This Carnegie-Mellon University Libraries study compared the effectiveness of two methods of current awareness service: computerized updates and the distribution of the tables of contents of journals. In particular it compared the timeliness and availability of articles in-house with the greater coverage but longer time lag (and possible lower accessibility) of articles cited in computer updates. Forty-eight randomly selected faculty members from the chemistry and public affairs departments were segmented into three groups and given retrospective searches on the topics of their choice. Thereafter, one group received only computer updates, another tables of contents, and the third a combination of both. Participants then evaluated their service via questionnaires. It was found that the tables of contents generally provided a more valuable service than the computer updates. The report cites nine references and includes tables and sample questionnaires. (FM)