This project examines the construction of cognitive authority among young people aged 10-24 in everyday health information environments. It applies the concept of new literacies to study young people's literacy practices in formal, informal, and non-formal learning contexts, including web-based spaces. The project consists of a literature review and 4 case studies using qualitative methods like interviews and discourse analysis. The goals are to deepen understanding of cognitive authority in health contexts and to inform practices in schools, libraries, and health promotion for young people.

1. University of Oulu
Cognitive Authorities in
Everyday Health Information Environments of
Young People (CogAHealth)
An overview of the project
Prof. Maija-Leena Huotari
University of Sheffield, UK, Dec 12-13, 2016

2. University of Oulu
Introduction

3. University of Oulu
Funded by the
Academy of
Finland
from 2016 to 2020
- Lifestyle related diseases increase as an
outcome of unhealthy behaviour, e.g. such
as overeating and physical inactivity
- Health behaviours are adopted at a young
age and often last a lifetime (Pitel et al.
2013)
- Young people learn the competences that
enable them to manage their own lives and
make choices that influence their health
- In constantly transforming information
environment it is not easy to determine
who and what to believe and trust in health
issues (Niemelä et al. 2012)
=> It is demanding to know who or what
cognitive authorities are in health.
3

4. University of Oulu
Based on
the
previous
research
of the
researchers
involved (1)
The Academy of Finland funded projects
1) Health Information Practice and its Impact (HeIP), conducted with
Åbo Akademi University in 2008–2012
Increased understanding of childhood obesity through a doctoral study focusing on
the creation of patient value for obese children and their families in Finnish health
care practice (Känsäkoski 2014, Känsäkoski & Huotari Journal of Documentation
2016).
2) Utilization of Health Information Management and Modern
Technology in the Prevention of Obesity of the PrevMetSyn
consortium, funded by the Academy’s SALVE programme in 2010–2012, Sub-
project focused on developing an everyday health information literacy (EHIL)
screening tool (Niemelä et al. 2012), which was also utilized in lifestyle counselling
(Huotari et al. 2015).
The MOPO study (2009–2015) co-funded by the EU/ESF and EU/ERDF,
Finnish Development Fund for Innovation TEKES and the Finnish Ministry of
Education and Culture. The EHIL tool was further tested among call-up-aged young
men of the MOPO study in the doctoral studies of Hirvonen (2015) and Enwald
(2013), and a number of international, high quality articles published.
1/5/2017 Replace footertext if needed4

5. University of Oulu
Based on
the previous
research
of the
researchers
involved (2)
‒ The Joy of Reading Program (2012–2015) conducted together by
the Faculties of Humanities and Education at the University of
Oulu, funded by the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture.
- Aimed at developing comprehensive reading skills for children and young
people, boys in particular, and promoting motivation to read through
cooperation between schools, libraries and homes. Focusing on
multiliteracy and the use of new technologies supported developing new
curricula (the national curriculum will be in force from 2016) and library
strategies.
- The Future School Research (FSR) Second Wave project (2011–2014),
funded by two ESF grants in 2009–2013.
- Aimed at promoting the 21st century skills (Voogt & Pareja 2010) by
employing technology in a pedagogically meaningful manner to promote
functional and exploratory teaching and make learning active by
implementing the so-called ‘off-the-school-desk’ pedagogy by allowing
children to learn with and from their peers in formal, informal and non-formal
environments around the clock, on a 24/7 basis.
- The doctoral studies of Palmgren-Neuvonen (2016) and of Sari Räisänen
(2015) relate to this project.
1/5/2017 Replace footertext if needed5

6. University of Oulu
Limitations of
previous
research
within this multi-
disciplinary field
of research (1)
- Literacy research conducted in
isolation within education, psychology,
psycholinguistics
= > theories segregated, fragmented,
compartmentalized with limited
applicability in practice
-Literacies investigated as individuals’
instrumental skills rather than as
situated, socially derived practices
-Health literacy research conducted
mostly in medical settings (Chinn &
McCarthy 2013)
1/5/2017 Replace footertext if needed6

7. University of Oulu
Limitations
of
previous
research (2)
-- The concept of new literacies is new in
health context
‒ Research on new literacies focused on
formal school environments (Gee 2010)
‒ Research limited on health related
literacies in everyday life settings, and on
literacy practices in which formal and
informal or even non-formal environments
are examined in an integrated manner
‒ Web-based and other practices typically
investigated separately from each other
1/5/2017 Replace footertext if needed7

8. University of Oulu
Main
Concepts
Cognitive Authority (CA, P. Wilson 1983)
-Based on influence rather than position
-Evaluated on the basis of an individual’s information
need and the context in which the information will be
used
-Communities may recognize different types of CA
=> Contextual and constructed (ACRL 2015, Huvila
2013).
1/5/2017 Replace footertext if needed8

9. University of Oulu
Main
Concepts
(continued…)
- Information Literacy (IL) ‘the set of
integrated abilities encompassing the
reflective discovery of information, the
understanding of how information is
produced and valued, and the use of
information in creating new knowledge
and participating ethically in
communities of learning.’ (ACRL 2015, 3)
‒ Health Information Literacy (MLA)
Everyday Health Information Literacy
(EHIL, Niemelä et al. 2012)
1/5/2017 Replace footertext if needed9

10. University of Oulu
Authority
examined
through the
concept of
new literacies
Because New Literacies
- Refer to participation, production, non-
professional expertise, and shared
authority (Gee 2010) and understanding
literacies as a meaning-making social
practice (Selander & Kress 2010)
- Involve multimodal texts (e.g. figurative,
aural, spoken, written, numerical,
gestural, factual, imaginative)
- Are transforming and transformative
(Martin & Grudziecki 2006), implying a
mutual shaping relationship of media,
practices, literacies, and users.
1/5/2017 Replace footertext if needed10

11. University of Oulu
Aim
To deepen the understanding of the construction of
cognitive authority among young people (10-24-year-
olds, UN 2015) when participating in contemporary
health information environments.

12. University of Oulu
Purpose
To examine this by applying the concept of new literacies to
scrutinize young people’s literacy practices in various
everyday life health information environments and
communities, i.e. in the formal, informal and non-formal
learning and other social contexts, web-based included.

13. University of Oulu
Research
Questions
(RQs)
RQ1: How are questions related to cognitive authority
addressed in health related literacy research?
RQ2: How is cognitive authority constructed in
everyday health information environments of young
people?
a. Who or what do young people consider as cognitive
authorities in health?
b. On what do young people base their judgments of the
cognitive authority of health information?
c. What is the role of trustees (e.g. teachers or parents)
in the construction of cognitive authorities?
d. How do young people themselves construct cognitive
authority for health information they produce?

14. University of Oulu
Methodology
Based on socio-cultural
perspective

15. University of Oulu
Metho-
dology
in WPs
WP1 Building theoretical & conceptual
understanding. Huotari: The concept of cognitive
authority in health contexts
WP2 Examining the phenomenon in empirical
settings. Case Study I: Palmgren-Neuvonen:
Learner perspective in formal evironment
Case Study II: Räisänen: Trustee perspective in formal
environment
Case Study III: Hirvonen & Case Study IV: Huhta:
Learner perspective in informal & non-formal
environments

16. University of Oulu
Methods
in
WPs
WP1: Systemic review based on literature &
WP2’s findings
WP2: Case Studies I, II and III: Nexus analysis
based on qualitative data (e.g. interviews,
videorecordings, observations, informant
generated data), field notes, questionnaires,
participants’ products (digital videos, reflective
texts)
-Case Study IV: Discourse analysis based on
multimodal data from social networking sites;
interviews

17. University of Oulu
Contribution of project

18. University of Oulu
In theory
-Increased
understanding based
on empirical research
-New inter- and
transdisciplinary
approachers and
conceptios
-New methods
In practice
-New practises for schools,
teaching and learning, and
for libraries
-Up-dated content for
promoting healthy life-style
-Decrease in life-style related
diseases in future
18

19. University of Oulu
Further
develop-
ment of
the EHIL
screening
tool
Includes ten statements [with response options from 1 (strongly
disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)]:
1. It is important to be informed about health issues.
2. I know where to seek health information.
3. I like to get health information from a variety of sources.
4. It is difficult to find health information from printed sources
(magazines and books).
5. It is difficult to find health information from the Internet.
6. It is easy to assess the reliability of health information in
printed sources (magazines and books).
7. It is easy to assess the health information on the Internet.
8. Health related terminology and statements are often difficult
to understand.
9. I apply health related information to my own life and/or that
of people close to me.
10. It is difficult to know who to believe in health issues.
19

20. University of Oulu
Discussion
Your comments are very welcome

21. University of Oulu
References
Association of College and Research Libraries, ACRL (2015) Framework for
Information Literacy for Higher Education. (see
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework )
Chinn D & McCarthy C (2013) All Aspects of Health Literacy Scale (AAHLS):
developing a tool to measure functional, communicative and critical health
literacy in primary healthcare settings. Patient Education and Counseling 90(2),
247–253.
Enwald, H. (2014) Tailoring of health communication. PhD-Thesis (see
http://jultika.oulu.fi/files/isbn9789526202792.pdf ).
Gee JP (2010) New digital media and learning as an emerging area and “worked
examples” as on way forward. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hirvonen, N. (2016) Health information matters. PhD-Thesis (see
http://jultika.oulu.fi/files/isbn9789526210407.pdf ).
1/5/2017 Replace footertext if needed21

22. University of Oulu
Huotari M-L, Enwald H, Hirvonen N, Keränen A-M, Jokelainen T, Salonurmi T & Niemelä R (2015)
Everyday health information literacy in counselling on healthy eating. The case of PrevMetSyn.
In: Serap Kurbanoğlu, Joumana Boustany, Sonja Špiranec, Esther Grassian, Diane Mizrachi and
Loriene Roy (Eds.) Information Literacy: Moving Toward Sustainability. Third European
Conference, ECIL 2015, Tallinn, Estonia, October 19-22, 2015, Revised Selected Papers.
(Communications in Computer and Information Science Series Vol. 552, pp. 223-232.)
Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Huvila, I (2013) In Web search we trust? Articulation of the cognitive authorities of Web searching.
Information Research 18(1), paper 567.
Känsäkoski, H. (2015) Value creation in childhood obesity care and prevention. PhD Thesis (see
http://jultika.oulu.fi/Record/isbn978-952-62-0413-0 ).
Känsäkoski, H. & Huotari, M-L. (2016) Applying the Theory of Information Worlds within a health care
practise in Finland. Journal of Documentation, 72(2): 321-341.
Leu DJ, Kinzer CK, Coiro JL & Cammack DW (2004) Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from
the internet and other information and communication technologies. The International Reading
Association. (http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/leu/ Cited 2015/09/09 )
Medical Library Association, MLA (2003) What is health information literacy?
(http://www.mlanet.org/resources/healthlit/define.html Cited 2015/01/01. )

23. University of Oulu
Martin, A., & Grudziecki, J. (2006). DigEuLit: Concepts and tools for digital literacy
development. Inno-vation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer
Science, 5(4). (http://journals.heacademy.ac.uk/doi/abs/10.11120/ital.2006.05040249 )
Niemelä, R., Ek, S., Eriksson-Backa, K. & Huotari, M.-L. (2012) A screening tool for
assessing everyday health information literacy. Libri: International Journal of Libraries
and Information Services 62(2): 125–134.
Palmgren, L (2016) Social interaction in the context of new literacies: pedagogical
potentials of publishing-oriented learner-generated video production. PhD-Thesis
(http://urn.fi/urn:isbn:9789526211886 )
Pitel L, Gecková AM, Reijneveld SA & van Dijk JP (2013) Socioeconomic differences in
adolescent health-related behavior differ by gender. Journal of Epidemiology 23(3), 211–
218.
Räisänen, S (2015) Changing literacy practices : a becoming of a new teacher agency?
PhD-Thesis (http://urn.fi/urn:isbn:9789526208480 )
Selander S & Kress G (2010) Design för lärande – ett multimodalt perspektiv [Design for
learning – a multimodal perspective]. Stockholm, Norstedt.
Wilson P. (1983) Second-hand knowledge: an inquiry into cognitive authority. Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press.
1/5/2017 Replace footertext if needed23