TTB

If a media buyer believed that the primary reader (that is, the one who acquired the copy) was the appropriate audience level to buy, one could point to the issue-specific "through-the-book" method as a resource for identifying this more intense reader.

This idea never built up enough momentum, I think, because there was always the "through-the-book" numbers if you wanted to buy on primary audiences.

Although the screening procedure has been virtually ignored in the United States as a topic of investigation, it has been known for some time that material numbers of respondents who fail to screen-in would qualify as recent-reading or through-the-book measured readers had the question been asked (Lysaker, 1981; Tennstadt and Hansen, 1981; Wilson, 1981; Meier and Cornish, 1983; Vorster, 1985; Cornish, 1988).

"Validating the Recency and Through-the-Book Techniques." In Proceedings of the First International Readership Research Symposium, New Orleans, 1981.

Are Recent-Reading and Through-the-Book affected differently?

Based on data contained in the 1980 ARF Comparability Study [ARF, 1980, 1981], he showed a very strong relationship between screen-in rates and readership levels, for both Recent-Reading and Through-the-Book.

While the ARF study was at the time the only available body of screen-in and readership data for both the Recent-Reading and Through-the-Book methods, it was limited in two respects.