2004, Vol.21, No.2

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 1.31

pISSN : 1013-0799 / eISSN : 2586-2073
https://journal.kci.go.kr/kosim

For the guarantee of retrieval ratio, thesaurus's maintenance for descriptors are necessary. To maintain the optimum scale of thesaurus, new terms and existing terms should be structured to the equivalence relationship. Therefore, equivalence relationships are needed to new standard. This study proposes new standard of the equivalence relationships, which is more specified for better guarantee of retrieval ratios. The relationships have seven facets. These six facets will be used as new knowledge-base, which could be reestablished between the descriptors.

This study proposed a theoretical framework that could explain the service use of a community informatics. The proposed community informatics use model was developed based on three theoretical models: (1) Ajzen's Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) from social psychology; (2) Uses and gratifications approaches from media use research; and (3) Technology Acceptance Model(TAM) from information technology use research. The proposed model consists of three basic components: expectations of the outcomes from use, approvals from important others, and perceivied controllability over using the service. The initially proposed model was assessed using structural equation modeling, and then re-sepcified in order to propose a better fitting model. The initially proposed and revised community informatics use models were discussed with their theoretical and practical implications.

The purposes of this study are to compare and analyze the evaluation indicators for selection of journal suggested by scholars and organizations and to prepare theoretical background for the ideal model to meet opposing paradigms of collection management in academic libraries. A web survey method was employed to investigate applications of various selection criteria (27 for printed and 37 for electronic academic Journal) from the top 40 academic libraries in Korea. In addition, data were analysed statistically using factor analysis, t-test, Analysis of Variance(ANOVA), and Spearman's Rank Oder Correlation. The mean ranking for 9 evaluation indicators for printed were as follows: subscribing volumes per departments, degree of use, selection authority, electronic/print bundle, ISI impact factor, Internationality and reputation, costs for subscription, ILL & DDS, space considerations for printed materials. But, 11 evaluation indicators for electronic were as follows: costs for subscription, accessibility, electronic/print bundle, consortia, selection authority, access expandability, subscribing volumes per departments, scholarly features of the university, ISI impact factor, ILL & DDS, internationality and reputations.