The present study examined whether social and individual motivation factors influence researchers’ article-sharing intentions through their use of institutional repository or ResearchGate and how these factors differ between the two types of platforms. For this study, we employed a theoretical framework that integrated the Theory of Planned Behavior, community considerations, and reciprocity to examine social and individual motivation factors affecting researchers’ article-sharing intentions through the use of institutional repositories or ResearchGate. We employed diverse statistical analyses including Cronbach’s alpha, principal components factor analysis, multiple regression, and t-test based on a total of 492 survey responses from institutional repository and ResearchGate users. The results of this research revealed that institutional repository users’ article-sharing intentions were led by perceived community benefit, career benefit, and career risk whereas ResearchGate users’ intentions were led by subjective norms, perceived reciprocity, career benefit, career risk, and ease of use of the platform. These results demonstrate the need to develop different types of support and article-sharing policies for both institutional repository and ResearchGate users to facilitate or increase their article-sharing behaviors.
AbrizahAHilmiMKassimNA (2015) Resource-sharing through an inter-institutional repository: Motivations and resistance of library and information science scholars. The Electronic Library33(4): 730–748.
2.
AjzenI (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process52(2): 179–211.
3.
AjzenIFishbeinM (2005) The influence of attitudes on behavior. In: AlbarracinDJohnsonBTZannaMP (eds) Handbook of Attitudes and Attitude Change. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 173–221.
4.
AsogwaCNUgwuishiwuCH (2016) Building institutional repository in academic digital libraries: Requirements and implementation issues. Empowering the 21st Century Learner2016: 151–161.
5.
BankierJ-GFosterCWileyG (2009) Institutional repositories: Strategies for the present and future. The Serials Librarian56(1–4): 109–115.
6.
BarkerK (2007) The UK research assessment exercise: The evolution of a national research evaluation system. Research Evaluation16(1): 3–12.
7.
BlankenshipLHainesA (2008) The institutional repository: Storing and sharing digital scholarship. Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of North America27(2): 22–25.
8.
BorregoÁ (2017) Institutional repositories versus ResearchGate: The depositing habits of Spanish researchers. Learned Publishing30(3): 185–192.
9.
BrunsA (2013) Faster than the speed of print: Reconciling “big data” social media analysis and academic scholarship. First Monday18.
ChiuC-MHsuM-HWangET (2006) Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems42(3): 1872–1888.
12.
ChoHChenMChungS (2010) Testing an integrative theoretical model of knowledge-sharing behavior in the context of Wikipedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology61(6): 1198–1212.
13.
CitromeL (2015) My two favourite professional social networking sites: LinkedIn and ResearchGate: How they can help you, or hurt you?International Journal of Clinical Practice69(6): 623–624.
14.
CraginMHPalmerCLCarlsonJR, et al. (2010) Data sharing, small science and institutional repositories. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences368(1926): 4023–4038.
15.
DavisFD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance in information technology. MIS Quarterly13(3): 319–340.
16.
DawsonPHYangSQ (2016) Institutional repositories, open access and copyright: What are the practices and implications?Science & Technology Libraries35(4): 279–294.
FeathermanMSPavlouPA (2003) Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective. International Journal of Human Computer Studies59(4): 451–474.
HernandezBMontanerTSeseFJ, et al. (2011) The role of social motivations in e-learning: How do they affect usage and success of ICT interactive tools?Computers in Human Behavior27(6): 2224–2232.
24.
HorwoodLSullivanSYoungE, et al. (2004) OAI compliant institutional repositories and the role of library staff. Library Management25(4/5): 170–176.
25.
HsuM-HChiuC-M (2004) Predicting electronic service continuance with a decomposed theory of planned behaviour. Behaviour & Information Technology23(5): 359–373.
26.
HungS-YLaiH-MChangW-W (2011) Knowledge-sharing motivations affecting R&D employees’ acceptance of electronic knowledge repository. Behaviour & Information Technology30(2): 213–230.
27.
JantzRCWilsonMC (2008) Institutional repositories: Faculty deposits, marketing, and the reform of scholarly communication. The Journal of Academic Librarianship34(3): 186–195.
KimJ (2011) Motivations of faculty self-archiving in institutional repositories. The Journal of Academic Librarianship37(3): 246–254.
30.
KimYNahS (2018) Internet researchers’ data sharing behaviors: An integration of data reuse experience, attitudinal beliefs, social norms, and resource factors. Online Information Review42(1): 124–142.
31.
KimYStantonJM (2016) Institutional and individual factors affecting scientists’ data-sharing behaviors: A multilevel analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology67: 776–799.
32.
LeeHReidEKimWG (2014) Understanding knowledge sharing in online travel communities: Antecedents and the moderating effects of interaction modes. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research38(2): 222–242.
33.
LinHF (2010) Applicability of the extended theory of planned behavior in predicting job seeker intentions to use job-search websites. International Journal of Selection and Assessment18(1): 64–74.
34.
LiouD-KChihW-HYuanC-Y, et al. (2016) The study of the antecedents of knowledge sharing behavior: The empirical study of Yambol online test community. Internet Research26(4): 845–868.
35.
LynchCA (2003) Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. Portal: Libraries and the Academy3(2): 327–336.
36.
McDonaldRHThomasC (2008) The case for standardized reporting and assessment requirements for institutional repositories. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship20(2): 101–109.
37.
McLure WaskoMFarajS (2000) “It is what one does”: Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems9(2–3): 155–173.
38.
McMillanDWChavisDM (1986) Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology14(1): 6–23.
39.
OstromE (2003) Toward a behavioral theory linking trust, reciprocity, and reputation. In: OstromEWalkerJ (eds) Trust and Reciprocity: Interdisciplinary Lessons from Experimental Research. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 19–79.
40.
PavlouPA (2003) Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce7(3): 101–134.
41.
PinfieldS (2005) A mandate to self archive? The role of open access institutional repositories. Serials18(1): 30–34.
42.
QuaddusMXuJ (2005) Adoption and diffusion of knowledge management systems: Field studies of factors and variables. Knowledge-Based Systems18(2–3): 107–115.
43.
RyuSHoSHHanI (2003) Knowledge sharing behavior of physicians in hospitals. Expert Systems with Applications25(1): 113–122.
44.
SugimotoCRWorkSLarivièreV, et al. (2017) Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology68(9): 2037–2062.
45.
TeoHHWeiKKBenbasatI (2003) Predicting intention to adopt interorganizational linkages: An institutional perspective. MIS Quarterly27(1): 19–49.
46.
ThelwallMKoushaK (2015) ResearchGate: Disseminating, communicating, and measuring scholarship?Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology66(5): 876–889.
47.
ThelwallMKoushaK (2017) ResearchGate articles: Age, discipline, audience size, and impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology68(2): 468–479.
48.
TohidiniaZMosakhaniM (2010) Knowledge sharing behaviour and its predictors. Industrial Management & Data Systems110(3–4): 611–631.
49.
Van WestrienenGLynchCA (2005) Academic institutional repositories. D-Lib Magazine11(9): 1082–9873.
50.
VenkateshVDavisFD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science46(2): 186–204.
51.
VenkateshVMorrisMGDavisGB, et al. (2003) User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly27(3): 425–478.
52.
XiaJ (2007) Assessment of self-archiving in institutional repositories: Across disciplines. The Journal of Academic Librarianship33(6): 647–654.
53.
XiaJGilchristSBSmithNX, et al. (2012) A review of open access self-archiving mandate policies. Portal: Libraries and the Academy12(1): 85–102.
54.
YakelERiehSSt JeanB, et al. (2008) Institutional repositories and the institutional repository: College and university archives and special collections in an era of change. The American Archivist71(2): 323–349.
55.
YuM-CWuY-CJAlhalabiW, et al. (2016) ResearchGate: An effective altmetric indicator for active researchers?Computers in Human Behavior55: 1001–1006.
56.
ZhangHBoockMWirthAA (2015) It takes more than a mandate: Factors that contribute to increased rates of article deposit to an institutional repository. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication3: e1208.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
