a well-known comparison is that of kenneth kister, who gave a qualitative and quantitative comparison of "collier's encyclopedia" with the "encyclopædia britannica" and the "encyclopedia americana". for the "quantitative" analysis, ten articles were selected at random (circumcision, charles drew, galileo, philip glass, heart disease, iq, panda bear, sexual harassment, shroud of turin and uzbekistan) and letter grades (a–d, f) were awarded in four categories: coverage, accuracy, clarity, and recency. in all four categories and for all three encyclopaedias, the four average grades fell between b− and b+, chiefly because not one encyclopaedia had an article on sexual harassment in 1994. in the accuracy category, "collier's" received one "d" and seven "a"s. "encyclopedia americana" received eight "a"s, and the "britannica" received one "d" and eight "a"s; thus, "collier's" received an average score of 92% for accuracy to "americana"s 95% and "britannica"s 92%. in the timeliness category, "collier's" averaged an 85% to "americana"s 90% and "britannica"s 86%. after a more thorough "qualitative" comparison of all three encyclopedias, kister recommended "collier's encyclopedia" primarily on the strength of its writing, presentation and navigation.