6 On user studies and information needs.docx

6 On user studies and information needs.docx

《6 On user studies and information needs.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《6 On user studies and information needs.docx（13页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

6Onuserstudiesandinformationneeds

6.Onuserstudiesandinformationneeds

T.D.Wilson

PostgraduateSchoolofLibrarianshipandInformationScience,UniversityofSheffield,Sheffield,UK

Abstract

Purpose:

Apartfrominformationretrievalthereisvirtuallynootherareaofinformationsciencethathasoccasionedasmuchresearcheffortandwritingas“userstudies”.Withinuserstudiestheinvestigationof“informationneeds”hasbeenthesubjectofmuchdebateandnolittleconfusion.Theaimofthispaperistoattempttoreducethisconfusionbydevotingattentiontothedefinitionofsomeconceptsandbyproposingthebasisforatheoryofthemotivationsforinformation-seekingbehaviour.

Design/methodology/approach:

Thepaperdescribestheissuesofuserstudiesandinformationneedswithinthecontextofinformationscience.

Findings:

Thepaperfindsthattheproblemseemstolie,notsomuchwiththelackofasingledefinition,aswithafailuretouseadefinitionappropriatetothelevelandpurposeoftheinvestigation.

Originality/value:

Theanalysismaybeusedasaspringboardtoresearchbaseduponawider,holisticviewoftheinformationuser.

Keywords:

Informationscience,Informationretrieval,Userstudies

Papertype:

Researchpaper

Introduction

Apartfrominformationretrievalthereisvirtuallynootherareaofinformationsciencethathasoccasionedasmuchresearcheffortandwritingas“userstudies”.Withinuserstudiestheinvestigationof“informationneeds”hasbeenthesubjectofmuchdebateandnolittleconfusion.Theaimofthispaperistoattempttoreducethisconfusionbydevotingattentiontothedefinitionofsomeconceptsandbyproposingthebasisforatheoryofthemotivationsforinformation-seekingbehaviour.

Information

Partofthedifficultywith“informationneeds”lieswiththetroublesomeconcept“information”.Numerousdefinitionshavebeenevolved,seekingtodistinguish,forexample,among“data”,“information”and“knowledge”,andrecentlytherehavebeenattemptsatasingleconceptofinformationforinformationscience.

However,theproblemseemstolie,notsomuchwiththelackofasingledefinitionaswithafailuretouseadefinitionappropriatetothelevelandpurposeoftheinvestigation.Theword“information”isused,inthecontextofuser-studiesresearch,todenoteaphysicalentityorphenomenon（asinthecaseofquestionsrelatingtothenumberofbooksreadinaperiodoftime,thenumberofjournalssubscribedto,etc.）,thechannelofcommunicationthroughwhichmessagesaretransferred（aswhenwespeakoftheincidenceoforalversuswritteninformation）,orthefactualdata,empiricallydeterminedandpresentedinadocumentortransmittedorally.

Thesituationisfurthercomplicatedbythefactthatdistinctionsmayormaynotbemadeamong“facts”,“advice”and“opinion”.Thedistinction,ofcourse,isthatthefirstoftheseisassumed（notalwayscorrectly）tobefreeofvaluejudgements,whereasvaluejudgementsalmostcertainlyaffectadviceandopinion.

Thesemultipleusesoftheterm“information”causeconfusionbecauseresearcherssometimesfailtodistinguishbetweenonesenseandanother,orsimplyleavethereadertodiscoverwhichsenseismeantbyreadingthepaperorreport.Eventhenitissometimesunclearwhichofthesensestheresearcherhadinmindwhensettingtheresearchobjectives.

Userstudies

Figure1presentsawayofthinkingofthefield,“userstudies”;itsaimisnotto“model”information-seekingbehaviourbuttodrawattentiontotheinterrelationshipsamongconceptsusedinthefield.Thefiguresuggeststhatinformation-seekingbehaviourresultsfromtherecognitionofsomeneed,perceivedbytheuser.Thatbehaviourmaytakeseveralforms:

forexample,theusermaymakedemandsuponformalsystemsthatarecustomarilydefinedasinformationsystems（suchaslibraries,on-lineservices,Prestelorinformationcentres）,oruponsystemswhichmayperforminformationfunctionsinadditiontoaprimary,non-informationfunction（suchasestateagents’officesorcarsalesagencies,bothofwhichareconcernedwithselling,butwhichmaybeusedtoobtaininformationoncurrentprices,areasof“suitable”housing,ordetailsofcarsthatholdtheirsecond-handvalue）.

Alternatively,theusermayseekinformationfromotherpeople,ratherthanfromsystems,andthisisexpressedinthediagramasinvolving“informationexchange”.Theuseoftheword“exchange”isintendedtodrawattentiontotheelementofreciprocity,recognizedbysociologistsandsocialpsychologistsasafundamentalaspectofhumaninteraction.Intermsofinformationbehaviour,theideaofreciprocitymaybefairlyweakinsomecases（aswhenajuniorscientistseeksinformationfromaseniorbuthierarchicallyequalcolleague）butinothercasesmaybesostrongthattheprocessisinhibited,aswhenasubordinatepersoninahierarchyfearstorevealhisignorancetoasuperior.

Inanyoftheabovecasesofinformation-seekingbehaviour,“failure”maybeexperienced:

thisisindicatedinthediagramfortheuseofsystemsbut,ofcourse,itmayalsobeexperiencedwhenseekinginformationfromotherpeople.

Whateverthesourceoftheinformationitwillatsomepointbe“used”,ifonlyinthesenseofbeingevaluatedtodiscoveritsrelationshiptotheuser’sneed.That“use”maysatisfyorfailtosatisfytheneedand,ineitherevent,mayalsoberecognizedasbeingofpotentialrelevancetotheneedofanotherpersonand,consequently,maybe“transferred”tosuchaperson.

Althoughalloftheseareasareofpotentialinteresttothefieldofuserstudies,attentionhasbeengiveninthepastchieflytothedemandspeoplemakeuponformalinformationsystems.Curiously,informationuse（whichoughttopointmostdirectlytotheneedsexperiencedbypeople）isoneofthemostneglectedareas;and“informationexchange”asdefinedherehastendedtofallwithinthesphereofinterestofsociologistsandorganizationaltheoristsratherthanwithinthatofinformationscientists.

“Information”inthefiguremaybeunderstoodinanyofthesensesmentionedearlier.Thus,ininformationexchange,anindividualmaybelookingforfacts,adviceoropinions,andmayreceiveanyoftheseeitherinwritingororally.Sometimesthechannelitselfmaybeofoverridingsignificance,aswhenorallygivenadvicemaybepreferredoveranythinginwriting.Again,ausermaybeinterestedinaspecificdocumentasaphysicalentity,asintheexpressionofaneedtoviewvariantcopiesofanincunabulum.Ininformationtransferitmaybeafact,anopinionorapieceofadvicethatistransferredorally,oraphysicaldocument“containing”thefact,opinionoradvicemaybegiventoanotherperson.Wecanchoosetostudythefacts,ideas,adviceoropinions,orthenatureanddistributionofthedocumentary“containers”.Inanyevent,whentheterm“userstudy”isemployedthespecificsub-fieldshouldbespecified,andtheaspectoraspectsof“information”underconsiderationshouldbedefined.

Figure1.Amodelofinformationbehaviour

Informationneeds

Withinthefieldofuserstudiestheinvestigationof“informationneeds”haspresentedseeminglyintractableproblems.Ifwedateuserstudiesfrom1948andtheRoyalSocietyScientificInformationConference（RoyalSociety,1948）,withitsseveralsurveysofusers’information-seekingbehaviour,thentheprogresstowardssometheoreticalunderstandingoftheconceptof“informationneed”hasbeenslow.ThisfactisrecognizedbyvirtuallyeverycommentatoronthesubjectfromMenzel（1960）;andPaisley（1965）throughthevariousauthorsintheARISTvolumes,toFord’sreviewof1977.Aswellasdrawingattentiontothisfact,theauthorshavetriedtodiscoverwhyitissoandhavegenerallyconcludedthatthereasonliesininadequatemethodologyandthefailuretodoresearchthatis“cumulative”.Attentionhasalsobeenpaidtothedefinitionalproblemof“informationneed”[1]andthedifficultyofseparatingtheconceptfrom“wants”,“expresseddemand”,“satisfieddemand”andsoon.However,whilemuchofthisworkisveryuseful,theproblemremainsgenerallyunresolved.

Partly,thisistheresultofafailuretoidentifythecontextwithinwhichinformationneedsinvestigationsarecarriedout.Figure2[2]isanattempttoshowsomeofthepossiblecontexts.（Figure1maybethoughtofasasub-graphofFigure2,centredontheuser.）Itisdifficultinanytwo-dimensionaldiagramtoconveythecomplexityofthe“real”worldandabstractelementsofthatrealworld.The“universeofknowledge”,forexample,isanabstractconcept,whichembracesallknowledge-relatedobjects,eventsandphenomenaand,assuch,clearlyinteractswiththe“physicaluniverse”.Toshowthecomplexinteractionsofthephysicalandabstractuniverses,however,wouldinvolveamulti-dimensionaldiagramwhichwouldbeextremelydifficult,ifnotimpossible,toexpressuponasheetofpaper.Acceptingthatdifficulty,however,the“user’slifeworld”canbedefinedasthetotalityofexperiencescentredupontheindividualasaninformationuser.Withinthislife-worldoneimportantsub-worldwillbetheworldofwork,withinwhichwillexistvarious“referencegroups”withwhichtheuseridentifies:

fellowprofessionals,thepeergroupwithinanorganizationandsoon.

Figure2.Thecontextofinformationseeking

Theuserwillbeincontactwithavarietyof“informationsystems”,onlyoneofwhichisshowninthediagram,hencetheindicatedoverlapwiththeuserandhislife-world.Withintheinformationsystemtwosubsystemsareshown:

the“mediator”（generallyalivingsystem,i.e.ahumanbeing）andthe“technology”,usedhereinthegeneralsenseofwhatever