Annals of Library Science and Documentation 45,2; 1998; 41-48.

INFORMATION SEEKING BEHAVIOUR OF PHYSICAL SCIENTISTS AND SOCIAL SCIENTISTS:A REPORT

H. N. PrasadReader & HeadDeptt. of Library & Information ScienceB.H.U., Varanasi - 221 005

Deals with the similarities and differences in theinformation seeking behaviourof physical scientistsand social scientists. Highlights the methods usedby scientists for gathering information and theirinformation needs. Also covers the various sourcesof information use" by the scientists.

INTRODUCTION

Information seeking behaviour is an area of activeinterest among librarians and informationscientists. It results from the recognition of someneed perceived by the user, who as a consequencemakes demand upon formal systems such aslibraries, information centres, on-line services orsome other person in orderto satisfy the perceivedneed.

The study of information seeking behaviour canbe dated back to the late 1940s. Since that time alarge number of studies have been carried out onthe various aspects of information seekingbehaviour of the physical scientists and literaturehas been extensively reviewed. There is also aconsiderable amount of literature on theinformation seeking behaviour of social scientistswhich has also been extensively reviewed.Howeverthere have been lesser numberof studiesdealing with the similarities and differences ininformation seeking behaviour of these two groupsparticularly in India. The present study is an attemptto examine the information seeking activities ofthe social scientists and the physical scientists andthe various formal and informal sources ofinformation used by them.

Vol45 No 2 June 199R

Manorama TripathiResearch ScholarDeptt. of Library & Information ScienceB.H.U .. Varanasi - 221 005

OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

The objective of this explorative study is to castlight on the methods used by scientists for gatheringinformation and their information needs. The aimis to find out how the scientists seek informationand to what extent they use existing library andinformation services. The objectives of the studyare to determine:

i) the various activities of the scientists and typesof information used

"\ii) use of various formal and informal sources of

information and the methods used in locatingthem

iii) use of secondary sources of information

iv) use of material in languages other than English

METHODOLOGY

A questionnaire was developed and distributed forthe collection of data required forthe purpose. Thispreliminary study is limited to the survey ofscientists both from the social sciences andphysical sciences fields working in Banaras HinduUniversity, Varanasi. The data analysis andinterpretation is based on the response of 26scientists belonging to both physical and socialsciences disciplines.

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Respondents' distribution based on discipline

The sample population had 26 scientists. The

41

(H N) Prasad and Manorama Tripathi

Table 1

Respondents distribution based on Discipline

'Discipline Frequency Percent

Physical SciencesSocial Sciences

917

34.665.4

Total 26 100.00

Table 2

Respondents distribution by involvement in research

Discipline Total No. Non-involvement inresearch

Involvementin research

Physical SciencesSocial Sciences

917

7(77.77)4(23.52)

2 (22.23)12 (76.47)

(Note: Figure in the brackets indicate percentage)

physical scientists were nine in number whereassocial scientists were 17 in number. (Table 1)

Respondents' distribution by involvement inresearch

When asked if the scientists were involved inteaching and research, majority of the physicalscientists answered positively. This number was

. 7 (out of 9 or 77.77%).

The relatively low number of social scientistsconducting research might be attributed to the lackof interest in research related activities or due toscarcity of research grants allocated in the area.Another reason might be that they were quite busywith the teaching work.

A comparison of answers of respondents relatedto their research and teaching activities showedthat physical scientists and social scientists didmore teaching than research work.

Use of formal and informal channels of Information

Table 3

Discipline Total No. BothFormal Channels Informal

Physical Sciences 9 o 2 (22.22)

2 (11.76)Social Sciences 17

7 (77.77%)

15 (88.24%) o(Note: Figure in the brackets indicate percentage)

42 Ann Lib Sci Doc

INFORMATION SEEKING BEHAVIOUR OF PHYSICAL SCIENTISTS AND SOCIAL SCIENTISTS

Use of formal and informal channels ofinformation

Out of total 9 physical scientists, it was found that7 made use of formal channels of information

.whereas 22.22% of the physical scientists usedboth the sources of information.

Among the social scientists, 15 or 88.24% usedformal channels of information, whereas 11.76%used both thesources of information.

Use of formal information sources

Table 4

Sources Physical SocialScientists Scientists

i) Journals 9 (100.00) 16 (94.12)ii) Monographs/Textbooks 4 (44.44) 14 (82.35)iii) Abstracting & Indexing 7 (77.77) 3 (17.64)

Journalsiv) Thesis/Dissertation 2 (22.22) 10 (58.82)v) Year Books 1 (11.11) 3 (17.64)vi) Dictionaries 0 (0) 2 (11.76)vii) Research Reports 6 (66.66) 7 (41.17)viii) Conference Proceedings 7 (77.77) 8 (47.05)ix) Year Books/Hand Books 3 (33.33) 4 (23.52)

(Note: Figure in the brackets indicate percentage)

Use of formal information sources

Table 4 shows that the journals were the mostfrequently used sources of information among thephysical scientists as well as social scientists.Almost 100% of the physical scientists usedjournals for locating, required information. Thesocial scientists (94.11 %) used journals forlocating information required by them. Only44.44% of physical scientists used books andmonographs, whereas these were used by 82.85%of the social scientists.

From this it can be concluded that books andmonographs have high relevance for the socialscientists as compared to the physical scientists.Indexing and abstracting journals were used by77.77% of the physical scientists whereas it wasused by just 17.64% of the social scientists. Thisshows that social scientists did not make adequateuse of abstracting and indexing journals. Thisfinding confirms the findings of the studies

Vol45 No 2 June 1998

conducted earlier by Brittain [1]. Gutterman [2].Van Styvendaele [3] and Subrahmanyan [4] thatsocial scientists db not make heavy use ofindexing and abstracting periodicals to retrieveinfonnation. This may be attributed to the followingfacts.

i) The bibliographical tools are in some wayinadequate to meet the requirements of socialscientists.

ii) These tools are unknown to users.

iii) Users have a habit of using these.tools withouta strong tradition.

iv) A combination of the above reasons.

On the questions related to the use of secondaryperiodicals, 7 out of 9 physical scientistsresponded whereas the response rate among thesocial scientists was rather low as just 5 out of 17attempted this question. . .

43

(H N) Prasad and Manorama Tripathi

Tools and techniques used for currentawareness

and current contents. The social scientists alsoscanned current issues of periodicals to a largeextent. But the percentage of social scientistsusing abstracting and indexing periodicals andcurrent contents was significantly low as comparedto that of physical scientists.

Table 5 reflects that in order to be in touch withthe recent literature, the physical scientistsresorted to scanning of current issues ofperiodicals, abstracting and indexing periodicals

Table 5

Tools & Techniques used for current awareness

Methods PhysicalScientists

SocialScientists

1. By scanning of current 8 (88.88) 12 (70.5)issue of periodicals

2. Scanning of abstracting 7 (77.77) 4 (23.52)and indexing periodicals

3. Scanning of Current 5 (55.55) 4 (23.52)Contents

4. Through information 2 (11.76)services provided byNASSDOC, New Delhi

5. By attending conferences/ 2 (22.22) 15 (88.23)SymposiaIWorkshops

6. By personal 2 (22.22) 10 (58.82)correspondence

( Note: Figures in the brackets indicate percentage)

Table 6

Publication output of physical scientists and social scientists

Publications Journal Articles Books

Physical SciencesSocial Sciences

9 (100)17 (100)

6 (66.66)10 (58.88)

(Note: Figures in the bracket indicate percentage)

44 Ann Lib Sci poc

INFORMATION SEEKING BEHAVIOUR OF PHYSICAL SCIENTISTS AND SOCIAL SCIENTISTS

Table 7

Participation of physical and social scientists atconferences/seminars/workshops at various levels

Discipline Total Response Number Percentage

Physical Sciences 9 Yes 6 66.66No 3 33.33

Social Sciences 17 Yes 16 94.11No 1 5.88

Publication output

The table 6 shows that physical scientists and socialscientists were actively and heavily engaged inpublishing work. This may be attributed to 'Publishor Perish Syndrome' . In orderto become well knownor survive in their respective fields, the work ofpublishing articles in journals, writing books is ofsignificance otherwise they will be at the losing end.As communication is the essence of science, thescientists consequent upon the completion of theirresearch work, actively go for communicating theirresearch findinqs. Expressing the new ideas,thoughts and recording it for communication is avery common phenomenon.

The figures show that all of the physical and socialscientists had contributed articles in journalswhereas 66.66% of the physical scientists and58.88% of social scientists had books totheir credit.

Abstracting and indexing journals used by socialscientists and physical scientists are:

Physical Scientists

Physical AbstractsChemical AbstractsCurrent Contents

Social Scientists

Index IndiaPsychological AbstractsSociological AbstractsIndian Sociological Abstract

Vol 45 No 2 June 1998

(ICSSR, New Delhi)Dissertation Abstract International

Participation in conferences, etc.

Out of 9 physical scientists, six had participated inconferences or seminars at different levels(national, international, regional) whereas 16 outof 17 social scientists had participated inconferences or seminars as communication is thebasic essence of science (Table 7).

The scientists participate in conferences with a viewto develop contacts and have interaction with otherexperts of their own fields.

Use of material available in languages otherthan English

On the use of material (information available) inlanguages otherthan English, the behaviour of boththe groups appeared similar. Most of the physicalscientists ( 77.77) just consulted the materialavailable in English. A minority (22.23%) of physicalscientists also consulted material in languagesother than English.

The social scientists (88.23%) consulted materialavailable in English only. This tendency may beattributed to the fact that there is ample qualitymaterial available in English language.

Since English has acquired the status of being aninternational language, all new findings andobservations are reported in English journals orbooks etc.

45

(H.N) Prasad and Manorama Tripathi

Table 8

Use of material available in languages other than English

Other languages Physical Scientists Social Scientists

YesNo

2 (22.23)7 (77.77)

2 (11.76)15 (88.23)

(Note: Figures in the bracket indicate percentage)

Table 9

Types of information used

Types of Information Physical SocialScientists Scientists

1. Socio-economic Information 2 (22.22) 16 (94.12)

2. R & D information 5 (55.55) 2 (11.76)

3. Factual information 5 (55.55) 4 (23.52)

4. Statistical information 3 (83.33) 2 (11.76)

5. Conceptual information 2 (22.22) 4 (23.52)

6. Current information 7 (77.77) 12 (70.58)

7. Retrospective information 3 (33.33) 14 (82.35)

(Note: Figures in the bracket indicate percentage)

Types of information used Developments" occur in physical sciences at avery fast pace, so it is very essential for physicalscientists to keep abreast with the latestdevelopments in their fields. Among the socialscientists group 'socio-economic information' wasused by 94.12% of the social scientists followedby the use of 'retrospective' information whicl'>"'--used by 82.35% of them.

By observing the table 9 it is seen that the use ofcurrent information was maximum among the.physical scientists. It was used by 77.77% ofphysical scientists.

46 Ann Lib Sci Doc

INFORMATION SEEKING BEHAVIOUR OF PHYSICAL SCIENTISTS AND SOCIAL SCIENTISTS

Table 10

Frequency of visit to library

"Frequency Social ScientistsPhysical Scientists

DailyOnce in a weakOnce in a fortnightOccasionally

1 (11.11)2 (22.22)1 (11.11)5 (55.55)

2 (11.76)7 (41.17)3 (17.64)4 (23.52)

( Note: Figure in the brackets indicate percentage)

Frequency of visit to library

Table 10 reflects that just 11.11% of physicalscientists and social scientists visited the librarydaily. Just 22.22% of physical scientists and

41.17% of social scientists visited library once ina week. The figures show that social scientistsand the physical scientists were not veri regularin visiting the library.

Table 11

Usefulness of information sources and services of the library

Scientists Adequate Needs tremendousimprovement

Inadequate

Physical ScientistsSocial Scientists

o4 (23.5)

oo

9 (100)13 (76.4)

( Note: Figures in the brackets indicate percentage)

Usefulness of information sources andservices

The physical scientists. and social scientists werevery much dissatisfied with information sourcesand information services of the library. The generalimpression was that the whole library needs to beimproved tremendously. This was suggested by100% of physical scientists and 76.4% of socialscientists. •

CONCLUSION

The study reveals that there are significantdifferences in information seeking behavior of

Vol45 No 2 June 1998

physical scientists and the social scientists. Thereare differences in their approach, informationseeking process, difference of information needsand sources used for satisfying their informationrequirements.

The significant findings of the study are:

1. The physical scientists and social scientistsdid more teaching than research work. Allphysical scientists and 82.41%-of socialscientists were engaged in teaching workwhereas 77.81 % of the physical scientists and23.51 % of social scientists were involved inresearch pursuit. The relatively low number

47

(H N) Prasad and Manorama Tripathi

of social scientists conducting research mightbe aHributed to scarcity of research grants orthe discipline is more theoretical, it does notinvolve much of laboratory work.

2. The study shows that majority of physicalscientists arid social scientists were heavilyengaged in contributing articles in journals orwriting books.

3. The physical scientists and social scientistsused both formal and informal channels ofinformation.

4. The primary journals were used by bothgroups of scientists. For social scientistsbooks and monographs had a lot ofsignificance.

5. The social scientists made very little use ofabstracting and indexing periodicals whereasthe physical scientists used them to a largeextent. .

6. In order to remain in touch with the latestdevelopments in their fields, the physicalscientists scanned current issues ofperiodicals, abstracting and indexingperiodicals whereas social scientists took partin conferences and seminars to keepthemselves upto date.

7. Majority of the physicalscientists and socialscientists just consulted the materialsavailable in English.

8. All physical scientists and 75% of the social

48

scientists were unsatisfied with theinformation sources and services offered atthe libraries which they attended,

9. The socio-economic information was used byalmost 95% of the social scientists whereas77.77% of the physical scientists used currentinformation.

The findings derived from the study are based ona sample of 26 physical scientists and socialscientists. So the findings can not be generalised.Although the findings provide significant insightinto the similarities and differences in theinformation seeking behaviour of the physicalscientists and social scientists in India.

REFERENCES1. BRITIAIN (J M) : Information and its uses: A

review with special Reference to socialsciences. 1970. Bath University.

2. GUTTERMAN (WL) : Literature of socialsciences and provision of research in them.Journal of Documentation. 22; 1966; 186-194.

3. VAN STYVENDAELE (BJH) : Universityscientists as seekers of information sourcesof references to books and their first useversus date of publication. Journal ofLibrarianship. 13; 1981; 83-92.

4. SUBRAHMANYAN (T) :A study of Informationseeking behaviour of doctoral candidates insocial sciences. Herald of Library Science. 22;1983; 104.

Ann Lib Sci Doc