The self-built e-reserve database (SED) has still been considered an essential e-reserve service in Chinese academic libraries to resolve the issue of insufficient library copies and to support the future digital learning model. This study aims to examine the factors influencing users’ continuance intention to use SED in university libraries based on an integrative model that includes the Information System Success Model (ISSM), the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Post-Acceptance Model of Information System Continuance, and the Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) model. A total of 384 valid responses were collected through a questionnaire-based survey across Chinese colleges and universities. The findings confirmed the direct influence of perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU), and personal innovativeness in IT(PIIT) on continuance intention to use SED. Additionally, the study highlighted the different mediating roles of the organism (i.e. PEOU, PU, and PIIT) between the stimulus (i.e. information quality, system quality, service information quality, and social influence) and continuance intention. Specifically, information quality and social influence were identified as the two primary antecedent variables influencing continuance intention through the mediating effects of PU and PIIT. This study could help library administrators identify areas of improvement and explore ways to increase the use and relevance of e-reserve services.
AbdelKaderAFSayedMH (2022) Evaluation of the Egyptian knowledge bank using the information systems success model. Journal of Academic Librarianship48(2): 102506.
2.
AgarwalRPrasadJ (1998) A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Information Systems Research9(2): 204–215.
3.
AhmadSBhattiSHHwangY (2020) E-service quality and actual use of e-banking: Explanation through the technology acceptance model. Information Development36(4): 503–519.
4.
AjzenLFishbeinM (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
5.
AlbayrakTRosario González-RodríguezMCaberM, et al. (2023) The use of mobile applications for travel booking: Impacts of application quality and Brand Trust. Journal of Vacation Marketing29(1): 3–21.
6.
AliIWarraichNF (2024) Meta-analysis of technology acceptance for mobile and digital libraries in academic settings using technology acceptance model (TAM). Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication. Epub ahead of print 9 February 2024. DOI: 10.1108/GKMC-09-2023-0360
7.
AlismailHA (2023) The influence of the information system success model and theory of planned behavior on the Zoom application used by elementary education teachers. Sustainability15(12): 9558.
8.
AnSEckTYimH (2023) Understanding consumers’ acceptance intention to use mobile food delivery applications through an extended technology acceptance model. Sustainability15(1): 832.
9.
BarfiKAImoroOArkorfulV, et al. (2023) Acceptance of e-library and support services for distance education students: Modelling their initial perspectives. Information Development40(3): 517–529.
10.
BhattacherjeeA (2001) Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly25(3): 351–370.
11.
CarriónGCNitzlCRoldánJL (2017) Mediation analyses in partial least squares structural equation modeling: Guidelines and empirical examples. In: LatanHNoonanR (eds) Partial Least Squares Path Modeling: Basic Concepts, Methodological Issues and Applications. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, pp.173–195.
12.
ChavoshiAHamidiH (2019) Social, individual, technological and pedagogical factors influencing mobile learning acceptance in higher education: A case from Iran. Telematics and Informatics38: 133–165.
13.
ChengYM (2014) Why do users intend to continue using the digital library? An integrated perspective. Aslib Journal of Information Management66(6): 640–662.
14.
ChengYM (2023) How gamification and social interaction stimulate MOOCs continuance intention via cognitive presence, teaching presence and social presence?Library Hi Tech41(6): 1781–1801.
15.
ChenJFChangJFKaoCW, et al. (2016) Integrating ISSM into TAM to enhance digital library services. Electronic Library34(1): 58–73.
16.
CohenJ (ed.) (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd edn.New York: Routledge.
17.
CumaogluGSaciciETorunK (2013) E-Book versus printed materials: Preferences of university students. Contemporary Educational Technology4(2): 121–135.
18.
D AmbraJWilsonCSAkterS (2020) Continuance of E-Textbook use by tertiary students: A qualitative approach. Journal of Computer Information Systems60(3): 223–232.
19.
DavisFD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly13(3): 319–340.
20.
DeLoneWHMcLeanER (1992) Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research3(1): 60–95.
21.
DeLoneWHMcLeanER (2003) The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems19(4): 9–30.
22.
DengZTianZXueJ, et al. (2023) What predicts patients’ satisfaction and continuous use of intelligent medical guidance? The moderating effect of consulting experience. Behaviour & Information Technology43(13): 3111–3118.
23.
FaganMKilmonCPandeyV (2012) Exploring the adoption of a virtual reality simulation. Campus-Wide Information Systems29(2): 117–127.
24.
FalloonKA (2020) Effectively evaluating the accessibility of electronic monographs using VPATs and other resources at the College of Staten Island Library- CUNY. Serials Review46(2): 98–113.
25.
FangCCuiLLianH (2010) Electronic reserve services for academic libraries in China: Practices and concerns. Interlending & Document Supply38(4): 245–252.
26.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39–50.
27.
FosterSWilsonDSandersS, et al. (2023) The user experience: Student perspectives on library course reserve. Journal of Academic Librarianship49(2): 102635.
28.
GelderblomHMattheeMHattinghM, et al. (2019) High school learners’ continuance intention to use electronic textbooks: A usability study. Education and Information Technologies24(2): 1753–1776.
29.
GuoYYangZYangZ, et al. (2021) The provision of patron services in Chinese academic libraries responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. Library Hi Tech39(2): 533–548.
30.
HairJFHultGTMRingleC, et al. (2013) A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
31.
HairJFRisherJJSarstedtM, et al. (2019) When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review31(1): 2–24.
32.
HandfieldAE (2017) The future of electronic reserves and the presence of librarians in content management systems: A case study at Manhattan College. Journal of Access Services14(4): 163–170.
33.
HaqueMZQianAAminM, et al. (2020) An empirical study on geotagging technology adoption among the social networking sites (SNSs) users: The moderating effect of geotagg’s use frequency. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management19(03): 2050018.
34.
HaqueMZQianALuckySA (2023) Exploring the factors of online social networks (OSNs) on individual investors’ capital market investment decision: An integrated approach. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management22(02): 2350002.
35.
HarmanH (1967) Modern Factor Analysis. Chicago, IL and London: University of Chicago Press.
36.
HenselerJRingleCMSarstedtM (2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science43(1): 115–135.
37.
HuJZhangY (2016) Understanding Chinese undergraduates’ continuance intention to use mobile book-reading apps: An integrated model and empirical study. International Journal of Information Studies and Libraries66(2): 85–99.
38.
HuLBentlerPM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal6(1): 1–55.
39.
HwangY (2009) The impact of uncertainty avoidance, social norms and innovativeness on trust and ease of use in electronic customer relationship management. Electronic Markets19(2): 89–98.
40.
IqbalMRafiqMSoroyaSH (2022) Examining predictors of digital library use: An application of the information system success model. Electronic Library40(4): 359–375.
41.
IslamAYMAMokMMCXiuxiuQ, et al. (2018) Factors influencing students’ satisfaction in using wireless internet in higher education. Electronic Library36(1): 2–20.
42.
JbeenAUr RehmanSMahmoodK (2022) Awareness, use and attitudes of students towards e-books: Differences based on gender, discipline and degree level. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication71(6/7): 449–467.
43.
JeonSHKangJYLimJI (2014) Analysis of factors affecting intention of continuous use for mobile wallet based on the Information System Success Model. Journal of Information Technology Services4(13): 325–340.
44.
JooSChoiN (2016) Understanding users’ continuance intention to use online library resources based on an extended expectation-confirmation model. Electronic Library34(4): 554–571.
45.
JooYJParkSShinEK (2017) Students’ expectation, satisfaction, and continuance intention to use digital textbooks. Computers in Human Behavior69: 83–90.
46.
KarahannaEStraubDW (1999) The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease-of-use. Information Management35(4): 237–250.
47.
KatLMValdesZOwensE, et al. (2019) Where’s the EASY button? Uncovering e-book usability. Reference & User Services Quarterly59(1): 44–65.
48.
KhailovaL (2021) Using curriculum mapping to scaffold and equitably distribute information literacy instruction for graduate professional studies programs. Journal of Academic Librarianship47(1): 102281.
49.
LaskowskiMS (2021) The life cycle of an e-reserve service. Journal of Interlibrary Loan Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve29(1-2): 1–55.
50.
LeeJCChenCY (2022a) Motivating members’ involvement to effectually conduct collaborative software process tailoring. Empirical Software Engineering27(7): 183.
51.
LeeJCChenX (2022b) Exploring users’ adoption intentions in the evolution of artificial intelligence mobile banking applications: The intelligent and anthropomorphic perspectives. International Journal of Bank Marketing40(4): 631–658.
52.
LeeJCXiongL (2023) Exploring learners’ continuous usage decisions regarding mobile-assisted language learning applications: A social support theory perspective. Education and Information Technologies28(12): 16743–16769.
53.
LetchumananMTarmiziR (2011) Assessing the intention to use e-book among engineering undergraduates in Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia. Library Hi Tech29(3): 512–528.
54.
LimCSongHDLeeY (2012) Improving the usability of the user interface for a digital textbook platform for elementary-school students. Educational Technology Research and Development60(1): 159–173.
55.
LiYLiuRWangJ, et al. (2022) How does mHealth service quality influences adoption?Industrial Management & Data Systems122(3): 774–795.
56.
LuJ (2014) Are personal innovativeness and social influence critical to continue with mobile commerce?Internet Research24(2): 134–159.
57.
LuWMaPYuJ, et al. (2019) Metro maps for efficient knowledge learning by summarizing massive electronic textbooks. International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition22(2): 99–111.
58.
LwogaETSifeAS (2018) Impacts of quality antecedents on faculty members’ acceptance of electronic resources. Library Hi Tech36(2): 289–305.
59.
McNaughtAMacMullenRSmithS, et al. (2018) Evaluating e-book platforms: Lessons from the e-book accessibility audit. Learned Publishing31(1): 5–10.
60.
MehrabianARussellJ (1974) An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
61.
MishraAShuklaARanaNP, et al. (2023) Re-examining post-acceptance model of information systems continuance: A revised theoretical model using MASEM approach. International Journal of Information Management68: 102571.
62.
MizrachiDSalazAM (2022) Reading format attitudes in the time of COVID. Journal of Academic Librarianship48(4): 102552.
63.
MizrachiDSalazAMKurbanogluS, et al. (2018) Academic reading format preferences and behaviors among university students worldwide: A comparative survey analysis. Plos One13(5): e197444.
64.
MuneCAgeeA (2016) Are e-books for everyone? An evaluation of academic e-book platforms’ accessibility features. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship28(3): 172–182.
65.
NicholasDRowlandsIJamaliHR (2010) E-textbook use, information seeking behaviour and its impact: Case study business and management. Journal of Information Science36(2): 263–280.
66.
OECD (2012) E-books: Developments and Policy Considerations. OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 208, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://doi.org/10.1787/5k912zxg5svh-en
67.
OliverRL (1980) A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research17(4): 460–469.
68.
OwensEHwangSYKimD, et al. (2023) Do you love them now? Use and non-use of academic ebooks a decade later. Journal of Academic Librarianship49(3): 102703.
69.
Pitts-NoggleSRaffertyR (2017) Investigating textbook reserves: A case study of two models for reserves collections. College & Research Libraries78(1): 66–79.
70.
RamadhanAHidayantoANEvikCS, et al. (2022) Factors affecting the continuation to use and e-WOM intention of online library resources by university students: A study in Indonesia. Journal of Academic Librarianship48(6): 102592.
71.
RamloganRPapin-RamcharanJ (2011) The potential of e-reserves for the Main Library, University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad. Information Development27(3): 196–206.
72.
RojeskiM (2012) User perceptions of ebooks versus print books for class reserves in an academic library. Reference Services Review40(2): 228–241.
73.
RoskosKBrueckJLenhartL (2017) An analysis of e-book learning platforms: Affordances, architecture, functionality and analytics. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction12: 37–45.
74.
ScottREJallasMMurphyJA, et al. (2022) Assessing the value of course-assigned e-books. Collection Management47(4): 253–271.
75.
ShahzadKZhangQKhanMK, et al. (2023) The acceptance and continued use of blockchain technology in supply chain management: A unified model from supply chain professional’s stance. International Journal of Emerging Markets18(12): 6300–6321.
76.
ShivdasAMenonDGNairCS (2020) Antecedents of acceptance and use of a digital library system. Electronic Library38(1): 170–185.
77.
Soltani-NejadNTaheri-AzadFZarei-MaramN, et al. (2020) Developing a model to identify the antecedents and consequences of user satisfaction with digital libraries. Aslib Journal of Information Management72(6): 979–997.
78.
SultanMAAl-DaihaniSM (2016) Students’ adoption of Twitter as an information source: An exploratory study using the Technology Acceptance Model. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science21(3): 57–69.
79.
SuSF (2021) Exploring students’ attitudes toward university e-textbooks: Experiences, expectations, and preferences. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science54(3): 331–349.
80.
TudescoSRelevoJB (2021) Course reserves during the COVID 19 pandemic: Pivoting print to electronic reserves through a data driven process. Journal of Interlibrary Loan Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve29(3-5): 105–117.
81.
WangMXKimKSKimJK (2023) Investigating the determinants of IoT device continuance intentions: An empirical study of smart speakers through the lens of expectation-confirmation theory. Sage Open13(3): 1935530379.
82.
WangSBaiX (2016) University students awareness, usage and attitude towards e-books: Experience from China. Journal of Academic Librarianship42(3): 247–258.
83.
WuBChenX (2017) Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model. Computers in Human Behavior67: 221–232.
84.
XieK (2022) Research on the construction of electronic teaching reference service platform in University Library. Master’s Thesis, Xiangtan University, China.
85.
XuFDuJT (2022) Research on the drivers of undergraduates’ intention to use university digital libraries: Affinity theory as an additional construct of information system success model. Library Hi Tech40(6): 1627–1641.
86.
YuKHuangG (2020) Exploring consumers’ intent to use smart libraries with technology acceptance model. Electronic Library38(3): 447–461.
87.
ZhaoXLynchJGChenQ (2010) Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis. Journal of Consumer Research37(2): 197–206.
88.
ZhaoYWangASunY (2020) Technological environment, virtual experience, and MOOC continuance: A stimulus-organism-response perspective. Computers & Education144: 1–14.
