While I did find Todd's "Utilization of Heroin Information" to be less sound that Pettigrew's, in that his subject pool was so limited, the process that the four subjects went through during the study was interesting. Once again, this theory fits in nicely with the other readings we've done during this semester: the search for information is a process, one that can change over its course. Additionally, Todd suggests that our knowledge structure itself is a fluid thing capable of changing. This sits exactly into Brooke''s model of knowledge structure:
Todd describes five types of effects or stages: get a complete picture, get a changed picture, get a clearer picture, get a verified picture, and finally get a position in a picture (Todd 1999, pg. 15).
What is interesting about this study is that the participates were almost the exact opposite than those we discussed during information poverty. That is, the four students were very willing to learn new things about incorporate what they discovered during their searches into their knowledge. Unlike people who practice information blunting and/or are information poor, the students absorbed a variety of information and then actively sought more information based on what they had learned.
Pettigrew's article was almost the opposite of this individual and interior focused study. Information grounds puts the importance on a group of people, rather than on the individual user, as is the focus of the cognitive viewpoint.
The theory that people can create information grounds for sharing and disseminating information is an interesting one. These informal meetings can lead to a learning setting that can compare to an academic setting. This method of sharing information seems particularly helpful when taking into consideration some of the other theories we've learned this semester, namely that people aren't always able to define what information they need, if they recognize it at all. By placing people in an informal learning center, information needs that might go unrealized can be solved. In this particular setting studied by Pettigrew, the nurses were able to not only answer questions but in some case provide the care that the senior citizens needed.
I believe that this sort of information community can be replicated in the cyber world. Message boards, chat rooms, blogs, and email groups allow people to gather to discuss a variety of topics. And because the Internet is available to search a large portion of the population, conversation is varied. Like Pettigrew's observations that communication between nurses and seniors could be subtle (Pettigrew 1999, pg. 808), conversation online can too be indirect and open-ended. Medical websites like WebMD is an example of this sort of online information grounds: along with articles and news relating to health, there are also discussion boards for people to share questions and information. Like the clinic, there are medical experts present to answer questions, but a lot of information comes from other users.
Pettigrew doesn't mention this in "Waiting for Chiropody," but when I was reading this article and working on our presentation about information needs and behaviors in the medical field, I was struck about how little attention is given to wrong information. The nurses in this study of course have medical training, but in these informal information grounds, there is the possibility that people without experience or knowledge in medicine are giving out their opinions as fact. There's also a chance that people could share private information, as well as private information about someone else.
No comments:
Post a Comment