ATG Special Report — The Power of Collaboration: How Librarians and Publishers Can Restore Confidence in Research

By Emily Singley (Vice President, North American Library Relations, Elsevier) <e.singley@elsevier.com>

The research landscape has seen significant technological and cultural shifts over the last few years following the COVID-19 pandemic. According to Elsevier’s global Confidence in Research study, these shifts have resulted in a loss of confidence in scientific research among the research community (“Confidence in Research — Elsevier,” n.d.). About 78% of U.S. researchers surveyed believe the pandemic has increased the importance of separating good quality information from misinformation, and 79% believe the pandemic increased the importance of science bodies and researchers explaining and communicating their research better.

A rapidly changing scholarly communication ecosystem is also impacting confidence in research. We have seen the rise of new threats such as paper mills and predatory publishing, which prey on early career researchers who are in the “publish or perish” stage of their careers — and these less-than-reputable actors are muddying the scholarly record with their questionable content. Advancements such as artificial intelligence (AI) hold the promise of boosting productivity and efficiency, but also present challenges we will need to overcome. And the success of Open Access publishing models, while spurring our transformation to a more open, transparent, and equitable society, has also undoubtedly made scholarly communication more complex.

As information providers, librarians are uniquely positioned to help both researchers and the public navigate this rapidly evolving research landscape and restore confidence in research. The need for information literacy — and especially science literacy — has never been greater.

The State of Information Literacy

Academic libraries have long seen information literacy as a core part of their mission. Back in 2016, the Association of College & Research Libraries’ Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education outlined information literacy as an educational reform movement and called on academic librarians to create a new cohesive and collaborative curriculum (Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education, ACRL). According to a recent study that surveyed 189 instruction librarians, 96% said they were concerned about the impact of misinformation, and 79% said they teach misinformation in their library instruction courses (Saunders, Laura, 2023). But the study also found a low rate of collaboration between faculty and librarians on misinformation topics and suggests many are using outdated instruction methods and are not assessing learning outcomes adequately.

And the latest Ithaka S+R Library Director survey found that although most academic library directors (98%) rank information literacy as a high priority function for the library, only 16% of all library directors in the survey sample believe they have a clear vision for futureproofing that considers technological and socio-political trends, and only 17% have a clear vision for redressing the influence of misinformation among their community members (“US Library Survey 2022” n.d.). Information literacy, as it stands, is not keeping up with today’s needs.

Is it time to reinvent information literacy again? And do we need to think more broadly and consider how to address information literacy not just within our institutions but for our communities and our society?

During the pandemic, we saw libraries begin to take up this challenge and become anti-misinformation warriors. In San Diego, academic and public libraries partnered with both local government and the National Library of Medicine to address the infodemic. Local universities, public libraries, and government agencies collectively created a Toolkit to help stop the spread of health misinformation in their communities (Henderson n.d.). Margaret Henderson, a Health Sciences Librarian from San Diego State University involved in the Toolkit, noted that the inclusive aspect of the project, involving librarians from different backgrounds and with differing expertise, was critical to its success: “it wasn’t just one voice” Henderson said, “all of the different librarians that were collaborating on this gave input to it.”

Scott Walter, Dean of the San Diego State University Library, also emphasized that collaboration is key to addressing social crises rooted in the slackening of public confidence in scientific and scholarly expertise. “Bringing researchers, librarians, policy makers, and community members together may be the ‘next level’ of information literacy engagement that is needed at the present moment,” Walter said. “Any meaningful solution goes well beyond what we have previously thought about when discussing ‘information literacy’ and well beyond the familiar models for collaboration among librarians, faculty members, and publishers. It’s all bigger than that now.”

In South Africa, a review of academic library websites showed librarians responded to pandemic “fake news” by employing various strategies including relying on their empowerment programs (in the form of information and media literacy), provision of quality and credible information to users, and support for research and collection development (Bangani 2021). The study found South African libraries played an important role as sources of trustworthy health information during the pandemic but that there is more work to be done — particularly around the need for resources to be provided in local languages other than English.

Joyce V. Garczynski, Assistant University Librarian for Communication and Digital Scholarship at Towson University, said she would like to see library workers advocating on the national stage for the need to teach information literacy and critical thinking skills at all levels, kindergarten through adulthood. “If education isn’t seen as a possible solution to misinformation, we will continue to see an erosion of public trust in the research process and science,” Garczynski said. “We have seen the impact that information literacy can have in our own classrooms, but we aren’t part of the larger conversation about how to solve problems like mis- and disinformation. Researchers and scientists need library workers to continue to teach information literacy skills and to advocate on the national stage for the necessity of these skills.”

The Role of Librarians and Publishers

In a world where confidence in research is under threat, the role of academic libraries is more important than ever. But that role needs to evolve — librarians need to go beyond providing lists of resources or evaluation checklists. As Henderson put it, “the big thing is critical thinking — that’s important. It’s not just about teaching information literacy, you have to be teaching critical thinking, teaching the process of science.” Without understanding scientific inquiry, and how it is communicated, the public will be poorly equipped to distinguish fact from fiction. “It’s in everybody’s best interest for citizens to understand how science works,” Henderson said. Information literacy instruction needs to expand beyond the classroom and be more collaborative. Walter noted that researchers need to be able to not only discern and describe misinformation in their areas of expertise but need to be able to communicate that out to the public, beyond their traditional audience of students and fellow scholars. And he believes that to accomplish this “information literacy, data literacy, media literacy, and scientific communication skills will need to come together in new ways,” adding that this suggests a need for “a deeper commitment to collaboration across academic, public, special, and school libraries.”

Publishers also have a critical role to play in restoring confidence in research. We need to embrace Open Access while maintaining high quality, reliable scientific communication, and collaborate with libraries to educate both scholars and the public about the scientific process. Walter said he believes publishers can help by working to demystify the process of scientific inquiry, peer review, and publication of science and scholarship so that members of the public understand the way in which scientific knowledge evolves, especially in a quickly emerging area like a pandemic.

Diversification of the scholarly record can also help combat misinformation, and both publishers and libraries need to be actively working towards that goal. As Garczynski points out, publishers need to pay more attention to diversifying what voices they publish: “when information consumers can see themselves represented in what they read, how it impacts them, and they understand the rigorous process that went into creating what they’re reading, I believe that will go a long way to help restoring faith in the scientific research process.”

There is still a lot of work that both libraries and publishers need to do if we are to collectively restore confidence in research, but here are a few ways to start:

• Expand information literacy efforts beyond the classroom — Academic libraries and STEM publishers can partner with public libraries, science museums, and local communities to develop curricula designed to equip the public to become better consumers of scientific communication.

• Give workshops in collaboration with trusted publishers to train researchers how to recognize predatory journals, paper mills, and unreliable research — Publishers can partner with academic libraries to host “author workshops” that share information about the publishing process with graduate students and early-career researchers.

• Develop training for researchers and faculty on social media communication — Inform researchers about the risks and benefits of engaging in public dialogue around their research and help them understand not only how to communicate effectively, but also how to deal with comments, backlash, and abuse online.

• Be more open and transparent about the publishing process — STEM publishers can do more to make the work they do on research integrity more visible. Publishers manage a reliable and equitable peer review process, link data and software to articles, ensure compliance with funder and institutional policies, check for plagiarism and image manipulation, make articles machine-readable, and conduct ethics investigations. Publishers should share this work more widely with researchers, libraries, and the public.

• Diversify author voices globally scientific communication needs to be more globally diverse and equitable. Publisher-led initiatives like the Joint Commitment for Action on Inclusion and Diversity in Publishing (“Joint Commitment for Action on Inclusion and Diversity in Publishing” n.d.) and selfidentification of authors upon submission are a good start, but there is more work to be done (Elsevier n.d.).

Conclusion

If researchers, libraries, and publishers all work together, we can collectively address the threat of misinformation and restore confidence in research. While it may seem daunting given the speed at which information is created and disseminated, I believe it’s possible. It will take publishers and libraries working together to build a scholarly communication ecosystem grounded in integrity, transparency, openness, and diversity if we are to build a world where information can once again be trusted. Collaboration — across institutions, industry, and governments — is key. If we want to go far, we’ll have to go together.

References

Bangani, Siviwe. 2021. “The Fake News Wave: Academic Libraries’ Battle against Misinformation during COVID-19.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 47 (5): 102390. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102390

“Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education.” Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL). February 9, 2015. https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework

“Confidence in Research — Elsevier.” n.d. Confidenceinresearch. elsevier.com. https://confidenceinresearch.elsevier.com/

Elsevier. n.d. “Paving the Way to Increase Diversity in Journals — and Research.” Elsevier Connect. Accessed August 28, 2023. https://www.elsevier.com/connect/reviewers-update/pavingthe-way-to-increase-diversity-in-journals-and-research

San Diego Circuit. (2023, February 10). Library Toolkit for Addressing Health Misinformation. https://libguides.sdsu.edu/ library-toolkit-addressing-health-misinformation

“Joint Commitment for Action on Inclusion and Diversity in Publishing.” n.d. Royal Society of Chemistry. Accessed August 28, 2023. https://www.rsc.org/policy-evidence-campaigns/ inclusion-diversity/joint-commitment-for-action-inclusionand-diversity-in-publishing/

Saunders, Laura. 2023. “Librarian Perspectives on Misinformation: A Follow-up and Comparative Study | Saunders | College & Research Libraries, v.84, n.4.” Crl.acrl.org. Accessed August 28, 2023. https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/ view/25976/33915

“US Library Survey 2022.” n.d. Ithaka S+R. Accessed August 28, 2023. https://sr.ithaka.org/publications/us-librarysurvey-2022/

Author’s note: The personal quotes used in this article are from direct conversations with academic librarians. Each individual quoted has given consent to have their commentary published as part of this piece.

Emily Singley Bio

Emily Singley is the Vice President for North American Library Relations at Elsevier. Singley has more than 16 years of experience building sustainable partnerships in academic libraries and an expertise in engaging academic leadership in game-changing conversations. She most recently served as Associate University Librarian, Technology and Technical Services at Boston College. During her tenure at Boston College, she directed the vision, strategic planning, staffing, and resourcing for five key library programs. Emily’s past positions include library technology roles at Harvard University, Southern New Hampshire University, and Curry College.