654749 research-article2016
LIS0010.1177/0961000616654749Journal of Librarianship and Information ScienceMansour and Ghuloum
Article
The information-seeking behaviour of Kuwaiti judges
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 2017, Vol. 49(4) 468–485 © The Author(s) 2016 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000616654749 DOI: 10.1177/0961000616654749 journals.sagepub.com/home/lis
Essam Mansour
PAAET, Kuwait; South Valley University, Egypt
Husain Ghuloum PAAET, Kuwait
Abstract The key purpose of this study is to show the information-seeking behaviour of Kuwaiti judges. Being one of the few studies about the information needs and information-seeking behaviour conducted in Arab and developing countries, this study is a pioneer one among many studies conducted in information seeking, especially with this significant group of information users. The authors tried to investigate this seeking behavior in terms of Kuwaiti judges’ thoughts, perceptions, motivations, techniques, preferences, tools and barriers met when seeking information. The authors employed a questionnaire, with a response rate of 77.2%. This study showed that most Kuwaiti judges were likely to be older, educated and with a work experience ranging from new to old. There was a statistically reliable significant difference between Kuwaiti judges’ demographic characteristics and some sources of information, such as books, encyclopedias, references and mass media. Kuwaiti judges were using information moderately to make decisions, to be in line with current events, to collect statistics and to do specific/general research. The office and home were the most frequent location from which Kuwaiti judges were accessing information. Their efficiency level in the English language was described to be moderately good, and a number of them confirmed that their efficiency level in French was not bad. The assistance provided by colleagues, followed by consultants, translators, secretaries and librarians were found to be the strongest types of assistance needed when seeking information. Mobile apps, followed by PCs, information networks (the Internet) and information databases were the highest technology tool used. Printed materials, followed by non-printed and audiovisual materials were the most preferred information formats used. The use of languages, the recency of information and the place of information, the deficit in the library’s role to deliver information were at least significant barriers to Kuwaiti judges when seeking information.
Keywords Information needs, information users, information-seeking behaviour, judges, Kuwait
Introduction Information plays a very important role in the life of nations. A nation might die due to a very bad decision based on false or poor information made by its legislators and lawmakers, or it might fail in meeting the expectations of its people due to a very bad background of information owned by its representatives. (Mansour and Alkhurainej, 2011: 671)
We believe that precise, organized and secured information is the main element underpinning any successful decision that can contribute to a successful life. Hence,
this study aims to collect data about factors that may influence information in the life of some of its significant users: judges, being described as extensive users of information in their role as decision-makers (Hainsworth, 1992), especially from the information-seeking behaviour perspective. It investigates the information-seeking behaviour of judges in one of the Arab countries, Kuwait, where data about such information seekers and users are still scarce. It tries to establish what type of information Corresponding author: Essam Mansour, DLIS, South Valley University, Qena, 83523, Egypt. Email:
[email protected]
469
Mansour and Ghuloum judges prefer and why, and what factors contribute to their decision-making. In fact, the study of the information-seeking behaviour of various populations is a major research area within the discipline of Library and Information Science (LIS), but this concept is not exclusive to this discipline (Eskola, 1998). Information-seeking behaviour, as stated by Mansour and Alkhurainej (2011), is broad in scope and extends across other disciplines and those from a range of academic backgrounds may be interested to understand the factors that influence judges’ behaviour when making decisions and rulings that may shape or even reshape the lives of some of them (people), either in a positive or negative way.
Problem statement This study aims to identify those factors that affect Kuwaiti judges’ information-seeking behaviour. This behaviour has gained no significant attention by academic scholars. ‘The administration of justice is complex and diverse and needs to be studied to understand all the political and social factors at work in the decision making of judges’ (Hainsworth, 1992: 2). So far, some limited research has been conducted about the way judges perceive and access information in some countries, specifically the USA, but data on such important topics in the Arab world in general and in the Arabian Gulf, where Kuwait is located, in particular, are missing.
Study objectives The key objectives of this study are: To describe the demographic profile of Kuwaiti judges (KJs). To find the reasons that make KJs use information, the time spent in the seeking process and the level of use of each source of information. To verify types of information sources, information formats and technology tools used by KJs. To identify challenges and barriers, if any, met by KJs that may decrease their benefit from information.
The importance and significance of the study This study is interested in a very significant group of information users/seekers – judges – that are largely neglected by many researchers and information professionals, especially in developing and Arab countries. Sharing Hainsworth’s (1992) view, the importance of this study is not just that it is the second one of its kind in the LIS discipline to study judges, but rather, in its potential to offer
new factors to predict and understand judicial behaviour and to show some of their research processes. Thus, this study aims to shed light on issues related to judges in one of these countries, Kuwait, in terms of their thoughts, attitudes, ways, tools, preferences and barriers met by them when seeking information.
Research design and methodology Study setting Kuwait is a sovereign Arab Emirate surrounded by Saudi Arabia to the south and Iraq to the north and west. Kuwait, which became an independent state on 19 June 1961, has a population of about 3.1 million people, which includes about 2 million non-citizens, and covers an area of about 17,818 km2 (Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), n.d).
The judicial system of Kuwait According to Global Law and Justice (n.d.), the legal system of Kuwait is a mixture of Islamic foundations, French civil law, British public law as well as Egyptian law. The Constitution of Kuwait (www.kuwaitconstitution.org/ kuwaitconstitutionenglish.html), which was ratified in 1962, guarantees the independence of the judiciary. Law No. 19 of 1959 (amended in Law No. 19 of 1990) organizes the judiciary in Kuwait. The main legal codifications include the Civil Code, Code of Civil Procedure, Commercial Code, Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure. There are a number of courts with specialized jurisdictions, such as the traffic Court and the Court of State Security. According to the annual statistical book for the Ministry of Justice (2014) and Ministry of Information (2011) about the organization of the judiciary and courts in Kuwait, Article 231 of Chapter 2 of the decree of law No. 23 of 1990 states that the Kuwaiti civil courts consist of three main courts as follows: 1. The Court of First Instance (159 judges). The job of this court is to look into the conflicts of personal, civil, commercial, and labour affairs and administrative cases. 2. The Court of High Appeal (159 judges). This court looks into appeals sent to them from the Court of First Instance excluding cases appealed before the Court of First Instance as of urgent, penalized and non-penalized cases. 3. The Court of Cassation (15 judges). This court serves as the final court of appeal and looks into cases that are sent down from the Court of Appeals in dealing with labour, civil, commercial cases, personal affairs and crime cases. There is also the Constitutional Court, which has exclusive jurisdiction to interpret the constitutionality of legislation
470 and is empowered to review electoral contestations. Judges in Kuwait are appointed by Amiri decree, and may not assume any other profession after appointment. The Judicial Council must allow the impeachment of a judge, and the Judiciary Disciplinary Council must exercise disciplinary action. The retirement age of judiciary members is 65 years.
Study instrument and data collection This study identified the information-seeking behaviour of Kuwaiti judges. It used a survey, which was administered from March to April of 2015. Survey research is the most commonly used research method in the social sciences (Brown and Gilmartin, 1969). To collect data from participants, a personally administrated questionnaire was designed in the Arabic language, being the official language of all participants. The structured self-administrated questionnaire was designed to address the four objectives of the study. It comprised 12 closed-ended questions and just one open-ended question for judges who wished to add something about the study, such as comments and suggestions. The questionnaire tried, as far as possible, to cover all variables affecting the information-seeking behaviour of Kuwaiti judges, such as those related to their demography (age and education), years of experience in judicial work, the motivation to seek information, the level of use of a range of sources of information, the level of technology tools used when accessing information, the level of their language skills to use information, the level of help needed when accessing information, and the level of significance of barriers met when seeking information. A cover letter accompanied the study questionnaire, introducing and explaining the purpose and reason for the research, and the potential benefits expected from it. We agree with Linsky (1975) and Borg and Gall (1989) that the questionnaire cover letter may influence respondents and motivate them to respond to the questionnaire.
Study sample (participants) There are three main courts in Kuwait consisting of 333 judges. From those 333 judges, the two researchers managed to reach 262 judges who were willing to answer the questionnaire. Accordingly, the questionnaire was directed to those 262, but five of the returned questionnaires were invalid because they were not fully answered and thus were excluded. The final number of responses to be analyzed reached 257, representing 77.2% of the entire population.
Data analysis All returned valid questionnaires were coded. An SPSS (V. 17) data matrix was used for each sample and responses
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 49(4) entered. To answer the research questions, the following methods of analysis were undertaken with each sample: frequency counts, percentage, mean, standard errors of mean and standard deviations for the listed categories in the questionnaire; cross-tabulation for degree of relationship among different variables of the study as appropriate; the one-way ANalysis Of VAriance (ANOVA) to determine whether there are any significant differences between the means of independent groups.
Previous research on judges’ information-seeking behaviour The design of the study was inspired by Wilson’s model of information behaviour. Wilson (1981) attempted to focus deeply on the interrelationships among concepts that affect the user’s information behaviour. He proposed that information behaviour covers all aspects related to humaninformation behaviour, whether this behaviour is active or passive. Information-seeking behaviour is the act of actively seeking and using information to meet a specific query. It is the behaviour which stems from the searcher’s interaction with the system in question. This system could be a technological one, such as the interaction with an online search engine, or a manual one, such as the selection of information resources, which apply to the query. The information use behaviour pertains to the searcher’s actions to gain the required knowledge. According to Hainsworth (1992), the few studies conducted about judges pay attention only to the individual demographics of judges in attempting to understand and predict their decisions. However, no study has examined the role of information seeking in the process of their decision-making. Due to the nature of the judicial work that is described sometimes as ‘critical’ and ‘sensitive’ work, there are few studies conducted on the judges’ information-seeking behaviour and their needs for information, especially in developing countries in general and in Arab countries in particular. Due to this fact, the literature review identified no serious attempts made by Arab researchers to investigate or even to describe why and how Arab judges seek for information. As a result, we depended mainly on studies, also scarce, conducted by foreign researchers in other countries hoping to close gaps in this area of research in Arab States in general and in Kuwait in particular. Marvell (1978), who was the first researcher to study appellate information, states that in the court environment, information means ‘any assertion, except a purely normative one, about facts, ideas, rules or relationships …’ (p. 4). A gap in knowledge was identified in how the court verifies those facts and what affects the judicial search for the
471
Mansour and Ghuloum relevant law in the decision-making process. How, when and why judges seek information beyond what is provided to them is a largely unstudied phenomenon. Marvell (1978) studied in depth a supreme court of a northern industrial state and five other courts less thoroughly. He interviewed 46 judges, 33 law clerks, 17 staff members and 36 appellate lawyers over a period of four years and analyzed hundreds of court briefs. Regarding the role and importance of information to judges, he stated that judges cannot make decisions without information and the quality of their decision depends highly on the relevancy, accuracy and completeness of the information provided to them through counsel, law clerks and their personal knowledge. Hainsworth’s (1992) PhD dissertation, Informationseeking behaviour of judges of the Florida District Courts of Appeal, has been the most significant study in this research area, though it is now quite dated. She stated that judicial behaviour studies focus on judges, especially on their decision-making process, but no judicial behaviour study has explored the role of the judges’ informationseeking behaviour in this process. To explore the individual, organizational and environmental factors that may influence the judges’ information-seeking behaviour, she used a structured observation, mailed questionnaire and personal interview with 50 judges who participated in the research. She concluded that: 1. judges have particular needs regarding organizing information, which are not met by any system; 2. the time needed for information seeking is predicted based on the judge’s situation regarding the case; 3. the oral argument and panel conference affect the judges when seeking information; 4. judges are seeking information independently and individually; 5. the judge’s distance from the information source predicts its relevance, use and value; 6. law clerks and personal library collections are the most used resources in judges’ information seeking; 7. the quality and depth of the judges’ information seeking is guided primarily by their internal feelings of satisfaction toward their resulting opinions; 8. the judges’ use of the computer is usually affected by their job, which involves reading and writing; 9. information that is available in hard copy is mostly preferred by 77% of judges; and 10. the judges’ information-seeking behaviour is affected by time. In the fifth part of his study, which is titled ‘Courtimposed fines: A survey of judges’, Searle (2003) confirmed the role of specific types of information about the
offender, when sentencing him/her to a fine. He stated that information about the offender such as his/her criminal record, family status, employment status, outstanding fines/infringement fees, assets and financial expenditure was necessary in most cases. He also added that such information should be available, adequate and verified. Al-Daihani and Oppenheim (2006) attempted to investigate the information behaviour of Kuwaiti legal professionals and their information needs. They collected data from 132 legal professionals of whom 16 were selected for interview. The key findings of this study showed that personal collections were found to be the most heavily used sources on a daily basis, and newspapers were the most important source from which they got information by chance. The findings also showed that the majority of Kuwaiti legal professionals did not use the Internet or legal databases. The majority relied on internal communication with colleagues as a channel for exchanging information more than external communication with others. The study recommended adopting new technology to meet the information needs of their users in terms of sources and services provided. Legal professionals themselves should also develop their own technology skills. Khan and Bhatti (2011) conducted a survey about the information-seeking behaviour of law practitioners at the District Bar Council, Bahawalpur, Pakistan to reveal that most law practitioners tended to be males, mostly aged between 31 and 50 years, mostly with a BA degree, mostly with a work experience ranging from one to 15 years. Participants in this study showed that they were seeking information mainly for case preparation and research work and depending largely on the District Bar library and other libraries as well as their personal collections. They preferred sources in the English language in print format. They also showed that they used the Internet and mobile devices to access these sources.
Findings of the study The findings of this study are organized based on the order of the items listed in its questionnaire in addition to the four research questions, which lead this study. Some items are cross-tabulated with each other as appropriate.
RQ1. What is the demographic profile of Kuwaiti judges? The findings showed that most KJs tend to be older, mostly with a BA degree and with a work experience of judging ranging from less than five to over 30 years. In detail, the KJs’ demographic characteristics indicated, as shown in Table 1, that the age of the surveyed judges ranged from 31
472
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 49(4)
Table 1. Kuwaiti judges’ demographic characteristics (age & education) cross-tabulated with the type of court through Mean & SD. Demography
Age: 31–35 years 36–40 years 41–45 years 46–50 years 51–55 years 56–60 years 61 + years Total Education: BA Master’s PhD High Diploma Total Work experience: –5 years 6–10 years 11–15 years 16–0 years 21–25 years 26–30 years 31 + years Total
The Court of First Instance (N = 113/159)
The Court of High Appeal (N = 130/159)
The Court of Cassation (N = 14/15)
Total
Mean
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
24 49 30 9 1 0 0 113
21.2 43.4 26.5 8 0.9 0 0 100
4 15 12 25 29 30 15 130
3.1 11.5 9.2 19.2 22.3 23.1 11.5 100
0 0 0 0 3 7 4 14
0 0 0 0 21.4 50 28.6 100
28 64 42 34 33 37 19 257
10.9 24.9 16.3 13.2 12.8 14.9 7.4 100
110 1 0 2 113
97.3 0.9 0 1.8 100
92 32 3 3 130
70.7 24.6 2.3 2.3 100
8 5 1 0 14
57.1 35.7 7.1 0 100
210 38 4 5 257
81.7 14.8 1.6 1.9 100
80 30 3 0 0 0 0 113
70.8 26.5 2.6 0 0 0 0 100
8 24 31 35 18 13 1 130
6.2 18.5 23.8 26.9 13.8 10 0.8 100
0 1 1 1 1 7 3 14
0 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 50 21.4 100
88 55 35 36 19 20 4 257
34. 21.4 13.6 14 7.4 7.8 1.6 100
4.65
1.24
2.68
to 61 years and over. While slightly higher than two-thirds (69.9%) of the Court of First Instance’s judges were characterized to be relatively older (aged from 36 to 45 years), higher than half (56.9%) of the Court of High Appeal’s judges and all (100%) the Court of Cassation’s judges tended to be older (aged over 50 years). The data also showed that while almost all (97.3%) the Court of First Instance’s judges held a BA, slightly higher than twothirds (70.7%) of the Court of High Appeal’s judges and slightly higher than half (57.1%) of the Court of Cassation’s judges held a BA. The study also showed that almost a quarter (24.6%) of the Court of High Appeal’s judges and slightly higher than one-third (35.7%) of the Court of Cassation’s judges had a Master’s degree. The study also showed that just 2.3% of the KJs, particularly in the Court of High Appeal, held a PhD, and just 1.8% of them, particularly in the Court of First Instance, had a High Diploma. The study also showed that 97.6% of the KJs of the Court of First Instance were relatively inexperienced in judging, with a work experience ranging from less than five to 10 years, slightly higher than two-thirds (69.2%) of the Court of High Appeal’s judges had relatively more experience of judging, with their work experience ranging from six to 20 years and slightly higher than two-thirds (71.4%) of the
SD
1.844 .575 1.697
Court of Cassation’s judges had long experience of judging, with their work experience ranging from 26 to over 31 years. The study found that there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the work experience of the KJs and their demographic factors (age and education). For example, there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ work experience and their age (p = 0.000; (p < .05), education (p = 0.000; (p < .05) and the type of court they worked in (p = 0.000; (p < .05).
RQ2. Why are Kuwaiti judges seeking for information? As seen in Table 2, the findings showed that KJs were seeking information mainly to make a decision, to be in line with current events and to collect statistics. In detail, when all KJs were asked to show their strength of agreement on a four-point scale with reasons and motivations for seeking information, they gave varied answers ranging from ‘not strong’ to ‘very strong’. All KJs (100%) showed that ‘to make a decision’ was at least strong to them, followed by ‘to be in line with current events’
473
Mansour and Ghuloum Table 2. Kuwaiti judges’ seeking for information. Motivation
Level
Very strong (%)
Strong (%)
Somewhat strong (%)
Not strong (%)
To be in line with current events To make a decision To undertake general research To undertake specific research To collect statistics
49 40.5 38.5 35 33.1
50.6 59.5 58.8 63.4 66.1
0.4 0 2.7 1.6 0.8
0.4 0 0 0 0
Table 3. ANOVA (shortened) of Kuwaiti judges’ seeking for information and their demographic profile through Mean, SE & SD. Motivation
Statistics
Significance
Mean
SE of Mean
SD
Age
Education
The type of the court
To be in line with current events To make a decision To do general research To do specific research To collect statistics
3.49 3.40 3.36 3.33 3.32
.032 .031 .033 .031 .030
.509 .031 .534 .031 .485
.002 .272 .252 .969 .633
.960 .535 .086 .077 .389
.001 .086 .556 .431 .417
Table 4. Time spent per week to access information by Kuwaiti judges through Mean, SE & SD. Time spent accessing information
Statistics N
%
Mean
SE of mean
SD
Three hours or less Four to six hours Seven to nine hours Ten hours or more
30 121 82 24
11.7 37.1 31.9 9.3
2.39
.050
.813
Table 5. Kuwaiti judges’ access to information. Location
Level
Very High high (%) (%)
Office 93.8 Home 69.6 The library 0
6.2 30.4 0
Moderate (%)
Low (%)
Very low (%)
0 0 14.4
0 0 44.4
0 0 41.6
(99.6%), ‘to collect statistics’ (99.2%), "to undertake specific research’ (98.4%), then ‘to undertake general research’ (97.3%). As seen in Table 3 the study showed that there was only a statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ age and their motivation to be in line with current events (p = 0.002; (p < .05). The study also showed there was only a statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ motivation to be in line with current events and the type of the court they worked in (p = 0.001; (p < .05).
RQ3. What characteristics of information use (time, access & assistance), types of information resources, information formats, language skills and technology tools are used by Kuwaiti judges when seeking information? Through their answer to the time spent per week using information, KJs showed that they were using information moderately. In detail, the highest percentage of KJs (37.1%) spent from four to six hours weekly accessing information, followed by 31.9% spending from seven to nine hours, 11.7% spending less than three hours, and 9.3% spending over 10 hours weekly (Table 4). KJs were asked to identify where they accessed information. As seen in Table 5, the findings showed that the most frequent locations where KJs accessed information were from their offices and homes. In detail, the highest percentage of KJs accessed information more from their office (93.8%) and home (69.6%). The study showed that the KJs’ access to information from the library was low, as a large percentage (86%) confirmed that this access ranged from very low to low. The study revealed that while there was no statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ demographic data (age and education) and their location of accessing information, there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the type of the court they worked in and accessing information from home (p = 0.003; (p < .05) (Table 6). Regarding the level of help needed by KJs when accessing information, the study showed that 79.4% of KJs confirmed that the significance level of help provided by
474
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 49(4)
Table 6. ANOVA (shortened) by the location of accessing information by Kuwaiti judges through Mean, SE & SD. Location
Statistics
Significance
Mean
SE of Mean
SD
Age
Education
The type of the court
Office Home The library
4.94 4.70 1.73
.015 .029 .044
.242 .461 .699
.317 .079 .864
.632 .409 .842
.436 .003 .471
Table 7. Level of assistance needed by Kuwaiti judges when accessing information. Assistance
Colleagues Consultants Translators Secretaries Librarians & assistants Abstracts & indexes Book lists
Level Very strong (%)
Strong (%)
Somewhat strong (%)
Not strong (%)
22.6 4.3 5.1 0.4 0.8 0 0
56.8 51.4 29.6 25.7 15.2 0 0
18.7 44 33.9 65.8 25.7 22.2 36.2
1.9 0.4 31.5 8.2 58.4 77.8 63.8
Table 8. ANOVA (shortened) of level of assistance and demographic data of Kuwaiti judges through Mean, SE & SD. Assistance
Colleagues Consultants Sectaries Translators Librarians & assistants Book lists Abstracts & indexes
Statistics
Significance
Mean
SE of Mean
SD
Age
Education
Type of court
3.00 2.60 2.18 2.08 1.58 1.36 1.22
.044 .036 .035 .056 .048 .030 .026
.702 .579 .567 .900 .722 .481 .416
.000 .171 .000 .000 .000 .000 .327
.126 .003 .270 .044 .438 .728 .530
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
colleagues was at least strong, followed by consultants (55.7%), translators (34.7%), secretaries (26.1%), and librarians (16%) (Table 7). The study revealed that there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ age and their level of assistance provided by colleagues (p = 0.000; (p < .05), translators (p = 0.000; (p < .05), secretaries (p = 0.000; (p < .05), librarians and assistants (p = 0.000; (p < .05) and book lists (p = 0.000; (p < .05). The study also showed that there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ education level and the level of assistance provided to them by consultants (p = 0.003; (p < .05) and translators (p = 0.044; (p < .05). The study also revealed there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the type of court the KJs worked in and the level of assistance provided by colleagues (p = 0.000; (p < .05), consultants (p = 0.000; (p < .05) and translators (p = 0.000; (p < .05), sectaries (p = 0.000; (p < .05), librarians and assistants (p = 0.000; (p < .05), abstracts and indexes
(p = 0.000; (p < .05) and book lists (p = 0.000; (p < .05) (Table 8). Regarding the types of information sources used by KJs, the findings revealed, as shown in Table 9, that the most important sources of information for KJs were books, the Web, encyclopedias, references and directories. In detail, among four scales given to them, KJs were asked to indicate the level of importance of a range of information sources. Their answers ranged from ‘not important’ to ‘very important”. A large number (85.6) of KJs showed that books and the Web respectively, were at least important sources of information to them, followed by references (83.7%), encyclopedias (82.5%), directories (58.3%), mass media (48.6%) and information networks & databases (30.7%). This study found that there was a statistically reliable significant difference between their demographic factors (age and education) and some sources of information they used. For example, there was a statistically reliable
475
Mansour and Ghuloum Table 9. Importance of types of information resources for Kuwaiti judges. Categories (according to the highest level)
Level Very important (%)
Important (%)
Somewhat important (%)
Not important (%)
Books The Web Encyclopedias References Directories Mass media (press, TV, videos) Information networks & databases Terminological dictionaries Lingual dictionaries Minutes Specialized bulletins Microfilms & microfiches Abstracts of books & articles Atlases & gazettes Bibliographies Biographies CD-ROMs Conferences works Library catalogues Personal letters Research reports Specialized journals Theses & dissertations
29.6 21 19.1 18.3 12.8 9.3 6.2 3.9 3.5 3.5 1.9 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
56 64.6 63.4 65.4 45.5 39.3 24.5 21.8 24.5 42.4 16.3 8.6 1.6 0.4 1.6 0.8 0.8 0.8 3.9 26.1 28.8 12.8 1.9
14.4 14.4 16.3 16.3 36.2 46.3 64.2 55.6 35.8 50.6 61.3 42 18.7 19.1 40.5 25.3 35 27.6 41.6 33.9 47.1 52.5 34.6
0 0 1.2 0 5.4 5.1 5.1 18.7 36.2 3.5 19.8 48.6 79.8 80.5 58 73.9 64.2 71.6 54.5 40.1 24.1 34.6 63.4
significant difference between the KJs’ age and their use of books (p = 0.000; (p < .05), encyclopedias (p = 0.000; (p < .05), references (p = 0.022; (p < .05), mass media (p = 0.006; (p < .05), terminological dictionaries (p = 0.002; (p < .05), lingual dictionaries (p = 0.000; (p < .05), minutes (p = 0.023; (p < .05), abstract of books & databases (p = 0.018; (p < .05), atlases and gazettes (p = 0.031; (p < .05), bibliographies (p = 0.000; (p < .05), biographies (p = 0.022; (p < .05), conference works (p = 0.000; (p < .05), personal letters (p = 0.000; (p < .05), research reports (p = 0.037; (p < .05) and theses and dissertations (p = 0.005; (p < .05). There was also a statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ education level and their use of abstracts of mass media (p = .018 (p < .05), bibliographies (p = 0.024; (p < .05), library catalogues (p = 0.045; (p < .05), personal letters (p = 0.034; (p < .05) and research reports (p = 0.030; (p < .05). The study also showed that there was a significant difference between the type of court KJs were working in and some sources of information they were using. For example, there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ type of court and their use of books (p = 0.000; (p < .05), encyclopedias (p = 0.000; (p < .05), references (p = 0.000; (p < .05), directories (p = 0.002; (p < .05), mass media (p = 0.000; (p < .05), terminological dictionaries (p = 0.004; (p < .05), lingual dictionaries (p = 0.000; (p < .05), minutes (p = 0.000; (p < .05), abstracts of books and articles (p = 0.001; (p < .05), atlases
and gazettes (p = 0.009; (p < .05), bibliographies (p = 0.000; (p < .05), biographies (p = 0.013; (p < .05), personal letters (p = 0.000; (p < .05) and research reports (p = 0.000; (p < .05) (Table 10). As shown in Table 11, the findings showed that KJs’ preference for information was printed formats (89.1%), followed by non-printed formats (61.1%) and then audiovisual formats (2.3%). The study showed that while there was no statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ education level and their preferred information formats, there was only a statistically reliable significant difference between their age and their use of non-printed materials (p = 0.000; (p < .05). The study also showed that there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the type of court the KJs worked in and their use of printed materials (p = 0.017; (p < .05), non-printed materials (electronic) (p = 0.000; (p < .05) and audiovisual materials (p = 0.000; (p < .05) (Table 12). The findings showed, as in Table 13, that their skills in foreign languages ranged from ‘not good’ to ‘very good’. In detail, 34.2% of KJs confirmed that their skill level in the English language, the most dominant language used to access information sources and highly used in Kuwait after the Arabic language, was at least good, and 4.16% of them confirmed that their skill level in French was at least good. The study showed that while there was no statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ education
476
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 49(4)
Table 10. ANOVA (shortened) of Kuwaiti judges’ level of use of information resources and their demographic data through Mean, SE & SD. Categories
Statistics
Significance
Mean
SE of Mean
SD
Age
Education
The type of the court
Books The Web References Encyclopedias Directories Mass media (press, TV, videos) Minutes Information networks & databases Terminological dictionaries Research reports Specialized bulletins Lingual dictionaries Personal letters Specialized journals Microfilms & microfiches Library catalogues Bibliographies Theses & dissertations CD-ROMs Conference works Biographies Abstracts of books & articles Atlases & gazettes
3.15 3.07 3.02 3.00 2.66 2.53 2.46 2.32 2.11 2.05 2.00 1.95 1.86 1.78 1.65 1.49 1.44 1.39 1.37 1.29 1.27 1.22 1.20
.040 .037 .037 .040 .048 .046 .039 .042 .046 .045 .041 .054 .050 .041 .042 .036 .033 .033 .031 .029 .039 .028 .026
.647 .593 .589 .634 .770 .734 .624 .667 .742 .727 .664 .865 .803 .655 .893 .574 .527 .526 .499 .472 .461 .450 .409
.000 .824 .022 .000 .054 .006 .023 .567 .002 .037 .364 .000 .000 .119 .202 .000 .000 .005 .211 .492 .022 .018 .031
.145 .312 .545 .769 .707 .018 .569 .874 .077 .030 .716 .076 .034 .763 .706 .045 .024 .228 .365 .067 .170 .805 .512
.000 .912 .000 .000 .002 .000 .000 .293 .004 .000 .195 .000 .000 .228 .701 .273 .000 .191 .261 .094 .013 .001 .009
Table 11. Kuwaiti judges’ preferences for different formats of information. Formats
Level
Very much preferred (%)
Just preferred (%)
Not much preferred (%)
Printed materials Non-printed materials (electronic) Audiovisual materials
89.1 61.1 2.3
10.1 38.5 25.7
0.8 0.4 72
Table 12. ANOVA (shortened) of Kuwaiti judges’ level of using information formats and their demographic data through Mean, SE & SD. Formats
Statistics
Significance
Mean
SE of Mean
SD
Age
Education
The type of the court
Printed materials Non-printed materials (electronic) Audiovisual materials
2.88 2.61 1.30
.022 .031 .032
.345 .497 .509
.652 .000 .886
.218 .132 .334
.017 .000 .020
level and their skills level in languages needed to access information, there was a statistically reliable significant difference between their age and their use of the English language (p = 0.000; (p < .05) and French (p = 0.017; (p < .05). The study showed that there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the type of court the KJs
worked in and their use of the English language (p = 0.000; (p < .05) and French (p = 0.000; (p < .05) (Table 14). Regarding the types of technology tools used by KJs when accessing information, the findings showed that 99.4% of the KJs showed that they felt that they were at least good at using mobile apps, followed by information
477
Mansour and Ghuloum networks (the Internet) (62.3%), PCs (57.2%) and information databases (46.3) (Table 15). The study showed that while there was no statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ education level and their level of technology skill, there was a statistically reliable significant difference between their age and their use of mobile apps (p = 0.001; (p < .05), PCs (p = 0.000; (p < .05), information networks (the Internet) (p = 0.000; (p < .05) and information databases (p = 0.000; (p < .05). The study also showed that there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the type of court the
Table 13. Kuwaiti judges’ skill level in languages used to access information. Languages
English French
Level Very good (%)
Good (%)
Somewhat good (%)
Not good (%)
2.7 1.9
31.5 2.7
55.6 12.5
10.1 82.9
Table 14. ANOVA (shortened) of Kuwaiti judges’ level of efficiency in languages and their demographic data through Mean, SE & SD. Language Statistics
English French
Significance
Mean SE of Mean
SD
2.27 1.24
.675 .000 .063 .595 .017 .258
.042 .037
Age Education The type of court .000 .000
KJs worked in and their level of use of mobile apps (p = 0.000; (p < .05) PCs (p = 0.000; (p < .05), information networks (the Internet) (p = 0.000; (p < .05), and information databases (p = 0.000; (p < .05) (Table 16).
RQ4. What challenges and barriers, if any, are met by Kuwaiti judges when using information? Through the judges’ answers to this question, the results showed that the use of languages, the recency of information and the location of information were the most important barriers KJs faced when seeking information. In detail, 49.8% of KJs confirmed that the use of languages was at least significant to them, followed by the recency of information (45.1%), the location of information (26.8%), the poor ability of the library to deliver information (25.6%), and the use of technology tools (16%) (Table 17). This study showed that there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ age and barriers faced when seeking information, such as the use of languages (p = 0.000; (p < .05), the location of information (p = 0.000; (p < .05), the recency of information (p = 0.000; (p < .05) and the poor ability of the library to deliver information (p = 0.005; (p < .05). The study also found a statistically reliable significant difference between the KJs’ education level and barriers faced when seeking information, such as the location of information (p = 0.007; (p < .05) and the recency of information (p = 0.028; (p < .05). The study also showed that there was a statistically reliable significant difference between the type of court the KJs worked in and barriers faced when seeking information, such as the use of languages (p = 0.000; (p < .05), the location of information (p = 0.000; (p < .05), the recency of information
Table 15. Kuwaiti judges’ level of skill with technological tools used to access information. Tools
Level
Very good (%)
Good (%)
Somewhat good (%)
Not good (%)
Mobile apps PCs Information networks (the Internet) Information databases
60.3 31.9 30 16.7
33.1 25.3 32.3 29.6
6.6 35.8 35.8 47.9
0 7 1.9 5.8
Table 16. ANOVA (shortened) by Kuwaiti judges’ level of skill in using technology tools and their demographic data through Mean, SE & SD. Tools
Statistics
Significance
Mean
SE of Mean
SD
Age
Education
The type of the court
Mobile apps PCs Information networks (the Internet) Information databases
3.54 2.82 2.90 2.57
.039 .060 .053 .052
.618 .964 .854 .836
.001 .000 .000 .000
.405 .400 .526 .894
.000 .000 .000 .000
478
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 49(4)
Table 17. Barriers faced by Kuwaiti judges when accessing information, based on the level of significance. Barriers
The use of languages The use of technology tools The location of information The recency of information The poor ability of the library to deliver information The high cost of information
Level Very important (%)
Important (%)
Somewhat important (%)
Not important (%)
12.1 3.9 3.1 2.7 2.3
37.7 12.1 23.7 42.4 23.3
27.2 76.7 39.3 39.3 50.6
23 7.4 33.9 15.6 23.7
0
0.4
24.1
75.5
Table 18. ANOVA (shortened) by Kuwaiti judges’ level of the barriers faced when accessing information through Mean, SE & SD. Barriers
The use of languages The use of technology tools The location of information The recency of information The poor ability of the library to deliver information The high cost of information
Statistics
Significance
Mean
SE of Mean
SD
Age
Education
The type of the court
2.39 2.12 1.96 2.32 2.04 1.25
.061 .036 .052 .048 .047 .028
.970 .580 .838 .766 .750 .442
.000 .938 .000 .000 .005 .533
.057 .263 .007 .028 .491 .064
.000 .791 .000 .000 .000 .636
(p = 0.000; (p < .05) and the poor ability of the library to deliver information (p = 0.000; (p < .05) (Table 18).
Discussion and conclusions of the study This study identifies the information-seeking behaviour of Kuwaiti judges (KJs) regarding the information needed to carry out their judicial work. Four research questions were designed to guide the study. Factors and variables affecting the KJs’ information-seeking behaviour were identified to describe this behaviour. Both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were used to interpret the results of the study. The diversity of KJs’ answers to the research questions mirrored their perceptions and attitudes about what they do to carry out their judicial work. Demographically, this study showed that most of the KJs were likely to be older (aged over 36 years) and educated (mostly with BA degrees). According to Hainsworth (1992), judicial behaviour studies draw attention to the individual demographics of judges in attempting to predict or understand judges’ decisions. It is worth mentioning that, in accordance with Kuwaiti tradition, women are not eligible for the judiciary. Therefore all judges in Kuwait, including non-nationals, are male. In addition, Islamist militants reject the appointment of women as judges in Kuwait claiming that such an appointment is against Islamic law. Article 29 of the Kuwait Constitution states that ‘All people are equal in human dignity and in public rights and duties before the law, without distinction as to race, origin, language or religion’. Regarding the experience of KJs, the study showed that many of the Court of First Instance’s judges were relatively new to judging, slightly higher than
two-thirds of the Court of the High Appeal’s judges had relatively longer experience and slightly higher than two-thirds of the Court of Cassation’s judges had long experience of judging. The study showed that there was a significant relationship between the work experience of the KJs and their age, education and the type of court they worked in. This finding is consistent with some other earlier studies, such as Khan and Bhatti (2011), which showed that the highest percentage (33.3%) of law practitioners was described as having relatively short experience. KJs have clearly showed their motives and goals in their use of information. They showed that they were seeking information mainly to make a decision, to be in line with current events, to collect statistics and to undertake both specific and general research. There was only a significant relationship between the KJs’ age and their motivation to be in line with current events. The study also showed there was only a significant difference between the KJs’ motivation to be in line with current events and the type of the court they worked in. In line with Hainsworth’s (1992) findings, the judges agreed that they had a responsibility to seek information. The variance in their reasons for seeking information shows that they cannot depend on the brief to provide them with enough information about cases. Although some specific types of information sources, such as specialized journals, were perceived by KJs as one of the less often used information sources, they were perceived as the most important source accessed by Kuwaiti legal professionals, the population surveyed in Al-Daihani and Oppenheim’s (2006) study, for keeping themselves current in legal information, where a large number (91.2%) of this population used these journals to be in line with current legal events.
Mansour and Ghuloum As indicated earlier, this study showed that there was a significant relationship between KJs’ demographic characteristics and their use of a large number of information sources as well as a significant relationship between the type of court they worked in and some sources of information. This relationship has shown the KJs’ use of these sources to meet the needs of their judicial work. KJs showed that they were using information moderately, where slightly over twothirds (69%) of them were spending from four to nine hours a week seeking information. This finding is to some extent consistent with Hainsworth’s (1992) study, which showed that the median time spent seeking information of a large proportion (81%) of American judges was two hours a day. This finding is also supported by some earlier studies, such as Otike (1999), which showed that books, especially new ones, were the most important medium for gaining information, and also supported by Al-Daihani and Oppenheim’s (2006) study, which showed that the majority (91.2%) of legal professionals claimed that mass media, specifically newspapers, were the most important source from which they got information. The KJs’ work offices, followed by home and the library, especially the library of the court they worked in, were found to be the most frequent location where KJs accessed information. The study revealed that while there was no significant relationship between the KJs’ demographic data and their location for accessing information, there was a significant relationship between the type of the court they worked in and accessing information from home. This finding matches with Hainsworth’s (1992) study, which showed that the majority of the American judges’ information-seeking time (65%) was spent in their chambers (office quarters including law clerks and secretary). She showed that judges kept information resources closest to their desks which probably explains why they spent this amount of their information-seeking time in their chambers. This study showed a high use of assistants, such as colleagues, consultants and sectaries by KJs. The assistance provided by colleagues, followed by consultants, translators, secretaries and librarians were found to be the most used types of assistance needed by KJs when seeking information. The study revealed that while there was a significant relationship between the KJs’ age and the level of assistance provided by colleagues, translators, secretaries, librarians and assistants and book lists, there was only a significant relationship between the KJs’ education level and the level of assistance provided to them by consultants and translators. The study also revealed there was a significant relationship between the type of court KJs worked in and the level of assistance provided by colleagues, consultants and translators, secretaries, librarians and assistants, abstracts and indexes, and book lists. This finding is consistent with Marvel’s (1978) study, which showed that judges depended highly on the relevancy, accuracy and completeness of the information provided to them through counsel, colleagues, law clerks as well as their personal knowledge. However, this finding is not matched with some other studies, such as Hainsworth (1992), which showed
479 that all the judges showed degrees of distrust and lack of confidence in the information provided to them through intermediates, such as colleagues and assistants: ‘All judges agreed to this overriding consideration of feeling responsible for seeking information’ (Hainsworth, 1992: 192). Their unanimous scepticism showed several types of reasons, which can be put into four categories: (1) experience, (2) intuition, (3) presumption, and (4) the brief’s critical omissions. Al-Daihani and Oppenheim (2006) also confirmed that a large number (89.5%) of legal professionals seek information themselves without asking assistance of others, specifically legal counsel. As noted, librarians, followed by abstracts and indexes, and book lists were last as sources of assistance needed by KJs. Although there are some rich libraries provided with specialized sources of legal information in Kuwaiti courts, librarians and library assistants do not seem to meet the information needs of judges efficiently. This finding is supported by some other studies, such as Kuhlthau and Cole (2000) and Otike (1999), which confirmed the limitation of the role played by librarians as mediators in delivering specific sources of information needed by the judges. It is worth mentioning that Kuwait has a very specialized institute available online, the Kuwaiti Institute for Judicial & Legal Studies (www.Kijs. gov.kw), focusing on judicial work in Kuwait, which has a very specialized library and a specialized journal reflecting its activities. Regarding proficiency in foreign languages, which is necessary to access information manipulated and delivered only in these languages, alongside the use of the Arabic language, this was described as moderately good, and a few confirmed that their proficiency level in French was not bad. The study showed that while there was no a significant relationship between the KJs’ education level and their level of language proficiency needed to access information, there was a significant relationship between their age and their use of the English language and French. In addition, the study showed that there was a significant relationship between the type of court KJs worked in and their use of both English and French. Printed materials, followed by non-printed and audiovisual materials were found to be the most preferred information formats KJs used to access information. The study showed that while there was no significant relationship between the KJs’ education level and the type of information formats used to access information, there was only a significant relationship between their age and their use of non-printed materials. The study also showed that there was a significant relationship between the type of court worked in and the use of printed materials, non-printed materials (electronic) and audiovisual materials. This finding is consistent with Khan and Bhatti (2011), which showed that a large number of law practitioners prefer printed over non-printed materials. Mobile apps, PCs, information networks and information databases were found to be the technology tools that KJs felt positive about using when accessing information. They saw such tools as tools for locating information. The study showed that while there was no significant relationship between the KJs’ education level and
480 their level of technology use, there was a significant relationship between their age and their use of mobile apps, PCs, information networks and information databases. The study also showed that there was a significant relationship between the type of the court the KJs worked in and their use of mobile apps, PCs information networks, and information databases. This finding is consistent with Khan and Bhatti (2011), who showed that many law practitioners in Bahawalpur city, Pakistan were using mobile devices for getting information and for communication. Hainsworth (1992) showed that 50% of American judges stated that computers had had no direct impact on their job and the other half (50%) confirmed that computers had had a direct impact on their information-seeking processes. She also showed that only 36% of judges used the computer for legal research, and even that group did not use it in a regular way. ‘The word processing has impacted the law clerk, making them more independent from the secretary’ (Hainsworth, 1992: 182). She also added that: ‘Computers remain as simply finding and locating tools for a case or statute that will then be read in hard copy format’ (p. 185). However, this finding is not matched by some other studies, such as Khan and Bhatti (2011), Al-Daihani and Oppenheim (2006) and Haruna and Mabawonku (2001), which showed that the majority of legal professionals were not using the information networks like the Internet, legal databases and electronic resources when seeking information. During their use of information, KJs faced some significant barriers. They showed that barriers, such as the use of foreign languages, the recency of information and the location of information, the poor ability of the library to deliver information and the use of technology tools were at least significant barriers to them when seeking information. The study showed that there was a significant relationship between the KJs’ age and barriers faced when seeking information, such as the use of languages, the location of information, the recency of information and the poor ability of the library to deliver information. The study also found a significant relationship between the KJs’ education level and barriers faced when seeking information, such as the location of information and the recency of information. The study also showed that there was a significant relationship between the type of court worked in and barriers faced when seeking information, such as the use of languages, the location of information, the recency of information and the poor ability of the library to deliver information. All Kuwaiti courts have well-prepared libraries with huge legal collections. This is supposed to help KJs use these collections from their offices, especially those who depend more on printed materials, such as books, encyclopedias and directories. Some types of Kuwaiti courts provide a personal library to each judge, specifically judges (n = 15) at the Court of Cassation, and this may help them get convenient access to information sources contained. However, many judges showed that they did not depend on librarians to assist them to access the library collections, neither did they use library catalogues as tools to search these collections. This
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 49(4) may be because some judges compare the court library to their home and private collections, or they have had negative experiences when requesting materials through the library due to a delay in receiving materials. According to Hainsworth (1992), such a problem may make judges fear that if the library is not complete, then they are not aware of all the information available. This finding contradicts some earlier studies, such as Khan and Bhatti’s (2011) study, which showed that law practitioners in Pakistan were high users of the district library and other libraries as the most important sources of acquiring information and also the study of Hainsworth (1992), which showed that all judges used the central courthouse library in a convenient way though it had inadequate collections. Similarly, other studies, such as those by Al-Daihani and Oppenheim (2006) and Majid and Kassim (2000), also showed a high use of personal collections by legal professionals. The study showed that cost is not a barrier to access information. This finding is also matched by Hainsworth’s (1992) study, which showed that more over two-thirds (73.7%) of American judges confirmed that such an issue was not a matter of concern when seeking information. It is worth mentioning that Kuwait is one of the richest countries in the world. It has an average GDP of $43,700, which makes it a prosperous nation in the Middle East and Asia (ItsGR9, 2015).
The limitation of the study This study covers judges who are Kuwaiti nationals. It did not cover foreign judges, although they are much in evidence in Kuwaiti judicial work, specifically Egyptian judges. Any conclusions resulting from this study are limited in scope to Kuwaiti judges only.
Recommendations for further research This study tried to investigate the information-seeking behaviour of a very important group of information seekers and users: judges, particularly Kuwaiti judges (KJs). The topic has limited previous research, not only at the local and Arabic level but also internationally. This study is therefore considered a unique one of its kind among many studies conducted in information-seeking behaviour, especially with this significant group of information seekers. Based on the findings of this study, and the strict shortage of relevant literature, more studies should be conducted to investigate information-seeking behaviour of such an important group of information seekers in the developing and Arab countries, particularly Kuwait. Consistent with this acute shortage, the results showed several areas that need to be addressed by further research. As far as possible, the researcher tried to investigate all probable characteristics related to the information-seeking behaviour and needs of KJs. However, further studies are still needed to check more additional characteristics of the use of information by this very important group of information users. This study tried to investigate KJs’ use of different
481
Mansour and Ghuloum sources of information in general. More research should be conducted to identify each type of source separately. Due to a statistical relationship existing between some of the KJs’ demographic characteristics as well as their professional characteristics and their use of some information resources, serious attempts should be made by other researchers in this research environment to consider the reasons that lead to the existence of such relationships. For example, some of the KJs surveyed in this study were not using specific types of information resources, such as research reports, specialized journals, and theses and dissertations. Judicial libraries in Kuwait should build strategies to attract the target client, judges, in a convenient way. Such libraries should be provided with more specialized collections offering more suitable services to meet judges’ needs for information. They should create a ‘user profile’ for each judge to serve him according to his research needs. The service of Selective Dissemination of Information (SDI) in the court libraries should be activated to keep the judge informed of new resources. Libraries should establish a smart research unit for Kuwaiti judges, providing them with the most appropriate and latest sources of information. Kuwaiti judicial libraries also should create a translation unit concerned with those materials in foreign languages, especially the most dominant languages in the information industry, like English and French. Barriers and challenges faced by KJs when seeking information should be decreased as far as possible. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The two researchers wish to thank the Public Authority for Applied Education & Training (PAAET), the state of Kuwait for supporting this study through Research Grant BE-15-02.
References Al-Daihani S and Oppenheim C (2006) The information behaviour of Kuwaiti legal professionals. Information Studies 1(1): 36–52. Borg W and Gall M (1989) Educational Research: An Introduction. New York: Longman. Brown S and Gilmartin G (1969) Sociology today: Lacunae, emphases, and surfeits. The American Sociologist 4: 283–291. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) (n.d) The World Factbook. Available at: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/theworld-factbook/geos/ku.html (accessed 13 June 2014). Eskola EL (1998) University students’ information-seeking behaviour in a changing learning environment. Information Research 4(2). Available at: http://InformationR.net/ir/4–2/ isic/eeskola.html (accessed October 2014). Global Law and Justice (n.d.) Kuwait’s Legal System and Legal Research. Available at: http://www.nyulawglobal.org/ globalex/Kuwait.htm (accessed August 2014).
Hainsworth M (1992) Information-seeking behaviour of judges of the Florida District Courts of Appeal. PhD dissertation, Florida State University, USA. Haruna I and Mabawonku I (2001) Information needs and seeking behaviour of legal practitioners and the challenges to law libraries in Lagos, Nigeria. International Information and Library Review 33(1): 69–87. ItsGR9 (2015) Top 10 Richest Countries in the World 2015. Available at: http://itsgr9.com/top-10-richest-countries-inthe-world (accessed June 2014). Khan S and Bhatti R (2011) Information-seeking behaviour of law practitioners: A survey of Bahawalpur. Library Philosophy and Practice. Available at: http://www.webpages.uidaho. edu/~mbolin/khan-bhatti.pdf (accessed August 2014). Kuhlthau C and Cole C (2000) Information and information seeking of novice versus expert lawyers: How experts add value. In: Wilson T and Barralas MJ (eds) The New Review of Information Behaviour Research. Vol. 1. Cambridge: Taylor Graham, pp.103–115. Linsky A (1975) Stimulating responses to mailed questionnaires: A review. Public Opinion Quarterly 39(1): 82–101. Majid S and Kassim G (2000) Information-seeking behaviour of international Islamic University Malaysia law faculty members. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science 5(2): 1–17. Mansour E and Alkhurainej N (2011) Information-seeking behaviour of Members of the Kuwaiti Parliament (MKPs). Library Review 60(8): 671–684. Marvell TB (1978) Appellate Courts and Lawyers: Information Gathering in the Adversary System. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Ministry of Information (2011) Media Information Department, Kuwait. Available at: http://www.kuwait-info.com/a_state_ system/state_system_pjudiciary.asp (accessed June 2014). Ministry of Justice (2014) The Annual Statistical Book. Available at: https://www.moj.gov.kw/sites/ar/Documents/Book2014/ Page17.pdf (accessed July 2015). Otike J (1999) The information needs and seeking habits of lawyers in England: A pilot study. International Information and Library Review 31: 19–39. Searle W (2003) Court-imposed Fines: A Survey of Judges. Available at: http://www.justice.govt.nz/publications/globalpublications/c/court-imposed-fines-a-survey-of-judges/documents/court-imposed-fines-report.pdf (accessed October 2014). Wilson TD (1981) On user studies and information needs. Journal of Documentation 37(1): 3–15.
Author biographies Dr Essam Mansour is currently an Associate Professor and Head of the Department of Library and Information Science, South Valley University, Qena, Egypt. He holds a BA in Library and Information Science from Cairo University, Egypt, an MLIS in the same major from the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee and a PhD in Library and Information Science from the University of Pittsburgh. Dr Hussain Ghuloum is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Library and Information Science, PAAET, Kuwait. He holds a BA in Library and Information Science PAAET’s DLIS, an MLIS in the same major from the University of Leeds Metropolitan and a PhD in Library and Information Science from the University of Salford.
482
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 49(4)
Appendix
5. 46–50 6. 51–55 7. 56–60 8. 61 +
The information-seeking behaviour of Kuwaiti judges Dear judges, It would be very helpful if you could contribute to this study that is concerned with the informationseeking behaviour of Kuwaiti judges. You were selected to help fill out the study questionnaire which includes some demographic data about you. Any personal information gathered in the course of this study will be COMPLETELY CONFIDENTIAL. No individual will be identified in any publication of the results, nor will you be identified from the questionnaire. Please return your completed questionnaire by 30 April 2015. Try to answer every question. Your answers will be greatly appreciated. If you wish to be notified of the findings of this study, feel free to contact us at:
Education: 1. Bachelor’s 2. Master’s 3. PhD 4. Other 2) How many years have you spent in judicial work? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
***************************************** The study questionnaire 1) Demographic data: Age:
5 years 6–10 years 11–15 years 16–20 years 21–25 years 26–30 years 31 + years
3) What type of court do you work in (please check just one)?
1. 30 2. 31–35 3. 36–40 4. 41–45
1. The Court of First Instance 2. The High Court of Appeal 3. The Court of Cassation
4) Please state the level of your motivation in seeking for information. Level Motivation
Very strong (4)
Strong (3)
Somewhat strong (2)
Not strong (1)
1
To make a general research
2
To make a specific research
3
To collect statistics
4
To make a decision
5
To be in line with current events
6
Others:
5) Please state the location where you access information. Level Location
Very high (5)
High (4)
Moderate (3)
Low (2)
Very low (1)
Home
Office
The library
Other: ------------
483
Mansour and Ghuloum 6) Please state the level of use of the following categories of information.
Level Categories (in alphabetical order)
Very important (4)
Important (3)
Somewhat important (2)
Not important (1)
1
Abstracts of books & articles
2
Atlases & gazettes
3
Bibliographies
4
Biographies
5
Books
6
CD-ROMs
7
Conferences works
8
Directories
9
Encyclopedias
10
Information networks & databases
11
Library catalogs
12
Lingual dictionaries
13
Mass media (Press, TV, Videos)
14
Microfilms & Microfiches
15
Minutes
16
Personal letters
17
References
18
Research reports
19
Specialized Bulletins
20
Specialized journals
21
Terminological dictionaries
22
Theses & dissertations
23
The Web
24
Others: …………………………………………….
7) Please state the level of preference of formats when accessing information. Preference Format
Too much preferred (3)
Just preferred (2)
Not much preferred (1)
1
Printed materials
2
Non-printed materials (electronic)
3
Audiovisual materials
4
Others: …………………………………..
484
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 49(4)
8) Please state the level of technological tools used when accessing information. Level Tool
Very good (4)
Good (3)
Somewhat good (2)
Not good (1)
1
PCs
2
Information databases
3
Information networks (the Internet)
3
Mobile pps
4
Others: ……………….
9) How much time (weekly) do you spend in accessing information? 1. 2. 3. 4.
3 hours 4–6 hours 7–9 hours 10 + hours
10) Please state the level of your efficiency in foreign languages used to access information. Level Language
Very good (4)
Good (3)
Somewhat good (2)
Not good (1)
1
English
2
French
3
Others: …………………………
11) Please state the level of assistance needed when accessing information. Level Assistance
Very strong (4)
Strong (3)
Somewhat strong (2)
Not strong (1)
1
Abstracts & indexes
2
Book lists
3
Colleagues
4
Consultants
5
Librarians & assistants
6
Sectaries
7
Translators
8
Others: ……………………..
485
Mansour and Ghuloum 12) Please state the level of problems faced when accessing information. Level Problems are due to
Very significant (4)
Significant (3)
Somewhat significant (2)
Not significant (1)
1
The recency of information
2
The place of information
3
The high cost of information
4
The use of languages
5
The use of technology tools
6
The deficit in the library’s role to deliver information
7
Others: ………………………………..
13) Please state any comments, suggestions or ideas that may help to understand your information needs. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Done! We really thank you very much for completing the questionnaire!
