published quarterly by the University of Borås, vol. 23 no. 4, December, 2018

Proceedings of ISIC: The Information Behaviour Conference, Krakow, Poland, 9-11 October, 2018: Part 1.

Subject domain expertise of ISIC2018 reviewer community: a scoping review

Ina Fourie, Tumelo Maungwa and Theresa Dirndorfer Anderson

Introduction. The paper reports on the subject domain expertise of the ISIC2018 international programme committee (i.e., reviewers) to assess how the reviewer expertise reflects information behaviour research, related fields, trends in the information behaviour research landscape, and opportunities for collaboration.
Method. The paper is basesd on a scoping review of selected key publications of reviewers indexed in three proprietary databases covering library and information science and interdisciplinary research. References were exported to EndNote databases; one per reviewer.
Analysis. A thematic analysis of more than four thousand references (duplicates removed) identified the key focus areas of information behaviour. Titles and abstracts of mostly journal articles were analysed. Publications in non-English languages are included based on English titles and abstracts.
Findings. Reviewers published on eleven major information behaviour themes and sub-themes, and a variety of topics other than information behaviour that can strengthen collaboration and the scope of information behaviour research.
Conclusion. The ISIC2018 international programme committee is well qualified to review papers within the scope of information behaviour, (i.e., the variety of target groups, contexts, demographic factors, and information activities). Representation of countries not typically attending ISIC conferences and benefiting from auxiliary research expertise must needs further investigation.


Responsible and authoritative peer reviewing are essential requirements for intellectual growth and expansion in any scholarly community (Weller, 2002). Review processes are, however, also often met with scepticism, and concern about gatekeeper effects (Gould, 2013; Moran, 1998), inclusion and exclusion, but also with acknowledgement of its strengths and benefits (Schwartz et al., 2010).

Reviewers’ subject expertise and qualities such as willingness to share knowledge and develop a scholarly community are important when planning a programme committee. Timeliness in returning reviews, constructive feedback, acceptance of different schools of thought and methodologies, experience in research supervision and examination and editorial experience enhance the reputations of reviewers. Subject domain and multidisciplinary expertise are very important. Morris and Van der Veer Martens (2008, p. 213) explain: 'Specialities are important in science because of their crucial role in the creation and validation of scientific knowledge’. We can map expertise in various ways (Ingwersen, Larsen and Noyons, 2001).

The ISIC2018 international programme committee had 69 reviewers. Their names appear on the ISIC2018 website (http://www.isic2018.com/programme/isic-2018-programme.html). More people were invited but some declined due to retirement, not being active in the field any more or due to other commitments. A few, did not respond. We analysed the research publications (mostly articles with a few books) of the reviewers indexed by four key proprietary databases). Reviewers were from a diversity of continents and countries, including Australia, Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Japan, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom, and United States. Apart from English, some also publish in Finnish, French, Japanese, Polish, and Spanish. The paper is a first step in exploring reviewer expertise as a means to enrich the research community. Since the paper only considered output indexed by proprietary databases, findings do not represent the full spectrum of expertise such as supervisory and examination expertise, conference presentations, workshops, unpublished keynote addresses, and self-projecting as on websites, blogs and curriculum vitae’s. This belongs in a follow-up project.

This paper briefly explains the purpose of the project, role of the authors in terms of conceptualising the paper, literature searches and selection of references, the thematic analysis and expertise mapping, suggestions for further work and conclusion.

Purpose of paper – knowledge map as boundary object

The ISIC scholarly community of information behaviour and practice face many exciting developments and challenges: growing trends for interdisciplinary research (Case and Given, 2016) and pressure for research with value and impact for society. Reviewers serve as gatekeepers of the dissemination of ideas through publications, conferences and other scholarly venues. There is often the irony of differences of opinion on relevance for the research community and the challenge of evaluating established ideas versus new ones. The idea for the project was conceptualised by Theresa Anderson (third author), and it began with two simple questions:

To answer these questions we sought to build an expertrise or knowledge map, initially based on the research output indexed in four proprietary databases. We intended to built a set of working matrixes of reviewer expertise as first round in an action research project on an ISIC reviewer knowledge map as boundary object (Huvila, Anderson, Jansen, McKenzie and Worrall, 2017).

Literature searches, selection, and analysis

Three key databases in library and information science, Library and Information Science Abstracts, Library and Information Source Index and Library and Information Science Technology Abstracts, as well as the interdisciplinary database, Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge, were searched for different variations of reviewer names (e.g. Theresa Anderson, and Theresa Dirndorfer Anderson or for variations in initials). The first and second authors, Ina Fourie and Tumelo Maugnwa, did the literature searching, selection, thematic analysis and mapping of expertise. We exported references to EndNote databases for each reviewer and removed duplicates, book reviews and incomplete references. We included references from sources in languages other than English; the titles and abstracts were in English and acknowledgement of expertise in languages such as Spanish, Polish and Japanese can strengthen the contribution of this paper. References were mostly for articles, with limited coverage of conference papers, chapters in books and books. In total, we worked through the titles and abstracts of more than four thousand references and therefore had to be selective.Some reviewers have extensive lists of publications and research collaborations, while others had much less.Although readers might not agree with all our choices, we tried to reflect core issues related to information behaviour with care. Although not a full review, we consider our knowledge mapping sufficient for a scoping exercise.

Mapping of topical expertise

Some reviewers have extensive experience in the field of information behaviour through their work as reviewers, journal editors, supervisors, examiners, and their own research. Names that stand out include Reijo Savolainen, Tom Wilson, Elena Macevičiūtė, Charles Cole and Andrew Cox. Some are widely acknowledged for conceptual and theoretical contributions, notably Reijo Savolainen (2016d, 2017a,b,c) and Peter Ingwersen (Ingwersen and Järvelin, 2005). Others for how their work relates to other fields that benefit from the understanding of information behaviour. Such fields include information literacy (Aharony and Bronstein, 2014b; Aharony et al., 2017; Julien, 2000; Limberg, 2009; Lloyd, 2010b), information retrieval and specifically interactive information retrieval (Ingwersen, 1992; Xie, 2007), and the learning sciences (Hansen and Rieh, 2016). Reviewers who developed widely cited models include David Ellis (1989b), Carol Kuhlthau (1988), Reijo Savolainen (2008b) and Tom Wilson (1999 a, b). Some reviewers have developed a reputation for their application of theories, such as David Allen for activity theory (2011) and Annemaree Lloyd (2010 a,c) and Sanna Talja (Talja, Keso and Pietiläinen, 1999) for practice theory and other theoretical issues. Christine Stilwell (2010) reviewed information behaviour research in the South African context, Charles Cole wrote on information behaviour in general (Spink and Cole, 2006), Theresa Anderson on information seeking research per se (Anderson and Orsatti, 2008) and Hester Meyer (2016) developed a model of building blocks of information behaviour to support novice researchers. Heidi Julien co- authored a review chapter for Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (Fisher and Julien, 2009). She and her co-workers have also reported on trends in information behaviour research (Julien and O'Brien, 2014; Julien, Pecoskie and Reed, 2011).

Expertise can be categorised in many ways and often scholars work in different fields of specialisation at the same time. Sanda Erdelez, an expert on information encountering and serendipity, has also done research related to Alzheimer’s disease (Erdelez, Howarth and Gibson, 2015), and Preben Hansen on collaborative information seeking (Hansen and Widén, 2017; Hansen, Shah and Klas, 2015). Lisa Given (2008a, b; 2015), an expert in qualitative research methods is also recognised for her work on photovoice and affordance theory (Julien, Given and Opryshko, 2013).

This paper discusses ISIC2018 reviewers’ topical expertise under eleven subheadings derived from models of information behaviour (Case and Given, 2016; Ford, 2015; Johnson and Case, 2012) namely: context, components and elements of context; actors; information activities and information encounters; information carriers; information fields; antecedents, triggers and barriers; information needs; theories; models; methodologies; and cross-cutting expertise. Each are briefly discussed with examples of reviewer expertise and sub-divisions; the examples are not exhaustive although we tried to do justice to the extensive body of research output. Our focus is on the scope of expertise and not individual achievements, and often we keep to the author’s labelling of their work.

Expertise according to context, components and elements of context

The meaning and importance of context as a key focus in studies of information behaviour have been widely discussed and debated (Kari and Savolainen, 2004a; Lloyd, 2010b; Lloyd and Williamson, 2008; Savolainen, 2009e). Context is situated in a larger environment such as a country, society or organisation. Reviewer expertise reflects conceptual discussions with strong theoretical underpinnings, research in a wide variety of specific contexts, specific situations, situations in progress, and elements of contexts such as time, motivation and space Charles Cole (Cole and Leide, 2003), Makiko Miwa (Miwa and Kando, 2007), Reijo Savolainen (2006b,c); Kari and Savolainen (2007) and Sanna Talja (Talja and Hartel, 2007; Talja and McKenzie, 2007). Table 1 portrays expertise on context.

Table 1: Reviewer expertise on context
Topical focus: contextExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Specific contexts
Healthcare: the scope of health related information behaviour studies is addressed in the work of Case and Given (2016), Johnson and Case (2012), papers by Fourie and Nesset (2017), Anderson and Fourie (2015, 2017), Fisher and Julien (2009). In information behaviour studies in healthcare the disease location, trajectory, stage, prognosis and centre of care are very important (Fourie, 2012).Autism spectrum disorders: Martinovic and Stričević (2016)
Alzheimers: Sanda Erdelez (Erdelez et al., 2015)
Cancer: Ina Fourie (2008, 2010; Fourie and Bakker, 2013; Fourie and Claasen-Veldsman, 2005, 2007; Westbrook and Fourie, 2015)
Chronic illness e.g. HIV/AIDS: Ina Fourie and Heidi Julien (Julien and Fourie, 2015); Christine Stilwell (Ntombela, Stilwell and Leach, 2008); Tiffany Veinot (Flicker et al., 2004; Kaziunas, Ackerman and Veinot, 2013; Meadowbrooke, Veinot, Loveluck, Hickok and Bauermeister, 2014; Veinot, Caldwell, Loveluck, Arnold and Bauermeister, 2016; Veinot, Harris, Bella, Rootman and Krajnak, 2006)
Co-morbid depression: Makiko Miwa (Han-Cheol, Okazaki, Miwa and Tsujii, 2013) Diabetes: Makiko Miwa (Arima, Miwa and Kawahara, 2007; Han-Cheol et al., 2013)
Health in general and health information needs: Jannica Heinström (Ek and Heinström, 2011); Malgorzata Kisilowska (2004); Paloma Korycińska (Niedźwiedzka and Korycińska, 2016); Annemaree Lloyd (2014a); Pamela McKenzie (2002, 2010); Hester Meyer (Khayesi, Meyer and Machet, 2013); Tiffany Veinot (Hawkins, Costello, Veinot, Gibson and Greyson, 2017)
Home care: Hester Meyer (Khayesi et al., 2013); Christine Urquhart (Cooper and Urquhart, 2005, 2008)
Mental disorders: Paloma Korycińska (Niedźwiedzka and Korycińska, 2016)
Obesity: Maija-Leena Huotari (Enwald and Huotari, 2010)
Obsessive compulsory disorder: Jenny Bronstein (2014a)
Pain: Ina Fourie (Fourie and Nesset, 2017)
Palliative care: Theresa Anderson, Ina Fourie and Hester Meyer (Anderson and Fourie, 2015, 2017; Fourie, 2008, 2010; Fourie and Meyer, 2014)
Pre-diabetic: Maija-Leena Huotari (Enwald et al., 2013; Enwald et al., 2012)
Sexuality education: Tiffany Veinot (Kimmel et al., 2013; Veinot et al., 2016)
Academic: including studies at institutions of higher education (universities), schools, types of education and learning such as distance education, virtual and e-learning, formal and informal learning.E-and virtual learning: Charles Cole (Wright, Park and Cole, 2011); Elena Macevičiūtė (2006); Eric Meyers (2009b); Trine Schreiber (2013, 2017a)
Formal and informal learning: Sanna Talja (2007)
Higher education institutions: Charles Cole (2000a,b)
Schools: Anna Lundh and Louise Limberg (Lundh and Alexandersson, 2012; Lundh and Limberg, 2008, 2012); Malgorzata Kisilowska (Gałecka, Kisilowska and Jasiewicz, 2017); Paul Solomon (1994); Olof Sundin (Lundh, Francke and Sundin, 2015; Carlsson and Sundin, 2017)
Organisations and institutions: e.g. workplaces often with specific aims and purposes.Digital workplaces: Eric Thivant (Thivant and Bouzidi, 2008)
Information collaboration in workplace: Gunnilla Widén (Widén, Ahmad and Huvila, 2017); Reijo Savolainen (Franssila, Okkonen and Savolainen, 2016)
Public administration: Dennis Ocholla (Matovu and Ocholla, 2009)
Workplace in general: Jannica Heinström and Ian Ruthven (Byström, Ruthven and Heinström, 2017); Camilla Moring (2017); Gunilla Widén (Widén, Steinerová and Voisey, 2014)
Research contexts: studies on research information behaviour cover a wide array of disciplines. There are two prominent issues: (i) the nature and essence of research and (ii) the requirements from the discipline as such.Social network context: Jutta Haider (2016a); Hester Meyer (Du Preez and Meyer, 2016); Olof Sundin (Kjellberg, Haider and Sundin, 2016)
Research: Steinerová and Hrckova (2014)
Leisure, hobbies, sportLeisure and serious leisure: Andrew Cox (Cox and Blake, 2011; Cox, Griffin and Hartel, 2017; Hartel, Cox and Griffin, 2016); Jenna Hartel (2003, 2006, 2010; Hartel et al., 2016); Ian Ruthven (Albassam and Ruthven, 2018)
Hobbies: Jenna Hartel (2003)
Gourmet cooking: Jenna Hartel (2006, 2010)
Exercise: Maija-Leena Huotari (Hirvonen, Huotari, Niemela and Korpelainen, 2012)
Everyday lifeEveryday life in general: David Ellis (Mawby, Foster and Ellis, 2015); Annemaree Lloyd (Lloyd and Wilkinson, 2016); Reijo Savolainen (1995, 2008b; Savolainen and Kari, 2004a); Ivanka Stričević (Kolarić and Stričević, 2016); Tom Wilson (2011)
Context of poverty: Charles Cole (Spink and Cole, 2001); Ian Ruthven (Hasler, Ruthven and Buchanan, 2014)
Sexual information seeking: Charles Cole (Spink, Koricich, Jansen and Cole, 2004)
Weddings: Pamela McKenzie (McKenzie and Davies, 2010)
Health: Reijo Savolainen (2007b)
Virtual contextsWebometrics, informetrics, cybermetrics and other metrics (library, journal, alternative): Judit Bar-Ilan (2000b, 2002a; Greenberg and Bar-Ilan, 2017; Milojevic, Radicchi and Bar-Ilan, 2017; Shema, Bar-Ilan and Thelwall, 2014; Peter Ingwersen (Björneborn and Ingwersen, 2001, 2004); Ian Ruthven (Tombros, Ruthven and Jose, 2005)
Web user interaction: Peiling Wang (Berry, Wang and Yang, 2003; Wang, Hawk and Tenopir, 2000)
OtherMakerspaces: Ross Todd (Li and Todd, 2016)
Political protest: Lisa Given (Wallis and Given, 2016)
Self-development: Reijo Savolainen (Kari and Savolainen, 2004b)
Conceptualisation and theoretical issues of context
A deeper appreciation of context can add value to information behaviour studies in multi-contextual environments (Johnson, 2003). Interpretations and understanding of context influence what is studied. Many discussions and debates have been published (Case and Given, 2016).Conversation in information-seeking contexts: Paul Solomon (1997a)
Discovering information in context: Paul Solomon (2002)
Every day-life: Reijo Savolainen (1995, 2004, 2008b)
Information context and information search context: Peiling Wang (Tenopir, Wang, Zhang, Simmons and Pollard, 2008)
Meaning of context: Reijo Savolainen (2012a)
Task related context: Noa Aharony (2006)
Elements of context
These can include time, motivation, spatial and social.Reijo Savolainen (2006b)
Situations in progress
The phrases person-in-situation and person-in-progressive situation refer to people in situations where information needs change due to the circumstances of the situation e.g. abuse getting worse (Dunne, 2002; Westbrook, 2008).Abuse and neglected children: Julie Hersberger (Hersberger, Murray and Sokoloff, 2006)
Behavioural change in stages: Maija-Leena Huotari (Hirvonen, Pyky, Korpelainen and Huotari, 2015; Hirvonen et al., 2012)
Pregnant women: Pamela McKenzie (2004, 2010)

Actors featuring in information behaviour studies

Actors, also referred to as role players, and target groups are the humans whose information behaviour is studied: they can be defined in terms of their roles such as student, patient, caregiver or a professional role such as lawyer, doctor or engineer (Case and Given, 2016), or in terms of positions of vulnerability. Tom Wilson (2008b) offers a valuable reflection on the past, present and future of the information user. Table 2 portrays reviewer expertise according to actors.

Table 2: Reviewer expertise on actors
Topical focus: actorsExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Occupational roles
Artisan fisher folk: Dennis Ocholla (Ikoja-Odongo and Ocholla, 2003)
Designers: Ole Pilerot (2013, 2014a); Eric Thivant (Thivant, 2016) (financial products)
Early career workers and researchers: Carol Kuhlthau (1999); Marzena Świgoń (2017b)
Government staff: Trine Schreiber (Berger, Hertzum and Schreiber, 2016)
Library and information professionals: Makiko Miwa (2012)
Library users: Jela Steinerová (Steinerová and Šušol, 2005, 2007)
Newcomers: Camilla Moring (2017)
Nurses: Ina Fourie and Hester Meyer (Fourie and Claasen-Veldsman, 2007, 2008) (oncology), Fourie and Meyer, 2014 (palliative care); Anna Lundh, Olof Sundin and Louise Limberg (Sundin, Limberg and Lundh, 2008)
Teachers: Ina Fourie (Bitso and Fourie, 2011; Fourie and Krauss, 2011); Eric Meyers (Khan, Meyers, Gowen and Bergman, 2014); Dennis Ocholla (Durodolu and Ocholla, 2017); Ross Todd (1997)
Unemployed: Reijo Savolainen (2008a)
Academic roles
Children: Lisa Given (Given et al., 2014, 2016); Anna Lundh (2016); Paul Solomon (1993, 1994); Peilang Wang (Bilal and Wang, 2005)
Faculty: Anna Mierzecka (Mierzecka, Kisilowska and Suminas, 2017) Mature students: Lisa Given (2000)
School children: Judit Bar-Ilan (Bar-Ilan and Belous, 2007); Charles Cole (Beheshti, Cole, Abuhimed and Lamoureux, 2015; Cole, Beheshti and Abuhimed, 2017; Cole, Beheshti, Abuhimed and Lamoureux, 2015; Cole, Leide and Beheshti, 2005; Lamoureux, Beheshti, Cole, Abuhimed and AlGhamdi, 2013); Carol Kuhlthau (1988)
Students (undergraduate and postgraduate): Charles Cole (2000a,b; Cole, Leide and Beheshti, 2005; Cole, Lin, Leide, Large and Beheshti, 2007; Leide, Cole, Beheshti, Large and Lin, 2007; Yi, Beheshti, Cole, Leide and Large, 2006); Lisa Given (Sadler and Given, 2007); Jannica Heinström (2005; Heinström and Sormunen, 2016); Jela Steinerová (Steinerová and Hrckova, 2014); Olof Sundin (Carlsson and Sundin 2017)
Professional and workplace roles
Economists and business analysts: Eric Thivant (Thivant, 2005)
Engineers: Ina Fourie (Du Preez and Fourie, 2009); Hester Meyer (Du Preez and Meyer, 2011, 2016)
Government staff: Trine Schreiber (Berger et al., 2016)
Healthcare professionals e.g. doctors, nurses: Ina Fourie (Fourie and Claasen-Veldsman, 2007 (oncology nurses and social workers)); Olof Sundin (2002; Johannisson and Sundin, 2007)
Lawyers: Carol Kuhlthau (Kuhlthau and Tama, 2001); Christine Stilwell (Lawal, Stilwell, Kuhn and Underwood, 2012; Lawal, Stilwell, Kuhn and Underwood, 2014)
Librarians (reference librarians): Christine Urquhart (Urquhart and Tbaishat, 2016)
Pharmacists: Lisa Given (Schindel and Given, 2013)
Researchers (various disciplines): Andrew Cox (Al-Omar and Cox, 2016); Lynne McKechnie (Goodall, Julien, Lajoie-Paquette and McKechnie, 2005)
Roles related to illness
CareCaregivers (formal, informal): Theresa Anderson and Ina Fourie (Anderson and Fourie, 2015, 2017); Dennis Ocholla (Mnubi-Mchombu, Mostert and Ocholla, 2009)
Early caregivers: Marzena Świgoń (Nicholas et al., 2017)
Home-care: Christine Urquhart (Cooper and Urquhart, 2005, 2008)
PatientsCharles Cole (1998, 2011; Cole and Leide, 2003; Cole, Leide and Large, 2005); Ina Fourie (Fourie, 2008, 2010, 2012; Fourie and Nesset, 2017); Hester Meyer (Khayesi et al., 2013); Dennis Ocholla (Ikoja-Odongo and Ocholla, 2003; Matovu and Ocholla, 2009; Mnubi-Mchombu et al., 2009); Tiffany Veinot (Veinot, Mitchell and Ancker, 2018); Bosk, Veinot and Iwashyna, 2011; Veinot et al., 2018)
Parental (father, mother, grandparent)First-time mothers: Ian Ruthen (Loudon, Buchanan and Ruthven, 2016)
Parents: Ivanka Stričević (Martinovic and Stričević, 2016)
Actor networksTrine Schreiber (2017a)
Roles of vulnerability
Heroin addicts: Ross Todd (1999a,b)
Homeless people: Ian Ruthven (Muggleton and Ruthven, 2012)
Intermediaries: Ina Fourie and Hester Meyer (2014); Carol Kuhlthau (1996)
People with disabilities: Lisa Given (Saumure and Given, 2004; Anna Lundh (Lundh and Johnson, 2015); Christine Stilwell (Seyama, Morris and Stilwell, 2014)
Orphans: Dennis Ocholla (Mnubi-Mchombu et al., 2009)
Refugees: Ian Ruthven (Oduntan and Ruthven, 2017); Ole Pilerot (Lloyd, Pilerot and Hultgren, 2017); Annemaree Lloyd (2014a, 2015; Lloyd, Kennan, Thompson and Qayyum, 2013; Lloyd, Pilerot and Hultgren, 2017)
Roles as users and people in everyday lifeHomebuyers: Reijo (Savolainen, 2009b)
Library users: Jela Steinerová (Steinerová and Šušol, 2005)
Academic library users: Judit Bar-Ilan (Greenberg and Bar-Ilan, 2017)

Expertise in specific information activities and information encounters

A wide variety of information activities and encounters have been the focus of information behaviour studies (Case and Given, 2016; Fisher and Julien, 2009; Ford, 2015; Johnson and Case, 2012). In addition there are also researchers who distinguish between information behaviour and information practice (Savolainen, 2007c; Wilson, 1997). (A separate sub- heading addresses information practice.) Although the larger portion of information behaviour studies are on information seeking and information searching using a general or comprehensive interpretation, there are some expertise on finer detail such as the formulation of queries and other activities such as information sharing, information use, information processing, information encountering, information monitoring, and information transfer.

Information seeking and searching activities

Expertise on information seeking and searching range from a holistic view of the spectrum of activities, sometimes referred to as steps, phases or stages for example starting, browsing, changing, monitoring, differentiating, extracting, verifying and ending (Ellis, 1989b) to specific activities such as information monitoring or browsing. Table 3 provides more detail.

Table 3: Reviewer expertise on information seeking and searching activities
Topical focus: information seeking and searchingExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Spectrum of information seeking activities / information
seeking per se
This include researchers taking a general approach to information seeking such as reflected in the models by David Ellis (1989b), Carol Kuhlthau (1991) and Allen Foster (2004) or reporting on a specific group of actors or information seeking in a specific context.As idea generation: Trinke Schreiber (2017b)
Cross language information seeking behaviour: Allen Foster (Al-Wreikat, Rafferty and Foster, 2015)
Everyday life: Lisa Given (Given et al., 2016); Reijo Savolainen (1995); Christine Stillwell (Chilimo, Ngulube and Stilwell, 2011)
General: Charles Cole (Cole and Spink, 2004, Spink and Cole, 2006); Dennis Ocholla (Ikoja-Odongo and Ocholla, 2003)
Information seeking: David Ellis (Ellis, Cox and Hall, 1993)
Information process: Charles Cole (1997a,c)
Interactive information seeking: Nils Pharo (Isfandyari-Moghaddam and Pharo, 2011); Ian Ruthven (2012)
Online information seeking: Eric Meyers (Khan et al., 2015)
Query formulation: Judit Bar-Ilan (Bar-Ilan and Barsky, 2005)
Search processes: Carol Kuhlthau (1988, 1991, 1997a,b, 2000; Kuhlthau, Heinström and Todd, 2008)
Seeking pictures: Anna Lundh (Lundh and Alexandersson, 2012)
Spectrum of information seeking activities/phases/stages: David Ellis (1989b); Allen Foster and Christine Urquhart (Foster, Urquhart and Turner, 2008); Carol Kuhlthau (2008) Teenagers/tweens: Eric Meyers (2009a; Meyers, Fisher and Marcoux, 2007)
Web information seeking: Ina Fourie (2006); Ian Ruthven (Jose, Ruthven and Tombros, 2005)
Information monitoringCurrent awareness services: Fourie and Claasen-Veldsman (2007)
SearchingExploratory search: Ian Ruthven (Ruthven et al., 2008)
Keywords: Judit Bar-Ilan (Barsky and Bar-Ilan, 2012)
Information searching: Brendan Luyt (Luyt, Dion and Chei Sian, 2009); Maria Próchnicka (2004)
Procedures: Peter Ingwersen (1982)
Queries, strategies and process: Jutta Haider (2016b, 2017); Dennis Ocholla (Durodolu and Ocholla, 2017); Nils Pharo (Pharo, 2004; Pharo and Järvelin, 2006); Savolainen 2016e; Iris Xie (Xie, Soohyung and Bennett-Kapusniak, 2013)
Search styles: Jannica Heinström (2006a,b)
Search transition: Nils Pharo (Nordlie and Pharo, 2013)
Task phrasing: Judit Bar-Ilan (Barsky and Bar-Ilan, 2012)
Web searching: Peter Ingwersen (Skov and Ingwersen, 2014); Makiko Miwa (Miwa and Takahashi, 2008); Iris Xie (Lin and Xie, 2013; Rieh and Xie, 2006)

Information sharing and information transfer activities

Although studies on information sharing are fewer, it is gaining increased attention. Table 4 reflects expertise on information sharing and information transfer activities such as information communication, dissemination and exchange.

Table 4: Reviewer expertise on information sharing and transfer activities
Topical focus: information sharing and information transferExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Information sharingFocusing on trust: Ola Pilerot (2013)
Digital communication: Trine Schreiber (Berger et al., 2016)
Knowledge sharing: Marzena Świgoń (2013, 2017a); Gunilla Widén (Widén-Wulff and Suomi, 2007; Ahmad and Widén, 2015; Widén-Wulff and Ginman, 2004; Ming, Fredriksson and Widén, 2016)
Information sharing: Lisa Given (Ward and Given, 2017); Elena Macevičiūtė (Janiuniene and Macevičiūtė, 2016); Hester Meyer (Meyer, 2009); Ola Pilerot (Pilerot, 2012, 2013, 2014a, 2015; Pilerot and Limberg, 2011); Reijo Savolainen (2011a, 2017d); Tiffany Veinot (Jones, Pressler, Seng, Coleman-Burns and Veinot, 2015; Jones, Wright, Wallace and Veinot, 2018; Veinot, 2010; Veinot et al., 2006; Veinot et al., 2018); Gunilla Widén (Widén et al., 2017; Widén, Heinström, Österbacka, Ahmad and Huvila, 2016; Widén et al., 2014; Widén-Wulff and Davenport, 2007); Widén-Wulff (2007)
Resource sharing: Christine Stilwell (Nzimande and Stilwell, 2008)
Small talk: Pamela McKenzie (McKenzie and Davies, 2010)
Information transferMeyer (1996)

Information use and processing activities

Information use include decision-making, problem-solving and scholarly publishing. Personal information management is also included under information use. Table 5 shows examples of reviewer expertise.

Table 5: Reviewer expertise on information use and processing activities
Topical focus: information use and ProcessingExamples of reviewers with related expertise
In general, not focusing on a specific reason for useGeneral: Charles Cole (Spink and Cole, 2006); Ian Ruthven (Ruthven and Lalmas, 2002; Ruthven, Lalmas and Van Rijsbergen, 2002); Savolainen (1998, 2000)
Use of health information: Tiffany Veinot (Barbarin, Klasnja and Veinot, 2016; Wolf and Veinot, 2015); Reijo Savolainen (2009a,c); Jela Steinerová (2012)
Decision-makingCognitive authority decisions: Pamela McKenzie (2003b)
Everyday life: Ivanka Stričević (Kolarić and Stričević, 2016)
Relevance assessment: Preben Hansen (Hansen and Karlgren, 2005); Jela Steinerová (2007, 2008)
Relevance decisions / relevance in decision-making: David Allen (Mishra, Allen and Pearman, 2013, 2015); Theresa Anderson (2005); Charles Cole (Cole et al., 2017); Allen Foster (Stokes, Foster and Urquhart, 2009); Ian Ruthven (2007, 2014; Albassam and Ruthven, 2018; Baillie, Azzopardi and Ruthven, 2008; Balatsoukas and Ruthven, 2012; Beresi, Kim, Song and Ruthven, 2010; Beresi, Kim, Song and Ruthven and Baillie, 2010; Lalmas, Ruthven and Van Rijsbergen, 2003; Ruthven, Baillie and Elsweiler, 2007)
Problem solvingNils Pharo (1999)
Scholarly publishingE-book publishing and production: Elena Macevičiūtė (Gudinavičius and Macevičiūtė, 2015; Gudinavičius, Šuminas and Macevičiūtė, 2015)
Open access and open access publishing: Jutta Haider (2007); David Nicholas (Huntington, Nicholas and Rowlands, 2004); Dennis Ocholla (2013)
Use and non-use of information sourcesDigitised scholarly resources: Eric Meyers (Eccles, Thelwall and Meyer, 2012); Sanna Talja (Fry and Talja, 2007)
Information sources: Pamele McKenzie (2003a)
Journals in higher education: David Ellis (Armstrong et al., 2003)
Political information sources: Anna Mierzecka (Šuminas and Mierzecka, 2014)
Scholarly journals: Sanna Talja (Maula and Talja, 2003)
Source horizons and preferences: Reijo Savolainen (2007d)
Use and non-use of electronic journals: Sanna Talja (Maula and Talja, 2003; Vakkari and Talja, 2006); Jela Steinerová (2003, 2008, 2012")
Personal information managementAndrew Cox (Al-Omar and Cox, 2016); Ina Fourie (Fourie, 2011, 2012); Christopher Khoo (Khoo et al., 2007); Ian Ruthven (Elsweiler, Baillie and Ruthven, 2009; Elsweiler, Ruthven and Jones, 2007); Marzena Świgoń (Świgoń, 2013; Świgoń and Weber, 2014)
OtherAmongst homebuyers: Reijo Savolainen (Savolainen, 2009d)
Information processingConstructing meaning: Louise Limberg (Alexandersson and Limberg, 2003)
General: Peter Ingwersen (Ingwersen and Järvelin, 2005)
Health disruption: Jenny Bronstein (Genuis and Bronstein, 2017)
Sense-making: Reijo Savolainen (1992, 1993, 2006a); Paul Solomon (1997a,b,c,d)
Idea generation: Trine Schreiber (2017b)

Information encountering as information activity

Sanda Erdelez (1999, 2004; Erdelez, Basic and Levitov, 2011) is a leading researcher on information encountering also referred to as opportunistic discovery of information and accidental acquisition of information. These all relate to information serendipity. Table 6 reflects expertise on information encountering.

Table 6: Reviewer expertise on information encountering
Topical focus: information encounteringExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Information encounteringChance encounters: Jenny Bronstein (Solomon and Bronstein, 2016)
Incidental information encountering: Jannica Heinström (2006c)
SerendipitySanda Erdelez (Erdelez et al., 2016)
Allen Foster (Ford and Foster, 2003; Foster and Ellis, 2014)
Information discovery, opportunistic information discoveryPaul Solomon (2002)
Sanda Erdelez (Million, O'Hare, Lowrance and Erdelez, 2013)

Information evaluation as an information activity

The evaluation of search results and information channels and resources is a very important component in information seeking; so is relevance assessment (Ingwersen and Järvelin, 2005). Reviewer expertise is potrayed in Table 7; it covers various contexts, information activities and related issues. (A later section covers criteria for source selection and trust in sources.)

Table 7: Reviewer expertise on information evaluation
Topical focus: information evaluationExamples of reviewers with related expertise
RelevanceAssessment: Theresa Anderson (1999, 2005); Paul Solomon (Tang and Solomon, 1998); Jela Steinerová (2007, 2008)
Relevancy: Charles Cole (Cole et al.,2017)
Source evaluation e.g. quality of sourcesDebating reliability: Brendan Luyt (Luyt, 2015)
Digital library evaluation: Preben Hansen (Fuhr et al., 2007); Iris Xie (2006)
Evaluation of image databases: Elena Macevičiūtė and Tom Wilson (Eklund, Lindh, Macevičiūtė and Wilson, 2006)
Evaluation of specific sources: Brendan Luyt (Goh, Luyt, Chua, See-Yong, Kia- Ngoh and How-Yeu, 2008) (open source portals); Preben Hansen (Klas et al., 2006) (digital libraries); Martinez Mendez (Martinez-Mendez, J., Martinez-Mendez, F.J. and Lopez-Carreno, 2012); Sanna Talja (2007; Maula, Savolainen and Talja, 2004; Savolainen, Talja and Tuominen, 2003; Talja, Vakkari, Fry and Wouters, 2007) (scholarly material, scholarly literature library 2.0, digital libraries) (digital library resources use)
Source credibility and negotiationSource credibility: Helana Francke and Olof Sundin (Francke and Sundin, 2012); Reijo Savolainen (2007e, 2010b)
Source negotiation: Reijo Savolainen (2011b); Olof Sudin (Francke and Sundin, 2012)
OtherCrowd judgement in searching: Judit Bar-Ilan (Zhitomirsky-Geffet, Bar-Ilan and Levene, 2016)
Debating credibility: Helana Francke, Olof Sundin, Louise Limberg and Anna Lundh (Francke, Sundin and Limberg, 2011; Lundh et al., 2015; Sundin and Francke, 2009)
Web pages: Ian Ruthven (Jose et al., 2005); Iris Xie (Sabin-Kildiss, Cool and Xie, 2001)
Web portal: Sanda Erdelez (Wang et al., 2010)

Information retrieval

ISIC2018 reviewers with expertise in both information behaviour and information retrieval, specifically interactive information retrieval, are limited; Table 8 portrays expertise.

Table 8: Reviewer expertise on information retrieval
Topical focus: information retrievalExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Charles Cole (1998, 2008); Peter Ingwersen (1992, 1996; Ingwersen and Järvelin, 2005); Christopher Khoo (Khoo, Myaeng and Oddy, 2001) (precision); Paul Solomon (1993); Iris Xie (2006, 2009)

Information practice as information activity

The terms information behaviour and information practice have been debated over time in the literature, specifically by Tom Wilson and Reijo Savolainen (Behaviour/practice debate... , 2009). Several reviewers have aligned their work with a specific focus on information practice. Table 9 potrays the reviewer expertise.

Table 9: Reviewer expertise on information practice
Topical focus: information practiceExamples of reviewers with related expertise
General and conceptualTheresa Anderson (2007); Andrew Cox (2012, 2013); Jutta Haider (2011, 2012, 2017); Annemaree Lloyd (2007, 2010c, 2012, 2015; Bonner and Lloyd, 2011); Anna Lundh and Louise Limberg (2008); Ross Todd (Li and Todd, 2016); Trine Schreiber (2014); Gunila Widén and Jela Steinerová (Widén et al., 2014)
Critical literacies in information practices: Veronica Johansson and Louise Limberg (2017)
Knowledge practicesSana Talja (Franssila, Okkonen, Savolainen and Talja, 2012)
Specific actors or contextsNurses: Ina Fourie (Fourie and Claasen-Veldsman 2005, 2007); Olof Sundin (Sundin, 2002; Johannisson and Sundin, 2007)
Workplace: Anna Lundh (Lundh, Limberg and Lloyd, 2013); Tiffany Veinot (2007)
Information micro-practicesSanda Erdelez (Doty and Erdelez, 2002)

Information avoidance

Although most publications focus on active information seeking, deliberate information avoidance has also been reported, especially in health care (Case and Given, 2016). Table 10 portrays reviewer expertise.

Table 10: Reviewer expertise on information avoidance
Topical focus: information avoidanceExamples of reviewers with related expertise
General: Reijo Savolainen (Sairanen and Savolainen, 2010)
Health information avoidance: Jannica Heinström (Ek and Heinström, 2011)

Collaborative and social information seeking

There has been an increase in research on collaborative information seeking, retrieval, and behaviour and contexts of collaborative learning (Hansen and Järvelin, 2005). Interests have recently expanded to social information seeking and crowdsourcing. Table 11 reflects reviewer expertise.

Table 11: Reviewer expertise on collaborative and social information seeking
Topical focus: collaborative and social information seekingExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Collaborative information seekingIna Fourie (Fourie and Meyer, 2014); Preben Hansen (Hansen and Järvelin, 2005); Jannica Heinström (Heinström and Sormunen, 2016); Hester Meyer (Du Preez and Meyer, 2016); Preben Hansen and Gunilla Widén (Hansen and Widén, 2017; Widén and Hansen, 2012)
Collectivist information behaviour: Lisa Given (Given and Kelly, 2016)
Group information seeking: Jette Hyldegård (2007)

Mediated information seeking

Expertise on mediated information seeking is limited, mostly to librarians as information intermediaries seeking information on behalf of users. Table 12 shows expertise on mediated information seeking.

Table 12: Reviewer expertise on mediated information seeking
Topical focusExamples of reviewers with related expertise
GeneralAllen Foster (Spink, Wilson, Ford, Foster and Ellis, 2002a,b,c)
Proxy information seeking in other contexts and rolesIntermediation: Paloma Korycińska (2015)
Mediated information seeking: Allen Foster (Spink et al., 2002a,b,c)

Information carriers and information communication technology (ICT)

Although different terminology is used in the literature, the interpretations by David Johnson and Donald Case (both with a background in communication) (2012) will be used to categorise expertise. Carriers are the 'primary repositories of information available to individuals within their information fields’ (Johnson and Case, 2012, p. 31). There are three classes of information carriers, namely channels, sources and messages. Messages are the essential building blocks – the words, codes, symbols, pictures. Sources relate to an individual or institution originating messages (Johnson and Case, 2012, p. 33) and include books and articles. Sources are available in print and digital forma; they are availabe through different devices such as mobile technology and through different channels where channels are the information transmission systems. Channels include mass and social media, social networks, and interpersonal communication. ISIC2018 reviewers have published on the preferences, use, selection and evaluation of a variety of information carriers. Table 13 portrays expertise on information carriers, using information channels, information sources and messages as key sub-themes. ICTs are included in this section. (Table 5 covers use and non-use of information sources.)

Table 13: Reviewer expertise on information carriers and ICT
Topical focus: information carriersExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Information channels (this includes the internet and social media platforms)
World wide web, cyberspaceGoogle Scholar: Ian Ruthven (Balatsoukas and Ruthven, 2012)
Health care and Internet use: Elena Macevičiūtė (Hoglund, Macevičiūtė and Wilson, 2004)
Internet use: Reijo Savolainen (Savolainen and Kari, 2004b, 2006a); Kirsty Williamson (Williamson, 2006; Williamson, Jenkins and Wright, 2001)
Search engines: Judit Bar-Ilan (2002b); Charles Cole (Spink et al., 2004); Javier Martinez (Caceres, Mendez and Munoz, 2008; Carreno, Carreno and Mendez, 2009); Iris Xie (Sabin-Kildiss, Cool and Xie, 2001)
User interaction: Peiling Wang (2000)
Web: Judit Bar-Ilan (Bar-Ilan and Belous, 2007) (directories); Reijo Savolainen (1998, 2002, 2004; Kari and Savolainen, 2004b); Peiling Wang (Berry et al., 2003; Wang, Tenopir, Layman, Penniman and Collins, 1998; Wolfram, Wang and Zhang, 2009)
Social media: e.g. blogs, Facebook, Library 2.0, microblogging, Twitter, WhatsApp; this will also include information activities that are very important in the use of social media such as information disclosure, information exchangeBlogging: Noa Aharony (2009a); Gunilla Widén and Isto Huvila (Hall, Widén and Paterson, 2010; Huvila, Ek and Widén, 2014); Reijo Savolainen (2011c); Tom Wilson (2008b)
Emotional support blogs: (Savolainen, 2010a, 2011a)
General: Christopher Khoo (2014)
Information disclosure: Jenny Bronstein (2013)
Information exchange in virtual communities: Jenny Bronstein (2013), Julie Hersberger (Hersberger, Murray and Rioux, 2007)
Online platforms: Jenny Bronstein and Noa Aharony (Bronstein et al., 2016); Paloma Korycińska (Niedźwiedzka and Korycińska, 2016)
Question and answers (Q&A): Reijo Savolainen (2013b, 2014b, 2015e)
Scholarly communication: Allen Foster and David Ellis (Shehata, Ellis and Foster, 2015); Jutta Haider (Haider and Åström, 2017)
Social bookmarking: Andrew Cox (Taha, Wood and Cox, 2014)
Social media: Noa Aharony (2010); Theresa Anderson (Bawden et al., 2007); Lisa Given (Wallis and Given, 2016); Gunilla Widén (Gu and Widén-Wulff, 2011); Iris Xie (Xie and Stevenson, 2014a,b)
Twitter: Andrew Cox (Shah and Cox, 2017)
Virtual communities: Eric Meyers (Meyers, 2009a,b); Julie Hersberger (Hersberger, Murray and Rioux, 2007)
WhatsApp: Noa Aharony (Aharony and Gazit, 2016)
YouTube: Ian Ruthven (Madden, Ruthven and McMenemy, 2013)
Information retrieval systems: e.g. databases, discovery systems, library catalogues, search enginesDatabases: Reijo Savolainen (Iivonen and Savolainen, 1993); Miko Miwa (Hosono and Miwa, 1982); Christine Urquhart (2009)
OPACs: Andrew Cox (Osborne and Cox, 2015); Lisa Given (Willson and Given, 2014); Paul Solomon (1993, 1994); Iris Xie (Xie and Wolfram, 2009)
Information and information retrieval systems: David Ellis (1989 a,b); David Allen and Tom Wilson (Ellis, Allen and Wilson, 1999)
Information sources (this includes source preferences and selection)
Source scope and preferencesSource preferences: Reijo Savolainen (2008b, 2010b)
Information source horizons: Reijo Savolainen (Kari and Savolainen, 2004b); Jenna Hartel (2017)
Information landscapes: Annemaree Lloyd (Lloyd and Wilkinson, 2016)
Scholarly publication in generalDigitised scholarly resources: Eric Meyers (Eccles et al., 2012)
Scholarly e-reading: Elena Macevičiūtė (2015); Sanna Talja and Tom Wilson (Tenopir, Wilson, Vakkari, Talja and King, 2010)
Books and journals (printed, e-books)Digital: Noa Aharony (2014); Iris Xie (2007)
Encylopaedias: Olof Sundin and Jutta Haider (2013)
Grey literature: Javier Martinez (Martinez-Mendez and Lopez-Carreno, 2011); Christine Stilwell (Kwanya, Stilwell and Underwood, 2014)
Patents: Javier Martinez (Martinez-Mendez, Pastor-Sanchez and Lopez-Carreno, 2010)
Web portals: Javier Martinez (Martinez-Mendez and Lopez-Carreno, 2012; Rodríguez, Martínez and Rodríguez, 2008)
E-books: Anna Lundh (Lundh and Johnson, 2015) (digital talking books); David Nicholas (Nicholas, Huntington and Rowlands, 2007); Tom Wilson (2015)
Digital libraries and resources, including repositoriesDigital libraries: Allen Foster (2006, 2007); Carol Kuhlthau (1997b); Ola Pilerot (Pilerot, 2013); Reijo Savolainen and Sanna Talja (Savolainen et al., 2003); Jeila Steinerová (2003, 2007); Iris Xie (Babu and Xie, 2017; Xie, Babu, Joo and Fuller, 2015)
Information repositories: Maria Próchnika (Janiak and Próchnicka, 2017)
Learning in digital libraries: Carol Kuhlthau (1997b)
Internet e.g. portals, websites, web pagesInternet and e-health: Tiffany Veinot (Flicker et al., 2004)
Web portals: Charles Cole (Large, Beheshti and Cole, 2002)
Source selection (detail on evaluation and relevance assessment is covered under a separate heading; this point includes trust in sources, credibility, debating credibility and source negotiation)Credibility: Helena Francke and Olof Sundin (2012)
Criteria: Reijo Savolainen (2010b; Savolainen and Kari, 2006b)
Quality assurance: Makiko Miwa (2015)
Reliability of sources: Brendan Luyt (2015) Trust: Jutta Haider (Haider and Åström, 2017)
Wikipedia: Brendan Luyt (2011, 2012, 2018a, b; Luyt, Aaron, Thian and Hong, 2008; Luyt, Ally, Low and Ismail, 2010; Luyt, Zainal, Mayo and Yun, 2008); Olof Sundin (Francke and Sundin, 2010)
OtherDigital images: Zinaida Manžuch (2009b)
News: Jannica Heinström (Yadamsuren and Heinström, 2011); Christopher Khoo (Khoo, Nourbakhsh and Na, 2012); Kirsty Williamson (Qayyum, Williamson, Liu and Hider, 2010)
Information articats: Louise Limberg (Alexandersson and Limberg, 2003)
Newspapers: Lisa Given (Schindel and Given, 2013); Jannica Heinström (Yadamsuren and Heinström, 2011)
Pictures: Anna Lundh (Lundh and Alexandersson, 2012)
Videos: Ian Ruthven (Albassam and Ruthven, 2018)
Messages e.g. email, micro-blogging, tweetsSocial networking, blogging and microblogging: Noa Aharony (2010); Andrew Cox (Cox and Blake, 2011; Cox, McKinney and Good, 2017; Shah, Shabgahi and Cox, 2016)
Technology (use of technology and technological developments where the focus is on the device/technology as means of access and interaction e.g. the use of mobiles, tablets and cloud technology)Digital information challenges: Jela Steinerová (2016)
ICT diffusion: Dennis Ocholla (Kwake, Ocholla and Adigun, 2006)
Use of technology by specific groups: Isto Huvila (Enwald et al., 2016)

Information fields

According to Johnson and Case (2012, p. 28) an individual’s information field provides the context for information seeking. It includes the carriers, information channels and information sources to which people are exposed and relates to concepts such as information pathways, information horizons and information infrastructures. It also relates to disciplines and the broad categories of science (natural, social and humanities) and sub-categories such as medicine, economics, engineering, and further specialisation such as nursing. Early day user studies found differences between preferences and information seeking according to the broad science. Table 14 presents three broad categories of science to group expertise on specific disciplines, as well as health science due to the large group in this field. Sanna Talja and Reijo Savolianen report on field differences in general (Talja, Savolainen and Maula, 2004).

Table 14: Reviewer expertise on information fields
Topical focus: information fieldsExamples of reviewers with related expertise
HumanitiesHumanistic research: Charles Cole (1997c)
Music: Reijo Savolainen (Rousi, Savolainen and Vakkari, 2016)
History: Charles Cole (2000a,b; Cole et al., 2017; Leide et al., 2007; Yi et al., 2006)
Natural sciencesAgriculture: Hester Meyer (Meyer and Boon, 2003; Boon and Meyer, 2003); Christine Stilwell (Lwoga, Stilwell and Ngulube, 2011; Munyua and Stilwell, 2010, 2013)
Engineering: David Ellis (Ellis and Haugan, 1997); Ina Fourie (Du Preez and Fourie, 2009); Hester Meyer (Du Preez and Meyer, 2011, 2016)
Environmenal information: Jutta Haider (2011, 2016a)
Physical sciences: David Ellis (Ellis et al., 1993)
Social sciences: David Ellis (Ellis et al., 1993)
Social sciencesBusiness: Heidi Julien (Julien, Detlor, Serenko, Willson and Lavallee, 2011); Eric Thivant (2003) (design of financial products)
Competitive intelligence: Sanda Erdelez (Erdelez and Ware, 2001)
Law: Sanda Erdelez (O'Hare and Erdelez, 2017)
Psychology: Charles Cole (Yi et al., 2006)
Political information sources: Anna Mierzecka (Šuminas and Mierzecka, 2014)
Health sciencesJenny Bronstein (2014a; 2017a); Jannica Heinström (Ek and Heinström, 2011); Olof Sundin (2002); Tiffany Veinot (Valdez, Holden, Novak and Veinot, 2015, 2018; Veinot et al., 2018; Wolf and Veinot, 2015)
Sexual information seeking: Charles Cole (Spink et al., 2004)

Antecedents and barriers

Johnson and Case (2012, p. 46) use the term antecedents to refer to factors influencing information behaviour and imperatives to motivate information seeking, while others such as Wilson (1999a,b) refer to intervening variables. Savolainen (2006b) refers to qualifiers of information seeking and Meyer (2016) to personal components of information behaviour. There are also activating mechanisms and triggers of information seeking, and barriers. Some researchers refer only to demographic factors. This section covers expertise where specific antecedents such as age or gender, as well as triggers of information seeking or barriers are the focus. Table 15 shows expertise on antecedents and barriers.

Table 15: Reviewer expertise on antecedents and barriers
Topical focus: antecedents and barriersExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Demographic influences: age, gender, socio-economic background, education, diversity, etc.Affordances: Jutta Haider (2016a)
Age: Jette Hyldegård (2014); Kirsty Williamson (2006)
Young, teenager/tweens: Theresa Anderson (2013b); Eric Meyers (2009a; Meyers, Fisher and Marcoux, 2007); Ross Todd (1999, 2008, 2003)
Youth: Annemaree Lloyd (Lloyd and Wilkinson, 2016); Anna Mierzecka (Šuminas and Mierzecka, 2014)
Young adults: Lynn McKechnie (Rothbauer and McKechnie, 1999); Kirsty Williamson (Qayyum and Williamson, 2014; Qayyum et al., 2010)
Old: Lisa Given (Given, Ruecker, Simpson and Sadler, 2007); Brendan Luyt (Luyt and Ann, 2011); Hester Meyer (Khayesi et al., 2013); Isto Huvila (Enwald et al., 2016)
Very old: Kirsty Williamson (Asla and Williamson, 2015)
Culture: Maija-Leena Huotari (Askola, Atsushi and Huotari, 2010); Hester Meyer (2009)
Disability and special needs:
Blind and visually disabled: Christine Stilwell (Majinge and Stilwell, 2013); Iris Xie (Babu and Xie, 2017; Xie, Babu, Joo and Fuller, 2015)
Gender: Charles Cole (Lamoureux et al., 2013); Jela Steinerová (Steinerová and Šušol, 2007); Christine Urquhart (Urquhart and Yeoman, 2010)
Self-control: Jutta Haider (2016a)
Socio-economic status e.g. poverty: Charles Cole (Spink and Cole, 2001); Jutta Haider and Bawden (2006, 2007)
Cognitive influences: knowledge, skills (literacy, information literacy, health or workplace literacy), expert versus novice, reading and e-reading skills, experience (in the field and in the situation e.g. genetic cancer as seen by Johnson and Case, 2012, p. 52-53).Cognition: Charles Cole (1997b)
Cognitive aspects of document use: Peter Ingwersen (1996); Peiling Wang (Wang and Soergel, 1998)
Cognitive processes and styles: David Ellis, Allen Foster and Tom Wilson (Spink, Wilson, Ford, Foster and Ellis, 2002c); Paul Solomon (1995)
Critical literacies in information practices: Veronica Johannson (Johansson and Limberg, 2017)
Digital literacy: Eric Meyers (Meyers, Erickson and Small, 2013); Maija-Leena Huotari (Hirvonen, Pyky, Korpelainen and Huotari, 2015) (health information literacy)
Experience: Carol Kuhlthau (1999); Sanda Erdelez (Moore, Erdelez and He, 2007) (search experience)
Expertise e.g. novice vs expert, domain expertise: Charles Cole (1997a, 2000a,b; Beheshti, Brooks, Cole, Large and Leide, 2005; Beheshti et al., 2015; Cole, Leide and Large, 2005); Carol Kuhlthau (2000)
Information seeking expertise: Olof Sundin (Sundin, 2008)
Information literacy: Sanda Erdelez (Erdelez et al., 2011); Ina Fourie (Fourie, 2008; Fourie and Krauss, 2010); Lisa Given (Given and Julien, 2003); Heidi Julien (2000, 2016; Detlor, Booker, Serenko and Julien, 2012; Detlor, Julien, Willson, Serenko and Lavallee, 2011; Julien et al., 2011; Julien and Williamson, 2011); Kirsty Williamson (Julien and Williamson, 2011); Paloma Korycińska (Cisek, Korycińska and Krakowska, 2017); Annemaree Lloyd (2007, 2010a,b,c, 2012, 2014b; Lloyd et al.,2013; Lloyd and Williamson, 2008); Louise Limberg, Ina Fourie, Heidi Julien (Aharony, Limberg, Julien, Albright, Fourie and Bronstein, 2017); Jenny Lindberg (Pilerot and Lindberg, 2011); Anna Lundh (Sundin et al., 2008); Brendan Luyt (Foo et al., 2014; Guo, Goh and Luyt, 2017; Kusolpalin, Luyt, Munro and Lim, 2013); Eric Meyers (Addison and Meyers, 2013); Ola Pilerot and Jenny Lindberg (2011); Maria Próchnicka (Cisek and Próchnicka, 2012); Reijo Savolainen (Tuominen, Savolainen and Taija, 2005); Ola Pilerot (2014b, 2016a, b); Jela Steinerová (2010, 2012); Christine Stilwell (Lawal et al., 2012; Lwehabura and Stilwell, 2008; Zinn, Stilwell and Hoskins, 2016); Olof Sundin (2008; Sundin et al., 2008); Sanna Talja (Talja and Lloyd, 2010; Tuominen, Savolainen and Talja, 2005); Trine Schreiber (2013, 2014, 2017a); Kirsty Williamson (Lloyd and Williamson, 2008); Tom Wilson (Streatfield, Allen and Wilson, 2010)
Language: Iris Xie (Sabbar and Xie, 2016)
Meta-cognitive skills: Dennis Ocholla (Durodolu and Ocholla, 2017); Ole Pilerot (2014b)
Reading ability (children): Åse Hedemark (2012)
Socio-cognitive approach: Charles Cole (2008)
Subject positions: Anna Lundh (2016)
User mental models: Charles Cole (Cole and Leide, 2003; Cole et al., 2007); Lisa Given (Willson and Given, 2014)
Workplace information literacy and learning: Camilla Moring (2017); Camilla Moring and Annemaree Lloyd (2013); Ola Pilerot (2014b, 2016a, b); Christine Stilwell (Lawal et al., 2014)
Psychological influences: affective e.g. emotions, feelings, anxiety, intent, tiredness, self-efficacyGeneral psychological factors: Jannica Heinström (2006c)
Self concept and self efficacy: Jenny Bronstein (2014b); Lisa Given (Willson and Given, 2014)
Affect/emotion: Ina Fourie and Heidi Julien (Fourie, 2008; Fourie and Julien, 2014a,b; Julien and Fourie, 2015); Jannica Heinström (Yadamsuren and Heinström, 2011); Heidi Julien and Lynn McKechnie (Julien, McKechnie and Hart, 2005); Carol Kuhlthau (1985); Ian Ruthven (Tinto and Ruthven, 2015, 2016); Reijo Savolainen (2014a, 2015a,c,d,f)
Library anxiety: Marzena Świgoń (Świgoń, 2011c)
Self-concept: Dennis Ocholla (Durodolu and Ocholla, 2017)
Beliefs: different from religion; this is more prominent in health information seeking than in other contextsReijo Savolainen (2012c)
Personality traits and stylesNoa Aharony (2009b); Jannica Heinström (2003, 2005, 2006 a,b,c); Jette Hyldegård (2009) (group based behaviour)
Noa Aharony and Jenny Bronstein (Amichai-Hamburger et al., 2016)
Location (geographic region e.g. country, remote vs urban)Developed countries
Poland: Małgorzata Kisilowska (2000; Gałecka et al.,2017); Marzena Świgoń (2011b)
Slovakia: Jela Steinerová (2003; Steinerová and Hrckova, 2014)
Developing countries
Africa: (South Africa, Tanzania): Christine Stilwell (Chilimo et al., 2011; Dansoh, Stilwell and Leach, 2007; Lawal et al., 2012; Lwehabura and Stilwell, 2008; Nzimande and Stilwell, 2008)
Rural: Hester Meyer (2002, 2003; Martins and Meyer, 2012; Meyer and Boon, 2003); Christine Stilwell (Chilimo et al., 2011)
Asia: Christopher Khoo (2011)
Information overload (can be seen from cognitive as well as psychological and affective perspectives)Noa Aharony (Shachaf, Aharony and Baruchson, 2016); David Allen (Allen and Shorad, 2005; Allen and Wilson, 2003a); Reijo Savolainen (2007a); Christine Stilwell (Chilimo et al., 2011); Tom Wilson (Wilson, 2012; Allen and Wilson, 2003a)
Triggers of information seeking: risk, uncertainty, anxiety, tasks and information- intensity of tasksInformation intensive domains: Hansen and Järvelin (2005)
Learning tasks: Jannica Heinström (Heinström, Sormunen and Kaunisto-Laine, 2014)
Motivators of information seeking: Reijo Savolainen (2013a)
Multitasking: Charles Cole (Spink, Cole and Waller, 2008)
Tasks: Charles Cole (Leide et al., 2007); Preben Hansen (Byström and Hansen, 2005); Peter Ingwersen (Ingwersen and Järvelin, 2004, 2005); Ian Ruthven (Jose, Ruthven and White, 2003); Iris Xie (2009)
Uncertainty: Theresa Anderson (2006, 2010); Carol Kuhlthau (1993, 1999); Ian Ruthven (Baillie et al., 2008); Reijo Savolainen (2012b)
These are factors that inhibit or complicate information activities and include the digital divide, poverty and information poverty, information access, knowledge gaps, ignorance and avoidance (the latter was also discussed under information activities)Digital divide: Ina Fourie (Fourie and Bothma, 2006); Sanda Erdelez (Houston and Erdelez, 2004); Julie Hersberger (2002); Brendan Luyt (2006a)
General: Eric Meyers (Meyers, Nathan and Saxton, 2007); Marzena Świgoń (2007, 2011a,b,c); Reijo Savolainen (2015b)
Information access: Brendan Luyt (2006a,b); Eric Thivant (2016)
Information avoidance as barrier: Jannica Heinström (Ek and Heinström, 2011); Maija-Leena Huotari (Hirvonen et al., 2015) Information poverty: Jenny Bronstein (2014a); Julie Hersberger (2002)
Library anxiety: Marzena Świgoń (2011b)
Socio-cultural barriers: Reijo Savolainen (2016a,b)

Information needs

Information needs have been approached from various points of view in the information behaviour literature starting with the widely cited work of Dervin and Nilan (1986), Taylor (1968) on question negotiation, Belkin, Oddy and Brooks (1982) on anamolous state of knowledge, and Shenton (2007) for suggestions on the use of the Jahori Window (developed from psychology). Reviewers who has taken a more holistic approach are Tom Wilson (1999a,b) noting dormant information needs and that information needs are often primary and not secondary needs, and Charles Cole who published a book on information needs (2012). Table 16 reflects the reviewer expertise.

Table 16: Reviewer expertise on information needs per se
Topical focus: information needsExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Anomalous states of knowledge hypothesisCharles Cole (Cole, Leide and Beheshti, 2005)
ChildrenCharles Cole (Large, Beheshti and Cole, 2002)
GeneralCharles Cole (1998, 2011, 2012; Cole and Leide, 2003; Cole, Leide and Large, 2005); Anna Lundh (2010); Elena Macevičiūtė (2006); Paloma Korycińska (Niedźwiedzka and Korycińska, 2016); Savolainen (2012a); Christine Urquhart (Cooper and Urquhart, 2005)
HomebuyersReijo Savolainen (Savolainen, 2009b)
Question-negotiationsAnna Lundh (2010)

Expertise in theories supporting studies of information behaviour and related information interactions and practices

All ISIC2018 reviewers are aware of key theories, some with more knowledge and experience than others are. Theories noted in their research output include theory of interaction and Goffman’s theory (Ikeya, 1991), Reijo Savolainen and Sanna Talja on constructivism, collectivism and constructionism (Tuominen, Talja and Savolainen, 2003; Talja, Tuominen and Savolainen, 2005) and numerous others reported in Theories of information behaviour (Fisher, Erdelez and McKechnie, 2007; McKechnie and Pettigrew, 2002; Pettigrew and McKechnie, 2001). Table 17 notes only researchers where theories pertinently featured in titles of articles.

Table 17: Reviewer expertise on theories supporting studies of information behaviour
Topical focus: theoriesExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Specific theoriesActivity theory: David Allen (Allen, Karanasios and Slavova, 2011; Karanasios et al., 2013; Karanasios and Allen, 2014); Tom Wilson (2008a)
Affordance theory: Lisa Given (Sadler and Given, 2007)
Appraisal theory: Christopher Khoo (Khoo et al., 2012)
Cognitive theory: Peter Ingwersen (Ingwersen, 1992; Ingwersen and Jårvelin, 2005) Dempster-shafer's theory of evidence: Ian Ruthven (Lalmas and Ruthven, 1998; Ruthven and Lalmas, 2002)
Kintsch's discourse comprehension theory: Charles Cole (Cole and Mandelblatt,
Information ecology: Jela Steinerová (2010, 2012)
Information grounds: Jenny Bronstein (2017b); Paloma Korycińska (Cisek, Korycińska and Krakowska, 2017)
Information worlds: Maija-Leena Huotari (Kansakoski and Huotari, 2016)
Position theory: Pamela McKenzie (2004)
Practice theory: Annemaree Lloyd (2010a; Lloyd et al., 2013); Camilla Moring and Annemaree Lloyd (2013); Sanna Talja (Talja and Nyce, 2015)
Spatial justice theory: Lisa Given (Croft-Piggin and Given, 2013)
General discussion of theoriesSanda Erdelez and Lynn McKechnie (Fisher, Erdelez and McKechnie, 2007)
Information retrieval: David Ellis (1984)

Expertise in models supporting studies of information behaviour

There is a wide variety of models. Some are theoretical models and others developed from empirical work. Some are general models of information behaviour, and others focus more on specific information activities such as information seeking (Kuhlthau, 1991 or information and interactive information retrieval such as Peter Ingwersen (Ingwersen and Jårvelin, 2005) and Iris Xie (2006). Apart from models developed by reviewers (see Table 18), there are reviewers who reviewed information behaviour models in a more holistic manner, such as Hester Meyer on building blocks of information behaviour (2016). Allen Foster and co- workers (Foster et al., 2008) consider models in general. Savolainen (2017a) reports a theoretical reflection on revisiting the Ellis model, on the Kuhlthau and Nahl models (Savolainen 2015d) and in genereal on conceptual growth in models (Savolainen, 2016c), while Carol Kuhlthau and co-workers revisited the value of her information search process model (Kuhlthau et al., 2008).

Table 18: Reviewer expertise on models of information behaviour and related information activities
Topical focus: modelsExamples of reviewers with related expertise
Building blocks of information behaviourHester Meyer (2016)
Cognitive model of information retrievalPeter Ingwersen (1992; Ingwersen and Järvelin, 2005)
Ellis modelDavid Ellis (1989b); Reijo Savolainen (2017a)
General models of information behaviourTom Wilson (1999a,b)
Non-linear model of information seekingAllen Foster (2004, 2005; Foster and Urquhart, 2012)
Information seeking process model
Carol Kuhlthau (1988, 1991, 1999, 2000, 2008; Kuhlthau and Tama, 2001); Charles Cole (Beheshti et al., 2015); Reijo Savolainen (2015d; in this paper he also considers the model of Nahl)

Research methodologies

Research methodology is key to any research. Reports are mostly on quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies, surveys, case studies, questionnaires, interviews and focus group interviews. Table 19 only notes expertise in research methodology if explicitly stated in the titles of papers. (It would be a too extensive task to categorise all reviewer methodological expertise.) Peilang Wang (2001) gives a good general overview of methodologies and methods in information behaviour research.

Table 19: Reviewer expertise on models of information behaviour and related information activities
Topical focus: methodologiesExamples of reviewers with related expertise
AutoethnographyTheresa Anderson and Ina Fourie (2015, 2017)
Citation analysisHeidi Julien and Lynn McKechnie (Goodall et al., 2005)
CodingChristine Urquhart (Foster et al., 2008)
Content analysisJudit Bar-Ilan (2000a,b); Heidi Julien and Ina Fourie (2015; Heidi Julien, 1996); and Heidi Julien and Lynn McKechnie (Julien, McKechnie and Hart, 2005)
DelphiNoa Aharony and Jenny Bronstein (Aharony and Bronstein, 2014a)
Discourse analysis, user discourse and discursionLisa Given (Given, Hicks, Schindel and Willson, 2014; Hicks and Given, 2013; Schindel and Given, 2013); Jutta Haider (Haider and David Bawden, 2006, 2007); Åse Hedemark and Jenny Lindberg (2017); Christopher Khoo (Khoo, Na and Jaidka, 2011); Olof Sundin (Hedemark, Hedman and Sundin, 2005); Sanna Talja and Pamela McKenzie (2007)
Ethnographic observationLynne McKechnie (2000)
Eye-trackingMakiko Miwa (Takaku et al., 2009); Ian Ruthven (Balatsoukas and Ruthven, 2012; Clark, Ruthven and Holt, 2010)
Literature reviewsChristopher Khoo (Khoo, Na and Jaidka, 2011)
Mental mappingAndrew Cox (Cox and Benson, 2017)
Observation (participant, non-participant)Christine Urquhart (Cooper, Lewis and Urquhart, 2004)
Naturalistic inquiryDavid Ellis and Allen Foster (Shehata et al., 2015)
Philosophical underpinning/intellectual history perspectives: constructivism, collectivism and constructionismDomains (ontological, epistemological and sociological dimensions): Jenna Hartel (Hartel and Hjørland, 2003)
Qualitative methodologyLisa Given (2006, 2008a,b, 2015; Croft-Piggin and Given, 2013)
Sentiment analysisChristopher Khoo (Khoo et al.,2012)
Visual and creative research methods e.g. photovoicePhotovoice: Andrew Cox (Benson and Cox, 2014; Cox and Benson, 2017); Heidi Julien and Lisa Given (Julien, Given and Opryshko, 2013)
Pictures, drawings and photo’s: Jenna Hartel (2014a,b,c, 2017; Hartel and Thomson, 2011); Anna Lundh and Louise Limberg (2012)
Think aloud protocolPaul Solomon (1995)
Transaction log analysisCharles Cole (Yi et al., 2006)
Visual traffic sweepsLisa Given (Given and Archibald, 2015)

Cross-cutting expertise

Reviewers also have expertise in various other fields related to information behaviour that can benenfit from information behaviour studies or strengthen such studies. Table 20 is very selective in portraying the extensive scope of expertise other than information behaviour.

Table 20: Reviewer expertise in related fields
Topical focus: expertise in related fieldsExamples of reviewers with related expertise
AssessmentAnna Lundh (Lundh et al., 2015)
BibliographyElena Macevičiūtė (1995; Macevičiūtė and Janonis, 2004)
BibliotherapyAndrew Cox (Brewster, Sen and Cox, 2012); Christine Urquhart (Fanner and Urquhart, 2008)
Boundary objectsTheresa Anderson (2007); Theresa Anderson, Isto Huvila and Pamela McKenzie (Huvila et al., 2014; Huvila, Anderson, Jansen, McKenzie and Worrall, 2017)
Career trackingPaul Solomon (Marshall et al., 2009)
Censorship (children)Lynne McKechnie (Isajlovic-Terry and McKechnie, 2012)
Cluster analysisChristopher Khoo (Khoo, Higgins and Foo, 2004)
CommunicationHealth communication: Maija-Leena Huotari (Enwald and Huotari, 2010; Enwald et al., 2013; Enwald et al., 2012)
Informal scientific communication: David Ellis and Allen Foster (Shehata, Ellis and Foster, 2015, 2017)
Shannon's mathematical theory: Charles Cole (1997a)
Communities of practiceAndrew Cox (2015)
ComplexityCole (1997b)
Consumer health informaticsTiffany Veinot (Valdez, Holden, Novak and Veinot, 2015; Veinot, Campbell, Kruger and Grodzinski, 2013)
Country specific expertise – holisticallyCroatia: Ivanka Stričević (Stričević and Cunovic, 2013; Stričević and Pehar, 2015)
South Africa: Christine Stillwell (Stilwell, Bats and Lor, 2016)
CreativityTheresa Anderson (2006, 2010, 2011, 2013a, 2014)
Current awareness servicesIna Fourie (Fourie, 1999, 2003a; Rossouw and Fourie, 2007)
Data playTheresa Anderson (Anderson, Knight and Tall, 2017)
Digital imagesZinaida Manžuch (2009a)
Digital ScienceJela Steinerová (2016)
Digitisation and preserving digital materialsZinaida Manžuch (Manžuch, 2006, 2008, 2009b,c, 2011, 2012)
Distance educationIna Fourie (2001, 2003b)
Evidence-based librarianshipLisa Given (2006); Ross Todd (2009)
E-book publishing, production and acquisitionPublishing: Elena Macevičiūtė (Gudinavičius et al., 2015; Macevičiūtė and Borg, 2013; Macevičiūtė, Wallin and Nilsson, 2015; Macevičiūtė, Wilson, Gudinavičius and Šuminas, 2017)
Production: Elena Macevičiūtė (Macevičiūtė, Borg, Kuzminiene and Konrad, 2014)
E-governmentBrendan Luyt (2003)
Embedded librarianshipChristine Stilwell (Kleinveldt, Schutte and Stilwell, 2016)
Entity recognitionMakiko Miwa (Han-Cheol et al., 2013)
Environmental informationJeta Haider (2012)
ErgonomicsReijo Savolainen (Franssila et al., 2016)
Evaluation (hard core) of information retrieval and information retrieval systems (e.g. cognitive interpretation, cognitive elements of information retrieval)Evaluation of information retrieval systems: Peter Ingwersen (Borlund and Ingwersen, 1997); Ian Ruthven (Borlund and Ruthven, 2008)
Search engine performance: Judit Bar-Ilan (2002b)
Facet analysisDavid Ellis (Ellis and Vasconcelos, 1999)
Gay and lesbian fictionLynn McKechnie (Rothbauer and McKechnie, 1999)
Guided inquiryCharles Cole (Cole et al., 2017; Cole et al., 2015; Lamoureux et al., 2013); Carol Kuhlthau (Kuhlthau, Maniotes and Caspari, 2007)
IndexingDavid Ellis (Ellis, Ford and Furner, 1998); Niel Pharo (Soba and Pharo, 2017); Sanda Erdelez (Wang et al., 2012)
Indigenous knowledgeJeta Haider (Lindh and Haider, 2010); Christine Stilwell (Elia, Mutula and Stilwell, 2014; Lwoga, Ngulube and Stilwell, 2010)
Information and mindMaria Próchnicka (1991); Reijo Savolainen (Harviainen and Savolainen, 2014)
Information as processCharles Cole (1997c)
Information ethics educationDennis Ocholla (2009, 2013; Ndwandwe, Ocholla and Dube, 2009; Ocholla and Bothma, 2006; Ocholla and Britz, 2013)
Information literacyAndrew Cox (Cox, McKinney and Good, 2017); Carol Kuhlthau (2004); Louise Limberg (Beheshti et al., 2016); Ivanka Stričević (Rubinic and Stričević, 2011); Ross Todd (1997, 2010, 2017)
Information and knowledge managementLisa Given (Rathi and Given, 2017); Małgorzata Kisilowska (2006); Elena Macevičiūtė (Macevičiūtė, 1995, 2002); Marzena Świgoń (2013, 2014); Ross Todd (Southon, Todd and Seneque, 2002)
Information and knowledge organisationDavid Ellis (Ellis and Vasconcelos, 1999)
Lisa Given (Given and Olson, 2003)
Information retrievalCharles Cole (2008); David Ellis (1984); Peter Ingwersen (1992, 1996); Ian Ruthven (Borlund and Ruthven, 2008; White and Ruthven, 2006); Iris Xie (2009); Sanda Erdelez (He, Erdelez, Wang and Shyu, 2008)
Information system strategiesDavid Allen and Tom Wilson (Allen and Wilson, 2003b; Codington and Wilson, 1994)
InformetricsIan Ruthven (2004)
Institutional informationMaria Próchnicka (2016)
Non-profit organisations: Lisa Given (Rathi and Given, 2017)
InterfacesLisa Given (Given et al., 2007); Ian Ruthven (White and Ruthven, 2006; Mohd, Crestani and Ruthven, 2012)
International research teamsLisa Given (Ward and Given, 2017)
Interprofessional collaborationHeidi Julien (Latham, Julien, Gross and Witte, 2016)
Journal publishingJela Steinerová (Suchá and Steinerová, 2015)
Knowledge as a commonsJutta Haider (2008)
Knowledge constructionAndrew Cox (Li, Cox and Ford, 2017)
Learning and teachingCurricula: Ross Todd (2006)
E-learning: David Nicholas (Gunter, Nicholas and Williams, 2005)
Inquiry-based learning: Charles Cole (Cole et al., 2017; Cole et al., 2015; Lamoureux et al., 2013); Carol Kuhlthau (2004; Kuhlthau et al. 2007)
Learning analytic devices: Theresa Anderson (Anderson and Knight, 2017)
Learning in libraries: Brendan Luyt (Heok and Luyt, 2010)
Library and information science education: Dennis Ocholla (Ocholla and Bothma, 2006); Ross Todd (Kallenberger and Todd, 2001)
Teacher education: Ross Todd (Dow and Todd, 1997)
Teaching information seeking: Olof Sundin (Limberg and Sundin, 2006)
Training of library users: Hester Meyer (2010a,b)
LibrariansChildren: Ivanka Stričević (Martinovic and Stričević, 2013)
General: Ina Fourie (2013; Fourie and Meyer, 2016)
Children’s librarians: Åse Hedemark and Jenny Lindberg (2017)
Emotion in work: Heidi Julien (Julien and Genuis, 2009)
Teaching roles: Heidi Julien (Julien and Genuis, 2011)
Libraries and related institutions (archives, museums)Academic and scientific libraries: Anna Mierzecka (Mierzecka et al., 2017); Nils Pharo (Frank and Pharo, 2016); Jela Steinerová (2003); Ivanka Stričević (Rubinic and Stričević, 2011); Kirsty Williamson (Bannister and Williamson, 2003; Burstein, Schauder, Williamson and Wright, 2003; Stayner and Williamson, 1980)
Access: Christine Stilwell (Lwoga et al., 2011)
Archives: Lisa Given (Given and McTavish, 2010)
Children's libraries: Ivanka Stričević (2009b; Stričević and Jelusic, 2010) (young adults)
Digital libraries: Elena Macevičiūtė (Macevičiūtė, 2014)
Faculty-librarian relationships: Lisa Given (Given and Julien, 2003)
General: Lisa Given (Given and McTavish, 2010); Brendan Luyt (2007; Luyt, Chow, Ng and Lim, 2011); Zinaida Manžuch (2005, 2010a, b, 2011, 2016; Manžuch and Macevičiūtė, 2014); Kirsty Williamson (Bannister and Williamson, 2003; Burstein et al., 2003; Stayner and Williamson, 1980); Tom Wilson (1987, 2010)
Information services: Brendan Luyt (Luyt, Chow, Ng and Lim, 2011); Carol Kuhlthau (Kuhlthau and Tama, 2001)
Intercultural settings: Annemaree Lloyd (Hicks and Lloyd, 2016)
Library and information research: Christopher Khoo (2011); Jela Steinerová (2003)
Library leadership: Lisa Given (Hicks and Given, 2013)
Library management: Lynne McKechnie (Duffield, Padmore and McKechnie, 2003; Hung and McKechnie, 2014; Julien, McKechnie and Hart, 2005; Nilsen and McKechnie, 2002; Rothbauer and McKechnie, 1999)
Library space: Lisa Given (Given and Archibald, 2015)
Museums: Lisa Given (Given and McTavish, 2010); Peter Ingwersen (Skov and Ingwersen, 2014)
Public libraries: Christine Stilwell (2011a,b); Veronica Johannson (Johansson, 2004); Brendan Luyt (2007); Reijo Savolainen (Anttiroiko and Savolainen, 2011; Makinen, Jjarvelin, Savolainen and Sormunen, 2016); Ivanka Stričević (2004)
Records and archives management: Jenna Hartel (Joseph and Hartel, 2017)
Roles: Christine Stilwell (Stilwell et al., 2016) (in political processes and conflict situations)
School libraries: Ross Todd (2007; Dadlani and Todd, 2015)
Services: Christine Stilwell (2007); Ivanka Stričević (Stričević and Jelusic, 2010; Stričević and Cunovic, 2013); Christine Urquhart (Urquhart and Tbaishat, 2016)
Library and information scienceJetta Haider (Weller and Haider, 2007); Christopher Khoo (Khoo and Na, 2006); Annemaree Lloyd (2007; Huvila, Lloyd, Budd, Palmer and Toms, 2016); Małgorzata Kisilowska (2000); Ross Todd (1999a)
Library and information science educationTheresa Anderson (Bawden et al., 2007); Hester Meyer (2010a,b)
Health librarian education: Christine Urquhart (Petrinic and Urquhart, 2007)
Health informatics education: Christine Urquhart (Pearson and Urquhart, 2002)
Literary communicationPaloma Korycińska-Huras (2006)
Linguistic analysis, toolsPaloma Korycińska (Niedźwiedzka and Korycińska, 2016); Anna Lundh (Garden, Francke, Lundh and Limberg, 2014)
MarketingNoa Aharony (2009c, 2010)
Mental health servicesChristine Urquhart (Fanner and Urquhart, 2008)
Mentoring circlesLisa Given (Given and Kelly, 2016)
Metaphors (pictorial)Pictorial metaphors for information: Jenna Hartel (Hartel and Savolainen, 2016)
MulticulturalismIvanka Stričević (2009b)
Networked informationRoss Todd (2000, 2008)
Online media and privacyEric Meyers (Greyson, Agosto, Meyers, Subramaniam and Abbas, 2014)
Ontology constructionJudit Bar-Ilan (Zhitomirsky-Geffet, Erez and Bar-Ilan, 2017); Christopher Khoo (Khoo, Na, Wang and Chan, 2011)
Performance measurementAllen Foster (Foster, Ferguson-Boucher and Broady-Preston, 2010)
Philosophy of informationCharles Cole (Cole and Spink, 2004)
Portfolio analysis and power positioningAndrew Cox (2005)
Privacy (online media)Eric Meyers (Greyson et al., 2014)
Poverty, social exclusionChristine Stilwell (2011a,b)
Preservation and digitisationZinaida Manžuch (2006, 2009b)
Professional communicationZinaida Manžuch (2010a,b); Lynn McKechnie and Heidi Julien (McKechnie, Julien, Genuis and Oliphant, 2008)
Reader development, readingAnna Lundh (Lundh and Dolatkhah, 2016); Ivanka Stričević (2009a, c)
Reference interviewsChristine Urquhart (Price, Urquhart and Cooper, 2007)
Research cultures (impact of library 2.0)Sanna Talja (Talja et al., 2007)
Reseachers – indiviualsMarcia J. Bates: Jenna Hartel (2013)
Scientific collaborationPaul Solomon (Hara, Kim, Solomon and Sonnenwald, 2003)
ScholarshipZinaida Manžuch (2008)
Semantic relationsChristopher Khoo (Khoo and Na, 2006)
Specific library groups (not related to information behaviour issues)Adolescents: Ivanka Stričević (2009a,b,c; Kolarić and Stričević, 2016; Martinovic and Stričević, 2016)
Babies and toddlers: Lynne McKechnie (McKechnie, 2004, 2006; Ivanka Stričević (Stričević and Cunovic, 2013)
Young adults: Ivanka Stričević (2004)
Tagging (images)Judit Bar-Ilan (Bar-Ilan, Zhitomirsky-Geffet, Miller and Shoham, 2010)
Text analysisChristopher Khoo (Khoo, Dai and Loh, 2002)
ThesauriCharles Cole (Cole et al., 2007; Yi et al., 2006); Javier Martinez (Pastor-Sanchez, Mendez and Rodríguez-Muñoz, 2009)
User rankingJudit Bar-Ilan (Bar-Ilan, Keenoy, Yaari and Levene, 2007)
User studiesOlof Sundin (2002d) (health information); Zinaida Manžuch and Elena Macevičiūtė (2014)
VisualiationTheresa Anderson (Anderson, Knight and Tall, 2017); Charles Cole (Leide et al., 2007); Ian Ruthven (Beresi, Kim, Song and Ruthven, 2010a)
Web analyticsSanda Erdelez (Paul and Erdelez, 2013)
Web archivingEric Meyers (Dougherty and Meyer, 2014)
Web, portalsAndrew Cox (Cox and Yeates, 2003)
Website mappingJudit Bar-Ilan (Bar-Ilan and Azoulay, 2012)
Zones of interventionCarol Kuhlthau (1995, 1996)


The analysis shows expertise in a variety of ISIC related matters. A finer granular analysis would reveal even more on the expertise especially if we triangulated findings form other resources as suggested in the conclusion and steps forward. Apart from showing expertise on eleven major themes selected from models of information behaviour and seeking, pointing to key authors, as well as sub-themes, Tables 1-20 reflect areas where the ISIC2018 international programme committee is not actively involved e.g. studies on religion and information behaviour and in formation transfer.


With this first step of our knowledge mapping, we intended to collate the evidence of expertise as reflected in the literature, specifically articles in peer-reviewed journals. Subsequent steps will involve building a map of reviewer expertise after this initial literature search and content analysis by:

As for designing a review process that maintains quality, the ISIC2018 international programme certainly covers a spectrum of expertise. As for ability to remain open minded to new ideas, we will only be able to answer this question after completion of 2018 reviews, and insight into the list of topics submitted and feedback from authors.

About the authors

Dr. Ina Fourie is a Full Professor in the Department of Information Science, University of Pretoria. She holds a doctorate in information science, and a post-graduate diploma in tertiary education. Her research focus includes information behaviour, information literacy, information services, current awareness services and distance education. Currently she mostly focuses on affect and emotion and palliative care including work on cancer, pain and autoethnography. Postal address: Private bag X20, Hatfield, 0028, Pretoria, South Africa. She can be contacted at ina.fourie@up.ac.za
Tumelo Maungwa is a Lecturer in the Department of Information Science, University of Pretoria. He holds a masters degree in information science from the University of Pretoria and is currently a doctoral candidate. His research interests are in competitive intelligence and information behaviour. Postal address: Private bag X20, Hatfield, 0028, Pretoria, South Africa. He can be contacted at tumelo.sebata@up.ac.za
Theresa Dirndorfer Anderson is Associate Professor and Course Director of the Master of Data Science & Innovation in the Faculty of Transdisciplinary Innovation at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) P.O. Box 123, Broadway, NSW 2007 Australia. Her research and teaching focus on human-centred technology design, responsible innovation and data ethics. She has MA degrees in international relations & security studies (University of Lancaster, UK) and information (University of Technology, Sydney) where she also completed her PhD in information science. She can be contacted at theresa.anderson@uts.edu.au


How to cite this paper

Fourie, I., Maungwa, T. & Dirndorfer Anderson, T. (2018). Subject domain expertise of ISIC2018 reviewer community: a scoping review In Proceedings of ISIC, the Information Behaviour Conference, Krakow, Poland, 9-11 October: Part 1. Information Research, 23(4), isic1802. Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/23-4/isic2018/isic1802.html (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/74IAwNwnx)

Check for citations, using Google Scholar