Actualidad en estudios LibQUAL+®paradigmas de la biblioteca informativa y social-creadora y cuestión de género como reflejos de la realidad social

  1. Lázaro-Rodríguez, Pedro 1
  2. López-Gijón, Javier 1
  3. Alonso, Sergio 1
  4. Herrera-Viedma, Enrique 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Granada
    info

    Universidad de Granada

    Granada, España

    ROR https://ror.org/04njjy449

Journal:
Revista española de documentación científica

ISSN: 0210-0614,  1988-4621

Year of publication: 2020

Volume: 43

Issue: 2

Type: Article

DOI: 10.3989/REDC.2020.2.1649 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Revista española de documentación científica

Abstract

The purposes of this article are four: to analyze the main differences between the best valued dimensions of three studies on users satisfaction based on LibQUAL+® and carried out in university libraries of Spain, Argentina and Chile: to analyze the differences of the gender issue (men and women); to determine whether the differences on gender are statistically significant; and to discuss about the results in the specific field of libraries, as a reflection of the social reality in general. The results show that, in Spain, users are less satisfied with the dimension of the library as a space while in Latin America there is a lower degree of satisfaction about the control of information. The highest degree of satisfaction is found, in all the three studies, in the dimension related with the affective value of the service. Women in Spain show less satisfaction and a higher demand than men in the affective value of service. In addition, statistically significant differences were found in the analysis of the averages by gender. The results are discussed considering the reviewed literature and two paradigms are defined for libraries: the informative and the social-maker libraries, considering the satisfaction rates by gender as a reflection of the social reality. The main limitation of the article is that it is based on three specific studies. On the other hand, its main value and originality is that it can be considered as a starting point for further research on the gender issue in the field of libraries and their services.

€ View funding

Funding information

The first signing author is a beneficiary of one of the grants for pre-doctoral contracts from the University Teacher Training Program FPU-2014 of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports of Spain (reference number FPU-2014/04213). This work is supported by the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness of Spain (reference number TIN2016-75850-R).

Funders

Bibliographic References

  • Ahmed, S. (2017). Service Quality Satisfaction: A Comparative Cross-Sectional Study of Public and Private University Librarians in Pakistan. Libri, 67 (4), 313–325.
  • ARL. (2018). Association of Research Libraries - Libqual+ 2018 Survey. Disponible en: https://www.libqual.org/ documents/LibQual/notebooks/261_6.pdf [Fecha de consulta: 06/06/2019].
  • ARWU. (2020). ARWU World University Rankings 2018 | Academic Ranking of World Universities [en línea]. Disponible en: http://www.shanghairanking.com/index. html [Fecha de consulta: 01/04/2020].
  • Asemi, A.; Kazempour, Z.; Rizi, H. A. (2010). Using LibQUAL+TM to improve services to libraries: A report on academic libraries of Iran experience. Electronic Library, 28 (4), 568-579.
  • Buck, S.; Nutefall, J. E.; Bridges, L. M. (2012). “We thought it might encourage participation.” Using lottery incentives to improve LibQUAL+TM response rates among students. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38 (6), 400-408.
  • Cabrerizo, F. J.; López-Gijón, J.; Martínez, M. A.; Morente-Molinera, J. A.; Herrera-Viedma, E. (2017). A Fuzzy Linguistic Extended LibQUAL+ Model to Assess Service Quality in Academic Libraries. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 16 (01), 225-244.
  • Cabrerizo, F. J.; Pérez, I. J.; López-Gijón, J.; Herrera-Viedma, E. (2012). An Extended LibQUAL+ Model Based on Fuzzy Linguistic Information. En: Torra, V.; Narukawa, Y.; López, B.; Villaret, M. (eds.), Modelling Decisions for Artificial Intelligence pp. 90-101. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
  • Collins, E.; Stone, G. (2014). Understanding Patterns of Library Use Among Undergraduate Students from Different Disciplines. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 9 (3), 51-67.
  • Cook, C.; Heath, F. (2001). The ARL “LibQUAL+” Pilot Project. Journal of Library Administration, 35 (4), 47- 53.
  • Cook, C.; Heath, F.; Thompson, B. (2001). Libqual+: One Instrument in the New Measures Toolbox. Journal of Library Administration, 35 (4), 41-46.
  • Cook, C.; Heath, F.; Thompson, B.; Kyrillidou, M.; Roebuck, G.; Yeager, A. (2014). European College and University Libraries. Disponible en: https://www. libqual.org/documents/LibQual/publications/2014/ Euro_2014.pdf [Fecha de consulta: 06/06/2019].
  • Cook, C.; Thompson, B. (2001). Psychometric Properties of Scores from the Web-Based LibQUAL+ Study of Perceptions of Library Service Quality. Library Trends, 49 (4), 585-604.
  • Cook, C.; Thompson, B.; Heath, F.; Thompson, R. (2001). LibQUAL+: Service Quality Assessment in Research Libraries. IFLA Journal, 27 (4), 264-268.
  • Dahan, S. M.; Taib, M. Y.; Zainudin, N. M.; Ismail, F. (2016). Surveying Users’ Perception of Academic Library Services Quality: A Case Study in Universiti Malaysia Pahang (UMP) Library. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42 (1), 38-43.
  • Delgado-López-Cózar, E. (2004). La investigación por encuesta en la biblioteconomía y documentación española: Análisis de las encuestas publicadas en revistas y congresos de la especialidad entre 1976 y 1997. En: Ríos-Hilario, A.B.; Frías-Montoya, J.A. (coords), Metodologías de investigación en Información y Documentación, 2004, pp. 71-136. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.
  • Fernández-Ardèvol, M.; Ferran-Ferrer, N.; Nieto-Arroyo, J.; Fenoll, C. (2018). The public library as seen by the non-users. El Profesional de La Información, 27 (3), 659-670.
  • Fushimi, M. (2011). Evaluación de bibliotecas universitarias: una propuesta desde las perspectivas objetiva y subjetiva. Buenos Aires: Alfagrama.
  • Gimeno-Perelló, J. (2008). Evaluación de la calidad en bibliotecas: compromiso con lo público. Buenos Aires: Alfagrama.
  • Hariri, N.; Afnani, F. (2008). LibQUAL+ (TM) in Iran: a subgroup analysis by gender. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 9 (2), 80-93.
  • Heinrichs, J. H.; Sharkey, T.; Lim, J.-S. (2005). Relative Influence of the LibQUAL+TM Dimensions on Satisfaction: A Subgroup Analysis. College & Research Libraries, 66 (3), 248-265.
  • Herrera-Viedma, E.; López-Gijón, J. (2013). Libraries’ Social Role in the Information Age. Science, 339 (6126), 1382-1382.
  • Hiller, S. (2001). Assessing user needs, satisfaction and library performance at the University of Washington Libraries. Library Trends, 49 (4), 605–625.
  • Hossain-Shoeb, Z. (2010). Perceptions of Library Services by Gender – a Study in Bangladesh. Libri, 60 (4), 331– 338.
  • Hossain-Shoeb, Z.; Zabed-Ahmed, S. M. (2009). Individual differences in service quality assessment: A study of a private university library system in Bangladesh. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 10 (3), 193- 211.
  • Houghton, K.; Foth, M.; Miller, E. (2013). The continuing relevance of the library as a third place for users and non-users of IT: the case of Canada Bay. The Australian Library Journal, 62 (1), p. 27–39.
  • Killick, S.; Van-Weerden, A.; Van-Weerden, F. (2014). Using LibQUAL+® to identify commonalities in customer satisfaction: the secret to success? Performance Measurement and Metrics, 15 (1/2), 23-31.
  • Lázaro-Rodríguez, P.; López-Gijón, J.; Alonso, S.; Martínez-Sánchez: M-Á.; Herrera-Viedma, E. (2018a). Secaba-Rank, herramienta online para analizar y evaluar bibliotecas. El profesional de la información, 27 (2), 278-288.
  • Lázaro-Rodríguez, P.; López-Gijón, J.; Herrera-Viedma, E. (2018b). Visibilidad de las bibliotecas públicas y la lectura en medios de comunicación españoles frente a otros hechos de la cultura y relación con su uso: medidas para su mayor promoción y difusión. BiD: textos universitaris de biblioteconomia i documentació, 40.
  • Lázaro-Rodríguez, P.; López-Gijón, J.; Herrera-Viedma, E. (2019). Secaba-Rank a examen: validación de su metodología sobre eficiencia en bibliotecas versus la técnica Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) y el método Finlandia. El profesional de la información, 28 (3).
  • Lázaro-Rodríguez, P.; Vakkari, P. (2018). Modelizando el uso de las bibliotecas públicas a través de sus características: estudio comparativo entre España y Finlandia para los préstamos y las visitas. Revista española de documentación científica, 41 (4), e216.
  • Leorke, D.; Wyatt, D.; McQuire, S. (2018). “More than just a library”: Public libraries in the ‘smart city’. City, Culture and Society, 15, 37-44.
  • LibQUAL+®. (2020). LibQUAL+® Publications [en línea]. Disponible en: https://www.libqual.org/publications [Fecha de consulta: 01/04/2020].
  • Lin, H.; Pang, N.; Luyt, B. (2015). Is the library a third place for young people?. Journal of librarianship and information science, 47 (2), 145–155.
  • López-Gijón, J.; Ávila-Fernández, B.; Pérez-Gálvez, I.J.; Herrera-Viedma, E. (2010). La calidad en las bibliotecas universitarias biomédicas según sus usuarios. El Profesional de la Información, 19 (3), 255-259.
  • Lor, P. J. (2008). Critical reflections on international librarianship. Mousaion, 25 (1), 1-15. Disponible en: http://hdl.handle.net/2263/9911
  • Lor, P. J. (2017). International and Comparative Librarianship. En: McDonald, J.D.; Levine-Clark, M. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, Boca Raton: CRC Press.
  • Maidul-Islam, M. D; Zabed-Ahmed, S. M. (2011). Measuring Dhaka University students’ perceptions of ease-of-use and their satisfaction with University Library’s online public access catalogue. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 12 (3), 142-156.
  • McCaffrey, C. (2013). LibQUAL in Ireland: Performance Assessment and Service Improvement in Irish University Libraries. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 39 (4), 347-350.
  • MECD. (2020). Bibliotecas públicas españolas en cifras [en línea]. Disponible en: http://www.mecd.gob.es/ cultura-mecd/areas-cultura/bibliotecas/mc/ebp/portada.html [Fecha de consulta: 01/04/2020].
  • Morales, M.; Ladhari, R.; Reynoso, J.; Toro, R.; Sepulveda, C. (2011). Factor structure and psychometric properties of a Spanish version of LibQUAL+TM. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 12 (1), 23-37.
  • Validating LibQUAL+® using multitrait multimethod analysis. Library & Information Science Research, 38 (1), 30-38.
  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Okpala, H. N. (2016). Making a makerspace case for academic libraries in Nigeria. New Library World, 117 (9-10), 568-586.
  • Oomes, M.; Audunson, R.; Vakkari, P.; Aabø, S.; Huysmans, F. (2014). Perceived outcomes of public libraries in Finland, Norway and the Netherlands. Journal of Documentation, 70 (5), 927-944.
  • Parasuraman, A.; Zeithaml, V. A.; Berry, L. L. (1988). Servqual: A Multiple-Item Scale For Measuring Consumer Perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64 (1), 12-40.
  • Pourahmad, A. A.; Neshat, M.; Hasani, M. R. (2016). Using LibQUAL Model for Improving the Level of Students’ Satisfaction from Quality of Services in Academic Libraries: A Case Study in North Khorasan Province, Iran. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, 15 (1), 1650011.
  • Rehman, S. U. (2013). Service Quality Assessment in University Libraries of Pakistan. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science-Revue Canadienne des Sciences de L’Information et de Bibliotheconomie, 37 (1), 59-80.
  • Rey-Martín, C. (1999). La aplicación de los estudios de satisfacción de usuarios en la biblioteca universitaria: el caso de las universidades catalanas. BiD: textos universitaris de biblioteconomia i documentació, 3. http://bid.ub.edu/03rey2.htm
  • Sin, S.-C. J.; Huysmans, F.; Vakkari, P.; Aabø, S.; Audunson, R.; Oomes, M.; Kwon, N. (2016). Patterns of perceived public library outcomes in five countries. Journal of Documentation, 72 (2), 342-361.
  • Slatter, D.; Howard, Z. (2013). A place to make, hack, and learn: makerspaces in Australian public libraries. The Australian Library Journal, 62 (4), 272-284.
  • Thompson, B.; Cook, C. (2002). Stability of the Reliability of LibQual+TM Scores a Reliability Generalization Meta-Analysis Study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62 (4), 735-743.
  • Thompson, B.; Cook, C.; Kyrillidou, M. (2005). Concurrent Validity of LibQUAL+TM Scores: What Do LibQUAL+TM Scores Measure? The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31 (6), 517-522.
  • Toledo-Sánchez, M. C.; Maldonado-Radillo, S. E.; López- Torres, V. G. (2012). Propiedades psicométricas de una adaptación de LibQUAL+. Un estudio en bibliotecas de universidades mexicanas. Biblios: Revista de Bibliotecología y Ciencias de la Información, 49, 1-13.
  • Universidad de Salamanca. (2020). Observatorio de la Calidad y el Rendimiento Académico [En línea]. Disponible en: http://indicadores.usal.es/portal/ [Fecha de consulta: 01/04/2020].
  • Voorbij, H. (2012). The use of LibQUAL+ by European research libraries. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 13 (3), 154-168.
  • Webometrics. (2020). Ranking Web of Universities [en línea]. Disponible en: http://www.webometrics.info/en [Fecha de consulta: 01/04/2020].
  • Xi, Q.; Wu, W.; Zhang, Y. (2017). Makerspace Activities in China. Science and Technology Libraries, 36 (4), 425- 433.
  • Yesmin, S.; Zabed-Ahmed, S. M. (2016). Preference of Bangladesh university students for searching the library catalogue: OPAC or discovery tool? The Electronic Library, 34 (4), 683-695.
Data source: Dialnet