. The major difference when adopting a TABLE 2 LEVEL OF REVIEWING, NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED, AND TI\1E TO PROCESS UNSOLICITED MANUSCRIPTS Level of reviewing: Number of Average time in weeks Selection of unsolicited individuals from receipt of manuscript to: manuscripts for publication involved§ Publication Decision Actual Publication w 1. Editor decides what is published ~ Audiovisual Instruction 1 6--8 52 Catholic Library World 1 2 8 (J Journal of Microgr~hics 2 1 10 c ~ Law ubnuuoum 1 4 12-36 a'Q LeamingT y 1 4 50 ~ Microfonn Review 2 4 52 q- Music Library Association Notes 2 4-8 48 !l:l RQ 1 1-12 12-24 ~ To~ of the News 2 26 52 ~ 1:1 Wi son Library Bulletin 4 12 20 ~ 2. Editor decides with assistance of editorial staff ;:3"' American Libraries 5 10 18 t:; Argus 6 12 * ~ •canadian Library Journal 2 8-10 8-16 ~ *Film Library Quarterly 2 3 25 :2. Hom Book , 2 8 t ~ Infonnation: Reports/Bibliography 3 3-4 24 en *Jrl of Lib. Hist., Phil. &: Comp. Librarianship 3 4--6 8-12 ~ ~ Quarterly Journal of the Library of-Congress 4 4 25 ~ ~ School Library Journal 4 20 * ~ *School Media ~arterly 4 6 24--30 ~ ~ 3. Editor decides wi assistance of advisory staff ..., • American Archivist 8 15 26 ........ Bulletin of the American Soc. for Info. Science 3-4 3-4 * "0 tJoumal of Academic Librarianship 12 2-9 12-52 ~ Library Resources & Technical Services · 6-7 15 52 • Library Quarterly 13 1-10 30+ 4. Editorial Board decides _ *Joum~ of Library Automation 7 8 34 Library journal 3--5 4-12 6-24 5. Referees ecide; know author's name Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 3 8 20 Infonnation Processing &: Management 3 6 18 Journal of the American Soc. for Info. Science 2 8-12 30 6. Referees decide; do not know author's name-double-blind College &: Research Libraries 3 6 40 Journal of Education for Librarianship 3 8 36 Special Libraries 2-3 8 16 •AJso uses outside referees who know author's name tAlso uses double-blind refereeing system :tDid not respond IThe questionnaire did not distinguish between number of individuals who serve as referees and the actual number involved in reviewing each manuscript. refereeing system would be the decision- making environment within our journals. Instead of a relatively small number of indi- viduals making many decisions on wide ranges of topics, there would be many indi- viduals each making a few decisions in their particular areas of expertise. The time delay between receipt of manuscript and publica- tion decision now averages two months; with a refereeing system this is likely to in- crease. However, the average five-month time span from publication decision to ac- tual publication should not be affected. The most serious problems with refer- eeing are the criteria used to evaluate man- uscripts and the consistency with which they are applied. Fortunately, several editors from levels 5 and 6 sent us the evaluation forms used by their referees, and these were most enlightening. The best conglomerate form would include specific evaluation criteria followed by a scale so manuscripts can be judged according to originality of ideas, importance to the jour- nals' audience, clarity, appropriateness of method, and similar standards. 13 In addi- tion, an open-ended section for comments · would allow referees to state specific criti- cisms of rejected manuscripts. Because this form is so important, editors should publish it regularly in their journals so prospective authors will know in advance the criteria used and how it is applied in the evaluation of their manuscript. The other problems with refereeing- masking authors' identities and robbing of ideas-are rare but cannot be easily over- come. These merit close monitoring by journal editors. Finally, it is our opinion that if journals lack a detailed purpose statement, do not provide for an objective review of manu- scripts, and hide their evaluation criteria from prospective authors, then two things might happen: (1) There will be a high re- jection rate for· unsolicited manuscripts; and (2) there will be widespread complaints by editors that the quality of manuscripts re- ceived is very low. QUESTIONING THE QUESTION Previous writers on this topic have con- centrated on vague notions of "quality" that should emanate from library periodicals. Getting into Print I 395 This study does not pretend to address this issue in any direct manner. Instead, our in- vestigation is a very specific one aimed at examining the method by which unsolicited manuscripts become published articles. An examination of thirty-three national jour- nals, whose editors responded to a six-item questionnaire is, admittedly, a limited study. But we feel it is an important begin- ning in describing an influential segmen.t of the library literature, whose combined cir- culation exceeds 335,000 subscriptions. The treatment of unsolicited manuscripts reported here indicates a clear need to reas- sess the policies · and levels of decision mak- ing within our national journals. We view a librarian's opportunity to publish as severely limited by the following factors: (I) high manuscript rejection rate; (2) lack of objec- tivity in the manuscript reviewing process; (3) uncertainty about the journal's purpose; and (4) ignorance of reviewers' evaluative criteria. These issues deserve an open hearing to ·resolve the problems facing librarians who would like to communicate their ideas with colleagues. It is not enough to continue the current trend of workshops, where editors and researchers identify for librarians the ideal, -publishable manuscript. Instead, journal staffs must reexamine and publicize their policies. This should also benefit the journals in providing them with external measures of stability when editors and editorial boards change. Of course, we intend to end this on a positive, constructive note. A few journals have already accomplished some of the rec- ommendations suggested in this study. The experiences of these editors should be shared with others to identify reasonable modifications of current practice as journals move toward the development of national guidelines. The American Library Association can exercise leadership in this area by examin- ing its periodicals to determine the pattern appropriate to each journal's purpose and audience. In addition, a conference of li- brarians and editors to discuss specific is- sues would go far in advancing the state of our journal literature. To keep this in focus, we suggest that the initial considerations address three basic 396 I College & Research Libraries • September 1978 points: (1) Journals should regularly publish specific statements on their purpose, scope, and audience; (2) journals should publish the criteria used to evaluate manuscripts; and (3) journals should adopt a double-blind refereeing system. These proposed changes should provide vehicles for the improvement of our litera- ture to the benefit of editors, authors, and readers. Once these issues are resolved, we may look forward to Katz's Best of 1980 as a two-volume work. REFERENCES l. Ingelis Bell, "Mechanics of Editorial Work," ALA Library Periodicals Round Table News- letter 6:5 (1959). 2. Jean Colquhoun, "Dullness in Library Jour- nals ," Ontario Library Review 37 :86-87 (1953) . 3. Leon Carnovsky, "Standards for Library Pe- riodicals," Library Journal 80:2~9 (1955). 4. Fay M. Blake, "A Look at Library Litera- ture ," Wilson Library Bulletin 35:715, 720 (1961) . 5. Eric Moon, "Popular or Scholarly?" Library Journal 87:2330 (1962) . 6. Eric Moon, "The Library Press," Library Journal 94:4104-9 (1969) . 7. Ibid ., p.4105. 8. Jennie M. Harreld, "Report on the Confer- ence on Writing and Publishing for Librar- ians," College & Research Libraries News 36:177-79 Oune 1975). 9. "Is There a Need for a Journal of Library Re- search?" "Program of the 91st Annual Con- ference of the American Library Association, Chicago, Illinois, June 25-July 1, 1972," p.81. 10. Moon , "The Library Press ," p.4105, and telephone conversation with John Berry, editor of Library Journal, on Oct. 25, 1976. 11. A. J. Meadows, Communication in Science (London: Butterworths, 1974), p.38. 12. Ibid., p.42. 13. A more thorough listing of criteria can be found in "American Libraries $1000 Prize Ar- ticle Competition," American Libraries 7:685 (1976). SPECIAL PRE-PUBLICATION OFFER ENCYCLOPEDIA OF BIOETHICS Editor in Chief: WARREN T. REICH, Center for Bioethics, Kennedy Institute of Eth~cs, Georgetown University A groundbreaking reference work-the only comprehensive source of information on social and ethical issues in the life sciences, medicine, health care, and the health professions. In over 300 cross-referenced articles ranging from Abortion to Zygote Banking, the major concepts, principles, and problems of bipethics-past and present- have been synthesized, analyzed, and compared. Distinguished international contribu- tors explore significant ethical positions in all philosophical and religious traditions. The impli- cations of these positions, the unresolved issues, and the anticipated developments are examined to encourage ethical reflection on the part of the reader. With an exhaustive index and an exten- sive bibliography following each article, the Encyclopedia of Bioethics is invaluable for re- searchers, students, educators, and professionals. Available in December 1978. Four-volume set $200.00N ISBN 0-02-926060-4 Special Pre-publication Price: $1 80.00 Order before December and save 1 0 %. INTERNATIONAL ENCYCLO- PEDIA OF STATISTICS Edited by WILLIAM H. KRUSKAL, University of Chicago, and JUDITH M. TANUR, State University of New York at Stony Brook The most extensive, definitive reference work on statistics in print, covering the development of modern statistical methods and describing the operations, interpretations, and applications of various statistical techniques. This two-volume set (1344 pages) is fully cross-referenced, alphabeti- cally arranged, and includes: 75 articles on statis- tics proper, 42 articles on social science topics with special relevance to statistics, 57 biogra- phies, extensive bibliographies following each article, complete index. An essential reference tool for statisticians, social scientists, engineers, medical researchers, market researchers, and anyone who uses or has to understand statistics. Available in November 1978. Two-volume set $100.00N ISBN 0-02-917960-2 Special Pre-publication Price: $90.00 Order before November and save 1 0 %. BAKER'S BIOGRAPHICAL DICTIONARY OF MUSICIANS $ixth Edition NICHOLAS SLONIMSKY At last, the long-awaited new edition of Baker's -the classic one-volume reference work of musi- cal biography for over 75 years. More than one thousand entries have been added and thou- sands more have been completely revised, making the Sixth Edition more comprehensive, authoritative, and up-to-date than any previous editions. Baker's offers immediate access to the most pertinent information on virtually all the well-known and little-known figures in the music world: composers, singers, instrumental virtuosos, orchestral conductors, critics, librettists, publish- ers, impresarios, instrument makers, scholars and patrons of music. The approximately 12,000 musi- cal portrl'ts span the history of music from the Middle A es to the age of rock and include lists of works nd selective bibliographies. Musicians, music scholars, and music lovers will find Baker's a must-an engaging and enlightening guide to the people who make music. Available in December 1978. One volume, 2000 pages $75.00N ISBN 0-02-870240-9 Special Pre-publication Price: $65.00 Order from: ----- MACMILLAN PROFESSIONAL AND LIBRARY SERVICES A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. 1 OOB Brown Street, Riverside, New Jersey 08370 REPRINTS UNCHANGED OR I G. AUTH OR TITLE ED. PA GES PRICE Barclay FOUNDATIONS OF COUNSELING STRATEGIES 1971 470 pp. S15 75 Bendat PRINCIPLES AND APPLICATIONS Of RANDOM NOISE THEORY 1958 456 pp. S18.50 Bernstein AUDIO SYSTEMS 1966 424 pp. In Prep. Berwanger AS THEY SAW SLAVERY 1973 176 pp. ppb S7 50 Billingsley ERGODIC THEORY AND INFORMATION 1965 210 pp. In Prep. Bloom GAS LASERS 1968 184 pp. S1350 Bodnar STRUCTURAL ADHESIVES BONDING 1966 504 pp In Prep. Bow sky THE BLACK DEATH 1971 134 pp. ppb. 54.50 Broudy BUILDING A PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION 1954 426 pp. $16 .50 Broudy et al DEMOCRACY AND EXCELLENCE IN AMERICAN SECONDARY EDUCATION 1964 310 pp. S1200 Bullough THE SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION 1970 136 pp. ppb 54.50 Butler CORROSION AND ITS PREVENTION IN WATERS 1966 312 pp. In Prep. Cater/Lee POLITICS OF HEALTH 1972 248 pp. In Prep. Chalmers PRINCIPLES OF SOLIDIFICATION 1964 336 pp. S16.95 Chikazum1/Charap PHYSICS OF MAGNETISM 1964 554 pp. In Prep. Chua INTRODUCTION TO NON LINEAR NETWORK THEORY !Subdivided into 3 parts) In Prep. Cohn DIFFERENCE ALGEBRA 1965 372 pp. S19.50 Connelly THE EPOCH OF NAPOLEON 1972 208 pp. ppb 54 50 Dean et al MATHEMATICS FOR MODERN MANAGEMENT 1963 456 pp. S16.50 Dean OPERATIONS RESEARCH IN RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT 1963 302 pp $12 .95 Denn OPTIMIZATION BY VARIATIONAL METHODS 1969 438 pp. $22 .50 Disque APPLIED PLASTIC DESIGN IN STEEL 1971 256 pp $15 .50 Easton A SYSTEMS ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL LIFE 1965 507 pp St7.50 Eringen MECHANICS OF CONTINUA 1967 520 pp In Prep. Filler FROM POPULISM TO PROGRESSIVISM: Representative Seiections !formerly titled : Late 19th Century American liberalism) 1962 310 pp In Prep . Gei'Fand LECTURES ON LINEAR ALGEBRA 1964 204 pp S11 .50 Gilbert SULFONATION AND RELATED REACTIONS 1965 542 pp. S22.50 Glorig AUDIOMETRY: PnnCiples and Practices 1965 21!6 pp. S14.50 Grazda et al HANDBOOK OF APPLIED MATHEMATICS 1966 1127 pp. S20.50 Grinspoon et al SCHIZOPHRENIA: Pharmacotherapy and Psychotherapy 1972 312 pp 515.75 Hecht et al THE WOMEN . YESI 1973 226 pp. In Prep Himwich BIOCHEMISTRY. SCHIZOPHRENIAS. AND AFFECTIVE ILLNESSES 1971 514 pp. S24.50 Jackson / Messick PROBLEMS IN HUMAN ASSESSMENT 1967 890 pp. $32 .50 Javid/Brenner ANALYSIS . TRANSMISSION . AND FILTERING OF SIGNALS 1963 478 pp. $17 . ~0 Jones THE FORMATION OF THE CONSTITUTION 1971 142 pp. ppb. 54.50 Keys THE HISTORY OF SURGICAL ANESTHESIA 1945 224 pp. S9.50 Kneller EDUCATIONAL ANTHROPOLOGY: An Introduction 1965 182 pp. 58.50 Mamatey RISE OF THE HASBURG EMPIRE 1526·1815 1971 192 pp. ppb 54.50 Miller MODERN MATHEMATICAL METHODS FOR ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS 1972 502 pp. In Prep. Morrison THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY 1971 142 pp. ppb. S4.50 Oldenberg/Holladay INTRODUCTION TO ATOMIC AND NUCLEAR PHYSICS 1949 424 pp. S17.50 Olson MODERN SOUND REPRODUCTION 1972 352 pp. In Prep. ORGANIC REACTIONS-Volumes 1. 14. 15 !complete set ava1lable1 S19.50 each Parnsh THE CIVIL WAR 1970 158 pp. ppb 54.50 Pope/Harper HIGH-SPEED WIND TUNNEL TESTING In Prep Rail COMPUTATIONAL SOLUTION OF NONLINEAR OPERATOR EQUATIONS 1969 236 pp. In Prep. Rose CONCEPTS IN PHOTOCONDUCTIVITY AND ALLIED PROBLEMS 1963 178 pp. In Prep. Ross THE FRENCH REVOLUTION 1971 136 pp. ppb 54.50 Saloutos POPULISM : Reaction or Reform? 1968 128 pp ppb S4.50 Schwartz SURFACE ACTIVE AGENTS AND DETERGENTS - Vol 1 1949 592 pp. In Prep. Slattery MOMENTUM . ENERGY. AND MASS TRANSFER IN CONTINUA 1972 702 pp. In Prep. Seymour INTRODUCTION TO POLYMER CHEMISTRY 1971 448 pp In Prep Strahler INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE 1974 722 pp. 518.50 Thaler ELECTRIC MACHINES: DynamiCS and Steady State 1966 615 pp. S25 00 Waddell PRACTICAL QUALITY CONTROL FOR CONCRETE 1962 406 pp. $19 .50 Willis DeGAULLE: Ana chromsm. Realist. or Prophet? 1967 128 pp ppb 54 50 Wymore A MATHEMATICAL THEORY OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING. The Elements 1967 361 pp $19 .50 REPRINTS WITH CORRECTIONS OR UPDATING Norton FINE CERAMICS 1970 524 pp. In Prep. Perrin ORGANIC COMPLEXING REAGENTS 1964 378 pp. In Prep Pf ann ZONE MELTING 1958 326 pp. $15 .75 Ralston INTRODUCTION TO PROGRAMMING AND COMPUTER SCIENCE 1971 538 pp. In Prep Stipe THE DEVELOPMENT OF PHYSICAL THEORIES 1967 494 pp. In Prep ROBERT E. KRIEGER PUBLISHING co. INC. P.O. BOX 542 HUNTINGTON, N.Y. 11743 USA (516) 271-5252 REPRINTS RELEASED in 78and79 REPRINTS WITH CORRECTIONS OR UPDATING Brems QUANTITATIVE ECONOMIC THEORY: A Synthesis Approach 1968 532 pp. In Prep. Brown MICROMAGNETICS 1963 154 pp In Prep. Bube PHOTOCONDUCTIVITY OF SOLIDS 1960 482 pp. In Prep Bykhovsky FUNDAMENTALS OF VIBRATION ENGINEERING 1969 360 pp In Prep. Chang BASIC PRINCIPLES OF SPECTROSCOPY 1971 314 pp In Prep. Chapple/Coon PRINCIPLES OF ANTHROPOLOGY 1942 730 pp. In Prep. Chapple REHABILITATION : THE DYNAMIC OF CHANGE 1970 122 pp. In Prep. Condoyannis SCIENTIFIC GERMAN 1957 174 pp In Prep. Condoyann1s SCIENTIFIC RUSSIAN 1959 238 pp. In Prep Fararo MATHEMATICAL SOCIOLOGY 1973 830 pp In Prep. Gregory A COLLECTION OF MATRICES FOR TESTING COMPUTATIONAL ALGORITHMS 1969 164 pp. 515.00 Hackett / Williamson ANATOMY OF READING 1970 272 pp $9.95 Harnwell / livingood EXPERIMENTAL ATOMIC PHYSICS 1933 486 pp. In Prep. Hart COMPUTER APPROXIMATIONS 1968 356 Jfp In Prep. Heald PLASMA DIAGNOSTICS WITH MICROWAVES 1965 470 pp. In Prep. Herzberger MODERN GEOMETRICAL OPTICS 1958 416 pp In Prep. Howell INTRODUCTION TO GEOPHYSICS 1959 412 pp. In Prep. Johnson MECHANICAL DESIGN SYNTHESES: Creative Design and Optimization 1971 360 pp. 51750 Johnson NOMOGRAPHY AND EMPIRICAL EQUATIONS 1952 160 pp. $12.50 Lew1s GAS POWER DYNAMICS 1962 544 pp In Prep. Lindmayer /Wngley FUNDAMENTALS OF SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES 1965 496 pp In Prep. McCarthy INTRODUCTION TO STATISTICAL REASONING 1957 416 pp In Prep. Morgan INTRODUCTION TO UNIVERSITY PHYSICS-Volume 1 1963 526 pp. In Prep. Volume 2 t963 489 pp. In Prep. Mornsh THE PHYSICAL PRINCIPLES OF MAGNETISM 1965 696 pp In Prep. Mysels INT RODUCTION TO COLLOID CHEMISTRY 1959 492 PP In Prep ADVANCE INFORMATION ON 1978/79 TITLES (NEW) OR I G. AUTHOR TITLE ED. PAGES PRICE Anderson "PUBLIC POLICY MAKING 1978 160 pp. approx . $10 50 Armstrong "IDEOLOGY. POLITICS & GOVERNMENT IN SOVIET UNION 1978 256 pp $9.95 Banerji ENERGY ECONOMY IN DESIGN 1978 In Prep. Boschmann/Welcher ORGANIC REAGENTS FOR COPPER 1978 550 pp. approx . In Prep. Graupe THE RISE OF MODERN JUDAISM- An Intellectual History of German Jewry 1650-1942 1978 394 pp. $19.50 Hinton "INTRODUCTION TO CHINESE POLITICS 1978 336 pp 511 95 Iiams PEACEMAKING FRO M VERGENNES TO NAPOLEON 1979 140 pp. approx . In Prep. La ng ABSORPTION SPECTRA IN THE ULTRA VI OLET & VISIBLE 1978 198 pp. 54250 REGION - Vol. 22 Mappen WITCHES AND HISTORIANS : Interpretations of Salem Witchcraft 1979 260 pp. approx . In Prep. Martin/Stubaus AMERICAN REVOLUTION: WHOSE REVOLUTION? 1977 168 pp. ppb. S4 50 Meyer "THE POLITICAL EXPERIENCE 1978 224 pp 510 95 Morgan THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF MUSICAL SOUND 1979 200 pp. approx . In Prep. Poole BEHIND THE IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY: Six Men Who Shaped U.S. Foreign Polley 1941-1976 1979 120 pp. approx. In Prep. Preston/Wise "MEN IN ARMS 1978 424 pp In Prep Roback et al GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY RESEARCH : Commentaries and Readings 1978 320 pp. approx . In Prep. Rooney LAMENESS: A Horse Owner's Guide 1979 In Prep. Snead WORLD ATLAS OF GEOMORPHIC FEATURES 1978 320 pp. approx . 516.50 Spanier "HOW AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY IS MADE 1978 192 pp 59.95 Stollak UNTIL WE ARE SIX 1978 132 pp. approx . In Prep. •Joinl publicalion wilh Holl . Rineharl & Winston. REVISED EDITIONS Chatfield A HISTORY OF ACCOUNTING THOUGHT 1974 322 pp. cl. 516.50 ppb. S9.50 Ch1ang INTRODUCTION TO STOCHASTIC PROCESSES & THEIR APPLICATIONS 1968 313 pp. approx In Prep. Enrick INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING MANUAL 1962 270 pp. In Prep F1rmage FUNDAMENTAL THEORY OF STRUCTURES 1963 350 pp. approx 514.50 Hughes OIL PROPERTY VALUATION 1967 324 pp. In Prep. Lowenthal PHARMACEUTICAL CALCULATIONS-A Self-Instructional Text 1969 424 pp. 511 .50 Luthin DRAINAGE ENGINEERING 1966 258 pp. approx . 516.50 Malloy /Turner ECONOMIC THICKNESS OF THERMAL INSULATION 1961 In Prep. Malloy THERMAL INSLUATION 1969 570 pp. In Prep. Poole EIGHT PRESIDENTS AND INDOCHINA 1973 160 pp . approx . ppb 55.25 ROBERT E. KRIEGER PUBLISHING co. INC. P.O. BOX 542 HUNTINGTON, N.Y. 11743 USA (516) 271-5252 < ii~XI~I {.t-\1~ SCII~XCI~ lXI li~X General Science Index is a new index a wide variety of scientific topics and specifically designed to help make access studies. Covering all the major areas in to and research with science periodicals science today, General Science Index offers more effective for public library patrons indexing for 89 English language period- and students of all ages. Now, noh-spe- icals that encompass both numerous and/ cialists may investigate, with greater ease, or individual subject fields. Carefully selected periodicals in the following areas are indexed: Astronomy Atmospheric Sciences Biological Sciences Botany Chemistry Earth Sciences Environment and Conservation Food and Nutrition Genetics From questions concerning astronomy to those about zoology, General Science Index provides users with a useful guide to recently published material. Using a sub- ject entry format for all articles, indexing is conducted by experienced librarians with subject specialties. A special subject authority file was established at the incep- tion of the Index to assure continuity and consistency of the headings, and a com- plete system of cross-references has been Mathematics Medicine and Health Microbiology Oceanography Psychology Physics Physiology Zoology employed with each issue. Whenever pos- sible, a commonly used name or familiar contemporary term is used with a see reference from the traditional, often Latin, or scientific term, thus giving access to many articles through either name. An- other valuable source of information in the Index is the separate section devoted to citations of book reviews, a feature that appears in each issue. The NEW Index to Scientific Literature Genera1 Science Index, which began publication in July of 1978, is issued monthly, except in June and December. Cumulative issues appear in September, November, Februil.ry, and May. An annual permanent hardbound cumulation is included in the subscription price. General Science Index is sold on the service basis. For a quotation of your service basis rate, please write for the General Science Index list of periodicals in- dexed. Check the periodicals your library now receives or expects to receive during the coming year. Request- ing your service basis rate does not, of course, obligate you to subscribe. THE H. W. WILSON COMPANY 950 University Avenue, Bronx, New York 10452