Cost-effectiveness comparison of manual and on-line retrospective bibliographic searching.
A study to compare the cost effectiveness of retrospective manual  and on-line  bibliographic searching is described. Forty search queries were processed against seven abstracting-indexing publications and the corresponding SDC/ORBIT data bases. Equivalent periods of coverage and searcher skill levels were used for both search  models. Separate task times were measured for question analysis, searching, photocopying, shelving, and output distribution. Component costs were calculated for labor, information, reproduction, equipment, physical space, and telecommunications. Results indicate that on-line searching is generally faster, less costly, and more effective than manual searching. However, for certain query/information-source combinations, manual searching may offer some advantages in precision and turn-around time. The results of a number of related studies are reviewed.
D002140:California; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D007256:Information Systems; D007999:Library Services; D009862:Online Systems