College and Research Libraries


ORLANDO BEHLING and KERMIT CUDD 

A Library Looks at Itself 

In attempting to evaluate its service The Ohio State University li-
braries in M01J 1966 designed a questionnaire to determine: (1) the 
characteristics of library users; (2) the ways in which users avail them-
selves of the facilities; (3) the users opinions of the library and its 
services. The results indicated that: (1) 55 per cent were using the 
library only for study purposes; (2) this group was more dissatisfied 
than those seeking service or information; (3) history majors and faculty 
were the heaviest users followed by students in education, business, 
political science, and English; (4) the questionnaire is effective for 
measurement of library-campus relations. 

LIBRARIES EXIST for two fundamental 
reasons. As repositories of man's re-
corded knowledge they seek to build 
representative collections of significant 
materials and preserve them for future 
generations. The Folger, Huntington, 
and Newberry libraries are obvious ex-
amples of libraries where these roles of 
collection building and preservation are 
dominant. To be sure, libraries of this 
cype are in the minority. The majority 
of libraries have information dissemina-
tion as their predominant function. In 
this role the libraries' holdings are or-
ganized and controlled for maximum 
availability. For the majority of libraries, 
effectiveness is not determined entirely 
by size of the collection but rather by 
the success with which they are able to 
provide the user with the information 
he seeks. 

The library ful£lls this function best 
by pursuing a policy of constant sell-
evaluation in order to keep alert to the 
changing needs of its users. The usual 
methods of evaluating performance are 
by internal criteria. Criteria frequently 

Dr. Behling is Assistant Professor, and 
Mr. Cudd is a doctoral candidate, in the 
Department of Business Organization of 
Ohio State University. 

416/ 

considered include size and growth of 
the collection, circulation and reference 
statistics, new services added, and num-
ber of library users served. Appraisal 
may also be concerned with the speed at 
which books are procured, processed, 
and made available to the public. These 
criteria are satisfactory for comparing 
library with library and present with 
past performance, if the library is con-
sidered only as a repository. How suc-
cessful are they in determining whether 
the library is providing the information 
its public needs and wants? In this re-
spect, these traditional methods of ap-
praisal are perhaps weak. At best, ap-
praisal by internal criteria measures only 
indirectly a library's success as an infor-
mation disseminating unit. 

How then is a library to determine the 
degree of success with which it serves its 
public? The ultimate authority, the li-
brary user, is the most logical source 
of an answer. Libraries are the constant 
recipients of compliments, suggestions, 
and complaints. These unsolicited com-
ments have formed the basis for passive 
appraisals to which libraries respond 
haphazardly. There are, however, many 
dangers in attaching credence to such 
random observations. In the first place, 



a library has no way of knowing whether 
or not the comments received are repre-
sentative of all patrons. It may be that 
the library has heard from a small, but 
vocal, minority. Also to be considered 
is the propensity for people to verbal-
ize complaints more frequently than 
compliments. It is possible that some 
areas of the library could be over looked 
completely because no one happens to 
comment, while other areas could be so 

~ susceptible that they would receive con-
tinual and, perhaps, unwarranted at-
tention. Therefore, there is probability 
that this type of appraisal is not repre-
sentative, is negatively biased, and is 
haphazard in areas of coverage. It would 
seem more logical to seek users' opinions 
and measure their attitudes in an active 
and systematic manner. 

Ohio State University libraries has at-
tempted to take such an active approach 
to the measurement of user attitudes. 
With a system that includes a main li-
brary and twenty-two departmental li-
braries, The Ohio State University li-
braries have a book collection of over 
1,700,000 volumes, and serve a student 
body of 31,604 and 2,857 faculty. The 
effectiveness of its service to the campus 
could not be determined by the sporadic 
feedback that it received from students 
and faculty. It was decided, therefore, 
that it was necessary to develop a meth-
od of actively determining library users' 
opinions. The technique employed to 
secure meaningful data was an opinion 
survey. 

How THE STUDY WAS PERFoRMED 
The study performed by The Ohio 

. State University libraries was designed 
to evaluate main library performance 
from the point of view of its users. Spe-
cifically it was designed to gather infor-
mation about: ( 1) the nature of indi-
viduals who use the library; ( 2) the 
ways in which they make use of its fa-
cilities; ( 3) their opinions about the li-
brary and its services. 

A Library Looks at Itself I 417 

A printed questionnaire was designed 
to be handed out to users as they 
entered the library with a request that 
they complete and return it at the guard 
station before leaving the building. Such 
an approach, using a questionnaire con-
taining written instructions for its com-
pletion, permitted reaching a large pro-
portion of those using the library at a 
minimum cost. 

The questionnaire was designed for 
ease and economy of tabulation. Closed-
end questions, requiring only that the li-
brary user check one of a predetermined 
series of responses, were used for gath-
ering most of the information. Such a 
format has the advantage of permitting 
machine tabulation of the data which 
again minimizes manpower costs. This 
type of question also has the advantage 
of requiring a minimum amount of the 
respondent's time, which probably in-
creases the over-all return of usable 
questionnaires. An open-ended question 
which permits the respondent to write 
a full paragraph if he so wishes was used 
as the last item on the questionnaire. 
This was used to probe an area where 
there was considerable doubt as to the 
nature of the responses which might be 
expected. It was hoped that such a for-
mat would minimize chances of distort-
ing or concealing important aspects of 
the information requested. Provision was 
made, however, for numeric classification 
of the responses to this question so that 
machine tabulation techniques might be 
applied to them. 

The £rst group of questions was aimed 
at gathering information about the na-
ture of individuals using the library . 
These questions, all of which were 
closed-end in format, were designed to 
determine the respondent's classification 
(freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, 
graduate student, faculty member, or 
other); his major £eld of study; and the 
frequency with . which he made use of 
library facilities. Information as to time 
of day (morning, afternoon or evening) 



418 I College & Research Libraries • November 1967 

was also obtained through the use of 
color-coded questionnaires. The informa-
tion obtained from these questions was 
put to a dual use. First, it provided a 
basis for classifying opinion responses 
so that certain ideas about which groups 
would show the most favorable reactions 
to library services could be tested. Sec-
ond, it was valuable in itself, since it pro-
vided the first organized information 
about library users. 

The second set of questions concerned 
the use made of library facilities by the 
respondents. These questions, which 
were also closed-end in format, deter-
mined whether the respondent visited 
the library in search of some specific 
information or service or whether he 
came for general study purposes. They 
also indicated, for those individuals seek-
ing information or service, where they 
sought and where they found the infor-
mation or service. 

The final group of questions dealt with 
the opinions of the respondents about 
the library and its services. Two closed-
end questions permitted respondents 
who were seeking information or service 
to rate on a five-point scale ranging from 
very satisfactory to very unsatisfactory 
the ease of location of the information or 
services sought and the helpfulness and 
courtesy of staff members encountered. 
A third question, identical in format to 
the two preceding ones, permitted all 
respondents, regardless of whether they 
came to study or in search of informa-
tion or services, to rate the over-all .. satis-
factoriness" of their visit to the library. 
An additional question, for those indi-
viduals seeking service or information, 
asked for the amount of time spent wait-
ing. The final question, which was open-
ended in format, permitted respondents 
to express in their own words what made 
their visit satisfactory or unsatisfactory. 

The questionnaires were passed out to 
every fifth indjvidual entering the library 
on a Thursday near the middle of Spring 
quarter 1966. This rate was determined 

by the ability of a single individual to 
hand out and explain briefly the purpose 
of the questionnaire. No attempt was 
made to restrict the number of question-
naires to that which would provide only 
an .. adequate sample size." Pre-tests had I" 
revealed marked variations in the rate of 
return and thus, since there were mini-
mal variations in the cost involved, it 
was considered best to obtain the maxi-
mum number of responses. No attempt 
was made to stratify the sample, since 
no data existed on which to base the 
classifications. 

A total of 1,230 questionnaires were • 
handed out, of which 687 or 55 per cent 
were returned in usable form. This was 
considered an acceptable response, 
though somewhat lower than that ob-
tained in the pre-tests of the question-
naire. The data obtained was tabulated 
on an IBM 1620 computer. The program 
permitted the classification of data along 
the different dimensions discussed iri re-
gard to the .. nature of users" questions . 
It provided frequency distributions as 
well as means and other parameters. 

Preliminary examination of the results 
revealed two facts which led to a change 
in the original plans for analysis. First, 
high correlatio11s were found among the 
answers to the three questions dealing 
with ease of obtaining service, courtesy 
and helpfulness of staff, and over-all sat-
isfactoriness of the visit to the library. 
This led to the conclusion that the data 
from the question on ease of service was 
redundant, and it was therefore not in-
cluded in the final report. It was. also 
found that, in contrast to pre-test respond-
ents, a relatively small percentage of 
individuals, filled in the figures on wait-
ing time. Therefore these figures were 
also omitted from the final report. 

The analysis of the data and the writ-
ing of the final report were performed 
in the light of several cautions. First it 
was recognized that the sample taken 
was, in all probability, somewhat biased. 
Practical considerations made it impos-



sible to sample from all days of the week 
and from all weeks in the quarter. Fur-
ther, follow-up oral questioning of the 
non-respondents in one of the pre-tests 
revealed that there was a higher propor-
tion of faculty members among the non-
respondents than among the respondents 
and that the non-respondents · were 
slightly less likely to have a favorable 
over-all opinion of the library than were 
the respondents. Taken together, these 
things led to a decision to make no sta-
tistical test of the differences found. It 
was felt that the presentation of such 
tests would lend a spurious sense of cer-
tainty to the data. The analysis presented 
in the final report was, therefore, lim-
ited to the presentation of the frequency 
distributions and associated means. 

WHO uSES THE LIBRARY? 

In interpreting the information pre-
sented in this and in following sections, 
the reader should keep one important 
point in mind. These data concern one 
library on one university campus. Though 
there is some evidence available indicat-
ing that similar patterns may occur in 
other libraries, 1 there can be no guaran-
tee that the results obtained in the Ohio 
State University Study can be general-
ized to all libraries on all campuses. 

When library users were grouped ac-
cording to university classification, a pro-
gressive decline in the absolute number 
of respondents occurred as one moved 
up the scale from freshman through soph-
omore, junior, senior, and graduate stu-
dent to faculty member. For the most 
part, this can be seen as a reflection of 
the decreasing total numbers of individ-
uals in the classifications, since the ratio 
of the number of respondents to the 
number of individuals in a class re-

1 Results similar in several respects to those obtained 
in this study were found at the University of Dela-
ware-see Gorham Lane, " Assessing the Undergradu-
ates' Use of the University Library," CRL, XXVII 
(July 1966) , p. 277-81; and at Western Michigan 
University (personal correspondence to author from 
Katharine M . Stokes, director of libraries, Western 
Michigan University). 

A Library Looks at Itself I 419 

mained relatively constant. To a certain 
extent, however, it also represented a 
change in the pattern of use of library 
facilities. While no consistent pattern 
was found among the variations in num-
bers of respondents using the library as 
a source of information, materials, or 
services, a progressive decrease in the 
number of individuals using it for study 
purposes was uncovered. 

The study indicated that there was a 
core, particularly among those respond-
ents using the library for study pur-
poses, of heavy users who made demands 
on library space and facilities far out of 
proportion to their numbers. Two-thirds 
of those completing questionnaires had 
previously visited the library four or 
more times during the preceding two · 
weeks. Only 6 per cent of the respond-
ents indicated, in contrast, that this was 
their only visit to the library during the 
two-week period. 

It is particularly interesting to note 
that though the proportion of those using 
the library for study purposes was fairly 
consistent in the infrequent visitor cat-
egories, a marked shift occurred when 
the group which had made four or more 
visits was considered. In this group a 
far larger proportion of the users came 
for study purposes. 

The patterns of utilization of library 
facilities by respondents enrolled or em-
ployed in various departments of the 
university are some of the most difficult 
to explain. Though much of the varia-
tion · can be attributed to differences in 
relative enrollment, this does not ac-
count for all of them. Certain large de-
partments were represented by a rela-
tively small number of respondents, while 
some small departments appeared in 
numbers out of proportion to their en-
rollments. Attempts were made to ex-
plain these differences in terms of the 
availability of departmental libraries, 
but, though this is doubtless a factor in 
the differences, it could not account for 
all of them. Unless these are purely 



420 I College & Research Libraries • November 1967 

chance variations, as is always possible, 
further . research will be required to ex-
plain them. 

How Do THEY UsE LIBRARY FACILITIEs? 

One of the more surprising results of 
the study concerned the purposes of the 
visits made by respondents. Though 
there were marked variations from class 
to class and during different portions of 
the day, almost 55 per cent of those com-
pleting questionnaires were in the library 
for general study purposes, rather than 
in search of specific information, mate-
rials, or services. This represents a rad-
ical departure from the information dis-
seminating role of the university library 
and indicates a need for a reappraisal of 
the planning of libraries and of study 
facilities. The provision of study accom-
modations in other facilities, such as dor-
mitories and student unions, could re-
lieve much pressure for space at a cost 
far below that of constructing and oper-
ating additional library facilities. 

Heaviest utilization of library facili-
ties came during the afternoon, followed 
by morning and evening, respectively. 
Average hourly use remained relatively 
constant during the day and dropped off 
during the evening. Marked shifts oc-
curred among these periods in the pat-
tern of utilization of library facilities. 
During the afternoon hours there was a 
disproportionately large increase in the 
demand for information, materials, and 
services. 

Variations in the patterns of utiliza-
tion by individuals enrolled in the vari-
ous departments of the university were 
also discovered. The results indicated 
that the history department majors and 
faculty were the heaviest users of the 
main library. The next four departments 
in order of usage were education, busi-
ness organization, political science, and 
English. Again, however, no ready ex-
planation was available for these varia-
tions and thus the understanding of this 

aspect of the results will have to await 
further research. 

WHAT Do THEY TmNK OF THE LIBRARY? 

The interpretation of opinion survey 
data almost always presents problems. 
Rarely do absolute guidelines exist 
against which the obtained results may 
be judged in terms of "goodness" or 
"badness." Rather, the data have mean-
ing only relative to those obtained for 
other groups or under other conditions. 
The Ohio State University Study was no 
exception to this rule and thus the dis-
cussion of this data was limited to com-
parisons of various aspects of the library 
operation and of different user groups. 
Nonetheless, it was heartening to the 
library staff, who were used to the com-
plaint-oriented passive methods of eval-
uating library-user attitudes, to see the 
favorable over-all evaluation of the li-
brary and its services. 

The first opinion question dealt with 
the respondents' evaluation of the satis-
factoriness of their visit to the library. 
Two basic patterns were revealed in re-
gard to this question. First of all, those 
visiting the library for study purposes 
felt that their visit, on the average, was 
slightly less satisfactory than did those 
who came in search of specific informa-
tion, material, or service. It is again pos-
sible that the provision of auxiliary study 
facilities in dormitories and student 
unions for undergraduates would dimin-
ish this dissatisfaction with library facil-
ities. Second, though undergraduate stu-
dents in all four classifications rated the 
satisfactoriness of their visits at about 
the same average value, graduate stu-
dents and faculty members, especially 
those seeking information, materials, or 
services, were substantially more favor-
able in their appraisals. 

When respondents were classified ac-
cording to frequency of previous visits, 
results were somewhat less clear. While 
a more favorable average response was 



obtained from the frequent users who 
were seeking specific items, no readily 
explicable trend was apparent among 
those who were using the library for 
study purposes. A number of interpreta-
tions of the data are possible. The most 
logical one is that those who visit the 
library frequently are more familiar with 
its idiosyncracies and thus more likely 
to complete their searches of library re-
sources successfully. An alternate expla-
nation of the results cannot be ignored, 
however. It may be that the exact oppo-
site is true. It is possible that persons 
who, for one unknown reason or an-
other, tend to view the library and its 
services favorably also tend to use the li-
brary more frequently than do those who 
view it in an unfavorable light. 

Data were also analyzed for the ques-
tion dealing with the library users' eval-
uation of the helpfulness and courtesy 
of the library staff. Responses to this 
question were obtained only from those 
individuals seeking information, mate-
rials, or services, since it was felt that 
those individuals coming to the library 
only for study purposes would rarely 
have meaningful contact with the library 
staff. Again the over-all favorableness of 
the responses was heartening. 

When the respondents were grouped 
by university classification, no consistent 
pattern was revealed, though it did ap-
pear that faculty members considered 
the service rendered somewhat more sat-
isfactory than did students. Whether this 
represents variation in the behavior of 
the library staff members when in con-
tact with faculty members, or a differ-
ence in the perception by the faculty 
respondents, cannot be determined from 
the results of this study. No consistent 
patterns were found where responses to 
this question were classified according 
to frequency of previous visits. 

The open-ended question dealing with 
sources of the respondents' satisfaction or 
dissatisfaction generated a surprising 

A Library Looks at Itself I 421 

number of highly detailed answers. As 
might be expected, these ranged from 
the complimentary to the critical and 
from the constructive to the sarcastic. It 
was generally possible to associate these 
comments with .particular phases of the 
library's operations, which permitted the 
discovery of one of the most interesting 
results. A strikingly consistent set of 
differences was found between those 
comments associated with study facilities 
and those concerning the information, 
material, or service processing facilities 
of the library. While the comments asso-
ciated with the former dealt almost ex-
clusively with the physical environment 
(temperature regulation, noise, comfort, 
etc.) , those associated with the latter 
dealt almost exclusively with the qual-
ity and courtesy of the personnel staff-
ing the facilities. 

THE lMPAcr OF THE STUDY 

· At this writing it is difficult to know 
the full, long-range impact of the study, 
since consideration of many of its con-
clusions is still in progress. It is already 
apparent, however, that a number of 
important benefits have accrued to The 
Ohio State University libraries as a re-
sult of the study. 

First of all, though the questionnaire 
will doubtless be refined and improved 
in any future applications, it has been 
shown to be an effective tool for the 
continuing measurement of library-cam-
pus relations. Library users are willing 
and able to provide information about 
their perceptions of the library and its 
services. It is possible to design a ques-
tionnaire in such a w ay that the infor-
mation it provides is specific and con-
sistent enough to permit the identifica-
tion of particular trouble spots and eval-
uation of the effectiveness of programs 
designed to minimize difficulties . 

Second, the study provided a body of 
information about present sources of 
user satisfaction and dissatisfaction with 



422 I College & Research Libraries • November 1967 

library service on which such programs 
might be based. Faculty and students 
using different areas of the library re-
sponded differently to the questions. 
Variations were found in the ability of 
groups with different purposes to obtain 
satisfactory library service. In some re-
spects the information uncovered merely 
served to confirm suspicions based on 
passive methods of evaluation, but in 
other cases it gave a picture of the li-
brary and its services different from that 
which would be drawn from the usual 
run of "gripes" and compliments aimed 
at the library staff. 

Third, the study provided the library 
with data which should be of value in 
both the long and short-range planning 
and administration of library and related 
facilities. This information, particularly 
that dealing with the use of the library 
as a general study hall, if confirmed in 

future studies, could provide the basis 
for substantial rethinking of the role of 
the library and that of auxiliary study 
facilities throughout the university com-
munity. The information on variations 
in usage of library facilities during the 
day may prove to be an important aid 
in staffing the various areas and services 
of the library. 

In a broader sense, the data on the 
nature of library users may have the 
most far-reaching impact. Certain indi-
viduals use the library heavily. Others 
apparently use it hardly at all. Deter-
mination of the reasons for these differ-
ences may prove to be the key to under-
standing where the library is succeeding 
and where it is failing in its job of dis-
seminating information, and thus provide 
the basis for making it an even more 
effective force in the total educational 
program of the university. • •