Studying Collaborative Information Seeking: Experiences with Three Methods

Part of the Computer Supported Cooperative Work book series (CSCW)

Abstract

Collaborative information seeking (CIS) has lately produced interesting empirical studies, describing CIS in real-life settings. While these studies explore how and why CIS manifests itself in different domains, discussions about how to study CIS have been scarce. The research area of CIS may, however, benefit from a discussion of methodological issues. This chapter describes the application of three methods for collecting and analyzing data in three CIS studies. The three methods are Multidimensional Exploration, used in a CIS study of students’ information behavior during a group assignment; Task-structured Observation, used in a CIS study of patent engineers; and Condensed Observation, used in a CIS study of information-systems development. The three methods are presented in the context of the studies for which they were devised, and the experiences gained using the methods are discussed. The chapter shows that different methods can be used for collecting and analyzing data about CIS incidents. Two of the methods focused on tasks and events in work settings, while the third was applied in an educational setting. Commonalities and differences among the methods are discussed to inform decisions about their applicability in future CIS studies and, more generally, to foster methodological discussions in CIS research.

Keywords

Collaborative information seeking Qualitative methods Observation Diaries 

References

  1. Brannen J (ed) (1992) Mixing methods: qualitative and quantitative research. Ashgate Publishing, BurlingtonGoogle Scholar
  2. Button G, Sharrock W (2009) Studies of work and the workplace in HCI: concepts and techniques. Morgan & Claypool, San RafaelGoogle Scholar
  3. Cleverdon C (1967) The cranfield tests on index language devices. ASLIB Proc 19:173–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dervin B (1983) An overview of sense-making research: concepts, methods and results to date. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the international association, DallasGoogle Scholar
  5. Fidel R, Pejtersen AM, Cleal B, Bruce H (2004) A multidimensional approach to the study of human-information interaction: a case study of collaborative information retrieval. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 55(11):939–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Foster J (2006) Collaborative information seeking and retrieval. In: Cronin B (ed) Annual review of information science and technology, vol 40. Information Today, Medford, pp 329–356Google Scholar
  7. Gallagher S, Zahavi D (2007) The phenomenological mind: an introduction to philosophy of mind and cognitive science. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Hansen P (2011) Task-based information seeking and retrieval in the patent domain. Processes and relationships. Doctoral thesis, Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1631Google Scholar
  9. Hansen P, Järvelin K (2000) The information seeking and retrieval process at the Swedish Patent- and Registration Office. Moving from lab-based to real life work-task environment. In: Kando N, Leong M-K (eds) Proceedings of the SIGIR 2000 workshop on patent retrieval. ACM SIGIR, Athens, pp 43–53Google Scholar
  10. Hansen P, Järvelin K (2005) Collaborative information retrieval in an information-intensive domain. Inf Process Manag 41(5):1101–1119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hertzum M (2000) People as carriers of experience and sources of commitment: information seeking in a software design project. New Rev Inf Behav Res 1:135–149Google Scholar
  12. Hertzum M (2002) The importance of trust in software engineers’ assessment and choice of information sources. Inf Organ 12(1):1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hertzum M (2008) Collaborative information seeking: the combined activity of information seeking and collaborative grounding. Inf Process Manag 44(2):957–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hyldegård J (2006a) Collaborative information seeking – exploring Kuhlthau’s information search process-model in a group-based educational setting. Inf Process Manag 42(1):276–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hyldegård J (2006b) Using diaries in group based information behavior research – a methodological study. Information interaction in context. In:Proceedings of the 1st IIiX symposium on information interaction in context, Royal School of Library and Information Science, 18–20 Oct 2006, pp 261–274Google Scholar
  16. Hyldegård J (2009a) Beyond the search process: exploring group members’ information behaviour in context. Inf Process Manag 45(1):142–158. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2008.05.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hyldegård J (2009b) Personality traits and group-based information behaviour: an exploratory study. Inf Res 14(2): paper 402. Available from 25 May 2009 at http://InformationR.net/ir/14-2/paper402.html
  18. Ingwersen P, Järvelin K (2005) The turn: integration of information seeking and retrieval in context. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  19. Jurgens J, Hansen P, Womser-Hacker C (2012) Going beyond CLEF_IP: the ‘reality’ for patent searchers? In: Catarci T et al (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd international conference of the CLEF initiative, CLEF 2012, Rome, Sept 2012, pp 30–35Google Scholar
  20. Kuhlthau CC (1991) Inside the search process: seeking meaning from the users perspective. J Am Soc Inf Sci 42(5):361–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kuhlthau CC (2004) Seeking meaning – a process approach to library and information services, 2nd edn. Libraries Unlimited, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Kuhlthau CC, Heinström J, Todd, RJ (2008) The ‘information search process’ revisited: is the model still useful? Inf Res 13(4): paper 355. Available at http://InformationR.net/ir/13-4/paper355.html
  23. Lazar J, Feng JH, Hochheiser H (2010) Research methods in human-computer interaction. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  24. Lofland J, Snow D, Anderson L, Lofland LH (2006) Analyzing social settings: a guide to qualitative observation and analysis, 4th edn. Wadsworth, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  25. McGrath J (1981) Dilemmatics: the study of research choices and dilemmas. Am Behav Sci 25(2):179–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shah C (2014) Collaborative information seeking. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 65(2):215–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Siegel S, Castellan NJ Jr (1988) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioural sciences, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. Strauss A, Corbin J (1998) Basics of qualitative research – techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. Voorhees EM (2002) The philosophy of information retrieval evaluation. In: Evaluation of cross-language information retrieval systems. Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 2406. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 355–370Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jette Hyldegård
    • 1
  • Morten Hertzum
    • 1
  • Preben Hansen
    • 2
  1. 1.Royal School of Library and Information ScienceUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Computer and Systems SciencesStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations