I was pleased to see that this was not a dream encyclopedia! Mary A. Carskadon's Encyclopedia of Sleep and Dreaming is very much a scholarly reference book about the various psychological, physiological, and cultural aspects of sleeping and dreaming. The book starts with a short preface discussing the current (as of 1993) trends in sleep and dream research. Carskadon writes that the book is aimed at students. While the age of the student is not noted, much of the material is quite scientific in nature. It would be appropriate for the undergraduate level. As a reference it would still be relevant for graduates as well. The book is organized alphabetically with entries by various contributors. There are also "guidepost" entries which serve to help readers navigate from broad topics to more focused entries. Most entries include references to other sources, as well as cross-references to related entries.
Because the book covers so many types of topics, I believe it is a real strength to take contributions from many authors. There is a list of articles by contributor which also notes the institution of the contributor. The articles range in topic from chemicals and hormones, to sleep practices of different cultures. One or several authors might not have had the expertise to elaborate on these narrow subjects, but the large pool of contributors appears to have done a good job.
The book is most troubled by its age; it is 20 years old and has not seen a second edition. There is bound to be important research that has been left out due to its age. All the same, I see this book as a good introductory resource for students interested in this part of psychology.
Carskadon, M.A. (Ed.). (1993). Encyclopedia of Sleep and Dreaming. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Sunday, November 3, 2013
Anthropology
Of the disciplines we have reviewed so far, anthropology is the one I would have figured reference services for it would have been the most straightforward. After going through the module, I can't decide if this feeling has been confirmed or turned inside out. On one side, anthropology produces knowledge in a way I have not really observed other disciplines do. Economics, history, and political science all seem to constantly be changing, and aside from basic concepts, most knowledge produced is related strictly to current events. Anthropology appears to me to create knowledge about people that I could really see ending up in our much beloved reference books and staying there. An anthropologist makes discoveries and observes; their research should NOT alter the subject. Alternatively, political science and economics research may involve running simulations with controls, etc. In this way, I feel that reference services can be more straight forward to anthropologists.
However, all of the material we have read and watched shows that this is not a passive field of "facts" and truths" but is also one that is constantly changing. Any of the blogs will show that new research is constantly pouring out and changing the way we formally looked at a specific phenomenon or group of people. The field itself seems to be changing, as writers talk about their changing discipline as much as their research.
The breadth of good web resources for information really solidified my feeling about anthropology as being a slightly different discipline for librarians to relate to; since anthropology is the study of humans and our cultural heritage; there is already quite a lot of resources out there related to this that anthropologists might want to find. Quite a lot of this is already in libraries, archives, and museums (anthropologists are also concerned with digging up the rest of this heritage). I say this only in sort of jest; humans have been interested in humans for quite a long time, and it is easier to preserve human artifacts than it is to preserve political or economic artifacts. It is also easier to digitize a human artifact and put on the web, in some form or another. Cultural anthropology is a different story.
It is also one that is fighting to preserve cultures and publicize injustices. My anthropology professor worked with Somali Bantu refugees in America, studying them but also helping them to adjust to life in this country. Her research helped to bring light to a story of tragedy for a people whose culture was at risk of being wiped out. While my professor worked with refugees as part of her research, many anthropologists are concerned with preserving cultures in their own lands. The stories reported in Cultural Survival Quarterly are sad but it is good to see an organization that works to keep these people and these cultures alive and empowered. I am reminded of recent reports concerning the price of quinoa becoming to high for those who have traditionally grown it to afford it; while this NPR article makes it appear that this is not entirely true (http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2013/07/17/busting-quinoa-myth) it shows me that our economic, social, and political decisions can have anthropological effects. I am sure this is just one example of the disciplines we are studying being put to use for advocacy and human rights.
However, all of the material we have read and watched shows that this is not a passive field of "facts" and truths" but is also one that is constantly changing. Any of the blogs will show that new research is constantly pouring out and changing the way we formally looked at a specific phenomenon or group of people. The field itself seems to be changing, as writers talk about their changing discipline as much as their research.
The breadth of good web resources for information really solidified my feeling about anthropology as being a slightly different discipline for librarians to relate to; since anthropology is the study of humans and our cultural heritage; there is already quite a lot of resources out there related to this that anthropologists might want to find. Quite a lot of this is already in libraries, archives, and museums (anthropologists are also concerned with digging up the rest of this heritage). I say this only in sort of jest; humans have been interested in humans for quite a long time, and it is easier to preserve human artifacts than it is to preserve political or economic artifacts. It is also easier to digitize a human artifact and put on the web, in some form or another. Cultural anthropology is a different story.
It is also one that is fighting to preserve cultures and publicize injustices. My anthropology professor worked with Somali Bantu refugees in America, studying them but also helping them to adjust to life in this country. Her research helped to bring light to a story of tragedy for a people whose culture was at risk of being wiped out. While my professor worked with refugees as part of her research, many anthropologists are concerned with preserving cultures in their own lands. The stories reported in Cultural Survival Quarterly are sad but it is good to see an organization that works to keep these people and these cultures alive and empowered. I am reminded of recent reports concerning the price of quinoa becoming to high for those who have traditionally grown it to afford it; while this NPR article makes it appear that this is not entirely true (http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2013/07/17/busting-quinoa-myth) it shows me that our economic, social, and political decisions can have anthropological effects. I am sure this is just one example of the disciplines we are studying being put to use for advocacy and human rights.
Anthropology -- Encyclopedia of Creation Myths
This book has probably been the most fascinating to pick up and flip through. David Adams Leeming's Encyclopedia of Creation Myths briefly describes the creation myths of cultures and religions from around the world. Each tale is presented in summary, as well analyzed in the context of broader themes in creation myths. There are entries for common themes and characters as well; for instance, there are many creation myths which involve a great flood and this theme gets its own entry. Entries are cross referenced by being emboldened in the text of other entries.
I can see this book being useful for researchers needing simple facts about a specific culture's belief systems. What makes it so valuable, I think, are the cross references to cultures with a similar belief system and to common themes. In the same way that Aarne-Thompson tale-type numbers discussed in Christine Goldberg's article (2003) categorize folktales, different types of creation myths are typified in Leeming's book. This is also valuable to researchers interested in the oral tradition, in the evolution of myths from culture to culture, or in the survey of creation myths themselves.
I could not find information on Leeming's background, but he has published many titles on myths, folktales, and storytelling. Kent State has 26 titles alone (several are alternate editions of the same book). Many of them are included in the reference collection. I cannot think of a way to verify that Leeming did not leave important myths out, but he provides sources for much of his information, and there is a full bibliography listed in the back of the book.
The entries are not detailed. Usually a brief synopsis of the creation myth is given, but it is enough to get an idea of the tale. From then on, the bibliography could be used to locate other sources, or library research could be done. For this reason, I think this resource would be more suited for underclassmen, or as a source used for discovery. It is comprehensive nonetheless.
The book was published in 1994. There is a second edition which Kent State University does not have. This edition, published in 2009, has been expanded with new myths, as well as an increased focus on the relationships between myths. This edition seems as if it would be even more valuable and perhaps more worthy of scholarly research.
Leeming, D. A., Leeming, M. A. (1994). Encyclopedia of Creation Myths. ABC-CLIO: Santa Barbara.
I can see this book being useful for researchers needing simple facts about a specific culture's belief systems. What makes it so valuable, I think, are the cross references to cultures with a similar belief system and to common themes. In the same way that Aarne-Thompson tale-type numbers discussed in Christine Goldberg's article (2003) categorize folktales, different types of creation myths are typified in Leeming's book. This is also valuable to researchers interested in the oral tradition, in the evolution of myths from culture to culture, or in the survey of creation myths themselves.
I could not find information on Leeming's background, but he has published many titles on myths, folktales, and storytelling. Kent State has 26 titles alone (several are alternate editions of the same book). Many of them are included in the reference collection. I cannot think of a way to verify that Leeming did not leave important myths out, but he provides sources for much of his information, and there is a full bibliography listed in the back of the book.
The entries are not detailed. Usually a brief synopsis of the creation myth is given, but it is enough to get an idea of the tale. From then on, the bibliography could be used to locate other sources, or library research could be done. For this reason, I think this resource would be more suited for underclassmen, or as a source used for discovery. It is comprehensive nonetheless.
The book was published in 1994. There is a second edition which Kent State University does not have. This edition, published in 2009, has been expanded with new myths, as well as an increased focus on the relationships between myths. This edition seems as if it would be even more valuable and perhaps more worthy of scholarly research.
Leeming, D. A., Leeming, M. A. (1994). Encyclopedia of Creation Myths. ABC-CLIO: Santa Barbara.
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Economics Module
I liked this week's guided tour through the different kinds of sources of information available to economists (and probably most social scientists). Economics is something I am painfully clueless about so it was interesting to read about what economists study (much more than money) and how they are studying it.
I am always interested in free sources of data. I took classes on GIS in my undergrad, and while it was sometimes tedious, the possibilities of what you could do with just a collection of numbers was pretty amazing to me. I think a lot of people conceive of libraries as places where you go to get books and maybe access journals, but especially undergrads probably never consider having to search for data sets. At least at KSU, I think this is probably because we never really had to. We are given data sets to work with in our classes, probably with the assumption that we will develop the skills needed to collect or find our own when we get to that point in our academic or professional careers. Anyway, lists like these http://rfe.org/showCat.php?cat_id=3 could open up possibilities for students and researchers alike to pursue interests of theirs. Our jobs as librarians will be just as much to be able connect patrons to data as it will be to connect them to information...
... and showing them how to use it. http://rfe.org/showCat.php?cat_id=86. More and more we are expected to know how to use computers and computer programs and troubleshoot problems, but working in the sciences or around scientists, we should have some understanding of the kind of programs they use. We should be versed in basic database usage and statistical analysis. It might even benefit us in our own projects.
On the other end of the spectrum from data are Reddit and podcasts, I would say. Both of these sources are great for keeping up to date on new developments and ideas in the field without having to get in to anything too technical. Especially in the case of Reddit, a lot of the articles are relatively short and digestible. Many of the topics on Econtalk sounded fascinating. Something like that would be a great substitute to your normal radio or podcast show in the morning. Here are some more: http://www.learnoutloud.com/subcategory_podcast.php?cat=0&catid=31&level=1&id=51&.
http://guides.lib.purdue.edu/content.php?pid=129114 This was a great LibGuide from Purdue which highlights the different government sources from which we can get economic information. One benefit of these sources is that they are usually free. They are also detailed and extremely relevant. I have seen links to stories and research published by Federal Reserve Banks before. They are available both here http://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/default.htm and from the individual banks at :http://www.federalreserve.gov/otherfrb.htm.
Economics is often the topic of either the regular posts or the news story posting over at the Internet Scout. I've posted this before but couldn't resist because it was so topical. With all of the available sources online, I wonder how much of these accounted for the numbers which showed both faculty and students preferring online resources. While those numbers might look alarming at first glance, there are a lot of really great resources out there. It is not such a bad thing when the quality of information and data is so high.
I am always interested in free sources of data. I took classes on GIS in my undergrad, and while it was sometimes tedious, the possibilities of what you could do with just a collection of numbers was pretty amazing to me. I think a lot of people conceive of libraries as places where you go to get books and maybe access journals, but especially undergrads probably never consider having to search for data sets. At least at KSU, I think this is probably because we never really had to. We are given data sets to work with in our classes, probably with the assumption that we will develop the skills needed to collect or find our own when we get to that point in our academic or professional careers. Anyway, lists like these http://rfe.org/showCat.php?cat_id=3 could open up possibilities for students and researchers alike to pursue interests of theirs. Our jobs as librarians will be just as much to be able connect patrons to data as it will be to connect them to information...
... and showing them how to use it. http://rfe.org/showCat.php?cat_id=86. More and more we are expected to know how to use computers and computer programs and troubleshoot problems, but working in the sciences or around scientists, we should have some understanding of the kind of programs they use. We should be versed in basic database usage and statistical analysis. It might even benefit us in our own projects.
On the other end of the spectrum from data are Reddit and podcasts, I would say. Both of these sources are great for keeping up to date on new developments and ideas in the field without having to get in to anything too technical. Especially in the case of Reddit, a lot of the articles are relatively short and digestible. Many of the topics on Econtalk sounded fascinating. Something like that would be a great substitute to your normal radio or podcast show in the morning. Here are some more: http://www.learnoutloud.com/subcategory_podcast.php?cat=0&catid=31&level=1&id=51&.
http://guides.lib.purdue.edu/content.php?pid=129114 This was a great LibGuide from Purdue which highlights the different government sources from which we can get economic information. One benefit of these sources is that they are usually free. They are also detailed and extremely relevant. I have seen links to stories and research published by Federal Reserve Banks before. They are available both here http://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/default.htm and from the individual banks at :http://www.federalreserve.gov/otherfrb.htm.
Economics is often the topic of either the regular posts or the news story posting over at the Internet Scout. I've posted this before but couldn't resist because it was so topical. With all of the available sources online, I wonder how much of these accounted for the numbers which showed both faculty and students preferring online resources. While those numbers might look alarming at first glance, there are a lot of really great resources out there. It is not such a bad thing when the quality of information and data is so high.
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
Economics Module Reference Book -- 2013 State Profile Ohio
State Profile 2013, published by Woods & Poole Economics, is a resource which has compiled well over 100 pieces of economic data for the years 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, 2011, and 2015, with additional projections for the years 2015, 2020, 2030, and 2040 for the nation, states, metropolitan areas, smaller urban agglomerations, and counties. Included in Kent State's reference collection is only the publication with pages for Ohio, but data for all states can be purchased. The data ranges from purely demographic (population by age and race) to education, employment, income, industry, and sales information.
I could see this information forming the basis of a variety of geographically focused economic studies. The data itself comes from various sources: the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Census and American Community Survey, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and Woods & Poole Economics itself. The paper version is a three ring binder with loose leaf pages contained inside; I assume that each year new data and new projections are released (though I could not determine the frequency from Woods & Poole's website). In paper form, the data is displayed in tables. Each geographic area takes up two full pages. Thankfully for researchers, a CD form of the publication exists as well, with datasets available as CSV (comma separated values) files. In this form, the data can be displayed and manipulated using spreadsheet and database software, such as Excel, SPSS, ArcGIS, SAS, and others.
The scope of the data is within the realms of political science and economics, but it could all be related to other data to perform new analyses of economic phenomena. From the website, data from any state can be purchased either in print, on CD, or downloaded. The nature of the way data is collected can impart bias, and the publisher makes sure to note that the accuracy is not guaranteed. However, the publication itself has only compiled data and performed projections and calculations; presumably very little bias went into this process. At the start of the volume there are descriptions of each indicator to explain exactly what is contained in the data. The most current year in the data set is 2011, but changes have been made in the 2013 version to include more information. Projections extend to 2040.
I chose to review the State Profile because I was intrigued at how the nature of data (and more importantly accessing it) has changed. I couldn't imagine having to manually tabulate the extensive calculations that went into releasing this data set. Nor can I imagine manually performing the analysis it is intended for. Economists of today have the blessing of statistical software and quick, immediate access to data that researchers of former generations would have never dreamed of. This publication seems o be relatively accessible with clearly labeled data fields. However, often times when dealing with raw data things are not so clear, which makes me think back to the first week, reading about data repositories. I foresee less and less of printed data sets of this type; but with slew of data being stored digitally, I hope it is curated in a way that it will be discoverable and accessible to researchers.
Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. (2013). 2013 State Profile Ohio. Washington, DC: Author.
I could see this information forming the basis of a variety of geographically focused economic studies. The data itself comes from various sources: the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Census and American Community Survey, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and Woods & Poole Economics itself. The paper version is a three ring binder with loose leaf pages contained inside; I assume that each year new data and new projections are released (though I could not determine the frequency from Woods & Poole's website). In paper form, the data is displayed in tables. Each geographic area takes up two full pages. Thankfully for researchers, a CD form of the publication exists as well, with datasets available as CSV (comma separated values) files. In this form, the data can be displayed and manipulated using spreadsheet and database software, such as Excel, SPSS, ArcGIS, SAS, and others.
The scope of the data is within the realms of political science and economics, but it could all be related to other data to perform new analyses of economic phenomena. From the website, data from any state can be purchased either in print, on CD, or downloaded. The nature of the way data is collected can impart bias, and the publisher makes sure to note that the accuracy is not guaranteed. However, the publication itself has only compiled data and performed projections and calculations; presumably very little bias went into this process. At the start of the volume there are descriptions of each indicator to explain exactly what is contained in the data. The most current year in the data set is 2011, but changes have been made in the 2013 version to include more information. Projections extend to 2040.
I chose to review the State Profile because I was intrigued at how the nature of data (and more importantly accessing it) has changed. I couldn't imagine having to manually tabulate the extensive calculations that went into releasing this data set. Nor can I imagine manually performing the analysis it is intended for. Economists of today have the blessing of statistical software and quick, immediate access to data that researchers of former generations would have never dreamed of. This publication seems o be relatively accessible with clearly labeled data fields. However, often times when dealing with raw data things are not so clear, which makes me think back to the first week, reading about data repositories. I foresee less and less of printed data sets of this type; but with slew of data being stored digitally, I hope it is curated in a way that it will be discoverable and accessible to researchers.
Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. (2013). 2013 State Profile Ohio. Washington, DC: Author.
Saturday, October 19, 2013
History Module
I will absolutely be modeling any future LibGuides I create after the ones found at Temple University's library webpage. The depth and care taken for annotating each resource specifically for that guide is very different than others I have seen (where there is one annotation that appears in every guide that a resource appears in). David C. Murray's guide http://guides.temple.edu/content.php?pid=1264&sid=15632 for history is up to par with what I have seen from Temple. He includes three separate pages for Primary Sources for the U.S., Europe, and Latin America, and demos for finding articles. There are several well though out sections, including one that contains resources for finding theses and dissertations specifically in the area of history. He also includes links to other guides to specific courses. For the class Hollywood and American History, Murray includes resources for film and popular culture in addition to more typical history resources. This is a great example of making sure to provide relevant instruction; it is good to appeal universally, but it is also good to appeal specifically. Contextualize your information to your target audience. Historians, especially, might approach differently from other students and faculty, and so explaining how each resource is relevant to them is an important part of the process.
Something I had never considered when thinking of different subject areas of study are how diverse different researchers needs and interest could be in one discipline. There are a large number of nursing and public health students who frequently contact the reference desk for help. Between the two groups, they primarily use PubMed, CINAHL, and Medline. Dalton and Charnigo's study finds that of a wide variety of history electronic databases, only four are used by more than 10% of the study population. Perhaps both because history is such a spread out discipline, over time and place, and the nature of historical resources, in that digitizing them is expensive and time consuming, it is difficult to present these resources in universally appealing databases. Historical societies, archives, and museums take on a much larger role in historical research, I think, than in other disciplines, and maybe for similar reasons are the sources used by historians more varied.
It is interesting to me how wide reaching historians' study can be. The Royal Society's library is a portal to the history of science and medicine. Most college freshman would probably not include the study of medicine and science in their description of history. I probably would not have either! But anybody is likely to be a historian on something. And any museum or collection is preserving some history. It is just up to people themselves to make these connections and discover new meanings from the record we have preserved.
The list of history resources offered by the Digital Librarian reminds me of the Internet Scout, a weekly compilation of multidisciplinary resources organized by the Computer Sciences department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I think that the list has some great resources but there also dead links. There is no organization either! We are left to scroll the extremely large page to find what we are looking for. The Internet Scout similarly compiles links to interesting websites; many of which are digital libraries themselves or digitized collections. The links can be viewed by week published going back into the 1990s (yikes!) or they can be searched or browsed by subject . I check it weekly as the distractions it provides might end up being useful to a patron some day. Equally interesting are the free software posts that usually appear (though not this week).
Looking through Kent's LibGuide, I'm actually surprised that I don't get more questions about these resources. I do not know if it is because people generally know how to use them, but anytime I get questions about research related to history, the patrons usually seem to be more interested in books (as reported by Dalton and Charnigo). I do not believe I have ever fielded a question by a history faculty member (of which 2% in the study said they consult librarians for help). A resource I have enjoyed in my own time is Chronicling America, which I'm assuming was down throughout the shutdown. It is weird to think how this discipline's access to information can be regulated by government; if the government controls access to the past through its archives, it can, if it wishes, withhold information which will change historians' understanding of the past (and present).
Something I had never considered when thinking of different subject areas of study are how diverse different researchers needs and interest could be in one discipline. There are a large number of nursing and public health students who frequently contact the reference desk for help. Between the two groups, they primarily use PubMed, CINAHL, and Medline. Dalton and Charnigo's study finds that of a wide variety of history electronic databases, only four are used by more than 10% of the study population. Perhaps both because history is such a spread out discipline, over time and place, and the nature of historical resources, in that digitizing them is expensive and time consuming, it is difficult to present these resources in universally appealing databases. Historical societies, archives, and museums take on a much larger role in historical research, I think, than in other disciplines, and maybe for similar reasons are the sources used by historians more varied.
It is interesting to me how wide reaching historians' study can be. The Royal Society's library is a portal to the history of science and medicine. Most college freshman would probably not include the study of medicine and science in their description of history. I probably would not have either! But anybody is likely to be a historian on something. And any museum or collection is preserving some history. It is just up to people themselves to make these connections and discover new meanings from the record we have preserved.
Looking through Kent's LibGuide, I'm actually surprised that I don't get more questions about these resources. I do not know if it is because people generally know how to use them, but anytime I get questions about research related to history, the patrons usually seem to be more interested in books (as reported by Dalton and Charnigo). I do not believe I have ever fielded a question by a history faculty member (of which 2% in the study said they consult librarians for help). A resource I have enjoyed in my own time is Chronicling America, which I'm assuming was down throughout the shutdown. It is weird to think how this discipline's access to information can be regulated by government; if the government controls access to the past through its archives, it can, if it wishes, withhold information which will change historians' understanding of the past (and present).
Thursday, October 17, 2013
Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artificats to Cyberspace -- History Module
As we have no doubt seen, historians pull from a large variety of source types, many of them outside the normal scope of popular citation styles, like APA and even Chicago. How do you cite a gravestone? What about the records of an insurance company? The multitude of unconventional and unpublished source types can make historical and genealogical research difficult to document properly. For that purpose, Evidence Explained exists.
In its pages are example upon example of historical source citations, for virtually any kind of resource. There is definitely an emphasis on primary resources, for which other style guides often provide vague instructions for citations.The source types are organized in a relatively easy to navigate structure: archives and artifacts, records for businesses and institutions, cemeteries, censuses, churches, local & state governments, national governments, and publications of all types. In each section, there is a contents list, a "quickcheck model," and more detailed explanations of the citations. The quick check models are extremely helpful in that they breakdown each part of the citation into individual units. The detailed instructions are also very thorough, typically describing procedures for online access to resources of that nature and the various nuances of the source type. For example, the differences between films and fiches made for preservation purposes only and those made for commercial distribution are covered in the archives section.
There is also a chapter related not to the citation of sources but to their analysis. Here the author covers primary and secondary sources, legal terms, criticisms to consider when analyzing sources, and a "process map for evidence analysis," all in significant detail. This section is valuable for understanding how arguments can be made and proven soundly in research.
The author, Elizabeth Shown Mills, is a well known historian and genealogist. She was a former president of the American Society of Genealogists. he book itself is published by the Genealogical Publishing Company. Because of this, perhaps, the book does seem to be geared towards genealogists and local historians (or maybe this is my own projection/bias for having taken a class on local history and genealogical research methods). Either way, the list of source types is extensive; it is hard to imagine a source that would not be covered here. I do not think this bias matters much as there seem relatively few sources a historical researcher would use that a local historian would not.
The book does a good job of considering both the multitude of sources that one might cite, and also the format that these sources might be viewed (in person or electronically, etc.). The 2nd edition has apparently added much in the way of content due to consideration by the author, suggestions by readers, and the changing nature that researches access their sources.
Many of the explanations include instructions that do not necessarily come from any documented style. For example, for citing a photocopied material received from another individual, Mills notes that you should indicate who supplied the photocopy. These comments seem to be made at the discretion of Mills, but lean to the side of reason and care.
Overall, this book is an extremely helpful source for those utilizing sources not covered in APA, MLA, and Chicago. History faculty and students alike would benefit from its availability; few things are more frustrating to me then trying to cite a source when there isn't a clear format for that type. Evidence Explained takes the guess work out of bibliographies and notes and allows the researcher to focus on their research.
Mills, E.S. (2007). Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Company.
In its pages are example upon example of historical source citations, for virtually any kind of resource. There is definitely an emphasis on primary resources, for which other style guides often provide vague instructions for citations.The source types are organized in a relatively easy to navigate structure: archives and artifacts, records for businesses and institutions, cemeteries, censuses, churches, local & state governments, national governments, and publications of all types. In each section, there is a contents list, a "quickcheck model," and more detailed explanations of the citations. The quick check models are extremely helpful in that they breakdown each part of the citation into individual units. The detailed instructions are also very thorough, typically describing procedures for online access to resources of that nature and the various nuances of the source type. For example, the differences between films and fiches made for preservation purposes only and those made for commercial distribution are covered in the archives section.
There is also a chapter related not to the citation of sources but to their analysis. Here the author covers primary and secondary sources, legal terms, criticisms to consider when analyzing sources, and a "process map for evidence analysis," all in significant detail. This section is valuable for understanding how arguments can be made and proven soundly in research.
The author, Elizabeth Shown Mills, is a well known historian and genealogist. She was a former president of the American Society of Genealogists. he book itself is published by the Genealogical Publishing Company. Because of this, perhaps, the book does seem to be geared towards genealogists and local historians (or maybe this is my own projection/bias for having taken a class on local history and genealogical research methods). Either way, the list of source types is extensive; it is hard to imagine a source that would not be covered here. I do not think this bias matters much as there seem relatively few sources a historical researcher would use that a local historian would not.
The book does a good job of considering both the multitude of sources that one might cite, and also the format that these sources might be viewed (in person or electronically, etc.). The 2nd edition has apparently added much in the way of content due to consideration by the author, suggestions by readers, and the changing nature that researches access their sources.
Many of the explanations include instructions that do not necessarily come from any documented style. For example, for citing a photocopied material received from another individual, Mills notes that you should indicate who supplied the photocopy. These comments seem to be made at the discretion of Mills, but lean to the side of reason and care.
Overall, this book is an extremely helpful source for those utilizing sources not covered in APA, MLA, and Chicago. History faculty and students alike would benefit from its availability; few things are more frustrating to me then trying to cite a source when there isn't a clear format for that type. Evidence Explained takes the guess work out of bibliographies and notes and allows the researcher to focus on their research.
Mills, E.S. (2007). Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Company.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)