Transcript University of Sheffield iSchool, 20 February 2013 Visitors and Residents: What Motivates Engagement with the Digital Information Environment? Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.

University of Sheffield iSchool,
20 February 2013
Visitors and Residents:
What Motivates Engagement
with the Digital Information
Environment?
Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph. D.
Senior Research Scientist
OCLC Research
[email protected]
Then & Now
• Then: The user built workflow
around the library
• Now: The library must build its
services around user workflow
• Then: Resources scarce, attention
abundant
• Now: Attention scarce, resources
abundant
(Dempsey, 2008)
Current Environment
• Challenges
• Budget cuts
• High retirement rates
• Hiring freezes
• Opportunity
• Best value for most use
• Understand how, why, &
under what circumstances
individuals use systems &
services
Visitors and Residents:
What Motivates Engagement with the Digital Information Environment?
• Funded by
• JISC
• OCLC
• Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D.
• Oxford University
• David White
• Alison Le Cornu, Ph.D.
• In partnership with
• University of North Carolina, Charlotte
• Donna Lanclos, Ph.D.
Why Visitors and Residents Project?
• If we build it, they will NOT come
• Shifting changes in engagement with information environment
• Effect of larger cultural changes influenced by Web
• New attitudes towards education
• Gap in user behaviour studies – need for longitudinal studies
• Understand motivations for using & expectations of technologies
& spaces in information environment
• Inform project & service design to improve engagement & uptake
http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/vandr/
Research Questions
•What are the most significant factors for novice & experienced
researchers in choosing their modes of engagement with the
information environment?
•Do individuals develop personal engagement strategies which
evolve over time & for specific needs & goals, or are the
educational contexts (or, in the context of this study, “educational
stages”) the primary influence on their engagement strategies?
•Are modes of engagement shifting over the course of time,
influenced by emergent web culture & the availability of “new”
ways to engage, or are the underlying trends & motivations
relatively static within particular educational stages?
Theoretical Framework
• Prensky
• Digital Natives & Digital
Immigrants
• Wilson
• Models in information behaviour
research
• Cool & Spink
• Information seeking in context
Visitors & Residents
Video: http://is.gd/vanrvideo
First Monday Paper: http://is.gd/vandrpaper
(White & Connaway, 2011)
Residents
• Significant online presence &
usage
• Collaborative activity online
• Contribute online
• Mobile device dependence
• >10 hours online/week
Visitors
• Functional use of technology
• Formal need
• Passive online presence
• Favor FtF interactions
• <6 hours online/week
Visitors & Residents
(White & Connaway, 2011-2012)
Phase 1
• Individual Interviews
• Emerging (secondary school/1st year
undergraduates
•
31 (16 US, 15 UK)
• Establishing (2nd-3rd year
undergraduates)
•
10 (5 US, 5 UK)
• Embedding (postgraduates, PhD
students)
•
10 (5 US, 5 UK)
• Experiencing (scholars)
•
10 (5 US, 5 UK)
• Completed data analysis
• Quantitative data:
•
Demographics, number of occurrences
of technologies, sources, & behaviours
• Qualitative data:
•
Themes & direct quotes
(White & Connaway, 2011-2012)
Phase I & 2: Participant Demographics
• 61 participants
15 secondary students
46 university students & faculty
34 females
27 males
38 Caucasian
5 African-American
2 Two or more
1 Asian
2 Hispanic
13 Unidentified
(White & Connaway, 2011-2012)
Academic Disciplines by Educational Stages
18
16
14
2
Unidentified
1
Undeclared
12
Double Major
10
8
3
8
6
4
2
3
4
Professions and Applied
Sciences
Formal Sciences
Natural Sciences
2
3
2
4
Social Sciences
2
1
1
1
1
Humanities
3
2
2
1
0
Emerging
Establishing
Embedding
Experiencing
Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013
.
Triangulation of Data
• Several methods:
• Semi-structured interviews (qualitative)
• Diaries (qualitative)
• Online survey (quantitative)
• Enables triangulation of data
(Connaway et al., 2012)
Diaries
• Ethnographic data collection
technique
• Get people to describe what
has happened
• Center on defined events or
moments
(Connaway & Powell, 2010)
Interviews
• Allows for
• Probing
• Clarifying
• Creating new questions
• Including focused questions
• Exploring new lines of inquiry
• Enables data collection for extended period of
time
(Connaway & Powell, 2010)
Participant Interview Questions
1. Describe the things you enjoy doing
with technology and the web each week.
2. Think of the ways you have used
technology and the web for your
studies. Describe a typical week.
3. Think about the next stage of your
education. Tell me what you think this
will be like.
Participant Interview Questions
4. Think of a time when you had a situation where you needed
answers or solutions and you did a quick search and made do
with it. You knew there were other sources but you decided not
to use them. Please include sources such as friends, family,
teachers, coaches, etc.
5. Have there been times when you were told to use a library or
virtual learning environment (or learning platform), and used
other source(s) instead?
6. If you had a magic wand, what would your ideal way of getting
information be? How would you go about using the systems and
services? When? Where? How?
(Connaway & Radford, 2005-2007)
(Dervin, Connaway, & Prabha, 2003-2005)
Surveys/Questionnaires
• Encourages frank answers
• Eliminates variation in the
question process
• Can collect large amount of
data in short period of time
• Delivery
• In-person
• Telephone
• Mail
• Email
• Online
• Point of contact
(Connaway & Powell, 2010)
Codebook
I. Place
II. Sources
III. Tools
IV. Agency
V. Situation/context
VI. Quotes
VII. Contact
VIII. Technology Ownership
IX. Network used
(White & Connaway, 2011-2012)
Codebook
I. Place
A. Internet
1. Search engine
a. Google
b. Yahoo
2. Social Media
a. FaceBook
b. Twitter
c. You Tube
d. Flickr/image sharing
e. Blogging
B. Library
1. Academic
2. Public
3. School (K-12)
C. Home
D. School, classroom, computer
lab
E. Other
(White & Connaway, 2011-2012)
Nvivo 9
• Qualitative research software
• Upload documents, PDFs, & videos
• Create nodes & code transcripts
• Merge files
• Queries
• Reports
• Models
(QSR International, 2011)
You have a last-minute project to complete.
Where would you go to get information?
ASK SOMEONE
GOOGLE
-Family
-Colleague
-Friend
-Librarian
-Professor
FACEBOOK SOMEONE
TEXT SOMEONE
-Family
-Colleague
-Friend
-Librarian
-Family
-Colleague
-Friend
-Librarian
-Professor
-Professor
Connaway for
OCLC Research.
2013.
Place & Educational Stage
120%
100%, n=10
100%
100%, n=10
94%, n=29
90%, n=9
90%, n=9
84%, n=26
80%, n=8
80%
70%, n=7
Google
Facebook
60%
50%, n=5
Twitter
50%, n=5
YouTube
40%, n=4
40%
30%, n=3
23%, n=7
20%
3%, n=1
0%
Emerging Interviews
Establishing Interviews
Embedding Interviews
Experiencing Interviews
Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013
.
“I always stick with the first
thing that comes up on
Google because I think
that’s the most popular site
which means that’s the
most correct.”
(USS1, Female, Age 17)
“Google doesn’t
judge me”
(UKF3, Male, Age 52)
Human Sources & Educational Stages
100%
90%, n=9
90%
81%, n=25
80%
70%
68%, n=21
70%, 7
60%
50%
48%, n=15
50%, n=5
50%, n=5
Friends/Colleagues
50%, n=5
Teachers/Professors
Peers
40%, n=4
Librarians
40%
40%, n=4
30%, n=3
30%
20%, n=2
20%
13%, n=4
10%, n=10
20%, n=20
10%
0%, n=0
Connaway for OCLC Research.
0%
Emerging Interviews
Establishing Interviews
Embedding Interviews
Experiencing Interviews
.
2013
The word “librarian” never
mentioned in original
interviews by Emerging
Stage participants as a
source of information
One participant referred to
“a lady in the library who
helps you find things”
(USU5, Male, Age 19)
Library=books
34 participants mention the
library equating with books
Digital Sources & Educational Stage
100%
90%, n=9
90%
80%
77%, n=24
70%, n=7
70%
60%
50%
48%, n=15
50%, n=5
50%, n=5
50%, n=5
Major Media Sites
Wikipedia
Retail
40%, n=4
40%, n=4
40%
Syllabus- and discipline-based sites
32%, n=10
30%
26%, n=8
20%, n=20
20%
10%
0%
Emerging Interviews
Establishing
Interviews
Embedding Interviews
Experiencing
Interviews
Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.
“It’s like a taboo I guess with all teachers, they
into Google
and see
whatthe
just “I
alljust
say type
– youitknow,
when they
explain
papercomes
they always
say, “Don’t use Wikipedia.”
up.” (UKS2)
(USU7, Female, Age 19)
Learning Black Market
Contact & Educational Stages
120%
100%, n=10
100%, n=10
100%, n=10
100%
84%, n=26
90%, n=9
80%
70%, n=7
70%, n=7
Face-to-Face
60%, n=6
Phone calls
60%
55%, n=17
IM, Chat
Email
52%, n=16
40%, n=4
40%
30%, n=3
Connaway for
OCLC Research.
2013.
20%
10%, n-1
0%
Emerging Interviews
Establishing Interviews
Embedding Interviews
Experiencing Interviews
Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.
Connaway for
OCLC Research.
2013.
Connaway for
OCLC Research.
2013.
Recommendations
• Begin educating early
• Market
• 1/3 of users don’t know services
available
• Provide a broad range of tools
• Simple interface
• Discovery & access
• Social networking sites
• Wikipedia
• Facebook
• Provide help at time of need
• Chat & IM
• Mobile technology
(Dervin, Connaway & Prabha, 2003-2006)
(De Rosa, 2005)
(Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2013)
Future Research
Digital Visitors & Residents
•Online survey
•Continue with diaries &
interviews
•Initial interviews with 12 new
Emerging Stage participants
• Monthly diaries with 6 new
Emerging Stage participants
References
Connaway, L. S., Dickey, T. J., OCLC Research., & Joint Information Systems Committee. (2010). The
digital information seeker: Report of the findings from selected OCLC, RIN, and JISC user
behaviour projects. Bristol, England: HEFCE.
Connaway, L. S., Lanclos, D., White, D. S., Le Cornu, A., & Hood, E. M. (2012). User-centered decision
making: A new model for developing academic library services and systems. IFLA 2012
Conference Proceedings, August 11-17, Helsinki, Finland.
Connaway, L. S., & Powell, R. R. (2010). Basic research methods for librarians. Santa Barbara, CA:
Libraries Unlimited.
Cool, C., & Spink, A. (2002). Issues of Context in Information Retrieval (IR): An Introduction to the
Special Issue. Information Processing & Management, 38, 5, 605-11.
Dempsey, L. (2008). Always on: Libraries in a world of permanent connectivity. First Monday, 14(1).
Retrieved from
http://www.firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2291/207
De Rosa, C. Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources: A Report to the OCLC Membership.
Dublin, OH: OCLC Online Computer Library Center, 2005. (p.1-8).
References
Dervin, B., Connaway, L. S., & Prabha, C. (2003-2005). Sense-making the information confluence: The
hows and the whys of college and university user satisficing of information needs. Funded by the
Institute for Museums and Library Services (IMLS). Retrieved from
http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/past/orprojects/imls/default.htm
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The interpretation of cultures: selected essays. New York: Basic Books, 6.
Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative
research. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co., 273.
Holton, D. (2010, March 19). The digital natives/digital immigrants distinction is dead or at least dying.
[Web log comment]. EdTechDev . Retrieved from http://edtechdev.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/thedigital-natives-digital-immigrants-distinction-is-dead-or-at-least-dying/
Kennedy, G., Judd, T. & Dalgarno, B. (2010). “Beyond natives and immigrants: Exploring types of net
generation students,” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 332–343.
Kvale, S. (1996). IntervVews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, Calif:
Sage Publications, 133-135.
McKenzie, J. (2007). Digital nativism, digital delusions, and digital deprivation. From Now On: The
Educational Technology Journal, 17 (2). Retrieved from http://www.fno.org/nov07/nativism.html
Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2013). Library services in the Digital Age. Retrieved from
http://libraries.pewinternet.org/2013/01/22/library-services/
#CNFAE16
References
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5). Retrieved from
http://www.marcprensky.com/writing
Prensky, M. (2006). Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 8-13.
Radford, M. L., & Connaway, L. S. (2005-2007). Seeking synchronicity: Evaluating virtual reference
services from user, non-user, and librarian perspectives. Funded by the Institute for
Museums and Library Services (IMLS). Retrieved from
http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/synchronicity/default.htm
Wasserman, S. (2012, June 18). The Amazon effect. The Nation. Retrieved from
http://www.thenation.com/article/168125/amazon-effect
White, D. S., & Connaway, L. S. (2011-2012). Visitors & residents: What motivates engagement with
the digital information environment. Funded by JISC, OCLC, and Oxford University.
Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/vandr/
White, D. S., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement.
First Monday, 16(9). Retrieved from
http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/3171/3049
Whyte, W. F. (1979). “On Making the Most of Participant Observation,” The American Sociologist
14 , 56-66.
Wilson, T. D. (1997). Information behaviour: an interdisciplinary perspective. Information
Processing and Management, 33(4), 551-572.
Wilson, T. D. (1999). Models in information behaviour research. Journal of Documentation, 55(3),
249-270.
#CNFAE16
Lynn Silipigni Connaway
[email protected]
Questions &
Discussion