College and Research Libraries Theft and Mutilation of Library Materials Terri L. Pedersen Periodical and book theft and mutilation are problems encountered by most academic libraries. Not only do these problems anger and frustrate library staff and patrons, but also it is expensive to replace damaged and stolen materials. Through a questionnaire study at Emporia State University, an attempt was made to deter- mine the answers to several questions and concerns. Behind these questions are the underlying assumptions that periodical and book theft and mutilation occur as a result of several circum- stances, such as students' unfamiliarity or dissatisfaction with the library and its services, lack of knowledge about replacement time and costs, lack of concern about the needs of others, and little thought about the act of crime. ccording to research, the prob- lem of periodical and book theft and mutilation is laying waste to vital and expensive library collections throughout the country. Too often the damage is done quietly and is not discovered until long after the act has taken place. Damage ranges from a few pages to entire books and journals. Infor- mation is scarce on why theft and mutila- tion occur and on how much they cost li- braries. From 1972 to 1987, less than fifteen articles and papers have been writ- ten on the subject. Very few studies have been undertaken. REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH In the early 1970s Ron G. Martin, a li- brarian at Kearney State College in Ne- braska, surveyed libraries. He received re- sponses from ninety-two of them regarding instances of periodical mutila- tion. Eighty percent reported considerable damage to periodicals. Forty-seven per- cent said that they replaced mutilated pe- riodicals with microforms. 1 Around the same time, another study was conducted by Mary Noel Gouke and Marjorie Murfin. It was undertaken three years after the conclusion of a widespread publicity campaign. Their purpose was to determine the extent and cost of periodical mutilation at the library in which they worked and to locate possible solutions. They discovered that the rate of mutilation of periodicals was 15 percent. This amounted to 1,295 issues annually with $7,700 to $12,950 spent on repair. The au- thors also estimated that in the previous ten years $13,860 to $23,100 was spent for 2,310 issues. They also found that the pub- lic relations campaign was a viable method of reducing periodical mutilation and that the presence of damaged periodi- cals led to more mutilation. Among the preventive methods used were signs stat- ing that there would be no replacement of lost articles, offers of better copiers, and the beginning of a copy machine loan fund. 2 A study was also undertaken at Kent State University in 1973 by Clyde Hen- drick and Marjorie Murfin in which 168 students were issued questionnaires as- sessing their knowledge of and opinions Terri L. Pedersen is Assistant Head of Reference at Emporia State University, Emporia, Kansas 66801. 120 about periodical mutilation. The respon- dents were enrolled in introductory psy- chology and social psychology classes at the institution. The first portion of the questionnaire dealt with personal infor:. mation; familiarity with the library; and attitudes toward mutilation, copier use, penalties, and replacement. The closing section asked for opinions about possible solutions. The students were also given the option of signing their questionnaire so that Hendrick and Murfin could iden- tify and interview professed mutilators. 3 In 1978 Dana Weiss attempted to repli- cate the Murfin-Hendrick study. She sur- veyed 201 students and found that mutila- tion involved good students who were motivated by academic pressure. How- ever, no connection was discovered be- tween a student's attitude toward the li- brary and the acts of theft and mutilation. Also, her theory that more photocopy ma- chines might alleviate the problem was not supported. 4 In 1981 the University of Nebraska at Omaha reported a rise in mutilation and theft. During the year 1,000 magazine pages and 672 complete issues had to be replaced. To combat the problem, the li- brary launched a public relations cam- paign alerting students to the fact that mu- tilation is a crime. 5 Collectively these studies demonstrate that all libraries encounter the problem of mutilation and theft. The damage is espe- cially troublesome for academic libraries and leads to costly damage that causes frustration for both patrons and library staff members. The present study was conducted because a need exists for re- search into the causes and prevention of mutilation and theft in libraries. There were four major goals of the study. The desired result of the project was to discover the answers to inquiries related to these stated goals: 1. Through the examination of the atti- tudes and characteristics of students who mutilate and steal as compared with those who do not, to uncover the reasons why theft and mutilation occur. 2. In discovering the reasons for and circumstances surrounding the theft and mutilation of library materials, to find out Theft and Mutilation 121 how it is accomplished. 3. By looking at the proportion of stu- dents involved in theft and mutilation of periodicals or books, to discover who is re- sponsible. 4. Finally, to locate preventive methods that students feel would be good deter- rents to the problem of mutilation and theft. METHODOLOGY OF DATA COLLECTION The study was conducted during the 1988 spring semester at Emporia State University. At that time the school had an enrollment of 5,134 students. As in the Hendrick-Murfin and Weiss studies, it was determined that an anonymous ques- tionnaire would yield the greatest results. It was in the selection of the sample that this study deviates from the previous two. In those studies, the methods of obtaining students were limited, thus biasing their results. The test group and final data were thrown off by a young population that was mainly female. In this project, an at- tempt was made to choose a sample that was more representative of the entire stu- dent population. Courses were randomly selected from each subject division mak- ing up the university structure. The questionnaires were administered to the students during class time, with the permission of the instructor. This method was chosen to help ensure a high survey return. Sixteen classes were visited with the questionnaire during a two-week pe- riod. It was administered to 235 students. Data analysis is based upon the results from those respondents. The question- naire is located at the end of this article. RESULTS The first section describes the makeup of the sample. The next section presents the results of the questionnaire and com- pares those who admitted to being in- volved in theft and mutilation (violators) and those not involved (nonviolators). Characteristics of the Sample The 235 students surveyed represented approximately 5 percent of the total popu- lation of the university. Of the 235 stu- 122 College & Research Libraries dents 54%, or 122, were female and 46%, or 104, were male. This came fairly close to the university's ratio of 60/40, as shown in the figure 1. The sample population was also very close to the university's totals in regard to student grade classification. The breakdown was as follows: freshmen, 65, or 28%; sophomores, 41, or 17%; juniors, 61, or26%; seniors, 54, or23%, and gradu- ate students, 14, or 6%. The university class breakdown was 18%, 13%, 16%, 18%, and 32%, respectively. The obvious downfall in the sampling was the low questioning of graduate students, which could have been avoided by visiting more graduate courses. The students involved ACTUAL POPULATION ACTUAL POPULATION GRADUATE : 32 % 18% JUNIORS: 16 % SOPHOMORES : 13% FRESHMEN: 18% March 1990 in the survey were fairly evenly spread be- tween the ages of 18 and 23, with only 13% of the sample over the age of 25. The stu- dents were also from the various colleges, with the highest percentages in either the school of business or the teachers college, which was not overly surprising. Two of the most significant questions asked if the students had ever stolen books or magazines from the library or if they had ripped out pages. Twenty-four students admitted ripping out pages and 11 confessed to stealing library materials. Only 6 students circled yes to both ques- tions, for a total of 29 violators, 12% of the sample surveyed. Of this group of viola- SAMPLE POPULATION SAMPLE POPULATION 23% 26 % FRESHMEN : 28 % FIGURE 1 Survey Sample in Comparison with Actual University Population (Total University Enrollment, Spring 1988, = 5,134; Research Sample = 235, or 5 Percent) tors, most were involved in fewer than five instances. One goal was to determine whether a vi- olator differed drastically from a nonviola- tor and to devise a composite sketch of a violator. The belief was that those in- volved would be younger students with poor to average grades, lacking responsi- bility and looking for an easy way out. What emerged as the typical violator was a male or female student, aged 20-22, junior or senior, with a C.P.A. in the 2.0-2.9 range. One important fact was that students do not spend much time in the library. The study indicated that those spending more time in the library were less likely to dam- age and steal library materials. Most stu- dents also admitted to writing very few papers in their college career. Seventy- five percent completed less than ten. Stu- dents writing fewer papers were more in- clined to damage periodicals, but this was not as true for the theft of books. Another interesting fact is that paying for one's own college education does not seem to make a student more responsible or less likely to mutilate and steal. Replacement Several questions asked students what they knew about the replacement time and cost involved when pages, books, and periodicals have been stolen or mutilated. Students believe that things are replaced fairly easily. This usually only holds true for magazine articles and book pages that are missing and not entire books and peri- odicals. Students made a good guess at the replacement cost and time when only the pages were missing. Most missing pages at Emporia State are ordered through the interlibrary loan department. These replacement pages may be received in a month, and 66% of the students an- swered this question accurately. The cost usually involves only staff time in locating and ordering replacement pages. This probably averages $5 to $10, which was the response of 48% of the students. In terms of replacing entire books and whole periodicals, the sample perceived it as be- ing easier than it actually is. Only 16% of the students answered that replacements Theft and Mutilation 123 may never be found and bought. Most students ( 62%) felt that materials could be replaced within a three-month period. When it comes to changing the percep- tions of students regarding periodical and book theft and mutilation, information concerning replacement costs and time should probably be used in a campaign. Perhaps if more patrons realized that items may not be replaced, they might think before acting rashly. In terms of cost, 84% of the students felt that stolen items could be replaced for under ten dol- lars. Once again, this is an area where the students' beliefs need to be changed (see table 1). Perceptions of the Problem and Penalties A major group of questions involved students' perceptions of the problem of mutilation and theft and the penalties as- sessed. One of the most important conclu- sions is that students felt that the library would be or is a very easy place from which to steal. This belief could be altered. Most students recognized that the theft and mutilation of library materials are crimes. Eighty-two percent felt that the penalty for getting caught should be a fine. Very few (under 4%) felt that no pen- alty should exist. When asked what they would do if they saw someone ripping out pages or stealing a magazine or book, 61% said they would do nothing. Thirty per- cent indicated they would report it, and the remaining 9% would either tell the of- fender what they were doing was wrong or ask them to stop. When asked if they had ever considered tearing out articles or pages from a book, most of the students (56%) said that they had never thought about it. Thirty-eight percent admitted to considering the act once or twice, with only 6% thinking about it more than a few times. Twenty- five percent admitted considering stealing a magazine or book, while 75% never con- sidered it. When admitted violators were asked about their concerns for getting caught in the act, 50% were not concerned at all, 34% were mildly to moderately con- cerned, and only 16% were very worried about someone catching them. 124 College & Research Libraries March 1990 TABLE 1 RESULTS ON LIBRARY USE AND PERCEPTIONS OF THE PROBLEM Non- Page Ri~offs Thieves Rif~)rs Question %) (%) Library use A. Number of term 0-9 74 36 80 tapers done so 10-19 20 46 16 ar in collep.e 20+ 6 18 4 B. Amount o times Almost never 41 82 33 one goes to the 1-5 times weekly 55 9 63 library Daily 4 9 4 c. Hours a week 0 30 36 17 s~ent in the 1-5 55 55 75 li rary 6-15 12 0 4 16+ 3 9 4 Perc{ttions on Theft and Mutilation of Library Materials A. ow easy would it Very easy 61 90 63 be to tear out an Somewhat difficult 28 10 29 article or to steal Moderately difficult 8 0 8 library materials? Very difficult 3 0 0 B. What is the J'enalty None 20 36 35 for theft an mutil- Misdemeanor 72 46 57 ation of library items? Higher than Misdemeanor 8 18 8 c. What should the None 2 18 17 penalty be? Fine 83 82 75 More severe 15 0 8 D. If you saw someone Nothing 59 91 88 violati~ library Tell them it's wrong materi s, what and ask to stop 8 9 4 would you do? Report it 33 0 8 E. Time to replace Less than 1 month 48 54 59 a torn out 1-6 months 39 28 29 article Over 6 months 13 18 12 F. Time to replace Less than 1 month 30 46 46 a stolen magazine 1-6 months 43 18 30 Over 6 months 10 9 11 Never Replaced 17 27 13 G. Cost to the library $1 and under 27 55 54 to replace tom $5-$10 51 27 21 tages Over$15 22 18 25 H. ost to replace a Under $10 84 91 96 stolen book or $15-$20 11 9 0 magazine Over$20 5 0 4 I. Have you ever been Never 32 63 42 in~o~venienced by One in a while 56 27 50 rmssm~ pages, Quite often 10 10 4 magazmes or books? All the time 2 0 4 J. Have J:ou ever Never 60 18 17 consi ered tearing Once or twice 36 37 63 out an article or Occasionally 3 27 12 book pages? All the time 1 18 8 K. Have Jou ever Never 76 9 54 consi er.ed stealing Once or twice 22 64 33 ama9azmeor Occasionally 2 9 4 book. All the time 0 18 9 L. What percenta3e of 0-15% 51 18 20 the student bo y is 15-30% 29 27 42 involved in theft 30-50% 15 18 17 and mutilation? Over 50% 5 37 21 Of the 235 students questioned, only 33% said that they had never been incon- venienced by missing or torn-out pages. Fifty-five percent had been bothered once in a while, and 12% were either inconvenienced quite often or all of the time. Of the violators, only 58% had ever been inconvenienced through stolen or damaged periodicals or books. In the sampling of the student popula- tion, only 10% admitted to periodical and book theft or mutilation. When students were asked to estimate what percentage of the student body might rip out articles or steal books or magazines: 18% answered under 5%; 30% responded with 5-15%; 30% also marked 15-30%; and 28% felt that over 30% of the student body might be involved in the theft and damage. Stu- dents who admitted to being violators were more inclined to believe that a large percentage of the students were involved in theft and mutilation. Opinions on the Reasons for Theft and Mutilation Another section asked students why they thought books and periodicals were Theft and Mutilation 125 mutilated and stolen (see table 2). They were to circle as many responses as they felt correct. Seventy-eight percent of the nonviolators felt that students did not consider the needs of others, as compared with 83% of the violators. Few respondees believed that students were unable to af- ford the copy machine or the price of the book, with only 36% of the nonviolators and 50% of the violators answering yes to that question. Because more violators felt this was true, it may explain why some were involved in the damage. When asked if students were aware of the cost of the theft and mutilation to the library, 55 percent of both the violators and nonviola- tors felt that this was a problem. Again, both groups were in agreement when asked if students need the photographs or charts that could not be copied. Only 30% in each group answered yes to this ques- tion, indicating a problem. When asked if mutilation and theft were done casually and thoughtlessly, 52% of the nonviola- tors felt this was true. A big difference was . shown in the responses of the violators. Fifty-five percent of the article and page rippers felt that it was done thoughtlessly, TABLE2 QUESTION: BOOKS AND PERIODICALS ARE STOLEN AND MUTILATED BECAUSE STUDENTS ... Thieves Responses Page Rifpers (%) (% A. Do not consider the (T) 72 83 needs of others (F) 28 17 B. Cannot afford the copy machine or the price ~~~ 45 54 of the book, but want 54 45 c. to own a copy Are not aware of the (T) 36 55 cost of theft and (F) 64 45 mutilation to the library D. Need the photographs (T) 19 50 or charts and cannot (F) 81 50 E. ghotocohy them o not t ink about the (T) 27 45 act or the library, but (F) 73 55 steal and mutilate casually and thought- less.!r F. Ste and mutilate items (T) 18 9 as an expression of (F) 82 91 hostility toward the libr~ and universi!Y Nonviolators (%) 79 21 36 64 56 44 70 30 53 47 13 87 126 College &: Research Libraries March 1990 but only 27% of the book or magazine stealers indicated this was true. Very few students viewed theft and mutilation as an expression of hostility towards. the li- brary. Effective Preventive Methods Opinions were asked on which mea- sures would be effective in eliminating the problem (see table 3). The only option that received an overwhelming response was the availability of free copying. Sixty-three percent of both the violators and non viola- tors felt that this would help prevent the problem. Other options included the fol- lowing: (1) periodicals kept on reserve for checkout-30% for and 70% against; (2) periodicals on limited access or not able to be removed from the area-35% for and 65% against; (3) sign warning of the pen- alty, $500 fine or 30 days in jai1_._45% felt this would work, while 55% said it would not; (4) signs indicating the cost and time of replacement-32% felt this would beef- fective, while 68% felt it would not be; (5) a publicity campaign showing the extent of the problem and urging concern for others-23% in favor and 77% opposed; and (6) a copying loan service or copy card bought in advance-25% for and 75% against. Forty-five percent of the non- violators favored checking out periodicals like books as compared with 54% of the vi- olators. General Attitudes Concerning the Library and Its Services The final section of the questionnaire dealt with the library, its services, and copy machines (see table 4). Generally, students were positive toward the library (87%). Most usually found what they needed in the library, with only 20% dis- agreeing. A majority felt they were treated fairly by the library, with only 18% feeling unfairly treated. When asked if the library discriminates against undergraduate stu- dents by having more lenient policies for graduate students and faculty, most of the students either disagreed or had no opin- ion. When asked if the library was a cold and anonymous place, 71% answered ei- ther no opinion or disagreed. It was inter- esting to find that 54 percent of those ad- TABLE 3 RESULTS FOR EFFECTIVE PREVENTIVE MEASURES Thieves, Not Rip~rs, Effective Effective Measure Nonv10lators (%) (%) A. Periodicals kept on T 36 64 reserve and have to R 33 67 be checked out NV 29 71 B. Limited access- T 36 64 Periodicals not R 33 67 taken from area NV 35 65 c. Sign warninofl of T 64 36 I'enalty: $5 or 30 R 46 54 aays in jail NV 44 56 D. Signs indicatin~ T 18 82 cost and time o R 38 62 replacement NV 31 69 E. Periodicals could T 27 73 be checked out like R 54 46 books NV 45 55 F. Publicity campaign T 0 100 showing the extent of R 25 75 problem and urging NV 22 78 concern for others G. Free cofeying T 45 55 availab e R 63 37 NV 63 37 H. Copying loan service T 27 73 or copy cards bought R 42 58 in advance NV 24 76 Theft and Mutilation 127 TABLE4 GENERAL ATTITUDES CONCERNING THE LffiRARY AND SERVICES Somewhat No Dis- Question Thieves, Rippers, Non violators ~)e A'(d/o)e Opinion (%) a~ee %) A. In general, I feel T 36 55 0 9 very bositive toward R 67 25 4 4 the li rary NV 64 23 10 3 B. The library is a cold T 36 18 27 18 and anonymous R 13 25 12 50 flace NV 5 23 27 45 c. find the library T 64 27 9 0 staff to be quite R 63 29 8 0 friendly ana helpful NV 39 38 - 15 8 D. I alwals find T 18 45 27 9 what needin R 39 52 4 4 the library NV 16 57 5 21 E. I have been treated T 9 27 27 36 unfairly bfe the R 8 13 25 54 libr:lib at east once NV 10 8 25 57 F. The 1i rary discriminates against undergraduates T 18 9 36 36 because it has more R 0 17 50 33 lenient policies for NV 6 12 52 30 gads and faculty G. opy machines are T 46 18 18 18 too expensive R 50 29 0 21 NV 44 23 17 16 H. Copy machines T 9 18 18 55 take too long R 8 25 17 50 to use NV 9 13 23 55 I. The copy machines T 18 46 27 9 are usually out R 17 54 8 21 of order NV 17 34 28 21 J. The library can easily T 27 9 18 46 replace stolen or R 8 25 25 42 mutilated books and NV 1 9 24 56 K. Neriodicals o harm is done since T 9 18 9 64 no one else will need R 4 13 17 66 that particular item NV 1 1 10 88 mitting to stealing items agreed that the use, most students disagreed, so this does library was cold and anonymous. Most of not seem to be a problem. those students also found the library staff The final two questions dealt with the to be friendly and helpful and felt positive perceptions on mutilation and theft. It toward the library. Basically, these ques- was surprising to find that 80% of the non- tions helped library employees to know violators disagreed with the statement that they are viewed positively but need to that the library could easily replace stolen work on helping patrons more in finding items and over 30% of the violators felt what they need. that stolen and damaged materials could Three questions were asked about the be easily replaced. It was encouraging to copy machines. As expected, a large rna- note that 85% agreed that theft and muti- jority felt that the copy machines were too lation are harmful because someone may expensive and usually out of order. Nei- need an item. ther can be changed when the cost of oper- SUMMARY ation and high level of use are considered. When a machine breaks down, the repair- Based on the data, the violators did not men are contacted immediately. When seem to differ greatly from the nonviola- asked if copy machines take too long to tors. Basically, it was discovered that stu- 128 College & Research Libraries dents cannot be identified as potential vio- lators of library materials. It appears that situational circumstances lead a student to mutilation and theft. A number of the nonviolators expressed the temptation to steal pages, articles, books, or journals, thus indicating a potential group for more damage to library materials. Dana Weiss noted in her research: Because this study was done in an urban uni- versity library, it could be said that the "tough- ness" of city life causes the theft. However, I believe a case could be made for ''danger'' on a rural college campus ... 6 Because Emporia is in a rural area, the ''toughness of city life'' is not a cause of mutilation and theft. The fault does not appear to lie with the library being un- friendly, cold, and anonymous. Students did not view the theft and mutilation problem as an expression of hostility to- ward the institution but instead felt that their fellow students were selfish and did not consider the needs of others. In the 1980s, the emphasis has been on the suc- cess of the individual striving for personal gain no matter what cost is involved. With the thought of academic achievement leading to professional success for the in- dividual, there is the pressure to do well and to earn high grades. Thus, as Weiss remarked, ''Good grades may serve to re- inforce for . . . students that it is more im- portant what happens in their individual careers than sensitivity to the needs of fel- low students. " 7 The present study points to certain steps that the library can take to reduce in- March 1990 stances of theft and mutilation. Staff should watch carefully for and be aware of those students having trouble using the li- brary and possibly looking for help, thus reducing the frustration level that may u1- timately lead to desperate measures. As in previous studies, the survey indicates that patrons are not really aware of the diffi- culty and expense involved in replacing damaged and stolen library materials. A publicity campaign could inform students of the cost associated with lost, stolen, or mutilated books and magazines. In- formed students shou1d be less likely to steal and mutilate. Other measures are the setting of equi- table penalties for violation, with signs that cite the law and list penalties. Those surveyed, however, felt that the theft and mutilation of library materials were easy to do with limited consequences and little chance of being apprehended. If students found that the theft and mutilation of li- brary materials were more difficult to ac- complish and that the penalties were stiffer and enforced, the problem would decrease. A library's lowering the cost of photocopying shou1d diminish the prob- lem as well. This study has uncovered possibilities for further work, such as initiating some preventive measures and evaluating their usefulness. If preventive measures are ef- fective, libraries will be able to overcome the costly damage that causes frustration for both patrons and library staff mem- bers. Further means to deter possible vio- lators of library materials still need to be developed. REFERENCES 1. Ron Martin, "Microforms and Periodical Mutilation," Microform Review 2:6-8 Oan. 1973). 2. Mary Noel Gouke and Marjorie Murfin, "Periodical Mutilation: The Insidious Disease," Library Journal105:1795-97 (Sept. 15, 1980). 3. Clyde Hendrick and Marjorie Murfin, ''Project Library Ripoff: A Study of Periodical Mutilation in a University Library," College & Research Libraries 35:402-4 (Nov. 1974). 4. Dana Weiss, "Book Theft and Mutilation in a Large Urban University Library," College & Research Libraries 42:341-47 Ouly 1981). 5. "University of Nebraska Reports Sharp Rise in Mutilation," Library ]ournal107:2212 (Dec. 1, 1982). 6. Weiss, "Book Theft and Mutilation," p.345. 7. Ibid .