JOURNAL ACQUISITION BY LIBRARIES: SCATTER AND COST‐EFFECTIVENESS

The traditional Bradford approach to bibliographic scatter involves ranking journals in order of productivity. It is suggested that this approach should be modified, with a view to answering more directly questions concerning the cost‐effectiveness or cost‐benefit of journal acquisition. Several alternative ranking methods are suggested, and their properties and relationships explored. A test of some of these ideas is described. A collection of journals contributing to a specific subject area were ranked in the various orders, and the relative value of decisions taken on the basis of these rankings was assessed. From a cost‐effectiveness point of view, the Bradford ranking performed substantially worse than the other rankings; but the results appear to be very dependent on the particular journals that contribute to a field.