General

A pilot study at the Library of Congress in 1960 of patron stack use, based on a random sample (sample size 200; 181 responding) of patrons in the book stacks, showed that55% were in the stacks to obtain specific books for which they already knew the call numbers, while 38% were browsers. (The remainder were there for both or other reasons.) The majority of patrons in the stacks for work-related reasons were looking for specific books; the majority (57%) in the stacks for recreational or other non-work related reasons were browsers. 123 (68%) of the sample were LC employees.                    (Source)

A 1970 survey of psychiatrists randomly selected from the 1968 membership of the American Psychiatric Association (survey size: 394; responding: 290 or 74%) showed thatthe 4 most frequently mentioned prime methods of searching the literature (out of 11) were:

                library reference services                  23% respondents

                abstracts and indexes                       17% respondents

                bibliographies                                   17% respondents

                review articles                                   16% respondents

Use of the card catalog as a prime method of searching the literature was reported by 5% of the respondents, while browsing as a prime method was reported by 4% of the respondents.                    (Source)

Academic

A 1973 survey of physicists in 6 universities of the greater Boston area (Boston University, Brandeis, Brown, Harvard, MIT, and Northeastern) to determine how they meet their information needs (sample size: 339; responding: 179 or 52.8%) showed thatthe reasons for library use (Harvard chemistry faculty respondents included) were (multiple responses allowed): specific information (160 respondents), keeping up (122 respondents), browsing (88 respondents), and other (6 respondents). No number of respondents given.                        (Source)

A survey reported in 1975 of 50 faculty patrons who had not used a new system of departmental microfiche catalogs of the total collection or an accompanying twice daily book delivery system at Georgia Tech, showed thatthe following were the reasons for not using the new system (multiple responses allowed):

                REASON                                                                                 NUMBER

                inertia                                                                                           13 (26.0%)

                I like to go to the library                                                                14 (28.0%)

                I have not had occasion to use the new system                                9 (18.0%)

                It is more convenient for me to go to the library                              15 (30.0%)

                I like to browse or look at the books I select                                   8 (16.0%)

                I do not fully understand the (new system)                                       6 (12.0%)                 (Source)

A survey reported in 1981 of historians listed in the 1978 Directory of American Scholars concerning their use of and attitudes toward periodicals (survey size: 767 historians, although not all questionnaires could be delivered; responding: 360 or 46.9%, with respondents tending to be younger and with a higher scholarly productivity record than nonrespondents) showed thatthe invisible college was not important in making accidental discoveries. For example, the 3 most frequently reported ways of making frequent accidental discoveries (out of 6) were:

                scanning current periodicals                                                       173 (48.1%) respondents

                looking up a given reference and spotting something else            151 (41.9%) respondents

                wandering along library shelves                                                  108 (30.0%) respondents

 “In conversation with colleagues” ranked fourth with 78 (21.7%) respondents.               (Source)

Public

A 1966 survey of 21,385 adult (12 years old or older) public library users in the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan region of Maryland, conducted during a 6-week period, entering the library (79.1% of patrons approached filled out the survey instrument) showed that the use made of the library was as follows (multiple responses allowed): browsing (43.1%), reference books (22.1%), library catalogs (19.0%), help from a librarian (16.0%), consulting books or magazines (12.4%), read new magazines or newspapers (8.7%), periodical indexes (5.7%), recordings (2.7%), films (0.7%), other (2.0%), and no response (11.1%).                 (Source)

Special

A 1970 survey of psychiatrists randomly selected from the 1968 membership of the American Psychiatric Association (survey size: 394; responding: 290 or 74%) showed thatthe 4 most frequently mentioned prime methods of searching the literature (out of 11) were:

                library reference services                 23% respondents

                abstracts and indexes                      17% respondents

                bibliographies                                  17% respondents

                review articles                                 16% respondents

Use of the card catalog as a prime method of searching the literature was reported by 5% of the respondents, while browsing as a prime method was reported by 4% of the respondents.                    (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