바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

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

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.23 No.1

Citation Share

대학도서관의 전통적 기능에 대한 이용자 평가

User Evaluation to the Factors Affecting the Traditional Functions of Academic Libraries

정보관리학회지 / Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, (P)1013-0799; (E)2586-2073
2006, v.23 no.1, pp.243-259
https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2006.23.1.243
박일종 (계명대학교)
신상헌 (계명대학교)
박일종, & 신상헌. (2006). 대학도서관의 전통적 기능에 대한 이용자 평가. 정보관리학회지, 23(1), 243-259, https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2006.23.1.243

초록

본 연구에서는 대학 도서관들이 이용자들에게 제공하는 여러 가지 기능들을 조사하고 그 가치를 측정하였다. 이용자들의 판단을 중시하는 연구의 수행을 위해 구체적인 대학 도서관의 이용요인이나 기능이 될 수 있는 상황이나 조건들은 이용자들이 직접 설정하고 그 중요도 평가를 설문조사방법으로 수집하였다. 수집된 자료의 분석은 크게 세 단계로 나누어 시행하였다. 첫째, 측정변수들의 관련성 및 독특성, 그리고 통계적 중요도에 따른 요인을 영역별로 나누기 위해 요인분석을 실시하였다. 둘째, 연구모형을 도출하기 위해 이분 로지스틱 회귀분석(binary logistic regression)을 실시하여 판별력 향상을 검정하였다. 세 번째 분석에서는 연구모형의 독립변수들에 대해 집단간 평균차이 분석을 실시하여 집단별 변수값 등 부가적인 설명을 하였다. 분석결과, 이용자들이 대학 도서관을 활용하는 목적 뿐만 아니라 이용자들에게 끼치는 지식이나 정보 그리고 도서관 시설들을 설명하는 데에는 도서요인, 경쟁 및 효율요인, 그리고 지불(무료)요인 등이 있음이 밝혀졌다. 또한 본 연구에서는 전자도서관 기능과 지불요인과의 상관성도 통계적으로 유의하게 나타났다.

keywords
대학도서관, 이용요인, 이용자평가, 도서관기능, 도서관평가, Academic library, use factor, user evaluation, library function, library evaluation, Academic library, use factor, user evaluation, library function, library evaluation

Abstract

This paper examines the values of various library functions according to users' points of view. To execute this study, the several 'circumstance', related variables and 'condition' variables that lead to factors or functions of academic libraries were measured.Analysis was carried out in three stages. In the first, factor analysis was used on the three multi variable dimensions to ensure that the groups of variables loaded significantly and uniquely on the respective dimensions. The second phase of analysis involved the use of binary logistic regression analysis to complete research models. In the third phase, t-test was used to identify significant differences in the independent variables for additional explanation of the models. Books, competition & effectiveness and fee verses free (fee-free hereafter) are the three main factors that distinguish not only the purpose of using an academic library but also the degree of influence on knowledge, information and library facilities for the users. In addition, the fee-free factor related to digital library facilities was also uncovered.

keywords
대학도서관, 이용요인, 이용자평가, 도서관기능, 도서관평가, Academic library, use factor, user evaluation, library function, library evaluation, Academic library, use factor, user evaluation, library function, library evaluation

참고문헌

1.

Balas, Janet. (2002). Meeting Expectations. Computers in Libraries, 22(1), 46-48.

2.

Barnett, M.. (1998). Testing a Digital Library of Technical Manuals. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 41(2), 116-122.

3.

Berry III. (2002). Right Message, Wrong Messenger. Library Journal, 127(2), 8-.

4.

Boardman, Edna M. (1995). How to Help Students Deal with 'Too Much'. Book Report, 14(2), 23-24.

5.

Buckley, Mary. (2003). Just Do It.. Library Journal, 128(5), 62-.

6.

Ching, Hsianghoo. (2003). Taiwan eBooks Network Has Access to netLibrary Titles. Information Today, 20(3), 15-.

7.

Cronin, Blaise. (2000). Customer Satisfaction. Library Journal, 125(17), 44-.

8.

D'Elia, George. (2002). The Impact of the Internet on Public Library Use: An Analysis of the Current Consumer Market for Library and Internet Service. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 53(10), 802-820.

9.

Dugdale, Christine. (2000). A New UK University Library Service to Meet the Needs of Today's Students and Tomorrow's Lifelong Learners. Information Services & Use,, 20(1), 1-8.

10.

Fialkoff, Francine. (2000). Where are the Books. Library Journal, 125(19), 54-.

11.

Helfer, Doris Small. (1999). Has the Virtual University Library Truly Arrive?, Sep., Vol. 7, Issue 8: 62-65.. Searcher, 7(8), 62-65.

12.

Hong, Weiyin. (2002). Determinants of User Acceptance of Digital Libraries: An Empirical Examination of Individual Differences and System Characteristics. Journal of Management Information System, 18(3), 97-124.

13.

Lee, Ook. (2002). An Action Research Report on the Korean National Digital Library. Information & Management, 39(4), 255-260.

14.

New Straits Times-Management Times. (2004). Books should be Library's Priority.

15.

Oder, Norman. (2002). UK Libraries Face Major Drop in Use. Library Journal, 127(1), 18-.

16.

Plosker, George R. (2002). Conducting User Surveys: An Ongoing Information Imperative. Online, (26), 64-68.

17.

Robins, David. (2002). Analysis of Web-based Information Architecture in a University Library: Navigating for Known Items. Information Technology & Libraries, 21(4), 12-20.

18.

Rogers, Michael. (2001). Tennessee Ups Satisfaction Level. Library Journal, 126(8), 20-.

19.

Rogers, Michael. (2001). European Libs. Sign with VTLS. Library Journal, 126, -.

20.

Rogers, Michael. (2003). Conversion Project. Library Journal, 128(2), 27-28.

21.

St. Lifer, Evan. (2001). What Public Libraries Must Do To Survive. Library Journal, 126(6), 60-62.

22.

Wiederhold, G. (1995). Digital Libraries, Value, and Productivity. Communications of the ACM, 38(4), 85-96.

정보관리학회지

논문 투고 OA 정책