Social Psychology for Librarians

I've been reading a textbook called Social Psychology by Thomas Gilovich, et al and looking at its companion website. I wanted to share some ideas from the book that I think will be of real use to librarians and other government information professionals trying to persuade people to take action to ensure access, preservation and privacy with respect to government information. It may also be of use to people trying to raise awareness and usage of government information, library websites and libraries.

So often activists put out calls to action that either seemingly fall on deaf ears or make people aware of issues without taking action. Why is this? It could be because of the way people tend to change their attitudes. In chapter 7 of Social Psychology, we are told that people are open to persuasion on two levels -- a central route and a peripheral route. The central route of persuasion is what is most familiar to us -- "People attend carefully to the message, and they consider relevant evidence and underlying logic in detail." Speaking for myself here, this is the way I tend to try and convince others. I attempt to lay out the evidence to convince people of my point of view or to understand why I think something is under threat. I use statistics when I can and logical-sounding thought experiments when I don't have statistics.

If you look at campaigns to increase library use or use of library-purchased electronic resources, I think you see a similar pattern -- "You should use the library because we have x and y and you'll save time and money."

But it turns out that people only use the central route under certain conditions -- "when the message is relevant to them, when they have knowledge in the domain, and when the message evokes a sense of personal responsibility."

What happens when people don't feel like a message is relevant, when they don't have a lot of knowledge in a particular area and/or they feel no personal responsibility? They take the peripheral route of persuasion -- "people attend to superficial aspects of the message. They use this route when they have little motivation or time or ability to attend to its deeper meaning. In this route, people are persuaded by source characteristics (such as attractiveness and credibility of the communicator) and message characteristics (such as how many arguments there are and whether the conclusions are explicit)"

Looking that two two methods of persuasion in detail, I see immediate problems in the efforts of librarians in general and documents librarians in particular to get people to care and be good stewards of our resources. I'd like to outline these problems specifically for those helping to stimulate the building of local digital collections and invite librarians in other disciplines to see how these different routes might explain disconnects with their audiences.

I believe that I and others in the "digital deposit" movement have been obsessing over crafting ever better "central route" messages without realizing that much of our core audience (other documents librarians and other government information users) are in fact at the peripheral level though no fault of their own. Let's look at the "central route" factors again:

  1. Relevance to audience;
  2. Audience has knowledge in the domain;
  3. Audience has sense of personal responsibility.

Relevance -- This factor could go either way. Docs librarians understand a message of digital deposit is relevant to them because it is about government information or it's not relevant because the word "digital" makes it an IT concern and not theirs.

Knowledge -- While documents librarians have tremendous knowledge of government information products and fine knowledge of how to use Internet-based products, general IT skills and knowledge of local/remote repository options (LOCKSS, dSpace, OAIS, etc) is low. We at FGI have heard from people concerned about the problem, but have no idea what to do and aren't sure where to look for answers.

Personal Responsibility -- My personal sense is that this area is the greatest challenge to any "central route" approach of persuading depository librarians to build the geographically distributed depository system of the future. Although the Government Printing Office (GPO) has zero track record in preserving government information over the long haul and in fact no onsite collection at all until very recently, it now proposes to be the sole preserver of federal government information through its Future Digital System. Since this public commitment seemingly absolves libraries of their traditional preservation responsibilities, a majority of our documents colleagues say "GPO's got it covered, why do I need a local collection. Their problem, not mine." And so any message based on library responsibility to preserve materials regardless of format gets tuned out.

Obviously I wouldn't be blogging about this if I thought the correct course of action in light of the above was to throw in the towel, go home and kick back with some Alaskan Amber and a good salmon dish. So, what do we do if we are librarians either interested in getting our colleagues to build locally-housed, but Internet shared digital document collections or if we're trying to educate the larger public about the
availability of government information, specialists willing and able to help them (librarians), and the need to protect both?

As I see it, I think it's using the peripheral route to convince people that government information is relevant to them and they've got responsibility for its continued availability. We also need to provide clear direction as to HOW people can use government information AND keep it available for the future. Once we've done that and people have relevance, knowledge and responsibility, we can go back to the "central route" arguments to solidify our gains.

But how to use the peripheral route? Let's look at its characteristics again: "people are persuaded by source characteristics (such as attractiveness and credibility of the communicator) and message characteristics (such as how many arguments there are and whether the conclusions are explicit)" So perhaps we can hire Antonio Banderas and Catherine Zeta-Jones to be spokespersons for government documents. :-)

Or perhaps we should focus on credibility of the communicator and message characteristics. Perhaps we could lobby ALA or other library organizations to come out in favor of local digital collections, or at least provide an information clearinghouse on the subject. If we as "digital deposit" advocates can get our message out through existing organizations, their credibility might help the cause. In the case of depository libraries advancing their case, they might try to get a prominent citizen or some other respected person to publicly talk about the value of federal depository libraries.

In terms of message characteristics, researchers have found that short messages combined with instructions have helped increase a desired action. For example in 1967, Leventhal, Watts, & Pagano found that people who watched a film about smoking dangers AND were given smoking cessation tips smoked only a third as much as people who where just given tips or who just saw the film.

Part of the short messages should be stories, sort of like the ones we've been trying to collect under our Depository Success Stories, stories about libraries being collected by ALA, or even just blogging about how we answered a question on average tariff levels. Lobbyists have been trying to get us to be storytellers for years. Social psychologists have understood the power of persuasion for so long, they even have a name for it -- the indentifiable victim effect.

The other part of our message should be about what librarians and other people can actually DO. Here at FGI we've tried to answer part of that question at least implicitly by having pages about remixing government information, blogs of government documents librarians, and resources for capturing digital resources and producing video clips promoting resources.

Any ideas about how we put this all together? Get GODORT to hire attractive people to put together a YouTube series called This Old Depository where we give step by step instructions on building your very own globally accessible local digital collection? Let's all think about it together and start a new season of persuasion.

Average: 5 (1 vote)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

how's this for persuasive?

Hi Daniel. Thanks so much for starting this conversation. It's definitely food for thought -- if only documents were as addictive as cigarettes our job would be so much easier ;-)

I like your idea of connecting our cause with ALA. I'll start talking in GODORT about putting forth a resolution in support of local digital collections. Might I suggest that documents librarians run for ALA council? If we had a "docs bloc" we'd be able to more easily push this agenda as well.

I keep thinking though that it's not necessarily about persuasion per se. Or rather, if persuasion were as easy as hiring celebrities like Catherine Zeta-Jones and Antonio Banderas, then the @yourlibrary campaign would have caused a flood of cash flowing into libraries :-) Bear with me while I think this through in this comment:

I think the people within the community know from both a practical and philosophical standpoint that government documents are important. They've gleaned this almost visceral ideal over their lives of collecting, giving access to, and preserving government information. But I get the sense that the internet is overwhelming many in our community and like the deer in the headlights, they are frozen into inaction, not knowing which way to run.

The people outside the docs community (i.e., our users) don't realize the importance of government information and won't necessarily grok it until they need it to answer a question, find out some history, get some statistics, file a form etc.

So I'm not sure that we need to persuade either group of the importance of government information. What we need is:

  1. An easy-to-grasp plan as well as examples and tools (open-source of course so that budget-conscious admins are placated) so the community can participate. GODORT has a wiki on which collaborative projects have started to spring up, so that's a start!

    With a few projects under our belts (like LOCKSS, Archive-it, and the OCLC archive) combined with the experience with Web services like del.icio.us and LibraryThing and blogs and wikis, and we'll be on our way!

  2. For information seekers, libraries need to be at the point of user inquiry (see #1). THAT'S what will persuade them of the importance of libraries. And right now, that means being high up in google results. How to do that? We need to blog! We need to write about the questions we get and how we answer them; we need to describe our collections lovingly and point people to collections of import in our area, region and across the country; we need to highlight new documents and evaluate and give perspective on those new documents and collections. We need to open up our collections and our data (do a search on the Tamworth Library site for a great example) and open up channels of communication like IM (UC Berkeley's doin' it and I'm sure others are as well!)

I guess I'll stop there for now. What do others think?

Google buys feedburner!

Well speak of the devil! This is going to make blog content even easier to find. Get going everyone!! And if you tell us, we'll add your blog to the FGI aggregator.

Google feasts on FeedBurner. By John Oates. The Register. Published Monday 4th June 2007 12:42 GMT

Hot on the heels of its purchase of photo-sharing website Panoramio, Google has bought FeedBurner for an undisclosed amount.

FeedBurner allows bloggers, or anyone else with a website, to better manage RSS feeds. As well as offering ways to get blogs more widely read, FeedBurner provides statistical tools so you can see where your content is going. FeedBurner claims 431,171 publishers.

On its company blog, FeedBurner said combining its stats tools with Google's ad-serving and counting technology would give publishers better ways to promote content and make money off it. Feedburner hopes the Google deal will allow it to offer improved services more quickly to its users.

ALA Read campaign lacks important elements

James,

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I also appreciate you bringing up how celebrities are already working for ALA.

I haven't seen studies of the effectiveness of the ALA Read campaign, but based on the social psychology I've read thus far, I'd predict it isn't very effective. If someone knows different, please share the research with us.

Why do I predict that the flagship promotion of ALA isn't helping librarians much? Let's go back to the factors that persuade people using the peripheral route:

people are persuaded by source characteristics (such as attractiveness and credibility of the communicator) and message characteristics (such as how many arguments there are and whether the conclusions are explicit)

While the ALA Read campaign certainly has attractive and often credible figures, there really isn't a clear message with an explicit conclusion. Read? What? Why? To be like Catherine Zeta-Jones when I grow up. :-> Most importantly, where do I read? Where can I get books? I don't see these answers in the READ campaign and its signature posters.

What should they be doing instead? I don't know. Maybe find some famous doctors, lawyers, actors and actors and have posters and 30 sec ads relating libraries to "how they got to be where they are."

More later, maybe,

------------------------------------
"And besides all that, what we need is a decentralized, distributed system of depositing electronic files to local libraries willing to host them." -- Daniel Cornwall, tipping his hat to Cato the Elder for the original quote.

What story are you telling?

Pete Bromberg of Library Garden is guest-posting for Michael on TTW. He recently posted a story called What Story are you telling? that I think tags along with the story and comments here.

Pete examines research about how the stories we tell ourselves can affect our moods and general attitudes. Perhaps even "how we see ourselves in the future." In general, people with positive self stories tended to be happier and more effective.

Pete brings these conclusions home by asking:

What's this all mean? Dunno. Personally, I've tended to look at the setbacks in my own life as, "Well that's the end of chapter 1 but I can't wait to see what happens in chapter 2." This has served me well. If this gets posted before the weekend, I ask everyone to take a few moments between bites of burgers and notdogs to think about YOUR stories; the ones you've heard and the ones you tell.

Was that funding cut (1) the end of the book, or (2) the exciting cliff-hanger that lead to chapter two, "How we marshaled the support of the community and increased our funding..."?

Is the Internet (1) the death of reference librarianship, or (2) the tool we're using to re-establish ourselves as information experts and reconnect with our customers?

Has Borders (1) stolen our business with their fancy displays, pleasant reading nooks, caffeinated drinks, and children's storytimes, or (2) re-energized us with new ideas on how to create welcoming spaces, merchandise our collection, and do a better job of putting books, cds and dvds in the hands of our customers?

If you answered (1) instead of (2) to these questions, remember: How we tell these stories not only reveals our perceptions, but may also influence our future decisions, and contribute (or detract) from the health of libraries, and our relevance in the lives of our customers.

If we are documents librarians or other information activists, what stories are we telling ourselves? A story where we are passive recipients of whatever the government chooses to offer? Or a story where we actively shape the future against long odds? It really is up to us.
------------------------------------
"And besides all that, what we need is a decentralized, distributed system of depositing electronic files to local libraries willing to host them." -- Daniel Cornwall, tipping his hat to Cato the Elder for the original quote.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Easily link to terms in various wikis. For help, see <a href="/interwiki/3">interwiki</a>.

More information about formatting options

Syndicate content