Ten recurring information myths

This is an excerpt from my monthly newsletter, Re:filtered. You can subscribe here.

In working through questions on how information is consumed in autocratic, tightly-controlled media ecosystems, I just finished Looking for Information: A Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior by Donald O. Case and Lisa M. Given. 

It's a great review of research over the past century on information needs and uses, sense-making, and information avoidance. I wish I had read Case and Given sooner, especially their list of "information myths" that have tainted thought in this field:

Myth #1: Only “objective” information is valuable.

People are not always rational; we do not always scan for new information to optimize our thinking, nor do we only access reliable, proven sources. People tend to use easily available sources of information, selecting quick, immediate answers, rather than the best information.

Myth #2: More information is always better.

Too much information leads to cognitive overload, and we start to ignore or avoid information. People have plenty of information around them, yet they struggle to interpret and understand what they see, read, or hear. Having information is not the same as “being informed.”

Myth #3: Objective information can be transmitted out of context.

People tend to ignore isolated facts. We want to understand how new information inter- sects with known facts, beliefs, and emotions.

Myth #4: Only formal sources, such as scientific journals or vetted institutions, are essential.

Most people consult formal, vetted sources rarely. Instead, they rely on informal sources, often friends and family, or information they encounter serendipitously.

Myth #5: There is relevant information for every need.

Information alone cannot satisfy every need. While people want to learn, understand, and be entertained, we also need the physical and psycho- logical necessities of daily life, such as food, shelter, clothing, respect, and love.

Myth #6: Every problem has a solution.

Institutions like libraries and medical clinics try to provide information to solve people’s problems. Like search engines, they map requests onto the language and resources of their systems to produce a response. However, people are sometimes seeking empathy or reassurance (rather than information), which the system may not be able to provide.

Myth #7: It is always possible to make information available or accessible.

Formal information systems cannot easily address vague, ambiguous, and constantly changing human needs. People often construct their own answers to unique, unpredictable questions without accessing formal information systems.

Myth #8: Material information, such as books or websites, will satisfy people’s needs.

Information systems rely on standardized “packages” of information and provide these on request (like a list of links returned by a search engine). Yet people may seek solutions, instructions, ideas, inspirations, and human contacts that do not match these standard packages and often cannot be provided by the system.

Myth #9: Individual situations and contexts can be ignored.

Typically, it is a person’s experience of a situation or context that shapes their information needs and how they use information. When we face unpredictability and lack of control, we worry, and then the worry itself becomes a need.

Myth #10: People make easy, conflict-free connections between external information and their internal reality.

People often struggle to make sense of situations and the world at large. Researchers need to ask more questions about why people think and act as they do, how they arrived at certain beliefs, and how they inform themselves.

The book is available on Amazon.

This is an excerpt from my monthly newsletter, Re:filtered. You can subscribe here.