User studies

User studies are investigations of the use and users (including non-users and potential uses and users) of documents, information, communication channels, information systems and information services. 

Wilson (1981) writes that as the first user study is commonly recognized a publication at "The Royal Society's " conference in London in 1948.

Several thousand investigations have been carried out in which the use of libraries, databases, media, documents or "information" were treated as the dependent variable, while the sex, age, job, geographical location or institutional affiliation were treated as the independent variable. This kind of studies in Library and Information Science (LIS) are related to similar studies in mass communication, often termed "Use and Gratification Studies".

User studies seem to culminate in 1960s. Hereafter a certain skepticism began to spread in the LIS community. Palmer (1992, p. 335), for example, wrote: "Over­all the collection adds nothing to the literature and will confirm the worst prejudices of those who have come to view user studies with suspicion".

Among the surprising results form user studies are Allen's (1966) and Gerstberger & Allen's (1968) findings that engineers consequently seem to prefer information sources which are physically easily available in spite of a recognized higher quality of less available sources.  

Pors (1990, p. 42) writes that a common pattern in studies of library users is that users are satisfied with library services. This may, however, be related to low expectations of what service they should expect, which again is associated with a low level of knowledge about the purposes and capabilities of libraries.

"Research has shown that users of on-line library computer catalogs (OPACs) and other computer-based information retrieval systems often express satisfaction with their search results and the overall performance of the retrieval system even when the results, upon analysis, are shown to be poor. This has been called the phenomenon of "false positives" in user assessments of search success (Applegate, 1993, 525). A fundamental assumption of the user-oriented approach to information retrieval (IR) system performance testing and evaluation is that end users of a system, those individuals who bring information needs and questions to the system, are the best judges of the quality of search results and the performance of the retrieval system. If the phenomenon of false positives, that is, unwarranted user satisfaction with search results, is as common as research and experience indicates, this assumption must be reconsidered." (Hildreth, 2001).

"In retrospect, one finding about users and their search experiences has been reported too often to be ignored or treated lightly. Users of IR systems frequently express satisfaction with poor search results and, perhaps, poor system performance. The evidence requires us to question the validity of these user assessment variables, for example, satisfaction with search results and perceived ease of use, as measures and predictors of actual search success and system performance." (Hildreth, 2001).

 

Paisley (1968) articulated the various “systems” in which a scientist—or anybody who uses information—must navigate:

 (1)  The scientist within his culture
 (2)  The scientist within a political system
 (3)  The scientist within a membership group
 (4)  The scientist within a reference group
 (5)  The scientist within an invisible college
 (6)  The scientist within a formal organization
 (7)  The scientist within a work team
 (8)  The scientist within his own head [sic]
 (9)  The scientist within a legal/economic system
(10) The scientist within a formal information system - library, information centre etc.

Economist (leader) June 9th, 2007, p. 11: "Lessons from Apple": "Listening to customers is generally a good idea, but it is not the whole story. For all the talk of "user-centric innovation" and allowing feedback from customers to dictate new product designs, a third lesson from Apple is that smart companies should sometimes ignore what the market says today. The iPod was ridiculed when it was launched in 2001, bur Mr. Jobs stuck by his instinct. Nintendo has done something similar . . . ".

to be edited:
En hel del bruger­undersøgelser kan også som fremhævet af Pors (1990, side 74-75) opfattes som markeds- eller opinions­undersøgel­ser af aktuel, lokal værdi, bl.a. til plan­lægnings- og evaluerings­for­mål, men ikke nød­ven­dig­vis med videnskabelig værdi. Bruger­undersøgelser kan ligge nær op ad ren benyttelsesstatistik for biblioteker (f.eks. Kongelige Bibliotek, 1992), d.v.s. en "deskriptiv" undersøgelse uden særlige teoretiske ambitioner.

Problemet omkring brugerundersøgelserne blev omkring 1960'erne især opfattet som et metode­problem m.h.t. at fremskaffe tilstrækkeligt objektive, valide og reliable data om forskeres brug af information. Der var med andre ord tale om en stærk empiristisk videnskabsteoretisk holdning. Idag opfattes problemet omkring brugerundersøgel­ser nok snarere som et teoretisk problem. Udfra hvilken teoretisk referen­ceramme skal man forstå brugerens infor­mationssøgningsadfærd?

 

Der er næppe tvivl om, at alle 10 punkter er relevante, og Paisleys opdeling har siden været benyttet i mange over­sigter over forskningen på området. Et problem er, hvordan forholdet mellem disse planer skal opfattes. En indflydel­sesrig retning har her været "det kognitive paradigme", der tager ud­gangspunkt i punkt (8) og bl.a. interes­serer sig for brugernes forudsætninger for at udnytte infor­mations­sy­stemerne udfra modeller inspireret af kunstig intelligens. Dette paradigme synes nu på retur, i den angloamerikanske verden erstattet af filosofisk inspiration fra bl.a. den ældre Wittgenstein og hermeneu­tikken. En væsentlig debat knytter sig til begrebet "metodolo­gisk individualisme" (jfr. Informations­videnskabens metodologi).

En videreførelse af den brugerorienterede forskning forudsætter en mere helheds­orienteret beskrivelse af det miljø, som brugerbehovet er en del af. En dybere for­tolkning af f.eks. Allens resultater og af informa­tions­kanalernes funktion generelt, forudsætter en bredere analyse af forskningens "kultur", kvalitet, præferencer etc. Den enkelte brugers psykologiske beslutninger må ses i forhold til en analyse af informations­formidlingens sociale system. Derfor forekommer udarbejdelsen af en over­ordnet­ teoretisk referen­ceramme for informationssøgning overordent­lig væsentlig for at trække bruger­­undersøgelserne ud af deres tilsyne­ladende stangnation.

En konsekvens af teoretisk arbejde på dette område kan meget vel tænkes at blive en nedtoning af interessen for brugerundersøgelser og en optoning af interessen for bl.a. producentundersøgel­ser, ind­holdsanalyser etc. - en tendens, man også har observeret i massekommu­nikations­forskningen.

Brugeren er dog immervæk en vigtig kategori i informations­videnskaben og såvel empiriske som teoretiske belysning af brugen af informationsmedier, vil der fortsat være behov for.
 

"A given epistemological position may exist in a domain, whether or not this is recognized by people in that domain. Abrahamsen (2003), for example, asked music-librarians about their attitudes towards different views on music, including different kinds of music. He found that the librarians could not or would not take a standpoint; they claimed to be "neutral". In studying how they selected and organized music he found, however, that certain kinds of music were given higher priority, why he claimed that the librarians in their behavior revealed an epistemological view of music. We believe this example to be representative for most fields: researchers, professionals as well as ordinary people normally do not explicitly claim certain epistemological positions, but nonetheless, a study of what they are doing, what kind of information they prefer, reveal a particular pattern, which form an epistemological position.

    In order to uncover the epistemologies in a given domain, the best way is not to ask the average person in that domain. No. the best way is probably to ask people who have studied the theories in the domain. Such people may be historians of science, historians of ideas, philosophers, bibliometricians, and other kind of science studies (both from within the domain and from outside the domain). [This view implies a criticism of user studies]." (Hjørland & Nicolaisen, 2005).

Literature:

Allen, T.  J. (1966). Managing the flow of scientific and technological information. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management.

Applegate, R. (1993). Models of user satisfaction: understanding false positives. RQ, 32(4): 525-539.
 

Berg Hansen, I. (1974). The value of user-studies in the planning of library and documentation services. EURIM-conference. Paris 20.-22.nov. 1973. Aslib, London.
 

Gerstberger, P. G. &  Allen, T. J. (1968). Criteria used by research and development engineers in the selection of an information source. Journal of Applied Psychology, 52, 272-279.

Hedemark, A.; Hedman J. & Sundin, O. (2005). Speaking of users: on user discourses in the field of public libraries. Information Research, 10(2) paper 218  Available at 

http://informationr.net/ir/10-2/paper218.html

Hildreth, C. R. (2001). Accounting for users' inflated assessments of on-line catalogue search performance and usefulness: an experimental study. Information Research, 6(2) Available at: http://InformationR.net/ir/6-2/paper101.html

Hjørland, B. & Nicolaisen, J. (2005). Epistemologies as (normative) theories of information seeking and use. Oral presentation for the session on Information Seeking Behavior in Epistemological Light at the ASIS&T Annual Meeting in Charlotte, NC (November 1., 2005). http://www.db.dk/jni/lifeboat/Speech.doc

Kongelige Bibliotek, Det (1992). Brug og bevaring. Udlånsdata. Bearbejdning, analyse og anvendelse. Af Jens Chr. Poulsen. Brug og bevaring af nationallitteraturen. Danske Afdeling. Af John T. Lauridsen. Aspekter af udlånets fordeling. En analyse af den udenlandske afdeling på Det kongelige Bibliotek. Af Sten Barfort. København: Det kongelige Bibliotek. (Forskningsrapporter 3).
 

Paisley, W. J. (1968). Information Needs and Uses. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 3, 1-30.
 

Palmer, J. (1992). [Review of Information seeking and communicating behavior of scientists and engineers, 1991]. Journal of Documentation, 48(3), 354-355.
 

Pors, N. O. (1990). Døde bøger og tomme hylder. Om evaluering og styring af bibliotekets materiale­bestand. Valby: Danmarks Biblioteksforenings Forlag.
 

Pors, N. O. (1990). Users, Collection Use and Online Searching: In­vestigations in Danish Public Libraries. International Journal of Information and Library Research, 2(2), 63-76.
 

Pors, N. O. (1994). Tilgængelighed og græsning. Om bibliotekernes brugere, materialer og servicekvalitet. Ballerup: Danmarks Biblioteksforenings Forlag.

Wilson, T. D. (1981). On User Studies and Information Needs. Journal of Documentation, 37(1), 3-15.
 

Bibliography:

Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 1966- (Most volumes contain a review of recent user studies).

See also: Everyday life information seeking; User; User and User Studies (Lifeboat for KO).

Birger Hjørland

Last edited: 10-06-2007

Home