Thriving on Theory: A New Model for Synchronous Reference Encounters Marie L. Radford, Ph.D. Associate Professor, Rutgers, The State University of NJ Lynn.

Thriving on Theory: A New Model for SynchronousReference Encounters

Marie L. Radford, Ph.D.

Associate Professor,

Rutgers, The State University of NJ

Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D.

Senior Research Scientist, OCLC

ASIS&T 2009 Annual MeetingNovember 6-11, 2009Vancouver, BC

Need for Integrated Theoretical Model

• “In time, perhaps an overarching model of all reference, regardless of medium of delivery, will be developed.” (Pomerantz, 2005)

• Today will present new model grounded in Communication & Sociology Theory

Relational Theory & Approach to Interpersonal Communication

• Every message has dual dimensions – both content & relational.

(Watzlawick, Beavin, & Jackson, 1967)

Dual Dimensions

Content

• The “WHAT” of the message

• Information exchange

Relational

• “HOW” message is to be taken

• Relationship of participants

Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior

Erving Goffman1922-1982

Essay:

“On Face-Work: An analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction” (1967)

Model Grounded in Research

Identify what is critically important to users & librarians in successful reference interactions

• FtF Environment – Reference Encounter (Radford, 1999)

• Virtual Reference, Live Chat Environment– Seeking Synchronicity (Radford & Connaway, 2005 - 2008)

The Reference Encounter – FtF (Radford, 1999)

• “Interpersonal relationships & communication of great importance in librarian & user perceptions.”

• Librarians value content more.

• Users value relational aspects more.

Seeking Synchronicity – VR

• Librarians AND users value BOTH information (content) & relational aspects

• Greater portion of users value content in VR than in FtF

• Librarians sensitive to user’s attitude in unsuccessful VR encounters (as found in FtF)

Findings from Interpersonal Communication Analysis

• Relational & Content Facilitators– Interpersonal aspects of FtF or chat conversation

that have a positive impact on librarian-client interaction & that enhance communication.

• Relational & Content Barriers– Interpersonal aspects of FtF or chat conversation

that have a negative impact on librarian-client interaction & that impede communication.

Facilitators - Positive Relational & Content Dimensions

Relational (Interpersonal) – Positive Attitude– Positive Relationship

Quality– Approachability– Positive Impact of

Technology– Familiarity– Greeting Ritual– Closing Ritual

Content (Information)– Providing Information

Access– Accurate Information– Specific Information– Demonstrating Knowledge

(General/Specialized)– Appropriate Instruction– Convenient/Timely Access

Barriers - Negative Relational & Content Dimensions

Relational – Negative Attitude– Negative Relational Quality– Lack of Approachability– Negative Impact of

Technology– Lack of Greeting Ritual– Lack of Closing Ritual

Content – Lack of Info./Access– Lack of Accuracy– Negative Impact of

Technology– Lack of Knowledge

(General/Specialized)– Lack of Appropriate

Instruction– Unrealistic Task

Encounter Context – Participant Characteristics

Librarian & User– age & gender– cultural background– educational level– technological skills (including keyboarding) – subject knowledge– language & communication skills – institutional affiliation– user’s past experience with libraries/librarians– librarian’s reference service philosophy

Encounter Context – Situation

• Reference queries are related to different situations including

– professional – academic – personal – other

Encounter Context – Mode of Communication

• Synchronous reference modes

– FtF, traditional reference

– VR (live chat) encounters

Implications

• Information & relationship development critical to successful interactions

• Sustainability dependant upon developing & maintaining positive relationships with VR & FtF users

• For LIS education– Content & technical skills vitally important– Increase emphasis on interpersonal communication– Emphasize user’s point of view

Future Research

• More testing of Theoretical Model– Does it hold up in other modes (IM)?– Non-synchronous modes (email)?– Quasi-synchronous modes (SMS text messaging?)

• Next will investigate Instant Messaging (IM) reference environment – growing steadily– IM believed to be congruent with model, closely

related to live chat

Special Thanks

• Rutgers University & OCLC Seeking Synchronicity Grant Project Team

• Jocelyn DeAngelis Williams • Susanna Sabolsci-Boros• Timothy J. Dickey• Patrick Confer• Mary Anne Reilly• Julie Strange• Lisa Rose-Wiles• Andrea Simzak• Jannica Heinstrom

• Those helping with the graphic design of the model• Nathan Graham (Rutgers), Mor Naaman (Rutgers), & Gary P. Radford

(Fairleigh Dickinson University)

End Notes

• This is one of the outcomes from the projectSeeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services

from User, Non-User, and Librarian Perspectives

• Funded by IMLS, Rutgers University, & OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc.

• Slides available at project web site: http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/synchronicity/