Thriving on Theory: A New Model for Synchronous Reference Encounters

1. Thriving on Theory: A New Model for SynchronousReference Encounters Marie L. Radford, Ph.D. Associate Professor, Rutgers, The State University of NJ Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D. Senior Research Scientist, OCLC ASIS&T 2009 Annual Meeting November 6-11, 2009 Vancouver, BC

2. Need for Integrated Theoretical Model • “In time, perhaps an overarching model of all reference, regardless of medium of delivery, will be developed.” (Pomerantz, 2005) • Today will present new model grounded in Communication & Sociology Theory

3. Relational Theory & Approach to Interpersonal Communication • Every message has dual dimensions – both content & relational. (Watzlawick, Beavin, & Jackson, 1967)

4. Relational “HOW” message is to be taken Relationship of participants Dual Dimensions Content • The “WHAT” of the message • Information exchange

5. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior Essay: “On Face-Work: An analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction”(1967) Erving Goffman 1922-1982

6. Model Grounded in Research Identify what is critically important to users & librarians in successful reference interactions • FtF Environment • Reference Encounter (Radford, 1999) • Virtual Reference, Live Chat Environment • Seeking Synchronicity (Radford & Connaway, 2005 - 2008)

7. The Reference Encounter – FtF(Radford, 1999) • “Interpersonal relationships & communication of great importance in librarian & user perceptions.” • Librarians value content more. • Users value relational aspects more.

8. Seeking Synchronicity – VR • Librarians AND users value BOTH information (content) & relational aspects • Greater portion of users value content in VR than in FtF • Librarians sensitive to user’s attitude in unsuccessful VR encounters (as found in FtF)

9. Findings from Interpersonal Communication Analysis • Relational & Content Facilitators • Interpersonal aspects of FtF or chat conversationthat have a positive impact on librarian-client interaction & that enhancecommunication. • Relational & Content Barriers • Interpersonal aspects of FtF or chat conversation that have a negativeimpact on librarian-client interaction & that impedecommunication.

10. Relational (Interpersonal) Positive Attitude Positive Relationship Quality Approachability Positive Impact of Technology Familiarity Greeting Ritual Closing Ritual Content (Information) Providing Information Access Accurate Information Specific Information Demonstrating Knowledge (General/Specialized) Appropriate Instruction Convenient/Timely Access Facilitators - Positive Relational & Content Dimensions

11. Relational Negative Attitude Negative Relational Quality Lack of Approachability Negative Impact of Technology Lack of Greeting Ritual Lack of Closing Ritual Content Lack of Info./Access Lack of Accuracy Negative Impact of Technology Lack of Knowledge (General/Specialized) Lack of Appropriate Instruction Unrealistic Task Barriers - Negative Relational & Content Dimensions

13. Encounter Context – Participant Characteristics Librarian & User • age & gender • cultural background • educational level • technological skills (including keyboarding) • subject knowledge • language & communication skills • institutional affiliation • user’s past experience with libraries/librarians • librarian’s reference service philosophy

14. Encounter Context – Situation • Reference queries are related to different situations including • professional • academic • personal • other

15. Encounter Context – Mode of Communication • Synchronous reference modes • FtF, traditional reference • VR (live chat) encounters

16. Implications • Information & relationship development critical to successful interactions • Sustainability dependant upon developing & maintaining positive relationships with VR & FtF users • For LIS education • Content & technical skills vitally important • Increase emphasis on interpersonal communication • Emphasize user’s point of view

17. Future Research • More testing of Theoretical Model • Does it hold up in other modes (IM)? • Non-synchronous modes (email)? • Quasi-synchronous modes (SMS text messaging?) • Next will investigate Instant Messaging (IM) reference environment – growing steadily • IM believed to be congruent with model, closely related to live chat

18. Special Thanks • Rutgers University & OCLC Seeking Synchronicity Grant Project Team • Jocelyn DeAngelis Williams • Susanna Sabolsci-Boros • Timothy J. Dickey • Patrick Confer • Mary Anne Reilly • Julie Strange • Lisa Rose-Wiles • Andrea Simzak • Jannica Heinstrom • Those helping with the graphic design of the model • Nathan Graham (Rutgers), Mor Naaman (Rutgers), & Gary P. Radford (Fairleigh Dickinson University)

19. End Notes • This is one of the outcomes from the project Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, and Librarian Perspectives • Funded by IMLS, Rutgers University, & OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc. • Slides available at project web site: http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/synchronicity/