Measuring theory through practice: Librarians’ perceptions of relevance, concreteness, and importance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47989/ir31iConf64197Keywords:
Information behaviour theories, Reference librarians, Theory-practice gap, User studiesAbstract
Introduction. This study investigates how reference librarians perceive the relevance, concreteness, and importance of established theories of information behaviour. While the theory–practice gap has been widely discussed, little empirical evidence exists on how practitioners perceive formal theories in relation to their work.
Method. We conducted an online survey using plain language descriptions of twelve major theories of information behaviour. Participants rated each theory on three semantic differential scales: irrelevant-relevant to their work, abstract-concrete, and unimportant-important.
Analysis. A total of 771 valid questionnaires were analysed using descriptive statistics, correlations, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and were compared with findings from a prior qualitative interview and card-sorting study.
Results. Reference librarians evaluated all theories as at least moderately relevant, concrete, and important. Despite strong correlations between relevance and importance ratings, interesting differences emerged: some theories were viewed as more relevant than important, while others were seen as more important than relevant to their work. This suggests that librarians differentiate between immediate applicability and broader conceptual value.
Conclusion(s). The study showed that reference librarians make subtle but meaningful distinctions in how they perceive information behaviour theories. A survey using semantic differential scales proved useful in capturing these perceptions and revealed patterns that align with qualitative findings.
References
Abbas, J., Garnar, M., Kennedy, M., Kenney, B., Luo, L., & Stephens, M. (2016). Bridging the divide: Exploring LIS research and practice in a panel discussion at the ALISE’16 conference. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 57(2), 94-100. https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis.57.2.94
Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2022). Introduction to information science (2nd ed.). Facet.
Haddow, G., & Klobas, J. E. (2004). Communication of research to practice in library and information science: Closing the gap. Library & Information Science Research, 26(1), 29-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2003.11.010
Lowe, S., Rod, M., Kainzbauer, A., & Hwang, K. S. (2016). Exploring the perceived value of social practice theories for business-to-business marketing managers. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29(5), 751-768. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-09-2015-0154
Matusiak, K. K., Bright, K. M., & Schachter, D. (Eds.). (2024). Bridging research and library practice: Global perspectives on education and training. de Gruyter.
Miner, J. B. (2003). The rated importance, scientific validity, and practical usefulness of organizational behavior theories: A quantitative review. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2(3), 250–268. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2003.10932132
Nguyen, L. C., & Hider, P. (2018). Narrowing the gap between LIS research and practice in Australia. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association, 67(1), 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2018.1430412
Osgood, C. E. (1964). Semantic differential technique in the comparative study of cultures. American anthropologist, 66(3), 171-200.
Takahashi, H., Ban, M., & Asada, M. (2016). Semantic Differential Scale Method Can Reveal Multi-Dimensional Aspects of Mind Perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01717.
Tucker, B. P. (2013). What the right hand is doing: Academic and practitioner perceptions of the research–practice gap in management accounting. Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2312198
VanScoy, A., Hands, A. S., Švab, K., & Merčun, T. (2024). Surfacing the ‘silent foundation’: Which information behaviour theories are relevant to public library reference service? Information Research: An International Electronic Journal, 29(2), 589–601. https://doi.org/10.47989/ir292849
Wakeling, S., Pinfield, S., Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2019). The use of theory in research relating to open access: practitioner perspectives. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 56(1), 788-789. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.177
Yanchar, S. C., South, J. B., Williams, D. D., Allen, S., & Wilson, B. G. (2010). Struggling with theory? A qualitative investigation of conceptual tool use in instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(1), 39-60.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Tanja Merčun , Amy VanScoy , Africa S. Hands , Katarina Švab
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
