Looks like no one added any tags here yet for you.
Criteria that define scholarly sources
Goes through peer review process
Summarizes research findings
Written by scholars for scholar
Includes citations
Respond directly to current events (?)
Criteria that define popular sources
Published quickly
Responds directly to current events
Can be read quickly
Summarizes research findings (?)
Includes citations
Title
Includes: concise description of what an article is about
Authors
Includes: A list of all of the authors of an article, along with each authors credentials
Abstract
The overall topic
The research problem and research questions investigated
The methods used to conduct the study
A brief summary of the authors findings
A description of the implications of these findings
Introduction
An introduction to the overall topic
Summarizes whats already been done on the topic & what gaps remain
Identifies specific research problem & research questions they investigated
Explains why this research problem/question is important to address
Lays out goals & objectives for their research
Literature Review
A synthesized review of what has already been done in this research area
Ends with identification of a specific gap they intend to address with their research
Methods
A description of overarching research design
Describes in detail the specific methods used to recruit participants for their study, to collect data from them, and to analyze this data
A rationale for using these particular methods
Good practice to include info about how the researcher protected study participants (e.g. informed consent, privacy)
Findings/Results
Subsection where authors describe their participants (how many, relevant demographic characteristics, etc…)
Moves on to actual findings - identifying answers to their research questions and/or central themes that emerged in their data
Various forms of evidence (e.g. statistics, verbatim quotes) to support their findings.
Conclusion
Author relating their findings back to initial goals and specific research questions
Description of the conclusions they drew based on their findings and the particular contributions their work has made
Discussion of the potential significance of their findings
Propose ideas for future research in the area
Reference List
An alphabetical list of the literature cited within the paper
Entries are usually formatted according to a particular citation style
Appendices
Full text of the survey administered to participants
A list of questions posed to interviewees (sometimes called “interview protocol”)
Guide that researchers developed to gives structure to a field observation they conducted (often called “observation guide”)
Script that authors developed as they conducted an experiment with their study participants
Validity
The extent to which our measuring procedures accurately measure what we intend to measure
Reliability
Replicability; measures repeated under the same conditions yield highly similar measurements
Triangulation
Collection of multiple types of data and/or use of multiple data collection/analysis techniques within one particular study
Great way to strengthen study design
Probing
Asking an interviewee to elaborate on their response to a question
Participatory Design
Researcher/designers actively involve the technology’s intended end-users in the design, from initial idea generation to prototyping and production
Convenience sampling
Finding participants based on who is the most available to the interviewer and who is willing to participate
Snowball sampling
Past participants in an experiment recruit future participants, and are useful for finding hard-to-reach participants or populations
Respect for persons
Participants recognized as autonomous individuals.
Beneficence
Do no harm.
Maximize possible benefits, minimize possible harms
Justice
Distributions of benefits and burdens of research
Informed consent
Information: provided all that is relevant in an understandable and researchable way
Comprehension: participants should be able to understand the information provided
Voluntariness: participants should not be under any pressure to participate in research (incl. coercion, excessive reward, influence, threatening to withdraw health services, etc.)
Assessment of risks & benefits
Benefits should outweigh risks
Must be communicated to participants in informed consent process
Selection of subjects
Individual Justice: participants chosen fairly and without bias, all research in participants favor
Social justice: burden and benefits equally shared
User Centered Design
Design that keeps the user and their needs at the center of the process throughout every stage
How do UX, accessibility, and usability affect each other?
An information technology is not usable if it is not accessible. Accessibility and usability influence the user’s experience (UX) as they attempt to interact with the technology
To be accessible, technologies must be…
“Usable in an equal manner by all users without relying on specific senses or abilities… [and] must be compatible with the assistive technologies that users may rely on”
Why does having accessibility on the internet matter?
Inaccessibility exacerbates existing inequities with regard to education, employment, and civic engagement opportunities
Digital Divide
The gap between those who have access to a computer and the Internet and those who do not
Digital Literacy
Having the cognitive and technical skills necessary to use the internet to fulfill one’s information needs
Digital Inclusion
People can both access and use information and communication technologies (ICTs)
Dervin’s Sense-Making Model/Theory
Central Assumption: discontinuity and how it affects our lives and choices
3 Concepts:
Situation: the events in a person's life that create the context for a lack of sense
gaps
Verbings: sense-making, sense-unmaking ( things that help the people make sense and cross the gap)
outcomes : what a person hopes to have after a person creates they’ve created a new sense of their situation
2 Behaviors:
gap-defining : this occurs when a person thinks they cant move forward because they don't make sense of their situation
Gap bridging: when a person figures how to make sense of things
Bates’ Berrypicking Model
Move from source to source (bushes or “patches”), taking pieces of information (berries) until another source is determined to be more useful
Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process Model
Change in thoughts & actions
Thoughts: ambiguous -> specificity
Actions: seeking relevant information -> seeking pertinent information
Pettigrew’s Information Ground
“An environment temporarily created by the behavior of people who have come together to perform a given task, but from which emerges a social atmosphere that fosters the spontaneous and serendipitous sharing of information”
Zipf’s Law
Definition: The idea that people will generally try to minimize effort where they can by minimizing the total amount of effort they put in to a task
Consequences: Often results in sacrificing credibility for accessibility
1900’s – World War II
Library Focus
Pivot: WWII
1990’s – Present
Expanded focus includes the whole environment
Disinformation
intentionally misstating the facts
Misinformation
getting the facts wrong
Satisficing
finding information that is just good enough
Optimizing
exhaustive searches
Relevant
Information that has to do with your topic
Pertinent
Information that fits with specific information need
Recall
What proportion of relevant items in the database were successfully retrieved
Maximizes? Comprehensive
Poor recall = missed relevant information
Precision
What proportion of the items retrieved are actually relevant
Maximizes? Relevance
Poor precision = information overload
Information Behavior Model & Theory
Model: Describe and/or predict how people advance through various stages as they interact with information in order to perform some type of task or activity
Theory: Explain why people do what they do (or not do) with regard to information
Differences: Models are often more specific and concrete, tend to precede or illustrate stories
Information
Anything that someone might perceive to be informative at some time
Information Behavior
“The totality of human behavior in relation to sources and channels of information, including both active and passive information seeking, and information use” (Wilson , 1999)
It encompasses
peoples interactions (and lack of interactions) with information
equations: behavior + verb = information behavior
Information Avoidance
Intentionally avoiding or delaying information that is freely accessible
Ranges: passive → active
Consequences
Positive
Avoiding fear or anxiety
Avoiding uncertainty
Maintaining hope
Negative
Unable to participate in making informed decisions
Offered less info by doctors
Treated paternalistically
Having/keeping limited information literacy
Information Access
The physical and/or cognitive freedom or ability to acquire information
perceived accessibility is just as (and perhaps more) important than actual accessibility
A lack of actual (or perceived) information can be functionally equivalent to a lack of access
Common findings
People are often willing to sacrifice information quality or credibility for convenience
Incognizance
Having an information need, but not being aware of it
Consequences
Unlikely to actively seek info pertaining to this need or be able to recognize the relevance of any information they do happen to come across
Serendipity
Searching for information on one topic and happening to come across information on another topic that is of interest to you
Supercounters
People are more “serendipity-prone”
Everyday Life Information Seeking (ELIS)
Information seeking outside of school or work
Learning Commons Model
Shift to user- & learner-centered and user-friendly model since 1980s
Role of a Librarian
Gatekeepers of information → “connectors and instructors on how to use advanced technology to accumulate knowledge” (Hadler, 2016)
Library Anxiety
“The feeling that one’s research skills are inadequate and that those shortcomings should be hidden. In some students, it’s manifested as an outright fear of libraries and the librarians who work there” (Mellon, 1986)
Librarians Axiom
Consistent finding that public library use increases during economic downturns
Mental Model
A person’s continuously evolving cognitive representation of a system that incorporates their beliefs about how the system works
A person’s mental model of a particular system guides his/her use of the system and is iteratively (re)informed by his/her interactions with the system across time
Users’ mental models are often messy and incomplete (Norman, 1983)
How students believe Google works
Students’ drawings exhibited a limited understanding of how Google actually works
People’s mental models of a system have been found to correlate with their (in)ability to make effective use of it
Recommendations and Limitations (Kodama et al.)
Recommendations
Educators need to teach students how search engines work
SE developers & interface designers need to make the actual search processes more transparent & trustworthy to users
Limitations
Instructions may have influenced students’ drawings and/or their verbal explanations of their drawings
Students’ verbal explanations may have been influenced by students who went before them
Participants may have had inadequate manual dexterity skills and/or verbal/written capabilities to accurately draw and describe their mental models of Google
Didn’t ask about any prior computing/digital literacy classes the students may have taken
Sample was relatively small & findings likely don’t generalize beyond this particular group of students
Legal Information Literacy
The fact that laypeople are not familiar with legal terminology is only part of the problem
Legal terminology difficult to understand – when people don’t understand what they are reading, they are likely to stop reading
Legal system is not user-friendly
Number of self-represented litigants has been steadily increasing over the past ~20 years, particularly in certain types of cases
Barriers to legal information access
Not familiar with legal terminology
legal terminology is difficult to understand
Legal system is not user friendly
Main ways to combat barriers experienced by lay people
Two recent sets of initiatives have been instrumental in helping to diminish the barriers to legal information access experienced by laypeople:
Use of plain language in legal materials
Development of self-help services
Consumer health information behavior (CHIB)
Encompasses consumers’ health-related information needs, as well as the activities in which they engage (or do not engage) in order to look for, manage, share, and make use of this information
Health information behavior equation
Health information + verb (or not) = Health information behavior
Health information preferences & challenges
Preferences:
Important role of information in enabling a person to stay healthy or cope with an illness
3 types of seeking practices
Active (reduces uncertainty)
Passive
Avoidant (maintains or increases uncertainty)
Challenges:
Incognizance
Having some particular information need, but being unaware that one has this need; lacks even a visceral sense that something is missing
Some may never develop this awareness or they may too late
May not recognize that symptoms mean anything = unlikely to seek info, unlikely to recognize relevance of info
Info Need → Info Seeking
Once need is recognized, must be able to identify & articulate that need to begin searching
Examples of potential barriers:
Insufficient health literacy
Lack of awareness, access, or knowledge of how to use / find trustworthy health information
Inability understand personal relevance, credibility, usefulness of info they may find
Info Seeking → Info Use
Once info is gathered, additional barriers may prevent putting that info to use
Must be able to understand, adapt, take action based on it
Health info ≠ “one size fits all”
Information use (or non-use) influences health trajectory, quality of life, potential / actual health outcomes
Health Justice
Health justice underscores the moral right of every individual to an equitable and sufficient capability to be healthy
Cannot achieve health justice without a fair distribution of resources and opportunities, particularly information
The WHO (2017) specifically mentions information as one of the underlying determinants of health
Does not exist but is a distant goal