My paper

The role of libraries in the twenty-first century has greatly expanded and altered in the advent of the digital age. Given greater technological advances, more information than ever has been made available via the internet and electronic resources. However given the abundance of content, information literacy of users has not necessarily adjusted or improved.

According to one study conducted by Auburn University, print usage decreased by more than a third between 2000 and 2004 at the University’s Montgomery Library among undergraduates and masters students. The use of electronic materials however, increased three-fold. This includes e-books, e-journals and other internet sources. These findings seem logical given the increasing technological savvy-ness of the latest college-entering generations.

Since the way people seek information is rapidly changing, so is the way they read and consume it. As some researchers, including Slate write Michael Agger puts it, we are apparently “information foragers”. According to his research, in the earlier days of the internet, when it was more time consuming to switch between websites, we were more focused and would stay in one place and dig deeply into that information. Now we scan sites quickly, browse for key words and phrases and rarely stay in one place at a time.

However, this also raises the question should e-books and other electronic resources be treated in the same way as print materials when it comes to the way we read. When we read the web, we are actively engaged in a vast network of participation. It’s as if we have a buffet of information at our fingertips and we can pick and choose less of more. Whereas when we read print material, it’s as if we have been given one main course, left to consume more of less.

This theory has been the subject of many academic studies. Information seeking behaviour, especially that of younger users was the subject of a 200 study by UCL’s Centre for Information Behavior and the Evaluation of Research (CIBER). According to CIBER’s findings, the Google generation has been shaped by greater digital choice and 24/7 access to content, there is a greater demand for instant gratification. The ability to “power browse” through vast amounts of information and skim through multiple articles upon quick database or search engine searches has completely altered the way we consume information. This information seeking behavior was completely unknown and practically impossible outside the digital landscape.

However this raises a whole new set of concerns in regards to information literacy and comprehension. According to Maryanne Wolf, a professor of child development at Tufts, the “greatest concern is that the young brain will never have the time (in milliseconds or in hours or in years) to learn to go deeper into the text after the first decoding, but rather will be pulled by the medium to ever more distracting information, sidebars, and now, perhaps, videos (in the new vooks).”

I found that quote particularly alarming, from both a developmental and information science perspective. As an avid consumer of electronic content, I am well aware of just how many distractions loom at the user’s fingertips. According to Professor Gloria Mark, “When online, people switch activities an average of every three minutes (e.g. reading email or IM) and switch projects about every 10 and a half minutes.” Now with the inception of the iPad, an e-reader with a multitude of potential applications, the ability to grasp and comprehend content at a deeper level seems more difficult than ever. The ability to check email, use social networks, and browse the web all on the same platform as an e-reader challenge the traditional ways in which we read.

These findings regarding both the increase in use of e-resources and concern for lack of deeper comprehension implies that the need for libraries is more pertinent than ever. Given then abundance of resources made available librarians must often aid users in finding content that is authoritative, accurate and relevant to their needs. This is especially necessary in academic libraries and other scholarly settings, as this is where the research skills of future generations of scholars are being shaped.

The implications for research libraries is vast. They clearly have to understand the habits of the behavior of today’s virtual scholar, and also design systems accordingly. According to the CIBER study, libraries “should also accept that much content will seldom or never be used, other than perhaps a place from which to bounce”. While it initially struck me as disheartening that content maybe neglected, it at least serves another purpose in regards to serendipitous discovery via “bouncing”.

But all of these findings about information foraging still left me wondering about how we read electronically once we find what it is we’re looking for, particularly within the context of e-books and e-readers According to one usability test findings conducted by Jakob Nielson, “The iPad measured at 6.2% lower reading speed than the printed book, whereas the Kindle measured at 10.7% slower than print. However, the difference between the two devices was not statistically significant because of the data's fairly high variability.” This test used linear narratives such e-books, rather than other applications in its methodology.

While the results may not be statistically significant, it still seems self-evident that we clearly read slower when not reading the print medium. After hearing Dr. Kathryn Piquette discuss how the individual’s cognitive process of reading can be greatly altered depending on the context and environment in which they read in, I feel a lot more aware and enlightened about this phenomenon. There is clearly an adjustment to be made for many reasons. I’m sure the comportment of the body and glare and orientation of the screen have something to do with it.

However I wonder if our cognitive process too will alter as we adapt to the increasing prominence and availability of e-readers. Professor Sandra Aamodt claims, “As technology continues to improve, we can probably expect to see electronic reading become as useful as paper for most purposes.” I can’t help but wondering if or when this predication may come to fruition and if it does how long do libraries have to prepare their services in this greatly evolving digital landscape.