Study by Ross J Todd

UTILIZATION OF HEROIN INFORMATION BY

ADOLESCENT GIRLS IN AUSTRALIA: A

COGNITIVE ANALYSIS

THE STUDY

Premise –Ross Todd takes the prior studies of Baran and Davis (1995) and works to identify

that the information adolescents are exposed to is not a synonym with

information used.

Expands on Dervin and Nilan (1986) studies of the user-oriented nature – humans

are fundamental to the process and user is the seeker.

Todd’ study varied in that it was designed to understand from the adolescent's

perspective.

THE STUDY

Goal –Sought to determine the perceived effects of exposure to

information and establish how the effects changed the

adolescents' (in this case girls’) knowledge structure and

establish any patterns in the changes.

THE STUDY

The Measures – (of the knowledge structure)

What was:

Appended?

Inserted?

Deleted?

The Process –

Graesser and Clark (1985) Conceptual Graph Structure – used in system development

GRAESSER AND CLARK(1985)

Acknowledge the 3 generic cognitive

strategies used to change individual thinking:

Append, Insert and Delete

The Todd study found the girls first appended new areas of the topic that they were

exposed to their existing thoughts and then inserted later , much less was

deleted overall from the perceived knowledge.

WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE

Add to existing – the framework of knowledge is

detailed.

New information related to existing framework

is considered.

Existing information is now thought to be incorrect and is removed.

Usually replaced with appended information and not just solely

deleted.

PATTERN OBSERVED

The behavior most often observed was of an

Elaborative Knowledge structure. (Append)

Other knowledge structures include: Expanded

and Integrated and a mixture or progression of

both. For instance, Elaborative changes led to

integrative changes at times. (Insert may lead to

deletion)

BERTRAM BROOKES’ FUNDAMENTAL

EQUATION OF INFORMATION SCIENCE (1980)

K[S] + rI = K[S+rS]

Existing knowledge plus information and

determine how what they know changes

First, have to understand

that looking for

cognitive “doing”;

information utilization.

Not “doing” the visible

action but rather

measure how that they

thought about the world

changed.

Second, was begin the

process of adding the

information.

Third, observe the changes.

Observed them in terms

of the PICTURE.

THE PERCEIVED BEHAVIOR OF THE

INFORMATION SEEKERS

Get a COMPLETE picture

Get a CHANGED picture

Get a CLEARER picture

Get a VERIFIED picture

Get a POSITION in the picture

The process is one of construction then de-construction and then re-construction. Very fluid.

The PICTURE

perceived effects of

exposure to information

Get a COMPLETE Picture

Rounding out existing data, elaborating with more detail, linking various bits of information, triggered remembrance and recalling of existing ideas.

REVISED KNOWLEDGE STRUCTURES were more most often elaborative, then inclusive and lastly, integrative in nature.

Integrative seemed more directly related to elaborative. Having more details seemed to lead to insertion and an actual integrative of the knowledge. Comfort and confidence in the info was built.

Get a CHANGED picture

When the new information exposed to moved them to determine existing was incorrect and removal of some idea occurred.

Deletion was result after appending and most often, insertion took place.

Get a CLEARER picture

More information exposure led to

further appends and inserts.

Expansion on existing led to

clarification, again inclusive and

elaborative structures.

Get a VERIFIED picture

More appending to solidify the

information, not as much insertion.

This stage is more about providing

certainty, not adding.

The inclusion to existing occurs

building confidence in the

knowledge.

Get a POSITION in a Picture

All about forming an opinion or

state of mind in how thought

about the topic.

This stage is more “active”:

reactive, formative and

predictive.

CONCLUSIONS

Affirmed the information utilization constructs

already touched on in knowledge utilization

studies.

Supported Dervin’s progression of information

seeking: get, got, change, get, got, new.

Supported that quantity of information is not as

effective to adolescents as quality and the

approach so that membership to the information

is established.

THE HOOK

Frames of reference were necessary to

“trigger” the hooking of information.

Existing knowledge is the basis that

gathering, interpreting, sorting , grouping,

organizing and integrating are built on.

The process is fluid and different for each

depending on the foundation building on

HOW TO APPLY

Utilizing streams of information that

acknowledge the information seekers

cognitive process would encourage

information providers to not rely on the

authorities or compelling nature of the

information for transfer to occur but rather

use ways that include the seeker in the

information gathering process. More facts do

not equal more knowledge for this group.

FURTHER RESEARCH

Rolinson, “Health information for the teenage

years: what do they want to know?” (1998) Again, understanding what the existing information base and what the need is rather then presenting the

perceived set of desired facts

Meyers, Nathan, Saxton, “Barriers to information seeking in

school libraries: conflicts in perceptions and practice” Expands on Kuhlthau's model of intermediation, the barriers for adolescents