The massive expansion of electronic resources has been identified as one of the major drivers
behind the ‘explosion’ in the popularity of family history, which bring ease, convenience and
accessibility to some parts of the research process. Amongst this expanse of easily-accessible
raw materials, online local studies materials (recording both historical and contemporary
aspects of a community) can add real context and value to researchers’ findings and
experience; turning a genealogy into a family history. However, the vast majority of these do
not appear visible to online family history researchers. Through three central foci (users,
e-family history resources, and Local Studies Collections), this research investigates these
resources and collections from the perspective of users, to establish how to make the added
value of the local studies collections more visible and encourage increased engagement for
those who cannot visit collections in person. Specific evaluative criteria for e-family history
resources are presented, contributing to practitioners’ awareness and understanding of their
nature; in turn helping maintain their service quality to researchers. Using a hybrid
(primarily ethnographic) research approach, the study also examines the online research
behaviour of family historians, identifying a taxonomy of actions (seeking of genealogical
facts, local or social history; communicating with other researchers or resources; locating
resources or instructive information; managing own information), strategies (search
modifications and incorporation of background knowledge) and outcomes (outcome;
direction (projected and actual)). From these categories, a model of Family Historians’ online
information seeking has been developed. Researchers have both informational and affective
needs, and are highly emotionally attached to the research process. Users universally used
Ancestry, FamilySearch, ScotlandsPeople, and Genes Reunited far more than other sites, seeking
out quality informational content and unique records, which must be successful for
researchers. Google was a major method of access to these. Very few participants were preaware
of ‘e-local studies’ websites, and were surprised by the variations in quality,
inconsistencies in terminology and navigation, and invisibility of quality content. Despite a
lack of ease of use, the content present on e-local studies sites and their usefulness and value
had been demonstrated to researchers. This suggests significant demand for local
information of this kind online where it is available and made known