Abstract

Motivation - According to the UK's National Skills for Life survey carried out in 2003, 16% or equivalent to 5.2 million of the UK population presented low levels of literacy (Williams, et al. 2003). In this study we investigate the differences in information seeking behaviours between low and high literacy users of an on-line social service system. Research approach - Ten volunteers participated in the study. Using the National Skills for Life Survey, five were classified as high literacy; five as low literacy. All participants were asked to think-aloud whilst carrying out the information search using the Adviceguide website. The four tasks were of varying difficulty; easy, medium and difficult. Observations, video recording, and a semi structured interview technique that uses cognitive probes were used. The qualitative data were transcribed and analysed using Strauss and Corbin's (1998) Grounded Theory and Wong and Blandford (2002) Emergent Themes Analysis approach. Findings/Design - We identified eight themes or characteristics from this study; Verification, Reading, Recovery, Trajectories, Abandon, Focus, Satisfied, and Perception. Results showed that low and high literacy users demonstrated critically different characteristics. Take away message - To better support the low and high literacy users with information seeking, we plan to look at information seeking behaviour models as theoretical lenses to analyse their behaviour from the identified characteristics (Makri, Blandford & Cox, 2008). The behaviour models will better inform the development of interface design for low and high literacy users.

Highlights

  • The purpose of this study is to investigate information seeking behaviours of low and high literacy users of an online social service system called “Adviceguide”

  • The results show that low literacy users perform significantly worse than high literacy users as they used a website to search for social service information intended for use by socially disadvantaged citizens

  • Key results indicate that (i) low literacy users take eight times more time than high literacy users to complete an information search task, and yet were significantly less accurate, (ii) low literacy users on average spent one-third more time on a web page than high literacy users, but did not seem to be informed by it, (iii) low literacy users employed a much less focused information search strategy than high literacy users visiting eight times more web pages in total, (iv) low literacy users back-tracked 13 times more frequently than high literacy users, and are four times more likely to re-visit web pages, and (v) low literacy users are 13 times more likely to be lost than high literacy users

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The purpose of this study is to investigate information seeking behaviours of low and high literacy users of an online social service system called “Adviceguide”. This system is part of the services provided by the Barnet Citizen’s Advice Bureau which provide support to clients from socially disadvantaged backgrounds. A previous study by Kodagoda & Wong (2008) looked at the performance of low and high literacy users information search and retrieval. The results show that low literacy users perform significantly worse than high literacy users as they used a website to search for social service information intended for use by socially disadvantaged citizens. Key results indicate that (i) low literacy users take eight times more time than high literacy users to complete an information search task, and yet were significantly less accurate, (ii) low literacy users on average spent one-third more time on a web page than high literacy users, but did not seem to be informed by it, (iii) low literacy users employed a much less focused information search strategy than high literacy users visiting eight times more web pages in total, (iv) low literacy users back-tracked 13 times more frequently than high literacy users, and are four times more likely to re-visit web pages, and (v) low literacy users are 13 times more likely to be lost than high literacy users

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.