Gender and racial bias in email reference services

IF 1.3 4区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Reference Services Review Pub Date : 2023-09-05 DOI:10.1108/rsr-05-2023-0051
Megan Vladoiu, Pnina Fichman, Jieli Liu
{"title":"Gender and racial bias in email reference services","authors":"Megan Vladoiu, Pnina Fichman, Jieli Liu","doi":"10.1108/rsr-05-2023-0051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis article examines if there is evidence of racial or gender bias in email reference services in American public and academic libraries.Design/methodology/approachUsing a two-by-two study design and an unobtrusive data collection, the authors conducted two studies in which the authors sent 1,960 email requests to 505 academic and public libraries. Requests in both studies differed in the perceived identity of the user as indicated by their name, and the counterbalanced method was utilized to control for intervening variables. Based on content analysis of the responses, the authors examined the statistical significance of the differences by race, gender and race by gender.FindingsOverall, the authors found equitable service to users regardless of their race and gender; at times, however, there was evidence of favorable service to the White female in academic and public libraries and to the Black male in academic libraries.Originality/valueThere is little research into potential bias in email reference services in both academic and public libraries in the United States of America. Yet, following the rise of the Black Lives Matter Movement in 2020, there has been an increased focus on racial equality in library services and the American Library Association (ALA) Code of Ethics was modified accordingly. The authors' study makes significant contributions to the increasing body of research on racial and gender equality in online library services.","PeriodicalId":46478,"journal":{"name":"Reference Services Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reference Services Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/rsr-05-2023-0051","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeThis article examines if there is evidence of racial or gender bias in email reference services in American public and academic libraries.Design/methodology/approachUsing a two-by-two study design and an unobtrusive data collection, the authors conducted two studies in which the authors sent 1,960 email requests to 505 academic and public libraries. Requests in both studies differed in the perceived identity of the user as indicated by their name, and the counterbalanced method was utilized to control for intervening variables. Based on content analysis of the responses, the authors examined the statistical significance of the differences by race, gender and race by gender.FindingsOverall, the authors found equitable service to users regardless of their race and gender; at times, however, there was evidence of favorable service to the White female in academic and public libraries and to the Black male in academic libraries.Originality/valueThere is little research into potential bias in email reference services in both academic and public libraries in the United States of America. Yet, following the rise of the Black Lives Matter Movement in 2020, there has been an increased focus on racial equality in library services and the American Library Association (ALA) Code of Ethics was modified accordingly. The authors' study makes significant contributions to the increasing body of research on racial and gender equality in online library services.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
电子邮件参考服务中的性别和种族偏见
目的研究美国公共图书馆和学术图书馆的电子邮件参考服务是否存在种族或性别偏见。设计/方法/方法采用二乘二的研究设计和不引人注目的数据收集,作者进行了两项研究,作者向505个学术和公共图书馆发送了1960封电子邮件请求。两项研究中的请求在用户的感知身份方面存在差异,并使用平衡方法来控制干预变量。在对问卷内容分析的基础上,研究了种族差异、性别差异和种族性别差异的统计学意义。总体而言,作者发现,无论用户的种族和性别如何,都能获得公平的服务;然而,有时有证据表明,在学术和公共图书馆,白人女性和黑人男性在学术图书馆得到了有利的服务。原创性/价值在美国的学术图书馆和公共图书馆中,对电子邮件参考服务的潜在偏见的研究很少。然而,随着2020年“黑人的命也是命”运动的兴起,人们越来越关注图书馆服务中的种族平等问题,美国图书馆协会(ALA)的《道德准则》也进行了相应的修改。作者的研究对在线图书馆服务中种族和性别平等的研究做出了重大贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Reference Services Review
Reference Services Review INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Reference Services Review (RSR ) is a quarterly, refereed journal dedicated to the enrichment of reference knowledge and the advancement of reference services. RSR covers all aspects of reference functions, including automation of reference services, evaluation and assessment of reference functions and sources, models for delivering quality reference services in all types and sizes of libraries, development and management of teaching/learning activities, promotion of information literacy programs, and partnerships with other entities to achieve reference goals and objectives. RSR prepares its readers to understand and embrace current and emerging technologies affecting reference functions, instructional services and information needs of library users.
期刊最新文献
Fostering UDL-informed library instruction practices developed from the COVID-19 pandemic Toward the development of a framework for literacy support and promotion by public libraries in financially and infrastructurally low-resourced territories Editorial: Start the conversation: impactful reading on reference and instruction Non-familial White Sponge Nevus, an Innocuous yet Clinically Significant Entity: Report of a Case with Review of the Literature. Implementing universal design for learning in the library and across campus to promote more inclusive pedagogy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1