정보관리학회지 (Journal of the Korean Society for information Management)

  • 제34권2호
  • /
  • Pages.47-80
  • /
  • 2017
  • /
  • 1013-0799(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2586-2073(eISSN)
한국정보관리학회 (Korean Society for Information Management)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

기관리포지터리 수용모형 연구: 과학분야 연구자를 중심으로

The Adoption Model of Institutional Repositories: Which Constructs Attract Scientists to Share Their Research Outputs?

  • Hwang, Hyekyong (Department of Information Services, Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information) ;
  • Lee, Jee Yeon (Department of Library and Information Science, Yonsei University)
  • 투고 : 2017.05.29
  • 심사 : 2017.06.06
  • 발행 : 2017.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구의 목적은 과학분야 연구자를 대상으로 기관리포지터리 수용에 영향을 미치는 요인들을 도출하고 이들 요인들간의 관계를 규명함으로써 기관리포지터리 수용모형을 개발하는 것이다. 270명의 물리수학분야와 생명과학분야 연구자들이 응답한 설문조사와 12명의 심층면담 내용 분석 결과, 개인의 심리적 특성이 기관리포지터리 수용의도에 가장 높은 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 그 다음은 성과기대, 사회조직적 영향 순으로 확인되었으나, 인지된 위험은 유의한 영향을 주지 못하는 것으로 검증되었다. 기관리포지터리 수용의도 향상을 위한 전략으로 국가주도적 제도 개선 방안과 운영 기관의 역할강화 및 홍보 방안, 그리고 연구자의 참여유도형 서비스방안을 제언하였다.

The purpose of this study is to develop an adoptive model of institutional repositories (IRs) by identifying the key factors affecting adoptive intention of IRs and explaining the relations among these factors. Through a survey of 270 researchers and 12 in-depth interviews in the field of physics, mathematics, and life science in Korea, performance expectancy, perceived risks, socio-organizational influence, and individual characteristics were found to have substantial influences on the adoptive intention of IRs. Among the key factors, individual characteristics showed the greatest effect on the adoptive intention of IRs, followed by performance expectancy and other socio-organizational influences except for the perceived risks. Strategies to enhance the adoptive intention of IRs based on analyses of the results were suggested, in terms of the reformation of research assessment system at the national level, strengthening of role of the operational institution, and the need for voluntary scientists-participating service.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1998). A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Information System Research, 9(2), 204-215. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.9.2.204
  2. Angst, C. M., & Agarwal, R. (2009). Adoption of electronic health records in the presence of privacy concerns: The elaboration likelihood model and individual persuasion. MIS Quarterly, 33(2), 339-370. https://doi.org/10.2307/20650295
  3. Arts, J. W. C., Frambach, R. T., & Bijmolt, T. H. A. (2011). Generalizations on consumer innovation adoption: A meta-analysis on drivers of intention and behavior. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 28(2), 134-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.11.002
  4. Babbie, E. (2007). The practice of social research (11th ed.). Belmont, California: Thomson Wadsworth.
  5. Bandalos, D. L. (2002). The effects of item parceling on goodness-of-fit and parameter estimate bias in structural equation modeling. structural equation modeling. A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(1), 78-102. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem0901_5
  6. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
  7. Bankier, J. G., & Perciali, I. (2008). The institutional repository rediscovered: What can a university do for open access publishing? Serials Review, 34(1), 21-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.serrev.2007.12.003
  8. Bates, M., Loddington, S., Manuel, S., & Oppenheim, C. (2006). Rights and rewards project academic survey: Final report. Retrieved from https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-jspui/bitstream/2134/1815/1/SurveyReport.pdf.
  9. Bjork, B. C., Laakso, M., Welling, P., & Patrik, P. (2014). Anatomy of green open access. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(2), 237-250. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22963
  10. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In A. B. Kenneth & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications.
  11. Cabrera, E. F., & Cabrera, A. (2005). Fostering knowledge sharing through people management practices. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(5), 720-735. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190500083020
  12. Chang, M. K., & Cheung, W. (2001). Determinants of the intention to use Internet/WWW at work: A confirmatory study. Information & Management, 39(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(01)00075-1
  13. Cho, H., Chen, M., & Chung, S. (2010). Testing an integrative theoretical model of knowledge-sharing behavior in the context of Wikipedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(6), 1198-1212. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21316
  14. Cho, Hyun-Chul, & Kang, Suk-Hou (2007). The effects of item parceling on causal parameter testing and goodness-of-fit indices in structural equation modeling. Journal of Korean Academy of Marketing Science, 17(3), 133-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/12297119.2007.9707264
  15. Chou, S. W., & Chen, P. Y. (2009). The Influence of individual differences on continuance intentions of enterprise resource planning (ERP). International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67(6), 484-496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.01.001
  16. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211. https://doi.org/10.2307/249688
  17. Cranor, L. F., Reagle, J., & Ackerman, M. S. (2000). Beyond concern: Understanding net users' attitudes about online privacy. In V. Ingo & M. C. Benjamin (Eds.), The internet upheaval: Raising questions, seeking answers in communications policy (pp. 47-70). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
  18. Cresser, C., Fry, J., Greewood, H., Oppenheim, C., Probets, S., Spezi, V., & White, S. (2010). Authors' awareness and attitudes toward open access repositories. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 16(S1), 145-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2010.518851
  19. Cullen, R., & Chawner, B. (2011). Institutional repositories, open access, and scholarly communication: A study of conflicting paradigms. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(6), 460-470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.07.002
  20. Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2004). Internet privacy concerns and their antecedents-measurement validity and a regression model. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23(6), 413-422. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290410001715723
  21. Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2005). Internet privacy concerns and social awareness as determinants of intention to transact. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 10(2), 7-29. https://doi.org/10.2753/jec1086-4415100201
  22. Dulle, F. W. (2010). An analysis of open access scholarly communication in Tanzanian public universities. Ph.D. dissertation, University of South Africa, Pretoria.
  23. Dulle, F. W., & Minishi-Majanja, K. M. (2011). The suitability of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model in open access adoption studies. Information Development, 27(1), 32-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666910385375
  24. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
  25. Fogel, J., & Nehmad, E. (2009). Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns. Computer in Human Behavior, 25, 153-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.08.006
  26. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  27. Foster, N. F., & Gibbons, S. (2005). Understanding faculty to improve content recruitment for institutional repositories. D-Lib magazine, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1045/january2005-foster
  28. Fry, J., Oppenheim, C., Probets, S., Creaser, C., Greenwood, H., Spezi, V., & White, S. (2009). PEER behavioural research: Authors and users vis-a-vis journals and repositories. Baseline report. Loughborough University, Research & consultancy for performance management, information, cultural & academic services. Retrieved from http://www.peerproject.eu/fileadmin/media/reports/Final_revision_-_behavioural_baseline_report_-_20_01_10.pdf
  29. Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
  30. Harley, D., Earl-Novell, S., Arter, J., Lawrence, S., & King, C. J. (2007). The influence of academic values on scholarly publication and communication practices. The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0010.204
  31. Hartwick, J., & Barki, H. (1994). Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. Management Science, 40(4), 440-465. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.40.4.440
  32. Heinrichs, J. H., Lim, K. S., Lim, J. S., & Spangenberg, M. A. (2007). Determining factors of academic library web site usage. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(14), 2325-2334. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20710
  33. Hekman, D. R., Steensma, H. K., Bigley, G. A., & Hereford, J. F. (2009). Effects of organizational and professional identification on the relationship between administrators' social influence and professional employees' adoption of new work behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1325-1335. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015315
  34. Hew, K. F., & Hara, N. (2007). Knowledge sharing in online environments: A qualitative case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(14), 2310-2324. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20698
  35. Hirschman, E. C. (1980). Innovativeness, novelty seeking and consumer creativity. The Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 283-295. https://doi.org/10.1086/208816
  36. Hockx-Yu, H. (2006). Digital preservation in the context of institutional repositories. Program, 40(3), 232-243. https://doi.org/10.1108/00330330610681312
  37. Hong, Sehee (2000). The criteria for selecting appropriate Fit indices in structural equation modeling and their rationales. Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology, 19(1), 161-177.
  38. Huber, GP. (2001). Transfer of knowledge in knowledge management systems: Unexplored issues and suggested studies. European Journal of Information Systems, 10(2), 72-79. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137552105_9
  39. Hung, S. Y., Lai, H. M., & Chang, W. W. (2011). Knowledge-sharing motivations affecting R&D employees' acceptance of electronic knowledge repository. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30(2), 213-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2010.545146
  40. Jones, R., Andrew, T., & MacColl, J. (2006). "Advocacy" in the institutional repository. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.
  41. Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C.Y., & Wei, K. K. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 113-143. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148670
  42. Kim, Gye-Soo (2010). AMOS 18.0 structural equation model analysis. Seoul: Hannarae.
  43. Kim, Jihyun (2007). Motivating and impeding factors affecting faculty contribution to institutional repositories. Journal of Digital Information, 8(2). Retrieved from https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/193/177
  44. Kim, Jihyun (2008). Faculty self-archiving behavior: Factors affecting the decision to self-archive. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
  45. Kim, Jihyun (2010). Faculty self-archiving: Motivations and barriers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(9), 1909-1922. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21336
  46. Kim, Jihyun (2011). Motivations of faculty self-archiving in institutional repositories. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(3), 246-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.02.017
  47. Kim, Kyung Kyu, Ryoo, Sungyul, Kim, Moonoh, & Kim, Hyojin (2009). Determinants of user intentions to use mobile web browsing service: Self efficacy and social influences. Journal of Information Technology Applications and Management, 16(1), 149-168.
  48. Lai, J. Y. (2009). How reward, computer self-efficacy, and perceived power security affect knowledge management systems success: An empirical investigation in high-tech companies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2), 332-347. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20982
  49. Lawal, I. (2002). Scholarly communication: The use and non-use of e-print archives for the dissemination of scientific information. Issues in Science & Technology Librarianship, 36.
  50. Lin, M. J. J., Hung, S. W., & Chen, C. J. (2009). Fostering the determinants of knowledge sharing in professional virtual communities. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 929-939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.03.008
  51. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications.
  52. Lynch, C. A. (2003). Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. ARL Bimonthly Report, 226. Retrieved from http://old.arl.org/resources/pubs/br/br226/br226ir-print.shtml
  53. Macaulay, J., & Berkowitz, L. (1970). Altruism and helping behavior: Social psychological studies of some antecedents and consequences. New York: Academic Press, 3. In H. Heckhausen (1991). Motivation and Action (p. 243). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  54. Maldonado, U. P. T., Khan, G. F., Moon, J. H., & Rho, J. J. (2011). E-learning motivation and educational portal acceptance in developing countries. Information Review, 35(1), 66-85. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111113597
  55. Martin, H. S., & Herrero, A. (2012). Influence of the user's psychological factors on the online purchase intention in rural tourism: Integrating innovativeness to the UTAUT framework. Tourism Management, 33(2), 341-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2011.04.003
  56. Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism. Bureau of Library and Museum Policy Planning (2017). Open access Korea portal. Retrieved from http://www.oak.go.kr/aboutOak/
  57. Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2.3.192
  58. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Book.
  59. Park, Ji-Hong (2007). Factors influencing the adoption of open access publishing. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Syracuse.
  60. Pinfield, S., Salter, J., Bath, P. A., Hubbard, B., Millington, P., Anders, J. H. S., & Hussain, A. (2014). Open-access repositories worldwide, 2005-2012: Past growth, current characteristics, and future possibilities. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(12), 2404-2421. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23131
  61. Quinn, B. (2010). Reducing psychological resistance to digital repositories. Information Technology and Libraries, 29(2), 67-75. https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v29i2.3145
  62. Ram, S. (1987). A model of innovation resistance. Advances in Consumer Research, 14, 208-212.
  63. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
  64. Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., & Huntington, P. (2004). Scholarly communication in the digital environment: What do authors wants? Learned Publishing, 17(4), 261-273. https://doi.org/10.1087/0953151042321680
  65. Sanchez-Tarrago, N., & Fernandez-Molina, J. C. (2010). The open access movement and Cuban health research work: An author survey. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 27(1), 66-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00852.x
  66. Schaper, L. K., & Pervan, G. P. (2007). An investigation of factors affecting technology acceptance and use decisions by Australian allied health therapists. Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.2007.69
  67. Sheng, H., Nah, F. F. H., & Siau, K. (2008). An experimental study on ubiquitous commerce adoption: Impact of personalization and privacy concerns. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 9(6), 344-376. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00161
  68. Sheth, J. N. (1981). Psychology of innovation resistance: The less developed concept (LDC) in diffusion research. Research in Marketing. In J. N. Sheth (Eds.), Psychology of innovation resistance (pp. 273-282). Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press.
  69. Singeh, F. W., Abrizah, A., & Karim, N. H. A. (2013). Malaysian authors' acceptance to self-archive in institutional repositories: Towards a unified view. The Electronic Library, 31(2), 188-207. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471311312375
  70. Swan, A., & Brown, S. (2004). Authors and open access publishing. Learned Publishing, 17(3), 219-224. https://doi.org/10.1087/095315104323159649
  71. Swan, A., & Brown, S. (2005). Open access self-archiving: An author study. Key Perspective. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Open%20Access%20Self%20Archiving-an%20author%20study.pdf.
  72. Theodorou, R. (2010). OA Repositories: The researchers' point of view. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0013.304
  73. Tibenderana, P., Ogao, P., Ikoja-Odongo, J., & Wokadala, J. (2010). Measuring levels of end-users' acceptance and use of hybrid library services. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT), 6(2). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1084985.pdf
  74. University of Nottingham (2017). OpenDOAR: The directory of open access repositories. Retrieved from http://www.opendoar.org/find.php/
  75. Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., Maruping, L. M., & Bala, H. (2008). Predicting different conceptualizations of system use: The competing roles of behavioral intention, facilitating conditions, and behavioral expectation. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 483-502. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148853
  76. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
  77. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  78. Verdegem, P., & Marez, L. D. (2011). Rethinking determinants of ICT acceptance: Towards an integrated and comprehensive overview. Technovation, 31(8), 411-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.02.004
  79. Wang, C. H., Liu, W. L., Tseng, M. C., & Tsai, H. S. (2010). A study of Taiwanese college teachers' acceptance of distance learning. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 3(2), 243-260.
  80. Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2000). It is what one does: Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2-3), 155-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0963-8687(00)00045-7
  81. Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35-57. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148667
  82. Watson, S. (2007). Authors' attitudes to, and awareness and use of, a university institutional repository. The Journal for the Serials Community, 20(3), 225-230. https://doi.org/10.1629/20225
  83. Willinsky, J. (2010). Open access and academic reputation. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 57, 296-302.
  84. Yi, M. Y., Fiedler, K. D., & Park, J. S. (2006). Understanding the role of individual innovativeness in the acceptance of IT-based innovations: Comparative analyses of models and measures. Decision Sciences, 37(3), 393-426. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5414.2006.00132.x