Critique of Marchinini’s Information Seeking Model
In the Context of the 2009 H1N1 Influenza Scare
Katarzyna A.Woznica
woznicak1@owls.southernct.edu
Information Seeking Behavior
ILS 537-S70
Eino Sierpe, Ph.D.
Southern Connecticut State University
April 9, 2011
1
Abstract
There are many theories on information seeking behavior. Gary Marchionini’s model describes just one
of these theories. His description is detailed and seemingly comprehensive however, his theory does fail
to take into consideration some important factors. Not found in Marchionini’s model are three factors—
risk perception, efficacy and anxiety—which play important roles in the information seeking process
during times of crisis. Numerous studies have been conducted by researchers in the fields of psychology,
communication and library science that confirm that these three factors have an influence on people’s
behaviors, thought processes and, ultimately, their information seeking decisions during crisis situations,
such as the recent H1N1 influenza scare. Much of this literature invalidates parts of Marchionini’s
theory. Some studies show that, it is not knowledge of subject domain, but a perception that one is at
high risk for a disease can motivate one to initiate information seeking. Other studies show that, in
opposition to Marchionini’s model, a low sense of efficacy can also be a catalyst for engaging in
information seeking behavior. Finally, anxiety has a large impact on behavior, decision-making,
cognitive skills and the information seeking process. Anxiety, which was felt by many people during the
H1N1 scare, can play a greater role in the information seeking process than cognitive skills.
2
Introduction
Over the years many theories and models of the information-seeking process have been proposed,
tested and accepted to be valid, or at least useful, in predicting how people will proceed when confronted
by an information need. Gary Marchionini has created one of these theories, which is the basis for his
book Information Seeking in Electronic Environments (Marchionini, 1997). Marchionini’s model
presents, in great detail, the many factors that guide and influence a person’s decision to initiate the
information-seeking process and also the individual steps that are undertaken during the informationseeking process. The detailed factors and complicated subprocesses that, at times, revert to previous
subprocesses make this model appear to be comprehensive and accurate. Indeed, Marchionini’s model
may very well be comprehensive and accurate when applied to information seeking in a controlled setting
or in an everyday work environment such as might happen in a university or special library.
Marchionini’s model, however, is inadequate in describing and predicting the decisions,
behaviors and thought processes of individuals who are emotionally affected by a crisis situation, such as
the H1N1 pandemic of 2009-2010. Marchionini’s model emphasizes logical, cognitive factors—
“information gaps” that motivate a person to seek information, a seeker’s evaluation of his or her personal
information infrastructure and search systems before beginning to look for answers, careful evaluation of
the search results, and deciding how to continue the seeking process. This logical, cognitive-based model
may apply during neutral, everyday situations; however, it falls short in describing the informationseeking processes that can occur during a crisis and in stress-filled situations. This model fails to take
into consideration the fact that emotions, such as anxiety and fear, play an important role in guiding and
influencing people’s actions during their everyday lives. Studies conducted by various researchers show
that these emotions play a greater role in information seeking than do cognitive processes and personal
information infrastructures. During crisis situations when diseases such as H1N1 threaten people’s health
and lives, emotions become a big factor in the information seeking process.
The H1N1 influenza pandemic, also known as Swine Flu, was a global threat for most of 2009
and part of 2010. It spread rapidly throughout the world after its devastating initial appearance in April
3
2009 in Mexico. There, young adults and children, an age group that normally is resilient to the effects of
influenza, were the most susceptible to the virus and its serious complications, which included death
(Delaney & Fowler, 2010, p. 75). People across the world, including in the United States, grew fearful of
this virus, more fearful than they do during the typical flu season. In initial stages of the pandemic, when
the virus was still called Swine Flu, and its connection to pigs was inaccurately described by the media,
people worried that eating pork might lead to H1N1 (Goodwin, 2009, p. 168). Later on, accurate factual
information indicated this was indeed a serious virus with a high death rate and a disproportionately high
percentage of young people being stricken (Delaney & Fowler, 2010, p. 75; McCaughey, 2010, p. 50).
Many people, filled with anxiety, began to engage in health-promoting behaviors in an attempt to prevent
catching and spreading the H1N1 flu (Goodwin, 2009, p. 168; Ibuka et al, 2010). Among those healthpromoting behaviors was information seeking, an activity in which some people engaged to reduce their
feelings of anxiety. These feelings of anxiety, however, interfered with their information seeking abilities
and decisions, as is evidenced by studies that have been conducted by various researchers (Darke, S.,
1988; Haenen et al, 1998; Turner, 2006).
Studies conducted by Darke, Rimal and Real, Turner et al., and Haenen et al. indicate that
personal factors—risk perception, efficacy beliefs and anxiety—not mentioned in the Marchionini model,
have an impact on the initiation of a search for information, the progress of the information-seeking
process itself and the results of this endeavor (1988). Risk perception, or the “belief that one is vulnerable
to disease,” is a factor that motivates a person to seek health-related information (Rimal and Real, 2006,
p. 370). Efficacy, or the belief that one has the “ability to enact a particular behavior,” has been found to
have a connection with the information-seeking process (Turner et al., 2006, p. 132). It goes beyond
Marchionini’s efficacy factor which is based on only a person’s ability to effectively use an information
search system. Studies have shown that individuals engage in information seeking whether or not they
believe they have high efficacy. Often people will engage in information seeking behavior to reduce
anxiety that has been induced by low efficacy beliefs and high risk perception. Anxiety itself is the third
personal factor that affects the information seeking process in an often detrimental manner.
4
Information Seeking Factors and Process According to Marchionini
In his book Information Seeking in Electronic Environments, Gary Marchionini (1997) has
written in detail about the elements and subprocesses that are part of the information-seeking process.
According to Marchionini, elements of the information-seeking process include the information seeker, a
task that consists of the information problem and the activities involved in solving it, the search system
that includes a variety of tools which provide access to information, a domain of knowledge on a specific
topic, the specific setting in which the information need and seeking process occur, and the outcomes of
the search process. Marchionini presents a detailed description of the complicated information-seeking
process that consists of the following eight subprocesses: recognition and acceptance of the problem,
defining and understanding the problem, choosing a search system, formulating a query, executing a
search, examining the results, extracting information, and reflection, iteration, stopping of the search
process.
The complicated information seeking process, as defined by Marchionini, has its beginnings
when a person realizes he or she is missing information that would be useful for him or her in order to
understand a situation. At this point the individual will decide whether or not he or she will engage in a
purposeful information-seeking process. According to Marchionini, a person will choose to ignore or put
aside an information problem if he or she determines it to be not worth the physical or mental cost. The
decision to initiate a search, according to Marchionini, is motivated by “knowledge of the task domain, by
the setting, by knowledge of search systems and the information seeker’s confidence in his or her
personal information infrastructure” (Marchionini, 1997, p. 51). The act of recognizing and accepting an
information problem is the first step in Marchionini’s model of the information-seeking process.
The next three subprocesses in Marchionini’s model involve preparing for the actual informationseeking activity. The progress of this part of the information seeking process depends on the information
seeker’s knowledge, his or her familiarity with the domain task and his or her cognitive skills. During
this phase, the information seeker first attempts to understand and define the problem. The information
problem is narrowed down; key elements, words, and concepts related to the problem are assigned, and
5
the information seeker hypothesizes what the answer will be, or what it will look like. After defining the
problem, the information seeker chooses an appropriate search system. The search system can be an
information expert such as a librarian, a book, an electronic database, the internet or any other source of
information. While there are various search system options, the one which Marchionini emphasizes, and
which is also the focus of this paper, is the electronic and online system. The search system that is
selected is influenced by the information seeker’s past experiences in this type of endeavor, the quality of
his or her own personal information infrastructure and his or her expectations of the answer. A personal
information infrastructure consists of mental models, general and specialized cognitive skills, material
resources (time, money, information documents, and electronic equipment) and attitude toward the
process. After a search system is selected, the information seeker will formulate a query which will
involve selecting vocabulary and a strategy that are appropriate for the selected search system. The query
that is formulated at this stage may be modified later in the information-seeking process.
Finally the information seeker will execute the search, examine the results, extract information
and reflect, iterate or stop the search process. Once again, personal information infrastructure will have
an influence on these final steps of the information seeking process. The information seeker will rely on
his/her understanding (mental model) of how the selected search system is organized and how it can be
utilized in order to carry out these sub processes. During the examination sub process, Marchionini
(1997) states that an information seeker will determine the relevance of the records that are pulled up
during a search by looking at the “quantity, type and format of the response” (p. 55). While examining
the search results, the seeker will extract information that is judged to be relevant for the problem at hand.
This extracted information will then be “manipulated and integrated into the information seeker’s
knowledge of the domain” (Marchionini, 1997, p. 58). In Marchionini’s model, extracted information
may be photocopied, written on paper, or pasted into an electronic document. According to
Marchionini’s model, the final step in the information seeking process will involve assessing the process
itself, determining its relation to the information problem and then deciding whether to repeat the search
process or stop entirely (pg. 58).
6
Marchionini’s model of the information-seeking process is highly detailed and consists of many
factors that interact with each other in an, often, complicated manner. Though it comprehensively
describes the information-seeking process, the absence of some important factors and his emphasize on
cognitive skills, makes the Marchionini model flawed and incomplete. Missing from this model are the
seeker’s emotions, especially anxiety, which can be a powerful variable when seeking information during
times of crisis, such as the H1N1 influenza pandemic scare of 2009-2010. Also absent are the seeker’s
perceptions of his or her risk and efficacy when confronted by the information needs presented by a crisis
situation. These missing variables have a great influence on the information seeker’s decision to initiate
the activity of information seeking, the direction of the information-seeking process, and the results of
this process. During stressful times, anxiety, risk and efficacy perceptions have an impact on people who
are seeking information in an attempt to cope with and move past crisis situations. As evidenced by
various studies of people during crisis or stressful situations, when people are worried and afraid, anxiety,
not cognitive functions, is the variable that guides their information-seeking process.
The H1N1 Influenza Pandemic of 2009-2010
The novel A-H1N1 influenza virus, more commonly known as H1N1 or swine flu, that circulated
around the world in 2009-2010 originated some 15 years earlier in pigs (McCaughey, 2010, p. 48).
According to McCaughey, the virus’ genetic structure is composed of three different virus strains that
have been present in farmed pigs since 1995, in European swine viruses since 1991-1993, and in Asian
swine since 1999 (McCaughey, 2010, p. 48). The H1N1 virus first emerged in humans in Mexico in
early March 2009, and in the southern United States in April 2009 (McCaughey, 2010, p. 48).
People were understandably worried about the spread of H1N1, especially during its peak phases,
for the reasons that follow. Compared to the typical seasonal flu, H1N1 “caused high levels of summer
infections in the northern hemisphere” (World Health Organization, 2011). A disproportionately large
number of children, young adults, pregnant women and healthy persons became sickened by this flu strain
(World Health Organization, 2011). The H1N1 flu also interacted with pneumonic bacteria, as did the
Spanish Influenza of 1918 that killed 100 million people worldwide (Singer, 2009, p. 204) and a larger
7
than anticipated percentage of hospitalized patients ended up being cared for in intensive care units
(Delaney and Fowler, 2010, p. 76). H1N1’s mortality rate was 30% during its peak while the typical
seasonal flu has a mortality rate of only about 0.1% (Hilton, 2010, p.1). Additionally, despite national
health organizations’ attempts to monitor and minimize its spread, the infection rate continued to rise
(Hilton and Hunt, 2010, p. 1). On June 11, 2009, for the first time in over forty years, the World Health
Organization declared a phase 6 global influenza pandemic (World Health Organization, 2011; Hilton et
al., 2010, p.1).
The concern of infectious disease experts and the World Health Organization’s
declaration of the presence of a global flu pandemic led to “immense media attention, with front
page headlines, constant updates and top story status” Hilton and Hunt, 2010, p.1). Newspapers
and internet websites published stories about the outbreak, numbers of infected persons and
deaths, preventive measures and progress at creating a vaccine. Dramatic newspaper headlines
from the local Hartford Courant newspaper included: “Getting ready for flu; Hospitals tweaking
elaborate plans; H1N1” and “State pledges to remain vigilant; Swine flu outbreak” (Becker,
2009) Headlines from the New York Times during the same period included “Mayor says more
school closings won't stop swine flu's spread” and “Swine flu forces cancellation of concerts in
U.S., and Mexico.” (Chan, 2009). With so much frightening information about the H1N1 flu, some
people became anxious and changed their behaviors in an attempt to prevent infection. One of these
health-promoting behaviors was information seeking on the topic of influenza in general, and H1N1 in
particular. As shown in the sections that follow, this anxiety and high risk perception impacted people’s
information-seeking behaviors in ways that were not anticipated by Marchionini.
Risk Perception, Efficacy and Anxiety: Links to Information Seeking Decisions
The Risk Perception Attitude (RPA) framework was presented by Rimal and Real in
2003 and tested in subsequent studies by the original researchers and Turner et al. (2006). The
8
RPA framework theory states that risk perception and efficacy beliefs are factors that influence a
person’s decision to engage in, or not to engage in, health-promoting activities. Risk perception,
or perceived risk, is a “belief that one is vulnerable to a disease” (Rimal and Real, 2006, p. 370).
Efficacy refers to a person’s belief that they have the “ability to enact a particular behavior” and
that this behavior “will result in positive outcomes” (Turner et al., 2006, p. 132). Rimal and Real
proposed that people who have both a high risk perception and strong efficacy beliefs, will
engage in health-promoting behaviors. This health-promoting behavior includes information
seeking, and other activities which can be carried out as a result of, or in addition to, information
seeking. At first glance some factors of the RPA framework appear to be identical to those in
Marchionini’s model. A closer comparison of the two theories, however, will reveal that the
factors are not only different but also that the RPA framework is better able to account for the
information-seeking processes that occur during times of crisis, such as happened during the
H1N1 influenza scare of 2009-10.
Marchionini’s model states that an “an information seeker is motivated by an information
problem or need” and then determines whether “the immediate costs (physical and mental) of initiating
the search” are worth his or her effort (Marchionini, 1997, pgs. 32, 51) A person may decide not to seek
information if it is “not worth the effort” (Marchionini, 1997, p. 51). Marchionini also indicates that
information seeking is initiated if the seeker determines that s/he has knowledge about the task domain
and the appropriate search system; and “confidence in his or her personal information infrastructure”
(Marchionini, 1997, p. 51). While these cognitive-related factors may indeed influence a person’s
decision to seek information, they are not the only catalysts behind information seeking. In crisis
situations, information seeking is often initiated not because of cognitive factors but by less logical factors
such as risk perception, efficacy beliefs and anxiety. These emotional factors are also capable of shutting
down the very cognitive factors that Marchionini erroneously claims are responsible for guiding the entire
9
information-seeking process. The efficacy beliefs described in more recent information-seeking models
are different from the seeker’s confidence in their personal information infrastructure that is mentioned by
Marchionini.
Numerous studies have found that anxiety and risk perception is linked to engaging in healthpromoting and illness-preventing activities. In one of their studies on Rimal and Real’s RPA framework,
Turner et al. (2006) re-tested the link between risk perception and efficacy during the information-seeking
process. As did Rimal and Real, Turner et al found that high risk perception, and not confidence in
personal information infrastructure or adequate knowledge of a search system, was linked to a higher rate
of information seeking. In their study, participants who perceived they were at greater risk for developing
skin cancer engaged in information seeking more often, and for longer periods of time, than did those
who believed they had little or no risk for developing skin cancer. Studies conducted during the H1N1
pandemic from 2009 to 2010 indicated that “precautionary behaviors [including information seeking]
were associated with anxiety about H1N1 influenza … risk perceptions … perceived efficacy of the
precautionary behaviors” (Ibuka, 2010, p. 297). In surveys conducted by Ibuka et al. (2010, p. 300),
approximately 30% of respondents perceived either they, or someone they knew, had a high risk for
becoming infected with the H1N1 virus. Nearly the same percentage of respondents (29%) engaged in
seeking information on the swine flu outbreak.
Contrary to Marchionini’s theory, a low sense of self-efficacy does not dissuade a person from
seeking information on topic that concerns them. In Marchionini’s model, the sense of efficacy refers to
the individual’s perception about his or her ability to effectively use resources to find needed information.
If the individual has a high efficacy belief or is confident about his or her knowledge of the search system
and seeking skills, then the individual will initiate the information-seeking process (Marchionini, 1997, p.
51). However, a low efficacy belief, Marchionini claims, may cause the individual to suppress the
information need and not engage in information seeking behavior. Rimal and Real, and Turner et al, also
expected that persons with low efficacy beliefs would not seek information when they came across facts
that suggested they were at risk for contracting a serious illness. The results of their studies, however,
10
point to the opposite correlation: low efficacy beliefs are linked to “greater information seeking
behaviors” (Turner et al., 2006, p. 141).
In the studies conducted by Turner et al, random participants were informed that, based on their
answers to a health questionnaire, they were at high risk for getting skin cancer. Later, a portion of this
high risk perception group was shown information that proved there was nothing they can do to prevent
skin cancer. In the final portion of the study, all participants were given the opportunity to seek
information on the researchers’ computers. The data collected from the last portion of this study showed
that high risk perception participants spent more time seeking information than did the low risk group. Of
this high risk perception group, the participants with low efficacy beliefs, or those who were informed
there is little they can do to prevent skin cancer, spent more time seeking information on cancer than did
the high efficacy subgroup. The fact that study participants engaged in health information seeking
behavior despite being told there was nothing they can do to prevent cancer and searching would be “not
worth the effort” (Marchionini, 1997, p. 51) points to a flaw in Marchionini’s model. Low efficacy
beliefs, or lack of confidence in one’s personal information infrastructure and in one’s ability to engage in
effective health-promoting behaviors will not suppress a person’s desire to seek information when
presented with facts that indicate they are at high risk for a serious, life-threatening illness. Researchers
have theorized that people will engage in health-promoting behaviors, including seeking information,
despite low efficacy beliefs in order to alleviate feelings of anxiety “by resolving to seek additional
information and enact healthier behaviors” (Rimal and Real, 2003, p. 394).
Turner et al. (2006) conducted another study on risk perception and efficacy perception
correlations to information-seeking behavior. In this study the researchers focused on the state of anxiety
that was induced in high risk participants who had been convinced they had low efficacy in controlling
their future health. For this multi-part study, participants were provided general information about a
disease and then randomly assigned a level of risk for getting the disease. The disease used for this study
was diabetes. The researchers felt diabetes was an unfamiliar knowledge domain for most people and,
therefore, would be useful to measure retention of new information. Persons living with diabetes were
11
excluded from the study. The results of this study showed that participants with increased risk perception
and low efficacy beliefs developed stronger feelings of anxiety than did all other participants, including
those in the high risk, high efficacy group. Participants with the heightened sense of anxiety also had a
greater intention to learn more about diabetes and spent more time seeking information than the lowanxiety participants. “Risk-induced anxiety evokes resolutions to seek information. Intentions to seek
information lead to greater information seeking” (Turner et al., 2006, p. 150). This emotion-based
statement contrasts with Marchionini’s model which takes into account only cognitive motivations behind
the intention and initiation of information seeking. According to Marchionini’s model, information
seekers are motivated only by a need to fill an information gap in their personal information
infrastructures. Marchionini made no mention of anxious information seekers being motivated to search
for information in attempt to reduce their anxiety levels, which can happen when a person learns they are
at a risk for developing a seriously illness such as diabetes or the H1N1 influenza virus.
Anxiety Induces Poor Recall During Information Seeking
Despite spending a great deal of time seeking information, persons who are feeling high levels of
anxiety are not able to retain new information as well as a relaxed person can. Studies conducted by
Turner et al. (2006) and Haenen et al. (1998) support this theory. Results from the Turner et al. (2006)
study in which participants were presented information about diabetes, indicate that anxious information
seekers retain less new information than do non-anxious information seekers. Turner et al. states that
these anxious information seekers “lack ability to process information (anxiety decreases ability),”
therefore, even though they “seek information, they cannot retain it” (p. 143). Similar results were
obtained from a study conducted by Haenen et al. (1998) in which the quality and quantity of cancer
knowledge possessed by hyochondriacal participants was compared to that of a non-hyponchondriacal
group. Hypochondriacal persons, or hypochondriacs, have “an extreme preoccupation with their own
health status in absence of organic pathology or with insufficient organic pathology to justify anxiety”
(Haenen, 1998, p. 1005). In other words, hypochondriacs, are extremely anxious about their own health
and contracting illnesses. The Haenen et al. study found that hypochondriacs who spent more time
12
seeking cancer-related information than the control group, did not retain any more knowledge than did the
non-hypochondriacs.
The finding that hypochondriacs and high anxiety information seekers do not easily retain new
information contrasts with Marchionini’s claim that information seeking results in gained knowledge and
“for every information problem, information seekers reinforce and extend their mental models”
(Marchionini, 1997, p. 33) and that outcomes, or a set of search results, “change the state of the
information seeker’s knowledge; that is, they impart knowledge” (Marchionini, p. 48). Therefore, in the
case of H1N1 scare, anxious people participating in information seeking behaviors might not have added
or updated their knowledge base as the information changed over time. Studies conducted during the the
H1N1 pandemic, found that respondents’ risk perceptions rose as the number of influenza cases
increased. At the same time, conversely, people’s interest in preventive activities decreased, indicating
that any knowledge they may have gained was either forgotten or ignored (Ibuka, 2010, pg. 303).
Anxiety’s Effect on Inferential Reasoning
Throughout his model, Marchionini has stated that information seekers learn from their searching
endeavors. They add newly acquired information to their knowledge base, use information to modify the
facts and beliefs they already have or retain new information just long enough to solve a problem. As
they work to solve their information problems, “information seekers accrue experience and knowledge”
and “reinforce and extend their mental models” (Marchionini, 1997, pg. 33). Outcomes, or the results of
an information seeking session, “change the state of the information seeker’s knowledge; that is, they
impart information” (Marchionini, 1997, pg 48). According to Marchionini’s theory, toward the end of
the information searching process, information seekers evaluate their results and extract information that
may be useful for solving their problems. Marchionini’s view that people gain new knowledge and
insight from the information seeking sessions is a logical possibility. However, studies show that not
everyone’s information seeking process follows the steps that are outlined in Marchionini’s model.
People who are experiencing state anxiety, for example, not only do not add new knowledge to their
personal information infrastructures, they are also not able to “extract information” from what they read.
13
Darke (1988) studied the effects of state anxiety on people’s abilities to make correct inferences
based on short textual passages which they read. State anxiety refers to “a temporary emotional state
(encompassing cognitive-worry components and autonomic arousal) resulting from situational stress”
(Corsini, 1999, p. 941). It is the type of anxiety a person would have felt if they believed they were at risk
for catching the H1N1 influenza virus. In his empirical studies, Darke presented short textual passages of
either two or four sentences to two groups of participants—high anxiety and low anxiety. Each short
reading passage was followed by questions that required the participants to make inferences based on
what they had just read only a few seconds earlier. The passages consisted of short sentences that
conveyed simple, concrete thoughts. Data from these studies showed that anxious participants
consistently spent more time answering the questions and making twice as many incorrect inferences than
did the low-anxiety participants.
During the H1N1 pandemic, survey results indicated that people extracted incorrect information
or made wrong inferences about a variety of facts (Goodwin, 2009, p, 168). 26% of survey participants
wrongly believed that the regular flu shot can provide them immunity from the H1N1 flu. At the same
time, the same percentage believed, incorrectly, that the swine flu’s symptoms would differ from those of
the regular seasonal flu. 70% of participants came to wrong conclusion that pig farmers were at highest
risk for getting for the H1N1 virus, while 7% of respondents actually “stopped or reduced their eating of
pork” (Goodwin, 2010, p. 168).
Conclusion
Empirical studies conducted by various researchers have shown that the information-seeking
process does not always follow the logical, cognitive-based steps that are elaborated upon in
Marchionini’s model. In stressful times or when an individual perceives there is a threat to their wellbeing, such as during the H1N1 pandemic scare, people can initiate the information seeking process based
on emotional rather than a logical need to fill an information guide. A foreboding feeling that one is at
risk for catching a potentially deadly influenza virus can motivate someone to seek information faster
than can the need to simply fill an information need. A feeling of high efficacy, or believing that one can
14
prevent illness by following sound health advice, can motivate a person to look for the necessary
information. People will also engage in the information-seeking process despite feelings of low efficacy.
This contrasts with Marchionini’s claim that a person will not engage in the information seeking process
if they believe that they not be able to effectively use a search system or that the seeking process is not
worth the effort. Anxiety, a factor not mentioned by Marchionini, also plays a part in the process.
Anxiety can motivate a person to engage in the information-seeking process. It can also have a
detrimental effect on the process and the results. Information seekers who are feeling anxious have been
shown to have a difficult time comprehending simple textual sentences, misinterpreting information and
not being able to recall simple facts that they had just read. This inability to understand and gain new
information contrasts with Marchionini’s model which claims that all information seeking results in new
knowledge or the modification of existing mental model.
Marchionini’s model consists of numerous factors and detailed information about the intricate
information seeking process. Its emphasis on logical cognitive processes and factors, however, creates a
serious flaw. Missing from his model are personal factors, such as anxiety, risk perception and efficacy
beliefs. These are the factors that come into play during times when stressful situations motivate a person
to seek information on the evolving or potential crisis situation. The addition of these personal factors,
and others that also impact the seeking process, to the Marchionini’s theory would make it a more
comprehensive and accurate model of the information-seeking process.
15
References
Becker, A.L. (2009, Oct. 2). Getting ready for flu; Hospitals tweaking elaborate plans, H1N1.
Hartford Courant. Accessed 4/30/11 from
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=7&did=1870642991&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt
=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1304952422&clientI
d=78876
Becker, A.L. (2009, May 5) State pledges to remain vigilant; Swine flu outbreak. Hartford
Courant. Accessed 4/30/11 from
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=28&did=1699319781&SrchMode=1&sid=1&F
mt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1304953136&clien
tId=78876
Chan, S. & Sulzberger, A.G. (2009). Mayor says more school closings won’t stop swine flu’s
spread. New York Times. Accessed 4/30/11 from
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?query=%22swine+flu%22&srchst=nyt&d=&o=&
v=&c=&sort=closest&n=10&dp=0&daterange=period&year1=2009&mon1=04&day1=0
1&year2=2009&mon2=06&day2=09&frow=10
Corsini, R.J. (1999). The dictionary of psychology. Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Darke, S. (1988). Effects of anxiety on inferential reasoning task performance. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 55: 499-505.
Delaney, J.W. & Fowler, R.A. (2010). 2009 Influenza A (H1N1): A clinical review. Hospital Practice,
38, 74-81.
Goodwin, R., Haque, S., Neto, F., & Myers, L.B. (2009). Initial psychological responses to Influenza A,
H1N1 (“Swine flu”). BMC Infectious Diseases, 9, 166-171.
16
Haenen, M-E., Schmidt, A.J.M., Schoenmakers, M., & Van Den Hout, M.A. (1998). Quantitative and
qualitative aspects of cancer knowledge: Comparing hypochondriacal subjects and healthy
controls. Psychology and Health, 13, 1005-1014.
Hilton, S., & Hunt, K. (2010). UK newspapers’ representations of the 2009-10 outbreak of swine flu:
One health scare not over-hyped by the media? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.
Accessed 3/1/11 from http://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2010/12/03/jech.2010.119875.full.pdf
Ibuka, Y., Chapman, B., Meyers, L.A., Li, M. & Galvani, A.P. (2010). The dynamics of risk perceptions
and precautionary behavior in response to 2009 (H1N1) pandemic influenza. BMC Infectious
Diseases, 10, 296-306.
Marchionini, G. (1997). Information seeking in electronic environments. New York, NY: Cambridge
University Press.
McCaughey, C. (2010). Influenza: A virus of our times. Ulster Medical Journal, 79: 46-51.
Rimal, R.N., & Real, K. (2003). Perceived risk and efficacy beliefs as motivators of change: Use of
the Risk Perception Attitude (RPA) framework to understand health behaviors. Health
Communication Research, 29, 370-399.
Singer, M. (2009). Pathogens gone wild? Medical anthropology and the “Swine Flu” pandemic.
Medical Anthropology, 28, 199-206.
Turner, M.M., Rimal, R.N., Morrison, D., & Kim, H. (2006). The role of anxiety in seeking and
retaining risk information: Testing the Risk Perception Attitude framework in two studies.
Human Communication Research, 32, p. 130-156.
World Health Organization (2011). What is the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus? Accessed 4/30/2011 from
http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swineflu/frequently_asked_questions/about_disease/en/index.htm
l.
17