UNDERSTANDING AND SERVING USERS
INF 382C
# 27740
Dr. Philip Doty
School of Information
University of Texas at Austin
Fall 2010
Class time:
Thursday 9:00 AM – 12:00 N
Place:
UTA 1.208
Office:
UTA 5.448
Office hrs:
Thursday 1:00 –3:00 PM
By appointment other times
Telephone:
512.471.3746 – direct line
512.471.2742 – iSchool receptionist
512.471.3821 – main iSchool office
Internet:
pdoty@ischool.utexas.edu
http://www.ischool.utexas.edu/
Class URL:
http://courses.ischool.utexas.edu/Doty_Philip/2010/fall/INF382C/
TA:
Carol Brock
cbrock@ischool.utexas.edu
Office hours
Face to face: Monday 10:00 – 11:00 AM
UTA 5.558
Virtual:
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
Friday 2:00 – 3:00 PM
1
By appointment other times
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction to the course
3
Expectations of students’ performance
4
Standards for written work
5
Editing conventions
9
Grading
10
Texts and other tools
11
List of assignments
13
Outline of course
14
Schedule
16
Assignments
21
References
25
Readings in the class schedule
25
Selected ARIST chapters 1966-2008
29
Useful digital sources for evaluating digital information
33
Additional sources
34
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
3
INTRODUCTION TO THE COURSE
INF 382C, Understanding and Serving Users, aims to understand people’s information behavior
and practices beyond their role as users of particular information systems. The course explores
how social theory and empirical research help us understand people, their information behavior,
and information practices and how we can design information services and systems to greatest
effect. These services and systems can range from the paper-based to the digital and from the
institutionalized to the less formal. The course helps prepare students for more advanced study
and for more informed evaluation of information services, as students and as practitioners.
To achieve those ends, the course looks at social, humanistic, system design, and other modes of
investigation. We look especially at the interactions among interpretation, meaning making,
identity, community, practice, narrative, information agencies, information policy, and
information technologies.
How these and other material/social conditions interact in complex ways is of special interest to
the course, as is how we learn and know as members of communities, in particular, situated
circumstances. We will not make the common error of believing that membership in a particular
community explains the totality of one’s information behavior or practices. Nor will we equate
information behavior and practice with the more limited concept of “information seeking.”
One of the major goals of the course is an increased awareness of similarities and differences
among disciplines interested in information practices and behavior: information studies,
computer science, system design, communication, cognitive psychology, science and technology
studies, education, sociology, cultural studies, intellectual history, anthropology, philosophy, and
organizational studies. We will look at three modes of understanding and serving users:



Empirical studies of users of all kinds; these studies will include the use of human, paperbased, and digital information systems and will be drawn from a wide variety of sources.
The practice of the information professions, especially the provision of reference services in
libraries and archives both in-person and digitally; this set of readings will feature research
based in information studies.
Examining and generating social theory related to understanding people and their use of
information; this set of readings will be based on our discipline as well as a wider set of
disciplinary perspectives.
These literatures and modes are not mutually exclusive.
Efforts to understand information practices and behavior have evolved in a number of ways:





From system-centric to people-centric perspectives, an important step in the maturity of the
information disciplines; this evolution has been accompanied by a growing recognition of the
agency of users as co-creators of information systems and technologies of all kinds
From an emphasis on scientists and engineers to the study of people more generally,
especially the socially marginalized such as women, children, and the poor
From the study of cognition in the early days of the “user turn” to the wider array of
behaviors and practices involved with information and communication, especially the
material and embodied
From a focus on the atomistic individual to a focus on communities, their mutual negotiation
of meaning, and creation of information and communication practices
From a focus on professionals’ use of “information resources” to the study of people’s wider
everyday information practices.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
4
Structurally, the course comprises three units:



Understanding information and people’s information behavior and practices (6 classes)
Providing information services (3 classes)
Students’ research, social theories of information work, and information policy (5 classes).
While all of the topics we address deserve more attention, there are a number that are especially
pertinent that we cannot explore in any depth, e.g., browsing, so-called resistance to technology,
genre studies, anomalous states of knowledge, problem-solving and bounded rationality (and the
weaknesses of problem-based approaches to information behavior), information overload,
boundary objects, information and referral services, reading studies, and social informatics.
Students should engage these and other topics as their interests and professional goals dictate.
EXPECTATIONS OF STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE
Students are expected to be involved, creative, and vigorous participants in class discussions and
in the overall conduct of the class. In addition, students are expected to:
•
Attend all class sessions. If a student misses a class, it is her responsibility to arrange with
another student to obtain all notes, handouts, and assignment sheets.
•
Read all material prior to class. Students are expected to use the course readings to inform
their classroom participation and their writing. Students must integrate what they read with
what they say and write. This last imperative is essential to the development of professional
expertise and to the development of a collegial professional persona.
•
Educate themselves and their peers. Successful completion of graduate programs and
participation in professional life depend upon a willingness to demonstrate initiative and
creativity. Participation in the professional and personal growth of colleagues is essential to
one’s own success as well as theirs. Such collegiality is at the heart of scholarship, so some
assignments are designed to encourage collaboration.

Spend 3-4 hours in preparation for each hour in the classroom; therefore, a 3-credit graduate
hour course requires a minimum of 10-12 hours per week of work outside the classroom.
•
Participate in all class discussions.
•
Complete all assignments on time. Late assignments will not be accepted except in the
limited circumstances noted below. Failure to complete any assignment on time will result in
a failing grade for the course.
•
Be responsible with collective property, especially books and other material on reserve.
•
Ask for help from the instructor or the teaching assistant, either in class, during office hours,
on the telephone, through email, or in any other appropriate way. Email is especially
appropriate for information questions, but the instructor limits access to email outside the
office. Unless there are compelling privacy concerns, it is always wise to send an additional
copy of any email intended for the instructor to the TA who has access to email more
regularly.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
5
Academic dishonesty, such as plagiarism, cheating, or academic fraud, is intolerable and will
incur severe penalties, including failure for the course. If there is concern about behavior that
may be academically dishonest, consult the instructor. Students should refer to the UT General
Information Bulletin, Appendix C, Sections 11-304 and 11-802 and Texas is the Best . . .
HONESTLY! (1988) by the Cabinet of College Councils and the Office of the Dean of Students.
The instructor is happy to provide all appropriate accommodations for students with
documented disabilities. The University’s Office of the Dean of Students at 471.6259, 471.4641
TTY, can provide further information and referrals as necessary.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
6
STANDARDS FOR WRITTEN WORK
You will meet professional standards of clarity, grammar, spelling, and organization in writing.
Review these standards before and after writing; I use them to evaluate your work.
Every writer is faced with the problem of not knowing what her audience knows; therefore,
effective communication depends upon maximizing clarity. Wolcott in Writing Up Qualitative
Research (1990, p. 47) reminds us: "Address . . . the many who do not know, not the few who do."
Remember that clarity of ideas, of language, and of syntax are mutually reinforcing.
Good writing makes for good thinking and vice versa. Recall that writing is a form of inquiry, a
way to think, not a reflection of some supposed static thought “in” the mind. Theodore Dreiser’s
Sister Carrie shows how this process of composition and thought works (1994, p. 144):
Hurstwood surprised himself with his fluency. By the natural law which governs all
effort, what he wrote reacted upon him. He began to feel those subtleties which he could
find words to express. With every word came increased conception. Those inmost
breathings which thus found words took hold upon him.
We need not adopt Dreiser’s breathless metaphysics or naturalism to understand the point.
All written work for the class must be done on a word-processor and double-spaced, with 1"
margins all the way around and in either 10 or 12 pt. font.
Some writing assignments will demand the use of notes (either footnotes or endnotes) and
references. It is particularly important in professional schools such as the School of Information
that notes and references are impeccably done. Please use APA (American Psychological
Association) standards. There are other standard bibliographic and note formats, for example, in
engineering and law, but social scientists and a growing number of humanists use APA.
Familiarity with standard formats is essential for understanding others' work and for preparing
submissions to journals, funding agencies, professional conferences, and the like. You may also
want to consult the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (2001, 5th ed.).
Do not use a general dictionary or encyclopedia for defining terms in
graduate school or in professional writing. If you want to use a reference source to
define a term, use a specialized dictionary such as The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Philosophy or
subject-specific encyclopedia, e.g., the International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences.
The best alternative, however, is having an understanding of the literature related to the term
sufficient to provide a definition in the context of that literature.
Use a standard spell checker, but be aware that spell checking dictionaries have systematic
weaknesses: they exclude most proper nouns, e.g., personal and place names; they omit most
technical terms; they omit most foreign words and phrases; and they cannot identify the error in
using homophones, e.g., writing "there" instead of "their,” or in writing "the" instead of "them."
It is imperative that you proofread your work thoroughly and be precise in
editing it. It is often helpful to have someone else read your writing, to eliminate errors and to
increase clarity. Finally, each assignment should be handed in with a title page containing your
full name, the date, the title of the assignment, and the class number (INF 382C). If you have any
questions about these standards, I will be pleased to discuss them with you at any time.
Remember, every assignment must include a title page with:
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
7
•
•
•
•
The title of the assignment
Your name
The date
The class number – INF 382C.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
8
Since the production of professional-level written work is one of the aims of the class, I will read
and edit your work as the editor of a professional journal or the moderator of a technical session
at a professional conference would. The reminders below will help you prepare professional
written work appropriate to any situation. Note the asterisked errors in #'s 3, 4, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16,
19, 21, and 25 (some have more than one error):
1. Staple all papers for this class in the upper left-hand corner. Do not use covers, binders, or
other means of keeping the pages together.
2. Number all pages after the title page. Notes and references do not count against page limits.
3. Use formal, academic prose. Avoid colloquial language, *you know?* It is essential in
graduate work and in professional communication to avoid failures in diction – be serious
and academic when called for, be informal and relaxed when called for, and be everything in
between as necessary. For this course, avoid words and phrases such as "agenda," "problem
with," "deal with," "handle," "window of," "goes into," "broken down into," "viable," and
"option."
4. Avoid clichés. They are vague, *fail to "push the envelope," and do not provide "relevant
input."*
5. Avoid computer technospeak like "input," "feedback," or "processing information" except
when using such terms in specific technical ways.
6. Avoid using “content” as a noun.
7. Do not use the term "relevant" except in its information retrieval sense. Ordinarily, it is a
colloquial cliché, but it also has a strict technical meaning in information studies.
8. Do not use "quality" as an adjective; it is vague, cliché, and colloquial. Instead use "highquality," "excellent," "superior," or whatever more formal phrase you deem appropriate.
9. Study the APA style convention for the proper use of ellipsis*. . . .*
10. Avoid using the terms "objective" and "subjective" in their evidentiary senses; these terms
entail major philosophical, epistemological controversy. Avoid terms such as "facts,"
"factual," "proven," and related constructions for similar reasons.
11. Avoid contractions. *Don't* use them in formal writing.
12. Be circumspect in using the term "this," especially in the beginning of a sentence. *THIS* is
often a problem because the referent is unclear. Pay strict attention to providing clear
referents for all pronouns. Especially ensure that pronouns and their referents agree in
number; e.g., "each person went to their home" is a poor construction because "each" is
singular, as is the noun "person," while "their" is a plural form. Therefore, either the referent
or the pronoun must change in number.
13. "If" ordinarily takes the subjunctive mood, e.g., "If he were [not "was"] only taller."
14. Put "only" in its appropriate place, near the word it modifies. For example, it is appropriate
in spoken English to say that "he only goes to Antone's" when you mean that "the only place
he frequents is Antone's." In written English, however, the sentence should read "he goes
only to Antone's."
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
9
15. Do not confuse possessive, plural, or contracted forms, especially of pronouns. *Its* bad.
16. Do not confuse affect/effect, compliment/complement, or principle/principal. Readers will
not *complement* your work or *it's* *principle* *affect* on them.
17. Avoid misplaced modifiers; e.g., it is inappropriate to write the following sentence: As
someone interested in the history of Mesoamerica, it was important for me to attend the
lecture. The sentence is inappropriate because the phrase "As someone interested in the
history of Mesoamerica" is meant to modify the next immediate word, which should then,
obviously, be both a person and the subject of the sentence. It should modify the word "I" by
preceding it immediately. One good alternative for the sentence is: As someone interested in
the history of Mesoamerica, I was especially eager to attend the lecture.
18. Avoid use of "valid," "parameter," "bias," "reliability," and "paradigm," except in limited
technical ways. These are important research terms and should be used with precision.
19. Remember that the words "data," "media," "criteria," "strata," and "phenomena" are all
PLURAL forms. They *TAKES* plural verbs. If you use any of these plural forms in a
singular construction, e.g., "the data is," you will make the instructor very unhappy :-(.
20. "Number," "many," and "fewer" are used with plural nouns (a number of horses, many
horses, and fewer horses). “Amount," "much," and "less" are used with singular nouns (an
amount of hydrogen, much hydrogen, and less hydrogen). Another useful way to make this
distinction is to recall that "many" is used for countable nouns, while "much" is used for
uncountable nouns.
21. *The passive voice should generally not be used.*
22. "Between" is used with two alternatives, while "among" is used with three or more.
23. Generally avoid the use of honorifics such as Mister, Doctor, Ms., and so on when referring to
persons in your writing, especially when citing their written work. Use last names and dates
as appropriate in APA.
24. There is no generally accepted standard for citing electronic resources. If you cite them, give
an indication, as specifically as possible, of:
-
responsibility
title
date of creation
date viewed
place to find the source
(who?)
(what?)
(when?)
(when?)
(where? how?).
See the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (2001, 5th ed., pp. 213-214,
231, and 268-281) for a discussion of citing electronic material and useful examples. Also see
Web Extension to American Psychological Association Style (WEAPAS) at
http://www.beadsland.com/weapas/#SCRIBE for more guidance.
25. *PROFREAD! PROOFREED! PROOOFREAD!*
26. Citation, quotation, and reference are nouns; cite, quote, and refer to are verbs.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
10
27. Use double quotation marks (“abc.”), not single quotation marks (‘xyz.’), as a matter of
course. Single quotation marks are to be used to indicate quotations within quotations.
28. Provide a specific page number for all direct quotations. If the quotation is from a Web page
or other digital source, provide at least the paragraph number and/or other directional cues,
e.g., “(Davis, 1993, section II, ¶ 4).”
29. In ordinary American English, as ≠ because.
30. Use "about" instead of the tortured locution "as to."
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
11
31. In much of social science and humanistic study, the term "issue" is used in a technical way to
identify sources of public controversy or dissensus. Please use the term to refer to topics
about which there is substantial public disagreement, NOT synonymously with general
terms such as "area," "topic," or the like.
32. On a related note, avoid the locution of “public debate.” Such a locution makes a series of
faulty assumptions:
- It presumes that a public policy issue has only two “sides.” There are usually three or four
or more perspectives on any topic of public dissensus that merit consideration. “Debate”
hides this complexity.
- “Debate” implies that one “side” and only one “side” can be correct; that presumption
ignores the fact that the many perspectives on a public policy issue have contributions to
make to its resolution.
- “Debate” implies that there can be and will be one and only one “winner.” This
presumption naively ignores the fact that some public policy issues are intractable, that
these issues are often emergent as are their resolutions, and that compromise is success
rather than failure or “surrender.”
33. Please do not start a sentence or any independent clause with “however.”
34. Avoid the use of “etc.” – it is awkward, colloquial, and vague.
35. Do not use the term “subjects” to describe research participants. “Respondents,”
“participants,” and “informants” are preferred terms and have been for decades.
36. Do not use notes unless absolutely necessary, but, if you must use them, use endnotes not
footnotes.
37. Please adhere to these orthographic (spelling) conventions:
- Web with a capital “W.”
- Web site, two words, with a capital “W.”
- Internet with a capital “I” to indicate the TCP/IP-compliant computer network with a
shared address convention. Otherwise, internet with a lower-case “i” simply means any of
the many millions of networks of networks.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
12
SOME EDITING CONVENTIONS FOR STUDENTS’ PAPERS
Symbol
Meaning
#
number OR insert a space; the context will help you decipher its meaning
AWK
awkward and usually compromises clarity as well
BLOCK
make into a block quotation without external quotation marks; do so with
quotations ≥ 4 lines
caps
capitalize
COLLOQ
colloquial and to be avoided
dB
database
FRAG
sentence fragment; often means that the verb or subject of the sentence is missing
ITAL
italicize
j
journal
lc
make into lower case
lib'ship
librarianship
org, org’l
organization, organizational
PL
plural
Q
question
Q’naire
questionnaire
REF?
what is the referent of this pronoun? to what or whom does it refer?
RQ
research question
sp
spelling
SING
singular
w/
with
w.c.?
word choice?
The instructor also uses check marks to indicate that the writer has made an especially good
point. Wavy lines indicate that usage or reasoning is suspect.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
13
GRADING
Grades for this class include:
A+
A
AB+
B
BC+
C
CF
Extraordinarily high achievement
Superior
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Barely satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unacceptable and failing.
not recognized by the University
4.00
3.67
3.33
3.00
2.67
2.33
2.00
1.67
0.00.
See the memorandum from former Dean Brooke Sheldon dated August 13, 1991, and the notice in
the School of Information student orientation packet for explanations of this system. Consult the
iSchool Web site (http://www.ischool.utexas.edu/programs/general_info.php) and the Graduate
School Catalogue (e.g., http://registrar.utexas.edu/catalogs/grad0709/ch01/ch01a.grad.html#The-Nature-and-Purpose-of-Graduate-Work and
http://registrar.utexas.edu/catalogs/grad07-09/ch01/ch01b.grad.html#Student-Responsibility)
for more on standards of work. While the University does not accept the grade of A+, the
instructor may assign the grade to students whose work is extraordinary.
The grade of B signals acceptable, satisfactory performance in graduate school. The instructor
reserves the grade of A for students who demonstrate not only a command of the concepts and
techniques discussed but also an ability to synthesize and integrate them in a professional
manner and communicate them effectively, successfully informing the work of other students.
The grade of incomplete (X) is reserved for students in extraordinary circumstances and must be
negotiated with the instructor before the end of the semester. See the former Dean's
memorandum of August 13, 1991, available from the main iSchool office.
The instructor uses points to evaluate assignments, not letter grades. He uses an arithmetic – not
a proportional – algorithm to determine points on any assignment. For example, 14/20 points on
an assignment does NOT translate to 70% of the credit, or a D. Instead 14/20 points is roughly
equivalent to a B. If any student's semester point total ≥ 90 (is equal to or greater than 90), then
s/he will have earned an A of some kind. If the semester point total ≥ 80, then s/he will have
earned at least a B of some kind. Whether these are A+, A, A-, B+, B, or B- depends upon the
comparison of point totals for all students. For example, if a student earns a total of 90 points and
the highest point total in the class is 98, the student would earn an A-. If, on the other hand, a
student earns 90 points and the highest point total in the class is 91, then the student would earn
an A. This system will be further explained throughout the semester.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
14
TEXTS AND OTHER TOOLS
There are three required and three recommended texts for this class: Brown & Duguid (2002),
Bruner (1990), Norman (2002), and Suchman (2007) are at the Co-op (476.7211
http://universitycoop.com/). As many of the readings as possible will be on Reserve at PCL;
many are available online.
The required texts are:
Brown, John Seely, & Duguid, Paul. (2002). The social life of information (2nd ed.). Boston:
Harvard Business School.
Bruner, Jerome. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Suchman, Lucy. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions (2nd ed.).
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
The recommended texts are:
Bishop, Ann Peterson, Van House, Nancy A., & Buttenfield, Barbara P. (Eds.). (2003). Digital
library use: Social practice in design and evaluation. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Fisher, Karen E., Erdelez, Sanda, & McKechnie, Lynne (E.F.). (Eds.). (2005). Theories of
information behavior. Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Norman, Donald A. (2002). The design of everyday things (with a new introduction). New York:
Basic Books.
The course Blackboard site, as well as direct email messages, will inform students about changes
in the course schedule, discuss assignments, and so on. All course participants can use both
means to communicate with each other, notify the class about interesting events and sources, and
the like.
While I always have reservations about readings that I assign, I want to mention some particular
concerns I have with the texts for this semester’s course.
Brown & Duguid’s The Social Life of Information (2002) is a widely cited and influential book, but
there are two concepts important to their argument and problematic in the context of this course:
1.
The “content/conduit” distinction – although the authors explicitly discuss this mistaken
dualism’s ill effects and how it misleads us, like all English speakers, they allow this
metaphor to seep into their analysis. Be aware of its use and sensitive to how it tends to
obscure important questions.
2.
On a related note, Brown & Duguid talk about information as if it were exclusively a “thing.”
They talk about how it is “transmitted,” “acquired,” and the like, and they do the same to
knowledge. This way of speaking, as we know, is controversial and problematic, especially
for those of us who do not limit the concept of information to the mathematical/message
context and those who do not support the supposed distinction between information and
knowledge. See Buckland (1991) for a contrasting view.
Remember, however, that I think that The Social Life of Information is an excellent book and well
worth our attention.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
15
Jerome Bruner’s Acts of Meaning (1990) is another of our texts, and, while it is an outstanding
piece of work, my main reservations about that book stem from Bruner’s earlier status as one of
the forebears of the so-called “cognitive revolution” with its misplaced emphasis on people as
primarily cognitive beings and on computation as an adequate analogue for thinking. We will
discuss these and other themes as the semester progresses.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
16
LIST OF ASSIGNMENTS
The instructor will provide additional information about each assignment. Written assignments
are to be word-processed and double-spaced in 10- or 12-point font, with 1" margins.
Assignments are due in class unless otherwise indicated. GRP indicates a group assignment.
Assignment
Preparation and participation
Date Due
-----
Percent of Grade
10%
Formation of research teams GRP
SEP 2
---
Choice of user group GRP
SEP 9
---
Oral History of TX Oil Industry synchronization
SEP 23
see DEC 2
Articulation work (4 pp.)
OCT 7
15
Oral History of TX Oil Industry annotation
OCT 21
see DEC 2
Annotated bibliography GRP
OCT 28
20
Analysis of a research paper (5-7 pp.)
NOV 4
20
Presentation on user group GRP
NOV 11 or 18
---
Oral History of TX Oil Industry annotation
DEC 2
10
Challenges of design for human-machine
communication (6-8 pp.)
TUE, DEC 7
12:00 N
25
All assignments must be handed in on time, and the instructor reserves the right to issue a course
grade of F if any assignment is not completed. Late assignments will be accepted only if:
1.
At least 24 hours before the date due, the instructor gives explicit permission to the student to
hand the assignment in late.
2.
At the same time, a specific date and time are agreed upon for the late submission.
3.
The assignment is then submitted on or before the agreed-upon date and time.
The first criterion can be met only in the most serious of health, family, or personal situations.
All of your assignments should adhere to the standards for written work; should be clear,
succinct, and specific; and should be explicitly grounded in the readings, class discussions, and
other sources as appropriate. You will find it particularly useful to write multiple drafts of your
papers.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
17
OUTLINE OF COURSE
Date
TOPICS AND ASSIGNMENTS
Unit 1: Understanding information and people’s information behavior and practices
1
AUG 26
Introduction to the course
Review of the syllabus
Introduction to the history of user studies (1): Scientists and engineers
2
SEP 2
History of user studies (2): Beyond professional work to ordinary people
and ordinary tasks
• DUE: Formation of research teams – GRP
3
SEP 9
Zack Vowell – Introduction to the Oral History of the Texas Oil Industry
Quinn Stewart – GLIFOS to support Oral History of the Texas Oil Industry
• DUE: Choice of user group – GRP
4
SEP 16
Exploring the concept of information (1): Cognition, mentalist metaphors,
and the “content/conduit” distinction
Group meeting
5
SEP 23
Guest -- Exploring the concept of information (2): Information retrieval
and relevance
• DUE: Synchronize Oral History of Texas Oil Industry transcript
6
SEP 30
Exploring the concept of information (3): Materialist and practice-oriented
views and critiquing the “content/conduit” distinction
Unit 2: Providing information services
7
OCT 7
Communities of practice
Invisible and articulation work
• DUE: Articulation work (4 pp.) (15%)
8
OCT 14
Guest – Interfaces
Considering Suchman (2007) (1)
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
18
9
OCT 21
Panel – The information intermediary
Considering Suchman (2007) (2)
• DUE: Oral History of Texas Oil Industry annotation
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
19
Unit 3: Students’ research, social theories of information work, and information policy
10
OCT 28
Information policy issues (1): Privacy and social networking
What are documents?
• DUE: Annotated bibliography (20%) – GRP
11
NOV 4
Information policy issues (2): “Censorship”
• DUE: Analysis of a research paper (5-7 pp.)(20%)
12
NOV 11
Students’ presentations
Considering Suchman (2007) (3)
• DUE: Presentation on user group – GRP
13
NOV 18
Students’ presentations
Considering Suchman (2007) (4)
• DUE: Presentation on user group – GRP
14
NOV 25
No class – Happy Thanksgiving!
DEC 2
Course evaluation
Considering Suchman (2007) (5)
Summary discussion
• DUE: Oral History of Texas Oil Industry annotation (10%)
TUE
DEC 7
No class – assignment due at 12:00 N
• DUE: Challenges of design for human-machine communication (6-8
pp.)(25%)
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
20
SCHEDULE
DATE
TOPICS AND ASSIGNMENTS
Unit 1: Understanding information and people’s information behavior and practices
AUG 26
Introduction to the course
Review of the syllabus
Introduction to the history of user studies (1): Scientists and engineers
READ: Brown & Duguid (2002), Acknowledgements, Preface, Introduction,
Chapters 1, 6
Borgman (2007b) CD
Dervin & Nilan (1986) CD
Tenopir et al. (2005) online
AS:
SEP 2
Delamont & Atkinson (2001) online
Garvey (1979)
Israel (2001)
Maher (1986)
Norman (2002), Prefaces to both editions, Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4
Subramanyam (1979)
Turnbaugh (1986)
History of user studies (2): Beyond professional work to ordinary people
and ordinary tasks
READ: Bates (2005a) CD
Borgman et al. (1995) online
Eisenberg & Berkowitz (2008) online
Hersberger (2005) CD
Kline & Pinch (1996) online
Kuhlthau (2005) CD
Lowe & Eisenberg (2005) CD
AS:
Barton & Hamilton (1998a)
Bishop et al. (2001)
Cooper (2002a)
Eisenberg & Spitzer (1991)
Fidel et al. (1999) online
Large (2004)
Large et al. (2002) online
Marcum (2002) online
Sharp et al. (2007), Foreword, Preface, and Chapter 1 CD
Walter (1994)
• DUE: Formation of research teams – GRP
SEP 9
Zack Vowell – Introduction to the Oral History of the Texas Oil Industry
Quinn Stewart – GLIFOS to support Oral History of the Texas Oil Industry
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
21
READ: Pettigrew et al. (2001) CD
AS:
Norman (2002), 5, 6, and 7
• DUE: Choice of user group – GRP
SEP 16
Exploring the concept of information (1): Cognition, mentalist metaphors,
and the “content/conduit” distinction
READ: Brown & Duguid (2002), 2 and 3
Bruner (1990), Preface, Acknowledgements, and Chapter 1
Bates (2005b) CD
Belkin (2005) CD
MacMullin & Taylor (1984) CD
Weaver (1949) CD
Wilson (2000) online
AS:
SEP 23
Cole (1994)
Cornelius (2002)
Losee (1990a)
Losee (1997)
Scarrott (1994)
Guest -- Exploring the concept of information (2): Information retrieval
and relevance
READ: Bruner (1990), 2
Suchman (2007), 6
Kuhlthau (1991) online
Saracevic (2007a) online
Saracevic (2007b) online
AS:
Barry & Schamber (1998) online
Choi & Rasmussen (2003) online
Ruthven (2008) online
Sharp et al. (2007), 2 and 3 CD
• DUE: Synchronize Oral History of Texas Oil Industry transcript
SEP 30
Exploring the concept of information (3): Materialist and practiceoriented views and critiquing the “content/conduit” distinction
READ: Bruner (1990), 3
Buckland (1991) online
Nunberg (1996b) online
Reddy (1993) CD
Schiller (1988) CD
Tidline (2005) CD
Van House (2003a) CD
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
22
AS:
Bates (1989)
Belkin, Oddy, & Brooks (1982 a and b)
Case (2002) passim especially 6
Enser (2008)
Harter & Hert (1997)
Kuhlthau (1993a)
Schamber (1994)
Swanson (1988)
Vakkari & Sormunen (2004) online
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
23
Unit 2: Providing information services
OCT 7
Communities of practice
Invisible and articulation work
READ: Brown & Duguid (2002), 4, 5
Suchman (2007), 7, 8
Brown & Duguid (1991) online
Davenport & Hall (2002) CD/online
Davies (2005) CD
Ehrlich & Cash (1999) online
Nardi & Engeström (1999) online
Star et al. (2003) CD
Star & Strauss (1999) online
Suchman (1995) online
Suchman (1996) CD
AS:
Daft & Weick (1984)
Dervin (1976)
Granovetter (1973)
Lave (1988) passim
McKechnie et al. (2007) CD
Nahl (2007) CD
Lave & Wenger (1992) passim
Parker & Berryman (2007) CD
Sharp et al. (2007), 5 CD
Wenger (1998) passim
• DUE: Articulation work (4 pp.) (15%)
OCT 14
Guest – Interfaces
Considering Suchman (2007) (1)
READ: Suchman (2007), Chapters 2-5
AS:
OCT 21
Sharp et al. (2007), 6 both parts CD
Panel – the information intermediary
Considering Suchman (2007) (2)
READ: Suchman (2007), 6-8
Taylor (1968) CD
Yakel (2000) CD
AS:
Abbott (1988)
Abbott (1998) online
Duff & Johnson (2002) online
Edwards (2005) CD
Marshall (2003)
Nardi & O’Day (1999), 7 (“Librarians: A Keystone Species,” pp. 79-104)
Nunberg (1998) online
Ortega y Gassett (1975)
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
24
Palmquist (2005) CD
Schön (1983)
Taylor (1986a)
Taylor (1986b)
Tissing (1984)
• DUE: Oral History of Texas Oil Industry annotation
Unit 3: Students’ research, social theories of information work, and information policy
OCT 28
Information policy issues (1): Privacy and social networking
What are documents?
READ: Brown & Duguid (2002), 7, 8. Afterword
Bishop (1999) online
Buckland (1997) online
EPIC (2010a) online
EPIC (2010b) online
Grassian (2006) online
Levy (2003) CD
AS:
Heins et al. (2006) online
• DUE: Annotated bibliography (20%) – GRP
NOV 4
Information policy issues (2): “Censorship”
READ: Asheim (1953) CD
Asheim (1983) CD
Curry Jansen (1991) CD
U.S. v. ALA (2003) on Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) online
[the plurality opinion by Rehnquist, the two concurring opinions by
Kennedy and Breyer, and the two dissenting opinions by Stevens
and Souter]
AS:
Preer (1994)
Tucker (1981)
• DUE: Analysis of research paper (5-7 pp.)(20%)
NOV 11
Students’ presentations
Considering Suchman (2007) (3)
READ: Suchman (2007), 9-10
AS:
Andersen (2008)
Borges (1964)
Borgman (2007a) CD
Crane (1991)
Eco (1984)
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
25
Geertz (1983) CD
Leckie (2005) CD
• DUE: Presentation on user group – GRP
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
26
NOV 18
Students’ presentations
Considering Suchman (2007) (4)
READ: Bruner (1990), 4
Suchman (2007), Acknowledgements, Preface, Introduction, Chapters 1,
11, 12
O’Day & Nardi (2003) CD
AS:
Cornelius (1996a) CD
Long (1993) CD
Nagel (1986)
Toms & Duff (2002) online
• DUE: Presentation on user group – GRP
NOV 25
No class – Happy Thanksgiving!
DEC 2
Course evaluation
Considering Suchman (2007) (5)
Summary discussion
READ: Hauptman (1998) online
Karat (1998) online
Marchionini (2008) online
Norman (2007) CD
Petroski (2003) CD
Schweikardt (2009) online
Suchman (2007), 13, 14, 15
AS:
Augst (2001)
Augst & Wiegand (2001)
Wiegand (2003)
• DUE: Oral History of Texas Oil Industry annotation (10%)
TUE
DEC 7 No class – assignment due at 12:00 N
• DUE: Challenges of design for human-machine communication (6-8
pp.)(25%)
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
27
ASSIGNMENTS
Articulation work – Due October 7 (15%)
In her paper about digital libraries and collaborative knowledge construction, Nancy Van House
(2003a, p. 281) discusses articulation work, borrowing the concept from Star and Strauss (1999)
and Suchman (1996). Strauss et al. (1985) first developed and explored the concept.
1.
2.
What does the term “articulation work” mean in Van House’s chapter, Star & Strauss (1999),
and Suchman (1996)?
How does the concept of articulation work shed light on the design, implementation, and
evaluation of information services?
Please write a paper 4 double-spaced pages long in response to these questions, submitting it in
class on October 7. Please be specific and direct in addressing the questions. Consult the
standards for written work both before and after writing your paper and feel free to use other
sources, especially things we have read and class discussion, as you consider them appropriate.
Adding value to the Oral History of the Texas Oil Industry (OHTOI) through the use of richmedia – Due various dates
Librarianship has a long and rich history of aiding users in their search for information.
Librarians and other information professionals have developed indices, finding aids, tables of
contents, and other finding aids for many years for print materials, as well as producing guides
to audio and video collections. The arrival of the World Wide Web in 1989 provided new
opportunities for as well as new challenges to connecting users to sources of information.
This project seeks to combine the best of the analog print world with the realized potential of
digital distribution. It builds upon a similar project done in recent semesters at the iSchool that
culminated in an award for the Briscoe Center for American History and the School of
Information as The Most Innovative Archive on the Web
(http://www.archivesnext.com/?p=1580).
The Oral History of the Texas Oil Industry (OHTOI) began in 1951 in Beaumont, Texas, at a
reunion for the oil pioneers present at the discovery of oil at nearby Spindletop in 1901, which
marked the beginning of the modern oil era. Estelle B. Sharp, wife of one of the early drillers,
recognized the need to preserve these early pioneers’ stories before they were lost, and provided
support for the University of Texas to begin recording the pioneers’ recollections in the summer
of 1952 on magnetic tape. Magnetic tape recording developed in Germany and was secret during
WWII, but it and other Axis power technologies came to U.S. and became commercialized in the
late 1940’s, making it a new technology in 1952.
Later, someone made transcripts of the tapes, and, in 1982, 10 students in the Indexing and
Abstracting course taught by Professor Eugene B. Jackson at the Graduate School of Library and
Information Science at UT created an index of 179 of the transcript recordings. Evaluation of this
index and a sample of recordings was part of a School of Information Capstone Project in 2008,
but technical problems with the tapes prevented further work on them.
Now, it’s INF 382C’s turn. The majority of these recordings are digitized and available online.
Students in the Survey of Digitization class this semester will be scanning and using optical
character recognition (OCR) software on the original transcripts, and they will make an electronic
version of the 1982 index available. Each student in the users class will then utilize online
training tutorials in Glifos Social-Media at the iSchool to work directly on the project server at the
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
28
Briscoe Center, to perform the following tasks. These tasks will involve approximately 40-60
minutes of audio interview in the OHTOI collection assigned by Quinn and the instructor. Each
student will:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Divide and synchronize the transcript text with the audio recording. IT IS IMPERATIVE TO
PRESERVE the page numbering information!
Create a chronological Table of Contents (ToC) based upon the particular interview(s).
Create an alphabetical index for the interview(s) by searching for and using entries from the
existing collective index.
Evaluate the interview(s) for geographic information; use Google Earth to create a Maps iText
for each interview. Each interview should have at least one entry, showing where the
interview was conducted.
Work with the original comprehensive index in a format to be determined and link each
entry from the index to the appropriate point in the interview(s).
If the student desires, update the Student Credit section of the interview(s) to get public
recognition for the work.
Today, if a patron wants to hear one of these recordings at the Briscoe Center, she probably
cannot. She can access the index online, and determine the transcript number and page number
of a desired section, but must then go to the Briscoe reading room and request the transcript to
read. This has been the case for some 50 years now.
At the conclusion of this project, people worldwide will be able to access the original recordings
online in a rich-media format; use the ToC, index, and maps; and search within each individual
interview as well as across all of the interviews. Further, they can search across all of the richmedia holdings at the Briscoe Center. A search for a specific geographic location across
collections at the Briscoe could retrieve an interview with a conservationist in 2001 from the
Texas Legacy collection, as well as an interview from an oil pioneer from the same geographic
area in 1901.
In addition, an online, rich-media version of the Oral History of the Texas Oil Industry would
help expand research into how rich-media can aid scholars, researchers, and students of this
important age in Texas history.
• Individual Oral History of the TX Oil Industry interview annotation – due Thursday,
September 23; Thursday, October 21; and Thursday, December 2, 2010 (10%)
Students will do this assignment individually. Quinn Stewart and the instructor will assign each
student about 40-60 minutes of audio interview from the TX Oil Industry Oral History that has
not yet been annotated. Then, using GlifosMedia and Google Earth as demonstrated in class and
in the online tutorials, each student will complete the six annotation tasks described above:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Synchronize the pre-existing transcript with the interview(s) using GlifosMedia Creator.
Create and synchronize a table of contents (ToC) for each interview using GlifosMedia
Creator. These first two parts of the assignment are due on Thursday, September 23.
Create an alphabetical index for the interview(s) using entries from the collective index.
Using Google Earth, create appropriate links from each interview to some large or small
areas on earth. These third and fourth parts of the assignment are due on Thursday, October
21.
Link each entry from the collective index to the appropriate place in the individual
interview(s).
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
29
6.
Take credit for the work completed as the student wishes. These final two parts of the
assignment are due on the last class day, Thursday, December 2.
Quinn Stewart has created online tutorials that will walk students through each phase of this
assignment. The tutorials can be used remotely, and require a broadband Internet connection
and the latest Firefox, Safari, or Chrome browser. Please note that GM does NOT support the use
of Internet Explorer. You can do the annotations on your own machines or on Windows or Mac
computers in the iSchool IT Lab, UTA 1.210. See http://www.ischool.utexas.edu/labs/it_lab/
for lab hours. The IT Lab also provides Windows and Mac laptops that students can check out
and use to complete this assignment.
Please recall that parts 1 and 2 of the assignment are due September 23, three and four on October
21, and five and six on December 2. Students will complete their files following instructions from
Quinn.
Studying the information behavior of particular user groups – due various dates GRP
This multi-part assignment will be done in research teams. The class will self-select into teams of
four or five students each and choose one of the communities from the list below or provide some
alternative that the instructor approves. No more than one team may choose any particular user
community.
Agricultural field agents
Architects
Cartographers
Chemists
Civil engineers
Economists
Hang gliding enthusiasts
Electrical engineers
Elementary school history teachers
Engineering educators
Environmental engineers
Environmental research centers
Geoscientists
Gerontologists
Home schoolers
Hydrologists
Managers in for-profit enterprises
Managers in not-for-profit
enterprises
Mechanical engineers
Middle school geography teachers
Military field commanders
Nurses
Persons with “disabilities”
Physicians
Print makers
Public safety specialists, e.g., police
officers
Public utility regulators
Real estate professionals
Skilled crafts persons, e.g., roofers,
plumbers, auto mechanics (choose
one group)
Soil scientists
Community of users – Due Thursday, September 9 – GRP. Each self-selected team will
select the proposed community of users and notify the instructor of the choice by September 9.
Since the choices will be strictly first come, first served, the sooner you tell the instructor which
communities you are interested in the better.
Annotated bibliography – Due Thursday, October 28 (20%) – GRP
Each team of students will produce a double-spaced annotated bibliography of twenty (20) items
we have not read in class but are related to the user community in question and its information
behavior. Include the twenty items you consider most valuable to understanding this
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
30
community. This bibliography should be distributed in print form in class, including two (2)
copies for the instructor, and should have annotations that:
1.
2.
Explain specifically how the resource is of value to understanding the information behavior
of the user community and its identity as a community of practice.
Are two to three sentences long.
Presentation on user group – Due Thursday, November 11, or Thursday, November 18 – GRP
Each team will make an in-class presentation no more than 20 minutes long about their chosen
user group. Each student will do roughly 4-5 minutes of the presentation, and the team should
clearly identify the interviews used, the intended user group, the external sources and other
material linked to the interviews, important sources about that user group’s information
behavior, and the like. All members of the team will earn the same grade for the presentation.
Students should plan to use visuals, e.g., PowerPoint, and handouts as appropriate. The
classroom is equipped with Mac and Windows computers, an Internet connection, and projector.
In your presentation, please be sure to consider the following questions and concerns:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
What are the most important elements of the community’s information behavior and
practice? How do you know?
What are the noteworthy ways in which this community is like and unlike others in its
information behavior and practice?
How can you characterize this group as a community of practice? Rely on sources from
earlier classes on communities of practice and focus on the group’s information behavior.
How have the things we have read and discussed as a class helped you understand this
particular user community and its similarities and dissimilarities when compared to others?
Be sure to discuss at least some of the sources noted in your annotated bibliography in your
presentation.
Post the full presentation and annotated bibliography in the appropriate forum in Blackboard.
Make the presentation and annotated bibliography available at a public URL and notify the class
of the URL in your class handouts and in the appropriate Blackboard forum.
Analysis of a research paper – Due November 4 (20%)
Please choose one of the following papers to write about. No more than five students can choose
any paper; consult the course Web site for the availability of the papers, and see the first part of
the references in this syllabus for their complete citations.
Please address the following questions:
1.
2.
What are the most important contributions the paper makes to our understanding of the
users of information services? Why are these contributions important? (3-4 pp.)
Choose any one of the papers we have read as a class and explore how it compares to the
paper you read for this assignment. What are the papers’ most important similarities and
differences for our study of users? As always, please be as specific and as you can in
addressing this question. (2-3 pp.)
Because these papers come from a variety of disciplines, it is essential to pay special attention to
their conceptual frameworks, assumptions, terminology, and other characteristics that we usually
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
31
elide when reading in our own discipline. Also be especially sensitive to their bibliographies –
whom do they cite, and what disciplines are represented among their sources?
Candidate papers:
Bielawski, “Inuit Indigenous Knowledge and Science in the Arctic’ (1996) online
Latour, “Visualization and Cognition: Thinking with Eyes and Hands” (1986) online
Myers, “Stories and Styles in Two Molecular Biology Review Articles” (1991) online
Pierce, “Communication” (1972) CD
Taylor, “Information Use Environments” (1991) CD
Weick & Roberts, “Collective Mind in Organizations: Heedful Interrelating on Flight Decks”
(1993) online
Westbrook, “Information Access Issues for Interdisciplinary Scholars: Results of a Delphi Study
on Women’s Studies Research” (1997) online
Each student will produce an essay 5-7 double-spaced pages long addressing the questions
above. Please ensure that the paper is as specific as possible and adheres to our usual standards
for written work.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
32
Challenges of design for human-machine communication– Due Tuesday, December 7, 12:00 N
(6-8 pp.)(25%)
This assignment is intended to help students more fully integrate several of the concepts and
texts important to understanding and serving users, focusing on Lucy Suchman’s Human-Machine
Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions (2nd ed., 2007).
In addition to Suchman’s book, students should use these sources in addressing the questions
below: Petroski (2003) and Norman (2007) on the difficulties of design, particularly for
communication between machines and people, and Marchionini (2008) on human-information
interaction.
Students must address these questions as explicitly and specifically as possible, using the page
guidelines in parentheses to help shape their responses:
1.
2.
3.
Why is clear communication between people and even quite sophisticated machines so
difficult? (2-3 pp.)
What are some useful strategies for addressing the difficulties identified in question 1? (2-3
pp.)
How does considering the previous two questions help us understand and serve users? (2
pp.)
Students should use Suchman (2007) as the primary source to address these questions.
At the same time, however, besides Petroski (2007), Norman (2003), and Marchionini (2008),
many of the concepts and sources we discussed earlier in the semester may prove quite useful in
completing this assignment, e.g.:







Articulation and invisible work
Communities of practice
Presentations and readings about information retrieval and interfaces
Various theories about information and information behavior generally
Bruner’s Acts of Meaning
Students’ own team research about specific user groups’ information behavior
Classmates’ presentations.
Students must put a hard copy of a paper 6-8 double-spaced pp. long engaging these questions
into the instructor’s mail box on the fifth floor of UTA no later than 12:00 N, Tuesday, December,
7, 2010. This assignment is worth 20% of the course grade, and the instructor will not accept late
papers.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
33
REFERENCES
Many required readings are available online, as indicated below and in the class schedule. Some of
the course readings are in the Course Documents section of the Blackboard site (CD).
Some of the readings require you to be logged in with your UT EID through the UT libraries.
Those journals are usually available online for only part of their publication run; further, UT often
has more than one arrangement through which to get these journals online, so there may be more
than one URL for each journal. Feel free to explore the various online journal packages – the more
familiar you are with such arrangements, the better researcher you will be.
I. Readings in the class schedule
American Library Association. (2009). CIPA.
http://staging.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/wo/woissues/civilliberties/cipaweb/cipa.cfm
Asheim, Lester. (1953). Not censorship but selection. Wilson Library Bulletin, 28(1), 63-67. CD
Asheim, Lester. (1983). Selection and censorship: A reappraisal. Wilson Library Bulletin, 58(3),
180-184. CD
Bates, Marcia J. (2005a). Berrypicking. In Karen Fisher, Sanda Erdelez, & Lynne (E.F.)
McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 58-62). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
CD
Bates, Marcia J. (2005b). An introduction to metatheories, theories, and models. In Karen Fisher,
Sanda Erdelez, & Lynne (E.F.) McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 1-24).
Medford, NJ: Information Today. CD
Belkin, Nicholas J. (2005). Anomalous state of knowledge. In Karen Fisher, Sanda Erdelez, &
Lynne (E.F.) McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 44-48). Medford, NJ:
Information Today. CD
Bielawski, Ellen. (1996). Inuit indigenous knowledge and science in the Arctic. In Laura Nader
(Ed.), Naked science: Anthropological inquiry into boundaries, power and knowledge (pp. 216-227).
New York: Routledge. Also available at http://www.carc.org/pubs/v20no1/inuit.htm
Bishop, Ann P. (1999). Document structure and digital libraries: How researchers mobilize
information in journal articles. Information Processing & Management, 35(3), 255-279. Also
available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03064573
Bishop, Ann Peterson, Van House, Nancy A., & Buttenfield, Barbara P. (Eds.). (2003). Digital
library use: Social practice in design and evaluation. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Borgman, Christine. (2007b). Disciplines, documents, and data. In Scholarship in the digital age:
Information, infrastructure, and the Internet (pp. 179-226). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CD
Borgman, Christine L., Hirsh, Sandra G., Walter, Virginia A., & Gallagher Andrea L. (1995).
Children’s searching behavior on browsing and keyword online catalogs: The science library
catalog project. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(9), 663-684. Also available
at http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/results?vid=2&hid=111&sid=9f7ecce6-0e4e-45dd-bb0b-
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
34
e30bd74db18c%40sessionmgr112&bquery=%28JN+%22Journal+of+the+American+Society+for+I
nformation+Science%22+AND+DT+19951001%29&bdata=JmRiPWJ0aCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG
9zdC1saXZl
Brown, John Seely, & Duguid, Paul. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-ofpractice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2(1),
40-57. Also available at
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/results?vid=2&hid=111&sid=2f8d1c53-f8a6-4eb7-8ead209417aa6896%40sessionmgr114&bquery=%28JN+%22Organization+Science%22+AND+DT+199
10201%29&bdata=JmRiPWJ0aCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl
Brown, John Seely, & Duguid, Paul. (2002). The social life of information (2nd ed.). Boston:
Harvard Business School.
Bruner, Jerome. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Buckland, Michael K. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science, 42(5), 351-360. Also available at
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/results?vid=2&hid=111&sid=a08e61a0-0838-4ede-a55c2458f08ea017%40sessionmgr111&bquery=%28JN+%22Journal+of+the+American+Society+for+In
formation+Science%22+AND+DT+19910601%29&bdata=JmRiPWJ0aCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9
zdC1saXZl
Buckland, Michael K. (1997). What is a “document”? Journal of the American Society for
Information Science, 48(9), 804-809. Also available in Trudi Bellardo Hahn & Michael Buckland
(Eds., 1998), Historical studies in information science (pp. 215-220). Medford, NJ: Information
Today. Also available at
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/results?vid=2&hid=111&sid=a08e61a0-0838-4ede-a55c2458f08ea017%40sessionmgr111&bquery=%28JN+%22Journal+of+the+American+Society+for+In
formation+Science%22+AND+DT+19970901%29&bdata=JmRiPWJ0aCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9
zdC1saXZl
Curry Jansen, Sue. (1991). The imprimatur of power. In Censorship: The knot that binds power and
knowledge (pp. 181-191 and 246-248). New York: Oxford University. CD
Davenport, Elisabeth, & Hall, Hazel. (2002). Organizational knowledge and communities of
practice. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 36, pp.
171-227). Medford, NJ: Information Today. CD Also available at
www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/109861081/toc
Davies, Elisabeth. (2005). Communities of practice. In Karen Fisher, Sanda Erdelez, & Lynne
(E.F.) McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 104-107). Medford, NJ: Information
Today. CD
Dervin, Brenda, & Nilan, Michael. (1986). Information needs and uses. In Martha Williams
(Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (pp. 3-33). Medford, NJ: Learned
Information. CD
Ehrlich, Kate, & Cash, Debra. (1999). The invisible world of intermediaries: A cautionary tale.
Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8(1-2), 147-167. Also available at
http://www.kluweronline.com/article.asp?PIPS=161888&PDF=1
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
35
Eisenberg, Michael B., & Berkowitz, Robert E. (2008). Information & technology skills for student
achievement [the Big6]. http://www.big6.com
EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center). (2010a). Facebook privacy.
http://epic.org/privacy/facebook
EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center). (2010b). Social networking privacy.
http://epic.org/privacy/socialnet/default.html
Fisher, Karen E., Erdelez, Sanda, & McKechnie, Lynne (E.F.). (Eds.). (2005). Theories of
information behavior. Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Grassian, Esther. (2006). Thinking critically about Web 2.0 and beyond.
http://www2.library.ucla.edu/libraries/college/11605_12008.cfm
Hauptman, Robert. (1998). Information technology: Seduction & peril. Educom Review, 33(3), 4849. Also available at
http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/ehost/results?vid=2&hid=101&sid=68e9e55459a2-4e9b-b992eb83a98f152b%40sessionmgr111&bquery=(JN+%22Educom+Review%22+and+DT+19980501)&b
data=JmRiPWE5aCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl
Hersberger, Julie. (2005). Chatman’s information poverty. In Karen Fisher, Sanda Erdelez, &
Lynne (E.F.) McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 75-78). Medford, NJ:
Information Today. CD
Karat, Clare-Marie. (1998). Guaranteeing rights for the user. Communications of the ACM, 41(12),
29-31. Also available at
http://portal.acm.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/toc.cfm?id=J79&idx=J79&type=periodical&coll=A
CM&dl=ACM,ACM&part=magazine&WantType=Magazines&title=Communications&CFID=48
845888&CFTOKEN=61758569
Kline, Ronald, & Pinch, Trevor. (1996). Users as agents of technological change: The social
construction of the automobile in the rural United States. Technology & Culture, 37(4), 763-795.
Also available at http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/stable/i356128
Kuhlthau, Carol C. (1991). Inside the search process: Information seeking from the user’s
perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 361-371. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. (2005). Kuhlthau’s information search process. In Karen Fisher, Sanda
Erdelez, & Lynne (E.F.) McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 230-234). Medford,
NJ: Information Today. CD
Latour, Bruno. (1986). Visualization and cognition: Thinking with eyes and hands. Knowledge
and society: Studies in the sociology of culture past and present (Vol. 6, pp. 1-40). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Also available as a .pdf file through Dogpile, searching on the title (at citeseerx.ist.psu.edu . . . .)
Levy, David M. (2003). Documents and libraries: A sociotechnical perspective. In Ann Peterson
Bishop, Nancy Van House, & Barbara P. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital library use: Social practice in
design and evaluation (pp. 25-42). Cambridge, MA: MIT. CD
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
36
Lowe, Carrie A., & Eisenberg, Michael B. (2005). Big6 Skills for information literacy. In Karen
Fisher, Sanda Erdelez, & Lynne (E.F.) McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 6368). Medford, NJ: Information Today. CD
MacMullin, Susan, & Taylor, Robert. (1984). Problem dimensions and information traits. The
Information Society, 3(1), 91-111. CD
Marchionini, Gary. (2008). Human-information interaction research and development. Library &
Information Science Research, 30(3), 165-174. Also available at
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236577%2320
08%23999699996%23698481%23FLA%23&_cdi=6577&_pubType=J&_auth=y&_acct=C000059713
&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=108429&md5=d0e78297f252f6d50f36cb0e9625d9b6
Myers, Greg. (1991). Stories and styles in two molecular biology review articles. In Charles
Bazerman & James Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions: Historical and contemporary
studies of writing in professional communities (pp. 45-75). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.
Also available as a .pdf file searching in Dogpile on the title (at
wac.colostate.edu/books/textual_dynamics/chapter2 . . . . )
Nahl, Diane, & Dania, Bilal. (Eds.). (2007). Information and emotion: The emergent affective paradigm
in information behavior research and theory. Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Nardi, Bonnie, & Engeström, Yrjö. (1999). A web on the wind: The structure of invisible work.
Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8(1-2), 1-8. Also available at
http://www.springerlink.com/content/5lj9lh0jmmw2/?p=d3beeb88bfa24a5cb2cc5f4db666a15c
&pi=40
Norman, Donald A. (2002). The design of everyday things (with a new introduction). New York:
Basic Books.
Norman, Donald A. (2007). Communicating with our machines. In The design of future things
(pp. 135-153 and 215). New York: Basic Books. CD
Nunberg, Geoffrey. (Ed.). (1996a). The future of the book. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. (1996b). Farewell to the Information Age. In Geoffrey Nunberg (Ed.), The
future of the book (pp. 103-133). Berkeley, CA: University of California. Also available
http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~nunberg/farewell.pdf
O’Day, Vicki, & Nardi, Bonnie. (2003). An ecological perspective on digital libraries. In Ann
Peterson Bishop, Nancy Van House, & Barbara P. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital library use: Social
practice in design and evaluation (pp. 65-83). Cambridge, MA: MIT. CD
Petroski, Henry. (2003). The nature of design. In Small things considered: Why there is no perfect
design (pp. 3-16 and 247-248). New York: Alfred A. Knopf. CD
Pettigrew, Karen, Fidel, Raya, & Bruce, Harry. (2001). Conceptual frameworks in information
behavior. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 35, pp.
43-78). Medford, NJ: Information Today. CD
Pierce, J. (1972). Communication. Scientific American, 227(3), 31-41. CD
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
37
Reddy, Michael J. (1993). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language
about language. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 164-201).
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University. CD
Saracevic, Tefko. (2007a). Relevance: A review of the literature and a framework for
thinking on the notion in information science. Part III: Behavior and effects of relevance.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(13), 2621-2644. Also
available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/journal/116833768/issue
Saracevic, Tefko. (2007b). Relevance: A review of the literature and a framework for
thinking on the notion in information science. Part II: Nature and manifestations of
relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(13), 19151933. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/journal/116833768/issue
Schiller, Dan. (1988). How to think about information. In Vinnie Mosco & Janet Wasco (Eds.),
The political economy of information (pp. 27-43). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. CD
Schweikardt, Eric. (2009, May + June). User centered is off center. Interactions, 16(3), 12-16. Also
available at
http://portal.acm.org/toc.cfm?id=1516016&coll=portal&dl=ACM,ACM&type=issue&idx=J373&
part=magazine&WantType=Magazines&title=interactions&CFID=96417723&CFTOKEN=350568
57
Sharp, Helen, Rogers, Yvonne, & Preece, Jenny. (2007). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer
interaction (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Star, Susan Leigh, Bowker, Geoffrey, & Neumann, Laura J. (2003). Transparency beyond the
individual level of scale: Convergence between information artifacts and communities of
practice. In Ann Peterson Bishop, Nancy Van House, & Barbara P. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital
library use: Social practice in design and evaluation (pp. 241-270). Cambridge, MA: MIT. CD
Star, Susan Leigh, & Strauss, Anselm. (1999). Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The dialogues
between visible and invisible work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8(1-2), 9-30. Also
available at
http://www.springerlink.com/content/5lj9lh0jmmw2/?p=d3beeb88bfa24a5cb2cc5f4db666a15c
&pi=40
Suchman, Lucy [A.]. (1995). Making work visible. Communications of the ACM, 38(9), 56-63. Also
available at
http://portal.acm.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/toc.cfm?id=J79&idx=J79&type=periodical&coll=A
CM&dl=ACM,ACM&part=magazine&WantType=Magazines&title=Communications&CFID=48
845888&CFTOKEN=61758569
Suchman, Lucy [A.]. (1996). Supporting articulation work. In Rob Kling (Ed.), Computerization
and controversy: Value conflicts and social choices (2nd ed., pp. 407-423). San Diego, CA: Academic.
CD
Suchman, Lucy A. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions (2nd ed.).
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
38
Taylor, Robert S. (1968). Question-negotiation and information seeking in libraries. College &
Research Libraries, 29(3), 178-194. CD
Taylor, Robert S. (1991). Information use environments. Progress in Communication Sciences (Vol.
10, pp. 217-255). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. CD
Tenopir, Carol, King, Donald W., Boyce, Peter, Grayson, Matt, & Paulson, Keri-Lynn. (2005).
Relying on electronic journals: Reading patterns of astronomers. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, 56(8), 786-802. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/76501873
Tidline, Tonyia J. (2005). Dervin’s sense-making. In Karen Fisher, Sanda Erdelez, & Lynne (E.F.)
McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 113-117). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
CD
United States et al. v. ALA et al. [Children’s Internet Protection Act case] 539 U.S. 194 (2003)
[read the plurality opinion by Rehnquist, the two concurring opinions by Kennedy and Breyer,
and the two dissenting opinions by Stevens and Souter] Available at
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-361.ZS.html and
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=02361
Van House, Nancy. (2003a). Digital libraries and collaborative knowledge construction. In Ann
Peterson Bishop, Nancy Van House, & Barbara P. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital library use: Social
practice in design and evaluation (pp. 271-295). Cambridge, MA: MIT. Also available as an
electronic resource at the UT Libraries at
http://catalog.lib.utexas.edu/search/X?SEARCH=digital+library+use
Weaver, Warren. (1949). The mathematics of communication. Scientific American, 181(1), 11-15.
CD
Weick, Karl E., & Roberts, K.H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating
on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 357-381. Also available at
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/results?vid=2&hid=111&sid=65f52420-ed5c-48b6-a9a5e699976b9519%40sessionmgr112&bquery=%28JN+%22Administrative+Science+Quarterly%22+A
ND+DT+19930901%29&bdata=JmRiPWJ0aCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl
Westbrook, Lynn. (1997). Information access issues for interdisciplinary scholars: Results of a
Delphi study on women’s studies research. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 23(3), 211-216. Also
available at
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_cdi=6556&_pubType=J&_acct=C
000059713&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=108429&md5=3308d1ff90f5e150c06f76415d8b5a
5d&jchunk=23#23
Wilson, Thomas D. (2000). Human information behavior. Informing Science, 3(2), 49-56. Also
available at
http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:0tGFx42BMTkJ:inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p4956.pdf+human+information+behavior+wilson&hl=en
Yakel, Elizabeth. (2000). Thinking inside and outside the boxes: Archival reference services at
the turn of the century. Archivaria, 49, 140-160. CD
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
39
II. Selected ARIST chapters 1966 - 2008
Allen, Bryce L. (1991). Cognitive research in information science: Implications for design. In
Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 26, pp. 3-37).
Medford, NJ: Learned Information.
Allen, Thomas J. (1969). Information needs and uses. In Carlos A. Cuadra (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 4, pp. 1-29). Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica.
Andersen, Jack. (2008). The concept of genre in information studies. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 42, pp. 339-367). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Bar-Ilan, Judith. (2003). The use of Web search engines in information science research. In Blaise
Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 38, pp. 231-288). Medford,
NJ: Information Today.
Bearman, David. (2007). Digital libraries. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information
science and technology (Vol. 41, pp. 223-272). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Benoît, Gerald. (2002). Data mining. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science
and technology (Vol. 36, pp. 265-310). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Bishop, Ann P., & Star, Susan Leigh. (1996). Social informatics of digital library use and
infrastructure. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol.
31, pp. 301-401). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Black, Alistair. (2006). Information history. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information
science and technology (Vol. 40, pp. 441-473). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Blair, David C. (2002). Information retrieval and the philosophy of language. In Blaise Cronin
(Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 37, pp. 3-50). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Borgman, Christine L., & Furner, Jonathan. (2002). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics.
In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 36, pp. 3-72).
Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Boyce, Bert R., & Kraft, Donald H. (1985). Principles and theories in information science. In
Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 20, pp. 153-178).
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Buckland, Michael K., & Liu, Ziming. (1995). History of information science. In Martha
Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 30, pp. 385-416). Medford,
NJ: Information Today.
Burke, Colin. (2007). History of information science. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 41, pp. 3-53). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Burt, Patricia V., & Kinnucan, Mark T. (1990). Information models and modeling techniques for
information systems. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology
(Vol. 25, pp. 175-208). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
40
Callahan, Ewa. (2004). Interface design and culture. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 39, pp. 257-310). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Capurro, Rafael, & Hjørland, Birger. (2002). The concept of information. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 37, pp. 343-412). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Case, Donald. (2006). Information seeking. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information
science and technology (Vol. 40, pp. 293-327). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Chang, Shan-Ju, & Rice, Ronald E. (1993). Browsing: A multidimensional framework. In Martha
Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 28, pp. 231-276). Medford,
NJ: Learned Information.
Chen, Hsinchen, & Xu, Jie. (2006). Intelligence and security informatics. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 40, pp. 229-289). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Cool, Coleen. (2001). The concept of situation in information science. In Martha Williams (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 35, pp. 5-42). Medford, NJ: Information
Today.
Courtright, Christina. (2007). Context in information behavior research. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 41, pp. 273-306). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Cornelius, Ian. (2002). Theorizing information for information science. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 36, pp. 393-425). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Crane, Diana. (1971). Information needs and uses. In Carlos A. Cuadra (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 6, pp. 3-39). Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica.
Crawford, Susan. (1978). Information needs and uses. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 13, pp. 61-81). Medford, NJ: Knowledge Industry.
Davenport, Elisabeth, & Hall, Hazel. (2002). Organizational knowledge and communities of
practice. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 36, pp.
171-227). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Davenport, Elizabeth, & Snyder, Herbert W. (2004). Managing social capital. In Blaise Cronin
(Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 39, pp. 517-550). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Davies, Philip H.J. (2002). Intelligence, information technology, and information warfare. In
Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 36, pp. 313-352).
Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Dervin, Brenda, & Nilan, Michael. (1986). Information needs and uses. In Martha Williams
(Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 21, pp. 3-33). Medford, NJ:
Knowledge Industry.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
41
Dillon, Andrew, & Morris, Michael G. (1996). User acceptance of information technology:
Theories and models. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology
(Vol. 31, pp. 3-32). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Doctor, Ronald D. (1992). Social equity and information technologies: Moving toward
information democracy. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and
technology (Vol. 27, pp. 43-96). Medford, NJ: Learned Information.
Doty, Philip. (2001a). Digital privacy: Toward a new politics and discursive practice. In Martha
E. Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 35, pp. 115-245).
Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Eisenberg, Michael B., & Spitzer, Kathleen L. (1991). Information technology and services in
schools. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 26, pp.
243-285). Medford, NJ: Learned Information.
Ellis, David, Oldridge, Rachael, & Vasconcelos, Ana. (2003). Community and virtual community.
In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 38, pp. 144-186).
Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Enser, Peter G.B. (2008). Visual image retrieval. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 42, pp. 3-42). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Fallis, Don. (2006). Social epistemology and information science. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual
review of information science and technology (Vol. 40, pp. 475-519). Medford, NJ: Information
Today.
Ford, Nigel. (2008). Educational informatics. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information
science and technology (Vol. 42, pp. 497-544). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Harter, Stephen P., & Hert, Carol A. (1997). Evaluation of information retrieval systems:
Approaches, issues, and methods. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science
and technology (Vol. 32, pp. 3-94). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Haythornthwaite, Caroline, & Hagar, Christine. (2004). The social worlds of the Web. Blaise
Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 39, pp. 311-346). Medford,
NJ: Information Today.
Herner, Saul, & Herner, Mary. (1967). Information needs and uses in science and technology. In
Carlos A. Cuadra (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 2, pp. 1-34). New
York: Wiley Interscience.
Hewins, Elizabeth T. (1990). Information needs and use studies. In Martha Williams (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 25, pp. 145-172). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Houston, Ronald D., & Harmon, Glynn. (2007). Vannevar Bush and Memex. In Blaise Cronin
(Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 41, pp. 55-92). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Jones, William. (2007). Personal information management. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review
of information science and technology (Vol. 41, pp. 453-504). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
42
Large, Andrew. (2004). Children, teenagers, and the Web. Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 39, pp. 347-392). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Legg, Catherine. (2007). Ontologies on the semantic Web. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review
of information science and technology (Vol. 41, pp. 407-451). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Lievrouw, Leah A., & Farb, Sharon E. (2002). Information and equity. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 37, pp. 499-540). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Lin, Nan, & Garvey, William. (1972). Information needs and uses. In Carlos A. Cuadra (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 7, pp. 5-37). Washington, DC: American
Society for Information Science.
Lipetz, Ben-Ami. (1970). Information needs and uses. In Carlos A. Cuadra (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 5, pp. 3-32). Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica.
Marchionini, Gary, & Komlodi, Anita. (1998). Design of interfaces for information seeking. In
Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 33, pp. 89-120).
Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Martyn, John. (1974). Information needs and uses. In Carlos A. Cuadra (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 9, pp. 3-22). Washington, DC: American Society for
Information Science.
Menzel, Herbert. (1966). Information needs and uses in science and technology. In Carlos A.
Cuadra (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 1, pp. 41-69). New York:
Wiley Interscience.
Paisley, William J. (1968). Information needs and uses. In Carlos A. Cuadra (Ed.), Annual review
of information science and technology (Vol. 3, pp. 1-30). Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica.
Palmer, Carole L., & Cragin, Melissa H. (2008). Scholarship and disciplinary practices. In Blaise
Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 42, pp. 165-212). Medford,
NJ: Information Today.
Palmquist, Ruth Ann. (1992). The impact of information technology on the individual. In Martha
Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 27, pp. 3-42). Medford, NJ:
Learned Information.
Pettigrew, Karen, Fidel, Raya, & Bruce, Harry. (2001). Conceptual frameworks in information
behavior. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 35, pp.
43-78). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Rieh, Soo Young, & Danielson, David R. (2007). Credibility: A multidisciplinary framework. In
Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 41, pp. 307-364).
Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Rogers, Yvonne. (2003). New theoretical approaches for human-computer interaction. In Blaise
Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 38, pp. 87-144). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
43
Rorvig, Mark E. (1988). Psychometric measurement and information retrieval. In Martha
Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 23, pp. 157-189).
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Ruthven, Ian. (2008). Interactive information retrieval. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 42, pp. 43-91). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Sawhney, Harmeet, & Jayakar, Krishna P. (2007). Universal access. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 41, pp. 159-221). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Sawyer, Steve, & Eschenfelder, Kristin R. (2002). Social informatics: Perspectives, examples, and
trends. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 36, pp. 427466). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Schamber, Linda. (1994). Relevance and information behavior. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual
review of information science and technology (Vol. 29, pp. 3-48). Medford, NJ: Learned Information.
Smith, Martha Montague. (1997). Information ethics. In Martha E. Williams (Ed.), Annual review
of information science and technology (Vol. 32, pp. 339-366). Medford, NJ: Learned Information.
Snyder, Herbert W., & Pierce, Jennifer Burek. (2002). Intellectual capital. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 36, pp. 467-500). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Solomon, Paul. (2002). Discovering information in context. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review
of information science and technology (Vol. 36, pp. 229-264). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Sonnenwald, Diane H. (2007). Scientific collaboration. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 41, pp. 643-681). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Spink, Amanda, & Losee, Robert M. (1996). Feedback in information retrieval. In Martha
Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 31, pp. 33-78). Medford,
NJ: Information Today.
Sugar, William. (1995). User-centered perspective of information retrieval research and analysis
methods. In Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 30, pp.
77-109). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Tibbo, Helen R. (1991). Information systems, services, and technology for the humanities. In
Martha Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 26, pp. 287-346).
Medford, NJ: Learned Information.
Vakkari, Pertti. (2002). Task-based information searching. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review
of information science and technology (Vol. 37, pp. 413-464). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Van House, Nancy A. (2003b). Science and technology studies and information studies. In Blaise
Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 38, pp. 3-86). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
White, Howard D., & McCain, Katherine W. (1989). Bibliometrics. In Martha Williams (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 24, pp. 119-186). Medford, NJ: Learned
Information.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
44
White, Howard D., & McCain, Katherine W. (1997). Visualization of literatures. In Martha
Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 32, pp. 99-168). Medford,
NJ: Learned Information.
Yang, Kiduk. (2004). Information retrieval on the Web. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of
information science and technology (Vol. 39, pp. 33-80). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
III. Useful digital sources for evaluating digital information
Ciolek, T. Matthew. (2006). Information quality WWW virtual library.
http://www.ciolek.com/WWWVL-InfoQuality.html
Fitzgerald, Mary Ann. (1999). Evaluating information: An information literacy challenge.
http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/slmrcontents/volume2
1999/vol2fitzgerald.cfm
Grassian, Esther. (1997). Thinking critically about discipline-based World Wide Web resources.
http://www.mscare.org/cmsc/Articles-Thinking-Critically-about-Discipline.html
Grassian, Esther. (2009). Thinking critically about World Wide Web resources.
http://www2.library.ucla.edu/libraries/college/11605_12337.cfm
Smith, Alastair G. (1997). Testing the surf: Criteria for evaluating Internet information resources.
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review, 8(3).
http://epress.lib.uh.edu/pr/v8/n3/smit8n3.html
Smith, Alastair G. (2009). Evaluation of information sources.
http://www.vuw.ac.nz/staff/alastair_smith/evaln/evaln.htm
IV. Additional sources
Abbott, Andrew. (1988). The information professions. Notes and References. In The system of
professions: An essay on the division of expert labor (pp. 215-246, 367-373, and 389-421). Chicago:
University of Chicago.
Abbott, Andrew. (1998). Professionalism and the future of librarianship. Library Trends, 46(3),
430-443. Also available at
http://infotrac.galegroup.com/itw/infomark/556/943/84829109w3/purl=rc11_EAIM_0__sn+0
024-2594+&dyn=75!cnb_281_300?sw_aep=txshracd2598
Agada, John. (1999). Inner-city gatekeepers: An exploratory survey of their information use
environment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(1), 74-85. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Agre, Philip E. (1995). Institutional circuitry: Thinking about the forms and uses of information.
Information, Technology and Libraries, 14(4), 225-230. Also available at
http://infotrac.galegroup.com/itw/infomark/192/918/69085623w6/purl=rc1_EAIM_0_A17814
175&dyn=9!ar_fmt?sw_aep=txshracd2598
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
45
Agre, Philip E. (1998). Designing genres for new media: Social, economic, and political contexts.
In Steven G. Jones (Ed.), CyberSociety 2.0: Revisiting CMC and community (pp. 69-99). Newberry
Park, CA: Sage.
Agre, Philip. (2003). Information and institutional change: The case of digital libraries. In Ann
Peterson Bishop, Nancy Van House, & Barbara P. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital library use: Social
practice in design and evaluation (pp. 219-240). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Allen, Bryce. (1996a). From research to design: A user-centered approach. In Peter Ingwersen &
Niels Ole Pors (Eds.), Information science: Integration in perspective (pp. 45-59). From the Second
International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS2).
Copenhagen: The Royal School of Librarianship.
Allen, Bryce. (1996b). Information tasks: Toward a user-centered approach to information systems. San
Diego, CA: Academic.
Allen, Robert B. (1990). User models: Theory, method, and practice. International Journal of ManMachine Studies, 32(5), 511-543.
Allen, Thomas. (1966). Managing the flow of scientific and technical information. Cambridge, MA:
MIT.
Allen, Thomas. (1970). Managing the flow of technology transfer and the dissemination of technological
information within the R&D organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Anderson, Benedict. (1991). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of
nationalism. London: Verso. (Original published 1983)
Augst, Thomas. (2001). Introduction: American libraries as agencies of culture. American
Studies, 42(3), 5-22.
Augst, Thomas, & Wiegand, Wayne A. (Eds.). (2002). Libraries as agencies of culture. Madison,
WI: University of Wisconsin. Reprint of Augst, Thomas, & Wiegand, Wayne A. (Eds.). (2001).
The library as an agency of culture [special issue]. American Studies, 42(3).
Autrey, Pamela Sanders. (1980). Using information skills. In Betty-Carol Sellen (Ed.), What else
you can do with a library degree (pp. 10-16). Syracuse, NY: Gaylord Professional Publications.
Bannon, Liam. (1990). A pilgrim’s progress: From cognitive science to cooperative design. AI
and Society, 4(4), 259-275. Also available at
http://www.ul.ie/~idc/library/papersreports/LiamBannon/2/Aisoc.html
Barry, Carol L., & Schamber, Linda. (1998). Users' criteria for relevance evaluation: A crosssituational comparison. Information Processing & Management, 34(2/3), 219-236. Also available at
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03064573
Barlow, J.P. (1995, March/April). Is there a there in cyberspace? Utne Reader, 68, 52-56. Also
available at
http://w2.eff.org/Misc/Publications/John_Perry_Barlow/HTML/utne_community.html
Barton, Daniel, & Hamilton, Mary. (1998a). Understanding literacy as social practice. In Local
literacies (pp. 3-22). London: Routledge.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
46
Barton, Daniel, & Hamilton, Mary. (1998b). Becoming expert: Literacy and sense making. In
Local literacies (pp. 231-246). London: Routledge.
Barton, Daniel, & Hamilton, Mary. (1998c). Vernacular literacies. In Local literacies (pp. 247-262).
London: Routledge.
Barzun, Jacques, & Graff, Henry F. (1992). The modern researcher (5th ed.). Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Bates, Marcia J. (1984). The fallacy of the perfect thirty-item search. RQ [Reference Quarterly],
24(1), 43-50.
Bates, Marcia J. (1989). The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online
search interface. Online Review, 13(5), 407-424.
Bates, Marcia J. (1994). The design of databases and other information resources for humanities
scholars: The Getty Online Searching Project Report No. 4. Online & CD-ROM Review, 18(6), 331340.
Bates, Marcia J. (1999). A tour of information science through the pages of JASIS. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science, 50(1), 975-993. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Bates, Mary Ellen. (1998). Finding the question behind the question. Information Outlook, 2(7),
19-21. http://www.sla.org/pubs/serial/io/1998/jul98/bates.html
Baum, Christina D. (1992). Feminist thought in American librarianship. Jeffrey, NC: McFarland.
Bawden, David. (2001). Information and digital literacies: A review of concepts. Journal of
Documentation, 57(2), 218-259.
Bawden, David, & Robinson, Kay. (1997). Information behavior in nursing specialties. Journal of
Information Sciences, 23(6), 407-421.
Bawden, David, & Robinson, Lyn. (2002). Promoting literacy in a digital age: Approaches to
training for information literacy. Learned Publishing, 15(4), 297-301.
Belkin, Nicholas, Oddy, Robert, & Brooks, Helen M. (1982a). ASK for information retrieval I.
Journal of Documentation, 38(2), 61-71.
Belkin, Nicholas, Oddy, Robert, & Brooks, Helen M. (1982b). ASK for information retrieval II.
Journal of Documentation, 38(3), 145-164.
Bell, Daniel. (1980). The social framework of the Information Society. In T. Forester (Ed.), The
microelectronics revolution (pp. 500-549). Boston: MIT.
Benko, R.P. (1987). Economic theory and intellectual property rights. In Protecting intellectual
property rights (pp. 15-25). Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy
Research.
Berg, Marc. (1996). Practices of reading and writing: The constitutive role of the patient record
in medical work. Sociology of Health and Illness, 8(4), 499-524.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
47
Berring, Robert C. (1993). Future librarians. In R. Howard Bloch & Carla Hesse (Eds.), Future
libraries (pp. 94-115). Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Beyer, Hugh, & Holtzblatt, Karen. (1998). Contextual design: Defining customer-centered systems.
San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
Biggs, Mary. (1991). The role of research in the development of a profession or a discipline. In
Charles R. McClure and Peter Hernon (Eds.), Library and information science research: Perspectives
and strategies for improvement (pp. 72-84). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Bijker, Wiebe E. (1995). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change.
Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Bijker, Wiebe E., & Law, John. (Eds.). (1992). Shaping technology/building society: Studies in
sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Bishop, Ann P. (1994). The role of computer networks in aerospace engineering. Library Trends,
42(4), 624-729. Available at
http://search.epnet.com/direct.asp?db=aph&jn=%22LIT%22&scope=site
Bishop, Ann Peterson, Mehra, Bharat, Bazzell, Imani, & Smith, Cynthia. (2001). Scenarios in the
design and evaluation of networked information services: An example from community health.
In Charles R. McClure & John Carlo Bertot (Eds.), Evaluating networked information services:
Techniques, policy, and issues (pp. 45-66). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Bishop, Ann Peterson, Mehra, Bharat, Bazzell, Imani, & Smith, Cynthia. (2003). Participatory
action research and digital libraries: Reframing evaluation. In Ann Peterson Bishop, Nancy Van
House, & Barbara P. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital library use: Social practice in design and evaluation
(pp. 161-189). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Bishop, Ann P., Neumann, Laura J., Star, Susan Leigh, Merkel, C., Ignacio, E., & Sandusky, R.J.
(2000). Digital libraries: Situating use in changing information infrastructure. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science, 51(4), 394-413. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Borges, Jorge Luis. (1964). The library of Babel. In Donald A. Yates & James E. Irby (Eds.),
Labyrinths: Selected stories & other writings (pp. 51-58). (James E. Irby, Trans.). New York: New
Directions Paperback.
Borgman, Christine. (2003). Designing digital libraries for usability. In Ann Peterson Bishop,
Nancy Van House, & Barbara P. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital library use: Social practice in design and
evaluation (pp. 85-118). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Borgman, Christine. (2007a). Building an infrastructure for information. In Scholarship in the
digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the Internet (pp. 149-177). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
CD
Borgmann, Albert. (1999). Holding on to reality: The nature of information at the turn of the
millennium. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Branscomb, Anne Wells. (1994). Who owns information?: From privacy to public access. s.l.: Basic
Books.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
48
Brittain, J.M. (1982). Pitfalls of user research, and some neglected areas. Social Science Information
Studies, 2, 139-148.
Britz, Johannes J. (2004). To know or not to know: A moral reflection on information poverty.
Journal of Information Science, 30(3), 192-204. Also available at
http://jis.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/30/3/192
Bruce, Bertram C. [Chip]. (1997). The relational approach: A new model for information
literacy. New Review of Information and Library Research, 3(???), 1-22.
Bruce, Bertram C. [Chip]. (1999). Workplace experiences of information literacy. International
Journal of Information Management, 19(1), 33-47.
Bruce, Bertram C. [Chip]. (2000). Credibility of the Web: Why we need dialectical reading.
Journal of Philosophy of Education, 34(1), 97-109. Also available
http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:0gChgfCegIQJ:www.isrl.illinois.edu/~chip/pubs
/01credibility/credibility.pdf+%22credibility+of+the+web%22+bertram+bruce&hl=en&gl=us
Brusilovsky, Peter, Kobsa, Alfred, & Nejdl, Wolfgang. (Eds.). (2007). The adaptive Web: Methods
and strategies for Web personalization. Berlin: Springer.
Bush, Vannevar. (1945). As we may think. Atlantic Monthly, 176(1), 101-108. Also available
http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/flashbks/computer/bushf.htm
Busha, Charles H., & Wedgeworth, Robert. (1993). Censorship and intellectual freedom. In
Robert Wedgeworth (Ed.), World encyclopedia of library and information services (3rd ed.) (pp. 182185). Chicago: American Library Association.
Capurro, Rafael. (1992). What is information science for? A philosophical reflection. In Peter
Vakkari & Blaise Cronin (Eds.), Conceptions of library and information science: Historical, empirical
and theoretical perspectives (pp. 82-96). Los Angeles: Taylor Graham.
Carvin, Andy. (2000). More than just access: Fitting literacy and content [sic] into the digital
divide equation. Educause Review, 35(6), 29-36. Also available
http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0063.pdf
Case, Donald O. (2002). Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs,
and behavior. Amsterdam: Academic.
Chartier, Roger. (1993). Libraries without walls. In R. Howard Bloch & Carla Hesse (Eds.),
Future libraries (pp. 39-52). Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Chartier, Roger. (1995). Forms and meanings: Texts, performances, and audiences from codex to
computer. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
Chatman, Elfreda. (1991). Channels to a larger social world: Older women staying in contact
with the great society. Library & Information Science Research, 13(3), 281-300. Also available at
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/07408188
Chatman, Elfreda. (1996). Impoverished life world of outsiders. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science, 47(3), 193-206. Also available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgibin/jtoc?ID=27981
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
49
Choi, Youngok, & Rasmussen, Edie M. (2003). Searching for images: The analysis of users'
queries for image retrieval in American history. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, 54 (6), 498-511. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/103520066/PDFSTART
Choo, Chun Wei, Detlor, Brian, & Turnbull, Don. (2000). Information seeking on the Web: An
integrated model of browsing and searching. First Monday, 5(2).
http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue5_2/choo/index.html
Cobbledick, Susie. (1996). The information-seeking behavior of artists: Exploratory interviews.
Library Quarterly, 66(4), 343-372. Also available at
http://search.epnet.com/direct.asp?db=aph&jn=%22LIQ%22&scope=site
Cockburn, Cynthia. (1988). Machinery of dominance: Women, men, and technical know-how. Boston:
Northeastern University.
Cole, Charles. (1994). Operationalizing the notion of information as a subjective construct.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(7), 465-476. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Cole, Charles, Cantero, P., & Ungar, A. (2000). The development of a diagnostic-prescriptive tool
for undergraduates seeking information for a social science/humanities assignment. III.
Enabling devices. Information Processing & Management, 36(3), 481-500.
Conway, Paul. (1986). Research in presidential libraries: A user survey. The Midwestern
Archivist, XI(1), 35-56.
Cooper, Linda. (2002a). A study of the relationship between categories of library information
use as typified by young children. In Harry Bruce, Raya Fidel, Peter Ingwersen, & Pertti Vakkari
(Eds.), Emerging frameworks and methods: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on
conceptions of library and information science (CoLIS4) (pp. 17-31). Greenwood Village, CO:
Libraries Unlimited.
Cooper, Linda. (2002b). Methodology for a project examining cognitive categories for library
information use in young children. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 53(14), 1223-1231. Also available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgibin/jtoc?ID=76501873
Cornelius, Ian. (1996a). Information and interpretation. In Peter Ingwersen & Niels Ole Pors
(Eds.), Information science: Integration in perspective (pp. 11-21). From the Second International
Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS2). Copenhagen: The
Royal School of Librarianship. CD
Cornelius, Ian. (1996b). Meaning and method in information studies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Cornelius, Ian. (2002). Theorizing information for information science. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 36, pp. 393-425). Medford, NJ:
Information Today. Also available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgibin/jtoc?ID=76501873
Covi, Lisa M., & Kling Rob. (1996). Organizational dimensions of effective digital library use:
Closed rational and open natural systems models. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science, 47(9), 672-689.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
50
Crane, Gregory. (1991). The authority of an electronic text. Current Anthropology, 32(3), 293-311.
Crawford, Walt. (1998). Uncommon knowledge: Mythbreaking for the future. In Cheryl
LaGuardia & Barbara A. Mitchell (Eds.), Finding common ground: Creating the library of the future
without diminishing the library of the past (pp. 16-24). New York: Neal-Schuman.
Crawford, Walt, & Gorman, Michael. (1995). Deconstructing dreams of the all-electronic future.
In Future libraries: Dreams, madness & reality (pp. 88-103). Chicago: American Library Association.
Cronin, Blaise. (1982). Invisible colleges and information transfer: A review and commentary
with particular reference to the social sciences. Journal of Documentation, 38(3), 212-236.
Crowder, Robert G., & Wegner, Richard K. (1992). The psychology of reading: An introduction (2nd
ed.). New York: Oxford University.
Davenport, Thomas H. (1997). Information ecology: Mastering the information and knowledge
environment. New York: Oxford University.
Delamont, Sara, & Atkinson, Paul. (2001). Doctoring uncertainty: Mastering craft knowledge.
Social Studies of Science, 31(1) , 87-107. Also available at
http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/stable/285819
Derrida, Jacques. (1995). Archive fever (Eric Prenowitz, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago.
Dervin, Brenda. (1976). The everyday information needs of the average citizen: A taxonomy for
analysis. In M. Rochen & J.C. Donohue (Eds.), Information for the community (pp. 19-38). Chicago:
American Library Association.
Dervin, Brenda. (1977). Useful theory for librarianship: Communication, not information.
Drexel Library Quarterly, 13(3), 16-32.
Dervin, Brenda. (1989). Users as research inventions. Journal of Communication, 39(3), 216-232.
Also available at
http://pao.chadwyck.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/articles/displayItem.do?QueryType=articles
&ResultsID=1229ABA489D18A0955&filterSequence=0&ItemNumber=1&journalID=5419
Dresang, Eliza, & Gross, Melissa. (2001). Evaluating children’s resources and services in a
networked environment. In Charles R. McClure & John Carlo Bertot (Eds.), Evaluating networked
information services: Techniques, policy, and issues (pp. 23-44). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Duff, Wendy M., & Johnson, Catherine A. (2002). Accidentally found on purpose: Informationseeking behavior of historians in archives. Library Quarterly, 72(4), 472-496. Also available
http://search.epnet.com/direct.asp?db=aph&jn=%22LIQ%22&scope=site
Duguid, Paul. (1996). Material matters: The past and futurology of the book. In Geoffrey
Nunberg (Ed.), The future of the book (pp. 63-101). Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Eason, Ken. (1988). Information technology and organisational change. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Eco, Umberto. (1984). Introduction: The role of the reader. In The role of the reader: Explorations
in the semiotics of texts (pp. 3-43). Bloomington, IN: Bloomington University.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
51
Edwards, Philip M. (2005). Taylor’s question-negotiation. In Karen Fisher, Sanda Erdelez, &
Lynne (E.F.) McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 358-362). Medford, NJ:
Information Today. CD
Eisenberg, Michael B., & Berkowitz, Robert E. (1988). Curriculum initiatives: An agenda and
strategy for library media programs. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Ellen, Deborah. (2001). Bridging the digital divide: Is access enough? ASSIGNation, 18(2), 32ff.
Ellis, David. (1993). Modeling the information seeking patterns of academic researchers: A
grounded theory approach. Library Quarterly, 63(4), 469-486. Also available
http://search.epnet.com/direct.asp?db=aph&jn=%22LIQ%22&scope=site
Ellis, David. (1998). Paradigms and research traditions in information retrieval research.
Information Services and Use, 18(4), 225-241.
Englebart, Douglas. (1988). A conceptual framework for the augmentation of man’s intellect. In
Irene Greif (Ed.), Computer-supported cooperative work: A book of readings (pp. 35-65). San Mateo,
CA: Morgan Kaufmann. (Original work published 1963)
Feldman, Ronen, & Sanger, James. (2007). The text mining handbook: Advanced approaches in
analyzing unstructured data. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Fidel, Raya, Davies, Rachel K., Douglass, Mary H., Holder, Jenny K., Hopkins, Carla J., Kushner,
Elisabeth J., Miyagishima, Bryan K., & Toney, Christina D. (1999). A visit to the information
mall: Web searching behavior of high school students. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science, 50(1), 24-37. Also available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgibin/jtoc?ID=27981
Ford, Nigel. (2000). Cognitive styles and virtual environments. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science, 51(6), 543-557. Also available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgibin/jtoc?ID=27981
Foucault, Michel. (1992). Archaeological description. Part IV in The archaeology of knowledge and
The discourse on language (A.M. Sheridan Smith, Trans.) (pp. 133-195). New York: Pantheon
Books. (Original work published 1970)
Foucault, Michel. (1994). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. New York:
Vintage Books. (Original work published 1966)
Frohmann, Bernd. (1992). Knowledge and power in library and information science: Toward a
discourse analysis of the cognitive viewpoint. In Peter Vakkari & Blaise Cronin (Eds.),
Conceptions of library and information science: Historical, empirical and theoretical perspectives (pp. 135148). Los Angeles: Taylor Graham.
Frohmann, Bernd. (1994). Communication technologies and the politics of postmodern
information science. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 19(2), 1-22.
Galvin, Thomas J. (1984). The significance of information science for the theory and practice of
librarianship. Libri, 34(2), 81-87.
Gardner, Howard. (1983). The socialization of human intelligence through symbols. In Frames of
mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (pp. 299-327 and 422-423). New York: Basic books.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
52
Garfinkel, Harold. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Garrison, Dee. (1979). Apostles of culture: The public librarian and American society, 1876-1920.
New York: Macmillan.
Garvey, William D. (1979). The role of scientific communication in the conduct of research and
the creation of scientific knowledge. In Communication, the essence of science: Facilitating
information exchange among scientists, engineers, and students (pp. 1-39). New York: Pergamon.
Geertz, Clifford. (1983). The way we think now: Toward an ethnography of modern thought. In
Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology (pp. 147-163). New York: Basic Books.
(Original work published 1982) CD
Geertz, Clifford. (2000). Imbalancing act: Jerome Bruner’s cultural psychology. In Available light:
Anthropological reflections on philosophical topics (pp. 187-202). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
Gillespie, Tarleton. (2007). Wired shut: Copyright and the shape of digital culture. Cambridge, MA:
MIT.
Gollop, Claudia J. (1997). Health information-seeking behavior and older African American
women. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 85(2), 141-146.
Gorman, Paul N. (1995). Information needs of physicians. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science, 46(10), 729-736. Also available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgibin/jtoc?ID=27981
Granovetter, Mark S. (1973). The strength of loose ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 13601380.
Greenberg, Jane, & Méndez, Eva. (Eds.). (2007). Knitting the semantic Web. [published
simultaneously as Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 43(3/4), 2007]. Binghamton, NY:
Haworth.
Grunberg, Gérald, & Giffard, Alain. (1993). New orders of knowledge, new technologies of
reading. In R. Howard Bloch & Carla Hesse (Eds.), Future libraries (pp. 80-93). Berkeley, CA:
University of California.
Haraway, Donna. (1990). A manifesto for cyborgs: Science, technology, and socialist feminism
in the 1980s. In Linda J. Nicholson (Ed.), Feminism/postmodernism (pp. 190-233). New York:
Routledge.
Harmon, E. Glynn. (1987). The interdisciplinary study of information: A review essay [Review
of The study of information: Interdisciplinary messages]. The Journal of Library History, 22(2), 206-227.
Harris, Michael. (1973). The purpose of the American public library: Revisionist interpretation
of history. Library Journal, 98(16), 2509-2514.
Harris, Michael H., Hannah, Stan A., & Harris, Pamela C. (1998). Into the future: The foundations
of library and information services in the post-industrial era (2nd ed.). Greenwich, CT: Ablex.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
53
Harris, Roma, & Dewdney, Patricia. (1994a). Information transfer failures, or why it’s so hard to
locate the information you need. In Barriers to information: How formal help systems fail battered
women (pp. 1-6). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Harris, Roma, & Dewdney, Patricia. (1994b). Theory and research on information seeking. In
Barriers to information: How formal help systems fail battered women (pp. 7-34). Westport, CT:
Greenwood.
Hauptman, Robert. (Ed.). (1991a). Ethics and the dissemination of information [Special Issue].
Library Trends, 40(2).
Hauptman, Robert. (1991b). Five assaults on our integrity. In F.W. Lancaster (Ed.), Ethics and the
librarian (pp. 83-91). Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Graduate School of Library and Information Science.
Hayes, Robert M. (1992). Measurement of information. In Peter Vakkari & Blaise Cronin (Eds.),
Conceptions of library and information science: Historical, empirical and theoretical perspectives (pp. 268285). Los Angeles: Taylor Graham.
Heins, Marjorie, Cho, Christina, & Feldman, Ariel. (2006). Internet filters: A public policy report (2nd
ed.). Brennan Center for Justice. New York University School of Law. Free Expression Policy
Project. http://www.fepproject.org/policyreports/filters2intro.html
Henderson, Kathryn. (1996). The visual culture of engineers. In Susan Leigh Star (Ed.), The
cultures of computing (pp. 196-218). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Hendry, D.G., & Harper, D.J. (1997). An informal information-seeking environment. Journal of
the American Society for Information Science, 48(1), 1036-1048. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Hert, Carol A. (2001). User-centered evaluation and connection to design. In Charles R.
McClure & John Carlo Bertot (Eds.), Evaluating networked information services: Techniques, policy,
and issues (pp. 155-173). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Hertzum, M., & Pejtersen, A.M. (2000). The information-seeking practices of engineers:
Searching for documents as well as for people. Information Processing & Management, 36(5), 761778.
Hilden, Julie. (2002). A recent Supreme Court decision allowing the government to force public
libraries to filter users' Internet access is less significant than it might at first appear (FindLaw
Legal Commentary). http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hilden/20030701.html
Hinnebusch, Nicole. (1998). Restricting Internet access in public libraries. The Yale Political
Quarterly, 19(4).
Hirsh, Sandra G. (1997). How do children find information on different types of tasks?
Children’s user of the science library catalog. Library Trends, 45(4), 725-745.
Hobart, Michael E., & Schiffman, Zachary S. (1998). Information ages: Literacy, numeracy, and the
computer revolution. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.
Hofstadter, Richard. (1963a). On the unpopularity of intellect. In Anti-intellectualism in American
life (pp. 24-51). New York: Knopf.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
54
Hofstadter, Richard. (1963b). The school and the teacher. In Anti-intellectualism in American life
(pp. 299-322). New York: Knopf.
Hoskisson, Tam. (1997). Making the right assumptions: Know your user and improve the
reference interview. The Reference Librarian, 59, 67-75.
Hutchins, Edwin. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Information. (1966, September). [Special issue]. Scientific American, 215(3).
Israel, Jonathan I. (2001). Libraries and enlightenment. In Radical enlightenment: Philosophy and
the making of modernity 1650-1750 (pp. 119-141). Oxford, UK: Oxford University.
Janes, Joseph. (2001). Digital reference services in public and academic libraries. In Charles R.
McClure & John Carlo Bertot (Eds.), Evaluating networked information services: Techniques, policy,
and issues (pp. 175-196). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Janes, Joseph. (2002). Digital reference: Reference librarians’ experiences and attitudes. Journal
of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(7), 549-566. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=76501873
Jeavons, Thomas H. (1994). Ethics in nonprofit management: Creating a culture of integrity. In
Robert D. Herman & Associates (Eds.), The Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and
Management (pp. 184-207). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Johnson, J. David. (1996). Information seeking: An organizational dilemma. Westport, CT: Quorum.
Jones, William, & Teevan, Jaime. (Eds.). (2007). Personal information management. Seattle:
University of Washington.
Kahneman, Daniel. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kenner, Hugh. (1986). Libraries and glowlamps: A strategy of reassurance. Scholarly Publishing,
18(1), 17-22.
Knoblauch, C.H., & Brannon, Lil. (1993). Critical teaching and the idea of literacy. Portsmouth, NH:
Reed Publishing.
Kramarae, Cheris. (Ed.). (1988). Technology and women's voices: Keeping in touch. New York:
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Krikelas, James. (1983). Information-seeking behavior: Patterns and concepts. Drexel Library
Quarterly, 19(11), 5-20.
Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. (1999). The role of experience in the information search process of an
early career information worker: Perceptions of uncertainty, complexity, construction, and
sources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(5), 399-412. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. (2004). Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information
services (2nd ed.). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
55
LaGuardia, Cheryl, & Mitchell, Barbara A. (Eds.). (1998). Finding common ground: Creating the
library of the future without diminishing the library of the past. New York: Neal-Schuman.
Lancaster, F.W. (Ed.). (1991). Ethics and the librarian. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science.
Lankes, R. David, Collins, J.W. III, & Kasowitz, A.S. (Eds.). (2000). Digital reference service in the
new millennium: Planning management, and evaluation. New York: Neal-Schuman.
Large, Andrew. (1988). Information seeking in an online age. East Grinstead, UK: Bowker-Saur.
Large, Andrew, Behesti, Jamshil, &Rahman, Tarjin. (2002). Design criteria for children’s Web
portals: The users speak out. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
53(2), 79-94. Also available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=76501873
Latour, Bruno. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Lave, Jean. (1988). Cognition in practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Lave, Jean, & Wenger, Étienne. (1992). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Leckie, Gloria, Pettigrew, & Sylvain, Christian. (1996). Modeling the information seeking of
professionals: A general model derived from research on engineers, health care professionals,
and lawyers. Library Quarterly, 66(2), 161-193.
Leckie, Gloria J. (2005). General model of the information seeking of professionals. In Karen
Fisher, Sanda Erdelez, & Lynne (E.F.) McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 1581644). Medford, NJ: Information Today. CD
Levy, David M. (2000). Digital libraries and the problem of purpose. D-Lib Magazine, 6(1).
http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january00/01levy.html
Lievrouw, Leah A., & Farb, Sharon E. (2002). Information and equity. In Blaise Cronin (Ed.),
Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 37, pp. 499-540). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Lindsey, Jonathan A. (1994). Ethics. In Wayne A. Wiegand & Donald G. Davis (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of library history (pp. 187-188). New York: Garland Publishing.
Littlewood, Bev, & Stringini, Lorenzo. (1992). The risks of software. Scientific American, 267(5),
62-66, 75.
Long, Elizabeth. (1993). Textual interpretation as collective action. In Jonathan Boyarin (Ed.),
The ethnography of reading (pp. 180-211). Berkeley, CA: University of California. CD
Losee, Robert M. (1990a). Information. In The science of information: Measurement and applications
(pp. 1-43). San Diego, CA: Academic.
Losee, Robert M. (1990b). Information retrieval. In The science of information: Measurement and
applications (pp. 195-236). San Diego, CA: Academic.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
56
Losee, Robert M. (1997). A discipline-independent definition of information. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science, 48(3), 254-269. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Lynch, Clifford A. (1998). Finding common ground. In Cheryl LaGuardia & Barbara A. Mitchell
(Eds.), Finding common ground: Creating the library of the future without diminishing the library of the
past (pp. 1-15). New York: Neal-Schuman.
Lynch, Clifford. (2003). Colliding with the real world: Heresies and unexplored questions about
audience, economics, and control of digital libraries. In Ann Peterson Bishop, Nancy Van House,
& Barbara P. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital library use: Social practice in design and evaluation (pp. 191218). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Maack, Mary Niles. (1994). Gender issues in librarianship. In Wayne A. Wiegand & Donald G.
Davis (Eds.), Encyclopedia of library history (pp. 227-232). New York: Garland Publishing.
Machlup, Fritz. (1962). The production and distribution of knowledge in the United States. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University.
Machlup, Fritz. (1980). Alternative classifications of knowledge. In Knowledge: Its creation,
distribution, and economic significance. Volume I: Knowledge and knowledge production (pp. 100109). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
Machlup, Fritz. (1980). Knowledge and knowledge production. Knowledge, its creation, distribution,
and economic significance (Vol. 1). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
Machlup, Fritz. (1982). The branches of learning. Knowledge, its creation, distribution, and economic
significance (Vol. 2). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
Machlup, Fritz. (1984). The economics of information and human capital. Knowledge, its creation,
distribution, and economic significance (Vol. 3). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
Machlup, Fritz, & Mansfield, Una. (Eds.). (1983). The study of information: Interdisciplinary
messages. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Maher, William J. (1986). The use of user studies. The Midwestern Archivist, XI(1), 15-26.
Mainstream Loudoun et al. v. Board of Trustees of the Loudoun County Library. (1998).
http://lw.bna.com/lw/19981208/2049.htm
Marchionini, Gary. (1995). Information seekers and electronic environments. In Information
seeking in electronic environments (pp. 11-26). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University.
Marchionini, Gary. (1998). Research and development in digital libraries. In Encyclopedia of
Library and Information Science (vol. 63, pp. 259-279). New York: Marcel Dekker.
Marcum, James W. (2002). Rethinking information literacy. Library Quarterly, 72(1), 1-26. Also
available at http://search.epnet.com/direct.asp?db=aph&jn=%22LIQ%22&scope=site
Marien, Michael. (1984). Some questions for the Information Society. The Information Society,
3(2), 181-197. (Original work published 1983)
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
57
Marshall, Catherine. (2003). Finding the boundaries of the library without walls. In Ann
Peterson Bishop, Nancy Van House, & Barbara P. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital library use: Social
practice in design and evaluation (pp. 43-64). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Matson, Lisa Dallape, & Bonski, David J. (1997). Do digital libraries need librarians?: An
experiential dialog. Online, 21(6), 68-76. Also available
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/results?vid=2&hid=108&sid=ed77ad4a-2aa8-4380-9157e8dab18bfc30%40sessionmgr111&bquery=(JN+%22Online%22+and+DT+19971101)&bdata=JmRi
PWE5aCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl
McCain, Roger A. (1988). Information as property and as a public good: Perspectives from the
economic theory of property rights. Library Quarterly, 58(3), 265-282.
McCarthy, John. (1966). Information. Scientific American, 215(3), 64-73.
McClure, Charles R. (1994). Network literacy: A role for libraries. Information Technology and
Libraries, 13(2), 115-125.
McGarry, K.J. (1975). Communication: Definitions and models. In Communication, knowledge and
the librarian (pp. 7-37). London: Clive Bingley.
McKechnie, L. M., & Pettigrew, K. E. (2002). Surveying the use of theory in library and
information science research: A disciplinary perspective. Library Trends, 50(3), 406-417.
McKechnie, Lynne (E.F.), Ross, Catherine Sheldrick, & Rothbauer, Paulette. (2007). Affective
dimensions of information seeking in the context of reading. In Diane Nahl & Dania Bilal (Eds.),
Information and emotion: The emergent affective paradigm in information behavior research and theory
(pp. 187-195). Medford, NJ: Information Today. CD
McNeely, C.V. (1999). Repositioning the Richmond Public Library for the digital age: One
library’s perspective. Library & Information Science Research, 21(3), 391-406.
Mehra, Bharat, Bishop, Ann Peterson, Bazzell, Imani, & Smith, Cynthia. (2002). Scenarios in the
Afya project as a participatory action research (PAR) tool for studying information seeking and
use across the “digital divide.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 53(14), 1259-1266. Also available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgibin/jtoc?ID=76501873
Mele, C. (1999). Cyberspace and disadvantaged communities: The Internet as a tool for
collective action. In M.A. Smith & P. Kollock (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace (pp. 290-310).
London: Routledge.
Miksa, Francis, & Doty, Philip. (1994). Intellectual realities and the digital library. In John
Schnase, John Leggett, Richard Furuta, & Ted Metcalfe (Eds.), Digital libraries '94 (pp. 1-5).
College Station, TX: Texas A&M University, Hypermedia Research Laboratory.
Mizzaro, Stefano. (1998). Relevance: The whole history. In Trudi Bellardo Hahn & Michael
Buckland (Eds.), Historical studies in information science (pp. 221-244). Medford, NJ: Information
Today.
Molz, Redmond Kathleen, & Dain, Phyllis. (1999). Civic space/Cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
58
Montgomery, Kathryn C. (2007). Generation digital: Politics, commerce, and childhood in the age of
the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Morton, Sandy. (1989). The FBI library awareness program: What we know . . . what we do not
know. Information Management Review, 4(3), 53-58.
Murfin, Margery E., & Gugelchuk, Gary M. (1987). Development and testing of a reference
transaction assessment instrument. College & Research Libraries, 48(4), 314-38.
Nagel, Thomas. (1986). The view from nowhere. New York: Oxford University.
Nahl, Diane. (1996). The user-centered revolution [sic]: 1970-1995. Encyclopedia of
Microcomputers, 19, 143-199.
Nahl, Diane. (2003). The user-centered revolution [sic]: Complexity in information behavior.
Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science (2nd ed., revised and expanded; pp. 3028-3042). New
York: Marcel Dekker.
Nahl, Diane. (2007). The centrality of the affective in information behavior. In Diane Nahl &
Dania Bilal (Eds.), Information and emotion: The emergent affective paradigm in information behavior
research and theory (pp. 3-37). Medford, NJ: Information Today. CD
Nardi, Bonnie. (Ed.). (1996). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer
interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Nardi, Bonnie A., O’Day, Vicki L. (1996). Intelligent agents: What we learned at the library.
Libri, 46(2), 59-88.
Nardi, Bonnie A., & O’Day, Vicki L. (1999). Information ecologies: Using technology with heart.
Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Neuliep, J.W. (1996). The study of human communication. In Human communication theory:
Applications and case studies (pp. 1-22). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Nielsen, J. (1993). Executive summary. In Usability engineering (pp. 1-21). Boston: Academic.
Noble, David F. (1997). Digital diploma mills: The automation of higher education. First
Monday, 3(1).
http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/569/490
Norman, Donald A. (2007). The design of future things. New York: Basic Books.
Noyes, Janet M., & Baber, Christopher. (1999). User-centered design of systems. London: SpringerVerlag.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. (1993). The place of books in the age of electronic reproduction. In R.
Howard Bloch & Carla Hesse (Eds.), Future libraries (pp. 13-37). Berkeley, CA: University of
California.
Nunberg, Geoffrey. (1998). Will libraries survive? American Prospect, 9(41). Available at
http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&ri
sb=21_T7198803779&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7198
803782&cisb=22_T7198803781&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=161341&docNo=7
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
59
O'Donnell, James Joseph. (1998). Avatars of the word: From papyrus to cyberspace. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University.
Office of Intellectual Freedom. American Library Association. (1996). Intellectual freedom manual
(5th ed.). Chicago: American Library Association.
Olaisen, Johan, Munch-Petersen, Erland, & Wilson, Patrick. (Eds.). (19vvv). Information science:
From the development of the discipline to social interaction. Boston: Scandinavian University.
Olson, David R. (1994). The world on paper: The conceptual and cognitive implications of writing and
reading. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Ong, Walter J. (1982). Orality & literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Routledge.
Ortega y Gassett, José. (1975). The mission of the librarian. In John David Marshall (Ed.), Of, by,
and for librarians, Second Series (pp. 190-213). s.l.: Shoe String. (Original work published 1961)
O’Toole, James M. (1989). On the idea of permanence. American Archivist, 52(1), 10-25.
Paisley, William. (1980). Information work. Progress in Communication Sciences, 2, 113-165.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Palmer, Carole L. (1996). Information work at the boundaries of science: Linking library services
to research practices. Library Trends, 45(1), 165-191.
Palmquist, Ruth A. (2005). Taylor’s information use environments. In Karen Fisher, Sanda
Erdelez, & Lynne (E.F.) McKechnie (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 354-357). Medford,
NJ: Information Today. CD
Parker, Nicola, & Berryman, Jennifer. (2007). The role of affect in judging “what is enough.” In
Diane Nahl & Dania Bilal (Eds.), Information and emotion: The emergent affective paradigm in
information behavior research and theory (pp. 85-95). Medford, NJ: Information Today. CD
Perry, Ruth. (1993, Spring). Embodied knowledge. Harvard Library Bulletin, 4(1), 57-62.
Pettigrew, Karen E. (1999). Waiting for chiropody: Contextual results from an ethnographic
study of the information behavior among attendees at community clinics. Information Processing
& Management, 35(6), 801-817.
Poster, Mark. (1990). The mode of information: Poststructuralism and social context. Chicago:
University of Chicago.
Pirolli, P., & Card, S. (1999). Information foraging. Psychological Review, 106(4), 643-675.
Preer, Jean. (1994). Censorship. In Wayne A. Wiegand & Donald G. Davis (Eds.), Encyclopedia of
library history (pp. 117-123). New York: Garland Publishing.
Rasmussen, Jens. (2000). Human factors in a dynamic information society: Where are we
heading? Ergonomics, 43(7), 869-879.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
60
Resnick, Lauren B., Sälijö, Roger, Pontecorvo, Clotilde, Burge, Barbara. (Eds.). (1998).
Discourse, tools and reasoning: Situated cognition and technologically supported environments.
Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
Rice-Lively, Mary Lynn, & Racine, J. Drew. (1997). The role of academic libraries in the era of
information technology. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 23(1), 31-41.
Rieh, Soo Young. (2002). Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(2), 145-161. Also available
at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=76501873
Rieh, Soo Young, & Belkin, Nicholas J. (1998). Understanding judgment of information quality
and cognitive authority in the WWW. In Cecilia M. Preston (Ed.), Information access in the global
information economy: Proceedings of the 61st annual meeting of the American Society for Information
Science (pp. 279-289). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Roszak, Theodore. (1994). Ben Franklin's information service: Libraries, literacy, and the
ecology of mind. In The cult of information: A neo-Luddite treatise on high-tech, artificial intelligence,
and the true art of thinking (2nd ed.) (pp. 173-201). Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Rothenberg, Jeff. (1995). Ensuring the longevity of digital documents. Scientific American, 272(1),
42-47.
Rouse, W.B., & Rouse, S.H.. (1984). Human information seeking and design of information
systems. Information Processing & Management, 20(1-2), 129-138.
Royce, Bert R., Meadow, Charles T., & Kraft, Donald H. (1994). Measurement in information
science. San Diego, CA: Academic.
Sales, G. (1987). Developing a human services taxonomy: A case study. Reference Services
Review, 15(4), 35-44.
Saracevic, Tefko. (1996). Relevance reconsidered ‘96. In Peter Ingwersen & Niels Ole Pors (Eds.),
Information science: Integration in perspective (pp. 201-218). From the Second International
Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS2). Copenhagen: The
Royal School of Librarianship.
Savolainen, Reijo. (1995). Everyday life information seeking: Approaching information seeking
in the context of “way of life.” Library and Information Science Research, 17(3), 259-294. Available
at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/07408188
Scarrott, Gordon G. (1994). Some functions and properties of information. Journal of Information
Science, 20(2), 88-98.
Schiller, Herbert I., & Schiller, Anita R. (1988). Libraries, public access, and commerce. In Vinnie
Mosco & Janet Wasco (Eds.), The political economy of information (pp. 146-166). Madison, WI:
University of Wisconsin.
Schön, Donald. (1983). From technical rationality to reflection-in-action. In The reflective
practitioner: How professionals think in action (pp. 21-69 and 357-359). New York: Basic Books.
Schön, Donald. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
61
Schuler, Douglas. (1996). Community and technology: A marriage of necessity. In New
community networks: Wired for change (pp. 1-34). New York: ACM.
Schuler, Douglas, & Namioka, Aki. (Eds.). (1993). Participatory design: Principles and practice.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erblaum.
Shannon, Claude E., & Weaver, Warren. (1971). The mathematical theory of communication.
Urbana, IL: University of Illinois. (Original work published 1949)
Shera, Jesse. (1972). An epistemological foundation for library science. In The foundations of
education for librarianship (pp. 109-134). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Shurkin, Joel. (1984). Engines of the mind: A history of the computer. New York: W.W. Norton.
Simonsen, J., & Kensing, F. (1997). Using ethnography in contextual design. Communications of
the ACM, 40(7), 82-88.
Sloan, Bernie. (2002). Digital reference services bibliography.
Smith, H.J., & Hasnas, J. (1999). Ethics and information systems: The corporate domain. MIS
Quarterly, 23(1), 109-127.
Smith, J. F., & Kida, T. (1991). Heuristics and biases: Expertise and task realism in auditing.
Psychological Bulletin, 109(3), 472-489.
Smith, Martha Montague. (1997). Information ethics. In Martha E. Williams (Ed.), Annual review
of information science and technology (Vol. 32, pp. 339-366). Medford, NJ: Learned Information.
Sonnenwald, D.H., & Pierce, L.G. (2000). Information behavior in dynamic work contexts:
Interwoven situational awareness, dense social networks and contested collaboration in
command and control. Information Processing & Management, 36(3), 461-479.
Special Libraries Association. (1996). Competencies for special librarians of the 21st century.
http://www.sla.org/content/SLA/professional/meaning/competency.cfm
Star, Susan Leigh. (Ed.). (1995). Ecologies of knowledge. New York: State University of New
York.
Star, S. Leigh, & Griesemer, James R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary
objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39.
Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387-420.
Starbuck, W.H., & Milliken, F.J. (1988). Executives’ perceptual filters: What they notice and how
they make sense. In D.C. Hambrick (Ed.), The executive effect: Concepts and methods for studying top
managers (pp. 35-65). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Stepp, Ermel. (1993). The virtualization of institutes of research. The Arachnet Electronic Journal
on Virtual Culture, 1(6). http://www.infomotions.com/serials/aejvc/aejvc-v1n06-steppvirtualization.txt
Strauss, Anselm, Fagerhaugh, Shizuko, Suczek, Barbara, & Wiener, Carolyn. (1985). Social
organization of medical work. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
62
Street, Brian. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Subramanyam, K. (1979). Characteristics and structure of scientific literature. In "Scientific
literature." Encyclopedia of library and information science (pp. 391-403). New York: Marcel
Dekker.
Suchman, Lucy [A.]. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine
communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Suchman, Lucy, Blomberg, Jeanette, Orr, Julian E., & Trigg, Randall. (1999). Reconstructing
technologies as social practice. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 392-408.
Sutcliffe, A.G., Ennis, M., & Watkinson, S.J. (2000). Empirical studies of end-user information
searching. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(13), 1211-1231. Also available
at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Swan, John. (1994). Intellectual freedom. In Wayne A. Wiegand & Donald G. Davis (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of library history (pp. 280-285). New York: Garland Publishing.
Swann, William B., Jr. (1984). Quest for accuracy in person perception: A matter of pragmatics.
Psychological Review, 91(4), 457-477.
Swanson, Don R. (1988). Historical note: Information retrieval and the future of an illusion.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 39(2), 92-98. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Tague-Sutcliffe, Jean. (1995). Measuring information: An information services perspective. San Diego,
CA: Academic.
Taylor, Charles. (1989). Sources of the self: The making of the modern identity. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University.
Taylor, Robert S. (1986a). The user-driven model and information use environments. In Valueadded processes in information systems (pp. 23-47). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Taylor, Robert S. (1986b). The value-added model. In Value-added processes in information systems
(pp. 48-70). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Taylor, Robert S. (1986). Value-added processes in information systems. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Tissing, Robert W., Jr. (1984). The orientation interview in archival research. American Archivist,
47(2), 173-178.
Toms, Elaine G., & Duff, Wendy. (2002). “I spent 1 1/2 hours sifting through one large box . . . .”:
Diaries as information behavior of the archives user: Lessons learned. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(14), 1232-1238.
Toms, Elaine G., & Kinnucan, M.T. (1996). The effectiveness of the city metaphor for organizing
the menus of Free-Nets. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(12), 919-931.
Also available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Tucker, Nicholas. (1981). Selection, censorship and control. In The child and the book: A
psychological and literary exploration (pp. 190-217). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
63
Tufte, Edward R. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics.
Tufte, Edward R. (1990). Envisioning information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics.
Tufte, Edward R. (1997). Visual explanations: Images, evidence and narrative. Cheshire, CT:
Graphics.
Turnbaugh, Roy C. (1986). Archival mission and user studies. The Midwestern Archivist, XI(1),
27-33.
U.S Department of Commerce. National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
(2003). Report to Congress: Children’s Internet Protection Act [PL 106-554]: Study of technology
protection measures in section 1703. Available at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/ntiageneral/cipa2003/index.html
Vakkari, Pertti. (1999). Task complexity, problem structure and information actions: Integrating
studies on information seeking and retrieval. Information Processing & Management, 35(6), 819-837.
Vakkari, Pertti, & Sormunen, Eero. (2004). The influence of relevance levels on the effectiveness
of interactive information retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 55(11), 963-969. Also available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgibin/jissue/109580889
Van House, Nancy A. (2003). Digital libraries and collaborative knowledge construction. In Ann
Peterson Bishop, Nancy Van House, & Barbara P. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital library use: Social
practice in design and evaluation (pp. 271-296). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Varlejs, J. (Ed.). (1991). Information literacy: Learning how to learn. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
Vickery, B.C. (Ed.). (1994). Fifty years of information progress: A Journal of Documentation review.
London: ASLIB.
Virnoche, M. (1998). The seamless web and communication equity: The social shaping of a
community network. Science, Technology & Human Values, 23(2), 199-220.
Walter, Virginia A. (1994). The information needs of children. Advances in Librarianship (Vol. 18,
pp. 111-129).
Wang, Peiling, & White, Marilyn Domas. (1999). A cognitive model of document use during
a research project. Study II. Decisions at the reading and citing stages. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science, 50(2), 98-114. Also available at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc?ID=27981
Wasik, Joann M. (2005). Digital reference bibliography. Available at
http://www.webjunction.org/do/DisplayContent;jsessionid=FFBB8699B5FF14270F93B90A2
D4769AE?id=11878
Weick, Karl E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Weinberger, David. (2007). Everything is miscellaneous: the power of the new digital disorder. New
York: Holt.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
64
Wenger, Étienne. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University.
Westbrook, Lynn. (1993). User needs: A synthesis and analysis of current theories for the
practitioner. RQ, 32(4), 541-549.
White, Marilyn Domas. (2001). Digital reference services: Framework for analysis and
evaluation. Library & Information Science Research, 23(2), 211-231.
Widén-Wulff, Gunilla, & Ginman, Mariam. (2004). Explaining knowledge sharing in
organizations through the dimensions of social capital. Journal of Information Science, 30(5), 448458. Also available at http://jis.sagepub.com/content/vol30/issue5/
Wiegand, Shirley A., & Wiegand, Wayne A. (2007). Books on trial: Red scare in the heartland.
Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma.
Wiegand, Wayne A. (1988). The role of the library in American history. In Filomena Simora
(Ed.), The Bowker annual (pp. 69-76). New York: R.R. Bowker.
Wiegand, Wayne A. (2003). To reposition a research agenda: What American Studies can teach
the LIS community about the library in the life of the user. Library Quarterly, 73(4), 369-382.
Williams, Christine L. (1995). Still a man’s world: Men who do women’s work. Berkeley, CA:
University of California.
Wilson, Patrick. (1983). Second-hand knowledge: An inquiry into cognitive authority. Westport, CT:
Greenwood.
Wilson, Thomas D. (1981). On user studies and information needs. Journal of Documentation,
37(1), 3-15.
Wilson, Thomas D. (1997). Information behaviour: An interdisciplinary perspective. In Pertti
Vakkari, Reijo Savolainen & Brenda Dervin (Eds.), Information seeking in context (pp. 39-52).
London: Graham Taylor.
Wilson, Thomas D. (1999). Models in information behaviour research. Journal of Documentation,
55(3), 249-270.
Winograd, Terry, & Flores, Fernando. (1987). Understanding computers and cognition: A new
foundation for design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Winter, Michael F. (1988). The trick question: Thinking through the occupation/profession
debate. In The culture and control of expertise: Toward a sociological understanding of librarianship (pp.
97-113). New York: Greenwood.
Winterowk, W. Ross. (1989). The culture and politics of literacy. New York: Oxford University.
Copyright Philip Doty July 2010
65