Information overload: A multi-disciplinary explication and citation ranking within three selected disciplines: Library studies, psychology/psychiatry, and consumer science: 1960-1996
| dc.contributor.author | Akin, Lynn Kathryn | |
| dc.contributor.committeeChair | Swigger, Keith | |
| dc.contributor.committeeMember | McGregor, Joy | |
| dc.contributor.committeeMember | Dowd, Frances | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2018-08-21T15:13:13Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2018-08-21T15:13:13Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 1997-05-30 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Information overload is a frequently used term describing a condition apparently agitated by the information age. No comprehensive analysis exists determining even the barest essentials: definitions, parameters, research results, or implications. The purpose of this research effort is to do an in-depth conceptual, citational, and research oriented explication of information overload as the term is used in three selected disciplines: library studies, psychology/psychiatry, and consumer science. Searches in the Firstsearch databases of Article1st, Eric, LibraryLit, MedLine, PsychInfo, SocSciAbs, and WilBusAbs with the search term "information overload" identified a set of documents. Weeded out were documents indexed incorrectly, false drops, or documents published before 1960, or after July, 1996. Documents sharing similar perspectives formed researchable discipline specific threads. Thread explication is an in-depth synthesis of what is explicit and implicit in the text(s) under consideration. Beginning with the most current document, a tri-level analysis examined definitions and semantics, citation activity and information transfer behaviors, and a discussion of what is implicit in each document. Thread analysis travels backward as citations are followed back to cited sources. Tables of citation figures show common citations through like-minded documents, through the discipline as a whole, and across all three disciplines. Citation frequency counts identify key overload researchers for each discipline and whether the researchers come from within or outside the discipline in question. Gathering together the individual thread analyses creates a complete picture of overload literature by a discipline. The three complete overload literatures are then compared and contrasted. Emergent patterns reveal citation linkages, citation ranking, within and without of discipline citing behaviors, definition issues, and methodologic and research oriented characteristics. A standard overload formula based on three commonly used variables is identified and discussed. Citation analysis leads to a new cross-discipline key overload researcher list. Additional issues include gender and age, the reason-to-believe syndrome, an element of researcher inter-activity, and a proliferation of medical terminology to claim overload. An annotated bibliography of over 200 overload materials from twenty fields of study is appended. Fifty-seven citation tables also are included. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11274/10267 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
| dc.subject | Communication and the arts | en_US |
| dc.subject | Psychology | en_US |
| dc.subject | Consumer science | en_US |
| dc.subject | Information overload | en_US |
| dc.subject | Library studies | en_US |
| dc.subject | Psychiatry | en_US |
| dc.subject | Psychology | en_US |
| dc.title | Information overload: A multi-disciplinary explication and citation ranking within three selected disciplines: Library studies, psychology/psychiatry, and consumer science: 1960-1996 | en_US |
| dc.type | Dissertation | en_US |
| thesis.degree.department | Library and Information Studies | en_US |
| thesis.degree.grantor | Texas Woman's University | en_US |
| thesis.degree.level | Doctoral | en_US |
| thesis.degree.name | Doctor of Philosophy | en_US |