1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. 文學院
  4. 學位論文
  5. Item

學術產出-學位論文

文章檢視/開啟

書目匯出

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

引文資訊

TAIR相關學術產出

題名 機構典藏與學術集成平台使用者調查研究：以國立政治大學為例
A User Study on Institutional Repository and Academic Hub: A Case Study of National Chengchi University
作者 王紫薇
Wang, Zi-Wei
貢獻者 陳志銘
Chen, Chih-Ming
王紫薇
Wang, Zi-Wei
關鍵詞 機構典藏
學術集成
學者庫
使用者滿意度
網站可用性
問卷調查
Institutional Repository
Academic Hub
Scholar Hub
User Satisfaction
Website Usability
Questionnaire Survey
日期 2021
上傳時間 3-五月-2021 10:27:17 (UTC+8)
摘要 機構典藏是大學展示和傳播學術成果的數位平台。隨著科技的發展和大學對於知識傳播的需求與日俱增，機構典藏已不足以滿足大學對於學術成果的傳播需求，因此許多大學開始將機構典藏平台升級或轉移成為學術集成平台。考慮到促進學術傳播的發展趨勢，國立政治大學於2016年將原始的機構典藏平台改寫，發展為學術集成平台，其主要特徵為以機構為主體、作者為視角對學術產出進行典藏及內容呈現，提供機構研究者詳細之學術經歷與研究成果資訊，以及與其他研究者之合著社會網路連結。
為了瞭解使用者對於政大學術集成平台與政大機構典藏平台的網站可用性及使用者滿意度差異，本研究設計【學術集成與機構典藏平台使用者評估調查問卷】，希望據此瞭解使用者對於這兩個平台的使用感受評價差異，並對於這兩個平台提出未來發展建議。研究果顯示不同背景使用者對於政大學術集成平台與政大機構典藏平台在主題分類、網站使用、提供研究者資訊之間的感受與評價具有顯著差異。其中身份為學生之使用者對於政大機構典藏平台在主題分類的感受評價上顯著高於政大學術集成平台；一個月內使用頻率超過5次的使用者對於政大學術集成平台在提供研究者相關資訊上的評價顯著高於政大機構典藏平台；來自政大的使用者對於政大機構典藏平台在主題分類上的評價顯著高於政大學術集成平台；非來自政大的平台使用者對於政大學術集成平台在研究者資訊呈現結果上的感受評價顯著高於政大機構典藏平台。
整體而言，本研究透過問卷調查，瞭解政大學術集成平台與政大機構典藏平台的使用者在網站可用性及使用者滿意度上的差異，以及對於這兩個平台不足部分的系統功能建議，對於政大學術集成平台與政大機構典藏平台的未來發展方向具有參考價值。
Institutional Repository (IR) is a digital platform for universities to display and disseminate academic achievements. With the development of technology and the increasing demand for knowledge dissemination in universities, IR is no longer sufficient to meet the needs of universities for the dissemination of academic achievements. Therefore, many universities have begun to upgrade or transfer IR into Academic Hub (AH) or Scholar Hub. Taking into account the development trend of promoting academic communication, the National Chengchi University (NCCU) upgraded the original IR in 2016 and developed it into an AH. It collects and analyzes academic output from the perspective of the institution and the author, and provides details for researchers. Besdies, it also provides information on academic experience and research results, as well as co-authored social network links with other researchers.
In order to understand the differences between user website usability and user satisfaction of the NCCU AH and the NCCU IR, this research designs an Academic Hub and Institutional Repository User Evaluation Questionnaire to examine the research questions , and suggests the future development of them. The research results show that users of different backgrounds have significant differences in the feelings and evaluations of the AH and the NCCU IR in subject classification, website using, and providing researcher information. Among them, the users who are student have a significantly higher evaluation of the subject classification of the NCCU IR than the NCCU AH; users who have used it more than 5 times in a month have significantly higher evaluations of the NCCU AH in providing researcher-related information than the NCCU IR; users who are not from the NCCU have a significantly higher evaluation of the results of the researcher information by the NCCU AH than that of the NCCU IR.
On the whole, this study can understand the differences in website usability and user satisfaction between the users of the AH and the IR of NCCU through the questionnaire survey. This study contributes to the comparison between the NCCU AH and the NCCU IR, as well as the future development direction of the NCCU IR and the NCCU AH.
參考文獻 林巧敏(2014)。檔案檢索工具易用性評估實例分析。國家圖書館館刊，103 (1), 35-62。 台灣: 國家圖書館。
林芳(2015)。機構知識庫引入Altmetrics的的模式分析。圖書情報工作, 20,60-65。
邱均平、张心源、董克(2015)。Altmetrics指標在機構知識庫中的應用研究。圖書情報工作， 59(2)，100-105。
金濤、張強(2013)。學術圖書開放存取策略選擇。圖書館理論與實踐，6，9-11。
翁崇雄、張淑楨(2013)。以系統面、行為面與社會面探討網站使用之滿意度與持續使用意圖。行銷評論， 10 (1)，061-078。台灣: 華泰文化事業股份有限公司。
張曉林(2014)。機構知識庫的的發展趨勢與挑戰。現代圖書情報技術， 30(2)，1-7。
許燕、曾建勋(2015)。面向科技管理研究的機構知識庫建設政策與機制。圖書情報工作，41(1)，4-15。
黃江玲(2013)。高校圖書館學術典藏庫的現狀與發展初探。內蒙古科技與經濟，2，129-130。
黃俊英 (2008)，行銷研究-管理與技術，八版，華泰書局。
劉吉軒、陳靜宜、王乃昕(2010)。大學機構典藏推展之策略與實踐: 以國立政治大學圖書館為例。大學圖書館，14 (1), 16-36。
劉錦宏、閆翔(2011)。開放獲取學術資源集成模式研究。出版科學, 19 (3)，71-75。 
鄭琳、黃國彬(2015)。網站可用性評價工具的發展現狀與功能特點剖析。情報理論與實踐，38 (5)，135-140。
鄭琳、黃國彬(2015)。網站評價工具的發展現狀與功能特點剖析。情報理論與實踐，38 (5)，135-140。
鍾雪珍、蔡明月(2012)。臺灣機構典藏發展:近十年文獻回顧。圖書館學與資訊科學，38 (2)，071-086。台灣: 國立臺灣師範大學。
關芳、林強、尹瑾、黃小強(2015)。高校圖書館數位文化服務使用者滿意度影響因素研究。情報探索，5，32-35。
Abdeldayem, M. M. (2010). A study of customer satisfaction with online shopping: evidence from the UAE. International Journal of Advanced Media and Communication, 4(3), 235–257.
Alexiei Dingli , Sarah Cassar & Eklundh, Kerstin S(2014). An intelligent framework for website usability. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, 2014(1),1-13.
Al-Qeisi, K., Dennis, C., Alamanos, E., & Jayawardhena, C. (2014). Website design quality and usage behavior: Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Journal of Business Research, 67(11), 2282-2290.
Andrew, W. (2012). Augmenting interoperability across scholarly repositories. Mellon Foundation, Tech.
Bangani (2018).The history, deployment, and future of institutional repositories in Public Universities in South Africa. Siviwe The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 44 (1), 39-51.
Baughman, S., Roebuck, G., & Arlitsch, K. (2018). Reporting practices of institutional repositories: analysis of responses from two surveys.Journal of Library Administration, 58(1), 65-80.
Belanche Daniel, Casaló LuisV & Guinalíu Miguel(2012).Website usability, consumer satisfaction and the intention to use a website: The moderating effect of perceived risk. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19(1), 124-132.
Benbunan-Fich, R. (2001). Using protocol analysis to evaluate the usability of a commercial website. Information & Management, 39(2), 151-163.
Bevan, N. (2001). International standards for HCI and usability. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 55(4), 533-552.
Bevana N, Kirakowskib, J., & Maissela, J. (1991). What is usability? Proceesings of the International Conference on HCI.
Bhardwa, R. K. (2014). Institutional repository literature: A bibliometric analysis. Science & Technology Libraries (New York, N.Y.), 33(2), 185-202.
Branin, J. (2009). Institutional repositories. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, Third edition, 2785-2796.
Byun D., & Finnie, G. (2001). Evaluating usability, user satisfaction and intention to revisit for successful e-government websites. Electronic Government, 8(1),1-19.
Cappel, J. J, & Zhenyu, H. (2007). A usability analysis of company websites. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 48(1), 117-123.
Ceballos, H. G., & Montoya, M. S. R. (2018). Institutional repositories. Technical Report.
CHO, S. (1999).Customer-focused internet commerce at cisco systems. Communications Magazine, 37(9), 61-63.
Conte, T., Massollar, J., Mendes, E., & Travassos, G. H. (2007). Usability evaluation based on web design perspectives. Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, 146-155.
Crow, R. (2002). The case for institutional repositories: A SPARC position paper.
Csikszentmihalyi M., R. Larson& S. Prescott (1977). The ecology of adolescent activity and experience. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 6(3), 281-294.
Davis F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer techology: A comparison of two theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
Drake, M. (2005). Encyclopedia of library and information science (First Update Supplement). UAS: Georgia Institute of Technology.
David F Hardwick MDa, John Sinard MDb & Fred Silva MDc (2011). Development and evolution of the knowledge hub for pathology and related electronic resources. Human Pathology, 42(6), 795–801.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111-1132.
Deng, L. Q. & Poole, M. S. (2010). Affect in Web Interfaces: A study of the impacts of web page visual complexity and order. Mis Quarterly, 34(4), 711-730.
Dugan, R. E. (1999). Access america: reengineering through information.Technology. J Acad Librarian, 25(1), 46-49.
Drucker, P. (1988). The coming of the new organization. Harvard Business Review on Knowledge Management. 66(1), 45.
Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M., & Gurrea, R. (2006). The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information & Management, 43(1), 1-14
Gardner, W. (1990). The electronic archive: Scientific publishing for the 1990s. Psychological Science, 1(6), 333–341.
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D.W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. Mis Quarterly, 27(1), 51-90.
Gehrke, D., & Turban, E. (1999). Determinants of successful web site design: Relative importance and recommendations for effectiveness. Proceedings of the 31st Hawaii International Conference on Information Systems.
Genuis, S. K. (2004). Web site usability testing: A critical tool for libraries. Feliciter, 50(4), 161-164.
Giesecke, J. (2011). Institutional repositories: Keys to success. Faculty Publications, UNL Libraries.
Hasan & Abuelrub (2011). Assessing the quality of web sites. Applied Computing and Informatics, 9, 11-29.
Hassan (2017). The state of the University of Khartoum institutional repository. Journal of Library & Information Technology, 7(2), 104-108.
Hunt, H. K. (1977). Conceptualization and measurement of customer satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Cambridge, Mass.: Marketing Science Institute.
ISO9241 Ergonomic (1998). International organisation for standardisation , Part 11: Guidance on Usability. 1st edition. ISO.
Kim, E., & Eom, S. (2002). Designing effective cyber store user interface. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 102(5), 241–251.
Lee, Y., & Kozar Kenneth A. (2012). Understanding of website usability: Specifying and measuring constructs and their relationships. Decision Support Systems, 52 (2), 450-463.
Liu, S. H., Liao, H. L., & Pratt, J. A. (2009). Impact of media richness and flow on E-learning technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 52(3) 599-607.
Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35, 382-385.
Lynch, C. A. (2003). Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. ARL Bimonthly Report, 226, 1-7.
Madan, A., & Dubey, S. K. (2012). Usability evaluation methods: a literature review. International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 4(2), 590-599.
Mack, R. L., & Nielsen, J. (1994). Executive Summary. Usability Inspection Methods. Readings in Human–Computer Interaction (Second Edition) ,170-181.
Maditinos, D. I., & Theodoridis, K. (2010). Satisfaction determinants in the Greek online shopping context. Information Technology and People, 23(4), 312-329.
Muir, B. M., & Moray, N. (1996). Trust in automation, part II: experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics, 39(3), 429-460.
Newman, W. M., & Lamming, M. G. (1994). Interactive system design. Wokingham, Addison-Wesley.
Nielsen (1993). Usability engineering. Boston: Academic Press.
Nielsen (1995). Getting usability used, in proceedings of human-computer. Interaction: Interact Chapman & Hall.
Nielsen, J., & Loranger, H. (2006). Prioritizing web usability. New Riders Press, Berkeley, Calif, USA.
Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. New York: Basic Books
Palmer, J. W. (2002). Web site usability, design, and performance metrics. Information Systems Research, 13(2), 151–167.
Perneger, T. (2004). Relation between online hit counts and subsequent citations：prospective study of research papers in the BMJ. BMJ, 392, 546-547.
Prabhakar, S. V. R., & Rani, S. M. (2018). Benefits and perspectives of institutional repositories in academic libraries. Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language , 5(25).
Rosenfeld, L., & Morville, P. (2006). Information architecture for the world wide web. (3rd ed.). Sebastopol, CA: Oreilly & Associates Inc.
Shankar V. S., Smith, A. K., & Rangaswamy, A. (2003). Customer satisfaction and loyalty in online and offline environments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20 (2), 153–175.
Singh, I., & Sook, A.（2002）. An evaluation of the usability of South African university web sites. In: Proceedings of the 2002 CITTE Conference, Durban, South Africa.
Spool, J. M, Scanlon, T., Schroeder, W., Snyder, C., & DeAngelo, T. (1999). Web site usability: A designer`s guide. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco.
Ukwoma, S., & Dike, V.W. (2017). Academics attitudes toward the utilization of institutional repositories in Nigerian Universities. Portal Libraries Acad.,17(1),17-32. A. O.
Thompson Lindsay A, Mercado Rebeccah E, Gurka Matthew J, Rivkees &Scott A (2020). A centralized research hub in a Pediatric Academic Center. The Journal of Pediatrics, 218, 5-6.
Thowfeek, M., & Salam, M. (2014). Students’ assessment on the usability of E-leaming Websites. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141, 916-922.
UGC (2009). Annual report on knowledge transfer. The University Grants Committee.
Younghwa, L., & Kenneth, A. K. (2011). Understanding of website usability: Specifying and measuring constructs and their relationships. Decision Support Systems, 52, 450-463.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
圖書資訊與檔案學研究所
106155026
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1061550262
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 陳志銘zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Chen, Chih-Mingen_US
dc.contributor.author (作者) 王紫薇zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (作者) Wang, Zi-Weien_US
dc.creator (作者) 王紫薇zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Wang, Zi-Weien_US
dc.date (日期) 2021en_US
dc.date.accessioned 3-五月-2021 10:27:17 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 3-五月-2021 10:27:17 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 3-五月-2021 10:27:17 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G1061550262en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/134869-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 圖書資訊與檔案學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 106155026zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 機構典藏是大學展示和傳播學術成果的數位平台。隨著科技的發展和大學對於知識傳播的需求與日俱增，機構典藏已不足以滿足大學對於學術成果的傳播需求，因此許多大學開始將機構典藏平台升級或轉移成為學術集成平台。考慮到促進學術傳播的發展趨勢，國立政治大學於2016年將原始的機構典藏平台改寫，發展為學術集成平台，其主要特徵為以機構為主體、作者為視角對學術產出進行典藏及內容呈現，提供機構研究者詳細之學術經歷與研究成果資訊，以及與其他研究者之合著社會網路連結。
為了瞭解使用者對於政大學術集成平台與政大機構典藏平台的網站可用性及使用者滿意度差異，本研究設計【學術集成與機構典藏平台使用者評估調查問卷】，希望據此瞭解使用者對於這兩個平台的使用感受評價差異，並對於這兩個平台提出未來發展建議。研究果顯示不同背景使用者對於政大學術集成平台與政大機構典藏平台在主題分類、網站使用、提供研究者資訊之間的感受與評價具有顯著差異。其中身份為學生之使用者對於政大機構典藏平台在主題分類的感受評價上顯著高於政大學術集成平台；一個月內使用頻率超過5次的使用者對於政大學術集成平台在提供研究者相關資訊上的評價顯著高於政大機構典藏平台；來自政大的使用者對於政大機構典藏平台在主題分類上的評價顯著高於政大學術集成平台；非來自政大的平台使用者對於政大學術集成平台在研究者資訊呈現結果上的感受評價顯著高於政大機構典藏平台。
整體而言，本研究透過問卷調查，瞭解政大學術集成平台與政大機構典藏平台的使用者在網站可用性及使用者滿意度上的差異，以及對於這兩個平台不足部分的系統功能建議，對於政大學術集成平台與政大機構典藏平台的未來發展方向具有參考價值。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) Institutional Repository (IR) is a digital platform for universities to display and disseminate academic achievements. With the development of technology and the increasing demand for knowledge dissemination in universities, IR is no longer sufficient to meet the needs of universities for the dissemination of academic achievements. Therefore, many universities have begun to upgrade or transfer IR into Academic Hub (AH) or Scholar Hub. Taking into account the development trend of promoting academic communication, the National Chengchi University (NCCU) upgraded the original IR in 2016 and developed it into an AH. It collects and analyzes academic output from the perspective of the institution and the author, and provides details for researchers. Besdies, it also provides information on academic experience and research results, as well as co-authored social network links with other researchers.
In order to understand the differences between user website usability and user satisfaction of the NCCU AH and the NCCU IR, this research designs an Academic Hub and Institutional Repository User Evaluation Questionnaire to examine the research questions , and suggests the future development of them. The research results show that users of different backgrounds have significant differences in the feelings and evaluations of the AH and the NCCU IR in subject classification, website using, and providing researcher information. Among them, the users who are student have a significantly higher evaluation of the subject classification of the NCCU IR than the NCCU AH; users who have used it more than 5 times in a month have significantly higher evaluations of the NCCU AH in providing researcher-related information than the NCCU IR; users who are not from the NCCU have a significantly higher evaluation of the results of the researcher information by the NCCU AH than that of the NCCU IR.
On the whole, this study can understand the differences in website usability and user satisfaction between the users of the AH and the IR of NCCU through the questionnaire survey. This study contributes to the comparison between the NCCU AH and the NCCU IR, as well as the future development direction of the NCCU IR and the NCCU AH.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 5
第三節 研究問題 5
第四節 研究範圍與限制 6
第五節 名詞解釋 7
第二章 文獻探討 9
第一節 機構典藏與學術集成平台 9
第二節 網站可用性評估 13
第三節 使用者滿意度 16
第三章 研究方法 17
第一節 研究架構 17
第二節 研究方法 20
第三節 研究對象 20
第四節 研究工具 21
第五節 問卷發展與資料分析 46
第六節 研究實施步骤 51
第四章 研究結果與分析 53
第一節 問卷專家效度分析 53
第二節 問卷預試結果分析 54
第三節 正式問卷調查結果與分析 64
第五章 結論與建議 83
第一節 結論 83
第二節 政大學術集成平台與政大機構典藏平台改善建議 85
第三節 未來研究方向 87
参考文獻 88
附錄一：學術集成與典藏平台使用者評估調查問卷 93
附錄二：專家效度調查問卷 95
附錄三：學術集成與機構典藏平台 105		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 6269381 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1061550262en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 機構典藏zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 學術集成zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 學者庫zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 使用者滿意度zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 網站可用性zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 問卷調查zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Institutional Repositoryen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Academic Huben_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Scholar Huben_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) User Satisfactionen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Website Usabilityen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Questionnaire Surveyen_US
dc.title (題名) 機構典藏與學術集成平台使用者調查研究：以國立政治大學為例zh_TW
dc.title (題名) A User Study on Institutional Repository and Academic Hub: A Case Study of National Chengchi Universityen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 林巧敏(2014)。檔案檢索工具易用性評估實例分析。國家圖書館館刊，103 (1), 35-62。 台灣: 國家圖書館。
林芳(2015)。機構知識庫引入Altmetrics的的模式分析。圖書情報工作, 20,60-65。
邱均平、张心源、董克(2015)。Altmetrics指標在機構知識庫中的應用研究。圖書情報工作， 59(2)，100-105。
金濤、張強(2013)。學術圖書開放存取策略選擇。圖書館理論與實踐，6，9-11。
翁崇雄、張淑楨(2013)。以系統面、行為面與社會面探討網站使用之滿意度與持續使用意圖。行銷評論， 10 (1)，061-078。台灣: 華泰文化事業股份有限公司。
張曉林(2014)。機構知識庫的的發展趨勢與挑戰。現代圖書情報技術， 30(2)，1-7。
許燕、曾建勋(2015)。面向科技管理研究的機構知識庫建設政策與機制。圖書情報工作，41(1)，4-15。
黃江玲(2013)。高校圖書館學術典藏庫的現狀與發展初探。內蒙古科技與經濟，2，129-130。
黃俊英 (2008)，行銷研究-管理與技術，八版，華泰書局。
劉吉軒、陳靜宜、王乃昕(2010)。大學機構典藏推展之策略與實踐: 以國立政治大學圖書館為例。大學圖書館，14 (1), 16-36。
劉錦宏、閆翔(2011)。開放獲取學術資源集成模式研究。出版科學, 19 (3)，71-75。 
鄭琳、黃國彬(2015)。網站可用性評價工具的發展現狀與功能特點剖析。情報理論與實踐，38 (5)，135-140。
鄭琳、黃國彬(2015)。網站評價工具的發展現狀與功能特點剖析。情報理論與實踐，38 (5)，135-140。
鍾雪珍、蔡明月(2012)。臺灣機構典藏發展:近十年文獻回顧。圖書館學與資訊科學，38 (2)，071-086。台灣: 國立臺灣師範大學。
關芳、林強、尹瑾、黃小強(2015)。高校圖書館數位文化服務使用者滿意度影響因素研究。情報探索，5，32-35。
Abdeldayem, M. M. (2010). A study of customer satisfaction with online shopping: evidence from the UAE. International Journal of Advanced Media and Communication, 4(3), 235–257.
Alexiei Dingli , Sarah Cassar & Eklundh, Kerstin S(2014). An intelligent framework for website usability. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, 2014(1),1-13.
Al-Qeisi, K., Dennis, C., Alamanos, E., & Jayawardhena, C. (2014). Website design quality and usage behavior: Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Journal of Business Research, 67(11), 2282-2290.
Andrew, W. (2012). Augmenting interoperability across scholarly repositories. Mellon Foundation, Tech.
Bangani (2018).The history, deployment, and future of institutional repositories in Public Universities in South Africa. Siviwe The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 44 (1), 39-51.
Baughman, S., Roebuck, G., & Arlitsch, K. (2018). Reporting practices of institutional repositories: analysis of responses from two surveys.Journal of Library Administration, 58(1), 65-80.
Belanche Daniel, Casaló LuisV & Guinalíu Miguel(2012).Website usability, consumer satisfaction and the intention to use a website: The moderating effect of perceived risk. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19(1), 124-132.
Benbunan-Fich, R. (2001). Using protocol analysis to evaluate the usability of a commercial website. Information & Management, 39(2), 151-163.
Bevan, N. (2001). International standards for HCI and usability. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 55(4), 533-552.
Bevana N, Kirakowskib, J., & Maissela, J. (1991). What is usability? Proceesings of the International Conference on HCI.
Bhardwa, R. K. (2014). Institutional repository literature: A bibliometric analysis. Science & Technology Libraries (New York, N.Y.), 33(2), 185-202.
Branin, J. (2009). Institutional repositories. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, Third edition, 2785-2796.
Byun D., & Finnie, G. (2001). Evaluating usability, user satisfaction and intention to revisit for successful e-government websites. Electronic Government, 8(1),1-19.
Cappel, J. J, & Zhenyu, H. (2007). A usability analysis of company websites. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 48(1), 117-123.
Ceballos, H. G., & Montoya, M. S. R. (2018). Institutional repositories. Technical Report.
CHO, S. (1999).Customer-focused internet commerce at cisco systems. Communications Magazine, 37(9), 61-63.
Conte, T., Massollar, J., Mendes, E., & Travassos, G. H. (2007). Usability evaluation based on web design perspectives. Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, 146-155.
Crow, R. (2002). The case for institutional repositories: A SPARC position paper.
Csikszentmihalyi M., R. Larson& S. Prescott (1977). The ecology of adolescent activity and experience. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 6(3), 281-294.
Davis F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer techology: A comparison of two theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
Drake, M. (2005). Encyclopedia of library and information science (First Update Supplement). UAS: Georgia Institute of Technology.
David F Hardwick MDa, John Sinard MDb & Fred Silva MDc (2011). Development and evolution of the knowledge hub for pathology and related electronic resources. Human Pathology, 42(6), 795–801.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111-1132.
Deng, L. Q. & Poole, M. S. (2010). Affect in Web Interfaces: A study of the impacts of web page visual complexity and order. Mis Quarterly, 34(4), 711-730.
Dugan, R. E. (1999). Access america: reengineering through information.Technology. J Acad Librarian, 25(1), 46-49.
Drucker, P. (1988). The coming of the new organization. Harvard Business Review on Knowledge Management. 66(1), 45.
Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M., & Gurrea, R. (2006). The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information & Management, 43(1), 1-14
Gardner, W. (1990). The electronic archive: Scientific publishing for the 1990s. Psychological Science, 1(6), 333–341.
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D.W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. Mis Quarterly, 27(1), 51-90.
Gehrke, D., & Turban, E. (1999). Determinants of successful web site design: Relative importance and recommendations for effectiveness. Proceedings of the 31st Hawaii International Conference on Information Systems.
Genuis, S. K. (2004). Web site usability testing: A critical tool for libraries. Feliciter, 50(4), 161-164.
Giesecke, J. (2011). Institutional repositories: Keys to success. Faculty Publications, UNL Libraries.
Hasan & Abuelrub (2011). Assessing the quality of web sites. Applied Computing and Informatics, 9, 11-29.
Hassan (2017). The state of the University of Khartoum institutional repository. Journal of Library & Information Technology, 7(2), 104-108.
Hunt, H. K. (1977). Conceptualization and measurement of customer satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Cambridge, Mass.: Marketing Science Institute.
ISO9241 Ergonomic (1998). International organisation for standardisation , Part 11: Guidance on Usability. 1st edition. ISO.
Kim, E., & Eom, S. (2002). Designing effective cyber store user interface. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 102(5), 241–251.
Lee, Y., & Kozar Kenneth A. (2012). Understanding of website usability: Specifying and measuring constructs and their relationships. Decision Support Systems, 52 (2), 450-463.
Liu, S. H., Liao, H. L., & Pratt, J. A. (2009). Impact of media richness and flow on E-learning technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 52(3) 599-607.
Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35, 382-385.
Lynch, C. A. (2003). Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. ARL Bimonthly Report, 226, 1-7.
Madan, A., & Dubey, S. K. (2012). Usability evaluation methods: a literature review. International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 4(2), 590-599.
Mack, R. L., & Nielsen, J. (1994). Executive Summary. Usability Inspection Methods. Readings in Human–Computer Interaction (Second Edition) ,170-181.
Maditinos, D. I., & Theodoridis, K. (2010). Satisfaction determinants in the Greek online shopping context. Information Technology and People, 23(4), 312-329.
Muir, B. M., & Moray, N. (1996). Trust in automation, part II: experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics, 39(3), 429-460.
Newman, W. M., & Lamming, M. G. (1994). Interactive system design. Wokingham, Addison-Wesley.
Nielsen (1993). Usability engineering. Boston: Academic Press.
Nielsen (1995). Getting usability used, in proceedings of human-computer. Interaction: Interact Chapman & Hall.
Nielsen, J., & Loranger, H. (2006). Prioritizing web usability. New Riders Press, Berkeley, Calif, USA.
Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. New York: Basic Books
Palmer, J. W. (2002). Web site usability, design, and performance metrics. Information Systems Research, 13(2), 151–167.
Perneger, T. (2004). Relation between online hit counts and subsequent citations：prospective study of research papers in the BMJ. BMJ, 392, 546-547.
Prabhakar, S. V. R., & Rani, S. M. (2018). Benefits and perspectives of institutional repositories in academic libraries. Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language , 5(25).
Rosenfeld, L., & Morville, P. (2006). Information architecture for the world wide web. (3rd ed.). Sebastopol, CA: Oreilly & Associates Inc.
Shankar V. S., Smith, A. K., & Rangaswamy, A. (2003). Customer satisfaction and loyalty in online and offline environments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20 (2), 153–175.
Singh, I., & Sook, A.（2002）. An evaluation of the usability of South African university web sites. In: Proceedings of the 2002 CITTE Conference, Durban, South Africa.
Spool, J. M, Scanlon, T., Schroeder, W., Snyder, C., & DeAngelo, T. (1999). Web site usability: A designer`s guide. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco.
Ukwoma, S., & Dike, V.W. (2017). Academics attitudes toward the utilization of institutional repositories in Nigerian Universities. Portal Libraries Acad.,17(1),17-32. A. O.
Thompson Lindsay A, Mercado Rebeccah E, Gurka Matthew J, Rivkees &Scott A (2020). A centralized research hub in a Pediatric Academic Center. The Journal of Pediatrics, 218, 5-6.
Thowfeek, M., & Salam, M. (2014). Students’ assessment on the usability of E-leaming Websites. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141, 916-922.
UGC (2009). Annual report on knowledge transfer. The University Grants Committee.
Younghwa, L., & Kenneth, A. K. (2011). Understanding of website usability: Specifying and measuring constructs and their relationships. Decision Support Systems, 52, 450-463.		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202100429en_US