國內大學圖書館目前大多是以館際互借圖書記錄分析借出及借入的數量與類別等做為館藏強弱之分析；亦或納入館藏採購及館藏發展之參考，而對於圖書實際使用效益分析則較為缺乏，故本研究針對個案大學圖書館館藏圖書及館際互借圖書之流通記錄做分析，目的在於暸解個案大學圖書館館藏圖書與館際互借圖書之使用情形，並計算館藏圖書及館際互借圖書兩者之使用成本效益，藉由上述之分析結果，考量較佳的使用成本效益下，本研究提出有別於個案大學圖書館現行之館際互借服務流程，以個案大學圖書館館際互借使用者為調查對象，透過SERVQUAL問卷調查暸解使用者對於不同服務流程間之滿意度差異。
本研究採用現有統計資料分析法和問卷調查法。研究結果顯示個案大學圖書館近年所採購之館藏圖書，不論是中文或外國語文圖書，皆是符合其館藏發展政策以人文社會科學類圖書為主，但是由館藏圖書與館際互借圖書之使用情形可得知大多使用者還是較習慣使用中文圖書；而對外國語文館際互借圖書也有一定的需求存在。另外，從使用率之觀點來計算使用成本效益結果顯示，個案大學圖書館之中文館藏圖書使用成本效益比中文館際互借圖書較佳，因館際互借中文圖書被使用之單位時間成本是館藏中文圖書約1.04倍，而館際互借外國語文圖書之使用成本效益比館藏外國語文圖書較佳，因館藏外國語文圖書被使用之單位時間成本是館際互借外國語文圖書約34.70倍。
在滿意度問卷調查中，亦發現使用者對於本研究提出之館際互借服務流程較為滿意，且他們希望圖書館能藉由分析館際互借圖書加以關照使用者需求，並擬訂一份館際互借採購方案及制訂館際互借服務之處理時間。
最後依據研究結果，本研究提出下列幾點建議，以供大學圖書館做為參考：(一)大學圖書館應常分析館藏圖書與館際互借圖書之使用成本效益，以提高圖書之使用效益；(二)分析館際互借之需求，以做為採購決策之參考並擬訂館際互借圖書選書政策；(三)將館際互借申請費用納入館藏預算分配之中；(四)訂定整個館際互借服務流程之處理時間；(五)建立自動化館際互借記錄決策支援系統。

Most domestic university libraries currently use interlibrary loan records to analyze the quantity and category of borrowing and lending to be the judgment of collection strength or the reference to put into the purchase or development list; however, there is still short of the analysis of utilization effectiveness. Therefore, this study analyzed the library collection and interlibrary loan circulation records of of one university in order to understand the utilization of the books of library collection and interlibrary loan and calculate the cost-benefit anlaysis. Based on the results of analysis and considering to improve the utilization cost-benefit anlaysis, this study proposed an interlibrary loan service process different its current one and used the SERVQUAL questionnaire to understand the difference of users’ satisfaction about these two processes, users of the interlibrary loan of this university as the survey subjects.
This study used existing statistical data anlysis methods and questionnaire survey. The results showed that the books, in Chinese or foreign language, of library collection that it purchased within these years conform to its library collection development policy focusing on the category of social science; nevertheless, from the utilization status of the books of library collection and interlibrary loan, it can be known that as for the library collection, the vast majority of the users of the library are still more accustomed to using Chinese library; there definitely exists a need of interlibrary loan books with the library of foreign languages. In addition, the results of utilization cost-benefit calculated by utilization rate showed that the utilization cost-benefit of Chinese books of the library collection was better than Chinese books of the interlibrary loan because the unit time/cost was 1.04 times of Chinese books of the library collection. The utilization cost-benefit of foreign books of the interlibrary loan was better than foreign books of the library collection because the unit time/cost of foreign books of the library collection was 34.70 times of foreign books of the interlibrary loan.
It was discovered in the satisfaction questionnaire survey that users were more satisfied with the interlibrary loan service process proposed by this study and they hoped that the library can satisfy their needs by analyzing the books of the interlibrary loan, draw up an interlibrary loan purchasing program and set the time to deal with the interlibrary loan services.
Finally, based on the results, this study proposed the following suggestions to be the reference for university libraries: University libraries should (1) always anlayze the utilization cost-benefit of their books of library collection and interlibrary loan to improve the utilization effectiveness; (2) analyze the needs of the interlibrary loan to be the reference for purchasing decision and regulate the book selection policy of the interlibrary loan; (3) put the application fee of the interlibrary loan into the budget of the library collection; (4) set the time to deal with the interlibrary loan services; (5) establish an automatic interlibrary loan records of decision support system.

一、中文部分
Babbie, E.（李美華譯）（民94）。社會科學研究方法。臺北市：時英發行。（原作2000年出版）
吳文慧（民92）。館際合作和文獻提供：資訊時代的定位和展望。圖書與資訊學刊，47，36-41。
吳明德（民80）。館藏發展。臺北市：漢美。
吳淑芬（民79）。我國人文社會及科技館際合作組織館際互借現況及問題硏究。臺北市：漢美。
林清山（民81）。心理與教育統計學。臺北市：東華書局。
邱皓政（民94）。量化研究法。臺北市：雙葉書廊。
侯雲卿（民87）。館際合作文獻供應之服務成本與計價淺探。大學圖書館，2（4），72-83。
馬少娟（民75）。大學圖書館圖書預算館藏發展問題之探討。臺北市：文津。
財團法人國家實驗研究院科技政策研究與資訊中心（民96）。全國文獻傳遞服務年報NDDS (2006) 。臺北市：財團法人國家實驗研究院科技政策研究與資訊中心。
財團法人國家實驗研究院科技政策研究與資訊中心（民97）。全國文獻傳遞服務年報NDDS (2007) 。臺北市：財團法人國家實驗研究院科技政策研究與資訊中心。
楊世瑩（民94）。SPSS統計分析實務。臺北市：旗標。
趙素貞（民97）。大學圖書館NetLibrary電子書之使用效益分析。未出版之碩士論文，臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。
蔡佳霖（民94）。輔仁大學圖書館服務品質研究：LibQUAL+(™) 之運用實證。未出版之碩士論文，輔仁大學圖書資訊學系，臺北縣。
鄭麗敏（民82）。談館際互借統計在館藏發展的應用。書苑季刊（20），89-102。

二、西文部分
Anderson, K. J., Freeman, R. S., Hérubel, J.-P. V. M., Mykytiuk, L. J., Nixon, J. M., & Ward, S. M. (2002). Buy, Don't Borrow:Bibliographers’Analysis of Academic Library Collection Development Through Interlibrary Loan Requests. Collection Management, 27(3/4), 1-11.
Bailey, T. P., Barnes Lessels, J., & Best, R. D. (2005). Using universal borrowing data in the library book fund allocation process. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services, 29(1), 90-98.
Cornish, G. P. (1991). Interlibrary Loan and Document Supply as an Indicator of Social and Cultural Infrastructures. American Society for Information Science. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science, 17(3), 23-24.
Crump, M. J., & Freund, L. (1995). Serials cancellations and interlibrary loan: The link and what it reveals. Serials Review, 21(2), 29-36.
Fong, Y. S. (1996). The Value of Interlibrary Loan : an Analysis of Customer Satisfaction Survery Comments. Journal of Library Administration, 23(1/2), 43-44.
Hébert, F. (1994). Service Quality:An Unobtrusive Investigation of Interlibrary Loan in Large Public Libraries in Canada. Library and Information Science Research(16), 3-21.
Ireland, M., & Brown, B. (2006). Using document delivery data for selecting medical titles in a large STM library: the experience of CISTI. Interlending & Document Supply, 34(1), 29-35.
Jackson, M. E. (1998). Measuring the Performance of Interlibrary Loan Operations in North American Research and College Libraries. Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Libraries.
Khalil, M. (February 1, 1993). Document Delivery:A Better Option. Library Journal, 43-45.
Knievel, J. E., Wicht, H., & Connaway, L. S. (2006). Use of circulation statistics and interlibrary loan data in collection management. College & Research Libraries, 67(1), 35-49.
Naylor, T. E. (1997). The cost of interlibrary loan services in a medium-sized academic library. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Information Supply, 8(2), 51.
Nitecki, D. A. (1995). An Assessment of the Applicability of SERVQUAL Dimensions as Customer-based Criteria for Evaluating Quality of Services in a Academic Library. University of Maryland College Park.
Rajendiran, P., Desphande, A. U., Bhushan, I., & Parihar, Y. S. (2008). Identification of Users' Information Needs: An Analysis of Inter-library Loan Requests for Journals Selection. DESIDOC Joumal of Library & Information Technology, 28(3), 56-59.
Rosemary, G., & Chan, Y. C. (2004). Purchase Instead of Borrow: An International Perspective. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Information Supply 14(4), 23-37.
Ruppel, M. (2006). Tying collection development's loose ends with interlibrary loan. Collection Building, 25(3), 72-77.
Ward, S. M., Wray, T., & Debus-Lopez, K. E. (2003). Collection development based on patron requests: collaboration between interlibrary loan and acquisitions. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services, 27(2), 203-213.
White, M. D. (1997). Measuring Service Quality in Libraries. Advances in Library Administrations and Organizaions(15), 2-19.
Xia, L., & Ting, L. (2008). A costing study of the document supply service at a Chinese research library: the case of Wuhan University Library. Interlending & Document Supply, 36(2), 86-90.