Potential Collection Development Bias: Some Evidence on a Controversial Topic in California

Abstract

Using an unobtrusive quantitative method, this study investigates whether there is a bias in recent collection development practices at academic and public libraries in California. Influenced by Asheim's article «Not Censorship, but Selection» and Fiske's landmark 1957 California study, Book Selection and Censorship, the investigator applies a research method involving ten judges and the Online Computer Library Center's (OCLC) database holdings for eight representative books. These books (portraying a spectrum along the prochoice/pro-life abortion controversy) are used to demonstrate that the collection development activities of academic and public libraries in California appear to have a bias. Based on 580 reported holdings of these eight books, California academic and public libraries were found three times more likely to collect pro-choice than pro-life books. Interestingly, the evidence also shows that, comparatively, collection practices of religious-affiliated academic libraries in California appear to result in collections holding only slightly more representative pro-life books than pro-choice ones. Therefore, a conclusion may be inferred that stereotypical «conservative» libraries are doing a better job of providing different points of view on controversial issues than their «secular» institutional counterparts