Research Article
Library Anxiety Among
Marginalized University Students in Northeast India
Tripti Gogoi
Research Scholar
Department of Library and
Information Science
School of Media and
Communication
Pondicherry University,
Puducherry, India
Email: tripti10aug@gmail.com
Mangkhollen Singson
Assistant Professor
Department of Library and
Information Science
School of Media and
Communication
Pondicherry University,
Puducherry, India
Email: manglien@gmail.com
S. Thiyagarajan
Assistant Professor
Department of International
Business
School of Management
Pondicherry University,
Puducherry, India
Email: sthiyags@yahoo.com
Received: 19 Aug. 2019 Accepted: 28 Oct. 2020
2021 Gogoi, Singson, and Thiyagarajan. 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/eblip29626
Abstract
Objective – Library anxiety experienced by students has been discussed extensively
for many decades. While the phenomenon is widely recognized, little attention
has been paid to seeing its specific effect on marginalized sections of the
society. The study attempts to understand the library anxiety experienced by
students at three different universities in Assam. Assam is the only state in
Northeast India to have private, state, and central universities. These
universities draw their student populations from several different hill states
in Northeast India, all of which face significant socio-political-economic
challenges.
Methods – A stratified
random sample technique was used for the study. A total of 150 questionnaires
were distributed equally among the three universities in Assam and found 119
questionnaires were fit for analysis. The study adopted the modified and
validated version of the Bostick Library Anxiety Scale developed by Anwar, Al-Kandari, and Al-Qallaff (AQAK) in
2004, with 32 item statements and 4 categories. The questionnaire is divided
into two parts: Demographic Variables
and the Library Anxiety Scale. The categories used for the study were: Category
1 (Staff Approachability) – 11 statements; Category 2 (Feelings of Inadequacy)
– 6 statements); Category 3 (Library Confidence) – 8 statements; and Category 4
(Library Constraints) – 7 statements.
Results – The study
hypothesized that factors such as gender, the language of instruction, type of
university, and caste or community do not influence library anxiety among
Northeast India students. However, the study's findings suggest that type of
university influences library anxiety among students and its three constructs.
Tezpur university students experience a higher level of library anxiety.
Although no overall significant difference in the level of library anxiety was
observed among students across gender (p=0.278,
p> 0.05), the language of
instruction (p=0.023, p> 0.05), castes and communities (p=0.223, p> 0.05), there was a significant difference in one construct of
library anxiety among students based on gender (feelings of inadequacy), the
language of education instruction (staff approachability), caste and community
(feelings of inadequacy).
Conclusions – Results
from the present study provided compelling evidence to suggest that many
students, irrespective of their gender, the language of instruction, type of
university, discipline, and caste or community experience library anxiety. The
difference levels of library anxiety among independent variables indicate a
critical lack of information literacy skills. Overall, library anxiety scores
among the students were moderate; some categories such as staff
approachability, the feeling of inadequacy, and library constraint are the
attributes of the students' anxiety. However, the findings of the study also
suggest that students are confident in using the library. They are optimistic,
enthusiastic, and keen to use library resources.
Introduction
In recent years, there has been a strong aspiration
for the Indian political class to upgrade the standing of Indian universities
among other world-class academic institutions. Economist Amartya Sen endorsed
the idea that formal education empowers individual employability, social
confidence, and other ‘capabilities’ (Sen, 1999). However, despite many
initiatives, there has been continued criticism of publicly funded higher
education in India, for underperforming in various parameters compared with
global university standards (Tierney, Sabharwal, & Malish,
2019; Deshpande, 2006; Chanana, 1993). Reductions in
higher education budgets, library budgets, and education policy have
contributed significantly to the problem. More importantly, however, the
government of India’s reservation policies to the historically disadvantaged section
of the society in higher education is often criticized for undermining merit.
The historic Hindu caste system divided the majority
of Hindu society into rigid hierarchical groups based on their Karma (work) and Dharma (Religion). They are divided into Brahmins (Priests, Teachers), Kshatriyas
(Warriors), Vaishyas (Farmers,
Traders, and Merchants), Shudra (Labourers), and Dalits
(Outcastes). Discrimination based on caste lines is a common practice in India
(Kumar & Hashmi, 2020). Dalits have historically experienced caste
discrimination from the majority caste Hindu. These marginalized (i.e., educationally
or socially disadvantaged) sections of the
society include the Dalits (Scheduled caste or SC), Adivasi (Tribal
or indigenous, Schedule tribe or ST), and later extended to Other Backward
Classes (OBC).
Central universities are established under an act of
the parliament. They are autonomous and funded by the Union Ministry of Higher
Education (previously known as the Ministry of Human Resource Development). The
Ministry of Education adopted an inclusivity policy that enabled students from
the marginalized SC, ST, and OBC communities in India to pursue higher
education and established mandatory reservation policies regarding OBC students
(27%), SC students (15%), and ST students (7.5%). Subsequently, the reservation
percentage was increased to 59.5% by including an additional 10% reservation
for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) provided that they do not identify
themselves with any of the previously reserved categories of OBC, SC, or ST
students. According to Tierney, Sabharwal, and Malish,
students from marginalized communities such as SC, ST, and OBC communities
encounter various challenges to complete graduation and perform in universities
(Tierney, Sabharwal, & Malish, 2019). Research
conducted at the prestigious Indian Institute of Technology provided evidence
of the problems experienced by SC and ST students (Singh, 2017). Some of these
problems may be related to library anxiety.
Academic libraries routinely conduct library
orientation programs to promote the library and educate students to become
self-reliant in using the library and becoming a lifelong learner. The students
then apply these library skills to locate the required information and
resources in the library. However, due to the overwhelming amount of
information resources available, students are often confused and disoriented.
The introduction of computers and information technology in academic libraries
has further increased students’ experience of disorientation (Jiao &
Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Ahmed & Aziz, 2017). Today, technologically driven
electronic resources have replaced traditional print resources. Thus, students
who lack the necessary skills to cope with the rapid technological transition
have often developed fear and anxiety when contemplating a library visit (Kohrman, 2003). Students may also experience library
anxiety for other reasons, such as lack of self-confidence in the conduct of
study, lack of information retrieval skills, lack of previous exposure to
academic libraries, and lack of knowledge of library equipment and technology
(Jiao & Onwuegbuzie, 2004).
Students in Northeast India may be particularly prone
to experiencing these conditions because of the socio-political-economic
isolation of the region from the rest of India. The Northeast region of India
constitutes eight States: Assam, Meghalaya, Sikkim, Tripura, Mizoram, Manipur,
Arunachal Pradesh, and Nagaland. The region has been marginalized in social,
political, and economic terms compared with the rest of India due to its poor
connectivity and communication resources, rugged terrain, and recurring armed
conflicts. However, unlike the rest of India, ST and SC communities in
Northeast India are geographically isolated, and as such they may have never
experienced historical caste discrimination. However, people from the Northeast
India experience racial discrimination and are marginalized as they venture out
from the northeast to seek employment and education (Wouters & Subba, 2013).
As a result of the government’s inclusivity policy,
students from different parts of India and Northeast India seek higher
education in Assam as the state provides one of the region's best educational
infrastructures. This level of access for all students ensures that Assam
Universities' demographic profiles are very multicultural, representing Tribal,
Dalit, Caste Hindu, Muslims, and Christians, thus providing an ideal
environment for research investigating factors related to library anxiety.
Literature Review
Measuring Library Anxiety
Various researchers have adopted the Bostick Library Anxiety Scale (LAS)
to understand library anxiety and its associated reasons. The studies by Jiao
and Onwuegbuzie suggests that library anxiety could be correlated with personal
characteristics such as age and nationality (Jiao, Onwuegbuzie, &
Lichtenstein, 1996; Jiao, Onwuegbuzie, & Bostick, 2006); freshmen library
experience (Jiao & Onwuegbuzie, 2004); low levels of academic self-competence
(Jiao &Onwuegbuzie, 1999); cooperative students (Jiao & Onwuegbuzie,
2002); and physiological, cognitive, affective, and behavioral ramification
(Jiao, Onwuebuzie & Lichtenstein, 1996). Other
researchers have also linked library anxiety with critical thinking and language
(Kwon, Onwuegbuzie & Alexander, 2007; Sinnasamy
& Karim, 2017). In their respective countries and cultures, several
researchers have validated and altered the scale (Shoham
and Mizrachi, 2001; Świgoń, 2011; Anwar, Al-Qallaf, Al-Kandari &
Al-Ansari et al., 2012; Song, Zhang, & Clarke, 2014). However, Ahmed and
Aziz who conducted a study at Bangladesh University challenged Bostick's LAS
psychometric soundness in a developing country perspective (Ahmed & Aziz,
2017). They argued that today's library infrastructure has undergone a
significant change ever since Bostick proposed LAS in 1992 (Ahmed & Aziz,
2017).
Measuring Library Anxiety with Special Populations
In 2004, Anwar, Al-Kandari, and Al-Qallaff developed a new scale (AQAK) based on the original
Bostick LAS to examine the status of library anxiety among undergraduate
students of Kuwait whose mother tongue was Arabic but used English as a second
language. The study found differences in categories such as feelings of
inadequacy and library constraints. Kuwaiti students who were weak in English
were more likely to face frustration sooner and displayed a higher level of
library anxiety (Anwar, Al-Kandari, & Al- Qallaf, 2004). Similarly, Jiao, Onwuebuzie,
and Bostick (2004) conducted the first study that focused on race as a factor
in the level of library anxiety. They studied the library anxiety among
Caucasian-American and African-American graduate students and reported that
African-American students have lower library anxiety levels correlated with
three dimensions of library anxiety than their Caucasian-American peers (Jiao, Onwuebuzie, & Bostick, 2004; Jiao & Onwuebuzie, 2004).
Using the AQAK scale, another survey conducted at Kuwait University by
Anwar, Al-Qallaf, Al-Kandari,
and Al-Ansari stated that there is no significant relationship between gender,
school, or college history in the library anxiety score (Al-Qallaf,
Al-Kandari & Al-Ansari, 2012). Correspondingly,
research conducted among international students indicates no substantial
difference in the degree of library anxiety scores between gender and
discipline (Lu & Adkins, 2012). However, modifying the existing Bostick
LAS, Doris, Provata, and Vraimaki
developed the Greek Library Anxiety Scale (G-LAS) and found that male students
experienced higher anxiety scores than female students (Provata
& Vraimaki, 2015). This phenomenon according to
researchers is due to the fact that female students are more driven and prefer
to go to the root of a specific problem with persistence and depth compared to
their male counterparts (Kennedy, Wellman & Klement,
2003; Halder & Chakrabarty, 2010). Shehata and Elgllab’s
recent comparative study of library anxiety among Saudi Arabian and Egyptian
students found that Egyptian students were more anxious about using libraries
than Saudi Arabian students (Shehata & Elgllab,
2019).
Library Anxiety Studies in Developing Countries
Numerous studies from
developing countries have also been conducted in recent years to explain
library anxiety among students. Noor Harun and Ansari implemented a modified
version of Bostick's LAS that examined the effects of gender, nationality, and
bibliographic instruction on library anxiety among Malaysian students. The
findings of their analysis suggest that there is a statistically significant
mean difference between Malaysian and non-Malaysian students in the affective
barriers portion of library anxiety. Malaysian students experience higher
library anxiety related with affective barriers than their non-Malaysian
counterparts (Noor Harun & Ansari, 2011). Similarly, Sinnasamy
and Karim conducted a study among Malaysian students and reported the
prevalence of at least one or more library anxiety dimensions among non-native
English Malaysian students. Research shows that higher library anxiety scores
have been associated with the language barrier (Sinnasamy
& Karim, 2017).
Adopting the AQAK modified
LAS, Jan, Anwar, and Warraich conducted a study among
Pakistani students to examine the relationship between library anxiety with
library use, gender, academic performance (grade point average), and academic
discipline. The results of the study showed that students experience moderate
anxiety in the library, and there is a statistically significant difference in
gender and discipline anxiety in the library. However, Jan, Anwar, and Warraich (2016) found that library anxiety and academic
performance were inversely proportional. Similarly, adopting the qualitative
method, Abusin & Zainab (2017) conducted a study
in Africa using the diary method among Sudanese university students. They found
that, when using the academic library to write their first research paper,
88.2% of the students displayed fear and anxiety. The students also reported on
the language barrier, particularly English, where the mastery of the English
language among students was found to be poor. In Bangladesh, Ahmed & Aziz
(2017) conducted a study using the original Bostick scale to indicate that
university students may experience anxiety related to library services based on
their technological proficiency.
Aims
This research study attempts to understand the nature of marginalized
students' library anxiety experience in Northeast India.
The research questions that motivated this study were:
- Does gender, educational background, or language
influence students' library anxiety score in three different university
settings?
- Does discipline or type of university in which
they study influence students' library anxiety score in three other
university settings?
- Does caste and community influence students'
library anxiety score in three different university settings?
Methods
Participants in the Study
The present study selected three universities in Assam. The state of
Assam is the only Northeast state of India to have private, state, and central
universities. Central universities are union government-funded universities
established under parliament's act, and they follow the central reservation
policy. The state government funds state universities and follows the state
reservation policy, which is different from the central reservation policy.
Private universities are purely self-funded and do not follow any reservation
policy. The three universities selected for the study were: Kaziranga
University (private), Dibrugarh University (state), and Tezpur University
(central). The libraries in these universities are well equipped with modern
and integrated library systems. They cater to students from all of the six
neighboring hill states of Assam and elsewhere in the country. The total
population of the students was 2,560 (Kaziranga
University), 4408 (Dibrugarh), and 3,059 (Tezpur University).
The sampling technique used for the study was a stratified random
sampling technique. Lists of first-year students enrolled in the year 2017 for
a Master's degree in Arts, Commerce, Management, and Science were considered
for the study. The sample did not include Medicine, Engineering, or
research-based degrees like JD or Ph.D. The study identified 3 universities,
and 50 students from each university were randomly selected using Microsoft
Excel's random number generation function. The total number of first-year
postgraduate students enrolled in the academic year 2017-18, in all three
universities in total, was 1,578. A sample pool of 150 students represents
approximately 10% of the population. For the data collection, the researchers
personally visited each university to distribute the questionnaire and then
collected them with the help of volunteers from April 23rd to June 19th, 2018.
Since the sampling technique was stratified random, the respondents were
identified before and informed over e-mail that they would need to assemble at
a venue, based on their convenience, for data collection. The number of
responses received from the three universities was Kaziranga
University (38 responses), Dibrugarh University (39 responses), and Tezpur
University (42 responses), with a total response rate of 79.3% in aggregate
(119 out of 150). Data were analyzed using EXCEL and SPSS.
Instrument and Procedures
The questionnaire (see Appendix A) consists of demographic variables and
the Library Anxiety Scale (LAS). The LAS consists of 4 categories and 32
statements as modified and validated by Anwar, Al-Kandari
& Al-Qallaf (2004) from the original Bostick
Library Anxiety Scale. The categories used for the study are Category 1 (Staff
Approachability) – 11 statements, Category 2 (Feelings of Inadequacy) – 6
statements, Category 3 (Library Confidence) – 8 statements, and Category 4
(Library Constraints) – 7 statements. These statements are rated based on
students’ library experiences using a five-point Likert scale (1, strongly
disagree; 2, disagree; 3, undecided; 4, agree; and 5, strongly agree). The
study adopted Independent t-test and ANOVA tools for statistical analysis. The
Independent t-test was used to analyze the difference between two categories or
groups such as gender, group, or college. In contrast, the one-way ANOVA was
used to analyze the differences in more than two groups/categories such as
communities, language, university, and educational background.
Results
Demographic Data
Table 1 shows the demographic profile of 119 respondents. All but 9 of
the students (92.44%) hail from Northeastern states, and just 7.5% of
respondents hail from outside Northeastern states. Based on the respondent's
community profile, the majority of the respondents belonged to OBC (35.3%),
followed by General (33.6%), ST (19.3%), and SC (11.7%).
Table 1
Frequency and Percentage of the Respondents from
Assam Universities in India
|
Sl. No. |
Variables |
Categorization |
No. of Respondents |
% |
|
1. |
Gender |
Male |
60 |
50.42% |
|
Female |
59 |
49.58% |
||
|
2. |
Nativity (Geographical origin) |
North-East Students |
110 |
92.44% |
|
Outside North East |
9 |
7.56% |
||
|
3. |
Caste/Community |
General |
40 |
33.60 |
|
OBC |
42 |
35.30 |
||
|
SC |
14 |
11.76 |
||
|
ST |
23 |
19.34 |
||
|
4. |
College Education Background |
Private |
52 |
43.69 |
|
Public |
67 |
56.31 |
||
|
5. |
Schooling Education Background |
Private |
67 |
56.30 |
|
Public |
52 |
43.70 |
||
|
6. |
Language of Instruction in School |
English |
56 |
47.1 |
|
Vernacular |
25 |
21.0 |
||
|
Both |
38 |
31.9 |
||
|
7. |
School Educational Institution Location |
Urban |
41 |
34.4 |
|
Rural |
36 |
30.3 |
||
|
Semi Urban |
42 |
35.3 |
||
|
8. |
Library in College |
Yes |
119 |
100.0 |
|
No |
0 |
0.0 |
||
|
9. |
Library in School |
Yes |
87 |
73.10 |
|
No |
32 |
26.90 |
The study results also indicated that the majority (56.31%) of the
respondents graduated from a public-funded institution, while 43.69% of
respondents graduated from a private institution. By comparison, most of the
respondents (56.30%) completed their school education at a private institution
compared to 43.70% of respondents from publicly funded government schools.
Similarly, most of the respondents reported English (47.1%) as the language of
instruction in their schools, while only 21% used a vernacular language; 31.9%
of respondents stated that both English and vernacular were the languages of
instruction. For the students who belong to Northeastern states, the primary
languages of instructions were English, Bhutia, Bodo, Khasi, Meitei, and Mizo (Lushei).
The majority (35.3%) of the respondents graduated from the semi-urban
schools, followed by 34.4% urban and rural (30.3%). Interestingly, while 100%
of the respondents stated there was a library in their college, only 73.1% of
the respondents acknowledged having a library in the school. In comparison,
26.9% of respondents did not have a library in their school. Library hours in
schools are mandatory in the timetable to foster good reading habits, but are
not mandatory in college.
Reliability and Normality of Library Anxiety Scale
Cronbach's alpha is a statistical analysis or tool that demonstrates the
reliability of scales. For the present study, Anwar's (2004) scale was adopted
to measure the level of library anxiety among postgraduate students. The LAS
was administered and pre-tested for culturally different populations of
university students in Assam. The pilot study and pre-testing result indicated
that the Cronbach's alpha (Table 2): (i) Staff approachability - 0.85, (ii)
Feeling of inadequacy - 0.79, (iii) Library confidence - 0.73 and (iv) Library
constraints - 0.74 and the overall scale of 0.87. From Appendix B Table 2 the
Null Hypothesis of Data Normally Distribution cannot be rejected at a 1% level
for all the variables. Therefore, it can be concluded that the data are
normally distributed (Staff approachability, Feelings of inadequacy, Library
confidence, and Library constraints).
Table
2
Cronbach’s
Alpha Score
|
Sl. No. |
Category |
Cronbach’s alpha score |
|
1. |
Staff approachability |
0.85 |
|
2. |
Feelings of inadequacy |
0.79 |
|
3. |
Library confidence |
0.73 |
|
4. |
Library constraints |
0.74 |
|
5. |
Overall Scale |
0.87 |
Hypothesis Testing
We hypothesized that library anxiety is not prevalent
among students from marginalized castes or communities. Factors such as gender,
the language of instruction, discipline, and type of university a student
attends do not contribute to anxiety.
Hypotheses for the study
H01: Gender of the student does not have any influence on library
anxiety.
H02: Students’ language of school instruction does not influence library
anxiety levels.
H03: Type of university does not influence the level of library anxiety.
H04: Caste and community do not influence library anxiety among
students.
Influence of Gender on Library Anxiety
H01: Gender of the student does not have any influence on
library anxiety.
Table 3 shows that there is no significant influence
of gender on library anxiety scores between male and female students (t (117) = 1.090, p=0.278).
However, the result of the scores suggests that there is a significant
difference in library anxiety scores between males and females in feelings of inadequacy (Category 2, p=0.035). The male respondents
(Mean=20.70) have higher library anxiety when compared with female respondents.
The effect size for the test feelings of inadequacy is 0.390, which is termed
as small (Cohen, 1992).
Table
3
T-test of
Library Anxiety Score Library Score of Students with Respect to Gender and
Education Background (School and College)
|
Variable |
Group |
N |
Category 1 Staff Approachability |
Category 2 Feelings of Inadequacy |
Category 3 Library Confidence |
Category 4 Library Constraints |
Total |
|
|
|
Mean |
Mean |
Mean |
Mean |
Mean |
|||
|
Gender |
Male |
60 |
44.85 (5.87) |
20.70 (4.70) |
16.77 (3.46) |
24.97 (3.77) |
107.28 (11.53) |
|
|
Female |
59 |
44.80 (5.09) |
18.85 (4.55) |
16.88 (3.42) |
24.68 (3.01) |
105.20 (9.12) |
||
|
t |
0.053 |
2.129** |
0.182 |
0.461 |
1.090 |
|||
|
p -value |
0.958 |
0.035 |
0.856 |
0.646 |
0.278 |
|||
|
Cohen’s D |
0.009 |
0.390 |
-0.033 |
0.084 |
0.200 |
|||
|
School |
Private |
67 |
44.36 (5.74) |
19.42 (4.67) |
17.34 (3.72) |
24.60 (3.40) |
105.72 (10.62) |
|
|
Public |
52 |
45.42 (5.10) |
20.25 (5.01) |
16.15 (2.91) |
25.12 (3.42) |
106.94 (10.19) |
||
|
t |
-1.053 |
-0.934 |
1.898 |
-0.823 |
-0.635 |
|||
|
p -value |
0.294 |
0.352 |
0.060 |
0.412 |
0.526 |
|||
|
Cohen’s D |
-0.196 |
-0.172 |
0.375 |
-0.152 |
0.117 |
|||
|
College |
Private |
52 |
44.15 (6.45) |
19.42 (4.80) |
17.33 (3.71) |
24.63 (3.60) |
105.54 (11.70) |
|
|
Public |
67 |
45.34 (4.56) |
20.06 (4.85) |
16.43 (3.17) |
24.97 (3.27) |
106.81 (9.34) |
||
|
t |
-1.178 |
-0.714 |
1.417 |
-0.532 |
-0.657 |
|||
|
p -value |
0.241 |
0.477 |
0.159 |
0.596 |
0.512 |
|||
|
Cohen’s D |
-0.213 |
-0.131 |
0.259 |
-0.097 |
-0.119 |
|||
|
Library in School |
Yes |
87 |
44.33 (5.55) |
20.08 (4.69) |
16.96 (3.52) |
24.74 (3.36) |
106.16 (10.74) |
|
|
No |
32 |
46.15 (5.17) |
18.87 (5.14) |
16.53 (3.21) |
24.90 (3.67) |
106.46 (9.96) |
||
|
t |
-1.663 |
1.159 |
0.635 |
-0.222 |
-0.144 |
|||
|
p -value |
0.102 |
0.252 |
0.528 |
0.825 |
0.886 |
|||
|
Cohen’s D |
-0.338 |
0.245 |
0.127 |
-0.045 |
-0.029 |
|||
**Significance at 5%, Value in parenthesis is
Standard deviation (SD)
Influence of Medium (Language) of Instruction in
Schools on Library Anxiety
H02: Students’ language of school instruction does not
influence library anxiety levels.
Table 4 shows that the significance value of the
language variable (language of education instruction) is more than 0.05. Hence,
the null hypothesis (H02) cannot be rejected. The medium of
education instruction in schools does not influence the overall library anxiety
of the students. But there is an influence of medium of instruction on staff approachability (second construct
of library anxiety) as the significance value is less than 0.05(p = 0.015) with the effect size F statistics for the test staff
approachability being 4.33. However, there was no significant difference in the
level of feelings of inadequacy, library confidence, and library constraints among students
coming from different mediums of instruction in schools. The effect size
(partial eta square) for category 1 (staff approachability) is 0.069 which is
termed as medium effect size (Cohen, 1992).
Table
4
One-Way
ANOVA Result of Library Anxiety Score with Respect to University, Discipline,
Community, and Language
|
Variable |
N |
Category 1 Staff Approachability |
Category
2 Feelings of Inadequacy |
Category
3 Library Confidence |
Category
4 Library Constraints |
Total Library Anxiety |
|
|
Mean |
Mean |
Mean |
Mean |
Mean |
|||
|
University |
Dibrugarh University |
39 |
43.67 (3.99) |
17.87 (4.63) |
17.08 (3.30) |
24.18 (2.88) |
102.79 (8.03) |
|
Kaziranga University |
38 |
42.82 (5.66) |
19.21 (3.72) |
17.53 (3.68) |
23.79 (3.35) |
103.34 (10.42) |
|
|
Tezpur University |
42 |
47.71 (5.38) |
22.07 (5.02) |
15.95 (3.19) |
26.36 (3.42) |
112.10 (10.01) |
|
|
F |
10.84*** |
9.20*** |
2.31 |
7.45*** |
12.19*** |
||
|
p value |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.104 |
0.001 |
0.000 |
||
|
Effect
Size (Partial
Eta Square) |
0.157 |
0.137 |
0.038 |
0.114 |
0.174 |
||
|
Discipline |
Humanities |
4 |
45.50 (2.38) |
18.75 (3.77) |
16.25 (2.63) |
24.75 (2.50) |
105.25 (4.99) |
|
Science |
80 |
44.29 (5.59) |
19.60 (4.87) |
16.73 (3.37) |
24.78 (3.46) |
105.40 (10.71) |
|
|
Social
Science |
35 |
45.97 (5.37) |
20.31 (4.87) |
17.11 (3.69) |
24.91 (3.43) |
108.31 (10.08) |
|
|
F |
1.19 |
0.36 |
0.21 |
0.02 |
0.97 |
||
|
p-value |
0.308 |
0.699 |
0.809 |
0.983 |
0.381 |
||
|
Effect
Size (Partial
Eta Square) |
0.020 |
0.006 |
0.0040 |
0.000 |
0.016 |
||
|
Caste/Community |
General |
40 |
44.98 (5.15) |
19.83 (5.03) |
16.60 (3.34) |
25.65 (3.62) |
107.05 (9.28) |
|
OBC |
42 |
44.60 (5.29) |
20.90 (4.28) |
17.05 (4.00) |
24.50 (3.13) |
107.05 (10.40) |
|
|
SC |
14 |
43.93 (7.61) |
16.64 (5.77) |
16.00 (2.86) |
24.21 (4.14) |
100.79 (14.41) |
|
|
ST |
23 |
45.52 (5.11) |
19.57 (4.14) |
17.30 (2.79) |
24.35 (2.93) |
106.74 (9.10) |
|
|
F |
0.279 |
2.89** |
0.530 |
1.218 |
1.481 |
||
|
p-value |
0.840 |
0.038 |
0.663 |
0.306 |
.223 |
||
|
Effect
Size (Partial
Eta Square) |
0.007 |
0.070 |
0.014 |
0.031 |
0.037 |
||
|
Language |
English |
56 |
43.34 (5.43) |
19.54 (4.39) |
17.45 (3.52) |
24.32 (3.36) |
104.64 (10.97) |
|
Vernacular |
25 |
45.60 (5.70) |
20.36 (5.96) |
16.68 (3.69) |
25.84 (4.23) |
108.48 (11.57) |
|
|
Both |
38 |
46.50 (5.00) |
19.76 (4.69) |
16.00 (3.00) |
24.89 (2.72) |
107.16 (8.50) |
|
|
F |
|
4.33** |
0.25 |
2.08 |
1.75 |
1.39 |
|
|
p-value |
|
0.015 |
0.779 |
0.130 |
0.178 |
0.252 |
|
|
Effect
Size (Partial
Eta Square) |
|
0.069 |
0.004 |
0.035 |
0.029 |
0.023 |
|
***
Significant at 1%, ** Significant at 5%, Value in parenthesis is
Standard deviation (SD)
Influence of Type of University on Library Anxiety
HO3: Type of university does not influence the level
of library anxiety.
Table 4 shows that the significance value for
university (types) is less than 0.05. Hence, the null hypothesis H02
is rejected. This implies that there is an influence on the types of
universities on the level of library anxiety, except category 3 (library
confidence), where the p-value of
category 3 is more than 0.05. The results show there is an effect of university
(types) on three categories; staff approachability (p=0.000, p < 0.05, effect size =0.157),
feelings of inadequacy (p= .000, p
< 0.05, effect size= 0.137) and library constraints (p = .001, p < 0.05, effect size= 0.114) as
their respective p values are less
than 0.05. However, there was no significant difference in the level of library
confidence among students studying in different universities. The results also
suggest that among the universities, Tezpur University students experience
higher levels of anxiety than students at the other two universities. The
Effect Size (partial eta square) value for library anxiety is 0.174, which is
termed as a medium effect size (Cohen, 1992).
Similarly, student disciplines such as social science,
science, and humanities do not influence library anxiety in all the constructs
(p=0.381, p>0.05).
Influence of Caste/Community
on Library Anxiety
H04: Caste and community do not influence library anxiety
among students.
As shown in Table 4, there is no significant difference in library
anxiety levels among different student communities as a significant value for
the variable community is more than 0.05(p=0.223).
Hence, the null hypothesis H03 cannot be rejected. Therefore, there is no
influence of the caste/community on library anxiety levels. However, the
p-value in the category (feelings of inadequacy) is less than 0.05, indicating
that there is an influence of community on feelings of inadequacy (p=0.038).
The interesting observation from the testing communities indicated that OBC
students experience more anxiety during their visit to the library.
The F statistics for feelings of inadequacy are 2.89
with a p-value of less than 0.05 (p
=0.038). Hence, community background influences library anxiety scores among
students for feelings of inadequacy. The effect size (partial eta square) for
the same (feelings of inadequacy) is 0.070, which is termed as medium effect
size (Cohen, 1992).
Subsequently, other factors considered for the study
included whether the students’ educational background, such as type of school,
college, or presence of the library in their school, determine their library
anxiety level.
Library Anxiety Among Students with Different School
and College Educational Backgrounds
Table 3 shows the library anxiety score of students
based on their college and school educational backgrounds. Overall result of
t-test suggests that there is no significant difference among students from
different educational backgrounds, for both college (t (117) = 0.657, p= 0.512) and school (t (117) = -0.635, p = 0.526). Therefore, before joining
the university, whether a student studied in a private or public school or
college is immaterial.
Discussion
The university library commonly causes library anxiety
in Northeast India. Using library jargon to explain a complicated interface
following an obscure classification scheme may lead to higher LAS values. The
study's findings confirm the occurrence of library anxiety among the students
who responded to our questionnaire. Irrespective of their gender, the language
of school instruction, type of university, caste, and community, library
anxiety as a phenomenon is common among students. The questionnaire responses
indicate that the anxiety score level was mild (overall mean score = 3.31)
among the students studying at the three sample universities in Assam. However,
the study found interesting trends.
The present findings are in line with previous studies
(Anwar, Al-Qallaf, Al-Kandari
& Al-Ansari, 2012; Lu & Adkins, 2012; Lawless, 2011). The current study
results suggest no significant difference in library anxiety scores between
male and female students. However, male students experience higher anxiety
levels in the categories of inadequacy (Categories 2, p=0.035) than female students. The male students indicated a sign
of confusion, unsure of using the library. Perhaps the Indian culture of very
sociable female students and their motivation to compete with the opposite sex
greatly reduces their anxiety while visiting the library.
Although the language of instruction in their education did not
significantly influence library anxiety, students coming from vernacular and
both (Vernacular and English) as the medium of instruction experience severe
library anxiety in the category of staff approachability (average is 4.15 and
4.23). Hence, students either experience
communication problems, lack the confidence to communicate with library staff,
or perceive library staff as unfriendly. Simultaneously, students’ low scores
(average of 2.18, 2.09, and 2.00) in the category library confidence (negative
construct) suggest the lack of confidence and comfort in making use of library
services.
This finding suggests that teaching information
literacy may lead to greater familiarity with the library resources and less
anxiety, as Whitmire (2007) found. Furthermore, it is possible that the
language barrier between the students and the library staff further increases
the level of library anxiety.
The student's discipline does not influence library anxiety, but the
type of university does. Students at the central university (Tezpur University)
exhibited the highest library anxiety level (average was 3.50) among the three
universities. Tezpur university students experience severe anxiety in the
categories staff approachability (Mean average 4.34), feelings of inadequacy
(Mean average 3.68), and library constraints (Mean average 3.77). Tezpur
University is a central university, and the infrastructures, including library
resources, are funded by the central (Union) government. It was ranked 29th by
the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) in 2019, and students
enrolled from all over the country. Unlike state and private universities,
Tezpur University conducts an annual national entrance examination for
university admission students. There is, therefore, an enormous competition
among students to get admission to one of India's leading universities. Hence,
students experience anxiety in communication, assistance, restrictive library
rules, regulations, and library resources.
Based on previous research from the majority caste
Hindu perspective, the researchers hypothesized that there would be a
significant difference in the experience of library anxiety among the
marginalized students of Northeast India based on caste/community. However,
this study's results suggest that there is no significant difference in the
level of anxiety among students from different castes/communities (p=0.223, p> 0.05). Interestingly, students with an OBC or General
community profile experience higher library anxiety (average means 3.35) while
Schedule Caste students' level of anxiety is the lowest among the group of
students (average mean 3.15). This study’s findings are in line with Jiao, Onwuebuzie, and Bostick's findings that African Americans
demonstrated lower library anxiety levels than their Caucasian-American
counterparts. However, unlike Jiao, Onwuebuzie, and
Bostick, the students who participated in the study were from three
universities and did not differ in the types of the institution they attended.
One possible explanation of this phenomenon is that participants were among the
highest-achieving ST and SC graduate students in the Northeastern
Region and the rest of India. In addition, unlike their counterparts elsewhere
in India, indigenous tribal (ST) and scheduled caste (SC) groups in northeast
India may have never encountered historical caste discrimination.
Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research
The limitation of the study was that the sample was limited to only
three universities in Assam. Hence, the sample size for each category was small
and limited the possibility of generalizing the results.
The LAS scale adopted for the survey was the AQAK (a modified version of
the Bostick scale developed for use among Kuwaiti undergraduate students whose
mother tongue was Arabic). Although the present scale's reliability was good,
developing and validating a new version of the original Bostick scale with 43
statements complying with the Indian multicultural context would significantly
contribute to the knowledge base. The questionnaire did not include the desired
number of representations from students outside Assam that may help provide a
better understanding of the language barrier. Although the questionnaire helped
determine the students' overall anxiety level, including an open-ended
questionnaire for respondents' comments could provide more insight into the
reasons for the anxiety.
Conclusion
Students enrolled in universities world-wide are
required to submit assignments every semester that require a visit to the
library for resources. Previous research literature suggests that library
anxiety may result in library avoidance, procrastination, poor quality
deliverables, and even increased dropouts among the students (Onwuegbuzie &
Jiao, 2000). Therefore, it is important to look for ways to reduce library
anxiety in student populations. The present
study and those from the previously published research provide compelling
evidence to suggest that many students experience library anxiety. They lack
the confidence and communication skills to seek help from a librarian
successfully. Schools and colleges are intended to impart necessary
prerequisite library skills, information resources, and research skills, bridge
the gap, and prepare students for university; however, students often remain
unprepared. Although the overall library anxiety score among the students was
found to be moderate (overall average score= 3.32), the findings indicate that
library classification schemes, confusing formats, unfamiliar jargon, RFID,
imposing online catalogue systems, and unfriendly library staff made a
significant contribution to the degree of library anxiety. Similarly,
categories such as staff approachability, feelings of inadequacy, and library
constraint indicated higher anxiety scores among the students.
Many of the students in Assam come from the
neighbouring states of Northeast and other states in India. The student's
cultural background and unfamiliarity with the existing library system
contributed significantly to the level of library anxiety. While some of them
may be familiar with library systems in their previous schools and colleges,
their present university's existing resources and technology may differ. Hence,
library orientation and library instruction to the newly enrolled student could
reduce the anxiety levels. While the students' previous school instruction's
language does not significantly influence the overall level of library anxiety,
there is a significant difference in staff approachability.
Although the results of this study indicated no
significant difference in the level of library anxiety based on caste/community
or gender, there was a substantial difference in the feeling of inadequacy
across these variables. Furthermore, there was a significant difference in
library anxiety among students based on the different languages of instruction
and the university that the student attended. Students enrolling in the
university whose medium of instruction while in school was vernacular or both
(Vernacular and English), experience higher anxiety than students from the
English medium of instruction when approaching the staff of the library.
Furthermore, since English is now the universally accepted standard for
scholarly communication in India and elsewhere, the potential for students’
scholastic achievements and academic discourse could depend on their mastery of
the English language. Finally, the
results from the present study provide strong evidence
to suggest that while many students, irrespective of their caste/community
and/or gender experience library anxiety, many students are confident in using
the library. These students are optimistic, enthusiastic, and keen to use
library resources. Overall, library anxiety scores among the student
population were found to be moderate, and while some categories such as staff
approachability, the feeling of inadequacy, and library
constraint exist, these are areas in which increased library orientation and library instruction, to the
newly enrolled student, could reduce the level of the anxiety the student
experiences.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Mr. Bobby, Mr. Binoy
Bhushan Konwar, Mr. Nabajit
Bora, Miss. Sewali Taid and Mr. Tanushyam
Mili for their help and assistance in collecting the
data from the three universities and Ph.D. fellowship from Pondicherry
University.
References
Abusin, K. A., & Zainab, A. N. (2017). Exploring library anxiety among
Sudanese university students. Malaysian Journal of Library &
Information Science, 15(1), 55-81.
Ahmed, S. Z., & Aziz, T.
B. (2017). Use of Bostick’s Library Anxiety Scale (LAS) in a developing country
perspective. Library Review, 66(4/5), 282-296. https://doi.org/10.1108/lr-06-2016-0052
Anwar, M. A., Al-Kandari, N.M. & Al-Qallaf,
C.L. (2004). Use of Bostick's Library Anxiety Scale on undergraduate biological
sciences students of Kuwait University. Library & Information
Science Research, 26(2), 266-283.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2004.01.007
Anwar, M. A., Al-Qallaf, C. L., Al-Kandari, N. M.,
& Al-Ansari, H. A. (2012). 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. http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/dissertations/AAI9310624.
(AAI9310624)
Chanana, K. (1993).
Accessing higher education: The dilemma of schooling women, minorities,
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in contemporary India. Higher
Education, 26(1), 69-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01575107
Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current
directions in psychological science, 1(3),98-101. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10768783.
Deshpande, S. (2006). Exclusive inequalities: Merit,
caste, and discrimination in Indian higher education today. Economic
and Political Weekly, 2438-2444. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4418346
Doris, K. A., Provata, P. A., & Vraimaki,
E. (2015) Library anxiety among undergraduate students in Greece. International
Journal on Integrated Information Management, 2 (2005), 25-37. http://ejournals.uniwa.gr/index.php/JIIM/article/view/3065
Halder, S., Ray, A., & Chakrabarty,
P. K. (2010). Gender differences in information seeking behavior
in three universities in West Bengal, India. The International
Information & Library Review, 42(4), 242-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572317.2010.10762869
Jan, S. U., Anwar, M. A.,
& Warraich, N. F. (2016). Library anxiety,
library use and academic performance of undergraduate students in
Pakistan. Library Review, 65(8/9), 564-577. https://doi.org/10.1108/lr-03-2016-0024
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. (2002). Dimensions of library anxiety and social interdependence:
Implications for library services. Library Review, 51(2), 71-78. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242530210418837
Jiao, Q. G., &
Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). The impact of information technology on library
anxiety: The role of computer attitudes. Information
Technology and Libraries, 23(4),
138-144. https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v23i4.9655
Jiao, Q. G., Onwuegbuzie, A.
J., & Bostick, S. L. (2004). Racial differences in library anxiety among
graduate students. Library Review, 53(4), 228-235. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242530410531857
Jiao, Q. G., Onwuegbuzie A.
J. & Lichtenstein A. A. (1996). Library anxiety: Characteristics of
‘at-risk’ college students. Library &
Information Science Research, 18(2),
151-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0740-8188(96)90017-1
Jiao, Q. G., Onwuegbuzie, A.
J., & Bostick, S. L. (2006). The relationship between race and library
anxiety among graduate students: A replication study. Information
processing & management, 42(3), 843-851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2005.03.018
Kennedy, T., Wellman, B.,
& Klement, K. (2003).Gendering the digital
divide. IT and Society, 1(5), 72e96, Retrieved 15th January from https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.177.1749&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Kohrman, R. (2003,
April). Computer anxiety in the 21st century: When you are not in Kansas any more. In eleventh Association of College &
Research Libraries conference, Charlotte, United States.
Kumar, A., & Hashmi, N.
I. (2020). Labour Market Discrimination in India. The Indian Journal of
Labour Economics, 63, 177–188.
Kwon, N., Onwuegbuzie, A.
J., & Alexander, L. (2007). Critical thinking disposition and library
anxiety: Affective domains on the space of information seeking and use in
academic libraries. College & Research Libraries, 68(3),
268-278. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.68.3.268
Lawless, L. J. (2011).An
examination of library anxiety at Cape Breton University. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 6(3), 16-27. https://doi.org/10.18438/B8JC9X
Lu, Y., & Adkins, D.
(2012). Library anxiety among international graduate students. Proceedings
of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 49(1),
1-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.14504901319
Noor Harun, A. K.,
& Ansari, N. A. (2011). Examining the effects of gender,
nationality, and bibliographic instruction on library anxiety. Malaysian
Journal of Library & Information Science, 16(2), 141–54.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., &
Jiao, Q. G. (2000). I’ll go to the library later: The relationship between
academic procrastination and library anxiety. College & Research
Libraries, 61(1), 45-54. Research
Libraries, 47(2), 160-165. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.61.1.45
Sen, A., (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford
University Press.
Shehata, A. M. K., & Elgllab, M. F. M. (2019). Library anxiety among
undergraduate students: A comparative study on Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The
Journal of Academic Librarianship, 45(4), 386-393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.05.006
Shoham, S. &Mizrachi, D.
(2001). Library anxiety among undergraduates: A study of Israeli B. Ed
students. The Journal of Academic
Librarianship, 27(4), 305-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-1333(01)00216-6
Singh, C. B. (2017). Multilevel exclusion of Dalit
students in professional elite colleges of India. Social Change, 47(3),
359-372. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049085717712814
Sinnasamy, J., &
Karim, N. H. A. (2017). 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2014.07.010
Song, Z., Zhang, S., &
Clarke, C. P. (2014). Library anxiety among Chinese students: Modification and
application of LAS in the context of Chinese academic libraries. The
Journal of academic librarianship, 40(1), 55-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2013.10.014
Świgoń, M. (2011). Library anxiety
among Polish students: Development and validation of the Polish Library Anxiety
Scale. Library & Information Science Research, 33(2),
144-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2010.09.003
Tierney, W. G., Sabharwal,
N. S., & Malish, C. M. (2019). Inequitable structures:
Class and caste in Indian higher education. Qualitative Inquiry, 25(5),
471-481. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800418817836
Whitmire, E. (2007). A
longitudinal study of undergraduates' academic library experiences. Journal
of Academic Librarianship, 27(5), 379-385. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-1333(01)00223-3.
Wouters, J. J., &
Subba, T. B. (2013). The “Indian Face,” India's Northeast, and “The Idea of
India”. Asian Anthropology, 12(2),
126-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/1683478X.2013.849484.
Appendix A
Library Anxiety Among Post-Graduate Students in India:
A Survey
1. Name: Mr. /Ms.
(Optional)…………………………………………………………………….
2. Gender: Male [ ] Female [ ]
3. State/Country: ……………………...………...…………………………...
4. Existing Educational Qualification:
…………………………………………
5. PG Course undertaken: ……………………………………………………..
6. Department: ……………………………………………………………………………………
7. Name of Institute:……………………………………….…………………….
8. Community: (a) General [ ] (b) OBC [ ] (c) SC [ ]
(d) ST [ ] (e) Others [ ]
9. College Educational background: (a) Private
University [ ] (b) Public [ ] (c) NGO funded [ ]
10. Schooling background: (a) Private Institution [ ]
(b) Public [ ] (c) NGO funded Institution [ ]
11. Medium of Instruction in Schools: (a) English [ ]
(b) Vernacular [ ] (c) Both [ ]
12. My College had a library: (a) Yes [ ] (b) No [ ]
13. My school had a library: (a) Yes [ ] (b) No [ ]
Category 1:
Staff approachability
S2 The librarians are unapproachable.
S3 The reference librarians are unhelpful.
S4 The librarians don't have time to help me because
they're always on the telephone.
S5 I can't get help in the library at the times I need
it.
S6 Library clerks don't have time to help me.
S7 The reference librarians don't have time to help me
because they're always busy doing
something else.
S11 The reference librarians are not approachable.
S18 The reference librarians are unfriendly.
S24 The library staff doesn't care about students.
S29 Librarians don't have time to help me.
S33 The library staff doesn't listen to students.
Category 2:
Feelings of inadequacy
S1 I'm embarrassed that I don't know how to use the
library.
S8 I am unsure about how to begin my research.
S9 I get confused trying to find my way around the
library.
S10 I don't know what to do next when the book I need
is not on the shelf.
S27 I don't understand the library's overdue fines.
S32 I don't know what resources are available in the
library.
Category 3:
Library confidence
S12 I enjoy learning new things about the library.
S13 If I can't find a book on the shelf, the library
staff will help me.
S15 I feel comfortable using the library.
S17 I feel comfortable in the library.
S19 I can always ask a librarian if I don't know how
to work a piece of equipment in the library.
S20 The library is a comfortable place to study.
S25 The library is an important part of my college.
S26 I want to learn to do my own research.
Category 4:
Library constraints
S14 There is often no one available in the library to
help me.
S16 I feel like I'm bothering the reference librarian
if I ask a question.
S21 The library never has the materials that I need.
S22 I can never find things in the library.
S30 The library's rules are too restrictive.
S31 The directions for using the computers are not clear.
S34 The library won't let me check out as many items
as I need.
Appendix B
LAS Scores
Table 1
Anwar et al (2004) Proposed Categories for LAS Scores
|
No Anxiety |
1.00 – 2.21* |
|
Low Anxiety |
2.22 – 2.65 |
|
Mild Anxiety |
2.66 – 3.54 |
|
Moderate Anxiety |
3.55 – 3.98 |
|
Severe Anxiety |
3.99 – 5.00 |
*The “No Anxiety” level was listed in the article as
“0.00 – 2.21” but the lowest achievable score on the LAS is actually 1.00
(Lawless, 2011).
Table 2
Tests of Normalityg
|
|
Kolmogorov-Smirnov |
Shapiro-Wilk |
||||
|
Statistic |
df |
Sig. |
Statistic |
df |
Sig. |
|
|
Library
Anxiety |
0.074 |
119 |
0.159 |
0.986 |
119 |
0.238 |
|
Staff approachability |
0.075 |
119 |
0.095 |
0.976 |
119 |
0.037 |
|
Feelings of inadequacy |
0.073 |
119 |
0.180 |
0.982 |
119 |
0.124 |
|
Library confidence |
0.080 |
119 |
0.057 |
0.977 |
119 |
0.048 |
|
Library constraints |
0.083 |
119 |
0.041 |
0.979 |
119 |
0.059 |
Table 3
Mean Score of Library Anxiety
|
Variable |
Category 1 Staff Approachability |
Category 2 Feelings of Inadequacy |
Category3 Library Confidence |
Category 4 Library Constraints |
Library Anxiety |
||
|
N |
Mean |
Mean |
Mean |
Mean |
Mean |
||
|
University |
Dibrugarh University |
39 |
3.97 |
2.98 |
2.14 |
3.45 |
3.21 |
|
Kaziranga University |
38 |
3.89 |
3.20 |
2.19 |
3.40 |
3.23 |
|
|
Tezpur University |
42 |
4.34 |
3.68 |
1.99 |
3.77 |
3.50 |
|
|
Over all Mean |
|
4.07 |
3.29 |
2.11 |
3.54 |
3.31 |
|
|
Gender |
Male |
60 |
4.08 |
3.45 |
2.10 |
3.57 |
3.35 |
|
Female |
59 |
4.07 |
3.14 |
2.11 |
3.53 |
3.29 |
|
|
Over all Mean |
|
4.08 |
3.30 |
2.11 |
3.55 |
3.32 |
|
|
Community |
General |
40 |
4.09 |
3.31 |
2.08 |
3.66 |
3.35 |
|
OBC |
42 |
4.05 |
3.48 |
2.13 |
3.50 |
3.35 |
|
|
SC |
14 |
3.99 |
2.77 |
2.00 |
3.46 |
3.15 |
|
|
ST |
23 |
4.14 |
3.26 |
2.16 |
3.48 |
3.34 |
|
|
Over all Mean |
|
4.07 |
3.21 |
2.09 |
3.53 |
3.30 |
|
|
Language |
English |
56 |
3.94 |
3.26 |
2.18 |
3.47 |
3.27 |
|
Vernacular |
25 |
4.15 |
3.39 |
2.09 |
3.69 |
3.39 |
|
|
Both |
38 |
4.23 |
3.29 |
2.00 |
3.56 |
3.35 |
|
|
Overall Mean |
|
4.11 |
3.31 |
2.09 |
3.57 |
3.34 |
|