- Email: [email protected]
Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran
ARTICLE IN PRESS The International Information & Library Review (2008) 40, 52–63
The International Information & Library Review www.elsevier.com/locate/iilr
Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran Zouhayr Hayati, Tahere Jowkar Department of Library and Information Science, Shiraz University, P.O. Box 71944, Shiraz, Fars, Iran
Summary Libraries have experienced a great deal of change in communication networks and information technology. The Iranian academic libraries, like other libraries, attempted to adopt the new information technology. It should be realized that although new information technologies and electronic resources are collected on a large scale by academic libraries they are not always used in the same scale. There are some factors, which affect the rate of adoption of each new technology. Rogers in his theory introduced these factors in five categories as relative advantage, observability, trial- ability, complexity and compatibility. This paper investigates the effects of different features of electronic reference materials on the rate of their adoption. Results show that the most effective factors in adoption of electronic reference materials are the ability of electronic reference materials to facilitate information retrieval, shortening the time of searching and fair cost of resources. In addition, it seems that the most problematic factors, which slow down the adoption of electronic reference materials, stem from unfamiliarity of academic librarians and users with computers and searching of databases. & 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction Libraries, especially academic libraries have experienced a great deal of changes in communication networks and information technology. These organizations are important factors in transmission of information technology to their users that are academic staff and other researchers. The introduction of CDs and local databases in 1980s and then the World Wide Web in 1990s have changed the system of scholarly communication Fax: +98 711 6276374.
E-mail address: [email protected] (Z. Hayati).
tremendously. Developing countries are increasingly adopting information technologies to solve their developmental problems. Academic libraries in these countries, like their counterparts in developed countries, are making a large effort to adopt new technologies to revive scholarly communication. Iranian academic libraries are not an exception; they are in the passage from paper environment to the electronic environment. In this passage, they are eagerly attempting to adopt new technologies, which can lead them to more productivity, reduced costs and greater efficiency. Now, they are pioneers in introducing new technological changes in the
1057-2317/$ - see front matter & 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.iilr.2007.09.003
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran form of off-line and online reference materials. It is worth mentioning that the adoption of new information technology in Iranian academic libraries does not mean their final acceptance and efficient use. There are many internal and external factors, which affect their acceptance by academic librarians and their users. These factors could be attributed to poor infrastructure, high costs, language barriers, social factors and politics, contributing impediments to the process (Al-Gahtani, 2003, p. 69). This article aims to study the internal and external features of electronic reference materials, which can accelerate their adoption in Iranian academic libraries.
The significance and aims of the study The introduction of new information technology has tremendously changed the forms of information services in libraries to provide online access to electronic reference materials for their users (Martin, 2001). Many reference materials, including books and periodicals, have changed into electronic off-line and online databases and are available to library patrons. The Iranian academic libraries, especially those which are affiliated with the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, attempted to adopt the new information technology by heavy investment. These universities along with medical sciences universities have provided a fairly good infrastructure for the development of local and national networks. Academic libraries have online access to databases of publishers such as Elsevier, Wiley, Springer and of aggregators such as Ebsco and Proquest. It should be realized that although electronic information sources are collected on a large scale by academic libraries, they are not used in the same scale (Weiner, 2003, p. 69). Researchers are particularly interested in factors that affect the adoption of information technology innovations. Adoption here is a function of one’s willingness to try new products, technologies or ideas (Cheong, 2002). Diffusion theory is used frequently to evaluate the effect of perceived innovation attributes on the rate of adoption of innovations. Everret M. Rogers,1 who introduced the diffusion of innovations theory in 1964, recognized the features of the innovation which are most important in its adoption (Rogers, 1986, pp. 124–34). Electronic reference materials are not an exception to this general rule. By studying and recognizing the features of these materials, which 1
An American sociologist.
53
help or hinder new introduction, managers of academic libraries can increase the rate of adoption of electronic reference materials by cultivating the positive factors to enhance their adoption while trying to reduce the effects of negative factors.
The theoretical framework of the study Rogers’ diffusion of innovations theory, which has been supported by more than five thousand research studies, was selected as the theoretical framework for this study. In his theory Rogers defines innovation as ‘‘an idea, practice or object that is perceived to be new by an individual or other unit of adoption’’ (1995, p. 11). The newness of the idea does not depend on its first application or discovery. The only premise is that the idea seems new to the person. In this case, it is recognized as an innovation or factor of change (Diffusion of Innovations Theory, 1998). This theory discusses the factors that affect the adoption of an innovation. Rogers summarized these factors in five categories as follows (Borgatta & Montgomery, 2000, pp. 676–679; Holland, 1997; Rogers, 1995, pp. 204–251; Walker, 1999, pp. 15–33). 1. ‘‘Relative advantage: is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the idea it supersedes’’ (Rogers, 1995, p. 212). The adopter’s better understanding of the new idea will increase the rate of adoption. 2. ‘‘Compatibility: is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters’’ (Rogers, 1995, p. 224). This feature is valid for innovations, which affect cultural and social values important to adopters. 3. ‘‘Complexity: is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as relatively difficult to understand and use’’ (Rogers, 1995, p. 242). Some innovations are easy to understand while some are not. This factor has a negative relationship with innovation. This means that the higher the degree of complexity of an idea the lower will be its rate of adoption. 4. ‘‘Trialability: is the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis’’ (Rogers, 1995, p. 243). This should be possible at lower cost for the potential adopters. 5. ‘‘Observability: is the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others’’ (Rogers, 1995, p. 244). Some people are very conservative in accepting new ideas. However,
ARTICLE IN PRESS 54
Z. Hayati, T. Jowkar when they can observe the good and valid results of an innovation they will be convinced to accept the new idea.
These factors affect the decisions of adopters of electronic reference materials. These factors, with the exception of complexity, have positive correlation with the probability of acceptance of innovation by a person or a group. This paper investigates the effects of different features of electronic reference materials on the rate of adoption of this innovation.
The review of literature An overview of the literature shows that there are many researchers who studied the impacts of the features of innovations on different social settings on the basis of Rogers’ theory (Rogers, 1995). Most of these scholars have emphasized the incentive and preventive roles of the features on adoption of an innovation. On an explanation of his theory, Rogers reports the studies carried out by Kivlin (1960), Fliegle and Kivlin (1962), Petrini (1966) and Singh (1966): Kivlin surveyed 299 farmers in Pennsylvania to study the process of adoption of innovations and found out that three features of relative advantage, compatibility and complexity have been effective on the adoption of innovations introduced to farmers. Fliegle and Kivlin (1962) carried out research to study fifty innovations, which had been introduced to a group of Indian farmers. They concluded that relative advantage and observability of results had positive correlation with their rate of adoption. Petrini (1966) studied the adoption of fourteen innovations among Swedish farmers and found that complexity and relative advantage were effective in accelerating the process of adoption of innovations. Singh (1966) also observed 130 Canadian farmers to study their reactions to twenty-two innovations introduced to them. He concluded that relative advantage, complexity, trialability and observability of results had affected the rate of adoption of innovations and had positive correlations with it. Drucker (1994) emphasized simplicity, stated that to be successful innovations should be simple and deal with only one subject. Otherwise, they will confuse their targeted community. Surry (1997) stated that many researchers in the field of instructional technology have based their studies on the theory of perceived attributes.
Researchers like Wyner (1974), Holloway (1977), and Eads (1984) found that the perception of the attributes, such as compatibility, complexity, and relative advantage, play a significant role in adoption of new information technology in instruction (Surry, 1997). There are several authors who focused their studies on the relationship of features of each innovation to its rate of adoption. For example, Ash (1997) reported the results of a study carried out to identify factors that had an impact on the application of information technology, which facilitated end users searching. To study the effects of the relevant factors on the diffusion of online searching within institutions he recognized fifteen factors and clustered them in three sets of attributes including innovation attributes, organizational attributes and marketing attributes. The dependent variables of the study were internal diffusion (spread of diffusion) and infusion (depth of diffusion). The results showed that the relationship between innovations attributes and internal diffusion and infusion was significant. He concluded that successful diffusion of online searching was depended on visibility of systems, communication among, rewards to, and peers of possible users. Schoch and Hahn (1997) studied the electronic publishing as an innovation. Electronic publication can be understood as a cluster of related innovations, which can be incorporated in different combinations. Cluster members individually and in combination, influence adopter perceptions of the relative advantage, complexity, compatibility, visibility, and trialability of a particular implementation. The results show that the change agents involved with the project, succeeded in increasing the observability, trialability and compatibility of the innovation for their users. However, complexity remained high and relative advantage decreased. These resulted in diversity of trials and the slow rate of diffusion of the innovation to date. Prammanee (2003) studied the process of introduction and diffusion of the Internet in Thailand. His study showed that the features of the Internet affecting its diffusion in Thailand (i.e. complexity and trialability) showed that the difficulty of using the Internet by the people, the high cost of providing computers and paying other costs for access to the network had negative effects on the diffusion of the Internet on this country. Williamson, Wright, Burstein, and Schauder (2003) in a study evaluated content, potentiality and the use of some online databases that had been introduced to Australian public libraries in the state of Victoria. By taking advantage of the factors of innovations in Rogers’ theory, they studied the
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran Table 1
55
Frequency (percentage) of priorities of relative advantage of electronic reference materials (n ¼ 41).
Priorities
First attribute
Second attribute
Third attribute
Fourth attribute
Fifth attribute
Sixth attribute
Seventh attribute
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Total
4 7 7 6 7 3 7 41
5 7 5 12 3 6 3 41
0 2 2 5 14 8 10 41
22 4 7 3 2 2 1 41
1 2 2 5 12 10 9 41
1 3 12 6 1 11 7 41
9 15 5 4 3 1 4 41
(9.8) (17.1) (17.1) (14.6) (17.1) (7.3) (17.1) (100)
(12.2) (17.1) (12.2) (29.3) (7.3) (14.6) (7.3) (100)
(0) (4.9) (4.9) (12.2) (34.1) (19.5) (24.4) (100)
factors which accelerated or slowed down the adoption of databases. The relative advantages, such as access to large amounts of authoritative information, access to many full-text articles, the compatibility of the databases with technical conditions of the public libraries and the experience of using the Internet encouraged library patrons to use databases. On the other hand, there were some weaknesses, such as articles on special subjects, non-satisfactory subject coverage of databases, the limited number of articles about Australia, unfamiliarity of many users with searching in databases and differences of search strategy required from one database to another, were problems for diffusion of databases. Al-Gahtani (2003) carried out a survey to investigate how perceived attributes of computer technology influenced its rate of adoption in the workplace in Saudi Arabia. He participated in his study knowledge workers from all sectors of the economy. The results showed that attributes, such as relative advantage, compatibility and observability had played roles as positive correlating factors in computer adoption and complexity was a negative factor. He, Duan, Fu, and Li (2006) carried out a study to examine the adoption of online e-payment by business enterprises using Rogers’ relational model of perceived innovation attributes and rate of adoption. The findings indicated that only perceived compatibility had significant influence on adoption of online e-payment technology by Chinese companies. No significant impact was observed for other attributes.
(53.7) (9.8) (17.1) (7.3) (4.9) (4.9) (2.4) (100)
(2.4) (4.9) (4.9) (12.2) (29.3) (24.4) (22) (100)
(2.4) (7.3) (29.3) (14.6) (2.4) (26.8) (17.1) (100)
(22) (36.6) (12.2) (9.8) (7.3) (2.4) (9.8) (100)
special features and features of electronic reference materials were extracted from different monographs in the field of library and information science (Bopp & Smith, 2001, pp. 97–124; Joerger, 1995; Kilbride, 2004; Nolan, 1999, pp. 111–41). Then they categorized in five groups on the basis of the diffusion of innovations theory. The questionnaire was designed in two parts. The first part gathered information about the libraries and the second part sought the priorities of features based on Rogers’ theory. To measure the validity of the research tool, the questionnaire was reviewed by academic staff of the Department of Library and Information Science and College of Education and Psychology of Shiraz University, Iran. The reliability of the questionnaire was measured by carrying out a test and retest. The Pearson Correlation test showed a number equal to 0.998, which meant that the research tool was highly reliable. Sixty-six questionnaires were sent to academic libraries, which were affiliated with the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, to be filled by reference librarians or library managers. Fortyeight questionnaires were returned of which seven were dropped from the data file due to nonexistence of electronic materials in these libraries.
Results The results will be discussed according to different features of the electronic references materials.
Relative advantage
Research methodology A survey method was used on this study. Data were collected by a structured questionnaire (see Appendix). To formulate the questionnaire the
At the beginning, we will deal with features of electronic reference materials in the category of relative advantage. There are seven features (also referred to as attributes) in this category which were ranked by respondents (see Table 1). These
ARTICLE IN PRESS 56
Z. Hayati, T. Jowkar
features/attributes are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
The possibility of using Boolean operators. The possibility of searching in special fields. The existence of links to authority files. The convenience of information retrieval. The existence of search history option. The existence of links to hypertext and related documents. 7. The accumulation of a large amount of information in one CD or online database. The selection of priority for each option is usually possible by looking at their relative frequencies. For instance, the relative frequencies shown in Table 1 give the highest ranked priorities to the convenience of information retrieval (the fourth attribute) and to the accumulation of a large amount of information in one CD or online database (the seventh attribute), respectively. However, in designating the priority of the first attribute, the possibility of using Boolean operators, we faced a difficulty, because 17.1% of respondents chose second, third, fifth and seventh priorities for this attribute, simultaneously. This
Table 2 Different attributes of relative advantage of electronic reference materials ranked by means. Priority
Relative advantage
Mean
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh
Fourth attribute Seventh attribute Second attribute First attribute Sixth attribute Fifth attribute Third attribute
72.13 99.10 133.76 144.82 166.74 193.74 197.71
problem was also repeated for other attributes. To solve this problem we carried out a Kruskal–Wallis test. The Kruskal–Wallis test is a non-parametric method suitable for testing differences among three or more groups of independent ordinal data. In this case, we have more than two groups of attributes for each feature. To measure the differences among the ranked observations, the following formula was used, in which n is the number of observations or total sample size, j the number of attributes in each feature, Rj the sum of the ranks for each group (here the sum of the ranks of attributes in each feature) and nj the number of scores in group: 2
H¼
12 X Rj 3ðn þ 1Þ. nðn þ 1Þ nj
As a result, we had the mean rank for each attribute according to the sum of priorities which were assigned to that attribute. Therefore, small mean scores show higher ranks while higher numbers show lower ranks. In Table 2 the means are ranked in ascending order. This table shows that the fourth attribute, the convenience of information retrieval, of the first factor, relative advantage, ranks highest with a mean score 72.13. Next highest is the seventh attribute, the accumulation of a large amount of information in one CD or in an online database, with a mean score 99.1. The third attribute, the existence of links to authority files and thesauri, has the lowest rank (mean score 197.71). To find out if these attributes are significantly different, a Chi-Square test was carried out and the result showed that they are significantly different at probability level of 0.01: Chi-square : 79:938;
Table 3
df : 6;
Asymp: Sig: : 0:000.
Frequency (percentage) of priorities of observability of electronic reference materials (n ¼ 41).
Priorities First attribute
Second attribute
Third attribute
Fourth attribute
Fifth attribute
Sixth attribute
Seventh attribute
First 16 (39) Second 10 (24.4) Third 5 (12.2) Fourth 4 (9.8) Fifth 3 (7.3) Sixth 2 (4.9) Seventh 1 (2.4) Total 41 (100)
4 11 6 4 6 5 5 41
3 (7.3) 7 (17.1) 9 (22) 6 (14.6) 5 (12.2) 7 (17.1) 4 (9.8) 41(100)
4 3 11 10 8 4 1 41
8 4 4 13 8 2 2 41
2 1 2 1 3 12 2 41
4 5 4 4 7 9 8 41
(9.8) (26.8) (14.6) (9.8) (14.6) (12.2) (12.2) (100)
(9.8) (7.3) (26.8) (24.4) (19.5) (9.8) (2.4) (100)
(19.5) (9.8) (9.8) (31.7) (19.5) (4.9) (4.9) (100)
(4.9) (2.4) (4.9) (2.4) (7.3) (29.3) (48.8) (100)
(9.8) (12.2) (9.8) (9.8) (17.1) (22) (19.5) (100)
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran
Observability The second factor considered for electronic reference materials is observabiltiy. This factor has seven attributes (Table 3). Table 4 shows the ranking of these attributes. The attributes for this factor are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Shortening the time of searching. Retrieval of a large number of results. Access to full-texts in most situations. Being a multi-user database. Access to resources throughout the world. Printing citations simultaneously. Using several sources simultaneously.
Table 3 shows that the seventh priority (48.8%) and first priority (39%) have the highest relative frequencies, respectively. These percentages belong to the sixth attribute, the possibility of printing citations simultaneously, and the first attribute, shortening the time of searching, respectively. For other attributes, the sums of relative frequencies for each priority are equal so they cannot show definite priorities for each attribute. In order to show priorities for different attributes of the second factor, observability, a Kruskal–Wallis
57
test*** was carried out. Table 4 shows that the first attribute, shortening the time of searching, and the fifth attribute, accessing to resources throughout the world, with means 81.09 and 126.26 had the highest ranks, respectively. The sixth attribute, printing citations simultaneously, had the lowest rank with mean 221.05. A significance test was carried out for seven attributes of observability. Results showed that at the probability level 0.01 there were significance differences among them: Chi-square : 66:354;
df : 6;
Asymp: Sig: : 0:000.
Complexity, trialability and compatibility The last factors to be discussed are complexity, trialability, and compatibility. Because of the limited number of attributes to be discussed in these three features all of them will be evaluated together. The features (attributes) that fall under these three factors include: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Fair price of electronic reference services. Simple interface and user-friendliness. The existence of a help option. The experience of using databases in a trial period.
Table 4 The ranking of attributes of observability, by means. Priority
Observability
Mean
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh
First attribute Fifth attribute Fourth attribute Second attribute Third attribute Seventh attribute Sixth attribute
81.09 126.26 134.22 135.12 143.13 167.13 221.05
Table 6 The ranking of attributes of complexity, compatibility & trial ability by means. Priority
Complexityy
Mean
First Second Third Fourth Fifth
First attribute Third attribute Second attribute Fifth attribute Fourth attribute
86 87 111 111 120
Table 5 Frequency (percentage) of given priorities to the complexity, compatibility & trial ability of electronic reference materials (n ¼ 41). Priorities
First attribute
Second attribute
Third attribute
Fourth attribute
Fifth attribute
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Total
17 4 8 3 9 41
7 5 12 7 10 41
4 22 6 4 5 41
3 7 9 14 8 41
10 3 6 13 9 41
(41.5) (9.8) (19.5) (7.3) (22) (100)
(17.1) (12.2) (29.3) (17.1) (24.4) (100)
(9.8) (53.7) (14.6) (9.8) (12.2) (100)
(7.3) (17.1) (22) (34.1) (19.5) (100)
(24.4) (7.3) (14.6) (31.7) (22) (100)
ARTICLE IN PRESS 58
Z. Hayati, T. Jowkar Table 7
Frequency (percentage) of preventive factors (n ¼ 41).
Priorities
First attribute
Second attribute
Third attribute
Fourth attribute
Fifth attribute
Sixth attribute
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Total
3 9 12 8 3 6 41
2 4 12 11 5 7 41
3 13 7 16 2 0 41
31 6 2 1 0 1 41
1 8 5 4 17 6 41
1 1 3 1 13 22 41
(7.3) (22) (29.3) (19.5) (7.3) (14.6) (100)
(4.9) (9.8) (29.3) (26.8) (12.2) (17.1) (100)
(7.3) (31.7) (17.1) (39) (4.9) (0) (100)
5. The experience of work with a computer and the Internet. Table 5 shows that the relative frequencies of the third attribute, the existence of a help option, and first attribute, fair price of electronic reference sources, in the second and first priorities are 53.7% and 41.5%, respectively. These frequencies compared with other priorities given to other attributes, differ in significant ways. Therefore, the priorities of these attributes are exactly defined. However, the priorities of other attributes because of their similar frequencies are not definable. To show the priorities of other attributes a Kruskal–Wallis test was carried out. Table 6 shows that the first and the second attributes, with means 86 and 87, have the highest ranks, respectively. The fifth attribute, the experience of work with computer and the Internet, with mean 120 has the lowest rank. A Chi-square test carried out for these attributes shows that at the probability level 0.01, they are significantly different: Chi-square : 11:674;
df : 4;
Asymp: Sig: : 0:000.
Preventive factors To study the preventive factors, which retard the adoption of the electronic reference materials, the main attributes were extracted from five factors as cited in Rogers’ diffusion of innovations theory. The features considered to prevent adoption of this technology include the following: 1. The existence of different search strategies in different databases. 2. The lack of confidence on information retrieved from the Internet and databases. 3. The difficulty of searching in some electronic reference materials.
Table 8
(75.6) (14.6) (4.9) (2.4) (0) (2.4) (100)
(2.4) (19.5) (12.2) (9.8) (41.5) (14.6) (100)
(2.4) (2.4) (7.3) (2.4) (31.7) (53.7) (100)
The ranking of barriers by means.
Priority
Barriers
Mean
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth
Fourth attribute Third attribute First attribute Second attribute Fifth attribute Sixth attribute
38.99 103.98 119.89 136.85 148.72 192.57
4. The lack of sufficient expertise in using computers. 5. The inability of the library to introduce the electronic materials. 6. The potentials of electronic reference materials were not as expected.
These attributes were prioritized by respondents. The results are shown in Table 7. According to the relative frequencies in Table 7, the priorities of the forth attribute (75.6%), the lack of sufficient expertise in using computer, the sixth attribute (53.7%), the potentials of electronic reference material were not as expected, and the fifth attribute (41.5%), the inability of library to introduce electronic reference materials, are higher than other attributes. These three priorities are significantly distinguished from others. However, to find out the exact priorities of attributes and ranking them a Kruskal–Wallis test was carried out. The results in Table 8 show that the fourth attribute, the lack of sufficient expertise in using a computer (mean 38.9), and the third attribute, the difficulty of searching in some electronic reference materials (mean 103.98), have the highest ranks, respectively. The lowest rank with (mean 192.57) belongs to the sixth attribute, the potentials of electronic reference materials were not realized.
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran The Chi-square test for six preventive attributes, at the probability level 0.01 showed that they were significantly different: Chi-square : 15:37;
df : 6;
Asymp: Sig: : 0:000.
Discussion Rogers enumerated five factors for every innovation that have effective impact on its pace of adoption. This study shows that these factors are observable in the adoption of electronic reference materials. However, as stated by Barnett (cited in: Rogers, 1995, p. 212), these different attributes of electronic reference materials that are defined for each factor influence their adoption. The results suggest that these attributes and ranking of their factors are highly dependent on users’ information seeking behavior. For example, in relative advantage, the fourth attribute, the convenience of information retrieval, and the seventh attribute, the accumulation of a large amount of information in one CD or in an online database, have the highest ranks. In observability, the first attribute, shortening the time of searching, and the fifth attribute, access to resources throughout the world, receive the highest ranks. In features such as complexity, trialability and compatibility, the first attribute, fair price of electronic reference sources, and the third attribute, the existence of help option, have the highest ranks. The most important barriers to adoption of these materials are the fourth attribute, the lack of sufficient expertise in using computer, and the third attribute, the difficulty of searching in some electronic reference materials. A detailed discussion on these results on the basis of Rogers’ theory and Kruskal–Wallis test is presented in the following subsections.
59
fields; the first attribute, possibility of applying Boolean operators; the sixth attribute, the existence of links to hypertext or related documents; the fifth attribute, the existence of search history option; and the third attribute, existence of links to authority files and thesauri. Users and librarians have had unfavorable experiences when searching traditional reference materials accumulated in libraries. Searching in card catalogs was time consuming and necessitated library skills. Electronic materials, whether in databases or in electronic journals, provided users more understandable options for the search and retrieval of information. Users realized that sources can be found in databases and on the Internet to answer their questions and be used in their research. Users of electronic materials greatly appreciated the large amount of data provided by databases or CDs, especially when they referred to peer-reviewed journals. However, the fact that users failed or neglected to take advantage of some important attributes of electronic reference materials, such as attribute number 5, the existence of search history option, and attribute number 6, the existence of links to authority files and thesauri, is frustrating. These attributes save time, increase precision of searching, and are unavailable in print reference sources, but users were often indifferent to them. This may be because of users’ unfamiliarity with these important attributes of electronic reference materials. The information seeking behaviors of users had a significant role that caused most of them to search for information in a pre-patterned method. Users usually failed to use the full range of facilities provided for them in a database. For example, searching authority files on the basis of subject and names was not a part of the users’ information seeking behavior. As a result it received the lowest rank in priorities assigned to different attributes of electronic reference materials.
The factors which encourage adoption of electronic reference materials Observability Relative advantage The attributes of the electronic reference materials that received the highest number of positive responses from subjects given the Kruskal–Wallis test are the fourth attribute, the convenience of information retrieval; the seventh attribute, accumulation of a large volume of information on a compact disc or on an online database; the second attribute, the possibility of searching in special
The attributes which had the highest ranking in promoting adoption of electronic reference materials are the first attribute, shortening the time of searching; the fifth attribute, accessing resources throughout the world; the forth attribute, being multi-users databases; the second attribute, retrieval of a large amount of results; the third attribute, accessing to full-texts in most situations; the seventh attribute, using several sources
ARTICLE IN PRESS 60 simultaneously; and the sixth attribute, printing citations simultaneously. The highest ranks in the Kruskal–Wallis test were assigned to attributes one, five, and four because of the time pressure academic staff and postgraduate students who use electronic resources experience. They preferred this feature of electronic resources that a powerful search engine provided. These are important considerations for users who communicate with other scholars internationally whose works they wish to consult through databases and networks. In addition, Iranian academic libraries are faced with a lack of funds to collect non-Persian resources. Moreover, document delivery and resource sharing through inter-library loans and by means of surface mail are very time consuming for academic libraries and their users. So they prefer to use networks and electronic resources that do not have these problems. However, to our surprise, the third attribute, accessing to full-texts in most situations, ranked only no. 5. This may be because the databases that are at hand are not supplying full-texts for all citations or because they do not cover all subject areas evenly. In addition, subscription of full-text databases is expensive and many academic libraries cannot afford the cost.
Complexity, trialability and compatibility The priorities of attributes on the basis of Kruskal–Wallis test are the first attribute, fair cost of electronic reference resources; the third attribute, the existence of help options; the second attribute, simple interface and user-friendliness; the fifth attribute, the experience of work with computers and the Internet; and the forth attribute, the experience of using database in trial period. Assigning the highest priority to attribute number one, fair price of electronic reference sources, does not mean that databases are cheap or that academic libraries pay subscriptions from their own budget. In most universities, subscriptions paid for databases use are not paid directly from the library’s budget, but are met by administrative officials (known as Deputies of Research) who are outside the library. The Ministry of Science, Research and Technology also pays subscription fees for small and minor universities or gives them subsidies to subscribe to their databases. The second rank was assigned to the third feature, the existence of help options, because many users are not familiar with using electronic reference materials. In addition, librarians are
Z. Hayati, T. Jowkar usually busy with their own duties and have no time to search for all users. In addition, the second attribute, simple interface and user-friendliness, is one of the valuable features of databases which simplifies locating wanted resources for users, especially those who are not familiar with search strategy. However, in many cases it is usual for libraries to be granted a period to assess the utility of proposed databases. This trial period enables them to become familiar with different potentials of databases that eventually may lead to their subscriptions. Placing the attribute, the experience of using databases trial period, in the last place is a little surprising.
The preventive factors against adoption of electronic reference materials The most important factors which cause problems for adoption of electronic reference materials, and which also had the highest ranks in the Kruskal–Wallis test, are the fourth attribute, the lack of sufficient experience in using computer; the third attribute, the difficulty of searching in some electronic reference materials; the first attribute, the existence of different search strategies in different databases; the second attribute, the lack of confidence on information retrieved from the Internet and databases; the fifth attribute, the inability of library in introducing electronic reference materials; and the six attribute, the potentials of electronic reference materials were not as expected. Problems one to three are related to complexity features while problems four and six are related to adaptability features. According to the responses to the survey, the most important problems that make the adoption of electronic reference materials difficult stem from unfamiliarity of academic librarians and users with computers and database searching. Although most academic libraries are computerized and many academic staff and students have access to computers and networks, either from their offices or computer labs, working with these technologies is still a problem. This is mostly because of the changing nature of information technology and network applications. In addition, databases do not use similar interfaces and search strategies. These factors make the many technicalities of working with databases difficult for users to learn and remember.
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran
Conclusions The diffusion of innovations theory shows the significant impact specific features of electronic reference materials have on their adoption. As a result, these factors should be identified and introduced to librarians and users. The results of this study show that the most effective attributes of electronic reference sources are: their ability to facilitate information retrieval and accumulation of large volumes of information on a compact disc or on an online database (Relative advantage), shortening the time of searching and accessing a variety of information sources all over the world (Observability), and the fair cost of resources and the existence of help option in all pages (Complexity, Compatibility & Trialability). What impedes adoption of these kinds of information sources are lack of sufficient experience in working with computers among subjects of the study and the complexity of searching in some
61
electronic databases. These factors are related to complexity and compatibility features of electronic reference sources and databases. Indeed, it should be accepted that searching in these sources is not easy for all users. This survey’s results suggest that users’ previous experience and knowledge are often not applicable to these new information technologies. To reduce the impact of negative factors it is necessary to take some initiatives and familiarize adoptive groups with different aspects of these resources: teaching search strategies, appointing experienced librarians to supervise and assist users with their searches, setting up workshops, and providing web-based instructions. The results of this survey indicate that these processes are very complex. To take full advantages of electronic resources it is advisable to draw up programs to facilitate their adoption and the understanding of them. In addition, subsidies to targeted groups would help expand access to databases.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 62
Z. Hayati, T. Jowkar
Appendix. Questionnaire2 IX. Here is a list of electronic reference materials’ Observable Results for
Please, answer the following questions:
libraries. Please, define which of them encourage your library more to
I. Identifications:
use this kind of materials. (Use numbers 1-7 to rank the options. a. Name of the library: …………………………………………… b. Affiliated university/College:
…………………………………
Number 1, shows the lowest importance (priority) ) Observability of E-Reference Sources
Priority
Shortening the time of searching
II. Please, define which of the followings are you?
Retrieval of a large number of results Head of the Library
Reference librarian
III. Which degree do you hold? PhD
Being multi-user database
MA/ MS
Associate-Diploma
Access to full- texts in most situations
Access to resources throughout the world
MA/ BS Others (please, specify): ….
Printing citations simultaneously Using several sources simultaneously
IV. What is your field of study?
X. Please, define which option was more important for your library and Library and Information Science
users to use this kind of materials. (Use numbers 1-5 to rank the
Others (please, specify): ………………………………………………..…………
options. Number 1, showsthe lowest importance (priority) ) Complexity, Trial ability and Compatibility of E- Reference Sources
V. Do you have a reference collection in your library? Yes
Fair price of electronic reference sources
No
VI. Do you have any electronic reference materials in your library (i.e.
Simple interface and user friendliness The existence of help option
CDs or Online Databases)? Yes
Priority
The experience of using databases in trial period
No
(If you answer the above question with ‘yes’,please, go through other
The experience of work with computer and the Internet
questions, in other case, no)
XI. Here is a list ofcommon barriers that mostly prevent libraries to offer VII. When did your library provide the electronic reference materials for the first time?
of them affect your library more? (Use numbers 1-6 to rank the
CD-ROMs:………………………
options. Number 1, showsthe lowestimportance(priority) )
Online-Databases: ………………
Preventive Factors in Using E- Reference Sources
VIII. Here is a list of electronic reference materials advantages for libraries. Please, define which of them encourage your library more to use this kind of materials?(Use numbers 1-7 to rank the options. Number1, shows the lowest importance (priority) )
Relative Advantages of E-Reference Sources
electronic reference materials in a wide range. Please, define which
Priority
The possibility of using Boolean operators The possibility of searching in special fields The existence of links to authority files and thesauri The convenience of information retrieval
Priority
The existence of different search strategies in different databases The lack of confidence on information retrieved from the Internet and databases The difficulty of searching in some electronic reference materials The lackof sufficient expertiseinusing computer The inability of library in introducing electronic reference materials The potentials of electronic reference materials were not as expected
XII. Please, attach a list of your electronic reference materials (Persian & Non Persian) to the questionnaire.
The existence of search history option The existence of links to hypertext and related documents The accumulation of a large amount of information in one CD or in an online database
References Al-Gahtani, Said S. (2003). Computer technology adoption in Saudi Arabia: Correlates of perceived innovation attributes. Information Technology for Development, 10(1), 57–69. Ash, Joan. S. (1997). Factors affecting the diffusion of the computer-based patient record. In Proceedings of American 2
This questionnaire is extracted from a large one. If you need to see the latter, please contact the authors at their email addresses.
medical informatics association fall symposium (AMIA’97) (pp. 682–6), Nashville, TN. Bopp, Richard E., & Smith, Linda C. (2001). Reference and information services: An introduction (3rd ed.). New York: Libraries Unlimited. Borgatta, Edgar F., & Montgomery, Rhonda J. V. (2000). Encyclopedia of sociology, Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan Reference. Cheong, Weng Hin (2002). Internet adoption in macao. JCMC. 7(2). Retrieved March 20, 2006 from /http://jcmc.indiana. edu/vol7/issue2/index.htmlS.
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran Diffusion of Innovations Theory. (1998). Retrieved June 15, 2004 from /http://www.Ciadvertising.Org/studies/student/98_ fall/theory/hornor/paperS. Drucker, Peter F. (1994). Innovation and entrepreneurship: Practice and principles. London: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd. Eads, Gerald Milton (1984). Manipulation of innovation attributes and impaction attitude formation. Ph.D. thesis. Kansas: Kansas State University /http://www.sssgrp.comS. Fliegle, Fredrick C., & Kivlin, Joseph E. (1962). Farm practice attributes and adoption rates. Social Forces, 40, 364–370. He, Q., Duan, Y., Fu, Z., & Li, D. (2006). An innovation adoption: Study of online e-payment in Chinese companies. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 4(1), 48–69. Holland, Matt (1997). Diffusion of innovations theories and their relevance to understanding the role of librarians when introducing users to networked information. Electronic Library, 15(5), 389–394. Holloway, Robert Evan (1977). Perceptions of an innovation: Syracuse University project advance. Ph. D. thesis, Syracuse University. Joerger, Thilo (1995). Educational uses of CD-ROM technology. Retrieved November 15, 2004 from /http://aci.mta.ca/ TheUmbrella/TTTF/CDROM.htmlS. Kivlin, Joseph E. (1960). Characteristics associated with rate of adoption. Ph.D. thesis. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania State University: In Rogers Everret M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press. Kilbride, William (2004). Why bother with digitization? Users and using digital resources. Retrieved November 15, 2004 from /http://ahds.ac.uk/history/creating/information-papers/ why-bother-digitisingS. Martin, Rebbeca R. (2001). Restructuring the University of Vermont libraries: Challenges, opportunities and change. Retrieved July 20, 2004 from /http://www.ala.Org/acrl/pil/martin.HtmlS. Nolan, Christopher W. (1999). Managing the reference collection. New York: American Library Association. Petrini, Frank (1966). The rate of adoption of selected agricultural innovations. Uppsala: Agricultural College of
63
Sweden. Report 53. In Surry, Daniel W. (1997). Diffusion theory and instructional technology. Retrieved March 20, 2006 from /http://intro.base.org/docs/diffusionS. Prammanee, Noppadol (2003). A critical analysis of adoption and utilization of the Internet in Thailand for educational purposes. Retrieved August 7, 2004 from /http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_1/prammanee/index.htmlS. Rogers, Everret M. (1986). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press. Rogers, Everret M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press. Schoch, Natalie A., & Hahn, Karla L. (1997). Applying diffusion theory to electronic publishing: A conceptual framework for examining issues and outcomes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 34, 5–13. Singh, Ram M. (1966).Characteristics of farm innovations associated with the rate of adoption. Guelph, Ontario Agricultural Extension Education Report, Vol. 14. Surry, Daniel W. (1997). Diffusion theory and instructional technology. Retrieved March 20, 2006 from /http://intro. base.org/docs/diffusion/S. Walker, Jill Cohen (1999). Diffusion of innovations theory applied: The adoption of digital on-demand technology by book publishers and printers. M.Sc. thesis. University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Retrieved September 25, 2005 from Ebsco Academic Search Premier. Weiner, Sharon Gray (2003). Resistance to change in libraries: Application of communication theories. Portal: Libraries and Academy, 3(1), 69. Williamson, Kristy, Wright, Steven, Burstein, Frada & Schauder, Don (2003). Adoption of online databases in public libraries: An Australian case study. Libries, 13(2). Retrieved September 19, 2004 from /http://libres.curtin.edu.au/libres13n2/ index.htmS. Wyner, N.B. (1974). A study of diffusion of innovation: Measuring perceived attributes of an innovation that determine rate of adoption. Dissertation Abstracts International, 35, 3583A.
The International Information & Library Review www.elsevier.com/locate/iilr
Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran Zouhayr Hayati, Tahere Jowkar Department of Library and Information Science, Shiraz University, P.O. Box 71944, Shiraz, Fars, Iran
Summary Libraries have experienced a great deal of change in communication networks and information technology. The Iranian academic libraries, like other libraries, attempted to adopt the new information technology. It should be realized that although new information technologies and electronic resources are collected on a large scale by academic libraries they are not always used in the same scale. There are some factors, which affect the rate of adoption of each new technology. Rogers in his theory introduced these factors in five categories as relative advantage, observability, trial- ability, complexity and compatibility. This paper investigates the effects of different features of electronic reference materials on the rate of their adoption. Results show that the most effective factors in adoption of electronic reference materials are the ability of electronic reference materials to facilitate information retrieval, shortening the time of searching and fair cost of resources. In addition, it seems that the most problematic factors, which slow down the adoption of electronic reference materials, stem from unfamiliarity of academic librarians and users with computers and searching of databases. & 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction Libraries, especially academic libraries have experienced a great deal of changes in communication networks and information technology. These organizations are important factors in transmission of information technology to their users that are academic staff and other researchers. The introduction of CDs and local databases in 1980s and then the World Wide Web in 1990s have changed the system of scholarly communication Fax: +98 711 6276374.
E-mail address: [email protected] (Z. Hayati).
tremendously. Developing countries are increasingly adopting information technologies to solve their developmental problems. Academic libraries in these countries, like their counterparts in developed countries, are making a large effort to adopt new technologies to revive scholarly communication. Iranian academic libraries are not an exception; they are in the passage from paper environment to the electronic environment. In this passage, they are eagerly attempting to adopt new technologies, which can lead them to more productivity, reduced costs and greater efficiency. Now, they are pioneers in introducing new technological changes in the
1057-2317/$ - see front matter & 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.iilr.2007.09.003
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran form of off-line and online reference materials. It is worth mentioning that the adoption of new information technology in Iranian academic libraries does not mean their final acceptance and efficient use. There are many internal and external factors, which affect their acceptance by academic librarians and their users. These factors could be attributed to poor infrastructure, high costs, language barriers, social factors and politics, contributing impediments to the process (Al-Gahtani, 2003, p. 69). This article aims to study the internal and external features of electronic reference materials, which can accelerate their adoption in Iranian academic libraries.
The significance and aims of the study The introduction of new information technology has tremendously changed the forms of information services in libraries to provide online access to electronic reference materials for their users (Martin, 2001). Many reference materials, including books and periodicals, have changed into electronic off-line and online databases and are available to library patrons. The Iranian academic libraries, especially those which are affiliated with the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, attempted to adopt the new information technology by heavy investment. These universities along with medical sciences universities have provided a fairly good infrastructure for the development of local and national networks. Academic libraries have online access to databases of publishers such as Elsevier, Wiley, Springer and of aggregators such as Ebsco and Proquest. It should be realized that although electronic information sources are collected on a large scale by academic libraries, they are not used in the same scale (Weiner, 2003, p. 69). Researchers are particularly interested in factors that affect the adoption of information technology innovations. Adoption here is a function of one’s willingness to try new products, technologies or ideas (Cheong, 2002). Diffusion theory is used frequently to evaluate the effect of perceived innovation attributes on the rate of adoption of innovations. Everret M. Rogers,1 who introduced the diffusion of innovations theory in 1964, recognized the features of the innovation which are most important in its adoption (Rogers, 1986, pp. 124–34). Electronic reference materials are not an exception to this general rule. By studying and recognizing the features of these materials, which 1
An American sociologist.
53
help or hinder new introduction, managers of academic libraries can increase the rate of adoption of electronic reference materials by cultivating the positive factors to enhance their adoption while trying to reduce the effects of negative factors.
The theoretical framework of the study Rogers’ diffusion of innovations theory, which has been supported by more than five thousand research studies, was selected as the theoretical framework for this study. In his theory Rogers defines innovation as ‘‘an idea, practice or object that is perceived to be new by an individual or other unit of adoption’’ (1995, p. 11). The newness of the idea does not depend on its first application or discovery. The only premise is that the idea seems new to the person. In this case, it is recognized as an innovation or factor of change (Diffusion of Innovations Theory, 1998). This theory discusses the factors that affect the adoption of an innovation. Rogers summarized these factors in five categories as follows (Borgatta & Montgomery, 2000, pp. 676–679; Holland, 1997; Rogers, 1995, pp. 204–251; Walker, 1999, pp. 15–33). 1. ‘‘Relative advantage: is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the idea it supersedes’’ (Rogers, 1995, p. 212). The adopter’s better understanding of the new idea will increase the rate of adoption. 2. ‘‘Compatibility: is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters’’ (Rogers, 1995, p. 224). This feature is valid for innovations, which affect cultural and social values important to adopters. 3. ‘‘Complexity: is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as relatively difficult to understand and use’’ (Rogers, 1995, p. 242). Some innovations are easy to understand while some are not. This factor has a negative relationship with innovation. This means that the higher the degree of complexity of an idea the lower will be its rate of adoption. 4. ‘‘Trialability: is the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis’’ (Rogers, 1995, p. 243). This should be possible at lower cost for the potential adopters. 5. ‘‘Observability: is the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others’’ (Rogers, 1995, p. 244). Some people are very conservative in accepting new ideas. However,
ARTICLE IN PRESS 54
Z. Hayati, T. Jowkar when they can observe the good and valid results of an innovation they will be convinced to accept the new idea.
These factors affect the decisions of adopters of electronic reference materials. These factors, with the exception of complexity, have positive correlation with the probability of acceptance of innovation by a person or a group. This paper investigates the effects of different features of electronic reference materials on the rate of adoption of this innovation.
The review of literature An overview of the literature shows that there are many researchers who studied the impacts of the features of innovations on different social settings on the basis of Rogers’ theory (Rogers, 1995). Most of these scholars have emphasized the incentive and preventive roles of the features on adoption of an innovation. On an explanation of his theory, Rogers reports the studies carried out by Kivlin (1960), Fliegle and Kivlin (1962), Petrini (1966) and Singh (1966): Kivlin surveyed 299 farmers in Pennsylvania to study the process of adoption of innovations and found out that three features of relative advantage, compatibility and complexity have been effective on the adoption of innovations introduced to farmers. Fliegle and Kivlin (1962) carried out research to study fifty innovations, which had been introduced to a group of Indian farmers. They concluded that relative advantage and observability of results had positive correlation with their rate of adoption. Petrini (1966) studied the adoption of fourteen innovations among Swedish farmers and found that complexity and relative advantage were effective in accelerating the process of adoption of innovations. Singh (1966) also observed 130 Canadian farmers to study their reactions to twenty-two innovations introduced to them. He concluded that relative advantage, complexity, trialability and observability of results had affected the rate of adoption of innovations and had positive correlations with it. Drucker (1994) emphasized simplicity, stated that to be successful innovations should be simple and deal with only one subject. Otherwise, they will confuse their targeted community. Surry (1997) stated that many researchers in the field of instructional technology have based their studies on the theory of perceived attributes.
Researchers like Wyner (1974), Holloway (1977), and Eads (1984) found that the perception of the attributes, such as compatibility, complexity, and relative advantage, play a significant role in adoption of new information technology in instruction (Surry, 1997). There are several authors who focused their studies on the relationship of features of each innovation to its rate of adoption. For example, Ash (1997) reported the results of a study carried out to identify factors that had an impact on the application of information technology, which facilitated end users searching. To study the effects of the relevant factors on the diffusion of online searching within institutions he recognized fifteen factors and clustered them in three sets of attributes including innovation attributes, organizational attributes and marketing attributes. The dependent variables of the study were internal diffusion (spread of diffusion) and infusion (depth of diffusion). The results showed that the relationship between innovations attributes and internal diffusion and infusion was significant. He concluded that successful diffusion of online searching was depended on visibility of systems, communication among, rewards to, and peers of possible users. Schoch and Hahn (1997) studied the electronic publishing as an innovation. Electronic publication can be understood as a cluster of related innovations, which can be incorporated in different combinations. Cluster members individually and in combination, influence adopter perceptions of the relative advantage, complexity, compatibility, visibility, and trialability of a particular implementation. The results show that the change agents involved with the project, succeeded in increasing the observability, trialability and compatibility of the innovation for their users. However, complexity remained high and relative advantage decreased. These resulted in diversity of trials and the slow rate of diffusion of the innovation to date. Prammanee (2003) studied the process of introduction and diffusion of the Internet in Thailand. His study showed that the features of the Internet affecting its diffusion in Thailand (i.e. complexity and trialability) showed that the difficulty of using the Internet by the people, the high cost of providing computers and paying other costs for access to the network had negative effects on the diffusion of the Internet on this country. Williamson, Wright, Burstein, and Schauder (2003) in a study evaluated content, potentiality and the use of some online databases that had been introduced to Australian public libraries in the state of Victoria. By taking advantage of the factors of innovations in Rogers’ theory, they studied the
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran Table 1
55
Frequency (percentage) of priorities of relative advantage of electronic reference materials (n ¼ 41).
Priorities
First attribute
Second attribute
Third attribute
Fourth attribute
Fifth attribute
Sixth attribute
Seventh attribute
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Total
4 7 7 6 7 3 7 41
5 7 5 12 3 6 3 41
0 2 2 5 14 8 10 41
22 4 7 3 2 2 1 41
1 2 2 5 12 10 9 41
1 3 12 6 1 11 7 41
9 15 5 4 3 1 4 41
(9.8) (17.1) (17.1) (14.6) (17.1) (7.3) (17.1) (100)
(12.2) (17.1) (12.2) (29.3) (7.3) (14.6) (7.3) (100)
(0) (4.9) (4.9) (12.2) (34.1) (19.5) (24.4) (100)
factors which accelerated or slowed down the adoption of databases. The relative advantages, such as access to large amounts of authoritative information, access to many full-text articles, the compatibility of the databases with technical conditions of the public libraries and the experience of using the Internet encouraged library patrons to use databases. On the other hand, there were some weaknesses, such as articles on special subjects, non-satisfactory subject coverage of databases, the limited number of articles about Australia, unfamiliarity of many users with searching in databases and differences of search strategy required from one database to another, were problems for diffusion of databases. Al-Gahtani (2003) carried out a survey to investigate how perceived attributes of computer technology influenced its rate of adoption in the workplace in Saudi Arabia. He participated in his study knowledge workers from all sectors of the economy. The results showed that attributes, such as relative advantage, compatibility and observability had played roles as positive correlating factors in computer adoption and complexity was a negative factor. He, Duan, Fu, and Li (2006) carried out a study to examine the adoption of online e-payment by business enterprises using Rogers’ relational model of perceived innovation attributes and rate of adoption. The findings indicated that only perceived compatibility had significant influence on adoption of online e-payment technology by Chinese companies. No significant impact was observed for other attributes.
(53.7) (9.8) (17.1) (7.3) (4.9) (4.9) (2.4) (100)
(2.4) (4.9) (4.9) (12.2) (29.3) (24.4) (22) (100)
(2.4) (7.3) (29.3) (14.6) (2.4) (26.8) (17.1) (100)
(22) (36.6) (12.2) (9.8) (7.3) (2.4) (9.8) (100)
special features and features of electronic reference materials were extracted from different monographs in the field of library and information science (Bopp & Smith, 2001, pp. 97–124; Joerger, 1995; Kilbride, 2004; Nolan, 1999, pp. 111–41). Then they categorized in five groups on the basis of the diffusion of innovations theory. The questionnaire was designed in two parts. The first part gathered information about the libraries and the second part sought the priorities of features based on Rogers’ theory. To measure the validity of the research tool, the questionnaire was reviewed by academic staff of the Department of Library and Information Science and College of Education and Psychology of Shiraz University, Iran. The reliability of the questionnaire was measured by carrying out a test and retest. The Pearson Correlation test showed a number equal to 0.998, which meant that the research tool was highly reliable. Sixty-six questionnaires were sent to academic libraries, which were affiliated with the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, to be filled by reference librarians or library managers. Fortyeight questionnaires were returned of which seven were dropped from the data file due to nonexistence of electronic materials in these libraries.
Results The results will be discussed according to different features of the electronic references materials.
Relative advantage
Research methodology A survey method was used on this study. Data were collected by a structured questionnaire (see Appendix). To formulate the questionnaire the
At the beginning, we will deal with features of electronic reference materials in the category of relative advantage. There are seven features (also referred to as attributes) in this category which were ranked by respondents (see Table 1). These
ARTICLE IN PRESS 56
Z. Hayati, T. Jowkar
features/attributes are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
The possibility of using Boolean operators. The possibility of searching in special fields. The existence of links to authority files. The convenience of information retrieval. The existence of search history option. The existence of links to hypertext and related documents. 7. The accumulation of a large amount of information in one CD or online database. The selection of priority for each option is usually possible by looking at their relative frequencies. For instance, the relative frequencies shown in Table 1 give the highest ranked priorities to the convenience of information retrieval (the fourth attribute) and to the accumulation of a large amount of information in one CD or online database (the seventh attribute), respectively. However, in designating the priority of the first attribute, the possibility of using Boolean operators, we faced a difficulty, because 17.1% of respondents chose second, third, fifth and seventh priorities for this attribute, simultaneously. This
Table 2 Different attributes of relative advantage of electronic reference materials ranked by means. Priority
Relative advantage
Mean
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh
Fourth attribute Seventh attribute Second attribute First attribute Sixth attribute Fifth attribute Third attribute
72.13 99.10 133.76 144.82 166.74 193.74 197.71
problem was also repeated for other attributes. To solve this problem we carried out a Kruskal–Wallis test. The Kruskal–Wallis test is a non-parametric method suitable for testing differences among three or more groups of independent ordinal data. In this case, we have more than two groups of attributes for each feature. To measure the differences among the ranked observations, the following formula was used, in which n is the number of observations or total sample size, j the number of attributes in each feature, Rj the sum of the ranks for each group (here the sum of the ranks of attributes in each feature) and nj the number of scores in group: 2
H¼
12 X Rj 3ðn þ 1Þ. nðn þ 1Þ nj
As a result, we had the mean rank for each attribute according to the sum of priorities which were assigned to that attribute. Therefore, small mean scores show higher ranks while higher numbers show lower ranks. In Table 2 the means are ranked in ascending order. This table shows that the fourth attribute, the convenience of information retrieval, of the first factor, relative advantage, ranks highest with a mean score 72.13. Next highest is the seventh attribute, the accumulation of a large amount of information in one CD or in an online database, with a mean score 99.1. The third attribute, the existence of links to authority files and thesauri, has the lowest rank (mean score 197.71). To find out if these attributes are significantly different, a Chi-Square test was carried out and the result showed that they are significantly different at probability level of 0.01: Chi-square : 79:938;
Table 3
df : 6;
Asymp: Sig: : 0:000.
Frequency (percentage) of priorities of observability of electronic reference materials (n ¼ 41).
Priorities First attribute
Second attribute
Third attribute
Fourth attribute
Fifth attribute
Sixth attribute
Seventh attribute
First 16 (39) Second 10 (24.4) Third 5 (12.2) Fourth 4 (9.8) Fifth 3 (7.3) Sixth 2 (4.9) Seventh 1 (2.4) Total 41 (100)
4 11 6 4 6 5 5 41
3 (7.3) 7 (17.1) 9 (22) 6 (14.6) 5 (12.2) 7 (17.1) 4 (9.8) 41(100)
4 3 11 10 8 4 1 41
8 4 4 13 8 2 2 41
2 1 2 1 3 12 2 41
4 5 4 4 7 9 8 41
(9.8) (26.8) (14.6) (9.8) (14.6) (12.2) (12.2) (100)
(9.8) (7.3) (26.8) (24.4) (19.5) (9.8) (2.4) (100)
(19.5) (9.8) (9.8) (31.7) (19.5) (4.9) (4.9) (100)
(4.9) (2.4) (4.9) (2.4) (7.3) (29.3) (48.8) (100)
(9.8) (12.2) (9.8) (9.8) (17.1) (22) (19.5) (100)
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran
Observability The second factor considered for electronic reference materials is observabiltiy. This factor has seven attributes (Table 3). Table 4 shows the ranking of these attributes. The attributes for this factor are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Shortening the time of searching. Retrieval of a large number of results. Access to full-texts in most situations. Being a multi-user database. Access to resources throughout the world. Printing citations simultaneously. Using several sources simultaneously.
Table 3 shows that the seventh priority (48.8%) and first priority (39%) have the highest relative frequencies, respectively. These percentages belong to the sixth attribute, the possibility of printing citations simultaneously, and the first attribute, shortening the time of searching, respectively. For other attributes, the sums of relative frequencies for each priority are equal so they cannot show definite priorities for each attribute. In order to show priorities for different attributes of the second factor, observability, a Kruskal–Wallis
57
test*** was carried out. Table 4 shows that the first attribute, shortening the time of searching, and the fifth attribute, accessing to resources throughout the world, with means 81.09 and 126.26 had the highest ranks, respectively. The sixth attribute, printing citations simultaneously, had the lowest rank with mean 221.05. A significance test was carried out for seven attributes of observability. Results showed that at the probability level 0.01 there were significance differences among them: Chi-square : 66:354;
df : 6;
Asymp: Sig: : 0:000.
Complexity, trialability and compatibility The last factors to be discussed are complexity, trialability, and compatibility. Because of the limited number of attributes to be discussed in these three features all of them will be evaluated together. The features (attributes) that fall under these three factors include: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Fair price of electronic reference services. Simple interface and user-friendliness. The existence of a help option. The experience of using databases in a trial period.
Table 4 The ranking of attributes of observability, by means. Priority
Observability
Mean
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh
First attribute Fifth attribute Fourth attribute Second attribute Third attribute Seventh attribute Sixth attribute
81.09 126.26 134.22 135.12 143.13 167.13 221.05
Table 6 The ranking of attributes of complexity, compatibility & trial ability by means. Priority
Complexityy
Mean
First Second Third Fourth Fifth
First attribute Third attribute Second attribute Fifth attribute Fourth attribute
86 87 111 111 120
Table 5 Frequency (percentage) of given priorities to the complexity, compatibility & trial ability of electronic reference materials (n ¼ 41). Priorities
First attribute
Second attribute
Third attribute
Fourth attribute
Fifth attribute
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Total
17 4 8 3 9 41
7 5 12 7 10 41
4 22 6 4 5 41
3 7 9 14 8 41
10 3 6 13 9 41
(41.5) (9.8) (19.5) (7.3) (22) (100)
(17.1) (12.2) (29.3) (17.1) (24.4) (100)
(9.8) (53.7) (14.6) (9.8) (12.2) (100)
(7.3) (17.1) (22) (34.1) (19.5) (100)
(24.4) (7.3) (14.6) (31.7) (22) (100)
ARTICLE IN PRESS 58
Z. Hayati, T. Jowkar Table 7
Frequency (percentage) of preventive factors (n ¼ 41).
Priorities
First attribute
Second attribute
Third attribute
Fourth attribute
Fifth attribute
Sixth attribute
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Total
3 9 12 8 3 6 41
2 4 12 11 5 7 41
3 13 7 16 2 0 41
31 6 2 1 0 1 41
1 8 5 4 17 6 41
1 1 3 1 13 22 41
(7.3) (22) (29.3) (19.5) (7.3) (14.6) (100)
(4.9) (9.8) (29.3) (26.8) (12.2) (17.1) (100)
(7.3) (31.7) (17.1) (39) (4.9) (0) (100)
5. The experience of work with a computer and the Internet. Table 5 shows that the relative frequencies of the third attribute, the existence of a help option, and first attribute, fair price of electronic reference sources, in the second and first priorities are 53.7% and 41.5%, respectively. These frequencies compared with other priorities given to other attributes, differ in significant ways. Therefore, the priorities of these attributes are exactly defined. However, the priorities of other attributes because of their similar frequencies are not definable. To show the priorities of other attributes a Kruskal–Wallis test was carried out. Table 6 shows that the first and the second attributes, with means 86 and 87, have the highest ranks, respectively. The fifth attribute, the experience of work with computer and the Internet, with mean 120 has the lowest rank. A Chi-square test carried out for these attributes shows that at the probability level 0.01, they are significantly different: Chi-square : 11:674;
df : 4;
Asymp: Sig: : 0:000.
Preventive factors To study the preventive factors, which retard the adoption of the electronic reference materials, the main attributes were extracted from five factors as cited in Rogers’ diffusion of innovations theory. The features considered to prevent adoption of this technology include the following: 1. The existence of different search strategies in different databases. 2. The lack of confidence on information retrieved from the Internet and databases. 3. The difficulty of searching in some electronic reference materials.
Table 8
(75.6) (14.6) (4.9) (2.4) (0) (2.4) (100)
(2.4) (19.5) (12.2) (9.8) (41.5) (14.6) (100)
(2.4) (2.4) (7.3) (2.4) (31.7) (53.7) (100)
The ranking of barriers by means.
Priority
Barriers
Mean
First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth
Fourth attribute Third attribute First attribute Second attribute Fifth attribute Sixth attribute
38.99 103.98 119.89 136.85 148.72 192.57
4. The lack of sufficient expertise in using computers. 5. The inability of the library to introduce the electronic materials. 6. The potentials of electronic reference materials were not as expected.
These attributes were prioritized by respondents. The results are shown in Table 7. According to the relative frequencies in Table 7, the priorities of the forth attribute (75.6%), the lack of sufficient expertise in using computer, the sixth attribute (53.7%), the potentials of electronic reference material were not as expected, and the fifth attribute (41.5%), the inability of library to introduce electronic reference materials, are higher than other attributes. These three priorities are significantly distinguished from others. However, to find out the exact priorities of attributes and ranking them a Kruskal–Wallis test was carried out. The results in Table 8 show that the fourth attribute, the lack of sufficient expertise in using a computer (mean 38.9), and the third attribute, the difficulty of searching in some electronic reference materials (mean 103.98), have the highest ranks, respectively. The lowest rank with (mean 192.57) belongs to the sixth attribute, the potentials of electronic reference materials were not realized.
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran The Chi-square test for six preventive attributes, at the probability level 0.01 showed that they were significantly different: Chi-square : 15:37;
df : 6;
Asymp: Sig: : 0:000.
Discussion Rogers enumerated five factors for every innovation that have effective impact on its pace of adoption. This study shows that these factors are observable in the adoption of electronic reference materials. However, as stated by Barnett (cited in: Rogers, 1995, p. 212), these different attributes of electronic reference materials that are defined for each factor influence their adoption. The results suggest that these attributes and ranking of their factors are highly dependent on users’ information seeking behavior. For example, in relative advantage, the fourth attribute, the convenience of information retrieval, and the seventh attribute, the accumulation of a large amount of information in one CD or in an online database, have the highest ranks. In observability, the first attribute, shortening the time of searching, and the fifth attribute, access to resources throughout the world, receive the highest ranks. In features such as complexity, trialability and compatibility, the first attribute, fair price of electronic reference sources, and the third attribute, the existence of help option, have the highest ranks. The most important barriers to adoption of these materials are the fourth attribute, the lack of sufficient expertise in using computer, and the third attribute, the difficulty of searching in some electronic reference materials. A detailed discussion on these results on the basis of Rogers’ theory and Kruskal–Wallis test is presented in the following subsections.
59
fields; the first attribute, possibility of applying Boolean operators; the sixth attribute, the existence of links to hypertext or related documents; the fifth attribute, the existence of search history option; and the third attribute, existence of links to authority files and thesauri. Users and librarians have had unfavorable experiences when searching traditional reference materials accumulated in libraries. Searching in card catalogs was time consuming and necessitated library skills. Electronic materials, whether in databases or in electronic journals, provided users more understandable options for the search and retrieval of information. Users realized that sources can be found in databases and on the Internet to answer their questions and be used in their research. Users of electronic materials greatly appreciated the large amount of data provided by databases or CDs, especially when they referred to peer-reviewed journals. However, the fact that users failed or neglected to take advantage of some important attributes of electronic reference materials, such as attribute number 5, the existence of search history option, and attribute number 6, the existence of links to authority files and thesauri, is frustrating. These attributes save time, increase precision of searching, and are unavailable in print reference sources, but users were often indifferent to them. This may be because of users’ unfamiliarity with these important attributes of electronic reference materials. The information seeking behaviors of users had a significant role that caused most of them to search for information in a pre-patterned method. Users usually failed to use the full range of facilities provided for them in a database. For example, searching authority files on the basis of subject and names was not a part of the users’ information seeking behavior. As a result it received the lowest rank in priorities assigned to different attributes of electronic reference materials.
The factors which encourage adoption of electronic reference materials Observability Relative advantage The attributes of the electronic reference materials that received the highest number of positive responses from subjects given the Kruskal–Wallis test are the fourth attribute, the convenience of information retrieval; the seventh attribute, accumulation of a large volume of information on a compact disc or on an online database; the second attribute, the possibility of searching in special
The attributes which had the highest ranking in promoting adoption of electronic reference materials are the first attribute, shortening the time of searching; the fifth attribute, accessing resources throughout the world; the forth attribute, being multi-users databases; the second attribute, retrieval of a large amount of results; the third attribute, accessing to full-texts in most situations; the seventh attribute, using several sources
ARTICLE IN PRESS 60 simultaneously; and the sixth attribute, printing citations simultaneously. The highest ranks in the Kruskal–Wallis test were assigned to attributes one, five, and four because of the time pressure academic staff and postgraduate students who use electronic resources experience. They preferred this feature of electronic resources that a powerful search engine provided. These are important considerations for users who communicate with other scholars internationally whose works they wish to consult through databases and networks. In addition, Iranian academic libraries are faced with a lack of funds to collect non-Persian resources. Moreover, document delivery and resource sharing through inter-library loans and by means of surface mail are very time consuming for academic libraries and their users. So they prefer to use networks and electronic resources that do not have these problems. However, to our surprise, the third attribute, accessing to full-texts in most situations, ranked only no. 5. This may be because the databases that are at hand are not supplying full-texts for all citations or because they do not cover all subject areas evenly. In addition, subscription of full-text databases is expensive and many academic libraries cannot afford the cost.
Complexity, trialability and compatibility The priorities of attributes on the basis of Kruskal–Wallis test are the first attribute, fair cost of electronic reference resources; the third attribute, the existence of help options; the second attribute, simple interface and user-friendliness; the fifth attribute, the experience of work with computers and the Internet; and the forth attribute, the experience of using database in trial period. Assigning the highest priority to attribute number one, fair price of electronic reference sources, does not mean that databases are cheap or that academic libraries pay subscriptions from their own budget. In most universities, subscriptions paid for databases use are not paid directly from the library’s budget, but are met by administrative officials (known as Deputies of Research) who are outside the library. The Ministry of Science, Research and Technology also pays subscription fees for small and minor universities or gives them subsidies to subscribe to their databases. The second rank was assigned to the third feature, the existence of help options, because many users are not familiar with using electronic reference materials. In addition, librarians are
Z. Hayati, T. Jowkar usually busy with their own duties and have no time to search for all users. In addition, the second attribute, simple interface and user-friendliness, is one of the valuable features of databases which simplifies locating wanted resources for users, especially those who are not familiar with search strategy. However, in many cases it is usual for libraries to be granted a period to assess the utility of proposed databases. This trial period enables them to become familiar with different potentials of databases that eventually may lead to their subscriptions. Placing the attribute, the experience of using databases trial period, in the last place is a little surprising.
The preventive factors against adoption of electronic reference materials The most important factors which cause problems for adoption of electronic reference materials, and which also had the highest ranks in the Kruskal–Wallis test, are the fourth attribute, the lack of sufficient experience in using computer; the third attribute, the difficulty of searching in some electronic reference materials; the first attribute, the existence of different search strategies in different databases; the second attribute, the lack of confidence on information retrieved from the Internet and databases; the fifth attribute, the inability of library in introducing electronic reference materials; and the six attribute, the potentials of electronic reference materials were not as expected. Problems one to three are related to complexity features while problems four and six are related to adaptability features. According to the responses to the survey, the most important problems that make the adoption of electronic reference materials difficult stem from unfamiliarity of academic librarians and users with computers and database searching. Although most academic libraries are computerized and many academic staff and students have access to computers and networks, either from their offices or computer labs, working with these technologies is still a problem. This is mostly because of the changing nature of information technology and network applications. In addition, databases do not use similar interfaces and search strategies. These factors make the many technicalities of working with databases difficult for users to learn and remember.
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran
Conclusions The diffusion of innovations theory shows the significant impact specific features of electronic reference materials have on their adoption. As a result, these factors should be identified and introduced to librarians and users. The results of this study show that the most effective attributes of electronic reference sources are: their ability to facilitate information retrieval and accumulation of large volumes of information on a compact disc or on an online database (Relative advantage), shortening the time of searching and accessing a variety of information sources all over the world (Observability), and the fair cost of resources and the existence of help option in all pages (Complexity, Compatibility & Trialability). What impedes adoption of these kinds of information sources are lack of sufficient experience in working with computers among subjects of the study and the complexity of searching in some
61
electronic databases. These factors are related to complexity and compatibility features of electronic reference sources and databases. Indeed, it should be accepted that searching in these sources is not easy for all users. This survey’s results suggest that users’ previous experience and knowledge are often not applicable to these new information technologies. To reduce the impact of negative factors it is necessary to take some initiatives and familiarize adoptive groups with different aspects of these resources: teaching search strategies, appointing experienced librarians to supervise and assist users with their searches, setting up workshops, and providing web-based instructions. The results of this survey indicate that these processes are very complex. To take full advantages of electronic resources it is advisable to draw up programs to facilitate their adoption and the understanding of them. In addition, subsidies to targeted groups would help expand access to databases.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 62
Z. Hayati, T. Jowkar
Appendix. Questionnaire2 IX. Here is a list of electronic reference materials’ Observable Results for
Please, answer the following questions:
libraries. Please, define which of them encourage your library more to
I. Identifications:
use this kind of materials. (Use numbers 1-7 to rank the options. a. Name of the library: …………………………………………… b. Affiliated university/College:
…………………………………
Number 1, shows the lowest importance (priority) ) Observability of E-Reference Sources
Priority
Shortening the time of searching
II. Please, define which of the followings are you?
Retrieval of a large number of results Head of the Library
Reference librarian
III. Which degree do you hold? PhD
Being multi-user database
MA/ MS
Associate-Diploma
Access to full- texts in most situations
Access to resources throughout the world
MA/ BS Others (please, specify): ….
Printing citations simultaneously Using several sources simultaneously
IV. What is your field of study?
X. Please, define which option was more important for your library and Library and Information Science
users to use this kind of materials. (Use numbers 1-5 to rank the
Others (please, specify): ………………………………………………..…………
options. Number 1, showsthe lowest importance (priority) ) Complexity, Trial ability and Compatibility of E- Reference Sources
V. Do you have a reference collection in your library? Yes
Fair price of electronic reference sources
No
VI. Do you have any electronic reference materials in your library (i.e.
Simple interface and user friendliness The existence of help option
CDs or Online Databases)? Yes
Priority
The experience of using databases in trial period
No
(If you answer the above question with ‘yes’,please, go through other
The experience of work with computer and the Internet
questions, in other case, no)
XI. Here is a list ofcommon barriers that mostly prevent libraries to offer VII. When did your library provide the electronic reference materials for the first time?
of them affect your library more? (Use numbers 1-6 to rank the
CD-ROMs:………………………
options. Number 1, showsthe lowestimportance(priority) )
Online-Databases: ………………
Preventive Factors in Using E- Reference Sources
VIII. Here is a list of electronic reference materials advantages for libraries. Please, define which of them encourage your library more to use this kind of materials?(Use numbers 1-7 to rank the options. Number1, shows the lowest importance (priority) )
Relative Advantages of E-Reference Sources
electronic reference materials in a wide range. Please, define which
Priority
The possibility of using Boolean operators The possibility of searching in special fields The existence of links to authority files and thesauri The convenience of information retrieval
Priority
The existence of different search strategies in different databases The lack of confidence on information retrieved from the Internet and databases The difficulty of searching in some electronic reference materials The lackof sufficient expertiseinusing computer The inability of library in introducing electronic reference materials The potentials of electronic reference materials were not as expected
XII. Please, attach a list of your electronic reference materials (Persian & Non Persian) to the questionnaire.
The existence of search history option The existence of links to hypertext and related documents The accumulation of a large amount of information in one CD or in an online database
References Al-Gahtani, Said S. (2003). Computer technology adoption in Saudi Arabia: Correlates of perceived innovation attributes. Information Technology for Development, 10(1), 57–69. Ash, Joan. S. (1997). Factors affecting the diffusion of the computer-based patient record. In Proceedings of American 2
This questionnaire is extracted from a large one. If you need to see the latter, please contact the authors at their email addresses.
medical informatics association fall symposium (AMIA’97) (pp. 682–6), Nashville, TN. Bopp, Richard E., & Smith, Linda C. (2001). Reference and information services: An introduction (3rd ed.). New York: Libraries Unlimited. Borgatta, Edgar F., & Montgomery, Rhonda J. V. (2000). Encyclopedia of sociology, Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan Reference. Cheong, Weng Hin (2002). Internet adoption in macao. JCMC. 7(2). Retrieved March 20, 2006 from /http://jcmc.indiana. edu/vol7/issue2/index.htmlS.
ARTICLE IN PRESS Adoption of electronic reference materials in academic libraries of Iran Diffusion of Innovations Theory. (1998). Retrieved June 15, 2004 from /http://www.Ciadvertising.Org/studies/student/98_ fall/theory/hornor/paperS. Drucker, Peter F. (1994). Innovation and entrepreneurship: Practice and principles. London: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd. Eads, Gerald Milton (1984). Manipulation of innovation attributes and impaction attitude formation. Ph.D. thesis. Kansas: Kansas State University /http://www.sssgrp.comS. Fliegle, Fredrick C., & Kivlin, Joseph E. (1962). Farm practice attributes and adoption rates. Social Forces, 40, 364–370. He, Q., Duan, Y., Fu, Z., & Li, D. (2006). An innovation adoption: Study of online e-payment in Chinese companies. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 4(1), 48–69. Holland, Matt (1997). Diffusion of innovations theories and their relevance to understanding the role of librarians when introducing users to networked information. Electronic Library, 15(5), 389–394. Holloway, Robert Evan (1977). Perceptions of an innovation: Syracuse University project advance. Ph. D. thesis, Syracuse University. Joerger, Thilo (1995). Educational uses of CD-ROM technology. Retrieved November 15, 2004 from /http://aci.mta.ca/ TheUmbrella/TTTF/CDROM.htmlS. Kivlin, Joseph E. (1960). Characteristics associated with rate of adoption. Ph.D. thesis. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania State University: In Rogers Everret M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press. Kilbride, William (2004). Why bother with digitization? Users and using digital resources. Retrieved November 15, 2004 from /http://ahds.ac.uk/history/creating/information-papers/ why-bother-digitisingS. Martin, Rebbeca R. (2001). Restructuring the University of Vermont libraries: Challenges, opportunities and change. Retrieved July 20, 2004 from /http://www.ala.Org/acrl/pil/martin.HtmlS. Nolan, Christopher W. (1999). Managing the reference collection. New York: American Library Association. Petrini, Frank (1966). The rate of adoption of selected agricultural innovations. Uppsala: Agricultural College of
63
Sweden. Report 53. In Surry, Daniel W. (1997). Diffusion theory and instructional technology. Retrieved March 20, 2006 from /http://intro.base.org/docs/diffusionS. Prammanee, Noppadol (2003). A critical analysis of adoption and utilization of the Internet in Thailand for educational purposes. Retrieved August 7, 2004 from /http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_1/prammanee/index.htmlS. Rogers, Everret M. (1986). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press. Rogers, Everret M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press. Schoch, Natalie A., & Hahn, Karla L. (1997). Applying diffusion theory to electronic publishing: A conceptual framework for examining issues and outcomes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 34, 5–13. Singh, Ram M. (1966).Characteristics of farm innovations associated with the rate of adoption. Guelph, Ontario Agricultural Extension Education Report, Vol. 14. Surry, Daniel W. (1997). Diffusion theory and instructional technology. Retrieved March 20, 2006 from /http://intro. base.org/docs/diffusion/S. Walker, Jill Cohen (1999). Diffusion of innovations theory applied: The adoption of digital on-demand technology by book publishers and printers. M.Sc. thesis. University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Retrieved September 25, 2005 from Ebsco Academic Search Premier. Weiner, Sharon Gray (2003). Resistance to change in libraries: Application of communication theories. Portal: Libraries and Academy, 3(1), 69. Williamson, Kristy, Wright, Steven, Burstein, Frada & Schauder, Don (2003). Adoption of online databases in public libraries: An Australian case study. Libries, 13(2). Retrieved September 19, 2004 from /http://libres.curtin.edu.au/libres13n2/ index.htmS. Wyner, N.B. (1974). A study of diffusion of innovation: Measuring perceived attributes of an innovation that determine rate of adoption. Dissertation Abstracts International, 35, 3583A.