Unplated: An Interview with 3 Js and a G
Meetings over beers, an unexpected collaboration, and lifelong friendship
This conversation is part of the Unplated series, a collection of interviews with folks whose work intersects with food, but who work outside culinary spheres. My hope is that these conversations not only spark your curiosity, but help you think about how what you eat is connected to the world well beyond your plate.
If you enjoy this interview series, please consider supporting my work with a subscription for yourself or a gift subscription for a loved one. Or, just share this interview with a food-loving friend!
I think theory, its development, its testing, its tweaking, is magical. This is due in part to my incredible dissertation advisor, but also to great connections with colleagues and mentors.
One of those friendships, or rather several of them, became the 3 Js and a G research group consisting of me and Drs. Gary Burnett, Jon Hollister, and Jisue Lee.
This research group, which met weekly to discuss theory and codebook development, was a very important part of my development as a researcher and as a thinker in general.
There were a couple special things about this group, beyond the people themselves: First of all, we created and adapted a codebook for the theory of Information Worlds, and then used and compared it across three very different dissertation projects covering library history, MMORGs, and social media in politics.
The codebook we wrote worked in all three cases, which is in itself quite a feat.
But the group also offered something sorely lacking from many people's dissertation experiences, which was continued collaboration. I didn't feel isolated during my PhD in large part because I found community I could work with continuously on shared projects, while also pursuing my own research.
Our group would meet weekly over beers at The Fermentation Lounge or elsewhere in Tallahassee to hash out ideas and catch up. Those weekly meetings are what sparked my interest in catching back up with everyone and seeing where they are now, and how food (or beer!) fits into their work today.
Jon and Jisue moved to Korea to become assistant professors, got married, and now have an adorable son. Gary is still mentoring and researching at FSU, where we all met.
Since this is an interview with multiple people, it's longer than most, but is worth a read and was a lot of fun for me to do. I hope you enjoy!
JS: First of all, I want to start off by hearing about the work you're doing now, and then we'll travel back down memory lane to visit our work together! Can you each briefly tell me about the research you're doing at the moment?
GB: I’ve been working in two general directions, almost (but not entirely) in collaboration, either with the other Dr. Burnett [Kathy Burnett, also at FSU] or with my current doctoral students.
The first is an extension of the Information Worlds framework. This is, in part, a response to a criticism that this framework disregards the role of the individual (in terms both of individual cognition and individual agency) in information behavior / information practices (a criticism with which I agree). I call this extension “Information Domains,” and it includes three components:
1. The Domain of the Individual, which comprises individual cognitive, affective, and physical characteristics in relation to information behavior. Much of the (pre-Elfreda) history of information behavior research takes place in this domain.
2. The Domain of the Social, which is the Information Worlds part.
3. The Domain of Signification, which has to do with any kind of representational or encoding system used to record, transmit, or otherwise embody information. Being who I am, I’m mostly interested in language (and, in particular, writing) as such a system, but it also contains things such as graphics, etc. This allows me to bring to bear my interest in things like poetics and hermeneutics in a more integrated way than was possible in the Information Worlds theory. One of the things this means is that I can finally justify a large amount of time spent reading poetry as legitimate LIS research.
The general idea is that these three domains interact with each other to make information work possible – individuals interact with other individuals and with social groups; social groups interact with each other and are made up of individuals; and all of these interactions rely on signification practices in order to communicate and share information.
This grew out of my sabbatical a few years ago; the other Dr. Burnett and I hope to produce a book at some point (when she finishes being an administrator) that uses the Information Domains framework as a way of thinking about a variety of Information Ethics issues. Because, of course, ethics involves both individuals and social groups, and always involves signification practices.
The second general direction involves looking at things like memes and misinformation; these are primarily collaborations with doctoral students. Minhyung Jo and I have an almost finalized paper ready looking at memes that cross cultural and national boundaries; and Shannon Williams and I have another almost finished book chapter that looks at misinformation in everyday information behavior, focusing on conspiracy theories, and QAnon in particular.
JH: Coincidentally, I am working with Dr. Jisue Lee (one of the other J’s and currently an assistant professor at Chonnam National University) and Dr. Sungjae Park (another Florida State University LIS PhD and now associate professor at Hansung University) on a systematic literature review of the application of theory of information worlds in research articles.
We are trying to find out what contexts and with what methods it has been applied since the theory was published. I’m also in the early stages of projects exploring the use of VR in library and information science (LIS) contexts, like I did here and here, and the (re-)development of information literacy frameworks to account for social, psychological, emotional, and cultural factors with Dr. Aaron Elkins (associate professor at Texas Woman’s University), Dr. Don Latham at (professor at FSU), and Dr. Jisue Lee (we explored this idea a bit in this article on the potential uses of Terror Management Theory for LIS. Sorry for the shameless self-promotion, but I am an assistant professor.
JL: The most current project that I am working on regarding information world theory is the systematic review with Jon and SungJae. We are trying to see how published research articles used and employed the theory of information worlds into various research settings.
Also, as an assistant professor at Chonnam National University, I am looking at how LIS field and information professionals (mainly those from libraries, museums, and archivists in Korea) adopt immersive media (AR/VR and Metaverse) for user services. By working with instructional design researchers, Jon and I recently published how LIS field can build VR-based training programs for enhancing librarians’ empathy and cultural competencies.
JS: I'd also like to hear about your research writ large: I know we all are probably sick of thinking about our research statement 'elevator pitches' after being on the academic job market BUT, would you be willing to tell me about your overall approach to your research?
GB: My research has to do with theory development related to information behavior / information practices, as well as to language practices and, in particular, interpretation. It is informed by both the LIS research traditions in those areas and by my training as a literary scholar with an interest in modern and contemporary American poetry.
JH: My research is primarily on the uses or depictions of information literacy (a skillset needed to effectively, efficiently, and ethically find, evaluate, and use information) and other information behaviors (how we find, use, manage, interact with, etc. information) in recreational or popular media, such as young adult literature, online games, and graphic novels. I try to focus on recreational or popular media because there are many negative misconceptions about recreational or popular media and lack of awareness of the positive things these media offer.
I was inspired to explore this idea by Stephen Johnson’s book, Everything Bad for You is Good, and by reflecting on my own experiences as a lifelong game-player (I taught myself how to type by playing Diablo II and honed my research skills planning character builds and executing raid strategies as a member of a competitive progression guild in World of Warcraft during the Wrath of the Lich King expansion).
How often have you heard people blame video games or popular music for their perceptions of what ails society? Or dismiss them as a waste of time or unworthy of cultural inclusion or notoriety? There is a lot of research that refutes these and other negative claims, and research on their positive impacts is growing. While we may interact or use these media for fun, to play, or for some sort of fulfillment, expression, or self-actualization, we are also engaging other important skills like critical thinking, problem solving, collaboration, etc.
Now, this is not to say that we need to capitalize our hobbies for profit or focus on how we can enhance our professional skills or careers through our pastimes but to recognize that the value of recreational and popular media is not solely intrinsic and abounds in myriad ways that benefit our lives across contexts. That all said, my approach to research is open and fluid, tending to be more qualitative and inter- or trans-disciplinary (which I will expand upon later). For better and worse, my research overlaps a lot with my personal interests.
JL: My research interest is on the large spectrum of information behaviors of users from both off line and online information rich environments. I have focused on looking at how online users engaged with collective actions for political purposes during my PhD program (users’ political information behaviors on online communities and social media) and how IT/LIS curricula in the US prepared information professionals’ evolving competencies (curriculum building and professional development).
Now I am researching more about the evolving roles and identities of libraries and librarians in Korea to make libraries more inclusive and socially responsible. To develop newly desired competencies for librarians, I built many capstone design courses that allowed students learn various ICTs (3d printing, scanning, VR, laser cutter, etc.) to solve real world information problems and design customized information services for certain user groups. Research method wise, I mainly use qualitative methods but aim at using mixed methods design.
JS: 3 Js and a G was one of the greatest highlights of my time as a doctoral student, and we did so much together that I sometimes struggle to succinctly define it for folks. How do you describe 3 Js and a G to people when they ask? And what was, for you, the most special thing (or things?) about it?
GB: 3 Js and a G was a collaborative project between 3 doctoral students and a professor, most often occurring in non-work settings over beer.
I don’t really know where to begin about what made it special, but here are some thoughts:
1. For me (as the professor) it was very important that I was NOT the major professor for any of the Js. This meant that I didn’t have to worry about any of the obligations that come with that role – “cracking the whip” to keep students on task, facilitating the procedural and administrative requirements, etc. In other words, although this did not (obviously) eliminate all of the power dynamics inherent in professor/student relationships, it did ameliorate many of them, allowing us to interact on a more equal footing.
2. The fact that the 3 Js were working on such different dissertation projects kept everything interesting, and made for a particularly interesting “test” for the information worlds theory.
3. The degree to which we were able to integrate WORK and the informality of the setting within which we worked. It was a very welcome respite from the absurd and constant academic emphasis on PRODUCTIVITY at all costs. It made the work fun.
4. And, not least, I completely enjoyed hanging out with the 3 Js.
JH: I feel the same way and have also struggled to explain it to other people. I usually explain 3 J’s and a G as a theory development group and that usually gets an understanding nod of approval. The group’s name itself seems to bewilder most people; I think they expect a more meaningful, impressive, or serious acronym. When I try to explain how we did the development, the looks get more confused.
I think that for many, theory development is associated with experiments, statistical analyses, and hypothesis testing, so theory development via the collaborative construction of a codebook based on data and coding from three (mostly) qualitative yet disparate dissertation projects seems very odd. Especially so, once you mention that we did this over tasty beers in informal settings and in an egalitarian manner with one of the theory’s creators.
Tasty beers aside, the egalitarian approach to the collaboration is the most special thing about the project. The G (also known as Dr. Gary Burnett) treated us as equals throughout the project and continues to do so to this day. Our meetings felt open and free–we were able to express our ideas, ask questions, and offer constructive critiques to each other, even to a Scary Full Professor, without fear of judgement or repercussions.
I think our approach made getting into theory more accessible and fun. It helped me to think about theory in a new way and to more easily see how it can be applied across different contexts.
The spirit of learning and building knowledge was shared between all of us, and we all learned from working together and from each other. I also learned a lot about different research methods from Julia and Jisue that was helpful for me at the time and even now as I regularly teach research methods at the undergraduate and graduate levels–in fact, I still discuss their dissertations as example research projects in my lectures.
JL: It was hard for me to explain clearly to other people but was always fun to do it at the same time! People were surprised at how we collaborated on the codebook development for relatively young theory (on-going process, which was interesting and risk-taking at the same time, compared to using fully established classic theories) and still successfully used it to finish respective dissertation projects! It was an amazing experience to work with one of the creators of the theory for the entire time!
Weekly research meetings helped me think critically and creatively and employ the same theory into three different research settings. Our collaboration was presented and published at many venues, which also prepared us for job hunting after graduation.
Our meetings were also sincere caring and mentoring sessions for us (3 poor doctoral students who were struggling) as well! I felt that I was connected to my peers and advisor, and we supported each other! I am talking about this great experience to all my grad students to encourage them to engage with more collaborative participatory learning and research opportunities instead of working alone for the entire doctoral program.
JS: I often tell people that part of the magic of studying Library & Information Science for me is that information is connected to everything, so we can use our theories and disciplinary perspective to approach just about any topic. How do you see the study of information connecting to the study of food? And how has food or drink shown up in your own work?
(A note for readers: Look for my own application of our Information Worlds research to food at some point in a future newsletter!)
GB: Although I have a great personal interest in food and cooking (let me tell you about the 2-star Michelin restaurant in Valencia, Spain, where I ate yesterday …), my own work really has nothing at all to do with food – although it could! The information worlds framework could most definitely be applied as a way of examining things like norms and values surrounding food and food practices across and within cultures.
Just one quick example – in the online conspiracy worlds I’ve been looking at, one recent issue has been insects as food, an issue that, within those worlds, is very much thought of as just one more example of how the “elites” are trying to repress and control “the people.” In other words, it’s seen as a NON-NORMATIVE imposed practice designed to dehumanize people (who, of course, would NEVER eat insects unless forced to do so). The dynamic surrounding this discourse has everything to do with the information worlds concepts such as social norms (“we don’t eat bugs”), social types (the “elite” vs. “the people”), information values (information about the nutritional value of eating insects is dismissed as “fake” and as nothing more than a mechanism of control), etc.
I guess the bottom line is that there are entire worlds of information related to foods and food cultures that are very much worth studying.
JH: While nowhere near the skills and knowledge of Dr. Julia Skinner [Julia's note: This is probably not true! Jon's a great cook], I am a bit of a home cook and do most of the cooking in our household. I can see the connection between information and food when I think about trying to find a new recipe.
Jisue and I’s son is 4 years old and has a surprisingly wide pallet given his age. I try to cook dishes from diverse cultures and countries from around the world because I like a wide variety of foods but also want to introduce our son to the world outside of Korea. Of course, sometimes my cooking fails due to lack of skill, missing ingredients, or not having the right cookware. When I want to learn a new dish, I try to find a recipe that is culturally authentic in its ingredients and preparation, clear and detailed, and from a representative source. While I may not be able to replicate everything, I try my best to follow to recipe and make variations as needed. As you well know, food is a crucial part of a community’s culture and heritage, so it is one way to get to know the world.
Food has shown up in my research, too. For my dissertation project, which explored the digital literacy and social information behaviors of role-players (people who create characters and interact with other player-characters while in-character for live, communal, collaborative storytelling in game) in the now shutdown MMORPG, WildStar, food was a common part of online role-playing activities. For one thing, establishment-based role-play often occurred in restaurants, bars, or tea houses. In fact, I conducted one of my longest in-character interviews in a tea house
I have also used food to help make the argument that information can come in many forms, including the, to me, horrifying smell and taste of 홍어회 (fermented skate fish, a South Korean dish from the Jeolla province; in my defense, I have tried it twice and I did not enjoy it either time).
JL: I like how broad and interdisciplinary the LIS is. It can be connected to many disciplines to understand human behaviors. Unfortunately, I do not see much of food or drink shown up in my own work yet!
JS: For me, and perhaps also for you, part of the drive to become a researcher was an insatiable curiosity, but I chose this field in part because it allows for interdisciplinarity: I'm not sure something with the breadth of 3 Js and a G would be possible in a lot of other disciplines! What, to you, are the benefits of an interdisciplinary approach to research, either in studying food or in general?
GB: As someone who was trained as a literary scholar who lived and breathed poetry, my position in the field is always and inherently interdisciplinary, and has, from the get-go, required me to grapple with ways to “translate” my training and interests to this field.
In some ways, this makes me an outlier (I’m not a social scientist, though I have become fluent in that language), but it also enriches things, because I’m always looking at information phenomena from an atypical angle.
It was a bit of a struggle in many ways when I was pre-tenure, and even when I was an Associate Professor, because in order to be successful I had to conform to the field’s norms to a certain extent. Becoming a Full Professor stripped all of that away, and I can completely follow my own interests without having to be concerned with “proving” myself.
In many ways, I’m very lucky, and entered this field at the right time. So many aspects of academia have ossified in recent years, and I’m not sure that someone like me could be hired in the current environment. I find myself in the position of having to say to younger colleagues “do as I say, not as I do.”
This is one of the things I so admire about you, Julia – you’ve found a way to pursue your own passion in an extraordinarily creative and fruitful way while side-stepping the increasingly ridiculous constraints of the academic world. I know that it’s not an easy path and that it can be fraught with peril, but it’s also incredibly exciting.
JH: I really enjoy inter- and trans-disciplinary work and have tried to embrace it in my research. My undergraduate degree is in the hard sciences, so coming into LIS/social science was a bit of a culture shock for me.
I had a strong background in quantitative methods and was/am comfortable with using them, but since I discovered qualitative methods during my coursework and early research collaborations (shout out to Dr. Don Latham, Dr. Melissa Gross, and Dr. Michelle Kazmer at FSU–working with Dr. Shuyuan Mary Ho was also great, but we mostly focused on quasi-experimental and quantitative approaches in her lab) I became fascinated with them and have focused more of my energy on them. For my dissertation project, I fused an ethnographic approach from anthropology and game studies to study the social information behaviors in a MMORPG.
And thanks, in part, to my experiences with 3 J’s and a G, I am interested in different types of theory work. As mentioned above, I am interested in importing theories from other disciplines into LIS. While some criticize the import of theory into LIS (as opposed to generating our own theory and exporting it to other disciplines), I think the intrinsic ubiquity and fluidity of information and related phenomena, using theories from other fields that can or may impact our understanding of information and information behavior–LIS does not have exclusive rights to “information.”
For example, social psychologists are also trying to solve the misinformation, fake news, and conspiratorial thinking problems that LIS has been fighting, so it makes sense to me to combine our efforts.
I think inter- and trans-disciplinary work allows us to explore topics in new ways, much like different theories allow us to interpret the world through different lenses. I think there is a saying about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different result being a less than great strategy.
While I do not study food specifically, I think food as a thing or concept has a lot in common with information. A food’s ingredients, recipes, traditions, preparation, preservation techniques, etc. can provide a lot of data and information about its culture and region. Among other things, food and information are both necessary for our survival.
JL: When studying humans’ social communication and engagement via technologies (from books, computers, internet, to social and immersive media), sociology, communication, psychology, political science, education, and instructional design are the fields that I am frequently working with. Interdisciplinary collaboration can let us (LIS researchers) look at human information behaviors, consider more complicated and subtle social contexts, and study the phenomenon from larger perspectives.
I don’t research particularly about food, but as a multi-cultural family member, I think food is one of the most important things which I can teach languages and cultures to my child with. Not just for cooking and feeding, I also use food for communication and interaction. Food can let us share our understanding and perceptions of food itself (including ingredients, recipes, etc.), as well as personal and collective memories and stories behind food (such as histories, customs, and cultures).
I think, like information, food also has two dimensions in its nature – food as physical object (regarding how we cook food) and food as cognitive and social process (regarding how we define, perceive, enjoy, share, and remember food). I hope to think more about this later when I have actual time to study real fun things! Ha!
Gary Burnett is a Professor at the School of Information at Florida State University, with a PhD in English from Princeton University and his MLS from Rutgers University. His work focuses on a theoretical approach to “Information Worlds,” exploring the social, political, and economic contexts of information access and exchange within specific communities; and “Information Domains,” which attempts to theorize information in terms of relationships and interactions between individuals, social worlds, and practices of signification. His passions include poetry, music, travel, and street art.
Jonathan M. Hollister is an assistant professor in the Department of Library, Archives, and Information Studies at Pusan National University. His research focuses on digital literacies and social information behaviors in recreational popular media, such as online games, graphic novels, and other works of fiction, as well as the development and application of theory in LIS. Please visit https://jonathanmhollister.com or follow @hollisterjm on Twitter for more information.
Jisue Lee is an assistant professor in the Department of Library and Information Science at Chonnam National University. Her research focuses on online information behaviors, virtual communication, and participation in social movements as well as LIS curriculum and professional development.
If you enjoy the Unplated series, or the newsletter writ large, please consider supporting my work with a paid subscription. If you're already a paid subscriber, thank you so much! Your support means the world.