Advertisement

Group Information-Seeking Behavior in Emergency Response

An Investigation of Expert/Novice Differences
  • Q. Gu
  • D. Mendonça
Part of the NATO Science for Peace and Security Series C: Environmental Security book series (NAPSC)

Abstract

Emergencies—whether natural or technological, random or human-induced—may bring profound changes to organizations, the built environment, and society at large. These changes create the need for reliable information about the emergency and its impacts, and thus require responding organizations to seek and process information from an evolving range of sources. By understanding how skilled versus novice response personnel search for information in emergencies, we may begin to understand how to support and train for skillful information seeking in situations characterized by risk, time constraint, and complexity. This study develops a hypothesized model of information-seeking behavior in emergency response and evaluates it using data from expert and novice groups addressing simulated emergency situations. The results suggest that experts maintain breadth in the extent of their information seeking, despite increasing time pressure. Novices, on the other hand, decrease the extent of their search under increasing time pressure. Both expert and novice groups show a decreasing effort in information seeking; moreover, effort devoted to search for common and unique information decreases over time.

Keywords

Time Pressure Task Difficulty Expert Group Emergency Response Information Seek 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ahituv, N., Igbaria, M. and Sella, A. “The effects of time pressure and completeness of information on decision making,” Journal of Management Information Systems, 15(2), 153–172, Fall 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ben Zur, H. and Breznitz, S. J. “The effect of time pressure on risky choice behavior,” Acta Psychologica, 47, 89–104, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benbasat, I. and Taylor, R. N. “Behavioral aspects of information processing for the design of management information systems,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 12(4), 439–450, July–August 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bonner, B. L., Baumann, M. R. and Dalai, R. S. “The effects of member expertise on group decision-making and performance,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88(2), 719–736, July 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Campbell, D. J. “Task complexity: a review and analysis,” Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 40–52, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chase, W. G. and Simon, H. A. “Perception in chess,” Cognitive Psychology, 1, 33–81, 1973.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dennis, A. R., Hilmer, K. M., Taylor, N. J. and Polito, A. “Information exchange and use in GSS and verbal group decision making: effects of minority influence,” 30th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, Hawaii, USA, 2, pp. 84–93, January 03-06, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dennis, A. R. “Information exchange and use in group decision making: you can lead a group to information, but you can’t make it think,” MIS Quarterly, 20(4), 433–457, December 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Durham, C. C., Locke, E. A., Poon, J. M. L. and McLeod, P. L. “Effects of group goals and time pressure on group efficacy, information-seeking strategy, and performance,” Human Performance, 13(2), 115–138, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Earley, C. “The influence of information, choice and task complexity upon goal acceptance, performance, and personal goals,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 481–491, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ellis, D. and Haugan, M. “Modeling the information seeking patterns of engineers and research scientists in an industrial environment,” Journal of Documentation, 53(4), 384–403, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Foster, A. “A nonlinear model of information-seeking behavior,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(3), 228–237, February 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Grønhaug, K. and Haukedal, W. “Experts and novices in innovative unstructured tasks: the case of strategy formulation,” Creativity and Innovation Management, 4(1), 4–13, March 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huber, V. “Effects of task difficulty, goal setting and strategy on performance of a heuristic task,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 492–504, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P. and Simon, H. A. “Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems,” Science, 208, 1335–1342, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leckie, G. J., Pettigrew, K. E. and Sylvain, C. “Modeling the information seeking of professionals: a general model derived from research on engineers, health care professionals, and lawyers,” Library Quarterly, 66(2), 161–193, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Littlepage, G., Robison, W. and Reddington, K. “Effects of task experience and group experience on group performance, member ability, and recognition of expertise,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(2), 133–147, February 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Maule, A. J., Hockey, G. R. J. and Bdzola, L. “Effects of time-pressure on decision-making under uncertainty: changes in affective state and information processing strategy,” Acta Psychologica, 104, 283–301, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meho, L. I. and Tibbo, H. R. “Modeling the information-seeking behavior of social scientists: Ellis’s study revisited,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 54(6), 570–587, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mendonça, D. “Decision support for improvisation in response to extreme events,” Decision Support Systems 43(3) 952–967, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mendonça, D., Beroggi, G.E.G. and Wallace, W.A. “Decision support for improvisation during emergency response operations,” International Journal of Emergency Management, 1(1), 2001.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mendonça, D. and Wallace, W.A. “A cognitive model of improvisation in emergency management,” IEEE Systems, Man and Cybernetics: Part A, 37(4), 547–561, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ordonez, L. and Lehman Benson, I. “Decisions under time pressure: how time constraint affects risky decision making,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71(2), 121–140, August 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Parks, C. D. and Cowlin, R. A. “Acceptance of uncommon information into group discussion when that information is or is not demonstrable,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66(3), 307–315, June 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Propp, K. M. “Information utilization in small group decision making: a study of the evaluative interaction model,” Small Group Research, 28(3), 424–453, August 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ramirez, A. Jr., Walther, J. B., Burgoon, J. K. and Sunnafrank, M. “Information-seeking strategies, uncertainty, and computer-mediated communication: toward a conceptual model,” Human Communication Research, 28(2), 213–28, April 2002.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Saito, H. and Miwa, K. “A cognitive study of information seeking processes in the www: the effects of searcher’s knowledge and experience,” Second International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering, Kyoto, Japan, 1, pp. 0321–0330, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Simon, D. P. and Simon, H. A. “Individual differences in solving physics problems,” In R. S. Siegler (Ed.), Children’s Thinking: What Develops? Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1978.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stasser, G., Vaughan, S. I. and Stewart, D. D. “Pooling unshared information: the benefits of knowing how access to information is distributed among members,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 102–116, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stasser, G., Taylor, La. A. and Hanna, C. “Information sampling in structured and unstructured discussions of three- and six-person groups,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 67–78, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Taylor, M. S. “The motivational effects of task challenge: a laboratory investigation,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 27, 255–278, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wai-yi, B. C. “An information seeking and using process model in the workplace: a constructivist approach,” Asian Libraries, 7(12), 375–390, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Weenig, M. W. H. and Maarleveld, M. “The impact of time constraint on information search strategies in complex choice tasks,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 23(6), 689–702, December 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wilson, T.D. “Human information behavior,” Information Science, 3(2), 49–56, 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Q. Gu
    • 1
  • D. Mendonça
    • 1
  1. 1.Information Systems DepartmentNew Jersey Institute of TechnologyNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations