1. Social media use by Canadian academic librarians:
a focus on motivation, attitudes and behaviours
Dean Giustini, Kevin Read, Tania Alekson
UBC Social Media Research Team
May 2011
Phase II Survey link (English version)
http://www.surveyfeedback.ca/surveys/wsb.dll/s/1gf76
Design of phase II survey
Our phase II survey instrument consists of eleven (11) essay-type questions
designed to elicit qualitative information from Canadian academic librarians. The
instrument builds on the phase I survey questions and the investigators’ analyses of the
quantitative data (made public on Slideshare in December 2010). Our goal in phase I
was to elicit data about academic librarians’ use of social media as well as institutional
support for their usage. Conversely, phase II aims to extract more in-depth narrative and
qualitative data about academic librarians’ use of social media especially their
motivation, attitudes and behaviours. In the phase I data, the major tools identified as
being used most-often by academic librarians were as follows (not in order): blogs,
wikis, RSS feeds, chat services such as Meebo and Google Talk, social networking sites
such as Twitter and Facebook, and media-sharing sites SlideShare and YouTube. We aim
to identify other tools that have emerged since our phase I survey (e.g. Foursquare,
Gowalla, Groupon).

2. The views of Canadian academic librarians about their readiness and acceptance
of social technologies are critically important in our study. Institutional cultures are
often at the root of why librarians do or do not use new technologies successfully.
Moreover, academic librarians’ attitudes towards technology are indicators of their
acceptance. According to Spacey, Fine and Evald, positive attitudes are fundamental to
the acceptance of new technologies. The relationship between attitudes and behaviours
is explained in detail in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis). In conducting
our phase II survey, we hope to identify the best practices of academic library 2.0 and
some of the major tools used most and valued by Canadian academic librarians.
Sample of Canadian academic librarians
Our sample in this survey will be randomly accrued from several data sources:
from phase I survey data; purposive browsing of Canadian academic library websites for
librarians who blog and tweet with some regularity (“theoretical sampling”) and other
methods such as consulting our social networks (e.g., Facebook and Twitter). Our main
aim is to identify academic librarians at CARL / ABRC libraries who use social media at a
higher level of proficiency than the norm (what might even be called ‘early adopters’ or
‘technology evangelists’) but whom we suspect will engage us in discussion about social
media. The sample will include both female and male librarians, across demographic
variables, in both public and technical services, and working at CARL / ABRC member
libraries. The resulting list of Canadian academic librarians (n=50), their names and e-

3. mail addresses, will form our sample. The phase II survey will be validated through an
iterative process of framing questions, testing them, editing and improving them, and
asking for input from the UBC Social Media Research Team. Eventually the survey will be
sent via e-mail to the sample in May 2011.
Analysis of survey data
Data captured in phase II will be analyzed using a triangulation approach, partly
informed by grounded-theory [1], a systematic technique of comparative analysis that is
used to examine qualitative data; we also plan to use a combination of open and
creative interpretation techniques [2]. The grounded theory analysis will first be
conducted by ATLAS.ti software (ATLAS.ti GmbH, Berlin, Germany) and additional
manual coding will be thereafter conducted. To consolidate various categories and
themes, all transcripts will be examined and recoded after ATLAS analysis. Through
iterative analysis and reflection, the investigators plan to enumerate the major factors
(e.g., attitudes and behaviours) that influence Canadian academic librarians’ use of
social media. Coding will be used to delineate emerging themes and inter-relationships
in the transcripts. Identifying information of respondents found in the interview
transcripts will be masked to ensure their privacy and confidentiality.

4. Four Stages of Analysis in Grounded Theory
Stage Purpose
Codes Identifying anchors that allow key aspects of the data to be gathered
Concepts Collections of codes of similar content that allow data to be grouped
Categories Broad groups of similar concepts used to generate a theory
Theory A collection of explanations that explain the subject of the research
References
1. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory. 2nd ed Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 1998.
2. Clandinin DJ, Connelly FM. Narrative inquiry: experience and story in qualitative
research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000.
3. Spacey, R., Goulding, A., & Murray, I. (2003). ICT and change in UK public
libraries: Does training matter? Library Management 24:1&2, pp. 61-69.
4. Evald, P. (1996). Information technology in public libraries. Program30: 2, pp.
121-31.
5. Fine, S. (1986).Technological innovation diffusion and resistance: An historical
perspective. Journal of Library Administration 7 (1). 83- 108.
6. Dillon, A., & Morris, M. (1996). User acceptance of information technology:
Theories and models. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 31,
pp.3-32.
7. Hicks, D. Perpetual beta: A study of the attitudes and opinions of Nova Scotian
academic librarians towards change. M.L.I.S. dissertation, Dalhousie University
(Canada), Canada.
8. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behaviour: An
Introduction to Theory and Research. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
9. Gilmore, E. (1998). Impact of training on information technology: Attitudes of
university faculty. http://www.tcet.unt.edu/research/dissert/gilmore
10. Yaacob, R.A. (1990). Attitudes concerning information technology of librarians
employed in government supported special libraries. PhD dissertation. University
of Michigan.