Deletion Considered Harmful

TL;DR

This study investigates how deletion of digital resources affects knowledge management, revealing that deletion is underused and can negatively impact retrieval success and user satisfaction.

Contribution

The paper provides empirical evidence that deletion is less adopted than other strategies and demonstrates its detrimental effects on information retrieval.

Findings

Deletion is under-adopted compared to filing and other tactics.

Deletion negatively impacts retrieval success.

Deletion reduces user satisfaction.

Abstract

In a world of information overload, understanding how we can most effectively manage information is crucial to success. We set out to understand how people view deletion, the removal of material no longer needed: does it help by reducing clutter and improving the signal to noise ratio, or does the effort required to decide to delete something make it not worthwhile? How does deletion relate to other strategies like filing; do people who spend extensive time in filing also prune their materials too? We studied the behaviour of 51 knowledge workers though a series of questionnaires and interviews to evaluate a range of tactics they used aimed at organizing, filing, and retrieving digital resources. Our study reveals that deletion is consistently under-adopted compared to other tactics such as Filing, Coverage, Ontology, and Timeliness. Moreover, the empirical data indicate that deletion is actually detrimental to retrieval success and satisfaction. In this paper, we examine the practice of deletion, review the related literature, and present detailed statistical results and clustering outcomes that underscore its adverse effects.