College and Research Libraries


By FRANCES L. MUNSON 

The Use qf the Depository Catalog 
in a University Library1 

IN VIEW OF the space consumed and the depository catalog, noting the number of 
cost of upkeep which includes catalog repetitive questions answered by i~ and 

cases and time spent in filing cards, a study testing the assumption that the dep6sitory 
of the frequency and types of use made of a · catalog should be maintained. The deposi-
depository catalog in a large university li- . tory cat~log of the Columbia University 
brary is pertinent. Since the recently com- Libraries was used as the medium for 
pleted Catalog of Books Represented by gathering data because of its accessibility and 
Library of Congress Printed Cards Issued to because there has beer:t some qu~stion as to 
July JI~ 1942 (referred to hereafter as Book whether the frequency of use is enough to 
Catalog) there has been much discussion as justify the space it occupies in the reference 
to the usefulness of the depository cards. rool;ll of the main library. Although this is 
Many librarians have decided that the a case study, it was assumed that the find-
limited use made of the depository catalog ings would have some application to similar 
does not warrant the expense of mainten- situations in other lihraries. 
ance and the space used, especially now that The depository catalog consists of ap-
the !Jook Catalog is available, and the Li- proximately two and one-half million cards 
brary of Congress plans to issue current housed in 2794 trays occupying about 540 
supplements. On the other hand, there are square feet of wall space. It is located ad-
librarians who believe that the depository jacent to the Columbia card catalog in the 
catalog should be maintained for various reference room of the Nicholas Murray 
reasons, chief among which are (I) the Butler Library. Because of its size and 
cards are more easily read than the Book continuous growth, the alphabet is divided 
Catalog and (2) cards can be interfiled in into two parts. On the main floor .are 
order to keep the depository up-to-date and, trays containing the alphabet from A to M, 
therefore, the use of supplements which and on the mezzanine floor directly above 
necessitates searching in more than one place are trays containing the letters N to Z. 
is not necessary. The decision regarding Also on the mezzanine floor, at the end of 
the retention or disposal of the depository the alphabet, is filed the supplementary cata-
catalog is an administrative problem and log. 2 This supplement consists of Library 
should be based upon the results of carefully of Congress cards printed after July I, 
planned objective studies. I942, and covers the entire alphabet. Since 

Purpose of the Study 
the Book Catalog includes cards issued to 
July 3I, I942, it was deemed advisable to 

This study was made for the purpose of file in a separate section the cards issued 
isolating the uses that are made of the 

1 Based on a master's essay prepared at the School 
of Library Service, Columbia University, 1946. 

APRILJ 1947 

2 After thi s study was made, the supplement wrts 
transterred to the main floor and th e ca talog from 
J -Z transferred to the mezzanine floor. 

151 

I 

t 



after July I, I 942, including the revised 
cards. 

The Columbia depository catalog is a 
union catalog in that some cards from the 
libraries of Harvard, the Vatican, John 
Crerar, Folger, and the Universities of Chi-
cago and Michigan have been interfiled with 
the Library of Congress cards. It is not, 
however, as a union catalog. that the de-
pository set is to be considered in this study, 
although a few of the in terfiled cards were 
used by persons interviewed. 

The cost of maintaining the depository 
catalog is approximately $I6oo per year. 
Filing costs amount to $I400, and card cases 
cost $200. · 

Althoug;h a number of studies have been 
made of the different types of catalogs and 
their uses, the depository catalog as a prob-
lem to be studied has been neglected. Mil-
ler's study reports "what some patrons 
actually used among the various types of 
information given on the traditional and 
typical catalog card."3 Knapp4 and Swank5 

discussed card catalogs chiefly from the sub-
ject point of view. Merritt/ Stone, 7 and 
Berthold8 have discussed union catalogs. 
A survey by Nyholm 9 and an experiment 
conducted by Bryan/0 both of which pertain 
to the legibility of the Book Catalog~ have 

3 Miller, Robert A. "On the Use of the Card Cata-
log." Library Quarterly 12:630 April 1942. 

4 Knapp
1 

Patricia B. "The Subject Catalog in the 
College Ltbrary." Library Quarterly 14:108-18, April 
1944; 214-28, July 1944. " 

6 Swank, Raynard. "Subject Catalogs, Classifica-
tions, or Bibliographies? A Review of Critical Dis-
cussions, 1876-1942." Library Quarterly 14:316-32, 
October 1944. 

6 Merritt, LeRoy Charles. "The Administrative, 
Fiscal and Quantitative Aspects of the Regional Union 
Catalog." (In Downs, Robert B., ed. Union Catalogs 
in the United States. Chicago, American Library 
Association, 1942, p. 3-125.) 

7 Stone, John Paul. "Regional Union Catalogs: A 
Study of Services Actual and Potential." (In Downs, -
Robert B., ed. Union Catalog in the United States. 
Chicago, Americ<tn Library Association, 1942, p. 129-
225.) 

8 Berthold, Arthur Benedict. "Manual of Union 
Catalog Administration. " (In Downs, Robert B., ed. 
Union Catalogs in the United States . Chicago, Ameri-
can Library Association, 1942·, p. 267-348 .) 

9 Nyholm, Jens. "Summary of Comments on a Cata-
log of Books Represented by Library of Congress 
Printed Cards, June 5, 1943." Mimeographed. 

• 10 Bryan, Alice I. "Legibility of Librar_y of Con-
g ress Cards and Their Reproductions." College and 
Research Libraries 6:447-64, September 1945, pt. 2. 

a bearing upon the problem of the deposi-
tory catalog. 

Nyholm investigated and summarized 
comments made by li!?rai-ians of twenty-
three selected libraries on the feasibility of 
replacing the depository catalog with the 
Book Catalog. Bryan made a study on the 
legibility of the Book Catalog as compared 
with the legibility of the printed cards. The 
consensus of those participating in both 
studies was that the print of the Book 
Catalog is uneven and has a tendency to-
ward illegibility, especially in the L.C. card 
numbers. 

A limited study was made by the writer 
in, which every tenth page, beginning with 
page thirteen of volume thirty-one (Coles, 
Abraham-Comstock, Frederick Harmon) 
was sampled. None of the I I 52 entries 
exami.ned was found to be entirely illegible. 
It would seem -that the amount of illegi-
bility, ·while undesirable, is not enough to 
interfere greatly with the normal uses made 
of the Book Catalog. 

Collecting the Data 

A plan was devised whereby interviews 
with all users of the catalog would be con-
ducted over a period of time _sufficiently 
long enough to permit drawing valid con-
clusions concerning its use. An interview 
schedule patterned after the tally card and 
the check sheet offered by Miller and Stone 
in their studies was constructed and utilized. 

In the formulation of the interview 
schedule for this study, the following points 
were considered: (I) examination of liter-
ature on the various catalogs, (2) the known 
uses of the depository catalog, ( 3) consul-
tation with catalogers and other members 
of· the staff. Two questions were kept in 
mind-( I) How frequently and by whom 
is the depository catalog consulted? and ( 2) 
What uses are made of the depository cata-
log? Convenience in handling the schedule 

152 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



and ease in tabulating the replies were also 
considered. In order to secure the best 
results quickly, the schedule was cast in 
the form of a checklist or tally card which 
might be answered by placing a checkmark 
opposite the appropriate statements or by 
adding necessary not~s to record the desired 
information. It was designed to answer . 
the following questions: Which items on 
the depository cards are being searched for 
and why? Which cards give the desired 
information-L.C. cards or. those from 
other libraries? Who is being interviewed 
-staff members or members of the public? 
On what subject is the person being inter-
viewed (public) working? Is the request 
answered? Which section of the alphabet 
is being searched ? Does the user know of 
the existence of the Book Catalog ? If so, 
what is his attitude toward the Book Cata-
log in relation to the depository card cata-
log? 

Each person was interviewed each time 
he approached the depository catalog during 
the period of this study when the inter-
viewer was on duty. The schedule 
previously prepared was followed with the 
information thus derived, recorded by 
checking in the proper space on a separate 
card for each interview held. If additional 
information seemed necessary, it was written 
on the card. 

Those interrogated represented members 
of the staff of the university libraries and a 
cross section of its public. For purposes of 
analyses the staff members were divided 
into groups according to the departments 
in which they were employed as follows: 
(I) reference, ( 2) cataloging, ( 3) acquisi-
tion, ( 4) circulation, ( 5) departmental. 
The first four groups were staff members 
of the main library. Group five included 
staff members from departmental libraries 
on the campus. 

The ·public was divided for purposes of 

APRIL~ 1947 

analyses into (I) undergraduate students I, 
2, 3, 4; (2) graduate students: (a) master, 
(b) doctor; (3) faculty; (4) permit; (5) 
research worker. Other categories added 
later were ( I ) first-year school of library 
service students; ( 2) faculty from other 
schools; ( 3) librarians from off-campus li-
braries; ( 4) all other users who did not 
fall i~to the above groups. 

The gathering of the data by intervif;WS 
covered a span of six weeks divided into 
three two-week periods, chosen on the as-
sumption that they were representative 
periods of the academic year. The periods 
fell approximately in the middle portion of 
the first semester, at the close of the first 
semester, and at the beginning of the second 
semester. The interviewing was so sched-
uled that every hour the library was open 
each day was covered sometime during the 
week. This averaged thirteen hours per 
week or approximately two hours per day 
of interviewing. At the end of the inter-
view period of six weeks, the data were 
recorded and analyzed by types of users to 
show the number and percentage of requests 
answered, the sections of the catalog used, 
the type of card consulted, and the knowl-
edge of the Book Catalog and attitudes to-
ward it. 

Several limitations should be pointed out. 
It is recognized that research in the fields 
of social science and the humanities especial-
ly, and in science to a lesser degree, was 
affected by war. Less research as such was 
being done during this period, and, as a 
result, the probable use of the depository 
catalog might have been less than in normal 
times. However, while it is.likely that the 
number of uses may have decreased, the 
types . of use probably did not vary. It 
should also be pointed out that much current 
foreign material, which ordinarily might be 
represented in the depository catalog, had 
not been obtained by L.C. 

153 



L[se by Staff 

A total of 62 5 interviews was recorded, 
365 involving members of the staff and 260 
the public. Of the 365 interviews con-
ducted with the staff group, the greatest 
number, 221, or 6o.6 per cent, were with 
members of the cataloging department; 72, 
or rg. 7 per cent, were with the reference 
staff; 48, or 13.1 per cent, were with. mem-
bet:s of the acquisition department; and 24, 
o'r 6.6 per cent, were with departmental li-
brarians. Members of the circulation de-
partment staff did not use the depository 
catalog during the course of this study. 

The cataloging department made the 
most varied use of the depository catalog 
among staff members. Sixteen different uses 
by this department were recorded. The 
chief ones were locating and withdrawing 
cards for a,id in cataloging and in ordering 
L.C. cards. During the course of this 
study, it was found that the catalog was 
used by members of the cataloging depart-
ment I 12 times for the purpose of with-
drawing cards and twenty-four times for 
the purpose of. ordering L.C. cards. V erifi-
cation of author or title to establish an entry 
ranked second in order as a reason for using 
the depository catalog by the cataloging 
staff. It was referred to eighty-three times, 
or 31.3 per cent of the total use of the 
catalog by this department, for the purpose 
of verification. Establishing corporate en-
tries, searching for subject headings and 
classification numbers, editions, ·serial 
changes, cross references, added entries, · 
analytics, date of volume, illustrator, series, 
and translator were other reasons given by 
this group for consulting the depository cata-
log. 

The location of the depository catalog in 
the reference room and the fact that the 
catalog is an acknowledged reference tool 
would lead one to believe that many varied 
uses could be made of the catalog by ~he 

reference staff. However, during the course 
of this study, it was found that this depart-
ment used the depository catalog chiefly for 
verification of authors and titles and for 
interlibrary loan. Fifty-one requests, or 
70.7 per cent' of the total number of uses 
made of the depository catalog by the refer-
ence department during this study, were for 
verification. The catalog was used fourteen 
times for verification and location in con-
nection with interlibrary loan service. 

As might pe expected, the chief use of 
the depository catalog by the acquisition de-
partment is .that of searching or verifying 
items requested for purchase. Cards in the 
depository catalog were used forty-one times 
by searchers from the acquisition depart-
ment who were either checking or verifying 
entries. This is 85.4 p_er cent of the total 
number of uses made of the catalog by mem-
bers of the acquisition department. The 
only other use of the depository catalog by 
acquisition department staff members was 
for Library of Congress card numbers to be 
used in ordering sets of the printed cards. 
These cards are for books which are in the 
"in-process file." They are usually collec-
tions of books which will not be held but 
will be sent through at once to be processed 
and shelved.11 The depository catalog was 
used seven times during this study by the 
acquisition department for the purpose of 
ordering L.C. cards. 

Although there are over thirty depart-
mental libraries and reading rooms in the 
university library system, members of the 
staffs from only ten of them were inter-
viewed during this study. , The libraries 
which used the depository catalog were as 
follows: journalism, social · science, Plimp-
ton, special collections, philosophy, modern 
languages, lending service, teachers college, 
and law. The depository catalog was used 

11 This procedure was followed for a short time only, 
but after this study was made it was abandoned. 

154 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



twenty-eight times for six different purposes 
by librarians employed in the above-men-
tioned departmental libraries. 

The two greatest uses of the depository 
catalog · by the departmental library ' staff 
members was to find Library of Congress 
card numbers for ordering cards and to 
verify author and title. Searching fo-,: items 
to be purchased was another use made of 
the depository catalog. In this study it was 
found that the depository catalog was used 
eight times for locating L.C. card numbers 
and thirteen times for verification. The 
edition of a book, the series to which a 
book belongs, and serial changes were other 
uses mad~ of the depository catalog by the 
departmental libraries. 

Use by Public 

Of the 260 interviews conducted with the 
public over the three periods, the greatest 
number, 163, or 62.7 per cent, were with 
students enrolled in Columbia University 
and its colleges. These included under-
graduates, first-year school of library service 
students, and graduate students-candidates 
for both master·'s and doctoral degrees. Use 
of the depository catalog by faculty members 
of Colun;1bia and other schools was recorded 
thirty-four times. Columbia faculty mem-
bers consulted the catalog twenty-eight 
times, and off-campus faculty members six 
times. , Librarians from off-campus libraries 
used the catalog twenty-one times. Most 
of these librarians were from within the 
city, but some were from adjoining com-
munities. Research workers were inter-
viewed nineteen times. Permit holders were 
recorded thirteen times ; these included 
graduates of the university as well as those 
with special permits issued by the director's 
office. Those who did not fall into any 

. of the above-mentioned categories were 
placed in one group and called "all others." 
These included members of the armed 

APRIL~ 1947 

forces, students from other schools, and 
wives and secretaries of faculty members. 
The catalog was consulted ten times by this 
group. 

Graduate students made the most varied 
use of the depository catalog among mem-
bers of the public. The chief :r:easons for 
consulting the catalog involved verification 
of entries eighteen times, or 39· I per cent, 
for term papers, theses, and recommended 
r.eading; compilation of bibliographies seven 
times, or 15.2 per cent and 29.2 per cent, 
by master's and doctoral students respec-
tively; location of books for interlibrary 
loan eleven times for master's students and 
twelve times for doctoral candidates. First-
year school of library service students used 
the depository catalog chiefly for the purpose 
of establishing entries for authority files and 
for verification of correct entries. These 
were 'for assignments given in a cataloging 
class. 

Undergraduate students used the deposi-
tory catalog ten times for the compilation 
of bibliographies preparatory to writing 
term papers for English classes. AI though 
a total of twenty-three undergraduate stu-
dents were interviewed, thirteen of this 
group admitted, during the course of the 
interview, that they had confused the Li-
brary of Congress catalog with the Colum-
bia catalog. 

Among the largest groups of public users 
were faculty members of the university and 
of other schools within the city. Thirty-four 
of the public interviews were with members 
of this group. Twenty-eight were with 
members of the faculty of Columbia, and six 
were with those associated with other educa-
tional institutions. The chief uses of the 
catalog by Columbia faculty were for veri-
fication of correct entries and checking to see 
what was available. Off-campus faculty used 
the catalog chiefly for location of books 
wanted for. interlibrary loan. 

155 



. 

Permit holders were interested mainly in 
whether such books as they desired were in 
existence. Off-campus librarians searched 
for L.C. card numbers for the purpose of 
ordering L.C. cards. Research workers 
were using the catalog to check bibliogra-
phies. The "all other" group consulted the 
catalog to see what was available on a 
particular subject, for L.C. card numbers 
for a private library, a translation of a Span-
ish book, the making of a bibliography fo-r 
an Italian publication, and the location of a 
certain edition. 

Users of the catalog were interrogated 
as to the subject for which they were seeking 
information. The persons interviewed were 
working on diversified subjects, with the 
exception of school of library service stu-
dents. This group was working on a single 
subject-cataloging. The principal subjects 
recorded were history, English literature, 
and Spanish. 

Before each interview was finished the 
user of the catalog was asked if he knew 
of the publication of the Book Catalog and 
his attitude toward it. As was to be ex-
pected, all staff members knew of the exist-
ence of the printed catalog in book form. 
Among the public I I 5 did not know of the 
publication; I45, or 55· 7 per cent, were 
aware of the set, but many had not used the 
volumes. The majority of both groups . 
stated that they preferred the cards to the 
Book Catalog, giving as the ch~ef reason 

. that "the print of the Book Catalog is too 
small and too hard to read." 

Confusing the depository catalog with the 
Columbia card catalog was an unforeseen 
variable brought to light by tbis study. Of 
the public users, I2.3 per cent were con-
fused in the two catalogs although both 
the Columbia catalog and the Library of 
Congress catalog are plainly marked. 

Summary 

Data gathered in the study of the use of 
the depository card catalog suggest that 
there should be serious doubt as to need for 
maintaining the card depository in the li-
brary studied now that the Book . Catalog 
is available for practically all normal uses 
made of L.C. entries. The important ex-
ception is the use of L.C. cards in the 
cataloging process. Libraries, of course, 
could use the cut L.C. proofsheet cards for 
this purpose and probably at less expense. 

The fact that the Book Catalog must be 
kept up-to-date by a card file and published 
supplements is a disadvantage . . How serious 
this will be will depend on the arrange-
ments made for keeping the Book Catalog 
up-to-date. 12 Searching in several places 
will remain as a disadvantage. 

The Book Catalog might have wider 
usage if it were called to the attention of 
those persons outside the library staff who 
would have the most need for such a tool. 
These include graduate students and faculty 
members especially. 

1 2 Since thi s wa s written the Library of Congress 
has announced plans for the publishing of mo.nthly, 
quarterly, and annual cumulations of L.C. entnes m 
book form. 

156 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES