Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
SlideShare a Scribd company logo
Melbourne, Australia • ASIS&T • 21 October 2019
There is a Method to It: Making Meaning in
Information Research through a Mix of
Paradigms and Methods
Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D.
Director of Library Trends and User Research, OCLC
Ixchel Faniel, Ph.D.
Senior Research Scientist, OCLC
Bhuva Narayan, Ph.D.
Transdisciplinary Researcher, UTS
Elham Sayyad-Abdi, Ph.D.
Information Researcher
“Survey research is one of
the most popular methods
used in the LIS literature.”
(Case & Given, 2016)
Prevalence of Survey Research
Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/froderik/9355085596/ by Fredrik Rubensson/CC BY-SA 2.0
“Perhaps the most convenient method…will be
to follow the reader from the moment he
enters the library to the moment he leaves it…”
(Ranganathan, 1931, 337)
Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/anjan58/7346141798 by anjan58 / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
• Interviews, 51
• Surveys, 34
• Content Analysis, 28
(Greifeneder, 2014)
Information Behaviour Research Methods:
JASIST, Information Research 2012-2013
JDOC, iConference Proceedings 2013-2014
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/kmakice/4390520785/by Kevin Makice/CC BY-NC-SA 2.0
Information Behaviour Research Methods:
JASIST, Information Research 2012-2013
JDOC, iConference Proceedings 2013-2014
• Methods used less than five times:
• Delphi studies (Poirier & Robinson, 2014)
• Eye-tracking (e.g. Balatsoukas & Ruthven, 2012;
Wildemuth, 2009)
• Log file analysis (Jiang, 2014)
• Participatory designs
(Greifeneder, 2014)
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/novecentino/50011555/by Gorgio Montersino/CC BY-SA 2.0
• Mixed Methods, 45%
• More than two methods, 7%
• Qualitative-Qualitative, 69%
• Quantitative-Qualitative, 31%
• Quantitative-Quantitative, 0%
(Greifeneder, 2014)
Information Behaviour Research Methods:
JASIST, Information Research 2012-2013
JDOC, iConference Proceedings 2013-2014
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/csb13/37236019891/by Chris Blakeley/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
Qualitative and mixed-method studies are not as
prevalent in information behavior studies but
demonstrate a greater variety of research
strategies and data collection techniques.
(Matusiak, 2017; McKechnie et al., 2002)
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/gawthrop/8274121366/by Peter Gawthrop/CC BY-NC 2.0
Call for Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research
• Rich data and thick description
• Answer how and why questions
• Can support decision-making for resources and programs
• Strategic planning from a user perspective
• Can help motivate and increase buy-in for change
• Provides opportunity to build relationships
(Connaway & Radford, 2017; Asher & Miller, 2011)
Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ihardlyflickr/2253071281/ by Mason Bryant/CC BY-SA 2.0
Research Methodology
Discovery system logs combined with
semi-structured interviews
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/gawthrop/8274084522/by Peter Gawthrop/CC BY-NC 2.0
Theoretical Background
• Log analysis to collect large amounts of unbiased user
data
(Jansen 2006, Connaway and Radford 2017)
• Logs used to study how people use online systems
• Catalog Search failure rates
• Behavior of digital library users
• Use of e-journals
• User experience with video and music streaming
services
(Hunter 1991; Jamali, Nicholas, and Huntington 2005; Lamkhede and Das 2019; Nouvellet, et al. 2019)
Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gawthrop/8272965471/by Peter Gawthrop/CC BY-NC 2.0
Theoretical Background
• Problems with log analysis
• Ambiguity of log events
• Actions not captured in logs
• Combining log analysis with user interviews
• Asked questions about search and analyzed
transaction logs
(Connaway, Budd, and Kochtanek 1995)
• No indication that combining search logs with
individual interviews has been used since
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/gawthrop/8273046981/ by Peter Gawthrop/CC BY-NC 2.0
Discovery and Access Project: How do academic library
users navigate the path from discovery to access?
• What do academic users do when searches don't result in
fulfillment?
• What differentiates searches that lead to access from
searches that don’t?
• What demographic characteristics influence the access of
users?
• How does access correlate with success?
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/gawthrop/8274042600/by Peter Gawthrop/CC BY-NC 2.0
WORLDCAT DISCOVERY
SEARCH LOG ANALYSIS
“Log analysis is everything that a lab study is not.”
(Jansen 2017, 349)
1. Did a keyword search but mistyped
it
- Had 0 results
2. Redid keyword search with correct
spelling
- Had 759,902 results
3. Began typing in additional keyword
4. Selected one of the autosuggested
keyword phrases
- Had 1,761 results
What do the raw logs tell us?
Ways of evolving a search
Corrected search
Refined search
Shows greater than 90% similarity with the
previous search string
Shows 80–90% similarity with the previous
search string, with the first string contained
in the second, or an index change
Shows less than 80% similarity with the
previous search string
New search
Summary of results
• Average of 5 minutes per session
• Average of 2.2 searches per session
• Average of 5.1 words per search
• 12% of sessions had search refinements
• 33% of sessions had multiple searches
n=282,307 sessions
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/claudine/8344927130/claundice/CC BY-SA 2.0
Types of Requests
Search results
Physical access
options
Online access
attempt
Attempt to save
Physical access
attempt
The user made a request for search results. This could include a new
search, refinement of an existing search, or the addition of limiters.
The user clicked an item or made a request to digitally access
the full text of the item.
The user attempted to export or otherwise save the citation.
The user clicked an item or made a request to place a hold
on a physical copy of the item.
Some users left the system after looking at holdings, where they were
able to identify the physical item call number and/or location. These users
were categorized as having the option to physically access the item.
USER INTERVIEWS
“User interviews can help capture search and discovery behavior as the
user understands it, rather than as a computer system understands it.”
(Connaway, Cyr, Brannon, Gallagher, and Hood 2019)
Example questions
• “Please tell us what you were looking for and why you
decided to do an online search.”
• “Did the item you were searching for come up in your
search results? In other words, did you find it?”
• “I’d like to understand how you felt about your search
experience overall. Would you say you were delighted with
your search experience?”
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/mattknox/2842537496/ by Matthewknox/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
What the logs told us:
• Began keyword search but mistyped it
o Had 0 results
• Redid keyword search with correct spelling
o Had 759,902 results
• Began typing in additional keyword
• Selected one of the autosuggested phrases
o Had 1,761 results
What do the interviews tell us?
What the logs told us:
• Began keyword search but mistyped it
o Had 0 results
• Redid keyword search with correct
spelling
o Had 759,902 results
• Began typing in additional keyword
• Selected one of the autosuggested
phrases
o Had 1,761 results
• Just starting work on a paper on a broad topic;
didn’t yet have a direction for the paper
• Was overwhelmed with number of search
results
• Abandoned “library search” to do “Google
searching” to better determine a direction for
the paper
• Later came back to the library search and
found it useful
• Also received help from student workers in the
library
• Felt “prepared” to use the library search due to
1st-year library instruction
What do the interviews tell us?
Interview coding themes
Item formats
Search
strategies
Decision-making
factors
Liked or
desired features
Evaluation of
resources
Feelings of
frustration and
delight
Influence of
librarian
METHODOLOGY
CHALLENGES AND BENEFITS
“The methodology used for this study also could be extended beyond
discovery systems. Other computerized activities that leave digital traces
could be studied using interview protocols based on log analysis.”
(Connaway, Cyr, Brannon, Gallagher, and Hood 2019)
Challenges of methodology
(Tandem use of log data and user interviews)
• Resource intensive
Time consuming
Multiple team members
Multiple IRBs
• High level of expertise required
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/queenscollege/3309770091/ by Queen’s College/CC BY 2.0
Benefits of methodology
(Tandem use of log data and user interviews)
• Provide context for quantitative data
• Clarify qualitative data
• Most effective when digital traces are present
• Inform development of literacy instruction
Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/pipwilson/2347270176/by Pip Wilson/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank the librarians and library users
who participated in this research.
We also thank additional OCLC staff who assisted with the project: Jay
Holloway and Ralph LeVan for assisting with data collection and analysis
and Nick Spence for his assistance in preparing this presentation.
References
Asher, A., & Miller, S. (2011). So you want to do anthropology in your library? Or a practical guide to ethnographic research in academic libraries.
Chicago: The ERIAL Project.
Case, D. O., & Given, L. S. (2016). Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs, and behaviour. Bingley, UK:
Emerald.
Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, John M. Budd, and Thomas R. Kochtanek. 1995. “An Investigation of the Use of an Online Catalog: User Characteristics
and Transaction Log Analysis.” Library Resources and Technical Services 39, no. 2: 142–152.
Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, Chris Cyr, Brittany Brannon, Peggy Gallagher, and Erin Hood. 2019. “Speaking on the Record: Combining Interviews
with Search Log Analysis in User Research.” ALISE/ProQuest Methodology Paper Competition Award Winner.
Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, and Marie L. Radford. 2017. Research Methods in Library and Information Science, 6th ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries
Unlimited.
Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, and Marie L. Radford. 2018. Survey Research. Webinar presented by ASIS&T, January 23.
https://www.slideshare.net/LynnConnaway/survey-research-methods-with-lynn-silipigni-connaway and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dlpAT7MXh0 .
Greifeneder, E. (2014). Trends in information behaviour research. In Proceedings of ISIC, the Information Behaviour Conference, Leeds, 2-5
September, 2014: Part 1. http://InformationR.net/ir/19-4/isic/isic13.html
Hunter, Rhonda N. 1991. “Successes and Failures of Patrons Searching the Online Catalog at a Large Academic Library: A Transaction Log
Analysis.” RQ 30, no. 3: 395–402. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25828813.
References
Jamali, Hamid R., David Nicholas, and Paul Huntington. 2005. “The Use and Users of Scholarly E-Journals: A Review of Log Analysis Studies.”
Aslib Proceedings 57, no. 5: 554–571. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530510634271.
Jansen, Bernard J. 2006. “Search Log Analysis: What It Is, What’s Been Done, How to Do It.” Library and Information Science Research 28, no. 3:
407–432.
Jansen, Bernard J. 2017. “Log Analysis.” In Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed., edited by Lynn Silipigni Connaway
and Marie L. Radford, 348-349. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
Lamkhede, Sudarshan, and Sudeep Das. 2019. “Challenges in Search on Streaming Services: Netflix Case Study.” In the Proceedings of SIGIR
’19, July 21–25, 2019, Paris, France. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1903.04638.pdf.
Matusiak, K. K. (2017). Studying information behavior of image users: An overview of research methodology in LIS literature, 2004-2015. Library
and Information Science Research 39 (1), 53–60.
McKechnie, L. M., Baker, L., Greenwood, M., & Julien, H. (2002). Research method trends in human information behaviour literature. The New
Review of Information Behaviour Research: Studies of Information Seeking in Context (Proceedings of ISIC 2002), 3, 113-125.
Nouvellet, Adrien, Florence D’Alché-Buc, Valérie Baudouin, Christophe Prieur, and François Roueff. 2019. “A Quantitative Analysis of
Digital Library User Behaviour Based on Access Logs.” Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries 7, no. 1: 1–13.
Ranganathan, S. R. (1931). The five laws of library science. London: Edward Goldston, Ltd.
Questions & Discussion
Lynn Silipigni Connaway, PhD
connawal@oclc.org
@LynnConnaway
Ixchel Faniel, Ph.D.
Senior Research Scientist, OCLC
Elham Sayyad-Abdi, Ph.D.
Information Researcher
Bhuva Narayan, Ph.D.
Transdisciplinary Researcher, UTS

More Related Content

There is a method to it: Making meaning in information research through a mix of paradigms and methods.

  • 1. Melbourne, Australia • ASIS&T • 21 October 2019 There is a Method to It: Making Meaning in Information Research through a Mix of Paradigms and Methods Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D. Director of Library Trends and User Research, OCLC Ixchel Faniel, Ph.D. Senior Research Scientist, OCLC Bhuva Narayan, Ph.D. Transdisciplinary Researcher, UTS Elham Sayyad-Abdi, Ph.D. Information Researcher
  • 2. “Survey research is one of the most popular methods used in the LIS literature.” (Case & Given, 2016) Prevalence of Survey Research Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/froderik/9355085596/ by Fredrik Rubensson/CC BY-SA 2.0
  • 3. “Perhaps the most convenient method…will be to follow the reader from the moment he enters the library to the moment he leaves it…” (Ranganathan, 1931, 337) Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/anjan58/7346141798 by anjan58 / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
  • 4. • Interviews, 51 • Surveys, 34 • Content Analysis, 28 (Greifeneder, 2014) Information Behaviour Research Methods: JASIST, Information Research 2012-2013 JDOC, iConference Proceedings 2013-2014 Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/kmakice/4390520785/by Kevin Makice/CC BY-NC-SA 2.0
  • 5. Information Behaviour Research Methods: JASIST, Information Research 2012-2013 JDOC, iConference Proceedings 2013-2014 • Methods used less than five times: • Delphi studies (Poirier & Robinson, 2014) • Eye-tracking (e.g. Balatsoukas & Ruthven, 2012; Wildemuth, 2009) • Log file analysis (Jiang, 2014) • Participatory designs (Greifeneder, 2014) Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/novecentino/50011555/by Gorgio Montersino/CC BY-SA 2.0
  • 6. • Mixed Methods, 45% • More than two methods, 7% • Qualitative-Qualitative, 69% • Quantitative-Qualitative, 31% • Quantitative-Quantitative, 0% (Greifeneder, 2014) Information Behaviour Research Methods: JASIST, Information Research 2012-2013 JDOC, iConference Proceedings 2013-2014 Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/csb13/37236019891/by Chris Blakeley/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
  • 7. Qualitative and mixed-method studies are not as prevalent in information behavior studies but demonstrate a greater variety of research strategies and data collection techniques. (Matusiak, 2017; McKechnie et al., 2002) Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/gawthrop/8274121366/by Peter Gawthrop/CC BY-NC 2.0
  • 8. Call for Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research • Rich data and thick description • Answer how and why questions • Can support decision-making for resources and programs • Strategic planning from a user perspective • Can help motivate and increase buy-in for change • Provides opportunity to build relationships (Connaway & Radford, 2017; Asher & Miller, 2011) Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ihardlyflickr/2253071281/ by Mason Bryant/CC BY-SA 2.0
  • 9. Research Methodology Discovery system logs combined with semi-structured interviews Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/gawthrop/8274084522/by Peter Gawthrop/CC BY-NC 2.0
  • 10. Theoretical Background • Log analysis to collect large amounts of unbiased user data (Jansen 2006, Connaway and Radford 2017) • Logs used to study how people use online systems • Catalog Search failure rates • Behavior of digital library users • Use of e-journals • User experience with video and music streaming services (Hunter 1991; Jamali, Nicholas, and Huntington 2005; Lamkhede and Das 2019; Nouvellet, et al. 2019) Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gawthrop/8272965471/by Peter Gawthrop/CC BY-NC 2.0
  • 11. Theoretical Background • Problems with log analysis • Ambiguity of log events • Actions not captured in logs • Combining log analysis with user interviews • Asked questions about search and analyzed transaction logs (Connaway, Budd, and Kochtanek 1995) • No indication that combining search logs with individual interviews has been used since Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/gawthrop/8273046981/ by Peter Gawthrop/CC BY-NC 2.0
  • 12. Discovery and Access Project: How do academic library users navigate the path from discovery to access? • What do academic users do when searches don't result in fulfillment? • What differentiates searches that lead to access from searches that don’t? • What demographic characteristics influence the access of users? • How does access correlate with success? Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/gawthrop/8274042600/by Peter Gawthrop/CC BY-NC 2.0
  • 13. WORLDCAT DISCOVERY SEARCH LOG ANALYSIS “Log analysis is everything that a lab study is not.” (Jansen 2017, 349)
  • 14. 1. Did a keyword search but mistyped it - Had 0 results 2. Redid keyword search with correct spelling - Had 759,902 results 3. Began typing in additional keyword 4. Selected one of the autosuggested keyword phrases - Had 1,761 results What do the raw logs tell us?
  • 15. Ways of evolving a search Corrected search Refined search Shows greater than 90% similarity with the previous search string Shows 80–90% similarity with the previous search string, with the first string contained in the second, or an index change Shows less than 80% similarity with the previous search string New search
  • 16. Summary of results • Average of 5 minutes per session • Average of 2.2 searches per session • Average of 5.1 words per search • 12% of sessions had search refinements • 33% of sessions had multiple searches n=282,307 sessions Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/claudine/8344927130/claundice/CC BY-SA 2.0
  • 17. Types of Requests Search results Physical access options Online access attempt Attempt to save Physical access attempt The user made a request for search results. This could include a new search, refinement of an existing search, or the addition of limiters. The user clicked an item or made a request to digitally access the full text of the item. The user attempted to export or otherwise save the citation. The user clicked an item or made a request to place a hold on a physical copy of the item. Some users left the system after looking at holdings, where they were able to identify the physical item call number and/or location. These users were categorized as having the option to physically access the item.
  • 18. USER INTERVIEWS “User interviews can help capture search and discovery behavior as the user understands it, rather than as a computer system understands it.” (Connaway, Cyr, Brannon, Gallagher, and Hood 2019)
  • 19. Example questions • “Please tell us what you were looking for and why you decided to do an online search.” • “Did the item you were searching for come up in your search results? In other words, did you find it?” • “I’d like to understand how you felt about your search experience overall. Would you say you were delighted with your search experience?” Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/mattknox/2842537496/ by Matthewknox/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
  • 20. What the logs told us: • Began keyword search but mistyped it o Had 0 results • Redid keyword search with correct spelling o Had 759,902 results • Began typing in additional keyword • Selected one of the autosuggested phrases o Had 1,761 results What do the interviews tell us?
  • 21. What the logs told us: • Began keyword search but mistyped it o Had 0 results • Redid keyword search with correct spelling o Had 759,902 results • Began typing in additional keyword • Selected one of the autosuggested phrases o Had 1,761 results • Just starting work on a paper on a broad topic; didn’t yet have a direction for the paper • Was overwhelmed with number of search results • Abandoned “library search” to do “Google searching” to better determine a direction for the paper • Later came back to the library search and found it useful • Also received help from student workers in the library • Felt “prepared” to use the library search due to 1st-year library instruction What do the interviews tell us?
  • 22. Interview coding themes Item formats Search strategies Decision-making factors Liked or desired features Evaluation of resources Feelings of frustration and delight Influence of librarian
  • 23. METHODOLOGY CHALLENGES AND BENEFITS “The methodology used for this study also could be extended beyond discovery systems. Other computerized activities that leave digital traces could be studied using interview protocols based on log analysis.” (Connaway, Cyr, Brannon, Gallagher, and Hood 2019)
  • 24. Challenges of methodology (Tandem use of log data and user interviews) • Resource intensive Time consuming Multiple team members Multiple IRBs • High level of expertise required Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/queenscollege/3309770091/ by Queen’s College/CC BY 2.0
  • 25. Benefits of methodology (Tandem use of log data and user interviews) • Provide context for quantitative data • Clarify qualitative data • Most effective when digital traces are present • Inform development of literacy instruction Image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/pipwilson/2347270176/by Pip Wilson/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
  • 26. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank the librarians and library users who participated in this research. We also thank additional OCLC staff who assisted with the project: Jay Holloway and Ralph LeVan for assisting with data collection and analysis and Nick Spence for his assistance in preparing this presentation.
  • 27. References Asher, A., & Miller, S. (2011). So you want to do anthropology in your library? Or a practical guide to ethnographic research in academic libraries. Chicago: The ERIAL Project. Case, D. O., & Given, L. S. (2016). Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs, and behaviour. Bingley, UK: Emerald. Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, John M. Budd, and Thomas R. Kochtanek. 1995. “An Investigation of the Use of an Online Catalog: User Characteristics and Transaction Log Analysis.” Library Resources and Technical Services 39, no. 2: 142–152. Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, Chris Cyr, Brittany Brannon, Peggy Gallagher, and Erin Hood. 2019. “Speaking on the Record: Combining Interviews with Search Log Analysis in User Research.” ALISE/ProQuest Methodology Paper Competition Award Winner. Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, and Marie L. Radford. 2017. Research Methods in Library and Information Science, 6th ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, and Marie L. Radford. 2018. Survey Research. Webinar presented by ASIS&T, January 23. https://www.slideshare.net/LynnConnaway/survey-research-methods-with-lynn-silipigni-connaway and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dlpAT7MXh0 . Greifeneder, E. (2014). Trends in information behaviour research. In Proceedings of ISIC, the Information Behaviour Conference, Leeds, 2-5 September, 2014: Part 1. http://InformationR.net/ir/19-4/isic/isic13.html Hunter, Rhonda N. 1991. “Successes and Failures of Patrons Searching the Online Catalog at a Large Academic Library: A Transaction Log Analysis.” RQ 30, no. 3: 395–402. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25828813.
  • 28. References Jamali, Hamid R., David Nicholas, and Paul Huntington. 2005. “The Use and Users of Scholarly E-Journals: A Review of Log Analysis Studies.” Aslib Proceedings 57, no. 5: 554–571. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530510634271. Jansen, Bernard J. 2006. “Search Log Analysis: What It Is, What’s Been Done, How to Do It.” Library and Information Science Research 28, no. 3: 407–432. Jansen, Bernard J. 2017. “Log Analysis.” In Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed., edited by Lynn Silipigni Connaway and Marie L. Radford, 348-349. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Lamkhede, Sudarshan, and Sudeep Das. 2019. “Challenges in Search on Streaming Services: Netflix Case Study.” In the Proceedings of SIGIR ’19, July 21–25, 2019, Paris, France. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1903.04638.pdf. Matusiak, K. K. (2017). Studying information behavior of image users: An overview of research methodology in LIS literature, 2004-2015. Library and Information Science Research 39 (1), 53–60. McKechnie, L. M., Baker, L., Greenwood, M., & Julien, H. (2002). Research method trends in human information behaviour literature. The New Review of Information Behaviour Research: Studies of Information Seeking in Context (Proceedings of ISIC 2002), 3, 113-125. Nouvellet, Adrien, Florence D’Alché-Buc, Valérie Baudouin, Christophe Prieur, and François Roueff. 2019. “A Quantitative Analysis of Digital Library User Behaviour Based on Access Logs.” Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries 7, no. 1: 1–13. Ranganathan, S. R. (1931). The five laws of library science. London: Edward Goldston, Ltd.
  • 29. Questions & Discussion Lynn Silipigni Connaway, PhD connawal@oclc.org @LynnConnaway Ixchel Faniel, Ph.D. Senior Research Scientist, OCLC Elham Sayyad-Abdi, Ph.D. Information Researcher Bhuva Narayan, Ph.D. Transdisciplinary Researcher, UTS