2.5, Information Needs and Uses

2.5 Information Needs and Uses

Brenda Dervin and Michael Nilan

This article, “Information Needs and Uses” by Brenda Dervin and Michael Nilan discusses the pre 1978 literature on “Information Needs and Uses” and considers where advancements need to be made. It also discusses six different categories related to information behavior in the traditional paradigm, as well as a few “alternative” approaches to information behavior.

This article seemed to give a very broad overview of lots of different ideas about information from before a certain time period. Because it was so broad, it was a little hard to understand at first and pick out what the article was actually about. Dervin and Nilan spend a long time talking about what kind of scholarship already exists, in theory to make it clear what needs to be improved upon. The section “The Practice Mandate for User-Need Oriented Studies” discussed different “calls” made in the previously published literature. These subheadings seem to summarize the advances needed more than the rest of the article. I wish the section on “The Call for Capitalizing on Technology” was better explained. Because of the date of the article and the literature it is reviewing, I have a hard time figuring out what technology should be better utilized. Interestingly enough, the same thing could be said now about our use of technology in information seeking.

Although this article was published in 1986, the categories relating to information behavior fit seamlessly with my perceptions of information systems. That is interesting because my default perception of an information system involves technology that was not in common use (and much of it not in existence) during that time period. I realized while reading this that my idea of information systems is very narrow, and I naturally just think of computers and databases, occasionally card catalogues. The article itself doesn’t do anything to clarify the idea of information systems, and I think it makes it harder to read receptively. When I re-read it after the class discussion with your note that it uses the broader sense of the term “system,” it was a little easier to understand.

While there have been some technological advances towards a more user-oriented systems, many users still have to be taught to use the systems correctly. Because of this, many use the system that seems the easiest. When it comes to using a computer for information retrieval, this is often a simple search engine such as Google. While they are still coming up with information, it is not always going to be the most reliable information, and it may take lots of browsing to find the information desired. If a similar study of literature was done now, I wonder what gaps would be found, and what improvements have been made? Aside from the technology available, it doesn’t seem that there has been much progress. Many of the computerized systems utilized by libraries are difficult to use, and require that patrons are taught to use them properly. Ideally we could reach the state where the average person could use an information system without assistance.