{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013173652694610778, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.102189781021898, '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}}
Weeding Older Social Sciences Journals

Weeding collections of older materials in order to make room for newer materials is now an accepted part of librarianship. Accordingly, a consistent set of objective principles for weeding now exist. Applying these objective principles of weeding to older social sciences materials is problematic in light of the epistemological debate over how the social sciences are, or should be practiced. This article will first discuss the debate over the nature of the social sciences. It will then outline the objective principles of weeding. These principles will be then be applied to an older social scientific journal that is a candidate for weeding. Finally, the article will discuss how the debate in the social sciences potentially can affect the librarian's judgment about these older materials.