See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268510128

The 'information search process' revisited: Is the model still useful?

Article  in  Information Research · October 2008

CITATIONS READS

67 5,621

3 authors, including:

Carol Collier Kuhlthau Jannica Heinström

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey Oslo Metropolitan University
64 PUBLICATIONS   5,116 CITATIONS    58 PUBLICATIONS   671 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Argumentative online inquiry in building students' knowledge work competences (ARONI) View project

The Impact of Information Literacy in the Digital Workplace (DiWIL) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jannica Heinström on 18 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 VOL. 13 NO. 4, DECEMBER, 2008

The ‘information search process’ revisited:

is the model still useful?

Carol C. Kuhlthau, Jannica Heinström and Ross J. Todd

Centre for International Scholarship in School Libraries, Department of Library and
Information Science, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 4 Huntington Street,
New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901 USA

Abstract
Introduction. This paper examines the continued usefulness of Kuhlthau's Information
Search Process as a model of information behaviour in new, technologically rich information
environments.
Method. A comprehensive review of research that has explored the model in various settings
and a study employing qualitative and quantitative methods undertaken in the context of an
inquiry project among school students (n=574). Students were interviewed at three stages of
the information search process, during which nine feelings were identified and tracked.
Results. Findings show individual patterns, but confirm the Information Search Process as a
valid model in the changing information environment for describing information behaviour in
tasks that require knowledge construction. The findings support the progression of feelings,
thoughts and actions as suggested by the search process model.
Conclusions. The information search process model remains useful for explaining students'
information behaviour. The model was found to have value as a research tool as well as for
practical application.

Problem statement
Kuhlthau’s model of the Information Search Process was developed in the 1980s and refined
in the 1990s. Since its conceptualization and development, the model has been used as a
framework and diagnostic tool for understanding the information search experience of people
in a variety of library and information settings. These information environments and services
have not remained static, particularly with rapid advances in and impacts of information
technology. Therefore, questions arise regarding the current usefulness of the model in light
of the developments in the information environment to date. This paper seeks to explore
whether the model still is a useful, insightful explanation of information seeking behaviour.
This question is examined through a literature review of recent work applying the model and
presents findings from a research study that explored the model within a school context.

Literature Review
Generating the Information Search Process model

Kuhlthau's initial study of secondary school students identified a series of stages of thoughts,
feelings and actions in the process of an extensive research assignment. It revealed that
students were involved in a complex process of construction rather than simply collecting and
reporting on found information. These results were reported in her 1993 doctoral dissertation
and book (Kuhlthau 1985) along with several articles shortly thereafter. From 1988 these
findings were verified and refined in larger, diverse studies across different information
environments, including the workplace and applying both quantitative and in-depth qualitative
analyses (Kuhlthau 1988a; 1988b; 1988c, 1999; 2001). This user-centred research was among
the first to include the affective experience of information seeking in addition to cognitive and
physical dimensions. Kuhlthau found that in more complex information seeking tasks,
feelings of uncertainty commonly increased in the process of information seeking before
diminishing with focus formulation and construction in later stages. This rise in uncertainty
was frequently unexpected and caused apprehension and confusion in some searchers to the
point of obstructing the task. From these results, Kuhlthau developed the principle of
uncertainty and the concept of zones of intervention for services and systems, based on Lev
Vygotsky's work (1978). This was consolidated in Seeking meaning: a process approach to
library and information services (Kuhlthau 1993b). Kuhlthau's empirical studies show that the
Information Search Process occurs in six stages: initiation, selection, exploration, formulation,
collection, presentation, named for the primary task to be accomplished at each point in the
process. A full description of these stages is available in Kuhlthau (2004).

Figure 1: Model of the Information Search Process

Since its generation the Information Search Process model has been used to examine
theoretical concepts within librarianship and information science, as well as to develop
practice in diverse contexts including education, work and every-day life information seeking.
The literature review shows that the model is used as a framework for understanding central
concepts in the librarianship and information science field, such as relevance judgments, task,
knowledge construction, affect and information seeking as process. The model is not only
valuable as a theoretical construct for examining information behaviour, but also serves as a
diagnostic tool for intervention in different information seeking contexts.

the Information Search Process as a model of cognitive, affective and

behavioural dimensions of knowledge construction

Several studies have supported the notion of information seeking as a process of knowledge
construction with different cognitive and affective stages (Cole 1997; George et al. 2006;
Harada 2002; Pitts 1995; Tang and Solomon 1998; Serola and Vakkari 2005; Vakkari 2001;
Vakkari et al. 2003; Vakkari and Hakala 2000; Wang and Soergel 1998; Yang 1997). The
Information Search Process model was ground-breaking in its emphasis on the
interrelationship of cognitive, affective and physical dimensions of information seeking and
how the search process often causes anxiety and uncertainty. Several studies have confirmed
this notion of interplay between cognitive, affective and behavioural factors in information
seeking (Bilal 2000; 2001; 2002; Bilal and Kirby 2002; George et al. 2006; Heinstrom 2002;
Jiao and Onwuegbuzie 1997; 1999; Jiao et al. 2006; Jiao et al. 1996; Mellon 1988;
Onwuegbuzie 1997; Onwuegbuzie and Jiao 1998; 2004; Wang and Soergel 1998). Sex
differences in how students proceed through the process have been reported. Burdick (1996)
found that boys tend to gather and complete, while girls prefer to investigate and formulate.
Girls are more likely to be optimistic as they start their projects, but doubtful and uncertain by
the end while boys tend to be more confident as they finish their projects.

The Information Search Process in a digital environment

The Information Search Process seems to be an over-arching process regardless of search

venue, or print or digital format. Ongoing research suggests that students undergo the same
affective and constructive stages of the process in digital environments (Branch 2003).
Computer experience does not seem to influence the process (Byron 1999). Some of the
search pitfalls suggested by the model may even be deeper when searching the Web (Broch
2000; Kennedy et al. 1999). Research suggests that the Internet's readily available information
has changed students' conceptions of the research process, in that they expect to find
information quickly and without effort and where choice of topic is guided by an estimate of
easy availability of information (Holliday and Li 2004). When students encounter problems
and obstacles they become confused and frustrated (Bilal 2002; Branch 2003; Holliday and Li
2004; Kracker and Wang 2002; Whitmire 2003). The search process often ends as a result of
deadlines. Students' feelings of relief at the end of their process is more related to task
completion rather than to a successful learning outcome (Holliday and Li 2004). Similar
results have been found in group work contexts where the sense of relief at the end of the
process is strongly related to end of stress rather than sense of accomplishment and negative
emotions prevailed throughout the project (Hyldegard 2006).

Application of the process in information retrieval systems

Information retrieval systems have been designed to support and prompt students' progress
through the Information Search Process. Timed interventions based on the process resulted in
improved student outcome overall, but the retrieval system also encountered challenges, as
not all students proceeded at the same pace through the process. Timing of the interventions
thus becomes challenging in automated systems (Cole 2001; Cole et al. 2001).

The Information Search Process and relevance judgments

As information seekers move through the search process stages and learn more about their
topics, their relevance criteria also undergo development and refinement. Particularly after
focus formulation they become more competent at selecting pertinent information, developing
more specific searches and becoming more critical of the found information. This awareness
is often accompanied by increased confidence and also results in improved search results
(Serola and Vakkari 2005; Tang and Solomon 1998; Vakkari 2001; Vakkari et al. 2003;
Vakkari and Hakala 2000; Wang and Soergel 1998; Yang 1997).

The Information Search Process and adult information seeking in work and
everyday life

The model has also been found to be a useful model for adult information seeking: it has been
shown to resemble stages in a complex work task with similar stages of feelings, construction,
problem formulation and solving (Bystrom and Hansen 2005; Bystrom and Jarvelin 1995;
Kuhlthau 1999; 2001). School librarians undergo equivalent stages in their research process as
their students do (Harada 2005), as do women seeking health information (Warner and
Procaccino 2004). Everyday life information seekers also experience uncertainty in their
search process, particularly when they encounter contradictory information and need help of
mediators (Warner and Procaccino 2004). The model is valuable as a diagnostic tool in a
reference setting to make interventions more user-centred (Isbell and Kammerlocher 1998).

Application in educational contexts

The model is a useful framework for teaching students information seeking. In recent years,
the Centre for International Scholarship in School Libraries has used it as the conceptual
framework for developing a programme of inquiry-based learning. It has employed the model
as a mechanism for teachers and school librarians to recognize critical moments when
instructional interventions are essential in students' information-to-knowledge experiences.
Students are often driven by the end product without allowing themselves time for gathering
and synthesizing information as part of a process (McGregor and Streitenberger 2004).
Particularly focus formulation is challenging (Broch 2000; Branch 2003; Fister 1992; Loerke
and Oberg 1997). Concept mapping has been found to help students in focus formulation
(Gordon 2000). When the model is used as a framework for guiding inquiry, students move
away from simply collecting and compiling information to please teachers; rather, they
become involved in thinking processes that require extensive exploration of ideas and
formulation of thoughts before developing their own deep understanding of their topics and
presenting it. By allowing time for reflecting and formulating while they are exploring and
collecting information, they avoid missing the critical stages of learning. This close
connection between the model and learning reveals how important it is for teachers and
librarians to guide students through this process (Kuhlthau et al. 2007).

The model as a diagnostic tool

The diagnostic value of the model seems even more crucial in today's digital age. Research
evidence suggests that students appear to settle for the first related information found. Now
accustomed to easy access to information, students tend to skip preliminary, exploratory
searching and focus formulation and proceed to information collection for their final product,
without building background knowledge and formulating essential questions that drive and
direct their information seeking. Few students identify a point of focus formulation. They
seldom collect ideas from several readings to form their own conclusions (Bilal 2002; Branch
2003; Holliday and Li 2004; Kracker and Wang 2002; Whitmire 2003). This may result in a
false focus where the choice of topic is mostly based on expediency, in which in turn creates
problems in later stages of collection and presentation (Kennedy et al. 1999). Timely
interventions of skilled professionals can prevent this. If students are aware of the process and
the need to formulate a focus, this will prompt them to include the pre-focus stages in their
process (Harada 2002; Loerke and Oberg 1997), as well reducing their anxiety (Harada 2002;
Kracker 2002). Awareness of the process is shown to be not only valuable for instructors but
also for students as it facilitates both their learning process and emotional experience.

Student learning through guided inquiry

Ongoing research centred on the model shows its continued application in research and
practice. A study conducted by the research team of the Rutgers Centre for International
Scholarship in School Libraries in 2003-2005 led by Ross Todd, Carol Kuhlthau and Jannica
Heinström, has provided an opportunity to revisit the model and to further explore the
question: Is the model still useful in the current information environment?

The research involved ten New Jersey public schools where school librarian and classroom
teachers implemented collaborative instructional units of work to engage students in
meaningful research on selected curriculum topics. The students were encouraged to use a
broad range of information sources including electronic sources and databases. Guided
Inquiry formed the pedagogical framework for the instruction, based on the stages of the
model (Kuhlthau 2004). The sample consisted of 574 students in Grades 6 to 12. The initial
research sought to determine the changes, if any, that are evident in students' knowledge of a
curriculum related topic, as well as changes, if any, in their feelings as they proceed through
the stages of information seeking in the context of a collaborative inquiry project. In addition,
it sought to identify and explain any interactions that might exist between knowledge
construction and feelings in information seeking. This study was also interested in examining
the extent to which the information search process model is useful for explaining the
interactions between knowledge construction and feelings in information seeking. As results
from this large project have already been reported in Heinström (2006) and Todd (2006), this
paper focuses on study findings pertaining to the usefulness of the model.

One of the goals of this study was to develop a data collection framework that could be used
by classroom teachers and school librarians to chart the information-to-knowledge
development of students. Data were collected at three points of the process: initiation of the
research task, midpoint and completion of the project, instead of at all stages (Figure 1).
Students' knowledge development was measured in terms of substance of knowledge,
structure of knowledge, amount of knowledge, extent of knowledge and title of knowledge. A
constructivist view of knowledge change posits feelings as an important aspect of information
seeking and sustained integrated learning. Nine feelings were identified and tracked through
the three points of data collection. These were: confidence, disappointment, relief, frustration,
confusion, optimism, uncertainty, satisfaction and anxiety. These were measured by asking
the students to indicate how they experienced a particular feeling on a four-point scale: very,
fairly, a little and not at all. In addition, the students were also asked to state what they found
easy and difficult in researching their topics at the three points in the search process.

Results related to the information seeking process model

At the beginning of the research process most students presented their topics with descriptive
statements. The common starting point was to list superficial general facts. Students
predominantly estimated their knowledge as 'not much'. (For further results see Todd 2006).
The data showed that at the initiation stage, their main difficulty was choosing a topic to
research. The characteristic feelings at this stage were uncertainty and confusion, feelings that
then continued to decrease throughout the project. Student descriptions of their initial
difficulties revealed that these feelings often were related to lack of knowledge and insecurity
as how to proceed (Table 1). For example,

I am worried when I know so little. I must spend much time searching for information (Grade
8 boy)

and

What is difficult about researching this topic is deciding which authors to use (Grade 8 girl)

Students were also worried about the lack of information (Table 1). In order to deal with these
fears, students often chose a well-known topic for the project:

I choose the topic because I thought it would be easiest to research (Grade 6 girl).

This approach made the whole process seem more manageable, a finding similar to Holliday
and Li (2004). Although insecurity was common, some students also felt confident and
optimistic at this stage (Figure 2). They felt reassured to know that their topic is likely to be
easily found in many sources:

X is a famous person, so it will be easy to find information about him (Grade 10 boy).

The six aspects of the inquiry

Beginning Middle End
process that the stud. found most
N N N
difficult
Availability of information 125 124 112
Lack of previous knowledge 28 4 3
Find precise information 26 26 30
Information quality 22 29 25
General research 15 19 14
Find a focus 13 18 17
Use a particular source (often book or
11 18 19
bibliography)

Table 1: The aspects of the inquiry process that the students

found most difficult.
(Note: N=number of students who mentioned this aspect.)
At the midpoint of the inquiry project a common experience for students was to retrieve
conflicting information and feel overwhelmed by the many aspects related to the topic. This
led students to rethink their initial conception of information seeking as a clear-cut process of
fact-finding. Optimism tended to decrease at this stage. They came to realize that information
seeking is a demanding process which requires reflection and analytical decisions related to
relevance judgments and focus. An example:

There are numerous topics within Ireland to research. Narrowing it down is hard. (Grade 8
girl).

When students analysed the retrieved information they found it difficult to sort through and
pick out the relevant information. The volume of retrieved information made it difficult to
focus on the most relevant aspects (Table 1), for example,

There is too much information and hard to find information that can really help me (Grade 6
girl).

The most dominating feeling at this point was frustration, which increased strongly in
intensity (Figure 2):

I don't really have a specific topic that interests me. (I am) Bored with this whole project.
(Grade 8 girl).

There was also a slight increase in anxiety and disappointment but the level of these feelings
were fairly even throughout the project. Lack of engagement and the hesitation to spend time
on information seeking were expressed in frustration related to the requirement to find enough
information and cover all aspects of the topic. Students generally tended to be frustrated
particularly with aspects that consume the most time and effort:

I think searching for information is difficult. Not many search engines or books have what I
want. Takes too much time. (Grade 6 boy)
The difficult thing is that one library didn't have all the books needed to research my topic, I
had to go all over town for resources. (Grade 8 girl)

and

Everything is difficult about researching. You have to take time to go out to the library, look
up books, make copies and then highlight and write. (Grade 8 girl)
 Figure 2: Average degree of disappointment, frustration, confusion, uncertainty and
anxiety through the three writing tasks.
0 = not at all, 1 = a little 2= fairly and 3 = very

Although the students faced problems at focus stage of the search process they started to
express more explanatory statements when they described their topics. They began to present
more specific facts and looked for explanations and reasons how and why things happen.
They estimated their knowledge as 'some' or 'quite a bit' (mean = 2.6, SD =0.83).

The highest statistical differences in feelings were found between writing tasks 2 to 3, which
possibly reflects the knowledge construction process. There were increases in relief (t = 12.5,
p <0.000), satisfaction (t = 7.4, p <0.000) and confidence (t = 6.4, p <0.000) between points 2
and 3. There were decreases in confusion (t = 5.9, p <.000), uncertainty (t = 4.9, p <.000) and
frustration (t = 4.7, p <0.000) between writing tasks 2 and 3. The overall development of
positive feelings throughout the project is illustrated in Figure 3. The development of a Grade
10 girl, may illustrate this change in feelings. At writing task 2 she estimated her topical
knowledge as 'not much', felt frustrated and uncertain and found that 'nothing' was easy in her
project work. When she reached writing task 3 she proclaims that she feels relieved and
satisfied and now knows 'a great deal' about her topic. What she has learned has actually made
her appreciate her whole project work:

I am very interested in this project so everything is pretty easy. (Grade 10 girl)

 Figure 3: Average degree of confidence, relief, optimism and satisfaction through the
three writing tasks.
0 = not at all, 1 = a little, 2 = fairly and 3 = very.

At the end of the search process difficulties tended to decrease and most students found they
knew at least 'quite a bit' (mean = 3.2, SD =.76) about their topics. Some students were able to
articulate personal conclusions, viewpoints and interpret the information they had
encountered. The dominating pattern in feelings at the final stage was a positive one. Students'
confidence, relief and satisfaction increased, while their frustration, uncertainty, confusion
and uncertainty dropped significantly. The main difficulty at this point was to use a particular
source (Table 1), for instance EBSCO host, or an encyclopedia. Many students also found it
difficult to find precise information:

Reading through a lot of information (is difficult). Sometimes when you type you get many
results and have to narrow them down (Grade 8 boy).

The students' emotions were compared to their estimates of topical knowledge at the three
phases of data collection. The more students had learned about the topic the more confident
(r=.39, p=0.000), relieved (r=.19, p=0.000), satisfied (r=.34, p=0.000) and optimistic (r=.28,
p=0.000) they felt. A qualitative analysis of students (n=35), who had shown a particularly
strong increasing depth in their topical understanding, showed that it was typical for them to
experience positive feelings throughout the project, particularly high degrees of confidence
and optimism, for example:

Even though it is a lengthy project, I know that I can accomplish it (Grade 8 girl).
and

I am good at using the Internet to find credible sources of information (Grade 9 boy).

These students had experienced negative emotions, particularly uncertainty and frustration, at
the middle of their projects, but at the end they felt satisfied and relieved.

Occasionally students ended their projects without ever developing a focus. In these cases the
students' knowledge level also seemed quite factual and superficial and their feelings
remained negative. Students who did not estimate their own knowledge or learning as
particularly high tended to feel disappointed (r=.28, p=0.000), frustrated (r=.33, p=0.000),
confused (r=.30, p=0.000) and uncertain (r=.33, p=0.000). A Grade 10 girl who estimates her
knowledge as 'not much' feels very disappointed, frustrated and confused and not at all
confident, relieved, optimistic or satisfied at the completion of her project. She relates,

I have absolutely no interest in this. I think I am stupid. And dumb. (Grade 10 girl)

The findings of this study support the progression of feelings, thoughts and actions as
suggested by the search process model. The students' feelings tended to be more negative at
the mid-point of the project with relief and satisfaction at the end. Their topical understanding
developed from factual to more analytical towards the end and they struggled with issues of
finding a focus and sorting out relevant information at the midpoint.

Discussion
The Information Search Process model remains useful for explaining students' information
behaviour. Although there were variations, the results supported the suggested knowledge
construction process. The mid-point bridged negative and positive feelings and was the
turning point from compiling facts towards more analytical understanding. The results also
revealed that not all students go through the search process in a similar manner. Some
students engaged with the collected information more analytically. They did not approach
their task as stockpiling facts but rather by building explanations, analyses and syntheses.
These students with a higher engagement in their learning experienced a stronger construction
curve with more negative emotions at the mid-point and more positive emotions at the end.
These findings support the model, which shows that the most challenging stages of an inquiry
project are the exploration and formulation stages (Kuhlthau 2004).

Students who remained at a descriptive level, mainly collecting superficial facts about their
topics instead of taking a more analytical approach, tended to experience negative emotions
throughout their research. They were relieved at the end but this relief seemed more related to
the project completion rather than a sense of accomplishment, a result similar to those
reported by Holliday and Li (2004) and Hyldegard (2006).

The findings of this study support earlier findings. They showed that students tend to
conceptualize information as something easily available and feel frustrated when the process
is not as seamless as they expect, as did Holliday and Li (2004). Students often chose their
topics based on estimated availability of information and they became frustrated when
information was not easily found, which are findings similar to those of Bilal, (2002; Branch
2003; Holliday and Li 2004; Kracker and Wang 2002; and Whitmire 2003). Availability of
information was the most pervasive challenge for the students. While uncertainty is the most
dominant feeling for students in a construction process, the feeling of frustration is related to
the actual information search particularly when this becomes challenging.

Not all students progressed through the construction process as described by the search
process model. Those who did tended to learn the most (according to the knowledge
measures) and felt most satisfied at the project conclusion, while those who skimmed through
the process and skipped stages ended up frustrated and demonstrated superficial descriptive
knowledge. This highlights the value of using the search process model as a diagnostic tool
and guiding students to deeper knowledge development. Students working in digital
environments appear to go through the search process stages to build knowledge of their
topics, but the easy availability of information encourages them to skip stages and thus end up
with superficial descriptive conceptions of their topics. The stages can function as a
diagnostic tool for educators to identify and understand the learning dilemmas students
experience as they engage with information to construct knowledge.

Implications
The information search process model describes feelings, thoughts and actions in an
information seeking task with a discreet beginning and end, where considerable construction
of knowledge takes place. The description of the stages of affective, cognitive and physical
experience of users continued to be found in this study. This indicates that the model
continues to be a useful theoretical and explanatory framework for user studies in
librarianship and information science.

In addition, the model continues to be instructive when designing user centred information
services and systems. Its consecutive stages can form the basis for timed interventions in
order to support users throughout the progress of a project. This research indicates that a
crucial stage for interventions is the exploratory middle part where the formulation of focus is
developed.

The model continues to be particularly useful when applied to intervening with students in
inquiry projects. If students are aware that increased frustration and anxiety is to be expected
mid-way through the construction process they become less discouraged when it happens
(Kracker 2002). Teachers and librarians who guide students through inquiry projects can
emphasize this for students and be ready to intervene in helpful ways. Inherent and crucial to
a successful Guided Inquiry project is a holistic view of students' experience in the search
process. In addition to cognitive processes, there are motivational and affective dimensions.
Guidance and instruction can emphasize these attributes of the learning experience at each
stage in the process.

In summary, the findings presented in this paper indicate that the model continues to be useful
for explaining information behaviour in information seeking tasks that require knowledge
construction. The model remains a useful research tool for designing, framing and analysing
the investigation of information seeking behaviour in complex tasks and also continues to be
useful for designing user centred information services and systems, particularly for students in
inquiry projects.

References
 Bilal, D. (2000). Children's use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine:I. Cognitive,
physical and affective behaviours on fact-based search tasks. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science, 51(7), 646-665.
 Bilal, D. (2001). Children's use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: II. Cognitive
and physical behaviors on research tasks. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, 52(2), 118-136.
 Bilal, D. (2002). Children's use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: III. Cognitive
and physical behaviors on fully self-generated search tasks. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(13), 1170-1183.
 Bilal, D. (2005). Children's information seeking and the design of digital interfaces in
the Affective Paradigm. Library Trends, 54(2), 197-208.
 Bilal, D. & Kirby, J. (2002). Differences and similarities in information seeking:
children and adults as Web users. Information Processing and Management, 38(5),
649-670
 Branch, J. L. (2003). Instructional intervention is the key: Supporting adolescent
information seeking. School Libraries Worldwide, 9(2), 47-61.
 Broch, E. (2000). Children's search engines from an information search process
perspective. School Library Media Research, 3. Retrieved 2 September, 2008 from
http://www.ala.org/ala/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/slmrcontents/volume32000/chil
drens.htm (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/5cS6dSsM6)
 Burdick, T.A. (1996). Success and diversity in information seeking: Gender and the
information search styles model. School Library Media Quarterly, 25(1), 19-26.
 Byron, S.M. (1999). Information seeking in a virtual learning environment.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas, USA.
 Bystrom, K. & Hansen, P. (2005). Conceptual framework for tasks in information
studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
56(10), 1050-1061.
 Bystrom, K. & Jarvelin, K. (1995). Task complexity affects information seeking and
use. Information Processing and Management, 31(2), 191-213.
 Cole, C. (1997). Information as process: The difference between corroborating
evidence and “information” in humanistic research domains. Information Processing
and Management, 33(1), 55-67.
 Cole, C. (2001). Intelligent information retrieval: Part 4. Testing the timing of two
information retrieval devices in a naturalistic setting. Information Processing and
Management, 37(1), 163-182.
 Cole, C., Cantero, P. & Ungar, A. (2000). The development of a diagnostic-
prescriptive tool for undergraduates seeking information for a social
science/humanities assignment. Part 3. Enabling devices. Information Processing and
Management, 36(3), 481-500.
 Fister, B. (1992). The research process of undergraduate students. Journal of
Academic Librarianship, 18(3), 163-169.
 George, C., Bright, A., Hurlbert, T., Linke, E. C., St. Clair, G. & Stein, J. (2006).
Scholarly use of information: graduate students' information seeking behaviour.
Information Research, 11(4), paper 272. Retrieved 2 September, 2008 from
http://informationr.net/ir/11-4/paper272.html (Archived by WebCite® at
http://www.webcitation.org/5cbDFityo)
 Gordon, C. A. (2000). The effects of concept mapping on the searching behavior of
tenth-grade students. School Library Media Research, 3. Retrieved 2 September, 2008
from http://bit.ly/112cU (Archived by WebCite® at
http://www.webcitation.org/5cbDLgW1P)
 Harada, V. H. (2002). Personalizing the information search process: A case study of
journal writing with elementary-age students. School Library Media Research, 5.
Retrieved 2 September, 2008 from http://bit.ly/W3j3 (Archived by WebCite® at
http://www.webcitation.org/5cbDWgyrj)
 Harada, V. H. (2005). Librarians and teachers as research partners: reshaping practices
based on assessment and reflection. School Libraries Worldwide, 11(2), 49-72.
 Heinström, J. (2006). Fast surfing for availability or deep diving into quality -
motivation and information seeking among middle and high school students.
Information Research, 11(4), paper 265 Retrieved 2 September, 2008 from
http://InformationR.net/ir/11-4/paper265.html (Archived by WebCite® at
http://www.webcitation.org/5cbDhgAcX)
 Heinström, J. (2002). Fast surfers, broad scanners and deep divers – personality and
information seeking behaviour. Åbo (Turku), Finland: Åbo Akademi University Press.
(Doctoral dissertation.) Retrieved 2 September, 2008 from
http://www.abo.fi/~jheinstr/thesis.htm (Archived by WebCite® at
http://www.webcitation.org/5cbDrNDGc)
 Holliday, W. and Li, Q. (2004). Understanding the millennials: updating our
knowledge about students to improve library instruction. Reference Services Review,
32(4), 356-366.
 Hyldegard, J. (2006). Collaborative information behavior-exploring Kuhlthau's
information search process model in a group-based educational setting. Information
Processing and Management, 42(1), 276-298.
 Isbell, D. & Kammerlocher, L. (1998). Implementing Kuhlthau: a new model for
library and reference instruction. Reference Services Review, 26(3-4), 33-44.
 Jiao, Q. G. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (1997). Antecedents of library anxiety. The Library
Quarterly, 67(4), 372-389.
 Jiao, Q. G. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (1999). Identifying library anxiety through students'
learning modality preferences. Library Quarterly, 69(2), 202-216.
 Jiao, Q. G., Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Bostick, S. L. (2006). The relationship between
race and library anxiety among graduate students: a replication study. Information
Processing and Management, 42(3), 843-851.
 Jiao, Q. G., Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Lichtenstein, A. (1996). Library anxiety:
characteristics of 'at-risk' college students. Library and Information Science Research,
18(2), 151-163.
 Kennedy, L., Cole, C. & Carter, S. (1999). The false focus in online searching.The
particular case of undergraduates seeking information for course assignments in the
humanities and social sciences. Reference and User Services Quarterly, 38(3), 267-
273.
 Kracker, J. (2002). Research anxiety and students'perceptions of research: an
experiment.Part I. Effect of teaching Kuhlthau's ISP model. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(4), 282–94
 Kracker, J. and Wang, P.L. (2002). Research anxiety and students' perceptions of
research: an experiment. Part II. Content analysis of their writings on two experiences.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(4), 295-
307.
 Kuhlthau, C. (1985). Teaching the library research process. New York, NY: Centre
for Applied Research in Education.
 Kuhlthau, C. (1988a). Developing a model of the information search process of users
in libraries. Library and Information Science Research, 10(3), 257-304.
 Kuhlthau, C. (1988b). Perceptions of the information search process in libraries: a
study of changes from high school through college. Information Processing and
Management, 24(4) 419-427.
 Kuhlthau, C. (1988c). Longitudinal case studies of the information search process of
users in libraries. Library and Information Science Research, 10(3), 257-304.
 Kuhlthau, C. (1991). Inside the search process: information seeking from the user's
perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 361-371.
 Kuhlthau, C. (1993a). A principle of uncertainty for information seeking. Journal of
Documentation, 49(4), 339-355.
 Kuhlthau, C. (1993b). Seeking meaning: a process approach to library and
information services. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Press.
 Kuhlthau, C. (1996). The concept of a Zone of Intervention for identifying the role of
intermediaries in the information search process. Proceedings of the American Society
for Information Science Annual Meeting, 33, 367-376.
 Kuhlthau, C. (1999). The role of experience in the information search process of an
early career information worker: perceptions of uncertainty, complexity construction
and sources. Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 50(5), 399-412.
 Kuhlthau, C. (2004). Seeking meaning: a process approach to library and information
services. 2nd ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
 Kuhlthau, C., Turock, B., George, M. and Belvin, R. (1990). Validating a model of the
search process: a comparison of academic, public and school library users. Library
and Information Science Research, 12(1), 5-32.
 Kuhlthau C. and Tama, S. (2001). Information Search Process of lawyers: A call for
“just for me” information services. Journal of Documentation, 57(1), 25-43.
 Kuhlthau, C., Maniotes, L. & Caspari, A., (2007). Guided inquiry: learning in the 21st
century. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
 Loerke, K. & Oberg, D. (1997). Working together to improve junior high research
instruction: An action research approach. School Libraries Worldwide, 3(2), 56-67.
 McGregor, J.H., & Streitenberger, D.C. (2004). Do scribes learn? Copying and
information use. In M. K. Chelton and C. Cool (Eds.), Youth information-seeking
behavior: theories, models and issues (pp. 95-118). Lanham, MD : Scarecrow Press.
 Mellon, C.A. (1988). Attitudes: the forgotten dimension in library instruction. Library
Journal, 113(14), 137-139.
 Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (1997). Writing a research proposal: the role of library anxiety,
statistics anxiety and composition anxiety. Library and Information Science Research,
19(1), 5-33.
 Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Jiao, Q. G. (1998). The relationship between library anxiety
and learning styles among graduate students: Implications for library instruction.
Library and Information Science Research, 20(3), 235-249.
 Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Jiao, Q. G. (2004). Information search performance and
research achievement: an empirical test of the Anxiety-Expectation Mediation model
of library anxiety. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 55(1), 41-54.
 Pitts, J. M. (1995). Mental models of information. The 1993-1994 AASL/Highsmith
Research Award Study. School Library Media Quarterly, 23(3), 177-184.
 Serola, S. & Vakkari, P. (2005). The anticipated and assessed contribution of
information types in references retrieved for preparing a research proposal. Journal of
the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(4), 373-381.
  Tang, R. & Solomon, P. (1998). Toward an understanding of the dynamics of
relevance judgment: an analysis of one person's search behavior. Information
Processing and Management, 34(2), 237-256.
 Todd, R. (2006). From information to knowledge: charting and measuring changes in
students' knowledge of a curriculum topic. Information Research, 11(4), paper 264.
Retrieved 2 September, 2008 from http://InformationR.net/ir/11-4/paper264.html
(Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/5cbESk41x)
 Vakkari, P. (2001). A theory of the task-based information retrieval process: a
summary and generalisation of a longitudinal study. Journal of Documentation, 57(1),
44-60.
 Vakkari, P. & Hakala, N. (2000). Changes in relevance criteria and problem stages in
task performance. Journal of Documentation, 56(5), 540-562.
 Vakkari, P., Pennanen, M. & Serola, S. (2003). Changes of search terms and tactics
while writing a research proposal: a longitudinal case study. Information Processing
and Management, 39(3), 445-463.
 Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological
processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
 Wang, P. & Soergel, D. (1998). A cognitive model of document use during a research
project. Study 1. Document selection. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science, 49(2), 115-133.
 Warner, D. & Procaccino, J.D. (2004). Toward wellness: women seeking health
information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
55(8), 709-730.
 Watson, J.S. (2003). Examining perceptions of the science fair project: content or
process? School Library Media Research, 6. Retrieved 2 September, 2008 from
http://bit.ly/mlff (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/5cbEgXuEY)
 Whitmire, E. (2003). Epistemological beliefs and the information-seeking behavior of
undergraduates. Library and Information Science Research, 25(2), 127-142.
 Yang, S. (1997). Information seeking as problem-solving using a qualitative approach
to uncover the novice learners' information-seeking process in a perseus hypertext
system. Library and Information Science Research, 19(1), 71-92.

How to cite this paper

Kuhlthau, C.C., HeinstrÖm, J. & Todd, R.J. (2008). "The 'information search process'
revisited: is the model still useful?" Information Research, 13(4) paper 355. [Available at
http://InformationR.net/ir/13-4/paper355.html]
Find other papers on this subject

Check for citations, using Google Scholar

Bookmark This Page

 © the authors, 2008.
Last updated: 18 October, 2007

View publication stats