The search-ification of everyday life and the mundane-ification of search
| Pages | 224-243 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-06-2016-0081 |
| Date | 13 March 2017 |
| Published date | 13 March 2017 |
| Author | Olof Sundin,Jutta Haider,Cecilia Andersson,Hanna Carlsson,Sara Kjellberg |
| Subject Matter | Library & 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 |
The search-ification of
everyday life and the
mundane-ification of search
Olof Sundin, Jutta Haider, Cecilia Andersson, Hanna Carlsson and
Sara Kjellberg
Lund University, Lund, Sweden
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to understand how meaning is assigned to online searching
by viewing it as a mundane, yet often invisible, activity of everyday life and an integrated part of various
social practices.
Design/methodology/approach –Searching is investigated with a sociomaterial approach with a starting
point in information searching as entangled across practices and material arrangements and as a mundane
part of everyday life. In total, 21 focus groups with 127 participants have been carried out. The study focusses
particularly on peoples’experiences and meaning-making and on how these experiences and the making of
meaning could be understood in the light of algorithmic shaping.
Findings –An often-invisible activity such as searching is made visible with the help of focus group
discussions. An understanding of the relationship between searching and everyday life through two
interrelated narratives is proposed: a search-ification of everyday life and a mundane-ification of search.
Originality/value –The study broadens the often narrow focus on searching in order to open up for a
research-based discussion in information science on the role of online searching in society and everyday life.
Keywords Search engines, Infrastructure, Everyday life, Searching, Trust, Focus groups, Sociomateriality
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
This study investigates the role of online searching in everyday life. Online searching –
typically understood as the use of general purpose search engines –has developed into a
close to naturalised part of most peoples’lives and the dominant search engine Google has
gained a prominent status in contemporary culture (Hillis et al., 2013). Google has turned
into a commonly used verb and “to Google”is now almost synonymous with “finding out
about things”. Studies have shown how search engines in many areas are identified as the
premium tool for finding information (e.g. Jamali and Asadi, 2010; Rowlands et al., 2008).
Within information science, online searching has been extensively investigated within
information retrieval (IR) as well as in experimental laboratory studies on search behaviour
( Jansen and Rieh, 2010). However, the knowledge gained from information science has only
in exceptional cases been used for enabling an understanding of the role of online searching
on the web in and for everyday life (Schroeder, 2015). At the same time, studies on
information seeking in everyday life have rarely considered online searching. Thus, as a
discipline, information science needs to develop an in-depth understanding of online
searching in and for everyday life.
We approach online searching as an activity central to many of today’s social practices.
More specifically, we study how people experience and reflect on online searching –i.e. the
use of general purpose search engines –in relation to different parts of their lives and which
pivotal issues emerge as shaping the understanding and meaning of search and search
engines in contemporary culture. The aim of the study is to elucidate how meaning is
Journal of Documentation
Vol. 73 No. 2, 2017
pp. 224-243
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0022-0418
DOI 10.1108/JD-06-2016-0081
Received 14 June 2016
Revised 12 September 2016
Accepted 22 September 2016
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0022-0418.htm
The work was funded by the Swedish Research Council through the framework grant “Knowledge in a
Digital World. Trust, Credibility and Relevance on the Web”.
224
JD
73,2
assigned to online searching by viewing it as a mundane, yet often invisible, activity of
everyday life and an integrated part of various social practices. We have carried out
21 focus groups with 127 people in order for them to discuss and reflect on a subject that is
often not thought of and even less often communicated in research.
When studying peoples’information seeking the dominant theoretical lenses have been
person-in-situation theory and task theory (Talja and Nyce, 2015). In either case, the starting
point is a cognitive problem that demands information as well as information processing
in order to be solved (e.g. Johnson et al., 2015). In contrast, here, we start from an
understanding of information searching as entangled across practices and material
arrangements (Orlikowski and Scott, 2008; Orlikowski, 2007) and thus as an ordinary part of
everyday life. With this paper, we intend to broaden an otherwise narrow focus on searching
in order to open up for a research-based discussion in information science on the role of
online searching in society, with a starting point in the stories told by users. We also intend
to complement research carried out with a particular interest for peoples’experiences and
meaning-making with an understanding for how these experiences and the making of
meaning could be considered in light of their algorithmic shaping.
Literature review
Earlier research points to how general purpose search engines have come to reduce the
multiplicity of how people go about finding information (e.g. Jamali and Asadi, 2010;
Rowlands et al., 2008). For example, Rowlands et al. (2008) argue that not only young people
but people in all ages rely on Google to such an extent that it is justified to talk of a Google
generation. According to Marchionini (2006), there are different types of searches,
depending on the complexity of a question. “Looking-up”searches are the simplest type,
while searching for learning and for investigation requires interpretation as well as multiple
searches, sometimes over a longer period of time (Marchionini, 2006). This is a useful
distinction and certainly accurate in many cases. Having said that, in the present study, this
dichotomy becomes somewhat blurry. Our participants often refer to “looking-up”, yet it
seems as if complex issues are turned into simple question of facts due to what we can call a
search engine logic, as we suggest and develop later (see below).
Taraborelli (2008, p. 196) distinguishes between evaluative judgements (content) and
predictive judgements of reliability, i.e. judgement made “prior to its actual inspection”, and
claims that the latter is important when understanding how we trust web information.
Hargittai et al. (2010) show that young adults, rather than evaluating a content’s credibility,
tend to rely on media brands (cf. Huvila, 2013). When discussing how people assess
credibility of information it is therefore important to include an understanding of how a
website is found and to not only focus on the website itself (Huvila, 2013; cf. Hargittai et al.,
2010; Sundin and Carlsson, 2016). One such cue, according to Taraborelli (2008, p. 201), are
“algorithmic endorsement indicators”, in this case the order of results that the algorithm
produces. Earlier research has shown how dependent we are on the order of search results
when choosing websites (Kammerer and Gerjets, 2012; Pan et al., 2007). However, from
transaction log studies, we learn that search engines seem to be used primarily for finding
and accessing information related to consumption and leisure (Waller, 2011). This led Waller
(2011, p. 774) to conclude that “the Internet search engine is not only an interface to
information or a shortcut to Websites, it is equally a site of leisure”. This and similar
research form the basis for Schroeder’s (2015, p. 152) claim that “the information science
approaches […], focusing on how effectively or successfully people find results, provide
only a limited perspective”.
In information science, the use of search engines is investigated in several fields of the
discipline. Jansen and Rieh (2010, p. 1517) note that “[t]he fields of information searching and
information retrieval both focus on the interaction between people and content in
225
The search-
ification of
everyday life
To continue reading
Request your trial