Rose M. LaJudice wrote:

> We have recently been able to generate  a report that reflects how many
> times a journal has been charged out or taken off the shelf (the journals
> have barcodes and we have a rolodex for the current issues) by using a
> portable scanner.
>
> I wanted to ask what someone would consider low usage.  We have 400 titles -
> and the report reflects 7 months.

[snip]

> I am just courious what guidelines other libraries use.

This question is interesting because of all the trouble caused by 'usage
studies.'

Writing in the Journal of Academic Librarianship (5:66, May 1979), Melvin
Voigt argued that research use cannot be determined by circulation
statistics, particularly where open stacks permit patrons to stand among
the shelves browsing, reading, checking citations, etc. A study by Dorothy
Milne and Bill Tiffany (Serials Librarian 19,3/4, 1991) indicated that
many patrons did not cooperate with their reshelving methodology. The
infamous Pitt study used a sample that indicated low usage of journals
while interviews indicated that faculty members systematically browsed all
new issues.

There are also arithmetical complications. Suppose your dept. heads browse
all major journals systematically. A weekly such as NEJM will show 50 uses
per patron while montlies show twelve and bimonthlies show six.

A "scientific" study of usage would probably use some other method to
assure a given level of reliability.

In other words, your statistics probably indicate a limited range of uses
in relative amounts and frequencies. I am not sure what conclusions, if
any, should be drawn.

Best wishes, Al Henderson, Editor, Publishing Research Quarterly
70244.1532@compuserve.com