The concept of neutrality: a new approach

Author:

Macdonald Stephen,Birdi Briony

Abstract

Purpose Neutrality is a much debated value in library and information science (LIS). The “neutrality debate” is characterised by opinionated discussions in contrasting contexts. The purpose of this paper is to fill a gap in the literature by bringing these conceptions together holistically, with potential to deepen understanding of LIS neutrality. Design/methodology/approach First, a literature review identified conceptions of neutrality reported in the LIS literature. Second, seven phenomenographic interviews with LIS professionals were conducted across three professional sectors. To maximise variation, each sector comprised at least one interview with a professional of five or fewer years’ experience and one with ten or more years’ experience. Third, conceptions from the literature and interviews were compared for similarities and disparities. Findings In four conceptions, each were found in the literature and interviews. In the literature, these were labelled: “favourable”, “tacit value”, “social institutions” and “value-laden profession”, whilst in interviews they were labelled: “core value”, “subservient”, “ambivalent”, and “hidden values”. The study’s main finding notes the “ambivalent” conception in interviews is not captured by a largely polarised literature, which oversimplifies neutrality’s complexity. To accommodate this complexity, it is suggested that future research should look to reconcile perceptions from either side of the “neutral non-neutral divide” through an inclusive normative framework. Originality/value This study’s value lies in its descriptive methodology, which brings LIS neutrality together in a holistic framework. This framework brings a contextual awareness to LIS neutrality lacking in previous research. This awareness has the potential to change the tone of the LIS neutrality debate.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Library and Information Sciences,Information Systems

Reference92 articles.

1. The prehospital assessment of severe trauma patients’ performed by the specialist ambulance nurse in Sweden – a phenomenographic study;Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine,2012

2. ABF (2003), “The librarian’s code of ethics”, L’Association des Bibliothécaires Français, Paris, available at: www.ifla.org/files/assets/faife/codesofethics/france.pdf (accessed 31 July 2019).

3. Åkerlind, G. (2005), “Phenomenographic methods: a case illustration”, in Bowden, J.A. and Green, P. (Eds), Doing Developmental Phenomenography, RMIT, Melbourne, pp. 103-127.

4. The social nature of information;Library Trends,2001

5. American Library Association (2008), “Code of ethics of the American Library Association”, available at: www.ala.org/advocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics (accessed 31 July 2019).

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3