IJCOPE Journal

UGC Logo DOI / ISO Logo

International Journal of Creative and Open Research in Engineering and Management

A Peer-Reviewed, Open-Access International Journal Supporting Multidisciplinary Research, Digital Publishing Standards, DOI Registration, and Academic Indexing.
Journal Information
ISSN: 3108-1754 (Online)
Crossref DOI: Available
ISO Certification: 9001:2015
Publication Fee: 599/- INR
Compliance: UGC Journal Norms
License: CC BY 4.0
Peer Review: Double Blind
Volume 02, Issue 10

Published on: October 2026

ALGORITHMIC BIAS AND INFORMATION TRUST IN ACADEMIC LIBRARY DISCOVERY SYSTEMS: AN ANALYTICAL STUDY OF USER SEARCH BEHAVIOUR AND DIGITAL INFORMATION LITERACY USING ONLINE PRIMARY EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE

Sunil Kumar Dr Rajeev Manhas Mamta Ruchi Dhiman Chand

Department of Library and Information Science, HRIT University Ghaziabad, UP, India

Article Status

Plagiarism Passed Peer Reviewed Open Access

Available Documents

Abstract

Background: Academic library discovery systems increasingly mediate access to scholarly information through ranking, metadata matching, filtering, database coverage, availability signals, and recommender functions. These algorithmic arrangements can shape what users notice, cite, and trust. Objective: This paper examines how algorithmic bias, user search behaviour, information trust, and digital information literacy intersect in academic discovery environments. Methodology: Since no local institutional dataset was provided, the paper uses a secondary analysis of online primary empirical evidence from three verifiable sources: Project Information Literacy's student survey of 2,318 respondents across six U.S. campuses; a published Summon query/click-log analysis based on anonymized searches by millions of users at hundreds of libraries; and an open representative German online survey on search-engine literacy and trust involving 2,012 respondents. Results: The data show high dependence on scholarly databases and OPACs but limited engagement with librarians. In the Project Information Literacy survey, 84% of students used scholarly research databases and 78% used OPACs for course-related research, while only 20% consulted librarians about assignments. Summon logs show that users generally began with simple search, with fewer than 6% of queries using fielded search and only slightly more than 2% using advanced operators, although more than 40% used at least one filter. Search-engine literacy data show that 79% knew paid ads exist, but only 29.2% knew how ads differ from organic results, and only 8.9% knew the term SEO. Implications: Libraries need discovery-literacy instruction that connects searching, ranking, metadata quality, database coverage, and calibrated trust.

Keywords: algorithmic bias; academic libraries; discovery systems; information trust; search behaviour; digital information literacy; information retrieval

How to Cite this Paper

Kumar, S., Manhas, D. R., Mamta, , Dhiman, R. & Chand, (2026). Algorithmic Bias and Information Trust in Academic Library Discovery Systems: An Analytical Study of User Search Behaviour and Digital Information Literacy Using Online Primary Empirical Evidence. International Journal of Creative and Open Research in Engineering and Management, <i>02</i>(10), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.55041/ijcope.v2i10.093

Kumar, Sunil, et al.. "Algorithmic Bias and Information Trust in Academic Library Discovery Systems: An Analytical Study of User Search Behaviour and Digital Information Literacy Using Online Primary Empirical Evidence." International Journal of Creative and Open Research in Engineering and Management, vol. 02, no. 10, 2026, pp. 1-9. doi:https://doi.org/10.55041/ijcope.v2i10.093.

Kumar, Sunil,Dr Manhas, Mamta,Ruchi Dhiman, and Chand. "Algorithmic Bias and Information Trust in Academic Library Discovery Systems: An Analytical Study of User Search Behaviour and Digital Information Literacy Using Online Primary Empirical Evidence." International Journal of Creative and Open Research in Engineering and Management 02, no. 10 (2026): 1-9. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.55041/ijcope.v2i10.093.

Search & Index

References

Asher, A. D., Duke, L. M., & Wilson, S. (2013). Paths of discovery: Comparing the search effectiveness of EBSCO Discovery Service, Summon, Google Scholar, and conventional library resources. College & Research Libraries, 74(5), 464-488. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl-374

Association of College and Research Libraries. (2016). Framework for information literacy for higher education. American Library Association. https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework

Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.), Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices (pp. 17-32). Peter Lang.

Bossaller, J. S., & Sandy, H. M. (2017). Documenting the conversation: A systematic review of library discovery layers. College & Research Libraries, 78(5), 602-619. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.5.602

Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. MIT Press.

Bozdag, E. (2013). Bias in algorithmic filtering and personalization. Ethics and Information Technology, 15, 209-227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-013-9321-6

Dahlen, S. P., & Hanson, K. (2017). Preference vs. authority: A comparison of student searching in a subject-specific indexing and abstracting database and a customized discovery layer. College & Research Libraries, 78(7), 878-897. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.7.878

Diamond, T., Price, S., & Chandrasekar, R. (2013). Actions speak louder than words: Analyzing large-scale query logs to improve the research experience. The Code4Lib Journal, 21. https://journal.code4lib.org/articles/8693

Friedman, B., & Nissenbaum, H. (1996). Bias in computer systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 14(3), 330-347. https://doi.org/10.1145/230538.230561

Hanneke, R., & O'Brien, K. K. (2016). Comparison of three web-scale discovery services for health sciences research. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 104(2), 109-117. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.104.2.004

Ethical Compliance & Review Process

  • •All submissions are screened under plagiarism detection.
  • •Review follows editorial policy.
  • •Authors retain copyright.
  • •Peer Review Type: Double-Blind Peer Review
  • •Published on: Oct 15 2026
CCBYNC

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. You are free to share and adapt this work for non-commercial purposes with proper attribution.

View License
Scroll to Top