Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2012.46.4.005

An Exploratory Study of Developing a Measurement Tool for the Quality of Information Commons  

Park, Ji-Hong (연세대학교 문헌정보학과)
Key, Sun-Ah (연세대학교 문헌정보학과, 연세대학교 학술정보원 문헌정보학)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science / v.46, no.4, 2012 , pp. 5-25 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to develop a measurement tool for the quality of information commons. Information commons is a physical, technological, social, and intellectual place where library users can experience various educational, research, and cultural activities. It is recently gaining popularity and several libraries have implemented it to help users share knowledge and interact with each other. It also intends to provide a place for collaboration, learning, and rest. Despite its benefits and usefulness, there is no measurement tool explicitly designed for the quality of information commons. This study used in-depth personal interview, compared prior studies, and conducted a pilot study to elicit library users' perceptions on information commons and factors influencing on the perceived quality of information commons. Groups of initial items were emerged through classifying and clustering key concepts in the data. Then, the validity of the items were verified through a pilot study. The findings of this study will be useful for developing more reliable and valid survey measurement tool.
Keywords
information commons; service quality; measurement development;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. 2000. Data Management and Analysis Methods. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln. eds. Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2nd Ed., 769-802. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
2 Silver, H. 2007. Use of Collaborative Spaces in an Academic Library. Ph.D. diss., Simmons College, Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A.
3 Somerville, M. M., & Collins, L. 2008. "Collaborative design: A learner-centered library planning approach." The Electronic Library, 26(6): 803-820.   DOI
4 Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Thompson, R. 2002. "Reliability and structure of $LibQUAL+^{TM}$ Scores: Measuring perceived library service quality." Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2(1): 3-12.   DOI
5 Van Scoyoc, A. M., & Cason, C. 2006. "The electronic academic library: Undergraduate research behavior in a library without books." Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 6(1): 47-58.   DOI
6 Weber, R. P. 1990. Basic Content Analysis. 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
7 Albanese, A. R. 2003. "Deserted no more." Library Journal, 128(7): 34-36.
8 Ardichvili, A., Page, V., & Wentling, T. 2003. "Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge-sharing communities of practice." Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(1): 64-77.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Bailey, R., & Tierney, B. 2002. "Information commons redux: Concept, evolution, and transcending the tragedy of the commons." The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 28(5): 277-286.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Bailey, D. R., & Tierney, B. G. 2008. Transforming Library Service through Information Commons: Case Studies for the Digital Age. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.
11 Cook, C., & Thompson, B. 2001. "Psychometric properties of scores from the web-based $LibQUAL+^{TM}$: Study of perceptions of library service quality." Library Trends, 49: 585-604.
12 Beagle, D. R., Bailey, D. R., & Tierney, B. 2006. The Information Commons Handbook. New York: Neal Schuman Publishers.
13 Bennett, S. 2003. Libraries Designed for Learning. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources. [online]. [cited 2010.10.1]. .
14 Cook, C., & Heath, F. 2001. "Users' perceptions of library service quality: A $LibQUAL+^{TM}$: Qualitative interview study." Library Trends, 49: 548-584.
15 Cowgill, A., Beam, J., & Wess, L. 2001. "Implementing an information commons in a university library." The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 27(6): 432-439.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. 1992. "Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension." Journal of Marketing, 56(3): 55-68.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Dillenbourg, P. 1999. "What do you mean by collaborative learning?" Collaborative-Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches, 1-19. Oxford: Elsevier.
18 Fitzpatrick, E. B., Moore, A. C., & Lang, B. W. 2008. "Reference librarians at the reference desk in a learning commons: A mixed methods evaluation." The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(3): 231-238.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Gayton, J. T. 2008. "Academic libraries: "social" or "communal?" The nature and future of academic libraries." The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(1): 60-66.   DOI
20 Halbert, M. 1999. "Lessons from the information commons frontier." The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 25(2): 90-91.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Jabocy, J., & O'Brien, N. P. 2005. "Assessing the impact of reference services provided to undergraduate students." College & Research Libraries, 66(4): 324-340.   DOI
22 Hara, N. 2007. "Information technology support for communities of practice: How public defenders learn about winning and losing in court." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(1): 76-87.   DOI
23 Heath, F., Kyrillidou, M., Webster, D., Choudhury, S., Hobbs, B., Lorie, M., & Flores, N. 2003. "Emerging tools for evaluating digital library services: Conceptual Adaptations of LibQUAL+ and CAPM." Journal of Digital Information, 4(2). [online]. [cited 2010.8.1]. .
24 Holsti, O. R. 1969. Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
25 Jung, M. K., & Nam, T. W. 2007. "A study of information commons as model of library integrated service." Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 41(4): 347-363.   DOI
26 Killick, S. 2008. An Introduction to LibQUAL+. London: Aslib Engineering Group AGM, Imperial College of Science and Technology. [online]. [cited 2009.8.5]. .
27 Krippendorf, K. 1980. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
28 Lincoln, Y. S. 2002. "Insights into library services and users from qualitative research." Library & Information Science Research, 24: 3-16.   DOI
29 MacWhinnie, L. A. 2003. "The information commons: The academic library of the future." Portal: Librarians and the Academy, 3(2): 241-257.   DOI
30 Malenfant, C. 2006. "The information commons as a collaborative workspace." Reference Services Review, 34(2): 279-286.   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Murray, D. 2011. "Information Commons and Beyond." [online]. [cited 2011.1.10]. .
32 Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. 2003. Scaling Procedures: Issues and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
33 Neuman, W. L. 1997. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. 3rd ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
34 Nonaka, I., Toyoma, R., & Konno, N. 2000. "SECI, Ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation." Long Range Planning, 33(1): 5-34.   DOI   ScienceOn
35 Parasuraman, A., Zeithamal, V., & Berry, L. 1985. "A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research." Journal of Marketing, 49(4): 41-50.   DOI   ScienceOn
36 Parasuraman, A., Zeithamal, V., & Berry, L. 1988. "SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality." Journal of Retailing, 64(1): 12-40.
37 Parasuraman, A., Zeithamal, V., & Berry, L. 1994a. "Alternative scales for measuring service quality: A comparative assessment based on psychometric and diagnostic criteria." Journal of Retailing, 70(3): 201-230.   DOI   ScienceOn
38 Parasuraman, A., Zeithamal, V., & Berry, L. 1994b. "Reassessment of expectations as a comparison standard in measuring service quality: Implications for further research." Journal of Marketing, 58(1): 111-124   DOI   ScienceOn
39 Roberts, R. L. 2007. "The evolving landscape of the learning commons." Library Review, 56(9): 803-810.   DOI