Annals of Library Science and Documentation 47 , I: 2000: 5-16.
USE OF GUIDE TO INDIAN PERIODICAL LITERATURE AMONG SOCIAL SCIENTISTS IN INDIA: A
CASE STUDY OF GULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA
B S Maheswarappa
Professor
Department of P G Studies &
Research in Lib & Inf Sci
Gulbarga University
Gulbarga - 585 106
Subhas Hanumanthappa
Department of P G Studies &
Research In lib & Inf Sci
Gulbarga University
Gulbarga - 585 106
Studies the awareness, use, frequency of use,
purpose/s of using, opinion on the coverage and
arrangement, approaches used in searching,
usefulness and the need for user instruction in the
use of Guide to Indian periodical Literature (GIPL)
among social scientists in India with special
reference to Gulbarga University, Gulbarga . Also
tests the null hypothesis that the personal attributes
of social scientists have no bearing on them .
Concludes that there is a need for formal
instruction in the use of GIPL among social
sCientists in India.
The present study has been conducted to verify
the extent of:
(i)
awareness and use ;
(ii)
frequency and purpose/s of consultation ;
(iii)
opinion on the coverage of Indian social
science literature;
(iv)
approaches used in searching information
and usefulness;
INTRODUCTION
(v)
need for user instruction in the use;
In this cyber age, information plays a pivotal role
in different spheres of human endeavors such as
education, research and development, decision
and policy making . The role of library and
information centers in providing information for
these endeavors is well documented. The
generators and users of information playa key role
in information transfer and utilization process. The
information required by the users is available in a
variety of sources - primary, secondary and tertiary
sources and in different formats . Among these,
abstracting and indexing sources - which are the
result of surrogation of primary publications play
an important role in bringing to the notice of
scientists the published literature in the field . A
survey of literature on the use of abstracting and
indexing sources by social scientists in India [1],
has brought to light the non-use or less use of
abstracting and indexing sources. It may be due
to various reasons like - the inadequacy of the
tools, unawareness of the tools, lack of instruction
in the use, and combination of all these .
(vi)
to find out whether the personal attributes
of social scientists have any bearing on
these; and
(vii)
to suggest the measures to create better
awareness and to promote the use of Guide
to Indian Periodical Literature among social
scientists in India.
Vol 47 No I March 2000
HYPOTHESIS
The study was based on the following hypothesis :
The personal attributes of social scientists
such as qualifications, designation , sex, age ,
research experience , responsibilities . and
publications have no bearing on the
awareness , use, frequency of use, purpose
of using , opinion on coverage and
arrangement, searching methods, usefulness
and need for instruction in the use of Guide to
Indian Periodical Literature.
5
o
B S MAHESWARAPPA and SUBHAS
HANUMANTHAPPl~
METHODOLOGY AND STUDY POPULATION
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Several methods could be employed for a
systematic study on the awareness and use of
Guide to Indian Periodical Literature among social
scientists in the university environment. Some of
the methods useful for gathering information
required for the study are questionnaire ,
observation , interview, etc ,. For the present study,
the investigators have employed the questionnaire
method .
Characterisrics of Study Population
A questionnaire, keeping in view the objectives and
hypothsis of the study, was dev ised . The
questionnaire con"sisted of two parts viz . Part I
covering 'General Information' and Part II dealing
with 'Aware ness and use of Gu ide to Indian
Pe riodical Literature (G IPL), (Appendix-I) .
Guide to Indian Periodical Literature is being
published by Indian Documentation Se rvice ,
Gurgaon". Haryana since 1964. It is an indexing
service which indexes the literature published in
the field of social sciences and humanities in India.
It Indexes articles , rese a rch pap ers, notes ,
conference proceedings and book reviews from
abou t 500 Indian journals In SOCial sciences and
humanities including newspapers for news , signed
articles and significant edit on;'1ls Th us. it is a basic
information source in the flel o (;1 SOCial sCiences
and humanities .in India .
The study population consisted of faculty,
researchers, M.Phil and Pre Ph .D.students from
post-graduate departments of economics , history,
sociology, social work, political science , education ,
library and information science, commerce and law
of Gulbarga University, Gulbarga.
The questionnaire designed fo r the study wa s
given personally to each one of the seventy one
members of these departments. Out of these, sixty
five members responded which means a response
rate of 91 .55% The data thus collected through
the questionnaires was processed and analyzed.
The chi-square test has been used to test the null
hypothesis at 0.05% level of significance. The null
hypothesis was accepted where the calculated chisquare value is lesser than the table value .
The study population consisted of representatives
from political science (20%), economic s (18 .5%),
history (13 .8% ), sociology (12.3% ) , education
(10.8%), commerce (9.2%), library and information
science (7.7%) , social work (4.6% ) and law (3.1%).
A large majority of the population (6 1.5%) are nonPh . D's . Research students (46.2% ), readers
(21.5%), lecturers (18.5%) and professors (13.8%)
also constit ute the study population. Al mos t 80%
of the study population consists of males and
femall9s accounted for the rest. More than half of
the study population (58 .5% ) belonged to the age
group of less than 35 years, while the scientists
whose age group ranged between 3q-40 years
accoUinted for 32.3% , and only 9.2% of scientists
had an age of more than 40 years. More than threefourths of the population studied had research
experience of less than 10 years. Slightly less than
half o f the ' population studied had dU al
responsibility of teaching as well as research, while
44.6% were involved only in research and 6 .2%
teaching. Majority of the scientists (6 1.5% ) had
publications to their credit, while the rest (38 .5%)
did nClt have any publications (Table 1).
Awareness and Use
The data gathered were analysed for knowing :
How far the social scient ists working in the
university environment are aware of the indexing
journal? and if they are unaware. then what are
the reasons for being so? How far the soc ial
scientists are using the source ? - whether any
personal attributes have a bearing on the use of
Guide to Indian Periodical Literature. Surprisingly
43.1% of scientists were not aware of GIPL (Table
2) and hence , it is felt th at there is a need for
creating awareness regarding the GIPL among the
social scientists In the university environment in
India. It was also found that the personal attributes
have no bearing on the awareness of GIPL among
social scientists . Out of the 43.1 % o f soc ial
scientists , who were not aware of GIPL gave the
reasons like the lack of user edl)cation (53 .5% ),
lack of knowledge (10.7%) and ignorance (17 .8%)
as the main reasons for not knowing the sou rce
(Table 3).
An n Lib Sc i Doc
A CASE STUDY OF GULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA
Table 1
Characteristics of Study Population (N=65)
Frequency
Percent
Cum
Percent
Name of the Department
Sociology
Social Work
Economics
Political Science
History
Law
Education
Library & Inf. Science
Commerc e
8
3
12
13
9
2
7
5
6
12.3
4.6
18.5
20 .0
13.8
3.1
10.8
7.7
9.2
12.3
16.9
35.4
55.4
69.2
72.3
83.1
90 .8
100.0
Qualifications
Ph . D.
Non-Ph . D.
25
40
38 .5
61.5
38 .5
100.0
Designation
Professor
Reader
Lecturer
Research Students
9
14
12
30
13.8
21.5
18.5
46 .2
. 13.8
35.4
53 .8
100.0
Sex
Male
Female
51
14
78 .5
21 .5
78 .5
100.0
Age (in Years)
>35
36-45
46>
38
21
6
58.5
32 .3
9.2
58 .5
90 .8
100.0
Research Experience (Years)
> 10
11-20
21 >
50
13
2
76 .9
20 .0
3.1
76 .9
96.9
100.0
Responsibilities
Teaching
Research
Both
4
29
32
6.2
44.6
49.2
6.2
50 .8
100.0
Publication/s
Yes
No
40
25
61 .5
38.5
61 .5
100.0
Characteristic s
Vol 47 No I March 2()(){)
7
B S MAHESWARAPPA and SUBHAS HANUMANTHAPPA
Table 2
Awareness of GIPL among Social Scientists (N=65)
Awareness
Valid
Percent
Frequency
Percent
37
28
56 .9
43.1
56.9
43.1
65
100 .0
100.0
Yes
No
Total
Cum
Percent
56.9
100.0
Chisquare Test: Summary of Results
Personal
Attributes
Qualification
Designation
Sex
Age
Research
Experience
Responsibilities
-Publications
Calculated
X2
df
1.31914
9.64349
0.34877
0.42362
1
3
2
0.16940
7.78675
0.40154
2
2
Table
X2(oc= .05)
Significant
Hypothesis
3.84
7.82
3.84
7.82
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
7.82
7.82
3.84
Yes
Yes
Yes
Accepted
AccEtpted
Acc€:pted
Table 3
Reasons for Unawareness 01' GIPL (N=28)
Reasons for not aware
Frequency
Percent
Valid
Percent
Cum
Percent
Lack of User Education
Lack of Knowledge
Ignorance
Other reasons
15
3
5
5
37
23.07
4.61
7.69
7.69
56.92
53.5
10.7
17.8
17.8
Missing
53.5
64.2
82 .0
100.0
Total
65
100.00
100.00
Valid cases 28 Missing 37
A nn Lib Sci Doc
ACASE STUDY OF GULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA
Table 4
Use of GIPL among Social Scientists (N=37)
Use
Frequency
Percent
Valid
Percent
Cum
Percent
Yes
37
28
56.9
43.1
100.0
Missing
100.0
65
100.0
100.0
No
Total
Table 5
Frequency of Use of GIPL among Social Scientists (N=37)
Percent
Valid
Percent
40.5
59.5
Missing
Frequency
Frequency
Frequently
Rarely
15
22
28
23.1
33.8
43.1
Total
65
100.0
Cum
Percent
40.5
100.0
100.0
Chisquare Test: Summary of Results
Personal
Attributes
Qualification
Designation
Sex
Age
Research
Experience
Responsibilities
Publications
Vol 47 No 1 March 2000
Calculated
df
X2
Table
Significant
DC =.05)
Hypothesis
X2 (
0.49333
2.11429
2.97678
3.2355
1.83741
2
6
2
4
4
7.82
12.59
5.99
9.49
9.49
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
0.97829
2.3989
4
2
9.49
7.82
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
B S MAHE'SWARAPPA and SUBHAS HANUMANTHAPPA
the information on the scope and coverage of
literature in GIPl. Slightly less than th ree-fourth
of social scientists are of the opinion that the
coverage of Indian social science literature in GIPl
is good (Table 7) . The personal attributes except
age , have no bearing on the opinion regarding the
coverage of literature in GIPl among social
scientists . The G IPl arranges the author and
subject entries in one single alphabetical
sequence. The headings are alphabetized word
by word. The basic inverted headings precede
univerted headings and abbreviated headings are
given at the beginning of each alphabet. More than
one subject headings have been provided with see
and see also references. Each entry gives the full
bibliographial details for subject headings. The
respondents were asked to give their opinion on
the arrangements in GIPl and 40.5% of the social
scientists felt that the arrangement of entries in
GIPl is very useful , while it is moderately useful
for 35.1 % (Table 8). The personal attributes have
no bl:laring on the opinion on the arrangement of
entries in GIPl among social scientists .
It is thus clear that all the social scientists who are
aware (56 .9%) are making use of GIPl (Table 3
and 4). Quite a good number of scientists (43%)
are neither using nor have given any reason/s for
not using it. All the scientists who are aware of
GIPl are thus making use of the source .
Frequency and Purpose of Consultation
A question was asked to know how frequently social
sCientists consult GIPl and for what purpose/s7 It
was found that a majority of social scientists (59.5%)
are consulting GIPl rarely, and only 40.5% use it
frequently. Majority of the scientists are using GIPl
for keeping themselves up-to-date as well as for
retrospective search only and 18.9% exclusively for
keeping up -to-date (Table 6) . The personal attributes
except age. have no bearing on the purpose of using
GIPl among social scientists.
Coverage of Literature and Anrangement of
Entries
The investigators were al so interested in eliciting
Table 6
Purpose/s of Using GIPL among Social Scientists (N=37)
Purpose/s
Frequency
Percent
Valid
Percent
Keep Up-to-date
Retrospective Search
Both
7
14
16
28
10.8
21 .5
24.6
43 .1
Missing
Total
65
100.0
100.0
18.9
37.8
43 .2
Cum
Percent
18.9
56 .8
100.0
Chisquare Test: Summary at Resuits
Personal
Attributes
Qualification
Designation
Sex
Age
Research
Experience
Responsibilities
Publications
10
Calculated
df
X2
Table
Significant
Hypothesis
X 2 (ex =. 05)
6.971 64
13.08057
0.15574
13.69481
4.90226
2
6
2
5.78934
50 .3159
4
4
4
2
7.82
12.59
7.82
9.49
9.49
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Rejected
Accepted
9.49
7.82
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
A CASE STUDY OF GULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA
Table - 7
Opinion on the Coverage in GIPL among Social Scientists (N=3 7)
Percent
Valid
Percent
Cum
Percent
7
26
2
2
28
10.8
40.0
3.1
3.1
43 .1
18.9
70 .3
5.4
5.4
Missin g
18.9
89 .2
94 .6
100.0
65
100.0
Frequency
Coverage
Very Good
Good
Poor
Very Poor
Total
100.0
Chisquare Test: Summary of Results
Personal
Attributes
df
Calculated
X2
Qualification
DeSignation
Sex
Age
Research
Experience
Responsibilities
Publications
Table
X2 (ex: =.05)
Significant
Hypothesis
7.13775
15.12146
3.65256
14.31894
2.17818
3
9
3
6
6
7.82
16.92
7.82
12.59
12.59
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Rejected
Accepted
11 .63838
4.88694
6
3
12.59
7.82
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
Table 8
Opinion on the Arrangement of Entries in GIPL among Social Scientists
Arrangement
Frequency
Very Useful
Moderately Useful
Rarely Useful
Not Useful
Total
Vol 47 No I March 2000
Percent
15
13
7
2
28
23.1
20 .0
10.8
3.1
43.1
65
100.0
Valid
Percent
Cum
Percent
40 .5
35.1
18.9
5.4
Missing
40 .5
75 .7
94.6
100.0
100.0
JJ
B S MAHESW/.tRAPPA and SUBHAS HANUMANTHAPPA
(table 8) contn .
Chisquare Test: Summary of Results
Personal
Attributes
Calculated
Qualification
Designation
Sex
Age
Research Experience
Responsibilities
Publications
1.55477
15.35761
3.54988
3.22626
5.52967
3.59949
5.85612
Table
(ex :=.05)
df
X2
Significant
Hypothesis
;(2
7.82
16.92
7.82
12.59
12.59
12.59
7.82
3
9
3
6
6
6
3
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Acce pted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
subject approaches . While 18.9% follow subject
and 5.4% follow author approach for sE!arching of
information (Table 9) . The personal attributes have
no bearing on the approaches used in searching
GIPl among social scientists . The GIPl is very
useful for 54.1%, moderately useful for 32.4%,
rarely useful for 10.8% and not useful for 2.7% of
scientists (Table 10).
Searching Methods and Usefulnl!;!ss
The questionnaire was devised to get answer to
questions like 'What are the approaches used in
searching information?' and To what extent the
IndeXing Jo urnal is useful as a source of
information '? Three-fourth of social scientists
(75.7%) answered that they were using author and
Table 9
Approaches Used in searching the Information in GIPL among
Social Scientists (N=37/
Percent
Valid
Percent
2
7
28
28
3.1
10.8
43.1
43.1
5.4
18.9
75.7
Missing
65
100.0
Frequency
Approaches
Author
Subject
Both
Total
Cum
Percent
5.4
24.3
100.0
100.0
Chisquare Test: Summary of Results
Personal
Attributes
Qualificatio n
Designation
Sex
Age
Research
Experience
Responsibilities
Publications
12
Calculated
df
Table
X2 (ex :=.05)
1.1 4524
3.90136
0.67959
2.82305
3.5 1594
2
6
2
4
5
2.81381
2.68098
4
2
X2
Significant
Hypothesis
5.99
12.59
5.99
9.49
9.49
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
9.49
5.99
Yes
Yes
Acce pted
Acce pted
A nn Lib Sci Doc
A CASE STUDY OF GULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA
Table 10
Usefulness of GIPL as information Source among Social
Scientists (N=37)
Frequency
Usefulness
Very Useful
Moderately Useful
Rare ly Usefu l
Not Useful
Total
Percent
20
12
4
1
28
30.8
18.5
6.2
1.5
43.1
65
100.0
Val id
Percen t
Cum
Percent
54 .1
32 .4
10.8
2.7
Missing
54 .1
86.5 ·
97 .3
100.0
100.0
Chisquare Test: Summary of Resu lts
Calculated
Personal
Attributes
df
Table
X2
Qualification
Designation
Sex
Age
Research
Experience
Responsibilities
Publications
Significant
Hypothesis
X2 (oc =.05)
2.92711
7.69365
1.68849
4.90530
3
9
3
6
7.82
16.92
7.82
12.59
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
3.85417
3.69353
5.40769
6
6
3
12.59
12.59
7.82
Yes
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Need for User Instruction
Use of a secondary source like Guide to Indian
Periodical Literature among social scientists
depends on the instructions to users on the use of
the source . The social scientists who are using
GIPL and also those who are not using the service
are of the opinion that proper instructions should
be given about GIPL and its use (Table 11) .
Irrespective of the personal attributes the social
scientists have expressed that there is a need for
instruction in the use of GIPL .
Table 11
Need for Instruction in the Use of GIPL among Social SCientists :
Users vi s Non-Users (N=65)
Category of Users
Users
Non-Users
Need for Instructions
30(81.1 )
27(96 .4)
No need for Instructions
7(18.9)
1(3.4)
contd .
Vol 47 No I March 200()
13
B 5 MAHESWARAPPA and SUBHAS HANUMANTHAPPA
(table 11) contn.
Personal
Attributes
Caluclated
Qualification
Designation
Sex
Age
Research
Experience
Responsibilities
Publications
X2
0.69846
3.02516
2.50430
1.67516
2.99342
0.9033
0.69846
df
Table
Significant
Hypothesis .
X2 (oc =.05)
3
1
2
2
2
Need for Creating Awareness
3.84
7.82
3.84
5.99
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
5.99
5.99
3.84
Yes
Yes
Yes
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
some of the reasons cited by the respondents for
not using it. Majority of the scientists are using this
tool for keeping up-to-date as well as for
undHrtaking retrospective literature search. It has
been found that the personal attributes like age,
sex etc. of social scientists in the university
environment have no bearing on the awareness,
use, frequency of use, purpose of using , opinion
on coverage and arrangement , searching
methods , usefulness and the need fo r instruction
in the use of GIPL.
The faculty members , research students, M. Phil
and pre-Ph. D. students in the field of social
sciences are expected to keep track of current and
retrospective literature for which the GIPL is one
of the very important services available in the field
of social sciences in India. A majority of social
scientists - both users and non-users have
expressed the need for instruction in the use of
GIPL. Therefore, there is an urgent need for
providing user instruction by way of lectures,
seminars , discussions, demonstrations and hands
on experience, in the use of GIPL among social
scientists in India with a view to create better
awareness and promote the use of Guide to Indian
Periodical Literature.
Thanks are due to referee for the suggestions and
critical comments for improving the quality of the
paper.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
REFERENCE
More than half of the social scientists are aware
of GIPL and are using the service. Lack of user
education , lack of knowledge and ignorance are
1. MAHESWARAPPA (8S) . Use of abstracting
and indexing sources by social scientists in
India: Need for research at the national level.
IASLIC BUlletin. 41 , 4; 1996; 151-154.
14
Acknowledgements
A nn Lib Sc.:i Doc.:
A CASE STUDY OF GULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA .
QUESTIONNAIRE
APPENDIX -I
Please tick mark ( ) the appropriate one
PART - I GENERAL INFORMATION
1.
Name
2.
Department
3.
Qualifications
() Ph . D
4.
Designation
() Professor
() Lecturer
5.
Sex
() Male
( ) Reader
() Research Student
(M Phil/Pre-Ph. O/Ph. 0 )
() Female
6.
Age (Years)
() >35
( ) 36-45
() 46>
7.
Research Experience
(Years)
( ) >10
( ) 11-20
()21>
8.
Responsibilities
( ) Teaching () Research ( ) Both
() Non Ph. D
9. Do you have publ icatl on/s to your credit? () Yes
( ) No
PART -II
AWARENESS AND USE OF GUIDE TO INDIAN PERIODICAL LITERATURE
10. Are you aware of 'Guide to Indian Periodical Literature'?
( ) Yes
() No
11 . If No, Is it because of
( ) Lack of User Education () Lack of Knowled ge
( ) Other ( PI Specify) : .. .... ... ... .... .. .......... .
( ) Ignorance
. ,,-
[THOSE WHO SAY 'NO' TO ( .
; u GO TO
12. If Yes, Do you use 'Guide to Indian Periodical Literature
'i
(j
Q. NO. 13]
Yes
() No
13. If No, Is it because of:
() Lack of .Time
() Late Receipt
( ) Lack of User Education
() Lack of Interest
() Poor Coverage
() Other (PI Specify) : - - - - - - -- - - -
Vo l 47 No I March 2000
15
B S MAHESWARAPPA and SUBHAS HANUMANTHAPPA
14. If Yes , to Q No. 12, how frequently you consult 'Guide to Indian Periodical Literature' ?
() Rarely
( ) Frequently
15. Indicate, the purpose of using 'Gu ide to Indian Periodical Literature'?
( ) Keeping Up-to-date ( ) Retrospective Literaturef>earch
() Both
( ) Others ( PI Specify) : .... ............. .. .. ... ........ ..
16. Indiacate, your opinion about the coverage of Indian Social Science literature in 'Guide to Indian
Periodical Literature'?
( ) Very Good
() Good
() Poor
() Very Poor
17. Indicate, your opinion about the arrangement of entries in 'Guide to Indian Periodical Literature' ?
() Very Useful
() Rarely Useful
() Moderately Useful
( ) Not Useful
18. Indicate, the approach you follow for searching the information in ' Guide to Indian Periodical
Literature'?
( ) Author
( ) Subject
( ) Both
19. Indicate, the usefulness of 'Guide to Indian Periodical Literature' for finding information in your field?
( ) Very Useful
() Moderately Useful
( ) Rarely Useful
() Not Useful
20 . Do you feel that there is a need for instruction in the use of 'Guide to Indian Periodical Literature?
( ) Yes
( ) No
21 . Give your.suggestions for promoting the use of Guide to Indian Periodical Literature in a University
environment.
Place :
Date :
Signature
•
...
10
A nn L ib Sc i Doc