Fear at First Sight: Library Anxiety, Race, and Nova Scotia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multidisciplinary research and services have attempted to decrease educational barriersand increase university success for African Canadian students. However, these efforts have put limited focus on the influence of academic libraries on student success. This study examined racial differences in library anxiety and the coping methods undergraduates used in Nova Scotia, Canada. To examine student experiences, this study used a mixed-methods approach with surveys and interviews. In the preliminary phase, survey findings demonstrated no significant racial difference. The interview phase revealed that African Nova Scotian undergraduates experienced lower library anxiety than Caucasian Nova Scotians. Specifically, African Nova Scotians expressed comfort interacting with their community and public libraries prior to attending university. While attending university, their initial reaction was overwhelmingly positive, reflecting their previous experiences with community libraries. However, throughout their degree programs their library anxiety increased when faced with barriers, particularly with staff. In contrast, the interviews revealed that Caucasian Nova Scotian undergraduates experienced higher levels of discomfort and anxiety during their pre-university interactions with public libraries and throughout their university programs. Based on the findings, this study contributes to a racial and Canadian context rarely discussed in Library and Information Science. This exploratory study recognized inclusive practices and spaces as methods that librarians and staff can use to alleviate library anxiety. These practices and spaces are particularly significant in lowering library anxiety for African Nova Scotian students and should continue in order to assure a successful transition into university for these students.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".