我们的图书馆:我们能衡量它们的馆藏和收购吗?

F. Machlup
{"title":"我们的图书馆:我们能衡量它们的馆藏和收购吗?","authors":"F. Machlup","doi":"10.2307/40224971","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We are a \" knowledge society,\" a society that devotes a large and ever-increasing part of its gross national product to the production and distribution of knowledge. The \"knowledge industry\" has been growing at a faster rate than most other sectors of the economy, and the number of people working in \"knowledge occupations\" is between two fifths and one half of our potential labor force. Statements of this sort were advanced fifteen years ago, and statistical research on \"knowledge production\" has been going forth ever since.1 Yet, on some rather elementary questions regarding \"knowledge embodied in print\" we know so little that we must admit deep embarrassment. Knowledge contained in books and journals has in fact been the earliest object of measurement in this area. The size and growth of our library collections have been taken to be the most reliable and most easily obtainable indicators of our engagement in knowledge production. For decades apodictic statements have been passed around to the effect that \"knowledge\" stored on the shelves of our libraries has been doubling every ten years, or every seven years, or some such number. A few of us have been skeptical about the meaning of such assertions; we have asked, for example, whether one hundred books really represented twice as much knowledge as fifty books, and whether fifteen journals really conveyed thrice as much information as five journals. But we have not questioned the physical meaning of the measurement. We have not questioned the reported \"facts\" about the rate at which the numbers of books and journals on the shelves in our libraries have been increasing. We believed the stories about the doubling every few years, because we had not known that the librarians themselves were so very unsure about the collections under their control. Now I know a little more about the extent of my ignorance and I want to share it with others. By sharing the realization of my ignorance I may relieve my conscience as an investigator of the dissemination of information.","PeriodicalId":87494,"journal":{"name":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","volume":"62 1","pages":"303"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1976-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40224971","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Our Libraries: Can We Measure Their Holdings and Acquisitions?.\",\"authors\":\"F. Machlup\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/40224971\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We are a \\\" knowledge society,\\\" a society that devotes a large and ever-increasing part of its gross national product to the production and distribution of knowledge. The \\\"knowledge industry\\\" has been growing at a faster rate than most other sectors of the economy, and the number of people working in \\\"knowledge occupations\\\" is between two fifths and one half of our potential labor force. Statements of this sort were advanced fifteen years ago, and statistical research on \\\"knowledge production\\\" has been going forth ever since.1 Yet, on some rather elementary questions regarding \\\"knowledge embodied in print\\\" we know so little that we must admit deep embarrassment. Knowledge contained in books and journals has in fact been the earliest object of measurement in this area. The size and growth of our library collections have been taken to be the most reliable and most easily obtainable indicators of our engagement in knowledge production. For decades apodictic statements have been passed around to the effect that \\\"knowledge\\\" stored on the shelves of our libraries has been doubling every ten years, or every seven years, or some such number. A few of us have been skeptical about the meaning of such assertions; we have asked, for example, whether one hundred books really represented twice as much knowledge as fifty books, and whether fifteen journals really conveyed thrice as much information as five journals. But we have not questioned the physical meaning of the measurement. We have not questioned the reported \\\"facts\\\" about the rate at which the numbers of books and journals on the shelves in our libraries have been increasing. We believed the stories about the doubling every few years, because we had not known that the librarians themselves were so very unsure about the collections under their control. Now I know a little more about the extent of my ignorance and I want to share it with others. By sharing the realization of my ignorance I may relieve my conscience as an investigator of the dissemination of information.\",\"PeriodicalId\":87494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors\",\"volume\":\"62 1\",\"pages\":\"303\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1976-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40224971\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/40224971\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AAUP bulletin : quarterly publication of the American Association of University Professors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40224971","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

我们是一个“知识社会”,一个将国民生产总值中越来越大的一部分用于知识的生产和分配的社会。“知识产业”的发展速度比大多数其他经济部门都要快,从事“知识职业”的人数占潜在劳动力的五分之二到一半。这种说法早在15年前就提出了,而关于“知识生产”的统计研究从那时起就一直在进行然而,在一些相当基本的关于“知识体现在印刷品中”的问题上,我们所知甚少,不得不承认我们深感尴尬。事实上,书籍和期刊中包含的知识是这一领域最早的测量对象。我们图书馆馆藏的规模和增长被认为是我们参与知识生产的最可靠和最容易获得的指标。几十年来,到处流传着这样的断言:我们图书馆书架上的“知识”每10年、每7年或诸如此类的数字翻一番。我们中的一些人对这些断言的意义持怀疑态度;例如,我们已经问过,一百本书所代表的知识是否真的是五十本书的两倍,十五种期刊所传达的信息是否真的是五种期刊的三倍。但我们没有质疑测量的物理意义。我们没有质疑报道的“事实”,即我们图书馆书架上的书籍和期刊的数量一直在增加。我们相信每隔几年馆藏就翻一番的说法,因为我们不知道图书管理员自己对他们控制的馆藏是如此不确定。现在我对自己无知的程度有了更多的了解,我想与他人分享。通过分享我对自己无知的认识,我可以减轻作为信息传播研究者的良心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Our Libraries: Can We Measure Their Holdings and Acquisitions?.
We are a " knowledge society," a society that devotes a large and ever-increasing part of its gross national product to the production and distribution of knowledge. The "knowledge industry" has been growing at a faster rate than most other sectors of the economy, and the number of people working in "knowledge occupations" is between two fifths and one half of our potential labor force. Statements of this sort were advanced fifteen years ago, and statistical research on "knowledge production" has been going forth ever since.1 Yet, on some rather elementary questions regarding "knowledge embodied in print" we know so little that we must admit deep embarrassment. Knowledge contained in books and journals has in fact been the earliest object of measurement in this area. The size and growth of our library collections have been taken to be the most reliable and most easily obtainable indicators of our engagement in knowledge production. For decades apodictic statements have been passed around to the effect that "knowledge" stored on the shelves of our libraries has been doubling every ten years, or every seven years, or some such number. A few of us have been skeptical about the meaning of such assertions; we have asked, for example, whether one hundred books really represented twice as much knowledge as fifty books, and whether fifteen journals really conveyed thrice as much information as five journals. But we have not questioned the physical meaning of the measurement. We have not questioned the reported "facts" about the rate at which the numbers of books and journals on the shelves in our libraries have been increasing. We believed the stories about the doubling every few years, because we had not known that the librarians themselves were so very unsure about the collections under their control. Now I know a little more about the extent of my ignorance and I want to share it with others. By sharing the realization of my ignorance I may relieve my conscience as an investigator of the dissemination of information.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信