Collaborative information behaviour

Most information behaviour studies have investigated information behaviour as individual activities. In real-life work settings, most tasks are carried out via collaborative action; however, there are only a limited number of studies investigating collaborative information behaviour. These articles discuss information processing in group-based activities. They indicate that information processing occurs in group-based settings besides being processed individually (Veinot, 2009). In this context, Talja and Hansen (2006a, 114) perceive collaborative information behaviour as “an activity two or more actors communicate to identify information for accomplishing a task or solving a problem.” Another more detailed definition of collaborative information behaviour is “the totality of behaviour exhibited when people work together to understand and formulate an information need through the help of shared representations; seek the needed information through a cyclical process of searching, retrieving, and sharing; and put the found information to use (Karunakaran et al., 2013, 2438).”. Therefore, newly emerging themes in information behaviour science are collaborative actions, team and group information behaviour activities (Talja and Hansen, 2006b, Sonnenwald, 2006).

Collaborative information behaviour differs in three points from other individual information behaviour. As summarised in Table 2 below, there is interaction between individuals, integration of the fragmented information sources, and communication differentiating collaborative information behaviour from individual information behaviour (Karunakaran et al., 2013, Reddy and Jansen, 2008).

Table 2 Differences between individual information behaviour (IIB) and collaborative information behaviour (CIB) (adapted from Karunakaran et al. 2013; Reddy and Jansen 2008, Sonnewald, 2006)

IIB CIB

Motives Lack of relevant

information to complete a task

Gap between the current situation and the expected outcome

Complex information needs

Fragmented information resources

Lack of domain expertise or distributed domain expertise

Lack of immediately accessible information

Mediators Querying, seeking, searching

Interaction between information users Communicative action among information users

Objective To fulfil the affective, physiological, cognitive information needs To carry out the individual work tasks

Ensuring collaboration between information users To accomplish the shared objective

Triggers for collaborative information behaviour can be categorised under three main domains: fragmented information needs that require team members to communicate to each other to be aware of the situation, lack of domain expertise, and immediate accessible information (Reddy and Jansen, 2008). Their findings from their case studies confirm the existence of these three triggers. In the communication part, team members seek information from each other and the seeking-sharing-seeking circle in the teamwork occurs. In this case, team members collect information from different agents and combine the different pieces of information to satisfy their information needs and solve the problem. In a similar vein, information sharing (communication) is sine qua non for collaborative group actions; otherwise the group work will fail (Sonnenwald, 2006; Sonnenwald and Lievrouw, 1996).

The second trigger for collaborative information behaviour is the lack of domain expertise. The complexity of the task constrains individuals from

reaching a decision individually. In this regard, each of the individuals focuses on different parts of the problem according to their expertise. Also, this point is well discussed in many communication studies (Franz and Larson, 2002, Stasser et al., 1995).

The third trigger is the information retrieval technologies. Individuals interact with technological tools to seek or share information. In collaborative settings, information technologies have a substantial role in supporting collaborative information work. It is notable here that in collaborative settings, information technologies have a supporting role (Reddy and Jansen, 2008).

Collaborative information sharing is one mode of systematic information processing in group- or team-based settings. It is not a serendipitous activity. It involves collaborative query formulation, database searching, information filtering, interpretation and synthesis (Talja and Hansen, 2006b). Therefore, it enables the group or the team to work on a specific task with a planned division of labour. So, the decision-making groups work in collaboration to make decisions on any course of action.

In a study on a battle simulation, Sonnenwald (2006) investigated dynamic group information behaviour and effective information sharing in a group that is influenced by organisational, inter-cultural and interdisciplinary differences. In her study she investigates face-to-face and remote communication of organizational members in command and control. One other collaborative information behaviour study is conducted by Hyldegård (2006, 2009) and Hyldegård and Ingwersen (2007), who investigated the collaborative information (seeking) behaviour of students in educational settings. These studies investigates Kulthau’s (1991, 2004) information search process in group settings. They scrutinises how the attitudes and affects of individuals alter in group-based works as opposed to individual works. Critics of these works identified that most information behaviour emerges in group settings. In contrast to this situation, previous researches have investigated individual behaviours, isolated from social factors. In light of this critique, they observe students who engaged in collaborative work

activities that refer to physical activities, and cognitive and emotional experiences. Hyldegård (2006, 2009) find out that every group member had different emotions during the search process, and that also intra-group divergence has an impact on motivation and feelings (uncertainty, frustration, disappointment). In addition, group members influence each other during group work. According to the results of the case studies, Hyldegård and Ingwersen (2007) point out that so many differences occur depending on contextual and social factors while working in the groups. They assert that group-based work is a dynamic process and that Kulthaus’ ISP model does not fully indicate the group members’ information behaviour while they are working collaboratively.

There is still a gap in the understanding of CIB comprehensively. Most of the work investigates seeking behaviour and information retrieval (Reddy and Jansen, 2008, Hansen and Jarvelin, 2005). There are a scarce number of papers devoted to information behaviour in information science while investigating collaborative actions and dynamic contexts. The societal part of information behaviour is still an underdeveloped area in information behaviour research.