Advertisement

A Comparative Study of Native and Non-native Information Seeking Behaviours

  • David BrazierEmail author
  • Morgan Harvey
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10772)

Abstract

The proliferation of web-based technologies has led most national governments to begin transitioning to a so called “e-service,” where provision is made through purely digital means. Despite their obvious benefits for most users, these on-line systems present barriers of access to certain groups in society. In this study we consider the information behaviour of English as a second language (ESL) and native English speaking participants as they conduct search tasks designed to reflect actual information seeking situations in a UK governmental context. Results show that the ESL users rely more on query assistance, delve deeper into the Search Engine Results Page (SERP) and obtain better performance the longer they read documents. This was not the case for the natives, despite spending the most time reading documents. There are some similarities in their information seeking behaviours as both groups submit similar length queries, and are equally proficient in identifying when a failed query did not meet their information need. This proficiency was not reflected in their performance in some tasks, with both groups unable to consistently predict when they had not performed well. The results of this work have potentially profound repercussions for how e-government services are provided and how users are assisted in their use of these.

References

  1. 1.
    Aham-Anyanwu, N., Li, H.: E-public engagement: formulating a citizen content engagement model. In: 25th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), 5–10 June 2017, pp. 753–770 (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allum, J.: How we’re making gov.uk work harder for users (2017). https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2017/02/27/how-were-making-gov-uk-work-harder-for-users/. Accessed 19 Dec 2017
  3. 3.
    Berendt, B., Kralisch, A.: A user-centric approach to identifying best deployment strategies for language tools: the impact of content and access language on web user behaviour and attitudes. Inf. Retrieval 12(3), 380–399 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bogers, T., Gäde, M., Hall, M., Skov, M.: Analyzing the influence of language proficiency on interactive book search behavior. In: iSchools (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brazier, D., Harvey, M.: E-government and the digital divide: a study of english-as-a-second-language users’ information behaviour. In: Jose, J.M., Hauff, C., Altıngovde, I.S., Song, D., Albakour, D., Watt, S., Tait, J. (eds.) ECIR 2017. LNCS, vol. 10193, pp. 266–277. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56608-5_21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brazier, D., Harvey, M.: Strangers in a strange land: a study of second language speakers searching for e-services. In: CHIIR, pp. 281–284. ACM (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Burroughs, J.M.: What users want: assessing government information preferences to drive information services. Gov. Inf. Q. 26(1), 203–218 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chu, P., Jozsa, E., Komlodi, A., Hercegfi, K.: An exploratory study on search behavior in different languages. In: IIiX, pp. 318–321. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chu, P., Komlodi, A.: Transearch: a multilingual search user interface accommodating user interaction and preference. In: 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts, pp. 2466–2472. ACM (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Edwards, A., Kelly, D.: How does interest in a work task impact search behavior and engagement? In: CHIIR, pp. 249–252. ACM, March 2016Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Freeguard, G., Andrews, E., Devine, D., Munro, R., Randall, J.: Whitehall monitor 2015 (2015). http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/whitehall-monitor-2015. Accessed 19 Dec 2017
  12. 12.
    Freund, L.: A cross-domain analysis of task and genre effects on perceptions of usefulness. Inf. Process. Manage. 49(5), 1108–1121 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Helbig, N., Gil-García, J.R., Ferro, E.: Understanding the complexity of electronic government: implications from the digital divide literature. Gov. Info. Q. 26(1), 89–97 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Józsa, E., Köles, M., Komlódi, A., Hercegfi, K., Chu, P.: Evaluation of search quality differences and the impact of personality styles in native and foreign language searching tasks. In: IIiX 2012, pp. 310–313. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lazarinis, F., Vilares, J., Tait, J., Efthimiadis, E.N.: Current research issues and trends in non-english web searching. Inf. Retrieval 12(3), 230–250 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lloyd, A., Kennan, M.A., Thompson, K.M., Qayyum, A.: Connecting with new information landscapes: information literacy practices of refugees. J. Doc. 69(1), 121–144 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nielsen, J.: Information foraging: why google makes people leave your site faster (2003). https://www.nngroup.com/articles/information-scent/. Accessed 19 Dec 2017
  18. 18.
    Peters, C., Braschler, M., Clough, P.: Multilingual Information Retrieval: From Research to Practice, 1st edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23008-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Savolainen, R.: Approaches to socio-cultural barriers to information seeking. Libr. Inf. Sci. Res. 38(1), 52–59 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Scantlebury, A., Booth, A., Hanley, B.: Experiences, practices and barriers to accessing health information: a qualitative study. Int. J. Med. Inform. 103, 103–108 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Internet World Stats, June 2017. http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats7.htm
  22. 22.
    Steichen, B., Freund, L.: Supporting the modern polyglot: a comparison of multilingual search interfaces. In: CHI, pp. 3483–3492. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vinson, T.: Social inclusion: the origins, meaning, definitions and economic implications of the concept of inclusion/exculsion (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Northumbria UniversityNewcastle upon TyneUK

Personalised recommendations