ABSTRACT
This bibliography was unhelpful because it did not group the titles in clusters of meaningful topics, and it did not offer any commentary on most of the individual entries. Good annotated bibliographies group entries in some way or another – for example, by method (experimental studies . . . , qualitative studies . . . , short reports . . .) or by age (studies with children . . . , studies with adolescents . . . , studies with parents . . .). This particular example did not do this. After a brief introduction, mentioning some thirty works, a list of over 200 titles was presented in alphabetical order determined by first author’s surname. Furthermore, where no author was quoted (putting ‘anon’ would be appropriate), the first word of the title determined the position of the entry in the list. Thus ‘Guide to . . .’, ‘How to . . .’, ‘In this issue . . .’, etc., became separate alphabetically related entries. In short, the list had no perceivable structure.
