Recently, some library circulation models have been developed, and it has been tried to make use of them for decision making in libraries. One of the main approaches is to use a negative binomial distribution as a book circulation frequency distribution.In this paper, firstly, we try to examine the validity of a negative binomial distribution as a book circulation frequency distribution in comparison to other mixture distributions — beta binomial, Neiman's type A, and logarithmic series distributions. As a result, the examination indicates the superiority of the negative binomial distribution.Secondly, we examine a nonstationary Poisson process model which Q. E. Burrell has developed. It's result clarifies that Burrell's model doesn't be enough to fit the year-by-year change of real circulation frequency distributions of Hiyoshi Library and Information Center in Keio University. So, we modify this model. Our modified model gives a better fitness to real deta than Burrell's model.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the selection of core journals of non-scientific journals contained in JOINT (the index for business journals in Japan) and also to study the selection measures and methods, especially, the journal ranking methods based on circulation and advertisement rates.In the survey, the following three methods which reflect different selection measures are used to select core journals in three industry fields: "Communication", "Auto-manufacturing" and "Transportation". (1) Productivitiy of journals articles: reflecting the specialty of journals concerning the industry. (2) Circuration of journals: reflecting the influence of journals and the extent of dissemination of the information in the journals. (3) Core author's contribution: reflecting the influence of opinion-leaders in the industry, which appearing in the advertisement rates of journals.The journal rankings of the above-mentioned three methods are synthesized and evaluated by subject specialists.As a result, the high ranked journals in the synthesized rankings almost correspond to the judgement of the subject specialists in the fields of "Communication" and "Auto-manufacturing". This shows that the methods used in the survey are effective as the quantitative methods for selecting core journals in particular industry fields. Furthermore, the synthesized journal rankings (1), (2) and (3) show the higher effect than the journal rankings by the method (1) solely or the synthesis of the methods (1) and (3). This fact may indicate that the journal ranking methods based on circulation and advertisement rates are effective in selecting core journals of non-scientific journals in particular industry fields in JOINT.

With the rapid growth of publications, information devices such as computers have been introduced into the services in academic libraries recently. These devices, however, are not adequetely applicable to technical services such as classification and cataloging.As the progress of computer science and knowledge engineering, a lot of expert systems have been developed in a variety of the fields. It might be possible to apply the technology to the intellectual aspect of the technical services, namely classification. To construct an expert system for a particular field, it is indispensable to analyze the information processing behavior of the professionals.This paper discusses an underlying framework of classifying behavior in terms of information processing based on the experiment carried out at Keio University Mita Library and Information Center. As the result, the following conclusions have been obtained.There is a large difference between literary works and scholarly publications in the process of classification.First step in the process of classification is to decide whether the book is a literary work or not.The classification process of scholarly publications is as follows: Classification experts, i) extract words that express a theme of the book from bibliographic data as title, belt, contents, and so on. ii) check the extracted words with relative index. iii) if the words are not included in the index, pick up alternative words such as synonyms, related terms, broader terms and narrower terms. iv) choose the classification number by the words which are more frequent than any others.Expert system can apply to the process of classification.

Most of public library surveys in Japan have not been directed to potential or non-users but to library visitors. Now a survey has been completed for determining the citizen’s usage of public libraries and other public facilities, i.e. public halls (koumin-kan), museums, art galleries, and so on. This survey can also make a significant suggestion that one’s library use has something to do with his or her other social and cultural activities. Library service is most used and best known among local public services. The higher one’s educational level, the more one uses public libraries. Library users are disposed to participate in other cultural activities as well. Though the number of library users with a lower educational level is very small, they are willing to involve themselves in several activities. Finally two things are proposed. A variety of public needs should be met by several types of services in a community. And those who are not oriented to library use and cultural activities should be offered appropriate programs rendered by public halls or the like.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the specialties in library and information science, using the technique of co-citation analysis. The co-citation analysis assumes that the more often two documents are cited together, the closer the relationship between them. The raw data consists of co-citation counts drawn from the Social Sciences Citation Index, 1966–1970 and 1983.This paper discusses the intellectual structure of a scientific specialty using Kuhn’s paradigm theory. In this discussion, the specialty is considered a set of paradigm-sharing communities. In this perspective the co-cited authors and the co-cited papers are regarded as the research frontiers in the specialty and the work undertaken by the member specialists.During the period 1966–1970, four specialties are identified; (1) Scientific information and citation study, (2) Information retrieval, (3) Information dissemination, (4) The specialty of several subjects, for example “the future of the library.”In 1983, five specialties are identified; (1) Citation study and social studies of science, (2) Information retrieval, (3) The relationship between computers and communication, (4) The evaluation of the library, (5) User study.

The processes by which Japanese medical and scientific journals select to publish research papers submitted to them have been surveyed. In summer 1981, to one hundred and sixty four Japanese journals which are indexed in Index Medicus and/or Science Citation Index were sent questionnaires, which were dealt with these basic publication situations and policies; number of circulation; month from paper submission to publication; number of referees per paper; anonymity or not of referees' names; rewards of referees; and rejection rate of papers submitted.The seventy one persent (117) were responded including usable information. Based on those responses, the author analyzed those 117 journals, of which 72 of all journals were in the medical science field, 12 in biological science, 14 in technological science, and 11 in agricultural science. In those 117 journals analyzed, 113 journals had a referee system and 4 journals had not yet.Several results were summarized as follows; (1) the average rejection rate was 14.3%, (2) the rejection rate of pure science journals were higher than the applied ones, (3) the average time from submission to publication was 6.4 months, (4) the numbers of referees per paper were 1.8, (5) the rewards were paid for referees in half the number of those journals, (6) 87 percent of those journals responded adopted a blind refereeing system, while only 8 percent carried out a double-blind refereeing system.

To find out a method to select important monographs and textbooks in library and information science from current publications, 1,771 book reviews for 1,183 books (about 1.5 reviews per book), appeared in 12 periodicals for the years of 1978, 1979, and 1980, were examined. The periodicals used for this study were; Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Journal of Documentation, Information Processing and Management, Aslib Proceedings, Special Libraries, Journal of Libraries, Library Automation, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, College and Research Libraries, Library Quarterly, Library Journal, Library Association Record, and Unesco Journal of Information Science, Librarianship, and Archives Administration. Some of these titles were selected by the citation counting method applied to Annual Review of Information Science and Technology and Advances in Librarianship. Others were selected by the same method applied to the top-ranking journals obtained in this primary selection. All the book reviews in these periodicals for the period were examined, recorded, and classified into 13 ranks, such as 1, 1+, -2, 2, 2+, …, -5, 5. Here, 1 denotes “a very poor book, you should not buy”; 2 denotes “a book you better not bu”; 3 is for “a book that was neither good nor ba”; 4 is for “better bu”; 5 is for “must bu”; + or - attached to them indicates a slant toward either better or poorer respectively. A list of 48 books, that were reviewed more than 4 times, was compiled. This includes a book by F. W. Lancaster that was reviewed in 9 different periodicals. The book was followed by another book of same author and a book written by M. S. Martin. Both of them had been reviewed 7 times. Then, there were four titles with 6 reviews, 11 with 5 reviews, and 30 with 4 reviews. While, the average points of all 1,183 books was 2.32, that of these 48 books was 2.68. That is slightly better than the average. However, 19 of them had lower points than this average. Another additional list of 19 titles, that were reviewed 3 times and received higher than 4.00 point, was also compiled. Almost all of these 67 titles were listed in more than one of the following three selective lists of books and book reviews. They were, 1) “the Librarian's Bookshel” of the Bowker Annual of Library and Book Trade Information; 2) American Reference Books Annual; and 3) “the JAL guide to New Books and Book Review” of Journal of Academic Librarianship. The present study found out that there were books that drew special attention of many people and were reviewed in many periodicals in the profession. However, all of these titles were not necessarily given favorable reviews. The works published many times as revised editions were also not necessarily given favorable reviews. But both, publishers and authors were found to be some reliable clue in judging the quality of books.

The structure and interrelations of 20 physiology journals are investigated for studies on research activities in physiology and its network of journal information transfer. The Journal Citation Reports 1978 (JCR) is used to obtain the source data for these journals.A two-step map, a journal cross-citing matrix and a hierachical diagram are prepared. To find out the citation pattern of each journal, the Spearman's rank-difference formula is used for grouping the journals.The following results are obtained; (1) The central core journal in the field of physiology is Journal of Physiology (Lond.). (2) Twenty physiology journals are divided into two sub-groups in physiology and a physiology related group. American Journal of Physiology and Brain Research are the core journals in each physiology sub-groups. (3) Brain Research is the core journal in the field of neurophysiology. (4) Journal of Physiology (Lond.) and Brain Research are connected in the two-step map, but American Journal of Physiology and Brain Research are not connected. (5) American Journal of Physiology is different from the other journals published by physiological societies, and it cites Journal of Clinical Investigation and Circulation Research in the two-step map.

Three methods of analyzing matrices of mutual citation frequencies among scientific periodicals are proposed in order to identify substructures, to visualize information flows among elements, and to clarify the characteristic of a specific discipline of science. Two of them are agglomerative clustering and multidimensional scaling: they are well-known statistical techniques based on a similarity or dissimilarity measure among elements. Since the measure of similarity assumes symmetric interaction, these analyses need symmetrization of the citation matrix. At the same time, this transformation ignores a distinctive feature, i.e., non-symmetricity of the citation matrix. Here the non-symmetricity occurs when a journal frequently cites another, while the latter has not many citations of the former. Therefore, another method which is called here “hierarchical grap” is presented so that non-symmetrical relationships are represented on a directed graph whose nodes are hierarchically positioned. The last method determines two kinds of arcs of the graph. Roughly speaking, an arc of one-sided influence from A to B is drawn when journal B frequently cites journal A but the converse is not true; an arc of two-sided influence between A and B is drawn when both journals have many citations of each other. In order to portray the graph, the positions of the nodes are determined so that the arcs have upward directions. An outline of the algorithm for this configuration is given with a simple numerical example. These methods are applied to the relationship of 43 journals of environmental/civil engineering: the data are extracted from Science Citation Index (1977). The citation matrix is derived and the above methods are applied. The clustering gives nine subgroups which consist of four groups of civil engineering, three of environmental engineering, and two of interdisciplinary studies. The hierarchical graph represents the information flows, from which the studies about water systems seem to be remarkable. Further, the MDS represents the structure of this field by a two-dimensional plot: the first axis shows the relationship of civil and environmental engineering, whereas the second axis suggests nature-human relationship. Moreover, both axes show the importance of the studies about water systems in the discipline of environmental/civil engineering.

The author discusses the significance of business intelligence with relation to library and information science, especially to business and corporate libraries and their activities.Intelligence services and activities do not mean "Spying" or "Espionage", but such activities as analysis, synthesis, estimation of various relevant informations to be done in corporate libraries and business information centers.It has been proved that business intelligence has close contact with management science, political science, library and information science, and sociology, by applying citation analysis technique to a bibliography: Business intelligence and strategic planning, published by Baker Library, Harvard University.It has been concluded that intelligence services should be discussed more thoroughly in library and information science, because the number of citations from business intelligence has been increasing in the field of library and information science as well as management science. Moreover, two authors, Sherman Kent and Washington Platt, are proved to be the core authors, influential in business intelligence fields.The author of this paper maintains an opinion that the function of business intelligence services will become one of the main activities of corporate libraries and/or business information centers, when computerized information retrieval services become more powerful.