Research rules for library ethnography
| Date | 06 September 2011 |
| Published date | 06 September 2011 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/07378831111174378 |
| Pages | 409-411 |
| Author | Michael Seadle |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
EDITORIAL
Research rules for library
ethnography
Michael Seadle
Humboldt-Universita
¨t zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Abstract
Purpose – The aim of this paper is to introduce the second part of the theme issue on “user research
and technology” and to discuss testing online digital library resources using methods from
ethnography and cultural anthropology.
Design/methodology/approach – This editorial reviews the literature and research design
methods.
Findings – Library and information science as a field is changing and the requirements for top
quality research are growing more stringent. This is typical of the experience of other professional
fields as they have moved from practitioners advising practitioners to researchers building on past
results.
Originality/value – The results of current research need not merely be interesting, but in so far as
possible, testable and reproducible.
Keywords Library and information science, Research,Digital storage, Resource management
Paper type Viewpoint
In her editorial for the first of this two-part theme issue on “User research and
technology” Elke Greifeneder (2011) wrote that: “Writing about the way we do research
is a dangerous task [...]”. I am going to continue in her footsteps and write about how I
believe the library community should approach research on users and technology. My
focus will be on testing online digital library resources using methods from
ethnography and cultural anthropology. Ethnography is the term more often used in
Germany and anthropology in the Anglo-American world. I will treat them here as
interchangeable.
There is a substantial literature on using cultural anthropology for studying
libraries, beginning with Information Ecologies by Nardi and O’Day (1999) and
continued in works such as “Studying students” by Foster and Gibbons (2007). I also
recommended anthropological methods as long ago as 1998 in my introduction to a
Library Hi Tech special issue where I discussed the “roles of anthropological theory
[...] as tools to help librarians to see the underlying elements in their work and
workplaces” (Seadle, 1998). In recent years ethnographic user research has expanded
substantially. In the Google map “AnthroLib” Nancy Foster has listed 40 projects
involving libraries and anthropological research from North America, Europe, Africa,
Asia and Australia. My own (former) student, Michael Stoepel, is listed for his work a
project at the American University of Paris, and if his work is any indication, the
quality of these projects is very high.
What does high quality mean in the context of library-based ethnography an d what
is its relationship to technology and user studies? I would like to suggest three
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0737-8831.htm
Research rules
for library
ethnography
409
Received June 2011
Revised June 2011
Accepted June 2011
Library Hi Tech
Vol. 29 No. 3, 2011
pp. 409-411
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0737-8831
DOI 10.1108/07378831111174378
To continue reading
Request your trial