AN ANALYSIS OF FACTORS IN THE ADOPTION OR NON-ADOPTION OF VIDEODISC TECHNOLOGY IN NORTH AMERICAN ACADEMIC AND SPECIAL LIBRARIES Robert E. Kelley, B.A., M.L.S. APPROVED: Major essor Co ittee Member Committee Member Comm M e an of the School of Library & Information Sciences Dean of the Robert B. Toulouse School of Studies AN ANALYSIS OF FACTORS IN THE ADOPTION OR NON-ADOPTION OF VIDEODISC TECHNOLOGY IN NORTH AMERICAN ACADEMIC AND SPECIAL LIBRARIES DISSERTATION Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of North Texas in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By Robert E. Kelley, B.A., M.L.S. Denton, Texas December, 1992 Kelley, Robert E., An Analysis of Factors in the Adoption or Non-Adoption of Videodisc Technology in North American Academic and Special Libraries. Doctor of Philosophy (Library Science), December, 1992, 289 pp., 154 tables, 2 illustrations, reference list, 241 titles. The researcher identified 37 independent variables to study their effect on the two dependent variables, the acquisition of videodiscs and the functions for which videodisc programs were acquired. The literature of the applications of videodisc technology in libraries, museums, education and industry, as well as related issues concerning interactive video, were presented in Chapter 2. Using the diffusion of innovation theory of Everett Rogers as a guide, the researcher constructed a questionnaire. Valid responses totalled 462 from management of all types of academic libraries and from special libraries other than non-academic law, military, veterans' hospital, and church libraries. The researcher used Pearson correlations, non- parametric, and chi-square tests to analyze the data. The following conclusions were made from the results: there were significant correlations between having videodiscs and perceptions of greater benefits than costs, appropriateness of videodisc programs for libraries' objectives or curricula, seeing videodiscs as an enhancement of an existing library technology, collection of videocassettes, and ability to raise funds from slack resources. The size of the libraries' materials and equipment budgets had some significance, but it was not consistently significant, as it was for the above-mentioned factors, at the p < .01 level. Lack of in-house recording ability did not impose a barrier on adoption of discs among respondents. Full--motion, full-screen video was not seen as very important for future multimedia use. Of the 462 respondents, 86 libraries had collected videodiscs. Fifty percent of libraries collecting videodiscs started from 1989-1991, indicating growth of use of videodiscs in academic and special libraries may continue. There is interest among respondents in digital multimedia, since approximately 53 percent said they would purchase a digital multimedia computer system for the library over the next two years. Copyright by Robert Emmett Kelley 1992 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES . vi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . xv Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY . .1 Statement of the problem Purposes . 7 of the study . 8 Dependent variables . 9 Independent variables . 9 Hypotheses . - . - .13 Significance of the study . .13 Assumptions, Limitations - .15 Definition of terms --- - w- ". ". ". 16 22 . 2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE-- . Diffusion of innovations - .22 The Development of videodisc technology . 29 Interactive video . 39 Issues in interactive video 50 Applications of videodiscs in education and.training . 70 Library applications of videodisc technology 76 Applications of videodisc technology in museums . 97 Approaching the "why" of diffusion of videodiscs in libraries . 99 3. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY . 103 Development of the random sample 103 Construction of the questionnaire . 107 Data collection . 111 Data analysis . - - - . 113 4. ANALYSIS OF DATA - - - . 115 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 196 APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE. 202 iv APPENDIX B: FOLLOW-UPS . 213 APPENDIX C: STATISTICAL TABLES 215 APPENDIX D: DEFINITION OF ADDITIONAL TERMS 267 REFERENCE LIST 270 V LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Frequency distribution, libraries having videodiscs or not . - . 116 2. Frequency distribution, year to start adopting videodiscs, by range of years . 116 3. Number of videodiscs acquired by randomly sampled libraries, by year . 117 4. Pearson product-moment correlation, Number of videodiscs acquired with 9 independent variables, 1979-1991 means . 119 5. Frequency table,Kruskal-Wallis 1-way ANOVA,Mann-Whitney U-Wilcoxon Rank Sum W Test for videodiscs & levels of materials expenditures, 1979 . 120 6. Frequency table [with K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1980. 121 7. Frequency table [with K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1981. 122 8. Frequency table [with K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1982. 123 9. Frequency table [with K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1983. 124 10. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1984. 125 11. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1985. 126 12. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1986. 127 13. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1987. 128 14. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1988. 129 vi 15. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1989. 130 16. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1990. 131 17. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of materials expenditures, 1991. 132 18. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1979. 133 19. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1980. 134 20. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1981. 135 21. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1982. 136 22. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1984. 137 24. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1985. 138 25. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1986. 139 26. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1987. 140 27. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1988. 141 28. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1989. 142 29. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1990. 143 30. Frequency table [and K-W,Mann-Whitney test] videodiscs and levels of equipment expenditures, 1991. 144 31. Pearson correlation, equipment and materials expendi- tures/size and videodiscs, 1986 . 146 32. Pearson correlation, equipment and materials expendi- tures/size and videodiscs, 1987 . 146 vii 33. Profit organizations versus others by discs, 1991 . 149 34. Profit organizations versus others, all with videodiscs, 1991 . - - - . 150 35. Libraries whose parent institution has produced videodisc . - - - - . 151 36. Chi-square test with crosstabulations, have videodiscs or not and ever produced . 152 37. Number and percentage of library/LRC directors given directive [to adopt or reject videodiscs] . 153 38. Costs vs. benefits of videodiscs [Frequency table] 155 39. Chi-square test of significance with crosstabulation cost vs. benefits, and have or not, of videodiscs 156 40. Chi-square test of significance with crosstabulation have videodiscs or not and importance of full-motion and full-screen video to multimedia . 157 41. Chi-square test of significance with crosstabulation have videodiscs or not and plan to purchase digital multimedia system, computer or cd-based . 157 42. Improvement on existing library technology. 158 43. Chi-square test for significance with crosstabulation improvement on existing technology and have videodiscs or not . 158 44. Chi-square test for significance with crosstabulation have videodiscs or notand effect of possibly lower costs for future digital multimedia . 159 45. Chi-square test for significance with crosstabulation influence of no "in-house" recording to having videodiscs or not . 160 46. Chi-square test for significance with crosstabulation appropriate for curriculum or library objectives and have videodiscs or not . 160 47. Frequency table, libraries with 1/2" videocassettes 161 48. Chi-square test for significance with crosstabulation 1/2" videocassettes and have videodiscs or not . 161 viii 49. Chi-square test for significance with crosstabulation Have videodiscs or not and staff use of HyperCard. 162 50. Chi-square test for significance with crosstabulation Have videodiscs or not and used other hypertext . 162 51. Chi-square test for significance with crosstabulation collection development policy incluedes video materials and have videodiscs or not. 163 52. Chi-square test for significance with crosstabulation Have videodiscs or not and institution has degree program in cinema studies or radio-tv-film. 164 53. Pearson