top of page



  • Oltmann, S. M. (Ed.). (2023). The fight against book bans: Perspectives from the field. Libraries Unlimited.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2019). Practicing intellectual freedom in libraries. Libraries Unlimited.

Refereed Articles

  • Espinoza Vasquez, F., & Oltmann, S. M. (Under review). Information precarity in post-Maria Puerto Rico: Extending the information marginalization framework.

  • Oltmann, S. M., Kitzie, V., & Barriage, S. (Accepted). ‘For me, it is an intellectual freedom issue’: Drag storytimes, neutrality, and ALA core values. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science.

  • Kitzie, V., Floegel, D., Barriage, S., & Oltmann, S. M. (2022). How visibility, hypervisibility, and invisibility shape library staff and drag performer perceptions of and experiences with drag storytimes in public libraries. Library Quarterly, 92(3), 215-240.

  • Oltmann, S. M., Samek, T., & Cooke, L. (2022). Intellectual freedom: Waving and wavering across three national contexts. IFLA Journal, 48(3), 439-448.

  • Greenhalgh, S. P., Krutka, D. G., & Oltmann, S. M. (2021). Gab, Parler, and (mis)educational technologies: Reconsidering informal learning on social media platforms. Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 10(3). *Winner of McJulien Scholar Award from the Culture, Learning and Technology division of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

  • Barriage, S. Kitzie, V., Floegel, D., & Oltmann, S. M. (2021). Public library staff perceptions of and experiences with drag queen storytimes. Children and Libraries, 19(2), 14-22. *Nominated for Eli M. Oboler Award from American Library Association.

  • Espinoza Vasquez, F., Proferes, N., Cooper, T., & Oltmann, S. M. (2021). Going rogue: Reconceptualizing government employees’ contentious politics on Twitter. First Monday, 26(6). Available at:

  • Oltmann, S. M., Knox, E. J. M., & Peterson, C. (2021). The significance of access to information—and the challenges it faces in librarianship. Library Philosophy and Practice, March 2021. Article #5094. Available at:

  • von Wiegen, L., & Oltmann, S. M. (2020). A different democratic divide: How the current U.S. online court record system exacerbates inequality. Law Library Journal, 112(2), 257-273.

  • Oltmann, S. M., Cooper, T., & Proferes, N. (2020). How Twitter’s affordances empower dissent and information dissemination: An exploratory study of the rogue and alt government agency Twitter accounts. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3). Article 101475.

  • Oltmann, S. M., & Reynolds, S.D. (2020). When libraries aren’t challenged: Librarians discuss a lack of patron challenges to their collections. Journal of Research on Libraries & Young Adults, 11(2). Available at:

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2019). Important factors in Midwestern public librarians’ views on intellectual freedom and collection development (Part II). Library Quarterly, 89(2), 156-172.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2018). Important factors in Midwestern public librarians’ views on intellectual freedom and collection development (Part I). Library Quarterly, 89(1), 2-15.
    Knox, E. J. M., & Oltmann, S. M. (2018). Social responsibility, censorship, and the ALA: The 2015 Banned Books Week controversy. Library Quarterly, 88(1), 5-22.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2018). Ethics, values, and intellectual freedom in school libraries. School Libraries Worldwide, 24(1), 71-86.

  • Peterson, C., Oltmann, S. M., & Knox, E. J. M. (2017). The inconsistent work of web filters: Mapping information access in Alabama public schools and libraries. International Journal of Communication, 11, 4583-4609.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2017). Intellectual freedom in academic libraries: Surveying deans about its significance. College and Research Libraries, 78(6), 741-760.

  • Oltmann, S. M., Peterson, C., & Knox, E. J. M. (2017). Analyzing challenges to library materials: An incomplete picture. Public Library Quarterly, 36(4), 274-292.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2016). The paradox of shock: Artists’ experience of censorship. Journal of Information Ethics, 25(2), 59-76.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2016). “For all the people”: Public library directors interpret intellectual freedom. Library Quarterly, 86(3), 290-312.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2016). Qualitative interviews: A methodological discussion of the interviewer
    and respondent context. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 17(2). Available at:

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2016). Public librarians’ views on collection development and censorship. Collection Management, 41(1), 23-44.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2016). Intellectual freedom and freedom of speech: Three theoretical perspectives. Library Quarterly, 86(2), 153-171.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2016). “They kind of rely on the library”: School librarians serving LGBT students. Journal of Research on Libraries and Young Adults, 7(1). Available at:

  • Oltmann, S. M., Knox, E. J. M., Peterson, C., & Musgrave, S. (2015). Using open records laws to conduct research. Library & Information Science Research, 37(4), 323-328.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2015). Dual use beyond the life sciences: An LIS perspective. Library & Information Science Research, 37(3), 176-188.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2015). Variables related to school media center LGBT collections. Libri, 65(1), 25-33.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2015). Dual use research: Investigation across multiple science disciplines. Science & Engineering Ethics, 21(2), 327-341.

  • Oltmann, S. M. (2015). Data, censorship, and politics: Analyzing the restricted flow of information in federal scientific policy development. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(1), 144-161.

  • Shachaf, P., Oltmann, S. M., & Horowitz, S. (2008). E-quality in virtual reference services: Evaluation of service equality. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(4), 535-550.

Current/Upcoming Research Projects:

  • Study of preservation of and access to AIDS-era LGBTQ voices in archives. 

  • Investigation of how social media affords civil liberties, through interviews with the local Latino community.

  • Study of individuals who’ve been listed on Professor Watchlist, a rightwing site which targets people who supposedly push liberal agendas in colleges and universities.

  • Examination of why people choose to take extra steps to encrypt their email, hard drives, etc. to protect their privacy, using an affordances framework.

bottom of page