This present study sought to evaluate the effectiveness of two types of school
library displays: a display with books only, called Display, and a display with books,
posters, models, copy, and realia, called Display +. The effectiveness of these displays
was to be measured in two ways: a) through the observation of the attaction power,
holding power and viewer participation in a display and b) through measuring the
circulation of displayed books.
Before commencing the study a literature search was conducted. The result of the
literature search yielded four authors, Goldhor (1972; 1981), Aguilar (1983), Watson
(1985), and Baker (1986), who had researched the relationship between circulation and
displays. Each of these studies used the measurable effect of circulation increasing,
decreasing or remaining constant to determine the effect of the display. This present study
used a similar methodology and monitored the circulation of books on both types of
displays. However, this study sought to go beyond the effect of circulation in determining
the effectiveness of displays because the previous studies had not taken into account the
library user who is affected by the display but is unable to borrow a book from the
display. The literature search turned towards the area of museum exhibits and displays
and the methodology employed to evaluate these exhibits and displays. Shettel (1968),
Warren (1972), Screven (1976), Linn (1976), Clowes and Wolfe (1980), and Miles
(1982) used attraction and holding power as measures of museum exhibit and display
effectiveness. Similarly, library users can be attracted and their attention held by library
displays. To the variables of attraction and holding power this study added the variable of
participation, picking up books or other items in the display not necessarily with the intent
of borrowing the books. In order to construct a Display + and control as far as possible
the elements in the display a literature search of books and articles relating to the design
elements of displays was conducted, and findings applied in the construction of the
display.
Shettel's (1968) methodology of unobtrusive observation was employed in this
study with the added benefit of videotaping the observations. The hypotheses were set out
in three groups, those relating to a single display, those comparing the effectiveness of
Display and Display +, and those relating to circulation.
The results of this study found in general that the attraction power of Display +
exceeded the attraction power of Display but the holding power and participation in
Display was greater than that of Display + indicating that the designer of library displays
should pay particular attention to the purpose of displays in their libraries. The results of
the circulation hypothesis confirmed the results of Goldhor (1972;1981), Aguilar (1983),
Watson (1985), and Baker (1986) that more books circulated when they were displayed
than when they were on the library shelves.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ADTP/219355 |
| Date | January 1989 |
| Creators | Stephenson, Judy Anne, n/a |
| Publisher | University of Canberra. Communication |
| Source Sets | Australiasian Digital Theses Program |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Rights | ), Copyright Judy Anne Stephenson |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds