Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2017.34.2.047

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)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Society for information Management / v.34, no.2, 2017 , pp. 47-80 More about this Journal
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.
Keywords
institutional repository; knowledge sharing; open access; unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT); adoption model;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 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.
2 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.
3 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   DOI
4 Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications.
5 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
6 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.
7 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   DOI
8 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   DOI
9 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/
10 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   DOI
11 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   DOI
12 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   DOI
13 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   DOI
14 Dulle, F. W. (2010). An analysis of open access scholarly communication in Tanzanian public universities. Ph.D. dissertation, University of South Africa, Pretoria.
15 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   DOI
16 Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
17 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   DOI
18 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   DOI
19 Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Book.
20 Park, Ji-Hong (2007). Factors influencing the adoption of open access publishing. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Syracuse.
21 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   DOI
22 Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
23 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   DOI
24 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   DOI
25 Ram, S. (1987). A model of innovation resistance. Advances in Consumer Research, 14, 208-212.
26 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   DOI
27 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   DOI
28 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.
29 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
30 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.   DOI
31 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   DOI
32 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
33 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   DOI
34 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.   DOI
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   DOI
36 Theodorou, R. (2010). OA Repositories: The researchers' point of view. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0013.304
37 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   DOI
38 Swan, A., & Brown, S. (2004). Authors and open access publishing. Learned Publishing, 17(3), 219-224. https://doi.org/10.1087/095315104323159649   DOI
39 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.
40 Hockx-Yu, H. (2006). Digital preservation in the context of institutional repositories. Program, 40(3), 232-243. https://doi.org/10.1108/00330330610681312   DOI
41 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.
42 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   DOI
43 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   DOI
44 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   DOI
45 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
46 University of Nottingham (2017). OpenDOAR: The directory of open access repositories. Retrieved from http://www.opendoar.org/find.php/
47 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.   DOI
48 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.   DOI
49 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   DOI
50 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   DOI
51 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.
52 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
53 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
54 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
55 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.
56 Jones, R., Andrew, T., & MacColl, J. (2006). "Advocacy" in the institutional repository. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.
57 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   DOI
58 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   DOI
59 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   DOI
60 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.
61 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   DOI
62 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   DOI
63 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   DOI
64 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   DOI
65 Willinsky, J. (2010). Open access and academic reputation. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 57, 296-302.
66 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   DOI
67 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.
68 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   DOI
69 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.   DOI
70 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   DOI
71 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   DOI
72 Babbie, E. (2007). The practice of social research (11th ed.). Belmont, California: Thomson Wadsworth.
73 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   DOI
74 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   DOI
75 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
76 Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
77 Kim, Jihyun (2008). Faculty self-archiving behavior: Factors affecting the decision to self-archive. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
78 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.   DOI
79 Kim, Gye-Soo (2010). AMOS 18.0 structural equation model analysis. Seoul: Hannarae.
80 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
81 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   DOI
82 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   DOI
83 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.
84 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   DOI