Are New Books Read More than Old Ones?Author(s): Elizabeth MuellerSource: The Library Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 3 (Jul., 1965), pp. 166-172Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4305567 .

Accessed: 10/06/2014 18:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheLibrary Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.140 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:39:06 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ARE NEW BOOKS READ MORE THAN OLD ONES?

ELIZABETH MUELLER*

H ow to balance the demand for new books in various fields with the competing demands

for depth of the book collection in specific areas is a complex question for the librarian. To state the problem simply: Should the librarian be better prepared to provide the "latest book on Viet Nam" than to provide the most comprehensive (or detailed or special- ized) book on the various aspects of the Southeast Asian conflict? When books and resources are limited, as is the case in the small public library, the librarian must look in part for the an- swer to his question in the way books are used. Can he tell by looking at his circulation records whether new books are used more heavily than old ones?

Little evidence has been gathered about the "age" of books circulated in libraries. Studies which have analyzed the circulation of books, especially fic- tion, as a function of their age tend to support the belief that new books cir- culate faster than do old ones. Most of these studies have been in public libraries serving more than 40,000 people.1 That is a limitation, because as recently as five years ago more than 50 per cent of public libraries in the United States served a population un-

der 5,000 and 85 per cent of them were located in communities of fewer than 35,000 people. Therefore, this study, while attempting to gather evi- dence on the general question of the relation of the newness of books to their circulation rate limited the area of in- quiry to public libraries in six different suburban communities with populations ranging from 4,000 to 35,000.

The six communities studied were in the Chicago metropolitan region. In the course of the study, many com- munity analyses were made in an ef- fort to correlate socioeconomic char- acteristics with various aspects of li- brary services and use. The communi- ties differ widely with respect to median number of school years completed, in- come distribution, and percentage of employed persons in white-collar oc- cupations. On the fifteen-point socio- economic scale constructed from these measures by the Northeastern Illinois Metropolitan Area Planning Commis- sion, the six communities ranged from a high of 1 to a low of 7 (Table 1). Attempts made in the original study to discern consistent relationships between these community indexes and library use and service were inconclusive and they will not be repeated in this report. However, it may be pertinent to record as a subject for further investigation the over-all similarity of library serv- ices despite great community variations.

The focus of this report is on the comparative circulation of old and new non-fiction titles in the six libraries.

*The author acknowledges the assistance of Mr. Phillip H. Ennis in the preparation of this paper.

'The study by Herman Fussier and Julian Simon is an especially detailed example analyzing use by age in an academic library. See Patterns in the Use of Books in Large Research Libraries (Chicago: University of Chicago Library, 1961).

166

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.140 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:39:06 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ARE NEW BOOKS READ MORE THAN OLD ONES? 167

The measurement of this difference posed some problems of methodology. First, some basis had to be found on which six different libraries that dif- fered so much in size and community characteristics could be compared. The device used was circulation rate, which was obtained by dividing the circula- tion for a library by the number of titles in the collection. By basing the comparison on a ratio between the size of circulation and the size of the col- lection, it is thus possible to treat large

and small libraries in the same table. Thus, in Table 2, the circulation rate of 5.1 in Library I means that the 43,700 titles circulated 222,900 times or on the average of 5.1 times per title.

A remarkable feature of the circula- tion rates for the total collections of the six libraries is the low range of varia- tion. Library III, the only library that had a bookmobile, was also the only one that had an annual circulation rate over 7 for its total collection. If, how- ever, the bookmobile's circulation is not included, Library III's circulation rate was 6.6. In other words, the variation in the annual rate of circulation for the

collections housed in the six library buildings was less than 2.

The variation in the fiction circula- tion rate (Table 3), although higher than that between the rates of the total collections, is not large either. And, with the exception of that of Library IV, the circulation rates of the non-fiction col- lections (Table 4) also have a small variation-less than 12.2 The fiction and the non-fiction circulation rates seem to be unrelated to the size of the libraries.

TABLE 2

RATE OF CIRCULATION OF THE BOOK COLLECTIONS IN SIX SUB-

URBAN LIBRARIES, 1961-63

No. Titles* Annual Library in Collection Circulation

(1,000's) Rate

I. . 43.7 5.1 II . 19.8 6.4 III .18.5 8.4 IV .18.5 5.4 V. 8.7 5.8 VI .11.3 6.8

*For non-fiction, the cards in the shelf list were counted; librarians' estimates were used for fiction.

TABLE 1

SOCIOECONOMIC CLASS OF SIX CHICAGO SUBURBS AND THE POPULATION CHAR- ACTERISTICS FROM THE 1960 CENSUS USED BY THE NORTHEASTERN ILLINOIS METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COMMISSION TO DETERMINE THIS CLASS

Median Famnilies Employed SchoolwihI- Prosn

Years Cor- Median comest WhIter Socio Suburb Population pleted by Family comes White- economic

Pbi mto oOersons Income / $10,000 Occupations Clm 25 Years (Per Cent) (Per Cent) or Over

....... 34,886 12.2 $ 8,610 34.2 58.5 5 I . .. 27,471 12.1 8,588 34.2 52.2 6

III ..... 20,729 11.5 8,232 30.2 46.4 7 IV....... 10,838 13.2 12,257 64.9 80.5 1 V ...... 8,588 12.1 8,240 30.1 54.0 6 VI..... 4,624 14.0 20,200 79.1 83.0 1

'The factors which caused Library IV's circu- lation rate to be so low will be discussed later.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.140 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:39:06 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

168 THE LIBRARY QUARTERLY

Because the circulation rates in the adult collections are so stable, the vari- ability of the juvenile collections ap- pears quite striking (Table 5). Even if the bookmobile circulation is removed from Library III, the adjusted juvenile circulation rate is 9.42. The variation

TABLE 3

CIRCULATION RATES-SIX SUBURBAN LIBRARIES, 1961-63: ADULT FICTION

No. Titles Hodins Annual Library in Collection (Per Cent) Circulation

(1,000's) (PrCn) Rate

I . 7.8 18 7.3 II . .. 7.2 36 6.1 IL . 5.5 30 6.0 IV .4.9 26 4.4 V . . 2.0 24 5.8 VI ....... 1.9 17 6.9

TABLE 4

CIRCULATION RATES-SIX SUBURBAN LIBRARIES, 1961-63: ADULT

NON-FICTION

No. Titles Holdings Annual Library in Collection (Per Cent) Circulation

(1,000's) Rate

I. ...... 17.7 40 3.5 II .... . . 4.7 24 4.7 III. ... 5.0 27 3.3 IV .... 7.7 42 2.6 V ...... 2.0 24 4.1 VI ...... 2.7 24 3.5

between the lowest and highest circula- tion rates of six libraries is still over 4 per year. The library having the small- est percentage of juvenile holdings (Library IV) has the largest annual circulation rate. Yet Library VI, which had the largest percentage of juvenile holdings, had a fairly high juvenile circulation, too. Neither the size of the collection nor the size of the popu- lation served seems related to this varia- tion. This is a puzzling phenomenon,

one which invites further research. The concern of the present report, however, is with the adult nonfiction collection (circulating titles only).

The following statistics were gathered from each of the six libraries for a twelve-month period: (1) total circu- lation of both fiction and juvenile col- lections and each of the eleven non-fic- tion sections (ten Dewey classes plus biographies); (2) the total number of "old titles" (those held at the beginning of the survey period) in each of the

TABLE 5

CIRCULATION RATES-SIX SUBURBAN

LIBRARIES, 1961-63: JUVENILE

No. Titles oldings Annual Library in Collection (Per Cent) Circulation

(1,000's) (PrCn) Rate

I. ...... 18.2 42 5.6 II....... 7.9 40 7.7 III .. 8.1 43 13.1 IV . . 6.0 32 9.7 V... . 4.5 52 6.7 VI ...... 6.7 59 7.8

eleven non-fiction sections, and a listing of the "new titles" (those acquired and made available for circulation during the survey period) in each of the eleven sections; and (3) the number of times each new title circulated during the survey's twelve-month period (since li- braries do not normally keep circulation records separately for new books, the information for this item was collected with the special co-operation of the li- braries).3 The data collected from each of the six libraries covered twelve con-

a In all six libraries the number of times each new book had circulated during the twelve-month period was found by counting its charges-auto- matically listed by date charged on the bookcard -recorded during the year for which statistics from each of the libraries were collected. Charges recorded for multiple copies of the same title were added together to obtain a circulation record for each new title.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.140 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:39:06 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ARE NEW BOOKS READ MORE THAN OLD ONES? 169

secutive months. The earliest of the twelve-month periods began January 1, 1961; the latest ended May 31, 1963.

After the data were collected, there were, for each library, three circulation figures-total, old title, and new title. But before the old-title circulation rates could be compared with those of the new titles in each library, an adjust- ment had to be made to the new-title statistics, for theoretically, according to our definition of new titles, none of them were in circulation at the begin- ning of the twelve-month survey period. At the same time, however, all of the old titles were available for circulation. Since the new titles had been added to all six libraries at a constant rate over the twelve-month periods, the average availability time for a new title was six months, or exactly one-half the exposure time of the old titles. Hence, the circula- tion records of the new titles were doubled in order to offset the time ad- vantage of the older titles. (The doubled circulation figure is labeled "adjusted circulation" in the tables and text that follow.)

The old-title circulation rate for the entire non-fiction collection in each li- brary was then compared to its adjusted new-title circulation rate. Then the same procedure was used to examine the old- and new-title relationship for each of the eleven Dewey classes in all six libraries.

The summary of the old-title and new-title circulation statistics for the six libraries in Table 6 clearly reveals each library's non-fiction circulation picture. First, for all six libraries old- title circulation rates were quite similar. Second, the libraries divide into two groups-Libraries I, II, and IV, with a high new-title rate, and Libraries III, V, and VI, with no substantial differ-

ence in the new- and the old-title circu- lation rates. The question became: What accounts for the much-aug- mented rate of new-title circulation in three of the libraries compared to the other three where old and new titles circulate at essentially the same rate?

Nothing about the communities ap- pears to be related to the new-title cir- culation differences. Neither the size of the population and its educational and income level nor the extent of library

TABLE 6

COMPARATIVE CIRCULATION OF OLD AND

NEW NON-FICTION TITLES

OLD TITLES NEW TITLES

LIBRLARY Ajse

N CircTi N Circulation per TitlepeTil

I..... 15,303 3.48 2, 420 8.00 II .... 3,897 4.82 812 8.45 III. 4,266 3.57 731 4.15 IV... 7,012 2.56 528 9.58 V..... 1, 761 4.37 320 5.82 VI... 2,291 3.71 384 4.53

use was related to the difference in new- title circulation. Such a result is hardly surprising but important to explore.

In comparing the libraries, the ques- tion arose as to whether the high circu- lation of new titles was consistently confined to special subjects. Also this question is important: Were the li- braries circulating a high rate of new non-fiction alike or different in the sub- jects of new books that were read a great deal? A comparison was made of the circulation rates of old and new titles in the ten major Dewey classes and biography in all six libraries. The results, shown in Table 7, fail to show a marked concentration of high circu- lation of new titles in any subject fields in Libraries I, II, and IV or any out-

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.140 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:39:06 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

170 THE LIBRARY QUARTERLY

standing differences among these three libraries. Libraries III, V, and VI, while showing noticeably higher new-title circulation in some classes, vary from each other in the classes so distin- guished.

The sheer volume of new titles in proportion to the rest of the book col- lection was also investigated. Did the libraries with the highest percentage of new titles consistently show a much higher adjusted circulation rate? The comparisons shown in Table 8 suggest

no positive correlation. With the excep- tion of that of Library IV, the ratios of new to old non-fiction titles vary little, and in the case of Library IV the ratio is much lower, although it was one of the libraries with a high circulation of new titles.

In the light of Library IV's deviation (see Table 8) the relationship between each library's holdings and its circula- tion was also considered as a possible determinant of the new-title circula- tion rate. In other words, perhaps the non-fiction collection formed a larger proportion of the total collection in the three libraries with high new-title circu-

lation rates than in those with low new- title circulation rates.

Perhaps the proportion of non-fiction in the library as a whole and the degree to which it circulated, compared to the fiction collection, influenced the new- title circulation rate. The relevant data, shown in Table 9, show no such rela- tion.

Library IV, did not conform very well to the trends cited in Tables 6-9. In fact this library's history was a com- plete puzzle: (1) it had the highest

percentage of holdings in non-fiction; (2) it had the lowest circulation rate per non-fiction title; (3) it had the highest circulation rate per new non- fiction title. In order to find the reason for this discrepancy in Library IV, its entire circulation picture was re-ex- amined.

At the time of this survey Library IV was in the midst of an expansion pro- gram. Because of this, approximately three thousand adult books were housed in the basement workroom, which was closed to the public. About three- fourths of these titles were non-fiction. Except for "controversial" or seasonal

TABLE 7

COMPARISON OF THE ANNUAL CIRCULATION RATE OF OLD TITLES WITH ADJUSTED CIRCULATION

RATE OF NEW TITLES FOR MAIN DEWEY CLASSES IN ALL Six LIBRARIES

LIBRARY I LIBRARY II LIBRARY III LIBRARY IV LIBRARY V LIBRARY VI

DEwEY CLAss --_ _ _ -_ _ _ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New

000's ........... 3.5 6.3 2.5 2.0 1.7 0 3.0 3.0 3.4 1.6 2.7 2.7 100's ...,. . 4.7 9.1 6.2 10.4 4.6 4.9 2.7 13.0 5.1 6.3 4.8 7.4 200's.. 3.6 5.1 4.6 5.5 2.5 2.3 2.0 7.4 3.8 9.4 2.9 2.7 300's ... . 2.9 7.2 4.3 8.3 2.5 4.1 3.0 10.6 3.7 5.6 4.0 5.1 400's........... 2.7 9.4 5.2 10.5 6.0 1.5 3.7 5.8 3.7 5.8 3.4 0 500's ........... 3.5 6.6 5.9 6.7 4.5 5.0 3.3 9.1 5.1 5.3 3.6 4.2 600's........ ..... 4.2 6.5 5.6 11.2 5.1 4.6 2.7 9.4 4.2 6.7 3.1 6.7 700'oots..... . ......3.4 6.8 5.0 8.6 3.7 5.0 2.3 8.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 3.3 800's ... . 2.4 4.3 5.1 9.7 3.1 3.0 1.9 9.9 5.0 5.3 2.9 5.3 900's ........... 7.9 9.2 4.5 8.1 4.0 3.8 2.8 9.0 4.9 6.6 6.0 4.7 Biography ...... 2.2 7.7 4.2 7.6 3.7 4.8 2.4 10.0 3.8 6.0 2.5 4.9

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.140 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:39:06 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ARE NEW BOOKS READ MORE THAN OLD ONES? 171

collections, none of the other libraries had a large percentage of their collec- tion inaccessible to their patrons. Yet in Library IV the non-fiction titles housed in the basement amounted to almost 30 per cent of the entire non- fiction collection, or about one-third of the old non-fiction titles. Theoretically, these books were available to the library patrons via the card catalog, personal searching, and, finally, an oral request to the librarian. Nevertheless, visual inaccessibility reduced book use con- siderably. Evidence for the assertion was the very low old-title rates for Library IV (Table 7) even in the divi- sions which are not as timebound as science or social reform, e.g., the 100's and 800's.

TABLE 8

COMPARISON BETWEEN NEW-TITLE CIRCULATION RATE AND PER- CENTAGE OF NEW NON-FICTION TITLES IN Six LIBRARIES

Percentage of Adjusted New Titles New-Title Library in Total Circulation

Non-Fiction Rate

I 14 8.00 II 17 8.45 Ill 15 4.15 IV 7 9.58 V 15 5.82 VI . . 14 4.53

Since inaccessibility had such a nega- tive effect on the circulation rate for old books in Library IV, the converse might account for the high circulation of new titles in Libraries I and II. En- hanced accessibility of new books, in other words, may have had a positive effect on their circulation rate. After reviewing the procedures for handling new non-fiction books in all six libraries I found that three of the six libraries had special places for new non-fiction

books. These were special tables or shelves where new books from all Dewey classes were displayed-and allowed to circulate-for a limited period of time before they were merged into the collection. These three libraries were, of course, Libraries I, II, and IV, the ones with high new-title circula- tion.

Personal observation of the circula- tion of each individual new non-fiction

TABLE 9

COMPARISON OF PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL HOLDINGS IN NON-FIC- TION TO PERCENTAGE OF CIR- CULATION COMPOSED OF NON-

FICTION

Percentage Percentage Library Non-Fiction Non-Fiction

Holdings Circulation

...... 40 29 I*.... 24 17

III .... 27 11 IV*.... 42 20 V . .. . 24 17 VI. . 24 13

* High new-title circulation.

title in Library IV revealed the process. The method of classifying new titles in this library necessitated the replace- ment of the temporary book card at the same time a book was transferred from the special new-title bin to the regular non-fiction shelves. But the number of circulations appearing on the original circulation card was re- corded on the new circulation card. Not only did this operation preserve each title's complete circulation record but it also made it possible to observe the effect of being "relocated" on a title's circulation. Frequently a new title which had circulated at least four times before appearing in the card catalog (not being cataloged was one of the

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.140 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:39:06 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

172 THE LIBRARY QUARTERLY

criteria for being placed in the new non-fiction special collection) had not circulated once since its transfer to the regular shelves. Yet, because of my fre- quent visits to Library IV, I could determine for many of these titles that the actual time spent on the regular non-fiction shelves was equal to or longer than the period for which it was assigned to the special table. Although in this survey no separate record was kept of each title's circulation before transfer to the regular shelves the con- trast in the circulation rate was so wide- spread that any exception to it could not escape notice since "before" and "after" circulations had to be added for a total circulation figure covering the survey period for each new non-fiction title in Library IV.

A similar process appears to have taken place in Libraries I and II. When new books were immediately merged with older books in the collec- tion they were "lost," so to speak. Without the heightened visibility and

accessibility that special shelving pro- vides, new books are no more likely than old ones to attract a reader. Al- though this result is not too surprising, it strongly reinforces the general be- lief in the power of accessibility.

If, as appears from this study, the use of the library can be so affected in such specific and measurable ways, then a powerful instrument is potentially at hand for the librarian. He can shape the reading patterns of his constituents, perhaps more than he had realized, via experimentation with differential acces- sibility of parts of the collection. Of equal importance he can provide, through methods similar to the ones developed in this research, a way of precisely evaluating the results of that experimentation. Thus the kind of re- search reported here may be useful in treating these two perennially difficult problems of library service-directing reading patterns and measuring library performance.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.140 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:39:06 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions