The proliferation of information technologies has changed how Internet users around the world seek information. While information and communication technologies have transformed the structure of the Chinese economy, they have also brought challenges to the informational realms of everyday lives. However, there is a lack of empirical research exploring if users have encountered barriers in seeking online information for daily tasks. This mixed-methods study focuses on the disruptive influence of digital technologies on everyday information seeking practices, namely, the paradoxical co-existence of information overload and the lack of information sources. Results suggest that Chinese Internet users face a dilemma of receiving redundant online information and yet still experience a lack of high-quality information sources online. Findings from this research provide new perspectives of understanding the role of digital technologies in everyday life and also extend the dimensions of digital divides from internet access to disparities in information practices and experiences.
AldooryLVan DykeMA (2006)
The roles of perceived “shared” involvement and information overload in understanding how audiences make meaning of news about bioterrorism. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly83(2): 346–361.
2.
BawdenDRobinsonL (2008)
The dark side of information: Overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies. Journal of Information Science35(2): 180–191.
3.
BeaudoinCE (2008)
Explaining the relationship between internet use and interpersonal trust: Taking into account motivation and information overload. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13(3): 550–568.
4.
BourdieuP (2010) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste.
New York:
Routledge.
5.
CartierCCastellsMQiuJL (2005)
The information have-less: Inequality, mobility, and translocal networks in Chinese cities. Studies in Comparative International Development40(2): 9–34.
6.
ChenYLiangCCaiD (2018a)
Understanding WeChat users’ behavior of sharing social crisis information. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction34(4): 356–366.
7.
ChenYMaoZQiuJL (2018b) Super-Sticky WeChat and Chinese Society.
Bingley:
Emerald Publishing Limited.
8.
CNNIC (2015) 农村互联网发展状况研究报告 [Report on rural Internet development in China]. Report, China Internet Network Information Center, Beijing, May.
9.
CNNIC (2018) Statistical report on Internet development in China. Report, China Internet Network Information Center, Beijing, January.
10.
CNNIC (2019) 第44次中国互联网络发展状况统计 [The 44th China statistical report on Internet development]. Report, China Internet Network Information Center, Beijing, February.
11.
CreemersR (2016)
Cyber China: Upgrading propaganda, public opinion work and social management for the twenty-first century. Journal of Contemporary China26(103): 85–100.
12.
CreswellJW (2015) Mapping the developing landscape of mixed methods research. In: TashakkoriATeddlieC (eds) SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research.
Thousand Oaks:
SAGE Publications, pp. 45–68.
13.
CreswellJW (2018) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative & Mixed Methods Approaches.
Los Angeles:
SAGE Publications.
14.
DonnerJ (2015) After Access: Inclusion, Development, and a More Mobile Internet.
Cambridge, MA:
The MIT Press.
15.
EdmundsAMorrisA (2000)
The problem of information overload in business organisations: A review of the literature. International Journal of Information Management20(1): 17–28.
16.
EpplerMJMengisJ (2004)
The concept of information overload: A review of literature from organization science, accounting, marketing, MIS, and related disciplines. The Information Society20(5): 325–344.
17.
GanC (2017)
Understanding WeChat users’ liking behavior: An empirical study in China. Computers in Human Behavior68: 30–39.
18.
GreeneJC (2008)
Is mixed methods social inquiry a distinctive methodology? Journal of Mixed Methods Research2(1): 7–22.
19.
GrinbergNJosephKFriedlandL, et al. (2019)
Fake news on twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Science (New York, N.Y.)363(6425): 374–378.
20.
HargittaiENeumanWRCurryO (2012)
Taming the information tide: Perceptions of information overload in the American home. The Information Society28(3): 161–173.
21.
HektorA (2001) What's the use? Internet and information behavior in everyday life. PhD thesis, Linköping University, Sweden.
22.
HoltonAEChyiHI (2012)
News and the overloaded consumer: Factors influencing information overload among news consumers. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking15(11): 619–624.
23.
HowardP (2020) Lie Machines: How to save Democracy from Troll Armies, Deceitful Robots, Junk News Operations, and Political Operatives.
London:
Yale University Press.
24.
JiQHaLSypherU (2014)
The role of news media use and demographic characteristics in the prediction of information overload. International Journal of Communication8: 699–714.
25.
KlappOE (1986) Overload and Boredom: Essays on the Quality of Life in the Information Society.
New York:
Greenwood Press.
26.
LonghoferJFloerschJHoyJ (2012) Quick-start to qualitative research for practice. In: Longhofer J, Floersch J and Hoy J (eds) Qualitative Methods for Practice Research, pp 31–82. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
McDonaldT (2016) Social Media in Rural China.
London:
UCL Press.
28.
NeumanWR (2016) The Digital Difference: Media Technology and the Theory of Communication Effects.
Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
29.
OregliaE (2013) From Farm to Farmville: Circulation, Adoption, and Use of ICT between Urban and Rural China.
Berkeley:
University of California.
30.
PanN (2018)
The mobilization of Cyber-Nationalism by the communist youth league: Pressure, opportunity and strategy. Journal of Asia Pacific Studies30: 139–156.
31.
PlantinJ-Cde SetaG (2019)
WeChat as infrastructure: The techno-nationalist shaping of Chinese digital platforms. Chinese Journal of Communication12(3): 257–273.
32.
QiuJL (2009) Working-Class Network Society: Communication Technology and the Information Have-Less in Urban China.
Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
33.
SavolainenR (1995)
Everyday life information seeking: Approaching information seeking in the context of “way of life”. Library & Information Science Research17(3): 259–294.
34.
SavolainenR (2007)
Filtering and withdrawing: Strategies for coping with information overload in everyday contexts. Journal of Information Science33(5): 611–621.
35.
SchmittJBDebbeltCASchneiderFM (2018)
Too much information? Predictors of information overload in the context of online news exposure. Information Communication & Society21(8): 1151–1167.
36.
TashakkoriATeddlieC (2010) SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research.
London:
SAGE Publications.
37.
WallisC (2013) Technomobility in China: Young Migrant Women and Mobile Phones.
New York:
New York University.
38.
WangX (2016) Social Media in Industrial China.
London:
UCL Press.
39.
WebsterJG (2014) The Marketplace of Attention: How Audiences Take Shape in a Digital Age.
Cambridge, MA:
The MIT Press.
40.
WhitneyDC (1981)
Information overload in the newsroom. Journalism Quarterly58(1): 69–161.
41.
YanPSchroederR (2020)
Variations in the adoption and use of mobile social apps in everyday lives in urban and rural China. Mobile Media & Communication8(3): 318–341.
42.
YuL (2010)
How poor informationally are the information poor? Journal of Documentation66(6): 906–933.
43.
ZhouB (2018)
Fear of missing out, feeling of acceleration, and being permanently online: A survey study of university students’ use of mobile apps in China. Chinese Journal of Communication12(1): 66–83.
