Research Article
Testing a Warmth-Based Instruction Intervention for
Reducing Library Anxiety in First-Year Undergraduate Students
Cecelia Parks
Research and Instruction
Librarian and Assistant Professor
University of Mississippi
Libraries
Oxford, Mississippi, United
States of America
Email: cparks@olemiss.edu
Received: 11 Jan. 2019 Accepted: 26 Apr. 2019
2019 Parks. This is an Open Access article
distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 4.0
International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
DOI: 10.18438/eblip29548
Abstract
Objective – This study
aimed to test the efficacy of a warmth-based library instruction intervention
in reducing rates of library anxiety in first-year undergraduate students.
"Warmth" is a concept that is commonly discussed within literature on
library anxiety, but to date no studies have explicitly tested the application
of a warmth-based instruction intervention. First-year students are ideal
targets for this intervention because they are the most likely to experience
library anxiety.
Methods – A
quasi-experiment was conducted examining library anxiety rates in first-year
undergraduate students at a public research university in the U.S. South. A
one-shot warmth-based instruction session focusing on the emotional dimensions
of library use was compared to a standard one-shot instruction session. Library
anxiety was measured using a modified version of Bostick's Library Anxiety
Scale as a pretest and posttest.
Results
–
Results indicated that both warmth-based and standard library instruction were
associated with a decrease in participants' library anxiety rates without
significant differences between the types of instruction. However, warmth-based
instruction was correlated with greater reductions in areas of library anxiety
related to interactions with library workers. Though library anxiety rates
decreased significantly after experiencing library instruction, participants
exhibited low levels of library anxiety before their library instruction
session occurred.
Conclusion – Though
warmth-based instruction did not have a significantly different impact than
standard library instruction on general library anxiety, the intervention
tested in this study suggests strategies that could be used to increase student
comfort with library workers. This study also demonstrates a successful method
to include emotional factors such as library anxiety in academic libraries'
regular assessment programs. Focusing assessment on students' skills and
knowledge alone risks ignoring an important aspect of student engagement and
missing opportunities for academic libraries to connect with students.
Assessment of emotional components of library instruction initiatives is
especially crucial to ensure and demonstrate that libraries are using their
resources effectively to maximize student success.
Introduction
Library anxiety is a demonstrated phenomenon that presents real barriers
to academic success in higher education (Mellon, 1986). Students with library
anxiety feel nervous or uncomfortable engaging with library resources,
including simple acts such as entering the library building, and are therefore
less likely to do so. This lack of engagement can be detrimental to student
success, as the use of library resources has been tied to increased academic
success and retention rates (Gaha, Hinnefeld, & Pellegrino, 2018; Soria,
Fransen, & Nackerud, 2017). The negative effects of library anxiety may be
particularly acute for students early in their academic careers, for example
first-years and sophomores have the highest reported levels of library anxiety
(Jiao, Onwuegbuzie, & Lichtenstein, 1996; Mech & Brooks, 1997).
Studies show that interventions by librarians such as library
instruction sessions can decrease library anxiety. The literature also
demonstrates that it is critical to target interventions towards the most
vulnerable students, like first-years, in order to maximize the impact of the intervention
(Brown, Weigart, Johnson, & Dance, 2004; Chiman, Nwajei, & Akpom, 2015;
Muszkiewicz, 2017; Onwuegbuzie, Jiao, & Bostick, 2004; Van Scoyoc, 2003).
This study further tests these findings by conducting a quasi-experiment
comparing two different types of library instruction, with the purpose of
determining whether warmth-based instruction is more effective than standard
library instruction, for lowering rates of library anxiety among first-year
students at a public research university in the South.
Assessment of library instruction is particularly important for
institutions that devote considerable resources to library instruction for
first-year students, such as the university under consideration in this study.
Assessment of information literacy skills is common and is often used to
justify large first-year instruction initiatives, but assessment of first-year
students’ emotional responses to the library is equally important, yet often
neglected (Cook, 2014; Gilbert, 2009; Lowe, Booth, Stone & Tagge, 2015;
Luetkenhaus, Hvizdak, Johnson & Schiller, 2017; Shao & Purpur, 2016).
Ideally, library instruction for first-year students provides not only a base
of information literacy skills to build on, but also an understanding of the
library as a resource that they can return to for help throughout their
academic careers. As librarians cannot work with every single class or
individual student, it becomes the students’ responsibility to seek out help
when needed; feelings of library anxiety make it less likely that they will do
so. Therefore, understanding the emotional impact of library instruction for
first-year students is a necessary component of assessment, to ensure that
library instruction resources are being used effectively.
Literature Review
Constance Mellon coined the term “library anxiety” in her 1986 article
titled “Library Anxiety: A Grounded Theory and its Development,” naming what
many academic librarians had noticed for years in their interactions with
students. Mellon found that students commonly expressed feelings of fear and
anxiety about using the library in general, rather than frustration with
specific aspects of library use or deficits in certain skills. This anxiety
often stemmed from a sense of perceived inadequacy, or feelings that everyone
but them already possessed the skills and knowledge necessary to use the
library to conduct research, and that library workers would judge them for
asking questions. Mellon (1986, p. 163) noted that students became so anxious
that they were “unable to approach the problem logically or effectively,”
preventing the students from seeking help. Sharon Bostick (1992) developed the
Library Anxiety Scale to measure library anxiety in college students. Although
other scales have been created, such as the AQAK (Anwar, Al-Qallaf, Al-Kandari,
& Al-Ansari, 2011) and an information anxiety scale (Blundell &
Lambert, 2014), Bostick’s Library Anxiety Scale remains the basis for most
assessments of library anxiety today.
Many studies on this subject have focused on understanding factors that
contribute to students’ experiences of library anxiety, such as gender, past
academic experiences, race, and socioeconomic status, though no consensus has
emerged around any predictor. Jiao & Onwuegbuzie (1999) studied library
anxiety in graduate students and found that students with lower
self-perceptions of competence exhibited the highest rates of library anxiety,
while Jiao, Onwuegbuzie, & Lichtenstein (1996) demonstrated that first- and
second-year undergraduates, men, and those who infrequently used the library
had higher rates of library anxiety (though Bostick’s 1992 dissertation showed
no differences in library anxiety between genders and Blundell and Lambert’s
2014 study indicated that female students experience higher rates of library
anxiety). Sinnasamy and Abdul Karim (2015) demonstrated that communication
anxiety and English language anxiety influence library anxiety. Blundell and
Lambert (2014) examined the relationship between information anxiety, race,
gender, and prior library experience, whereas Wildemuth (2017) noted that male
students who spoke English as a second language experienced the highest rates
of library anxiety.
Other studies have concentrated on how to mitigate the effects of
library anxiety, regardless of who experiences the highest levels of such
anxiety. Mellon (1986) focused on the importance of “warmth” in interactions
between library workers and students as a way to decrease library anxiety.
Fiske, Cuddy, and Glick (2006, p. 77) noted that warmth, or traits related to
perceived intent, such as “friendliness, helpfulness, sincerity,
trustworthiness, and morality”, is the first dimension of personality on which
humans judge one another. This finding suggests that warmth is crucial for
interactions with first-year students, particularly because the interaction may
be the student's first experience with an academic library. Other researchers
have tested various methods of incorporating warmth into library services and
interactions (though the impact of librarian personality on students' library
anxiety has not been tested) and one of the most common venues for intervention
is new student orientation, due to the high percentage of incoming students
that can be reached through orientation events. Orientation activities
described in the literature include traditional information sessions (Brown,
Weingart, Johnson, & Dance, 2006), distribution of “library survival
guides” (DiPrince, Wilson, Karafit, Bryant, & Springer, 2016), and fun,
casual, non-skills focused activities (Muszkiewicz, 2017). Each of these
studies demonstrated decreased levels of students’ library anxiety after
participating in the orientation activity.
Library instruction has also been commonly used to decrease library
anxiety. Mellon (1986) pointed to library instruction as a way to project
warmth and minimize library anxiety and that recommendation has been echoed by
others (Chimah, Nwajei, & Akpom, 2015; Collins, Mellon, & Young, 1987;
Naveed, 2017; Wildemuth, 2017). Studies such as those by Van Scoyoc (2003) and
Fleming-May, Mays, and Radom (2015) demonstrated that library instruction was
correlated with decreased library anxiety, though Van Scoyoc focused on
one-shot skills-based instruction sessions while Fleming-May, Mays, and Radom
explored the impact of a three workshop series for at-risk students. Similarly,
Kracker (2002) found that presentations on Kuhlthau’s Information Search
Process model (Kuhlthau, 1993) correlated with a decrease in research anxiety
among their participants. These studies demonstrate that library instruction
can have an impact on students’ library anxiety, but no study has specifically
explored the implementation of warmth in instruction sessions, even though the
importance of warmth is widely recognized.
First-year students are often the targets of library instruction
initiatives. Jiao, Onwuegbuzie, and Lichtenstein (1996) and Mech and Brooks
(1997) demonstrated that first-year students exhibited the highest rates of
library anxiety, and students new to higher education naturally lack some of
the skills and knowledge necessary to utilize academic libraries. Library
instruction has been shown to increase first-year students’ information
literacy skills, whether the instruction takes the form of a one-shot session
(Gilbert, 2009; Luetkenhaus, Hvizdak, Johnson & Schiller, 2017), a
for-credit course (Cook, 2014), or general interactions with librarians (Lowe,
Booth, Stone & Tagge, 2015). Van Scoyoc (2003) found that instruction
reduced first-year students’ library anxiety rates, but that study is over
fifteen years old (as are other important library anxiety studies), and
first-year students have changed significantly as today’s students have come of
age regularly using new and powerful information tools. These changes do not
eliminate first-year students’ library anxiety and information literacy
challenges, but they indicate that libraries’ approaches to addressing these
issues need to be updated.
Aims
The aims of this study are to:
- Test the efficacy of explicitly warmth-based
instruction on reducing first-year students’ library anxiety
- Update previous studies such as Van Scoyoc’s
(2003) that examine the impact of library instruction sessions on
first-year students’ library anxiety
Methods
This study used a quasi-experimental method to compare the effects of
standard library instruction (the control) to warmth-based library instruction
(the intervention) on library anxiety in first-year students as measured by
pretest and posttest results. As in a fully randomized experiment, a researcher
using quasi-experimental methods "manipulate[s] presumed causes to
discover their effects, but the researcher does not assign
units to conditions randomly. Quasi-experiments are necessary because it is not
always possible to randomize" (Lewis-Beck, Bryman, & Futing Liao,
2004, p. 888). Quasi-experiments are often used in educational settings because
these settings often do not allow for true randomization. The
quasi-experimental method was ideal for this study because it allowed for an
intervention to be tested on a population that could not be randomized, due to
the practical infeasibility of breaking up pre-determined classes to create
truly randomized testing groups.
A modified version of Bostick’s (1992) Library Anxiety Scale was
developed for use as the pretest and posttest. Modifications were necessary to
shorten the original 43-question scale to one that could be administered in a
shorter time period and to update some of the more dated items. Bostick's
(1992) modified Library Anxiety Scale was more suitable to the purposes of this
study than newer adaptations, such as the AQAK (Anwar, Al-Qallaf, Al-Kandari,
& Al-Ansari, 2011), which were too specific to a particular time and place
to be useful. A 24-question version of the modified Library Anxiety Scale was
piloted with a group of approximately 60 first-year students, and factor
analysis was used to eliminate an additional 6 items for a total of 18 items on
the final scale. See Appendix A for the full instrument and Appendix B for the
factor analysis table.
Sections of the “EDHE 105: Freshman Year Experience course”, which is
intended to help first-time, first-year students adjust to college, were
targeted for this study due to their consistent first-year student population
and history of cooperation with the library. New transfer students were not
included in this study. Eight instructors teaching a total of 12 sections and
262 enrolled students were recruited to participate in the study. Sections were
assigned to the control (standard instruction) or intervention (warmth-based
instruction) group. If an instructor taught more than one section, half of
their sections were assigned to the control group and half were assigned to the
intervention group to minimize instructor influence on the results. All
participating sections were pre-scheduled for a library instruction session and
all sessions were taught by the same librarian instructor. Pretests were
administered by the “EDHE 105” instructor approximately one week before each
section’s library instruction session, roughly early September through early
October 2018. Each student participant was randomly assigned a unique
identifier, which was destroyed before analysis, to allow direct comparison
between the pretests and posttests.
The “EDHE 105” sections in the control group participated in a standard
library instruction session, in which a librarian instructor introduced basic
information literacy skills by guiding students through an online worksheet to
learn about the library website, discovery service, and online catalog,
culminating in finding a book in the stacks. No emphasis was placed on the
emotional dimensions of using the library or any anxiety the students may have
been experiencing. The “EDHE 105” sections in the intervention group
participated in a warmth-based library instruction session, which emphasized
the emotional dimensions of library use rather than any specific skills, and
was intended to make students feel comfortable working with library workers and
using library resources. Activities for the warmth-based session were drawn
from the instructor's own experiences observing what makes students feel
comfortable in the classroom and in the library. Activities were also pulled
from the literature, such as sharing information about library anxiety
(Kracker, 2002), incorporating elements of active learning that require
students to leave the library classroom (Brown, Weingart, Johnson, & Dance,
2006; Muszkiewicz, 2017), and Mellon's (1986) and Fiske, Cuddy, and Glick's
(2006) discussions of what "warmth" looks like in personal
interactions.
The warmth-based instruction session used the same online worksheet as
the standard session, as seen in Appendix C. It began with a think-pair-share
activity about how the university library differs from students’ high school
libraries; this was intended to connect students with one another and to help
them think critically about what an academic library is, while acknowledging
the anxiety that may arise from the transition to using one. This activity was
followed by a brief discussion of what library anxiety is, accompanied by
reassurance from the librarian instructor that if students are experiencing
library anxiety, they are not alone and that library workers are there to help.
The session then proceeded to cover similar information literacy skills content
as the standard session, with the librarian instructor sharing their personal
experiences with library anxiety throughout the remainder of the session to
normalize library anxiety and to model ways to deal with it. Posttests were
administered approximately one week after each section’s library instruction
session, roughly mid-September through mid-October 2018.
Data Analysis
After the pretests and posttests were collected and the data was
entered, all incomplete responses and responses from participants who did not
take both the pretest and posttest were removed. There was a total of 161
complete responses, 76 in the control group and 85 in the intervention group
(as noted by Onwuegbuzie, Jiao, and Bostick (2004, p. 101) a minimum of 64
participants per group is necessary for a quasi-experiment). One hundred and
twelve participants self-identified as female and 49 self-identified as male.
After reverse-coding items 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 13 and calculating each
participant’s mean and total scores on pretests and posttests, paired t-tests
were conducted using R software to compare the following results:
- Overall pretest and posttest means
- Item-level pretest and posttest scores
- Overall pretest and posttest means broken out by
intervention
- Item-level pretest and posttest scores broken out
by intervention
Results
Regardless of whether or not participants experienced the standard
instruction (control) or warmth-based instruction (intervention), overall mean
scores on the posttest were significantly lower than those on the pretest, with
a medium-large effect size, indicating a reduction in library anxiety levels
(Table 1). At the item-level, Item One (“I’m embarrassed that I don’t know how
to use the library”) displayed a particularly significant change from pretest
to posttest, as did Item Five (“The librarians don’t have time to help me
because they’re always busy doing something else").
Table 1
Pretest and Posttest Mean Scores for Control
and Intervention Groups Combined a
|
Item |
Pretest Mean Score |
Posttest Mean Score |
t-value |
p-value |
r-value |
|
Overall total scores |
2.39 |
2.13 |
t(160) = 7.12 |
p < 0.05 |
0.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 1 scores |
2.29 |
1.71 |
t(160) = 6.41 |
p < 0.05 |
0.45 |
|
Item 3 scores |
2.14 |
1.70 |
t(160) = 5.12 |
p < 0.05 |
0.38 |
|
Item 5 scores |
2.25 |
1.83 |
t(160) = 4.73 |
p < 0.05 |
0.41 |
|
Item 8 scores |
2.26 |
1.94 |
t(160) = 4.63 |
p < 0.05 |
0.34 |
|
Item 9 scores |
2.15 |
1.86 |
t(160) = 4.25 |
p < 0.05 |
0.32 |
|
Item 11 scores |
2.41 |
2.04 |
t(160) = 4.44 |
p < 0.05 |
0.33 |
|
Item 15 scores |
2.30 |
1.92 |
t(160) = 5.38 |
p < 0.05 |
0.37 |
|
Item 18 scores |
2.78 |
2.35 |
t(160) = 4.64 |
p < 0.05 |
0.34 |
a Only items that displayed a medium or medium-large effect
size were included in the table
Table 2
Pretest and Posttest Mean Scores Broken Out
by Control and Intervention a
|
Item |
Pretest Mean Score |
Posttest Mean Score |
t-value |
p-value |
r-value |
|
Control total scores |
2.38 |
2.09 |
t(75) = 4.80 |
p < 0.05 |
0.48 |
|
Intervention total scores |
2.39 |
2.16 |
t(84) = 5.37 |
p < 0.05 |
0.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 9 control scores |
2.14 |
1.89 |
t(75) = 2.35 |
p > 0.05 |
0.26 |
|
Item 9 intervention scores |
2.15 |
1.82 |
t(84) = 3.69 |
p < 0.05 |
0.37 |
|
Item 11 control scores |
2.36 |
2.09 |
t(75) = 1.92 |
p > 0.05 |
0.22 |
|
Item 11 intervention scores |
2.25 |
1.84 |
t(84) = 4.73 |
p < 0.05 |
0.46 |
|
Item 18 control scores |
2.71 |
2.49 |
t(75) = 1.71 |
p > 0.05 |
0.19 |
|
Item 18 intervention scores |
2.84 |
2.22 |
t(84) = 4.79 |
p < 0.05 |
0.46 |
a Only items that displayed a medium or
medium-large effect size in the intervention group but not the control group
were included in the table.
Though both the intervention group and the control group demonstrated
reductions in library anxiety scores from the pretest to the posttest, the
intervention group had a slightly larger effect size than the control group
(Table 2). The intervention had an impact on several specific items on the
scale; Items 9, 11, and 18 (see Appendix A for the full instrument). All of
these items had larger effect sizes in the intervention group, and almost all
asked about participants' comfort with library workers. The intervention had a
particularly strong effect on Item 11 (“People who work at the circulation desk
are helpful)." Other item-level effect sizes were essentially the same
between the intervention and control groups.
Discussion
The results of previous studies that demonstrated a correlation between
library instruction and reduced library anxiety rates for first-year students
were supported by this study, as posttest scores dropped for most participants
regardless of the specific library instruction session they experienced.
However, results of this study indicate that the warmth-based instruction
advocated for by Mellon (1986) may not be as crucial as Mellon argued it was;
in other words, any purposefully-designed library instruction may be as
effective in reducing levels of library anxiety as specifically warmth-based
instruction. Warmth-based instruction did correlate with decreases in library
anxiety scores on items related to interactions with library workers that were
not seen with the standard instruction alone, indicating that such instruction
may be useful in achieving specific goals around increasing student comfort
with library workers and willingness to ask for help.
It is important to note, however, that the warmth-based instruction
session did not differ dramatically from the standard instruction session. Both
were based on the same online worksheet; the warmth-based instruction simply
took a different approach to guiding students through the worksheet and added
an activity and some discussion about library anxiety. Developing basic library
and information literacy skills, such as using the library’s online discovery
service or finding books in the stacks, is important for reducing library
anxiety, but there may be a way to design a more wholly warmth-based session
that does not include a significant information literacy component and that
leads to a more significant reduction in library anxiety when compared with
standard instruction.
The reduction in library anxiety rates associated with library
instruction, though important, is not the only result worth discussing.
Participants demonstrated low overall rates of library anxiety in the pretest
scores, with scores less than three defined as “low”, indicating that perhaps this
group of first-year students is entering the university without significant
library anxiety to contend with. However, the low levels of initial library
anxiety could be a result of the early stage in students’ university careers,
because participants took the pretest when they had only been at the university
for a few weeks. As Kelly (2017, p. 167) noted, this result may be a
manifestation of the Dunning-Kruger effect, in which students overestimate
their ability to complete tasks because “first-year students’ lack of
experience with academic research skills also [makes] them unable to accurately
assess their own competence in that domain”. This result indicates that it is
important for library instructors to recognize that students may come into library
sessions lacking context for library skills and with an unrealistic assessment
of their own competence, and that library instructors may need to provide that
context for students. However, despite the low levels of library anxiety
initially displayed, scores still decreased significantly after participating
in library instruction, suggesting that library instruction may still have an
effect.
One limitation of this study is the unequal distribution of
participants’ gender, with 70% of participants self-identifying as female. The
cause of this gender imbalance is unclear; more female students than male
students enroll in “EDHE 105” classes, but not at the level seen here (59% of
the total “EDHE 105” students were female and 41% were male in Fall 2018). Previous
studies have shown varying levels of influence of gender on library anxiety
rates, with no clear indication that gender plays a role or which gender
experiences library anxiety more (Bostick, 1992; Blundell & Lambert, 2014;
Jiao, Onwuegbuzie, & Lichtenstein, 1996; Wildemuth, 2017). However, overall
rates of library anxiety may be different with a more gender-balanced sample,
which may affect the impact of library instruction.
Another limitation of this study is that all participants experienced a
library instruction session, so the impact of library instruction could not be
compared with individuals who did not participate in a session. Such a
comparison would help to determine if the decrease in library anxiety rates was
truly due to the library instruction session or if the weeks between when
participants completed the pretest and posttest allowed students to become more
familiar with the library on their own, decreasing their anxiety without
library instruction. Additionally, data on previous library experience or
participation in other library instruction sessions was not collected or
controlled for, though it is unlikely that participants had experienced other
library instruction sessions or had a reason to use university library
resources, due to the timing of the “EDHE 105” library instruction sessions
early in the participants’ first semester at the university.
Areas for Future Research
This study presents multiple areas for future research. The finding that
first-year students exhibited low initial levels of library anxiety merits
further examination, as this information is key to understanding, targeting,
and creating library programming for today’s first-year students. To test this
finding, researchers could update Jiao, Onwuegbuzie, and Lichtenstein’s 1996
study that first indicated that first-year students demonstrated the highest
levels of library anxiety. Alternately, first-year students could be surveyed
about their library anxiety at multiple points throughout their first year to
see if their early feelings of confidence about the library turned out to be a
manifestation of the Dunning-Kruger effect and diminished as students gained
more context or if they continued unchanged.
The method of intervention itself should also be tested further. Though
the warmth-based instruction in this study did not lead to significantly
different outcomes than the standard instruction, this study does not present
the only possible method of warmth-based instruction, and other methods should
be tested. Such methods could include instruction sessions that do not have a
significant information literacy skills component, or less formal instruction
settings such as pop-up library events around campus that allow students to
interact with the library in a fun, casual setting. Additionally, comparison
between orientation events and class-based instruction sessions should be
conducted to determine if one broad category of intervention is more effective
in reducing rates of library anxiety. If possible, credit-bearing information
literacy courses should also be compared, as should the effect of not
participating in any formal library instruction.
Conclusion
This study used a quasi-experimental method to investigate the impact of
warmth-based library instruction compared to standard instruction on library
anxiety levels of first-year undergraduate students. Results indicated that
instruction was associated with an overall decrease in library anxiety rates
(aligning with prior studies done on this topic), though there was not a
significant difference between the warmth-based and standard instruction.
However, warmth-based instruction was correlated with gains in specific scale
items related to interactions with library workers, indicating that
warmth-based interventions may be effective in increasing students’ positive
perceptions of workers and thus their willingness to ask for help.
"Warmth" has long been described as an important feature of
library anxiety interventions but has not been rigorously tested. This study attempted
to fill that gap by implementing and assessing warmth in library instruction.
Though warmth-based instruction was not found to be significantly more
impactful in decreasing general library anxiety, the intervention tested here
points to possibilities for intervention strategies targeted at increasing
students' comfort with library workers. It also indicates areas for future
research on more wholly warmth-based instruction interventions.
In order to appropriately target and design library instruction,
demonstrate the full value of instruction, and ensure that library resources
are being used effectively, assessment must address the emotional state in
which students utilize information literacy skills and further their knowledge,
as well as the content in which they learn. Students bring their entire selves
into the classroom, including all of their anxieties, and assessment must take
this into account. Failure to do so can result not only in missed opportunities
to connect with students, but also in missed ways to show the impact that
library instruction has on student success beyond the acquisition of specific
skills.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Catherine Hensly and Savannah Kelly for
their help with the statistical analysis in this study.
References
Anwar, A., Al-Qallaf, C. L, Al-Kandari, N. M., &
Al-Ansari, H. A. (2011). AQAK: A library anxiety scale for undergraduate
students. Journal of Librarianship and Information
Science, 44(1), 36-46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000611425568
Bostick, S. L. (1992). The development and validation of the Library Anxiety Scale
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Wayne State University, Detroit.
Blundell, S., & Lambert, F. (2014). Information
anxiety from the undergraduate student perspective: A pilot study of
second-semester freshmen. Journal of
Education for Library & Information Science, 55(4), 261–273. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1074306.pdf
Brown, A. G., Weingart, S., Johnson, J. R. J., &
Dance, B. (2004). Librarians don’t bite: Assessing library orientation for
freshmen. Reference Services Review, 32(4),
394-403. https://doi.org/10.1108/00907320410569752
Chimah, J. N., Nwajei, M., & Akpom, C. (2015).
Library anxiety and intervention strategies: Review of conceptualized
antecedents in public service librarianship. British Journal of Education, Society, & Behavioural Science, 10(1),
1-8. https://doi.org/10.9734/BJESBS/2015/18178
Collins, B. L., Mellon, C. A., & Young, S. B.
(1987). The needs and feelings of beginning researchers. In C. A. Mellon (Ed.),
Bibliographic instruction: The second
generation (pp. 73-84). Littleton, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Cook, J. M. (2014). A library credit course and
student success rates: A longitudinal study. College & Research Libraries, 75(3), 272-283.
https://doi.org/10.5860/crl12-424
DiPrince, E., Wilson, A., Karafit, C., Bryant, A.,
& Springer, C. (2016). Don’t panic! Managing library anxiety with a library
survival guide. Reference & User
Services Quarterly, 55(4),
283–292. https://doi.org/10.5860/rusq.55n4.283
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2006).
Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. TRENDS in Cognitive Science, 11(2),
77-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005
Fleming-May, R. A. & Mays, R. & Radom, R.
(2015). “I never had to use the library in high school”: A library instruction
program for at-risk students. portal:
Libraries and the Academy, 15(3),
433-456. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2015.0038
Gaha, U., Hinnefeld, S., & Pellegrino, C. (2018).
The academic library’s contribution to student success: Library instruction and
GPA. College & Research Libraries, 79(6),
737-746. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.6.737
Gilbert, J. K. (2009). Using assessment data to
investigate library instruction for first year students. Communications in Information Literacy, 3(2), 181–192. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2010.3.2.80
Jiao, Q. G., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (1999).
Self-perception and library anxiety: An empirical study. Library Review, 48(3), 140-147. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242539910270312
Jiao, Q. G., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Lichtenstein,
A. A. (1996). Library anxiety: Characteristics of "at-risk" college
students. Library and Information Science
Research, 18(2), 151-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0740-8188(96)90017-1
Kelly, S. (2017). First-year students’ research
challenges: Does watching videos on common struggles affect students’ research
self-efficacy? Evidence Based Library and
Information Practice, 12(4), 158-172. https://doi.org/10.18438/B8QQ28
Kracker, J. (2002). Research anxiety and students’
perceptions of research: An experiment, Part I: Effect of teaching Kuhlthau’s
ISP model. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(4), 282-294. https://doi.org./10.1002/asi.10040
Kuhlthau, C. C. (1993). Seeking meaning: A process
approach to library and information services. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Lewis-Beck, M. S., Bryman, A., & Futing Liao, T.
(2004). The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412950589
Lowe, M. S., Booth, C., Stone, S., & Tagge, N.
(2015). Impacting information literacy learning in first-year seminars: A
rubric-based evaluation. portal:
Libraries and the Academy, 15(3),
489-512. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2015.0030
Luetkenhaus, H., Hvizdak, E., Johnson, C., &
Schiller, N. (2017). Measuring library impacts through first year course
assessment. Communications in Information
Literacy, 11(2), 339–353. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2017.11.2.6
Mech, T. F., & Brooks, C. I. (1997). Anxiety and
confidence in using a library by college freshmen and seniors. Psychological Reports, 81(3), 929-930. https://doi.org/10.2466%2Fpr0.1997.81.3.929
Mellon, C. A. (1986). Library anxiety: A grounded
theory and its development. College &
Research Libraries, 47(2), 160-165.
https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.76.3.276
Muszkiewicz, R. (2017). Get to know your librarian:
How a simple orientation program helped alleviate library anxiety. Public Services Quarterly, 13(4),
223-240. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2017.1319780
Naveed, M. (2017). Information seeking anxiety:
Background, research, and implications. International
Information & Library Review, 49(4), 266-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572317.2017.1319713
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Jiao, Q. G., & Bostick, S. L.
(2004). Library anxiety: Theory,
research, and applications. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
Shao, X., & Purpur, G. (2016). Effects of
information literacy skills on student writing and course performance. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(6),
670-678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2016.08.006
Sinnasamy, J., & Abdul Karim, N. H. (2015).
Academic related anxieties: A case study investigating the relationships among
library, communication and language anxieties among non-native speakers of
English. Malaysian Journal of Library
& Information Science, 20(2),
1–12. Retrieved from https://mjlis.um.edu.my/article/view/1763
Soria, K. M., Fransen, J. L., & Nackerud, S.
(2017). Beyond books: The extended academic benefits of library use for
first-year college students. College
& Research Libraries, 78(1), 8-22. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.1.8
Van Scoyoc, A. M. (2003). Reducing library anxiety in
first-year students: The impact of computer-assisted instruction and
bibliographic instruction. Reference and
User Services Quarterly, 42(4), 329-341. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/20864059
Wildemuth, B. (2017). Library anxiety impedes college
students’ library use, but may be alleviated through improved bibliographic
instruction. Evidence Based Library &
Information Practice, 12(4),
275–280.
https://doi.org/10.18438/B8K082
Appendix A
Modified Library Anxiety Scale Instrument
Pretest[1]
You are being asked to respond to statements
concerning your feelings about college or university libraries. Please mark the
number which most closely matches your feelings about the statement. The
numbers range from:
1
= Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Undecided
4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree
1. I'm embarrassed that I don't know how to
use the library. 1 2
3 4 5
2. A lot of the university is confusing to
me. 1 2
3 4 5
3. The librarians are unapproachable. 1 2
3 4 5
4. I can't get help in the library at the
times I need it. 1 2
3 4 5
5. The librarians don't have time to help me
because they're 1 2
3 4 5
always
busy doing something else.
6. I get confused trying to find my way
around the library. 1 2
3 4 5
7. I enjoy learning new things about the
library. 1 2
3 4 5
8. If I can't find a book on the shelf, the
library staff will help me. 1 2
3 4 5
9. I can always ask a librarian if I don't
know how to work a 1 2
3 4 5
piece
of equipment in the library.
10. The library never has the materials I
need. 1 2
3 4 5
11. The people who work at the circulation
desk are helpful. 1 2 3
4 5
12. The library is an important part of my
school. 1 2
3 4 5
13. I want to learn to do my own research. 1 2
3 4 5
14. The library does not have good wireless
internet. 1 2
3 4 5
15. Librarians don't have time to help me. 1 2
3 4 5
16. The printers are often out of paper. 1 2
3 4 5
17. There are not enough electrical outlets
available in the library. 1 2
3 4 5
18. I can't find enough space in the library
to study. 1 2
3 4 5
What is your gender identity?
____
Female
____
Male
____
Non-binary / third gender
____
Prefer not to say
____
Prefer to self-describe: ___________________________
Appendix B
Factor Analysis Table
|
|
Factor 1 |
Factor 2 |
Factor 3 |
Factor 4 |
Factor 5 |
Factor 6 |
|
I'm embarrassed that I don't know how to use the
library |
|
|
|
0.473 |
|
|
|
A lot of the university is confusing to me. |
|
|
|
0.986 |
|
|
|
The librarians are unapproachable. |
|
0.753 |
|
|
|
|
|
I can't get help in the library at the times I
need it. |
|
0.654 |
|
|
|
|
|
The librarians don't have time to help me because
they're always busy doing something else. |
0.384 |
0.626 |
|
|
0.300 |
|
|
I get confused trying to find my way around the
library. |
|
0.500 |
|
0.309 |
|
|
|
I enjoy learning new things about the library. |
|
|
0.672 |
|
|
|
|
If I can't find a book on the shelf, the library
staff will help me. |
0.743 |
|
|
|
0.337 |
|
|
I can always ask a librarian if I don't know how
to work a piece of equipment in the library. |
0.792 |
0.345 |
|
|
|
|
|
The library never has the materials I need. |
0.345 |
|
0.361 |
|
|
|
|
The people who work at the circulation desk are
helpful. |
0.436 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The library is an important part of my school. |
|
|
0.543 |
|
|
|
|
I want to learn to do my own research. |
|
|
0.432 |
|
|
|
|
The library does not have good wireless internet. |
|
|
|
|
|
0.956 |
|
Librarians don't have time to help me. |
|
0.377 |
|
|
0.843 |
|
|
The printers are often out of paper. |
|
|
-0.544 |
|
|
|
|
There are not enough electrical outlets available
in the library. |
|
0.432 |
|
|
|
|
|
I can't find enough space in the library to
study. |
-0.403 |
0.478 |
0.461 |
|
|
0.463 |
These items were removed from the final scale
because they did not fit in to one of the six identified factors:
·
I am unsure about how to begin my research.
·
I feel safe in the library.
·
The library is a comfortable place to study.
·
I don't understand the library's overdue
fines.
·
The library's rules are too restrictive.
·
I don't know what resources are available in
the library.
Appendix C
Warmth-Based 50-minute Instruction Session Lesson Plan
Items in bold
are unique to the warmth-based session.
I.
Introduction – name, role, welcome (5
minutes)
II.
Think-Pair-Share and class-wide discussion of how our
library is different from your high school library (10 minutes)
III.
Lead into how differences can cause anxiety (5 minutes)
a.
Library anxiety as a demonstrated phenomenon (though not
an anxiety disorder)
b.
Some people may feel it; some people might not -- both is
fine but you are not alone
c.
No one expects you to know how to use our resources and
no one expects you to be an expert after today
IV.
Online worksheet: tinyurl.com/libraryEDHE105
V.
Brief overview of library website (10
minutes)
a.
Demonstrate One Search
i.
Select a few sources to discuss differences
between popular and scholarly sources
b.
Give students time to fill in worksheet
VI.
Brief overview of library catalog (10 minutes
total)
a.
Library organization/Library of Congress call numbers (5
minutes)
i.
Why do we talk about this? Share personal experience with
library anxiety and confusion when first using an academic library.
b.
Give students time to fill in worksheet
VII.
Use Catalog to look up book related to major
or career (10 minutes)
a.
Leave classroom, find book on shelf, and take
a “shelfie”