As you are finding articles to answer your final project question, use those articles to practice your evaluation of discussion sections in the B exercise of Chapter 12 of your Pyrczak book.
For this discussion, please give a brief summary of the article you are sharing, and then point out the strengths and weaknesses of the discussion section.
(Note that this not only gives your colleagues a chance to share their experiences of this part of the evaluation process, but also gives everyone an opportunity to become more aware of what research is being done and what it is finding.)
170402 | 810xs | BWhitmer
Discussion Review
The article I will be reviewing for this discussion is entitled “Emotions as motivators for information seeking: A conceptual analysis” and originally appeared in 2014 in the journal Library & Information Science Research. The author is Reijo Savolainen and his primary research focus has been in the area of everyday life information seeking (ELIS). He currently teaches in the Department of Information Studies at the University of Tampere, Finland, and he is well-qualified to perform this conceptual analysis having authored over 130 articles or books on this topic. This article is part of the collection of articles I’ve selected to examine the role of affect/emotion in the process of information seeking behaviors.
The main purpose of this article is to explore the ways that emotions and feelings act as motivators in information seeking and does so primarily by using a portion of the framework developed in 2007 by Dervin and Reinhard as the conceptual starting point of the analysis. It specifically draws attention to the way library and information science researchers approach emotion in their modeling of information seeking behaviors – noting its particular negative/positive roles in 1) starting, expanding, limiting, or stopping an information-seeking process and 2) information avoidance.
Evaluation of Discussion/Conclusion Section using Pyrczak’s Questions
Note: This article ends with a discussion section followed by a conclusion section.
In accordance with good research reporting practice as identified by Pyrczak, the author summarizes the main findings both within the text and by using a table for easier reference which summarizes the results by: 1) emotional valence (positive-negative) and typical emotions or feelings and 2) examples of empirical studies with citation as well. The main findings are recapitulated and the researcher re-confirms the value of the analysis framework from Dervin and Reinhard that formed the basis of the study analysis as well as providing further support for the emphasis on negative emotions as motivators.
Because the article is a conceptual analysis, the criterion of methodological limitation is less relevant here than in the write-up of an empirical study. That said, the author does note, “The evaluation of the novelty value of the above findings is rendered difficult by the paucity of comparable investigation” (p. 64) and makes the point that the LIS research has been hampered by a somewhat parochial and non-detailed examination of the concept of “emotion” in the information-seeking process when contrasted with the approach in fields like psychology and biology.
The study amplifies the existing research and cites relevant conclusions drawn from previous studies to bolster its conclusions regarding the need for future researchers to draw upon other domains to create richer/more realistic conceptual models. As I would frame it, LIS tends to have a pronounced cognitivist bias having developed under the aegis of non-biological models of seeking behaviors and Savolainen specifically implies that the current LIS approach to emotion needs to be broadened by exposure to less cognitivist domains as a corrective. The author further concludes that more empirical research is also needed as well as research that examines the cognitive/affective factors mixed together which is more representative of actual human behavior. He points out a number of areas that could be examined as well as some representative work that can be used as future points of departure. The author has done a good job of suggesting specific future research, pointing out implications of his analysis, and used the cited literature and theories to reach his conclusions.
If there is a weakness to the article, it revolves around the variable meaning of the term “emotion” between authors as cited in the literature. Is one comparing apples to apples? How grounded is the conceptual definition? And the use of a binary conception of emotion as either positive or negative seems overly reductionist. However, the author himself recognizes these limitations, strikes a cautionary tone with no sweeping claims, and draws a tight boundary on the applicability of existing research.
Overall, I would rate this a strongly argued discussion section. It provides a good summary of the article’s content, stays within the bounds of cited sources, offers solid suggestions for improving the research in the field, and reaches data-based conclusions.
Reference
Savolainen, R. (2014). Emotions as motivators for information seeking: A conceptual analysis. Library & Information Science Research, 36(1), 59-65. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2013.10.004