isic icon social4.1                  

Accepted papers

Below are the lists of full and short papers accepted for ISIC 2018: The Information Behaviour Conference, and the Acceptance Rates.
The Conference sessions with paper presentations start on Tuesday morning (October 9, 2016) and close on Thursday (October 11, 2016).

Accepted full papers (in alphabetical order):

  • David Brazier, Geoff Walton and Morgan Harvey. An Investigation into Scottish Teenagers’ Information Literacy and Search Skills
  • Fiona Brown and Kirsty Williamson. Using mixed methods to explore the role of information use in developing legal capability: Theoretical considerations and practical challenges
  • Gobinda Chowdhury, Yurdagul Ünal, Serap Kurbanoğlu, Joumana Boustany and Geoff Walton. Research data management and data sharing behaviour of university researchers
  • Marek Deja and Maria Próchnicka. Metadata as a normalising mechanism for information-transfer behaviour in higher education institutions: the information culture perspective
  • Mirko Duić. In labyrinths of digital text: use of Web literature by faculty from two Croatian universities
  • Ann-Britt EnochssonTeenage pupils searching for information on the Internet
  • Carrie Forbes and Jennifer Bowers. Emotional silos: a review of doctoral candidates’ isolating experiences and the role for academic librarians in campus-wide support networks
  • Ina Fourie, Tumelo Maungwa and Theresa Anderson. Subject domain expertise of ISIC2018 reviewer community: a scoping review
  • Tim Gorichanaz. Perspective in information behaviour research
  • Jannica Heinström and Eero Sormunen. Structure to the unstructured - Guided Inquiry Design as a pedagogical practice for teaching inquiry and information literacy skills
  • Heidi Julien, Lynne Mckechnie, Sarah Polkinghorne and Roger Chabot. The user turn in practice: information behaviour researchers’ constructions of information users
  • Amalia Junestrom. A growing infrastructure of practices: A practice-based study of information infrastructure for managing user-generated content online
  • Malgorzata Kisilowska and Anna Mierzecka. Emotions, experience, identity – motivations of the teens’ information behaviour in the area of culture
  • Åse Kristine Tveit and Katriina Byström. Translation in transit: What changes does digital information bring into translation work?
  • Tumelo Maungwa and Ina Fourie. Exploring and understanding the causes of competitive intelligence failures: an information behaviour lens
  • Anika Meyer, Preben Hansen and Ina Fourie. Assessing the potential of Third Space to design a creative virtual academic space based on findings from information behaviour
  • Alice Nahyeon Kim, Nadia Caidi and Niel Chah. ‘Our Korea’: Transcultural Affinities as Negotiated Through YouTube
  • Bhuva Narayan, Edward Luca, Mal Booth, Belinda Tiffen, Ashley England and Henry Boateng. Scholarly communication practices in Humanities and Social Sciences: A Study of researchers’ attitudes and awareness of Open Access
  • Naailah Parbhoo-Ebrahim and Ina Fourie. Which lens for a study of information retrieval systems for cold case investigation - activity theory, systems or ecological approach?
  • Alicja Pawluczuk, Hazel Hall, Gemma Webster and Colin Smith. Digital youth work: youth worker’s balancing act between the digital innovation and digital literacy insecurities
  • Hue Thi Pham and Kirsty Williamson. A two-way street: Collaboration and information sharing in academia. A theoretically-based, comparative Australian/Vietnamese study
  • Ola Pilerot. The practice of public library-work for newly arrived immigrants
  • Trine Schreiber. Information stabilisation and – destabilisation as potential usable concepts in practice theoretical approaches
  • Jela Steinerová. Perceptions of the information environment by researchers: a qualitative study
  • Olof Sundin. Facts, fake and information literacy: A conceptual discussion of critical evaluation of information
  • Carla Teixeira Lopes and Bárbara Guimarães Da Silva. A classification scheme for analyses of messages exchanged in online health forums
  • Jia Tina Du, Yan Tan and Fang Xu. The information context of elderly Chinese immigrants in South Australia: A preliminary investigation
  • Amy VanScoy, Deborah Hicks and Mary Cavanagh. What Motivates Twitter Users to Engage with Libraries?
  • Thomas D. Wilson. The diffusion of information behaviour research across disciplines

 Accepted short papers (in alphabetical order):

  • Waseem Afzal. Weaving the affective research framework for Information Behaviour: A look at the ‘trilogy of mind’ and ‘flow’
  • Farhan Ahmad and Gunilla WidénInformation literacy at workplace: the organizational leadership perspective
  • Madely Du Preez. The consulting industry as an information behaviour context: consulting engineering as an example
  • Stefanie Elbeshausen, Thomas Mandl and Christa Womser-Hacker. Role-specific behaviour patterns in Collaborative Information Seeking
  • Isto Huvila, Jonas Moll, Heidi Enwald, Noora Hirvonen, Rose-Mharie Åhlfeldt and Åsa Cajander. Age-related Differences in Seeking Clarification to Understand Medical Record Information
  • Kahina Le Louvier and Perla Innocenti. The Information Mapping Board Game: a Collaborative Investigation of Asylum Seekers and Refugees’ Information Practices in England, UK
  • Jenny Lindberg and Åse Hedemark. Meaningful reading experiences among elderly: some insights from a small-scale study of Swedish library outreach services
  • Elena Maceviciute and Zinaida Manzuch. Conceptualising the role of digital reading in social and digital inclusion
  • Michael Ridley. The Autonomous Turn in Information Behaviour
  • Pian Wenjing, Christopher KhooGang Li and Jianxing Chi. Factors Affecting Browsing Duration on a Health Discussion Forum: Analysis of Eye-Tracking Data
  • Kyunghye Yoon and Adam Bezdicek. Semiotics based discursive communities in online book review

Accepted panel proposals (in alphabetical order):

  • Noa Aharony, Judit Bar-Ilan, Jenny Bronstein, Ina Fourie and Heidi Julien. Ethical Considerations in Academic Research in the Digital Age
  • Nadia Caidi, Perla Innocenti, Suzanne Van der Beek, Jannica Heinstrom, and David Kirk. On Being Spiritual: Pilgrimage as an Information Context
  • Lynn Connaway, Krystyna Matusiak, Anna Mierzecka and Justyna Jasiewicz. Interdisciplinary Approaches to Research Methods in Information Behavior Studies
  • Elysia Guzik, Anh Thu Nguyen, Tim Gorichanaz, Jarkko Kari, Kiersten Latham and Roger Chabot. Profound and Transcendental Information Experiences
  • Leslie Thomson, Nadia Caidi, Niel Chah, Alice Kim and Andrew Cox. ‘Doing YouTube’: The Everyday Information Rituals of YouTube Video Creators and their Viewers

 

ISIC 2018 paper acceptance rates

Acceptance rate for full papers: 45% (30 out of 66)

Acceptance rate for Short papers: 52% (13 out of 25)

In total, the acceptance rate for Full and Short Papers: 48%

Full and short papers presented at the conference will be considered for publication in Information Research – a peer-reviewed international electronic journal.

The review process was conducted according to a double-blind standard, via the EasyChair system. Two reviewers were assigned to each paper based on their expertise for a given topic. In several cases, papers have been assigned to a third reviewer.

A standardised form was used for evaluating the topic relevance, contribution to the information behaviour field, literature review, theoretical basis, empirical basis, and writing and expression. Based on the overall evaluation scores and the detailed narrative reviews, the papers were accepted based on scale:

2: Acceptable with no suggestions (no further actions needed)
1: Acceptable but requires some minor rewriting by the author
0: May be accepted but after more substantial changes
-1: Not acceptable in its current format, but the author may be encouraged to revise and resubmit the paper according to reviewer feedback / or for a different format (e.g. short paper, poster)
-2: Definitely not accepted (not to be improved in any way).

Papers that needed major changes entered the second round of the detailed double-blind review, and the papers that needed only minor changes were checked by the Chairs of the Programme Committee.