VOL. 20 NO. 1, MARCH, 2015
Contents | Author index | Subject index | Search
| Home
Subject positions of children in information behaviour
research
Anna Hampson Lundh
Abstract
Introduction. This paper problematises how children are
categorised as a specific user group within information
behaviour research and discusses the implications of this
categorisation.
Methods. Two edited collections of papers on children’s
information behaviour are analysed.
Analysis. The analysis is influenced by previous discourse
analytic studies of users within information science and by
the sociology of childhood and the discourse analytic concept
of subject positions guides the analysis.
Results. In the children-focussed discourse of information
behaviour research, children are described as being
characterised by distinctive child-typical features, which
means that similarities between children and other groups, as
well as differences within the group, are downplayed.
Children are also characterised by deficiencies: by not being
adults, by not being mature and by not being competent
information seekers. The discourse creates a position of
power for adults, and for children a position as those in need
of expert help. Children are also ascribed a subject position as
users of technologies that affect the group in various ways.
Conclusions. It is suggested that information behaviour
research would benefit from shifting the focus from trying to
explain how children innately are and therefore behave with
information, to creating understandings of various
information practices which involve people of a young age.
change font
Introduction
Within the research field of information behaviour (also
known as, for example, information-seeking studies;
information seeking behaviour; or information needs,
seeking and use), the notion of categorising people in
different user groups is fundamental. In the early history
of information behaviour research, the focus was largely
on different professional groups and researchers, and their
interactions with information and information systems
when carrying out work and research tasks. In more recent
years, however, groups outside workplace and institutional
settings have attracted greater interest. Two such groups
are the elderly (e.g., Asla, Williamson and Mills, 2006) and
children and young people (e.g., Large, 2005). Whereas
other groups of users studied in the field of information
behaviour are regarded as distinct groups because of, for
example, shared work duties (e.g., Huvila, 2010; Pilerot,
2014) or common spare time interests (e.g., Case, 2010;
Hartel, 2010), the basis for the groupings of the elderly
and children is that of similar age (Case, 2012, p. 349-355).
Thus, within information behaviour research, old or young
age is, explicitly or implicitly, seen as an important factor
affecting information behaviour. In this paper, this
assumption is problematised.
However, as Dervin highlighted in 1989, the division of
people into user groups within information behaviour
research might lead to the reproduction of static
categories, leaving little room for questioning the very
basis for the categorisations. In the present study,
therefore, how children as a group are described, and
thereby constructed, in information behaviour research
will be examined and discussed. The motivation for the
study is that the construction of children as a user group
within the research field of information behaviour has
implications for the knowledge production of this research
field, as well as for the actual design and use of
information systems and services for children and young
people.
The effects of the ways in which children are described in
information behaviour research can be said to be of three
kinds: 'discursive effects', 'subjectification effects' and
'lived effects' (Bacchi, 2009, p. 40). The discursive effects
concern the knowledge claims regarding the user group of
children that are produced through information behaviour
research. Within any research field, there are conventional
ways in which the field's objects of study are described.
However, such conventions constitute 'the limits imposed
on what can be said or thought' (Bacchi, 2009, p. 40)
within the field. In information behaviour research, as in
many other fields where children are studied, children are
often seen as a given, natural and self-evident group. One
implication of seeing young age as a determining factor for
information behaviour is that other ways of categorising
people who are young seem less evident. The very idea of
problematising how and why children are categorised as a
specific user group, as is done in this study, may therefore
appear irrelevant and even absurd. This is, however, why
such a problematisation is important.
Subjectification effects, which are the analytic focus of this
study, are about the relationships created within the
research field between children as a group and other
groups of users. Children appear as a specific user group
because they are contrasted with and positioned in relation
to other groups (cf. Bacchi, 2009, p. 16). For example,
children are often defined as people who are not yet adults.
An implication of this type of positioning of children is that
similarities between children and other groups, as well as
differences within the group, are obscured. Another
consequence is a focus on describing how children are in
general, rather than discussing, for example, the
conditions for children's lives in different situations,
historical contexts and societies.
Discursive and subjectification effects might sound quite
abstract. However, they are always connected to lived
effects, which are material and experienced effects in
people's lives (Bacchi, 2009, p. 17-18). Thus, how the user
group of children is described and regarded within
information behaviour research, and within information
science generally, has certain consequences: for the design
of studies; for how research problems are formulated; for
how actual research subjects are treated; and for how
research outcomes are put into practice, for example
through the design of information systems and services for
children and young people.
In light of the above-mentioned understanding that the
ways in which user groups are described have discursive,
subjectification and lived effects, the aim of the present
study is to create a better understanding of how the user
group of children is constructed within information
behaviour research. The study is guided by the following
two research questions:
1. How is the user group of children described in
information behaviour research?
2. In relation to other groups, which subject positions
are children ascribed in information behaviour
research?
The research questions will be addressed through an
analysis of two edited books on children's information
behaviour, published in 2004 and 2013. The main focus of
the analysis will be on the ways in which children are
distinguished as a group of users and the subject positions
of this group.
Literature review
The study connects to a tradition of critical analysis of
central concepts and ideas within information science
based in discourse analytic theory. The analysis is
influenced by previous studies of how users are
discursively constructed (e.g., Hedemark, Hedman and
Sundin, 2005; Rothbauer and Gooden, 2006; Tuominen,
1997), as well as a research tradition called the sociology of
childhood (e.g., James, Jenks and Prout, 1998; Prout and
James, 1997). These traditions, which both can be
described as social constructionist (cf. Talja, Tuominen
and Savolainen, 2005), are introduced below.
Discourse analyses of and in information
science
Since at least the 1990s, basic assumptions within
information science have been scrutinised through several
Foucauldian inspired discourse analyses (Olsson, 2010).
The focus of such studies has been to describe how
discourses within information science are produced from
the positions of 'institutionally privileged speakers'
(Frohmann, 1994, p. 120), creating stances, viewpoints
and concepts that become taken-for-granted within the
discipline. Examples of such studies are Radford's (2003)
discussion on the discursive formations of librarianship,
Frohmann's (1992) critique of the cognitive viewpoint and
Talja's (1997) and Savolainen's (2007) analyses of the
information-seeking research field.
Other examples concentrate on the discursive construction
of users. Frohmann, in (1994, suggested that such studies
could challenge:
the assumption that the identities studied –
children, young adults, women, scientists,
engineers, chief executive officers of
corporations, academics in various
disciplines, graduate students,
undergraduates, social scientists, and many
more – are "natural", or "found" identities…
(Frohmann, 1994, p. 134).
One such study is that by Hedemark et al. (2005
), which
analyses statements on users in professional journals in
the Swedish public library sector. Working with a type of
discourse analysis developed by Laclau and Mouffe (1985),
Hedemark et al. (2005) identify four discourses, 'a general
education discourse; a pedagogical discourse; an
information technology discourse'; and 'an information
management discourse', and discuss what implications
these different ways of 'speaking of users' might have for
actual public library users. A similar analysis is conducted
by Rothbauer and Gooden (2006), in their paper on
representations of children in studies published in Journal
of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology between the years 1985 and 2005. Their main
conclusion is that children in information science research
are described as developing and in need of 'training,
education and more responsive information systems
design' (Rothbauer and Gooden, 2006, p. 8).
A somewhat different discourse analytic approach from
that of Hedemark et al. (2005) and Rothbauer and Gooden
(2006) is taken by Tuominen (1997), in an analysis of the
subject positions of librarians and users constructed in
information behaviour studies, using Kuhlthau's well-
known book Seeking Meaning (1993) as an example of
'user-centered discourse'. Tuominen argues that, in this
discourse, 'the user is in the position of a layperson, and
the librarian functions as an expert who can diagnose the
user's mental states and propose treatments on the basis
of the diagnosis' (Tuominen, 1997, p. 362), creating
relations similar to those between doctor and patient or,
which is noteworthy in the context of the present study,
that between adult and child.
Hence, these discourse analytic studies highlight power
relations between users and librarians, as well as between
research subjects and researchers. In the case of
Rothbauer and Gooden, the possible power relations
between young research participants and adult
information science researchers is discussed with a basis in
what they call 'social research with children' (Rothbauer
and Gooden, 2006, p. 1). This research tradition is also
known as the sociology of childhood, which will be
discussed next.
The sociology of childhood
The sociology of childhood is often paired with the epithet
of new. However, as the research tradition now goes back
at least a couple of decades and has been influential for the
study of children in areas such as sociology, educational
science and media and communication studies, the
approach cannot any longer be said to be novel (Prout,
2011; Tisdall and Punch, 2012). Information behaviour
research and information science in general, however,
seems so far to be quite unaffected by this research
tradition (Lundh, 2011, pp. 14-15; Rothbauer and Gooden,
2006).
A central notion in the sociology of childhood is that of
childhood as a social construct. In an introduction to the
field from its formative years, Prout and James clarify this
notion by stating that '[t]he immaturity of children is a
biological fact of life but the ways in which this
immaturity is understood and made meaningful is a fact
of culture' (Prout and James, 1997, p. 7). This means that
ideas of what childhood is and should be are not seen as
natural and given, but as socially, historically and
geographically situated (James, Jenks and Prout, 1998). It
also means that the idea of children as a homogenous
group is questioned and that factors other than age, such
as gender, ethnicity and class, should be taken into
account when analysing childhood (Prout and James,
1997).
For researchers within the tradition of the sociology of
childhood, rather than trying to explain how children
innately are, an important task is to identify different
understandings of childhood in different social contexts
and historical eras and the consequences of these
understandings. Just as in the discourse analytic studies of
the constructions of users presented above, this tradition
highlights the implications of socially constructed
categorisations of people, in society in general and for the
relationships between research subjects and researchers in
particular. This approach, of bringing taken-for-granted
categories into the light of scrutiny, is the foundation for
the analysis in the present study.
Theoretical and methodological framework
The rationale for this study is the assumption that the ways
in which the research field of information behaviour
describes and defines the user group of children have
actual, practical consequences for this user group, as well
as for researchers, professionals and institutions working
with children and their information behaviour. In order to
create a better understanding of how the user group of
children is constructed within this field of research, the
discourse analytic concept of subject positions guides the
analysis of two edited books on children's information
behaviour.
Subject positions
In his paper from 1997 mentioned above, Tuominen
argues that there is a 'user-centered discourse' within
information science and that this discourse creates
different subject positions for users and librarians. In a
similar vein, a basic assumption in the present study is
that a children-focused discourse has been formed within
information behaviour research during the past decades,
producing certain subject positions (cf. Hall, 2001, p. 80;
Lindsköld, 2013, pp. 59/276) for children in relation to
other groups, such as adults in general and different
professional groups, including information science
researchers.
Hence, the analysis conducted is not an analysis of the
perspectives of individual authors, but rather of what, how
and from which subject positions something is expressed
within a discourse (cf. Foucault, 1972, p. 222; Hedemark,
2009, pp. 36/169; Lindsköld, 2013, pp. 61/276). The texts
analysed are thus seen as examples of a discourse on
children in information behaviour research.
Hedemark (2009, pp. 36/169, see also Lindsköld, 2013,
pp. 62) highlights that in analysed texts, there are different
types of subject positions, depending on whether they are
the positions of those who speak or those who are being
spoken about. In Tuominen's (1997) analysis, both users
and librarians are spoken about in the text analysed. In the
analysis of the present study, children and some groups of
adults are spoken about, whereas the subject position of
the information scientist is often that of those who speak.
Material analysed and analytical
approach
Two edited books have been chosen for analysis, as
illustrative examples of children-focused discourse in
information behaviour research. The first, published in
2004, is Youth information-seeking behavior: theories,
models, and issues (Chelton and Cool, 2004); the second,
published nine years later, is The information behavior of
a new generation: children and teens in the 21st century
(Beheshti and Large, 2013). A list of the twenty-seven
chapters analysed is found in Appendix 1.
The reason for choosing these two edited books for
analysis is that they constitute significant attempts to
establish a new research area through compiling chapters
that all are about various aspects of children's information
behaviour, and through introductions and final chapters
that summarise the area and suggests ways forward. As
such, both books are cohesive and comprehensive
resources to turn to for those who are new to the field. This
attempt at establishing a field is especially explicit in the
2004 book, in which several chapters previously published
as single journal papers are included. This also means that
the book chapters span a considerable period of time
(1996-2013, with references to studies conducted earlier).
It is important to highlight that the two books, implicitly in
the first and explicitly in the second, mainly cover North
American contexts. Hence, the discourse analysed, as is
the case with any discourse, is tied to a specific time and
place. It should be noted that one edited book (Beheshti
and Bilal, 2014), which could have been the object of
analysis, was excluded on the basis that a chapter
proposal, presenting similar ideas as the present study,
was submitted to and accepted for this book, but
subsequently withdrawn by the author because of time
constraints.
In the analysis, each of the twenty-seven chapters was
carefully analysed with a focus on statements about
children and subject positions created. A model and a set
of questions guiding the close reading of the chapters were
developed, based on the two research questions (see Table
1). The results of the analysis are presented in the next
section.
Table 1: Model of analysis
1. Statements about children
Questions asked:
How are children described? Which nouns are
used?
What distinctive features are children
ascribed? What are children described as
doing?
2. Subject positions
Questions asked:
How are children described in relation to
other groups?
Analysis
The analysis procedure was guided by the two research
questions and the following presentation is structured
accordingly. Statements about children in the analysed
texts are presented, concentrating on the terms used to
describe the user group and descriptions of the distinctive
features ascribed to this group (see Table 1). These terms
and distinctive features are then linked to the positions of
the user group in relation to other groups in the analysed
texts. The analysed chapters are referenced using the
numbers assigned in Appendix 1.
Statements
Terms used
The titles of the books indicate that they are about the
information (seeking) behaviour of 'youth', 'a new
generation', 'children' and 'teens'. However, in both books
a large number of terms are used to describe the group of
people in focus. It is also acknowledged in the introduction
of each book that the terminology is not self-evident (1, p.
vii; 16, p. vi). The analysis of the books below does,
however, indicate a number of recurring ways of
describing the group. A categorisation of terms into 16
groups is presented in the list below, with some examples
of each.
1. General terms; e.g., children; kids
2. Age- and development-based terms; e.g., 12- to
17-year olds; adolescents; young people
3. Education- and learning-related terms; e.g.,
learners, students, preschool children
4. Terms for study participants; e.g., Bastian, a
typical 14-year-old; participants; respondents
5. Terms for types of users; e.g., novice users;
users; young users
6. Information-seeking related terms; e.g., novice
searcher; school-aged information users; young
information seekers
7. Technology-related terms; e.g., digital age
youth; online teens; participants (in online
communities)
8. Generational terms; e.g., digital natives; the new
generation; post-Web school generation
9. Design team-related terms; e.g., design partner;
student members of the design team; young
colleagues
10. Ability-related terms; e.g., learning impaired and
normal students; young people with intellectual
disabilities; non-verbal children
11. LGBT-related terms; e.g., "queer” youth; young
"queer” individuals; gay and lesbian youth
12. Demographic terms (other than age); e.g.,
adolescent girls; boys; urban teens
13. Non-children-specific terms; e.g., individuals;
novices; person
14. Group-related terms; e.g., friends; the norm
group; peers
15. Names of individuals (other than as study
participants); e.g., Eric; a young adult named
David Abitbol
16. Other terms; e.g., expert children; drug users;
victim
The first category of terms includes inflections of child and
kid, the former widely used in both books. These are
general terms, highlighting that this group is seen as both
having something in common and being different from
other groups. The second category, which includes a
variety of terms, points toward age as something that
distinguishes this group from others, but also to the idea
that the group goes through stages of development, such as
adolescence. The prevalence of terms relating to
educational institutions and learning in general (category
3) highlights the role of this group of people as students at
different levels in an educational system.
Categories 4-9 all relate to specific interests within the
research field. Given that the analysed books are about
research on a user group and its information behaviour,
the use of terms such as participants or respondents
(category 4) and various formulations including users
(category 5) and information seekers (category 6) is
perhaps not very surprising. Category 7 terms all relate to
the use of modern and digital technologies, where young
people are described as, for example, online teens and
digital age youth. This category is also connected to
category 8 which describes children and young people as
belonging to a new generation which in many cases is
described in relation to digital media and the Web. These
terms are more common in the later book. It should,
however, be noted that different authors use terms such as
digital natives from various perspectives, some being
reluctant towards and critical of the use of the term (e.g.,
22
, pp. 137-138), whereas others use it unproblematically
to describe typical features of young people in the
beginning of the 21th century (e.g., 23, pp. 143-144, 148,
see also 16, p. vi). One category, number 9, is only found in
the book from 2013 and relates to a specific research
approach, namely that of participatory design processes
(21, pp. 96-97; 26, pp. 221-222, 230).
Three categories, 10-12, all relate to differences within the
group based on sexuality or gender identity, (dis)ability
and demographics other than age. It is interesting to note
that categories 10 and 11, which both include a small
number of terms, are about that which is described as
unusual and thereby highlight what can be perceived as
the norm (e.g., heterosexual, cissexual, able-bodied, able-
minded). The demographic differences included in
category 12 are gender, socio-economic status and, in a few
cases, nationality and ethnicity.
The terms in category 13 are all understood as denoting
children only because of the contexts in which they are
used, as for example, individuals, novices and person,
which are not child-specific terms. This is also the case for
many of the group-related terms of category 14, which
include, for example, friends and peers,. The two last
categories (categories 15-16) are related to particular
chapters in which the terminology used is quite specific.
For example, one chapter (25), refers to legal cases where
individual names and terms such as victim are used.
Many of the terms used in the books implicate actions and
activities which the user group is described as being
involved in, such as: going through developmental stages;
attending school; seeking information; using technologies;
being part of court cases; and participating in research
studies. These and many other actions and activities are
described in the books. What is interesting is that many of
these activities are described as typical for the user group;
hence, the focus lies on how children typically are and how
they do things in child-characteristic ways. Discerning a
group of people in this way suggests that members of this
group have something in common that distinguishes them
from other groups. In the analysed texts, this discursive
segregation of the group of children is both implied and
explicit.
Distinctive features
One example of the idea of children as a particular group
of people that differs from other groups is found in a
chapter presenting research on children's cognitive
development and its usefulness for the field of information
behaviour (18). Characteristic for research on cognitive
development is a focus on 'age differences', 'age
comparisons' and 'age trends' (18, p. 23) which is claimed
to be little researched within information behaviour
research and therefore encouraged (18, pp. 40-41). Three
groups discerned throughout the chapter are 'children,
adolescents, and adults' (18, pp. 28, 39, 40, see also 36,
38). It is acknowledged that classical theories within the
field, which state that levels of understanding are
'qualitatively distinct' in different age groups, have been
nuanced (18, p. 30). Nevertheless, an overriding interest in
predicting differences depending on age and levels of
expertise remains.
Classical theories of cognitive development are referred to
in some of the other analysed chapters. One example is
number 8, which opens with the following statement:
Literature tells us that children think
differently than adults. Professionals who
work with children concur with this
information. It should follow, then, that the
information interests and needs of children
are different than those of adults. This, too,
has been addressed in research. (8
, p. 181)
This chapter presents classical developmental psychology
as its theoretical foundation and concludes that 'children
at different developmental levels' in the empirical research
reported 'did have unique information interests' (8
, p.
205). That the group children have distinctive features that
affect their information behaviour is thus very clear in this
example.
All statements are not as articulated in terms of theoretical
foundations, but do still highlight distinctive features of
the user group. One example of a description of what is
typical of children is the following:
digital natives do not distinguish greatly
between their physical and virtual realities.
They are growing up in a world submerged
in technologies – a world where they are
comfortable and at ease. (25
, p. 203)
An interesting aspect of this quote is the relationship
between children and new digital technology. Both books
discuss the impact changing technologies have on
children's information behaviour. In the quote above,
children at the beginning of the 21st century are described
as 'at ease' with modern technologies. Another view, which
also builds on statements on the distinctive features of
children, can be found, for example, in a description of a
study on children's information searching using manual
card catalogues and online catalogues (OPACs), where
younger children are described as not being mature
enough for one type of digital technology:
Fourth graders are believed to be
"developmentally unready" for the type of
searching involved in manipulation of the
OPAC. (2
, p. 12)
However, both approaches to children and technologies –
where children are seen as either competent, or immature
– build on descriptions of children as being a certain kind
of user group. The relationship between this group and
new technologies will be further discussed in terms of
subject positions in the next section.
There are ample examples of statements regarding the
distinctive features of the user group of children in both
books. It would, however, be an oversimplification to claim
that the user group is described as completely
homogeneous in the analysed texts. As observed in the list
above, some of the categories of terms used for children
imply that there are differences within the group, for
example in terms of gender and socio-economic status.
There are also examples of studies reporting on different
search-styles within the group of children (e.g., 10
). On the
penultimate page of the 2004 book, in a discussion of
future directions for the research field, it is acknowledged
that:
The category of "child" or "youth" is a social
construction. What are the boundaries of
"youth"? We have discussed developmental
stages, but there are legal and regulatory
issues involved here as well. (15
, p. 389)
This quotation could indicate a movement towards a quite
different understanding than that of children as a group
mainly characterised by particular ages and stages. At
least, it is an acknowledgement that the perspective
adopted in the book is only one of many. It should be
noted, though, that this example stands out as being
unusual in both of the analysed books. The sociology of
childhood is mentioned once in the 2013 book (21, p. 98),
when a previous study on children's use of digital media is
outlined. This perspective does not, however, permeate the
discourse on children's information behaviour in the
analysed literature.
Subject positions
The analysis thus far suggests that children are portrayed
as a distinct group characterised by particular features, in
both books. This is further emphasised by statements in
which children are described as different from other
groups. There are many examples of children being
described as dissimilar to adults in the texts, such as the
following:
Rowlands and his partners (2008) conclude
that adults and youth behave similarly
when seeking information; that "we are all
the Google generation" (308)... However, as
many researchers have indicated, there are
differences between adults and children,
even though both groups may use similar
tools in their information behavior. (27
, p.
237)
In this quote, some similarities between the groups are
actually acknowledged; but the argument still results in a
perpetuation of the notion of adults and children as
different. Another particularly clear example of a
statement where the differences are emphasised is the
following:
Children are information seekers with
needs and development characteristics that
vary from those of adults. Cognitive
developmental ability, memory and recall
levels, emotional, social, and physical
developments are factors that influence
children's interaction with various
information-retrieval systems, including
the Web. Children are not “small adults” but
an entirely different user population with
their own culture, norms, complexities,
curiosities, interests, abilities, and
information needs. Therefore, researchers
need to develop a good understanding of
and sensitivity toward the needs of these
young users when they involve them in
research projects. (11, p. 285)
In this statement, children are described as an 'entirely'
separate group of users from that of adults. The statement
resembles that of the approach of 'the tribal child' (James,
Jenks and Prout, 1998, pp. 28-30), in which children are
seen as belonging to social worlds of their own. However,
what this approach conceals are similarities between
children and adults, as well as differences within the group
of children. A consequence of this approach is how the
need for a particular 'understanding' and 'sensitivity' from
researchers towards the group of children also means that
the perceived differences between the groups are in fact
maintained. This is also the consequence of statements
such as 'adults and youth are partners in the digital
world' (21, p. 94).
Thus, it appears as though children and adults are ascribed
different subject positions in the analysed statements. The
relationships between the groups are, however, described
in different terms, depending on the roles of the adults, for
example as parents, teachers, librarians or researchers.
When parents are mentioned, the relationship is rarely
problematised: parents have the position of those
parenting (e.g., 26, p. 215) and children are described as
belonging to or being members of families (e.g., 23, p.
146).
In relation to educators and librarians, children are often
described as those being taught, for example in terms of
information literacy:
The research highlights the need to teach
basic information literacy skills at an early
age so that bad habits never form;
furthermore, the students can build upon
these basic skills over the course of their K-
12 education so that they become second
nature. (19, p. 54)
In the above statement, emphasis is put on children and
youth in the roles of being students and the need for them
to develop in a desired direction. Elsewhere, the group is
also described as being in need of help from educators and
librarians to become better information seekers:
The novice searcher's need for some form of
mediated assistance in analyzing research
questions and in constructing effective
search statements is evident. As
information specialists and curriculum
consultants in a school setting, library
media specialists must be able to analyze
the problems that students encounter in
their information searches and devise
methods to increase students' proficiency in
information retrieval. (6
, p. 125)
The role of analysing – or diagnosing (cf. Tuominen, 1997
)
– children's problems and helping them on their learning
trajectories highlights educators' and librarians' positions
as experts and children as students and learners. There are
few exceptions to these described subject positions of
teachers/librarians and children in the two books. Another
group which holds the position of the expert helper is the
group of system designers:
System designers, librarians, and teachers
can all provide assistance to children as
they embark on research in unfamiliar
areas and can contribute to the design of
information-retrieval systems that will
support children's information needs and
educational pursuits in an information
society. (10
, p. 267)
The role of the system designer is to design systems that
suit children's specific needs (cf. Rothbauer and Gooden,
2006, p. 5). Sometimes, the system designer also has the
role of the information science researcher for whom
children are research subjects. In some chapters in the
later book with a specific focus on information systems
design, the positions of children in design teams are
described as that of a partner and even an expert. An
example is the following description of a type of design
methodology:
The new methodology was called Bonded
Design, because of a natural bond between
adults as design experts and children as
experts on being children. (26, pp. 220-221)
What this statement suggests, as in the quote above on
adults and youth as partners (21
, p. 94), is that adults and
children can be members of the same team and children
can even be experts, at least 'on being children'. However,
they are still described as two distinct entities requiring a
'bond'. So adults and children may be partners, but the
latter are still in need of specialised information system
solutions and help from the former.
Children's position as the recipients of and partners in
information system design also touches upon or coincides
with the position of the research subject. As the analysed
books present and synthesise original studies and previous
research on various aspects of children's information
behaviour, this subject position could be expected. It does,
however, reinforce the division into an us as adults and a
them as children. This is not least the case when the
position of the reader is included in the same we as the
author position, as for example in the title 'Youth and
online social networking: what do we know so far?' (22,
p. 117).
In the previous section, one relationship that was touched
upon was that between children and (new) technologies,
which is a concern in both books. Technologies are
ascribed important roles in the lives of children. In some
cases children are described as a group with stable
characteristics, while technologies are changing:
Whether or not we see young people as
Digital Natives […] they are still young
people who are grappling with the
developmental issues encountered by all
youth as they grow to be adults in our
modern technologically dependent society.
They encounter the same issues that young
people have always dealt with, but now
they have more sources and channels of
information in which to find help with their
everyday life information needs. (20, p. 86)
This is sometimes described as a problem for educational
institutions, as children might be experts on the
technologies, but lacking other types of expertise which are
said to be important for successful information behaviour
(e.g., 7, p. 176). In other cases, children are described as a
group whose characteristics change because of
technologies, which may also create problems for
educational institutions:
The fact is that students have changed
drastically as a result of early attachment
to technology, thus effectively creating a
serious problem for the education system.
(23
, p. 147)
In either case, with few exceptions, technologies are
described as a force which is having effects on children and
their lives, rather than the other way around. Thus, the
subject positions of children in relation to technology, are
that of a user (and in some cases a non-user), rather than a
master.
Discussion and conclusion
In summary, the subject positions of users identified by
Tuominen in 1997, as well as the discourses on children in
information science described by Rothbauer and Gooden
in 2006, still seem to be in play in the later literature
analysed in this study. In the children-focused discourse of
information behaviour research, children are described as
a group with distinctive child-typical features. Even though
differences within the group are acknowledged, the
differences between this group and that of adults are
emphasised. The user group of children is characterised by
deficiencies: by not being adults, by not being mature and
by not being competent information seekers. What
possible discursive, subjectification and lived effects might
these descriptions have?
The discourse of children in information behaviour
research, which includes the description of children as
being in the process of developing and maturing and as
being affected by the force of technologies, tends to gloss
over that the ways in which children as a group are
described and understood are social rather than naturally
given descriptions and understandings. Thus, the
discourse of children's information behaviour does echo a
more general discourse of information behaviour, which
previously has been analysed by Savolainen (2007). The
description of information needs, seeking and use as
individual cognitive processes, rather than material and
collective practices, means that the social is treated as a
factor, rather than as an inherent aspect of human life. The
aim of describing how children essentially are also has the
effect that the different childhoods that actual children live
(cf. Prout and James, 1997, p. 8), as within a geographical
context such as North America, are overlooked.
Depending on the roles of adults, children are ascribed
different subject positions: as members of families where
the adults are parents; as students and learners who are
developing and are in need of education and help from
teachers and librarians; and as in need of specific solutions
designed by system designers, albeit sometimes with the
involvement of the children themselves. By describing
adults such as teachers, librarians and system designers as
a group that helps children creates a position of power for
adults and a position as those in need of expert help for
children. Furthermore, children are ascribed a subject
position as users of technologies that – as some kind of
external force – affect the group in various ways.
Based on the analysis conducted in this study, the lived
effects of the children-focused discourse in information
behaviour research can only be speculated about.
However, there seems to be room in the field for creating
alternate ways of doing research about and with children.
One conclusion is that in order to allow for understandings
of children as social beings and childhoods as socially
constructed in the field of information behaviour, the field
needs to open up to influences from the new sociology of
childhood, as well as from other, socially oriented theories
of information practices. A way forward for the field is to
shift the focus from trying to explain how children in
general are and therefore behave with information, to
creating understandings of various information practices
which involve people of young age. Such a theoretical shift
would allow information science to create more nuanced
and less static descriptions of and knowledge about
children and the conditions within which they perform
their information activities.
Acknowledgements
This study has been funded by the Curtin Research
Fellowship, Curtin University, Perth, Australia. The author
is a member of the Linnaeus Centre for Research on
Learning, Interaction and Mediated Communication in
Contemporary Society (LinCS) at the University of
Gothenburg and the University of Borås, Sweden, funded
by the Swedish Research Council, ref 349-2006-146.
The author would like to thank Mats Dolatkhah, Linnéa
Lindsköld, Amira Sofie Sandin and the research seminar at
the Swedish School of Library and Information Science, as
well as Brad Gobby at Curtin University for their valuable
input and support during the writing of this paper; and
Bradley Smith at Semiosmith Editing and Consulting
Services for his help with the English editing of the
manuscript.
About the author
Anna Hampson Lundh, PhD, is Senior Research Fellow
at the Department of Information Studies, Curtin
University, Bentley, Perth, Western Australia 6102, and
Senior Lecturer at the Swedish School of Library and
Information Science, University of Borås, Allégatan 1, 501
90, Borås, Sweden. Her research interests concern
children's reading and documentary practices, and
accessible media. She can be contacted at
References
(Please note that the references to the books in the
dataset are listed in Appendix 1
)
Asla, T., Williamson, C. M. C. & Mills, J. (2006). The role
of information in successful aging: the case for a
research focus on the oldest old. Library &
Information Science Research, 28(1), 49-63.
Bacchi, C. L. (2009). Analysing policy: what's the
problem represented to be? Frenchs Forest, NSW:
Pearson.
Beheshti, J. & Bilal, D. (Eds.). (2014). New directions in
children's and adolescents' information behavior
research. Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Beheshti, J. & Large, A. (Eds.). (2013). The information
behavior of a new generation: children and teens in
the 21st century. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
Case, D. O. (2010). A model of the information seeking
and decision making of online coin buyers.
Information Research, 15(4), paper 448. Retrieved
from http://InformationR.net/ir/15-4/paper448.html
(Archived by WebCite® at
http://www.webcitation.org/6bg26WS2g).
Case, D. O. (2012). Looking for information: a survey of
research on information seeking, needs, and
behaviour (3rd expanded ed.). Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Chelton, M. K. & Cool, C. (Eds.). (2004). Youth
information-seeking behavior: theories, models, and
issues. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
Dervin, B. (1989). Users as research inventions: how
research categories perpetuate inequities. Journal of
Communication, 39(3), 216–232.
Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge and
the discourse on language. New York, NY: Pantheon
Books.
Frohmann, B. (1992). The power of images: a discourse
analysis of the cognitive viewpoint. Journal of
Documentation, 48(4), 365-86.
Frohmann, B. (1994). Discourse analysis as a research
method in library and information science. Library
and Information Science Research, 16(2), 119-138.
Hall, S. (2001). Foucault: power, knowledge and
discourse. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor & S.J. Yates
(Eds.), Discourse theory and practice: a reader (pp.
72–81). London: Sage.
Hartel, J. (2010). Managing documents at home for
serious leisure: a case study of the hobby of gourmet
cooking. Journal of Documentation, 66(6), 847-874.
Hedemark, Å. (2009). Det föreställda folkbiblioteket: en
diskursanalytisk studie av biblioteksdebatter i
svenska medier 1970-2006. [The imagined public
library: a study of library debates in the Swedish press
between 1970 and 2006 using discourse analysis.]
Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala University, Department of
ABM. (Doctoral theses, Volume 3).
Hedemark, Å., Hedman, J. & Sundin, O. (2005).
Speaking of users: on user discourses in the field of
public libraries. Information Research, 10(2), paper
218. Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/10-
2/paper218.html (Archived by WebCite® at
http://www.webcitation.org/6bg2FZvAT).
Huvila, I. (2010). Information sources and perceived
success in corporate finance. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology,
61(11), 2219-2229.
James, A., Jenks, C. & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing
childhood. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Kuhlthau, C. C. (1993) Seeking meaning: a process
approach to library and information services.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Laclau, E. & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony & socialist
strategy: towards a radical democratic politics.
London: Verso.
Large, A. (2005). Children, teenagers, and the Web.
Annual Review of Information Science and
Technology, 39, 347–392.
Lindsköld, L. (2013). Betydelsen av kvalitet: en studie
av diskursen om statens stöd till ny, svensk
skönlitteratur 1975-2009. [The meaning of quality: a
study on the discourse of the state support to new,
Swedish fiction 1975-2009.] Borås, Sweden: Valfrid.
(Doctoral thesis, University of Gothenburg,
Gothenburg, Sweden).
Lundh, A. (2011). Doing research in primary school:
information activities in project-based learning.
Borås, Sweden: Valfrid. (Doctoral thesis, University of
Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden).
Olsson, M. (2010). Michel Foucault: discourse,
power/knowledge, and the battle for truth. In G.J.
Leckie, L.M. Given & J. Buschman (Eds.). Critical
theory for library and information science: exploring
the social from across the disciplines (pp. 63-74).
Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
Pilerot, O. (2014). Making design researchers'
information sharing visible through material objects.
Journal of the Association for Information Science
and Technology, 65(10), 2006–2016.
Prout, A. (2011). Taking a step away from modernity:
reconsidering the new sociology of childhood. Global
Studies of Childhood, 1(1), 4–14.
Prout, A. & James, A. (1997). A new paradigm for the
sociology of childhood? Provenance, promise and
problems. In A. James & A. Prout (Eds.).
Constructing and reconstructing childhood:
contemporary issues in the sociological study of
childhood (2nd rev. and updated ed.) (pp. 7-33).
London: Falmer.
Radford, G.P. (2003). Trapped in our own discursive
formations: toward an archaeology of library and
information science. Library Quarterly, 73(1), 1–18.
Rothbauer, P. M. & Gooden. R. (2006). Representations
of young people in information science: the case of the
Journal of the American Society for Information
Science (and Technology), 1985-2005. In H. Moukdad
(Ed.), Information science revisited: approaches to
innovation: proceedings of CAIS (pp. 1-11). Toronto,
ON: York University.
Savolainen, R. (2007). Information behavior and
information practice: reviewing the 'umbrella
concepts' of information seeking studies. The Library
Quarterly, 77(2), 109-132.
Talja, S. (1997). Constituting 'information' and 'user' as
research objects: a theory of knowledge formations as
an alternative to the information man theory. In P.
Vakkari, R. Savolainen, A. Malmsjö, L. Limberg & B.
Dervin (Eds.), Information seeking in context:
proceedings of an international conference on
research in information needs, seeking and use in
different contexts 14-16 August, 1996, Tampere,
Finland (pp. 67-80). London: Taylor Graham.
Talja, S., Tuominen, K. & Savolainen, R. (2005). 'Isms' in
information science: constructivism, collectivism and
constructionism. Journal of Documentation, 61(1),
79-91.
Tisdall, E.K.M. & Punch, S. (2012). Not so 'new'?
Looking critically at childhood studies. Children's
Geographies, 10(3), 249-264.
Tuominen, K. (1997). User-centered discourse: an
analysis of the subject positions of the user and the
librarian. Library Quarterly, 67(4), 350-371.
How to cite this paper
Lundh, A.H. (2016). Subject positions of children in
information behaviour research. Information Research, 21(3),
paper 717. Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/21-
3/paper717.html (Archived by WebCite® at
http://www.webcitation.org/6kRfuXdRL)
Find other papers on this subject
Check for citations, using Google Scholar
Scholar Search
Google Search
Bing
Tweet
Appendices
Appendix 1. List of analysed book
chapters
1. Chelton, M. K. & Cool, C. (2004). Introduction. In
M.K. Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.), Youth information-
seeking behavior: theories, models, and issues (pp.
vii-xiii). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
2. Cool, C. (2004). Information-seeking behaviors of
children using electronic information services during
the early years. In M. K. Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.),
Youth information-seeking behavior: theories,
models, and issues (pp. 1-35). Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press.
3. Kuhlthau, C. C. (2004). Student learning in the
library: what Library Power librarians say. In M. K.
Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.), Youth information-seeking
behavior: theories, models, and issues (pp. 37-63).
Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
4. Neuman, D. (2004). Learning and the digital library.
In M. K. Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.), Youth
information-seeking behavior: theories, models, and
issues (pp. 65-94). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
5. McGregor, J. H. & Streitenberger, D. (2004). Do
scribes learn?: copying and information use. In M. K.
Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.), Youth information-seeking
behavior: theories, models, and issues (pp. 95-118).
Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
6. Nahl, D. & Harada, V. H. (2004). Composing
Boolean search statements: self-confidence, concept
analysis, search logic, and errors. In M. K. Chelton &
C. Cool (Eds.), Youth information-seeking behavior:
theories, models, and issues (pp. 119-144). Lanham,
MD: Scarecrow Press.
7. Watson, J. S. (2004). "If you don't have it, you can't
find it": a close look at students' perceptions of using
technology. In M. K. Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.), Youth
information-seeking behavior: theories, models, and
issues (pp. 145-180). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
8. Cooper, L.Z. (2004). Children's information choices
for inclusion in a hypothetical child-constructed
library. In M. K. Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.), Youth
information-seeking behavior: theories, models, and
issues (pp. 181-210). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
Like 0
9. Gross, M. (2004). Children's information seeking at
school: findings from a qualitative study. In M. K.
Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.), Youth information-seeking
behavior: theories, models, and issues (pp. 211-240).
Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
10. Hirsh, S. G. (2004). Domain knowledge and
children's search behavior. In M. K. Chelton & C.
Cool (Eds.), Youth information-seeking behavior:
theories, models, and issues (pp. 241-270). Lanham,
MD: Scarecrow Press.
11. Bilal, D. (2004). Research on children's information
seeking on the web. In M. K. Chelton & C. Cool
(Eds.), Youth information-seeking behavior:
theories, models, and issues (pp. 271-291). Lanham,
MD: Scarecrow Press.
12. Large, A. (2004). Information seeking on the web by
elementary school students. In M. K. Chelton & C.
Cool (Eds.), Youth information-seeking behavior:
theories, models, and issues (pp. 293-319). Lanham,
MD: Scarecrow Press.
13. Julien, H. (2004). Adolescent decision making for
careers: an exploration of information behavior. In
M. K. Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.), Youth information-
seeking behavior: theories, models, and issues (pp.
321-352). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
14. Todd, R. J. & Edwards, S. (2004). Adolescents'
information seeking and utilization in relation to
drugs. In M. K. Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.), Youth
information-seeking behavior: theories, models, and
issues (pp. 353-386). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
15. Chelton, M. K. (2004). Future direction and
bibliography. In M. K. Chelton & C. Cool (Eds.),
Youth information-seeking behavior: theories,
models, and issues (pp. 387-397). Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press.
16. Large, A. & Beheshti, J. (2013). Introduction. In J.
Beheshti & A. Large (Eds.), The information
behavior of a new generation: children and teens in
the 21st century (pp. v-x). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow
Press.
17. Cole, C. (2013). Concepts, propositions, models, and
theories in information behavior research. In J.
Beheshti & A. Large (Eds.), The information
behavior of a new generation: children and teens in
the 21st century (pp. 1-22). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow
Press.
18. Byrnes, J. P. & Bernacki, M. L. (2013). Cognitive
development and information behavior. In J.
Beheshti & A. Large (Eds.), The information
behavior of a new generation: children and teens in
the 21st century (pp. 23-43). Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press.
19. Bowler, L. & Nesset, V. (2013). Information literacy.
In J. Beheshti & A. Large (Eds.), The information
behavior of a new generation: children and teens in
the 21st century (pp. 45-63). Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press.
20. Abbas, J. & Agosto, D. E. (2013). Everyday life
information behavior of young people. In J. Beheshti
& A. Large (Eds.), The information behavior of a
new generation: children and teens in the 21st
century (pp. 65-91). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
21. Dresang, E. T. (2013). Digital age libraries and youth:
learning labs, literacy leaders, radical resources. In J.
Beheshti & A. Large (Eds.), The information
behavior of a new generation: children and teens in
the 21st century (pp. 93-116). Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press.
22. Agosto, D. E. & Abbas, J. (2013). Youth and online
social networking: what do we know so far? In J.
Beheshti & A. Large (Eds.), The information
behavior of a new generation: children and teens in
the 21st century (pp. 117-141). Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press.
23. Vincenti, G. (2013). Gaming and virtual
environments. In J. Beheshti & A. Large (Eds.), The
information behavior of a new generation: children
and teens in the 21st century (pp. 143-165). Lanham,
MD: Scarecrow Press.
24. Hanson-Baldauf, D. (2013). Everyday life
information in support of enhanced quality of life for
young adults with intellectual disabilities. In J.
Beheshti & A. Large (Eds.), The information
behavior of a new generation: children and teens in
the 21st century (pp. 167-194). Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press.
25. Shariff, S. (2013). Defining the line on cyber-
bullying: how youth encounter and distribute
demeaning information. In J. Beheshti & A. Large
(Eds.), The information behavior of a new
generation: children and teens in the 21st century
(pp. 195-211). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
26. Beheshti, J. & Large, A. (2013). Systems. In J.
Beheshti & A. Large (Eds.), The information
behavior of a new generation: children and teens in
the 21st century (pp. 213-236). Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press.
27. Beheshti, J. & Large, A. (2013). The future. In J.
Beheshti & A. Large (Eds.), The information
behavior of a new generation: children and teens in
the 21st century (pp. 237-242). Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press.
© the author, 2016.
Last updated: 26 July, 2016
Contents | Author index | Subject index |
Search | Home
