[Paper Review] Most borrowed is most cited? Library loan statistics as a proxy for monograph selection in citation indexes

Álvaro Cabezas-Clavijo, Nicolás Robinson‐García+6 more|arXiv (Cornell University)|May 7, 2013

scientometrics and bibliometrics research15 references22 citations

TL;DR

This study investigates whether library loan statistics can serve as a proxy for monograph use and selection in citation indexes. Analyzing loan data from two European university libraries and citation counts from Web of Science and Google Scholar, it finds no significant correlation between loans and citations, concluding that current loan data are insufficient for scientometric selection criteria despite potential for future improvement with better aggregation and standardization.

ABSTRACT

This study aims to analyse whether library loans statistics can be used as a measure of monograph use and as a selection criteria for inclusion in citation indexes. For this, we conducted an exploratory study based on loan data (1000 most borrowed monographs) from two non-Anglo-Saxon European university libraries (Granada and Vienna) with strong social sciences and humanities components. Loans to scientists only were also analysed at the University of Vienna. Furthermore, citation counts for the 100 most borrowed scientific monographs (SM) and textbooks or manuals (MTB) were retrieved from Web of Science and Google Scholar. The results show considerable similarities in both libraries: the percentage of loans for books in national languages represents almost 96 per cent of the total share and SM accounts only for 10 to 13 per cent. When considering loans to scientists only, the percentage of English books increases to 30 per cent, the percentage of SM loans also increases (approx 80 per cent). Furthermore, we found no significant correlations between loans and citations. Since loan statistics are currently insufficient for measuring the use of monographs, their suggested use as an applicable selection criterion for book citation indexes is not yet feasible. Data improvement and aggregation at different levels is a challenge for modern libraries in order to enable the exploitation of this invaluable information source for scientometric purposes.

Motivation & Objective

• To assess whether library loan statistics can serve as a reliable proxy for monograph use in academic research.
• To evaluate the feasibility of using loan data as a selection criterion for inclusion in citation indexes.
• To compare loan patterns across different types of monographs (scientific monographs vs. textbooks/manuals) in European university libraries.
• To examine the relationship between library loans and citation counts in major citation databases like Web of Science and Google Scholar.
• To identify challenges in using loan data for scientometric purposes and suggest improvements for future data standardization and aggregation.

Proposed method

• Collected loan data from the 1000 most borrowed monographs at two European university libraries: University of Granada and University of Vienna.
• Analyzed loans separately for general users and scientists only at the University of Vienna to assess language and subject-specific usage patterns.
• Retrieved citation counts for the 100 most borrowed scientific monographs (SM) and textbooks/manuals (MTB) from Web of Science and Google Scholar.
• Compared loan statistics with citation counts to test for correlations, focusing on national language vs. English publications and monograph types.
• Used descriptive and inferential statistical analysis to evaluate the strength and significance of relationships between loans and citations.
• Explored the limitations of current loan data for scientometric applications, emphasizing the need for improved data quality and standardization across institutions.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 To what extent do library loan statistics correlate with citation counts in major citation indexes?
• RQ2 How do loan patterns differ between monographs in national languages versus English-language monographs?
• RQ3 How does the use of monographs by scientists compare to general user borrowing patterns in terms of language and subject type?
• RQ4 Can loan statistics from university libraries be reliably used as a selection criterion for inclusion in citation indexes?
• RQ5 What are the main challenges in using library loan data for scientometric evaluation of monographs?

Key findings

• Approximately 96% of the most borrowed monographs were in national languages, indicating strong regional language preference in library use.
• Scientific monographs (SM) accounted for only 10–13% of total loans in general user groups, suggesting limited use in broader academic audiences.
• When restricted to loans to scientists only, the share of English-language monographs increased to 30%, and SM loans rose to approximately 80%.
• No significant correlation was found between library loan counts and citation counts in either Web of Science or Google Scholar.
• The study concludes that current library loan data are insufficient for measuring monograph use or serving as a selection criterion for citation indexes.
• Data quality, standardization, and aggregation across libraries remain major challenges for leveraging loan statistics in scientometric research.