This article describes the first two parts of a three-stage study investigating the information behaviour of fans and fan communities, focusing on fans of cult media. A literature analysis shows that information practices are an inherent and major part of fan activities, and that fans are practitioners of new forms of information consumption and production, showing sophisticated activities of information organisation and dissemination. A subsequent Delphi study, taking the novel form of a ‘serious leisure’ Delphi, in which the participants are not experts in the usual sense, identifies three aspects of fan information behaviour of particular interest beyond the fan context: information gatekeeping; classifying and tagging; and entrepreneurship and economic activity.
CoppaF.A brief history of media fandom. In: HelleksonKBusseK (eds) Fan fiction and fan communities in the age of the internet. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2006, pp. 41–59.
4.
JenkinsH.Fans, bloggers, and gamers: exploring participatory culture. New York, NY: New York University Press, 2006.
5.
JenkinsH.Textual poachers: television fans and participatory culture. Updated 20th anniversary ed.New York, NY: Routledge, 2013.
6.
BusseKHelleksonK (eds) Fan fiction and fan communities in the age of the internet. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2006.
7.
WalkerCW.Fifty years of “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.” In: SladeAFNarroAJGivens-CarrollD (eds) Television, social media, and fan culture. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2015, pp. 351–372.
8.
Bacon-SmithC.Enterprising women: television fandom and the creation of popular myth. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992.
9.
FiskeJ.The cultural economy of fandom. In: LewisL (ed) The adoring audience: fan culture and popular media. London: Routledge, 1992, pp. 30–49.
10.
HillsM.Fiske’s ‘textual productivity’ and digital fandom: web 2.0 democratization versus fan distinction?Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies2013; 10(1): 130–153.
11.
LewisL (ed) Adoring audience: fan culture and popular media. London: Routledge, 1992.
12.
PenleyC.Feminism, psychoanalysis, and the study of popular culture. In: GrossbergLNelsonCTreichlerP (eds) Cultural Studies. New York, NY: Routledge, 1992, pp. 479–500.
BusseKGrayJ.Fan cultures and fan communities. In: NightingaleV (ed) The handbook of media audiences. Chichester: Blackwell, 2011, pp. 425–443.
15.
BennettL.Tracing Textual Poachers: Reflections on the development of fan studies and digital fandom. Journal of Fandom Studies2014; 2(1): 5–20.
16.
BuryRDellerRAGreenwoodAJonesB.From Usenet to Tumblr: The changing role of social media. Participations: Journal of Audience and Reception Studies2013; 10(1): 299–318.
17.
WyattSBierJHarrisAvan HeurB.Participatory knowledge production 2.0: critical views and experiences. Information, Communication & Society2013; 16(2): 153–159.
18.
SchäferMT.Bastard culture! How user participation transforms cultural production. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2011.
19.
BrunsA.Towards produsage: futures for content-led user production. In: SudweeksFHrachovecHEssC (eds) Proceedings Cultural Attitudes towards Communication and Technology 2006. Tartu, Estonia, 28 June–1 July 2006, pp. 275–284, http://eprints.qut.edu.au/4863/1/4863_1.pdf (accessed 17 June 2016).
20.
BrunsA.Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and beyond: from production to produsage. New York, NY: Peter Lang, 2008.
21.
CampbellJAAragonCDavisKEvansSEvansARandallDP.Thousands of positive reviews: Distributed mentoring in online fan communities. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. San Francisco, CA, 27 February–2 March 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2819934 (accessed 19 February 2016).
22.
MillerV.Understanding digital culture. London: Sage, 2011.
23.
JensenJL.Online communities: a historically based examination of how social formations online fulfil criteria for community. In: El MorrCMaretP (eds) Virtual community building and the information society: current and future directions. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference, 2012, pp. 121–134.
24.
TönniesF.Community and association: gemeinschaft und gesellschaft. Translated from German by LoomisCP. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, 1955.
25.
HilleryGA.Definitions of community: areas of agreement. Rural Sociology1955; 20(2): 111–123.
26.
MillerDHorstH.The digital and the human: a prospectus for digital anthropology. In: HorstHMillerD (eds) Digital Anthropology. London: Berg, 2012, pp. 3–35.
RheingoldH.The virtual community: homesteading on the electronic frontier. First MIT Press edition. Cambridge, MA; MIT Press, 2000.
29.
ArmstrongAHagelJ.The real value of online communities. In: LesserEFontaineMSlusherJ (eds) Knowledge and communities. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000, pp. 85–95.
30.
JensonJ.Fandom as pathology: the consequences of characterization. In: LewisL (ed) The adoring audience: fan culture and popular media. London: Routledge, 1992, pp. 9–29.
31.
HillsM.Fan cultures. Abingdon: Routledge, 2002.
32.
PearceCArtemesia. Communities of play: emergent cultures in multiplayer games and virtual worlds. First MIT Press paperback edition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011
33.
DuffettM.Understanding fandom: an introduction to the study of media fan culture. London: Bloomsbury, 2013.
34.
SokolovaN.Co-opting transmedia consumers: user content as entertainment or ‘free labour’? The cases of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and Metro 2033. Europe-Asia Studies2012; 64(8): 1565–1583.
35.
TushnetR.Hybrid vigor: mashups, cyborgs, and other necessary monsters. I/S: A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society2010; 6(1): 1–12.
36.
BoreIKHickmanJ.Studying fan activities on Twitter: reflections on metholodological issues emerging from a case study on The West Wing fandom. First Monday2013; 18(9), http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4268 (accessed 17 June 2016).
37.
JeewaZWadeJ.Playing with identity: Fan role playing on Twitter. Alternation Journal: Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of the Arts and Humanities in Southern Africa2015; 22(2): 216–240.
AdamsSS.What games have to offer: information behaviour and meaning-making in virtual play spaces. Library Trends2009; 57(4): 676–693.
40.
SteinLE.“This dratted thing”: fannish storytelling through new media. In: HelleksonKBusseK (eds) Fan fiction and fan communities in the age of the internet. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2006, pp. 245–254.
41.
SandvossC.Fans: The mirror of consumption. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2005.
42.
JenningsD.Net, blogs, and rock ‘n’ roll: how digital discovery works and what it means for consumers, creators and culture. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing, 2007.
43.
BeerDBurrowsR.Consumption, prosumption and participatory web cultures. Journal of Consumer Culture2010; 10(1): 3–12.
44.
ShirkyC.Cognitive surplus: creativity and generosity in a connected age. London: Penguin, 2011.
45.
GauntlettD.Making is connecting: the social meaning of creativity, from DIY and knitting to YouTube and Web 2.0. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2011.
46.
LittletonCE.The role of feedback in two fanfiction writing groups. Ph.D. Thesis. Indiana, PA: Indiana University of Pennsylvania, 2011, https://dspace.iup.edu/handle/2069/394 (accessed 17 June 2016).
47.
EmmanouloudisA.You are not alone. The emergence of fan communities around user-generated content: a comparative analysis. MA. Thesis. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam, 2015, http://dare.uva.nl/cgi/arno/show.cgi?fid=605663 (accessed 19 February 2016).
48.
ArvidssonACaliandroAAiroldiMBarinaA.Crowds and value. Italian Directioners on Twitter. Information, Communication & Society2016; 19: 921–939.
49.
SwalesJM.Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
50.
BorgE.Discourse community. Key Concepts in ELT2003; 57(4): 398–400.
51.
DevittAJ.Writing genres. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 2004.
52.
SköldO.Documenting virtual world cultures: Memory-making and documentary practices in the City of Heroes community. Journal of Documentation2015; 71(2): 294–316.
53.
ProcterRGoldenbergADavenportEMcKinlayA.Genres in support of collaborative information retrieval in the virtual library. Interacting with Computers1998; 10(2): 157–175.
54.
DriscollC.One true pairing: the romance of pornography and the pornography of romance. In: HelleksonKBusseK (eds) Fan fiction and fan communities in the age of the internet. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2006, pp. 79–96.
55.
JenkinsH.Convergence culture: where old and new media collide. New York, NY: New York University Press, 2006.
56.
DellerRA.A decade in the life of online fan communities. In: DuitsLZwaanKReijndersS (eds) The Ashgate research companion to fan cultures. Farnham: Ashgate, 2014, pp. 237–248.
57.
BoellstorfT.Rethinking digital anthropology. In: HorstHMillerD (eds) Digital Anthropology. London: Berg, 2012, pp. 39–60.
58.
HarringtonCLBielbyDD.Soap opera fans: pursuing pleasure and making meaning in everyday life. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 1995.
59.
AardseK.Alternate reality games, narrative disbursement and canon:The Lost Experience. In: BartonKMLampleyJM (eds) Fan CULTure: essays of participatory fandom in the 21st century. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2014, pp. 106–118.
60.
SihvonenT.Players unleashed!: Modding The Sims and the culture of gaming. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2011.
61.
BlackRW.English-language learners, fan communities, and 21st-century skills. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy2009; 52(8): 688–697.
62.
SotoCB.The role of online reading and writing in the literacy practices of first-year writing students. Ph.D. Thesis. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts-Amherst, 2015, http://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_2/326/ (accessed 19 February 2016).
63.
HendersonS.The Hunger Games fanfiction as a community of practice: forming identities in online communities. MA. Thesis. Vancouver: University of British Columbia, 2015, https://circle.ubc.ca/handle/2429/54488 (accessed 19 February 2016).
64.
PughS.The democratic genre: fan fiction in a literary context. Bridgend: Seren, 2005.
65.
HartCet al. The bibliographical structure of fan information. Collection Building1999; 18(2): 81–89.
66.
BullardJ.Values and negotiation in classification work. In: CSCW’14 Companion. Baltimore, MD, 15–19 February 2014, pp. 45–48, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2556420.2556820 (accessed 17 June 2016).
67.
DaltonKL.Searching the Archive of Our Own: the usefulness of the tagging structure. MLIS Thesis. Milwaukee, WI: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2012, http://dc.uwm.edu/etd/26 (accessed 17 June 2016).
GursoyA.Evaluating fan fiction metadata for preservation use. In: ASIST ′15 Proceedings of the 78th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Information Science with Impact: Research in and for the Community. St Louis, MO, 6–10 November 2015, http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2857070.2857184 (accessed 28 January 2016).
70.
SavoleinanR.Everyday life information seeking: approaching information seeking in the context of “way of life”. Library & Information Science Research1995; 17(3): 259–294
71.
PeckosieJHillH.Beyond traditional publishing models: an examination of the relationships between authors, readers, and publishers. Journal of Documentation2015; 71(3): 609–626.
72.
RomanenkovaK.The fandom problem: a precarious intersection of fanfiction and copyright. Intellectual Property Law Bulletin2014, 18(2): 183–212.
73.
AdornoTW.On popular music: III. Theory about the listener. Studies in Philosophy and Social Science1941; 9: 17–48.
74.
BaudrillardJ.Simulacra and simulation. Translated from French by GlaserSF. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1994.
75.
BenjaminW.The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. Translated from German by UnderwoodJA. London: Penguin Books, 2008.
76.
LothianA.Archival anarchies: Online fandom, subcultural conservation, and the transformative work of digital ephemera. International Journal of Cultural Studies2012; 16(6): 541–556.
77.
HartelJ.Managing documents at home for serious leisure: a case study of the hobby of gourmet cooking. Journal of Documentation2010; 66(6): 847–874.
78.
MargreePMacFarlaneAPriceLRobinsonL.Information behaviour of music record collectors. Information Research2014; 19(4): paper 652, http://www.informationr.net/ir/19-4/paper652.html (accessed 17 June 2016).
79.
PickardAJ.Delphi study. In: PickardAJ (ed) Research methods in information, 2nd edn.London: Facet, 2013, pp. 149–156.
80.
Helmer-HirschbergORescherNH.On the epistemology of the inexact sciences. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1960, http://www.rand.org/pubs/reports/R353 (accessed 17 June 2016).
81.
GreenR.The Delphi technique for library research. International Journal of Library and Information Science2013, 5(9): 272–279.
82.
GreifenederE.Trends in information behaviour research. In: ISIC: The information behaviour conference, Proceedings of ISIC: the information behaviour conference. Leeds, UK, 2–5 September 2014, http://www.informationr.net/ir/19-4/isic/isic13.html (accessed 17 June 2016).
83.
HowardK.Educating cultural heritage information professionals for Australia’s galleries, libraries, archives and museums: a grounded Delphi study. Ph.D. Thesis. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology, 2015, http://eprints.qut.edu.au/85088 (accessed 19 February 2016).
84.
CasseldenBPickardAJMcLeodJ.The challenges facing public libraries in the Big Society: The role of volunteers, and the issues that surround their use in England. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science2014; 47(3): 187–203.
85.
PoirierERobinsonL.Slow Delphi: An investigation into information behaviour and the Slow Movement. Journal of Information Science2013; 40(1): 88–96.
86.
MissinghamR.Parliamentary library and research services in the 21st century: A Delphi study. IFLA Journal2011; 37(1): 52–61
87.
ZinsC.Conceptions of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2007; 58(3): 335–350.
88.
ZinsC.Conceptual approaches for defining data, information, and knowledge. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2007; 58(4): 479–493.
89.
ZinsC.Knowledge map of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology2007; 58(4): 526–535.
90.
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.
91.
DerechoA.Archontic literature: a definition, a history, and several theories of fan fiction. In: HelleksonKBusseK (eds) Fan fiction and fan communities in the age of the internet. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2006, pp. 61–78.
92.
KarpovichAI.The audience as editor: the role of beta readers in online fan fiction communities. In: HelleksonKBusseK (eds) Fan fiction and fan communities in the age of the internet. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2006, pp. 171–188.
93.
ZhangYWildemuthBM.Qualitative analysis of content. Analysis2005; 1(2): 1–12.
94.
ThomasG.How to do your research project: a guide for students in education and applied social sciences. London: SAGE, 2009.
95.
Von der GrachtHA. Consensus measurement in Delphi studies: Review and implications for future quality assurance. Technological Forecasting & Social Change2012; 79(8): 1525–1536.
96.
KapoorP.A systems approach to documentary maritime fraud. Ph.D. Thesis. Plymouth University of Plymouth, 1987, http://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/422 (accessed 17 June 2016).
97.
CottamHRoeMChallacombeJ.Outsourcing of trucking activities by relief organisations. Journal of Humanitarian Assistance2004; 1: 1–26, http://sites.tufts.edu/jha/files/2011/04/a130.pdf (accessed 17 June 2016).
98.
FloridiL.The fourth revolution: how the infosphere is reshaping human reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
