Library and Information Science Research 43 (2021) 101087

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Library and Information Science Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lisres

‘Follow us on Twitter’: How public libraries use dialogic communication to

engage their publics
Alla Kushniryk a, *, Stanislav Orlov b
a
Department of Communication Studies, Mount Saint Vincent University, 166 Bedford Highway, B3M 2J6 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
b
Mount Saint Vincent University Library, Mount Saint Vincent University, 166 Bedford Highway, B3M 2J6 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Public libraries that practice effective dialogic communication are more likely to build trust with their com­
Social media munities. Applying principles of dialogic communication as a theoretical framework, this study examines how
Dialogic communication public libraries in Canada and the USA use Twitter to build long-term positive relationships with their publics.
Twitter
Content analysis of 28,788 Twitter messages sent to and from thirteen library @names revealed that libraries
Public libraries
Trust
tend to employ the ‘dialogic cluster’ principles more often than the ‘technical and design cluster’ ones. However,
Distrust ‘technical and design cluster’ messages were more likely to be retweeted. The number of followers was found to
be positively related to the frequency of trust messages that the Twitter users send to a library @name. The
authors discuss communication practices to actively engage publics in dialogic communication on Twitter.

1. Introduction 2. Problem statement

Launched in 2006, Twitter has become a popular social media plat­ For public libraries to perform social functions successfully, they
form that advocates “for free expression and protecting the health of the must have trust of their local communities (Wojciechowska, 2020).
public conversation around the world” (Twitter, 2020). In 2021, Twitter Communication plays a very important role in building and maintaining
reported having 340 million active users with 500 million messages relationships based on trust because “doing good things in the com­
tweeted every day (Aslam, 2021). Aware of Twitter popularity, orga­ munity is one thing, but it’s how you go about communicating it that
nizations globally use this microblogging service to promote themselves, matters” (Young, 2018, p.2). To use Twitter effectively, librarians
provide services and share information with their customers, media, require relevant theoretical frameworks and should learn from best
patrons, stakeholders, and publics. Libraries resemble other organiza­ practices. Previous studies focused on examining the ways libraries are
tions around the world in their use of Twitter (Crawford, 2014). Its using Twitter (e.g.: Bunker, 2017; Crawford, 2014; Starr, 2010; Stvilia &
ability to spread information quickly and engage in dialogue can foster Gibradze, 2014). However, research on the role of Twitter in the
long-term positive relationships between libraries and their commu­ development and maintenance of long-term positive library-public re­
nities. Trust is viewed as an important outcome of these relationships lationships is rather limited and needs to be expanded.
(Childers Hon & Grunig, 1999; Yang, Kang, & Cha, 2015). The current study addresses these research needs by proposing the
This study discusses the results of the content analysis of 28,788 public relations theory of dialogic communication (Kent & Taylor, 1998)
messages sent to and from thirteen North American public libraries’ as a framework to explore library use of Twitter. Accordingly, the
Twitter accounts, focussing on how these public libraries use dialogic following research questions guided this study: How do public libraries
communication to build relationships based on trust with their publics. use Twitter to facilitate dialogic communication to build relationships
The term ‘publics’ is used to describe various groups of people in a based on trust with their publics? What communication practices can
community engaged with or being served by a public library. libraries implement to engage publics in dialogic communication?

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. Kushniryk), [email protected] (S. Orlov).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2021.101087
Received 29 July 2020; Received in revised form 16 February 2021; Accepted 27 March 2021
Available online 15 April 2021
0740-8188/© 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
A. Kushniryk and S. Orlov Library and Information Science Research 43 (2021) 101087

3. Literature review navigate and understand; and 5) conservation of visitors – users should be
valued and encouraged to remain on the site or platform.
3.1. Libraries and Twitter use Later Taylor, Kent & White (2001, p. 277) reorganized the five
principles into two clusters which “provide insight into the challenges of
Scholars suggest that Twitter, if used effectively, is a great commu­ fostering dialogue through the Internet”: 1) a technical and design
nication tool for libraries (e.g: Bunker, 2017; Crawford, 2014; Hathcock, cluster comprised of usefulness of information, ease of the interface, and
2017; Stvilia & Gibradze, 2014). According to Bunker (2017), the ben­ conservation of visitors, and 2) a dialogic cluster comprised of oppor­
efits of Twitter for libraries are that it takes far less time to write for tunities for generation of return visits and dialogic loop. Taylor et al.
Twitter than for other social media; Twitter is more tolerant of tradi­ (2001) argued that “technical and design” principles only lay the
tional marketing, such as events and announcements and links to blog foundation for dialogic communication and “alone cannot foster true
posts; it is easier to schedule and cross-post on Twitter; Twitter has dialogue between organizations and their publics”, and, therefore, uti­
immediacy for news and can foster direct relationships with reporters; lizing dialogic principles is “necessary for genuine dialogic communi­
and many famous authors are on Twitter. cation to emerge” (p. 279).
Stvilia and Gibradze (2014) classified tweets sent by six academic
libraries in the USA into nine categories or types: event, resource, 3.3. Dialogic communication and Twitter
community building, operations update, study support, Q&A, survey,
staff, and club. The “events” category included tweets about food drives, With the advent of new communication technologies and their
book sales, various exhibits, workshops, and presentations. The growing influence, researchers have widely applied Kent and Taylor’s
“resource” category tweets were about library catalogs, article data­ (1998, 2002) principles of dialogic communication to study social
bases, and other resources, including those created and maintained by media. Rybalko and Seltzer (2010) examined how Fortune 500 com­
the library, as well as information on laptops and tablets for loan. panies use Twitter to “facilitate dialogic communication with stake­
The “community building” tweets promoted the library as a place to holders” (p. 336). They conducted a content analysis of the Twitter
study, get research support, or simply hang out and have fun. They also profiles and messages posted on those profiles. Based on companies’
offered emotional support and congratulations to students, librarians, posting and response activity on Twitter profiles, the researchers clas­
and academic departments on different occasions. The “operations up­ sified companies into dialogic organizations and non-dialogic organi­
date” tweets provided information on the hours of operation, air- zations. Rybalko and Seltzer (2010) found that dialogic organizations
conditioning and heating problems, or emergencies. were more likely to employ the principle of conservation of visitors
The “study support” tweets promoted the library as a study location compared to non-dialogic organizations that were more likely to utilize
and provided information on support services available to students. The the principle of generation of return visits. Also, the usefulness of in­
“Q&A" category included responses to reference and general questions. formation principle was found to be the least frequently used dialogic
The “survey” tweets aimed to find participants for library polls and principle. Rybalko and Seltzer (2010) argue that in order “to adopt a
surveys. The “staff” tweets promoted librarians and advertised va­ dialogic orientation to Twitter use”, organizations need to seek “op­
cancies. Finally, “club” category tweets covered library hosted activity portunities to engage in and stimulate dialogue with stakeholders”
groups and clubs. (p.340). The authors recommend first conducting environmental scan­
Despite obvious benefits of Twitter discussed in scholarly literature, ning to monitor mentions of the organization, including its employees,
it can also disadvantage public libraries and their users, as Twitter has services and products, and then, when appropriate, initiate dialogue.
“both the power to alienate and include participants” as well as to Rybalko and Seltzer (2010) warned organizations not to treat Twitter as
“connect individuals and societies on a huge scale for better or for “just another means through which to disseminate the same advertise­
worse” (Appleton & Tattersall, 2015, p. 23). In addition, using social ments and publicity pieces that stakeholders are already receiving
media tools solely for the promotion of library services means not tap­ through other traditional media channels” (p.340).
ping into their potential to the full extent, which creates additional Rybalko and Seltzer (2010) conclude that it is unfortunate that or­
challenge of pressuring librarians into trying to provide instant feedback ganizations under-utilized Twitter in facilitating dialogic communica­
to service and reference queries, as well as requires significant time tion, since “Twitter seems to be designed for the sole purpose of
commitment and technological acumen to sustain an active and visible stimulating dialogue between users” (p.340). Fortune 500 companies
account (Appleton & Tattersall, 2015). were not the only ones found under-utilizing Twitter in a dialogic way.
After examining how colleges and universities are using Twitter, Linvill,
3.2. Dialogic communication McGee, and Hicks (2012) also found that these organizations are not
using Twitter in a dialogic way, but they are mostly using this platform
Years before the social media revolution, Kent and Taylor (1998) as a news feed to a general audience.
proposed the theory of dialogic communication that became a widely Based on the literature discussed above, this study is guided by the
used theoretical framework “to guide [web-based] relationship building following research question: Which principles of dialogic communica­
between organizations and publics” (p. 321). Kent and Taylor (1998) tion do public libraries utilize more often on Twitter? In addition to the
argued that “technology itself can neither create nor destroy relation­ research question, the following hypotheses are offered:
ships; rather, it is how the technology is used that influences
organization-public relationships” (p.324). Kent and Taylor (1998) H1. Public libraries will use dialogic cluster principles in their Twitter
defined dialogic communication as “any negotiated exchange of ideas profiles more often than technical design cluster principles.
and opinions” that represents a “communicative give and take” (p. 325), H2. The tweets categorized as a technical and design cluster will be
where individuals do not necessarily have to agree. more likely to be retweeted than the ‘dialogic cluster’ tweets.
To help organizations facilitate dialogic communication and use
web-based technology as a tool for relationship building, Kent and H3. There will be a significant difference between the type of dialogic
Taylor (1998, 2002) proposed the following five principles of dialogic principle utilized in a tweet and the likelihood of the tweet to be
communication: 1) the dialogic loop – providing publics an opportunity to retweeted.
and receive feedback; 2) usefulness of information – organizations should
provide information of general value to all publics; 3) generation of return 3.4. Trust, distrust and dialogic communication
visits – users should be encouraged to visit repeatedly over time; 4)
intuitiveness/ease of the interface – users should find the sites easy to Researchers argue that trust is one of the key dimensions of

2
A. Kushniryk and S. Orlov Library and Information Science Research 43 (2021) 101087

organization–public relationships (e.g., Childers Hon & Grunig, 1999; 4. Methodology

Yang et al., 2015). From an organizational perspective, trust is viewed as
“one party’s willingness to be vulnerable to another party based on the 4.1. Data collection
belief that the latter party is competent, reliable, open, and concerned”
(Mishra, 1996, p. 265), and “will not act opportunistically, is honest in To test the hypotheses, 28,788 Twitter messages were collected from
negotiations, and makes a good faith afford to behave in accordance the Twitter accounts of six Canadian and seven U.S. public libraries
with commitments” (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2000, p. 551). Trust is located in various regions coast to coast in both countries. The selected
argued be multidimensional construct (e.g.: Lewicki & Brinsfield, 2012; libraries varied in size, ranging from smaller local ones with an annual
Lyon, Möllering, & Saunders, 2012; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2000). budget of $2 million and 22 K cardholders to the largest libraries with a
The dimensions of trust discussed in the organizational literature are: budget of almost $200 million and 2 million cardholders (see Table 1).
benevolence and confidence (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2000), integrity, The Twitter messages were collected from October 2 until October
competence and dependability (Childers Hon & Grunig, 1999); reli­ 18, 2019 using Netlytic, a social media network analyzer. The sample
ability, openness and honesty (Mishra, 1996; Shockley-Zalabak, Mor­ included: 1) all Twitter messages sent by libraries using their official
reale, & Hackman, 2010; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2000), and Twitter account (including retweets and replies), 2) all Twitter messages
identification (Shockley-Zalabak et al., 2010). that mentioned library @names (including retweets and replies).
According to Lewicki, McAllister, and Bies (1998), trust and distrust
are independent constructs, so trust cannot be viewed as the opposite of 4.2. Data analysis
distrust. They describe trust as “confident positive expectations”, i.e.
believing in another’s goodwill, regarding “another’s” words, actions, 4.2.1. Operationalizing dialogic principles
and decisions (p. 439), and distrust as “confident negative expectations”, Kent and Taylor’s (1998, 2002) dialogic principles were used as a
i.e. suspecting another’s malice, regarding “another’s” words, actions, theoretical framework for the analysis of Twitter messages sent by li­
and decisions (p. 439). Lewicki and Brinsfield (2012) argue that trusting braries from their official Twitter accounts. A coding scheme was
expectations are grounded in optimism, hope and confidence, while developed to operationalize Kent and Taylor’s (1998, 2002) dialogic
distrusting ones are grounded in pessimism, fear and lack of confidence. principles. As Rybalko and Seltzer (2010) recommended, ease of interface
Therefore, trust is “expectations of things hoped for” and distrust is principle was omitted from the analysis “as features of Twitter’s inter­
“expectations of things feared” (Lewicki et al., 1998, p. 439). face are the same across profiles and are designed for simplicity”
Yang et al. (2015) argued that there are at least two dimensions of (p.637).
organization–public distrust, such as discredibility and malevolence. Usefulness of information principle theorizes that information should
Discredibility means that the organization is not respectful of laws; not only serve interests of organizations but interests of publics (Kent &
“does not care about acting ethically”, and “does not accept account­ Taylor, 1998). According to official Twitter accounts, the public libraries
ability for its actions” (Yang et al., 2015, p. 185). Malevolence means serve diverse communities in order to strengthen them; are dedicated to
that the organizational leaders will lie to increase profits; that organi­ the advancement of learning; inspire lifelong learning; advance knowl­
zation takes a lot more than it gives; it can deliberately deceive publics; edge; serve as a resource for everyone; and are a source of fun, learning
and it exploits its employees (Yang et al., 2015). and information.
Yang et al. (2015) suggested that trust, and especially distrust, were According to Rybalko and Seltzer (2010), tweets with links to news
important outcomes of effective or ineffective organization-public dia­ releases, speeches, policies, video, audio, industry news, annual reports,
logic communication. They argue that “dialogic communication can media rooms, careers webpages, homepages are useful to publics. One of
often reveal differences rather than similarities of goals”; it “can the goals of public libraries is to advance knowledge and inspire
potentially lead to irreconcilable conflicts… which can put communi­ learning, thus messages that provide links to external educational re­
cation parties in vulnerable/risky situations” (Yang et al., 2015, p. 180). sources, and containing interesting facts about books, authors, science,
Yang et al. concludes that dialogic communication can significantly technology, various cultures, history etc. were included in this category.
influence public judgments on trust or distrust of organizations. The In addition to those items, libraries’ operations updates were considered
outcomes of effective or ineffective dialogic communication between an useful for the general publics. Two categories were created to oper­
organization and its publics on Twitter is a growing number of engaged ationalize this principle: ‘info’ and ‘operations updates”.
followers who trust an organization. To increase the number of fol­ Principle conservation of visitors posits that users should be encour­
lowers, Business Twitter (2021) recommends engaging with publics aged to stay on the site (Kent & Taylor, 1998). Its elements are links to
thought leaders in your community by following influential people in descriptions of products or services, and posting regularly (Rybalko &
your field or interacting with or retweeting their posts to build con­ Seltzer, 2010). For this study, a “resource” category was created for
nections. To evaluate if the number of followers and followings could be tweets about library catalogs, book displays, article databases, and other
an outcome of effective or ineffective dialogic communication on resources, including those created and maintained by the library.
Twitter, the following hypotheses were posited: Designed to help develop relationships with stakeholders, principle
generation of return visits posits that users should be encouraged for
H4. There will be a positive relationship between the frequency of
repeat visits over time (Kent & Taylor, 1998). Prior studies (e.g.: Linvill
trust messages sent to a library @name and the number of followers.
et al., 2012; Rybalko & Seltzer, 2010) identified the following elements
H5. There will be a negative relationship between the frequency of that encourage visitors to return to sites: links to additional information
distrust messages sent to a library @name and the number of followers. about an organization, newsworthy information about the organization,
news items about the organization in media, discussion forums and
H6. There will be a positive relationship between the frequency of
FAQs; and links to events.
unrelated messages sent to a library @name and the number of
Two categories - library “promotion” and “events” - were created to
followers.
operationalize generation of return visits. The “promotion” category was
H7. There will be a positive relationship between the frequency of composed of tweets that contained the above-mentioned elements,
trust messages sent to a library @name and the number of followings. except events, plus all tweets that were promoting a library’s brand
identity, library as a place for learning, and crafting opportunities they
H8. There will be a negative relationship between the frequency of
offer. The “events” category included all messages that libraries sent
distrust messages sent to a library @name and the number of followings.
about library specific and community events held in libraries, such as
discussions, workshops, movie public screenings, book clubs, meeting

3
A. Kushniryk and S. Orlov Library and Information Science Research 43 (2021) 101087

Table 1
Public libraries use of Twitter.
Public library Total operating revenue Cardholders (registered or active users/registered Following Oct- Followers Oct- Joined Twitter
(in $) borrowers) 19 19

Boston @bplboston 50.2 mln 159,350 2025 28,378 October 2009

Calgary @calgarylibrary 55.3 mlnb 628,236a 1096 18,891 March 2009
Cape Breton @CBRLibrary 2.88 mlnc 22,005d 1971 2578 November
2011
Chicago @chipublib 107.8 mln 1,106,662 579 29,810 March 2010
Halifax @hfxpublib 23.5 mln 204,272 5251 28,794 May 2009
Knox County @knoxreads 13.7 mln 126,196 972 4350 June 2009
Los Angeles @lapubliclibrary 159.1 mln 1,665,288 945 25,176 April 2009
Miami-Dade @mdpls 64.8 mln 1,253,076 507 3058 June 2009
Montreal @bibliomontreal 115.6 mln 410,754 4746 11,441 November
2008
New York @nypl 316.1 mln 2,162,356 131 2,576,991 November
2008
Newfoundland and Labrador 11.66 mlne 159,562 536 2493 January 2014
@nlpublibraries
San Francisco @sfpubliclibrary 133.9 mln 428,427 983 18,328 March 2009
Toronto @torontolibrary 203.1 mln 972,213 1360 50,161 April 2008
a
Latest Registered Borrowers/Active Users for Calgary are from 2017.
b
Latest Total Revenue for Calgary is from 2016.
c
Latest Total Revenue for Cape Breton is from 2017.
d
Latest Membership data from Cape Breton Regional Library Board AGM 2018.
e
Latest data from Newfoundland and Labrador is from 2018.

with authors, competitions, etc. 4.2.3. Coding procedures

The dialogic loop principle was operationalized by the following ac­ To test the hypotheses, two coding sheets were developed to analyze
tions: when a library engaged in discussion with publics by posing a 28,788 tweets sent by public libraries and users. Two authors partici­
question to encourage dialogue, responded directly to a question or pated in the design and testing of the coding sheets and instructions.
commented another user (Rybalko & Seltzer, 2010), and when a library Initially, they coded 100 pieces of data. Based on the results of this
retweeted a post by another user (Linvill et al., 2012). The category practice session, the coding instructions were refined and any differ­
‘Q&A’ was created for the analysis. ences in coding resolved. After two authors had coded approximately
10% of data independently, the reliability was conducted to determine
4.2.2. Operational definitions of trust and distrust whether they were assessing the data uniformly. Intercoder reliability
The analysis of all Twitter messages sent by users, including all test was assessed using Cohen’s kappa formula; reliability coefficients
tweets and retweets sent to a library @name, and all replies to libraries’ (K) were found to be 0.91 for tweets sent by public libraries and 0.92 for
messages was guided by Mishra’s (1996) definition of organizational tweets sent by users to library @names. According to Cohen (1960,
trust and Lewicki et al. (1998) and Yang et al.’s (2015) definitions of 1968), if K is more than 0.7, the intercoder reliability is satisfactory.
distrust. Four categories were created: ‘trust’, ‘distrust’, ‘other’ and
‘unrelated’. 5. Findings
If the users in their tweets showed that they had confidence that a
library was open, honest, competent, dependable, reliable, and benev­ According to the Canadian Urban Libraries Council, the Institute of
olent, and doing good for the community; if the users were showing Museum and Library Services and provincial reports, the largest public
cooperation, doing information sharing, entering into agreements and libraries (PL) in our sample with over 900,000 cardholders (i.e. regis­
involvement with a library, risk taking (McKnight & Chervany, 2002), tered or active users/registered borrowers) are New York PL, Toronto
donating, supporting and promoting a library, expressing gratitude to a PL, Miami-Dade PL, Los Angeles PL and Chicago PL; the medium sized
library and librarians those tweets were classified as ‘trust’. Users libraries (between 400,000 and 900,000 cardholders) are San Francisco
retweeting libraries’ tweets were also classified as ‘trust’ (Adali et al., PL, Calgary PL and Montreal PL. Smaller libraries, such as Boston PL,
2010). Halifax PL, Knox County PL, Newfoundland and Labrador PL, and Cape
If the users expressed fear, skepticism, cynicism, wariness and Breton PL, have 20,000 to 400,000 cardholders (Alberta Government,
watchfulness, and vigilance (Lewicki et al., 1998); concerns about a 2018; Canadian Urban Libraries Council, (n.d.); Cape Breton Regional
library’s violation of obligations and reckless behavior, concerns about Library Board, 2018; Institute of Museum and Library Services, (n.d.);
an organization’s deliberate harm and lack of commitment to a com­ Newfoundland and Labrador Public Libraries, (n.d.); Nova Scotia Public
munity welfare, that a library does not accept accountability for its ac­ Libraries, (n.d.)).
tions and care about acting ethically, that a library takes a lot more from In October 2019, New York PL (NYPL) had the largest number of
a community than it gives back; it can intentionally mislead publics; and Twitter followers – 2,576,991, while the second largest library, Toronto
it exploits its employees (Yang et al., 2015); provides bad services to the PL, had 50,161 followers. However, New York PL followed the least
community; and if the users indicated their intent to withdraw donations amount of Twitter accounts (131) compared to other libraries in the
to a library fund, etc., those tweets were classified as ‘distrust’. sample. For more information, see Table 1.
The ‘other’ category included tweets that 1) were neutral, 2) written
in a language other than English and French, 3) described users’ atti­
5.1. Dialogic orientation
tudes toward government officials for their support of a library or lack
thereof, and 4) described users’ attitudes toward authors whose events
Content analysis of 1062 tweets (846 unique tweets and 216
were held in a library. Category ‘unrelated’ included messages sent by
retweets) sent by libraries identified six categories or types of tweets:
users who were only using or abusing a library’s official Twitter account
info (277 or 26%) and operations update (51 or 5%), resource (86 or
to disseminate information unrelated to a library or a library held event.
8%), library promotion (167 or 16%) and events (381 or 36%), and Q&A

4
A. Kushniryk and S. Orlov Library and Information Science Research 43 (2021) 101087

(100 or 9%) (See Table 2):

Total

1062
As for the dialogic principles, the usefulness of information combines

277

381

167
100
51
86
328 (or 31%) ‘info’ and ‘operations update’ tweets. The conservation of

@lapubliclibrary @chipublib @bibliomontreal

visitors is made of 86 (or 8%) ‘resource’ tweets. ‘Library promotion’ and
‘events’ merge into generation of return visits with 548 (or 52%) tweets.

Montreal
One category ‘Q&A’ (100 tweets or 9%) belongs to a dialogic loop
principle.

5
0
2

0
0
9
During the next step of the analysis, dialogic principles were rear­
ranged into two clusters suggested by Taylor et al. (2001). As a result,

Chicago
the technical and design cluster was composed of 414 tweets or 39%,

127
39

41

22
18
while the dialogic cluster was the largest with 648 tweets or 61%. Thus,

1
6
H1 was supported, meaning that the libraries used dialogic cluster
principles more often than technical design cluster principles to

Los Angeles
communicate with publics on Twitter.

110
33

39

15
13
5.2. Retweet velocity

1
9
@knoxreads
Out of 846 unique tweets that libraries sent, 276 (33%) were never

@CBRLibrary County
Newfoundland New Miami- Cape Breton Knox
retweeted by any users; 36% of tweets generated 1 to 3 retweets.

23

34
7
0
1

3
0
Overall, 88% of tweets generated from 0 up to 10 retweets. Only 12% of
tweets were retweeted more than 10 times. During the week of data
collection, the most popular tweet that was retweeted 189 times was
operations update sent by Chicago PL.

3
1
1

3
0
9
An independent t-test was conducted to test H2 and to determine if

@nlpublibraries @nypl @mdpls

the tweets categorized as a ‘technical and design cluster’ were more

York Dade

104
21

54

15
likely to be retweeted. The t-test was significant t = (450.21) = 2.84, p =

5
6

3
0.002. The ‘technical and design cluster’ tweets (M = 6.05, SD = 16.01)

143
78

15

16

28
were more likely to be retweeted compared to the ‘dialogic cluster’ (M

4
= 3.66, SD = 7.23).

@bplbostonBoston @torontolibrary @calgarylibrary @sfpubliclibrary @hfxpublib and Labrador

The H3 wanted to determine if there a significant difference between
the dialogic principle utilized in a tweet and the likelihood of a tweet to
be retweeted. A one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was calculated

107
12

58

19
6

4
using the type of tweet as an independent variable and the number of
times the tweet was retweeted as dependant variable. A significant Halifax
difference was noted: F(3, 842) =5.44, p = 0.001. As a follow up, a

16
15

26

69
Tukey HSD post hoc test was conducted. It showed that there was a

6
3
significant difference between the amount of retweets for usefulness of
San Francisco

information (M = 7.10.58, SD = 17.69) and generation of return visits (M

= 3.88, SD = 7.13), usefulness of information (M = 7.10.58, SD = 17.69)
and dialogic loop M = 2.43, SD = 7.72).
19

51

11

93
1
9

2
5.3. Trust and distrust
Calgary

Overall, 27,726 Twitter messages sent by users to the libraries offi­

102

cial accounts by mentioning libraries accounts, retweeting and replying

20

18

18
34
7
5

to library’s messages were collected and analyzed (see Table 3).

The sample consisted of 12,069 (44%) unique tweet messages and
15,657 (56%) retweets. The largest number of tweets 16,357 sent by
Toronto

users were collected for Toronto PL, nearly half of the messages (49% or
106
19

15

33

18
16

8625) were retweets. Second largest number of tweets 5580 were

5

collected for New York PL. Twenty-nine percent (29% or 3611) of all
messages were retweets.
Dialogic communication principles and clusters.

Twenty-six percent (26% or 7178) messages sent or retweeted by

users were coded as ‘trust’; 6420 (23%) messages were coded as
Boston

‘distrust’; 45% or 12,604 were ‘other’; and 1524 (5%) were ‘unrelated’
11

19

49
Operations 1
Resources 6

Promotion 9
3

to the libraries.
Category

In the ‘trust’ category, there were 3000 unique tweets and 4178
Events

Q&A

retweets of messages sent by libraries, meaning that 58% messages in

Info

this category were retweets. The highest percentage of ‘trust’ messages,

Dialogic Generation of

Dialogic loop
Technical Usefulness of

design Conservation

86% or 59 tweets and 67% or 710 tweets, were sent to Montreal PL and
information

of visitors
Principle

Chicago PL respectively.
Dialogic

return
visits

In the ‘distrust’ category, the majority of collected messages (4879 or

76%) were retweets of other users’ distrust messages; and the number of
original tweets was 1841 or 24%. For Toronto PL, 38% of tweets (6231)
Cluster
Table 2

Total

were classified as distrust; and it was the largest amount of distrust

&

messages received by a library in our sample. At the time of data

5
A. Kushniryk and S. Orlov Library and Information Science Research 43 (2021) 101087

Table 3
Frequencies of tweets sent by users to library @names.
Public library and @name Trust Trust % Distrust Distrust % Other Other % Unrelated Unrelated % Total

Boston PL @bplboston 203 19 51 5 758 70 70 6 1082

Calgary PL @calgarylibrary 362 43 17 2 451 54 4 0 834
Cape Breton PL @CBRLibrary 14 64 0 0 8 36 0 0 22
Chicago PL @chipublib 710 67 4 <1 334 32 4 <1 1052
Halifax PL @hfxpublib 295 58 12 2 206 40 0 0 513
Knox County PL @knoxreads 50 37 0 0 86 63 0 0 136
Los Angeles PL @lapubliclibrary 418 56 7 1 318 43 4 1 747
Miami-Dade PL @mdpls 94 37 0 0 159 62 4 2 257
Montreal PL @bibliomontreal 59 87 0 0 9 13 0 0 68
New York PL @nypl 2487 45 85 2 1608 29 1400 25 5580
Newfoundland and Labrador PL @nlpublibraries 166 52 1 <1 153 48 0 0 320
San Francisco PL @sfpubliclibrary 296 39 12 2 426 56 24 3 758
Toronto PL @torontolibrary 2024 12 6231 38 8088 49 14 <1 16,357

collection, the Toronto PL was experiencing a public relations crisis due positively related to the frequency of trust messages that the Twitter
to library’s decision to rent a room to a controversial radical feminist users send to a library. In those trust tweets to the library, users show
author (The Globe and Mail, 2019). that they have confidence that a library and its staff are open, honest,
The largest percentage of ‘other’ messages 70% or 758 were in competent, dependable, reliable, and benevolent, and doing good for the
Boston PL sample, because many of them were written in languages community, they acknowledge cooperation, share information, donate,
other than English or French and were classified as “other”. support and promote the library, and express gratitude for the services
Most ‘unrelated’ messages 1400, were collected for New York PL. and to librarians. Having numerous Twitter followers also has its dis­
The ‘unrelated’ messages to the NYPL constituted 25% of all tweets advantages. For example, it was found that the number of followers is
(5580) and were sent by users who were only using or abusing NYPL’s positively related to the number of unrelated messages sent by users who
official Twitter account to disseminate information unrelated to the li­ were only using or abusing a library @name to disseminate information
brary or a library held event. unrelated to the library or a library held event. Even though following
The H4, H5 and H6 were intended to examine the relationships be­ influential people or organizations helps to grow a community of fol­
tween frequencies of trust, distrust, unrelated messages sent to a library lowers, followings do not relate to the number of trust messages
@name, and a number of a library’s Twitter followers. The H7, and H8 received.
examined the relationships between frequencies of trust, distrust and a Business Twitter (2021) recommends several tips to grow followers
number of Twitter accounts a library follows. To complete these ana­ on Twitter: creating valuable content, sending messages consistently,
lyses, five Pearson product moment correlations were conducted. Fre­ tapping into trending keywords and hashtags that relate to libraries,
quency of trust messages was found to be positively related to the promoting a library @name everywhere, and following influential
number of followers (r(13) = 0.752, p = 0.003), and to the number of people in the field and local communities. Bunker (2017) argues that to
unrelated messages (r(13) = 0.99, p < 0.0.001). No relationships were build a library community on Twitter, it is important to know and
found between the frequency of distrust messages and the number of remain in touch with the audience; be local, authentic, interesting and
followers. A library following other Twitter accounts was not found to be helpful; and “tell stories with heart and emotion” (p.19).
related to the frequencies of trust or distrust messages. Thus, H1, H2, H3, To increase the number of followers, a library can run a public re­
H4 and H6 were supported and H5, H7 and H8 were rejected as a result lations campaign, create a team for coordinating social media activities,
of the data analyses. and enlist a help of an external consulting company to optimise social
media engagement. These actions help increase a number of Twitter
6. Discussion followers which leads to a higher trust and retweet velocity and,
consequently, to a higher number of users who have an opportunity to
6.1. Building community on Twitter see a message, but those actions can be rather costly.

Six categories or types of tweets (info, operations update, resource, 6.2. Recommendations to use Twitter in dialogic way
promotion, events and Q&A) that libraries posted on Twitter were iden­
tified in the analysis. These categories were later classified according to There are a number of communication practices which libraries can
five dialogic communication principles (usefulness of information, con­ implement to engage publics in dialogic communication, such as: 1)
servation of visitors, generation of return visits and dialogic loop) and two following other Twitter accounts with high numbers of followers,
clusters (technical and design, and dialogic). especially local influential people and organizations; 2) engaging in
Libraries were found to employ the ‘dialogic cluster’ principles more dialogue by mentioning other @names in tweets, replying to inquiries,
often than the ‘technical and design cluster’ principles on Twitter. providing feedback, commenting, and retweeting messages; 3) moni­
Compared to other organizations, discussed in previous studies (e.g.: toring accounts who use or abuse a library @name to disseminate in­
Linvill et al., 2012; Rybalko & Seltzer, 2010), libraries tend to use formation unrelated to your library; 4) tapping into and partnering with
Twitter in dialogic way. The ‘dialogic cluster’ tweets help organizations highly connected accounts in your field; 5) monitoring conversations
maintain successful and ongoing relationships with their publics by of­ about your library, 6) creating valuable content and sending useful in­
fering them reasons “why they might remain engaged in dialogue” and formation, 7) sending Twitter messages constantly, 8) utilizing library
encouraging them “to return for further relationship development” related hashtags and keywords; 9) always being open, honest, trans­
(Taylor et al., 2001, p. 279). It was also found that the ‘technical and parent, competent, reliable, and benevolent in your communication
design cluster’ messages, specifically usefulness of information messages, efforts; and 10) as Bunker (2017) recommends, telling stories with heart
were more likely to be retweeted. This finding indicates that creating and emotion is always a good choice. Public libraries can implement
valuable content and sending useful information provide the necessary these communication practices to build relationships based on trust with
foundation for engaging publics in dialogic communication. their publics.
The number of a library’s Twitter followers was found to be

6
A. Kushniryk and S. Orlov Library and Information Science Research 43 (2021) 101087

6.3. Limitations Kent, M., & Taylor, M. (2002). Toward a dialogic theory of public relations. Public
Relations Review, 28, 21–37.
Kent, M. L., & Taylor, M. (1998). Building dialogic relationships through the World Wide
The findings contribute to the understanding of how public libraries Web. Public Relations Review, 24, 321–334.
in North America use Twitter to facilitate dialogic communication with Lewicki, R. J., Brinsfield, C., Möllering, G., & Saunders, M. (2012). Measuring trust
their public. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution beliefs and behaviours. In F. Lyon (Ed.), Handbook of research methods on trust (pp.
29–39). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
due to its limitations. One of the limitations is the cross-sectional design Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships
of this study that prevents the inference of causal relationships. In the and realities. Academy of Management Review, 23, 438–458.
future, a longitudinal study about how public libraries use social media Linvill, D. L., McGee, S. E., & Hicks, L. K. (2012). Colleges’ and universities’ use of
Twitter: A content analysis. Public Relations Review, 38, 636–638. https://doi.org/
to build relationships with their publics will be beneficial. Another 10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.05.010.
limitation is that only 13 public libraries from Canada and the USA were Lyon, F., Möllering, G., & Saunders, M. (2012). The variety of methods for multi-faceted
sampled in this study. It is difficult to generalize these findings to all phenomenon of trust. In F. Lyon, G. Möllering, & M. Saunders (Eds.), Handbook of
research methods on trust (pp. 1–16). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
public libraries as they may differ in their use of Twitter and operate in McKnight, D. H., & Chervany, N. L. (2002). What trust means in e-commerce customer
other cultural contexts. relationships: An interdisciplinary conceptual typology. International Journal of
Electronic Commerce, 6(2), 35–60.
Mishra, A. K. (1996). Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In
7. Conclusion R. Kramer, & T. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research
(pp. 261–287). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
To have long lasting positive relationships based on trust with their Newfoundland and Labrador Public Libraries. (n.d.) Annual report 2017 – 18. Retrieved
from https://www.nlpl.ca/about/reports-plans.html.
publics, libraries should be able to communicate effectively about all the
Nova Scotia Public Libraries. (n.d.). Annual report 2016-2017. Retrieved from https://
good things they do in their communities. Public libraries that use library.novascotia.ca/about.
Twitter in dialogic way are more likely to build these relationships. Rybalko, S., & Seltzer, T. (2010). Dialogic communication in 140 characters or less: How
Principles of dialogic communication, from the public relations Fortune 500 companies engage stakeholders using Twitter. Public Relations Review,
36, 336–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.08.00.
perspective, can serve as a great theoretical framework for librarians to Shockley-Zalabak, P. S., Morreale, S. P., & Hackman, M. Z. (2010). Building the high trust
evaluate their communication efforts. No matter how large or small your organization: Strategies for supporting five key dimensions of trust. San Francisco, CA:
public library is and how big a budget it has, Twitter is a powerful tool to Jossey-Bass.
Starr, J. (2010). California digital library in Twitter-land. Computers in Libraries, 30(7),
engage publics, keep them informed, and help to turn a library into a 23–27.
great hub for community growth and development. Stvilia, B., & Gibradze, L. (2014). What do academic libraries tweet about, and what
makes a library tweet useful? Library & Information Science Research, 36, 136–141.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2014.07.001.
References Taylor, M., Kent, M. L., & White, W. J. (2001). How activist organizations are using the
Internet to build relationships. Public Relations Review, 27(3), 263–284. https://doi.
Adali, S., Escriva, R., Goldberg, M. K., Hayvanovych, M., Magdon-Ismail, M., org/10.1016/S0363-8111(01)00086-8.
Szymanski, B. K., … Williams, G. (2010). Measuring behavioral trust in social The Globe and Mail. (2019). Hundreds protest controversial Toronto Public Library event
networks. In 2010 IEEE international conference on intelligence and security informatics featuring Meghan Murphy. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/cana
(pp. 150–152). Vancouver, BC: IEEE Publications. da/toronto/article-hundreds-protest-controversial-toronto-public-library-event-f
Alberta Government. (2018). 2016 Public library statistics. Retrieved from https://open. eaturing/.
alberta.ca/publications/1189-4644. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W. (2000). A multidisciplinary analysis of the nature,
Appleton, L., & Tattersall, A. (2015). How librarians can harness the power of social meaning, and measurement of trust. Review of Educational Research, 70, 547–593.
media for the benefit of their users. Multimedia Information & Technology, 41(4), Twitter. (2020). Our advocacy. Retrieved from https://about.twitter.com/en_us/advo
23–26. cacy.html.
Aslam, S. (2021). Twitter by the numbers: Stats, demographics & fun facts. Retrieved Wojciechowska, M. (2020). Social capital, trust and social activity among librarians:
from: https://www.omnicoreagency.com/twitter-statistics/. Results of research conducted in 20 countries across the world. Library and
Bunker, L. (2017). Picking a platform and finding a voice. In S. W. H. Young, & Information Science Research, 42, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2020.101049.
D. Rossmann (Eds.), Using social media to build library communities: A LITA guide (pp. Yang, S., Kang, M., & Cha, H. (2015). A study on dialogic communication, trust, and
3–28). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. distrust: Testing a scale for measuring organization–public dialogic communication
Business Twitter. (2021). The power of Twitter’s audience. Retrieved from https://busi (OPDC). Journal of Public Relations Research, 27, 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/
ness.twitter.com/en/basics/twitter-followers.html. 1062726X.2015.1007998.
Canadian Urban Libraries Council. (n.d.). 2018 CULC public library statistics. Retrieved Young, T. (2018). How to build trust as a competitive advantage. Communication World,
from http://www.culc.ca/projects/KPIs/. 1, 1–6.
Cape Breton Regional Library Board. (2018). Highlights of the annual general meeting.
Retrieved from https://cbrl.ca/about/cbrl-board/.
Childers Hon, L., & Grunig, J. E. (1999). Guidelines for measuring relationships in public Alla Kushniryk is an associate professor in the Department of Communication Studies at
relations. Gainesville, FL: The Institute for Public Relations. PDF file. Retrieved from Mount Saint Vincent University, Canada. She received her PhD in communication and
https://www.instituteforpr.org//wp-content/uploads/Guidelines_Measuring_Relat information from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Her research and publications
ionships.pdf. centre on organizational communication and social media. Dr. Kushniryk’s research has
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and been published in journals and conference proceedings including Public Relations Review,
Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46. Canadian Journal of Communication, and the Journal of Professional Communication.
Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled
disagreement of partial credit. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 213–220. Stanislav Orlov is a systems librarian at Mount Saint Vincent University, Canada. He
Crawford, W. (2014). Successful social networking in public libraries. Chicago: American received his master of information studies degree from the University of Toronto. His
Library Association. research interests focus on how libraries use open educational resources and social media.
Hathcock, A. M. (2017). Cultivating critical dialogue on Twitter. In S. W. H. Young, & His research has been published in journals including Practical Academic Librarianship and
D. Rossmann (Eds.), Using social media to build library communities: A LITA guide (pp. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research and he
137–150). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. has presented at the American Library Association conference.
Institute of Museum and Library Services. (n.d.). Public library survey 2017. Retrieved
from https://www.imls.gov/research-evaluation/data-collection/public-libraries-
survey.