Speed of Processing Information into the CBCC Files; Currency and Content of the Files : 



Frequently, in an effort to understand the Center and evaluate it as a source of chemical- 

 biological information, the Center was asked how quickly after issuance published data was incorpor- 

 ated into its files, as well as how completely the published literature was represented by the infor- 

 mation in the files. This inquiry had the general objective of evaluating the Center's files primarily 

 on the basis of comparison with currency and coverage of published abstracts and indexes, a more 

 obvious criterion perhaps than evaluation on the basis of the other advantages which the Center felt 

 were its multiple indexing and use of machines. 



Certainly the factors of currency and completeness of coverage were Important ones. To 

 consider the factor of completeness of the literature coverage by the CBCC files first, it should be 

 recognized that the present CBCC information collection only began in late 1951 and 1952, prior to 

 which most of the Center's efforts were spent in developing and testing codes and procedures. Starting 

 from essentially nothing, it took a year or so to establish a steady flow of coded information. From 

 early 1953 to the end of 1956 when the Center was closed, the volume of flow of coded information 

 into the files remained generally at the same level. The fact that the volume rate did not increase to 

 any marked degree can be accounted for in part by the fact that the number of the Center's resident 

 staff and its non-resident coding staff remained at about the same level; it is also evidence that the 

 speed of information flow (discussed in the following paragraph) was perhaps near the speed possible 

 for the system at a given staff level. During those initial years, the coverage of the literature, even 

 considering the limitation to specifically chemical -biological data, could not pretend to be complete 

 and, regarded in strict comparison, the coverage in terms of number of journals reviewed, could 

 hardly compete with the old established abstracting and indexing publications. As was pointed out in 

 another place, the CBCC, realizing its initial limited capacities for covering the literature, concen- 

 trated on the forty of fifty journals that proved by a preliminary survey to be most productive of 

 chemical-biological information. Also, it attempted especially to include certain information which 

 it knew was not apt to be covered routinely by published abstracts and indexes. 



With regard to currency of the files, the Center estimated the average lapse of one year from 

 the date published information was selected for the files to the date the coded and punched information 

 was actually incorporated into the files and thereby made available by the routine CBCC retrieval 

 processes. The several steps in selecting and processing data are described in Appendix A. Certain 

 of these steps may be seen to take a month (or be separated by a month) or longer; by reviewing all 

 the steps, it will be understood why the speed of processing data was not much less than a year for 

 any given unit. 



The preceding time value expresses the speed by which any given information unit progressed 

 from the date of its selection to the date of its entry into the files. It does not indicate actual time 

 which the coders, checkers, arbitrators, chemists, IBM punch operators, and clerical staff spent on 

 a given unit. From records submitted by coders, checkers, and other staff members involved, the 

 Center estimated that each code line entered into the files took a total of one hour for all steps of its 

 preparation and entry into the files. This included the coder's time in studying the information and 

 constructing the code line, the checking and arbitrating time, a propoition of the clerical time spent 

 on an average Set, a proportion of the chemists' time spent on the average Sheet, the IBM operators' 

 punching time, and a proportion of the time for filing Code Sheets and IBM punched cards. 



The Center believed that by enlarging the size of its biology staff to perhaps twice the number 

 of members (i. e. , to approximately eight or ten resident biologists with a corresponding increase in 

 biology coders), the coverage of the published general chemical-biological literature, in addition to 

 the acquisition of unpublished data, could have been more satisfactorily complete and review of this 

 literature made more promptly after its issuance. If, in addition, the system was altered so that 

 coding might have been done by resident coders, the speed of selecting and processing, as well as 

 the volume, might have been increased to give the files an increased currency of published data. 



Though abstracts of the literature may be published relatively quickly, the indexes of chemical- 

 biological literature are at present published only after periods of well over a year after the literature's 

 issuance. Therefore, the Center's ability to have the information coded and incorporated into its files 

 within a year or less, even though it would be desirable to have it entered even more quickly, repre- 

 sents an advantage in currency over most published indexes. 



220 - 



