A case study of lent-out use of a special library

Fussler, H. H. and Simon, J. L. Patterns in the use of books in large research libraries. Chicago. University of Chicago. 1969. p.3 (Quoted from Kent (Allen) and others. Use of library materials: The University of Pittsburgh study. New York. Marcel Dekker Inc. 1979. p. 31)

Harris, C. A comparison of issues and in library use of books. (ASLIB proceedings. 29; 1977; pp. 199-22)

Kent, Allen and others. Use of library materials: The University of Pittsburgh study. New York. Marcel Dekker Inc. 1979. p. 2

Kent, Allen and others. Use of library materials: The University of Pittsburgh study. New York. Marcel Dekker Inc. 1979. p. 10

Kent, Allen and others. Use of library materials: The University of Pittsburgh study. New York. Marcel Dekker Inc. 1979. p. 49

Line, Maurice and Sanderson, A. Obsolescence and changes in the use of literature with time. (Journal of Documentation. 30; 1974; p. 52-54)

Line, Maurice and Sanderson, A. Obsolescence and changes in the use of literature with time. (Journal of Documentation. 30; 1974; p. 70)

Martyn, John and Lancaster, Wilfred F. Investigative methods in library and information science: An introduction. 1981. Virginia. Information Resources Press; p. 88.

Shaw, Ralph R. Pilot study on the use of scientific literature by scientists. 1971. New Jersey. Scarecrow Reprint Corporation. 1971; p. 7.

Sridhar, M. S. A study of library visits and in house use of library documents by Indian Space Technologists. (Journal of Library and Information Science. 7; 1982; 152-153)

Sridhar, M. S. User participation in collection building in a special library: A case study. (IASLIC Bulletin. 28; 1983; 171)

Walford, A. J. Circulation, loaned and inter-library loan. (In Batten (WE) Ed. Handbook of special librarianship and information work. 1975. London. ASLIB. 1975. p. 285)

"For all items circulating externally during the period 1969—1975, the average was 5.024 transaction per item", as per Allen Kent et al., Idem. p. 29. Though the magnitude, methodology and environmental parameters differ and Kent’s study is very much disputed as "remarkably superficial and unidimensional", "simultaneously aggressive and evasive", "highly subjective and political" and "question the validity of the hypothesis, research methods, conclusions and recommendations" vide the Senate Library committee, University of Pittsburgh, The study of library use of pitt by professor Allen Kent et al. A Pittsburgh reply, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, July 1979, the same has been cited in this paper for comparison purpose.