Task Type and a Faceted Task Classification

Task Type and A Faceted Classification of Tasks

Yuelin Li School of communication, Information and Library studies, Rutgers University, 4 Huntington Street, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, Email: [email protected]

Introduction Qiu, 1993; Reid, 2000; Kim & Allen, 2000; Kim, 2003), Generally speaking, users’ information seeking is aimed interactive tasks (Belkin, Marchetti, & Cool, 1993; Allen, at resolving problems and accomplishing tasks. Although 1996), procedure tasks (Kuhlthau, 1993; Marchionini, tasks draw little attention in the studies of information 1992; Reid, 1999), and goal-based tasks (Xie, 1998), in searching according to Vakkari (2003), people usually do order to review and identify task facets. not deny that information seeking is task-oriented. In other words, it is tasks that motivate this activity. Therefore, it is A faceted classification of task necessary to take tasks into consideration if we want to comprehensively understand human information behavior. We define task facets as different aspects, properties or characteristics of a task. Through literature review and The present study is concerned with task types and task facet analysis based on Ranganathan’ PMEST and Wood’s classification. A task is defined as an activity the task doer task components (1986), the following facets, sub-facets, performs in order to accomplish a goal (Vakkari, 2003). In and values are identified: information science there have been some studies of the relationship between work- and information-related tasks Generic facets of task (e.g. Byström & Järvelin (1995)), but each has been carried Facet: Source of tasks: where a task is generated out within the constraints of a single faceted classification Sub-facets and their values (in the parenthesis): of task or a certain kind of task. In addition, a task is organization-based (Internal- imposed: tasks generated in considered as an important factor influencing human organizational operation; external-imposed: tasks coming being’s behavior in social psychology and organizational from the environment of an organization); individual-based management. Some studies examine communication (internal-generated: task motivated by task doers between people with different tasks in the same themselves; external-generated: tasks assigned by task organization (e.g. Tushman, 1978); some investigate setters) interaction between group members and how it affects group performance (e.g. Hackman, 1968). These studies Facet: Task doer: people who conduct the task indicate that identifying task types is the departure point of Values: individual: tasks finished by only one task doer; investigating the relationship between tasks and behavior. individual in a group: tasks finished by one task doer for a However, in terms of task types, the previous studies group task; group: tasks completed by a group. mere classify one category of tasks or touch upon some Facet: Time aspects of a task. This makes it hard to completely grasp Sub-facets and their values (in the parenthesis): tasks, and thus influences the research into task and frequency (unique: tasks only happen one time so far; behavior. Therefore, this study aims to create a periodically: tasks with familiar working patterns but new comprehensive task classification system reflecting topics; routine: tasks happen frequently with familiar different aspects of a task, that is, a faceted classification of patterns and topics) task. Facet: Action: how a task is completed Values: create: a task to generate new ideas, designs, and Literature Review so on; evaluate: a task to evaluate and discuss the issue; The previous studies related to task classification in the choose: a task to make a decision; negotiate: a task that field of organizational management, social psychology and requires negotiation in order to arrive at a consensus; information science are reviewed. The tasks involved are execute: a task to be performed. categorized as work- and information–related tasks. We Facet: Product: the results of task completion divide work-related tasks into group tasks (Hackman, 1968; Values: physical: a task producing physical products; McGrath, 1984;Vinaja, 2003) and individual tasks (Whitley intellectual: a task producing new ideas or findings; & Frost, 1973; Tushman, 1978; Byström & Järvelin, 1995; decision/solution: a task to make a decision or find a Algon 1999; MacMullin & Taylor, 1984; Campbell, 1988; solution for a problem. Byström & Hensen, 2002). Task classification schemes and Facet: Goal underlying facets are discussed. To information-related tasks, we group them into search tasks (Marchionini, 1989; Sub-facets and their values (in the parenthesis): quality Fidel, P. Ingwersen, & P. Vakkari (Eds). Emerging frameworks (specific goal: a task with a goal that is explicit and and methods: Proceedings of the fourth international measurable; amorphous goal: a task with a goal that cannot conference on conceptions of library and information science be measurable); quantity (multi-goal: a task with several (pp.239-251). Greenwood Village, Colorado: Libraries Unlimited. goals; single goal: a task with only one goal) Bystöm, K., & Järvelin, K. (1995). Task complexity affects Common attributes of task information seeking and use. Information Processing & Facet: Task characteristics: task attributes related to a Management, 31, 191-213. task itself Hackman, J. R. (1968). Effects of task characteristics on group Sub-facets and their values (in the parenthesis): products. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 4, 162- 187. objective task complexity (simple; decision; judgment; problem; fuzzy (Campbell, 1988)); task interdependence Kim, J. (2003). Task as a predictable indicator of information (high interdependence; low interdependence); degree of seeking behavior on the Web. Unpublished preliminary proposal, Rutgers University. structure (well-structured; semi-structured; ill-structured). Kim, K.-S., & Allen, B. (2000). Cognitive and task influences on Facet: Users’ perception of task: task attributes related to web searching behavior. Journal of the American Society for users’ perception Information Science and Technology, 53(2), 109-119. Sub-facets and their values (in the parenthesis): salience Kuhlthau, C. C. (1993). Seeking meaning: A process approach to of task (high salience; low salience); degree of urgency library and information services. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. (immediate; delayed); degree of difficulty (difficult; MacMullin, S. D., & Taylor, R. S. (1984). Problem dimensions neutral; easy); subjective task complexity (simple; neutral; and information traits. The Information Society, 3, 91-111. complex); knowledge of task (low knowledge; high Marchionini, G. (1989). Information seeking strategies of novices knowledge) using a full-text electronic encyclopedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40(1), 54-66. Marchionini, G. (1992). Interfaces for end-user information Implication and Further Studies seeking. Journal of the American Society for Information This study develops a faceted classification that Science, 43(2), 156-163. describes different dimensions of a task, and tries to Qiu, L. (1993). Analytical searching vs. browsing in hypertext incorporate work- and information-related tasks into the information retrieval systems. Canadian Journal of Information same classification system. It triggers several promising and Library Science, 18(4), 1-13. studies. First, a survey is needed to verify this faceted Reid, J. (1999). A new, task-oriented paradigm for information classification. Then, it is necessary to investigate how a retrieval: Implications for evaluation of information retrieval task with different facets influences human information systems. In T. Aparac, T. Saracevic, P. Ingwersen, and P. seeking and searching behavior. Furthermore, if we can Vakkari (Eds.), Digital libraries: Interdisciplinary concepts, successfully articulate these issues, systems design will be challenges and opportunities (pp.97-108). Cubrovnik, Croatia. informed. Reid, J. (2000). A task oriented non-interactive evaluation methodology for information retrieval systems. Information Retrieval, 2, 115-129. ACKNOWLEGMENT: I appreciate Dr. Nicholas J. Belkin Tushman, M. L. (1978). Technical communication in R&D for his direction and inspiration. laboratories: The impact of project work characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 21(4), 624-645. REFERENCES Vakkari, P. (2003). Task-based information searching. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37, 413-464. Algon, J. (1999). The effect of task on the information-related behavior of individuals in a work-group environment. Doctoral Vianja, R. (2003). A classification of IS experimental tasks: A dissertation, Rutgers University. taxonomy-based task repository. Retrieved October 4, 2003 from Allen, B (1996). Information tasks: Toward a user-centered http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/research/2003/swdsi/Papers/07 approach to information systems. San Diego, CA: Academic 7.pdf. Press. Whitley, R., & Frost, P. (1973). Task type and information Belkin, N. J., Marchetti, P. G., & Cool, C. (1993). BRAQUE: transfer in a government research lab. Human relations, 25, Design of an interface to support user interaction in information 537-550. retrieval. Information Processing & management, 29(3), 325- 344. Wood, R. E. (1986). Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, Bystöm, K. (1999). Task complexity, information types and 60-82. information sources: Examination of relationships. Doctoral dissertation. University of Tampere. Xie, H. (1998). Planned and situated aspects in interactive IR: Patterns of user interactions and information seeking strategies. Bystöm, K., & Hansen, P. (2002). Work tasks as units for analysis Unpublished dissertation, Rutgers University. in information seeking and retrieval studies. In H. Bruce, R.