College and Research Libraries ROBERT F. CLARKE and HAYDEE GARCIA CLARKE Repeat Photocopying of Journal Articles When viewed in the perspective of total copying, repeated photoco pying of articles from fournals published in the United States does not appear to be of sufficient volume to warrant special attention from library ad- ministration. A study of 8,023 photocopies produced by photoduplica- tion services of three different research libraries reveals that only 178 (2.2 per cent) represented two or more repeat copies. No article was copied more .than four times during the period surveyed. LIBRARY -OPERA TED photoduplication services are an important means of dis- seminating information. Some libraries have used this means for many years to save their patrons from copying informa- tion by hand. Also, libraries have en- abled distant patrons and other libraries to use their collections by providing photocopies through mail service. These photoduplication services follow the practice of filling individual requests for single copies as and when requested. Libraries place restrictions on the types of material which can be photocopied. Requests may remain unfilled for any one or more of the following reasons: journal issues are too tightly bound for photocopying, not yet received, on loan, not in the collection, in a deteriorated condition, at the bindery, missing, tem- porarily missing, not identified, in proc- essing; or the requester fails to use prop- er request form, wants multiple copies, gives an incomplete citation, fails to in- clude return address; or because of-copy- right restrictions, length of article, etc. Dr. Clarke is Deputy Chief, Technical Services Division, National Library of M ed- icine. Mrs. Clarke is former Chief Medical Librarian, Hospital del Nino, Lima, Peru. In operating a photoduplication ser- vice, the question of whether the same material is requested and photocopied more than once inevitably arises. The present paper reports on a survey of re- peat photocopying of articles from jour- nal titles published in the United States, as performed at three research libraries in recent years. METHOD The survey was conducted by examin- ing records of three major photoduplica- tion services located in large research libraries in the United States. The di- rector of one of these requested anonym- ity for his library, thus all three must re- main anonymous. Library A is a large re- search library located in a metropolis on the east coast. Library B is a research li- brary famous for its holdings in science and technology. Library C serves a great midwestern university. All three photo- duplication services receive requests from around the world. All records for two peak months of photocopy activity, each one in different years, were examined at Library A. At Library B, the sample consisted of all requests filled in one year for randomly selected patrons and covered approxi- I 389 390 1 College & Research Libraries • September, 1966 mately 11 per cent of the year's total. A complete year of records was examined at Ljbrary C. These three types of sam- ples were combined to give a rounded approach for the examination. FINDINGS A total of 8,023 photocopies of articles was produced from the 1,318 different journal titles published in the United States. This represents a mean of 6.1 photocopies produced per journal title. The 8,023 photocopies actually repre- sented 7,845 different articles copied, be- cause 178 photocopies were repeats of articles which had already been copied once during the survey. This represents a mean of 5.9 articles copied per journal title. Only by noting the overlap in jour- nal titles copied in common by the three libraries were the two means this high, for if overlap were not taken into ac- count, the number of journal titles would be higher. This would then reduce the means. Repeat copies of the same articles amounted to 2.2 per cent of the total number ( 178 repeat copies from 8,023 photocopies produced). Clearly, repeat photocopying of the same articles from journal titles published in the United States does occur, and it occurs within the time periods of the samples ex- amined. The 2.2 per cent repeat copying is not an impressive amount, and it is less so when one considers that it re- quired totaling the copying from samples taken at the three libraries to achieve it. Further, the above means of 5.9 and 6.1 approximate each other, so that the mean number of articles photocopied per jour- nal title approaches the mean number of photocopies produced per journal title, all for journal titles published in the United States. Note that repeat copying would be greater than reported here, since patrons at times do request more than one copy of the same article at the same time, but the photoduplication services in each in- stance furnished only one copy, auto- matically cancelling requests for extra copies. From the 165 different articles copied repeatedly, 154 ( 93.3 per cent) were copied twice, nine were copied three times ( 5.4 per cent), and two were copied four times ( 1.3 per cent). Four was the highest frequency of repeat copies found, even combining the copy- ing from the three libraries. Thos~ arti- cles copied repeatedly appeared 1n 130 different journal titles from among the 1,318 ( 9.9 per cent) journal titles photo- copied. Only eleven journal titles (see Table 1) had articles copied more than two times; this represents 0.8 per cent of the 1,318 journal titles. Note that forty- four of the 178 ( 24.7 per cent) repeat photocopies (not articles) wer~ p.ro- duced by a different photoduphcatwn service than that which produced the "first" photocopy. In other words, if the other photoduplication service had not made the copy, there would have been no repeat copy of that article in this sur- vey. There is a core list of articles in a core list of journal titles published in the United States which receive repeated photocopying. The size of this list of TABLE 1. TITLE OF JOURNALS PUBLISHED IN THE U.S. HAVING ARTICLES PHoTocoPIED MoRE THAN TwiCE DURING THE PERIOD SURVEYED Journal0 Chern. Eng. Science Elect. Merchandising . Electronics Design Glass Ind. . J. Arner. Oil Chern. Soc. J. Applied Mechanics . J. Audio Eng. Soc. J. Meteorology Official Digest Fed. Paint & Varnish Radio Electronics . Senior Scholastic . No. Times Article Copied 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 o Combined samples from three libraries. Repeat Photocopying of Journal Articles 1 391 articles and journal titles decreases with an increase in repeated photocopying. These articles are copied at more than one photocopy service. Since 134 ( 75.3 per cent) of the 178 repeat copies were produced in the same library that made the first copy during this survey, the same photoduplication service tends to recopy the same article within the same time period more than another photoduplication service tends to copy that same article during its time period examined. Note that the holdings of the different libraries and their pol- icies and practices can influence repe- tition; for example, having material at the bindery, with the associated practices and schedules. All libraries do not hold the same journals in common, nor do all libraries offer photoduplication services, nor are all photoduplication services major ones, like those examined. All these factors tend to reduce the proba- bility of repeated copying. The age of the articles copied repeat- edly is also of interest (see Table 2). The ages ranged from less than one year since publication to a maximum of sixty- three years at the time of copying. Their mean and median ages were 8.0 and 6.5 years respectively, with the mode occur- ring between one and two years of age when a total of twenty-eight articles were repeatedly copied. Not enough in- formation is available to state whether the same articles in journals published in the United States are repeatedly copied down through the years, but it is a possibility which might be investi- gated. Clearly, there is repeated interest today in articles published in journals in the United States ranging back through many decades, as well as in those pub- lished in recent years. IMPLICATIONS Repeated photocopying of articles from journals published in the United States occurs in library photoduplication services. When viewed in the perspective of total copying, however, it doe not appear to be of sufficient volume to war- rant special attention by library adminis- tration. This seems even more nearly true in considering the volume of this repeti- tion involving producing more than a second copy. Copyright would restrict production of multiple copies of articles thus protected, particularly the produc- tion of more than one copy at one time. TABLE 2. AcE OF ARTICLEs CoPIED MoRE THAN ONCE DURI G THE PERIOD SURVEYED, WHICH APPEARED IN JoURNAL TITLES PUBLISHED IN THE U.S. I) Age in No. of Years Articles 0 4 1 28 2 24 3 5 4 6 5 13 6 11 7 8 8 7 9 6 10 10 11 6 12 1 13 3 14 7 15 1 16 1 17 4 18 5 19 1 20 1 21 2 22 1 23 2 24 1 28 2 32 1 34 1 36 1 41 1 63 1 Total 165 articles ° Combined samples from three libraries. 3921 College & Research Libraries • September, 1966 Stockpiling of extra copies of noncopy- righted journal articles which have been photocopied once, or more likely more than once, might be studied. This exami- nation should be from the viewpoint of considering storage costs for items which OPTIMUM SIZE .•. ( Continued from page 357) areas. These libraries will depend upon the centers for their published output as an important device for aiding in the evaluation, digestion, and manage- able assimilation of the literature for which they are responsible. In such a development, all libraries could approach the problems of opti- mum size and of division of subject re- sponsibility confidently and rationally. There is considerable evidence that the great research libraries-government, university, and private-are already mak- ing tentative shifts to prepare themselves for their proper roles in the network of collections and services which must eventually evolve if we are to solve our problems. The nationallibr.aries of medi- cine, of agriculture, and other remarka- ble concentrations of subject strengths in various government departmental librar- ies are becoming accepted as true na- tional resource centers, as indeed they have long tacitly been. There is much talk about the establishment of regional branches throughout the country. The Department of Agriculture has had so- called branches for many years, but not on the scale suggested here. The Library of Congress, which established a science and technology division only after World War II, and of course has tremendous resources and capabilities, is a central may never be asked for again, as well as production costs, and relating them to the present practice of photocopying only on demand, albeit if sometimes re- peatedly. •• point in this shift and will spearhead many of the costly e~periments and pro- grams necessary to achieve it. University libraries, for the first time, are separating their research functions in separate buildings, foreshadowing com- ing changes in function. At least one of them, Yale University, is separating its science research materials and will con- centrate them in a p.ew building. The former Midwest Inter-Library Center has changed its name, and, from all indications, its future role in the re- search library picture in the nation. John Crerar and the Linda Hall libraries are becoming increasingly national re- sources, rather than limited local or re- gional library features. In Great Britain, the national lending library of science is a well established, working entity, and plans for a national science reference li- brary are well along. In conclusion, it might be said that «optimum size" techniques may need to be related to a situation in the scien- tific literature and in scientific libraries, which show every indication of radical and extensive changes ahead. These changes will come very quickly, for the pace of achievements in new knowledge and in new literature, which demands these changes, give us very little time. ••