Do Reviews Matter? An Analysis of Usage and Holdings of Choice-Reviewed Titles Within a Consortium

Levine‐Clark, Michael; Jobe, Margaret M.

doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2007.09.002

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because of pre‐selection criteria used by Choice when determining which materials to review, the majority of Choice reviews are positive. The authors of the present study (Levine‐Clark and Jobe, 2007) used the spectra dimension collection analysis tool to examine collection and use patterns within a consortium of academic libraries. The participating libraries gathered data on titles and usage that were added to their collections for a roughly seven‐year period.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collecting law and medical titles for general academic collections: what use statistics can tell us

Levine‐Clark

Jobe

2009

Collection Building

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeIn order to better understand how collections are used, this study aims to present a large‐scale analysis of usage patterns for non‐core monographs in the collections of fourteen general academic libraries of varying sizes.Design/methodology/approachUsing Spectra Dimension, a collection analysis tool, this study compares use data from multiple academic libraries.FindingsIt appears that general academic libraries are overinvesting in legal materials and perhaps underinvesting in medical materials.Research limitations/implicationsThis study suggests that analysis of use data from multiple libraries may help individual libraries better understand their own collecting needs. Local issues may, however, override the broad patterns identified here.Practical implicationsIn lean budgetary times, understanding collection use is key to making informed decisions about resource allocation for collection development. Libraries may be able to use these data to better manage their own materials budgets and collecting practices.Originality/valueThough there have been a number of large‐scale analyses of collections, most have relied on sampling or have compared small portions of collections, and few have compared use across libraries. This study analyzes collection use across many institutions at a level of detail not possible before the introduction of multi‐library collection analysis tools.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collecting law and medical titles for general academic collections: what use statistics can tell us

Levine‐Clark

Jobe

2009

Collection Building

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some might argue that rather than giving so much weight to the opinions of professional reviewers, one would be wiser to look at what the consumer thinks of a particular book. According to Levine‐Clark and Jobe (2007), in 1989, Virgil L. Blake “theorized that reviews might play a less significant role in the collection development strategies of large academic libraries because of mass purchasing and approval plans”.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Books in Print: indispensable or unnecessary for academic library collection development?

Driscoll

2012

Reference Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – ‐‐ This article aims to determine if, given the current economic climate in higher education, academic libraries are still using the database Books in Print (BIP) as a collection development tool.Design/methodology/approach ‐‐ The article discusses a survey distributed to the Learning Times Library Online Community; Marylib, the list‐serv for the Maryland Library Association; ili‐l, the American Library Association's Information Literacy Instruction Discussion List; and Libref‐l, sponsored by Kent State for Reference Librarians. Participants responded to a series of questions about whether they use BIP as a collection development tool; whether they use other resources and, if so, what they are; and if the BIP database was dropped, why this decision was made.Findings ‐‐ Many academic libraries have dropped BIP and are using a variety of resources to find book reviews, pricing, and availability information. Only a slightly lower percentage of academic libraries have kept the database and use it as an important collection development tool.Research limitations/implications ‐‐ The sample size was relatively small.Originality/value ‐‐ This survey and subsequent article fill a gap in the literature – no other survey results could be found that addressed changes in academic libraries' perception of BIP as the “go to” source for collection development.

show abstract

Use and Non-Use of Choice-Reviewed Titles in Undergraduate Libraries

Jobe¹,

Levine‐Clark

2008

The Journal of Academic Librarianship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do Reviews Matter? An Analysis of Usage and Holdings of Choice-Reviewed Titles Within a Consortium

Cited by 4 publications

References 7 publications

Collecting law and medical titles for general academic collections: what use statistics can tell us

Collecting law and medical titles for general academic collections: what use statistics can tell us

Books in Print: indispensable or unnecessary for academic library collection development?

Use and Non-Use of Choice-Reviewed Titles in Undergraduate Libraries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About