LIS Research Summary Critique

John Pickens

School of Information, University of South Florida

LIS6271: Research Methods in Library and Information Science

Dr. Jim Andrews

September 10, 2023

Title
D. Courtenay McLeland (2017). Artists’ Books Collection Development: Considerations for
New Selectors and Collections
Citation
McLeland, D. C. (2017). Artists’ Books Collection Development: Considerations for New
Selectors and Collections. RBM : a Journal of Rare Books, Manuscripts, and Cultural
Heritage, 18(2), 80–. https://doi.org/10.5860/rbm.18.2.80
Article Review
The research report, “Artists’ Books Collection Development: Considerations for New Selectors
and Collections”, offers new insight into current practices libraries use while managing the
emerging special collections trend, artists’ books. McLeland cites a 2010 survey, Taking Our
Pulse: The OCLC Research Survey of Special Collections and Archives, which found that
“artists’ books were the specific genre most often identified as a new collecting area within
library special collections departments” (McLeland, 2017). This research is important because
there has been a recent gap in study on the topic of artists’ books, while the demand for the
collections has grown.
While a hypothesis is not present, the goal of the research report is clearly defined. McLeland
states the goal is to “provide an update to the literature on current artists’ books collecting and
management practices in libraries by broadly examining the areas of selection, acquisition,
preservation, description, and programming” (McLeland, 2017). The findings of the 14 question
survey highlight common library practices of artists’ books in the areas of; collections size and
type, development duties and polices, criteria, methods of acquisition, preservation, and
housings, access and description, and programing and exhibits.
There are several limitations of the study. Due to guidelines set by the campus institutional
research board, the survey is anonymous, which does not allow for follow up (McLeland, 2017).
There are also no qualifying questions included in the survey that would help identify the library
as a private, public, or academic institution. This eliminates any insight into how the types of
libraries differ in their handling of artists’ books. Another limitation is that the research uses a
nonprobability, accidental sample. The survey was distributed to the ARLIS/NA-L, Books Arts-
L, and RBMS-L LISTSERVs, yielding a sample size of 91 participants (McLeland, 2017). This
method of sampling also results in a sampling biased, as the self-selected sample does not
represent the entire library population.
Research Approach
McLeland uses a mixed methods approach to her research. Many of the questions in the survey
are quantitative in nature, either asking yes or no, or giving multiple options to choose from. A
few of the questions also elicit a free form response. For example, “are there any special housing
or preservation concerns that have had to be addressed? If yes, Please explain” (McLeland,
2017). This adds a qualitative nature to the survey.
URL
https://web.s.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=4aaf0663-d892-47df-89b5-
38405ba03729%40redis