Poster Session Presented at the 2005 ALA National Conference
I-9
Are They Ready to Make the Switch?
Results of the WSU Libraries Survey on Electronic and Print Collections
Cathy Moore-Jansen (cathy.moore-jansen@wichita.edu) Wichita State University Libraries, Wichita, KS
Judith Wolfe (judith.wolfe@unlnotes.unl.edu), Unoversity of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE
A recent survey of Wichita State University faculty, staff, and students by the WSU Libraries shows the university community
far from consensus on the issue of print versus electronic journals and other resources. The survey, made available to the
entire campus via the Web, provides an in-depth look at the importance of materials in different formats, how print and
electronic journals are located and used, the interest in alternative delivery methods, and the level of support for canceling
subscriptions or buying fewer books to maintain or add electronic access. The responses from 381 users have been
analyzed using statistical software and point to striking differences and similarities in format preferences and use – not just
among students and faculty, but among different disciplines. Survey data was used by departmental and library faculty
during the last serials cancellation project and by the library in deciding to add an unmediated document delivery service for
faculty and staff. A Web page of survey results is under development. The survey will be conducted on a biannually to track
changes in preference and usage patterns and to facilitate more informed decisions about print and electronic journal
subscriptions. The survey instrument and results, research methodology, and extensive bibliography are presented.
Introduction
In May 2003, the Department of Collection Development of WSU Libraries conducted a survey of WSU faculty, staff, and
students on the relative importance of print and electronic access to journals and other resources as well as to gather
information on how these user groups access and use electronic resources. The results of that survey are presented at
http://library.wichita.edu/colldev/onlinesurvey2003/index.htm and were used to help guide the assessment of print and
electronic needs and the acquisition of information resources for the WSU community.
Web Site
http://library.wichita.edu/colldev/onlinesurvey2003
Methodology
The Department of Collection Development conducted a Survey on Electronic and Print Collections in
March 2003. Two similar online survey instruments were created in FrontPage: 1) Faculty, Staff, and
Graduate Assistant survey and 2) Student survey. Links to both survey forms were posted on the WSU
Libraries' main home page. A PDF and an HTML version of each form were available to users. Signs were
placed at all workstations in the library and emails were sent to all faculty and staff encouraging
participation. When respondents submitted the online survey forms, the responses were automatically
posted to a text-file in FrontPage and to an email message to the departmental Administrative Specialist.
The text file was converted to an Excel spreadsheet and the data sorted and distributed to subject
librarians for use during the 2003 journals cancellation project. In the fall of 2004, the survey data was
uploaded into SPSS 12.0 for Windows for more in-depth analysis. The resultant tables and figures were
copied into FrontPage and a Web page created for the survey results.
•Online survey conducted by Dept. of Collection Development in March 2003
•Survey instruments posted to Library’s Web site
•Responses automatically posted to text-file in FrontPage
•Survey data uploaded into SPSS 12.0 for Windows for analysis of frequencies and crosstabulations
•Survey results posted to Web site
•Follow-up online survey to be conducted in Fall 2005
http://library.wichita.edu/colldev/onlinesurvey2003/combinedsurvey.htm
General Conclusions
Are WSU faculty, staff, and students ready to make the switch from print to electronic journals and books?
The results of the survey indicate strong support for both print and online journals and print books, less for
electronic books, among all user groups. Survey results varied depending on the type of material under
consideration as well as the academic status and/or subject major or specialty of the respondents. Users
in some disciplines were more ready than others to make the switch from print to electronic. There were
also relatively high numbers of “undecided” responses to several questions, e.g. support for reducing
book budgets to support electronic access. These differences indicate that any “switching” to electronic
format should be “localized” according to discipline and take into account the varying needs of different
constituents. It is clear that the WSU community is not ready for a blanket “switch” to electronic. Future
surveys may point to a different conclusion, as there is increasing availability of electronic books and
journals and the use of electronic materials by faculty, staff, and students.
•At the time of the survey, the WSU community was not ready for a blanket “switch’ to electronic
access. Support for print – both journals and books -- was strong among all user groups although
users in some disciplines were more ready than others to make the switch. Any “switching” to
electronic format should be “localized” according to discipline and user group.
•The relatively high number of “undecided” responses to several questions indicates that many
users were unwilling to commit one way or the other. An effort should be made in future surveys to
solicit input that might shed light on “undecided” responses.
•A follow-up survey is recommended to track any changes in preferences regarding electronic and
print resources among user groups. A larger sample will be needed – especially students -- to
better assess the significance of the results.
Recommendations
It is the recommendation of the team to conduct a semiannual survey to solicit library client input on the
relative importance of print and electronic access to journals and other resources as well as to gather
information on how these user groups access and use electronic resources. The results of the survey
could then be used to help guide the future assessment of print and electronic needs and ultimately the
acquisition of information resources for the WSU community.
•Raw data from the survey was distributed to academic departments during the most recent serials
cancellation project.
•Survey data has been used to help support decisions by some departments to switch journal
packages and individual titles from print to online only and/or to reduce book budgets to cover print
subscriptions.
•With support from survey results, the WSU Libraries recently implemented Infotrieve, an
unmediated document delivery service, for faculty.
•Results from this and future surveys will help assess the ongoing relevance and need for print and
electronic collections and provide valuable information on how users locate and use those
collections.
Importance of Print & Electronic Journals
Overall, the importance of print journals was rated nearly as
high as that of e-journals. Responses varied by academic
status and subject division, e.g. graduate students were the
strongest supporters of e-journals; support for print journals
was much stronger among Humanities faculty than among
Engineering faculty.
Importance of Print & Electronic Books
Respondents clearly rated print books as more important than ebooks. Responses varied by academic status and subject division, e.g.
undergraduates were the strongest supporters of both print and
electronic books; among faculty, the highest ratings for print books
were in the Fine Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences.
Canceling Print to Support Electronic Access
Just over 50% of all respondents were in favor of canceling print to maintain or add electronic access. Responses varied
by academic status and subject division, e.g. staff were more supportive and undergraduates less supportive of canceling
print; Engineering faculty were nearly unanimous in support for canceling print while the highest %s of “undecided”
responses were among Business, Fine Arts and Humanities faculty.
Reducing Book Budget to Fund Journals
Overall, there was less support for reducing book budgets to fund journals than there was for canceling print journals to fund
electronic access. “Yes” and “no” responses were almost evenly split with a relatively high number of “undecided”
respondents. Responses varied by academic status and subject division, e.g. most undergraduates as well as Fine Arts and
Humanities faculty did not support reducing book budgets; faculty in Engineering and the Social Sciences were more likely
to be “undecided” than other faculty.
Choosing Print or Online Only
Nearly three-quarters of all respondents would select “online only” access to journals if they had to choose due to
limited funding. Responses varied less by academic status and more by subject division, e.g. 100% of
Engineering faculty would opt for online while the majority of faculty in only two areas – Fine Arts and
Humanities – would opt for print rather than online only.
Using E-Journals
Citations in online databases and cited references were the most frequent methods for locating articles in
print journals. Responses varied by academic status and subject division, e.g. faculty were more frequent
users of cited references than students and staff who both preferred online databases; faculty were also
more likely to use personal subscriptions (esp. in Business and Health Professions) or browse current
periodical issues (esp. in the Humanities.)
Interest in Desktop Delivery
Just over half of the respondents indicated they used e-journals to search for specific articles. Fewer respondents searched by
specific subjects/authors, scanned TOCs or latest issues, and very few read preprints or used alert services. Responses varied
by academic status and subject division, e.g. graduate students were more likely to search for specific articles; all students
were more likely to search by specific subjects or authors than faculty and staff; a higher % of Engineering faculty scanned
latest issues and TOCs than other faculty.
Locating Articles in Print Journals
A high percentage of all respondents were interested in desktop delivery of ILL materials in PDF format.
Responses varied by academic status and subject division, e.g. undergraduates and staff were more likely to
be “undecided”; a preference for desktop delivery was particularly strong among faculty in Engineering,
Sciences, and Social Sciences.
Survey Demographics I
http://library.wichita.edu/colldev/onlinesurvey2003/demographics.htm




TABLE 1. University Faculty, Student, and Staff
Demographics, 2003
TABLE 2. General Academic Status of Survey
Respondents
TABLE 3. Specific Academic Status of Survey
Respondents
TABLE 4. Survey Respondents by Subject Division
Definitions
Academic Status Other Defined
Academic Status, Other may be defined as individuals associated with Wichita State University, who are
not faculty, student, or staff. There are six respondents with the status other. The respondents’
department affiliation includes: Biological Sciences, Ceramics, Chemistry, Field Major, General Education,
and Women’s Studies.
Question 6 Finding Articles Other Defined
28 respondents selected other as a method of finding articles. The responses are divided into eight
groups, which may be defined as: searching an aggregator/database (10), recommendations (7), TOC (4),
bibliographies (2), index (2), WWW (1), other libraries (1), and not used (1).
Question 10 Access Method Other Defined
Of the 13 responses downloading or printing of pdfs or article was the number one response. Responses
also included: cited references, keywords, reading the article, and locating specific topic.
Selected Bibliography
















Alan, R. & Butkovich, N. (2003). Libraries in transition: Impact of print and electronic journal access. Against the Grain, 15
(2), 32, 34.
Bancroft, A., Croft, V., Speth, R., & Phillips, D. (1998). A forward-looking library use survey: WSU Libraries in the 21st
century. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 24 (3), 216-223.
Belefant-Miller, H. & King, D. W. (2001). How, what, and why science faculty read. Science and Technology Libraries, 19 (2),
91-112.
Berger, K. & Hines, R. (1994). What does the user really want? The Library User Survey Project at Duke University. Journal of
Academic Librarianship, 20 (5-6), 306-309.
Black, S. (2005). Impact of full text on print journal use at a liberal arts college. Library Resources & Technical Services, 49
(1), 19-26.
Bombeld, M., Brown, E. & Shay, L. (2004). Developing and administering a journal use and preference survey: Lessons
learned. Serials Review, 30 (3), 206-213.
Boyce, P., King, D. Montgomery,C., & Tenopir, C. (2003) Library economic metrics: Examples of the comparison of electronic
and print. Journal Collections and Collection Services, 51 (3), 376-400.
Brown, C. M. (1999). Information seeking behavior of scientists in the electronic information age: Astronomers, chemists,
mathematicians, and physicists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50 (10), 929-943.
Chrzastowski, T. E. (2004). Rejoinder: Transition from print to electronic serials. (Letters to the editor). Journal of the
American Society for Information science and Technology, 55 (4), 370-371.
Chrzastowski, T. E. (2003). Making the transition from print to electronic serial collections: A new model for academic
chemistry libraries? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 54 (12), 1141-1148.
Cochenour, D. & Moothart, T. (2003) E-journal acceptance at Colorado State University: A case study. Serials Review, 29 (1),
16-25.
Davis, P. M. (2004). Transfer from print to electronic serials. (Letters to the editor). Journal of the American Society for
Information science and Technology, 55 (4), 369-370.
Dess, H. M. (1997). Gauging faculty utilization of science Journals: A defensive strategy for a lean budget era. Chemical
Librarianship: Challenges and Opportunities, 16 3/4), 171-190.
Dievko, J. & Gottlieb, L. (2002). Print sources in an electronic age: A vital part of the research process for undergraduate
students, Journal of Academic Librarianship, 28 (6): 381-392.
Fialkoff, F. (2003). Too soon to ditch print. (Inside track). Library Journal, 28 (9), 71.
Gardner, S. & Markley, S. B. (2003). Conducting serials surveys: Common mistakes and recommended approaches. The
Serials Librarian, 44 (34), 163-170.
Selected Bibliography Continued
















Gardner S. (2001). The impact of electronic journals on library staff at ARL member institutions: A survey and a critique of the
survey methodology. Serials Review, 27 (3/4). 17-32.
Johnson, Q. (2004). User preferences in formats of print and electronic journals. Collection Building, 23 (2), 73-77.
Maughan, P. (1999). Library resources and services: A cross-disciplinary survey of faculty and graduate student use and
satisfaction. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 25 (5), 354-366.
Orsdel, L. V. & Born, K. (2002). Doing the digital flip (42nd Annual Report, Periodical Price Survey). Library Journal 127 (7):
51-56.
Palmer, J. & Sandler, M. (2003).What do faulty want? Library Journal, 128 (1): 26-28.
Quigley, J. Peck, D. Rutter, S. & Williams, E. (2002). Making choices: Factors in the selection of information resources among
science faculty at the University of Michigan Results of a Survey Conducted July-September, 2000. Issues in Science and
Technology Librarianship, Spring. [On-line serial). Available: http://www.istl.org/02-spring/refereed.html.
Rowse, M. (2003). Hybrid environment: Electronic-only versus print retention. Against the Grain, 15 (2), 24, 26, 28.
Rupp-Serrano, K., Robbins, S., and Cain, D. (2002). Canceling print serials in favor of electronic: Criteria for decision making.
Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services, 26 (4), 369-378.
Siebenberg, T., Galbraith, B., & Brady, E. (2004). Print versus electronic journal use in three sci/tech disciplines. College and
Research Libraries, 65 (5): 427-438.
Sprague, N., & Chambers, M. B. (2000). Full-text databases and the journal cancellation process: A case study. Serials
Review, 26 (3), 19-31.
Talja, S. & Hanni, M. (2003). Reasons for the use and non-use of electronic journals and databases: A domain analytic study
in four scholarly disciplines. Journal of Documentation, 59 (6): 673-691.
Tenopir, C. (2003). Use and users of electronic library resources: An overview and analysis of recent research studies.
Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources.
Tenopir, C. & King, D. W. (2002). Reading behaviour and electronic journals. Learned Publishing, 15(4), 259-265.
Vaughan, K.T.L. (2003). Changing use patterns of print journals in the digital age: Impacts of electronic equivalents on print
chemistry journal use. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54 (12): 1149-1152
Weingart, S. J., & Anderson, J. A. (2000). When questions are answers: Using a survey to achieve faculty awareness of the
library’s electronic resources. College and Research Libraries, 61 (2), 127-134.
Compiled by Cathy Moore-Jansen, Wichita State University and Judith Wolfe, University of Nebraska—Lincoln, June 2005