{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.007309941520467836, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.445652173913044, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluating Scholarly Communication at the Subdisciplinary Level

Abstract While traditional citation studies offer insight into the literature usage patterns of specific disciplines, they fail to capture the diversity of information needs at the subdisciplinary level. Understanding scholarly communication within subfields can help academic librarians tailor their collections to better meet the requirements of the faculty they serve. Analyzing the citations in three specialized economics journals demonstrates that practitioners of different subfields draw upon different types of resources in conducting their research, which has implications for collection development policies.