College and Research Libraries


Problem Splving, 
Creative Librarianship, 

and Search -Behavior 
Diane Nahl-Jakobovits and Leon A. Jakobovits 

To understand how knowledge functions in society one needs to study social cognitions, or how 
people process information when solving problems. Librarianship has a dual interest in 
problem solving that involves creative librarianship and search behavior. Today's 
technological environment is constantly challenging librarians and patrons to devise new 
assumptions and solutions to address their needs. Problem solving as a subject offers 
principles, techniques, and new research domains to meet this challenge. 

wo decades ago Jesse Shera 
proposed a revolutionary self-
redefinition of librarianship: 
the study of social cognitions, 

or how knowledge functions for individ-
uals and society as a whole. 1 He suggested 
social epistemology as the name for this new 
perspective on ''knowledge about knowl-
edge.'' For some librarians this signaled a 
new, central concern with how society 
achieves a ''perceptive relation to its total 
environment." While Shera was making 
his remarks in the 1960s, at M.I. T. Noam 
Chomsky was bringing about a revolution 
in linguistics by redefining it as a ''branch 
of cognitive psychology.' ' 2 The science of 
linguistics became the study of what na-
tive speakers collectively "know about 
their language," their "linguistic intui-
tions'' or ''cognitive processes'' (i.e., their 
linguistic problem-solving behavior). 3 

Chomsky's Cartesian epistemology 
grounded in rationalism is clearly related 
to Shera' s insistence that librarians must 
''understand the cognitive processes of 
society, II or how people make use of 
knowledge to solve problems. 4 Chomsky 
married linguistics to cognitive science 

'while Shera saw librarianship as a behav-
ioristic science primarily concerned with 
the "utilization of the social transcript by 
human beings individually and collec-
tively. 11 Both put the user's problem-
solving activities at the center. 

Linguistics has since completed its revo-
lution and has proceeded through various 
phases of development. 5 Something very 
different has happened in library science, 
where a nonepistemological revolution in 
technology has broKen out, threatening to 
shift the focus of librarians from cognitive 
processes of users to managerial concerns 
regarding library automation. Given that 
librarians have ''embraced technology 
more rapidly and more successfully than 
many other fields," cautious voices are 
asking whether "the embrace has been 
too strong. " 6 

In an editorial, Charles Martell frankly 
expresses a feeling of malaise, even confu-
sion, about the increasing managerial 
complexities of library automation. 7 He 
notes that the "new dramatic trends in the 
information world" require a response 
that goes beyond coping. "Creative re-
sponses" are needed to challenge the as-

Diane Nahl-]akobovits is Lecturer in the School of Library and Infonnation Studies and Infonnation Support 
Librarian at Hamilton Library and Leon A. ]akobovits is Professor in the Department of Psychology, University of 
Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822. 

400 



sumptions that form the "historical basis 
of librarianship." Should we continue 
thinking of information as ''static'' mes-
sages deposited in books on shelves, or 
should we try to establish a ''base of dy-
namic information" that "might be orga-
nized at the time it is needed to help the 
user solve a problem?" 

The call for creative behavior in libraries 
envisions more than coping and adjust-
ment. Deborah Jakubs urges us to "do 
more than keep up with change; we 
should anticipate it and initiate it. " 8 This 
implies a change in the "internal and ex-
ternal image of the librarian.'' We need to 
separate ourselves from the image of a 
passive profession, and combine manage-
ment and analytical skills with technologi-
-cal foresight. While routine problem solv-
ing tries to cope with existing assump-
tions, creative problem solving invents 
new assumptions. The following three ex-
amples will illustrate this contrast. 
• Static versus Dynamic Software Systems. 

The current model in online catalog sys-
tems is static in the se.n~e that a 
software-hardware pa<;:l<age is chosen. 
Glitches are monitored and, if serious, 
corrected. Users are stuck with the 
problems and weaknesses of the sys-
tem. When administratively feasible, 
changing software merely recycles the 
static process with a new system. 
Through creative problem solving, li-
brarians and information specialists 
could contribute to the development of 
dynamic software systems that, like 
self-cleaning ovens, have the built-inca-
pacity for self-modification. Instead of 
remaining the same until replaced, on-
line catalogs could improve themselves 
as they are being used. User errors and 
preferred styles of searching could be 
tracked and could serve as feedback or 
input data guiding modifications and 
expansions. Like good wine that con-
tinues to improve with age, a dynamic 
online catalog should improve cumula-
tively the more it is used by a variety of 
patrons. 
Independent Storage and Retrieval Lan-
guages. The current model in informa-
tion science is based on the assumption 
that retrieval of information is second-

Problem Solving 401 

ary to storage. The latter is given the pri-
mary role through the use of controlled 
vocabulary. "Storage categories" are 
formalized as hierarchical classes of 
subject headings called a classification 
scheme. In this model the problem of re-
trieval becomes the problem of helping 
users acquire the categories of the con-
trol language specified by an appropri-
ate thesaurus. The burden is on the user 
to know these categories or to forego ac-
cess to the information. The develop-
ment of retrieval systems or languages 
independently of storage systems 
might be a creative problem-solving ap-
proach to which librarians can contrib-
ute. 

"Retrieval systems designed inde-
pendently and creatively according 
to the cognitive processes of patrons 
and their problem-solving styles are 
necessary.'' 

Storage categories, such as those 
comprising the Library of Congress 
classification, have evolved in response 
to problems faced by catalogers who 
must label the new textual material. The 
characteristics of the cataloger's cogni-
tive processes are not necessarily the 
best and most relevant for the user. In-
stead, retrieval systems designed inde-
pendently and creatively according to 
the cognitive processes of patrons and 
their problem-solving styles are neces-
sary. This implies that a translation is 
possible between storage and retrieval 
systems that are _ developed indepen-
dently. The possibility and efficiency of 
such an interdependence need to be re-
searched. 
Librarians and Professors Exchange Places. 
The old model has evolved into a rou-
tine, unquestioned expectation regard-
ing librarian-professor relationships: li-
brarians are generalists who know 
about the location of information while 
professors are experts who know the in-
formation in a field. The contrast here is 
between knowing about knowing (the li-
brarian) versus knowing (the scholar). 



402 College & Research Lib~:aries 

This model leads to the idea in library 
education that the preparation of librari-
ans should include majoring in an aca-
demic discipline to acquire a deeper 
knowing and to facilitate communication 
with scholars. 
There are- several alternative ways of 

conceptualizing the librarian-professor re-
lationship. One is to train librarian profes-
sors. This encourages library students and 
graduate students in other fields to ac-
quire a dual master's degree or Ph.D. An-
other idea is to facilitate midcareer 
switches by making available a re-
threading program, a shortened version 
of a regular program, used by those who 
already have a graduate degree in a field. 
Librarians could be given release time or 
sabbaticals to enroll in such programs, 
and professors could enroll in a graduate 
library program. When they finish, they 
could exchange places. Additionally, pro-
fessors might work as volunteers in the li-
brary, according to their experience or 
knowledge. Librarians can be given new 
job descriptions that allow them, like pro-
fessors, time and facilities for writing, and 
research. 

PROBLEM SOLVING 
AND SEARCH BEHAVIOR 

The future of librarianship is inextrica-
bly bound to the course of science. Library 
science and the behavioral sciences are 
visibly allied in a common focus on the li-
brary user. Librarians, psychologists, and 
linguists share an intense interest in social 
cognitions: their origin, structure, and 
use. Information has a physical and a ra-
tional component. The physical relates to 
engineering and marketing issues of 
human-machine interfaces: storage and 
retrieval, hardware and software, cost-
benefit and systems analyses. The rational 
aspect relates to human issues and cogni-
tive processes, to meaning and problem 
solving: coverage, scope, relevance, need, 
satisfaction, and difficulty level. 

Librarians as creative scientists can 
make unique contributions through their 
ability to unite these two features of infor-
mation. The study of user behavior is cen-
tral to alllibrarianship, in both the techno-
logical and humanistic aspects. The 

September 1988 

librarian's interest in search behavior 
overlaps with the psychologist's interest 
in problem solving and the information 
scientist's interest in decision making. 

Problem solving has been studied in 
psychology and education from two per-
spectives: conditioning and insight. Do 
we learn by being rewarded for responses 
to stimuli, or do we learn by looking 
deeply and understanding? Are drilling 
and rote memorization more important 
than teaching generalizable principles? 
Educational practice today incorporates 
both approaches. 9 Gestalt theory on per-
ception and human reasoning has re-
vealed that information in memory is or-
ganized in chunks embedded within 
chunks, forming hierarchical clusters that 
can be unpacked into subordinate units 
during recall. 10 

These ideas were further elaborated 
upon and applied by Allen Newell and 
Herbert Simon in their work on computer 
simulation of human problem solving. 11 

Libraries and personal information sys-
tems are designed on the assumption that 
users can evolve into independent search-
ers able to execute successful problem-
solving search strategies. The library re-
search or search behavior process is the 
recurrent, lifelong activity whereby infor-
mation needs arise, are translated by the 
individual into searchable queries, and are 
pursued through the formulation and exe-
cution of search strategies that yield an-
swers to fulfill needs. There are thus three 
broad components of library research: in-
formation need, search strategy, execu-
tion of strategy. 

The structural components of search 
strategies are executed in a sequence or 
flow that permits revision on the basis of 
feedback or new input. Problem-solving 
activity is composed of these structured 
steps, including 

1. clarify the question; 
2. identify the source for finding infor-

mation; 
3. translate question into the words of 

the source; 
4. conduct the search; 
5. locate the materials. u 

When these steps are analyzed it can be 
seen that each requires its own problem-



solving steps. For example, conducting 
the search (step 4) might require the strat-
egy of using periodical indexes. This in-
cludes the following steps: 13 

1. decide on search terms; 
2. select the right index; 
3. look up subject in index, most cur-

rent first; 
4. list articles on index cards (title, au-

thor, journal, volume, date, and 
pages for each article); 

5. check the serials record; 
6. locate by call number. 

Search behavior is a problem-solving ac-
tivity in which subskills are organized and 
retrieved according to the individual's 
perception of a current information need. 
As information specialists we need to un-
derstand how people discover, decide on, 
and execute search strategies that work, as 
well as what leads to errors and unproduc-
tive strategies. 

THE PSYCHOLOGY 
OF SEARCH BEHAVIOR 

Learning theorists concur on one basic 
point, namely, that motivation plays an 
important role in problem solving. 14 

Teachers know that students are moti-
vated to work harder when the grading is 
tough. Successful man~gers use incen-
tives such as money, privileges, and 
awards as tangible motivators to energize 
employees into better problem-solving ac-
tivity and critical thinking. Problem-
solving activity is driven by the motive to 
attain a goal that one finds rewarding. 
Search behavior is primarily goal-directed 
problem solving. The information need or 
goal provides the affective interest or mo-
tive: a desire to know, an attraction to a 
topic, the desire for mastery, a willingness 
to obey instructions, and others. The 
search strategy provides direction and 
planning for the cognitive decisions: 
knowledge of sources and tools, organiz-
ing notes, judging some information as 
relevant, choosing between courses of 
action. The execution of the strategy pro-
vides the sensory and motor acts that net the 
information with its enjoyments and re-
wards: the style of execution, the errors 
committed, the presentation of the prod-
uct in a report. Thus, a three-way corre-

Problem Solving 403 

spondence exists between the three com-
ponents of library research (information 
need/search strategy/execution), and the 
three domains of human behavior (affec-
tive/ cognitive/ sensorimotor). 15 

The searcher's affective state or infor-
mation need is personal, subjective, and 
manifests behaviorally in a variety of 
ways. The searcher's cognitive problem-
solving state corresponds to the act of for-
mulating a search strategy. Though intra-
psychic, this form of mental activity is 
objective, because the internal reasoning 
process must match the external standard 
logic of information tools. When the intra-
psychic cognitive acts are objectified in 
this way, the search will be productive. 
The searcher's sensorimotor activity cor-
responds to the execution of the search. 

''Librarians should be as much con-
cerned about people's abilities to 
process information as . . . about 
people's abilities to find it.'' 

TEACHING SEARCH BEHAVIOR 
AS PROBLEM SOLVING 

From the comparison of general 
problem-solving skills to search behavior, 
some library instructors have concluded 
that "library use skills are study skills. 1116 

David Fraser suggests that ''counseling 
study habits is one of the fundamental con-
cerns of the profession. 1117 He points out 
that ''the use of libraries for memory work 
has gradually placed a special educational 
responsibility on librarians-that of 'tutor' 
or 'learners' advisor.' 1118 The concern for 
teaching better information-processing 
skills appears closely connected to the con-
cern for teaching better problem-solving 
skills, better study skills, and better critical 
thinking, reading, and memory strategies. 
Search behavior involves not only finding 
information but processing it as well. This 
suggests another dual focus for informa-
tion specialists, as suggested by Fraser: 
''Librarians should be as much concerned 
about people's abilities to process informa-
tion as . . . about people's abilities to find 
it, especially if we intend to tutor and ad-



404 College & Research Libraries 

vise learners on their approaches to study-
ing."19 

An application of this view can be found 
in Mary Reichel's attempt to apply Jerome 
Bruner's theory of instruction as a frame-
work for bibliographic instruction. 20 

Bruner emphasizes three major features in 
teaching: predisposition to learning, 
which is an affective component; struc-
ture of materials and their sequencing, 
which are cognitive components; andre-
ward or punishment, which are s~nsori­
motor components. To improve the affec-
tive component Reichel tells students why 
they need to have library skills and assigns 
hands-on exercises for learning them. To 
improve the cognitive component, stu-
dents are provided organizational sys-
tems for searching the library. These in-
volve superordinate and subordinate 
categorizations of search principles and 
procedures. 

Generalizing procedures is emphasized 
to maximize transfer of principles to a vari-

, ety of tools and approaches. This in-
creases the "manipulability of the knowl- · 
edge.'' For example, reference sources are 
discussed in terms of their categories of in-
formation (dates, addresses, definitions, 
biographical details, and so on). Similarly, 
search strategies are discussed in terms of 
conceptual frameworks such as the 
guided design approach, or the browsing 
versus the systematic literature searching 
approach, or the citation patterns ap-
proach . To help promote better critical 
thinking and problem solving in search 
behavior, Reichel provides an intellectual 
context that details the process of creating 
and using knowledge, namely, scholarly 
documentation practices, disciplinary 
overlap, professional communication, pri-
mary/secondary sources, and scope/ 
breadth/depth of content. 

Reichel's approach emphasizes the 
teaching of general principles to insure 
transfer of knowledge and critical think-
ing. Susan Deese employs an analytic ap-
proach to library use instruction, concen-
trating on the subcomponents of general 
activities to insure that basic or elementary 
skills are built up sufficiently. 21 She pro-
vides an inventory of subskills involved in 
common information-processing activi-

September 1988 

ties, divided into nine groupings: 
1. Listening skills (17 subskills given) 
2. Reading skills (19) 
3. Library sources skills (14) 
4. Recording skills (13) 
5. Critical-thinking skills (12) 
6. Organizational skills (13) 
7. Synthesis skills (13) 
8. Memory skills (7) 
9. Use skills (15) 
The list of more than 100 skills is not ex-

haustive and will expand with further re-
search. A classification scheme that would 
provide a theoretical framework for man-
aging library use skills is clearly needed. 22 

Inventories of skills and errors should il-
lustrate the hierarchical nature of complex 
problem-solving skills. Analysis of an ac-
tivity reveals many of its subcomponents. 
Understanding the interrelationship of li-
brary skills can be useful to librarians. For 
example, consider the familiar steps one 
goes through when taking notes while 
reading: 

(1) verbalizing echoically or reading sub-
vocally as a strategy to enter it in memory 
as one would enter a sequence of key-
strokes on a computer; 

(2) paraphrasing phrases and sentences 
as a strategy to decode the meaning of the 
text or translate it into one's own lan-
guage; 

(3) formatting the notes by marking or 
copying selected passages of text as a 
strategy to outline the overall argument; 

( 4) reflecting on the content by reacting 
to it cognitively (thinking about implica-
tions) and affectively (agreeing or dis-
agreeing with its assumptions); 

(5) organizing the notes to form a reason-
able and self-contained thesis, supporta-
ble by evidence and precedence; 

(6) memorizing details by linking them to 
prior knowledge or mentally rehearsing 
them; 

(7) applying the new information to an 
old problem or contextualizing it, as a 
strategy to gain a new, enhanced perspec-
tive; 

(8) using the information wherever it 
can guide decisions and affect one's atti-
tudes. 

Teaching better problem solving in com-
plex intellectual tasks is a common con-

j 



cern in education. The rationale for pro-
viding training in problem solving is that 
common mistakes can be identified in ad-
vance and thereby avoided. We use this 
assumption in our bibliographic instruc-
tion efforts by giving students lists of fre-
quently committed search errors, for ex- -
ample: 

Common errors in copying call numbers: 
• not copying exactly; 
• copying the first line only; 
• leaving out punctuation; 
• changing the order of the lines; 
• writing illegibly. 

Common errors in using the card catalog: 
• not knowing the main categories of 

the classification; 
• not remembering that it IiSf's no acqui-

sitions after 1979; 
• not knowing the first word of a title 

one is looking up; 
• alphabetizing incorrectly due to inat-

tention or haste; 
• having the wrong spelling for a name 

or title word; 
• searching with the feeling that it's not 

there; 
• assuming without verifying that the 

library has nothing on a topic; 
• assuming without verifying that a 

book probably won't be there or that it 
is missing. 

In addition to alerting searchers to ex-
pected mistakes, it is desirable to discuss 
with them the source or origin of errors. 
These are in the affective domain because 
they reflect deeper inadequacies in one's 
basic problem-solving routines and may 
require special attention or occasions for 
relearning. For instance: 

Common sources of errors in searching: 
• insufficient attention to detail and or-

der; 
• illegible handwriting; 
• always rushing or feeling time pres-

sure; 
• frequently doubting and panicking; 
• insufficient motivation to be innova-

tive in information seeking. 

Searchers should become aware of how 
their general habits can influence their li-
brary research efforts. 

Problem Solving 405 

PROBLEM-SOLVING PROTOCOLS 

The use of modeling techniques that in-
volve exposure to thinking aloud search pro-
tocols is an intriguing possibility for library 
instruction. Psychologists and educators 
have used the technique to improve the 
problem-solving abilities of clients and 
students whose cognitive and affective 
skills are deficient. 23 The investigation of 
search behavior protocols and their use for 
library instruction is a new, promising 
area of research. Here is an example of a 
search protocol produced by an experi-
enced patron who was talking into a tape 
recorder while locating several books by 
their call numbers. 

Okay. Lookingfor668 ... 670,671 .. . must be 
down here. I'll go down here. C57, C57. Books 
that haven't been taken out in a long time . .. 
Let's see. Hmmm doesn't seem to be here. The 
Foundations of Education for Librarianship doesn't 
seem to be here. It's 554. It's supposed to be 
HERE .... This is 546. Could be missing ... . 
That wasn't one we were really looking for. 
That was just one that we thought we'd look 
at . . .. But I hope we do . .. find it some day. 
Okay (sigh). Then we need 566 with a Z665 ... 
542 ... 665 .... Oh there it is. An old one. Li-
braries and the Organization of Knowledge . . . . 
There is his other book, Knowing Books and Men: 
Knowing Computers Too . Hrnmm. The Compleat 
Librarian . That's also his book. What's this 
Teaching Yourself in Libraries? I've seen that one. 
Strategies of Public Policies of Informatics . Okay 
. . . And the last one is BD. It's on the second 
floor. So let's go to the second floor. 

This protocol segment reveals various 
types of common problem-solving strate-
gies people may use when locating books. 
Some examples: 

(1) verbalizing the parts of a call number 
in order to match it with the call numbers 
on the books (e.g., "Looking for 668 ... 
670, 671. '' or ''Then we need S66 wHh a 
Z665 ... S42 ... 665"); 

(2) stating the conclusion of a reasoning 
process ("must be down here" or "could 
be missing''); 

(3) browsing titles of possible interest and 
noting their potential relevance for the fu-
ture ("Hmmm. The Compleat Librarian . 
That's also his book. What's this Teaching 
Yourself in Libraries? I've seen that one"); 

(4) using self-regulatory sentences ("I'll 



406 College & Research Libraries 

go down here'' and ''So let's go to the sec-
ond floor"); 

(5) orienting to a new subsequence in 
the search flow ("Okay ... Looking for 
668" or "Okay ... and the last one is 
BD"). 

Inspection of the above protocol reveals 
two important features of problem-
solving activity. FirstJ it generates dis-
course just as a dialog does, one statement 
prompting another. Second, the stream of 

· self-talk is simultaneous with sensorimo-
tor activity (walking, reading, matching) 
and is objectively relevant to it. 

Additional understanding of the nature 
of problem-solving in search behavior 
may be gained from the protocol analysis 
of a Danish librarian's verbalizations dur-
ing a search. The query was "Which 
marking scale is used in the assessment of 
(technical) draughtsmen?" The fragment 
quoted is accompanied by the following 
sequence of actions: reads and considers 
the query; selects a source; walks to its lo-
cation; looks up the subject heading of the 
query; not finding it, decides on a related 
source: 24 

'Which marking scale is used in the measure-
ment of technical draughtsmen?' Yes then I in 
the first place rather have to find out which . . . 
training the draughtsmen get, ehh which high 
school they consult. I don't know that immedi-
ately . . . and ehh that I think I will look up in 
Erhvervskartoteket in . . . Erhvervskartote-
kets' index ... one can look up on technical 
draughtsmen . . . but that article is not on its 
place ... I try the other Erhvervskartotek. 

Note the basic similarities between the 
two protocols just presented, despite dif-
ferences in culture and task. The similari-
ties of human problem solving across cul-
tures and topics surely arises out of an 
individual's struggle with and adaptation 
to common problems in an objective envi-
ronment. Search strategies are con-
strained within the limits of the informa-
tion system and the individual's acquired 
problem-solving abilities. 

PROBLEM SOLVING 
ABOUT PROBLEM SOLVING 

Search behavior as problem solving has 
a certain reflexivity captured in the expres-
sion "problem solving about problem 

September 1988 

solving." The first "problem-solving" re-
fers to library research; the second, to 
scholarly or scientific research. In library 

. research, patrons engage in problem-
solving activities; in scientific research, ex-
perimenters engage in problem-solving 

· activities. The relation between patrons 
and experimenters may be seen when ex-
amining the problem-solving activities of 
each. The Encyclopedia of Education identi-
fies the intellectual skills of a scientist as 
follows: 25 

1. observing; 
2. using space/time relationships; 
3. measuring; 
4. classifying; 
5. inferring; 
6. interpreting data; 
7. defining operationally. 

The problem-solving activities of scientific 
research correspond to the problem-
solving activities of library research. For 
example: 

1. Obseroing the presence or absence of 
a spot on a slide preparation corresponds 
to observing that the Library of Congress 
subject headings do not include a particu-
lar subject term or that two different au-
thors cite the same article. 

2. Using space/time relationships in the 
formulation of an experimental hypothe-
sis corresponds to using a mental map of 
the library's floor plan to locate particular 
call numbers, special collections, or areas 
in the collection. 

3. Measuring the length of an object and 
recording it corresponds to copying ex-
actly and matching the written call num-
ber to the call number of the book on the 
shelf. 

4. Classifying the characteristics of an 
object or variable corresponds to arrang-
ing citations by subgroups on the basis of 
their subject. 

5. Inferring the result of two or more si-
multaneously acting forces corresponds to 
inferring that an article would be in the mi-
crofilm collection because it is in an old 
newspaper. 

6. Interpreting data from an experiment 
corresponds to deciding what references 
to look up after reading and evaluating an 
encyclopedia article. 

7. Operationally defining a concept in 

L 



terms of how it will be measured corre-
sponds to defining command languages 
in terms of their consequences. 
There is, thus, a clear relationship be-
tween scientific research and library re-
search. This is due in part to process, since 
both involve similar problem-solving 
tasks, and in part to content, since library 
collections are records of scientific prod-
ucts. 

Some librarians conduct problem-
solving workshops to bring out the 
problem-solving aspect of library re-
search, in which they emphasize that ''a 
detective's investigation for clues is analo-
gous to a researcher's pursuit of informa-
tion. " 26 Students are encouraged to 
"transfer knowledge from other 
information-seeking experiences to li-
brary research.'' Exercises involve discus-
sion of research questions, literature 
found through preliminary strategies, and 
reformulation in the light of experience. In 
such problem-solving sessions, social or 
interpersonal facilitation is expected to in-
crease ''students' confidence in their abil-
ity to make research decisions collabora-
tively." This type of brainstorming 
enriches problem solving by increasing 
available solutions. A similar effect can be 
expected when patrons consult librarians, 
since the social exchange enriches the in-
formation pool available to patrons. Thus, 
as patrons walk away from the reference 
desk with a new strategy and a renewed 
resolve, they surely feel more confident. 
Consulting a librarian becomes a reward-
ing experience. 

An interesting metaphor that highlights 
the problem-solving aspects of library re-
search is the notion that ''librarians are 
gatekeepers of knowledge," in the sense 
that they ''monitor the flow of informa-
tion and tend the access tools to knowl-

Problem Solving 407 

edge." 27 The problem-solving view of li-
brary research engenders the dramatic 
image of search behavior as an activity 
performed in the role of an information 
detective investigating the motives and in-
struments of the gatekeepers of knowl-
edge. 

CONCLUSION 

Teaching problem-solving strategies to 
users renders explicit the implicit mental 
world of information seeking and critical 
thinking. Library use is an activity of one 
mind seeking contact with other minds. 
The study of the cognitive processes of li-
brary users allows librarians to develop a 
new focus on the inner microenvironment 
of information seekers. It has been sug-
gested that ''this dual involvement creates 
a heightened consciousness about infor-
mation.''28 Librarians have the unique op-
portunity to integrate the roles of techni-
cian/problem solver in the information 
field and thinker/problem solver in a sci-
entific field. Thus they "cross the thresh-
old into the community of scholars rather 
than just stopping at the door to informa-
tion"29 (italics in original). 

This perspective supports the idea that 
librarians would greatly profit from a sec-
ond graduate degree in another disci-
pline. The rationale for a double or inter-
disciplinary degree is not merely 
familiarity with issues and terminology in 
a scholarly field, but also the ability to con-
tribute to the discipline in some unique 
way that stems from the librarian's dual 
involvement. An understanding of search 
behavior as problem solving may be a key 
consideration in this challenge because 
the reflexivity inherent in searching for in-
formation corresponds to the duality of li-
brarianship seen in the wedded roles of 
technocrat and scholar. 

REFERENCES 

1. Jesse H. Shera, "An Epistemological Foundation for Library Science," The Foundations of Access to 
Knowledge: A Symposium, ed. Edward B. Montgomery (Syracuse: Syracuse Univ . Pr ., 1968), 
p.7-35. 

2. Noam Chomsky, umguage and Mind (New York: HBJ, 1968). 
3. Noam Chomsky, Cartesian Linguistics (New York, Harper, 1966). 
4. Shera, "Epistemological Foundation," p.24. 
5. Howard Maclay, "Introduction to Linguistics Section," Semantics: An Interdisciplinary Reader in 



408 College & Research Libraries - September 1988 

Linguistics, Philosophy, and Psychology, ed. Danny Steinberg and Leon A. Jakobovits (Cambridge: 
Cambridge Univ. Pr., 1971); Thomas S. Kuhn The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2d ed. (Chi-
cago: Univ. of Chicago Pr., 1970). . 

6. Allen B. Veaner, "1985 to 1995: The Next Decade in Academic Librarianship," College & Research 
Libraries 46:295-308 Ouly 1985). 

7. Charles Martell, "Creative Behavior in Libraries," College & Research Libraries 64:293-94 Ouly 
1985). 

8. Deborah Jakubs, "Reactions to '1985-1995: The Next Decade in Academic Librarianship,' Parts I 
and II," College & Research Libraries 46:309-19 Ouly 1985). 

9. Gordon H. Bower and Ernest R. Hilgard, Theories of Learning, 5th ed. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: 
Prentice-Hall, 1981), p.299-325. 

10. Endel Tulving and W. Donaldson, eds., Organization of Memory (New York: Academic Pr., 1972); 
George Mandler, "Association and Organization: Facts, Fancies, and Theories," Verbal Behavior 
and General Behavior Theory, ed. T. R. Dixon and D. L. Horton (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-
Hall, 1968); George A. Miller, "The Magical Number Seven Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on 
Our Capacity for Processing Information," Psychological Review 63:81-97 (1956). 

11. Allen Newell and Herbert A. Simon, Human Problem Solving (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-
Hall, 1972). 

12. Constance Mellon, "Information Problem-Solving: A Developmental Approach to Library In-
struction," in Theories of Bibliographic Education: Designs for Teaching, ed. Cerise Oberman and 
Katina Strauch (New York: Bowker, 1982), p.82. 

13. Ibid., p.85. 
14. M. Henle, Documents of Gestalt Psychology (Berkeley: Univ. of California Pr., 1961); Bower and 

Hilgard, Theories of Learning, p.299-325. 
15. Leon A. Jakobovits and Diane Nahl-Jakobovits, "Learning the Library: Taxonomy of Skills and 

Errors," College & Research Libraries 48:203-14 (May 1987). 
16. Susan Annora Deese, "Integrating Library Use Education with Study Skills Instruction," Teach-

ing Librarians to Teach: On-the-Job Training for Bibliographic Instruction Librarians, ed. Alice S. Clark 
and Kay F. Jones (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow, 1986), p.207. 

17. David Fraser, "Memory Skills: Whose Concern?" College & Research Libraries 46:320-26 Ouly 1985). 
18. Ibid., p.324. 
19. Ibid., p.324. 
20. Mary Reichel, ''Preparing to Teach: Bruner's Theory of Instruction and Bibliographic Education,'' 

in Clark and Jones, Teaching Librarians to Teach (see ref. 16), p.20. 
21. Deese, "Integrating Library Use Education," p.215. 
22. Jakobovits and Nahl-Jakobovits, "Learning the Library." 
23. Donald H. Meichenbaum and J. Goodman, "Training Impulsive Children to Talk to Themselves: 

A Means of Developing Self-Control," Journal of Abnormal Psychology 77:115-25; Arthur Wimbley 
and Jack Lochhead, Problem Solving and Comprehension: A Short Course in Analytical Reasoning, 2d 
ed. (Philadelphia: Franklin Institute Pr., 1980), p.24-27. 

24. Peter Ingwersen and Soren Kaae, User-Librarian Negotiations and Information Search Procedures in 
Public Libraries: Analysis of Verbal Protocols (Denmark: Copenhagen Royal School of Librarianship 
1980), p.91-92 (mimeographed document). 

25. Lee C. Deighton, ed. Encyclopedia of Education, V.I (New York: Macmillan, 1971), p.197. 
26. Mary M. Huston and Willie Parson, "A Model of Librarianship for Combining Learning and 

Teaching," Research Strategies 3:75-80 (Spring 1985), p.78. 
27. Ibid., p.75, attributed to Eugene Garfield. 
28. Ibid. 
29. Ibid.