Are virtual reference services color blind?
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Differing communication expectations across racialized and power-differentiated identities can lead to deficient service outcomes.
“For example, in light of the initial studies on racialized bias in reference services mentioned above (A. Curry & Copeman, 2005;Shachaf & Horowitz, 2006;Shachaf et al., 2008), it appears that differing communication expectations across racialized and power-differentiated identities can lead to deficient service outcomes.”
From In Pursuit of Antiracist Social Justice: Denaturalizing Whiteness in the Academic Library (2015) · cites this paper as Shachaf & Horowitz, 2006
The paper reports lower-quality virtual reference service for African American and Arab users (Abstract). But its Procedures state that requests differed only in the user's name, not in communication expectations. It therefore supports unequal service outcomes, not the proposed explanation for them. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredResearch on racialized bias in virtual reference demonstrates that under-serving patrons of color extends to online environments.
“Furthermore, the work of Shachaf, Oltmann, & Horowitz (2008) and Shachaf & Horowitz (2006) on racialized bias in virtual reference demonstrates that under-serving patrons of color extends to online environments, showing that the disembodied and abstracted nature of online service delivery is not a corrective for racialized bias (Milkman, Akinola, & Chugh, 2012).”
From In Pursuit of Antiracist Social Justice: Denaturalizing Whiteness in the Academic Library (2015) · cites this paper as Shachaf & Horowitz (2006)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- Abels, E. G. (1996). The e-mail reference interview. Reference Quarterly, 35 (3), 345 -358.
- Adkins, D., & Espinal, I. (2004). The diversity mandate. Library Journal, 129 (7), 52 -54.
- Allen, R., Dawson, G., Wheatley, K., & White, C. S. (2004). Diversity practices: Learning responses for modern organizations. Development and Learning in Organizations, 18 (6), 13 -15.
- Bushallow-Wilbur, L., DeVinney, G., & Whitcomb, F. (1996). Electronic mail reference service: A study. Reference Quarterly, 35 (3), 359 -371.
- Bushman, B. J., & Bonacci, A. M. (2004). You've got mail: Using e-mail to examine the effect of prejudiced attitudes on discrimination against Arabs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40 (6), 753 -759.
- Carter, D. S., & Janes, J. (2003). Unobtrusive data analysis of digital reference questions and service at the Internet Public Library: An exploratory study. Library Trends, 49 (2), 251 -265.
- Coffman, S., & Arret, L. (2004). To chat or not to chat: Taking yet another look at virtual reference. The Searcher, 12 (8), 49 -56.
- Curry, A., & Copeman, D. (2005). Reference service to international students: A field stimulation research study. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31 (5), 409 -420.
- Dewdney, P., & Ross, C. S. (1994). Flying a light aircraft: Reference service evaluation from a user's viewpoint. Reference Quarterly, 34 (2), 217 -230.
- Douglas, K. M., & McGarty, C. (2001). Identifiability and self-presentation: Computermediated, communication and intergroup interaction. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40 (3), 399 -416.
- Durrance, J. (1989). Reference success: Does the 55 percent rule tell the whole story? Library Journal, 114 , 31 -36.
- Feagin, J. (1991). The continuing significance of race: Antiblack discrimination in public places. American Sociological Review, 56 (1), 101 -116.
- Glaser, J., & Kahn, K. B. (2005). Prejudice and discrimination and the Internet. In Y. Amichai-Hamburger (Ed.), The social psychology of the Internet (pp. 247 -274). Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
- Hernon, P., & McClure, C. R. (1986). Unobtrusive reference testing: The 55 percent rule. Library Journal, 111 (7), 37 -41.
- Shachaf, P. (2005). Bridging cultural diversity through email. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 8 (2), 46 -60.
- Shachaf, P., Hara, N., Meho, L., Kwon, N., Li, B., Sakai, Y., & Lankes, D. (2005). Crosscultural analysis of virtual reference. [electronic version]. Proceedings of the 68th Annual Meeting of the Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 42 .
- Stacy-Bates, K. (2003). E-mail reference responses from academic ARL libraries: An unobtrusive study. Reference and User Services Quarterly, 43 (1), 59 -70.
- Swanson, D. R. (2002). Diversity programs: Attitude and realities in the contemporary corporate environment. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 7 (4), 257 -268.
- Whitlatch, J. B. (1989). Unobtrusive studies and the quality of academic reference services. College and Research Libraries, 50 (2), 181 -194.
- Whitlatch, J. B. (2001). Evaluating reference services in the electronic age. Library Trends, 50 (2), 207 -217.
- Whitmire, E. (1999). Racial differences in the academic library experiences of undergraduates. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 25 (1), 33 -37.
- Whitmire, E. (2003). Cultural diversity and undergraduates' academic library experiences. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 29 (3), 148 -161.
- Zoe, L. R., & DiMartino, D. (2000). Cultural diversity and end-user searching-An analysis by gender and language background. Research Strategies, 17 (4), 291 -305.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
In Pursuit of Antiracist Social Justice: Denaturalizing Whiteness in the Academic Library
Brook, F., Ellenwood, D., & Lazzaro, A. E. (2015) · Library Trends · doi:10.1353/lib.2015.0048 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
- Authors
- Shachaf, P., & Horowitz, S.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Shachaf, Pnina
- ORCID
- Horowitz, Sarah
- Venue
- Library & Information Science Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2006-12
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 501-520
- ISSN
- 0164-0763 (ISSN-L)
- 0740-8188
- OpenAlex
- W2143952858
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 14.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Library & Information Science Research (publishedVersion)
- E-LIS Repository (University of Naples Federico II) (acceptedVersion)
- UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) (acceptedVersion)
- Hispana (submittedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Administration
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web and Library Services
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
- Keywords
- virtual reference services, librarians, racial bias, ethnic discrimination, color vision deficiency, service quality, online discrimination, self-awareness, user heterogeneity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
