Bringing out the everyday in everyday information behavior

DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/JD-10-2016-0119
Pages398-411
Published date12 March 2018
Date12 March 2018
AuthorMelissa G. Ocepek
Subject MatterLibrary & information science,Records management & preservation,Document management,Classification & cataloguing,Information behaviour & retrieval,Collection building & management,Scholarly communications/publishing,Information & knowledge management,Information management & governance,Information management,Information & communications technology,Internet
Bringing out the everyday in
everyday information behavior
Melissa G. Ocepek
School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, USA
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to argue that scholars in the information behavior (IB) field should
embrace the theoretical framework of the everyday to explore a more holistic view of IB.
Design/methodology/approach The paper describes the theory of the everyday and delineates four
opportunities offered by scholars of the everyday. The paper concludes with three examples that highlight
what a more everyday-focused everyday information behavior might look like.
Findings The theory of the everyday provides a useful theoretical framework to ground research
addressing the everyday world as well as useful concepts for analysis and research methodology.
Originality/value The theoretical framework of the everyday contributes to IB research by providing a
theoretical justification for work addressing everyday life as well as useful concepts for analysis. The paper
also outlines the benefits of integrating methods influenced by institutional ethnography, a methodology
previously used to address the nuances of the everyday world.
Keywords Research methods, Cultural theory, Information behaviour, Critical theory, Everyday life,
Everyday information behaviour
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
As library and information scientists, we do not have a tradition of focusing on normative problems
in which we can approach a line of inquiry with some measure of certainty. We cannot be sure that
our areas are well defined and that our problems are important. We have no central theory or body
of interrelated theories we can view as middle range(Chatman, 1996, p. 193).
In the 20 years since Chatman published the above quotation, considerable work has been
done to developand build models and theories throughout the libraryand information science
literature, especially among information behavior(IB) scholars (Case, 2012; Fisheret al., 2009).
Although greatstrides into theory development inIB research havebeen made, many aspects
still lack theoretical grounding and justification. This paper focuses on one of those aspects:
research addressing everyday information behavior (EIB)[1]. Most of the theoretical work in
IB and EIB use concepts and models from other disciplines to help explain behavior, but
not to situate the research theoretically. Scholars under the umbrella of IB study a variety of
individuals in different roles, occupations, and demographics without a theoretical
framework that explains their relationships or evaluates their importance to the wider goal
of understanding information behavior (Case, 2012).
Recently, IB scholars have begun to expand their domain of interest to include
everyday contexts. Although this expansion seems logical, the connection of everyday IB
literature to the more traditional IB literature has not been fully delineated. Major
theoretical works in EIB such as everyday life information seeking (Savolainen, 1995,
2009), life in the round (Chatman, 1999), and information grounds (Pettigrew, 1999),
largely address the context immediately surrounding an individualsinformation
behaviors. They do not articulate the rationale for exploring the everyday or how itrelates
to information behaviors in other contexts. IB and EIB scholars have built theories and
models to explain behavior, but they have not yet used theory to ground their approach to
the everyday domain or the rationale for studying it (Fisher et al., 2009).
Journal of Documentation
Vol. 74 No. 2, 2018
pp. 398-411
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0022-0418
DOI 10.1108/JD-10-2016-0119
Received 6 October 2016
Revised 8 September 2017
Accepted 17 September 2017
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0022-0418.htm
398
JD
74,2

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT