Based on the conceptual analysis, the study examines the features of cognitive barriers and their impact on information seeking. The study resulted in a typology specifying six sub-types of cognitive barriers: unwillingness to see one’s needs as information needs, inability to articulate one’s information needs, unawareness of information sources, low self-efficacy, poor search skills and inability to deal with information overload. The sub-types were reviewed at two stages of the information-seeking process: identifying and articulating information needs; and selecting and accessing information sources. The impact of cognitive barriers is mainly negative because they block, limit or hamper information seeking, or give rise to negative reactions such as frustration. Cognitive barriers can also impact positively by helping the individual to concentrate on a few, good enough sources of information.
SwigonM. Information barriers in libraries: Types, typologies and Polish empirical studies. Library Management2011; 32(6–7): 475–484.
2.
LambertSDLoiselleCGMacdonaldE. An in-depth exploration of information-seeking behavior among individuals with cancer. Part 2: Understanding differential patterns of information disinterest and avoidance. Cancer Nursing2009; 32(1): 26–36.
3.
Fleming-MayRA. Concept analysis for library and information science: Exploring usage. Library & Information Science Research2014; 36(3–4): 203–210.
4.
BanduraA. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1986.
SavolainenR. Time as a context of information seeking. Library & Information Science Research2006; 28(1): 110–127.
7.
BorgmanC. Why are online catalogs still hard to use?Journal of the American Society for Information Science1996; 47(7): 493–503.
8.
KumpulainenSJärvelinK. Barriers to task-based information access in molecular medicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2012; 63(1): 86–97.
9.
KraaijenbrinkJ. Engineers and the Web: An analysis of real life gaps in information usage. Information Processing & Management2007; 43(5): 1368–1382.
10.
BucklandM. Information and information systems. New York: Praeger, 1991.
11.
HoustonRWestbrookL. Information-based mitigation of intimate partner violence. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2013; 64(8): 1694–1706.
12.
LincolnYSGubaEG. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1985.
13.
WilsonTD. On user studies and information needs. Journal of Documentation1981; 37(1): 3–15.
14.
BronsteinJBaruchson-ArbibS. The application of cost–benefit and least effort theories in studies of information seeking behavior of humanities scholars: The case of Jewish scholars in Israel. Journal of Information Science2008; 34(2): 131–144.
15.
McKenziePJ. Communication barriers and information-seeking counter-strategies in accounts of practitioner-patient encounters. Library & Information Science Research2002; 24(1): 31–47.
16.
FurnerJ. Conceptual analysis: A method for understanding information as evidence, and evidence as information. Archival Science2004; 4(3–4): 233–265.
17.
ChatmanEA. Life in a small world: Applicability of gratification theory to information-seeking behavior. Journal of the American Society for Information Science1991; 42(6): 438–449.
18.
ShentonAK. Causes of information-seeking failure: Some insights from an English research project. In: CheltonMKCoolC (eds), Youth information seeking behavior II. Context, theories, and issues. Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press2007, pp. 313–364.
19.
AttfieldSDowellJ. Information seeking and use by newspaper journalists. Journal of Documentation2003; 59(2): 187–204.
20.
DervinB. Information needs of urban residents: A conceptual context. In: MurrayESWarnerADPalmourVE, Information needs of urban residents. Final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Office of Education. Bureau of Libraries and Learning Resources, 1973, pp. 8–42.
21.
MellonCA. Library anxiety: A grounded theory and its development. College and Research Libraries1986; 47(2): 160–165.
22.
JohnsonJDCaseDO. Health information seeking. New York: Peter Lang, 2012.
23.
FestingerL. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1957.
24.
KuhlthauCC. The role of experience in the information search process of an early career information worker: Perceptions of uncertainty, complexity, construction and sources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science1999; 50(5): 399–412.
25.
WilsonTD. Information behaviour: An interdisciplinary perspective. Information Processing & Management1997; 33(4): 551–572.
26.
WilliamsonKAslaT. Information behavior of people in the fourth age: Implications for the conceptualization of information literacy. Library & Information Science Research2009; 31(2): 76–83.
27.
ShentonAK.The information-seeking problems of English high schoolers responding to academic information need. Library Review2008; 57(5): 276–288.
28.
MansourianYFordN. Search persistence and failure on the Web: A ‘bounded rationality’ and ‘satisficing’ analysis. Journal of Documentation2007; 63(6): 680–701.
29.
FlynnMGMcGuinnessC. Hospital clinicians’ information behaviour and attitudes towards the ‘Clinical Informationist’: An Irish survey. Health Information and Libraries Journal2011; 28(1): 23–32.
30.
BlandfordAAttfieldS. Interacting with information. San Rafael: Morgan & Claypool, 2010.
31.
MountE. Communication barriers and the reference questions. Special Libraries1966; 57(8): 575–578.
32.
ShentonAKDixonP. Youngsters’ use of other people as an information-seeking method. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science2003; 35(4): 219–233.
33.
JulienHE. Barriers to adolescents’ information seeking for career decision making. Journal of the American Society for Information Science1999; 50(1): 38–48.
34.
HarrisRStickneyJGrasleyCHutchinsonGGreavesLBoydT. Search for help and information. Abused women speak. Library & Information Science Research2001; 23(2): 123–141.
35.
CaidiNAllardDQuirkeL. Information practices of immigrants. In: CroninB (ed.), Annual review of information science and technology, Vol. 44. Medford, NJ: Information Today, 2010, pp. 493–531.
36.
BanduraA. Self-efficacy. In: RamachaudranVS (ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior, Vol. 4. New York: Academic Press, 1994, pp. 71–81.
37.
PettigrewKWDurranceJCUnruhKT. Facilitating community information seeking using the Internet: Findings from three public library-community network systems. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2002; 53(11): 894–903.
38.
DebowskiS. Wrong way: Go back! An exploration of novice search behaviours while conducting an information search. Electronic Library2001; 19(6): 371–382.
39.
BertulisR. Barriers to accessing evidence-based information. Nursing Standard2008; 22(36): 35–39.
40.
WarwickCRimmerJBlandfordAGowJBuchananG. Cognitive economy and satisficing in information seeking. A longitudinal study of undergraduate information behavior. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2009; 60(12): 2402–2415.
41.
RowlandsIWilliamsPHuntingtonPFieldhouseMGunterBWitheyRJamaliHRDobrowolskiTTenopirC. The Google generation: The information behaviour of the researcher of the future. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives2008; 60(4): 290–310.
42.
DuncanVHoltslanderL. Utilizing grounded theory to explore the information-seeking behavior of senior nursing students. Journal of Medical Library Association2010; 100(1): 20–27.
43.
EpplerMJMengisJ. The concept of information overload. A review of literature from organization science, accounting, marketing, MIS and related disciplines. The Information Society2004; 20(5): 325–344.
44.
SavolainenR. Filtering and withdrawing: Strategies for coping with information overload in everyday contexts. Journal of Information Science2007; 33(5): 611–621.
45.
AgostoDE. Bounded rationality and satisficing in young people’s web-based decision making. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2002; 53(1): 16–27.
46.
PrabhaCConnawayLSOlszewskiLJenkinsLR. What is enough? Satisficing information needs. Journal of Documentation2007; 63(1): 74–89.
47.
AndersonTD. Uncertainty in action: Observing information seeking within the creative processes of scholarly research. Information Research2006; 12(1), http://InformationR.net/ir/12–1/paper283.html (accessed April 2015).
48.
JohnsonJDCaseDOAndrewsJAllardSAJohnsonNE. Fields and pathways: Contrasting or complementary views of information seeking. Information Processing & Management2006; 42(2): 569–582.
49.
JohnsonJD. An impressionistic mapping of information behavior with special attention to contexts, rationality, and ignorance. Information Processing & Management2009; 45(5): 593–604.
50.
DervinB. Strategies for dealing with human information needs: Information or communication?Journal of Broadcasting1976; 20(3): 324–351.
51.
ChooCW. The knowing organization: How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge, and make decisions, 2nd edn.New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
52.
ShiehCMaysRMcDanielAYuJ. Health literacy and its association with the use of information sources and with barriers to information seeking in clinic-based pregnant women. Health Care for Women International2009; 30(11): 971–988.
53.
LloydA. Informing practice: Information experiences of ambulance officers in training and on-road practice. Journal of Documentation2009; 65(3): 396–419.
54.
JohannisonJ.SundinO. Putting discourse to work: Information practices and the professional project of nurses. Library Quarterly2007; 77(2): 199–218.
