Category: Research

Posted on

It’s Worse Than That

When I talk about a Generative AI-induced Information Shock, I am neither endorsing the current state of things nor claiming this form of AI is inevitable. If anything, my intention is to rally action in the face of the shock.

There is a reason people are adopting AI chat so rapidly and so widely. It is human nature to seek to learn, and to build relationships with those we find informative. We have an entire neurotransmitter system in our brains that rewards learning (dopamine, anyone). That system has been hijacked and monetized, and it remains a vital part of what it is to be human.

So it is natural for people to seek out answers and build affective relationships with AI tools that anthropomorphize the technology. Our brains evolved to attribute intention and consciousness to the things we converse with.

This underlying human need to learn is why AI arrives as a shock rather than an evolution. It is also why the concern moving forward is no longer the flood of document-like objects AI can produce. It is the flood of unsubstantiated beliefs it can produce.

There is now evidence for how far that goes. A recent preprint shows the exchange can move what a person believes even when the person has been warned to be on guard.

Individual-level interventions against sycophantic AI reduce its appeal but not its persuasiveness

In two preregistered experiments, backed by a pooled analysis covering about 3,982 people, Ye, Kraut, and Rathje warned users that an AI chatbot was flattering them before they ever used it. Some read a warning. Others watched the same bot validate people on opposite sides of the same argument. The warnings worked on judgment. Users rated the AI as less objective and trusted it less. The warnings did nothing to belief. Those same users walked away more certain and more extreme in their positions. Knowing the exchange was working on them did not stop it from moving what they believed.

This is why information scientists need to pay particular attention to the learning literature right now. Concepts like cognitive offloading and zones of AI learning engagement are strong directions we can use when we center the exchange in our research and practice. These studies show what is happening inside the exchange (the changes to knowledge), and they gesture toward means to modify and optimize those exchanges.

Posted on

We are at the Start of an Information Shock

Generative AI isn’t just producing more information. It’s dissolving the document, the organizing unit that information science and librarianship have been built around for over a century. I’m calling this an Information Shock.

The short version of the argument was just published at Information Matters: [https://informationmatters.org/2026/07/ai-information-shock-and-a-new-information-science/]. It makes the core case in about a thousand words: AI creates a new kind of authorship with no stable object to catalog, retrieve, cite, or verify. That’s not a skills gap. It’s a structural problem for the field.

The longer version is a preprint on SocArXiv, submitted to the Journal of Documentation: [https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/36a97_v1]. That paper traces a historical pattern: the field has faced information shocks before, from cuneiform to the postwar data explosion, and each time rebuilt around a new object and a new professional identity. AI is the next such moment, and the field’s current responses, including AI literacy, aren’t scaled to what’s actually changing.

I’ll be writing more here about Information Shock and what it means for libraries and information science. I’d love to hear your thoughts.

For those who want the formal summary, here’s the abstract of the Journal of Documentation piece:

Purpose. This paper argues that AI authoring is prompting an Information Shock and a new information science. The shock is not a matter of increased volume and variable quality of AI produced information. It comes as generative AI creates a new kind of author that dissolves the document, the field’s organizing unit. This forces a reconstitution of tools, literacies, and identity.

Design/methodology/approach. The paper applies a conceptual framework drawn from the history of Information Shocks, tracing how disruptions from cuneiform to post-World War II research data forced the field to rebuild around new objects and practices. AI is analyzed against that pattern.

Findings. AI produces two modes of authorship: document-like objects that enter existing infrastructures, and transactional, co-authored exchanges with no stable unit to catalog, retrieve, cite, or verify. The second mode renders AI literacy inadequate, even in its current forms, because they presuppose an identifiable object and human interlocutors. Anticipated changes reach professional identity, tools, intellectual property, and education.

Research limitations/implications. The argument is theoretical and prospective, and some anticipated changes remain speculative. The Information Shock outlined is anticipated to have major impacts for librarians and information professionals moving forward.

Originality/value. The paper offers a historically grounded distinction between document-producing and transactional AI authorship, arguing that in this mode a nonhuman conversant takes the mediating position the field has long held.

Keywords. Artificial intelligence, generative AI, Information Shock, documentalism, information literacy, authorship, professional identity

Posted on

R. David Lankes Releases New Book on Libraries, AI, and Democracy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 27, 2025

R. David Lankes Releases New Book on Libraries, AI, and Democracy

Triptych: Death, AI, and Librarianship reframes the future of libraries of all types as a lifeline for community and connection.

Philadelphia, PA — R. David Lankes, in association with Library Journal, proudly announces the release of Triptych: Death, AI, and Librarianship—a daring, deeply personal, and visionary work that confronts the most urgent challenges facing libraries today.

In an era marked by deep social divides, technological disruption, and growing isolation, Triptych offers a transformative vision: that libraries can—and must—do more than inform; they can save lives. Joined by Jain Orr and Qianzi Cao, Lankes presents three bold lectures that challenge librarians to embrace their role as catalysts for community, justice, and human resilience.

“Triptych is a manifesto,” says Lankes. “It’s a call for librarians to resist despair, champion equity, and guide communities through the ethical complexities of artificial intelligence and rising authoritarianism—not by standing apart, but by standing together.”

Library Journal will feature a series of exclusive excerpts, author interviews, and companion essays on its digital platforms. In addition, LJ will partner with Lankes to host webinars throughout the coming year exploring each of the book’s major themes—from AI ethics to joy as resistance and the emergence of “feral librarians.”

Inside Triptych, readers will find:

  • A radical redefinition of librarianship rooted in mission, empathy, and action
  • A critical look at AI’s impact on trust, literacy, and community cohesion
  • A passionate defense of libraries as democratic, transformative spaces
  • A post-industrial vision for libraries centered on agency, adaptability, and radical inclusion

“Dr. Lankes’ reputation as a provocative and compassionate library thinker is reinforced in this latest work,” said Library Journal Editor-in-Chief Hallie Rich. “Triptych presents a vision for librarianship grounded in the issues libraries grapple with today, and we’re excited to help bring these ideas into the center of the profession’s conversation.”

Triptych: Death, AI, and Librarianship is available now through Amazon, and soon through major booksellers.

The first of a series of excerpts from Triptych: Death, AI, and Librarianship, can be found on the Library Journal website.

Media Contact:
rdlankes@utexas.edu

Author Website: https://DavidLankes.org

Library Journal Website: https://www.libraryjournal.com/

About Library Journal:
Founded in 1876, Library Journal is the leading voice of the library community, providing trusted reporting, reviews, and insights to help libraries and librarians thrive in a changing world.

About R. David Lankes:
R. David Lankes is the Virginia & Charles Bowden Professor of Librarianship at the University of Texas at Austin and a leading advocate for community librarianship. His work explores how libraries can empower communities to confront real-world challenges with knowledge, empathy, and hope.

Posted on

Demons, Determinism, and Divining the Future of Information Science

“Demons, Determinism, and Divining the Future of Information Science,” ASIS&T Inaugural President’s Lecture

Abstract: A demon in science is a conceptual device used to illustrate a theory or pose a question for interrogation. For example, Laplace’s Demon was a creature that could know every action occurring across the universe in an instant and thus perfectly predict the future and divine the past. Laplace used this construct as the basis of what would come to be known as determinism-a logical, causal, clockwork universe.

Let us posit an information demon. A creature that could reach out and hold the entirety of information science in its hands. Would information science have soft or hard edges? Would the shape and inner forms be fixed or constantly moving? How big of a factor is AI in this whole? Of course, the biggest question might be why would a demon do this in the first place? What could one learn from grasping the whole of the field versus picking up components one by one?

Video (Script below the slides):

SlidesDownload in PDF

Script:

Demons, Determinism, and Divining the Future of Information Science

R. David Lankes

September 19, 2024

Let me start by thanking Crystal and ASIS&T for inviting me to give the inaugural President’s Lecture. I’ve prepared about 30-40 minutes of remarks that should leave us plenty of time for questions, disagreements, and conversation.

Continue reading “Demons, Determinism, and Divining the Future of Information Science”
Posted on

What’s in Store for Libraries with AI? State Libraries Initiative

“What’s in Store for Libraries with AI? State Libraries Initiative” Computers in Libraries 2024

Abstract: Hear how this group of state libraries plans to explore the varied roles state libraries play in the use of AI and in their support of efforts around workforce development in AI. They plan to gather data, build an environmental scan, and interview library staff to provide focused explorations of the topic with participating state librarians. They plan to equip state libraries to proactively respond to the opportunities and perils in AI, gain insight, and participant-specific ideas for projects and applications to better position them in growing efforts in AI workforce development, and in their own outreach and support missions. Hear more and get excited by their idea to create an “AI Petting Zoo” where state library staff can experiment with AI products.

PDF of SlidesDownload
Posted on

State libraries to explore strategic use of AI around workforce development

February 1, 2024

AUSTIN, TX—The Collaborative Institute for Rural Communities & Librarianship (CIRCL) today announced the launch of the SLAAIT Project. The State Libraries and AI Technologies Working Group is a joint project of 14 state libraries and the Gigabit Libraries Network to understand the opportunities, challenges, and risks associated with AI and the library sector.

“Artificial Intelligence (AI) has already profoundly changed the way people find information, communicate, produce media, and learn about the world. AI will continue to change work; from automation in manufacturing, to how energy is distributed across a smart grid, to the use of generative AI to produce marketing, the workforce of our states will change,” according to the SLAAIT web site.

Participating state library agencies to date are from: Texas, Georgia, Iowa, New Jersey, Colorado, Washington, Hawaii, Delaware, New York, North Carolina, Arizona, Tennessee, Michigan and Ohio. Participation remains open and more states are anticipated to join. “It feels like we are at another seminal crossroads in libraries and access to information,” says Jennifer Nelson, New Jersey State Librarian.

Following the release of a federal executive order in October, an increasing number of state governments are also proposing or implementing new regulations and guidelines for the use of AI. This is creating a demand for strategic response from the state library agencies. “We’re so appreciative of Don and David’s leadership to ensure that Delaware Libraries, and all libraries,
can continue to stay ahead of the curve as technology evolves!” says Dr. Annie Norman, State Librarian of Delaware.

More information on the project can be found at https://slaait.circl.community

Coordinated by The University of Texas at Austin, the Collaborative Institute for Rural Communities & Librarianship is a think tank by, for, and of the rural library community and aligned partners including universities, government agencies and companies. https://circl.community

Posted on

Announcing the State Libraries and Artificial Intelligence Project: a CIRCL Working Group

CIRCL is creating a new working group with state libraries: State Libraries and AI Technologies or SLAIIT (like slate).

The prospectus calls for the creation of a limited term working group of state libraries and relevant stakeholders to explore the varied roles state libraries in the use of AI and in their support of efforts around workforce development in AI. Rather than a one-time event, the working group will be a facilitated process with CIRCL gathering data, building an environmental scan, and interviewing library staff to provide a focused explorations of the topic with participating state librarians. This work will result in state specific recommendations and findings.

The goal of the working group is better equipping state libraries to proactively respond to the opportunities and perils in AI. Through this process, state libraries will gain insight, and participant-specific ideas for projects and applications to better position them in growing efforts in AI workforce development, and in their own outreach and support missions.

Participation in the working group is through a one-time $10,000 program support fee. Funds from the program fees will support the work of CIRCL including development of an environmental scan, creation of an “AI Petting Zoo” where state library staff can experiment with AI products, and development of a development of state-specific set of recommendations by CIRCL experts and analysts. The work will take place over 6 months from the full funding of the working group by 10 participants.

The project will begin February 1st. If you are interested please contact David Lankes at rdlankes@utexas.edu

More information can be found here: https://circl.community/index.php/190-2/