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.28 No.4

Citation Share

교수들의 기관 레포지터리 수용에 관한 연구: 혁신확산이론을 바탕으로

A Study on Faculty's Adoption of Institutional Repositories(IRs) Based on the Diffusion of Innovations Theory

정보관리학회지 / Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, (P)1013-0799; (E)2586-2073
2011, v.28 no.4, pp.141-160
https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2011.28.4.141
김지현 (이화여자대학교)
김지현. (2011). 교수들의 기관 레포지터리 수용에 관한 연구: 혁신확산이론을 바탕으로. 정보관리학회지, 28(4), 141-160, https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2011.28.4.141

초록

본 연구는 기관 레포지터리에 셀프 아카이빙하고 있는 미국 연구중심 대학 교수 109명의 데이터를 혁신확산이론의 주요 개념을 바탕으로 분석한 것이다. 이들 교수들의 대다수가 기관 레포지터리 담당자의 직접적인 연락이나 발표를 통해 기관 레포지터리를 인식하고 있었다. 혁신의 5가지 특성과 관련하여 디지털 보존과 이용통계 제공이 기관 레포지터리의 상대적 우위성을 강조할 수 있는 서비스 기능으로 나타났다. 또한 기관 레포지터리의 기반이 되는 오픈액세스의 가치와 학자들이 지향하는 지식과 학문의 발전이라는 가치 사이에 적합성이 존재하는 것으로 나타났다. 파일럿 프로젝트를 통한 기관 레포지터리의 시험적 사용가능성을 확인할 수 있었으며 기관 레포지터리의 수용을 통해 긍정적이고 가시적인 피드백을 얻은 교수들은 기관 레포지터리를 보다 적극적으로 지원하고 있었다. 혁신의 계속 수용이라는 측면에서 볼 때 기관 레포지터리의 수용을 지속시킬 수 있는 안정적이고 효율적인 서비스를 제공하는 것이 필요할 것이다.

keywords
institutional repositories, self-archiving, diffusion of innovations theory, open access, university faculty, research universities, 기관 레포지터리, 셀프 아카이빙, 혁신확산이론, 오픈액세스, 대학교수, 연구중심대학, institutional repositories, self-archiving, diffusion of innovations theory, open access, university faculty, research universities

Abstract

This study examined perceptions of 109 professors at doctorate-granting universities in the U.S. who have self-archived in Institutional Repositories(IRs), predicated on the Diffusion of Innovations Theory. The majority of the faculty learned about IRs through the contact from IR staff or their presentations. Relating to five characteristics of an innovation, digital preservation and usage statistics of an IR were considered to be its relative advantage. The principle of Open Access(OA) was found to have compatibility with the values that professors ultimately pursued. The trialability of an IR was determined by the fact that IRs were adopted by faculty through the participation of pilot projects. Professors who gained positive and visible results from IR adoption seemed more strongly support the repository. In addition, it is necessary for IRs to provide stable and effective services that support the continued adoption of IRs.

keywords
institutional repositories, self-archiving, diffusion of innovations theory, open access, university faculty, research universities, 기관 레포지터리, 셀프 아카이빙, 혁신확산이론, 오픈액세스, 대학교수, 연구중심대학, institutional repositories, self-archiving, diffusion of innovations theory, open access, university faculty, research universities

참고문헌

1.

Allen, J. (2005). Interdisciplinary differences in attitudes towards deposit in institutional repositories. Master's theses, Manchester Metropolitan University. http://eprints.rclis.org/archive/00005180/.

2.

Chan, L. (2004). Supporting and enhancing scholarship in the digital age: the role of Open-Access institutional repositories. Canadian Journal of Communication, 29, 277-300.

3.

Covey, D. T. (2009). Self-archiving journal articles: A case study of faculty practice and missed opportunity. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 9(2), 223-251.

4.

Crow, R. (2002). The case for institutional repositories: A SPARC position paper. http://www.arl.org/sparc/IR/ir.html.

5.

Culled, R. (2010). Institutional repositories: Assessing their value to the academic community. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 11(2), 131-147.

6.

Davis, P. M. (2007). Institutional repositories: Evaluating the reasons for non-use of Cornell University's installation of DSpace. D-Lib Magazine, 13(3), -.

7.

Foster, N. F. (2005). Understanding faculty to improve content recruitment for institutional repositories. D-Lib Magazine, 11(1), -.

8.

Jantz, R. C. (2008). Institutional repositories: Faculty deposits, marketing, and the reform of scholarly communication. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(3), 186-195.

9.

Jones, R. (2006). Advocacy, In The Institutional Repository:Chandos Publishing.

10.

Kim, J. (2011). Motivations of faculty selfarchiving in institutional repositories. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(3), 246-254.

11.

Kingsley, D. (2008). Those who don't look don't find: Disciplinary considerations in repository advocacy. OCLC Systems & Services, 24(4), 204-218.

12.

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations:Free Press.

13.

Revell, J. (2009). Subject librarians' perceptions of the institutional repository as an information source (-). World Library and Information Congress: 75th IFLA General Conference and Council(Milan, Italy).

14.

Russell, R. (2010). Institutional repository interaction with research users: A review of current practice. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 16(1), 116-131.

15.

Shearer, K. (2003). Institutional repositories: Toward the identification of critical success factors. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 27(3), 89-108.

16.

Seaman, D. (2011). Discovering the information needs of humanists when planning an institutional repository. D-Lib Magazine, 17(3), -.

17.

Watson, S. (2007). Authors' attitudes to, and awareness and use of, a university institutional repository. Serials, 20(3), 225-230.

18.

Xia, J. (2007). Assessment of self-archiving in institutional repositories: Across disciplines. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(6), 647-654.

19.

Xu, H. (2008). The theory analysis of faculty participation in institutional repositories. CALA Occasional Paper Series, 1: 2-15. http://www.cala-web.org/files/ops/OPSMarch08.pdf.

정보관리학회지

논문 투고 OA 정책