Forrester1997
| Forrester1997 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Forrester1997 |
| Author(s) | Michael A. Forrester, Chistopher Ramsden, David Reason |
| Title | Conversation and Discourse Analysis in Library and Information Services |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, library services, interface design |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1997 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Education for Information |
| Volume | 15 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 283–295 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.3233/EFI-1997-15402 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The research interview constitutes one of the main methods for obtaining information from library users. Typically, interviews are now recorded and then analysed later by the interviewer. In this paper we consider the advantages and disadvantages of using discourse and conversation analysis when examining users' responses. We focus upon two concrete examples; a study employing discourse analysis when re-designing an index, and research in which conversation analysis is used as part of the evaluation procedure for interface design. Our suggestion is that discourse analysis is particularly useful when seeking information of a general nature, whereas conversation analysis has the advantage of uncovering implicit models and metaphors employed by people when using library services. Our primary aim in. this paper is to highlight some of the costs and benefits of utilising discourse and conversation analytic methods for library staff.
Notes
