IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v13y2023i3p21582440231198627.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Key Stakeholders and the Computer Skills of Librarians on Research Data Management Support Services (Id so-21-1893.r2)

Author

Listed:
  • Isidore Komla Zotoo
  • Guifeng Liu
  • Zhangping Lu
  • Frank Kofi Essien
  • Wencheng Su

Abstract

This study aims to investigate key stakeholders’ impact and to assess its effect on Research Data Management (RDM), thereby setting the agenda for sound local government Research Data Management (RDM) policy for maximum profit. This study relies mainly on the stakeholder’ theory. Our target population is stakeholders in RDM. The survey used the Partial Least Squares and Structural Equation Modeling tool with a sample of 295 received from respondents to find the effect among the stakeholders. The Statistical results confirmed there is a positive effect among stakeholders. The Funders agencies criteria influence researchers’ work. The effect of government support policies on librarians RDM support services was positive but not significant. The impact of computer literacy of librarians on the RDM support service delivered by librarians was insignificant. The finding is mainly due to overreliance on manual approach to work in most libraries in Ghana as a result inadequate fund support. Librarians need to take a leading role in RDM to implement RDM policy fully. This study contributes to the discourse by helping to strengthen the existing relationship and also to understand the role of various stakeholders in RDM. Stakeholders in Ghana and developing countries need to take greater responsibility to achieve success. Government can rely on it for policy formulation. The research can be used to expand the existing stakeholders’ effective support and interactions as well as in teaching. The survey results can also help identify best practices, improve current observation, and compare practices across different countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Isidore Komla Zotoo & Guifeng Liu & Zhangping Lu & Frank Kofi Essien & Wencheng Su, 2023. "The Impact of Key Stakeholders and the Computer Skills of Librarians on Research Data Management Support Services (Id so-21-1893.r2)," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:13:y:2023:i:3:p:21582440231198627
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440231198627
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440231198627
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440231198627?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter T. Darch & Ashley E. Sands & Christine L. Borgman & Milena S. Golshan, 2021. "Do the stars align?: Stakeholders and strategies in libraries' curation of an astronomy dataset," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(2), pages 239-252, February.
    2. Vincent Larivière & Cassidy R. Sugimoto, 2018. "Do authors comply when funders enforce open access to research?," Nature, Nature, vol. 562(7728), pages 483-486, October.
    3. Guo Li & Ming K. Lim & Zhaohua Wang, 2020. "Stakeholders, green manufacturing, and practice performance: empirical evidence from Chinese fashion businesses," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 290(1), pages 961-982, July.
    4. Ponomariov, Branco L. & Boardman, P. Craig, 2010. "Influencing scientists' collaboration and productivity patterns through new institutions: University research centers and scientific and technical human capital," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 613-624, June.
    5. David Moher & Lex Bouter & Sabine Kleinert & Paul Glasziou & Mai Har Sham & Virginia Barbour & Anne-Marie Coriat & Nicole Foeger & Ulrich Dirnagl, 2020. "The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-14, July.
    6. Paul Sturges & Marianne Bamkin & Jane H.S. Anders & Bill Hubbard & Azhar Hussain & Melanie Heeley, 2015. "Research data sharing: Developing a stakeholder-driven model for journal policies," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(12), pages 2445-2455, December.
    7. Abdullah Gök & John Rigby & Philip Shapira, 2016. "The impact of research funding on scientific outputs: Evidence from six smaller European countries," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(3), pages 715-730, March.
    8. Shelley Stall & Lynn Yarmey & Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld & Brooks Hanson & Kerstin Lehnert & Brian Nosek & Mark Parsons & Erin Robinson & Lesley Wyborn, 2019. "Make scientific data FAIR," Nature, Nature, vol. 570(7759), pages 27-29, June.
    9. Marta Cocos & Benedetto Lepori, 2020. "What we know about research policy mix," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(2), pages 235-245.
    10. Benner, Mats & Sandstrom, Ulf, 2000. "Institutionalizing the triple helix: research funding and norms in the academic system," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 291-301, February.
    11. Mattia Casula & Nandhini Rangarajan & Patricia Shields, 2021. "The potential of working hypotheses for deductive exploratory research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(5), pages 1703-1725, October.
    12. Xinshu Zhao & John G. Lynch & Qimei Chen, 2010. "Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 197-206, August.
    13. Marko Sarstedt & Jun-Hwa Cheah, 2019. "Partial least squares structural equation modeling using SmartPLS: a software review," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(3), pages 196-202, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea K. Thomer, 2022. "Integrative data reuse at scientifically significant sites: Case studies at Yellowstone National Park and the La Brea Tar Pits," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(8), pages 1155-1170, August.
    2. Honghua Han & Jason Xiong & Kexin Zhao, 2022. "Digital inclusion in social media marketing adoption: the role of product suitability in the agriculture sector," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 657-683, December.
    3. Luis Antonio Orozco Castro, 2015. "Diversidad y heterogeneidad en redes de colaboración científica. Un estudio de las escuelas de administración de América Latina," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Administración de Empresas, edition 1, number 44, April.
    4. S. Arunachalam & Sridhar N. Ramaswami & Pol Herrmann & Doug Walker, 2018. "Innovation pathway to profitability: the role of entrepreneurial orientation and marketing capabilities," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 744-766, July.
    5. Bilgihan, Anil & Madanoglu, Melih & Ricci, Peter, 2016. "Service attributes as drivers of behavioral loyalty in casinos: The mediating effect of attitudinal loyalty," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 14-21.
    6. Kareklas, Ioannis & Muehling, Darrel D. & King, Skyler, 2019. "The effect of color and self-view priming in persuasive communications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 33-49.
    7. Michaela Strinzel & Josh Brown & Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner & Sarah Rijcke & Michael Hill, 2021. "Ten ways to improve academic CVs for fairer research assessment," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-4, December.
    8. Tironi, Martín & Rivera Lisboa, Diego Ignacio, 2023. "Artificial intelligence in the new forms of environmental governance in the Chilean State: Towards an eco-algorithmic governance," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    9. Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Aaron K. Chatterji & Michael Findley & Nathan M. Jensen & Stephan Meier & Daniel Nielson, 2016. "Field experiments in strategy research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 116-132, January.
    10. Bryan Cheng-Yu Hsu & Yu-Feng Wu & Hsin-Wei Chen & Man-Lai Cheung, 2020. "How Sport Tourism Event Image Fit Enhances Residents’ Perceptions of Place Image and Their Quality of Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-14, October.
    11. Yi Yong Lee & Chin Lay Gan & Tze Wei Liew, 2023. "Thwarting Instant Messaging Phishing Attacks: The Role of Self-Efficacy and the Mediating Effect of Attitude towards Online Sharing of Personal Information," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-23, February.
    12. FeCheng Ma & Farhan Khan & Kashif Ullah Khan & Si XiangYun, 2021. "Investigating the Impact of Information Technology, Absorptive Capacity, and Dynamic Capabilities on Firm Performance: An Empirical Study," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    13. Mbassi, Christophe Martial & Messono, Omang Ombolo, 2023. "Historical technology and current economic development: Reassessing the nature of the relationship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    14. Nosheena Yasir & Nasir Mahmood & Hafiz Shakir Mehmood & Osama Rashid & An Liren, 2021. "The Integrated Role of Personal Values and Theory of Planned Behavior to Form a Sustainable Entrepreneurial Intention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-21, August.
    15. Jianzhuang Zheng & Muhammad Usman Khurram & Lifeng Chen, 2022. "Can Green Innovation Affect ESG Ratings and Financial Performance? Evidence from Chinese GEM Listed Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-32, July.
    16. Yafeng Zou & Qi Wang & Min Deng & Yujie Wang, 2021. "Community Intervention System: COVID-19 Control in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-18, December.
    17. Belén Álvarez-Bornstein & Adrián A. Díaz-Faes & María Bordons, 2019. "What characterises funded biomedical research? Evidence from a basic and a clinical domain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 805-825, May.
    18. Mia M. Vainio & Daiva Daukantaitė, 2016. "Grit and Different Aspects of Well-Being: Direct and Indirect Relationships via Sense of Coherence and Authenticity," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 2119-2147, October.
    19. Christian W. Scheiner & Christian V. Baccarella & John Bessant & Kai-Ingo Voigt, 2018. "Participation Motives, Moral Disengagement, And Unethical Behaviour In Idea Competitions," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(06), pages 1-24, August.
    20. Yu Ding & Wayne S. DeSarbo & Dominique M. Hanssens & Kamel Jedidi & John G. Lynch & Donald R. Lehmann, 2020. "The past, present, and future of measurement and methods in marketing analysis," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 175-186, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:13:y:2023:i:3:p:21582440231198627. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.