Two questionnaires were sent to individual and institutional subscribers to the American Psychological Association's Experimental Publication System (EPS) to investigate types of manuscripts and lengths of information units needed to support different job-related tasks. Basic findings from the questionnaire sent to individuals were that review or summary articles were most frequently judged useful, while theoretical articles were judged least useful. Also, almost all of the respondents selected abstracts or short versions to support their job-related tasks, but very few selected citations or complete text. With regard to the relationship between types of articles selected and work settings, those involved in basic research or training and education indicated the need for a greater range of types of articles than did those involved in applied research or management. Findings from the questionnaire sent to institutions were that descriptors used by academic institutions to characterize their subject matter requirements were more abstract and more discipline- and content-oriented, while those used by non-academic organizations were less abstract and more problem- and specialty-oriented. These findings have implications for designing EPS to better meet individual and institutional information needs. (Author)