Gardner Annotated Bibliography Page 22 of 22
The Information Needs and Information Behavior of Practicing Lawyers
Mary Gardner
INFO 510
Annotated Bibliography
December 10, 2008
Introduction
This annotated bibliography encompasses 13 scholarly English-language articles, plus three additional reading recommendations, on the information needs and information behavior of lawyers in the United States and elsewhere. The focus of the bibliography is on practicing lawyers; studies that focus solely or mostly on law students, academic lawyers, or law librarians have been excluded, as their information needs and behaviors tend to be markedly different from those of practicing attorneys. The publishing date of the included articles ranges from 1999 – 2008. Although the information needs of practicing attorneys tend to change very little over time, the rapid pace of change in information behavior, specifically the increasing use of electronic information resources, impacts the usefulness and applicability of less recent research.
User Group Description
Practicing lawyers are lawyers who hold a valid license to practice law in their practicing jurisdiction and who actively represent clients in any of a wide variety of legal matters. Unlike law students, academic lawyers, or law librarians, practicing lawyers have unique ethical and professional responsibilities to be effective legal researchers (Komlodi & Lutters, 2008, p. 187). Practicing lawyers can be sanctioned by their state bar or sued for malpractice by a client for violations of minimum standards of professional competence in legal research. Today, “familiarity with computer-assisted legal research . . . goes to the heart of an attorney’s competency to practice law” (Dunn, 2005, p. 4). Practicing lawyers’ needs for information are typically time-critical, complicating the requirement for accurate and complete information retrieval. Unlike many other user groups, practicing lawyers typically have daily access to many dedicated electronic resources for legal research (Komlodi & Lutters, 2008, p. 187).
Summary of Findings
From sole practitioners in rural areas (Dunn, 2005) to lawyers in large multi-office law firms (Komlodi & Lutters, 2008), American lawyers are increasingly looking to online legal databases, the Internet, and other electronic resources to fill their information needs. However, almost without exception, lawyers who used electronic resources expressed dissatisfaction with the capabilities of currently available electronic tools. Practicing lawyers expressed a need for more user-oriented electronic tools designed around their information needs and the way that they conduct their research – “just for me” information services, in the words of Kuhlthau and Tama (Komlodi & Soergel, 2002; Kuhlthau & Tama, 2001, p. 42).
Although online legal research services like LexisNexis and Westlaw worked well for routine tasks and specific searches, lawyers expressed frustration with their limitations with regard to complex tasks (Kuhlthau & Tama, 2001, pp. 32-33; Komlodi, 2004). Keyword searching did not work well for conceptual searches or when the lawyer did not know what he or she was looking for. (Dunn, 2005, p. 4; Kuhlthau & Tama, 2001, p. 40).
Lawyers outside the United States typically report less reliance on electronic legal resources (Otike, 1999; Wilkinson, 2001). In undeveloped countries such as Kenya and Nigeria (Haruna & Mobawonku, 2001; Otike & Matthews, 2000), access to electronic resources is non-existent. Lawyers in all countries relied on colleagues as important information sources, in addition to print resources such as law journals, and also meetings, conferences and seminars (Kuhlthau & Tama, 2001, p.37; Otike, 1999, pp.32-33; Wilkinson, 2001, p. 264).
There are differences in the information behavior of older, more experienced attorneys and that of younger lawyers. Senior attorneys typically delegate research tasks to younger attorneys, and do little research personally (Komlodi & Lutters, 2008, p. 187; Otike, 1999, p. 37). When senior attorneys do research, they tend to approach research tasks differently than novice lawyers. Expert lawyers take a “value-added” approach to information seeking where the focus is on the eventual use of the information to aid a client. Novice lawyers approach research as an objective, fact-finding task without regard to the use to which the information will be put (Cole & Kuhlthau, 2000, p. 107).
Lawyers’ information needs are not limited to research. Lawyers expressed needs for tools to allow collaborative uses of information for task delegation and reporting, accountability, informal training and collaborative learning, re-finding of information, and administrative uses. (Komlodi, 2008, p.190; Kuhlthau & Tama, 2001, pp. 34-35).
Bibliography
Cole, C., & Kuhlthau, C. (2000). Information and information seeking of novice versus expert lawyers: How experts add value. The New Review of Information Behavior Research, 1, 103-115.
Abstract:
Pilot study of 15 novice and expert lawyers in Montreal and New Jersey concludes that expert lawyers are better able than novice lawyers to add value to information collected for a client or case due to their ability to link problem recognition and solution structures. Suggests a four point arc of value adding for use by novice lawyers:
1. Cost-effective and convenient retrieval of appropriate data to be processed into value added information.
2. Construction of new knowledge and understanding from the appropriate data to benefit the client.
3. Effective communication of the new knowledge and understanding to, or on behalf of, the client.
4. Packaging of the new knowledge and understanding in such a way so as to enable the client, or others, to take advantage or act on the value added.
Search Strategy: Footnote in Case, D. (2002). Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs, and behavior. Amsterdam; New York: Academic Press. I wanted to begin my research with a better understanding of the term “information behavior” so I searched for relevant books in the Hagerty Library catalogue. After finding the Case book, I browsed the footnotes provided in the book.
Database: Hagerty Library catalogue
Method of Searching: Keyword searching and footnote chasing
Search String: information behavior
Annotation:
Relatively recent qualitative study by two recognized authorities in the field of information behavior research, published in a short-lived but scholarly journal. Well-organized presentation provides a succinct background discussion of research in the areas of sense-making theory, novice versus expert thinking processes, and value added theory. Poorly edited quotes from study subjects do not add substantially to understanding of the topic or conclusions of the study. Study appears to be unique in distinguishing information behavior of novice lawyers from that of lawyers with more experience. Authors state that they intend further research in the area of value added information and development of information systems for novice lawyers, although no further studies of that type were located in the research for this bibliography.
Dunn, M. (2005). Print vs. computer-assisted legal research: A survey of sole practitioner and small law firm attorneys in the Lookout Mountain Judicial Circuit. Tennessee Libraries, 55(4), 4-18.
Abstract:
Survey of 40 lawyers and two county law libraries concludes that online legal research is replacing in-house law library print collections in this rural area dominated by small law firms and sole practitioners.
Search Strategy: Hagerty Library recommends certain databases for Library Science research. I performed searches in each of these databases.
Database: Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts (LISTA)
Method of Searching: Keyword search
Search String: (lawyer or attorney) and (information or research) and (use* or seek* or need* or behav*) - search limited to scholarly (peer reviewed) journals
Annotation:
Recent qualitative study in a peer-reviewed journal. Unusual in that it focuses on sole practitioners and small firm attorneys in a rural area of the U.S. Dominant factors in favor of choosing online versus print resources were cost, convenience, and physical space considerations. Also notable is that most lawyers in this study expressed a decided preference for online resources although more than half had been practicing law for more than 20 years, in contrast to findings in other studies that more experienced lawyers prefer print resources (e.g. Kuhlthau & Tama, 2001).
Haruna, I., & Mabawonku, I. (2001). Information needs and seeking behavior of legal practitioners and the challenges to law libraries in Lagos, Nigeria. The International Information & Library Review, 33, 69-87.
Abstract:
Study concludes that Nigerian lawyers rank their most important information need as knowledge of the most recent decisions of superior courts, followed by information about recent legislation, information about seminars and conferences, acquiring and applying legal “know-how”, information on leading authorities in areas of law, finding relevant papers, knowing where and how to find the law, looking up the law, and awareness of different subject areas coming up. Law libraries are the most important source of information for lawyers; other sources of information were colleagues, government publications, personal collections of legal materials, and electronic databases, used by a small minority of lawyers. Law libraries in Lagos are ill equipped to adequately meet the information needs of lawyers due mostly to inadequate funding. Specific recommendations for improved library services included hiring librarians with specialized knowledge of the law, cooperative services with other libraries, comprehensive indexing of judgments of superior courts of record, and providing internet access.
Search Strategy: Certain online databases provide lists of documents that may be related to the document currently being viewed. I browsed the suggested related articles to Otike, J. (1999). The information needs and seeking habits of lawyers in England: A pilot study. International Information and Library Review, 31, 19-39.
Database: ScienceDirect
Method of Searching: browsing
Search String: not applicable
Annotation:
Recent study in a well-established refereed journal provides perspective on information needs and behavior of lawyers in a country where few computerized legal information services are available. While survey methodology is meticulously described, terms used to describe lawyers’ information needs are quite vague; e.g. “acquire and apply legal know-how”, “look up relevant papers”, “be aware of different subject areas coming up” (Haruna & Mabawonku, 2001, p. 72). Generally poorly organized and difficult to read. Notable finding is lawyers’ preference for libraries as primary source of information above any other source including colleagues, in contrast to studies in other countries where colleagues are rated more highly as a source of information (e.g. Kuhlthau & Tama, 2001).
Komlodi, A. (2004). Task management support in information seeking: A case for search histories. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 163-184.
Abstract:
Three phase study of the use of memory and externally recorded search histories in searching for and using legal information. In Phase1, sixteen attorneys and law librarians were “interviewed and observed to assess their use of their memory and external memory aids while searching for and using legal information.” (Komlodi, 2002, p. 557). Phase 2 involved participatory user interface design sessions with attorneys and law librarians from large, multi-office, multi-regional law firms. Phase 3, yet to be completed, will involve formal testing of the newly designed user interfaces. Article concludes that recorded search histories can aid in planning, monitoring, and evaluating online searches, managing multiple tasks, integrating search tasks previously segmented by various search tools, keeping track of tangents, and recreating context after interruptions or for successive search sessions. Study proposes enhanced online search history functionality to support lawyer’s information seeking and use, particularly in the management of complex research tasks.
Search Strategy: Hagerty Library recommends certain databases for Library Science research. I performed searches in each of these databases.
Database: Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts (LISTA)
Method of Searching: Keyword search
Search String: (lawyer or attorney) and (information or research) and (use* or seek* or need* or behav*) - search limited to scholarly (peer reviewed) journals
Annotation:
Third and perhaps most interesting in a series of articles describing the results and conclusions of this study. This article focuses on the role of system recorded search histories in the management of complex legal research tasks. Provides a detailed description of the online search process of practicing attorneys when completing a complex research task. Like the previous articles, a very organized and well-written peer-reviewed study, with clear explanations of methodology and conclusions. Includes a thorough review of formal models of problem solving and information seeking.
Komlodi, A. (2002). The role of interaction histories in mental model building and knowledge sharing in the legal domain. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 8, 557-566.
Abstract:
Sixteen attorneys and law librarians were “interviewed and observed to assess their use of their memory and external memory aids while searching for and using legal information.” (Komlodi, 2002, p. 557). Concludes that computer-recorded search histories can be useful aids in legal research and proposes that “the recorded information [] be provided back to the user through the user interface to support searching for and using information, learning about the subject matter and sharing this knowledge with others.” (Komlodi, 2002, p. 557).
Search Strategy: Mentioned in the footnotes to Komlodi, A. (2004). Task management support in information seeking: A case for search histories. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 163-184.
Database: Not applicable
Method of Searching: Footnote chasing.
Search String: Not applicable
Annotation:
Second in a series of articles presenting the results of a study focusing on the use of memory in information seeking and resultant design implications for user interfaces. This article focuses on how computer and manually recorded search histories can help to externally represent the lawyer’s mental model of a research topic, and aid in sharing that mental model with others to support shared learning and decision making, and also for team coordination and task delegation. Well-written and organized scholarly study published in a refereed journal. Presents a clear and succinct discussion of Stuart Sutton’s previous research on mental model building.
Komlodi, A. & Lutters, W.G. (2008). Collaborative use of individual search histories. Interacting with Computers, 20, 184-198.
Abstract:
Lawyers and service engineers were interviewed and observed in separate case studies to identify collaborative behaviors in the creation and use of search histories. Concludes that lawyers and engineers use shared search history in similar fashions for task delegation and reporting; accountability, in the sense of being held responsible and showing individual accomplishment; informal training and collaborative learning; collaborative re-finding of information; and administrative uses. Calls for extending current search history support tools to better assist collaborative activities by enabling automatic recording of search history, and methods of organizing, searching, editing, and annotating histories.