Information Overload in Undergraduate Students

Information Overload 1

Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. Barbara Wildemuth for her aid in the research and statistical analysis of this thesis. My gratitude also goes out to the perpetually patient Dr. Barreau, and to Mr. Fred Stutzman, who first showed me that one can turn a college pastime into a scientific study. I also cannot thank my parents enough for their love and encouragement in my pursuit of knowledge. This project was supported by the Sarah Steele Danhoff Undergraduate Research Fund, administered by the Honors Office at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.


Table of Contents Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... 1

Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... 2

Tables and Figures ........................................................................................................ 3

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 4

Literature Review .......................................................................................................... 5

Methods ....................................................................................................................... 14

Results ......................................................................................................................... 16

Discussion ................................................................................................................... 23

Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 26

References ................................................................................................................... 28

Appendix A: Recruitment E-mails .............................................................................. 33

Appendix B: Consent Form......................................................................................... 35

Appendix C: Survey .................................................................................................... 39

Appendix D: Statistics Tables ..................................................................................... 46


Tables and Figures Table 1. Demographic breakdown of the respondents ................................................ 17

Table 2. Response to the item “I feel overloaded by the amount of information I have to handle.” ................................................................................................................... 18

Table 3. Correlations between information sources and frequency of experiencing information overload ................................................................................................... 19

Table 4. SNS behaviors and how they correlate with experiencing information overload. ...................................................................................................................... 20

Table 5. How SNS behaviors correlate with the perception of SNSs as sources of information overload ................................................................................................... 20

Table 6. A distribution of the number of coping strategies employed by students. .... 22

Table 7. How gender and GPA correlate with frequency of feeling information overload ....................................................................................................................... 24

Table 8. Enrollment statistics for the University of North Carolina, Spring 2009 ..... 46

Table 9. Response distributions to items about information sources .......................... 50

Table 10. Response distributions SNS usage behavior items ..................................... 52

Table 11. Response distributions to coping strategy items ......................................... 56

Table 12. Correlations between SNS usage behaviors and feeling information overload. ...................................................................................................................... 57

Table 13. Correlations between information sources and feelings of information overload ....................................................................................................................... 58


Introduction

With the advent of the Internet and ubiquitous information technology, there is

not only a greater capability for one to find needed information, there is also a greater

demand to stay informed about current events in the world, one’s profession, and

one’s social life. These pressures can be overwhelming enough to cause a malady

known as information fatigue syndrome, analysis paralysis, or information overload.

The phenomenon, henceforth known as information overload, is the sense of being

overwhelmed by one’s information demands. Ellington (2005) cites class, e-mail,

personal web browsing, instant messaging, and seven other sources of information

overload in an undergraduate student’s lifestyle. I suspect the relative impact of these

sources have changed, however, and will investigate whether social networking sites

are another source of information overload. The questions to be researched are:

• To what extent are students experiencing information overload, and what are

the primary sources of this overload?

• How do students cope with information overload?

• What is the relationship between social networking site usage and reported

feelings of information overload?

This study reviews the literature on information overload, then reports the

findings of an online survey administered during the spring 2009 semester of a public

university. The survey, a more quantitative extension of Ellington’s (2005) research,

looks to analyze the frequency of information overload experienced by undergraduate

students, coping strategies used to alleviate the feelings of overload, and what role

social networking sites have in these feelings of information overload.


Literature Review

Information overload has become an increasingly salient issue in the wired world.

The annual costs of lost productivity caused by this modern malady has been

estimated by one consulting firm to be $650 billion (Richtel, 2008), and the stress

induced by too much information can pose a health risk to the overwhelmed worker

(White, 2000). Because of its dual threat to mind and money, we must have a clear

definition of information overload and understand what the primary sources of

information overload are. Likewise, strategies that reduce information overload need

to be evaluated and optimized to confront this problem that plagues so many citizens

of the information society.

The concept of information overload has seen many labels and definitions over

the years, depending on the context and severity of the situation in which it is

experienced. Regardless of the name, information overload is a result of the

tremendous influx of information and our inherent compulsion to know all we can. A

look at the psychological and physiological impact of information overload is

warranted, as well as an examination of the mechanisms people employ to reduce

information overload. Finally, looking at information overload in other types of

computer-mediated communication can reinforce the concepts named above, as well

as provide a suitable bellwether for how social networking sites (SNS) may serve to

exacerbate or ameliorate information overload in the undergraduate student’s life.


Defining the Problem

Information overload has been called by many names and has been studied in

many subject domains (Eppler & Mengis, 2004). It has had objective criteria applied

to its measurement (Jacoby, 1974; Galbraith, 1974), and it has been subjectively self-

reported (Farhoomand & Drury, 2002; Ellington, 2005). Broadbent (1958) and Miller

(1956) demonstrated the cognitive limits of individuals for processing information,

but did not comment on the effects of chronically pressing these limits. Nevertheless,

the majority of the studies concerning information overload use the term to describe

the disparity between one’s information processing capability and the volume of

information available to parse.

In addition to the chronological and psychological limits of processing

information, information irrelevance and fragmentation (Karger & Jones, 2006) are

also key contributors to feelings information overload (Farhoomand & Drury, 2002;

Ellington, 2005). Fragmentation is especially problematic, as having to maintain

multiple software applications (Bergman, Beyth-Marom, & Nachmias, 2006),

multiple devices (Dearman & Pierce, 2008), and interleaving activities (Bellotti et al.,

2005) add directly to the cognitive overhead of managing information. Perhaps new

techniques or technologies may mitigate fragmentation, but first it is necessary to

understand the extent of its impact among many different population sectors, such as

undergraduate students.


The Need to Know

One of the more insidious elements of information overload is that it is

sometimes driven by a personal compulsion to know as much as one can. The

research of Cacioppo et al. (1982, 1984, 1996) and Cohen et al. (1955) indicates that

some people are innately wired to enjoy thinking. Need for cognition is a personality

trait that indicates one’s tendency to retrieve, interpret, and evaluate information.

Cacioppo et al. group people as either cognitive misers, who use experts and

heuristics in seeking information, or chronic cognizers, who seek and evaluate

information on their own (1996). Cacioppo et al. have also found several studies

which have shown a positive correlation between ACT scores and need for cognition,

as well as between grade point averages and need for cognition (1996).When

considering undergraduate students at a selective university such as the University of

North Carolina, one could reasonably infer that they have a high need for cognition.

Their curiosity and intellectual independence, when combined with the volume of

information available and social pressures to seek as much of that information as

possible, can result in a self-induced overload. On the other hand, research in internet

usage behaviors has not shown significant differences in browsing habits between

people with high need for cognition and people with low need for cognition

(Amichai-Hamburger et al., 2007, Kaynar & Armichai-Hamburger, 2008). This latter

fact is comforting to an extent, especially considering that Google has indexed over 1

trillion unique pages from the Internet in the past decade (Alpert & Hajaj, 2008).


The aforementioned social pressures provide an irresistible impetus to retrieve and

consume as much information as possible. Wilson (1997) laments the pressure on

interdisciplinary researchers to stay current with all of their disciplines. Decision

makers in organizations often feel a need to amass an excessive quantity of

information to justify their decisions and reduce uncertainty, often to diminishing

returns (Butcher, 1995). In the context of social networking sites, having a profile and

consistently checking it is an obligation with undesirable social consequences when it

is unmet (boyd, 2007).

Computer-Mediated Communication

Social networking sites (SNS) are the latest trend in computer-mediated

communication. These avenues often provide private, asynchronous communication

in the manner of e-mail, public postings similar to Usenet or bulletin board systems,

and even instant messaging, incurring the advantages, as well as disadvantages, of all

three technologies. Looking at some of SNSs’ analogues could give us insight into

how significant SNSs may be in the information overload field.

As the single most common use of the Internet (Edmunds & Morris, 2000), e-

mail is also often the primary culprit in contributing to feelings of information

overload (Bawden et al., 1999; Janssen & Poot, 2006). Farhoomand and Drury (2002)

and Ellington (2005) found that e-mail is the second most common source of

information overload behind organizational sources. A study from the Pew Internet &

American Life Project (Madden, 2008) notes that 53% of American workers use

separate e-mail accounts for work and personal use, yet another instance of


information fragmentation. Nevertheless, coping strategies such as filtering, ignoring,

organizing, and delegating e-mail messages can be transferred to the interfaces of

many SNSs. In Jones et al.’s study (2004) of Usenet postings, they found users are

more likely to respond to simpler messages in overloaded mass interaction, to

generate simpler responses as the overloading of mass interaction increases, and to

end active participation as the overloading of mass interaction increases. Could there

be a social saturation point in SNSs in which users “end active participation” in them

in the manner described by Milgram (1970)?

Friends or Foes?

When individuals must keep up with dozens of e-mails per day (Fisher et al.,

2006; Whittaker, Bellotti, and Gwizdka, 2006), one might wonder why an individual

might burden himself with yet another tributary for the information flood: the social

networking site. However, Facebook reports over 110 million active users worldwide

and an 85% market share of 4-year universities in the United States (Statistics |

Facebook, 2008). Its widespread appeal is generally acknowledged, but Facebook’s

exact impact on students’ information habits have yet to be examined. SNSs could

provide good avenues for information delegation and filtration, letting friends weed

out irrelevant information for each other. On the other hand, SNSs could wind up as

another technology that pushes unsolicited information to the users. The amount of

agency users have in retrieving information from SNSs could influence their

perception of information overload. Hopefully, all of these issues will come to light


through further study. In this particular study, however, I will investigate the

following hypotheses:

H1a) There is a positive correlation between social networking site usage frequency

and frequency of feeling information overload.

H1b) There is a positive correlation between social networking site usage duration

and frequency of feeling information overload.

To Your Health!

Information overload is more than a drain on companies’ productivity and

time; it is a genuine health threat to 21st century workers. According to a recent study

by the Pew Internet & American Life Project (Madden, 2008), 49% of workers feel

that information and communications technologies have increased the amount of

stress they feel about their job. This stress can manifest itself physically in

cardiovascular problems, headaches, digestive disorders, fatigue, and blurred vision

(de Rijk et al., 1999; White, 2000). Psychologically, the stress can lead to depression

(Klausegger et al., 2007; Zeldes et al., 2007) and diminished attention span

(Hallowell, 1995). If too much information does not place a person into “analysis

paralysis” (Shenk, 1997; White, 2000), the complete inability to make a decision, it

may still lead to overconfidence and other adverse effects in decision making (Eppler

& Mengis, 2004; Klausegger et al., 2007). For the long-term health of current

undergraduate students, more research will be useful in determining the most

significant contributors to information overload stress and in evaluating effective

coping strategies.


Lightening the Load

Humans have adapted two main strategies to reduce information overload:

they either seek to increase their information processing capacity, or they reduce the

cognitive effort involved in processing the information (de Bakker, 2006). Ways of

increasing the information processing capacity of individuals include compressing

and aggregating information, training and acquiring skills such as speed reading

(Eppler et al., 2004; Koniger & Janowitz, 1995), multitasking, and employing

features in information technology (Allan & Shoard, 2006). Ways of decreasing the

cognitive effort involved in information processing include filtering out irrelevant

(Savoleinen, 2007) or redundant information, delegating the responsibility of

handling the information, or simply dedicating less attention to processing the

information (Agosto, 2002).

The merits of multitasking, defined as working on several tasks in quick

succession, are questionable. Studies have shown that there is a cognitive cost in

switching between tasks that is detrimental to workers’ effectiveness (Dzubak, 2006).

Moreover, the learning potential for students is drastically reduced when their

attention is divided between several tasks (Gardner, 2008; Levine et al., 2007). This

coping strategy may actually be exacerbating the feelings of information overload

among undergraduate university students.

Allan and Shoard (2006) found that when police officers were issued personal

digital assistants to handle e-mail in the field, the officers were able to spread their e-

mail loads throughout the day and reduce their feelings of information overload. E-

mail users who reduced their inbox queues through frequent organizing and


immediate message response were less likely to report being overloaded (Dabbish

and Kraut, 2006; Fisher et al., 2006; Whittaker, Bellotti, & Gwizdka, 2006; Whittaker

& Sidner, 1996). In several studies researchers saw e-mail clients being used for file

archival, file transfer, and task management, indicating the tendency for people to

centralize their software habits, often through satisficing strategies (Barreau, 1995), in

order to reduce fragmentation. Once the information is centralized, users organize

their information center to aid in retrieval and manage overload (Fisher et al., 2006).

In the context of this study, I will investigate the use of coping strategies

categorized by Farhoomand and Drury (2002) and Ellington (2005). Prominent

among these are prioritizing information, organizing work, delegating, filtering

information and eliminating the source. These are strategies that are very similar to

those employed by urban dwellers in Milgram’s (1970) work on the experience of

living in cities, indicating that abstract principles of information overload can be

applied in different contexts and implying the broader applicability of this study. This

leads me to the following hypothesis:

H2) There is a negative correlation between the number of coping strategies

employed by an individual and their frequency of feeling information overload.


Need For Research

When social networking sites have become as prevalent as they have among

internet users, and especially among college students, it signals a paradigm shift in

how people gather and share social information. But do users perceive SNSs as a

source of information overload? Are there particular usage behaviors – such as

frequently logging in to an SNS or remaining logged in for extended periods of time –

that influence feelings of information overload? How might the employment of

certain coping strategies determine the frequency of feeling information overload?

Finally, is there a relation between a student’s grade point average, which has been

linked to need for cognition, and reporting information overload? Through an online

survey, this study aims to provide the quantitative data that will answer these

questions.


Methods

This fixed design study consisted of an online survey, as I wanted to begin a

quantitative orientation in extending the findings of Farhoomand & Drury (2002) and

Ellington (2005). I provided ordinal Likert-type items for the sources of information

overload listed in Ellington’s study to better measure the relative prevalence each

source had in contributing to students’ sense of information overload. I administered

a pilot study (N=25) in December 2008 to get feedback on item wording and form

input design. There were sixty items in the final survey, although if the respondent

answered in the negative to using social networking sites, they were immediately

brought to the demographic items section of the survey. Also, items in this survey

pertaining to SNS usage habits were based on a 2008 Educause Center for Applied

Research study (Salaway & Caruso). As this was the third administration of the

ECAR study, I was confident in the wording of its survey items. Moreover, the report

could provide some corroborative evidence to this study’s statistical findings on

students’ SNS usage. The final survey and informed consent form are in the

Appendix of this thesis.

The most recent statistics on the student population at the University of North

Carolina indicate that during the spring 2009 semester there were 9,780 females and

6,763 males enrolled as undergraduates, for a total of 16,543 students in the

population (“SAID”, 2009). However, not all of these students were subscribers to the

informational e-mail mailing list through which I sent the study’s recruitment e-mails.

Participants were solicited via two e-mail announcements which contained a link to


the online Qualtrics survey. The survey was open for completion during the weeks of

January 26, 2009 through February 13, 2009. The initial recruitment e-mail was sent

on January 26, and a week later (February 2) the second e-mail with a link to the

survey was sent out to the participant pool. Once the three-week data collection

period was over, I closed the online survey to further submissions and began to clean

out the data. Data was unacceptable if survey takers did not agree to the informed

consent form item given on the first page. Submissions were also excluded if no items

were answered after the initial informed consent input. This yielded a final count of

N=343. Because this was a non-random population, N was a sufficiently large sample

from which I may extrapolate findings from the data analysis of this study.


Results

Demographics

Of the 343 respondents to the survey, 92 were male and 249 were female, with

two respondents unreported. The gender percentage of respondents had a much higher

female representation (73%) than that of the university’s undergraduate populace

(59%, or 9,780 out of 16,543 total students). Also, members of the senior class were

overrepresented, constituting 36% (5,894 out of 16,543) of the undergraduate

population but accounting for 53% (181 out of 341) of respondents to the survey. I

was unable to find enrollment statistics for part-time versus full-time students in the

general university population, but 97% (319 out of 341) of the respondents were full-

time, compared to 3% (22 out of 341) of the part-time student respondents. See

Appendix for the University of North Carolina’s enrollment statistics. There was no

breakdown by age or ethnicity for the survey.


Study Demographics

Grade Point Average

GPA Count Prob

A 57 0.16814

A- 96 0.28319

B+ 62 0.18289

B 55 0.16224

B- 27 0.07965

C+ 13 0.03835

C 9 0.02655

C- 4 0.01180

Decline to Report

16 0.04720

Total 339 1.00000

Gender

Gender Count Prob

Female 249 0.73021

Male 92 0.26979

Total 341 1.00000

Class Standing

Class Count Prob

Senior 181 0.53079

Freshman 47 0.13783

Other class

113 0.33138

Total 341 1.00000

Full-Time Status

Status Count Prob

Full Time

319 0.93548

Part Time

22 0.06452

Total 341 1.00000

Table 1. Demographic breakdown of the respondents by GPA, gender, class standing and

full-time status

Feelings of Information Overload and Their Sources

Undergraduates reported feeling overloaded by the information they had to

handle at least occasionally (M=3.47, SD=0.82). The highest rated sources of

information overload were Class Assignments (M=3.61, SD=1.00), E-mail (M=3.47,

SD=1.17), and Work (M=3.21, SD=1.07). Students had a neutral or undecided attitude

toward social networking sites as a source of information overload (M=3.09,

SD=1.17). The source least likely to be perceived as a source of information overload


was instant messaging (M=2.47, SD=1.03), which is surprising, giving the

interrupting nature of the communication. See Table 9 in the Appendix for the

complete statistics on attitudes about sources of information overload.

0

1

2

3

4

5

Disagree

Mean 3.4723032

SD 0.8227164

Std Err Mean 0.0444225

upper 95% 3.5596789

lower 95% 3.3849275

N 343

Key 1) Never 2) Very Rarely 3) Occasionally 4) Frequently 5) Very Frequently

Item 1: “I feel overloaded by the amount of information I have to handle.”

Table 2. Response to the item “I feel overloaded by the amount of information I have to

handle.” Most students felt overloaded at least occasionally.


Variable Spearman ρ Prob>| ρ| Class Assignments

0.3778 <.0001

Courseware 0.3589 <.0001 E-mail 0.3410 <.0001 Work 0.2875 <.0001 TV 0.2494 <.0001 Extracurricular 0.2384 <.0001 Other Internet 0.2366 <.0001 Text/Voice 0.2086 0.0001 Phone 0.1574 0.0038 Paper 0.1275 0.0189 SNS 0.1270 0.0191 IM 0.1258 0.0207

Table 3. Correlations between information sources and frequency of experiencing

information overload. Class assignments, courseware, and e-mail were the sources most

closely correlated with a higher frequency of experiencing information overload.

Social Networking Site Usage Behaviors

Most of the respondents had over 300 friends in their profiles, and tended to

visit their profiles at least daily. They would also spend six hours per week or less on

the social networking site, and were actively involved in zero to five groups.

Although there was a very weak correlation between perceptions of SNSs as a source

of information overload and admitted feelings of information overload (ρ=0.1270,

p<0.05), none of the specific behaviors could draw a significant correlation between it

and the perception of SNSs as a source of information overload, nor were there any

behaviors that had a significant correlation directly with the frequency of feeling

information overload. This disproved both aspects of Hypothesis 1, as neither the

frequency, duration (hours per week), nor intensity (profile changes and messages) of

students’ usage of SNSs were significantly correlated with the frequency of feeling

information overload. For the complete statistics, see Table 12 in the Appendix.


Variable Spearman ρ Prob>| ρ |

SNS (as a source of

information overload)

0.1270 0.0191

Visit Frequency 0.0612 0.2705

Hours/Wk 0.0612 0.2721

PM/Wall 0.0442 0.4279

Groups 2 0.0360 0.5174

Friends 0.0321 0.5639

Change Frequency -0.0276 0.6204

Table 4. SNS behaviors and how they correlate with experiencing information overload.

There were no significant correlations between usage behaviors and information overload

frequency.

Table 5. How SNS behaviors correlate with the perception of SNSs as sources of

information overload. There were no significant correlations between usage behaviors

and the perception of SNSs as a source of information overload.

Variable Spearman ρ Prob>| ρ|

Friends 0.1020 0.0667

Hours/Week 0.0972 0.0821

Visit Frequency -0.0968 0.0825

Change Frequency 0.0847 0.1287

PM/Wall Posts -0.0710 0.2038

Groups 0.0089 0.8733


Coping Strategies for Information Overload

The most common strategy for coping with information overload was filtering

out irrelevant information (91.8%, n=313), followed by multitasking (90.9%, n=311)

and organizing the information (86.2%, n=293). The least commonly employed were

ignoring the information (32.5%, n=111) and delegation (32.7%, n=112). On average,

respondents reported using about six of the ten coping strategies (M=5.96, SD=2.07).

A table with the complete distribution statistics is in the Appendix.

The results of the survey did not support Hypothesis 2; there was no

significant correlation between the number of coping strategies and reported

frequency of feeling information overload (ρ =0.0414, p=0.4451).


-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Mean 5.9620991

SD 2.0721682

Std Err Mean 0.1118866

upper 95% 6.1821716

lower 95% 5.7420267

N 343

Variable Spearman ρ Prob>|ρ|

“I feel overloaded…” 0.0414 0.4451

Table 6. A distribution of the number of coping strategies employed by students. There

was not a significant correlation between the number of strategies and reported

frequencies of information overload


Discussion

When clustered by gender, it is revealed that males do not associate SNSs

with feelings of information overload (ρ=0.070, p=0.510) while females do, to a

slight degree (ρ=0.144, p<0.05). This could be a function of the gender bias of the

sample, as Ellington (2005) showed males reporting a higher incidence of information

overload from technological sources. Also, 92 male respondents may be an

insufficient size to achieve the power necessary to derive any statistically significant

findings. When broken down by GPA, “A” students have a weak but significant

correlation (ρ=0.186, p<0.05) between SNS and feelings of information overload,

while “B” students do not have a significant correlation (ρ=0.089, p=0.292) between

perceptions of SNS and feelings of information overload. This finding could be a

budding indicator of a relationship between need for cognition and feelings of

information overload.

While SNSs are correlated with information overload at about the same rate as

instant messaging, e-mail, classes, and courseware are more strongly correlated with

the frequency of feeling overloaded. These results confirm the findings from

Ellington (2005) and Farhoomand & Drury (2002) that e-mail and organizational

sources rank higher than other sources for information overload. This could lead to

some interesting research into the agency and emotional affect of retrieving

information and its relation to information overload. E-mail, classes, and courseware

tend to “push” information to users, often in great volumes and with no consideration

of the user’s will. SNSs are more of a “pull” phenomenon, where users actively seek


out information they wish to know, and derive some social satisfaction for finding it.

Later studies could investigate the “push/pull” dichotomy, incorporating other

technologies such as RSS feeds and intelligent search agents to see if agency plays a

part in feelings of information overload.

n Variable by Variable Spearman ρ Prob>|ρ|

249 Female SNS Feel Overloaded 0.1444 0.0232

92 Male SNS Feel Overloaded 0.0696 0.5099

153 “A” Students SNS Feel Overloaded 0.1855 0.0217

144 “B” Students SNS Feel Overloaded 0.0888 0.2917

Table 7. How gender and GPA correlate with frequency of feeling information overload.

Females and “A” average students have a significant, positive correlation.

Limitations & Extensions

To improve the instrument, I would refine several of the items focused on

social networking site usage habits. For instance, the frequency of logging in, time

spent, and personal messages sent would permit more granular analysis as continuous

variables. I would try to find out what the “Other Internet uses” are that are more

greatly perceived as sources of information overload than SNSs. Another

improvement would be to introduce an ordinal scale to measure the frequency of

employing particular coping strategies, allowing researchers to draw better

correlations between coping strategies and their influence, or lack thereof, on

frequency of feeling information overload. Perhaps most importantly, instead of

relying on an explicit reporting of the frequency of experiencing information

overload, future studies can turn the intensity or frequency of information overload


into a latent variable comprising feelings of stress, employment of coping strategies,

and other elements that my obliquely reveal the understanding and experience of

information overload for each respondent. With enough iterations and refinement to

this instrument, researchers could develop a reliable Likert scale to evaluate feelings

of information overload. An index to determine social network site usage intensity,

based on frequency of usage and level of involvement within the SNS, could be

developed to help better answer questions such as those posited in this study. Despite

the flaws in the instrument, the data yielded from this survey still has rich possibilities

for analysis and interpretation.

Other ideas for future research may expand this study to examine factors such

as a student’s major, age, or ethnicity. The survey can also be refined for non-

academic settings to investigate how people in certain professions experience

information overload, and which factors they would cite which contribute to their

feelings of information overload. Researchers may wish to look into how the design

of a user interface may influence experiences and attitudes of information overload in

e-mail clients, social networking site profiles, or courseware systems. Finally, studies

that more closely examine the relationship between need for cognition and

information overload can give us more insight into how a personal disposition can

influence, and be influenced by, the copious amounts of information available

because of modern technology.


Conclusion

This study has concluded that social networking site usage behaviors are not

linked with the frequency of experiencing information overload in undergraduate

students. The number of times a respondent logged into his or her profile, how much

time they spent per week on the SNS, and the messaging and other habits enacted on

the sites played no significant role in how respondents perceived SNSs as information

overload triggers. Likewise, the number of coping strategies employed by

respondents had no significant correlation with the frequency of experiencing

information overload. When grouped by gender, female respondents showed a slight

correlation in viewing SNSs as a source of information overload, whereas males did

not exhibit this perception. After clustering respondents by grade point average, there

was a small but statistically significant positive correlation between GPA and

frequency of experiencing information overload.

For a concept that has been studied for more than half a century, information

overload is still a remarkably fertile field for research. Qualitative research can shed

light into what factors contribute to information overload, eventually yielding a way

to measure information overload as a latent variable. User interface designers can find

ways to minimize information overload in their software, and they can capitalize on

other research on how users rely on particular coping strategies in a technological

environment. This specific study can be refined and, eventually, administered to the

general population to gauge just how severe a threat information overload is, how

SNSs contribute to this load, and how best to cope with this unique challenge of the

21st century.


We are only human, with finite amounts of time and cognitive capacity to

process nearly infinite amounts of information. Although we have a predisposition to

gather as much information as we can, overindulging in information can be

detrimental to our mental and physical well-being. Social networking sites, which

pique our intellectual curiosity and exploit our social natures, will become major

components in the information habits of upcoming generations. With further

investigation, perhaps we will come to know whether this new form of computer-

mediated communication is more a blessing or a bane when considered in the context

of information overload.


References Agosto, D. E. (2002). Bounded rationality and satisficing in young people's Web-

based decision making. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(1), 16-27

Allan, D.K., Shoard, M. S. (2006). Spreading the load: Mobile information and

communications technologies and their effect on information overload, Retrieved September 8, 2008, from http://informationr.net/ir/10-2/paper227.html.

Alpert, J., & Hajaj, N. (2008). Official Google blog: We knew the web was big...

Retrieved September 30, 2008, from http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/07/we-knew-web-was-big.html.

Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Kaynar, O., & Fine, A. (2007). The effects of need for

cognition on Internet use. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 880-891 de Bakker, S. (2006). Organizational members’ experience of information overload:

Coping with information overload. Conference Papers -- International Communication Association, 1-32.

Barreau, D. K. (1995). Context as a factor in personal information management

systems. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(5), 327-339

Bawden, D., Holtham, C., & Courtney, N. (1999). Perspectives on information

overload. Aslib Proceedings: new information perspectives, 51(8), 249-255. Bellotti, V., Ducheneaut, N., Howard, M., Smith, I., & Grinter, R. E. (2005). Quality

versus quantity: e-mail-centric task management and its relation with overload. Human-Computer Interaction, 89-138.

Bergman, O., Beyth-Marom, R., & Nachmias, R. (2006). The project fragmentation

problem in personal information management. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems (pp. 271-274). Montréal, Québec, Canada: ACM.

boyd, danah. (2007) Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked

publics in teenage social life. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning – Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (ed. David Buckingham). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Broadbent, D. 1958. Perception and communication. Pergamon Press, London, U.K.


Butcher, H. (1995). Information overload in management and business. In Information Overload, IEE Colloquium on (pp. 1/1-1/2).

Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Chuan Feng Kao. (1984). The efficient assessment of

need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48(3), 306. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional

differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197-253.

Cohen, A. R., Stotland, E., & Wolfe, D. M. (1955). An experimental investigation of

need for cognition. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(2), 291-294.

Dabbish, L. A., & Kraut, R. E. (2006). Email overload at work: an analysis of factors

associated with email strain. In Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 431-440). Banff, Alberta, Canada: ACM.

Dearman, D., & Pierce, J. S. (2008). It's on my other computer!: computing with

multiple devices. In Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 767-776). Florence, Italy: ACM.

de Rijk, A. E., Schreurs, K. M. G., & Bensing, J. M. (1999). What is behind "i'm so

tired"? fatigue experiences and their relations to the quality and quantity of external stimulation. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 47(6), 509-523.

Dzubak, C. (2008). Multitasking: The good, the bad, and the unknown. ejournal of

the Association of the Tutoring Profession, 1(2). Edmunds, A., & Morris, A. (2000). The problem of information overload in business

organisations: a review of the literature. International Journal of Information Management, 20(1), 17-28

Ellington, V. (2005). An analysis of information overload components, sources,

frequency, effect on performance and coping strategies utilized by full-time

undergraduate university students. Master’s thesis, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.

Eppler, M., & Mengis, J. (2004). The concept of information overload: A review of

literature from organization science, accounting, marketing, MIS, and related disciplines. INFORMATION SOCIETY, 20(5), 325-344.


Farhoomand, A., & Drury, D. (2002). Managerial information overload. Commun. ACM, 45(10), 127-131.

Fisher, D., Brush, A. J., Gleave, E., & Smith, M. A. (2006). Revisiting Whittaker &

Sidner's "email overload" ten years later. In Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 309-312). Banff, Alberta, Canada: ACM.

Galbraith, J. R. (1974). Organization design: An information processing view.

Interfaces, 4(3), 28-36. Gardner, J.S.. (2008). Simultaneous media usage: Effects on attention. Retrieved

October 27, 2008, from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-02142008-172617/.

Hallowell, E. M. (2005). Overloaded circuits: why smart people underperform.

Harvard Business Review, 83(1), 54-62. Jacoby, J., Speller, D. E., & Kohn, C. A. (1974). Brand choice behavior as a function

of information load. Journal of Marketing Research, 11(1), 63-69. Janssen, R., & Poot, H. D. (2006). Information overload: why some people seem to

suffer more than others. In Proceedings of the 4th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: changing roles (pp. 397-400). Oslo, Norway: ACM.

Jones, Q., Ravid, G., & Rafaeli, S. (2004). Information overload and the message

dynamics of online interaction spaces: A theoretical model and empirical exploration. Information Systems Research, 15(2), 194-210.

Karger, D. R., & Jones, W. (2006). Data unification in personal information

management. Commun. ACM, 49(1), 77-82. doi: 10.1145/1107458.1107496. Kaynar, O., & Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2008). The effects of need for cognition on

internet use revisited. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 361-371. Klausegger, C., Sinkovics, R. R., & Zou, H. (2007). Information overload: a cross-

national investigation of influence factors and effects. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 25(7), 691 - 718.

Koniger, P., & Janowitz, K. (1995). Drowning in information, but thirsty for

knowledge. International Journal of Information Management, 15(1), 5-16. Levine, L. E., Waite, B. M., & Bowman, L. L. (2007). Electronic media use, reading,

and academic distractibility in college youth. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(4), 560-566.


Madden, Mary. Networked workers. (2008) Washington, D.C.: Pew Internet and

American Life Project. Retrieved September 30, 2008, from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/264/report_display.asp.

Miller, G. A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity to process information. Psych. Rev. 63. 81–97.

Milgram, S. (1970). The Experience of Living in Cities. Science, New Series., 167(3924), 1461-1468.

Richtel, M. (2008, June 14). Lost in E-Mail, Tech Firms Face Self-Made Beast. The

New York Times. Retrieved November 11, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/14/technology/14email.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&partner=rssnyt&pagewanted=print.

SAID :: Enrollment statistics - census date | Statistics | Office of the University

Registrar. (n.d.). Retrieved March 20, 2009, from http://registrar.unc.edu/stats/census_data.php.

Salaway, G., Caruso, J.B. (2008). The ECAR study of undergraduate students and

information technology, 2008 (Research Study, Vol. 8). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, available from http://www.educause.edu/ecar.

Savolainen, R. (2007). Filtering and withdrawing: strategies for coping with

information overload in everyday contexts. Journal of Information Science, 33(5), 611-621.

Shenk, D. (1997). Data smog : Surviving the information glut. San Francisco, Calif.:

Harper Edge. Statistics | Facebook. (2008). Retrieved October 2, 2008, from

http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics. White, M. (2000). Technology briefs: Confronting information overload. Journal of

School Health, 70(4), 160-161. Whittaker, S., Bellotti, V., & Gwizdka, J. (2006). Email in personal information

management. Commun. ACM, 49(1), 68-73. Whittaker, S., & Sidner, C. (1996). Email overload: exploring personal information

management of email. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: common ground (pp. 276-283). Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: ACM.


Wilson, P. (1997). Interdisciplinary research and information overload. Library Trends, 45(2), 192.

Zeldes, N., Sward, D., & Louchheim, S. (2007). Infomania: Why we can’t afford to

ignore it any longer. First Monday, 12(8).


Appendix A: Recruitment E-mails

INFORMATIONAL: Participants Needed for Online Study

Do you feel overwhelmed by information? Participants are needed for a study investigating information overload. To be eligible to participate, you must be:

• At least 18 years of age

• Enrolled as an undergraduate at UNC

To participate, complete an online survey at [http://uncodum.qualtrics.com/SE?SID=SV_bOCCVT1QjEN65bS&SVID=Prod]. The survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete. Four randomly selected participants who complete the survey will each be awarded a $25 Amazon.com gift card. Choosing or declining to participate in this study will not affect your class standing or grades at UNC-Chapel Hill. You will not be offered or receive any special consideration if you take part in this research; it is purely voluntary. This study has been approved by the UNC Behavioral IRB (IRB Study 08-2117; Approval Date: January 16, 2009). For more information, contact John Weis ([email protected]).


INFORMATIONAL: Feeling Overloaded? Tell Us About It!

A study investigating information overload in undergraduates is still going on. To be eligible to participate, you must be:

• At least 18 years of age

• Enrolled as an undergraduate at UNC

To participate, complete an online survey at [http://uncodum.qualtrics.com/SE?SID=SV_bOCCVT1QjEN65bS&SVID=Prod]. It takes approximately 15 minutes to complete. Four randomly selected participants who complete the survey for the study will each be awarded a $25 Amazon.com gift card. Choosing or declining to participate in this study will not affect your class standing or grades at UNC-Chapel Hill. You will not be offered or receive any special consideration if you take part in this research; it is purely voluntary. This study has been approved by the UNC Behavioral IRB (IRB Study 08-2117; Approval Date: January 16, 2009). For more information, contact John Weis ([email protected]).


Appendix B: Consent Form University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill

Consent to Participate in a Research Study

Adult Participants

Social Behavioral Form

________________________________________________________________________

IRB Study #___08-2117__________________ Consent Form Version Date: _____01/12/2009_________ Title of Study: Information Overload in University Undergraduate Students Principal Investigator: John Weis

UNC-Chapel Hill Department: SILS

UNC-Chapel Hill Phone number: 966-5042 Email Address: [email protected] Faculty Advisor: Dr. Deborah Barreau Faculty Contact telephone number: 966-5042 Faculty Contact email: [email protected] Funding Source and/or Sponsor: UNC Honors Office Study Contact telephone number: (910) 554-8752 Study Contact email: [email protected] _________________________________________________________________

What are some general things you should know about research studies?

You are being asked to take part in a research study. To join the study is voluntary. You may refuse to join, or you may withdraw your consent to be in the study, for any reason, without penalty. Research studies are designed to obtain new knowledge. This new information may help people in the future. You may not receive any direct benefit from being in the research study. There also may be risks to being in research studies. Details about this study are discussed below. It is important that you understand this information so that you can make an informed choice about being in this research study. You will be given a copy of this consent form. You should ask the researchers named above, or staff members who may assist them, any questions you have about this study at any time.

What is the purpose of this study?

The purpose of this research study is to learn about sources of information overload in undergraduate students’ lifestyles. It will try to determine what role participation in social networking sites has in feelings of information overload, and it will look at strategies students use to cope with information overload.


How many people will take part in this study?

If you decide to be in this study, you will be one of approximately 300 people in this research study.

How long will your part in this study last?

The survey should take about fifteen minutes to complete.

What will happen if you take part in the study?

You will complete a survey that features questions about your perceptions of information overload, your social networking site usage habits, and general demographic information.

What are the possible benefits from being in this study?

Research is designed to benefit society by gaining new knowledge. You may not benefit personally from being in this research study.

What are the possible risks or discomforts involved from being in this study?

The research involves no more than minimal risk to subjects. There may be uncommon or previously unknown risks. You should report any problems to the researcher.

How will your privacy be protected?

Participants will not be identified in any report or publication about this study. Although every effort will be made to keep research records private, there may be times when federal or state law requires the disclosure of such records, including personal information. This is very unlikely, but if disclosure is ever required, UNC-Chapel Hill will take steps allowable by law to protect the privacy of personal information. In some cases, your information in this research study could be reviewed by representatives of the University, research sponsors, or government agencies for purposes such as quality control or safety. The survey system used in the study is provided by Qualtrics, Inc. The Qualtrics system maintains data behind a firewall and all data are accessed only by the owner of the survey who must provide password and user id. All pieces of data are keyed to that owner identification and cannot be accessed by anyone other than the owner or, by the owner's request, technical assistance staff. Technical assistance staff include server administrators at Qualtrics who will respond to hardware or software failures, or Teresa Edwards, the UNC administrator for the Qualtrics Software Agreement. Ms. Edwards has completed Human Subjects Research certification at UNC-CH, and will only access survey data at the account owner's request. The Qualtrics system has been used by government agencies, hundreds of universities and in many dissertations involving human subjects and even disadvantaged and at risk populations, including government sponsored studies collecting data about


physical and dependency abuse for adults and children. These are extremely confidential studies that have passed the highest level of scrutiny from human subjects committees. If you enter your e-mail address for the Amazon.com gift card drawing, the information will be encrypted and stored in a password-protected file on a USB key accessible only by the researcher. Once the drawing is complete, the file containing the e-mail addresses will be completely erased.

Will you receive anything for being in this study?

After completing the survey, you will have the opportunity to enter a raffle for one of four $25 gift certificates to Amazon.com.

Will it cost you anything to be in this study?

There will be no costs for being in the study

What if you are a UNC student?

You may choose not to be in the study or to stop being in the study before it is over at any time. This will not affect your class standing or grades at UNC-Chapel Hill. You will not be offered or receive any special consideration if you take part in this research.

What if you have questions about this study?

You have the right to ask, and have answered, any questions you may have about this research. If you have questions, or concerns, you should contact the researchers via e-mail at [email protected] or [email protected].

What if you have questions about your rights as a research participant?

All research on human volunteers is reviewed by a committee that works to protect your rights and welfare. If you have questions or concerns about your rights as a research subject you may contact, anonymously if you wish, the Institutional Review Board at 919-966-3113 or by email to [email protected].

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Title of Study: Information Overload in Undergraduate Students Principal Investigator: John Weis Faculty Advisor: Deborah Barreau


Participant’s Agreement:

I have read the information provided above. I have asked all the questions I have at this time. I voluntarily agree to participate in this research study.


Appendix C: Survey

*Information overload is the feeling of receiving too much information to be able

to handle it effectively.

With this definition in mind, indicate how much you agree with the

following statements:

Never Very Rarely Occasionally Frequently Very Frequently

I feel overloaded by the amount of information I have to handle

I have enough time to process the information I need to process

When I perform an internet search, the results are relevant to me

Information that is sent to me is relevant to me

When I perform an internet search, the results are redundant

Information that is sent to me is redundant

How much do you agree that the following items are sources of information overload for you?

Strongly Disagree

Disagree Undecided/Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Class assignments


Courseware Systems (such as Blackboard or Sakai)

E-mail Instant Messaging

Social Networking Sites (such as Facebook or MySpace)

Other Internet use

Newspaper

Television

Phone Calls Voicemail and Text Messaging

Work, internship, or other employment

Extracurricular activities

I handle information overload by

No Yes Don't Know

Ignoring the information presented to me

Filtering out irrelevant information

Eliminating or discontinuing sources of information

Delegating responsibilities for handling the information to


others

Multitasking Checking sources of information more frequently

Checking sources of information less frequently

Organizing my information

Consolidating my information in one place

Looking for a technical solution

Do you use any social networking websites (Facebook, MySpace, Bebo,

LinkedIn, etc.)?

Yes No Don't Know

Which of the following social networking websites do you use? Check all that apply.

Bebo

Facebook

Friendster

LinkedIn

MySpace

Windows Live Spaces

Yahoo! 360

Other

How many profiles do you currently have at social networking websites?

0

1


2

3

4

5

More than 5

How do you use social networking websites? Check all that apply.

Stay in touch with friends

Make new friends I have never met in person

Find out more about people (I may or may not have met)

Find someone to date

As a forum to express my opinions and views

Share photos, music, videos, or other work

For professional activities (job networking, etc.)

Communicate with classmates about course-related topics

Communicate with instructors about course-related topics

Participate in special interest groups

Plan or invite people to events

Respond to site advertisements

Other

How often do you visit your social networking website profile?

Several times a day

About once a day

Every few days

Once a week

Once a month

Less than once a month

Never/ Don't know


How often do you change your profile?

Never

Once a year

Once a quarter/semester

Monthly

Weekly

Several times per week

Daily

Approximately how many hours per week do you use social networking websites?

Less than 1

1-3 hours

4-6 hours

7-10 hours

11-13 hours

14-16 hours

More than 16 hours

How many friends do you currently have at all the social networking websites you use?

None

1–50

51-100

101-200

201-300

301-500

More than 500

How frequently do you send personal messages or wall posts in social

networking websites?

Several times a day

Once a day


Several times a week

Once a week

Less than once a week

How many groups do you actively participate in at all the social networking websites you use?

None

1-5

6-10

More than 10

What is your class standing?

Senior or final year

Freshman or first year

Other

Are you currently a full-time or part-time student? Part-time is fewer than 12 credit hours per quarter/semester.

Full Time

Part Time

What is your cumulative GPA?

A

A-

B+

B

B-

C+

C

C- or lower

Decline to answer


What is your gender?

Female

Male

To be eligible for the Amazon.com gift card drawing, please enter your

e-mail address.


Appendix D: Statistics Tables

Table 8. Enrollment statistics for the University of North Carolina, Spring 2009

Classification Gender Total

FR F 2243

FR M 1564

JR F 1694

JR M 1143

SO F 2403

SO M 1602

SR F 3440

SR M 2454

Total 16543


Information Source Distributions

1

2

3

4

5

Class Assignments Mean 3.6058824

SD 1.0002776 Std Err Mean 0.0542477 upper 95% 3.7125868 lower 95% 3.4991779 N 340

1

2

3

4

5

Courseware

Mean 3.0352941 SD 1.0412955 Std Err Mean 0.0564722 upper 95% 3.1463741 lower 95% 2.9242141 N 340

1

2

3

4

5

E-mail



1

2

3

4

5

Instant Messaging


1

2

3

4

5

Social Networking Sites


1

2

3

4

5

Other Internet uses



1

2

3

4

5

Newspaper


1

2

3

4

5

Television


1

2

3

4

5

Telephone Calls



1

2

3

4

5

Text Messaging and Voicemail


1

2

3

4

5

Employment


1

2

3

4

5

Other Extracurricular Activities


Key 1) Strongly Disagree 2) Disagree 3) Neutral/Undecided 4) Agree 5) Strongly Agree

Table 9. Response distributions to items about information sources


SNS Behavior Distributions

1

2

3

4

5

Mean 1.6748466 Std Dev 0.9004849 Std Err Mean 0.0498732 upper 95% 1.7729618 lower 95% 1.5767315 N 326

Visit Frequency 1) Several times a day 2) About once a day 3) Every few days 4) Once a week 5) Once a month 6) Less than once a month 7) Never

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Change Frequency 1) Never 2) Yearly 3) Semester 4) Monthly 5) Weekly 6) SeveralWeek 7) Daily


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Hours/Wk 1) LessThan1 2) 1-3 3) 4-6 4) 7-10 5) 11-13 6) 14-16 7) 16+



Table 10. Response distributions SNS usage behavior items

2

3

4

5

6

7

Friends 1) None 2) 1-50 3) 51-100 4) 101-200 5) 201-300 6) 301-500 7) 500+


1

2

3

4

5

Personal Messages and Wall Posts 1) SeveralDay 2) Daily 3) SeveralWeek 4) Weekly 5) LessWeek


1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Activity in Groups 1) None 2) 1-5 3) 6-10 4) 10+



Coping Strategy Distributions Ignore

No

Yes

Frequencies

Response Count Prob No 231 0.67544 Yes 111 0.32456 Total 342 1.00000

Filter

No

Yes

Frequencies


Eliminate

No

Yes

Frequencies



Delegate

No

Yes

Frequencies


Multitask

No

Yes

Frequencies


More Frequent

No

Yes



Frequencies Less Frequent

No

Yes

Frequencies


Organize

No

Yes

Frequencies


Consolidate

No

Yes

Frequencies



Technical

No

Yes

Frequencies


Table 11. Response distributions to coping strategy items


SNS Usage Correlations

Nonparametric: Spearman's ρ

Variable by Variable Spearman ρ Prob>|ρ| Plot SNS (as a source) Feel Overloaded 0.1270 0.0191 Visit Frequency Feel Overloaded 0.0612 0.2705 Hours/Week Feel Overloaded 0.0612 0.2721 PM/Wall Posts Feel Overloaded 0.0442 0.4279 Groups 2 Feel Overloaded 0.0360 0.5174 Friends Feel Overloaded 0.0321 0.5639 Change Frequency Feel Overloaded -0.0276 0.6204

Table 12. Correlation tables between SNS usage behaviors and feeling information

overload.


Sources and Feelings of Information Overload Nonparametric: Spearman's ρ

Variable by Variable Spearman ρ Prob>|ρ| Plot Class Assignments Feel Overloaded 0.3778 <.0001 Courseware Feel Overloaded 0.3589 <.0001 E-mail Feel Overloaded 0.3410 <.0001 Other Internet Feel Overloaded 0.2366 <.0001 TV Feel Overloaded 0.2494 <.0001 Work Feel Overloaded 0.2875 <.0001 Extr Feel Overloaded 0.2384 <.0001 Text/Voice Feel Overloaded 0.2086 0.0001 Phone Feel Overloaded 0.1574 0.0038 Paper Feel Overloaded 0.1275 0.0189 SNS (as a source) Feel Overloaded 0.1270 0.0191 IM Feel Overloaded 0.1258 0.0207

Table 13. Correlations between information sources and feelings of information overload

Information Overload in Undergraduate Students

Documents