College and Research Libraries Occupational Role Identity of Women Academic Librarians Pamela J. Cravey With advanced microcomputer technology, distributed access to bibliographic and textual data, and a cultural climate of disdain for the traditional, the professional demands placed upon academic librarians are enormous. And yet, women continue to embrace this professional subspecialty. A national survey examined the occupational role identity of female academic librarians. Personal, demographic, and job data were collected. In addition, a test for orientation to the occupational role and a sex-role orientation test were administered. Statis- tical analyses ranged from cross-tabulations to multiple discriminant analyses. Academic librarians were found to hold a positive and unique occupational role identity. II n 1983 Kathleen Heim noted, in The Status of Women in Li- brarianship, that librarianship - is still a field that is numeri- cally domina ted by women. 1 In an era in which so many occupational choices are available to women, what is there about academic librarianship that continues to make it a viable career option for women? The answer to this question lies in the occupational role identity of aca- demic librarians. · IDENTITY AND IMAGE To the general public, the word librar- ian conjures up either an outmoded ste- reotypical picture of a "little old lady with a bun" or a rigid personality type. In other words, regardless of what li- brarians actually do, the profession la- belled "librarian" evokes a single occupational image. Pauline Wilson crit- icized librarians for spending inordinate amounts of time agonizing over their image.2 Similarly, Patricia Glass Schu- man indicated librarians should be "spending less time talking to ourselves, about ourselves; spending less time dis- cussing the inner workings of our librar- ies ... [and should] ... effectively present the potential of American librarian- ship."3 What is the difference between occu- pational identity and occupational image? Occupational image is the collec- tive perception of what a person is in the · occupation. It is formed by the opinions of others, and like a stereotype, it seems to be unresponsive to change. Its impact is felt in areas such as recruitment and occupational status and prestige. 4' 5 Oc- cupational identity, on the other hand, is self-perception. Occupational identity determines how librarians see them- selves in relation to librarianship-to the functions as well as to the clientele. Within librarianship there exists a sub- culture of subspecialties. Some critics have hypothesized that each librarian subspecialty may also have a unique oc- Pamela f. Cravey is associate professor and head of the Circulation Department, Pullen Library, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. 150 cupational identity. For example, Bev- erly P. Lynch described the occupational identity of the academic li_brarian as being closely allied to that of teacher and researcher. 6 Most of the literature about librarians, however, is focused on their image, rather than occupational identity. This literature has described the image of the librarian from the users' I observers' viewpoint, by studying library school students, or from a purely demographic and socioeconomic perspective.7-9 In some instances the librarian type was described after comparing a limited number of traits held by library school students to some form of a general pop- ulation.10 Generally, "image" is used as a euphemism for "stereotype." For li- brarians this image traditionally has been negative. The project was aimed at understand- ing women librarians through an analysis of some of the components of the total occupational role. In reaction to the stereotype-the ex- ternal view of the profession-the librarian's own occupational self-per- ception has suffered from internalizing the negative impression. For example, Wilson's content analysis of nearly 500 documents written about the librarian stereotype from 1921 to 1978 concluded that the negative librarian image has pervaded both professional librarian as well as nonlibrarian literature. 11 This study relates to occupational image rather than to occupational identity. However, two notable studies of the oc- cupational identity of librarians do exist. Both studies considered the occupa- tional subculture of public librarians. Alice I. Bryan's landmark study of pub- lic librarians found an anomalous group with no clearly defined professional identity.12 Robert B. Clift's study found that librarians underestimated their im- portance to their clienteleY This under- valuation of professional worth-a result of the pervasiveness of the nega- Women Academic Librarians 151 tive occupational image-was also re- ported by Rosalee McReynolds and by Locke J. Morrisey and Donald 0. Case. 14'15 Further, a recent study of prod- uct/ service advertisements in four jour- nals representing four dominant librarian subspecialties found shallow and boring physical and action-role por- traits of librarians. 16 No studies present- ing the occupational identity of librarians were identified. In an effort to explain the occupational identity of the librarian from within the profession, a large national survey of professionally - committed librarians was conducted in 1986. Funded by the Council on Library Resources, the project was aimed at un- derstanding women librarians through an analysis of some of the components of the total occupational role. These com- ponents included personal demograph- ics, orientation to the occupational role, and sex-role orientation. In addition, in order to determine if unique occupa- tional subcultures exist, librarians repre- senting four traditional subspecialties of librarianship-academic, public, school, and special-were sampled. Findings from the study included a picture of the occupational identity of each of the sub- specialties. Women practitioners were viewed apart from the question of the occupational image. This paper reports on the occupational role identity of women academic librarians as identified in this national survey. THE SURVEY The Sample Nine hundred seventy-seven female librarians representing members of each of these four traditional subspecialties were surveyed. Sample size was deter- mined by projected response rate, sam- pling procedure, homogeneity of the groups to be studied, and cost. First, the study was designed to analyze responses from 400 librarians-1 00 from each sub- specialty. In order to offset the projected 40 to 50 percent response rate of typical self-administered questionnaires, the group size was increased. 17 Second, the project was designed to study members 152 College & Research Libraries of four subspecialties that naturally rep- resent strata of the profession. Because projected variances among these sub- groups were of primary interest, a strat- ified sampling procedure was employed.18 Third, because each of the four strata was homogeneous relative to the attributes to be studied, a subgroup sample of 100 was sufficient. 19 Because records based on gender were not avail- able, each sample subgroup was in- creased proportionate to the estimated number of men in that subspecialty. Fi- nally, the costs of a larger sample were considered in relation to the expected gain in precision. By using this stratified sample, the study was comparable to a "special" survey of few subgroups. For this method, Seymour Sudman sug- gested a sample of 200-500. Doubling the sample size would not have signifi- cantly increased precision. 20 Two national associations drew the random samples. The American Library Association supplied a list and mailing labels for samples drawn from the mem- bership rosters of the Association of Col- lege and Research Libraries, The Public Library Association, and the American Association of School Librarians. The Special Libraries Association provided the same for the special librarians. The project was restricted to women for two reasons First, cost precluded use of the larger sample size that would have been necessary to include a representa- tive sample of men. Second, little schol- arly attention has historically been given to developing a theory about the unique factors that influence occupational choice for women. 21 Victor R. Fuchs noted that interest in gender issues rela- tive to occupational choice and eco- nomic equality is unequaJ.22 Part of the reason for this unequal treatment is that the issues surrounding an occupational choice are so complex that the literature of several fields is replete with studies. For example, journalists, educators, psy- chologists, economists, vocational coun- selors, and sociologists all examine occupational choice. 23 Studies are re- gional, cross-cultural, or international. 24 Study subjects include boys, women, March 1991 high school students, and junior college students. 25 Scholars have proposed uni- versal models, subject-specific models, and models that lean toward separate criteria for different types of people. 26 Some studies are concerned with occu- pational aspirations, aspirations in rela- tion to choice, and aspirations related to outcome. 27 In addition, choosing an oc- cupation has been dichotomized in the literature as normative, adventitious, or purposive. 28 Each discipline further di- vides its literature into three or four main categories. For example, Samuel H. Osipow identified four theoretical frameworks-trait-factor, self-concept, sociological, and personality theories. 29 Ronald M. Pavalko characterized three different approaches to the study of oc- cupational choice: the rational decision making approach, the fortuitous ap- proach, and the sociocultural influence approach. 30 Women continue to remain un- derrepresented in studies that focus either on overall occupational choice or on choice of an occupational sub- specialty. Researchers and theorists have wres- tled with the development of an overall theoretical framework for analyzing oc- cupational choice. However, a con- founding variable hindering the development of such a theory is the pos- sibility that multiple gender-specific the- ories must be developed.31 These writers argue that women are not free to make meaningful choices and that the choices made may reflect labor market in- sensitivities, socialization, and child- rearing responsibilities and emotional involvements. 32 Consequently, while oc- cupational choice theories abound, no unified theory yet exists. Further, women continue to remain un- derrepresented in studies that focus ei- ther on overall occupational choice or on choice of an occupational subspecialty.33 This study was restricted to women with the hope that the findings relative to oc- cupational identity would contribute to the overall literature of occupational choice for women. The Questionnaire The librarian's occupational role iden- tity was studied through the use of a self-administered, three-part mailed questionnaire that queried subjects about themselves, their assessments of job-related attributes, and their views on sex roles. The first and second parts of the questionnaire were developed by the researcher. The first part of the questionnaire was an overview of the librarian's personal occupational and social history. It in- cluded thirty multiple-choice and open- ended questions about demographics, economics, career choices, career mobil- ity, nuclear family, and family orienta- tion, among others. The second part of the questionnaire was a twenty-question bipolar semantic differential. It was developed using the domain sampling model. The semantic differential technique is used to measure both the meanings of things and attitudes toward things. It is a flexible measure that can adapt to a variety of concepts and formats. The semantic dif- ferential technique is frequently used to measure the differences in meaning of the same concept among groups. Bipolar scales are used to measure the differ- ences, and when factor analyzed, the dif- ferences traditionally yield the three dimensions of "evaluation," "potency," and "activity." 34 While the semantic dif- ferential technique has its critics, in oc- cupational research it can be a way of assessing the saliency of a concept among groups.35 To that end, two small surveys of practicing librarians were conducted to establish the poles for the semantic differential portion of the ques- tionnaire. The poles were to be relative to the librarian occupational role. In the first small survey, forty librarians sug- gested adjectives to complete the sen- tence: "In my role as an academic librarian I think I am: " The 176 adjectives suggested by these practitioners were tested for Women Academic Librarians 153 bidirectionality in several thesauri and were culled by frequency distributions to twenty of the most representative. Then forty additional librarians were contacted in the second small survey to provide "librarian role" antonyms to these twenty "librarian role" adjectives. Librarians (twenty from each sub- specialty) were selected for the adjective and antonym assemblage phases of the project to assure both scale poles would represent the salient aspects of the librar- ian role and cover the semantic space relative to librarianship.36 Page place- ment on the final questionnaire was de- termined by a criss-cross first-to-last last-to-first strategy. The third part of the questionnaire measured the sex-role orientations of the librarians. The Short Form of the Per- sonal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ), developed by Janet T. Spence, Robert Helmreich and Joy Stapp, was used with Dr. Spence's permission. The Short Form PAQ is a twenty-four-item bipolar self- report instrument used to differentiate stereotypically between the sexes.37 It also tests for masculinity and femininity. The PAQ was selected ·to measure sex- role orientation because it "is made up of items describing characteristics that are not only commonly believed to dif- ferentiate the sexes but on which men and women tend to report themselves as differing . ... The stereotypic characteris- tics included on the PAQ are favorably regarded, socially desirable attri- butes." 38 Sex-role orientation was se- lected as an important domain of occupational identity because of the nu- merical dominance of women in the pro- fession and the service relationship to the clientele. George Ritzer indicated that these attributes and "the seeming fit between occupational and sex roles" conspire to oppress professions in which women are numerically dominant.39 Data Collection Questionnaires were mailed with cover letters on university stationery. The letter mentioned the researcher's current position as a librarian and im- plored participation as a colleague. An 154 College & Research Libraries addressed, stamped, return envelope and a response postcard were also en- closed. There were no identifying marks or numbers on the questionnaires or on the return envelopes. All responses were anonymous. A reminder postcard was sent after two weeks; three weeks later another copy of the questionnaire was mailed. The overall response rate was 84.5 percent. Responses Responses were received from librari- ans practicing in all states except Idaho; and from the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and Canada. One hundred seventy-nine responses were from aca- demic librarians-a response rate of 83.6 percent. Findings will be presented ac- cording to each of the three role identity components studied. ACADEMIC LIBRARIANS Personal Demographics The first part of the questionnaire col- lected background information on the librarian respondents. Frequency distri- butions yielded little variety in either the entire sample or in the academic librar- ian sample relative to most of the per- sonal demographic attributes. For example, the mean age of the total sam- ple was 43.8 years; the mean age for the academic librarians was 43.7 years. Table 1 summarizes some of the nominal data about academic librarians and per- centages relative to the total sample. 40 A thumbnail sketch of the "average" academic librarian revealed a white, protestant, married, middle-aged woman with no children. She is the progeny of professional parents. This li- brarian began her career at age twenty- three after receiving an M.L.S. in 1971 from a library school in the east-proba- bly Simmons College, Columbia Univer- sity, or Rutgers. She has practiced academic librarianship for eleven years. Exactly half of the academic librarian respondents had practiced in other li- brarian subspecialties as well-usually speciallibrarianship-but preferred ac- ademic librarianship because they found March 1991 it challenging (15 percent) and they liked the academic environment (15 percent). A thumbnail sketch of the "average" academic librarian revealed a white, protestant, married, middle-aged woman with no children. Academic librarians were satisfied with their career choice; 69 percent indi- cated they would again select librarian- ship as a career. When asked why, the response most often cited was "I like it!" Approximately 75 percent of the aca- demic librarians would again select aca- demic librarianship as a subspecialty. Conversely, 30 percent of the academics indicated they would not select librari- anship as a career again. One-fourth of these librarians cited pay as the reason. Among these women, most cited law and teaching equally as the careers they would pursue instead of librarianship. Again, pay was the predominant reason (20 percent) for these choices. Academic librarians are profession- ally involved and committed to continu- ing education. Thirty-nine percent of them had degrees or training beyond the library degree. This training included additional coursework, certification pro- grams, and additional or advanced de- grees. Second master's degrees (completed and in process) were re- ported by 40 percent of the academics with advanced training. In addition, over one-half of the academic librarians belonged to two or three professional associations. By way of comparison, only 13 percent of the public librarians cited training beyond the library degree. However, public librarians (71.5 per- cent) indicated more associational mem- berships than the other three sub- specialties. Orientation to the Occupational Role The second part of the survey used the semantic differential technique to assess the respondents' orientation to the occu- pational role of librarian. The librarians were asked twenty Likert-style ques- Women Academic Librarians 155 TABLE 1 OVERVIEW OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANS Number Percent of Academic Librarians (Percent of Total Librarian Sam~le) Ethnic Origin Asian Black His~anic White Other 4 4 2 158 2 2.4 2.4 1.2 92.9 1.2 (1.6) (3.1) (0.9) (93.4) (1.0) Religion Catholic Iewish Protestant Other 29 8 85 38 18.1 5.0 53.1 23.8 (18.9) (6.5) (56.2) (18.5) Marital Status Divorced Married Never Married SeEarated Widowed 17 93 59 0 3 9.9 54.1 34.3 0.0 1.7 (13.4) (58.0) (25.3) (0.3) (3.1) Offs~ring Yes No 75 97 43.5 56.4 (51.5) (48.5) Father's Occu~ation Blue Collar Craftsmen Farming White Collar Not em~loyed 19 21 8 116 0 11.6 12.8 4.9 70.7 0.0 (15.4) (11.1) (6.3) (66.8) (0.5) Mother's Occu~ation Blue Collar Craftsmen Farming White Collar Not em~loyed 13 2 3 80 71 7.7 1.2 1.8 47.3 42.0 (10.9) (0.5) (0.9) (47.1) (40.8) Libra!l'_ School East Midwest North South Other 57 53 35 23 2 33.5 31.2 20.6 13.5 1.2 (34.4) (28.8) (20.0) (15.0) (1.7) Where Practicing East Midwest North South Other 51 43 43 30 6 29.5 24.8 24.8 17.4 3.5 (33.3) (23.9) (22.6) (16.8) (3.5) 156 College & Research Libraries Number Percent of Academic Librarians (Percent of Total Librarian Sample) Would Select Librarianship Again Yes 118.0 69.0 (72.1) Practiced in Other Subspecialties Yes 84.0 50.0 (49.7) Additional Training Yes 67.0 39.4 (32.3) Professional Association Memberships One 21.0 12.2 (12.9) tions that began: "In my role as a librar- ian in my current subspecialty I am .... " Several scholars suggest that situating survey questions in a specific role con- text allows the role to emerge, permits meaningful response options, and as- sures the stability of responses over long periods of timeY On all but one ques- tion, the librarians did respond in their professional role. However, the nurtur- ing/businesslike pair evoked many emotional handwritten comments and admonishments to the researcher. Clearly this question was extremely rel- evant to these women's current situation and emotional context. Pay seemed to be an issue and was the factor most likely to cause them to move to another profession. In the overall sample, the librarians' self-perceptions were extremely high; No 49.0 28.7 (25.8) No 84.0 50.0 (50.3) No 103.0 60.6 (67.7) Two 52.0 30.2 (30.0) Uncertain 4.0 2.3 (2.1) Three 54.0 31.4 (27.6) March 1991 Four or more 20.0 11.6 (13.0) responses generally clustered around the two most favorable response op- tions. While the academic librarians' self-perceptions were extremely high, they were more moderate than those of the group as a whole. Table 2 displays the frequency distributions for the aca- demic sample with all the orientation to the occupational role scales arranged in the same direction-most unfavorable to most favorable. Although the most fa- vorable selection might not reflect a pos- itive work situation (idle/busy), the responses of the academic librarians also clustered around the two most favorable intervals on most scales. In four adjecti- val pairs, the academic librarians' modal responses were different from the modal responses of the group as a whole. Several statistical tests were per- formed on the adjectival pairs. First, fac- tor analysis tested for dimensionality. Generally, factor analysis will yield three factors. 42 A visual inspection of the twenty adjectival pairs indicated three Women Academic Librarians 157 TABLE2 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR ORIENTATION TO THE OCCUPATIONAL ROLE OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIAN (ADJUSTED FREQUENCY PERCENT) unsympathetic .61.014.1117.1147.6130.61 N=170 sympathetic *superfluous .012.9113.4139 .5137.217.01 N=172 indispensable process-orienta ted 5.213.518 .7116.8/26.6139.31 N=173 service-orienta ted idle .01.611.113.4124.7170.11 N=174 busy unfriendly .01.61 .616.9 I 41.4150.61 N=174 friendly *rigid .011.713 .4119.0141.4134.51 N=174 flexible pessimistic .614.6114.5124.3138.7117.31 N=173 optimistic ignorant .0/1 .113.4112.6150.0132.81 N=174 knowledgeable hindering .0/1.1 I .014.6138.5155.7 I N=174 helpful unimaginative .0/1.117.5130.5138.5122.41 N=174 creative disorganized 2.311.7111 .5119 .0136.8128.7 I N=174 organized incompetent .0/1.1 11.119.2137.4151.11 N=174 competent *nurturing 2.416.5/20.1126.6124.9119.51 N=169 businesslike *burned-out .615.216.9114.9136.8135.61 N=174 interested underutilized 3.614.816.0128.6136.3120 .8 N=168 overworked bored 2.312.3111.5120.1128.7135.11 N=174 challenged clerical .611.213.5112.1126.6156.11 N=173 professional passive .OI3.4I10.3I21.8I35.1I29.3I N=174 assertive a "gopher" .01.613.5113.9147.4134.7 I N=173 instructive uncooperative .01 .01 .6/7.5140.2151.7 I N=174 cooperative Modal response for the overall sample of librarians (highlighted in bold). * The modal response of the academic librarians differs from the modal response of the entire sample. factors could have emerged. However, only one factor did emerge (factor load- ings ranged from .824 to .969). Conse- quently, a factor analysis that forced three factors was performed. Factor 1, however, accounted for 94.4% of the total variance (eigenvalue = 16.13744) and confirmed the unidimensionality of the data. Second, a one-way analysis of variance was performed on all twenty adjectival pairs. Ten were significant. Two of the four pairs in which the aca- demic librarians' modal responses dif- fered from those of the group as a whole (rigid/ flexible and nurturing/ business- like) were significant. The results are presented in table 3 and table 4. Further, for the original twenty pairs, Scheffe's a posteriori contrast measure was used to determine pairwise differences. At the .05 level, both pairs that had modal re- sponses below those of the entire sample sustained that significance. Also, dis- criminant function analysis was used to compare the predicted librarian sub- specialists with actual librarian sub- specialists. As a group, 45.20 percent of the librarians could be correctly classi- fied into subspecialty groups according to responses to these adjectival pairs. Ac- ademic librarians (34.10 percent) were the group least likely to be correctly placed according to the responses given. Finally, five adjectival pairs were com- bined (coefficient alpha= 0.41) to assess job satisfaction. These pairs included superfluous /indispensable, pessimis- tic/ optimistic, burned-out/interested, underutilized/ overworked, and bored I challenged. A mean job satisfaction 158 College & Research Libraries March 1991 TABLE3 COMPARISON OF LIBRARIANS CLASSIFIED BY SUBSPECIALTY BY SCORES ON THE "FLEXIBLE-RIGID" PAIR A) Description of mean scores by librarian subspecialty. Subspecialty X SD N Academic 1.96 0.91 174 Public 1.88 0.94 157 School 1.67 0.78 175 Special 1.72 0.77 183 TOTAL 1.81 0.86 689 B) Analysis of Variance of scores on the "flexible-rigid" pair by librarian subspecialty. Source df SS MS F between groups 3 9.61 3.20 4.43 within groups 685 495.71 0.72 p<.005 eta2=.02 TABLE4 COMPARISON OF LIBRARIANS CLASSIFIED BY SUBSPECIALTY BY SCORES ON THE "BUSINESSLIKE-NURTURING" PAIR A) Description of mean scores by librarian subspecialty. Subspecialty X SD N Academic 2.76 1.29 169 Public 2.72 1.38 150 School 3.19 1.40 172 Special 2.38 1.32 179 TOTAL 2.76 1.37 670 B) Analysis of Variance of scores on the "businesslike-nurturing" pair by librarian subspecialty. Source df ss MS F between groups 3 57.32 19.11 10.56 within groups 666 1204.99 1.81 p<.0001 eta 2=.04 Women Academic Librarians 159 TABLE 5 JOB SATISFACTION SCORES FOR ACADEMIC LIBRARIANS Level of Satisfaction 2 (Low to High) Number 0 0 Percent of Academic 0.0 0.0 . Librarians (Percent of Total (0.0) (0.3) Librarian Sample) score of 4.7 for the sample affirmed that, overall, the librarians were satisfied with their positions. Sex-Role Orientation Part three of the mailed survey was the Short Form of the Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ), a measure for sex- role orientation. This self-report adjec- tive-rating instrument differentiates stereotypically between the sexes. Its twenty-four bipolar items include eight scales for masculinity (M)-those so- cially desirable characteristics that more males possess than females; eight scales for femininity (F)-those socially desir- able characteristics that more females possess than males; and eight scales for masculinity-femininity (MF)-those characteristics whose social desirability varies among the sexes. Each item is scored 0-4, with a high score on M and MF indicating an extreme masculine re- sponse and a high F score indicating an extreme feminine response. 43 A multiple discriminant function anal- ysis was performed on the twenty-four original PAQ variables with the four li- brarian subspecialties. More than one- third of the total librarian sample could be correctly classified into a subspecialty group by their responses to this third part of the mailed survey. Academic li- brarians were the most differentiated group-correctly placed 44.7 percent of the time. All the librarians rated themselves very favorably. This "social desirability response bias" is not uncommon, as all the response options are socially desir- able.44 For the overall librarian sample, 3 4 5 6 6 52 98 10 3.6 31.3 59.0 6.0 (4.4) (26.2) (63.4) (5.7) the highest adjusted frequency percent- age was at the most favorable anchor on 75 percent of the pairs. Seven pairs of librarian responses, however, fell out- side the most favorable response option. Of these seven, five were affective attri- butes (emotionality, excitability, sensi- tivity,lamentation, adequacy) frequently associated with women. The homogene- ity of the sample on gender, demograph- ics, occupation, and degree of commitment to librarianship as a profes- sion may have caused these results to be slightly skewed. Normative values for theM, F, and MF scales were established on a college sam- ple by using a mean of the medians test. 45 Academic librarians scored above the median for all three subscales. Table 6 compares the academic librarians' scale scores with the scores of the overall sam- ple on the M, F, and MF scales. The median split method was used to place M and F subscale scores into a 2x2 (MxF) table. This technique grouped re- sponses into the four sex-role orientation categories of androgynous (high M high F), masculine (high M low F), feminine (low M high F), and undifferentiated (low M low F). Table 7 presents the per- centage of median split classifications by subspecialty for the M and F subscales. In a general sample, "androgynous" and "undifferentiated" would be the most populated cells. For female sam- ples, the expectation is to have high F and low M scores. Writers have at- tempted to link position in the MxF table with self-esteem. When this is done, the androgynous position possesses the greatest self- esteem and the undifferen- tiated the least. Various theories argue 160 College & Research Libraries March 1991 TABLE 6 A COMPARISON OF M,F, AND MF SCORES M F MF Median 21.0 23.0 15.0 Academic Librarians 28.0 29.0 19.0 (Librarian Sample) (27.7) (28.8) (18.2) TABLE 7 PERCENT OF LIBRARIANS IN THE FOUR MASCULINITY AND FEMININITY CATEGORIES BY SUBSPECIALTY N=708 PAQ Categories Undifferentiated Feminine Masculine Androgynous Academic 24.5 Public 19.0 School 17.5 Special 20.3 the dispensation of the other two groups. Generally, they fall in-between androgy- nous and undifferentiated. 46 For the li- brarian sample, only the academic librarians rated high on the F scale. CONCLUSION Roles have been defined as "clusters of norms organized around functions. [They] represent distinct substructures within social positions and statuses, and are situation-specific." 47 The situation specificity of the occupational role of ac- ademic librarians-her occupational identity-was the focus of this research. For this project, occupational role iden- tity was separated from the concepts of image or stereotype. Three domains of occupational role identity-personal de- mographics, orientation to the occupa- tional role, and sex-role orientation -were studied. Eli Ginzberg et al. identified three themes around which to evaluate occu- pational choice. These themes-"self," "reality," and "key people" -and an ad- ditional theme of "job satisfaction" were used to frame this study.48 Within the 29 .1 26.5 26.4 23.4 20.8 25.4 23.4 30.0 23.5 32.4 26.5 29.6 structural theme of "self," academic li- brarians in this study were white, Prot- estant, middle-aged, married women with no children. They were experienced in the profession as well as in their sub- specialty. In terms of "reality" -those factors descriptive of training, prepara- tion for, and the actual practice of the career-the academic librarians were summarized as achieving an M.L.S. in 1971 at one of three library schools. Pay seemed to be an issue and was the factor most likely to cause them to move to another profession. The academic librar- ians in the sample were well educated, pursuing studies beyond their library degrees. Sampled academic librarians welcomed the challenge of academic li- brarianship. In terms of "key people,"- mentors and family-they were the progeny of professional parents who probably encouraged them directly or by example to become professional women. The absence of children in their lives afforded them the time to succeed in the rigorous demands of academic li- brarianship. The fourth element, "job satisfaction," found the academic librar- ians satisfied with their positions, with the exception of pay. Orientation to the occupational role was the second domain of occupational role identity studied. Academic librari- ans were enthusiastic about their role identity, as evidenced by the clustering of responses around the most favorable options. However, they were somewhat more moderat€i in their enthusiasm than their counterparts in the other three sub- specialties. While school librarians (60.5 percent) were the most predictable in their responses, academic librarians were the least predictable (34.10 per- cent). Four possible explanations for this are the "organizational structure of the library," the "clientele," the "specializa- tion" available, and "certification." "Organizational structure of the li- brary" includes the size and type of the organization, the relationship of the li- brary to the organization, and the rela- tionship of the library program to the curriculum. Academic libraries encom- pass a wide variety of institutional foci (junior college, college, university, and research) with concomitant complexities in the organization of the host institu- tion. While the primary relationship of the library to the host is clearly defined as supporting the curriculum, academic libraries must also support the research and service mandate of the faculty. With a national emphasis on adult ed- ucation and the entry of retired adults into colleges and universities, academic libraries may support a clientele ranging from the thirteen-year-old gifted student to elderly adults. Academic libraries also support the lifelong learning needs of their constituents. Academic librarians may be character- ized as the most decisive, the most excitable in a major crisis, and the most gentle. "Specialization" in academic libraries introduces a large element of uniqueness to the subspecialty. Areas such as refer- ence, cataloging, collection develop- Women Academic Librarians 161 ment, serials, and database management require flexible thinking and specialized knowledge. In addition, graduate de- grees and advanced training, elements that set the academic librarians apart, have introduced areas of specialization within the profession. Generally, academic librarians do not have rigorous certification require- ments. "Certification" would introduce a common knowledge base and a philo- sophical homogeneity into the sub- specialty which academic librarians do not now generally possess. This domain of occupational identification most clearly differentiated between the sub- specialties. As such, it showcased the modern academic librarian as a person who daily copes in an arena much broader than that of her colleagues in the other three types of libraries. Further, it confirms the existence of a unique occu- pational identity I subspecialty for aca- demic librarians. The final aspect of occupational role identity considered was sex-role orienta- tion. This was included because of the numerical predominance of women in the field and raises issues of occupa- tional power. Historically, professions with a numerical dominance of women have been segregated from a power base. Two of the traditional explanations cited are the service relationship to the clien- tele and the lack of life-death decision- making requirements. 49 Other reasons for including sex-role orientation in a discussion of the librarian's occupa- tional identity are the librarian's alleged weak orientation to autonomy, the the- ory that the increase of homosexual men into librarianship is linked to fulfillment of the female role, and the overall image of the librarian as somehow deficient in feminine attributes. 50' 51 Based on re- search using the Short Form of the PAQ academic librarians may be character- ized as the most decisive, the most excit- able in a major crisis, and the most gentle. They had the highest F score of the total sample. With their educational background, commitment to continuing education, and role strengths, these women 162 College & Research 'Libraries strongly answer the question "Why aca- demic librarianship?" Academic librari- anship is an evolving profession which requires adaptability and commitment. These academic librarians show they have the adaptability-particularly with regard to the organization of the library, March 1991 clientele, and specializations-and com- mitme:t:lt to lead their institutions into the next century. The academic librari- ans represented in the survey blended their interests nicely with the enormous and diverse demands of their occupa- tional role. REFERENCES AND NOTES 1. Kathleen M. Heim, ed., The Status of Women in Librarianship, (New York: Neal-Schuman, 1983), p. 1. 2. Pauline Wilson, Stereotype and Status (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1982), passim. 3. Patricia Glass Schuman, "The Image of Librarians: Substance or Shadow?," Journal of Academic Librarianship 16:86-89 (May 1990). 4. George Ritzer, Working (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1977), p.96. 5. See, for example, Gerald Thiel bar and Saul D. Feldman, "Occupational Stereotypes and Prestige," Social Forces 48:64-72 (May 1969); Douglas M. More and Robert W. Suchner, "Occupational Situs, Prestige, and Stereotypes," Sociology of Work and Occupations 3:169-186 (May 1976); Albert J. Reiss, Jr., Occupations and Social Status (New York: Arno, 1977); and The Role of Women in Librarianship 1876-1976 ed. Kathleen Weibel, Kathleen M. Heim, and Dianne J. Ellsworth (Phoenix, Ariz.: Oryx, 1979),passim. 6. Beverly P. Lynch, "A Comment on the Role of the Academic Librarian," Journal of Academic Librarianship 4:134-35 (July 1978). 7. See, for example, Geraldine Beaty King, "Attitudes of Library School Students Towards Reference Librarians and Library Information Service" (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Minne- sota, 1971); Malcom H. Brantz, "Graduate Student's Attitudes Toward Librarians and Specialists," California School Libraries 47:28-33 (Fall 1975); U. Bloch and T. Bloch, "Occupational Perceptions of Librarians by High School Students," Library Quarterly 51:292-300 (July 1981). 8. See, for example, Marion Anthony Milczewski, "Personality Rating of Library School Students" (Master's thesis, Univ. of Illinois, 1940); Agnes L. Reagan, A Study of Factors Influencing College Students To Become Librarians (Chicago: Assoc. of College andRe- search Libraries, 1958); Anne McMahon, The Personality of the Librarian (Adelaide: Libraries Board of South Australia, 1967); Patricia Ann Reeling, "Undergraduate Fe- male Students as Potential Recruits to the Library Profession" (Ph.D. diss., Columbia Univ., 1969); and Patrick B. Forsyth and Thomas J. Danisiewicz, "Toward a Theory of Professionalization," Work and Occupations 12:59-76 (Feb. 1985). 9. See, for example, Anita R. Schiller, Characteristics of Professional Personnel in College and University Libraries (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Bureau of Research, 1968); Michael D. Cooper, "A Statis- tical Portrait of Librarians: What the Numbers Say," American Libraries 7:327-30 (June 1976); Leigh S. Estabrook and Kathleen M. Heim, "A Profile of ALA Personal Mem- bers," American Libraries 11:654-59 (Dec. 1980); Mark E. Cain, "Academic and Research Librarians: Who Are We?" Journal of Academic Librarianship 14:292-96 (Nov. 1988). 10. See, for example, Robert Raymond Douglass, "The Personality of the Librarian" (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Chicago, 1957); Perry D. Morrison, The Career of the Academic Librarian (Chicago: American Library Assoc., 1969); Howard Clayton, "Femininity and Job Satisfaction Among Male Library Students at One Midwestern University," College & Research Libraries 31:388-98 (Nov. 1970); David L. Lee and Janet E. Hall, "Female Library Science Students and the Occupational Stereotype: Fact or Fiction?," College & Research Libraries 34:265-67 (Sept. 1973); and Peter Hernon and Maureen Pastine~ "Student Perceptions of Academic Librarians," College & Research Libraries 38:129-139 (March 1977). 11. Wilson, Stereotype and Status, p.41-68. 12. Alice I. Bryan, The Public Librarian (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1952), passim. 13. Robert Benjamin Clift, "The Personality and Occupational Stereotype of Public Librar- ians" (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Minnesota, 1976),passim. Women Academic Librarians 163 14. Rosalee McReynolds, "A Heritage Dismissed," Library Journal110:25-31 (Nov. 1985). 15. Locke J. Morrisey and Donald 0. Case, "There Goes My Image: The Perception of Male Librarians by Colleague, Student, and Self," College & Research Libraries 49:453-64 (Sept. 1988). 16. Pamela J. Cravey, "Focusing on the Librarian: Are Librarians Selling Themselves?" Georgia Librarian 27:28-31 (Summer 1990). 17. Donald P. Warwick and Charles A. Lininger, The Sample Survey (New York: McGraw Hill, 1975), p.129. 18. Seymour Sudman, Applied Sampling (New York: Academic Press, 1976), p.107. 19. Charles H. Backstrom and Gerald Hursh-Cesar, Survey Research (New York: Wiley, 1981), p.68. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Sudman, Applied Sampling, p.111. George Psathas, "Toward a Theory of Occupational Choice for Women," Sociology and Socia[ Research 52:253-68 (Jan. 1968). Victor R. Fuchs, Women's Quest For Economic Equality (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1988), p.8. For representative studies see, for example, Studs Terkel, Working (New York: Pan- theon, 1972), passim; Charles Eugene Bujold, "The Role of Self-Concepts, Occupational Concepts, and Reality Considerations in the Occupational Choice of French-Canadian Secondary School Boys" (Ed.D. diss., TeachersCollege,Columbia Univ., 1972), passim; Anne Roe, The Psychology of Occupations (New York: Wiley, 1956), passim; Anne Roe, "Early Determinants of Vocational Choice," Journal of Counseling Psychology 4:212-17 (1957); Anne Roe and M. Siegelman, The Origin of Interests (Washington, D. C.: American Personnel and Guidance Association, 1964), passim; Richard B. Freeman, The Market for College-Trained Manpower: A Study in the Economics of Career Choice (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1971), passim; F. Kuder, Activity Interests and Occupational Choice (Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1977), passim; and John Saltiel, "The Wisconsin Model of Status Attainment and the Occupational Choice Process," Work and Occupations 15:334-55 (Aug. 1988). See, for example, David L. Klemmack and John N. Edwards, "Women's Acquisition of Stereotyped Occupational Aspirations," Sociology and Social Research 57:510-25 (1973); P. W. Musgrave, "Towards a Sociological Theory of Occupational Choice," Sociological Review 15:33-46 (March 1967); and M. Kh. Titma, "The Choice of Occupation as a Social Problem," Soviet Sociology 16:3-19 (Summer 1977). For examples of a variety of subjects of study see Eli Ginzberg, and others, Occupational Choice (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1951); Hidden Aspects of Women's Work, ed. Christine Bose, Roslyn Feldberg and Natalie Sokoloff (New York: Praeger, 1987); P. A. O'Reilly, "Predicting the Stability of Expressed Occupational Choices of Secondary Students" (Ph.D. diss., Pennsylvania State Univ., 1973); and Frank Echols, Jr., "Occu- pational Aspirations, Expectations and Deflection Level of Junior College Occupa- tional Students" (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Georgia, 1975). For examples of these models see, Peter M. Blau and others, "Occupational Choice: A Conceptual Framework," Industrial und Labor Relations Review 9:532-43 (July 1956); Psathas "Toward a Theory," p. 253-68 ; Samuel H. Osipow, Theories of Career Develop- ment (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1973), passim. For examples of occupational aspirations see, William P. Kuvlesky and Robert C. Bealer, "A Clarification of the Concept' Occupational Choice,'" Rural Sociology 31:265-76 (Sept. 1966); EdwardS. Jones, "Relation of Ability to Preferred and Probable Occupation," Educational Administration and Supervision 26:220-26 (Mar. 1940); E. Donald Sisson, "Vocational Choices of College Students," School and Society 46:765-68 (Dec. 1937). For examples of the applications of these dichotomies see, Terence R. Mitchell and Lee Roy Beach, "A Review of Occupational Preference and Choice Research Using Expec- tancy Theory and Decision Theory," Journal of Occupational Psychology 49:231-48 (1976); H. Lytle Givens and Albeno P. Garbin, "Social-Personal Characteristics and Occupa- tional Choice Processes of Female Flight Attendants," Vocational Guidance Quarterly 26:116-24 (Dec. 1977); Jacqueline Miles Boles, "The Nightclub Stripper: A Sociological Study of a Deviant Occupation" (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Georgia, 1973). Osipow, Theories of Career Development, p.10-11. Ronald M. Pavalko, Sociology of Occupations and Professions (Itasca, Ill.: Peacock, 1971), p.45. 164 College & Research Libraries March 1991 31. Musgrave, "Towards a Sociological Theory of Occupational Choice," p.34-35; Margaret A. Coulson and others, "Towards a Sociological Theory of Occupational Choice-A Critique," Sociological Review 15:301-09 (Nov. 1967); and Julienne Ford and Steven Box, "Sociological Theory and Occupational Choice," Sociological Review 15:287-99 (Nov. 1967). 32. For examples see, Donna M. Douglass, Choice and Compromise (New York: ANACON, 1983), passim; and Marilyn Fabe and Norma Wikler, Up Against the Clock (New York: Random, 1979), passim. 33. Louise Vetter, "Career Counseling For Women," in Career Development and Counseling of Women, ed. L. Sunny Hansen and Rita S. Rapoza (Springfield, Ill.: Thomas, 1978), passim. 34. Charles E. Osgood, George J. Sud, and Percy H. Tannenbaum, The Measurement of Meaning (Urbana: Univ. of Illinois Press, 1975), p. 325. 35. See, for example, Ann B. Pratt, "Exploring Stereotypes of Popular and Unpopular Occupations Among Women-in-General," Journal of Vocational Behavior 6:145-64 (Apr. 1975); Gwendolyn Hankerson Willis, "The Effect of Occupational Stereotypes and the Self-Perceptions of College Women, Traditionalists and Non-Traditionalists, on Occu- pational Choice" (Ph.D. diss ., Georgia State Univ., 1977), passim; and Morrisey and Case, "There Goes My Image," p. 453-60. 36. Edwin E. Ghiselli, John P. Campbell, and Sheldon Zedeck, Measurement Theory for the Behavioral Sciences (San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1981), p.209. 37. Janet T. Spence and R. L. Helmreich, Masculinity and Femininity (Austin, Tex.: Univ. of Texas Press, 1978), p.19. 38. Ibid., p .32-33. 39. Ritzer, "Working," p.132. 40. While his subjects were selected in a much different way but at about the same time, Cain's demographic study of academic librarians yielded similar results. 41. See, for example, Donald C. Reitzes, "The College Student Role/Identity: Processes and Consequences" (Ph.D. diss., Indiana Univ., 1977); Jeylan T. Mortimer and Jon Lorence, "Occupational Experience and the Self-Concept: A Longitudinal Study," Social Psychology Quarterly 42:307-23 (1979). 42. Osgood, Sud, and Tannenbaum, Measurement of Meaning, p.88. 43. Spence and Helmreich, Masculinity and Femininity, p.31-32. 44. Ibid., p .34-35. 45. Ibid., p.33-36. 46. Janet T. Spence, Robert Helmreich and Joy Stapp, "Ratings of Self and Peers on Sex Role Attributes and Their Relation to Self-Esteem and Conceptions of Masculinity and Femininity," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 32:29-39 (1975). 47. Frederick L. Bates and Clyde C. Harvey, The Structure of Social Systems (New York: Gardner, 1975), p.91. 48. Ginzberg and others, Occupational Choice, p.52. 49. See, for example: Valerie Kincade Oppenheimer, "The Sex Labeling of Jobs," Industrial Relations 7:219-34 (1968); Ritzer, "Working,"p. 179-88 and 329-56; The Status of Women in Librarianship, passim; Michael F. Winter, The Culture and Control of Expertise (West- port, Conn.: Greenwood, 1988). 50. Arnold Hirshon, "What's in a Name?" Michigan Librarian 43:4-5 (1977). 51. Dee Garrison, "The Tender Technicians: The Feminization of Public Librarianship, 1876-1905," Journal of Social History 6:131-59 (1972-1973).