Archival Science

, Volume 4, Issue 3–4, pp 149–197 | Cite as

Building an Infrastructure for Archival Research

  • Anne Gilliland
  • Sue Mckemmish


This article chronicles the rapid expansion since 1990 of research within archival science and characterizes contemporary archival research culture. It examines the role and state of key factors that have led to the development of the existing research infrastructure, such as growth in doctoral education, forums for presenting and publishing research, the numbers and size of graduate archival education programs, availability of diverse funding for research, transdisciplinary and international research collaborations, and application of innovative research methods and tools appropriate for investigating increasingly complex and wide-ranging research questions. An Appendix articulates and names archival research methods, including those derived and adapted from other disciplines, with a view to adding to the “literary warrant” for archival research methods, promoting the rigorous application of research design and methods, and providing sources for the teaching of research methods for professional and research careers. The article concludes with recommendations about how to sustain and extend the emerging research front.


archival research culture research paradigms research design research methods 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Gilliland-Swetland, A., “Archival Research: A ‘New’ Issue for Graduate Education”, The American Archivist (Fall 2000): for explanations of grounded theory, narrative analysis, ethnography, case studies, and historiography as used in archival research.Google Scholar
  2. Williamson, K., Research Methods for Students, Academics and Professionals: Information Management and Systems, 2nd edn., (Wagga: CIS CSU, 2002): for extended discussion of theory building, grounded theory, ethnography, case studies, action research, systems development, surveys and historiography, and related methods and techniques as applied in information management research.Google Scholar

Action Research

  1. Cook, T., “Appraisal Methodology: Macro-Appraisal and Functional Analysis. Part A: Concepts and Theory; and Part B: Guidelines for Performing an Archival Appraisal on Government Records”, (2002)
  2. Heazlewood, J.,  et al. 1999“Electronic Records: Problem Solved? A report on the Public Record Office Victoria’s Electronic Records Strategy”Archives and Manuscripts27 623Google Scholar
  3. Hol, R.C., Vries, A.G. 1998PIVOT Down Under: A ReportArchives and Manuscripts268101Google Scholar
  4. McKernan, J. 1991Curriculum Action Research. A Handbook of Methods and Resources for the Reflective PractitionerKogan PageLondonGoogle Scholar
  5. McCutcheon, G. and Jurg, B., “Alternative Perspectives on Action Research”, Theory into Practice 24(3) (Summer 1990).Google Scholar
  6. Oosthuizen, M., “Action Research”, in Williamson, Chapter 8 (2002) pp. 141–158.Google Scholar


  1. Cox, R.J., “Searching for Authority: Archivists and Electronic Records in the New World At the Fin-de-Siecle”, First Monday (2000).Google Scholar
  2. Borgman, C., Furner, J. 2002“Scholarly Communication and Bibliometrics”Cronin, B. eds. Annual Review of Information Science and TechnologyInformation TodayMedford, NJ37236Google Scholar
  3. Egghe, L., Rousseau, R. 1990Introduction to Informetrics: Quantitative Methods in Library, Documentation and Information ScienceElsevierAmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  4. Gilliland-Swetland, Anne J. 1992“Archivy and the Computer: A Citation Analysis of North American Periodical Articles”Archival Issues1795112Google Scholar
  5. Yakel, E., “Seeking Information, Seeking Connections, Seeking Meaning: Genealogists and Family Historians”, Information Research10(1) (2004).Google Scholar

Case Studies

  1. Babbie, E. 2004The Practice of Social Research 10WadsworthBelmost, CAGoogle Scholar
  2. Bastian, J.A., Owning Memory: How a Caribbean Community Lost its Archives and Found Its History (Westport, Conn. and London: Libraries Unlimited, 2003), based on her PhD thesis, Defining Custody: The Impact of Archival Custody on the Relationship Between Communities and their Historical Records in the Information Age. A Case Study of the United States Virgin Islands (University of Pittsburgh, 1999).Google Scholar
  3. Cox, R.J.Wallace, D. eds. 2002Archives and the Public Good: Accountability and Records in Modern SocietyQuorum BooksWestport, ConnecticutGoogle Scholar
  4. Darke, P. and Shanks, G., “Case Study Research” in Williamson, Chapter 5 (2002), pp. 93–106.Google Scholar
  5. Ketelaar, E. 1997“The Difference Best Postponed? Cultures and Comparative Archival Science”Archivaria44142148Google Scholar
  6. Oliver, G., Information in Organisations: A Comparative Study of Information Cultures, PhD Thesis (Monash University, 2005).Google Scholar
  7. Wallace, D., The Public’s Use of Federal Recordkeeping Statutes to Shape Federal Information Policy: A Study of the PROFS Case, Ph.D. Dissertation (University of Pittsburgh, 1997).Google Scholar

Content, Discourse, Narrative and Conceptual Analysis

  1. Abbott, A. 2003Methods of Discovery: Heuristics for the Social SciencesNortonNew York, NYGoogle Scholar
  2. Babbie, E. 2004The Practice of Social Research 10WadsworthBelmost, CAGoogle Scholar
  3. Brothman, B. 1999“Declining Derrida: Integrity, Tensegrity, and the Preservation of Archives from Deconstruction”Archivaria486489Google Scholar
  4. Cook, T. 1997“What Is Past Is Prologue: A History of Archival Ideas Since 1898, and the Future Paradigm Shift”Archivaria431763Google Scholar
  5. Fairclough, N. 1989Language and PowerLongmanEssex, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  6. Frohmann, B. 1989“Discourse Analysis as a Research Method In Library and Information Science”Library and Information Science Research16119138Google Scholar
  7. Iacovino, L., The Ethical-Legal Context of Recordkeeping: Theoretical and Practical Perspectives, PhD Thesis (Monash University, 2002).Google Scholar
  8. Jackson, F., From Metaphysics to Ethics: A Defence of Conceptual Analysis (Oxford, 1998).Google Scholar
  9. Ketelaar, E., “Recordkeeping and Societal Power”, in S. McKemmish, M. Piggott, B. Reed and F. Upward (eds.), Archives: Recordkeeping in Society (Wagga-Wagga, Charles Sturt University, 2005) (Topics in Australasian Library and Information Studies, No. 24), pp. 277–298.Google Scholar
  10. Leiter, B., “Introduction”, in Leiter (ed.), The Future for Philosophy (Oxford, 2004) – re conceptual analysis.Google Scholar
  11. Neuendorf, K.A. 2002The Content Analysis GuidebookSageThousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  12. Roberts, C.W. eds. 1997Text Analysis for the Social Sciences: Methods for Drawing Inferences from Texts and TranscriptsLawrence ErlbaumMahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  13. West, M.D. eds. 2001aApplications of Computer Content AnalysisAblexWestport, CTGoogle Scholar
  14. West, M.D. eds. 2001bTheory, Method, and Practice in Computer Content AnalysisAblexWestport, CTGoogle Scholar


  1. Carucci, P. 1987Il Documento ContemporaneoLa Nuova Italia ScientificaRomeGoogle Scholar
  2. Duranti, L. 1998Diplomatics: New Uses for an Old ScienceSociety of American Archivists, Association of Canadian Archivists and Scarecrow PressLanham, MDGoogle Scholar
  3. Duranti, L., Eastwood, T., MacNeil, H. 2002Preservation of the Integrity of Electronic RecordsKluwer Academic PublishingDordrechtGoogle Scholar
  4. Duranti, L., MacNeil, H. 1996“The Protection of Electronic Records: An Overview of the UBC-MAS Research”Archivaria424667Google Scholar

Ethnography and Ethnology

  1. deMarrais, K.B. eds. 1998Inside Stories: Qualitative Research ReflectionsErlbaumMahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  2. Geertz, C. 1973The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected EssaysBasic BooksNew York, NYGoogle Scholar
  3. Gracy, K.F., The Imperative to Preserve: Competing Definitions of Value in the World of Film Preservation, Ph.D. Dissertation (Los Angeles: University of California, 2001).Google Scholar
  4. Hammersly, M., Atkinson, P. 1995EthnographyRoutledgeLondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Sanday, P.R. 1983“The Ethnographic Paradigm(s)”Maanen, J. eds. Qualitative MethodologySageBeverly Hills, CAGoogle Scholar
  6. Saule, S., “Ethnography”, Williamson, Chapter 9 (2002), pp. 173–99.Google Scholar
  7. Shankar, K., Scientists, Records, and the Practical Politics of Infrastructure, Ph.D. Dissertation (Los Angeles: University of California, 2002).Google Scholar
  8. Stoler, A.L. 2002“Colonial Archives and the Arts of Governance”Archival Science287109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Stringer, E.,  et al. 1997Community-Based Ethnography: Breaking Traditional Boundaries of Research, Teaching and LearningErlbaumMahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  10. Trace, C., Documenting School Life: Formal and Informal Imprints of a Fifth-grade Classroom, Ph.D. Dissertation (Los Angeles: University of California, 2004).Google Scholar
  11. Yakel, E., Recordkeeping in Radiology: The Relationships between Activities and Records in Radiological Processes, Ph.D. Dissertation (University of Michigan, 1997).Google Scholar
  12. Yakel, E. 2001The Social Construction of Accountability: Radiologists and Their Record-keeping PracticesThe Information Society17233245CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Expert Knowledge Analysis

  1. Giarratano, J.C. and Rile, G.D., Expert Systems: Principles and Programming, 4th edn.: Principles and Programming (Course Technology, 2004).Google Scholar
  2. Gilliland-Swetland, A.J., Development of an Expert Assistant for Archival Appraisal of Electronic Communications: An Exploratory Study, Ph.D. Dissertation (University of Michigan, 1995).Google Scholar

Grounded Theory

  1. Bantin, P.C. 1998“Developing a Strategy for Managing Electronic Records: The Findings of the Indiana University Electronic Records Project”The American Archivist61328364Google Scholar
  2. Bearman, D. 1994Electronic Evidence: Strategies for Managing Records in Contemporary OrganizationsArchives and Museum InformaticsPittsburghGoogle Scholar
  3. Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L. 1967The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative ResearchAldineChicagoGoogle Scholar
  4. Hedstrom, M. 1997“Building Record-Keeping Systems: Archivists are not Alone on the Wild Frontier”Archivaria44 4471Google Scholar
  5. Strauss, A., Corbin, J. 1990Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory, Procedures and TechniquesSageNewbury Park, CAGoogle Scholar
  6. Ellis, D. 1993“Modeling the Information – Seeking Patterns of Academic Researchers: A Grounded Theory”Library Quarterly63469486Google Scholar


  1. Cox, R.J. 2000Closing an Era: Historical Perspectives on Modern Archives and Records ManagementGreenwood Publishing GroupWestport, CTGoogle Scholar
  2. Johanson, G., “Historical Research”, in Williamson, Chapter 10 (2002), pp. 177–190.Google Scholar
  3. Ketelaar, E., Horsman, P., Thomassen, T. 2003“New Respect for the Old Order: The Context of the Dutch Manual”American Archivist66249270Google Scholar
  4. Piggott, M., “The History of Australian Recordkeeping: A Framework for Research”, Australian Library Journal (November, 1998): 343–354.Google Scholar

Literary Analysis

  1. Cumming, K., Purposeful Data: The Roles and Purposes of Recordkeeping Metadata, PhD Thesis (Monash University, 2005).Google Scholar
  2. Duff, W.M., The Influence of Warrant on the Acceptance and Credibility of the Functional Requirements for Recordkeeping, Ph.D. Dissertation (University of Pittsburgh, 1996).Google Scholar
  3. Duff, W. 1998“Harnessing the Power of Warrant”The American Archivist6188105Google Scholar
  4. Gilliland, A.J., Rouche, N., Evans, J. and Lindberg, L., “Towards a Twenty-First Century Metadata Infrastructure Supporting the Creation, Preservation and Use of Trustworthy Records: Developing the InterPARES2 Metadata Schema Registry”, Archival Science (2005, forthcoming).Google Scholar
  5. Young, H. eds. 1983The ALA Glossary of Library and Information ScienceAmerican Library AssociationChicagoGoogle Scholar

Model Building

  1. InterPARES Project, The Long-term Preservation of Authentic Electronic Records: The Findings of the InterPARES Project (2005); available at
  2. McKemmish, S., Acland, G., Ward, N., Reed, B. 1999“Describing Records in Context in the Continuum: The Australian Recordkeeping Metadata Schema”Archivaria48343Google Scholar
  3. Monash University, Recordkeeping Metadata Research Project,

Surveys, Interviews and Focus Groups

  1. Craig, B.L. 2000“Canadian Archivists: What Types of People are They?”>Archivaria50 7992Google Scholar
  2. Gilliland-Swetland, A.J. 2001“Popularizing the Finding Aid: Exploiting EAD to Enhance Online Browsing and Retrieval in Archival Information Systems by Diverse User Groups”Journal of Internet Cataloging4199225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Pederson, A., “Understanding Ourselves and Others” in S. Hicks and K. Crowley (eds.), Archives at Risk: Accountability, Vulnerability and Credibility Proceedings of the 1999 Conference and Annual General Meeting of the Australian Society of Archivists Inc., Brisbane, Queensland, 29–31 July 1999 (Canberra: Australian Society of Archivists Inc., 2002), pp. 61–93.Google Scholar
  4. Russell, L., “Indigenous Records and Archives: Mutual Obligations and Building Trust”, Archives and Manuscripts (May 2005, forthcoming).Google Scholar
  5. Tanner, K., “Survey Research”, in Williamson, Chapter 71 (2002), pp. 71–92.Google Scholar

Systems Analysis

  1. Bantin, P.C., Bernbom, G. 1996“The Indiana University Electronic Records Project: Analyzing Functions, Identifying Transactions, and Evaluating Recordkeeping Systems—A report on Methodology”Archives and Museum Informatics: Cultural Informatics Quarterly10246266Google Scholar
  2. Cook, T. 2004“Macro-appraisal and Functional Analysis: Documenting Governance Rather Than Government”Journal of the Society of Archivists (UK)25518Google Scholar
  3. State Records Authority NSW, DIRKS Manual: A Strategic Approach to Managing Business Information (National Archives of Australia, rev. July 2003),

Systems Design and Development

  1. Burstein, F., “Systems Development in Information Systems Research”, in Williamson, Chapter 7 (2002), pp. 147–158.Google Scholar
  2. Evans, J., McKemmish, S. and Bhoday, K., “Create Once, Use Many Times: The Clever Use of Recordkeeping Metadata for Multiple Archival Purposes”, Archival Science (2005, forthcoming).Google Scholar
  3. Gilliland-Swetland, A., Rouche, N., Evans, J. and Lindberg, L., “Towards a Twenty-First Century Metadata Infrastructure Supporting the Creation, Preservation and Use of Trustworthy Records: Developing the InterPARES 2 Metadata Schema Registry”, Archival Science (2005, forthcoming).Google Scholar
  4. Nunamaker, J.F, Chen, J.R. Minder and Purdin, Titus D.M., “Systems Development in Information Systems Research”, Journal of Management Information Systems 7(3) (Winter 1990–91): 89–106.Google Scholar

Theory Building

  1. Brown, R. Winter 1991–92“Records Acquisition Strategy and Its Theoretical Foundation: The Case for a Concept of Archival Hermeneutics”Archivaria33 3456Google Scholar
  2. Cook, T. 1992“Mind Over Matter: Towards a New Theory of Archival Appraisal”Craig, B. eds. The Archival Imagination: Essays in Honour of Hugh A. TaylorAssociation of Canadian ArchivistsOttawa3870Google Scholar
  3. Harris, V., “Law, Evidence and Electronic Records: A Strategic Perspective from the Global Periphery”, Comma, International Journal on Archives (1–2) (2001): 29–44.Google Scholar
  4. Hurley, C. 1995a“Ambient Functions – Abandoned Children to Zoos”Archivaria402139Google Scholar
  5. Hurley, C. 1995b“Problems with Provenance”Archives and Manuscripts23234259Google Scholar
  6. Hurley, C. 1998“The Making and Keeping of Records: (1) What are Finding Aids For?”Archives and Manuscripts265777Google Scholar
  7. Hurley, C. 2000“The Making and Keeping of Records: (2) The Tyranny of Listing”Archives and Manuscripts28823MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Lynham, S.A. 2002“The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied Disciplines”Advances in Developing Human Resources.4221241Google Scholar
  9. Nesmith, T. 1999“Still Fuzzy, But More Accurate: Some Thoughts on the ‘Ghosts’ of Archival Theory”Archivaria47136150Google Scholar
  10. Nesmith, T., “Seeing Archives: Postmodernism and the Changing Intellectual Place of Archives”, The American Archivist (Spring/Summer 2002): 24–41.Google Scholar
  11. Upward, F. 1996“Structuring the Records Continuum – Part One: Postcustodial Principles and Properties”Archives and Manuscripts24268285Google Scholar
  12. Upward, F. 1997“Structuring the Records Continuum, Part Two: Structuration Theory and Recordkeeping”Archives and Manuscripts251035Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Information StudiesUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Caulfield School of Information TechnologyMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations