1. See, e.g., Shaheen, M.A., “The Library of tfshe Future”, SciTech World (September 2004) and Windau, B., “Library 2007”, IFLA Conference 2003 – Berlin. Steele, C., “No Easy Rider? The Scholar and the Future of the Research Library, by Fremond Rider: A Review Article”, The Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 37 (2005) emphasizes that this subject is relevant and up-to-date since many years.
2. See, e.g., Green, P.E. & Srinivasan, V., “Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook”, Journal of Consumer Research 5 (September 1978): 103–123, and Green, P.E., Srinivasan, V., “Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New Developments with Implications for Research and Practice”, Journal of Marketing 17 (1990): 3–19, for an introduction into the basic conjoint methodology. See also Halperin, M., “Determining User Preferences for Information Services,” Drexel Library Quarterly 17 (No. 2, 1981): 88–98, Ramsing, K., Wish, J.R., “What do Library Users Want? A Conjoint Measurement Technique May Yield the Answer,” Information Processing and Management 18 (2) (1982): 237–242, as well as Joseph, V. & Binwal, J.C., “Conjoint Analysis: Technique for Assessing Customer's Preferences on Library Products and Services,” Journal of Library Information Science 19 (2) (1994): 75–85 for more specific considerations in the library context.
3. Measuring Students’ Preferences for Reference Service: a Conjoint Analysis;Halperin;Library Quarterly,1980
4. “A Conjoint Analysis of Reference Services in Academic Libraries”;Crawford;College and Research Libraries,1994
5. Introduction of an Electronic Document Delivery Service as a ‘Complement’ to Conventional Interlibrary Loan;Karlowitsch,1998