ERIC ED373785: Book Theft and Mutilation of Library Materials: A Case Study.

18 Pages·1992·0.22 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 373 785 IR 055 141
Byunn, Kit Sam; Lau, Shuk-fong
AUTHOR
Book Theft and Mutilation of Library Materials: A
TITLE
Case Study.
PUB DATE
[92]
NOTE
18p.
Research/Technical (143)
PUB TYPE
Reports
Tests /Evaluation Instruments (160)
MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.
EDRS PRICE
*Books; *College Libraries; Crime Prevention; Higher
DESCRIPTORS
Education; *Library Materials; Questionnaires;
*Stealing; *Student Attitudes; Student Surveys;
Tables (Data)
*Book Losses; *Book Mutilation; Library Security;
IDENTIFIERS
University of Memphis TN
ABSTRACT
As the problems of book theft and mutilation of
library materials were growing, a survey was conducted by the
Periodicals and Reference Departments at the University of Memphis
Library (Tennessee) in the spring of 1994. An 11-item questionnaire
was distributed to 73 students. Students' attitudes toward the
problems, their causes, and means to prevent future occurrence were
examined. The findings and implications of the survey are discussed.
Three tables of the findings are presented, and the questionnaire and
students' comments are appended. (Contains 6 references.)
(Author/JLB)
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
**:.:,:.AA**AAAA..)............**:,AAA********************************************
U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF
EDUCATION
Of f bee of
Educalbonat tatmearcn
and unotovernent
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
INFORMATION
CENTER IERICI
O This document
hat been ,produced
as
rtscandod Iron, the Dyson
or orpanQshon
CNgatallr,g
Minor changes nave
peen made to trnprove
,wocluctton Qubltry
Points of vier Or
opmons stated In INS dOct,
OEmon! do not necessarily represent ofhc.a,
Ri million Or POI,CY
Case Study
Book Theft and Mutilation of Library Materials: A
Kit Sam Byunn
and
Shuk-fong Lau
Periodicals Librarian/Assistant Professor,
Kit Sam Bvunn,
Reference/Information
Periodicals Department and Shuk-fong Lau,
University of Memphis
Retrieval Librarian/Assistant Professor,
Library, Memphis, TN 38152
-PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS
MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
Kit Sam Byunn
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
2
ABSTRACT
the problems of book theft and mutilation of
library
As
materials are growing, a survey was conducted by the Periodicals
and Reference Departments at the University of Memphis Library in
the spring of 1994. An 11-item questionnaire was distributed to 73
students. Students' attitudes toward the problems, their causes,
examined.
and means to prevent future occurrence were examined were
The findings and implications of the survey are discussed. Three
tables of the findings are presented and two appendixes of the
questionnaire and students' comments are included.
2
3
LITERATURE OVERVIEW
The issues of book theft and mutilation of library materials
have been addressed sparingly in the library literature. In the
late 1970s,1 the main consideration for collection security was
whether to install electronic took detection systems. Even though
decided to install these detection
more and more libraries have
the problems of book theft and mutilation of library
systems,
materials remain. These detection systems may stop forgetful and
against
protection
offer
not
they
but
do
unskilled
users,
intentional damage and theft of library materials. During the last
serious;2 bringing
few years, the problems have been growing more
much more attention and concern from various libraries, including
academic, special, and public ones.
the general public,
Perusing the literature reveals that
scholars and even library staff are the
researchers,
students,
potential and actual groups who commit the crime.3 Items that are
rare
periodicals,
include
mutilated
stolen
or
often
most
Various motives for the crime have been
manuscripts, and books
socio-economic stresses, academic pressure
discussed, including
negative attitudes
among students, low-risk attitude among patrons,
and so on.
4
among patrons toward the libraries,
Previous studies have blamed the people who committed the
crime for their selfishness and dishonesty. The society was blamed
temrtation.
for being too materialistic, making it hard to resist
is not unusual to find that librarians were also
Moreover,
it
the
Often,
or complacent.
ignorant,
blamed for being innocent,
3
4
librarians%and patrons was considered a real victim.5
trust between
Hence, it is apparent from the literature that librarians, patrons
and the society all share the responsibility for the crime.
UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS LIBRARY
At the University of Memphis Library (UML), much concern has
been given to the problems of book theft and mutilation of library
materials. It is not infrequent to find that periodical articles
is missing; and pages
are ripped off, or that even the entire issue
of reference books and indexes are torn off. As a result, both the
Reference and the Periodicals Departments have to put some heavily
demanded books, current issues of magazines, and newspapers behind
their information desks. When patrons need them, they need to go to
the desks to sign a request slip for use.
PURPOSES OF THE STUDY
Since the problems of book theft and mutilation of library
materials impose tremendous hardships on the public services and
the administration, in the spring of 1994, a study of the problems
of the study are:
was carried out at the Library. The purposes
(1)
identify
to explore students' attitudes toward the problems; (2) to
library
the underlying reasons of book theft and mutilation of
and (3) to delineate potential solutions
materials among students;
to the problems.
METHODOLOGY
4
A questionnaire of 11 questions was designed to elucidate user
demographics, students' attitude toward the problems, the reasons
problems.6 The
for the problems, and suggestions to remedy the
questions were structured by using a combination of closed- and
open-ended responses as well as using a 5-point scale Likert-type
statements. Appendix I is a copy of the questionnaire and Al..pendix
II is a collection of students' comments toward the problems. The
participants were assured of anonymity in order to elicit candid
were
questionnaire
the
copies
Seventy-three
of
responses.
Reference
and
Periodicals
collected
the
and
in
distributed
Departments during the last two weeks in April, when the final
examinations were approaching and more students went to the library
Only
to study. They were asked if they would respond to the survey.
Responses were
those who agreed were given the questionnaire.
collected at about 15 minutes after the respondents were given the
questionnaire. The SAS statistical package was used to tabulate the
data collected from the survey. The following is a summary of the
findings.
FINDINGS
Demographics:
fi m
were
responses
(75.3%)
responses,
the
55
Of
73
undergraduate students: freshman (7; 9.6%), sophomore (15; 20.5+5 ,
junior (12; 16.4%), and senior (21; 28.8%). The other 18-
Thirty-tw-
(See Table 1)
responses were from graduate students.
(43.8%) of the respondents are male and 41 (56.2%) are female.
5
6
Materials:
and Theft of Library
Attitude Toward Mutilation
that missing
or
reported
respondents
(80.8%)
Fifty-nine
frustrated them:
had inconvenienced or
mutilated library materials
indicated often, and
occasionally, 15 (20.5%)
35 (47.9%) indicated
respondents
frequently. Only 14 (19.2%)
(12.3%) indicated very
9
bothered.
reported that they were not
materials,
mutilating or stealing library
If they saw someone
(19.2%) would ask
action: 14
(65.8%) of them would take some
48
personnel.
would report it to library
them to stop and 34 (46.6%)
them would do nothing.
However, 25 (34.21) of
tearing out an
had ever thought about
When asked if they
reported
book or magazine, 51 (69.9%)
article or stealing a library
(15.1%) reported
11
(13.7%) reported occasionally,
never, but 10
question, the
reported often. In a related
often, and only 1 (1.4%)
others
did realize that they and many
majority (66; 90.4%) of them
(9.6%) of them did not.
materials; only 7
had to use the same
article or stealing a
Regarding the ease of tearing out an
respondents
(72.6%)
being caught,
53
book or magazine without
somewhat
do so; 17 (23.3) indicated
indicated that it was easy to
difficult.
(4.1%) indicated very
difficult, and only 3
materials,
mutilating or stealing library
For those caught
penalty: 32 (43.8%)
97.3%) .:avored some form of
most of them (71;
and 3 (4.1%)
favored more severe penalty,
favored fine, 36 (49.3%)
indicated that
penalty. Only 2 (2.7%)
favored fine and more severe
penalty.
there should not be any
Materials:
and Theft of Library
Reasons for Mutilation
6
7
relevant reason for
Out of the 13 suggested reasons, the most
library
was
that
materials
library
and
theft
of
mutilating
other prevalent
materials could not be checked out (69.9%). The
penalties would be lenient if they
reasons were: the belief that
were
measures
security
library's
the
caught
were
(67.1 %);
users were not aware of replacement costs
inadequate
(61.7%);
did not believe
(57%). The lesser prevalent reasons included: users
library materials
that it was a crime or immoral to mutilate
it was conceived as much easier to take away library
(49.4%);
them; there were not enough
materials than to photocopy (42.5%)
wanted
copies of frequently used materials (40.3%) available; users
information (34.3%);
to prevent others from having access to the
photocopies (23.3%); the qualities
users did'not have time to make
color
of copies were not good enough for reproducing photographs,
the photocopy machines were not
on
(22.3%);
and
so
charts,
and users could not afford to make copies
(20.6%);
available
that the act of
(16.5%). The least relevant reason was the belief
mutilation was an expression of hostility toward the library and/or
(See Table 2)
the university (16.5%).
materials:
Means to prevent mutilation/theft of library
library
protecting
preventive measures
of
Regarding
the
respondents
materials from being mutilated or stolen, about 70% of
for mutilating
opined that posting signs of warning of punishment
Another 68.5%
library materials would be a very effective measure.
of the time and cost of
of respondents indicated that posting signs
of respondents
replacement would also be very effective. About 50%
7
8
materials on
rated the policy of keeping periodicals and reference
requiring periodicals and
reserve as effective. The policy of
reference materials not to be taken from certain limited areas was
conceived as effective by 47.9% of respondents. Only 38.4% of
photocopying
additional
installing
that
respondents
thought
See Table
machines in the library would be an effective measure.
(
3)
IMPLICATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS
theft and
As revealed from this study, the problems of book
mutilation of library materials at UM, cannot be taken lightly as
experience
their
of
report
did
respondents
about
of
80%
encountering such problems. Even though about 70% of respondents
it is
reported that they never thought about committing the crime,
startling to find that 72.6% of them thought that it was easy to do
SO.
Regarding the reasons for the crime, the most prevalent ones
reported were: the library materials can not be checked out; the
the inadequacy of library security
lenient policy of penalty;
It seems that
measures; and the unawareness of replacement costs.
and
books
reference
such
as
materials
non-circulatory
the
periodicals are the most easily targeted items to be mutilated or
Protection of library
stolen as they can not be checked out.
materials is in conflict with the convenience of access. However,
policy of
the problems are also attributed to the library's lenient
inadequacy of library security, and the inadequacy of
penalty,
8
9
What do these findings imply?
unawareness of replacement costs.
the purpose of
services point of
view,
From the public
put
to
is
non-circulatory
as
materials
library
classifying
location to ensure their
materials in great demand at a centralized
in theft or mutilation of
availability when needed. The increase
availability of these materials,
library materials means decreasing
the
among
and dissatisfaction
inconvenience
more
leading
to
of public services and defeating
patrons, thus lowering the quality
public relations between
its purpose. It also results in adverse
speaking, this also acts as
librarians and patrons. Intellectually
information which poses a threat
to
a limitation of access to
the
the administration,
knowledge pursuit and exchange. As for
More missing and
problem also poses great financial consequences.
expenses. The costs
damaged library materials means more monetary
additional expense for
of repair and replacement become a necessary
strains the already belt-tight
the library which, in turn, further
eventual
library materials. The
book funds for acquisition of new
of library services.
outcome is also a lower quality
CONCLUSION
situation? Even though 97.3% of
How could we remedy this
would a stricter policy of
respondents favor some form of penalty,
from this study, a public
penalty solve the problems? As suggested
the
publicizing the extent of the problems and
awareness campaign,
might be the best effective
financial consequences to the library,
Exhibiting damaged materials,
preventive measure to stop the crime.
9
o