CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 35Library Science and Information LiteracyInformation Science and LibrariesManagement and Organizational Studies

Sense-making, sensemaking and sense making—A systematic review and meta-synthesis of literature in information science and education: An Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) paper

Open access
Urquhart, Christine, Cheuk, Bonnie, Lam, Louisa, Snowden, Dave·2025·Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology
DOI 10.1002/asi.24866
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Sense‐making, sensemaking, and sense making are terms used in different disciplines. Similarities of usage seem unclear. (1) to examine the concepts used in different approaches to sense‐making/sensemaking/sense making; (2) to identify, classify and synthesize recent studies relevant to information science, as well as similar group on sensemaking in education research; (3) to reflect on future directions for sense‐making/sensemaking methodology in information science. The objectives were to retrieve, examine, classify and perform meta‐synthesis on sense‐making/sensemaking studies in both information science and education research. The review used systematic review principles, with selection criteria for case studies for examination in both information science and education sets. The final meta‐synthesis used a meta‐ethnographic approach, together with findings of recent overviews on organizational sensemaking, and other information science reviews. Qualitative sense‐making studies in information science often used Dervin's SMM (sense‐making methodology) and studies in organizations and education frequently used Weick's organizational sensemaking. Different mixed methods approaches were identified. Sense‐making is actively used in research and practice in information science and knowledge management. Using a coherent sense‐making methodology helps and dialogic principles are useful in planning, data collection and analysis. Individual and collective sense‐making are important to information science.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/asi.24866

Cites

187 of 187 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This review follows a structured six-step methodology informed by established review frameworks in education to ensure transparency and rigour.

    “To address these challenges and ensure transparency and rigour, this review follows a structured six-step methodology informed by established review frameworks in education (Cong-Lem et al., 2025; Urquhart et al., 2025).”

    From Six Institutional Intervention Areas to Support Ethical and Effective Student Use of Generative AI in Higher Education: A Narrative Review (2026) · cites this paper as Urquhart et al., 2025

    The Introduction describes systematic reviews as using transparent, rigorous steps and says this paper combines a systematic review with meta-synthesis. It does not prescribe a six-step methodology or identify an established education-review framework for the citing review; it traces systematic-review practice to the health sector. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. [5]5. Ahmed, M. R., & Naveed, M. A. (2019). Seeing beyond sight: The academic information behavior of visually impaired students. Pakistan Library & Information Science Journal, 50(2), 32-44.
  2. [15]15. Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Harvard University Press.
  3. [16]16. Carlin, E., & Whittaker, S. (2018). From inner space to outer space: Connecting autistic students to new information worlds. Paper presented at the LOEX Conference Proceedings. https:// commons.emich.edu/loexconf2018/27
  4. [39]39. Dervin, B. (2003). A sense-making methodology primer: What is methodological about sense-making. Introductory essay pre- sented at a non-divisional workshop held at the meeting of the International Communication Association, San Diego, CA. http://sense-making.org
  5. [51]51. Endsley, M. (2015a). Situation awareness misconceptions and mis- understandings. In Special Issue: Reflections and commentaries on situation awareness. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 9(1), 4-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 15553434155
  6. [55]55. Ferrara, S. (2017). The information practice of volunteer guides at the Museum of Contemporary Art Australia in Proceedings of RAILS-Research Applications, Information and Library Stud- ies, 2016, School of Information Management, Victoria Univer- sity of Wellington, New Zealand, 6-8 December, 2016. Information Research, 22(4), rails1612. http://InformationR. net/ir/22-4/rails/rails1612.html (Archived by WebCite ® at http://www.webcitation.org/6vOFIMO2z)
  7. [57]57. Finch, L., Moreno, C., & Shapiro, R. B. (2020). Teacher and student enactments of a transdisciplinary art-science-computing unit. Instructional Science, 48(5), 525-568. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11251-020
  8. [60]60. Fourie, I. (Ed.). (2021). Authoethnography for librarians and infor- mation scientists. Routledge.
  9. [97]97. Klein, G., Phillips, J. K., Rall, E. L., & Peluso, D. A. (2007). A data- frame theory of sensemaking. Paper presented at a conference in Pensacola, FL, May 2003.
  10. [98]98. In R. R. Hoffman (Ed.), Expertise out of context: Proceedings of the sixth International Conference on Naturalistic Decision Making (pp. 118-160). Psychology Press.
  11. [104]104. Lam, L. M. C. (2014). A micro-macro sense-making model for knowl- edge creation and utilization in healthcare organizations [Doc- toral thesis, Aberystwyth University, UK].
  12. [110]110. Li, X., & Todd, R. J. (2016). Information practices during 3D model- ling in a public library makerspace: Generating ideas, seeking help and iterative trial and error. In Proceedings of ISIC, the Information Behaviour Conference, Zadar, Croatia, 20-23 Sep- tember, 2016: Part 1. Information Research, 21(4), isics1601. http://InformationR.net/ir/21-4/isic/isics1601.html
  13. [117]117. Luttenberg, J., Imants, J., Van Veen, K., & Carpay, T. (2009). Zoe- ken naar samenhang. De rol van 'betekenisafstemming' in de interactie tussen docent en vernieuwing [Looking for coher- ence. The role of sensemaking in the interaction between teacher and innovation]. Pedagogische Studiën, 86(6), 443-458.
  14. [118]118. Lynam, T., & Fletcher, C. (2015). Sensemaking: A complexity per- spective. Ecology and Society, 20(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.5751/ ES-07410-200165
  15. [119]119. Maddock, J., Starbird, K., Al-Hassani, H. J., Sandoval, D. E., Orand, M., & Mason, R. M. (2015). Characterizing online rumoring behavior using multi-dimensional signatures. In Pro- ceedings of the 18th ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW'15) (pp. 228- 241). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10. 1145/2675133.2675280
  16. [125]125. Manuti, A., & Giancaspro, M. L. (2021). The meaning of the organi- zation or the organization of meaning? Metaphors as sense- making tools to understand organizational change management. TPM: Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 28(1), 113-127 (Special Issue). https://doi. org/10.4473/TPM28.1.8 · DOI
  17. [128]128. Martins, R. D. S., & Rodríguez Ortiz, L. D. (2019). Visual sense- making as an appropriate indicator for knowledge management when dealing with complex environments: First stage of a lon- gitudinal case study of a non-governmental organization, Bra- zil. Knowledge Management for Development Journal, 14(2), 37- 59. www.km4djournal.org/
  18. [131]131. McConnell, A. A. (2016). Making sense of change communication during restructuring: a case study of a public sector authority in Northern Ireland [Doctoral thesis. University of Ulster, UK]. uk.bl.ethos.698801.
  19. [142]142. Spink & J. Heinström (Eds.), New directions in information behaviour. Emerald ISBN 9778-1-78052-170-1.
  20. [144]144. Oduntan, O. (2018). Information behaviour in refugee integration [Doctoral thesis, Strathclyde University, UK]. uk.bl. ethos.759477.
  21. [147]147. Oduntan, O., & Ruthven, I. (2020). Situational information behav- iour: Exploring the complexity of refugee integration. The Inter- national Journal of Information, Diversity, & Inclusion, 4(2), 5- 21. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48645206
  22. [151]151. Oxborrow, K. M. (2020). "It's not just a professional development thing": Non-Maori librarians in Aotearoa New Zealand making sense of Mautaranga Maori [Doctoral thesis. Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand].
  23. [152]152. Pirolli, P., & Card, S. (2005). The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. Proceedings of International Conference on Intelli- gence Analysis, 5, 2-4.
  24. [153]153. Preece, A., Braines, D., Cerutti, F., Pearson, G., & Kaplan, L. (2021). Coalition situational understanding via adaptive, trusted and resilient artificial intelligence analytics. NATO Science & Tech- nology Organization. STO-MP-IST-190.
  25. [158]158. Rimkeit, B. S., & Claridge, G. (2017). Peer reviewed: Literary Alz- heimer's, a qualitative feasibility study of dementia-friendly book groups. New Zealand Library & Information Management Journal, 56(2), 14-22.
  26. [160]160. Rowley, J., & Urquhart, C. (2007). Understanding student informa- tion behavior in relation to electronic information services: Les- sons from longitudinal monitoring and evaluation, Part 1. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(8), 1162-1174. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.2059 · DOI
  27. [168]168. Schaefer, D. J., & Dervin, B. (2001). Dialoguing in electronic public spheres: Reconceptualizing participation as verbing micro-prac- tices. Paper presented at the annual Rochester Intercultural Conference, July 2001, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY. http://www.sense-making.org
  28. [176]176. Snow, D. A., Rochford, E. B., Jr., Worden, S. K., & Benford, R. D. (1986). Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. American Sociological Review, 51, 464-481. https://www.jstor.org/stable/223459
  29. [179]179. Snowden, D. J., & Boone, M. E. (2007). A leader's framework for decision making: Wise executives tailor their approach to fit the complexity of the circumstances they face. Harvard Business Review, 85(11), 69-76. https://www.systemswisdom.com/sites/ default/files/Snowdon-and-Boone-A-Leader's-Framework-for- Decision-Making_0.pdf
  30. [183]183. Stewart, J. R., Gapenne, O., & di Paolo, E. (2010). Enaction: Toward a new paradigm for cognitive science. MIT Press.
  31. [198]198. Urquhart, C., Lam, L. M. C., Cheuk, B., & Dervin, B. L. (2020). Sense-making/sensemaking. In Oxford bibliographies in com- munication. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ OBO/9780199756841-0112
  32. [217]217. Zontek, Z., & Lipianin-Zontek, E. (2021). Knowledge management and its transfer in diverse voluntary groups. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Knowledge Management (pp. 874- 881). Academic Conferences International Ltd. https://doi.org/ 10.34190/EKM.21.160 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Urquhart, C., Cheuk, B., Lam, L., & Snowden, D.
Affiliations
  • Aberystwyth University (GB)
  • AstraZeneca (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • Lingnan University (HK)
  • Centre Neurosciences intégratives et Cognition (FR)
ORCID
Urquhart, Christine
Venue
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-02-18
Volume
76
Issue
1
Pages
3-97
ISSN
  • 2330-1635 (ISSN-L)
  • 2330-1643
DOI
10.1002/asi.24866
OpenAlex
W4391932215
Cited by
35
References
187
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 3
FWCI
14.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (publishedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Science and Libraries
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
Keywords
sensemaking, meta-ethnography, information science research, educational research, knowledge management, dialogical research, collective sensemaking, concept classification

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review