[PADG:1035] Re: Paperback Preferred Question

["Stephanie A. Lamson" <salamson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Barbara & colleagues,

I agree with Shannon about the quality differences between paperbacks and
hardcovers.  The UW Libraries went to paperback-preferred in 2000-01 (if I'm remembering correctly) but for one year we received some duplicate copies in both paper and hardcovers.  We did a very unscientific survey comparing paper vs. hardcovers and these were the results.

Of the 123 surveyed:

Paper pH (Abbey Pen test) and the paper quality statement on the reverse of
the title page appear to be largely the same regardless of cover.

Leaf attachment:
56 (46%) both hardcover and paperback edition were adhesive binds
57 (46%) hardcover was sew-through-fold but paperback was adhesive
10 (8%) both hardcover and paperback edition were sew-through-fold

At that time, several university presses produced similar products in paper/hardcover.  Oxford, Cambridge, Cornell, Indiana, NYU -- 
both paper/hard are adhesive binds.  Duke, Ohio State, Penn State, Penn,
SUNY, UNC -- hardcovers are sewn, paper covers are adhesive.  Routledge &
St. Martin's sometimes do both hard/paper in adhesive, sometimes both sewn.

Margins:
79 (64%) had margin differences between the paper and hardcover
For nearly all of these the paper edition has less margin.

Flyleaves (we tracked this with wear/tear especially to last page with date due slips in mind):
Hardcovers always have flyleaves of course.
Of the paperback editions:
58 (47%) flyleaf at back only
52 (42%) no flyleaves
3 (2%) flyleaf at front & back
10 (8%) no data at this time

If we went back and did this comparison more rigorously and included looking at damage/repair would this be of interest?

Hope this helps,
Stephanie
__________________________________
Stephanie Lamson
Asst. Preservation Librarian
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA  98195-2900
salamson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
206.543.4890