Visitors and Residents: What Motivates Engagement with the Digital Information Environment?

1. University of Sheffield iSchool, 20 February 2013 Lynn SilipigniConnaway, Ph. D. Senior Research ScientistOCLC Research connawal@oclc.org Visitors and Residents: What Motivates Engagement with the Digital Information Environment?

2. Then & Now (Dempsey, 2008) • Then: The user built workflow around the library • Now: The library must build its services around user workflow • Then: Resources scarce, attention abundant • Now: Attention scarce, resources abundant

3. Current Environment • Challenges • Budget cuts • High retirement rates • Hiring freezes • Opportunity • Best value for most use • Understand how, why, & under what circumstances individuals use systems & services

4. Visitors and Residents:What Motivates Engagement with the Digital Information Environment? • Funded by • JISC • OCLC • Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D. • Oxford University • David White • Alison Le Cornu, Ph.D. • In partnership with • University of North Carolina, Charlotte • Donna Lanclos, Ph.D.

5. Why Visitors and Residents Project? If we build it, they will NOT come Shifting changes in engagement with information environment Effect of larger cultural changes influenced by Web New attitudes towards education Gap in user behaviour studies – need for longitudinal studies Understand motivations for using & expectations of technologies & spaces in information environment Inform project & service design to improve engagement & uptake http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/vandr/

6. Research Questions • What are the most significant factors for novice & experienced researchers in choosing their modes of engagement with the information environment? • Do individuals develop personal engagement strategies which evolve over time & for specific needs & goals, or are the educational contexts (or, in the context of this study, “educational stages”) the primary influence on their engagement strategies? • Are modes of engagement shifting over the course of time, influenced by emergent web culture & the availability of “new” ways to engage, or are the underlying trends & motivations relatively static within particular educational stages?

7. Theoretical Framework • Prensky • Digital Natives & Digital Immigrants • Wilson • Models in information behaviour research • Cool & Spink • Information seeking in context

8. Visitors & Residents Video: http://is.gd/vanrvideo First Monday Paper: http://is.gd/vandrpaper (White & Connaway, 2011)

9. Residents Significant online presence & usage Collaborative activity online Contribute online Mobile device dependence >10 hours online/week

10. Visitors Functional use of technology Formal need Passive online presence Favor FtF interactions <6 hours online/week

11. Visitors & Residents (White & Connaway, 2011-2012)

12. Phase 1 • IndividualInterviews • Emerging (secondary school/1st year undergraduates • 31 (16 US, 15 UK) • Establishing (2nd-3rd year undergraduates) • 10 (5 US, 5 UK) • Embedding (postgraduates, PhD students) • 10 (5 US, 5 UK) • Experiencing (scholars) • 10 (5 US, 5 UK) • Completed data analysis • Quantitative data: • Demographics, number of occurrences of technologies, sources, & behaviours • Qualitative data: • Themes & direct quotes (White & Connaway, 2011-2012)

13. Phase I & 2: Participant Demographics 61 participants 15 secondary students 46 university students & faculty 34 females 27 males 38 Caucasian 5 African-American 2 Two or more 1 Asian 2 Hispanic 13 Unidentified (White & Connaway, 2011-2012)

14. Academic Disciplines by Educational Stages Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.

15. Triangulation of Data (Connaway et al., 2012) • Several methods: • Semi-structured interviews (qualitative) • Diaries (qualitative) • Online survey (quantitative) • Enables triangulation of data

16. Diaries (Connaway & Powell, 2010) Ethnographic data collection technique Get people to describe what has happened Center on defined events or moments

17. Interviews (Connaway & Powell, 2010) • Allows for • Probing • Clarifying • Creating new questions • Including focused questions • Exploring new lines of inquiry • Enables data collection for extended period of time

18. Participant Interview Questions 1. Describe the things you enjoy doing with technology and the web each week. 2. Think of the ways you have used technology and the web for your studies. Describe a typical week. 3. Think about the next stage of your education. Tell me what you think this will be like.

19. Participant Interview Questions 4. Think of a time when you had a situation where you needed answers or solutions and you did a quick search and made do with it. You knew there were other sources but you decided not to use them. Please include sources such as friends, family, teachers, coaches, etc. 5. Have there been times when you were told to use a library or virtual learning environment (or learning platform), and used other source(s) instead? 6. If you had a magic wand, what would your ideal way of getting information be? How would you go about using the systems and services? When? Where? How? (Connaway & Radford, 2005-2007) (Dervin, Connaway, & Prabha, 2003-2005)

20. Surveys/Questionnaires (Connaway & Powell, 2010) • Encourages frank answers • Eliminates variation in the question process • Can collect large amount of data in short period of time • Delivery • In-person • Telephone • Mail • Email • Online • Point of contact

21. Codebook Place Sources Tools Agency Situation/context Quotes Contact Technology Ownership Network used (White & Connaway, 2011-2012)

22. Codebook I. Place A. Internet 1. Search engine a. Google b. Yahoo 2. Social Media a. FaceBook b. Twitter c. You Tube d. Flickr/image sharing e. Blogging B. Library 1. Academic 2. Public 3. School (K-12) C. Home D. School, classroom, computer lab E. Other (White & Connaway, 2011-2012)

23. Nvivo 9 Qualitative research software Upload documents, PDFs, & videos Create nodes & code transcripts Merge files Queries Reports Models (QSR International, 2011)

24. You have a last-minute project to complete. Where would you go to get information? • GOOGLE • ASK SOMEONE • -Family • -Colleague • -Friend • -Librarian • -Professor • FACEBOOK SOMEONE • -Family • -Colleague • -Friend • -Librarian • -Professor • TEXT SOMEONE • -Family • -Colleague • -Friend • -Librarian • -Professor Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.

25. Place & Educational Stage Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.

26. “I always stick with the first thing that comes up on Google because I think that’s the most popular site which means that’s the most correct.” (USS1, Female, Age 17)

27. “Google doesn’t judge me” (UKF3, Male, Age 52)

28. Human Sources & Educational Stages Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.

29. The word “librarian” never mentioned in original interviews by Emerging Stage participants as a source of information One participant referred to “a lady in the library who helps you find things” (USU5, Male, Age 19)

30. Library=books 34 participants mention the library equating with books

31. Digital Sources & Educational Stage Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.

32. “It’s like a taboo I guess with all teachers, they just all say – you know, when they explain the paper they always say, “Don’t use Wikipedia.” (USU7, Female, Age 19) Learning Black Market “I just type it into Google and see what comes up.” (UKS2)

33. Contact & Educational Stages Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.

34. Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.

35. Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.

36. Connaway for OCLC Research. 2013.

37. Recommendations • Begin educating early • Market • 1/3 of users don’t know services available • Provide a broad range of tools • Simple interface • Discovery & access • Social networking sites • Wikipedia • Facebook • Provide help at time of need • Chat & IM • Mobile technology (Dervin, Connaway & Prabha, 2003-2006) (De Rosa, 2005) (Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2013)

38. Future Research Digital Visitors & Residents Online survey Continue with diaries & interviews Initial interviews with 12 new Emerging Stage participants Monthly diaries with 6 new Emerging Stage participants

39. References Connaway, L. S., Dickey, T. J., OCLC Research., & Joint Information Systems Committee. (2010). The digital information seeker: Report of the findings from selected OCLC, RIN, and JISC user behaviour projects. Bristol, England: HEFCE. Connaway, L. S., Lanclos, D., White, D. S., Le Cornu, A., & Hood, E. M. (2012). User-centered decision making: A new model for developing academic library services and systems. IFLA 2012 Conference Proceedings, August 11-17, Helsinki, Finland. Connaway, L. S., & Powell, R. R. (2010). Basic research methods for librarians. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Cool, C., & Spink, A. (2002). Issues of Context in Information Retrieval (IR): An Introduction to the Special Issue. Information Processing & Management, 38, 5, 605-11. Dempsey, L. (2008). Always on: Libraries in a world of permanent connectivity. First Monday, 14(1). Retrieved from http://www.firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2291/207 De Rosa, C. Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources: A Report to the OCLC Membership. Dublin, OH: OCLC Online Computer Library Center, 2005. (p.1-8).

40. References Dervin, B., Connaway, L. S., & Prabha, C. (2003-2005). Sense-making the information confluence: The hows and the whys of college and university user satisficing of information needs. Funded by the Institute for Museums and Library Services (IMLS). Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/past/orprojects/imls/default.htm Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The interpretation of cultures: selected essays. New York: Basic Books, 6. Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co., 273. Holton, D. (2010, March 19). The digital natives/digital immigrants distinction is dead or at least dying. [Web log comment]. EdTechDev . Retrieved from http://edtechdev.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/the-digital-natives-digital-immigrants-distinction-is-dead-or-at-least-dying/ Kennedy, G., Judd, T. & Dalgarno, B. (2010). “Beyond natives and immigrants: Exploring types of net generation students,” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 332–343. Kvale, S. (1996). IntervVews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications, 133-135. McKenzie, J. (2007). Digital nativism, digital delusions, and digital deprivation. From Now On: The Educational Technology Journal, 17 (2). Retrieved from http://www.fno.org/nov07/nativism.html Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2013). Library services in the Digital Age. Retrieved from http://libraries.pewinternet.org/2013/01/22/library-services/ #CNFAE16

41. References Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5). Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing Prensky, M. (2006). Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 8-13. Radford, M. L., & Connaway, L. S. (2005-2007). Seeking synchronicity: Evaluating virtual reference services from user, non-user, and librarian perspectives. Funded by the Institute for Museums and Library Services (IMLS). Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/synchronicity/default.htm Wasserman, S. (2012, June 18). The Amazon effect. The Nation. Retrieved from http://www.thenation.com/article/168125/amazon-effect White, D. S., & Connaway, L. S. (2011-2012). Visitors & residents: What motivates engagement with the digital information environment. Funded by JISC, OCLC, and Oxford University. Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/vandr/ White, D. S., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday,16(9). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/3171/3049 Whyte, W. F. (1979). “On Making the Most of Participant Observation,” The American Sociologist 14 , 56-66. Wilson, T. D. (1997). Information behaviour: an interdisciplinary perspective. Information Processing and Management, 33(4), 551-572. Wilson, T. D. (1999). Models in information behaviour research. Journal of Documentation, 55(3), 249-270. #CNFAE16

42. Lynn Silipigni Connaway connawal@oclc.org Questions & Discussion