MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952296777 · doi:10.18438/eblip29548

Testing a Warmth-Based Instruction Intervention for Reducing Library Anxiety in First-Year Undergraduate Students

2019· article· en· W2952296777 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyLibrary instructionIntervention (counseling)Session (web analytics)PsychologyMedical educationClinical psychologyComputer scienceMedicineInformation literacyPedagogyPsychiatryWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.636
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it