Researchers and practitioners talk about users and each other. Making user and audience studies matter - paper 1

Introduction. We report here on the research phase of a multi-stage dialogue examining convergences and divergences in how three fields (library and information science, human computer interaction and communication and media studies) looked at users and each other. Our focus was on what researchers and practitioners saw as the big unanswered questions in user studies and what they saw as the convergences and divergences across disciplinary and practice-research divides. Method. Eighty-three international experts in the three fields were interviewed by phone; thirty-one local experts, public and academic librarians serving universities and colleges in central Ohio, were interviewed using self-journals and focus group reports. Analysis. A thematic analysis was completed. The purpose was not to fix substantive differences but to identify ways in which convergences and divergences showed relevance to the communicative aspects of the research enterprise. A theory of dialogue was applied that purposively positioned this analysis as only one of potentially many. Results. All informants showed strong commitment to improving user studies and making them matter more to design, practice and society. At the same time, regardless of field or perspective, they struggled with the incoherencies of avalanches of user research. They decried the general inability to communicate across fields and between research and practice. They decried the ways in which structural conditions seemed to constrain possibilities. Yet, they hoped for better things to come. Conclusions. The traditional modes used for communication in the social science research enterprise are not doing the job for user studies. We need to reclaim some procedures lost in the current emphases on quantity over quality and invent other options. This is the theme of our second paper, in this same issue.

[1]  J. G. Webster Beneath the Veneer of Fragmentation: Television Audience Polarization in a Multichannel World , 2005 .

[2]  Petri Tapio,et al.  Disaggregative Policy Delphi: Using cluster analysis as a tool for systematic scenario formation , 2003 .

[3]  Heidi E. Julien,et al.  Constructing 'users' in library and information science , 1999, Aslib Proc..

[4]  D'EliaGeorge,et al.  The impact of the internet on public library use , 2002 .

[5]  P. Freire Education for Critical Consciousness , 1973 .

[6]  S. Small,et al.  Bridging research and practice in the family and human sciences , 2005 .

[7]  H. E. Cook,et al.  On system design , 1992 .

[8]  Murray Turoff,et al.  The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications , 1976 .

[9]  Hubert L. Dreyfus,et al.  Mind over Machine: The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer , 1987, IEEE Expert.

[10]  Alan A. Block,et al.  Build it, and they will Come , 1999 .

[11]  Katherine Unger Slash and Burn , 2007 .

[12]  Robert LaRose,et al.  Internet Gratifications and Internet Addiction: On the Uses and Abuses of New Media , 2004, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[13]  R. Fidel,et al.  Conceptual Frameworks in Information Behavior. , 2001 .

[14]  Brenda Dervin,et al.  On studying information seeking methodologically: the implications of connecting metatheory to method , 1999, Inf. Process. Manag..

[15]  B. Flyvbjerg,et al.  Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again , 2001 .

[16]  Oliver Boyd-Barrett,et al.  Approaches to Media: A Reader , 1995 .

[17]  J. Shotter,et al.  Deconstructing Social Psychology , 1990 .

[18]  Marcia J. Bates,et al.  Information and knowledge: an evolutionary framework for information science , 2005 .

[19]  Matthew Longshore Smith,et al.  Overcoming theory-practice inconsistencies: Critical realism and information systems research , 2006, Inf. Organ..

[20]  Birger Hjørland,et al.  The concept of information , 2005, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[21]  Stephen Campbell,et al.  Users' understanding of medical knowledge in general practice. , 2002, Social science & medicine.

[22]  P. Golding,et al.  For a Political Economy of Mass Communications , 1973 .

[23]  Lee O. Thayer,et al.  On Communication: Essays in Understanding , 1987 .

[24]  J. C. Flanagan Psychological Bulletin THE CRITICAL INCIDENT TECHNIQUE , 2022 .

[25]  E. Katz,et al.  The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research. Sage Annual Reviews of Communication Research Volume III. , 1975 .

[26]  M. Hammersley Social Research Today , 2003 .

[27]  S. Hsi,et al.  A study of user experiences mediated by nomadic web content in a museum , 2003, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[28]  Birger Hjørland,et al.  Domain analysis in information science Eleven approaches traditional as well as innovative , 2002 .

[29]  Marcia J. Bates,et al.  Fundamental forms of information , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[30]  Sanna Talja,et al.  Constituting “information” and “user” as research objects: a theory of knowledge formations as an alternative to the information man-theory , 1997 .

[31]  Corinne Jörgensen,et al.  The impact of the Internet on public library use: An analysis of the current consumer market for library and Internet services , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[32]  Carol Edwards,et al.  Accessing the user's perspective. , 2000, Health & social care in the community.

[33]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. , 1992 .

[34]  Pertti Vakkari,et al.  Information seeking in context: A challenging meta-theory. , 1997 .

[35]  Paul Johnson,et al.  Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Nineties , 1983 .

[36]  A. Booth Bridging the Research-Practice Gap? The Role of Evidence Based Librarianship , 2003 .

[37]  Reijo Savolainen Incorporating small parts and gap-bridging: two metaphorical approaches to information use , 2000 .

[38]  J. Olaisen,et al.  Information science : from the development of the discipline to social interaction , 1996 .

[39]  B. Dervin,et al.  Sense-Making Methodology Reader: Selected Writings of Brenda Dervin , 2003 .