Search results

This paper seeks to draw on the linguistic model of narrative recursion developed by Ochs and Capps and on data collected and analysed in previous research projects conducted by Shenton in order to synthesise a new framework that represents the information behaviour of children and young people.

The model of narrative recursion provides the basis of the framework proposed. However, additional, LIS‐specific details have been introduced to ensure that the reworked version represents the phenomenon of information behaviour pertaining to the young as appropriately as possible.

The individual elements within the Ochs and Capps model correspond closely to three phases typically associated with information behaviour – the emergence of an information need, information‐seeking action, and information use.

No claim is made that the model delineates all instances of information behaviour. It ignores cases where information is acquired incidentally, where no clear goal is involved in the activity and where no enhancement of the knowledge state results, even though information has been accessed.

The model is sufficiently simple to be employed in information literacy sessions with secondary school pupils. It could also be extended to provide an instructional tool and is useful in highlighting various points in youngsters' information‐related action where intermediaries may help.

Although the adoption of ideas and frameworks from other disciplines with the aim of increasing understanding of LIS phenomena is a growing trend, the paper forms one of the first attempts to apply to information behaviour an existing model associated with linguistics.

The paper seeks to draw on Sice's systems model, itself based on Senge's “fixes that fail” archetype, and on data from two previous research projects conducted by one of the authors. The purpose of this paper is to synthesise a new model that portrays the information‐seeking behaviour of children and young people.

The systems model provides the backbone of the new framework but additions, accommodations and revisions were made to ensure that the version featured here represents the phenomenon of information seeking by the young as appropriately as possible in terms of the data that were gathered.

One of the new model's most significant characteristics is its emphasis on problems and issues that prevent information seeking from proceeding smoothly. Information seeking is also shown to be an iterative process, with the individual often revisiting previous stages, frequently in response to difficulties.

Data were collected from pupils in just seven schools. The undertaking of research further a‐field would be invaluable, if the extent to which the model is applicable to other information‐seekers in different environments is to be ascertained.

The model demonstrates the importance of the information professional's educative role, in terms of both delivering formal information literacy instruction and providing assistance at the point of need.

Although the use of ideas and frameworks from other disciplines, with the aim of increasing understanding of phenomena within LIS, is a growing trend, this paper represents one of the first attempts to apply an existing model associated with systems thinking to information behaviour.

The purpose of this paper is to explore meta‐models that pertain to information behaviour. It seeks to highlight the possibilities they offer to researchers wishing to develop their own and to readers more generally interested in information behaviour literature.

Various frameworks that may be regarded as information behaviour meta‐models were examined and three separate types were identified. These are discussed in turn, with particular characteristics of individual meta‐models used to illustrate the types.

A meta‐model is considered here to be a model that has been derived from one or more existing models. Information behaviour meta‐models fall into three categories: those that unify, within one framework, disparate models/theories from a number of areas; those that integrate the fundamentals of several models which share common strands; and those that recast an established model for a particular purpose.

The extent of the typology presented in the paper is bound by the limits of the authors' endeavours in uncovering relevant meta‐models. Should further meta‐models be traced, it is possible that other types would also come to light.

The work will aid the reader's understanding of how theoretical frameworks in information behaviour are developed. It will help those who study the field's literature to grasp variations in the origin of the individual models they see, by demonstrating that models may be derived from others in different ways. It will also enable readers intent on constructing their own models to understand some of the courses of action open to them.

Team formulation, used to understand patient problems and plan care, is a growing practice in adult mental health and learning disability services. The purpose of this paper is to explore definitions applied to team formulation (as distinct to therapy formulation), its underpinning theories, and the inter-relationship between the team and the process of formulation.

A database search (main search term of team formulation) of peer-reviewed studies was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. A main and second reviewer conducted quality appraisals and thematic analysis. Data were analysed by convergent qualitative synthesis design using thematic analysis to transform evidence from quantitative and qualitative studies into qualitative findings.

Initial searching produced 4,532 papers, 10 of which were eligible for inclusion. Team formulation has no distinct definition. Theories underpinning the practice of therapy formulation emanating from general psychological theory underpin team formulation. Seven studies applied psychological theories to the examination of team formulation. No studies examined the impact of the team on the formulation. Six themes were generated regarding the impact of team formulation on the team; “increased knowledge and understanding”, “altered perceptions, leading to altered relationships, feelings and behaviours”, “space to reflect”, “useful when stuck or challenged”, “perceived increase in effectiveness” and “improved team working”.

Limited evidence and variable quality compromised the availability of review evidence.

This is the first review to examine team formulation through the context of the team. The authors argue that a conceptual framework to encompass team inputs, processes and outputs in team formulation practice should guide future research.