LGBTQIA+ Students Exhibit Differing Information Practices Based on Social Media Presence and Self-Identified Personality Type

IF 0.4 Q4 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Hilary Jasmin
{"title":"LGBTQIA+ Students Exhibit Differing Information Practices Based on Social Media Presence and Self-Identified Personality Type","authors":"Hilary Jasmin","doi":"10.18438/eblip30256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A Review of:\nde la Cruz, J., Winfrey, A., & Solomon, S. (2022). Navigating the network: An exploratory study of LGBTQIA+ information practices at two single-sex HBCUs. College & Research Libraries, 83(2), 278–295. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.83.2.278\nObjective –To explore the information practices of LGBTQIA+ students and the potential for academic libraries to impact or influence these practices.\nDesign – Focus groups and individual interviews.\nSetting – Two single-sex Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) in the USA.\nSubjects – Twenty-three (23) LGBTQIA+ students who were recruited through convenience and snowball sampling.\nMethods – Students from the two colleges were hired and trained as recruiters and interviewers. Twenty-three (23) total interviews on information practices were conducted—nine (9) via focus group, fourteen (14) via individual interviews. No two students participated in both a focus group and an individual interview. Question banks were drafted by the authors for the interviewers to use.\nMain Results – Four primary themes arose in qualitative, applied thematic analysis: Acceptance, Support, Personality, and Social Media. Acceptance was further discussed by an interviewee stating one of the colleges in the study was started by lesbians, but this is silent in the campus history. Thus, it is difficult to feel accepted on a campus with so much erasure of LGBTQIA+ history. In conjunction with Acceptance is the lack of Support from both campuses, namely in events, activities, and other affirming programming for LGBTQIA+ students. Students felt the need for more explicit, unequivocal support for LGBTQIA+ students from campus administration. Findings also suggested that Personality, namely participants’ self-identified introversion, may contribute to information deprivation due to fewer social connections and therefore less information sharing. Social Media, the final theme, was noted as the most powerful forum for information sharing for students, as well as a space to normalize LGBTQIA+ movement and visibility. Finally, students viewed the library in a traditional light, such as a study space. The reasoning for some LGBTQIA+ students rejecting the library as a safe space was unclear, though the authors hypothesize this may be due to safety while returning back to their dorms at night.\nConclusion – With a paucity of research in the information practices of LGBTQIA+ students, specifically those enrolled at HBCUs, the authors concluded that continued research is needed to understand how libraries can create safety and visibility. One primary mode for this might be to make more visible that libraries are not neutral, and that supporting LGBTQIA+ students should be a priority.","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30256","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A Review of: de la Cruz, J., Winfrey, A., & Solomon, S. (2022). Navigating the network: An exploratory study of LGBTQIA+ information practices at two single-sex HBCUs. College & Research Libraries, 83(2), 278–295. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.83.2.278 Objective –To explore the information practices of LGBTQIA+ students and the potential for academic libraries to impact or influence these practices. Design – Focus groups and individual interviews. Setting – Two single-sex Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) in the USA. Subjects – Twenty-three (23) LGBTQIA+ students who were recruited through convenience and snowball sampling. Methods – Students from the two colleges were hired and trained as recruiters and interviewers. Twenty-three (23) total interviews on information practices were conducted—nine (9) via focus group, fourteen (14) via individual interviews. No two students participated in both a focus group and an individual interview. Question banks were drafted by the authors for the interviewers to use. Main Results – Four primary themes arose in qualitative, applied thematic analysis: Acceptance, Support, Personality, and Social Media. Acceptance was further discussed by an interviewee stating one of the colleges in the study was started by lesbians, but this is silent in the campus history. Thus, it is difficult to feel accepted on a campus with so much erasure of LGBTQIA+ history. In conjunction with Acceptance is the lack of Support from both campuses, namely in events, activities, and other affirming programming for LGBTQIA+ students. Students felt the need for more explicit, unequivocal support for LGBTQIA+ students from campus administration. Findings also suggested that Personality, namely participants’ self-identified introversion, may contribute to information deprivation due to fewer social connections and therefore less information sharing. Social Media, the final theme, was noted as the most powerful forum for information sharing for students, as well as a space to normalize LGBTQIA+ movement and visibility. Finally, students viewed the library in a traditional light, such as a study space. The reasoning for some LGBTQIA+ students rejecting the library as a safe space was unclear, though the authors hypothesize this may be due to safety while returning back to their dorms at night. Conclusion – With a paucity of research in the information practices of LGBTQIA+ students, specifically those enrolled at HBCUs, the authors concluded that continued research is needed to understand how libraries can create safety and visibility. One primary mode for this might be to make more visible that libraries are not neutral, and that supporting LGBTQIA+ students should be a priority.
LGBTQIA+学生基于社交媒体存在和自我认同的人格类型表现出不同的信息实践
书评:de la Cruz, J, Winfrey, A, and Solomon, S.(2022)。网络导航:两所单性别hbcu LGBTQIA+信息实践的探索性研究。高校图书馆学报,2009(2),278-295。https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.83.2.278Objective -探索LGBTQIA+学生的信息实践,以及学术图书馆影响这些实践的潜力。设计-焦点小组和个人访谈。背景-美国两所单性别黑人大学(HBCUs)。研究对象:23名LGBTQIA+学生,采用方便抽样和滚雪球抽样的方式招募。方法:从两所大学的学生被雇用和培训为招聘人员和面试官。共进行了二十三(23)次关于信息实践的访谈,其中九(9)次通过焦点小组访谈,十四(14)次通过个人访谈。没有两个学生同时参加焦点小组和个人面试。题库由作者起草,供采访者使用。主要结果——在定性的应用主题分析中出现了四个主要主题:接受、支持、个性和社交媒体。一位受访者进一步讨论了接受性,他说,研究中的一所学院是由女同性恋者创办的,但这在校园历史上是沉默的。因此,在一个对LGBTQIA+历史抹去如此之多的校园里,很难感到被接受。与接纳相结合的是两个校区都缺乏支持,即在LGBTQIA+学生的事件、活动和其他肯定项目上。学生们认为校园管理部门需要对LGBTQIA+学生提供更明确、更明确的支持。研究结果还表明,性格,即参与者自我认定的内向,可能会导致信息剥夺,因为社会联系减少,因此信息共享减少。最后一个主题是社交媒体,它被认为是学生们分享信息的最有力的论坛,也是LGBTQIA+运动和可见度正常化的空间。最后,学生们从传统的角度来看待图书馆,比如一个学习空间。一些LGBTQIA+学生拒绝图书馆作为安全空间的原因尚不清楚,尽管作者假设这可能是由于晚上返回宿舍时的安全。结论-由于缺乏对LGBTQIA+学生的信息实践的研究,特别是那些在HBCUs入学的学生,作者得出结论,需要继续研究,以了解图书馆如何创造安全和可见性。一个主要的模式可能是让更多的人看到图书馆不是中立的,支持LGBTQIA+学生应该是优先考虑的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
44
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信