The Google Generation - A Digital Revolution

Transcription

1 A.Noorhidawati,-et-al.-(Eds.):--ICOLIS-2014,-Kuala-Lumpur:-DLIS,-FCSIT,-2014:-pp-1E8- The Google generation, the mobile phone and the 'library' of the future: Implications for society, governments and libraries DavidNicholas CIBERResearchLtd,Newbury, WestBerkshireRG14RU,UNITEDKINGDOM. ABSTRACT The$ Google$ Generation,$ the$ born$ digital,$ are$ arriving$ at$ universities$ and$ workplaces$ as$ I$ write.$ They$arrive$with$very$different,$challenging$information$seeking$and$reading$styles$and$equipped$ with$mobile$devices,$their$own$trusted$ libraries,$and$will$undoubtedly$have$a$big$impact$on$the$ libraries$and$organisations$they$encounter.$the$paper$looks$at$the$data$that$are$emerging$about$ the$ mobile $Google$Generation$and$the$(fast)$way$they$seek,$view$and$use$information$and$sift$ through$ it$ to$ see$ what$ it$ means$ for$ libraries,$ government,$ society$ and$ culture.$ Some$ of$ the$ questions$the$paper$poses$and$answers$are:$what$do$the$runes$tell$us?$are$we$witnessing$the$ perfect$ storm?$ Are$ witnessing$ the$ end$ of$ society/culture$ as$ we$ know$ it$ and$ is$ it$ curtains$ for$ libraries?$$ Keywords: Digital natives; Digital information consumers; Online information seeking behaviour;onlinereadingbehaviour;mobilecommunication INTRODUCTION Not so very long ago, in 2008, the CIBER research team ( surprisedinformationprofessionalsandthemediawithrevelationsofwhatthenewly disfintermediated (born digital) Google Generation were up to in the virtual, unmediated information space (Rowlands et al. 2008). The `Google generation is a popularphrasethatreferstoagenerationofyoungpeople,bornafter1993,thathave beenbroughtupinaworlddominatedbytheinternetandnowchampioningthemobile device. They had thrown the information seeking and reading manual out of the window;theyweredoingthingsverydifferently(andfast),someofthesethingswere regardedasdistinctlybadpracticeandchallengingforparents,teachers,andlibrarians and(goingtobe)foremployersandsociety.furtherrevelationsfromneurologistand cognitivepsychologiststoldusthesechangeswehadwitnessedintheweblogswereno passingfadbutwerebecominghardfwiredinpeople sbrains.thisbehaviorthenwas heretostayanditwasnotdeviantbehavior,butthebehaviorofthedigitalconsumer. Page 1

2 Nicholas,-D.- - But we have seen nothing yet, the fires the Internet started are being fanned. With informationprofessionals,teachersandparentshavingbarelytakenbreathandstock, another revolution is on us, and this one has a much greater weight behind it. It will sweepallbeforeit.wemighthavebrieflyfeltwewereaheadofthecurveandnowwe arewellbehindit.thesmartphone/tablethassweptallwithitandinformationseeking and reading has gone mobile. Alarm bells are ringing, especially in academe and libraries.andiftheyarenot,theyshouldbe. Thefirsttransition,fromthephysicaltothedigitalenvironment,transformedtheway theyoungandnotsoyoungsought,read,trustedandconsumedinformation,butthe environmentinwhichtheseactivitieswereconductedhadnotreallychanged itwas stilllargelyinthelibrary/office/institution,andonadeviceprimarilydesignedforthe deskandtheinstitutionfbound. Butbythisyear,accordingtothepundits,themobiledevicebecomesthemainplatform foraccessingthewebandthismeansthatweareall untethered ininformationterms and this has huge implications for purveyors of physical information and services. Searching and reading now takes place in the social space, and often on the hoof; in Starbucksorthepubratherthantheuniversitylibrary.This,asweshalllearn,willtake fastandabbreviatedinformationseekingandreadingtoacompletelydifferentplane. The combination of the Google Generation hitting the job/academic market and the newly arrived smartphone/tablet becoming the main platform for digital information seekingcouldmeantheendofcultureasweknowitand,possibly,curtainsforlibraries asweknowthemnow.theseconddigitaltransition muchbiggerthanthefirst,has arrivedandfewofusarepreparedforthe hit. The basic characteristics of (fast) digital information seeking and reading behaviour As mentioned previously, the foundations of newfage digital behaviour are already in place on which mobilefinduced behaviour will build, so it is worth going over its characteristics first. Digital information consumers love choice and looking around for information.mostofwhomarewhatwemightcall bouncers,viewingonly1f2pages fromthethousandsavailableonawebsiteandpromiscuoustoointhesensethatmany donotreturntoasite.onefshots:onevisit,onepageandatinydwelltime,countedin secondsratherthanminutes,arethedominantusergroup.thisprobablyisnotwhatwe thoughtwouldhappen.thisbehaviourcanbeexplainedby: a) Thefactthatdigitalconsumersareconnectedtothe bigfatinformationpipe,the Internet, every day of the year, every waking hour of the day. This engenders an alwayson snackingformofbehaviourtowardsinformationconsumption. b) Searchenginesearching,thedominantformofsearching,isallabouttheproduction oflistsfromwhichconsumershavetodecidewhatisbestforthemandtheydothis by crossfchecking and then there are the hyperflinks which enjoin them to go elsewhere.soyoutheyarealwaysjumpingaroundandonthehop. c) Themassiveandchangingchoiceofwhatisonoffermeansthatusersalwayshave somewherenewtovisit. Page 2

3 The-Google-generation$ d) ThefactthatthereisnowsomuchrubbishonthewebaseveryTom,DickandHarry decide to air their views and disseminate their publications. So users are always rejectingmaterialastheynavigatetheweb. e) Poor retrieval skills on the part of the disintermediated digital consumers. The averagequerycontains2.2wordsandthatistosearchtheglobalinformationspace. Thereforeitisnosurprisethatpeoplegetmorethantheywantandrejectalotof whattheysee. f) Usersforgettingwheretheylookedlastandwhattheylookedfor:theyleavetheir memoriesincyberspaceandgotogoogletotryandfindit;thisaddsto churn rate. g) EndFuserchecking,peopledoingitthemselvesandnotbeinggoodorpractisedat evaluationsotheytendtosample,creatingabouncingformofbehaviour. h) Muchofthetimewhenpeopleareonlinetheyaredoingseveralthingsatonce;this ofcourseismultiftasking,somethingpsychologistsismuchmorepleasurablethan doingjustonethingatonce.thisofcoursemeansthattheyarealwaysmovingfrom onethingtoanother. Within this general pattern of digital consumer behaviour that for the Google Generationhavethesecharacteristics(Nicholas2010): Theyhavethegreatestappetiteforfastinformationandskittering Theyarethequickestsearchersandspendleasttimeonavisit afractionoftime spentbyadults. They are the least confident about the results of their searches. This lack of confidenceisexplainedbytheirbehaviour:theytendtochoosethefirstoneupon thehitlist(regardlessofrelevance),viewfewerpagesanddomainsandundertake fewer searches. They also put in much less effort, with the first past the post approachendemic. Theyconstructsearchstatementswhicharemuchclosertextuallytothequestions posed,makingthem,notjustthefastfoodgeneration,butalsothe`cutandpaste generation.asformultitasking,atwhichtheyaresupposedtoexcel,theydoitalot, butnotverywell. ThusthetechnologyisfastforwardingtheGoogleGenerationfromaworldwherethe focuswasonknowingsomethingwelltoaworldwhereyouwillknowmanythings,but notverywellordeeply.thereisanimportantmessageforeducatorsandlibrarieshere. Ingeneralthen,ininformationseekingandreadingterms,thehorizontalhasreplaced the vertical, deep reading is out and fast viewing is in. The tendency is to skitter, moving rapidly along a surface, with frequent light contacts or changes of direction. Another way of putting it is that users power browse. Nobody appears to do much deepreading,certainlynotwhatistraditionallythoughttobereading(readingwhole documents).areadonlinecanmeanthatjust10f15%ofadocumentisread(nicholaset al.2008).weblogstellus: Usersmightgoonlinetoavoidreading;muchpreferringtolookandwatch. Asmentionedonlyafewminutesisspentonavisitand15minutesisaverylong time. Shorterarticleshaveamuchbiggerchanceofbeingused;asaconsequenceshort storybooksarebeingdesignedespeciallyforthedigitaluniverse. Page 3

4 Nicholas,-D.- - Abstracts,theultimateinformationsnack,haveneverbeensopopularandpeople like them so much they want them refereed and it has been proposed that publishersgiveawaypfdsandchargefortheabstract. Thusfastinformation,likefastfood,haswonthedigitalday.Theinformationsnack/bite has replaced the three course meal (the whole document). We have all been conditionedby ing,textmessaging,tweetingandpowerpointtolikefastshotsof information.mobiles,ofcourse,aretheultimateformoftakefaway. Thebenefits,impactsandimplicationsofmobileinformationprovision Theyarelegionsoweneedtothinklongandhard: Mobilesmeanthatinformationneedscanbemetatthetimeofneed,ratherthan having to cold store the need until you reach the office, library or home. And probablytheywillbeforgottenthembythenor,maybe,timejustranoutonthem becauseyoucouldnotrespondstraightaway.thisofcoursemeansmoreneedscan bemet,butperhapsnotalwaysaswell.therehastobeatradefoff. Bigdeals providefantasticaccesstoinformationtoaprivilegedfew(thosebehind the university walls) however an information levelfplaying field is will be with us soon.thisisbecausemobilesprovideaccesstomassesofinformationtoeveryone andanywhere;and,openaccessisincreasingitshaul.inacoupleofyearsfromnow morethan80%ofjournalarticlescouldbeopenaccessintheuk,becauseofuk Government and European Union policies and mandates. For the pragmatic smartphoneusers80%meanseverythingwillbeavailable.itcouldbearguedthat libraries are guilty of giving away what was once regarded as the family silver. Certainlytheirmonopolyofprovisionisover. Smartphones are, above all else, powerful social media devices, which also stride thetwomajorinformationworlds,informal&formalcommunications.thisiseven more important given the growing importance of the social media as sources of scholarlyinformation.allthisinsomethingthatslipsintoyourpocket.incontrast publishers have been trying hard (but not really succeeding) to marry the two worldsontheirwebsitesandlibrarieshavesimilarlybeenunsuccessful. Mobiledevicesareanincreasinglyintrinsicpartofthedigitalconsumerpurchasing process usedtosearchforinformationpriortopurchase,duringthetransaction process itself and to make purchases. This, of course, means that they lend themselvestopayingforinformationcontent,albeitformicrofpaymentsorapps. Usersappeartotrustthemobilephonemorethananyotherformofinformation andcommunicationtechnologyandpresumablythisincludesthelibrary(srivastava 2005).Justastheynowtrustthelibrarian sgreathatefiguregoogle(nicholasetal. 2014).Thisinveststhemwiththequalitiesthatlibraries,televisionandnewspapers onceprovidedinthewayofatrustedintermediary. Smaller screens, albeit with high resolution, and different ways of interacting (via touch screens and voice recognition rather than keyboards and mice) has a big impactonuse.goingfromtypingtotouching/strokingisgoingtomeanlessinthe wayofprecision,detailandpersonalisationininformationseekingbehaviour.and of course a really important difference F smartphones are not computational devicesbutaccessdevices. Page 4

5 The-Google-generation$ Theyaresocial,personal,coolandmassivelypopular.Averyheadycocktailindeed andalongwayfrominstitutionallyprovidedtetheredcomputers. Mobilesdevicesthereforehaveahugepotentialto: Drawinalargerandmorediverseaudiencefor scholarly information, because of theirwiderfreach,accessibilityanduserffriendliness. Further change the nature of information seeking behaviour and to do this for billionsandbillionsofpeople. However, despite the considerable challenges for all stakeholders in the information industry, we really know very little about (a) how users behave in the mobile environment;b)howdifferentthisbehaviourisfromthatassociatedwithlaptopsand desktops,whichmostlibrariesarebuilton;and(c)whatwehavetodointhewayof changingourofferings. Foryoungpeoplemobiledevicesmeanevenmoreandtheyarethenewwave.Solisten carefully,askayoungpersonaboutthelibraryandtheywillpointtotheirmobilephone. Itissurelyironicthatthephoneoncebannedfromlibrarieshasbecomethelibrary. Snapshotsofmobiledeviceuseandinformationseekingbehaviour A study of the digital footprints left behind by users of the Europeana digital culture platform ( a year or so ago provides some new and interestinginsightsintomobileinformationseekingbehavior(nicholasandclark2013). Morethan150,000uniquemobileusersaccessedEuropeanainsix6months.Usagehas shown a staggering rise of nearly 400% over six months, admittedly from low base. Mobileusageisgrowing5timesasfastasthatoftetheredor fixed devices.atypical mobilevisitatjustoveraminutehardlyalongtimeanyway,isactually10seconds(13%) shorterthanavisittothesamesiteforafixedfcomputeruser.whatcanyoudointhat timeandthereisnoprintingofformuchdownloadingforlatergoingon.themajorityof Europeanavisitors(52%)are`bouncers whoonlyviewasinglepage,verylikelyhaving beenswepttherecourtesyofageneralsearchenginesuchasgoogle.ahighproportion willneverreturn,butthatisnottosaythattheymaynothaveextractedvaluablefacts orinformationfromthatvisit. Information seeking is very lite. Visits from mobiles were much less interactive than those from tethered platforms: fewer records/pages were viewed, fewer searches conductedandlesstimespentonavisit.informationseekingandviewingbehaviornot unexpectedly perhaps was fast and fleeting, with very little browsing going on. Of course,thisislargelybecauseoftherelativelysmallrealestateofthedevice,thefact that it is being used in a noisy environment where other things are going on and activitiescannotbeundertakencomfortably. Mobile use is personal use, and happens often in the evenings and on weekends; it occurs in the home or anywhere but the office. Searching and reading has clearly movedintothesocialspace.informationseekingandreadinghasbeentimefshifted.itis aboutconsumingcontentnotcreatingit. Page 5

6 Nicholas,-D.- - Over90%ofvisitorsusedAppleMacdevicestoaccesstheplatform;iPadsconstituted the vast majority. Recent advances in android devices are likely to change this dominance. There were significant differences between types of device. The limited screen real estate and slowness of the Blackberry, no doubt, contributes to the abbreviatedsearchingandviewingontheadvice.theiphone,possiblythemosticonic andpopularsmartphoneshowsasomewhatlessabbreviatedstyle,butstillabbreviated by contracts with traditional laptops, and the ipad generates metrics closer to desktops/laptops.inthecaseofallthedeviceslittledepthresearchwasonshow. Morerecentdatafroma2014unpublishedstudyofaneFcancerwebsiteshowsmobile usetobestillrisingatveryhighlevels(nearly130%inthemostrecentyear),butitis nowsmartphonesthatarethepreferredmobileplatform. Picking up on our fast food (information) analogy, mobile devices are providing the ultimate information takefaway with all the evidence showing that we use them for information bites and snacking more bouncing, more new visits, shorter visits and simpleandlessproductivesearchingareafeatureoftheiruse.moreseriouslyperhaps, mobileusersaremorepromiscuous. Implicationsforsocietyandlibraries What has been described in this paper constitutes another massive migration to the digitalworldandanotherbigroundofdisintermediation.whatthenaretheimplications for society? They are in fact very serious indeed and touch every cornerstone of our society. The Internet and the mobile device could actually be making us stupid (Carr 2010).Thepropensitytorush,relyonpointFandFclick,firstFupFonFGoogleanswers,along withunwillingnesstowrestlewithuncertaintiesandaninabilitytoevaluateinformation, couldkeepusstuckonsurfaceof'informationage ;notfullybenefitingfrom always on information.skitteringcouldimpactnegativelyonestablishedskillsasitchipsaway at capacity to concentrate and contemplate. Maybe McLuhan s universe of linear exposition,quietcontemplation,disciplinedreadingandstudywasanidealwhichweall boughtintoanddevelopedservicesaround.butjustmaybewealwayswantedtoskitter and power browse and did so when we could (out of view) and the Internet has liberatedandempoweredus.thesignificanceofthisisthattodaytheopportunitiesfor skitteringarelegionandthiscreatesmoreskitteringandthepaceisnotlettingfup(see thesuccessoftwitter).skitteringhasaplacebutcouldwesurviveonitalone? Addinthefactthatourmemoriesareactuallyshrinkingaswecannotevenbotherto remember anymore because, researchers explain, that the Internet acts as a "transactivememory"whichwedependupontorememberforus(palmer2011)andit is clear that things are getting rather worrying. The computer science guru, Alan Kay, believesthatthesituationweareinislargelyexplainedbythefactthat"thereisthe desire of a consumer society to have no learning curves. This tends to result in very dumbedfdown products that are easy to get started on, but are generally worthless and/or debilitating. But who is going to blow the whistle of apply the handbrake? CertainlynotGoogle,theInformationServiceProvidersorSmartphonemanufacturers; norgovernmentstooitseems. Page 6

7 The-Google-generation$ What of the implications for libraries and especially academic ones, who seem to be holding the fort for the profession? They have tried to join the general debate and address the big societal concerns but when librarians intercede with their talk of digital/informationliteracytheyareseenaspeoplewhowouldsaythatanyway(setin theirways)andappearveryuncool. Librariesalsohaveawholerangeofspecificproblemsoftheirownwhichtheyareyetto really address. Their users information horizons, once bound by the library, are not anymore. In information terms the user has narrowed the access gap. User now generallydonotseelibrariesasthepointofentrytotheinformationtheyarelooking. Somehow the introduction/adoption of federated search systems, while a step in the rightdirection,isunlikelytobethesolution. In fact libraries are increasingly perceived as incomplete sources of information and scholarsareincreasinglylesslikelytotrustlibrarianstomakethecriticaldecisionson whatisandwhatisnotinthewalledgardenontheirbehalf.thelibraryisalsonolonger the gatekeeper for, and sanctuary of, trustworthy sources. The trusted big fat informationpipe isnolongerthepublisherplatformorthelibrarycatalogue/website;it istheinternet,googleandhugethirdpartsites,suchaspubmedandscopus.ontopof that Google Scholar and the social media are creating a new value proposition by providingcitationandother(alt)metricssouserscanformownviewsonwhatisagood, socompensatingforlackoflibraryadvice. Librariesbadlyandurgentlyneedtoarticulateavalueorrationalefortheircollectionsin aborderlessinformationenvironment.access,snackingopportunitiesandconvenience are King, the adage content is King has been kicked into the long grass. This has significant implications for collections based services such as libraries. Libraries are increasinglybeingviewedinanostalgicfashion. Whiletheyareagonisingaboutallthisthemobiledevicemightdisconnectthemfrom theyoungandfuturescholar.betweenarockandahardplacecomestomind. What then of the future library? In fact academic libraries managed the first virtual transitionquitewellreally,theytookleadershipanditlargelyenabledthemmaketheir products more accessible. The second transition however is a much tougher nut to crack,becauseinfootballparlanceit sanawaygameontheusers turf.librarieslack control of events and their users are remote and anonymous. Usage is occurring everywhere, but less and less so in the library. It is very ironic that this should be happening because not so very long ago the phone was banned from libraries. This couldbepayfbacktime Thereisreallynopointintryingtoturnthetidebecauseitisbeingdrivenbyatsunami, insteadthereisaneedtogowiththeflow.librarians,justlikepublishers,needanother valueproposition.inthelatter scasetheyhavemovedawayfrombeingthewarehouse anddistributioncentrefordocumentsthattheyhavebecomeandmovedtobeingmuch more authorfcentric, returning to their roots. Some libraries have learnt from the publishersexperienceandexpandedtheirportfolioofactivities,forinstance,movingto research and its evaluation. There are now university bibliometricians coaching academicshowtoimprovetheirimpactandreputation;theyarealsobecominginvolved Page 7

8 Nicholas,-D.- - inopenaccesspaymentsandthemanagementofinstitutionalrepositories.thereare stillthe old booksandmanuscriptcollectionstolookafter.informationliteracycould workifembeddedineducationalprograms,andifit sstrictlypragmaticinitsaimsand undertakenwiththesmartphoneinmind.andifyoucannotbeatthemjointhem,so whynotworkwithpublishersandnotagainstthem?ofcourse,nobodybelievesthiswill fillthehugegapleftbytheflightofusersanddocumentstothedisintermediatedsocial space,librarieswilljusthavetodownsize. REFERENCES Carr, N How the Internet is making us stupid. The$ Telegraph, Available at: makingfusfstupid.html Nicholas D The behaviour of the researcher of the future (the 'Google generation').art$libraries$journal,35(1),18f21. Nicholas D, Clark D The second digital transition: to the mobile space an analysisofeuropeana.learned$publishing,26(4), NicholasD,HuntingtonP,TenopirC,JamaliH,DobrowolskiT.2008.Viewingandreading behaviour in a virtual environment: the fullftext download. Aslib Proceedings 60 (3),186F198. Nicholas D, Watkinson A, Volentine A, Allard S, Levine K, Tenopir C, Herman E Trustandauthorityinscholarlycommunicationsinthelightofthedigitaltransition: settingthesceneforamajorstudy.learnedpublishing,27(2),121f134. Palmer, J Internet s memory effects quantified in computer study. BBC News Science and Environment.$ Available at: environmentf Rowlands I, Nicholas D, Williams P, Huntington P, Fieldhouse M, Gunter B, Withey R, JamaliHR,DobrowolskiT,TenopirC.2008.TheGooglegeneration:theinformation behaviouroftheresearcherofthefuture,aslibproceedings,60(4),290f310. Srivastava,L.2005.Mobilephonesandtheevolutionofsocialbehaviour.Behaviour$&$ Information$Technology,24(2),111F129. Page 8