바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

  • P-ISSN1013-0799
  • E-ISSN2586-2073

기관리포지터리 수용모형 연구: 과학분야 연구자를 중심으로

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

정보관리학회지, (P)1013-0799; (E)2586-2073
2017, v.34 no.2, pp.47-80
https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2017.34.2.047
황혜경 (한국과학기술정보연구원)
이지연 (연세대학교)

  • 다운로드 수
  • 조회수

Abstract

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.

참고문헌

1

Ritu Agarwal. (1998). A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology. Information Systems Research, 9(2), 204-215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.9.2.204.

2

Angst, C. M.. (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.

3

Joep W.C. Arts. (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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.11.002.

4

Babbie, E.. (2007). The practice of social research:Thomson Wadsworth.

5

Deborah L. Bandalos. (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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem0901_5.

6

Bandura, A.. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control:W. H. Freeman and Company.

7

Jean-Gabriel Bankier. (2008). The Institutional Repository Rediscovered: What Can a University Do for Open Access Publishing?. Serials Review, 34(1), 21-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.serrev.2007.12.003.

8

Bates, M.. (2006). Rights and rewards project academic survey: Final report.

9

Bo-Christer Björk. (2014). Anatomy of green open access. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(2), 237-250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.22963.

10

Browne, M. W.. (1993). Testing structural models:Sage Publications.

11

Elizabeth F. Cabrera. (2007). Fostering knowledge sharing through people management practices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(5), 720-735. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585190500083020.

12

Man Kit Chang. (2001). Determinants of the intention to use Internet/WWW at work: a confirmatory study. Information & Management, 39(1), 1-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(01)00075-1.

13

Hichang Cho. (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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21316.

14

조현철. (2007). 구조방정식 모델에서 항목묶음이 인과 모수의 검정과 적합도 평가에 미치는 영향. Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science(마케팅과학연구), 17(3), 133-153.

15

Shih-Wei Chou. (2009). The influence of individual differences on continuance intentions of enterprise resource planning (ERP). International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67(6), 484-496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.01.001.

16

Deborah R. Compeau. (1995). Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249688.

17

Cranor, L. F.. (2000). The internet upheaval: Raising questions, seeking answers in communications policy:MIT Press.

18

Claire Creaser. (2010). Authors’ Awareness and Attitudes Toward Open Access Repositories. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 16(sup1), 145-161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2010.518851.

19

Rowena Cullen. (2011). Institutional Repositories, Open Access, and Scholarly Communication: A Study of Conflicting Paradigms. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(6), 460-470. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.07.002.

20

Tamara Dinev. (2004). Internet privacy concerns and their antecedents - measurement validity and a regression model. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23(6), 413-422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01449290410001715723.

21

Tamara Dinev. (2006). Internet Privacy Concerns and Social Awareness as Determinants of Intention to Transact. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 10(2), 7-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/jec1086-4415100201.

22

Dulle, F. W.. (2010). An analysis of open access scholarly communication in Tanzanian public universities.

23

Frankwell W. Dulle. (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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266666910385375.

24

Fishbein, M.. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research:Addison-Wesley Publishing.

25

Joshua Fogel. (2009). Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 153-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.08.006.

26

Claes Fornell. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3151312.

27

Nancy Fried Foster. (2005). Understanding Faculty to Improve Content Recruitment for Institutional Repositories. D-Lib Magazine, 11(1), -. http://dx.doi.org/10.1045/january2005-foster.

28

Fry, J.. (2009). PEER behavioural research: Authors and users vis-à-vis journals and repositories. Baseline report. Loughborough University, Research & consultancy for performance management, information, cultural & academic services.

29

Hair, J. F. Jr.. (2006). Multivariate data analysis:Prentice Hall.

30

Diane Harley. (2007). The Influence of Academic Values on Scholarly Publication and Communication Practices. The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 10(2), -. http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0010.204.

31

Jon Hartwick. (1994). Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use. Management Science, 40(4), 440-465. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.40.4.440.

32

John H. Heinrichs. (2007). Determining factors of academic library Web site usage. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(14), 2325-2334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.20710.

33

David R. Hekman. (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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015315.

34

Khe Foon Hew. (2007). Knowledge sharing in online environments: A qualitative case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(14), 2310-2324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.20698.

35

Elizabeth C. Hirschman. (1980). Innovativeness, Novelty Seeking, and Consumer Creativity. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 283-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/208816.

36

Helen Hockx‐Yu. (2006). Digital preservation in the context of institutional repositories. Program, 40(3), 232-243. http://dx.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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9781137552105_9.

39

Shin-Yuan Hung. (2011). Knowledge-sharing motivations affecting R&D employees' acceptance of electronic knowledge repository. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30(2), 213-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2010.545146.

40

Jones, R.. (2006). “Advocacy” in the institutional repository:Chandos Publishing.

41

Kankanhalli, A.. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 113-143.

42

Kim, Gye-Soo. (2010). AMOS 18.0 structural equation model analysis:Hannarae.

43

Kim, Jihyun. (2007). Motivating and impeding factors affecting faculty contribution to institutional repositories. Journal of Digital Information, 8(2), -.

44

Kim, Jihyun. (2008). Faculty self-archiving behavior: Factors affecting the decision to self-archive.

45

Jihyun Kim. (2010). Faculty self-archiving: Motivations and barriers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(9), 1909-1922. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21336.

46

Jihyun Kim. (2011). Motivations of Faculty Self-archiving in Institutional Repositories. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(3), 246-254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.02.017.

47

김경규. (2009). 모바일 웹 브라우징 서비스의 사용 의도에 영향을 미치는 요인:자기효능감과 사회적 영향. Journal of Information Technology Applications & Management, 16(1), 149-168.

48

Jung-Yu Lai. (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. http://dx.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

Ming-Ji James Lin. (2009). Fostering the determinants of knowledge sharing in professional virtual communities. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 929-939. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.03.008.

51

Lincoln, Y. S.. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry:Sage Publications.

52

Lynch, C. A.. (2003). Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. ARL Bimonthly Report, 226, -.

53

Macaulay, J.. (1991). Motivation and Action:Springer-Verlag.

54

Ursula Paola Torres Maldonado. (2011). E‐learning motivation and educational portal acceptance in developing countries. Online Information Review, 35(1), 66-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684521111113597.

55

Héctor San Martín. (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. http://dx.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. http://www.oak.go.kr/aboutOak/.

57

Gary C. Moore. (1991). Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.2.3.192.

58

Nunnally, J. C.. (1978). Psychometric theory:McGraw-Hill Book.

59

Park, Ji-Hong. (2007). Factors influencing the adoption of open access publishing.

60

Stephen Pinfield. (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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23131.

61

Brian Quinn. (2010). Reducing Psychological Resistance to Digital Repositories. Information Technology and Libraries, 29(2), 67-75. http://dx.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:Free Press.

64

Ian Rowlands. (2004). Scholarly communication in the digital environment: what do authors want?. Learned Publishing, 17(4), 261-273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1087/0953151042321680.

65

Nancy Sánchez-Tarragó. (2010). The open access movement and Cuban health research work: an author survey. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 27(1), 66-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00852.x.

66

Schaper, L. K.. (2007). An investigation of factors affecting technology acceptance and use decisions by Australian allied health therapists (1-10). Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

67

Sheng, H.. (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.

68

Sheth, J. N.. (1981). Psychology of innovation resistance:JAI Press.

69

Feria Wirba Singeh. (2013). Malaysian authors' acceptance to self‐archive in institutional repositories. The Electronic Library, 31(2), 188-207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02640471311312375.

70

Alma Swan. (2004). Authors and open access publishing. Learned Publishing, 17(3), 219-224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1087/095315104323159649.

71

Swan, A.. (2005). Open access self-archiving: An author study. Key Perspective. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Open%20Access%20Self%20Archiving-an%20author%20study.pdf.

72

Roxana Theodorou. (2010). OA Repositories: the Researchers' Point of View. The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 13(3), -. http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0013.304.

73

Tibenderana, P.. (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), -.

74

University of Nottingham. (2017). OpenDOAR: The directory of open access repositories. http://www.opendoar.org/find.php/.

75

Venkatesh, V.. (2008). Predicting different conceptualizations of system use: The competing roles of behavioral intention, facilitating conditions, and behavioral expectation. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 483-502.

76

Viswanath Venkatesh. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.

77

Venkatesh, V.. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.

78

Pieter Verdegem. (2011). Rethinking determinants of ICT acceptance: Towards an integrated and comprehensive overview. Technovation, 31(8), 411-423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.02.004.

79

Wang, C. H.. (2010). A study of Taiwanese college teachers’ acceptance of distance learning. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 3(2), 243-260.

80

M. McLure Wasko. (2000). “It is what one does”: why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2-3), 155-173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0963-8687(00)00045-7.

81

Wasko, M. M.. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35-57.

82

Sarah Watson. (2007). Authors' attitudes to, and awareness and use of, a university institutional repository. Serials: The Journal for the Serials Community, 20(3), 225-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1629/20225.

83

Willinsky, J.. (2010). Open access and academic reputation. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 57, 296-302.

84

Mun Y. Yi. (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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5414.2006.00132.x.

정보관리학회지