Academic

A 1-year study during 1964-65 at the Yale Medical Library concerning book and journal circulation (34,825 circulations) showed thatcurrency was more important for journals than for books. For example, 71% of the journals circulated had been published within the last 9 years, while only 66% of the books that circulated had been published within 9 years. Further, 90% of the journal circulations involved materials no more than 22 years old, while 90% of the book circulations required materials up to 28 years old.                (Source)

        Ibid…. showed thatthe importance of journal currency varied considerably by subject area. For example, in the areas of nursing, science, and the cardiovascular system, 90% of the circulations were accounted for by 12 years, 13 years, and 15 years of backfiles of journal materials, respectively, while in the areas of anatomy, pathology, and psychology, 90% of the circulations required 30 years of backfiles of journal materials each.                  (Source)

        Ibid…. showed thatthe importance of book currency varied considerably by subject area. For example, in the areas of biochemistry, neurology, and neoplasms, 90% of the circulations were accounted for by imprints going back 12 years, 17 years, and 17 years, respectively, while in the areas of surgery, biology, and infectious diseases, 90% of the circulations were accounted for by imprints going back 42 years, 39 years, and 37 years, respectively.                (Source)

A 6-month study during 1967-68 in the Medical Library of the Children’s Hospital of Michigan concerning periodical use through circulation, room use, and interlibrary loan (1,898 uses) showed thatcurrent-year journal issues accounted for 753 (39.67%) uses; journal issues 5 years old or less accounted for 1,408 (74.18%) uses; and journal issues 15 years old or less accounted for 1,813 (95.51%) uses.                 (Source)

A 1968-69 study over a period of 9 months of the use of materials at the Midwest Regional Medical Library (John Crerar Library), involving a random sample of 1,071 requests for material, showed that, of 1,061 requests, the age of the materials requested was as follows: under 1 year old (18.0%), 5 years old or less (53.8%), 10 years old or less (66.2%), and more than 10 years old (33.7%). (Source)

A 1971 study at the MIT Science Library of in-room use (journals do not circulate) of 220 physics journals over a 3.5-month period showed thatjournal use by age of journal was as follows:

                 1 year old or less                      288 (6.7%) of total uses

                 3 years old or less                  1,250 (29.1%) of total uses

                 6 years old or less                  2,239 (52.2%) of total uses

                10 years old or less                3,174 (74.0%) of total uses

                17 years old or less                4,039 (94.1%) of total uses

Only 253 (5.9%) uses were made of journals more than 17 years old, i.e., 18 years old or older.                       (Source)

        Ibid…. showed thatjournals receiving heavy use have a later “point of obsolescence” than journals receiving light use. For example, for Physical Review (a heavy use item), volumes more than 10 years old accounted for 33.2% of its total use, compared to the overall group of 220 journals, whose volumes more than 10 years old accounted for only 26% of their use.                          (Source)

A 1972 study at the University of Minnesota Bio-Medical Library concerning in-house use of periodicals during 2 1-week periods (1st period: 727 uses involving 269 different titles; 2nd period: 533 uses involving 209 different titles) showed thatcombined data from both periods indicated that 58% of total use came from periodicals 5 years old or less. Further, for every 3.4 years of material age (for materials in the 1st period) and every 3.2 years of material age (for materials in the 2nd period) the materials use decreased by half.                   (Source)

A 1972-73 study of periodical usage in the Education-Psychology Library at Ohio State University showed that, based on 7,623 periodical circulation transactions generated in just over a month, 5 years of holdings provided 75.6% of the materials circulated, and 8 years of holdings provided 90.6% of the materials circulated.               (Source)

A 1975-76 study of journal title usage through the extension services of the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Library (Oklahoma City) to hospital clients (4,216 articles from 1,055 journal titles requested) showed thathealth professionals in hospitals without libraries needed more recent information than their counterparts in hospitals with libraries. 82.3% of the journal articles requested by individuals had been published within the last 5 years, and 91.8% of the journal articles requested by individuals had been published within the last 10 years, while 74.6% of the articles requested by libraries had been published within the last 5 years, and 86.7% had been published within the last 10 years.                    (Source)

A 1977 study of biomedical journal use in the Lane Medical Library at Stanford University Medical Center during the month of November, involving the bound volumes of 334 journal titles for a 10-year period (1967-76), showed thatthe higher use of newer volumes was not due to their containing more articles. For example, for the 10-year period of holdings there was an exponential decrease in use but only a linear decrease in shelf space occupied. Specifically, 24.35% of the journal use involved bound volumes 1 year old, while volumes 10 years old received only 3.12% of the total use; bound volumes 1 year old occupied 10.63% of the shelf space, while volumes 10 years old occupied 9.26% of the shelf space.                        (Source)

A survey reported in 1978 of 31 Ph.D. dissertations in the field of business/management (13 from the State University of New York at Buffalo and 18 from SUNYAB incoming faculty but completed at other schools) showed that:

                42.7% of the periodical citations and 36.0% of the monographic citations were to materials 5 years old or less;

                72.8% of the periodical citations and 66.2% of the monographic citations were to materials 10 years old or less;

                87.0% of the periodical citations and 80.7% of themonographic citations were to materials 15 years old or less;

                and 93.0% of the periodical citations and 89.5% of the monographic citations were to materials 20 years old or less.                (Source)

A study reported in 1978 at Indiana University, Bloomington of materials requested through a delivery service to faculty in the political science and economics departments during a 32-month period (October 1972-June 1975), involving 39 political scientists and 14 economists (40-50% of the faculty in the departments) and 5,478 articles from 620 different journals and newspapers, showed thatarticles published after 1950 (the study concluded June 1975) accounted for 97.6% of the requests.                       (Source)

Special

A 1-year study during 1964-65 at the Yale Medical Library concerning book and journal circulation (34,825 circulations) showed thatcurrency was more important for journals than for books. For example, 71% of the journals circulated had been published within the last 9 years, while only 66% of the books that circulated had been published within 9 years. Further, 90% of the journal circulations involved materials no more than 22 years old, while 90% of the book circulations required materials up to 28 years old.                (Source)

        Ibid…. showed thatthe importance of journal currency varied considerably by subject area. For example, in the areas of nursing, science, and the cardiovascular system, 90% of the circulations were accounted for by 12 years, 13 years, and 15 years of backfiles of journal materials, respectively, while in the areas of anatomy, pathology, and psychology, 90% of the circulations required 30 years of backfiles of journal materials each.                   (Source)

A study reported in 1966 at the library of the Electronics Systems Center of the International Business Machines Corporation (Owego, New York) concerning periodical usage during a 2-year period (1963-64), involving 4,221 separate uses during this time, showed that:

                current-year requests totaled 1,470 (34.8% of the total);

                requests for materials between 1 and 2 years old totaled 812 (19% of the total);

                requests for materials between 2 and 3 years old totaled 480 (11% of the total);

                requests for materials 5 years old or less totaled 3,379 (80.1% of the total);

                requests for materials 10 years old or less totaled 3,874 (91.8% of the total).                   (Source)

A 6-month study during 1967-68 in the Medical Library of the Children’s Hospital of Michigan concerning periodical use through circulation, room use, and interlibrary loan (1,898 uses) showed thatcurrent-year journal issues accounted for 753 (39.67%) uses; journal issues 5 years old or less accounted for 1,408 (74.18%) uses; and journal issues 15 years old or less accounted for 1,813 (95.51%) uses.                 (Source)

A 1968-69 study over a period of 9 months of the use of materials at the Midwest Regional Medical Library (John Crerar Library), involving a random sample of 1,071 requests for material, showed that, of 1,061 requests, the age of the materials requested was as follows: under 1 year old (18.0%), 5 years old or less (53.8%), 10 years old or less (66.2%), and more than 10 years old (33.7%). (Source)

A 1972 study at the University of Minnesota Bio-Medical Library concerning in-house use of periodicals during 2 1-week periods (1st period: 727 uses involving 269 different titles; 2nd period: 533 uses involving 209 different titles), showed thatcombined data from both periods indicated that 58% of total use came from periodicals 5 years old or less. Further, for every 3.4 years of material age (for materials in the 1st period) and every 3.2 years of material age (for materials in the 2nd period) the materials use decreased by half.                   (Source)

A 1975-76 study of journal title usage through the extension services of the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Library (Oklahoma City) to hospital clients (4,216 articles from 1,055 journal titles requested) showed thathealth professionals in hospitals without libraries needed more recent information than their counterparts in hospitals with libraries. 82.3% of the journal articles requested by individuals had been published within the last 5 years, and 91.8% of the journal articles requested by individuals had been published within the last 10 years, while 74.6% of the articles requested by libraries had been published within the last 5 years, and 86.7% had been published within the last 10 years.                    (Source)

A 1977 study of biomedical journal use in the Lane Medical Library at Stanford University Medical Center during the month of November, involving the bound volumes of 334 journal titles for a 10-year period (1967-76), showed thatthe higher use of newer volumes was not due to their containing more articles. For example, for the 10-year period of holdings there was an exponential decrease in use but only a linear decrease in shelf space occupied. Specifically, 24.35% of the journal use involved bound volumes 1 year old, while volumes 10 years old received only 3.12% of the total use; bound volumes 1 year old occupied 10.63% of the shelf space, while volumes 10 years old occupied 9.26% of the shelf space.                  (Source)

Dr. David Kohl

 "Libraries in the digital age are experiencing the most profound transformation since ancient Mesopotamian scribes first began gathering and organizing cuneiform tablets."

Go to top