As part of a wider study of the relevance of the principles and practices of the Slow Movement to the information disciplines and professions, a Delphi study was carried out with 17 researchers in information behaviour and practices. A novel variant of the Delphi technique, termed the Slow Delphi, was devised for this study. This is aimed at eliciting qualitative understanding of complex conceptual topics, where there are a variety of perspectives and positions to be considered. The results of the study show a variety of points of potential applicability of Slow principles in research into information behaviour and practices, and in information provision. These include: more explicit inclusion of a temporal dimension in information behaviour models; greater recognition of the importance of the tempo of information seeking; more critical consideration of speed and scale as factors in the information environment; and the potential for individuals to exercise greater control over their information environment.
PoirierESR. Slow information in theory and practice: A qualitative exploration into implications of a Slow perspective of human information behaviour. PhD thesis, City University London, UK, 2012.
2.
TomlinsonJ. The culture of speed: The coming of immediacy. London: Sage, 2007.
3.
PetriniCPadovaniG. Slow food revolution: A new culture for eating and living. New York: Rizzoli International, 2006.
4.
Slow Movement. The Slow Movement: making a connection, www.slowmovement.com (2013, accessed 2 April 2013).
5.
HonoréC. In praise of Slow: How a worldwide movement is challenging the cult of speed. London: Orion, 2004.
CroninB. Slow food for thought. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2013; 64(4): 1.
10.
GleickJ. Faster: The acceleration of just about everything. London: Abacus, 1999.
11.
EriksenTHTyranny of the moment: Slow and fast time in the information age. London: Pluto Press, 2001.
12.
BawdenDRobinsonL. The dark side of information: Overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies. Journal of Information Science2008; 35(2): 180–191.
13.
SavolainenR. Time as a context of information seeking. Library and Information Science Research2006; 28(1): 110–127.
14.
OsatuyiBMendoncaD. Temporal modeling of group information foraging: An application to emergency response. Information Processing and Management, 2013; 49(1): 169–178.
15.
ConnawayLSDickeyTJRadfordML. ‘If it is too inconvenient I’m not going after it’: Convenience as a critical factor in information-seeking behaviors. Library and Information Science Research, 2011; 33(3): 179–190.
16.
LinstoneHATuroffM (eds). The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1975.
17.
PackardAJ. Delphi study. In: PackardAJResearch methods in information, 2nd edn.London: Facet, 2013, pp. 149–156.
18.
TuroffM. The policy Delphi. In: LinstoneHATuroffM (eds). The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1975, pp. 84–101.
19.
TapioP. Disaggregative policy Delphi: Using cluster analysis as a tool for systematic scenario formulation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change2003; 70(1): 83–101.
20.
PassigD. Imen-Delphi: A Delphi variant procedure for emergence. Human Organization1997; 56(1): 53–63.
21.
KuusiO. Expertise in the future use of generic technologies: Epistemic and methodological considerations concerning Delphi studies. Report for the Government Institute for Economic Research, Helsinki. Report no. VATT 59, 1999.
22.
ZinsC. Conceptions of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2007; 58(3): 335–350.
23.
ZinsC. Conceptual approaches for defining data, information, and knowledge. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2007; 58(4): 479–493.
24.
ZinsC. Knowledge map of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2007; 58(4): 526–535.
25.
ZinsC. Classification schemes of information science: Twenty-eight scholars map the field. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2007; 58(5): 645–672.
26.
MissinghamR. Parliamentary library and research services in the 21st century: A Delphi study. IFLA Journal2011; 37(1): 52–61.
27.
BronsteinJAharonyN. Views and dreams: A Delphi investigation into Library 2.0 Applications. Journal of Web Librarianship2009; 3(2): 89–109.
28.
EldredgeDD. The new Medical Library Association research agenda: Final results from a three-phase Delphi study. Journal of the Medical Library Association2012; 100(3): 214–218.
29.
MaceviciuteEWilsonTD. (2009), A Delphi investigation into the research needs in Swedish librarianship. Information Research 2009; 14(4): paper 419, InformationR.net/ir/14-4/paper419.html (accessed 2 April 2013).
30.
ZhuQ. Using a Delphi method and the analytic hierarchy process to evaluate Chinese search engines. A case study on Chinese search engines. Online Information Review2011; 35(6): 942–956.
31.
ZhangYSalabaA. What is next for functional requirements for bibliographic records? A Delphi study. Library Quarterly2009; 79(2): 233–255.
32.
SchneiderFvan OschLde VriesH. Identifying factors for optimal development of health-related websites: A Delphi study among experts and potential future users. Journal of Medical Internet Research2012; 14(1): e18, www.jmir.org/2012/1/e18 (accessed 2 April 2013).
33.
DuY. Librarians’ responses to ‘reading at risk’: A Delphi study. Library and Information Science Research2009; 31(1): 46–53.
34.
SaundersL. The future of information literacy in academic libraries: A Delphi study. Portal: Libraries and the Academy2009; 9(1): 99–114.
35.
RabinaD. Reference materials in LIS instruction: A Delphi study. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science2013; 54(2): 108–123.
36.
CharmazK. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage, 2006.
37.
DörkMBennettPDaviesR. Taking our sweet time to search. CHI 2013 Workshop, Changing perspectives of time in HCI, mariandoerk.de/slowsearch/chi2013.pdf (accessed 22 July 2013).
