Evidence Summary
Interlibrary Loan Rates for Academic Libraries
in the United States of America Have Increased Despite the Availability of
Electronic Databases, but Fulfilment Rates Have Decreased
A Review of:
Williams, J. A., &
Woolwine, D. E. (2011). Interlibrary loan in
the United States: An analysis of academic libraries in a digital age. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery
& Electronic Reserve, 21(4), 165-183. doi: 10.1080/1072303X.2011.602945
Reviewed by:
Kathryn Oxborrow
Team
Leader
Hutt City
Libraries
Lower
Hutt, New Zealand
Email: Kathryn.Oxborrow@huttcity.govt.nz
Received: 1
June 2011 Accepted: 5 Oct. 2011
2012 Oxborrow.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike
License 2.5 Canada (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by‐nc‐sa/2.5/ca/), which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work
is properly attributed, not used for commercial purposes, and, if transformed,
the resulting work is redistributed under the same or similar license to this
one.
Abstract
Objectives – To determine the number of interlibrary
loan (ILL) requests in academic libraries in the United States of America over
the period 1997-2008, and how various factors have influenced these rates.
These factors included electronic database subscriptions, size of print journal
and monograph collections, and the presence of link resolvers. Data were
collected from libraries as both lenders and borrowers. The study also looked
at whether the number of professional staff in an ILL department had changed
during the period studied, and whether ILL departments led by a professional
librarian correlated positively with rates of ILL.
Design – Online questionnaire.
Setting – Academic library members of the Online
Computer Library Center (OCLC) ILL scheme in the
United States of America.
Subjects – A total of 442 academic library members of
the OCLC ILL scheme.
Methods – An electronic questionnaire was sent to
1433 academic library member institutions of the OCLC ILL scheme. Data were
collected for libraries as both lending and borrowing institutions. Data were analyzed using a statistical software package, specifically
to calculate Spearman’s rank correlations between the variables and rates of
ILL.
Main Results – Responses to the electronic questionnaire
were received from 442 (31%) academic libraries. There was an overall increase
in the number of ILL requests in the period 1997-2008. The number of ILL
requests which were unfulfilled also increased during this period. There was a
positive correlation between rates of ILL and all of the variables
investigated, with the strongest correlations with size of print monograph
collections and size of print journal collections. The numbers of staff in ILL
departments remained relatively static during the period covered by the study,
although the majority of staff working in ILL was composed of
paraprofessionals. There was a weak positive correlation between numbers of ILL
requests and whether ILL departments were headed by a professional librarian.
Conclusions – Access to full text electronic databases
has not decreased the numbers of ILL requests in academic libraries in the United
States of America. In fact, ILL requests have increased, probably due to the
fact that students and staff of academic libraries now have access to a larger
number of citations through online databases and other information sources. The
authors suggest that the increase in unfulfilled ILL requests is also due to
this increased access. Libraries with large print collections are more likely
to receive ILL requests precisely because they have more material to lend out,
and may make more ILL requests due to the research output of their presumably
larger institutions. There may be a higher number of ILL requests fulfilled by
departments headed by a professional librarian because a librarian has more
knowledge of sources to fulfil requests.
Commentary
This study was
done as part of a previously conducted, larger scale study in the area of ILL
research, and the authors give a good summary of earlier literature. It aimed
to discover whether a series of factors correlated positively with numbers of
ILL requests conducted over a number of years in the United States of America. The data covers a wide range of scenarios:
separate datasets were recorded for ILL requests made and fulfilled, and for
libraries as borrowers and as lenders.
The
presentation of the data makes it difficult for the reader to interpret the
results. The authors use a coding system to represent ranges of numbers of ILL
requests. All of the figures and tables are presented in this way, so the
reader must continually refer back to the coding, and in some cases the code
numbers are divided into decimal points, meaning the reader must calculate for
themselves what the actual figures are. The coding is also misleading as the
numerical range covered by each code number varies widely. The scales used on
the graphical representations of the results also vary, which makes it very
difficult to compare among them.
The results of
this study do not give the reader the full story. Although a great number of
institutions were surveyed, every institution did not answer every question,
and there is no explanation of this in the text. Furthermore, information is
not given about the size and distribution of the institutions surveyed. This
makes some of the conclusions which the researchers draw somewhat shaky, as they
do not discuss how these factors may also have a bearing on the results. There
are other aspects which the researchers did not cover in their conclusions,
such as the fact that the presence of link resolvers may facilitate the ILL
application process, and that non-fulfilment in many cases may be due to
library users’ inability to find items in the collection.
This is an interesting
research area, and the authors suggest that further study could be undertaken
into the declining numbers of ILL requests being fulfilled. Further studies
could also look at the staffing question touched upon by the authors, such as a
smaller scale comparison of the success rates of professionally qualified staff
and paraprofessionals in the fulfilment of ILL requests. A study similar to
that carried out by Bernardini & Mangiaracina (2011), who investigated the types of items
that are being requested by ILL after the introduction of subscription bundles
in Italy, would also be an interesting addition to the literature. ILL is a
rapidly changing area of librarianship, particularly with continuing
technological advances such as e-books, so it is an area which requires
continual research. Implications for practice include the importance of
providing information literacy training to library users to ensure they can
access the available material.
References
Bernardini, E., & Mangiaracina, S. (2011). The relationship
between ILL/document supply and journal subscriptions. Interlending and Document Supply, 39(1), 9-25. doi: 10.1108/02641611111112101