Information behaviour of scholars

Abstract

In recent years we have seen intensive debates over the changes in scholarly practice caused by increased accessibility of digital resources and tools. This has caused an evident and rapid trend towards the development of different information behaviours by scholars: what information resources they are using, how and when. Recent studies of scholarly information behaviour all show significant changes in the ways researchers communicate, publish their works, collaborate, look for information and use it. Studies describe previously unseen patterns of scholarly information behaviour (e.g. skimming, navigating, power browsing, squirrelling, cross-checking). This, in turn, can (or should) have significant impact on the development of the information tools and information services for scholars. The paper first addresses key information concepts in scholarly context (e.g. information, information need, relevance, pertinence, salience, information overload, avoiding information), presents some general characteristics of scholarly information behaviour (e.g. difference between scholars and other users of information, differences between disciplines, individuals, etc.) and some typical examples of information behaviour (e.g. browsing, berrypicking, powerbrowsing, chaining, skimming, squirreling), as well as discusses some implications for information tools and services. In the end some attention is dedicated to issues of digital scholarship.

Identifying the information behavior in competitive intelligence process: a paradigm model for medical sciences universities

“…1. Information hunting has been considered as information behavior in many studies such as Palmer (1991a, b) and Vilar (2015).…”

“…There is a great deal of literature available on competitive intelligence. However, competitive intelligence in universities and higher education has received limited attention in the existing literature (Garcia-Alsina et al, 2013, 2015. In addition, limited studies have investigated the information behavior in competitive intelligence process.…”

Opening up the black box of scholarly synthesis: Intermediate products, processes, and tools

“…There is a rich scholarly tradition within Information Science that examines the physical, social, and cognitive processes and products of research and learning. A long strand of research on information seeking and information practices has sought to distill descriptive studies of scholarly processes into sets of primitives , or fundamental information activities, that are common across disciplines, such as “browsing,” “chaining,” “accessing,” “notetaking,” and “re‐reading.” (Blanke & Hedges, 2013; Ellis, 1993; Palmer, Teffeau, & Pirmann, 2009; Unsworth, 2000; Vilar, 2015). In their synthesis of the literature on primitives, Palmer et al (2009) show how 20 discrete primitives function across disciplines as building‐blocks for higher‐level scholarly activities such as searching, collecting, reading, writing, and collaborating.…”

Central Humanist Library at Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana

“…Vilar (2014) provides an overview of the implications of change in the academic library arena, focusing on scientific information, behaviour and communication. He notes that, to keep their status, libraries need to rethink their perception of end users, as well as re-evaluate, reorganize and/or update their services.…”

“…Studies show that end users are amenable to the provision of collaborative information environments, which they can customise according to their needs (such as discipline and academic status). These are seen as being collaborative spaces which present many opportunities for end-user contribution and sharing (Vilar, 2014).…”