Review of Literature Part I Elise Forte Dr.

Andrew Smith LI810XC

2 Elise Forte Review of Literature Part I

Summary of Article Lynn Connaway, Timothy Dickey, and Marie Radford co-wrote the article If Its Too Inconvenient Im Not Going After It: Convenience as a Critical Factor in Information Seeking Behaviors. The article explains the research and findings of two multi-year studies that observe the information seeking patterns of society. The article begins simply enough with an abstract, an introduction, and moves fluidly into the research area. Tables are provided to assist the reader in the findings of the authors. The authors do discuss the theory used for the research and conclude their findings nicely at the end. Overall, the article was neat, clear, concise, and well researched. The article is not too difficult to understand and the authors wrote professionally without patronizing the reader. Review of Title, Abstract and Introduction The first thing that grabs the reader is the title. The title is specific and concise. No variables or theories are mentioned in the title. The authors did not mention the results of the study in the title. Also, the title is free of jargon and acronyms that might have overwhelmed or been unfamiliar to the reader. The title is an accurate portrayal of the article and the study it contains. The title is indeed effective and appropriate. The article begins with a detailed and concise abstract. The abstract refers to the purpose of the study clearly and highlights the research methodology used by Connaway, Dickey, and Radford. The theories used for the research were mentioned and the authors avoided making broad references to future research endeavors. Overall, the abstract was clear and easy to understand. The abstract clearly outlined the layout of the article.

3 Elise Forte Review of Literature Part I

The introduction further guided the reader to the purpose of the study. The introduction explained all terminology and theories used throughout the study. Connaway, Dickey, and Radford identify the problems straightaway and establish the importance of the problems. The authors did cite sources for factual statements. The flow of the introduction is smooth and logical. The introduction does move from topic to topic and the research, questions, and hypotheses do stem from the introduction into the rest of the article. By and large the introduction is well written and sets up the rest of the paper nicely. Review of Methods Connaway, Dickey, and Radford presented their findings neatly and clearly. They gathered the information through the use of surveys both written and conducted via the telephone. Tables were included to highlight those findings. All three of the researchers did avoid using copious amounts of sources to make one point. They used current research, the oldest source being from 2004, and that source was mentioned once. The authors did distinguish between opinion and research and the overall paper was unbiased. Connaway, Dickey, and Radford did acknowledge that lack of research in this field was limited in regards to empirical research. The authors used rational choice theory and bounded rationality to interpret and support their findings. They also incorporated SAvolainens concept of time as a critical factor in information seeking. On the whole the methods used for this study were appropriate.
Reflection In comparison to other studies that I have had the pleasure to read, If Its Too Inconvenient Im Not Going After It was very easy. The title is clear and gave me an idea of what the article itself is about.

4 Elise Forte Review of Literature Part I The abstract and introduction only made me understand better what I was reading. Even though Connaway, Dickey, and Radford did include their findings and statistics, they did not go heavy on the mathematical formulae. In fact, they did not include any mathematical formulas from what I could see. The theories they chose made sense to me. I found the study interesting and was even relieved that people decided to measure, somehow, that usability and ease of access are vital to information seeking. I also liked that they used relatively recent sources, even though one citation was from 2004. In regards to what I have thus learned, I think all research should be this simple. That is not the case of course. I do not recall what the sample numbers were for this study. I gathered it was a large population and they did not discriminate against gender, income, access to technology, education level, or age. I think this study was well done and was both quantitative and qualitative. I felt that Connaway, Dickey, and Radford thought the study through before embarking on it. The quantity was large, I thought, and the quality of the study was well done. I thought that this was a good study and the researchers displayed their results without making my head hurt or eyes glaze over. In other words, this article and study was not dry. I did not need to drink a pot of coffee just to get through it. That does not mean that the studies that are heavy on the terminology and mathematical formulae are bad. They just are a bit too heavy for the general audience. This study I believe is intended for a wider audience and anyone can pick it up, read it, and talk about it when they are done.

Reviewed Article Connaway, L. S., Dickey, T. J., & Radford, M. L. (2011). If its too inconvenient Im not going after it: Convenience as a critical factor in information seeking behaviors. Library & Information Science Research, 33, 179-190.

5 Elise Forte Review of Literature Part I

Review of Literature Part II Elise Forte Dr. Andrew Smith LI810XC

6 Elise Forte Review of Literature Part I

Summary of Article Lynn Connaway, Timothy Dickey, and Marie Radford co-wrote the article If its Too Inconvenient Im Not Going After It: Convenience as a Critical Factor in Information Seeking Behaviors. The article explains the research and findings of two multi-year studies that observe the information seeking patterns of society. The article begins simply enough with an abstract, an introduction, and moves fluidly into the research area. Tables are provided to assist the reader in the findings of the authors. The authors do discuss the theory used for the research and conclude their findings nicely at the end. This essay will look at the findings, discussion, and conclusion sections of the article. Findings The findings of Connaways, Dickeys, and Radfords article were clear and comprehensible. When percentages were reported the underlying numbers were also reported. There were subtle differences in the results and the authors did well in mentioning them. The results section is cohesive with the rest of the article. Connaway, Dickey and Radford refer back to the original hypothesis stated in the introduction of the article. The authors did provide tables to illustrate their findings, as well as provide the survey and interview questions used in the studies. Highlights of the tables were mentioned in the narrative portion of the article, and the writers did encourage the reader to review them. This was helpful for the reader to get a better understanding of what exactly the authors were trying to accomplish. Overall, the results section is adequate. It was comprehensive and easy to follow.

7 Elise Forte Review of Literature Part I

Discussion Connaway, Dickey, and Radford concisely summarize the purpose and results at the beginning of the discussion. It was not apparent that they acknowledged limitations to the methods that were used. The results are discussed in terms of the literature cited in the introduction. Connaway, Dickey, and Radford did avoid introducing new theories and references in the discussion section. They referred all results and findings to earlier mentioned references. Specific implications are discussed towards the end of the discussion section. Suggestions for future research are not mentioned at all. The authors instead mentions how a library can improve create an economical method to reach a majority of patrons for their information needs. The authors did distinguish between speculation and data-based conclusions. In fact, there was little speculation mentioned in the discussion section, and all conclusions were based on the results of the two-year project. Overall, the discussion section of the article was relative and appropriate. Conclusion Connaway, Dickey, and Radford selected an important problem to study. The emergence of technology and the ease of retrieving information is a problem that libraries face and the research of Connaway, Dickey, and Radford help explain why this is a relevant problem, and what libraries can do to still remain relevant. The report is cohesive and the authors are not reflective. They were scientific and professional from the beginning of the studies to the end conclusion of the article. The report does extend the boundaries of the knowledge on this topic and assists in understanding the relevant theories. The research of this article does open the

8 Elise Forte Review of Literature Part I

door for future research of the convenience of finding relevant information. The article is very helpful in decision-making, especially if the library is having trouble getting patrons. On the whole this was a very informational, well thought, and researched article.