The Proposed Book Review Journal: Comment

Comments on "Book Reviewing in American Psychological Journals" by Girden and Dennis in the June 1954 American Psychologist. The comment author presents an argument against the establishment of a book review journal by APA. While it is true that the establishment of such a journal would constitute a reorganization of APA's present activities, it would require that the subscriber to present journals either subscribe to this new journal, which may carry a large portion of reviews in which he has no interest, or be deprived of the reviews of books in his field of special interest which currently appear in the journals to which he is already subscribing. It is unreasonable to expect an editor to have the breadth of acquaintance with the various fields of psychology that would be necessary to decide which books merit review or to have the breadth of acquaintance with psychologists in the various fields that would be necessary to enable him judiciously to select reviewers in all of the specialties. It seems difficult to understand how a book review journal could be operated without any pronounced increase in the number of pages that the APA now devotes to this function and still provide "a more complete coverage of psychological books." Several disadvantages to establishing a book review journal are summarized.