Epperson-Zemel2008
| Epperson-Zemel2008 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Epperson-Zemel2008 |
| Author(s) | Terrence W. Epperson, Alan Zemel |
| Title | Reports, Requests, and Recipient Design:The Management of Patron Queries in Online Reference Chats |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Ethnomethodology, Conversation Analysis, virtual reference services, library and informa- tion science |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2008 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology |
| Volume | 59 |
| Number | 14 |
| Pages | 2268-2283 |
| URL | |
| DOI | 10.1002/asi.20930 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The related fields of ethnomethodology (EM), founded by Harold Garfinkel, and conversation analysis (CA), as epit- omized by thework ofHarvey Sacks,offer unique insights into the operation of virtual reference services (VRS).The tradition of phenomenology within library and informa- tion science (LIS) provides a context for this research, although EM/CAdiffers in important respects, providing a program for grounded empirical investigations. Rele- vant EM/CAresearch concerns include the documentary method of interpretation, trust, indexicality, instructed action, and sequential organization. Review of the LIS literature on reference interactions in both face-to-face and virtual settings reveals a tendency to impose ana- lytic categories and classificatory schemes that obscure the extremely situated and collaborative nature of refer- encework;however, an EM/CAexamination of transcripts from the first 4 months of a newly implemented VRS at a large university library suggests the need for a more nuanced approach. Close-order examination of two chat reference transcripts reveals the interactional com- plexities and nuances that characterize even the most succinct encounters. Analyzing the reference query as a service request demonstrates how librarians deploy their interactional skills to address “face” concerns and ame- liorate potentially problematic aspects of the reference encounter.
Notes
