Volume 7, Issue 3 (12-2020)
Human Information Interaction 2020, 7(3): 50-65 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
pourkhalil N, koohi Rostami M. Analysis of information behavior paradigms: past and present. Human Information Interaction 2020; 7 (3)
URL: http://hii.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2937-en.html
URL: http://hii.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2937-en.html
public library institution
Abstract: (3086 Views)
Introduction: Information behavior in knowledge and information science is seen as a fundamental human behavior that has been studied extensively thus far. This study include different approaches and perspectives that examined information behavior. The purpose of this article is to investigate the paradigm shift in information behavior by using the texts of this research ground.
Methodology: The study was directed via library method with an analytical approach. After reviewing previous studies with the intention of identifying the dominant paradigms of information behavior.
Findings: Findings show that information behavior studies fell into two main paradigms of old and new. The old paradigm focuses on Shannon's theories of information, and the new paradigm emphasizes interdisciplinary relationships. In the new paradigm, cognitive, sociological, and multifaceted approaches could be defined.
Conclusion: Information behavior is an innate behavior that occurs in the social environment. It is influenced by various factors. like many human characteristics, is a behavior that does not occur in a vacuum. This behavior can be defined in interaction with information, human beings and society. Thus, it can have a wide and multifaceted aspects. This behavior is also a division of social sciences that can be examined under different paradigms. In social sciences, unlike natural sciences many meta-theories may go hand in hand. Sometimes a meta-theory simply disappears, and other times it may grow, evolve, and rekindle the interests of researchers. So, the evolution of information behavior research shows the combination of disciplines and interdisciplinary theories and new relationships in understanding human information behavior.
Methodology: The study was directed via library method with an analytical approach. After reviewing previous studies with the intention of identifying the dominant paradigms of information behavior.
Findings: Findings show that information behavior studies fell into two main paradigms of old and new. The old paradigm focuses on Shannon's theories of information, and the new paradigm emphasizes interdisciplinary relationships. In the new paradigm, cognitive, sociological, and multifaceted approaches could be defined.
Conclusion: Information behavior is an innate behavior that occurs in the social environment. It is influenced by various factors. like many human characteristics, is a behavior that does not occur in a vacuum. This behavior can be defined in interaction with information, human beings and society. Thus, it can have a wide and multifaceted aspects. This behavior is also a division of social sciences that can be examined under different paradigms. In social sciences, unlike natural sciences many meta-theories may go hand in hand. Sometimes a meta-theory simply disappears, and other times it may grow, evolve, and rekindle the interests of researchers. So, the evolution of information behavior research shows the combination of disciplines and interdisciplinary theories and new relationships in understanding human information behavior.
Keywords: Information Behavior, Information Behavior Paradigm, User-oriented Paradigm, Sociological Approach, Multifaceted Approach
References
1. Bates, M. J. (2008). An introduction to meta-theories, theories and patterns. Translated by Gholam Heydari. Library and Information Sci-ence. (44); 185-207. (Persian)
2. Beheshti, J., Large, A. (2015). New Generation Information Behavior: Children and Adolescents of the 21st Century. Translated by Mansour Koohi Rostami, Neda Pourkhalil and Maryam Fallah. Hamedan: Sepehr Danesh publishing. (Persian)
3. Bennett, S. (2009). Libraries and Learning: A History of Paradigm Change. Portal Libraries and the Academy. 9(2); 181-197. [DOI:10.1353/pla.0.0049]
4. Bird, A. (2000). Thomas Kuhn. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [DOI:10.1017/UPO9781844653065]
5. Blake, Reed H.; Haroldsen, Edwin O. (2000). A Taxonomy of Concepts in Communication. Translate by Masood Avhadi. Tehran: sorosh. (Persian)
6. Buckland, M.K. (2012). What kind of science can information science be? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(1); 1-7. [DOI:10.1002/asi.21656]
7. Budd, J. M., Hill, H. (2007). The cognitive and social lives of paradigms in information science. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS/Actes du congrès annuel de l'ACSI.
8. Cassin, B. (2016). Special Issue with the Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy. 30 (3); 242-266. [DOI:10.5325/jspecphil.30.3.0242]
9. Cool, C. (2001). The Concept of Situation in Information Science. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. 35; 5-42.
10. Cronin, B. (2008). the sociological turn in information science. Journal of Information Science. 34(4); 465-475. [DOI:10.1177/0165551508088944]
11. Davarpanah, M. (2004). Paradigm and information retrieval. Library and Information Science. (27); 2-14. (Persian)
12. David, M. (2005). Science in society. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. [DOI:10.1007/978-0-230-80204-9]
13. Fisher, K., Ardels, S., McCachney, L. (2008). Theories of information behavior. Translated by Firoozeh Zare Farashbandi, Mohsen Haji Zein Al-Abedini, Gholam Heidari, and Leila Maktabifard. Edited by Zahed Bigdeli. Tehran: Librarian (Persian).
14. Hjørland, B. (2015). Theoretical development of information science: a brief history. Retrived from: https://goo. Gl/TAVcFD.
15. Jamali, H. R. (2005). The book of theories of information behavior. Webology. 2(4). Retrived from: www.researchgate.net/ublication/26414596-review-of-theories-of-information-behavior
16. Jarvelin, K., Vakkari, p. (1993). The evolution of library and information science 1965-1985. Information Proccessing and management. 29(1); 129-144. Retrived from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/030645739390028C [DOI:10.1016/0306-4573(93)90028-C]
17. Julien, H., Duggan, J. (2000). "A Longitudinal Analysis of the Information Needs and Uses Literature." Library and Information Science Research. 22(3); 291-309. [DOI:10.1016/S0740-8188(99)00057-2]
18. Katuli-Munyoro, P., Mutula, S. (2018). Awareness of, and Attitudes towards the Paradigm Shifts among Library and Information Science (LIS) Faculty Staff in Zimbabwe. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 44(1); 25-32. [DOI:10.1016/j.acalib.2017.12.007]
19. Khalilian, s., Shabani, A. (2020). Emotions and information seeking: how does emotion manifest in information seeking behavior? Human Information Interaction. 6(4); 65-77 (Persian)
20. Khandan, M (2011). Library and information and the concept of paradigm in the philosophy of science of Thomas Cohen. Information Research and Public Libraries. (67); 623-648. (Persian)
21. Kovaravi, R., Momeni, E., Zayn Al-Abedini, M. (2015). Investigating the relationship between cognitive and metacognitive strategies with information seeking behavior. Journal of Scien-tific Studies. 2 (5): 59-78. (Persian)
22. Lopatovska, I. (2009). Emotional aspects of the online information retrieval process. Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, School of Communication, Information and Library Studies, The State University of New Jersey.
23. Mansoorian, Y. (2012). Current Approaches and Trends in Information Behavior Studies in an Interview with Professor Sanda Ardels. Book of the Month General.16 (3); 4-6. (Persian)
24. Mellon, C. A. (1988). Attitudes: the forgotten dimension in library instruction. Library Journal, 113(14); 137-139.
25. Morgan, D.L. (2007). Paradigms Lost and Pragmatism Regained Methodological Implications of Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1 (1), 48-76 [DOI:10.1177/2345678906292462]
26. Murugan, K., Ravi, S., Surianarayanan, S. (2014, February). Library and Information Science Research New Paradigm and Trends. National Conference on Research Trends and New Paradigms in Library and Information Science, At Bharathiyar University, Coimbatore.
27. Nahl, D., Bilal, D. (Eds.). (2007). Information and emotion: The emergent affective paradigm in information behavior research and theory. Information Today, Inc.
28. Nowkarizi, Mohsen, Narmenji, Seyyed Mahdi (2019). The Foundamentals of communicology. Tehran: samt. (Persian)
29. Okasha, S. (2008). Philosophy of Science. Translated by Hooman Panahande. Tehran: Contemporary Culture publishing. (Persian)
30. Pandita, R., BR, R (2013, February). Paradigm Shift in Library Services and Activities: Change Agents Thereof. In 58TH ILA International Conference (p. 31).
31. Percival, W. K. (1976). The applicability of Kuhn's paradigms to the history of linguistics. Language, 285-294. [DOI:10.2307/412560]
32. Pettigrew, K. E., Fidel, R., Bruce, H. (2001). Conceptual frameworks in information behavior. Annual review of information science and technology (ARIST). 35; 43-78.
33. Pettigrew, K. E., McKechnie, L. (2001). The use of theory in information science research. Journal of the American society for information science and technology. 52(1); 62-73.
https://doi.org/10.1002/1532-2890(2000)52:1<62::AID-ASI1061>3.0.CO;2-J [DOI:10.1002/1532-2890(2000)52:13.0.CO;2-J]
34. Shaghaghi M. (2019). Philosophical Approach to Autonomy and a scale for Measuring Ethical Autonomy of Public Librarians . Research on Information Science & Public Libraries. 25 (2);191-231.
35. Spink, A. (2010). Information behavior: An evolutionary instinct. Springer Science & Business Media. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-11497-7]
36. Spink, A. (2013). Information Behavior: An Evolutionary Instinct. Translated by Zahed Bigdeli, Fatemeh Rafiei Nasab. Tehran: Librarian publishing (Persian)
37. Toulmin, S. E. (1970). Does the distinction between normal and revolutionary science hold water? In Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. Vakkari, P. (1999). Task Complexity, Problem Structure and Information Actions: Integrating Studies on Information Seeking and Retrieval. Information Processing and Management. 35 (6); 819-837. [DOI:10.1016/S0306-4573(99)00028-X]
39. Wersig, G. (2003). Information theory. In: Feather J and Sturges P (eds.) International encyclopedia of library and information science. London & New York: Routledge.
40. White, R. W., Roth, R. A. (2009). Exploratory Search: Beyond the Query-Response Paradigm. Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval and Services. San Rafael, CA: Morgan and Claypool. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-031-02260-9]
41. Wilson, T. D. (1981). On User Studies and Information Needs. Journal of Documentation. 37 (1); 3-15. [DOI:10.1108/eb026702]
42. Wilson, T. D. (2000). Human information behavior. Informing science. 3(2); 49-56. Retrived from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tom_Wilson25/publication/270960171_Human_Information_Behavior/links/57d32fe508ae601b39a42875/Human-Information-Behavior.pdf [DOI:10.28945/576]
43. Zavarqi, R. (2011). A paradigmatic study of library and information science. Book of the Month. Generalities (171); 76-87. (Persian)
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
