#lis research

I attended the 2018 Asian Conference on Education and International Development (ACEID) last week, and it was my first time attending a conference outside of LIS. The majority of the conference participants (from over 40 countries) were from education, and their presentations covered a wide range of education related topics. My presentation was about how librarians and faculty collaborate in higher education, and it was scheduled in a session along with two other presentations focusing on higher ed. Unfortunately, not many people showed up in the audience - the concurrent sessions on K-12 issues outcompeted us. Still, I had a nice discussion with the small audience - before I presented my study, I showed them slides of librarian stereotypes and their true images (e.g. portraits of the book “This is What a Librarian Looks Like”, the New Zealand librarians cosplaying the Kardasians, and examples of the cool things that librarians made happen in the library), and the audience was quite impressed. They agreed that my presentation gave them good ideas of how to reach out to their librarians for help now that they know libraries are such an important component of the learning ecology in higher ed. 

I had much fun interacting with education researchers at the conference and learned a lot myself. There’s a even research about how PMS (pre-menstrual syndrome) affects middle school girls’ academic performance in school. How interesting.

Last week I went to the beautiful campus of Loyola Marymount University for IRDL 2017. I’m glad that this wonderful research methods training program received funding to continue for another three years – more academic librarians will benefit from it and gain important skills to become more competent and confident practitioner researchers. I had great conversations with the participants this year. They were all working on interesting projects – e.g. how ARL libraries design their fundraising page on the library website, how students understand or misunderstand library jargon, how students’ interpretation of research differs from faculty’s expectation and observation of their research behavior, just to name a few. I can’t wait to read more about these great projects in journal publications.

In the past week, I taught during the day, and worked on other projects at night (yes, it’s a productive week for me!). Particularly, I took full advantage of LMU library’s subscription to SAGE Research Methods, and read a number of articles about the research method – interview. There are different ways to use interview in gathering qualitative data. Here’s a summary of them from the SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research:

Convergent interviewing - a technique that aims to collect, analyze, and interpret people's experiences, opinions, attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge that converge around a set of interviews. It was created primarily to address issues in under-researched areas. It permits in-depth interviewing by promoting a cyclical research process that requires ongoing analysis as part of the overall strategy. Interviewers engage in a constant comparative reflexive process that permits detailed rich content and theoretical sampling as researchers seek to continuously test emerging interpretations from early interviews in subsequent interviews.

Cognitive interviewing – it encompasses a variety of approaches for eliciting qualitative data on how participants interpret and respond to a wide variety of situations. Cognitive interviewing increasingly is used in the evaluation of technology interfaces such as websites and tools for informatics. It is used in education to understand how students think about content and respond to test items and in marketing to understand how to evaluate products better.

Conversational interviewing - an approach used by research interviewers to generate verbal data through talking about specified topics with research participants in an informal and conversational way. Interviewers and interviewees rely on taken-for-granted assumptions about how everyday talk occurs and how speakers make meaning of one another's utterances. In emphasizing features of mundane conversation, conversational interviewers strive to facilitate a research environment in which participants feel free to participate in extended discussions of research topics in a less hierarchical environment than that convened in structured interview settings.

Narrative interview - an interview that is organized to facilitate the development of a text that can be interpreted through narrative analysis. Narrative analysis is guided by a theory of narrative, and these theories of narrative vary in the influence of the reader, the text, and the intent of the author on interpretation. For this reason, the content and structure of a narrative interview will depend both on the theory of narrative being used in the analysis and on the research question.

Interactive interviewing -  an interpretive practice for getting an in-depth and intimate understanding of people's experiences with emotionally charged and sensitive topics such as childbirth, illness, loss, and eating disorders. Emphasizing the communicative and joint sense-making that occurs in interviewing, this approach involves the sharing of personal and social experiences of both respondents and researchers, who tell (and sometimes write) their stories in the context of a developing relationship.

The critical incident technique (CIT) - originally, it refers to a set of procedures to collect direct observations of human behaviors in a way that facilitates their use in solving practical problems and developing broad psychological principles. Over the years, it has been increasingly applied to studying psychological states or experiences, and emphasis has shifted from direct observation by experts to retrospective self-report in interviews.

In library research, an important source of data is input from the community of library users. How are users using library collections/services/facilities? How satisfied are they with their library experience? What are the inadequacies in meeting their needs? User input is critical in helping library professionals understand how successful the library is in serving the user community. Traditionally, librarians gather user input through survey, in-depth interview and focus group. To make the research process more engaging to both the researcher and library users, they may consider more creative alternatives, such as the photovoice method. Through the utilization of photographs and stories, this method allows community members to identify and represent issues of importance to them, enabling policy makers to develop a greater understanding of the issues, and formulate effective and comprehensive strategies to address them in a way that is also meaningful for the community.

Photovoice is a qualitative method often used in community-based participatory research (CBPR), where community members take photos related to a particular issue and tell their stories behind the photos in a facilitated discussion. Community members are believed to be more imaginative and observant of community issues than the most experienced photographers and photo journalists. In library and information science (LIS), photovoice is still relatively new and not widely used. Recently I wrote an article to review this method and discuss its implications for LIS research. The article is published in Library Hi Tech, titled “Photovoice: A Creative Method to Engage Library User Community”.

Since Photovoice is a CBPR method, it is often applied in action-oriented projects, where a partnership among the key stakeholders is established and all partners are equitably involved in the process with the aim of combining knowledge and action for community improvement . The key stakeholders include researchers, community members and decision makers, and they participate in the photovoice process collaboratively to explore community issues and produce an action plan to address them. However, photovoice projects are known for being time consuming as they usually extend over several weeks, which can be burdensome for some community participants and lead to high attrition rates. The cost related to photography and exhibition can be a concern too. Without community members’ sustained commitment and adequate funding, it is unlikely for the photovoice project to succeed.

Recently I have been reading “Creative Research Methods in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide” by Helen Kara. It’s refreshing to read about the various approaches in arts-based research, research using technology, mixed-methods research and trans formative research. It made me think how these methods can be applied in LIS research. 

One of the methods is vignettes, which I happened to co-write a paper about with two wonderful librarians, Allison Benedetti and John Jackson. Here’s an excerpt from our paper:

“Vignettes are short stories about hypothetical characters in hypothetical circumstances, to whose situation the interviewee is invited to respond. As a methodological tool, vignettes can be used in focus group interviews, in-depth interviews, or survey interviews, where the interviewee is invited to draw upon their own experience, and provide perceptions, opinions, beliefs, attitudes, and diagnostic predictions about how the fictional character in the vignette will behave. When observing or placing an individual in a particular context would not be possible for logistical or ethical reasons, vignettes are often considered. Approximating a real-world situation, vignettes allow for features of the context to be specified so that the interviewee can make normative statements about a set of social circumstances rather than provide their responses in a vacuum. 

Vignettes are often presented as a written narrative that the interviewee can read. Vignettes must carry sufficient detail to allow the interviewee to visualize the hypothetical circumstances as an actual situation. Particularly, the situational elements of a vignette need to be carefully specified and the main characters in the vignette are usually given names. Following each vignette, the researcher may ask an open-ended question or a closed question with a set of response categories from which the interviewee can choose. Probes are used when necessary for the interviewee to elaborate on their responses. 

In LIS research, vignettes have not been widely used. Given that vignettes are helpful to depersonalize sensitive topics and encourage respondents to talk more openly, they could be potentially useful for researching the attitudes and behaviors of scholars related to publishing, copyright, open access practices, and practically any area in which libraries are curious about the behaviors and habits of users. Vignettes could also be used with students to teach about or demonstrate concepts related to plagiarism and academic integrity. User experience and web design practices have long been utilizing personas or archetypes to evaluate designs and functionality of interfaces; there may be a place for vignettes to augment these practices, perhaps with remote or online usability studies.”

The third and final Institute for Research Design in Librarianship (IRDL) took place in June. IRDL is an IMLS-funded project that seeks to create a learning opportunity and a support system for academic librarians who want to improve their research skills and increase their research output. Twenty-one librarian scholars gathered at the beautiful campus of Loyola Marymount University and went through a 9-day intensive research methods training program. This year, quite a number of librarians were working on topics involving populations that are understudied in library research. Here are a few examples:

1.      How international students use the library and how does the library contribute to their success and growth in life

2.      How Chinese international students interpret “Authority is constructed and contextual”

3.      How scholars who study materials in non-English languages but publish in English use citation management software

4.      What is the experience of librarians of color in residency programs

5.      What are the barriers for women to seek leadership positions in libraries

During the Institute, there were two hours scheduled each day for the participating librarians to consult the instructors and IRDL directors about their research projects. I enjoyed these consultations immensely. It is always pleasant to chat with people who are enthusiastic about their research. The projects about understudied populations reinforced my idea of offering a research methods course that focuses on researching special populations. Every semester there are always students in our MLIS degree program proposing to conduct research about the library and information needs/behavior of a population that is traditionally underserved or understudied in libraries. For instance, in the past semester, a student proposed a survey study to examine the library needs of people who are quadriplegic. As our libraries strive to meet the needs of diverse user populations, it would be helpful if our librarians know how to properly design studies to generate practice-informing evidence about different populations, especially the underserved or less privileged ones.

See, IRDL always gives me new ideas and refreshes my perspectives as a researcher/educator. Two weeks flew by very quickly. I appreciate the opportunity to be part of this great effort that seeks to enhance the quality of scholarship among librarians and foster a culture of research-mindedness. Marie and Kris, the two wonderful IRDL project directors, are truly insightful in making IRDL happen, and I’m sure that the IRDL participants will make them proud by raising the bar of library research.

Yesterday I tried my best to focus on writing my article on the top-of-mind associations that incoming freshman have when they think about libraries. I’ve been trying to write this for some time and I keep getting stuck in the cycle of writing some and then doing more research, which seems to make it more complicated and interconnected, and harder to see the big picture. Ultimately I found myself spending most of my time trying to get a handle on the literature that will help me tell the story. It’s getting more clear, but parts of the literature keep bleeding into each other and I’m still having a tough time figuring out the major shape that will be useful to me. 

Nonetheless, I’m going to try my best to put down what seem to be the shape of the literature right now. Maybe it’s just a sorting and organizing issue. I’m currently thinking that these are the two big sections, with some possible sub sections.

Library Brand and Stereotypes

OCLC Report - Brand = books, still

Positive and negative associations

Library anxiety / Library ignorance

Information Literacy Transfer Between High School and College

First year experience courses

Library skills and experience

Constructivist approach

Last week I had the pleasure of going to Doha, Qatar to give a workshop at the Research-based Library Practices Summit. The Summit was organized by librarians from University College London and Carnegie Mellon University in Qatar and attended by librarians from multiple countries in the Gulf region. My workshop focused on providing an overview of the frequently used quantitative and qualitative research methods in library and information science such as survey, focus group interview, in-depth interview and content analysis, and explaining the process of making a methodological decision based on the research question. The objective of the workshop is for participants to gain knowledge and skills to determine which qualitative and quantitative methods are most appropriate to address their research questions. I used the following questions to help them analyze their research question and make the methodological decision:

·        Are qualitative research methods appropriate for your research question?

a.      How much previous research exists on your topic?

b.      Do you intend to capture a nuanced, in-depth view of your topic?

c.      Do you intend to describe your observations via the identification of themes/patterns?

d.      Is there existing qualitative content you can analyze, or do you have to collect original qualitative data?

e.      Which qualitative data collection method do you plan to use – focus group interview, in-depth interview or field observations?

 ·        Are quantitative research methods appropriate for your research question?

a.      Is your research question a relationship question or a causality question?

b.      Has there been extensive research conducted on your topic that the range of Reponses or variations of behavior are already known?

c.      Do you intend to quantify your observations and produce generalizable conclusions?

d.      Is there existing statistics you can analyze, or do you have to collect original quantitative data?

e.      Which quantitative data collection method do you plan to use – quantitative content analysis, quantitative observations, or survey?

Overall the workshop went pretty well. We had a lot of good discussions. I was impressed with the participants’ eagerness to conduct research to improve their practice. This kind of “research-mindedness” is exactly what we need in the profession.

During my stay in Doha, I had the opportunity to visit the state-of-the-art Qatar National Library. It’s still under construction, so we had to wear safety hat and vest on the tour. It’s an amazing building. I loved the open design and the high level of automation. There is even a restaurant in the library – a real one with a kitchen, not just a café where you can only get sandwiches. Unfortunately we weren’t allowed to take pictures inside. But here’s a picture of us in front of the building.

Here are a couple of pictures I took of a gorgeous corridor in the Education City, where the Summit was taking place. Gorgeous view, isn’t it?