Librarian’s Conscience Framework:  Human oversight and accountability in AI-supported academic library work

Norhashimah Hashim; Haziah Sa'ari; Stan Skrzeszewski

doi:10.21834/e-bpj.v11i38.8107

Authors

Norhashimah Hashim Faculty of Information Science, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Puncak Perdana, Malaysia
Haziah Sa'ari Faculty of Information Science UiTM Kampus Rembau, Negeri Sembilan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9828-3755
Stan Skrzeszewski Museum and Archives of the Polish Armed Forces, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9266-3981

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v11i38.8107

Abstract

AI-supported library work creates risks involving accuracy, privacy, fairness, metadata, and access. This conceptual study synthesizes 38 Scopus- and Web of Science-indexed studies to develop the Librarian’s Conscience Framework. Librarian conscience refers to the capacity to apply shared professional duties across service contexts, justify interventions, and escalate decisions beyond individual authority. The framework integrates professional ethics, human oversight, humanistic values, and spiritual commitments through three dimensions: professional judgment, ethical responsibility, and accountability. Five actions guide output verification, privacy judgment, fairness assessment, metadata responsibility, and accountable mediation, producing reliable information, protected inquiry, fair access, accurate metadata, and defensible decisions in practice.

References

Aksnes, D. W., & Sivertsen, G. (2019). A criteria-based assessment of the coverage of Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of Data and Information Science, 4(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2019-0001

Adewojo, A. A. (2025). Perspectives of academic librarians on ethical challenges of AI-based bibliometric tools: A grounded theory study. The Electronic Library, 43(5), 777–797. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-05-2025-0166

Aguiñaga, J., Mooradian, N., Ghosh, S., & Hofman, D. (2025). Evolution of reference services in the era of generative artificial intelligence. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.1232

Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A. M., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00019

Bilal, D., Chu, C. M., Rieh, S. Y., & Choi, Y. (2025). Bridging the AI education, knowledge, and skills gap of library and information professionals: Evaluation of the Innovation, Inquiry, Disruption, and Access (IDEA) Institute on artificial intelligence (AI). Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 66(4), 340–362. https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis-2024-0033

Boateng, F. (2025). The transformative potential of generative AI in academic library access services: Opportunities and challenges. Information Services & Use, 45(1–2), 140–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/18758789251332800

Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x

Bridges, L., Lopezosa, C., Centelles Velilla, M., & Ferran-Ferrer, N. (2025). Moving towards critical AI literacy in LIS education: A scoping review and syllabi analysis. The Electronic Library, 43(5), 798–817. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-06-2025-0224

Budd, J. M. (2006). Toward a practical and normative ethics for librarianship. The Library Quarterly, 76(3), 251–269. https://doi.org/10.1086/511140

Butlin, P., Long, R., Elmoznino, E., Bengio, Y., Birch, J., Constant, A., Deane, G., Fleming, S. M., Frith, C., Ji, X., Kanai, R., Klein, C., Lindsay, G., Michel, M., Mudrik, L., Peters, M. A. K., Schwitzgebel, E., Simon, J., & VanRullen, R. (2023). Consciousness in artificial intelligence: Insights from the science of consciousness. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.08708

Cao, F., Bu, L., Huang, Y., Chi, Y., & Fu, H. (2026). Algorithm aversion in academic libraries: User resistance to AI-enabled discovery and search services. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 52(5), Article 103320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2026.103320

Chen, W.-N., & Grzybowicz, P. (2025). Security and privacy challenges in AI-powered library recommender systems: A systematic literature review. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 1386–1389. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.1412

Chen, S., & Li, M. (2024). AI for cataloging and metadata creation: Perspectives and future opportunities from cataloging and metadata professionals. Technical Services Quarterly, 41(4), 317–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2024.2394919

Cobbe, J., Lee, M. S. A., & Singh, J. (2021). Reviewable automated decision-making: A framework for accountable algorithmic systems. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 598–609). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445921

Dover, A., & Grzegorski, J. (2025). Artificial intelligence through the lens of the Cataloguing Code of Ethics. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 63(6–7), 600–620. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2025.2544137

Elsayed, A. M., & Abusharhah, M. M. (2025). Artificial intelligence adoption, perceptions, and ethical literacy among Arab academic librarians: A survey. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 51(5), Article 103083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2025.103083

Fruehauf, E., Schmidt, L., & Boczar, A. (2026). User perspectives on LINK: A generative AI chatbot for academic libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 52(4), Article 103255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2026.103255

Grimes, N. D. (2026). “I’m not trying to become an AI expert”: STEM academic librarian perspectives on the use of artificial intelligence within academic librarianship. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 52, Article 103331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2026.103331

Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378

Hamad, F., & Shehata, A. (2025). The potential of GPTs for enhanced information access and user services at academic libraries. IFLA Journal, 51(3), 671–681. https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352241298958

Hassan, D., & Becker, B. (2025). The rise of AI and the evolution of the academic librarian. Journal of Information Ethics, 34(1), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.2307/JIE.34.1.30

Hossain, Z. (2025). Integrating AI literacy into library and information science education and practice: A human-centered approach. Library Hi Tech News. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-05-2025-0089

Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10(1–2), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0

Jabeen, M. (2025). Assessing the readiness for the adoption of artificial intelligence and related technologies in academic libraries of Pakistan. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 51(6), Article 103161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2025.103161

Khan, Z. I., Oladokun, B. D., Upadhyay, A. K., & Kalbande, D. (2026). Ethical concerns of generative AI in academic libraries: A cross-regional quantitative study of librarians’ risk perceptions, trust, and governance practices. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006261461309

MacInnis, D. J. (2011). A framework for conceptual contributions in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.4.136

Mahmud, M. R. (2024). AI in automating library cataloging and classification. Library Hi Tech News. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-07-2024-0114

Mannheimer, S., Bond, N., Young, S. W. H., Kettler, H. S., Marcus, A., Slipher, S. K., Clark, J. A., Shorish, Y., Rossmann, D., & Sheehey, B. (2024). Responsible AI practice in libraries and archives: A review of the literature. Information Technology and Libraries, 43(3). https://doi.org/10.5860/ital.v43i3.17245

McCrary, Q. D. (2026). Are we ghosts in the machine? AI, agency, and the future of libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 52(1), Article 103181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2025.103181

McCusker, E., & Michalak, R. (2025). AI policies in U.S. universities: A critical analysis of policy gaps and library involvement. Journal of Library Administration, 65(6–7), 808–824. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2025.2560268

National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2026). Post-quantum cryptography. Retrieved September 13, 2026, from https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/post-quantum-cryptography

Olson, M. (2026). Operating the franchise: Vendor consolidation, algorithmic mediation, and the remaking of academic librarians as platform administrators for digital capitalism. Information Research, 31(2), 348–367. https://doi.org/10.47989/ir31262945

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.

Soltani-Nejad, N., Jahanshahi, M., Saberi, M. K., Ansari, N., & Zarei-Maram, N. (2022). The relationship between social responsibility and public libraries’ accountability: The mediating role of professional ethics and conscientiousness. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 54(2), 306–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006211014260

Sousa, N. (2025). Ethical and practical implications of AI in academic library research. IFLA Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352251391753

UNESCO. (2022). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381137

Wilkinson, L. (2014). Principlism and the ethics of librarianship. The Reference Librarian, 55(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2014.853270

Xing, Y., Huang, W.-B., & Wang, Y. (2026). Reconfiguring global LIS education: AI integration, pedagogical roles and epistemic challenges. The Electronic Library, 44(1), 4–26. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-06-2025-0214

Yang, X., Ding, J., Chen, H., & Ji, H. (2024). Factors affecting the use of artificial intelligence-generated content by subject librarians: A qualitative study. Heliyon, 10(8), Article e29584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29584

Zuo, S., Ma, X., & Iacca, G. (2025). ACAI: Awareness and consciousness in artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the 2025 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and the 2025 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (pp. 621–624). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3714394.3750573