Online First

Social media (SM) is defined as tools used for social interaction, using highly accessible and scalable communication techniques as defined by Wikipedia. Duffy (2015) stated that social media includes blogs, discussion forums, chat rooms, Wikis, WhatsApp, YouTube channels, LinkedIn, Faceboo k and Twitter. However, unlike traditional media such as newspapers and magazines, social media manages the content of the conversation or interaction in the online environment which allows for spontaneous two-way and multiple dialogue. Social media consist of various user-driven channels (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, blogs, YouTube) and offer one-to-one, one-to-many and many-to-many communication. Social media can be defined digital technologies used by people to interact socially and together to create and exchange content. (Chui, Manyika, & Bughin, 2012) The authors define social media technologies as the products and services that enable social interactions in the digital realm and thereby allow people to connect and interact virtually. These include technologies such as social media, Web 2.0, and Collaborative tools.

Turban, Liang, and Wu (2011) opined that social media is a wide concept that covers a wide range of Internet applications that support social communication between persons. This kind of communication can either be direct or indirect, synchronous or asynchronous, and it emphasises interaction between users, their content and also on building online relationships and communities. Khoo (2014) identified six types of social media which are: Social networking sites (e.g., Facebook), Collaborative projects (e.g., Wikipedia), Blogs and micro blogs (e.g., blogspot.com and Twitter which supports online journalism; Content communities (e.g., YouTube and Flickr which support file and content sharing; Virtual game worlds (e.g.,World of Warcraft); Virtual social worlds (e.g., Second Life). Khoo (2014) further explained that the following can also be considered as types of social media sites: Online discussion forums; Consumer review and rating sites; Social question-answering sites (e.g., Yahoo Answers); Collaborative or social bookmarking; Text communication services (e.g., email and instant messaging service); Voice and video communication services (e.g., Skype).

In a survey carried out by Taylor and Francis (2014) on use of social media by library: current practices and future opportunities, various reasons were highlighted for using social media by librarians who affirm that using social media has enabled them to achieve the following: seek opinion on the library and its services for self-evaluation purposes; provide feedback to users’ queries; advertise events, services, news and presence; reach library users in their homes or virtual spaces: encourage collaboration and building repositories of collaborative content to specific user’s group; increase usage of library collections by publicizing new and existing collections; librarians were able to connect with other librarians and have update information of the profession and so on.

In Nigeria, Okuonghae (2018) found that librarians in university libraries in South-south Nigeria were highly aware of social media use while Akporhonor (2015) found lack of awareness of use of social media among librarians in South-South Nigeria. However, Okuonghae (2018) found low usage of social media tools among librarians in South-South Nigeria university libraries.

Quadri and Idowu (2016) examined social media use for information dissemination by librarians in federal university libraries in Southwest, Nigeria. The study found that there was a high level of awareness of social media tools like Facebook, Google+, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Academia.edu by the librarians. The study also reported that the librarians made use of these social media tools for information dissemination. Similarly, Amuda and Tella (2017) conducted a study to investigate the application of social media used for innovative library services by university library staff in South-Western Nigeria. The study found that social media application to library services is now well-known among university library staff in South-Western Nigeria. The researchers submitted that the libraries selected for the study are using social media mostly to communicate with their users, provide reference services, and provide news on library services and to disseminate information. Also, Adewojo and Mayowa-Adebara (2016) examined the awareness and use of social media by library staff of Yaba College of technology, Lagos, Nigeria. The study submitted that the major challenges to social media usage as identified by the study include poor internet access, irregular power supply and lack of social media tools.

Islam and Habiba (2015) carried out a study on use of social media in marketing of library and information services in Bangladesh and found out that Facebook was the most popularly used social media tools among Library and information professionals. While Shihab (2015) revealed that 61% of LIS professionals in Indian used Facebook daily while blog was least used. Ian (2015) further highlighted the advantages and benefits for librarians and libraries when using social media as: low cost of using social media, little training is required when using social media, it facilitates interaction and engagement with library users, it advertises library services and deliver news quickly and information get to library users directly; social media enable feedback from users which will enhance user services, promote library collections and increase usage of the collections; social media use enhances communication within the library and with other departments or faculties; it helps to build connection, reputation and also for outreach activities through information sharing. In a study by Chen, Chu, and Xu (2012) to investigate the interaction between libraries and users on libraries Facebook, Twitter and Weibo, suggested that in order to enhance the efficiency of interacting with users on social networking sites, it is mandatory for libraries to coordinate various types of social networking sites as well as taking the assets of their communities in consideration.

Zohoorian-Fooladi and Abrizah (2013) studied academic librarians and their social media presence among twenty-two librarians from three research-intensive universities in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and the study indicated that librarians are aware that there is the need for them to use social media technologies in their daily work. Golwal, Kalbande, and Sonwane (2012) examined the purposes of Facebook use among LIS professionals of Maharashtra librarians online study circle (MLOSC) group and the findings show that majority of the librarians use Facebook for their academic and research activities and also that Facebook acts as a medium to interact with LIS professionals across the globe. Atulomah and Onuoha (2011) reported that Facebook is one of the most useful networks for developing library profession. Similarly, Weerasinghe and Hindagolla (2018) conducted a study to investigate the use of social network sites by library academics in Sri Lanka and results indicates that majority of university library academics used social network sites for both professional and personal purposes in their workplace.

Collins and Quan-Haase (2013) conducted a study to examine the social media adoption rates and practices in academic libraries in the province of Ontario, Canada over a period of 14 months. The findings show that libraries in the whole province are using social media tools with various stages of interactions and activities, and the rate of adoption of social media tools has increased since April 2010. The study further reported that some inhibitors to libraries in Eastern and Northern Ontario from having a social media presence includes, limited access to wireless services, technological infrastructure and other technologies, difficulties in providing equal services in English and French in heavily bilingual communities, difficulties securing funding and training opportunities, and lack of interest or skills among the staff.

In a similar study conducted by Chu and Du (2013) on the use of social networking tools in academic libraries among 38 libraries from Asia, North America and Europe, findings indicated that 71% of the libraries are using social networking tools, 13.1% libraries are planning to use the tools while 15.8% percent are not planning to use the social networking tools. The study also found that Facebook and Twitter are the most adopted social networking tools by the libraries. The study recommended that issues related to time pressure and competencies of staff members have to be taken into cognisance so as to encourage libraries to take the potential benefits of using social media technologies. Also, Kaushik (2016) carried out a survey on the use of social networking sites tools and services by LIS professionals for libraries in University of Kota, Rajasthan. A total of 100 questionnaires were distributed to LIS professionals working in different libraries, findings show that majority of the respondents who participated in the survey are aware of social networking tools and services. Booker and Bandyopadhyah (2017) found out that Facebook was the most frequently used social networking sites by library patrons.

Social media application according to Gupta and Dhami (2015) have emerged as a very interesting and powerful tool for libraries and the scope of its application in libraries include communicating with user community, interacting with library users and clients, marketing of library services, user education, creating awareness of library resources, connecting with other librarians and library staff, getting feedback on library and its services and so on. Also, Bik and Goldstein (2013) noted that researchers including librarians, who are aware of social media, use the sites for informal scientific communication.

Maisiri, Mupaikwa, and Ngwenya (2015) in their study on strategy planning for social media in libraries in Zimbabwe reported that fifty percent of the librarians from academic libraries indicated that social media tools were accessible through the library or university websites while the remaining percentage indicated that social media tools were accessible through the Internet. Information professiona ls have a lot to achieve if they join Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn because these sites give room for creation of network of colleagues that they can consult, exchange ideas and collaborate. Booker and Bandyopadhyah (2017) found out that Facebook was the most frequently used social networking sites by library patrons. O’Connell (2011) opined that librarians should have interest that transcends business approach because librarians are curators of knowledge and culture.

Some of the social media sites used in this study by library and information professionals to meet the information needs of their users in South-West, Nigeria include:

Social Network Sites (SNS) are web-based applications that enable library and information profession als to shared or partially shared accounts, browse and connect with other user accounts, as well as to make their interactions or connections open (Boyd & Ellison, 2008). Some examples of social network sites popularly used by library and information professionals to meet the information needs of their users in Nigeria are Facebook, LinkedIn, Whatsapp, Twitter, Instagram, Library Thing and Flickr.

Instant Messaging (IM) is a platform that allows two or more individuals to communicate with each other using online chat which may be one-to-one or many-to-many. In addition to chatting, most modern instant messaging software can also allow file sharing, audio and video conferencing. Library and information professionals can make use of Instant Messaging to provide information services to their users. Examples of IM tools are Google Chat, Slack and Skype.

Media Sharing is a website that allow library and information professionals to upload photos, videos and audio to a website which can be accessed from anywhere in the world.

The media can then be shared with the world or just a select group of friends. A media sharing site can also be used to back up files. Library and information professionals can upload photos, audio or videos relating the library services or collections which can be shared to users, some examples of media sharing sites include One drive, Google drive and YouTube.

Blogs is another popular social media platform that enables library and information professionals to post messages, share information on a particular issue and allow users to contribute to content (Ezeani and Igwesi, 2012). LIPs can write articles news on topical issues and expect an instant reaction from their users. They can also use blogs to market and promote their library activities and services to the users.

Library Thing is a social cataloging web application for storing and sharing book catalogs and various types of book metadata. According to Ezeani and Igwesi (2012) Library Thing is a tool that enriches the library OPAC. That is, once an account is created, lists of books with the ISBNs are sent to Library Thing which sends back a piece of code which is pasted into the footer of the Library OPAC. Library and information professionals can use Library Thing to send a list of recent acquisitions to the users.

Wikis is a website or database developed collaboratively by a community of users that allows any user to easily add, remove, or edit all content, very quickly and easily. A wiki is also a collaborative tool that allows users to contribute and modify one or more pages of course related materials. LIPs and the users can use wiki to contribute and manage contents in related materials. Example of a wiki is Wikipedia, a free encyclopedia in many languages that both LIPs and users can edit.

A virtual world is a computer-simulated representation of a world with specific spatial and physical characteristics, and users of virtual worlds interact with each other through representations of themselves called “avatars”. This social media platform can be used by LIPs and the users to interact with one another to provide information service effectively. Second life is one of the most popular examples of virtual world social media platform.

Podcast is a totally contextual and downloadable audio file that users can listen to at any time either using a podcast app, website or smart-speaker. A podcast is a series of episodes just like a television show, and then are broken down into episodes. Library and information professionals can develop audio contents on library collections, products and services which the users can listen to on a computer, iPod or other device.

RSS feeds (Really Simple Syndication) feed is an online file that contains details about every piece of content a site has published. It is a straightforward, standardized content distribution method that can help one stay up-to-date with ones favorite newscasts, blogs, websites, and social media channels (Teske, 2020). RSS feeds would enable LIPs and users stay up to date with news, come up with new ideas for content and gather sources to support their research.

Social bookmarking is a social media tool that enables LIPs to save a specific web page to a social bookmarking platform so they can revisit it later. LIPs can use this platform to render specialized services such as reference services.

The main objective of this study is to examine the awareness and use of social media tools by library and information professionals (LIPs).

The specific objectives are to:

• (a) Find out library and information professionals’ awareness of social media technologies.
• (b) Identify social media technologies that are used by library and information professionals.
• (c) Determine the extent of use of social media technologies among library and information professionals.
• (d) Ascertain the frequency of use of social media technologies by library and information professionals.
• (e) Examine the reasons for social media use by library and information professionals.
• (f) Identify the challenges of social media technologies use by library and information professionals.

The research questions that guided the study were:

• RQ1. Are library and information professionals aware of social media technologies?
• RQ2. Which social media technologies are being used by library and information professionals?
• RQ3. To what extent do library and information professionals in South-west Nigeria use social media technologies?
• RQ4. What is the frequency of use of social media technologies by library and information professionals in South-west Nigeria?
• RQ5. Why do library and information professionals use social media technologies?
• RQ6. What are the challenges faced by library and information professionals in the use of social media technologies?

Under this sub-section, the demographic analysis on respondents’ libraries, gender, age, marital status, highest educational qualification and work experience were analysed using frequency and percentage.

5.1.1 Distribution of Respondents by Gender

Fig. 1 showed the frequency analysis of the participants by gender. Result indicates that 51 of the respondents were male and 81 were female. This implies that majority of the respondents were female.

Fig. 1. 
Distribution of Respondents by Gender

5.1.2 Distribution of Respondents by Age

Fig. 2 showed the frequency analysis of the respondents by age. The result of analysis revealed that 25 of the respondents were between 20-29 years of age, 41 were between 30-39 years of age, 45 were between 40-49 years of age, 31 were between 50-59 years of age and only one respondent was above 59 years of age. Thus, this implies that majority of the LIPs in academic libraries in South–West, Nigeria were between the ages of 30-49 years.

Fig. 2. 
Distribution of respondents by Age

5.1.3 Marital status of respondents

Fig. 3 reveals that majority of the 109 respondents were married, 20 were single; one was a widow while three were divorced. This implies that majority of the respondents were married.

Fig. 3. 
Distribution of respondents by marital status

5.1.4 Level of education of the respondents

Fig. 4 reveals that majority of the respondents in the academic libraries in South-West, Nigeria shows that (62) were Masters’ degree holders, 29 possessed first degree certificate, 14 also possessed HND certificate, 14 were NCE/ OND certificate holders, 9 possessed doctorate degree certificate while four of the respondents possesses other certificate such as diploma certificate in Library studies and higher degree diploma certificate.

Fig. 4. 
Distribution of respondents by level of education

Key: NCE=National Certificate of Education, OND=Ordinary National DiplomaHND=Higher National Diploma, PhD= Doctor of Philosophy

5.1.5 Work experience of respondents

Fig. 5 shows result of analysis of the respondents’ working experience. Result indicates that that 29 respondents had below 5 years work experience; 41 had work experience between 6-10 years; 33 had 11-15 years’ work experience; 13 had 16-20 years’ work experience while 19 had over 20 years of work experience. This implies that majority of the respondent have within 1-10 years working experience.

Fig. 5. 
Distribution of respondents by work experience

Table 2 shows the findings on awareness of social media tools by library and information professionals in selected academic libraries in south west, Nigeria. Result indicates that 74 (54.5%) of the respondents were fully aware of social media tools, 58 (42.6 %) were aware of social media tools while four (2.9%) of the respondents were not aware of social media tools. This implies that majority of the respondents, 132 (97.1%) are aware of social media tools in academic libraries in South-West, Nigeria. There is high awareness of use of social media tools by LIPs in academic libraries in South-West Nigeria.

Table 3 presents the frequency analysis on the types of social media tools used by respondents. In the table, the N column indicates the number of respondents who nominated each of the ten types of social media tools utilized. From the 136 respondents who participated in the study, 127 of the respondents use social network sites (93.4%), 111 (81%) use instant messaging, 95(69%) use media sharing, 85 (63%) used blogs, 70 (51.4%) use library thing, 69 (50%) used wikis, 62 (45.6%) made use of virtual worlds, 44(32.4%) used podcasts/webcasts/vodcast, 37 (27.2%) used RSS feeds while 36 (26 4%) used social bookmarking. The study also indicates that social network sites 127 (93.4%) ranked highest among the types of social media tools used by the respondents while social book marking ranked lowest 36(26 4%). The graphical representation of the frequency count of Table 3 was further summarized and presented in Fig. 6.

Fig. 6. 
Distribution of respondents by types of social media tools used

Fig. 6 shows the graphical representation of the types of social media tools used by the library and information professionals (LIPs) in the selected academic libraries in south-west, Nigeria. The study indicates that social network sites were ranked first, followed by instant messaging and then media sharing. Social bookmarking and RSS feeds were the least used.

Fig. 7 presented the result of findings on the extent of use of social media by LIPs. Result shows that social networking sites (x=3.67), instant messaging (x=3.41) and Library Thing (x=3.07) were used to a large extent, while RSS feeds, Podcasts/Webcasts/Vodcasts and social bookmarking were of low use, going by their mean: 2.13, 2.14 and 2.21 respectively.

Fig. 7. 
Bar chart representation of mean values of extent of use of social media tools

Table 4 presented descriptive statistics on the frequency of use of social media tools. The result indicates that majority of the 136 library and information professionals sampled showed some levels of use of social media tools. This could be seen from the fact that majority (in terms of the cut-off mean of 2.5) of the respondents agreed that they use the listed social media tools. Therefore, all these suggest that the extent of use of social media tools among library and information professionals is to a high extent. Further, the frequency of use of social network sites (mean = 4.21) was ranked highest among the participants while the frequency of use of social bookmarking ranked lowest with a mean score (mean = 2.23). Findings also revealed that social network sites were highly used while Instant messaging, Library thing, Media sharing and Blogs were moderately used. Furthermore, finding revealed that social bookmarking and RSS feeds were lowly used by the LIPs. The frequency of use of social media tools followed the same pattern as the extent of use.

Fig. 8 revealed that among the respondents, 14 (11.5%) used Social networking sites for official purpose; 98 (80.3%) for personal purpose while 10 (8.2%) indicated using social networking sites for research purpose. The results showed that 15 (14.0%) of the respondents used Instant messaging for official, 85 (79.4%) for personal and 6 (5.6%) for research purposes. On media sharing, result shows that 13 (14.3%) of the respondents used social media for official purpose, 60 (65.9%) for personal and 18 (19.8%) for research. Furthermore, findings showed that 17 (19.5%) of the respondents used Blogs for official purpose, 50 (57.5%) for personal and 20 (23.0%) for research purpose. The findings agree with Bullas (2014) who submitted that librarians are aware of social media usage and that its ease of access makes it possible for them to communicate directly for the purpose of exchanging and improving ideas. This implies that social media tools were mostly used by the LIPs for personal, official and research purposes. It can also be seen that social media tools were majorly used by LIPs for personal use; they only used Library thing and Virtual world for official purposes. It can also be seen that social media tools were majorly used by LIPs for personal use; they only used Library thing and Virtual world for official purposes.

Fig. 8. 
Frequency distribution of purpose of use of social media

In order to analyze the challenges of using social media tools, data collected were analysed using Multiple-dichotomy frequency analysis and percentage. The five top most challenges associated with the use of social media by the respondents were:

• ∙ Inadequate power supply – 113 (83.1 per cent)
• ∙ Lack of Internet access – 96 (70.6 per cent)
• ∙ Time constraint – 85 (62.5 per cent)
• ∙ Internet low bandwidth – 80 (58.8 per cent)
• ∙ ICT unfriendly environment – 61 (44.9 per cent)

The graphical representation of the result is shown in Fig. 9. Fig. 9 indicates that inadequate power supply and lack of internet access posed major challenges to the use of social media among the LIPs as all the platforms used for social media require power to function.

Fig. 9. 
Frequency distribution of challenges of use of social media tools