Editorial

Statistics are at the core of much reference information, especially statistics collected by government or quasi government bodies. In addition to the plethora of specialist statistical series there are general compilations some of which, for example the UK Annual Abstract of Statistics and Social Trends and the US Statistical Abstract of the United States, are almost household names. Most librarians and information workers have a touching,some might say blind, faith in official statistical series and frequently extract information from them or recommend them to enquirers. On the whole, such trust of official statistics seems justified. In North America and most of Europe, while official data may not be immune to tweaking and spinning, it is safe to assume it is generally accurate and reliable. Librarians and information workers recommending or serving up statistical information would do well to remember however, that large chunks of the general public might have an entirely different perspective.

I make this point after reading a UK National Statistics press release a few weeks ago that revealed only 37 per cent of those questioned in a survey of 1,700 people agreed that official statistics were generally reliable (National Statistics, 2005). Even more strikingly, just 17 per cent felt official figures were produced without political interference and slightly fewer (14 per cent) believed government used figures honestly. Questioning and indeed cynicism is, of course, at the heart of any healthy democracy, but such apparent widespread suspicion of government data poses significant questions for information professionals who rely on it to respond to queries. If the enquirers are likely to mistrust the information we give them should it be presented with some form of qualification or “health”warning? Should there be such a reliance on official information in response to questions appearing to demand hard data? Will librarians regurgitating official figures be regarded as “agents” of the government rather neutral information providers?

In contemplating these questions it is hard to resist contrasting the apparent reluctance to trust official sources of data with increasing acceptance of snippets of statistical information snatched from the Internet. Academic colleagues frequently rail about students submitting data of dubious quality and provenance in assessed work. Sometimes entire tables from highly contentious or disreputable sources are presented as plain fact. Perhaps if students and the public generally were surveyed on their attitude to the mass statistical data floating around the web a similar level of suspicion would be revealed. Let us hope so, but the message that the National Statistics survey should reinforce for librarians and information workers is that quality of information is key. Many users may be skeptical of official information, and it is important that they clearly understand when figures are obtained from government sources, but it is also important that such information is distinguished from unofficial sources and given the prominence it deserves. Official statistics are at the“core” of much reference material; it is important for the credibility of the entire reference process that they are demonstrated as reliable and generally trustworthy.

On the same day as the National Statistics press release made me think about user attitudes to official data, another announcement involving numbers, in this case a very large one, reached me by e-mail. This was the news from OCLC that their flagship WorldCat database, surely one of the greatest achievements of librarians, had reached a stupendous one billion (10,000,000,000) holdings records. For the record I should tell you that the librarian entering the landmark holding was Anne Slane of Worthington (Ohio) Libraries and the momentous event took place at, and as we have been preaching statistical trustworthiness this needs to be on the dot, 02.21.34.286893PM EDT on 11 August. The holdings record was for The Monkees: The Day-to-Day Story of the 60s Pop Sensation. Reference librarians might have preferred it if a more fitting title had taken this honour, The Guinness Book of Records seems appropriate, but WorldCat’s attainment of this enormous number should be celebrated as a major achievement in library history. The co-operative endeavour of more than 9,000 libraries worldwide delivered by a non-profit organization,WorldCat is the trustworthy source for bibliographical information on printed sources which should put upstart sources such as Amazon.com and Google firmly in the shade.

Unusually, this issue of Reference Reviews contains few reviews of sources devoted to statistical data. Perhaps the only item that can be considered primarily “statistical” is The 1901 Census for England and Wales (RR 2006/46). We take a brief look at this massive web database,which had its ups and downs (initially mainly downs) when first launched several years ago. Our overview aims to expose this major genealogical source already well known in the UK to a wider international audience, and will be followed up by a further detailed examination in a later issue. Another massive electronic source reviewed is Gale’s The Making of the Modern Economy (RR 2006/16). Digitizing 61,000 works, many previously available in microfilm as part of the Goldsmiths’-Kress collection of economic literature, this is another major step forward in assembling subject collections of older texts which is revolutionizing study and teaching, primarily through rapid searching and accessibility of information.

Gale and other subsidiary imprints of the Thomson publishing empire also continue with the production of print multi-volume sets, now usually accompanied by e-book versions. Reviewed here are the second edition of the Gale Encyclopedia of Alternative Medicine (RR 2006/37), the new Dictionary of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (RR 2006/49), adapted from an earlier French language title and, probably the best of the bunch, the Encyclopedia of Irish History and Culture (RR 2006/55). Other significant multi-volume print sets covered are Fitzroy Dearborn’s Encyclopedia of African History (RR 2006/54), the latest in a string of encyclopedic publications on African history and culture, and Sage’s Encyclopedia of Prisons & Correctional Facilities (RR 2006/15).

Also in this issue Stuart Hannabuss provides two extended and deeply informative reviews of the competing single-volume philosophy references, The Oxford Companion to Philosophy (RR 2006/10) and the Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (RR 2006/11). The latter is a spin-off from the electronic Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (RR 2004/06), now the standard reference in philosophy for many academic libraries. While mentioning Routledge we should note that this imprint of the Taylor & Francis publishing group now seems to have absorbed at least some of Europa’s titles, with the Political and Economic Dictionary of Western Europe (RR 2006/57) issued under this label. The British publisher Bloomsbury has also swallowed the long-established reference book producer A&C Black, but the name seems set to live on, represented here by the second edition of British Studio Potters’ Marks (RR 2006/39). Also effectively a second edition is a revised and updated version of the influential 1970’s Raymond Williams text Keywords. New Keywords (RR 2006/17), published by Blackwell and with an editorial team now at the helm, attempts to update and carry forward this work into the very different socio-economic climate of the twenty-first century. Finally, as I write this editorial, the UK is celebrating the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar. This has brought forth an opportunistic rush of reference titles, some of which we will review in subsequent issues. Here we look at Trafalgar Captains (RR 2005/51), a text that takes an unusual slant on Britain’s victory over the Napoleonic fleet, providing detailed information on the memorials to the commanding officers, as well as their life stories and role in the battle.

Anthony ChalcraftEditor, Reference Reviews, and College Librarian, York St John College, York, UK