Validation of information-seeking behaviour of nursing students confirms most profiles but also indicates desirable changes for information literacy support

Abstract

Purpose The study aims were: (1) to replicate a previous study by the first author to confirm previous findings (internal validity) and to check construct validity of previously proposed information-behaviour profiles, (2) to compare the information processes used by students in parallel with requirements of early professional practice. Design/methodology/approach A replication study used the same questionnaire, delivered online to all 175 students across three years of a BSc adult nursing degree programme on one UK university campus. The survey included questions on information seeking processes, personality, approaches to learning and self-efficacy with information literacy. The literature review examined evidence around the transition from nursing student to practitioner and the Association for College and Research Libraries (ACRL) standards for nursing information literacy. Findings The response rate was 86/175 (49%). The result verified findings on the most frequent information processes and association between approach to learning and information literacy self-efficacy. The personality findings differed. Combining results for both studies helped confirm most of the information-behaviour profiles. Mapping the frequent information processes against requirements of practice indicated gaps, particularly around professional networking. Research limitations/implications As both studies were carried out at one higher education campus, further research to assess external validity is required. Practical implications Information-behaviour profiles, plus the mapping, help librarians and tutors develop tailored information literacy support that is clinically relevant and support transition to practice. Originality/value Validated a set of information behaviour profiles for nursing students and linked these to the requirements of professional practice.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 14 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.