Information behaviour paradox: Understanding perceptions of risk and online behaviour

IF 2.4 3区管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Library & Information Science Research Pub Date : 2022-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.lisr.2022.101205

Jenna Jacobson , Chang Z. Lin , Rhonda McEwen

{"title":"Information behaviour paradox: Understanding perceptions of risk and online behaviour","authors":"Jenna Jacobson , Chang Z. Lin , Rhonda McEwen","doi":"10.1016/j.lisr.2022.101205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Human behaviour is complex and demographics are insufficient to understand information behaviour. More nuanced analyses are required to understand the factors that drive action. Focusing on digital archiving and online protection strategies as manifestations of information behaviour, factors that influence perceptions of online risk were investigated. The relationship between perception and behaviour was analyzed by focusing on people’s risk responses and their archival habits. Using Bates’ theory of Information Behaviour, information behaviour paradoxes, what people do versus what they say they would do in online situations, were analyzed. By applying a mixed-method approach to 101 semi-structured interviews, individuals’ self-perceived internet skills and having a third-party negative experience are two key factors that influence perceptions of risk online. A three-part typology of internet users (cautiously optimistic offliners, confident onliners, and utopic onliners) is introduced. Perceptions of online risk have consequences for information behaviour and informs a theoretical modification.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47618,"journal":{"name":"Library & Information Science Research","volume":"44 4","pages":"Article 101205"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Library & Information Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740818822000688","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Human behaviour is complex and demographics are insufficient to understand information behaviour. More nuanced analyses are required to understand the factors that drive action. Focusing on digital archiving and online protection strategies as manifestations of information behaviour, factors that influence perceptions of online risk were investigated. The relationship between perception and behaviour was analyzed by focusing on people’s risk responses and their archival habits. Using Bates’ theory of Information Behaviour, information behaviour paradoxes, what people do versus what they say they would do in online situations, were analyzed. By applying a mixed-method approach to 101 semi-structured interviews, individuals’ self-perceived internet skills and having a third-party negative experience are two key factors that influence perceptions of risk online. A three-part typology of internet users (cautiously optimistic offliners, confident onliners, and utopic onliners) is introduced. Perceptions of online risk have consequences for information behaviour and informs a theoretical modification.

查看原文本刊更多论文

信息行为悖论:理解风险和在线行为的感知

人类行为是复杂的，人口统计学不足以理解信息行为。需要更细致入微的分析来理解推动行动的因素。重点关注作为信息行为表现形式的数字存档和在线保护战略，调查了影响对在线风险认知的因素。通过关注人们的风险反应和他们的存档习惯，分析了感知和行为之间的关系。利用贝茨的信息行为理论，他们分析了信息行为悖论，即人们在网络环境中所做的和他们所说的。通过对101个半结构化访谈采用混合方法，个人自我感知的互联网技能和第三方的负面体验是影响在线风险感知的两个关键因素。介绍了互联网用户的三部分类型(谨慎乐观的离线者，自信的在线者和乌托邦在线者)。对网络风险的认知会对信息行为产生影响，并为理论修正提供依据。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Library & Information Science Research INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

6.90%

发文量

期刊介绍： Library & Information Science Research, a cross-disciplinary and refereed journal, focuses on the research process in library and information science as well as research findings and, where applicable, their practical applications and significance. All papers are subject to a double-blind reviewing process.