Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The integration of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT-4o is redefining traditional workflows in library technical services, particularly in cataloguing and bibliographic functions. This study, therefore, investigates the awareness, use, and perceived challenges of ChatGPT-4o among cataloguers and bibliographers in Botswana, Nigeria, and South Africa. Using a phenomenological research design, six professionals attending the 5th Biennial International Conference of the Department of Library and Information Studies at the University of Botswana were purposively selected. Structured interviews were conducted, and data were analyzed through narrative analysis to uncover participants’ experiences. Findings revealed that all participants were aware of ChatGPT-4o and demonstrated varying degrees of self-taught application in cataloguing and bibliography. The tool was frequently used for MARC record generation, subject indexing, citation formatting, and bibliographic compilation. Participants highlighted substantial benefits, including enhanced speed, reduced workload, and improved thematic coverage. However, notable limitations such as AI hallucinations, lack of contextual sensitivity, internet dependence, and digital literacy gaps were also identified. The significance of this study lies in its empirical exploration of real-world experiences with ChatGPT-4o from cataloguing professionals in an African context, filling a crucial gap in existing literature. The study concludes that ChatGPT-4o holds significant promise as a complementary tool for technical service delivery but must be used with human oversight. It recommends policy development, staff training, and ethical guidelines for responsible integration into library workflows.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oladokun et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: