Content area
Full text
1. Introduction
In library and information science (LIS), “information behavior” and “information practices” are often used to describe how users process information. Although these terms can be used to characterize the range of information activities that people undertake, there are fundamental differences according to the perspective of the study (Savolainen, 2007a). Information practices are based on social constructivism, which emphasizes the social dimension of people's information actions and aims to discover their social context and multiple factors that influence them (Savolainen, 2008). However, based on and starting from human cognition, information behavior pays more attention to individual cognition (Kaitlin and Diana, 2021), whose research methodology is mainly based on cognitive constructivism (Carey et al., 2001; Savolainen, 1995b). These two different discursive approaches reflect different research features. The study of information behavior hinges on individualistic notions, implying that individual rational actors actively pursue existent cognitive needs. This reflects that information behavior relies on psychological theories rather than sociology or anthropology (Cox, 2012; Lloyd and Olsson, 2017; Savolainen, 2007a). Meanwhile, information practices highlight the social structure of the user's information activities and provide a stronger explanation of the everyday phenomena. Furthermore, it is more relevant in describing people's information activities in their daily lives because it can depict the information world as constructed by the interaction of individuals and their socio-cultural background (Savolainen et al., 2009). However, it is worth noting that information practices does not exclude users' cognition, which considers cognition factors macroscopically and does not explore cognition occurrence and changes in detail (Savolainen, 2007a).
The research on information practices is moving forward. However, when compared with the amount of research on information behavior, it still receives lesser attention. In addition, previous some studies have not made a strict distinction between “information behavior” and “information practices” (Savolainen, 2008). The connotation of information practices has been elaborated by scholars in terms of origin, contextual features, activities and methodology (Agosto, 2018; Bronstein and Solomon, 2021; Jarrahi and Thomson, 2017; Savolainen, 2008; Talja and McKenzie, 2007). However, researchers have not reached a consensus about the notion of information practices. Current research still lacks an elaboration of the connotation of information practices.
Previous information practice studies have produced several results in terms of the theoretical foundations, research models...