Determining how much of the library budget to spend on serials is a question of growing importance in the light of recent price hikes and budget difficulties. Citation studies provide one means of setting this ration, but criticisms of its scope and method limit its usefulness. This study intends to provide a useful interpretation of citation data long with other factors in determining how to budget for serials in psychology. Citation analysis showed that approximately 75% of all citations by University of Florida authors were to journals, for aticles they wrote in 1989. This ratio is consistent across year, subject, and department of origin. The ratio is much higher than for other social science disciplines, reported at between 30% and 50% citations to journals. This, combined with the price structure of psychology journals and the way in which information is exchanged in psychology, suggests that psychology should be considered a science for collection management purposes, and its serial/monograph budget ratio should be in line with the other sciences.