archivya3o.files.wordpress.com · Web viewOften anecdotal, these conversations ... professionals assisting users to preserve their records ... the web environment offers great advantages

Running head: USER KNOWLEDGE OF AND PERCEPTIONS TOWARD PERSONAL DIGITAL PRESERVATION 1

Personal Digital Preservation: User Perceptions, Knowledge, and the Role of Archives

Alexandra A. A. Orchard

Wayne State University

Author Note

Alexandra A. A. Orchard, School of Library and Information Science, Wayne State

University.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Alexandra A. A. Orchard,

Livonia, MI, 48150. E-mail: [email protected]

USER KNOWLEDGE OF AND PERCEPTIONS TOWARD PERSONAL DIGITAL PRESERVATION 2

Abstract

The purpose of this proposal is to explore the relationship between users’ personal digital

preservation habits and their knowledge of and perceptions toward digital preservation. The

proposed study utilizes a descriptive parallel samples survey to obtain information professional’s

and non-information professional’s habits and attitudes toward personal digital preservation.

Stratifying the sample in this way helps to understand if information professionals’ digital

preservation opinions and habits differ from those of the general public by providing a built-in

means of comparison. Additionally, the questions within the survey instrument further illuminate

the two samples’ attitudes, level of knowledge, and behaviors, providing insight and perhaps

correlation between perceptions and behaviors and knowledge and behaviors. After obtaining the

data, descriptive statistics will be applied to further examine the results. Gaining information

about users’ actual knowledge versus user perceptions about personal digital preservation, in

conjunction with the preservation actions taken by users, is vital to understanding the actual

rationale behind users’ reactions to digital information loss. In turn, this will help archivists to

understand and determine their own appropriate role in assisting users with personal digital

preservation.


Effects of Computer Knowledge on Attitudes towards Digital Data Loss

The purpose of this proposal is to explore the relationship between users’ personal digital

preservation habits and their knowledge of and perceptions toward digital preservation. Evens

and Hauttekeete (2011) define digital preservation “as a set of management processes and

activities that ensures permanent access to digital information, including scientific and cultural

heritages” (p. 158). This information is vital to determine archives’ future role in enhancing and

spreading users’ digital preservation of user-generated content.

A concern often cited within the digital preservation community is the perception that the

public does not have a firm grasp of the inherent difficulties of digital preservation and their own

capabilities to thwart pending digital rot. Often anecdotal, these conversations focus on users’

frustrated, yet almost expected reactions to websites shutting down and subsequent personal data

loss. It appears that users have low expectations of the permanence of digital information. Do

most users actually expect and accept that their digital data and information are likely to be lost,

and if so, do their expectations and acceptance significantly impact their actions towards

preserving their own content?

During his presentation at the Ann Arbor District Library, self-described street archivist

and Archive Team founder, Jason Scott, rendered a plausible explanation for users’ low

expectations of information permanence and passive, easy acceptance of online digital

information loss. Scott argues that users are disconnected from the technology that saves and

preserves their information. He contends that during the last 25 years, the industry abstracted the

inner workings of technology to the point where now the general public does not understand it.

He utilizes the analogy of an individual able to drive a car, but not able to fix it, and instead


taking it to the mechanic. Thus, losing information and data is an example of the “price for not

being knowledgeable” (Scott, 2012).

Given that at present much information is stored digitally, if precautions are not taken,

much of this information is likely to be lost to the future – before the future even arrives.

However, users as a whole do not initiate action to stop digital data loss, presumably because

users do not understand that there even is a problem, instead passively assuming that this is just

the reality of digital storage. To assist users in understanding that there is a problem, and to help

convince users that they can participate in its resolution, the rationale behind why users are so

passive about digital information loss must be determined.

Scott’s argument, that users are not upset because they perceive this as the natural

behavior of digital storage due to being uninformed about how the technology works, seems

logical enough. Indeed, if it is determined that this is the actual reason behind user reactions (or

lack thereof), then there is a starting point to determine how to fix the problem. The solution may

be as simple as educating users about technology, which in turn will help users participate in

digital preservation. However, previous studies have shown that perhaps this is not the root cause

of the users not preserving their own content, or at the very least, not the only cause. Thus,

gaining information about users’ actual knowledge versus user perceptions about personal digital

preservation, in conjunction with the preservation actions taken by users, is vital to

understanding the actual rationale behind users’ reactions to digital information loss. In turn, this

will help archivists to understand and determine their own appropriate role in assisting users with

personal digital preservation.


Literature Review

There is a wide range of literature concerning digital preservation. The articles reviewed

revealed various insights, ranging from the theoretical to the pragmatic, and from larger

institutions coordinating preservation efforts, to the contributions of individuals. Articles

discussing preservation efforts largely reveal the assorted rationales as to why digital materials

are sought after for preservation. However, only a small subset discusses the specific habits of

individual users engaged with the digital preservation process. And, despite revealing these user

habits, none of the articles reviewed provided full rationale for the users’ behaviors and attitudes

that result in a lack of appropriate personal digital preservation practices, although several

articles called for future research to illuminate these rationales.

Of the broad aspects of digital preservation seen, a significant subset encompass theory,

particularly newer theories and methodologies such as digital curation (Kunda and Anderson-

Wilk, 2011) designed to address digital preservation’s unique challenges, including “user

understanding of and engagement with the digital resources” (p. 896). Other articles feature

digital preservation, specifically the concept of permanence, in the context of historical and

cultural memory (Mason, 2007). In this article, Mason addresses digital preservation and the

permanence of objects preserved by cultural and heritage institutions.

Articles such as Grotke (2011) and Chudnov (2011) focus on digital preservation specific

to the preservation and attempted permanence of the web. Grotke’s article addresses the Library

of Congress’ web archiving efforts, detailing the challenges of technology, copyright, and

determining what to preserve. Like Grotke’s article, which discusses the Library of Congress’

role in web archiving, Chudnov also suggests a role for all libraries in this task, stating that “web


archiving is a big potential growth area for library collections” (p. 30). Indeed, like Mason

above, Grotke and Chudnov focus on digital preservation from an institutional point of view.

While institutions play an important role in digital preservation, given the onslaught and

continued growth of user-generated content, individuals also participate in digital preservation

tasks. Copeland (2011) sampled public library users to determine the characteristics, the

motivation behind maintaining, and the influences that contribute to the preservation of their

personal digital preservation. However, Copeland’s sample and research focused on personal

physical means of storage (e.g., hard drives) rather than web-based storage. Indeed, she asserted

that future research is needed to determine the reliability of web-based storage and potentially

encourage users to utilize the web as storage rather than digital devices (p. 1298). Copeland also

noted that most of her study’s participants (17 of 26) were not knowledgeable about “digital

format differences” (p. 1295), and earlier in the article, Copeland references Marshall’s research

“suggest[ing] that individual consumers are much less aware of the impermanent state of their

digital possessions or, if they are aware, they feel disempowered to do anything about it” (p.

1288).

Indeed, Marshall (2008), asserts that most users’ households have “tenuous ad hoc

support arrangements” (3.1 Digital stewardship, para. 3) and that only in “dire situations” will

users seek out professional assistance, and given the abhorrent cost, many find it cheaper to

simply purchase a new computer and do so. The result, “all too often, even if they’re technically

recoverable, the local files on the computer are lost forever” (3.1 Digital stewardship, para. 5).

Given the lack of service knowledge of their own digital devices, it is likely that many users face

similar circumstances with regard to their content living on the web.


However, Sinn, Syn, and Kim’s (2011) study reviewed users’ online preservation

behavior, in particular striving to answer, “what does the current status of web e-mail and blog

users’ archiving behavior suggest to informational professionals assisting users to preserve their

records online” (p. 321)? Throughout this article, Sinn et. al assert that “even though the web

environment offers great advantages in creating and keeping personal documents, not all are

eager to manage and keep them for future use” (p. 322). Indeed, the study revealed that “more

than three-quarters of all survey participants answered that they knew they could lose e-mail and

blog contents on the web, yet they still complained about the difficulties in saving content” (p.

326).

A key element in the Sinn et. al study was that a significant portion of the sample was

composed of information professionals. This allowed for stratification and a comparison of

digital preservation behaviors between information professionals and non-information

professionals. While a similar percentage of users in both groups were aware of the risks

surrounding personal data loss, there was a more significant difference between the two groups

in terms of actual data preservation with the information professional group backing up their data

“on a daily and weekly basis” more than the non-professional group (71.1% versus 45.7%).

However, this result differs from “previous research indicat[ing] that Internet users were not

fully aware of the importance of preserving personal data on the web” (p. 328). Regardless,

given the results, Sinn et. al concluded that “awareness of possible loss of data, or actual

experience of it, however, does not necessarily result in proactive behavior” (p. 328).

The results of Sinn et. al’s study and Copeland’s study both indicate that users are aware

of the risks of not backing up personal data, but perhaps perceived data preservation as a difficult

or unapproachable task, something best left to the experts. This finding contrasts the anecdotal


evidence that users expect data loss and do not understand or are not aware of the concept of

digital preservation. Instead this research points towards users who are aware of digital

preservation, but lack the technical knowledge of performing digital preservation tasks for their

own content, or retain erroneous perceptions regarding the difficult of digital preservation.

However, further research is needed to determine whether this is the case. Therefore, querying

users to understand their preconceived notions and knowledge of digital preservation as well as

users’ present digital preservation habits is vital to provide insight as to why users are not

meeting their own preservation needs. This information is vital to determine archives’ future role

in enhancing and spreading users’ digital preservation of user-generated content.

Methodology

Research Design

The research design is a descriptive, parallel samples survey. This design will provide

information about two samples, information professionals and non-information professionals,

obtaining information about user knowledge and perceptions towards personal digital

preservation. Additionally, as a descriptive survey, the results can be quantified and analyzed

utilizing descriptive statistical methodologies such as averages, percentages, and means.

Sample

The population of this study needs to encompass people who would likely be more

knowledgeable about digital preservation (information professionals) and those that are more

likely to be novices to help compare and contrast knowledge of and perceptions toward personal

digital preservation. Two samples will be utilized (information professionals and non-

information professionals). The total population will be 500, with 250 in each sample group.

Thus, a systematic, proportional, stratified random sample will be obtained. To obtain a sample


of information professionals, several professional organizations with digital preservation

familiarity will be utilized. These professional organizations are Society of American Archivists

(SAA), American Library Association (ALA), and Association of Records Managers and

Administrators (ARMA). The sample will be created from each organization’s member list.

Starting at the beginning of the list and continuing until the end, every 10th individual will be

selected and sent an email asking for participation in the study and providing a link to the survey.

After obtaining 250 completed questionnaires, the survey will close.

To obtain a sample of the non-information professionals, five public libraries from

different areas across the country will be contacted. Starting at the beginning of each library’s

library card holder list and continuing until the end, every 10th library card holder will be selected

and sent an email asking for participation in the study and providing a link to the survey. After

250 completed responses are obtained, the survey will close. For a copy of the email that will be

sent to selected sample members, see Appendix B.

Data Collection

To obtain data from the sample, each selected individual will receive the Research

Information Sheet (see Appendix B) which explains the survey questionnaire and states that by

completing the questionnaire the individual agrees to participate in the study. In addition to the

Research Information Sheet, each individual will receive a link to the online survey instrument

(see Appendix A for the survey instrument). The survey will collect demographic information to

see if any other correlations may be made between the demographic values and user knowledge

of or perceptions toward personal digital information. The next set of questions focus on users’

knowledge of digital preservation and current preservation habits. The final set of questions hone

in on users’ perceptions toward personal digital preservation. To enhance measurement quality,


the instrument contains multiple questions targeted at different aspects of the same issue.

Additionally, after selecting an answer for yes/no questions, users receive a follow-up question

to clarify the character of the yes or no response.

Data Analysis

After obtaining the data, descriptive statistics will be applied. First the frequency

distribution of each question will be determined by viewing the percentages of each answer was

chosen. Then the percentages of information professionals and non-information professionals

who selected each answer will be compared. By comparing the percentages between these two

groups, it may be determined if there is any correlation between perceived information

knowledge and personal digital preservation habits and perceptions. Then, by looking at specific

habits, we can determine the percentage of users across both samples who have particular habits

and perceptions. This will help to determine what areas to focus on. Additionally, by providing

an “other” option in many of these answers, the survey retains the ease of coding (providing

closed-ended questions) but still allow users to fill in their own answer if it is an outlier.

Correlation coefficients will be utilized to determine if there are correlations between

information professional status and personal preservation habits and perceptions (for example,

information professional and backup frequency). Correlation coefficients will also be utilized

with other demographic information such as age range and gender to determine if there are

relationships between these and preservation habits/perceptions.

Limitations

Limitations in this study include limiting the samples of information professionals and

non-information professionals. The limitation of information professionals to members of SAA,

ALA, and ARMA is strategic as members of these three organizations play a role in managing


and providing user access to digital material. However, there are numerous other information

professionals who do not belong to these professional organizations that will not have the

opportunity to participate in this study. Additionally, limiting the non-information professionals

to public library users is done to readily obtain a sample of individuals who may not necessarily

have extensive experience with preserving information, but would likely understand the concept

of it. These users may also be more likely to fill out the survey as they likely have an interest in

helping the library, given that they are cardholders. Finally, sending out the survey via email

limits access to those who have email addresses and ready access to a computer (although this

may be acceptable as these users would have access to a computer at their public library as we

know they are cardholders).

Reliability and Validity

With regard to the research design, the study is reliable in terms of being repeatable to a

similar population. However, it may not be reliable in terms of fully representing information

professionals who are non-members of SAA, ALA, and ARMA, and non-library cardholders,

and those who are not familiar with digital information and computers. Sample selection may not

be as valid as possible due to an element of self selection - specifically, users are systematically

chosen as part of the survey, but are contacted via email and do not have to respond and take the

survey.

The research instrument appears to have high validity. However, to ensure validity, the

survey questions will be verified by experts and pilot testing. These assorted pre- or pilot tests

may reveal validity problems, such as the age ranges or information profession status. This is due

to perhaps not grouping the age ranges as well as could be done, and given the subjectivity of


determining if one is a member of the information profession (as defined by this study). If this is

the case, the survey questionnaire will be revised prior to the study.

In terms of the reliability of the instrument, the repeatability may be affected again by the

various lists provided throughout the instrument. Again, the professions list may not best

describe those out there, and thus, responders may pick a different answer despite doing the same

job given different interpretations.

Concluding Remarks

If this study is conducted, it will likely continue to provide contrast to the digital

preservation community’s thinking that users are not aware of the risks of not backing up their

digital content. Instead, the study is apt to reveal similar results as Sinn et al’s and Copland’s

studies, that users are aware of the risks of not backing up digital content. Thus, it is not that

users do not care about personal digital content loss, but that they do not have the understanding

of how to accomplish it, instead perceiving it as a difficult task that is above their knowledge.

The study will hopefully go a step further and illustrate a correlation between user

perceptions and knowledge of digital preservation and their personal digital preservation habits.

Indeed, it is expected that an inverse correlation exists between negative perceptions (lack of

understanding, confusion, etc.) towards digital preservation and the amount of individual digital

preservation undertaken. That is, a user perceiving digital preservation with concern or lack of

understanding will perform fewer digital preservation tasks than a user well-versed in the

pragmatic methods of digital preservation. Similarly, a user with a lower knowledge of digital

preservation will also likely perform less digital preservation tasks.

The results of this study would be valuable, as they would help to understand the rationale

and motivations behind users’ digital preservation habits. Gaining this understanding will help to


figure out how to educate and train users to adequately maintain and preserve their digital

content. In turn, this will allow archives to better understand and define the role they can play

within the context of personal digital preservation.


References

Chudnov, D. (2011). Saving the web. Computers in Libraries, 31(10), 30-32.

Copeland, A. J. (2011). Analysis of public library user’s digital preservation practices. Journal of

the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1288-1300.

Grotke, A. (2011). Web archiving at the Library of Congress. Computers in Libraries, 31(10),

15-19.

Evens, T., & Hauttekeete, L. (2011). Challenges of digital preservation for cultural heritage

institutions. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 43(3), 157-165.

Kunda, S., & Anderson-Wilk, M. (2011). Community stories and institutional stewardship:

Digital curation’s dual roles of story creation and resource preservation. Portal: Libraries

and the Academy, 11(4), 895-914.

Marshall, C. C. (2008). Rethinking personal digital archiving part 1: Four challenges from the

field. D-Lib Magazine 14(3/4), Retrieved from:

http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march08/marshall/03marshall-pt1.html

Mason, I. (2007). Virtual preservation: How has digital culture influenced our ideas about

permanence? Change practice in a national legal deposit library. Library Trends, 56(1),

198-215.

Scott, J. (2012, May). Preservation activism and get lamp’s lost lecture. Lecture presented at the

Ann Arbor District Library, Ann Arbor, MI.

Sinn, D., Syn, S. Y., Sung-Min, K. (2011). Personal records on the web: Who’s in charge of

archiving, Hotmail or archivists? Library and Information Science Research, 33, 320-

330.


Appendix A: Data Collection Tool

Initial page the user is taken to after selecting the link:


Second page:


Third page if user selected “yes”:


Third page if user selected “no”:


Fourth page if users answer “yes” to the first question on this page (the second question dynamically appears after the user answers the first question):


Fourth page if users answer “no” to the first question on this page (the second question dynamically appears after the user answers the first question):


Final page:


Appendix B: Consent FormResearch Information Sheet

Title of Study: Personal Digital Preservation: User Perceptions, Knowledge, and the Role of Archives

Principal Investigator (PI): Alexandra A. A. OrchardSchool of Library and Information Science734-657-3094

Purpose: You are being asked to be in a research study of user perceptions and knowledge of digital because you fall into one of two categories. You are either a member of category one which means you belong to the Society of American Archivists (SAA), the American Library Association (ALA), and/or the Association of Records Managers and Administrators (ARMA). Or you were randomly selected because you are a library card holder at one (or more) of five chosen public libraries across the United States. This study is being conducted at Wayne State University via an online survey.

Study Procedures:If you take part in the study, you will be asked to fill out a survey questionnaire. In this questionnaire you will select one or more provided answers to each of the questions. Types of questions include demographics (age, gender, highest level of education completed), questions about your computer knowledge and usage, and questions about your digital preservation opinions and habits. The questionnaire will take less than 10 minutes to finish, and must be completed in full during a single session to remain in the study.

Benefits o As a participant in this research study, there may be no direct benefit for you; however, information

from this study may benefit other people now or in the future.

Risks There are no known risks at this time to participation in this study.

Costs o There will be no costs to you for participation in this research study.

Compensation o You will not be paid for taking part in this study.

Confidentiality:o You will be identified in the research records by a code name or number. There will be no list that links

your identity with this code

Voluntary Participation /Withdrawal: Taking part in this study is voluntary. You are free to not answer any questions or withdraw at any time. Your decision will not change any present or future relationships with Wayne State University or its affiliates


Questions:If you have any questions about this study now or in the future, you may contact Alexandra A. A. Orchard or one of her research team members at the following phone number (734) 657-3094. If you have questions or concerns about your rights as a research participant, the Chair of the Human Investigation Committee can be contacted at (313) 577-1628. If you are unable to contact the research staff, or if you want to talk to someone other than the research staff, you may also call (313) 577-1628 to ask questions or voice concerns or complaints.

Participation:By completing the questionnaire, you are agreeing to participate in this study.

Documents

archivya3o.files.wordpress.com · Web viewOften anecdotal, these conversations ... professionals assisting users to preserve their records ... the web environment offers great advantages