DETERMINANTS OF USERS’ SATISFACTION WITH E-LIBRARY SERVICES IN ACADEMIC LIBRARIES OF SRI LANKA: APPLICATION OF STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING (SEM)

1. Determinants of Users’ Satisfaction with
E-library Services in Academic Libraries of
Sri Lanka: Application of Structural Equation Modeling
(SEM)
S. K. Illangarathne
Senior Assistant Librarian, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka
skillangarathne@gmail.com
International Conference of University Librarians’ Association
(ICULA -2018)
Thursday, September 20, 2018
09/20/2018 1

2. Presentation Outlines
09/20/2018 2

3. Academic Libraries are considered as;
 the depositories where every
kind of information sources
would be available via print or
online.
 the services providers supporting
the learning and teaching
processes of higher education
institutions
 the consultants of the neighbor
libraries (public, school and
special)
 the integral part of the academic
programs
 the leaders of virtual library
context
“the heart of the
University “09/20/2018 3

4. E-resources are define as;
 the any types of information which is accessible
through computer, Internet and networking.
Cont.
09/20/2018 4

5. Satisfaction is defines as;
 the “fulfillment of one's wishes, expectations, or needs, or the pleasure derived
from this” (Oxford Dictionary, 2018).
 the “ultimate goal of all business activities” (Johnson & Kwak, 2012).
Today, institutions face their highest competition, because they move from a
product and sales philosophy to a marketing philosophy, which gives a company a
better chance of out performing competition (Kotler, 2000).
Cont.
Social Sciences Theories of Satisfaction:
 Oliver, Rust and Varki (1997) – Lower, Higher, Bivalant
 Morgan and Hunt (1994) – The theory of Three Factor (Basic, Excitement &
Performance factors
09/20/2018 5

6. Service quality (SQ) is defines as;
in its contemporary conceptualization, is a
comparison of perceived expectations (E) of
a service with perceived performance (P),
giving rise to the equation.
Cont.
SERVICE QUALITY
SQ=P-E
09/20/2018 6

7. Perceived service value is defines as;
 the worth or merits a customer assigns to a product or service
Cont.
PERCEIVED SERVICE VALUE
09/20/2018 7

8. Cont.
Association among users’ satisfaction, service quality and Service Value
 significant amount of research has been conducted reporting associations between service
quality and users’ satisfaction
 reported that all the elements of service quality directly influenced the users’ satisfaction.
service quality is “an important antecedent of users’ satisfaction” (Cronin and Taylor, 1992)
“higher service quality leads to higher users’ satisfaction” (Spreng and Mackoy,1996)
 “higher users’ satisfaction is an indicator of high Perceived quality” (Fornell, 1992)
 At the academic library context , with the e-resources services , users’ existing level of the
satisfaction and expected level of the service quality also questionable due to the various
situations.
By considering above associations, and existing situations at the library context, the
researchers have hypothesized the following;
09/20/2018 8

9. Cont.
Hypothesis (H1): There is a positive relation between
Service quality and User’s Satisfaction.
Hypothesis (H2): Perceived Service value influence on
User’s satisfaction
Hypothesis (H3): There is a relationship between Service
quality and Perceived Service Value
Based on the above hypotheses, the following conceptual
model was illustrated.
09/20/2018 9

10. Cont.
H1
H3
H2
Perceived
Service
Value
User’s
Satisfaction
Service
Quality
Reliability
Assurance
Tangibility
Empathy
Responsiveness
Reliability
Quality
Assurance
Quality
Tangibility
Quality
Empathy
Quality
Responsiveness
Quality
service
value
corporate
image
loyalty
switching
intention
09/20/2018 10

11.  The study was conducted based on the Model Testing Approach
 Survey method was used to test the model.
 A Proper sampling method was used to find out the sample size
Target Population = University Library Users of Sri Lanka
Accessible Population = Library users of RUSL (3500)
Sample size = 285
Stratified Random Sampling method was used to select the
proportion of the sample within the Rajarata University of Sri
Lanka
 five points Likert scaled questionnaire was employed with 3
constructs & 14 components.
 Statistical techniques were applied to analyze the primary data
using SPSS 22 & STATA 1209/20/2018 11

12. General objective :
To develop a model for determining of users’ satisfaction with E-library services
in Sri Lankan University Libraries by using the applications of Structural Equation
Modeling (SEM)
Specific objectives :
 To find out the nature of customer satisfaction in different contexts.
 To find out the affection of satisfaction with the service quality and service
value
 To determine the associations among users’ satisfaction, service quality and
Service Value
 To identify the basic model which assists to measure the users’ satisfaction by
using above three factors
 To test the model statistically by using the real data
09/20/2018 12

13. Response Rate
Sample Category Proportion
(%)
Questionnaire
Distributed
Responses
Undergraduates 50 175 170
Post-grandaunts 25 88 58
Academic staff members 15 53 51
Administrative staff 5 17 11
Non-academic staff members 3 10 9
Outside researchers 2 7 1
Total 100 350 300
Overall Response Rate 85.71%
09/20/2018 13

14. Reliability of the Questionnaire
Cont.
Variables Items Cronbach’s
Alpha (a)
Model 14 0.897
Service Quality 4 0.789
Perceived Service Value 5 0.786
User’s Satisfaction 5 0.746
Source: Author Calculation by using SPSS 22
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA
Authors Calculation by using STATA
Measures χ2 P-value RMSEA GFI AGFI NNFI CFI
Model 25.75 0.175 0.025 0.998 0.95 0.987 0.879
Service Quality 7.845 0.225 0.0012 0.889 0.878 0.952 0.889
Perceived Service Value 6.849 0.232 0.043 0.987 0.960 0.972 0.986
Customer Satisfaction 2.260 0.323 0.026 0.994 0.971 0.997 0.999
RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
GFI = Goodness of Fit / AGFI = Adjusted Goodness-of-Fit
NNFI = Non-Normed Fit Index / TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index
CFI = Comparative Fit Index
09/20/2018 14

15. Testing of Structural Equation Model (SEM)
Cont.
Goodness-of-fit statistics Values Desired range of
values for a good fit
Chi-square test χ2 84.10
(P = 0.189)
p>0.05
Degrees of freedom df 75 ≥ 0
Chi-square/degrees of freedom ratio χ2/df 1.121 1-5
The goodness of fit index GIF 0.954 Close to 1
Root mean square error of approximation RMSE 0.065 < 0.08
Adjusted good-of-fit index AGFI 0.925 > 0.85
Tucker-Lewis index TLI 0.91 > 0.85
Comparative fit index CFI 0.895 > 0.85
Normed fit index (NFI) NFI 0.0857 > 0.85
Authors Calculation by using STATA
09/20/2018 15

16. Testing of Hypnotized Causal Structural Model
Cont.
Authors Calculation by using STATA
Causality Direction Standardized Path
coefficient
(P-value)
C.R S.E Decision
H1: Service Quality User’s Satisfaction 1.85
(0.0025)**
12.50 0.148 Supported
H2: Perceived Value User’s Satisfaction 0.685
(0.0125)**
2.665 0.257 Supported
H3: Service Quality Perceived Service Value 0.85
(0.0445)**
4.292 0.198 Supported
09/20/2018 16

17. It was found that there were strong consistency internally in each and every construct of the
proposed model.
It was found that there is strong association among three variables
It was found that the developed hypotheses of the proposed model, which are shown in Figure 1,
were fully supported.
It was found that service quality and Service value have direct relationships with E-resources user’s
satisfaction.
Therefore, it is concluded that service quality and service value of E-resources services provide by
the university libraries are interlined and has an impact on their user’s satisfaction eventually.
09/20/2018 17

18. In order to improve the aspect of user’s satisfaction, library management should
take care of their end-users’ complains and what they usually try to express
through suggestions.
 In order to get feedback from them towards enhanced service quality,
management needs to consider conducting user surveys periodically through
their online systems.
This model could be used to test the users’ satisfaction of e-resources usage
within the university library context as well as other library contexts by doing
some changes of model components.
- Acknowledgements -
Prof. Luo Fan – Wuhan University of Technology
Dr. Zaman Mohomed – STATA specialist, School of Economics, WHUT
09/20/2018 18

19. Acknowledgement
Prof. Luo Fan – Wuhan University of Technology
Dr. Zaman Mohomed – STATA specialist, School of Economics, WHUT
09/20/2018 19

20. References
1. Adeniran, P. (2011). User satisfaction with academic libraries services: Academic staff and students perspectives. International Journal of Library and
Information Science, 3(10), 209-216.
2. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modelling in practice: A review and recommended a two-step approach. Psychological
Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
3. Bentler, P. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 170(1), 237-278.
4. Bentler, P. (2004). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(1), 7-27.
5. Browne, M. W., & Gudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen, K. A., Long: Sage.
6. Chin, W. W., & Todd, P. A. (1995). On the use, usefulness, and case of use of structural equation modelling in MIS research: a note of caution. MIS
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 19(2), 237-247.
7. Cronin, J. J., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the Effects of Quality, Value and Customer Satisfaction on Consumer Behavioral
Intentions in Service Environments. Journal of Retailing, 7(2), 193-218.
8. Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55-88.
9. Dominici, G., Palumbo, F., & Basile, G. (2015), The drivers of customer satisfaction for academic library services: managerial hints from an empirical
study on two Italian university libraries using the Kano model, Int. J. Management in Education, 9(3), 267-288.
10. Du Plessis, L. (2010). Customer relationship management and its influence on customer loyalty at Liberty Life in South Africa (pp. 12): University of
Johannesburg.
11. Fornell, C. (1992). A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish Experience. Journal of Marketing, 56(1), 6-21.
12. Green, P. E., Tull, D., & Albaum, S. (1988). Research for Marketing Decisions (5th ed.). New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
13. Iroaganachia, M. A., & Nkikob, C. (2016). Performance assessment model for academic libraries: the Covenant University Library example. Annals of
Library and Information Studies, 63(1), 7-15.
14. Johnson, S., & Kwak, J. (2012). Is Financial Innovation Good for the Economy? Innovation Policy and the Economy, 12(2), 1-15.
15. Kassim, N. A. (2009). Evaluating users' satisfaction with academic library performance. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 14(2),
101-115.
16. Kotler, P. (2000). Marketing Management. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
17. Mohajerani, P., & Miremadi, A. R. (2012). The Effective Aspect of Customer Satisfaction In Hotel Industry In Kish Island (Modeling). International
Journal of Marketing Studies, 4(2), 134-152.
18. Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20-38.
19. Oliver, R. L., Rust, R. T., & Varki, S. (1997). Customer Delight: Foundations, findings, and managerial insight. Journal of Retailing, 73(3), 311-336.
20. Spreng, R. A., & Mackoy, R. D. (1996). An empirical examination of a model of Perceived service quality and satisfaction. Journal of Retailing, 72(2),
201-214.
21. Veena, & Kotari, P. N. (2016). User Satisfaction with Library Resources, Services, and Facilities: A Study in SDM College Library, Ujire. Indian
Journal of Information Sources and Services, 6(1), 1-4.
22. Wang, Y., Lo, H. P., & Yang, Y. H. (2004). An integrated framework for service quality, customer value, satisfaction: evidence from China's
telecommunication industry. Information Systems Frontiers, 6(4), 325-340.
23. Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioural consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(1), 31-46.
09/20/2018 20

21. 09/20/2018 21