Home⇛ADMINISTRA Official Research Journal of the BSOA Program⇛vol. 2 no. 1 (2026)

Convenience And Credibility: Ai Use Vs Physical Library Utilization

Ma. Jesusa Talosig | Sarah Jasmine Respicio | Ruizelle Dango | Nicole Edrique C Ramos | Jennyvi Pascua

Discipline: Artificial Intelligence

 

Abstract:

This study evaluated and compared the perceived convenience and credibility of Artificial Intelligence (AI) use versus physical library utilization among students at Quirino State University, Diffun Campus. The research specifically determined the frequency of AI use and physical library visits, assessed information-seeking behaviors, examined perceived convenience and credibility levels, and identified significant relationships between these variables and students' information-seeking practices. Utilizing a quantitative descriptive-correlational research design, the study sampled 138 student respondents chosen via stratified and purposive sampling techniques. Data collection was conducted using a pilot-tested, reliability tested, researcher-made survey questionnaire, and statistical analyses were performed using weighted means, t-tests, and Pearson r correlation. Findings revealed that students frequently utilize both AI tools and physical library resources for academic purposes, though AI tools are used more often due to their speed, accessibility, and convenience. Conversely, physical libraries received higher mean ratings across all credibility indicators, including trustworthiness, accuracy, reliability of information, and transparency. The study concluded that AI offers greater perceived convenience and efficiency, while physical libraries remain important for perceived credibility and academic trust.



References:

  1. ACRL Information Literacy Framework Review and Revision Task Force. (2026). Framework for information literacy for higher education (First Revision Draft). American Library Association. https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework.
  2. Adetayo, A. J. (2022). Are physical libraries popular for research in the internet age post COVID-19? Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 26(4), 231–245. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10875301.2022.2090044
  3. Adetayo, A. J. (2023). ChatGPT and librarians for reference consultations. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 27(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10875301.2023.2203681
  4. Cabrera-Arnau, C., & Neville, R. D. (2025). Widely used, barely trusted? Understanding student perceptions on the use of generative AI tools in higher education. OSF Preprints. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/hxc4u_v1
  5. Chauhan, D. S. (2025). The digital shift: Technology’s role in modern library operations. International Journal for Science Technology and Engineering, 13, 271–280. https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2025.73556
  6. Chowdhury, G., & Chowdhury, S. (2024). AI- and LLM-driven search tools: A paradigm shift in information access for education and research. Journal of Information Science, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515241284046
  7. Corrall, S. (2023). Academic libraries and the evolving research ecosystem: Supporting learning, teaching, and research in the digital age. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 49(6), 102799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2023.102799
  8. Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
  9. Cox, A. M., Craig, M., & Tzoc, E. (2023). Positioning the academic library in the age of artificial intelligence. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 29(4), 383–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2023.2266053
  10. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications. https://openlibrary.org/books/OL28051490M/Research_Design_Qualitative_Quantitative_and_Mixed_Methods_Approaches
  11. Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2024). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100206
  12. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  13. Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., Albanna, H., Albashrawi, M., Al-Busaidi, K. A., Balakrishnan, J., Barlette, Y., Basu, S., Bose, I., Brooks, L., Buhalis, D., ... Wright, R. (2023). “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
  14. Estlund, K., & Hudson Vitale, C. (2026). Strategic implications of AI futures for research libraries: Workshop report. Association of Research Libraries and Coalition for Networked Information. https://doi.org/10.29242/report.futurescape2026
  15. Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. E. J. (2024). A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(3), 460–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846
  16. Fogg, B. J. (2003). Prominence-interpretation theory: Explaining how people assess credibility online. In Extended Abstracts of the 2003 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 722–723). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/765891.765951
  17. Gajbhiye, C. K. (2024). Impact of artificial intelligence (AI) in library services. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 6(3). https://www.ijfmr.com/research-paper.php?id=22452
  18. Galagala, M. R. G., & Bacarrisas, H. P. (2025). Higher education students’ information literacy skills in engaging with AI-generated content. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 12(12), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2025.12.001
  19. Grams, M.-K. (2024). Students’ perspective of the advantages and disadvantages of ChatGPT compared to reference librarians. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 19(2), 130–132. https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/30518
  20. Hauswald, R. (2025). Artificial epistemic authorities. Social Epistemology, 39(6), 716–725. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2025.2449602
  21. Islam, M. N., Ahmad, S., Aqil, M., Hu, G., Ashiq, M., Abusharhah, M. M., & Saky, S. A. T. M. (2025). Application of artificial intelligence in academic libraries: A bibliometric analysis and knowledge mapping. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 5(1), Article 59. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44163-025-00295-9
  22. Jose, B., et al. (2025). Epistemic authority and generative AI in learning spaces: Rethinking knowledge in the algorithmic age. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1647687. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.
  23. Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeiffer, F., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., ... Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
  24. Kisilowska-Szurmińska, M. (2025). Artificial intelligence in academic libraries – a tool, a collaborator, an adversary? A Delphi study of university librarians in Poland.            The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 51(5), 103114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2025.103114
  25. Kisilowska-Szurmińska, M. (2025). The library as a human-centered space: A Delphi study on AI integration in academic institutions. Journal of Library Administration, 65(3), 312–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2025.2443012
  26. Kumar, P. (2024). Exploring the influence of ChatGPT on information needs and seeking behavior of library users at MGCU, Motihari, Bihar. ShodhKosh Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 5(7).https://www.granthaalayahpublication.org/Arts-Journal/ShodhKosh/article/view/5256
  27. Li, B., Qi, P., Liu, B., Di, S., Liu, J., Pei, J., … & Yi, J. (2021). Trustworthy AI: From principles to practices. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.01167
  28. Lo, C. K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education Sciences, 13(4), 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410
  29. Lo, L. S. (2025). AI literacy in academic libraries: Core components and themes. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 51(1), 118–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102842
  30. 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. Information Technology and Libraries, 43(3). https://ital.corejournals.org/index.php/ital/article/view/17245
  31. Matsieli, M., & Mutula, S. M. (2025). Generative AI and the information society: Ethical reflections from libraries. Information, 16(9), 771.https://www.mdpi.com/2078-2489/16/9/771
  32. Meakin, L. (2024). Exploring the impact of generative artificial intelligence on higher education students’ utilization of library resources. Information Technology and Libraries. https://doi.org/10.5860/ital.v43i3.17246
  33. Miranda, J. P. P., Bansil, J. A., Fernando, E. Q., Gamboa, A. B., Hernandez, H. E., Cruz, M. A., Dianelo, R. F. B., Gonzales, D. D., & Penecilla, E. M. (2025). Prevalence, devices used, reasons for use, trust, barriers, and challenges in utilizing generative AI among tertiary students. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.11821
  34. Olatoye, A. A., Agbenu, D. O., & Bologun, O. O. (2025). Adoption and ethical use of artificial intelligence (AI) for library service provision in universities in South-West, Nigeria. Library and Information Perspectives and Research, 7(1), 1–9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11782261/
  35. Osuji, U. C. (2026). Digital epistemology, knowledge production and justification in the algorithmic age. Journal of People and Worldviews, 2(1), 1–15. https://journalofpeopleandworldviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/JPW-P2.-13.pdf
  36. Perc, M. (2025). Counterfeit judgments in large language models. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(48), e2528527122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2528527122 
  37. Perc, M., & Özer, M. (2025). Disappearing minds in the age of artificial intelligence. İnsan & Toplum, 15, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.12658/M0871 
  38. Phua, J. T. K., Neo, H.-F., & Teo, C.-C. (2025). Evaluating the impact of artificial intelligence tools on enhancing student academic performance: Efficacy amidst security and privacy concerns. Big Data and Cognitive Computing, 9(5), 131. https://www.mdpi.com/2504-2289/9/5/131.
  39. Quirino State University. (n.d.). Quirino State University. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quirino_State_University
  40. Ramteke, S. W., Daphal, Y. B., Ankush, S. M., & Arote, P. P. (2025). Will ChatGPT replace libraries? A thematic literature review and recommendation framework. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 33(1), 65–76. Public Services Quarterly. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10691316.2025.2576843  
  41. Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson. https://aima.cs.berkeley.edu/
  42. Sambrano, L. C., Reyes, J., Fabro, R. B. B., Colar, C. K. F., & Medrano, V. B. (2025). The influence of artificial intelligence (AI) on library patronage among college students. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, IX(VII), 141–152. https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijriss/articles/the-influence-of-artificial-intelligence-ai-on-library-patronage-among-college-students/
  43. Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x
  44. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540 
  45. Widjaya, S. N., Winoto, Y., & Susanti, S. (2025). Artificial intelligence and the transformation of digital search ecosystems: A bibliometric review of information literacy and user behavior. JIPI (Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan dan Informasi), 10(2). https://jurnal.uinsu.ac.id/index.php/jipi/article/view/27229
  46. Wildgaard, L., Vils, A., & Johnsen, S. S. (2023). Reflections on tests of AI-search tools in the academic search process. Liber Quarterly: The Journal of European Research Libraries. https://liberquarterly.eu/article/view/13567
  47. Wusu, H. J. O. (2024). The rise of artificial intelligence in libraries: The ethical and equitable methodologies, and prospects for empowering library users. AI Ethics, 5, 755–765. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43681-024-00432-7
  48. Zhai, X. (2023). ChatGPT for next generation science learning. Studies in Science Education, 59(2), 280–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2023.2190418

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic