图书情报工作

图书情报工作 >

2013 , Vol. 57 >Issue 14: 50 - 55,133

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7536/j.issn.0252-3116.2013.14.008

理论研究

图书馆读者满意度评价模型的差异性分析

  • 李志芳 ,
  • 邓仲华
展开
  • 武汉大学信息管理学院
李志芳,武汉大学信息管理学院博士研究生,E-mail:lizhifang122@163.com;邓仲华,武汉大学信息管理学院教授,博士生导师。

收稿日期: 2013-06-10

  修回日期: 2013-06-10

  网络出版日期: 2013-07-20

基金资助

本文系国家自然科学基金资助项目“云计算环境下图书馆的信息服务等级协议研究”(项目编号:71173163)研究成果之一。

收起

Analysis on Dissimilarities among the Evaluation Models of Library Readers Satisfaction Degree

  • Li Zhifang ,
  • Deng Zhonghua
Expand
  • School of Information Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072

Received date: 2013-06-10

  Revised date: 2013-06-10

  Online published: 2013-07-20

Fold

摘要

通过文献调查, 发现当前图书馆满意度评价模型主要是基于SERVQUAL、LibQUAL+TM、Rodski Group、AHP以及ACSI模型进行构建的。从各模型的发展背景、量表指标的设置与权值设置、适用性以及优缺点几个方面进行综合比较,得出各评价模型的差异性所在。研究发现,差异性最明显之处在于各评价模型的量表设置及适用性不同评价模型的测量过程和测量结果的侧重点是不同的。

关键词： 读者满意度; 评价模型; 评价量表; 差异性

本文引用格式

李志芳 , 邓仲华 . 图书馆读者满意度评价模型的差异性分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2013 , 57(14) : 50 -55,133 . DOI: 10.7536/j.issn.0252-3116.2013.14.008

Abstract

Through literatures surveying, we found that the current evaluation models of library readers satisfaction are mainly built based on SERVQUAL、LibQUAL+TM、Rodski Group、AHP and ACSI. This paper makes a comprehensive comparison among these models from their backgrounds, scale set, weight set, applicability as well as advantages and disadvantages. Then we can get the dissimilarities among these evaluation models. In the research, we find that the most obvious dissimilarities are their scales and applicability; Different evaluation models have different focuses in the measurement process and results.

Key words： readers satisfaction degreee; valuation model; evaluation scale; dissimilarities

参考文献

[1] Hernon P,Nitecki D A, Altman E. Service quality and customersatisfaction:An assessment and future directions [J]. Journal of Academc Librarianship, 1999, 25(1):9-17.
[2] 张翔,万华.CS理论与图书馆管理初探[J].图书馆建设,2000(3):11-13.
[3] 郭强,赵瑾,刘思源,等.图书馆读者满意度的基本计量规律研究[J].情报科学,2009,27(7):1021-1026.
[4] 马费成,胡翠华,陈亮,等.信息管理学基础[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2002:10-13.
[5] Parasuraman A,Zeithaml Va,Berry L L.Servqual-a multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality[J].Journal of Retailing, 1988, 64(1):12-40.
[6] Parasuraman A,Berry L L,Zeithaml Va.Refinement and reassessment of the servoqual Scale[J].Journal of Retailing, 1991, 67(4):420-450.
[7] Parasuraman A,Zeithami Va,Berry L L. Reassessment of expectations as a comparison standard in measuring service quality-Implications for further research [J].Journal of Marketing, 1994,58(1):111-124.
[8] Nitecki D A. Changing the concept and measure of service quality in academic libraries[J].Journal of Academic Librarianship, 1996,22(3):181-190.
[9] 许玲,王利,周从军.面向全面质量管理——用SERVQUAL评价图书馆服务质量[J].图书情报工作,2001,45(5):76-79.
[10] 常唯.LibQUAL+TM——图书馆服务质量评价方法新进展[J].大学图书馆学报,2003(4):23-26.
[11] Thompson B, Cook C, Thompson R L. Reliability and structure of LibQUAL+(TM) scores:Measuring perceived library servicequality [J]. Portal-Libraries and the Academy, 2002, 2(1):3-12.
[12] 吴冬曼,赵熊,解春伟,等.网络环境下图书馆服务质量评价方法探析——清华大学图书馆读者满意度调查工作的实践与思考[J].大学图书馆学报,2006(1):49-52.
[13] 罗红.LibQUAL+TM和Rodski Group之对比研究[J].江西图书馆学刊,2007,34(4):58-60.
[14] 刘晓波.基于AHP方法的高校图书馆读者满意度评价[J].科技情报开发与经济,2008,18(25):19-20.
[15] 黄海.引入ACSI模型的读者满意度测评应用研究[J].科技情报开发与经济,2007,17(24):69-70.
[16] 施国洪,王治敏.图书馆服务质量评价研究回顾与展望[J].中国图书馆学报,2009,35(5):91-98.
[17] 张为杰,杨广锋,周婕.Insync Surveys图书馆用户满意度调查分析[J].图书情报知识,2009(6):34-38,86.
[18] Andaleeb S S, Simmonds P L. Explaining user satisfaction with academic libraries:Strategic implications [J]. College & Research Libraries, 1998, 59(2):156-167.
[19] Stamatoplos A,Mackoy R. Effects of library instruction on university students' satisfaction with the library:A longitudinal study[J]. College & Research Libraries, 1998, 59(4):323-334.
[20] 罗曼.图书馆服务质量模型及其应用[J].中国图书馆学报,2005,31(2):20-24.

Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉