• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Evidence Based Library and Information Practice >National Differences in Perceived Benefit of Libraries May Be Due to Their Investments in Libraries, Library Supply, and Cultural Factors
【24h】

National Differences in Perceived Benefit of Libraries May Be Due to Their Investments in Libraries, Library Supply, and Cultural Factors

机译：图书馆在感知利益方面的国家差异可能是由于图书馆投资，图书馆供应和文化因素造成的

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

A Review of: Vakkari, P., Aab?, S., Audunson, R., Huysmans, F, Kwon, N., Oomes, M., & Sin, S. (2016). Patterns of perceived public library outcomes in five countries. Journal of Documentation, 72(2), 342–361. http://dx.doi:org/10.1108/JD-08-2015-0103 Objective – To compare citizens' perceptions of the benefits of libraries in five culturally diverse countries. Design – Postal survey to a random stratified sample and web surveys (some with a sampling plan, some apparently not). Setting – Surveys were administered in Finland (by post), Norway, the Netherlands, the United States of America, and South Korea (online). Subjects – Selected or self-selected members of the general adult population in the specified countries who had used a public library within the past year. Methods – Surveys were administered and data were collected in each of the five countries. A dependent variable representing perceived outcomes was calculated from 19 outcome measures (related to life experiences). Within this, 4 indices were calculated from subsets of the 19 measures, relating to work, education, everyday activities, and leisure activities. Five independent variables were used: frequency of library use, number of services used, gender, age, and education level. Respondent country was also entered into analyses. Descriptive statistics and analysis of covariance results were presented. Main Results – It was noted that each country's sample was skewed in some way towards one or more of the variables of gender, age, and education, and some statistical corrections were employed. While patterns within countries are similar, library users from Finland, the United States of America, and South Korea reported higher levels of benefits overall. "Fun in reading" and "self-education" were the two outcomes with the highest scores by respondents. Higher numbers of visits and greater use of services may account for the higher perceived benefits in the three countries reporting them. In fact, these two factors appear to explain a substantial portion of the variance in perceptions of benefits between countries, meaning that between-country variation in library resources and supply plays a role in perception of benefit. There were varied rather than linear patterns of benefit reporting along age and education continua, with those at the lowest education levels deriving the most perceived benefits in all spheres. By gender, women derived fewer perceived benefits in the work sphere than men. Conclusions – There is variation across countries in the level of public library benefits reported, as well as variation across individual measures, creating different profiles of response by country. Even when respondent demographic characteristics and library usage are controlled for, country differences remain. These may be explained by the differences in investment in – and hence supply of – libraries by country, types of investment (e.g., according to the authors, Finland invests in services, Norway in collections, and the USA in staffing), and cultural factors such as the propensity of USA respondents to have a more extreme response style. Future research may profitably concentrate on policy contexts of libraries in each country. In the nineteenth century libraries provided social welfare services and in the twentieth they provided human rights through equitable access to information, so research should focus, by country, on what libraries will provide in the twenty-first century. Future studies might also address how differences in demographic patterns among respondents play out in benefit perceptions between countries.
机译：的评论：Vakkari，P.，Aab ?, S.，Audunson，R.，Huysmans，F，Kwon，N.，Oomes，M.，＆Sin，S.（2016）。在五个国家中感知到的公共图书馆成果的模式。 Journal of Documentation，72（2），342–361。 http：//dx.doi：org / 10.1108 / JD-08-2015-0103目标–比较五个不同文化国家的公民对图书馆利益的看法。设计–对随机分层样本和网络调查的邮政调查（有些具有抽样计划，有些显然没有）。设置–在芬兰（按邮寄方式），挪威，荷兰，美利坚合众国和韩国（在线）进行了调查。主题–过去一年中使用公共图书馆的特定国家的成人成年人的选定成员或自行选定的成员。方法–在这五个国家中进行了调查并收集了数据。从19个结果指标（与生活经历相关）中计算出代表感知结果的因变量。其中，从19项措施的子集中计算出4个指数，这些指数与工作，教育，日常活动和休闲活动有关。使用了五个独立变量：图书馆使用的频率，使用的服务数量，性别，年龄和教育水平。受访国也进行了分析。描述性统计和协方差结果的分析。主要结果–注意到每个国家的样本都以某种方式偏向性别，年龄和教育程度的一个或多个变量，并进行了一些统计上的修正。虽然各国内部的模式相似，但来自芬兰，美利坚合众国和韩国的图书馆用户报告说，总体而言，其收益较高。 “阅读乐趣”和“自我教育”是受访者得分最高的两个结果。较高的访问次数和对服务的更多使用可能是报告这三个国家较高的感知利益的原因。实际上，这两个因素似乎解释了国家之间对收益的看法差异的很大一部分，这意味着国家间图书馆资源和供应的差异在收益看法中发挥了作用。随着年龄和教育持续性的不同，收益报告的模式多种多样，而不是线性的，其中最低教育水平的人在各个领域获得的收益最多。就性别而言，妇女在工作领域获得的感知利益要少于男性。结论–各国报告的公共图书馆收益水平存在差异，并且各个措施之间也存在差异，从而造成了不同国家的应对方式。即使在控制受访者的人口统计特征和图书馆使用情况的情况下，仍然存在国家差异。可以通过以下方面来解释这些：国家/地区对图书馆的投资（以及图书馆的供应），投资类型（例如，根据作者的说法，芬兰投资于服务，挪威投资于馆藏，美国投资于人员），文化因素的差异。例如美国受访者倾向于采取更极端的应对方式。未来的研究可能会有利地集中于每个国家的图书馆政策环境。在19世纪，图书馆提供了社会福利服务，在20世纪，图书馆通过公平地获取信息来提供人权，因此研究应按国家重点关注图书馆在21世纪将提供的服务。未来的研究可能还会解决受访者之间的人口统计学差异如何在国家间的利益观念中发挥作用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号