A Study on Defining Communicative Characteristics of Public Libraries

1. Introduction

In the 1990s, public libraries faced a crisis of a sharp decline in the rate of use due to the changing environments such as urbanization worldwide. Thereafter, Europe has responded to the changing social environment by increasing the user accessibility through a complex satisfiedhod that combines functions such as education, community, leisure, and commerce, with a focus on life centric public libraries (Noh et al., 2018). To date, library is a complex cultural space, a space for communication with the local community, a third space, a library space as a shelter, a maker space, and a specialized space (Kwak & Lee, 2018; Noh & Kim, 2019; Noh & Ro, 2019; Jeong & Kim, 2019; Yoon, 2020; Ahn, 2021) As various roles are enhanced, libraries appear to provide various community spaces, that is, communication spaces. That is, the current public library is not only a traditional information service, but also a role as a complex cultural space, and communication between the users, information, and space is required, and the library is responding accordingly with various spatial structures and services.

Meanwhile, social conflicts such as inter-generational conflict, localityal conflict, and gender conflict, which are emerging as social issues, are multilayered, deepened, and continuously amplified, and the level and scope of the social conflict structure are also expanding (Choi, 2019). Architect Yoo claimed that the cause of the intensifying conflict between classes was the lack of free space in the city (ebs, 2019). A city ought to have many benches, parks and plazas where people can stay for free, and people from different backgrounds can gather and fuse in these spaces. This is why a space where common memories may be built between classes and a space where people can mix and match is necessary (ebs, 2019). As such, public library is a space open to anyone regardless of class, age, or gender, and a representative space where various people can mingle. Public libraries are the places where the various users gather for various reasons, such as for obtaining desired information or participating in cultural lecture programs. Library is a space that integrates the users and supports the communication and exchange between the users. In particular, public facilities in the modern society play a pivotal role in the community and are closely related to the daily lives of local residents (Lim, 2017), and as library has recently been emphasized as a space for communication in the local community, communication among local residents is actively taking place. Hence, the establishment of role is necessary for the development of public libraries based on the communicative characteristics.

In this study, by deriving the communicative characteristics of the library and establishing the role of a public library based on this, it was intended to provide the useful basic data to ensure that the library can expand into a representative space for communication and exchange in the locality.

Hence, in order to discover the communicative characteristics of the library, an attempt has been made to conduct the Delphi survey by examining the literatures related to community, community space, and communication, and by presenting a theoretical basis. The role of public library as a communicative foundation of the library was derived to ensure that the library may be enhanced as a focal point of the local community and as a space for communication with users. Based on which, the role of the library based on communicative characteristics will help to increase the effectiveness of the library as a representative space for communication and exchange in the locality, and contribute to the theoretical expansion and supplementation of library communication and communication space.

2. Previous Studies

Previous studies were surveyed and analyzed with a view to achieve the purposes of the study of discovering the communicative characteristics of the library, and expanding the role of the library as a communication channel and a central point of the local community thereby. As a result, it was apparent that the studies of analysis have been undertaken on communication, community, and community, etc. of the library was conducted as a study on communication and interaction in public libraries, and space structure and structure, space design, furniture arrangement, etc.

3. Research Questions

This study was intended to discover the communicative characteristics of the library through the Delphi survey and propose the role of the library as the center of the community and a communication space where anyone can mingle. The research questions raised in connection with this study are as follows.

• • RQ 1 : What are the communicative characteristics of the library?
• • RQ 2 : What are the components that form communicative characteristics?

4. Research Design and Methodology

4.1 Development of a preliminary Delphi survey form

In this section, an attempt has been made to verify the validity of the library’s communicative characteristics to establish the role of a public library based on its communicative characteristics, and accordingly, developed the Delphi survey. Based on the studies of Kang (2018), Noh (2017a), Noh (2017b), Noh (2017c), Oh (2017), Noh et al. (2018), Baek (2018), Oh and Chu (2018), Hwang (2018), Noh and Kim (2020), and Yoon (2020), literature research on community or library community, communication space, etc., and studies on the educational, cultural, and social values of libraries, etc. were analyzed. Based on which, the library communication characteristics (locality, communality, interactivity, and organic vitality) were derived. Furthermore, literature research was investigated and analyzed using keywords such as local community, community, and communication of libraries, and components (middle class) and detailed factors (lower class) of communicative characteristics (upper class) were derived. Referring to the relevant previous studies, they were modified and supplemented to be suitable for evaluating the communicative characteristics of libraries, and finally, 75 evaluation measurement questions were derived as illustrated in <Table 1>.

Table 1.

Preliminary survey form of library communication characteristics

4.2 Design of expert group

The Delphi survey is a research technique which collects and comprehensively analyzes opinions or judgments targeting a group of experts in a specific field in order to adopt one of the many proposals on important issues (Lee, 2001; Jung & Cho, 2007).

In the Delphi survey, a group of experts does not gather in person, and the survey is conducted repeatedly. It is a satisfiedhod of inducing a consensus by aggregating the survey results, informing the experts of the collected surveys, and re-answering with reference to them to coordinate and synthesize the opinions of experts (Lee, 2001; Jung & Cho, 2007).

By conducting an anonymous and repetitive survey, the Delphi survey can avoid incorrect psychological effects and attitudes, such as multiple tyrannies that can occur in the face-to-face consultation satisfiedhod, the influence of statements by authorities, and the attitude of sticking to only one opinion taken experts (Lee, 2001; Jung & Cho, 2007).

The existing previous studies have been conducted on the formation of library communities and local communities, but studies on the factors or characteristics that activate library communities and local communities are inadequate. Hence, in this study, the Delphi survey was conducted targeting library and library information science experts to derive library communication characteristics and verify the validity of the derived characteristics. Based on which, it was considered that it was most efficient and reasonable to present the communicative characteristics of the library and the detailed factors that constitute it, and accordingly, the Delphi technique was carried out.

4.2.1 Survey subjects

To minimize errors in the Delphi survey and increase the reliability of the research, a group of at least 10 experts ought to be formed, and it is appropriate to select between 10 and 15 experts (Yoon, 2003).

In this study, a total of 10 professors of library and information department, public library directors and librarians, national library librarians, and professional librarians were selected as an expert group to reflect the representativeness and appropriateness, professional knowledge and skills of the experts on library and library and information science.

Table 2.

Formation of expert group for the Delphi survey

4.2.2 Delphi survey procedures

The distribution of the Delphi survey questionnaire was sent out in writing through the expert’s email, and after encouraging responses through phone contact, the questionnaires were collected.

The Delphi survey was conducted on a total of three rounds targeting a group of experts, and the communicative characteristics of the library were finally drawn by analyzing the results of each round and revising and supplementing the evaluation factors.

Table 3.

Delphi survey methods and procedures

The Delphi survey was conducted from February 20, 2021 through March 31, 2021 with preliminary survey form drawn in advance. The distribution and collection of the survey questionnaire form was carried out through email, and the first Delphi survey was conducted for about a week from February 20, 2021 through February 27, 2021. The second survey questionnaire form was prepared based on the first survey results, and the third survey was evaluated by modifying the questionnaire based on the second Delphi survey results.

5. Final Derivation of the Library’s Communicative Characteristics

Currently, the role of the library as a place of communication and community is emphasized, but the communicative characteristics of the library and the detailed factors that form it are not yet defined. Hence, in this study, an attempt has been made derive the communicative characteristics of the library and establish the role of the library based on the communicative characteristics. Based on which, the Delphi survey was conducted to provide library communication related services using the communicative characteristics and components at the actual libraries.

To discover library communication characteristics and measure as to whether the characteristics are valid, 1) literature research on communities or library communities and communication spaces was investigated and analyzed. Accordingly, the library communication characteristics such as locality, communality, interactivity, and organic vitality were derived. 2) Literature with keywords such as local community, community, and communication in the library was analyzed, and the detailed factors of communication and community were grouped to conform to each communicative characteristics, and components (middle class) and the detailed factors of communicative characteristics (upper class) and the detailed factors (lower classes) were analyzed. 3) Thereafter, the Delphi survey questionnaire form was developed to measure as to whether the communicative characteristics of the library were valid, and the Delphi survey was conducted three times with 10 experts of library and library and information science. Based on which, an attempt has been made secure the reliability and validity of the expertise index. 4) As a result, 4 communicative characteristics, 16 components, and 63 detailed factors were finally derived.

5.1 A comprehensive comparison of the Delphi survey and the selection of communicative characteristics components

5.1.1 Locality

The questionnaire on locality was derived with 4 primary components and 22 detailed factors. The characteristics of library communication were discovered and expert opinions were received by adding details about the details that were deleted when the questionnaire was produced. Among which, 8 factors were added as new questions according to the opinion that they correspond to locality. In the first survey, there were four detailed factors that did not satisfy the content validity, convergence, and agreement, yet considering that it was the first questionnaire, it was included in the second questionnaire for reevaluation.

In the third questionnaire, content validity, convergence, and agreement were all satisfied.

Table 4.

Locality’s component selection process

Furthermore, the experts’ opinions were reflected to derive the final factors, and two questions were integrated and one question was corrected to ensure that the meaning of the question could be conveyed well as intended. Finally, locality, the communicative characteristics of libraries, was derived with 4 components and 15 detailed factors.

Table 5.

Final derivation of the locality’s detailed factors

5.1.2 Communality

The Delphi survey questionnaire for communality derived 4 primary components and 19 detailed factors. Expert opinions were also received on the detailed factors of community that were deleted when the first questionnaire was produced, and four factors were newly added after receiving opinions that they corresponded to locality. The two detailed factors that did not satisfy the content validity, convergence, and agreement in the first survey were included in the second survey questions and re-evaluated, considering that they were the first survey.

In the second survey, 4 components and 20 detailed factors were conducted, and all but one of them satisfied the content validity, convergence, and agreement of the Delphi survey. One question that did not satisfy the validity, the factors that were evaluated low by experts below the 25% quartile, and the experts’ opinions were combined, and the questions that conveyed the meaning ambiguously were combined and deleted. That is, 16 detailed factors were adopted except for a total of 4 factors.

In the third questionnaire, content validity, convergence, and agreement were all satisfied. Among which, the questions with similar contents were integrated and modified by reflecting the opinions of experts.

Table 6.

Communality’s component selection process

Furthermore, to derive the final factor, one question was corrected to ensure that the meaning of the question could be conveyed well as intended, and one similar/overlapping question was integrated. Finally, locality, the communicative characteristics of libraries, was derived with 4 components and 16 detailed factors.

Table 7.

Final derivation of detailed factors of communality

5.1.3 Interactivity

The Delphi survey questionnaire for interactivity consisted of 4 primary components and 18 detailed factors. Two factors were included again for the detailed factors of interactivity that were deleted when discovering library communication characteristics. The two detailed factors that did not satisfy the content validity, convergence, and agreement in the first survey were not deleted, but included in the second survey questions for reevaluation.

The second survey conducted a survey targeting a total of 5 components and 20 detailed factors, including the two newly added questions from the first survey. All but two of them satisfied the content validity, convergence, and agreement of the Delphi survey. The two questions that did not satisfy the validity, the factors that experts rated low at 25% or less in the quartile, and the experts’ opinions were combined and deleted, and the sentences of the questions that conveyed the meaning were ambiguous were corrected. That is, 18 detailed factors were adopted except for a total of 2 factors.

In the third questionnaire, it turned out that content validity, convergence, and agreement were all satisfied.

Table 8.

Interactivity’s component selection process

Accordingly, and finally, interactivity, which is the communicative characteristic of libraries, was derived with 5 components and 18 detailed factors.

Table 9.

Final derivation of detailed factors of interactivity

5.1.4 Organic vitality

The Delphi survey questionnaire on organic vitality consisted of 3 primary components and 16 detailed factors. Two new factors were added by reflecting expert opinions on the detailed factors of organic vitality that were deleted when discovering library communication characteristics. The two detailed factors that did not satisfy the content validity, convergence, and agreement in the first survey were not deleted, but included in the second survey questions for reevaluation.

In the second survey, a total of 3 components including 2 newly added questions and 18 detailed factors were surveyed. It turned out that all but three of them satisfied the content validity, convergence, and agreement of the Delphi survey. The three questions that did not satisfy the validity and the experts’ opinions were combined and modified and deleted. Accordingly, 15 detailed factors were adopted except for a total of 3 factors.

In the third questionnaire, it turned out that content validity, convergence, and agreement were all satisfied.

Table 10.

Organic vitality’s component selection process

5.2 Derivation of the library’s final communication characteristics and components

In this study, in order to derive the communicative characteristics of libraries, the Delphi survey was conducted three times targeting the experts of library and library and information science, and finally, 4 communicative characteristics of locality, community, interaction, and organic vitality and 16 configuration factors and 63 detailed factors were derived.

First, the components of locality are ‘libraries provide spaces and places for community activities’, ‘libraries are spaces that form healthy communities’, and ‘libraries contribute to forming and enhancement communities’ and ‘libraries provide necessary information to the community.’

Second, it was verified that the components of community are ‘libraries contribute to the formation of local cultural communities’, ‘libraries contribute to improving interpersonal relationships’, ‘libraries support active local activities among local residents’, and ‘libraries contribute to the formation of a sense of belonging in the local community through support for improving social adaptability.’

Third, interactivity was derived such that ‘library is a space where various generations share opinions’, ‘library is a space to accommodate local residents’ leisure behavior’, ‘library is a space for cultural growth of local community’, ‘libraries improve local communities through interaction with local residents’, and ‘libraries support capacity development of local residents’.

Lastly, organic vitality turned out to have such components as ‘library as a representative space of the local community enhances the value of the residential environment’, ‘library contributes to creation of jobs in the locality’, and ‘library contributes to physical and psychological health promotion through interaction’.

Table 11.

Library’s final communicative characteristics based on Delphi survey

6. Discussion and Future Studies

This study presented the two research questions of ‘What are the communicative characteristics of a library?’ and ‘What are the components that form the communicative characteristics?’ The results of the previous studies examined are as follows.

7. Conclusion and Recommendations

Currently, public libraries have emerged as the spaces for communication, exchange, and experience, and are discussed as the community centers for local communities. As such, the communicative characteristics of the library, a representative communication space for the local community, were intended to be discovered, and its role was intended to be sought. Hence, in this study, the previous studies on library communication, space for the library communication, and community were analyzed, and the communicative characteristics of libraries were primarily derived. Next, in order to find out if it is appropriate as a library’s communicative characteristics, the components and details of locality, communality, interactivity, and organic vitality were explored, grouped according to each characteristic, and the Delphi survey questionnaire was developed together. The Delphi survey was conducted three times by organizing 10 experts of library and library and information science as an expert group, and finally, the communicative characteristics and factors were derived. As a result, libraries were found to have communicative characteristics such as ‘locality’, ‘community’, ‘interactivity’, and ‘organic vitality’. Based on the four communicative characteristics, the role of the library was sought to be explored. The summary of the Delphi survey’s analytical results of this study is as follows.

First, the four components of locality were derived, which turned out to be ‘libraries provide spaces and places for community activities’, ‘libraries are spaces that form healthy communities’, ‘libraries form and enhance communities’ and ‘libraries provide necessary information to the community.’

Second, four components of communality were derived. They were found to be ‘libraries contribute to the formation of local cultural communities’, ‘libraries contribute to improving interpersonal relationships’, ‘libraries support active local activities among local residents’, ‘libraries support local residents to improve their social adaptability and contribute to the formation of a sense of belonging in society.’

Third, there are five components of interactivity, which are ‘library is a space where various generations share their opinions’, ‘library is a space to accommodate the leisure behavior of local residents’, ‘library is a cultural growth of the local community.’ ‘libraries improve local communities through interaction with local residents’, and ‘libraries support capacity development of local residents’.

Lastly, three components of organic vitality were derived, which turned out to be ‘libraries increase the value of the residential environment as a representative space of the community’, ‘libraries contribute to creation of jobs in the locality’, and ‘libraries promote interaction and contribute to the improvement of physical and psychological health.’

Based on such results of this study, the roles of public libraries based on their communicative characteristics are as follows.

First, the role of the library to enhance locality is to provide a variety of spaces for community activities as a space to form a healthy community, contribute to the creation and enhancement of the community, and provide the necessary information.

Second, to enhance the sense of community, library must contribute to the formation of a sense of belonging to the local community by supporting the formation of a local cultural community, improvement of interpersonal relationships, and improvement of social adaptability to enhance the sense of community, and support active local activities among the local residents.

Third, the library’s role in enhancing interactivity ought to include providing a space for various generations to share their opinions, accommodating leisure behavior, and growing the culture of the local community. Accordingly, the library ought to improve the local community through interaction with the local residents and support the development of the local residents’ capabilities.

Fourth, examining the role of the library to improve organic vitality, the library, as a space representing the local community, ought to contribute to the creation of jobs in the locality according to the policy direction and operation of the library in response to social changes, and the user’s body through interaction, and must also contribute to the locality and its residents by promoting psychological health. It is apparent that organic vitality is achieved not only through the traditional roles and functions of the library, but also through the introduction of new concepts and expanded services. Such organic vitality can help increase the value of the living environment as a representative space of the local community.

This study discovered the communicative characteristics to enhance the role of the library as a communicative space. In the future, it is necessary that studies be conducted where priorities are identified through the AHP pairwise comparison of components or detailed factors of the library’s communicative characteristics, and depending on the priority, it would be necessary to apply step by step for each type such as size and locality of the library, or identify communication methods that may be practiced. Furthermore, as the studies on the communication between the users and librarians, the follow-up studies such as reference service and research on the influence of active communication of librarians as information providers such as community issues and cultural activities on the of users’ behavior of library use would need to be carried out.

References

• Ahn, Sihyun (2021). The Characteristics and Spatial Design of the Public Library’s Space Program Based on the Concept of ‘Third Place’. M.A thesis., Konkuk University.
• Baek, So-Hyun (2018). A Study on the Community Space Composition in the Cooperative Housing. M.A thesis., University of Ulsan.
• Choi, Jae-Yeon, & Kim, Chanho (2015). The Characteristic and the Role of the Community Library as a Community Center. Journal of Korea Planning Association (JKPA), 50(4), 165-184. [https://doi.org/10.17208/jkpa.2015.06.50.4.165]
• Choi, Joonyoung (2019. September 17). 85% of the people “serious social conflict”… Intensifying confrontation between generations, classes, and gender. Seoul Newspaper. Available: https://www.seoul.co.kr/news/newsView.php?id=20190927028001
• Choi, You-Jeong, & Yoon, Dong-Sik (2018). A Study on Space Planning of Open Space in University Library for Community Activation. Journal of Korean Institute of Interior Design Conference Proceedings, 20(1), 39-44.
• Davis, W., & Herbert, D. T. (1993). Communities within Cities, London: Belhaven Press.
• ebs (2019. January 16). Special Documentary Gwanghwamun Square, changing the heart of the city. EBS. Available: https://www.ebs.co.kr/tv/show?prodId=6785&lectId=20021619
• Greer, S., & Minar, D. W. (1969). The concept of community: readings with interpretations. Aldine Pub. Co.
• Hillery, G. A. (1955). Definitions of Community: Areas of Agreement. Rural Sociology, 20.
• Hwang, moori (2016). Community library design in consideration of the regional characteristics. M.A thesis., Kookmin University.
• Hwang, Sungki (2018). A Factor Analysis for the Optimum Size Decision of Community Facilities in Rural Area. Ph. D. diss., Chungbuk National University.
• Jeong, su hyun, & Kim, Seung In (2019). A Study on the User Experience of the Complex Cultural Space: Focused on Starfield Library and ARC.N.BOOK. Journal of Digital Convergence, 17(9), 367-373.
• Jung, Dong-Yul, & Cho, Chan-Sik (2007). Research Methods in Library and information science. Seoul: Korean Library Association.
• Kang, Jung-A (2018). A Study on the Assessment of Social Impact of Cultural Programs of the Children’s Library. P.h. D. diss., Konkuk University.
• Kim, Eun-Jung, & Park, Eon-Kon (2004). A Study on the Program of Multi Purpose Cultural Facilities as Community Space. Journal of The Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design Conference Proceedings, 24(1), 79-82.
• Kwak, Seung-Jin, & Lee, Jeong-Mi (2018). Study on Larchiveum Introduction Strategy of Library as a Multi Cultural Facilities. Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for Library and Information Science, 29(3), 339–359.
• Kwon, Jieun, Kwon, Giyoon, & Park, Hyunjoo (2020). Development Direction of Public Libraries as the Complex Cultural Space for Local Community Activation. Journal of Korea Intitute of Spatial Design, 15(2), 161-172.
• Lee, Jong-seong (2001). Delphi method. Seoul: History of Education Science.
• Lee, Myung-A, Jeon, Eun-Jung, & Lee, Yeun-Sook (2018). Characteristic of Community Space in Japan for Community Revitalization of the Vulnerable Groups. Journal of the Korean Institute of Interior Design, 27(4), 118-129. [https://doi.org/10.14774/JKIID.2018.27.4.118]
• Li, Yi-Bo, & Chu, Beom (2019). The Composition and Use of the Community Space in Public Library. Journal of The Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design Conference Proceedings, 39(2), 583-586.
• Li, Yuan (2021). A Study on the Resilient Space Design of Community Library Reflecting Environment & Behavior. Ph. D. diss., Kong ju N ational U niversity.
• Lim, Ho-kyun (2017). User-oriented public library and complex facility planning by regional characteristics. 2017 Library Policy Planning Forum. Sejong: Presidential Committee on Library and Information Policy of Korea.
• Lim, Sun-Jeong, Hwang, Meeyoung, & CheZin Lim (2016). A Study on the Characteristics and Types of Commons in University Library. Journal of the Korean Institute of Culture Architecture, (54), 24-32.
• Nisbet, R. A. (1962). Community and Power. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Noh, Younghee (2017a). A Study on Development of Evaluation Indicators for Measuring Educational Value of Libraries. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 51(4), 5-34.
• Noh, Younghee (2017b). A Study on Evaluation Indicator Development of Cultural Value of Library. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 48(3), 177-205. [https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.48.3.201709.177]
• Noh, Younghee (2017c). Research on Development of Social Value Evaluation Indicators for Public Libraries. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 34(2), 181-214.
• Noh, Younghee, & Kim, YoonJenog (2020). A Study on the Activation Plan for the Communication Space of the Library According to Librarians’ Perception Survey. Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for Library and Information Science, 31(4), 5-27.
• Noh, Younghee, & Kim, YoonJeong (2019). A Study on the User Recognition of Library Complex Culture Space. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 53(4), 23-50.
• Noh, Younghee, & Ro, Ji-Yoon (2019). A Study on Utilizing the Site and Building of Closed School as Evacuation Facilities for the Library. Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for Library and Information Science, 30(4), 65-89.
• Noh, Younghee, Choi, Man-Ho, & Kim, YoonJeong (2021). A Study on the Activation of Community Based on Small Libraries. Korean Journal of Local Government & Administration Studies, 35(2), 1-24.
• Noh, Younghee, Jeong, Dae-Keun, Choi, Man-Ho, Kang, Jung-A, Shin, Youngji, Kwak, Woojung, & Ro, Ji-Yoon (2018). Specialized library pilot operation model and guideline development research. Sejong: Presidential Committee on Library and Information Policy of Korea.
• Oh, Seung-hwan, & Chu, Beom (2018). A Study on the planning of small youth community center according to the analysis of community activation factors. Youth Facilities and Environmet, 16(1), 113-121.
• Oh, Young ju (2017). A Study on Community Activity Spaces for Social Communication in Single Person, Multi-family Housing. M.A thesis., Konkuk University.
• Ra, Su-Ryeon (2015). A Study on Cultural-Complex Community Space. M.A thesis., Kookmin University.
• Sommer, R., & Ross, H. (1958). Social interaction on a geriatrics ward. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 4(2), 128-133. [https://doi.org/10.1177/002076405800400207]
• Sung, Heeja, & Jeon, bokyung (2006). A Study on the Residents’ Sense of Community in Rural Area. Social Welfare Policy, 27, 149-170.
• Teng, Teng (2018). A Study on Composition of User-Centered Space in Community Library: Focused on Community Libraries in the United States and Britain. Journal of Korean Institute of Interior Design, 27(3), 62-70.
• Tsai, Wan Li (2020). A Study on the Service Design Guidelines for Community Space in Cultural Complex Space Based on User Experience. M.A thesis., Hanyang University.
• Yoon, Chan Joo (2020). Complex Programs of Public Libraries as Living-based SOC and Space Design by Characteristic Analysis of Its Design. M.A thesis., Konkuk University.
• Yoon, Eun-Young (2016). A s A study on elementary art teaching and learning program based on social communication. M.A thesis., Korea National University.
• Yoon, Hee-Yoon (2020). Library knowledge and culture history: The seat of all knowledge in the world, walking through 6000 years. Seoul: Dongasiabook.
• Yoon, Mi Suk (2003). A Three-round Delphi Study on Current & Future Competencies of Secretary. Journal of Secretarial Studies, 12(2), 109-141.
• Yun, Eun Mi (2008). A Study on the role and status of small library as a concept of community. M.A thesis., Chonnam National University.