Theory is basically defined as a set of interrelated constructs (variables), definitions and propositions that presents a systematic view of phenomena by specifying relations among variables, with the purpose of explaining natural phenomena (Kerlinger 1979:64). It is a system of assumptions, principles and relationships posited to explain a specified phenomenon (Fisher 2005:2). Thus a theory explains how and why the variables are related, acting as a bridge between or among the variables (Creswell 2003:139). A theory is usually in a form of a visual model or series of hypotheses or visual statements (Leedy and Ormrod 2005:141).
24
In literature the concepts of theory and model often tend to be used synonymously. However, the two are related, but not similar. People define models in different contexts. A model can be defined as a simplified representation of a real situation; including the main features of the real situation it represents (Kousoyiannis 1979:3). It can be described as a simulation or a representation of relationships between, and among, concepts (Sekaran 2003:98). A model can be of great help in achieving clarity and focusing on key issues in the nature of phenomena (Cohen, Manion and Morrison 2007:13). It is worth noting that models are most useful at the description and prediction stages of understanding a phenomenon, while theories are essential in developing an explanation for a phenomenon (Fisher, Erdelez and McKechnie 2005:3). Models are of great value in the development of theory, as they are a kind of proto- theory, a tentative proposed set of relationships which can be tested for validity (Fisher, Erdelez and McKechnie 2005:2).
As highlighted in Chapter One, various theories are used in behavioural studies in the fields of information science, communication, social sciences, natural science and health and psychology. These include Diffusion of Innovations (Rogers 1995), Wilson’s revised theory of information behaviour (1996), Dervin’s sense making theory (1983), Ellis’s theory of information behaviour (1989), Kuhlthau’s information search process model (1991), the social learning theory (Bandura 1977), the self-efficacy theory (Bandura 1986), the protection motivation theory (Rogers 1975), the sustainable livelihoods framework theory (Carney, Drinkwater, Rusinow, Neefjes, Wanmali and Singh 1999), the rational choice theory (Homans 1961), the coping theory (Lazarus 1966) and the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen 1991). In this study, the Diffusion of Innovations (DOI) was used as the theoretical framework.
2.2.1 Dervin’s Sense Making Theory
Dervin’s sense making theory is described as possessing a set of assumptions, a methodological approach, a set of research methods and a practice concerned with making sense of a reality in both a chaotic and orderly form (Dervin 1983). The theory which is presented in a triangular framework has three major elements. The first element is a situation in both time and space in a given context. The second element is the gap and the third attribute is an outcome. The situation describes a context where information problems emerge; a gap signifies the uncertainty situation of a person which differentiates between a particular situation and the anticipated situation. The outcome of the quest for information in
25
a particular situation is an outcome of a sense-making process which is achieved by means of a bridge which ends a prevailing gap between the situation and outcome elements. Among others who have applied Dervin’s sense making theory in studies related to agriculture are Menou (1995), Easdown and Starasts (2004) and Munyua (2011).
2.2.2 Ellis’s Information Behaviour Theory
Ellis’s theory of information behaviour (1989) describes information as having eight features.
The first feature describes a situation where a user recognises a need for information and initiates information seeking by asking knowledgeable people. The second feature is chaining, where a user follows citations and footnotes in sources such as citation indexes.
Browsing is the third feature of Ellis’ theory, where a user is involved in a semi-structured seeking process. The other feature is differentiating where a user sorts information retrieved from various information sources. Ellis (1989) describes monitoring as a fifth stage, where a user seeks information by searching current awareness information sources to keep pace with the search for new information. Thereafter a user extracts the information of his/her choice by identifying appropriate information from a source. The eighth stage in the Ellis theory is verifying where a user cross-checks the degree of accuracy when relating the information retrieved to the problem at hand. The last feature is ending, where a user concludes the search process. Studies which have used Ellis’s theory are those by Ellis (1989), who assessed information seeking patterns of academic social scientists, and Downs-Rose (2009), who assessed information seeking by geoscientists in the public and private sector.
Wilson (1996) categorises features similar to those described above into two different groups.
The first is micro-analysis of search behaviour, which involves starting, chaining, verifying and ending. The second is macro-analysis of information behaviour, which has browsing, monitoring and differentiating features.
2.2.3 Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process Model
Kuhlthau’s (1991) theory of information seeking behaviour, centres on the information search process, which has six stages in which a user is involved in initiation, selection, exploration, formulation, collection and presentation. Wilson (1996) describes the initiation stage of Kuhlthau’s theory as one of possessing feelings or thoughts on the problem and uncertainty which prompts one to seek background information after recognising a need for information.
The next stage is selection, which involves identifying a relevant broader topic to be searched
26
for in an information source. The exploration stage involves an information search on the broader topic identified while in the formulation stage a user is concerned with a specific problem relating to a topic of interest. During the collection stage the user gathers relevant information from a source and finally uses the collected information in the presentation stage.
Studies which have applied Kuhlthau’s theory are those by Kuhlthau (1999) who investigated the role of experience in information search, Byron (2000), on information seeking in a virtual environment, and Hyldegard’s (2006) study, which explored Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process (ISP) in a group education setting.
2.2.4 Wilson’s Model
Wilson’s (1996) model of information seeking behaviour is mostly applied in the field of information science. Its strength is attributed to two main components. First, by shedding light on the social, environmental and cognitive factors which influence the information seeking process (Niedzwiedzka 2003). Second, by borrowing other theories which are social learning theory, stress/coping theory and risk/reward theory from fields of education, sociology and economics. Wilson’s model comprises five main components. These are the context of information need, the activating mechanism, intervening variables, information seeking behaviour and information processing and use. The model presents the sequential cyclical steps a user engages in, in the process of information seeking, from the rise of information need to a stage when the information is being utilised. The first component of the model is information need, which concentrates on the information needs of a person. The context can be determined by the person him or herself as a factor. The role that the person plays in work and life influences the context, and the surrounding environmental factors such as social, political or economic factors (Niedzwiedzka 2003) determine the nature of the context.
Activating mechanisms act as catalyst which stimulate and motivate the information seeking process. Activating mechanisms are explained by the stress/coping theory, the risk/reward theory and the social learning theory. The intervening variables form the third component of Wilson’s model. The intervening variables, mentioned by Wilson, include psychological, demographic, environmental, role related/interpersonal and characteristics of a source. The intervening variables are deemed to be supportive as well as preventive to a person seeking information. The information acquisition stage of Wilson’s model involves a passive search, an active search and ongoing search categories. In the passive category a user absorbs
27
relevant information from the environment unintentionally. The active search involves a purposeful quest for information, while the ongoing search is a continuing searching process which results in a behaviour of seeking information aiming at updating and expanding knowledge. The last category is information processing and use, where information accessed by a user is processed and used. Thus, depending on the content of information, a user may be satisfied or not satisfied. If not satisfied, the user may be prompted to redefine his/her information needs and continue with a information seeking process. A number of scholars have applied Wilson’s model of information seeking behaviour. These include Niedźwiedzka (2003), who assessed information seeking behaviour of managers in Poland; Chiware, (2008) who assessed the business information needs, seeking patterns and information services in small, medium and micro enterprises sector in Namibia, and Nussbaumer, Slembek, Lueg, Mogicato and Schwabe, who in their 2009 study sought to understand information seeking behaviour in the provision of financial advice in Switzerland, Austria and Germany.
Despite the above-mentioned models being strong in the information science field in explaining the information seeking processes of a user, none of the theories could be utilised as the theoretical framework for this study, due to the nature of the problem under study, which leans more towards the adoption of innovations by farmers with regard to climate change and variability and factors shaping their decision to adopt. This problem is well explained in the Diffusion of Innovations theory.