MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1550187770 · doi:10.18438/b8nk75

Public Libraries Can Play an Important Role in the Aftermath of a Natural Disaster

2010· article· en· W1550187770 sur OpenAlexaffvenue
Virginia Wilson

Notice bibliographique

RevueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLibrary Science and Administration
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Saskatchewan
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNarrativeLibrary scienceThematic analysisHurricane katrinaPublic relationsNatural disasterSociologyQualitative researchPolitical scienceGeographyComputer scienceSocial science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A Review of:
 Welsh, T. S. & Higgins, S. E. (2009). Public libraries post-Hurricane Katrina: A pilot study. Library Review, 58(9), 652-659. 
 
 Objective – This paper analyzes Hurricane Katrina-related narratives to document the challenges faced by public libraries after the disaster and the disaster-relief services these libraries provided. 
 
 Design – A qualitative thematic analysis of narratives obtained by convenience sampling.
 
 Setting – Narratives were collected and analyzed in 2005 and 2006 across the Gulf Coast area of the United States.
 
 Subjects – Seventy-two library and information science students enrolled in the University of Southern Mississippi’s School of Library and Information Science. Many worked in local libraries. 
 
 Methods – In this pilot study, students 
 volunteered to participate in a confidential process that involved telling their stories of their post-Hurricane Katrina experiences. Data was collected in a natural setting (the libraries in which the students worked), and inductive reasoning was used to build themes based on these research questions: What post-disaster problems related to public libraries were noted in the students’ narratives? What post-disaster public library services were noted in the narratives?
 
 NVivo7 qualitative analysis software was used to analyze and code the narratives. Passages related to public libraries were coded by library location and student. These passages were analyzed for themes related to post-disaster challenges and disaster-recovery services pertaining to public libraries.
 Main Results – Ten of the 72 narratives contained passages related to public libraries. The libraries included four in Alabama, one in Louisiana, and five in Mississippi. Results related to the first research question (What post-disaster problems related to public libraries were noted in the students’ narrative?) were physical damage to the building, from light damage to total destruction (reported in 8 or 80% of the students’ narratives), and inundation by refugees, evacuees, and relief workers (reported in 8 or 80% of the narratives). Results pertaining to the second research question (What post-disaster public library services were noted in the narratives?) included providing information for things such as providing information via the use of computers and the filling out of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Red Cross aid forms (6 or 60% of the narratives included this), listening and providing comfort (5 or 50% of the narratives), and volunteering and donating, both from others and of the students’ own time, money, or materials (noted by 5 or 50% of the narratives).
 
 Conclusion – The researchers concluded that while public libraries suffered devastation during the hurricane, after the hurricane, those libraries that could open provided essential services to people in need. These services included providing access to computers and access to information via computers, aid in filling out necessary relief aid forms, listening and providing comfort, and volunteering time, money, and materials. The public library clearly played a role in both providing information and facilitating communication. Documenting such contributions serves to illustrate the value of public libraries, especially in a post-disaster setting, and helps to demonstrate the value of public libraries in their communities.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante
Catégories consensuellesCommunication savante
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,934
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,412
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,276
Écart entre enseignants0,256 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2010
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEvidence Based Library and Information PracticeMême sujetLibrary Science and AdministrationTravaux en français237 207