An important question in information-seeking behavior is where people go for information and why information seekers prefer to use one source type rather than another when faced with an information-seeking task or need for information. Prior studies have paid little attention to contingent variables that could change the cost-benefit calculus in source use. They also defined source use in one way or the other, or considered source use as a monolithic construct. Through an empirical survey of 352 working professionals in Singapore, this study carried out a context-based investigation into source use by information seekers. Different measures of source use have been incorporated, and various contextual variables that could affect the use of source types have been identified. The findings suggest that source quality and access difficulty are important antecedents of source use, regardless of the source type. Moreover, seekers place more weight on source quality when the task is important. Other contextual factors, however, are generally less important to source use. Seekers also demonstrate a strong pecking order in the use of source types, with online information and face-to-face being the two most preferred types.

Effective management of all knowledge in an organization is a key criterion for innovation. Academic libraries are beginning to realize the importance of knowledge management in this regard. However, there are no quantitative studies studying knowledge management and service innovation in the context of libraries. Islam, Agarwal and Ikeda arrived at a framework for knowledge management for service innovation in academic libraries (KMSIL). Through a survey of 107 librarians from 39 countries, this study investigates the effect of knowledge management (and knowledge management cycle phases) on service innovation. The study found that knowledge capture/creation and knowledge application/use both significantly impact service innovation in academic libraries. The effect of knowledge/sharing and transfer on innovation was found to be insignificant. The study also demonstrated the relationship between the knowledge management phases. The findings support the KMSIL framework. They should help academic libraries in the process of service innovation by utilizing phases of the knowledge management cycle.

Purpose: This exploratory study investigates the strategies that librarians employ to ensure quality of service, the ways and barriers for service innovation, and the likelihood of adopting knowledge management for service innovation in libraries. Methodology: Seventeen academic librarians filled out a qualitative survey with open-ended questions. Findings: Most librarians saw service innovation as critical to the continuing success of the library, and felt that knowledge management would be extremely helpful for service innovation in their libraries. The proposed strategies and findings led to a theoretical framework of knowledge management for service innovation in libraries (KMSIL).

The field of human information behavior runs the gamut of processes from the realization of a need or gap in understanding, to the search for information from one or more sources to fill that gap, to the use of that information to complete a task at hand or to satisfy a curiosity, as well as other behaviors such as avoiding information or finding information serendipitously. Designers of mechanisms, tools, and computer-based systems to facilitate this seeking and search process often lack a full knowledge of the context surrounding the search. This context may vary depending on the job or role of the person; individual characteristics such as personality, domain knowledge, age, gender, perception of self, etc.; the task at hand; the source and the channel and their degree of accessibility and usability; and the relationship that the seeker shares with the source. Yet researchers have yet to agree on what context really means. While there have been various research studies incorporating context, and biennial conferences on context in information behavior, there lacks a clear definition of what context is, what its boundaries are, and what elements and variables comprise context. In this book, we look at the many definitions of and the theoretical and empirical studies on context, and I attempt to map the conceptual space of context in information behavior. I propose theoretical frameworks to map the boundaries, elements, and variables of context. I then discuss how to incorporate these frameworks and variables in the design of research studies on context. We then arrive at a unified definition of context. This book should provide designers of search systems a better understanding of context as they seek to meet the needs and demands of information seekers. It will be an important resource for researchers in Library and Information Science, especially doctoral students looking for one resource that covers an exhaustive range of the most current literature related to context, the best selection of classics, and a synthesis of these into theoretical frameworks and a unified definition. The book should help to move forward research in the field by clarifying the elements, variables, and views that are pertinent. In particular, the list of elements to be considered, and the variables associated with each element will be extremely useful to researchers wanting to include the influences of context in their studies.

Knowledge Management (KM) is a collaborative and integrated approach adopted at various levels to ensure that an organization's knowledge assets are best utilized to increase organizational performance. While KM has been adopted in a large number of sectors and organizations, colleges and universities, and the higher education sector in general, is yet to take full advantage of the possibilities offered by KM. Also, while past research has sought to highlight the importance of implementing KM in higher education, there is a lack of a single, clear template for KM implementation that universities leaders and administrators can adopt. The contribution of the paper is a practical, actionable, step-by-step plan, as well as a diagrammatic, theoretical framework for initiating KM successfully in colleges and universities.

Purpose: This study investigates how libraries prevent the loss of knowledge with people leaving or resigning, and the strategies they adopt to retain this knowledge and to transfer organizational knowledge to new employees. Methodology/approach: Data was gathered from 101 academic librarians from 35 countries in 6 continents who provided qualitative answers to two open-ended questions in a survey questionnaire. Findings: Documentation, training and digital repositories were found to be the primary strategies employed. A number of respondents admitted to retention and transfer being done poorly. Very few libraries had a formal KM process. The study proposes a theoretical framework for knowledge retention and transfer in libraries. Implications: Libraries will be able to learn of retention and transfer strategies, and identify gaps in their KM process based on the mapping of a specific strategy to knowledge dimension or phase of the KM cycle. Originality/value: This is the first empirical study in the area of knowledge retention in libraries. The study brings together the perspectives of libraries across the world. The primary research contribution is the theoretical framework which can be used to further research on knowledge retention and transfer in the context of libraries.

Construct validity refers to the degree to which inferences can legitimately be made from the operationalizations in a study to the theoretical constructs on which those operationalizations were based. When both convergent and discriminant validities are satisfied, construct validity is said to be satisfied. Verifying survey items for construct validity becomes important, especially when these items are self-developed and not based on questionnaires used in past studies. Yet, there is lack of clarity on how to go about doing so. While researchers in other fields have come up with simple techniques, these have not been readily applied to the field of information behavior. Using the case of questionnaire design for source choice in information behavior, this methodological paper describes the use of a 2-stage sorting procedure based on Moore and Benbasat's 1991 work. The procedure can serve as a guide to researchers using questionnaire design for studies in information seeking behavior and should help lend greater rigor to such studies.

Despite the seemingly widespread and growing attention to the notion of 'context' in information seeking, the concept remains ill-defined and inconsistently applied. There isn't any success in defining: What context really means? What are the boundaries of context? What constitutes the 'core' (main factors that lead to information seeking behavior) and what constitutes the 'surrounding' circumstances (or context)? Where do we draw the line between this core and the context? Or does this context subsume the core? The contribution of this theoretical study will be to help towards delineating the boundaries of context through a IntroductionIn the last few years, the context of information seeking is receiving increased attention 1 , along with equivalent notions like 'situation', 'setting', 'environment ', etc. Cool (2001) attributes this to the thinking that 'in order to better understand information-seeking behavior (ISB) and information retrieval (IR) interaction, greater attention needs to be directed to the information spaces within which these activities are embedded' (p.5). However, despite the seemingly widespread and growing attention, the concept remains ill-defined and inconsistently applied ( McCreadie & Rice (1999 p.58) define context as the 'larger picture in which the potential user operates; the larger picture in which the information system is developed and operates, and potential information exists', whereas situation is seen as 'the particular set of circumstances from which a need for information arises.' Courtright (2007) sees context as including those elements that have a more lasting and predictable influence on information [behavior] than situation, whereas situation is seen as a potential part of context. Dervin (1997 p.14-15), through a 3-tiered categorization of context, argues that for many, 'context has the potential of being virtually anything that is not defined as the phenomenon of interest…a kind of container in which the phenomenon resides.' A second group struggles with trying to determine which of an 'inexhaustible list of factors' will be included in context.