2.1. Theory Use in LIS

The concept of “theory” can be defined differently depending on the academic context and purpose. Buckland (1991) viewed theory as a framework for explaining or expanding the essence of phenomena, whereas Popper regarded theory as a set of laws that can be empirically tested. A model, which is often used interchangeably with theory, is defined as a framework for analyzing problems and describing relationships (Wilson, 1999). However, it is distinct from a theory. Frankfort-Nachmias and Nachmias (1996) specify the difference in that a theory explains phenomena and a model describes phenomena. Therefore, the use of theory as a tool for analyzing and explaining phenomena, rather than merely describing them, can serve as a measure of research maturity and reliability (Brookes, 1980; Houser, 1988; Van Maanen, 1998).

The field of LIS has advanced through the development, application, and expansion of its own theories. LIS theories enable deeper understanding of human information behaviors, provide critical insights for the design of effective information systems, improve library collections and services, and inform the education and training of librarians and other information professionals. Since the 1990s and early 2000s, the use and application of theories in LIS research have increased (Kim & Jeong, 2006). However, Kim and Jeong (2006) note that despite this increase, articles specifically focused on developing theory were trending down. A decline in theory use has been noted by other researchers as well. Julien et al. (2011) noted decreasing theory use in information behavior research articles published between 1999 and 2008. Vakkari (2008) and VanScoy et al. (2022) identified overall decreases in theory use in LIS conference papers. Additionally, researchers have identified the trend of importing theories from neighboring disciplines, such as sociology, psychology, and business, for use in LIS (Pettigrew & McKechnie, 2001; Ukwoma & Ngulube, 2021; VanScoy et al., 2022). Interdisciplinary approaches may enhance the diversity and depth of LIS research, create new research opportunities, and speak to the meta-disciplinarity of information and information behaviors. However, these trends have spawned some existential dread among LIS scholars about the identity and theoretical foundations of the discipline.

Vakkari et al. (2022) looked at articles published in connection with authors’ disciplines and found that LIS articles published by LIS scholars accounted for about one-third of the publications. They noted significant contributions from computer science, business, economics, the humanities, the natural sciences, and medicine. Vakkari et al. (2022) argue that their findings support previous arguments from Nolin and Åström (2010) that LIS is a fragmented adhocracy (Whitley, 1984), meaning that LIS is a field in which there is inconsistency or disagreement on research areas and methods and less dependence of scholars upon one another in building knowledge. Bates (2009) and Raber (2003) describe a variety of different definitions, theories, and paradigms within the discipline but note that LIS continues to progress.

Studies have been conducted to examine the extent to which theories are utilized in LIS research. Lund (2019) found that Kuhlthau (1991)’s information search process (ISP) and Bates (1989)’s berrypicking are by far the most frequently cited theories in LIS. However, the sample of theories used by Lund (2019) was determined by those included in Fisher et al. (2005)’s textbook, Theories of Information Behavior, which does not include TIW because it had not yet been published. Citation data in the previous study (Park et al., 2022) found that TIW was cited 68 times over 13 years and 9 months (between June 2008, when it was first introduced, to March 2022, the end of data collection), which is roughly 4.95 citations per year, suggesting low awareness or adoption of TIW. Regionally, theoretical applications in LIS studies have been investigated in countries outside the West, such as Korea (Jeong & Kim, 2005), Taiwan (Wu et al., 2017), Tanzania (Kassim, 2024), and Nigeria and South Africa (Ukwoma & Ngulube, 2021). Jeong and Kim (2005) noted that about 10% of studies published in Korean LIS journals apply theories. In Taiwanese LIS journals published between 2010 and 2015, Wu et al. (2017) found that 49.9% of articles applied theory. Ukwoma and Ngulube (2021) found that most studies from LIS postgraduate students and researchers in Nigeria and South Africa used theories from outside disciplines, primarily in management, psychology, and sociology.

The depth or level of theory application has also been explored. Notably, Kumasi et al. (2013) categorized theory talk levels into seven stages: theory dropping, theory positioning, theory diversification, theory conversation, theory application, theory testing, and theory generation. VanScoy et al. (2022) adapted Kumasi et al. (2013)’s theory talk framework to explore the use of theory in ISIC conference papers published between 1996 and 2020. They found that most (around 78%) of the conference papers mention theory, with about 69% percent of papers using theory at a substantial level. VanScoy et al. (2022) also found that most of the theories used originated from LIS, though some from other disciplines, such as sociology, psychology, communication, and business or management, were noted. Similar to Lund (2019), VanScoy et al. (2022) found that Kuhlthau’s ISP was the most used LIS theory. Lund (2021) identified the prominence of ISP in dissertations as well.

Kassim (2024) also applied Kumasi et al. (2013)’s theory talk model in an exploration of theory use in articles published in Tanzanian LIS journals from 1990 to 2023. Kassim also identified an upward trend of theory use after 2006, but only 154 out of 616 (25%) of Tanzanian LIS articles overall included theory. Kassim (2024) also found that 109 (70.3%) applied theory, 29 (18.7%) dropped theories, and 17 (10.9%) generated theory. Contrary to other studies, Kassim (2024) found that the technology acceptance model (TAM; Davis, 1987) and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT; Venkatesh et al., 2003) were the most often used theories at 17.4% and 14.1%, respectively.

VanScoy et al. (2022) note that while Kumasi et al. (2013)’s theory talk framework was useful for providing terminology and framing the discussion of their findings, there were a variety of limitations. In particular, they describe difficulties in applying the framework to analyze or categorize studies that may not clearly articulate why or how a theory is used, or studies that may not clearly fall into one category. They argue that more development of the theory talk model could make it useful for analyzing the use of theory. In another study applying Kumasi et al. (2013)’s theory talk framework, Park et al. (2022) also note that the framework poses challenges in identifying the usage of specific theories because it considers all theories used in a study. Park et al. (2022) adapted and revised the original framework into the single theory talk framework by applying mutual exclusivity between certain categories and repositioning and redefining the seven original levels into five levels (theory dropping, theory positioning, theory conversation, theory application, and theory generation) to analyze the application of the TIW. Park et al. (2022) found that in the context of articles featuring TIW (n=68), 51.47% were briefly name-dropping TIW; 17.65% were using TIW to position their own study or theory; 4.41% conversed on TIW; 26.47% applied TIW for study design or data analysis or interpretation; and 16.18% used TIW in some way to generate theory. This study will explore the use and application of TIW in greater detail.

2.2. Theory of Information Worlds

The TIW is a framework for analyzing the social aspects of human information behavior. The theory is based on Chatman (1999)’s small worlds theory and Habermas (1992)’s concepts of the lifeworld. Normative information behaviors within Chatman’s small worlds are shaped by social norms, social types, and worldview. Burnett and Jaeger (2008; Jaeger & Burnett, 2010) modified the worldview concept into information value to account for variations in information value systems across worlds because different worlds may evaluate information differently. Additionally, the concept of boundaries was added to account for potential social interaction and exchange of information across worlds, in consideration of Habermas’s concept of the lifeworld. These revisions allow TIW to provide a more holistic perspective on the broader social and cultural contexts of information behavior in a way that small worlds cannot. To study information behavior in social contexts, the TIW (Jaeger & Burnett, 2010, p. 8) presents five key core concepts, defined as follows:

4.1. Applications of TIW (RQ1)

This study analyzed 27 papers that applied the TIW. The codes used in TA papers, which applied the theory, and TG papers, which provided new theoretical concepts, are TP, TC, TA1, TA2, TG2, TG3, and TG4. Although TP papers, which use TIW to position a study without applying it to research design or data analysis, were not the subjects of analysis, the corresponding codes were included in this study’s analysis when used alongside other TC, TA, or TG codes. A total of 35 codes were assigned across the 27 papers, with an average of approximately 1.3 codes per paper. The most frequently assigned codes were TA1 and TA2, which appeared in 10 papers each. Following those were TG4, which appeared six times, TC four times, TG2 and TC two times each, and TG3 one time. Abbreviated citations of the articles and their associated codes are listed in Table 2 (Bao & Ke, 2023; Brattland, 2017; Burnett, 2015; Burnett et al., 2009; Burnett et al., 2013; Froggatt, 2015; Gibson, 2016; Gibson & Kaplan, 2017; Hollister, 2020; Hollister et al., 2023; Hovious, 2018; Jaeger et al., 2014; Känsäkoski & Huotari, 2016; Lee, 2019; Lee & Butler, 2019; Ndumbaro & Ochieng, 2021; Ndumu, 2019; 2020; Pang et al., 2020; Park, 2022; Park et al., 2022; Rohman & Pitaloka, 2025; Welch, 2019; Worrall, 2019; Worrall et al., 2021; Xie et al., 2021; Yu, 2012).

Since a paper can have multiple codes, the study analyzed papers that applied the theory through combinations of codes. When considering combinations of codes, 10 code combinations were used, and the number of papers per combination is shown in Fig. 1. The code that appeared in most papers was TA1 (in eight papers). This was followed by TA2 in seven papers, and TC and TG4 in three papers each.

Fig. 1

The number of articles per unique code. Please see Section 3 or Table 1 for more information. TP, Theory Positioning; TC, Theory Conversation; TA1, Theory Application 1 - Research Design & Data Analysis; TA2, Theory Application 2 - Theory Convergence; TG2, Theory Generation 2 - Expansion; TG3, Theory Generation 3 - Alternative; TG4, Theory Generation 4 - Informed.

4.2. Theory Revision, Expansion & Generation with the Theory of Information Worlds (RQ2)

As noted above, nine articles were involved in theory generation using TIW. However, none of the articles propose revisions to the existing core concepts of TIW (TG1, n=0).

4.3. Theory Conversations with TIW (RQ3)

TC-coded articles discuss the theoretical implications and practical applications of TIW as well as offer critiques and other considerations, but do not use TIW to inform research design or collect and analyze empirical data. TC-coded articles, as well as those coded with TA and TG, identified and discussed the strengths and weaknesses of TIW. Consequently, the strengths and weaknesses of TIW identified across the sample are discussed in Sections 5.3 and 5.4, respectively, with supporting evidence.

Four articles within the sample are coded for theory conversation (TC): Burnett (2015); Hollister et al. (2023); Park (2022); and Park et al. (2022). Burnett (2015) presents a theory development paper that introduces an expansion of core TIW with the addition of the domains of individual and signification; the original core concepts are repositioned as the domain of the social. The new information domains framework can account for other theoretical paradigms and existing research in LIS, such as cognitive and physical paradigms (using Raber’s 2003 interpretations).

Hollister et al. (2023) describe the development of a TIW general codebook through a collaboration of three (then) doctoral candidates and Burnett. They found that TIW provides a scalable and flexible theory that could be successfully applied with a variety of research methods and in disparate research contexts. Park (2022) and Park et al. (2022) are precursors to the study presented here, exploring the use and applications of TIW in dissertations and peer-reviewed research articles, respectively. Both studies find that while TIW is often employed with qualitative methods, it has and continues to be applied with mixed and quantitative methods and is used to study social information behavior in a variety of populations around the world.

5.1. Theory Application

TIW has been demonstrated to be a versatile and robust theoretical framework applicable across various research contexts. The findings show that TIW effectively operates as an independent analytical tool, with many studies employing it exclusively to explain information phenomena. This highlights the theory’s self-contained theoretical structure, enabling researchers to leverage its value in specific research settings. TIW’s core concepts, particularly “information behavior” and “information value,” were frequently utilized, underscoring the theory’s optimization for analyzing information behavior. In particular, information value can be considered a unique concept of TIW, as it represents a shift from the world view concept in the process of developing Chatman’s original theory into TIW (Jaeger & Burnett, 2010). In the TC article, Hollister et al. (2023), there are specific examples of how to operationalize and apply the information value concept across three different research projects, which may be useful for those thinking about using the information value concept or TIW more fully. However, concepts such as social types and boundaries have been discussed relatively less frequently, and research on social types appears to be limited due to the difficulty of measuring the perception of assigned roles within society. Therefore, to enhance the extensibility of TIW, it may be necessary to clearly define and operationalize the concept of social types. As noted in Hollister et al. (2023), a draft of the general TIW codebook is available by request, which may help scholars to operationalize and apply the TIW concepts to guide their research and interpret their data.

TIW has also made contributions to research design by guiding the development of research questions, data collection methods, and research instruments. For example, TIW was useful in the creation of interview protocols (Gibson & Kaplan, 2017) and survey tools (Worrall, 2019), demonstrating its practical utility in empirical research. When combined with qualitative research methodologies, such as grounded theory (Gibson, 2016), TIW facilitated systematic analysis of complex social phenomena. Its core concepts were explicitly referenced during study design, ensuring that data collection and interpretation were aligned with the theory’s foundational principles. Methodologically, TIW has been leveraged in diverse research designs, including mobile ethnography (Pang et al., 2020), sentiment analysis (Worrall et al., 2021), and cognitive mapping (Bao & Ke, 2023). These applications illustrate TIW’s adaptability to both qualitative and quantitative methods, reinforcing its role as a versatile analytical framework. However, despite its strengths, challenges remain in quantifying individual cognition and emotions within TIW. Future research should focus on refining operational definitions of social types, integrating quantitative models, and developing theoretical frameworks that incorporate effective computing to enhance TIW’s explanatory power.

TIW has demonstrated strong synergy with various theoretical frameworks, enhancing its applicability across diverse research contexts. It has been integrated with Boundary Object Theory (Worrall, 2019), Information Overload (Ndumu, 2019; 2020), and Grounded Theory (Gibson, 2016; Lee, 2019) to provide deeper insights into information behavior. Additionally, it has been applied alongside activity theory to analyze transliteracy (Hovious, 2018) and the information behaviors of rural seniors during disasters (Pang et al., 2020), and with Social Informatics to examine socio-emotional interactions in online communities (Worrall et al., 2021). These integrations collectively highlight TIW’s flexibility in capturing both structural and affective dimensions of information behavior, demonstrating its ability to adapt to various research paradigms while maintaining theoretical coherence.

5.2. Theory Revision, Expansion & Generation

As seen in Section 4.3, although no modifications to the five core concepts of TIW were identified, TIW itself has seen some development and has been used to inform the development of other concepts, models, and theories. Jaeger et al. (2014)’s introduction of the bridges concept and Burnett (2015)’s own addition of domains are the only substantive theoretical developments of TIW, the latter especially so. Burnett (2015)’s information domains are coded as TC and TG2 as the domains framework absorbs the core TIW into the domain of the social and expands the framework with the introduction of the domains of the individual and signification. As such, the information domains can be seen as an expansion and not a replacement. As seen in the results, TIW is still functional as an independent theory and has continued to be used well after the introduction of the information domains framework. Yu (2012)’s TIW of individuals is positioned as an alternative to TIW, but is based on Popper (1979)’s three worlds rather than Chatman (1999; 2000)’s small worlds; and Yu also admits that research with Burnett and Jaeger’s TIW or other social information theories may still better address social aspects of and societal impacts on information behavior, as noted in Section 5.4.

TIW also informed the development of other theories, concepts, and models as seen in articles coded with TG4. Froggatt (2015) identifies different information worlds through interactions of student academic success and access to school library programs. Gibson (2016) uses TIW as one sensitizing theory to develop a model of post-diagnosis information seeking. Gibson and Kaplan (2017) develop a framework of information access in local communities. Similarly, Lee and Butler (2019) consult TIW to develop a theory of local information landscapes. Hovious (2018) combines TIW with activity theory (Engeström, 1987) to redefine transliteracy. Worrall et al. (2021) argue for a social-affective paradigm shift in LIS research, in part informed by TIW. These findings suggest that TIW is useful for informing the development of other theories.

5.3. Strengths: Research Contexts, Methodological Flexibility & Theoretical Amicability

As seen above and in the previous study (Park et al., 2022), TIW has been applied in a variety of research contexts, methods, and alongside other concepts, models, and theories. The scalability of TIW appears useful for exploring and describing multiple-level sociotechnical contexts, enabling its use across various research populations and phenomena ranging from social media users, medical practitioners, immigrants, online gamers, health information systems, to topics such as information access, digital inclusion, and information behavior (Park et al., 2022). Bao and Ke (2023, p. 974), pointing to Burnett and Jaeger’s 2011 chapter, explain that TIW is useful for understanding the social dimensions of information use as well as it “endows it with meaning through the multilevel context in which it occurs, so as to deepen the understanding the role of social and structural factors in shaping information behavior in society.” Känsäkoski and Huotari (2016, p. 336)’s study was one of the first to apply TIW to a micro-level information world setting of health care professionals and patients, and conclude that TIW “could be applied in wider contexts to increase understanding of the intersection among individuals in small worlds, in the meso worlds in which they work, and in the macro world in which they live.” Gibson and Kaplan (2017, p. 138) note that TIW, among other theories, “acknowledge[s] the social multiplicity inherent in physical information places.” Welch (2019, p. 246) found TIW useful for understanding the “conceptual, social, technological, and political context of [information behavior]” in their mixed-methods study on LAM professionals in Detroit. Lee and Butler (2019) found that TIW is helpful for understanding issues related to information access and information behaviors. Ndumu (2019; 2020) also found that TIW helps both to describe the information behaviors and to contextualize the information overload and acculturative stress experienced by Black immigrants in the US. Park (2022) noted similar strengths identified through dissertation projects using TIW.

Another area of strength is TIW’s methodological flexibility, allowing it to be applied with various research methodologies, whether quantitative, qualitative, or some combination thereof. This is in line with the original intention for TIW to be amethodological (Jaeger & Burnett, 2010). Although TIW was more often used with qualitative methods, as noted in Park (2022) and Park et al. (2022), it has been applied with quantitative methods as well. Froggatt (2015) developed a survey questionnaire regarding students’ information behaviors and information access from their contextual small, meso, and life worlds. Jaeger et al. (2014, para. 10) used surveys, site visits, usability and accessibility testing methods to examine user’s information needs, access, and behaviors “from the micro (the localized small worlds of information), to the meso (the intermediate levels of information in society), to the macro (the largest level of information flow in society)” while using e-government websites and services provided by public libraries. However, it should be noted that quantitative data collection and analysis methods were mostly used as parts of mixed and or multiple methods to triangulate findings from multiple data sources and provide holistic views of phenomena.

The most frequently used research methods among the sampled articles are qualitative, including data collection and analysis approaches, such as interviews, focus groups, content analyses of documents/texts, field diaries, and observation. Gibson (2016) and Gibson and Kaplan (2017)’s work used TIW to develop interview protocols in their grounded theory studies; Gibson (2016, p. 3) reported that “[TIW] is useful for guiding grounded theory data collection as it provides a framework for describing actor, information behaviors, information values, and boundaries within and between information worlds without imposing specific coding categories.” The five core concepts of social types, social norms, information behaviors, information value, and boundaries allow researchers to capture a wide spectrum of normative information behaviors and practices in social worlds, information values influenced by social types and norms, as well as conflicts and dynamics in, out, between, and across the multiple boundaries. TIW can be used as a guiding lens without specifying certain social types, social norms, information behaviors, information values, and boundaries; these are based on the unique data from the persons, communities, and contexts under study.

However, some studies feature a shared codebook to aid data collection and analysis. Hollister (2020) and Lee (2019) used a collaboratively developed codebook to analyze information worlds of Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game users and political opinion leaders on Twitter from their respective doctoral dissertation projects. Although the codebooks used in Hollister (2020) and Lee (2019) were initially based on inductively chosen codes for five core concepts, new codes were added through collaborative work and discussions with one of the theorists of TIW, Dr. Gary Burnett, and another (then) doctoral student, Julia Skinner, as well as deduced through coding research data across three different dissertation projects, as described in Hollister et al. (2023). Park (2022, p. 438) pointed out that “codebook development process using both inductive and deductive approaches contributed to expanding TIW,” and Hollister et al. (2023) maintain that collaborative doctoral education and dissertation work effectively assisted with further development and application of TIW into various research settings.

As seen in Sections 4.1.3 and 4.2.3 and noted in Sections 5.1 and 5.2, TIW exhibits theoretical amicability. Theoretical amicability is exhibited by TIW’s versatility to be used alongside other theories or theoretical concepts as well as to inform or guide the development of other concepts, models, or theories. Pang et al. (2020) combine Burnett (2015)’s expanded TIW with activity theory to better understand the information worlds of seniors during natural disasters, identifying significant roles of individual and social factors as well as the influence of space, proximity, and technology. In their conclusion, Pang et al. (2020, p. 629) argue that “[d]rawing on concepts from activity theory with the TIW allowed us to seek out substantial connections between information worlds and purposeful activities.”

Blending methodological and theoretical versatility, TIW was also combined with grounded theory approaches. As stated by Gibson and Kaplan (2017, p. 133), “Because this theory [TIW] is not predictive or prescriptive at the level of specific populations, it does not violate Corbin and Strauss (2014)’s or Charmaz (2014)’s suggestion that initial grounded theory should not test the validity of currently existing theoretical frameworks.” As noted in Section 2.2, TIW has no official propositions and is not intended to be predictive. Even though Park (2022) noted that the lack of official propositions could be considered a weakness, the omission appears to further support TIW’s strengths in methodological flexibility and theoretical amicability. Contrarily, the development of propositions may encourage more TIW use with quantitative methods.

5.4. Weaknesses: Social vs. Individual Information Worlds

As noted in Sections 4.2.2 and 5.2, Yu (2012) offers the most direct challenge to TIW with their introduction of the information worlds of individuals, arguing that Burnett and Jaeger’s formulation of information worlds does not adequately account for individual agency and other personal factors. However, Yu (2012) notes that issues related to parsing social and individual information worlds, the formation of information worlds, and understanding how information worlds impact or interact with society remain. Yu (2012, p. 16) acknowledges that continued research and development of Burnett and Jaeger’s TIW, or those developed by others, may address such issues. Burnett (2015)’s later integration of the domain of the individual simultaneously addressed prior limitations identified by Yu (2012) as well as potentially anticipated calls from Worrall et al. (2021) to integrate emotional or affective factors into social information behavior theory and research. Further, the domain of signification may account for Jaeger et al. (2014)’s suggested sixth core concept of bridges. Burnett (2015)’s added domain of signification focuses on the signs, languages, tools, and technologies that may or may not enable the exchange of information in a way similar in intent to the concept of bridges, which focuses on the ways in which information may or may not be moved across boundaries. However, broader adoption of the bridges concept is outside the scope of this project and may warrant further research.

The ability of the revised TIW, Burnett (2015)’s information domains framework, to address these concerns also requires further exploration. Within this study’s sample, just two research articles applied the information domains framework: Bao and Ke (2023) and Pang et al. (2020). Bao and Ke (2023) employ the concept of transition (Ruthven, 2022) alongside the expanded version of TIW (Burnett, 2015), in part to overcome the perceived social focus of TIW and to better understand how an individual’s cognitive, emotional, and physiological factors and activities impact information behavior during different stages of a transition process. In their study, the transitions were focused on the changing information worlds through different phases of lockdown as experienced by depression patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Bao and Ke (2023, p. 983) note in their conclusion that they “understand the effect of emotion, body, and embodiment in crisis situations on individual meaning construction as a motivating factor for individuals to create a picture of the information worlds and the ongoing impact it is thought to have on individuals’ lives.” Additionally, Pang et al. (2020) specifically note that the combination of activity theory (Engeström, 1987) and TIW’s domain of the individual helped them understand not just the social contexts of behaviors, but also the individual characteristics that could influence individuals’ information behaviors “rather than treating the subject as a black box” (Pang et al., 2020, p. 628). With some additional conceptual and theoretical support, the expanded TIW shows some potential in overcoming the limitations stated by Yu (2012), though more work is needed to explore the applications and developments of Burnett (2015)’s expanded TIW framework. TIW’s theoretical amicability allows it to work alongside other concepts, models, and theories in cooperative and constructive ways.

Although not in the sample of this or the previous study, Savolainen (2021) briefly discusses TIW in relation to three levels of critique for the purposes of developing theoretical concepts and models of human information behavior. Savolainen (2021) argues for three distinct levels of critique based on depth: the lowest level focusing on gaps or absences in the research literature; the middle level focusing on finding and interpreting limitations of existing theories; and the highest level that addresses identified limitations by proposing alternatives or modifications to strengthen human information behavior theories. Savolainen (2021) positions TIW in the second level, arguing that TIW’s development, as described in Burnett and Jaeger (2008; 2011), is based on a critique of the scope of Chatman (1999; 2000)’s small worlds theories due to their inability to address interactions between other small worlds and societal worlds. However, using Savolainen’s levels of critique, it seems like TIW should fall into the third level, as Burnett and Jaeger’s initial development of TIW builds on the limitations of small worlds through modification of the information value concept and expansion through the addition of the concept of boundaries, and not on critique without proposed solutions. Burnett (2015)’s later development of TIW into the information domains framework also features constructive criticism through the integration of domains to strengthen the theory by addressing weaknesses, such as those identified by Yu (2012). However, Savolainen (2021) did not capture these developments.

5.5. Emergent Themes, Limitations, and Future Work

The primary emergent themes of this study are largely represented by the strengths and weaknesses identified in Sections 5.3 and 5.4. Themes regarding TIW’s use across myriad research contexts, methodological flexibility, and theoretical amicability are meaningful, but are not unexpected. In fact, these strengths align with Jaeger and Burnett (2010)’s original intentions for the theory to be useful in these ways. The results of this study provide some evidence to support those intended goals. These features may explain TIW’s steady adoption. However, this study is not equipped nor intended to compare TIW with other social information behavior theories or to compare the adoption rate of TIW with related theories. Foundational TIW texts, such as Burnett and Jaeger (2008) and Jaeger and Burnett (2010) provide more information on the development and context of TIW. A larger, more recent, and comprehensive data set is needed to compare TIW’s adoption rate with other related theories.

TIW’s focus on social contexts at the perceived expense of individual cognitive and affective factors emerged as the primary weakness, with Yu (2012)’s direct challenge as well as the indirect critiques from Jaeger et al. (2014)’s introduction of the bridges concept and Worrall et al. (2021)’s calls for a socio-emotional paradigm shift. Burnett (2015)’s introduction of the information domains framework seems to address these concerns. The domain of the individual can account for an individual’s agency as well as cognitive and affective factors. The domain of signification, which focuses on the tools, technologies, symbols, and languages that facilitate the use and exchange of information, seems to account for the concept of bridges, which focuses on how information is exchanged across boundaries. As stated in Section 5.4, although two studies in this sample (Bao & Ke, 2023; Pang et al., 2020) reported useful applications of information domains, further research is needed to explore the use of the information domains framework to assess whether the framework addresses TIW’s weaknesses. Similarly, future work could explore the impact or use of the bridges concept as well.

Some uses and interpretations of TIW that emerged during the analysis related to these larger themes are interesting. In particular, and as noted above, Gibson (2016) and Gibson and Kaplan (2017) used TIW in their grounded theory studies because TIW is not prescriptive. This is an interesting finding because early grounded theory work by Glaser and Strauss (1967) and later Glaser (1998), specifically, discourages the use of pre-existing theories for coding and encourages delaying explorations of related research literature until near the end of data analysis (Thistoll et al., 2016; Thornberg, 2012). However, Gibson (2016) and, in later work, Gibson and Kaplan (2017) use a relatively more recent, post-positivist or constructivist form of grounded theory drawing from Charmaz (2014) and Corbin and Strauss (2008). See Thistoll et al. (2016), Thornberg (2012), and Kelle (2007) for more on the development and differentiation of grounded theory. As noted in Section 2.2 and discussed in Section 5.3, TIW’s lack of propositions is an apparent strength that permits TIW to be used with various methods and alongside other theories.

Even though TIW has been used to study a variety of research populations, few studies seem to focus on libraries, librarians, library educators, or other information professionals. Froggatt (2015)’s work demonstrates how TIW can be helpful for understanding how IU students benefit from access to school librarian programs. Jaeger et al. (2014) argue that the concepts of TIW alongside the introduced concept of bridges may help librarians and libraries to better understand and perform their intermediary roles in supporting access and use of e-government resources and the challenges faced by their library users in terms of information value, boundaries, and bridges. One of the studies included in this sample, Hollister (2020), is based on a portion of his dissertation research (Hollister, 2016), which explores the interactions between the core concepts of TIW and digital literacies. Hollister (2016) argues that social types, social norms, and information values can impact an individual’s information behaviors and digital literacy practices, such as which sources of information are considered important and how to appropriately use information within a community based on its social norms and information values. Considering practical implications, Hollister’s findings suggest that librarians and library educators should consider social types, social norms, and information value systems when engaging in information and digital literacy instruction and developing curricula. The social norms and information values of an information world may enable or hinder the effectiveness of its members’ information or digital literacy skills or acceptance of information from outside sources.

Building on those implications, a stronger understanding of a community’s social types, social norms, information behaviors, information value systems, and boundaries could help libraries and librarians be more effective with community outreach, programming, and instruction. TIW may also be a useful tool for librarians and libraries to assess and meet the needs of diverse communities, creating more inclusive and representative collections, services, and staffing. Future work on TIW should explore the potential applications in professional practice in libraries, archives, schools, universities, and other settings.

The design of this study introduces limitations as well. The small sample size could be augmented by including more languages beyond English and Korean, including more paywalled academic databases not currently available to the research team, and exploring TIW use in other publication formats, such as conference proceedings, books and book chapters, dissertations and theses, and grey literature. Interviews or focus groups conducted with scholars who have used or are using TIW might provide additional insight and depth not captured in the articles.

Given the findings, themes, and limitations of this study, the researchers propose several areas of future research and work:

(1) Continued application, development, and testing of TIW across new research contexts and more methods. Although TIW is amethodological, it is primarily used with qualitative methods. More quantitative and mixed methods studies using TIW may aid in adoption and development.

(2) Broader explorations and comparisons of TIW with other LIS theories. The findings of this study suggest that TIW plays well with a variety of methods and with other theories, and can be used to inform new concepts and theories, yet awareness and use of TIW seem to be comparatively low. The relationship of TIW to other theories and its overall impact on LIS scholarship could be explored and evaluated in the future. Relatedly, future systematic reviews of TIW could expand their scope to include more theories, more articles in other databases, other publication types, additional languages, etc. as well as conducting bibliometric or scientometric studies to examine comparative use and citation rates, research trends, interdisciplinarity, and the evolution of theory use in LIS more broadly.

(3) Exploration and description of the application and development of TIW, its core concepts, and expansions. Burnett (2015)’s information domains framework and Jaeger et al. (2014)’s concept of bridges seem to be the primary theoretical developments of TIW. Future work could explore and assess the use of these revisions or expansions to TIW and whether they improve upon TIW’s strengths, and address its weaknesses.

(4) Application of TIW to inform professional LIS practice and education. Given TIW’s strengths, it may be a useful tool in professional LIS and educational settings, such as libraries, archives, and other information organizations. TIW may aid libraries, librarians, and other information professionals in building and providing inclusive, equitable, and socially just collections, services, instruction, outreach, policies, and staffing that are responsive to and representative of the information worlds of the diverse communities they serve. More work is needed to explore the practical applications of TIW, to evaluate its use as a tool for working professionals as well as its usefulness in preparing future librarians, archivists, and other information professionals.