A Comparative Study of Digital Library Use: Factors, Perceived Influences, and Satisfaction

A Comparative Study of Digital Library Use:Factors, Perceived Influences,and Satisfactionby Ziming Liu and Lili LuoAvailable online 31 March 2011

This study explores the extent to whichundergraduate and graduate students inChina differ in their digital library use.

Unlike the factors promoting digitallibrary use, non-use factors, perceived

influences, and degree of satisfaction arequite different between undergraduate

and graduate students due to theirdiffering emphases and expectations forinformation. The implications for digital

library services are also discussed.

Ziming Liu,School of Library and Information Science, San Jose State University,

One Washington Square, San Jose, CA 95192-0029, USA<[email protected]>;

Lili Luo,School of Library and Information Science, San Jose State University,

One Washington Square, San Jose, CA 95192-0029, USA<[email protected]>.

230 The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 37, Number 3, pages

INTRODUCTIONThe popularity of digital libraries has been growing rapidly over thepast decade. It has also sparked a new wave of literature on digitallibrary use. Previous studies cover digital library use by faculty,researchers, and students. However, very little is known about thesimilarities and differences of digital library use between undergrad-uate students and graduate students. The arrival of digital libraries hasa significant impact on theway people gather information for researcharound the world. Most studies on digital library use have beenconducted in Western countries. Yet studies of digital library use inother cultures have not kept pace with these changes to the extentthat might be hoped.

This study attempts to explore the extent to which undergraduateand graduate students in China differ in the dimensions of digitallibrary use, such as factors for and against digital library use, purposes,perceived influences, and level of satisfaction with digital library use.Studying these issues would help in the design of more effective andresponsive digital library services as well as empower users in thedigital environment.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Digital libraries have increasingly become a gateway to accesselectronic resources. To provide effective digital library services,designers and managers need to have a good understanding of thefactors that influence use and non-use of digital libraries, user'sperceptions, and satisfaction. Buckland observes that all digitallibraries have been designed backwards because “library servicesshould be user-centered rather than data-centered.”He further pointsout that: “Only when substantially more research and developmenthas been completed from the library user's perspective can the digitallibrary environment begin to have the look and feel of good libraryservice.”1

Librarians face a new challenge in reaching invisible users whohave only electronic access to libraries. The increased reliance onelectronic resources requires reexamination of whom we serve. In acomprehensive study of 4678 respondents in 119 institutions of highereducation in the United States, McMartin et al. explore the uses,motivations, and barriers surrounding the use of educational digitallibraries by faculty members and instructors. Their survey results ofhow facultymembers and instructors differ in their use and non-use ofdigital libraries reveal that these groups are “more alike than differentin use of online digital materials” in variables such as level ofexperience, institution type, and academic appointment. They findthat commonly useddemographics in higher education that categorizepopulation could not reliably predict the use of digital resources.2

230–236

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Most digital libraries are constructed for certain intended usergroups. One particular challenge in the studies of digital library useis that we may focus only on those who actually use digitallibraries, while overlooking those who might use them but do not.3

User adoption of a new information technology is influenced by avariety of factors such as perceived usefulness and perceived easeof us.4-6 In a study of over 2000 students in Hong Kong, Thong,Hong and Tam identify three important predictors of increasedusability of digital libraries: interface characteristics (e.g., termi-nology clarity, screen design, and navigation clarity), organizationalcontext (e.g., relevance, system accessibility, and system visibility),and individual differences (e.g., domain knowledge and computerexperience).7

While an enormous amount of money has been spent buildingdigital libraries, a huge number of potential users may still not usethem. Therefore, it is important to learn more about non-users inorder to make digital libraries attractive for all potential users.Monopoli et al. find that a lack of relevant information is the mostimportant factor discouraging users from accessing electronicjournal services, followed by no access to older publications, theneed to pay to gain access to needed information, and slowdownloading speed.8 Research in virtual reference environmentsreveals that leading factors for non-use include unawareness of theservice, satisfaction with other information sources, and lack ofconfidence in the chat librarian's ability. In addition, distrust of thepotential of the virtual format and privacy concerns also contributeto non-use.9

“Research in virtual reference environmentsreveals that leading factors for non-use includeunawareness of the service, satisfaction with

other information sources, and lack ofconfidence in the chat librarian’s ability.”

Even though substantial investment has been made in digitallibraries, our understanding of the impact of improved access todigital resources in general is limited. Vakkari explores how the use ofelectronic resources has influenced scholars' opinions of their workand research productivity. His survey results indicate that perceivedimproved access is positively associated with the number ofinternational publication output. In addition, the most improvementin access is felt in the field of medicine and natural sciences, and theleast is in the humanities.10

Different user groups have differing expectations in the use ofdigital library services.11 In a study of users and librarians at VictoriaUniversity of Wellington in New Zealand, Xia looks at the extent towhich users' and librarians' perceptions of the usability of digitallibrary services differ. Academic staff and postgraduates prefer thingssuch as a wide range of resources and currency of information, as wellas convenience and easy access. Undergraduates, however, tend toemphasize quick access and information accuracy.12 A study byMelgoza, Mennel and Gyeszly also finds that most academic libraryusers, whether faculty or students, rank accessibility as the mostcrucial factor when they search for information, followed byconvenience and ease of use.13

A recent study of user expectations by Kani-Zabihi, Ghinea, andChen examines user suggestions of the functionality and features fordigital libraries. They find that users' expectations of the functionalityof digital libraries are the same, regardless of their IT backgrounds.“Finding information easily and quickly in DLs” and “being able to beeasily familiarized with DLs” are considered to be the two mostimportant requirements for digital libraries.14

Bawden and Vilar note that evidence, albeit limited because ofthe relatively few studies, suggests that user expectations of digitallibraries differ between different user groups.15 Comparative studiesin digital library setting are particularly important. A goodunderstanding of the similarities and differences of digital libraryuse among different user groups is needed to predict acceptanceof digital libraries and to serve user needs more effectively andresponsively.16

While previous studies have contributed to our understandingof the use of digital library services among different groups, theysuffer some limitations, such as solely emphasizing the differencesin usage. However, differences in other dimensions have not beenfully explored. The present study attempts to explore the extent towhich undergraduate and graduate students in China differ in thedimensions of digital library use, such as factors for and againstdigital library use, purposes, perceived influences, and level ofsatisfaction with digital library use. Moreover, it examines therelationship between frequency and satisfaction with digitallibrary use.

METHODOLOGY

A cluster of the following seven questions was used to measure thedimensions of digital library use:

• Three most important reasons leading to digital library use,

• Three most important factors discouraging digital library use,

• Primary purposes for using digital libraries,

• Influences/effects of digital library use,

• Frequency of digital library use,

• Overall experience with digital library use,

• Recommendations for digital libraries.

The questionnaire was designed to collect both quantitative andqualitative data by using both closed and open-ended questions. Thefinal part of the survey consisted of an open-ended question seekingrecommendations of what respondents would like to see for digitallibrary services.

A pilot study of nearly 80 students was conducted at San Jose StateUniversity in the spring of 2008 to pre-test the survey questions.Survey questions were significantly revised and expanded based onthe pilot study.

Chinese undergraduate and graduate students were selected as thesubjects of this study, because, as digital libraries become a morepervasive resource for scholars and students in China, they rely on avariety of resources including digital libraries for their course work.Four hundred copies of the questionnaire were distributed to studentsat Zhongshan University, South China Normal University, andGuangdong University of Technology in Guangzhou, China duringMay-August 2009. The three universities were chosen because theyare major comprehensive universities offering a wide range ofundergraduate and graduate programs. Their university librariesalso offer extensive electronic resources.

Efforts were made to ensure that students from diverse fieldswere included. Students enrolled in required courses at undergrad-uate and graduate levels were chosen as the target populations forthis study. Participants were undergraduate and graduate studentsfrom diverse disciplines such as biology, business, chemistry,communications, computer science, economics, education, engi-neering, environmental science, foreign languages and studies,history, library science, mathematics, physics, political science,

May 2011 231

Table 2Factors discouraging digital library use

Factors

Undergraduatestudents(n=152)

Graduatestudents(n=129)

I obtain needed information froma search engine (e.g., Google)

101 (66.4%) 47 (36.4%)

Digital libraries are difficult to use(e.g., not user friendly)

79 (52.0%) 37 (28.7%)

There is no human help(e.g., reference librarians)

50 (32.9%) 30 (23.3%)

Lack of relevant materials 49 (32.2%) 97 (75.2%)

Very slow downloading speed 41 (27.0%) 33 (25.6%)

I am not familiar with digitallibraries

38 (25.0%) 22 (17.1%)

There is no access to archival andolder publications

30 (19.7%) 59 (45.7%)

I obtain needed information froma physical library

23 (15.1%) 14 (10.9%)

I find online reading uncomfortable 19 (12.5%) 27 (20.9%)

Poorly scanned text in digitallibrary collections

15 (9.9%) 13 (10.1%)

I don't have a computer or Internetaccess

0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)

Other 11 (7.2%) 8 (6.2%)

and sociology. Participants were informed that the purpose of thestudy was to explore digital library use. They were asked to fill outthe questionnaires based on their own experiences with digitallibraries. Two hundred and eighty-one completed copies werereturned: 129 copies from graduate students (54% men and 46%women) and 152 from undergraduate students (51% men and 49%women). Since most undergraduate and graduate students in Chinapossess a good command of English, the questionnaire incorporatesEnglish and Chinese versions. Five students answered the surveyquestions in English.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The use of digital libraries is influenced by a combination of variousfactors. Lists of factors for and against digital library use weredeveloped based on related literature and the pilot study (see Tables 1and 2). Survey participants were asked to select the 3 most importantfactors from each list based on their experience. If their choices werenot within the lists, they could specify their answers in the “other”category.

Convenience and speed of information delivery are crucialfactors, especially to younger generations. Griffiths and Brophyfind that student use of search engines now influences theirperceptions and expectations of other digital resources.17 Digitallibraries allow users to get information outside the library, obtainfull-text journal articles in advance of the print version, andprovide greater access with less effort. Table 1 presents the threemost important factors leading to digital library use. Overall, factorsfor using digital libraries are quite similar among undergraduateand graduate students. Factors such as “remote access,” “24-h access,” and “faster access” are among the most importantfactors identified by both user groups. Remote and immediateaccess to full-text databases at midnight would epitomize the 24/7

Table 1Factors leading to digital library use

Factors



Digital libraries allow remote access 97 (63.8%) 83 (64.3%)

Digital libraries allow 24-h access 75 (49.3%) 81 (62.8%)

Digital libraries allow faster access 66 (43.4%) 54 (41.9%)

No need to worry about a sourcebeing checked out

57 (37.5%) 25 (19.4%)

No print equivalent (e.g., lackingan alternative print copy in thecollection)

35 (23.0%) 19 (14.7%)

Earlier access to publications online(e.g., before print versions arrive)

28 (18.4%) 57 (44.2%)

Digital libraries have better searchcapability

25 (16.4%) 23 (17.8%)

Digital documents have links toadditional information

21 (13.8%) 15 (11.6%)

I need articles rather than books 16 (10.5%) 8 (6.2%)

No limit on the number of itemsobtained

15 (9.9%) 5 (3.9%)

My assignments/papers requireup-to-the-minute information

12 (7.9%) 9 (7.0%)

Other 9 (5.9%) 8 (6.2%)

232 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

mentality and convenience. This finding is consistent with anumber of previous studies.18-21

Table 1 shows that both user groups are more similar in theirdigital library use than they are different. However, undergraduatestudents tend to placemore value on “no need toworry about a sourcebeing checked out.” Nearly 38% of undergraduate respondents in thissurvey report this as one of the 3 most crucial factors that wouldencourage digital library use, compared to only approximately 20% ofgraduate respondents. One possible explanation is that in a traditionallibrary environment, certain materials used by undergraduatestudents (e.g., assigned readings) are frequently checked out. Thispast experience may therefore make undergraduate students espe-cially value the unique benefit of simultaneous access to informationin the new service environment.

Another notable difference is that graduate students tend toplace more emphasis on “earlier access to publication online” thanundergraduate students. Over 44% of graduate students in thissurvey select it as one of the top three factors for using digitallibraries, in contrast to about 18% of undergraduate respondents.The motivation for digital library use stems from users’ informationneed. The greater emphasis on earlier access by graduate studentsin the digital library environment is very likely to be influenced bytheir research orientations. This explanation is further supported bythe survey results in Table 3. Nearly 15% of graduate students in thissurvey report that they use the digital library “to keep up withprogress in the field” compared to only 2.6% of undergraduaterespondents.

“…graduate students tend to place moreemphasis on “earlier access to publicationonline” than undergraduate students.”

Table 3Primary purposes for using digital libraries

Purposes



o find sources for schoolprojects/papers

85 (55.9%) 77 (59.7%)

o find electronic resourcesin addition to print resources

21 (13.8%) 17 (13.2%)

o look up a quick fact 16 (10.5%) 6 (4.7%)

o browse information 14 (9.2%) 4 (3.1%)

o keep up with progress in the field 4 (2.6%) 19 (14.7%)

o check citations in things read 4 (2.6%) 6 (4.7%)

ntertainment or idle reading 1 (0.7%) 0 (0.0%)

ther (including N/A) 7 (4.6%) 0 (0.0%)

T

T

T

T

T

T

E

O

All users want fast and easy access to information. This behavior isfurther confirmed in the non-use factors. Table 2 indicates that slowdownloading speed is seen as a major concern. Over 25% ofundergraduate and graduate students in this survey cite it as one ofthe chief barriers in their digital library use.

Unlike the factors leading to digital library use, factors discourag-ing digital library use identified by the undergraduate and graduateuser groups are quite different:

According to Table 2, a higher percentage of undergraduatestudents in this survey select obtaining needed information via ageneral-purpose search engine (e.g., Google) as a major non-usefactor than graduate students (66.4% vs. 36.4%). This suggestsundergraduate students tend to have a stronger preference towardsgeneral-purpose search engines (e.g., Google). One possible explana-tion is that materials needed by graduate students (e.g., journalarticles and archival materials) are not readily available via general-purpose search engines. Students like easily-mastered search enginessuch as Baidu (a popular search engine in China) and Google. Severalstudents mention that they frequently rely on general-purpose searchengines as the primary starting point for a search, and then use digitallibraries to download full-text articles that are not available viageneral-purpose search engines.

Table 2 indicates that 52.0% of undergraduate respondents select“digital libraries are difficult to use” as a major non-use factor,compared to only 28.7% of graduate students in this survey.Undergraduate students seem to need more help than graduatestudents—32.9% of undergraduates cite no human help as a chiefbarrier as opposed to 23.3% of graduate students. This indicates thatdigital libraries are new to many undergraduate students, and usertraining for undergraduate students is particularly important. Onerespondent points out: “I will become discouraged when I need tospend time learning the ins and outs of the system. Training can helpme remove the fear factor and get a novice user to interact with adigital library.” According to Table 5, over 20% of undergraduatestudents in this survey report that they have used digital libraries onceor twice or have never used them.

“…52.0% of undergraduate respondents select“digital libraries are difficult to use” as a major

non-use factor, compared to only 28.7% ofgraduate students in this survey.”

Factors such as the lack of availability of relevant materials andno access to archival and older publications are seen by a higherpercentage of graduate students in this survey as major barriersthan undergraduate respondents (75.2% vs. 32.2% and 45.7% vs.19.7%, respectively). The most common obstacle graduate studentsreported is the lack of enough resources relevant to their interests.One possible explanation is that graduate students need a widerrange of materials (including archival and older publications) thanundergraduate students for their research projects. One studentpoints out that the reason why she rarely uses digital libraries isdue, in part, to the lack of sufficient retrospective materials on hersubject. Another student notes that digital collections need tomatch what users are looking for. Good collections will createrepeated users and growth in usage through word of mouth.Monopoli et al. also indicate that “Depth and permanence of thecontent, in combination with breadth, will enhance the overallcritical mass and encourage users to make extensive use of theservice.”22

Survey participants were asked to select from the list (see Table 3)their primary purpose for using digital libraries. If their choices werenot within the lists, they could specify their answers in the “other”category. Table 3 reveals that the majority of undergraduate students(55.9%) and graduate students (59.7%) use digital libraries for theirresearch projects and papers. Over 13% of both user groups report thatthey use digital libraries to find electronic resources in addition toprint resources. It seems that the motive for a comprehensivecoverage of materials (i.e., print and digital) is a chief factor forlooking at additional information.23

In our pilot study of students in the United States, manyundergraduate students report that they often go to Wikipedia forinformation since it is a simple and quick method of answering aquestion. Table 3 shows that undergraduate students in Chinatended to rely on digital libraries “to look up a quick fact” morethan their graduate counterparts (10.5% vs. 4.7%). On the otherhand, a higher percentage of graduate students in this surveyindicate that they use digital libraries for keeping abreast of theprogress in their fields than undergraduate students (14.7% vs.2.6%). One graduate student notes: “It is very important for aresearcher to be aware of current research developments in thefield. I would feel embarrassed if I cannot answer this when Idefend my thesis.”

There are numerous effects of digital library use such asinspiring new research ideas and improving the quality of work.24

In this study, the perceived influence of digital library use wasmeasured by asking respondents to rate on a four-point scale on thefollowing five dimensions: save time in locating materials, reducephysical library visits, extend the range of materials, easier to finddocuments by accident (i.e., serendipity), and easier to keep up todate (see Table 4).

The vast majority of undergraduate and graduate students in thissurvey (over 70%) are of the opinion that the use of digital libraries hasconsiderably saved time in locating materials.

The majority of respondents feel that the use of digital resourceshas resulted in reduced visits to physical libraries. Of undergraduatestudents, nearly 56% report that the use of digital libraries hasdecreased physical library visits to some extent, whereas nearly 25%believe the reduction of visits is considerable. Similar figures arereported by graduate students in this survey.

Serendipity, a by-product of browsing, is commonplace in thephysical library environment where users find materials byaccident while browsing bookshelves on a particular subject.However, with digital libraries, there is another type of luck atwork in that an electronic search can lead to discoveries ofunexpected resources that would otherwise have remained hidden.It is interesting to note that over 67% of undergraduate and

May 2011 233

Table 4Perceived influences of digital library use

Dimensions

Considerably To some extent Not at all Don't know

UG GS UG GS UG GS UG GS

Save time in locating materials 70.4% 75.2% 15.1% 19.4% 10.5% 3.1% 3.9% 2.3%

Reduce physical library visits 24.3% 20.9% 55.9% 54.3% 15.1% 20.9% 4.6% 3.9%

Extend the range of materials 15.1% 42.6% 70.4% 45.7% 8.6% 7.8% 5.9% 3.9%

Easier to find documents by accident(i.e., serendipity)

9.2% 6.2% 13.8% 10.1% 67.8% 67.4% 9.2% 16.3%

Easier to keep up to date 14.5% 25.6% 49.3% 60.5% 22.4% 8.5% 13.8% 5.4%

Note: UG: Undergraduate students (n=152); GS: Graduate students (n=129).

Table 5Frequency of digital library use

Frequency



Daily 6 (3.9%) 7 (5.4%)

Weekly 49 (33.2%) 65 (50.4%)

Monthly 65 (42.8%) 41 (31.8%)

Access once or twice only 27 (17.8%) 16 (12.4%)

Never 5 (3.3%) 0 (0.0%)

graduate students in this survey believe that there is no impact onthe ease of serendipitous information encounters as a result ofdigital library use. Only a small number of respondents feel that itis easier to find documents by accident “considerably” or “to someextent” in the digital environment. Perhaps, serendipity is soubiquitous in the traditional library environment that many userscarry the same expectation into the new service environment.Another possible explanation is that serendipity is equally popularin the physical and digital environment, and therefore users do notnotice any big differences. The reported decline in visits to physicallibraries may also adversely affect the physical browsing thatbenefits serendipitous encounters.

“It is interesting to note that over 67% ofundergraduate and graduate students in thissurvey believe that there is no impact on the

ease of serendipitous information encounters asa result of digital library use.”

Several researchers raise concerns that the move to the digitalenvironment may limit the occurrence of serendipity.25 Huwe arguesthat “The challenge for the digital library is to preserve thisopportunity in cyberspace.”26 The perception of fewer significantserendipity encounters implies the need for more research onpreserving the value of serendipity in the digital environment. For acomprehensive discussion on serendipity, please see Foster andFord.27

There are two significant differences between undergraduate andgraduate students in the perceived influences of digital library use:

Many students use digital libraries to find electronic resources inaddition to print resources (see Table 3). As opposed to about 15% ofundergraduate respondents, over 42% of graduate students in thissurvey believe the use of digital libraries has considerably extendedthe range of materials available. A study by McMartin et al. revealsthat time is a major barrier to using digital resources. Paradoxically,the respondents in the survey say they use these resources becausethey save time.28 Similarly, it is interesting to note that even though ahigher percentage of graduate students cite a lack of availability ofrelevant materials and no access to archival and older publications aspotential barriers to digital libraries, a higher percentage of graduatestudents also acknowledge that the use of digital libraries hasextended the range of materials available. It seems that graduatestudents have a strong emphasis on accessing a wide range ofmaterials. This is reflected in the perceived influences as well as in thenon-use factors.


A higher percentage of graduate students report that the use ofdigital libraries has made it easier to keep up-to-date with newdevelopments in their fields of study than undergraduate students inthis survey. Over a quarter of graduate students believe this influenceis considerable, and over 60% are of the opinion that the impact is tosome extent. The corresponding figures for undergraduate studentsare 14.5% and 49.3%. This difference is logically consistent with thesurvey results in Table 3, where a higher percentage of graduatestudents report that their primary purpose for digital library use is tokeep up with the progress in their fields. The fact that 13.8% ofundergraduate respondents report “don't know” further indicatesthat keeping up-to-date is not their focus.

Respondents were asked how often they used digital libraries tosearch information. The questionwas framed in terms of the followingtime scales: daily, weekly, monthly, access once or twice only, andnever (see Table 5). Proportionally, more graduate students reportthat they use digital library services on a daily and weekly basis thantheir undergraduate counterparts, accounting for 55.8% and 37.1%respectively.

Graduate students in this survey tend to use digital librariessignificantly more frequently than undergraduate students. Banwellet al. also find that research postgraduates in the U.K. make more useof electronic information services than undergraduates.29

The overall experience of digital library use was measured byasking respondents to rate on the following six dimensions (e.g., veryhelpful, satisfactory, somewhat helpful, frustrating, very frustrating,and NA because of non-use). According to Table 6, the overallsatisfaction of graduate students with digital libraries is significantlymore positive than undergraduates. Over 80% of graduate students inthis survey report that their experience with digital library use is veryhelpful or satisfactory compared to nearly 60% of undergraduaterespondents.

It seems that graduate students use and appreciate digital libraryservices to a greater extent than undergraduates. This led us to ask:

Table 6Overall experience with digital library use

Degree ofsatisfaction



ery helpful 21 (13.8%) 38 (29.5%)

atisfactory 67 (44.1%) 69 (53.5%)

omewhat helpful 34 (22.4%) 15 (11.6%)

rustrating 19 (12.5%) 5 (3.9%)

ery frustrating 6 (3.9%) 2 (1.6%)

/A (because of non-use) 5 (3.3%) 0 (0.0%)

V

S

S

F

V

N

what is the relationship between frequency of use and degree ofsatisfaction in digital library services? Table 7 shows the cross-tabulation of the reported level of use against the degree ofsatisfaction in digital library use. As Table 7 indicates, there is asignificant relationship between reported frequency of use anddegree of satisfaction with digital library use. People who use digitallibraries more frequently tend to have a more positive experiencethan those who use digital libraries less frequently. For example, allof those who use digital library service on a daily basis report apositive experience, compared to 89.4% on a weekly basis, 65.1% ona monthly basis, and 25.6% of those who access only once or twice.Unsurprisingly, when users do not have a positive experience withdigital libraries, they tend to avoid using them. A few exceptions tothis rule occur in situations where needed materials cannot befound elsewhere in places like search engines and physical libraries.In a large-scale study, McMartin et al. also find that there is apositive interaction of perceived value and frequency of use. Thosewho greatly valued digital resources reported higher levels of usethan other respondents.30

“People who use digital libraries morefrequently tend to have a more positive

experience than those who use digital librariesless frequently.”

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

For digital libraries to be useful, theymust be accepted. Understandingfactors, perceived influences, usage, and satisfaction is crucial toensure and encourage users to accept and continually use digitallibrary services. This study explores the extent to which undergrad-uate and graduate students in China differ in the dimensions of digital

TableFrequency of use by reported satisf

Veryhelpful Satisfactory

Daily (N=13) 10 (76.9%) 3 (23.1%)

Weekly (N=114) 33 (28.9%) 69 (60.5%)

Monthly (N=106) 13 (12.3%) 56 (52.8%)

Access once or twice only (N=43) 3 (7.0%) 8 (18.6%)

Never 0 0

Note: This table combines responses from the two groups: undergraduate (n=152)

library use in such factors as for and against digital library use,purposes, perceived influences, and level of satisfaction with digitallibrary use. It also examines the relationship between levels of use andsatisfaction with digital library use.

Like many other studies, respondents in this survey widely enjoythe unique features of digital libraries that are absent in thetraditional environment, such as remote access, 24-h access, andfaster access. This is very likely the reason why a majority ofrespondents in this study have a positive experience with theirdigital library use. Unlike the factors leading to digital library use,non-use factors, perceived influences, and degree of satisfaction arequite different between undergraduate and graduate students dueto their differing emphases and expectations for information.Understanding differing expectations and emphases could enableus to customize services and interfaces, and offer the best form ofsupport to users.31 As previously stated, perceived ease of use andperceived usefulness play a critical role in the adoption of newtechnology. For undergraduate students who are generally unfamil-iar with digital libraries, it is very important to offer targetedtraining to demonstrate the tangible benefits and value of using theservice. Librarians need to explore creative ways to increase thevisibility of digital resources and to work with faculty to promotethe use of library digital resources. It is very important to letstudents know that they are not necessarily best served by theeasily-mastered search engines. For experienced users such asgraduate students, attention can be focused on providing targetedawareness of available digital resources to increase the usability ofdigital libraries. For digital libraries to be attractive, they need tomatch users' tasks.

Non-use factors and recommendations offered by respondentsindicate that people would be more likely to use digital libraryservices if providers would integrate the following: more intuitivenavigation features, natural language search capacity, streamliningdatabase interfaces, uniformity of interfaces and search structure,detailed tutorials, more full-text options, and databases in otherlanguages. It should be noted that users often have unrealistically highexpectations of digital libraries. Bawden and Vilar caution: “Trying tomeet expectations is of obvious importance ……. But expectationmust be met in a way which allows users to take advantages of thecontrolled and organized environment.”32

As noted earlier, one particular challenge in the studies of digitallibrary use is that by focusing solely on those who actually usedigital libraries, potential users are overlooked. The study sampleswere drawn from several required classes at three universities inGuangzhou, China, with the goal of covering non-users of digitallibraries and achieving a comprehensive coverage of students fromdiverse disciplines. However, this is a sample of convenience ratherthan a random sample of students. It is likely that students invarious disciplines are not equally represented. The inherentlimitations of self-reported measures also mean that the results

7action with digital library use

Somewhathelpful Frustrating

Veryfrustrating N/A

0 0 0 0

10 (8.8%) 2 (1.8%) 0 0

25 (23.6%) 9 (8.5%) 3 (2.8%) 0

14 (32.6%) 13 (30.2%) 5 (11.6%) 0

0 0 0 5

and graduate students (n=129).

May 2011 235

cannot be generalized across different user groups and cultures.Future research employing different methods is needed to fullyvalidate the findings.

Discipline may have a differential effect on the dimensions ofdigital library use.33 Future studies can also be focused on identifyingmeaningful differences among different user groups within aparticular field.

This study provides statistics and analysis that help to create asnapshot of the current state of academic digital library use inChina. Future research can extend the findings of this study byinvestigating similar research problems in other countries. Userexpectations are changing. Therefore it is very important tocontinually monitor the changes in information behavior acrossthe digital landscape.

Acknowledgments: The authorswould like to thankMary Birch forher assistance. The authors also appreciate constructive commentsfrom the anonymous referees.

APPENDIX A. SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in theonline version, at doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2011.02.015.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1.Michael K. Buckland, “Five grand challenges for library research”,Library Trend 51.4 (2003): 680–681.

2. Flora McMartin, Ellen Iverson, Alan Wolf, Joshua Morrill, GlendaMorgan & Cathryn Manduca, “The use of online digital resourcesand educational digital libraries in higher education”, InternationalJournal on Digital Libraries 9.1 (2008): 65–79.

3. David Bearman, “Digital libraries”, In Annual Review of InformationScience and Technology Vol. 41, edited by B. Cronin (Medford, NJ:Information Today, 2007), pp. 223–272.

4. Fred Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and useracceptance of information technology”,MIS Quarterly 13.3 (1989):319–340.

5. Oded Nov & Chen Ye, “Resistance to change and the adoption ofdigital libraries: An integrative model”, Journal of the AmericanSociety for Information Science and Technology 60.8 (2009):1702–1708.

6. Viswanath Venkatesh, Michael Morris, Gordon Davis & Fred Davis,“User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unifiedview”, MIS Quarterly 27.3 (2003): 425–478.

7. James Thong, Weiyin Hong & Kar Yan Tam, “What leads to useracceptance of digital libraries?” Communications of the ACM 47.11(2004): 79–83.

8.Maria Monopoli, David Nicholas, Panagiotis Georgiou & MarinaKorfiati, “A user-oriented evaluation of digital libraries: Case studythe ‘electronic journals’ service of the library and informationservice of the University of Patras, Greece”, Aslib Proceedings 54.2(2002): 103–117.

9. Lynn Connaway, Marie Radford & Timothy Dickey, “On the trail ofthe elusive non-user: what research in virtual reference environ-ments reveals”, Bulletin of the American Society for InformationScience and Technology 34.2 (2008): 25–28.

10. Pertti Vakkari, “Perceived influence of the use of electronicinformation resources on scholarly work and publication produc-


tivity”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science andTechnology 59.4 (2008): 602–612.

11. GaryMarchionini, Catherine Plaisant & Anita Komlodi, “The peoplein digital libraries: multifaceted approaches to assessing needs andimpact”, In Digital library use: Social practice in design andevaluation, edited by A.P. Bishop, N.A. VanHouse & B.P. Buttenfield(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003).

12.Wei Xia, “Digital library services: Perceptions and expectations ofuser communities and librarians in a New Zealand academiclibrary”, Australia Academic and Research Libraries 34.1 (2003):56–70.

13. Pauline Melgoza, Pamela Mennel & Suzanne Gyeszly, “Informationoverload”, Collection Building 21.1 (2002): 32–43.

14. Elahe Kani-Zabihi, Gheirghita Ghinea & Sherry Chen, “Digitallibraries: what do users want?” Online Information Review 30.4(2002): 395–412.

15. David Bawden & Polona Vilar, “Digital libraries: Tomeet ormanageuser expectations”, Aslib Proceedings 58.4 (2006): 346–354.

16. Edward Fox & Shalini Urs, “Digital libraries”, In Annual Review ofInformation Science and Technology Vol. 36, edited by B. Cronin(Medford, NJ: Information Today, 2002), pp. 503–589.

17. Jillian Griffiths & Peter Brophy, “Student searching behavior andthe web: use of academic resources and Google”, Library Trends53.4 (2005): 539–554.

18. Bawden & Vilar, “Digital libraries: To meet or manage userexpectations”.

19. Griffiths & Brophy, “Student searching behavior and the web”.20. Ziming Liu, (2008). Paper to digital: Documents in the information

age (Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited).21. Xia, “Digital library services”.22.Monopoli, Nicholas, Georgiou & Korfiati, “A user-oriented evalu-

ation of digital libraries”, 106.23. Ziming Liu, “Print vs. electronic resources: a study of user

perceptions, preferences, and use”, Information Processing andManagement 42.6 (2006): 583–592.

24. Vakkari, “Perceived influence”.25. Ted Gup, “Technology and the end of serendipity”, The Education

Digest 6 (1998): 48–50.26. Terence K. Huwe, “New search tools for multidisciplinary digital

libraries”, Online 23.2 (1999): 68.27. Allen Foster & Nigel Ford, “Serendipity and information seeking:

An empirical study”, Journal of Documentation 59.3 (2003):321–340.

28.McMartin, Iverson, Wolf, Morrill, Morgan & Manduca, “The use ofonline digital resources”.

29. Linda Banwell, Kathryn Ray, Graham Coulson, Christine Urquhart,Ray Lonsdale, Chris Armstrong, Rhian Thomas, Sian Spink, AlisonYeoman, Roger Fenton & Jennifer Rowley, “The JISC user behaviourmonitoring and evaluation framework”, Journal of Documentation60.3 (2004): 302–320.

30.McMartin, Iverson, Wolf, Morrill, Morgan & Manduca, “The use ofonline digital resources”.

31. Bawden & Vilar, “Digital libraries: To meet or manage userexpectations”.

32. Bawden & Vilar, “Digital libraries: To meet or manage userexpectations”, 351.

33. Vakkari, “Perceived influence.”

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.02.015