**Links for all of the readings are available on our class Sakai website in the Resources folder.**

Introduction and basic concepts of human information interaction

Session 1, August 21: Directions of human information behavior research

• Wilson, T.D. (2010). Fifty years of information behavior research. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 36(3), 27-34.
• Wildemuth, B.M., & Case, D.O. (2010). Early information behavior research. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 36(3), 35-38.

Session 2, August 26: Theoretical perspectives

• Due today: Article for evidence summary assignment. Please send me your citation and the article topic..

• Bates, M. J. (1999). The invisible substrate of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(12), 1043-1050..
• Marchionini, G. (2008). Human-information interaction. Library & Information Science Research, 30(3), 165-174.

Session 3, August 28: Models of information behavior

• Case, D. O. (2012). Models of information behavior. In Looking for Information: A Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs and Behavior (3rd ed., pp. 133-162). Emerald Group Publishing.
• Wilson, T. D. (1999). Models in information behaviour research. Journal of Documentation, 55(3), 249-270. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000007145.

September 2 - Labor day, no class.

Session 4, September 4: Cognitive and affective approaches to information behaviors

• Ingwersen, P., & Järvelin, K. (2005). The Turn: Integration of Information Seeking and Retrieval in Context.Springer. [UNC libraries - electronic resource]
  • Please just read Section 6.1, Building the conceptual framework, p263-274.(Feel free to skim other parts of chapter 6 if you have time.)
• Lopatovska, I., & Arapakis, I. (2011). Theories, methods and current research on emotions in library and information science, information retrieval and human-computer interaction. Information Processing & Management, 47(4), 575-592. [UNC libraries]

Information needs

Session 5, September 9: Experiencing and expressing information needs

• Belkin, N. (1980). Anomalous states of knowledge as a basis for information retrieval. Canadian Journal of Information Science, 5,133-143.
• Case, D. O. (2012). Information needs and information seeking. In Looking for Information: A Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs and Behavior (3rd ed., pp. 77-92). Emerald Group Publishing.
• Taylor, R. S. (1962). The process of asking questions. American Documentation, 13(4), 391-396. [Please read Page 392 on Question formation; skim or read the rest of the article if you have time.]

Evidence summary assignment:
• Michael: Crestani, F., & Du, H. (2006). Written versus spoken queries: A qualitative and quantitative comparative analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(7), 881-890.

Session 6, September 11: Analyzing information needs

• Chatman, E. (1991). Life in a small world: Application of gratification theory to information-seeking behavior. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(6), 438-449.
• Gabridge, C., Gaskell, M., & Stout, A. (2008). Information seeking through students' eyes: The MIT Photo Diary Study. College & Research Libraries, 69(6), 510-523.
• One additional study that analyzes the information needs of a particular group, other than college/graduate students or scholars. Identify a study from the additional reading list or through searching in the literature.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Halley: Schaller, S. (2011). Information needs of LGBTQ college students. Libri 61(2),100-115.
• Mari: Agosto, D.E., & Hughes-Hassell, S. (2006). Toward a model of the everyday life information needs of urban teenagers, Part 1: Theoretical model, [and] Part 2: Empirical model. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(10), 1394-1403, and 57(11), 1418-1426.

Information seeking

Session 7, September 16: Selection of information sources

• Lopatovska, I., Fenton, M. R., & Campot, S. (2012). Examining preferences for search engines and their effects on information behavior. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 49(1), 1-11. doi:10.1002/meet.14504901110.
• Savolainen, R. (2008). Source preferences in the context of seeking problem-specific information. Information Processing & Management, 44(1): 274-293.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Jessica: Evans, B.M., Kairam, S., & Pirolli, P. (2010). Do your friends make you smarter? An analysis of social strategies in online information seeking. Information Processing & Management, 46(6), 679-692.
Ashleigh: Morris, M. R., Teevan, J., & Panovich, K. (2010). What do people ask their social networks, and why?: a survey study of status message q&a behavior. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1739-1748). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

Session 8, September 18: Interactive information retrieval

• Due today: Three paragraphs on your human interaction problem or question for the evidence review memo assignment.

• Du, J. T., & Evans, N. (2011). Academic users' information searching on research topics: Characteristics of research tasks and search strategies. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(4), 299-306.
• Marchionini, G. (2006). Exploratory search: From finding to understanding. Communications of the ACM, 49(4), 41-46.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Mary: Kelly, D., & Fu, X. (2007). Eliciting better information need descriptions from users of information search systems. Information Processing & Management, 43(1), 30-46.
• Xuxiang: Xie, I., & Joo, S. (2010). Transitions in search tactics during the Web-based search process. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 61(11), 2188-2205.

Session 9, September 23: Relevance judgments

• Hariri, N. (2011). Relevance ranking on Google: Are top ranked results really considered more relevant by the users? Online Information Review, 35(4), 598-610.
• Saracevic, T. (2007). Relevance: A review of the literature and a framework for thinking on the notion in information science. Part II: Nature and manifestations of relevance, [and] Part III: Behavior and effects of relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(13), 1915-1933, 2126-2144.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Brendan: Janes, J.W., & McKinney, R. (1992). Relevance judgments of actual users and secondary judges: A comparative study. Library Quarterly, 62(2), 150-168.

Session 10, September 25: Assessing information quality

Due today: Statement of your information need for the diary and analysis of an information-seeking event assignment. It only needs to be 1-3 sentences.

• Rieh, S.Y. (2002). Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 53(2), 145-161.
• Tombros, A., Ruthven, I., & Jose, J.M. (2005). How users assess web pages for information seeking. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 56(4), 327-344.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Emily S.: Francke, H., & Sundin, O. (2012). Negotiating the role of sources: Educators' concepts of credibility in participatory media. Library & Information Science Research, 34(3), 169-175.
• Patrick: Flanagin, A.J., & Metzger, M.J. (2011). From Encyclopaedia Britannica to Wikipedia. Information, Communication & Society, 14(3), 355-374.

Information use

Session 11, September 30: Ways of using information

• Selecting articles/information for reading and citing in a paper: Wang, P., & White, M.D. (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.
• Using journal articles: Zhang, L. (2012). Grasping the structure of journal articles: Utilizing the functions of information units. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 63(3), 469-480.
• Using and understanding the texts retrieved in a library catalog: Morgan, E.L. (2012). Use and understand: The inclusion of services against texts in library catalogs and "discovery systems". Library Hi Tech, 30(1), 35-59.
• Discussing found information with a physician or using it to improve one's health: Warner, D., & Procaccino, J.D. (2004). Toward wellness: Women seeking health information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(8), 709-730.
• Eight different ways that information is used within organizational contexts: Choo, C.W., Bergeron, P., Detlor, B., & Heaton, L. (2008). Information culture and information use: An exploratory study of three organizations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(5), 792-804.
• Packaging and sharing information with stakeholders: Mutshewa, A. (2010). The use of information by environmental planners: A qualitative study using Grounded Theory methodology. Information Processing & Management, 46(2), 212-232.
• Use of images for the information they provide or as illustrations: McCay-Pett, L., & Toms, E. (2009). Image use within the work task model: Images as information and illustration. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 60(12), 2416-2429.
• Selection and use of particular pieces of information in house listings: Savolainen, R. (2009). Interpreting informational cues: An explorative study on information use among prospective homebuyers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 60(11), 2244-2254.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Tia: Woelfer, J.P., & Hendry, D.G. (2009). Stabilizing homeless young people with information and place. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 60(11), 2300-2312.
• Kyla: Moen, A., & Brennan, P.F. (2005). Health@Home: The work of health information management in the household (HIMH): Implications for consumer health informatics (CHI) innovations. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 12(6), 648-656.

Session 12, October 2: Information sharing and privacy

• Introna, L. D. (1997). Privacy and the computer: why we need privacy in the information society. Metaphilosophy, 28(3), 259-275.
• Talja, S., & Hansen, P. (2006). Information sharing. In New directions in human information behavior (Vol. 8, pp. 113-134). Netherlands: Springer.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Neda: Solove, D.J. (2007). "I've got nothing to hide" and other misunderstandings of privacy. San Diego Law Review, 44(4), 745-772.
• Katie M.: Attrill, A., & Jalil, R. (2011). Revealing only the superficial me: Exploring categorical self-disclosure online. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1634-1642. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.001

Session 13, October 7: Information overload

• Due today: Preliminary plan for literature searching for the evidence review memo assignment.

• Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2009). The dark side of information: overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies. Journal of Information Science, 35(2), 180-191. doi:10.1177/0165551508095781
• Goulding, A. (2001). Information poverty or overload? Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 33(3), 109-111.
• Levy, D. M. (2005). To grow in wisdom: Vannevar Bush, information overload, and the life of leisure. Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, 281-286.

Session 14, October 9: Information poverty

• Chatman, E. A. (1996). The impoverished life-world of outsiders. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(3), 193-206.
• Yu, L. (2006). Understanding information inequality: making sense of the literature of the information and digital divides. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 38(4), 229-252.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Kai: Haider, J., & Bawden, D. (2007). Conceptions of "information poverty" in LIS: a discourse analysis. Journal of Documentation, 63(4), 534-557.
• Stephanie: Cotten, S. R., & Gupta, S. S. (2004). Characteristics of online and offline health information seekers and factors that discriminate between them. Social Science & Medicine, 59(9), 1795-1806

Session 15, October 14: Copyright and ethical considerations

• Floridi, L. (2008). Foundations of information ethics. In The handbook of information and computer ethics (pp. 4-23). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• Seadle, M. (2007). Copyright cultures. Library Hi Tech, 25(3), 430-435

Session 16, October 16: Re-using and re-finding information

Due today: Diary and analysis of an information-seeking event

• Capra, R., & Perez-Quinones, M.A. (2005). Using Web search engines to find and refind information. IEEE Computer, 38(10), 36-42.
• Jones, W., Bruce, H., & Dumais, S. (2001). Keeping found things found on the web. In Proceedings of the tenth international conference on Information and knowledge management (pp. 119-126).

The impact of context on information behaviors

Session 17, October 21: Domain, disciplinary, and organizational context

• Cool, C. (2001). The concept of situation in information science. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 35, 5-42. (Only read pages 7-9.)
• Ellis, D., Cox, D., & Hall, K. (1993). A comparison of the information seeking patterns of researchers in the physical and social sciences. Journal of Documentation, 49(4), 356-369.
• Taylor, R.S. (1991). Information use environments. Progress in Communication Sciences, 10, 217-255. (Read Section II, then read about one of the three information use environments studied (engineers, legislators, or physicians), based on the following schedule: last name beginning with A-C, engineers; last name beginning with G-M, legislators; last name beginning with P-W, physicians.)

Evidence summary assignment:
• Yi: Reddy, M.C. & Jansen, B.J. (2008). A model for understanding collaborative information behavior in context: A study of two healthcare teams. Information Processing & Management, 44(1), 256-273.

Session 18, October 23: Everyday life information seeking

• Fisher, K.E., & Naumer, C.M. (2006). Information grounds: Theoretical basis and empirical findings on information flow in social settings. In Spink, A., & Cole, C. (eds.), New Directions in Human Information Behavior. Springer, 93-111.
• Savolainen, R. (1995). Everyday life information seeking: Approaching information seeking in the context of "way of life". Library & Information Science Research, 17(3), 259-294.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Emily Y: Westbrook, L. (2009). Crisis information concerns: Information needs of domestic violence survivors.Information Processing & Management, 45(1), 98-114.

Session 19, October 28: Browsing and serendipity

• Bates, M.J. (2007). What is browsing -- really? A model drawing from behavioural science research. Information Research, 12(4), Paper 330.
• Bawden, D. (2011). Encountering on the road to Serendip? Browsing in new information environments. In Foster, A., & Rafferty, P. (eds.), Innovations in Information Retrieval: Perspectives for Theory and Practice. London: Facet Publishing, 1-22.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Maggie: Ross, C.S. (1999). Finding without seeking: The information encounter in the context of reading for pleasure. Information Processing & Management, 35(6), 783-799.
• Joy: Heinström, J. (2006). Psychological factors behind incidental information acquisition. Library & Information Science Research, 28(4),579-594.

Session 20, October 30: Information behaviors by proxy

• Due today: Outline for the evidence review memo.

• Abrahamson, J.A., Fisher, K.E., Turner, A.G., Durrance, J.C., & Turner, T.C. (2008). Lay information mediary behavior uncovered: Exploring how nonprofessionals seek health information for themselves and others online. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 96(4), 310-323.
• Gross, M. (1995). The imposed query. RQ, 35(2), 236-243.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Amanda: Bennett, D.B., Cenzer, P.S., & Kirk, P. (2004). A class assignment requiring chat-based reference. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 44(2), 149-163.

November 4 - Class cancelled, ASIS&T annual meeting

Intermediation in information seeking

Session 21, November 6: Human intermediaries

• Agosto, D.E., Rozaklis, L., MacDonald, C., & Abels, E.G. (2011). A model of the reference and information service process: An educators' perspective. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 50(3), 235-244.
• Ellis, D., Wilson, T.D., Ford, N., Foster, A., Lam, H.M., Burton, R., & Spink, A. (2002). Information seeking and mediated searching. Part 5. User-intermediary interaction.Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 53(11), 883-893.

Session 22, November 11: Information retrieval systems as intermediaries

• Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. Atlantic Monthly, 176(1), 101-108. [Reprinted in interactions, 3(2), 35-46, March 1996]
• Marchionini, G., & White, R. (2007). Find what you need, understand what you find. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 23(3), 205-238.
• White, R.W. (2009). Designing information-seeking support systems. In Information Seeking Support Systems: An Invitational Workshop (June 26-27, 2008, Chapel Hill, NC), 55-58.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Travis: Xie, I., & Cool, C. (2009). Understanding help seeking within the context of searching digital libraries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 60(3), 477-494.

Session 23, November 13: Social intermediation

• Eysenbach, G. (2007). From intermediation to disintermediation and apomediation: New models for consumers to access and assess the credibility of health information in the age of Web 2.0. In MEDINFO 2007 Proceedings. IOS Press, 162-166.
• Shah, C., & Kitzie, V. (2012). Social Q&A and virtual reference -- Comparing apples and oranges with the help of experts and users. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 63(10), 2020-2036.
• Wakeling, S., Clough, P., Sen, B., & Connaway, L.S. (2012). "Readers who borrowed this also borrowed...": Recommender systems in UK libraries. Library Hi Tech, 30(1), 134-150.

Evidence summary assignment:
• Rachel: Adamic, L.A., Zhang, J., Bakshy, E., & Ackerman, M.S. (2008). Knowledge sharing and Yahoo! Answers: Everyone knows something. Proceedings of the 17th Inernational Conference on the World Wide Web (WWW '08), 665-674.

• Due on Friday, November 15 at 5 PM: Evidence review memo

Scholarly communication

Session 24, November 18: The invisible college and diffusion theory

• Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Social network analysis: An approach and technique for the study of information exchange. Library & Information Science Research, 18, 323-342.
• Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations. 4th ed. New York: Free Press. (We'll read only a portion of the first chapter (page 5, beginning with the section on "What is diffusion?" through page 31, before the "hybrid corn" example; skip the "scurvy" boxed example if you need to limit your time on this). This is an overview chapter and introduces most of the basic concepts of diffusion theory. Also examine Figure 5-1 on page 163; it provides an overview of the stages of the innovation decision process. Also read pages 389-400, "The innovation process in organizations".)

Evidence summary assignment:
• Shelby: Rutherford, L.L. (2008). Implementing social software in public libraries: An exploration of the issues confronting public library adopters of social software. Library Hi Tech, 26(2), 184-200.

Session 25, November 20: The role of scholarly communication

Note: Today in class we will select teams for the in-depth analysis of an example of scholarly communication.

• Evans, J.A. (2008, July 18). Electronic publication and the narrowing of science and scholarship. Science, 321(5887), 395-399.
• Palmer, C.L. (2005). Scholarly work and the shaping of digital access. Journal of American Society for Information Science & Technology, 56(11), 1140-1153. [UNC libraries]. (It would be worthwhile for you to read this entire article, but if you're short on time, start on page 1143, with the section on "Digital Access by Scholars".)

Evidence summary assignment:
• Shenmeng: Kousha, K., Thelwall, M., & Abdoli, M. (2012). The role of online videos in research communication: A content analysis of YouTube videos cited in academic publications. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 63(9), 1710-1727
• Yunghao: Nespor, J. (2012). The afterlife of "Teachers' beliefs": Qualitative methodology and the textline. Qualitative Inquiry, 18(5), 449-460.

Session 26, November 25: Models of scholarly publishing

• Due today: List of selected articles for your in-depth analysis of an example of scholarly communication.

• Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y., Oppenheim, C., Hajjem, C., & Hilf, E.R. (2008). The access/impact problem and the green and gold roads to open access: An update. Serials Review, 34(1), 36-40.
• Pochoda, P. (2013). The big one: The epistemic system break in scholarly monograph publishing. New Media & Society, 15(3), 359-378. doi:10.1177/1461444812465143

Evidence summary assignment:
• Katie W.: Solomon, D.J., & Björk, B.-C. (2012). A study of open access journals using article processing charges. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 63(8), 1485-1495.

November 27 - Thanksgiving, no class

Session 27, December 2: Metrics of scholarly publishing

• Smith, L.C. (1981). Citation analysis. Library Trends, 30(1), 83-106.
• Thelwall, M. (2012). Journal impact evaluation: a webometric perspective. Scientometrics, 92(2), 429-441. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0669-x

Session 28, December 4: The future of scholarly communication

• Acord, S. K., & Harley, D. (2013). Credit, time, and personality: The human challenges to sharing scholarly work using Web 2.0. New Media & Society, 15(3), 379-397. doi:10.1177/1461444812465140
• Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Russell, B., Canty, N., & Watkinson, A. (2011). Social media use in the research workflow. Learned Publishing, 24(3), 183-195.

Due December 6: In-depth analysis of an example of scholarly communication

The INLS 500 website, designed by Barbara M. Wildemuth, UNC-CH, 2011, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. This course benefitted greatly from earlier development by Earl Bailey, Laura Sheble, and Dr. Barbara Wildemuth. Address all comments and questions to Kaitlin L. Costello at kaitcost@email.unc.edu. This page was last modified on September 1, 2013, by Kaitlin L. Costello.