Students’ attitudes towards library overdue fines in an academic library: A study in a private university setting in Bangladesh

Abstract

In academic libraries, the obligation to pay a fine for overdue books is a common global phenomenon. As university libraries try to meet the growing expectations of their users with limited resources, it is important to ensure that the existing collection is available in circulation. This study investigated overdue returns at the BRAC University library, Bangladesh, focusing on the reasons why users returned their books late; students’ satisfaction with the current overdue policies; and suggested improvements to the overdue procedures. The study was carried out using a quantitative methodology. Structured questionnaires were distributed to the students and data was collected over a period of 60 days between March and April 2019. Of the 300 questionnaires distributed, 258 were returned, with a response rate of 86%. The primary reasons for users’ late return of books were forgetfulness and not completing the task required from the book. It is a positive fact of the study that, most students did not show unwillingness to use the library again after fine had been imposed for a late return; a large number of them managed to pay the fine out of their pocket money. The library’s current policies were considered to be satisfactory. The students considered them to be a form of discipline, which made them return items at the appointed time. There was no gender bias in their reactions. Suggestions for improvement included increasing the collection of hard-copy and e-books. The outcomes of this research may help to develop the overdue and circulation policies of academic libraries in developing countries.

Keywords

Academic libraries overdue books overdue policy students’ behaviour Bangladesh

Introduction

In general, a university library is considered a field of knowledge for study, teaching and research in any tertiary-level educational institution. To meet the demand for information and knowledge, each library must follow a policy to provide access to its available resources for its users. The circulation of libraries is one of the most important functions by which library users can borrow books and other resources for their required information as registered user (Hazarika and Gohain, 2013).

Although university libraries are increasingly providing electronic and digital content, in developing countries, including Bangladesh, they continue to provide a combination of electronic and printed resources. As well as Bangladesh, other developing countries will find this article useful. Studies have shown that while students and researchers have a growing preference for electronic content, the majority still use both print and electronic resources (Zha et al., 2012). Although many users can access electronic resources at the same time, printed books are limited to one person at a time.

In order for items to be put back into circulation as quickly as possible, thereby increasing their availability for others, each library must formulate a user-oriented circulation policy that covers borrowing privileges, loan periods and penalties for returning library documents late. An overdue fine is an amount charged to users for keeping borrowed library books beyond the loan period. It is not a source of income; its aim is to encourage the timely return of books to the library.

About BRAC University’s library

BRAC University is the top-ranked private university in Bangladesh, based on the Quacquarelli Symonds (2019) Asian university rankings in 2018. It was founded in 2001 under the 1991 Private Universities Act in the field of higher education. It provides high-quality education and aims to meet the demands of contemporary times.

The Ayesha Abed Library at BRAC University aims to become a world-class resource centre by providing innovative services and collections (for example, printed books and journals, online journals and databases, theses, dissertations, internship reports and annual reports) to support the academic and research activities of the university community (see Table 1). The library was able to extend the range and depth of its collection by subscribing to thousands of e-journals and databases through two consortia – the University Grants Commission Digital Library and the Programme for the Enhancement of Research Information operated by the International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publications. The expenditure on printed books was US$ 28,547 and on online journals US$ 8247 (Kairy, 2017: 84).

Table 1.

Demographic information of BRAC University and the Ayesha Abed Library.

University	Faculties		Departments	Students	Facultymembers		Teacher–student ratio	Halls	Library staff	Library holdings
BRAC University (established 2001)	6		10	7403	674		1:11	6	17	266,384
Resources and circulation service		Items				Amount
Collection		Books				46,544
		Audiovisual materials				600
		Institutional repositories				12,238
		E-books				43,128
		E-journals and databases				56,000+
		Conference proceedings				18,318
Circulation and overdue status		Circulation statistics (per week)				1050 (approximately)
Circulation and overdue status		Fines received for overdue items (per week)				6000 taka (approximately US$71)

Source: University Grants Commission of Bangladesh (2016) and interview with library staff.

As in most academic libraries, several measures for handling overdue materials have been taken at BRAC University’s library. These measures include:

Providing an online renewal facility;

Allowing users to log into their account to check the due date of any items;

Placing materials in the reserve book collection;

Charging overdue fines of 5 taka per day for each book item and 10 taka per day for each audiovisual item (see Table 2);

Sending friendly overdue notices to defaulters through mobile text messages as well as email accounts;

Restricting further loans until the item is returned and the penalty for the non-returned item is received.

Table 2.

Additional information on library privileges and loan periods.

Member category	Number of items		Loan period		Overdue fines (taka per day)		Holds
Member category	Books	Audiovisual	Books (weeks)	Audiovisual (days)	Books	Audiovisual	Holds
Student	4	1	1	3	5	10	1

Source: Ayesha Abed Library (2019).

Research problem

Recently, libraries have started to look at their fines policies more closely to determine the effects on patrons, workflow and staff, as well as to see whether their policies need to be changed or, in some cases, removed (Kim, 2018). Overdue fines may have a significant impact on students and researchers in their use of library resources, and user satisfaction. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct periodic studies to find out the attitudes of users regarding overdue books and fines, and the reasons they give for keeping items beyond their due date. To date, no studies have been carried out at BRAC University to gauge users’ attitudes towards overdue fines. Therefore, this study was conducted at the Ayesha Abed Library at BRAC University. The findings and suggestions from this research will help libraries to understand user feedback, revise library rules and minimize overdue fines for late returns which have been practised for a long time.

Objectives

The main objective of this study was to determine the attitudes of students towards library fines, borrowing privileges and library policy. The study also aimed to identify the ways in which the library can encourage students to return books on time for the benefit of both the library and its users.

In order to achieve the aforementioned objective, and to ensure that other readers have access to the library books they need, the following research questions were raised for investigation:

What are the usage patterns (purpose and frequency of visit) of the BRAC University library?

What are the reasons for students keeping borrowed library books beyond their return date?

Does the fine encourage/compel users to return library materials on time?

Are students satisfied with the library’s existing fines policy?

What are the borrowers’ perceptions with regard to whether overdue fines can prevent overdue items or not?

What are the suggestions/opinions of students for minimizing overdue fines for overdue books?

Literature review

Concerns about overdue library books are not new. In 1976, for example, Souter studied the incidence of delinquency among readers in British university libraries and noted, among other things, that getting students to return books on time was a problem. Mitchell and Smith (2005) pointed out that fines generally facilitate the timely return of books. They have argued, however, that there is little evidence that fines are more effective at minimizing outstanding books than reminder notices (Mitchell and Smith, 2005).

Currently, there has been very little research on overdue returns at academic libraries in either developed or developing countries. The majority of research has been conducted in countries where academic libraries are possibly more dependent on print materials than electronic resources. Common issues in the literature are discussed below.

Overdue books are recognized as an unavoidable part of library work and every library has a mechanism for retrieving overdue materials (Adomi, 2003: 19). One of the main concerns of libraries is to keep books in circulation and allow access to as many users as possible (Bhatt, 2011; Murugathas, 2009). McMenemy (2010: 79) emphasized the ethical aspect of book circulation by stating that penalizing borrowers with late payments can ‘encourage users to be more community-minded’.

Sung and Tolppanen (2013) analysed data on library fines imposed in two medium-sized libraries in Hawaii to determine whether fines had an impact on the borrowers’ return behaviour. The results indicated that fines, as well as the borrower group’s status (undergraduates, graduates or faculty), had a significant impact on their return behaviour.

Several studies have explored the reasons for overdue books. Davies and Sen (2013) conducted a mixed-methods study on overdue books at Leeds University Library in the UK. The results showed that the main reasons for the late return of books were forgetfulness and the complexity of using the online renewals system.

Findings of numerous studies revealed that, the borrowers had to pay overdue fine because of their forgetfulness, encouraging them to keep it longer because of the task being unfinished (Alao, 2002; Hazarika and Gohain, 2013).

In order to quantify library fines and their impact on patrons’ return behaviour, Phelps (2015) carried out a study on library fines in the academic libraries at the University of Hawaii at Manoa and Eastern Illinois University in the USA. The results showed that graduate students who were not fined had much higher return rates before the deadline than undergraduates who incurred fines. Graduate students had higher return rates than teachers, although both groups had no fines.

Bhatt (2011) discussed students’ perceptions of library fines at the Islamia College of Science and Technology Library in Jammu and Kashmir, India. The results of the study revealed that the majority of the patrons were satisfied with the borrowing privileges, loan periods and amount of the fines. Out of 290 respondents, 215 (77.33%) were aware of the fact that overdue fines were a disciplinary measure intended for library defaulters.

A study was conducted to assess the impact of the removal of fines at an academic library. The Vancouver Island Library in Canada eliminated most fines and made other loan modifications to improve access to its physical collections. One year later, the changes were evaluated using circulation data and interviews with staff. The removal of fines did not have a significant impact on borrowers’ return rates and circulation numbers, but generated goodwill among library users (Reed et al., 2014).

Debating the policy of ‘fines’ or ‘no fines’, the articles in the published literature, libraries at such institutions as New York University, Texas A & M University and Swarthmore College, which eliminated daily fines and adopted a multi-level approach, introducing a penalty-point system to better manage their reserved books (Rupp et al., 2010).

In response to a request from the library administration team, the Harold B Lee Library’s circulation committee at Brigham Young University designed and implemented a thorough evaluation of circulation policies. Using a variety of assessment methods, including surveys, focus groups and statistical analyses, the committee determined that the undergraduate loan period was insufficient and that the fine structure needed to change. Using the information obtained during the assessment, it successfully lobbied for an extension of the undergraduate loan period and the elimination of fines for materials that were regularly overdue (Wilson, 2014).

Some studies of overdue items have recommended improving library reminder notices to reduce the number of overdue returns (Alao, 2002; Anderson, 2008). It has also been suggested that text-message reminders might be more ‘immediate and personal’ as a way of alerting students to overdue items (Walsh, 2009: 10).

Shontz (1999) argued the effects of length between checkout and overdue fine in a medical library. The author discussed some other factors, such as the convenience of the renewal and returns system, the professional conscience have an positive impact on changing the users' late return.

Libraries can minimize overdue fines by sending late notices to defaulters, not allowing renewals and refusing further book loans (Hazarika and Gohain, 2013). Hazarika and Gohain (2013) also stated that this should be emphasized in library orientation sessions to make new members aware of the circulation policy.

Ajayi and Okunlola (2005) conducted a study on students’ perceptions of increased fines for overdue books at the Hezekiah Oluwasanmi Library in Nigeria. Using a structured questionnaire, the survey covered 1500 respondents. The results suggested that, to avoid overdue returns a periodic review of the measure and the library automation, particularly circulation operations were essential.

Using a structured questionnaire, a survey was conducted at the Mysore University Library and University Undergraduate Library in India on users’ attitudes towards overdue fines. The study made the recommendation to boost the library collections to avoid overdue fines (Sarasvathy et al., 2015).

Udoumoh and Okoro (2007) studied the effect of library policies on overdue materials at university libraries in the South-South zone of Nigeria. This study revealed that library policy was one of the factors influencing the late return of books: 71.4% of the respondents agreed that policies imposing penalties on defaulters affected the late return of books. Only 60% of the respondents agreed that borrowed books were kept beyond the due date because the fine was minimal, and 57% of the respondents strongly agreed that library hours affected the timely return of books.

Kim (2018) conducted a study to examine the policy of overdue fines at the Undergraduate Library at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. In particular, he analysed the impact of the fines policy on undergraduates and how they used the library, and how staff’s experiences with fines affected their workflow. The results of the study showed that although many students believed that fines were an effective way of encouraging the return of books, the financial burden played a role in the negative impression of libraries and could deter some customers from using their services.

In order to better determine the impact of differential fines on user behaviour, Boehme and Mihaly (2018) experimented in their study by charging fines to one group and not to another. They found that there was no statistically significant change in the fines collected or the amount of library materials borrowed. The data suggested that patrons kept an item for as long as they needed it and returned it when they had finished with it.

From the review of the relevant literature, few studies have been carried out in developing countries in academic libraries regarding the overdue return of library holdings. In Bangladesh, until now, there has been a lack of studies which have examined the impact of overdue fines and circulation policies, as well as students’ reactions to library penalties. This study aims to address this gap in the literature. In such a context, the significance of this study resides in examining the reactions of university students to the imposition of library fines at BRAC University, Bangladesh.

Methodology

Questions related to the issues identified during the literature review were developed and pretested on five students with experience of returning overdue items. These students were later excluded from the study. Based on the students’ responses, the questions were revised to produce the final questionnaire (see Appendix 1). This questionnaire was used for the data collection.

However, the sample is not entirely random for two reasons. First, the sample was selected only from those who came to the library – those who did not come to the library (for whatever reason) had no chance of being selected. Second, the first-semester (fresher) students were excluded from the selection process as they were still undergoing the information literacy/library instruction programmes. So, purposive sampling was also used to a certain extent.

A total of 300 copies of the questionnaire were distributed. These were randomly distributed to those who came to use the library. It took about two months (March–April 2019) to distribute and get back the questionnaires. The rate of return was encouraging: 258 copies of the completed questionnaire were returned. The data was analysed using IBM SPSS.

A semi-structured interview was conducted with a library officer at the Ayesha Abed Library to establish the size of the collection, library usage statistics, and how many books were overdue per week, per month or over other time periods.

Findings

The demographic profile of the respondents showed that, among the 258 students, 128 (49.61%) were male and the remaining 130 (50.39%) were female. Most of them (185, 72%) were studying at the undergraduate level, while only 73 (28%) were studying at the postgraduate level (see Table 3).

Table 3.

Frequency of users’ library visits (ranked frequency).

Frequency of visits	Gender		Frequency	Percent
Frequency of visits	Male	Female	Frequency	Percent
At least once a week	38	45	83	32.17
Twice a week	37	27	64	24.81
Daily	32	30	62	24.03
Fortnightly	17	18	35	13.57
Whenever needed	4	10	14	5.43
Total	128	130	258	100.00

As shown in Table 4, around 41% of the students made use of the library to borrow library materials and only 11.4% used the library to get information. From Figure 1, most of the respondents had faced overdue fines in their past experience and, in this case, no gender deviation was observed.

Table 4.

Reasons for making use of the library (multiple answers applicable, ranked frequency).

Reasons for using the library	Male	Female	n	Percent
To borrow books/compact discs/DVDs	84	89	173	41.1
To read notes	47	37	84	20.0
To complete class assignments	22	35	57	13.5
For information	28	20	48	11.4
To relax	22	25	47	11.2
Other	5	7	12	2.9

Figure 1.

Past experience of users’ overdue library materials.

As shown in Table 5, the three most common reasons for users returning their books late were: (1) forgetfulness (44.9%) – that is, not remembering to either renew or return the library materials on time; (2) necessity/perceived necessity (19.2%) – users needed the book or other materials for study so kept them beyond the due date; and (3) the inconvenience of the library regulations (15.8%) – users were unable to return the library materials on the due date due to the short loan period. Other reasons identified included being away from university on the due date; having lost or misplaced the book; having lent the book to a friend; and personal circumstances. These additional reasons for overdue returns were found to be far less common than the three main reasons. Thirteen students (4.9%) claimed illness, library server problems, sudden university leave, obstacles to obtaining library messages due to changing their mobile phone number or absence from the city on the due date as reasons for their past overdue experiences.

Table 5.

Users’ explanations for having overdue library books in the past (multiple answers applicable, ranked frequency).

Reason for overdue books in the past	Male	Female	Frequency	Percent
I forgot the due date	69	50	119	44.9
I had not finished using the book/compact disc/DVD	21	30	51	19.2
Loan period was too short	21	21	42	15.8
Personal circumstances	7	6	13	4.9
Other	8	5	13	4.9
Could not get to the library	3	8	11	4.2
Lost the book/compact disc/DVD	3	7	10	3.8
Lent book to somebody else	3	3	6	2.3
Total	135	130	265	100.0

In response to the question ‘How did you feel when you kept the library items/materials beyond the due date?’, Table 6 shows that 74 students (31.2%) were not worried about the consequences of returning books late and 62 (26.2%) felt guilty about it happening or were afraid of the penalty for returning books late. It is a positive fact of the survey that, most of the students (87.8%) did not show an unwillingness to use the library again and only 10 (4.2%) students felt overdue fine as burdened. These findings contradict the findings of an earlier study by Ajayi and Okunlola (2005), in which 36.9% of students said they felt guilty for keeping books beyond the date due and 7.1% were not concerned about the consequences of late books.

Table 6.

Users’ reactions to keeping books beyond their due date.

Users’ reactions	Male	Female	Frequency	Percent
Not worried	41	33	74	31.2
Afraid of the penalty	31	31	62	26.2
Felt guilty	28	34	62	26.2
Did not use the library again	11	18	29	12.2
Other	5	5	10	4.2
Total	115	122	237	100.0

As shown in Table 7, when students received a fine, a large number of them (68.2%) managed to pay it out of their pocket money. Only 4.2% of the students refused to pay the penalty. Among 57 students (24.4%) most of them never had a situation to pay the imposed fine. Only a few said that they had asked library staff if they could pay the fine later and only one student paid a fine from their part-time earnings (see Table 8).

Table 7.

Students’ sources of payment of fines.

Source of payment of fines	Male	Female	Frequency	Percent
Paid from pocket money (allowance)	80	83	163	68.2
Collected money from parents	21	32	53	22.2
Borrowed money from friends	8	4	12	5.0
Refused to pay	7	3	10	4.2
Other	1	0	1	0.4
Total	117	122	239	100.0

When the students were unable to pay their fines, 36.3% dropped in an application to the librarian to request that the fine be cancelled. However, it is alarming to note that 14.1% of the students did not go to the library or borrow items again (see Table 8), which needs to be taken into consideration by library authorities. In response to the question ‘Did you still continue to use/borrow library items after being fined?’, 194 (75.19%) continued to use/borrow library items after being fined, which is encouraging.

Table 8.

Students’ approaches when unable to pay fines.

Students’ approaches	Male	Female	Frequency	Percent
I drop in an application to the librarian requesting that my fine be cancelled	40	45	85	36.3
I do not go to the library	16	17	33	14.1
I do not borrow items again	17	16	33	14.1
I avoid the library staff	1	1	2	0.9
I use my friend’s card to borrow items	13	11	24	10.3
Other	28	29	57	24.4
Total	124	110	234	100.0

Although 65.12% of the students were satisfied or very satisfied with the existing library fine rules (see Figure 2), this type of survey needs to be carried out at regular intervals to establish the consistency of their responses and identify any new opinions/suggestions that might arise.

Figure 2.

Students’ satisfaction level with existing fine rules.

In response to the question ‘Do you think that an overdue library book is a problem when borrowing another library item?’, 165 (63.95%) of the students felt that having an overdue item was not a barrier to borrowing another library item, and 95 (36.05%) saw it as an obstacle.

The respondents were asked what they thought about the fines for overdue items. Table 9 shows that 83 (29.3%) of the respondents thought that overdue fines made students return items at the appointed time; 79 (27.9%) were of the view that they would instil discipline; 34 (12.0%) said that they would make library books available and accessible; and 50 (17.7%) thought that they would discourage students from using library materials. The remaining 37 (13.1%) felt that they served as a hindrance to students borrowing books.

Table 9.

Students’ opinions regarding the amount of fines for overdue books.

Perceptions of the increase in fines	Male	Female	Frequency	Percent
It will instil discipline	42	37	79	27.9
It makes students return items at the appointed time	41	42	83	29.3
It serves as a restriction to defaulters	18	19	37	13.1
It discourages students from using the library	22	28	50	17.7
It will make library items available and accessible	17	17	34	12.0
Total	140	143	283	100.0

Question 14 in the survey (see Appendix 1) invited the users to provide open-ended responses with any other suggestions or comments about overdue library books that would help in minimizing the problem. This question was answered by only 45 users (17% of the total respondents). Budget allocation for more e-resources, multiple copies of hard-copy books and uninterrupted library server connectivity to receive messages from the library were the most common solutions offered by the students.

The findings of this study will help other academic libraries and librarians to comprehend the necessity of conducting user-feedback surveys, enriching library collections, revising library rules if needed, and taking the necessary steps in order to minimize overdue fines.

Conclusion and recommendations

From the analysis and findings of this study, it can be concluded that library users realized that, without charging fines, the library could not make students return their borrowed books promptly, and so it did not serve as a deterrent. This constituted a barrier to the free circulation and availability of library books. The library did not aim to collect fines or to generate income. The survey revealed that students at the BRAC University were in favour of fines. The study also revealed that the amount of the fines charged in an academic library was not a barrier to the effective utilization of the library collection. Most of the respondents were satisfied with the existing fines policy (only 19.38% disagreed with it; see Figure 2).

The students seemed to agree that fines did not discourage them from using the library; fines instilled discipline, which made students return items by the due date, thereby making the library items available and accessible. These policies therefore needed to be effectively enforced by library staff and defaulters must be made to pay their fines. The study also showed that there was no gender difference in the acceptance of the fine increases. What is important to students is that their information needs are met regularly and that they do not waste time wandering among the shelves.

With the increase in student enrolments at BRAC University, an increased library budget to meet the high cost of books, the availability of e-resources and uninterrupted library server connectivity to obtain library messages seem to be the solution. Special attention should be given to the identification of the most used titles and more copies should be purchased to minimize overdue fines.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Shamima Yesmin

Appendix 1

References

Adomi

(2003) Attitudes of university library users towards overdue fines in Nigeria. Bottom Line 16(1): 19–24.

Ajayi

Okunlola

(2005) Students’ perception of fine increases for overdue library books in an academic library. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 37(4): 187–193.

Alao

(2002) Students and overdue books in a medical library. Journal of the Medical Library Association 90(3): 294–297.

Anderson

(2008) Are fines fine? A mixed methods study of the effectiveness of and attitudes to overdue fines among various borrower groups (age, gender, ethnicity, student status, faculty and degree) of the University of Canterbury Library. Master’s Dissertation, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.

Ayesha Abed Library, BRAC University (2019) Library borrowing privileges. Available at: http://library.bracu.ac.bd/library-borrowing-system (accessed 12 September 2019).

Bhatt

(2011) Students’ perception of charging fines for overdue books: Case of Islamia College of Science and Technology Library. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology 31(6): 407–413.

Boehme

Mihaly

(2018) Fine efficacy: An experimental study of the effect of daily fines on borrower return habits. University Libraries Faculty Publications: 53. Available at: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/ul_pub/53

Davies

Sen

(2013) Overdue books at Leeds University Library. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 46(3): 226–242.

Hazarika

Gohain

(2013) Attitudes of college library users towards overdue fines: A study of college libraries in Lakhimpur District of Assam, India. International Journal of Digital Library Services 3(3): 53–64.

10.

Kairy

(ed.) (2017) Annual report 2017. BRAC University. Available at: https://www.bracu.ac.bd/sites/default/files/resources/ar/BRACU-Annual%20-Report-2017.compressed.pdf (accessed 12 September 2019).

11.

Kim

(2018) Overdue fines in the academic library: Undergraduate student and staff perceptions of overdue fines at the UNC Undergraduate Library. Master’s Dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA.

12.

McMenemy

(2010) On library fines: Ensuring civic responsibility or an easy income stream? Library Review 59(2): 78–81.

13.

Mitchell

Smith

(2005) Using rewards to minimize overdue book rates. Journal of Access Services 3(1): 47–52.

14.

Murugathas

(2009) Why medical students keep books overdue: A study at the University of Jaffna. Journal of the University Librarians Association of Sri Lanka 13(1): 1–3.

15.

Phelps

(2015) Library fines make a difference in academic library book return behaviour. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 10(3): 96–98.

16.

Quacquarelli Symonds (2019) QS World University Rankings: Asia 2018. Available at: https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/asian-university-rankings/2018 (accessed 12 September 2019).

17.

Reed

Blackburn

Sifton

(2014) Putting a sacred cow out to pasture: Assessing the removal of fines and reduction of barriers at a small academic library. Journal of Academic Librarianship 40(3–4): 275–280.

18.

Rupp

Sweetman

Perry

(2010) Updating circulation policy for the 21st century. Journal of Access Services 7(3): 159–175.

19.

Sarasvathy

Giddiah

Selvaraja

(2015) Attitude of library users towards overdue fines, University of Mysore: A study. SRELS Journal of Information Management 52(1): 51–57.

20.

Shontz

(1999) Effect of fines on length of checkout and overdues in a medical library. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 87(1): 82–84.

21.

Souter

(1976) Delinquent readers: A study of the problem in university libraries. Journal of Librarianship 8(2): 96–110.

22.

Sung

Tolppanen

(2013) Do library fines work? Analysis of the effectiveness of fines on patron’s return behavior at two mid-sized academic libraries. Journal of Academic Librarianship 39(6): 506–511.

23.

Udoumoh

Okoro

(2007) The effect of library policies on overdue materials in university libraries in the South-South zone, Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice: 142. Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/142

24.

University Grants Commission of Bangladesh (2016) 43rd annual report of the University Grants Commission of Bangladesh. Available at: http://www.ugc.gov.bd/site/page/4fd862b5-7b93-44c8-a761-b8cac565fa43/%E0%A6%AC%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%B0%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B7%E0%A6%BF%E0%A6%95-%E0%A6%AA%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%A4%E0%A6%BF%E0%A6%AC%E0%A7%87%E0%A6%A6%E0%A6%A8-%E0%A7%A8%E0%A7%A6%E0%A7%A7%E0%A7%AC (accessed 12 September 2019).

25.

Walsh

(2009) Text messaging (SMS) and libraries. Library Hi Tech News 26(8): 9–11.

26.

Wilson

(2014) Why can’t they keep the book longer and do we really need to charge fines? Assessing circulation policies at the Harold B Lee Library: A case study. Journal of Access Services 11(3): 135–149.

27.

Zha

Yan

(2012) Understanding usage transfer from print resources to electronic resources: A survey of users of Chinese university libraries. Serials Review 38(2): 93–98.