Search results

This article provides a review and conceptual comparison between self‐report and performance‐based measures of emotional intelligence. Analyses of reliability, psychometric properties, and various forms of validity lead to the conclusion that self‐report techniques measure a dispositional construct, that may have some predictive validity, but which is highly correlated with personality and independent of intelligence. Although seemingly more valid, performance‐based measures have certain limitations, especially when scored with reference to consensual norms, which leads to problems of skew and restriction of range. Scaling procedures may partially ameliorate these scoring weaknesses. Alternative approaches to scoring, such as expert judgement, also suffer problems since the nature of the requisite expertise is unclear. Use of experimental paradigms for studying individual differences in information‐processing may, however, inform expertise. Other difficulties for performance‐based measures include limited predictive and operational validity, restricting practical utility in organizational settings. Further research appears necessary before tests of E1 are suitable for making real‐life decisions about individuals.

A survey of the current state of documentation practice in museums is presented. This concentrates on the broad themes of the practice, making comparisons with analogous library procedures, where appropriate. A brief introduction to museums and their organizational framework within the United Kingdom is given. With this as background, the methods of documentation used by museums are reviewed, and a survey presented of current developments on an international and national scale.

AT the very outset of this paper it is necessary to make clear that it is not an attempt to compile an exhaustive bibliography of literature relating to special librarianship. Neither space nor time permit this. In fact, the references given can only claim to be a sample of the wealth of material on the subject and this paper is submitted in the hope that it will stimulate others to more scholarly efforts. Reference numbers throughout this paper refer to items in the ‘Select list of references to the literature of special librarianship’, section 2 onwards.

By the death on 23 August 1956 of Arthur Denis Roberts, the world of bibliography has lost the author of important works which it might have been hoped he would have added to for many years to come; and The Journal of Documentation a valued contributor.

THE Leeds Conference of the Library Association was, in many respects, the most important gathering of librarians which has taken place in Britain since librarianship first became organised. The value and interest of the topics discussed, the joint discussion with representatives of famous educational bodies, and other features of a novel kind, all contributed to give the Leeds meeting a character which was very impressive; and its results are likely to be fruitful, if a strong effort is made to follow up the various important matters which were brought forward.

ONE or two questions raised by the writer of “Letters on our Affairs” this month are of some urgency. The first, the physical condition of books, is one that is long over‐due for full discussion with a view to complete revision of our method. The increased book fund of post‐war years, and the unexpected success of the twopenny library, have brought us to the point when we should concentrate upon beautiful and clean editions of good books, and encourage the public to use them. “Euripides” is quite right in his contention that there is too much dependence upon the outcasts of the circulating library for replenishing the stocks of public lending libraries. We say this gravely and advisedly. Many librarians depend almost entirely upon the off‐scourings of commercial libraries for their fiction. The result, of course, is contempt of that stock from all readers who are not without knowledge of books. It is the business of the public library now to scrap all books that are stained, unpleasant to the sight, in bad print, and otherwise unattractive. Of old, it was necessary for us to work hard, and by careful conservation of sometimes quite dirty books, in order to get enough books to serve our readers. To‐day this is no longer the case, except in quite backward areas. The average well‐supported public library—and there are many now in that category—should aim at a reduction of stock to proportions which are really useful, which are good and which are ultimately attractive if not beautiful. The time has arrived when a dirty book, or a poorly printed book, or a book which has no artistic appeal, should be regarded as a reproach to the library preserving it.

OWING to the comparatively early date in the year of the Library Association Conference, this number of THE LIBRARY WORLD is published so that it may be in the hands of our readers before it begins. The official programme is not in the hands of members at the time we write, but the circumstances are such this year that delay has been inevitable. We have dwelt already on the good fortune we enjoy in going to the beautiful West‐Country Spa. At this time of year it is at its best, and, if the weather is more genial than this weather‐chequered year gives us reason to expect, the Conference should be memorable on that account alone. The Conference has always been the focus of library friendships, and this idea, now that the Association is so large, should be developed. To be a member is to be one of a freemasonry of librarians, pledged to help and forward the work of one another. It is not in the conference rooms alone, where we listen, not always completely awake, to papers not always eloquent or cleverly read, that we gain most, although no one would discount these; it is in the hotels and boarding houses and restaurants, over dinner tables and in the easy chairs of the lounges, that we draw out really useful business information. In short, shop is the subject‐matter of conference conversation, and only misanthropic curmudgeons think otherwise.

In this first number of 1961 we wish all our readers a Happy and Prosperous New Year. With so many important projects on the stocks, there is no doubt that this will be a year of decision and progress for library affairs in Britain. The Library Association itself may well reorganise and resolve itself into a purely professional body during 1961. Its new syllabus may probably be finalised and geared for action within the next three years. Further progress will no doubt be made on the new building in Store Street which is to house the National Central Library and the headquarters of the Library Association. Other continuing items will doubtless be the discussion of authors' lending rights and the library binding of paper‐backed books, while many librarians in the Greater London area will be closely watching the events which will certainly follow the Royal Commission's Report on Local Government in Greater London. One thing, regrettably, seems certain. There will be no new Public Libraries Act in 1961, for Sir David Eccles' pronouncement that this will be delayed until the boundary review is completed has effectively put the Roberts Committee Report into cold storage for some considerable time.

WE publish this issue on the eve of the Brighton Conference and our hope is that this number of The Library World will assist the objects of that meeting. Everything connected with the Conference appears to have been well thought out. It is an excellent thing that an attempt has been made to get readers of papers to write them early in order that they might be printed beforehand. Their authors will speak to the subject of these papers and not read them. Only a highly‐trained speaker can “get over” a written paper—witness some of the fiascos we hear from the microphone, for which all papers that are broadcast have to be written. But an indifferent reader, when he is really master of his subject, can make likeable and intelligible remarks extemporarily about it. As we write somewhat before the Conference papers are out we do not know if the plan to preprint the papers has succeeded. We are sure that it ought to have done so. It is the only way in which adequate time for discussion can be secured.

The action of the Ministry of Food, which was designed to check the abuses that had developed with regard to the advertising of food stuffs and the labelling of packages made up for the retail trade, is not only most welcome but very necessary in the public interest. The term “misleading” is applied by the Ministry to the proceedings that have led them to take action. It is accurate, but official reticence necessarily causes it to be somewhat lacking in vivacity. The fact is that the consumer, for a number of years past, has been misled by means of deceptive labels and advertisements, as to the real nature of an admittedly important part of his food supply. The wording of the suggested code is incidentally exposure and condemnation of this. The mislabelling of foods has for a very considerable time attracted the attention of Public Analysts and of others who are interested in the purity of our food supply and in public health. We need only refer to the periodical reports of the health authorities to obtain convincing proofs of the need that had arisen for official action. The cruder forms of this particular species of fraud were obvious and scandalous. Others were more subtle and less obvious. With regard to the former we have had “digestive teas” said to contain a lower proportion of tannin than ordinary blends, but found on examination to contain the normal quantity. “Diabetic foods ”containing unaltered starch though the label said otherwise. “Cream” made of nut oil, and so forth. Vitamins then appeared on the scene. Their discovery aroused great public interest, and certain types of food manufacturers took good care that this interest, however unenlightened it might be, should not be allowed to flag. On the contrary, it was recognised as a valuable trade asset and it was therefore encouraged by advertisements which were not characterised by pedantic adherence to accuracy. Accuracy of statement was in fact not demanded at that time by anyone, and it was not supplied by the advertisers who, in apparent confidence, proclaimed in many of these advertisements the superior vitamin content of the food advertised and the peculiar advantage to health that would accrue to the consumer of it. The campaign was entered on with a light heart and was for a time successful. The statements made proved to be very effective stumbling blocks for the blind, and sales, presumably, increased. Unfortunately everybody whose business it was to manufacture certain kinds of processed foods thus advertised began to be involved. The straightforward manufacturer found his interests threatened by the action of his less scrupulous competitors. The unscientific use of the commercial imagination in this respect threatened to bring about a chaotic state of affairs when it was used as a weapon in acute trade competition. The great complexity of the chemical and physiological problems which a study of the vitamins involves was, and is, recognised by all who have dealt with these matters. In 1936 the Medical Officer of Health for Kensington, in a report, dealing with the misleading and deceptive labelling of food, says “originally jam invariably consisted of fruit plus sugar, but keenness of competition amongst manufacturers to secure the ‘lion's share’ of the trade led to the substitution of such cheaper substances as apple pulp, pectin and fruit juices for a percentage of the named fruit, with a consequent lowering of the general standard of the jams placed on the market. The jam manufacturers apparently became alarmed at the chaotic condition which they themselves had created.” The result, as we all know, was the drawing up of unofficial standards for jam by the trade and primarily for the benefit of the trade. The interests of the consumer were by no means the main object of the transaction. We have referred to this episode of some ten years ago and more because the question of the vitamin and mineral content of certain foods both in kind and quantity seemed to be drifting into the same unsatisfactory condition. Some of these foods were made for the benefit of children or of persons in a weak state of health. It was therefore the more important that they should be what they claimed to be. It may be conceded that under certain conditions unofficial regulations are better than no regulations at all, but it is unquestionably better that if regulations are to be made they should be made by impartial official experts and receive ipso facto the support of law. This has now been done. The interests of the consumer as well as legitimate trade interests, which theoretically at least should be identical with those of the consumer, have been taken into account. Under the Labelling of Food (No. 2) Order, 1944, it will be remembered, the disclosure of the quantity of vitamins or of minerals is obligatory. This, however, is not sufficient. Not only must the quantity of vitamins or minerals be disclosed, but that quantity must be such as to justify the claims made in respect thereof, and further the amount of the food “which an average consumer may reasonably be expected to consume daily should contain not merely a significant quantity of the vitamin or mineral in question, but a quantity sufficient in the light of modern nutritional science to justify whatever reference is made to it in the advertisement or on the label.” These remarks are quoted from the preamble to the suggested code of practice in framing labels and advertisements. The code was drawn up in response to many requests from traders to the Ministry of Food, and the composition of this suggested code is the result of the consultation of the Ministry with the Medical Research Council. It is printed verbatim below:—