Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Savolainen, R."
  1. Savolainen, R.: Information need as trigger and driver of information seeking : a conceptual analysis (2017) 0.05
    0.0498178 = product of:
      0.0996356 = sum of:
        0.03430505 = weight(_text_:26 in 3713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03430505 = score(doc=3713,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.19509095 = fieldWeight in 3713, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3713)
        0.06533055 = sum of:
          0.031599965 = weight(_text_:access in 3713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.031599965 = score(doc=3713,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04979191 = queryNorm
              0.18724121 = fieldWeight in 3713, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3713)
          0.03373058 = weight(_text_:22 in 3713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03373058 = score(doc=3713,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17436278 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04979191 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3713, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3713)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to elaborate the picture of the motivators for information behaviour by examining the nature of information need as a trigger and driver of information seeking. Design/methodology/approach Conceptual analysis focusing on the ways in which the researchers have conceptualized information need in models for human information behaviour (HIB). The study draws on conceptual analysis of 26 key studies focusing on the above topic. Findings Researchers have employed two main approaches to conceptualize information needs in the HIB models. First, information need is approached as a root factor which motivates people to identify and access information sources. Second, information need is approached as a secondary trigger or driver determined by more fundamental factors, for example, the information requirements of task performance. The former approach conceptualizes information need as a trigger providing an initial impetus to information seeking, while the latter approach also depicts information need as a driver that keeps the information-seeking process in motion. The latter approach is particularly characteristic of models depicting information seeking as a cyclic process. Research limitations/implications As the study focuses on information need, no attention is devoted to related constructs such as anomalous state of knowledge and uncertainty. Originality/value The study pioneers by providing an in-depth analysis of the nature of information need as a trigger and driver of information seeking. The findings refine the picture of motivators for information behaviour.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  2. Savolainen, R.: Tiedon kayton tutkimus informaatiotutkimuksessa (1994) 0.04
    0.035073526 = product of:
      0.07014705 = sum of:
        0.048027072 = weight(_text_:26 in 3670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048027072 = score(doc=3670,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.27312735 = fieldWeight in 3670, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3670)
        0.022119977 = product of:
          0.044239953 = sum of:
            0.044239953 = weight(_text_:access in 3670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.044239953 = score(doc=3670,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04979191 = queryNorm
                0.2621377 = fieldWeight in 3670, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3670)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Presents an overview of research on information use. The majority of use and user studies are surveys which focus on the consulting of different information sources and channels. In most studies, however, the substantial issues of information use are omitted. Discusses conceptual and terminological questions of information use and knowledge utilization. No consensus on the definition of these concepts exists among researchers because they can have no direct access to individual processes of information use. Examines the contributions made to information use theory by Brenda Dervin and Robert S. Taylor. Reviews the categories of uses specified in Dervin's sense making theory and discusses Taylor's concept of information use environments. Considers some methodological questions concerning the challenges of empirical research on information use
    Date
    29. 3.1996 21:35:26
  3. Savolainen, R.: Manifestations of expert power in gatekeeping : a conceptual study (2020) 0.03
    0.03295251 = product of:
      0.06590502 = sum of:
        0.03430505 = weight(_text_:26 in 5981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03430505 = score(doc=5981,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.19509095 = fieldWeight in 5981, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5981)
        0.031599965 = product of:
          0.06319993 = sum of:
            0.06319993 = weight(_text_:access in 5981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06319993 = score(doc=5981,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04979191 = queryNorm
                0.37448242 = fieldWeight in 5981, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5981)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This study aims to elaborate the picture of the relationships between information and power by examining how expert power appears in the characterizations of gatekeeping presented in the research literature. Design/methodology/approach This study uses conceptual analysis for examining how expert power is constitutive of the construct of gatekeeper and how people subject to the influence of gatekeeping trust or challenge the expert power attributed to gatekeepers. The study draws on the analysis of 40 key studies on the above issues. Findings Researchers have mainly constructed the gatekeepers' expert power in terms of superior knowledge and skills applicable to a specific domain, coupled with an ability to control or facilitate access to information. The gatekeeper's expert power has been approached as a contextual factor that facilitates rather than controls access to information. The power relationships between the gatekeepers and those subject to gatekeeping vary contextually, depending on the extent to which the latter have access to alternative sources of information. The findings highlight the need to elaborate the construct of gatekeeping by rethinking its relevance in the networked information environments where the traditional picture of gatekeepers controlling access to information sources is eroding. Research limitations/implications As the study focuses on how expert power figures in gatekeeping, no attention is devoted to the role of social power of other types, for example, reward power and referent power. Originality/value The study pioneers by providing an in-depth analysis of the nature of expert power as a constituent of gatekeeping.
    Date
    26. 9.2020 16:06:20
  4. Savolainen, R.: Providing informational support in an online discussion group and a Q&A site : the case of travel planning (2015) 0.01
    0.014864903 = product of:
      0.05945961 = sum of:
        0.05945961 = weight(_text_:description in 1660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05945961 = score(doc=1660,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23150103 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.25684384 = fieldWeight in 1660, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1660)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This study examines the ways in which informational support based on user-generated content is provided for the needs of leisure-related travel planning in an online discussion group and a Q&A site. Attention is paid to the grounds by which the participants bolster the informational support. The findings draw on the analysis of 200 threads of a Finnish online discussion group and a Yahoo! Answers Q&A (question and answer) forum. Three main types of informational support were identified: providing factual information, providing advice, and providing personal opinion. The grounds used in the answers varied across the types of informational support. While providing factual information, the most popular ground was description of the attributes of an entity. In the context of providing advice, reference to external sources of information was employed most frequently. Finally, although providing personal opinions, the participants most often bolstered their views by articulating positive or negative evaluations of an entity. Overall, regarding the grounds, there were more similarities than differences between the discussion group and the Q&A site.
  5. Savolainen, R.: Contributions to conceptual growth : the elaboration of Ellis's model for information-seeking behavior (2017) 0.01
    0.010291515 = product of:
      0.04116606 = sum of:
        0.04116606 = weight(_text_:26 in 3428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04116606 = score(doc=3428,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.23410915 = fieldWeight in 3428, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3428)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    16.11.2017 13:26:41
  6. Savolainen, R.: Information seeking and searching strategies as plans and patterns of action : a conceptual analysis (2016) 0.01
    0.008576263 = product of:
      0.03430505 = sum of:
        0.03430505 = weight(_text_:26 in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03430505 = score(doc=3361,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.19509095 = fieldWeight in 3361, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3361)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    23.10.2016 19:15:26
  7. Savolainen, R.: Network competence and information seeking on the Internet : from definitions towards a social cognitive model (2002) 0.00
    0.0047399946 = product of:
      0.018959979 = sum of:
        0.018959979 = product of:
          0.037919957 = sum of:
            0.037919957 = weight(_text_:access in 4467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037919957 = score(doc=4467,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04979191 = queryNorm
                0.22468945 = fieldWeight in 4467, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4467)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The author reflects the conceptual and practical questions of network competence in the context of information seeking. Network competence is seen as one of the information-related competences and is defined as the mastery of four major areas: knowledge of information resources available on the Internet, skilled use of the ICT tools to access information, judgment of the relevance of information, and communication. Drawing on the ideas of the social cognitive theory developed by Albert Bandura, a model of network competence is introduced in order to discuss network competence "in action". In the model, network competence is put in practical context by relating five major factors: network competence, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, affective factors such as anxiety, and experiences received from information seeking on the Internet. Particular attention is devoted to the connections between network competence and self-efficacy which denote a person's judgment of his or her ability to organize and execute action, such as finding information on the Web.
  8. Savolainen, R.: Everyday life information seeking (2009) 0.00
    0.0047399946 = product of:
      0.018959979 = sum of:
        0.018959979 = product of:
          0.037919957 = sum of:
            0.037919957 = weight(_text_:access in 3780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037919957 = score(doc=3780,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04979191 = queryNorm
                0.22468945 = fieldWeight in 3780, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3780)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Information seeking may be analyzed in two major contexts: job-related and nonwork. The present entry concentrates on nonwork information seeking, more properly called everyday life information seeking (ELIS). Typically, ELIS studies discuss the ways in which people access and use various information sources to meet information needs in areas such as health, consumption, and leisure. The entry specifies the concept of ELIS and characterizes the major ELIS models. They include the Sense-Making approach (Dervin), the Small world theory (Chatman), the ecological model of ELIS (Williamson), ELIS in the context of way of life (Savolainen), the model of information practices (McKenzie), and the concept of information grounds (Fisher). ELIS practices tend to draw on the habitualized use of a limited number of sources which have been found useful in previous use contexts. Since the late 1990s, the Internet has increasingly affected the ELIS practices by providing easily accessible sources. Even though the popularity of the networked sources has grown rapidly they will complement, rather than replace, more traditional sources and channels.
  9. Savolainen, R.: Modeling the interplay of information seeking and information sharing (2019) 0.00
    0.0042163227 = product of:
      0.01686529 = sum of:
        0.01686529 = product of:
          0.03373058 = sum of:
            0.03373058 = weight(_text_:22 in 5498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03373058 = score(doc=5498,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17436278 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04979191 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5498, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5498)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Years

Languages