Usage and acceptability ofe-resources in National DairyResearch Institute (NDRI) andNational Bureau of Animal

Genetic Resources (NBAGR),India

Chetan SharmaGuru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi, India

Lakhpat SinghMaharaja Agrasen College, Jagadhri (Yamuna Nagar), Haryana, India, and

Ritu SharmaJeevan Chanan College for Women, Assandh (Karnal), Haryana, India

Abstract

Purpose – This paper seeks to emphasise the use of e-resources by teachers and research scholars inthe National Dairy Research Institute (NDRI) and the National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources(NBAGR). The paper aims at particularly identifying the needs of the users as well as the problemsfaced by them while using e-resources and also their level of satisfaction in getting the essentialinformation on electronic means.

Design/methodology/approach – A survey was conducted through a questionnaire circulatedamong 140 teachers and research scholars of NDRI and NBAGR. The response rate was anencouraging 90.71 per cent.

Findings – The majority of the respondents are well aware of the various e-resources in theirrespective field and confidently use them regularly. E-Journals are the most preferred e-resourceamong the respondents. They seek the help of e-resources to perform their routine exercises,i.e. teaching, research, entertainment and communication. Some major problems faced by therespondents are slow speed of internet, difficulty in retrieving contents and poorly designed web sites.

Research limitations/implications – The study is restricted to the teachers and research scholarsof NDRI and NBAGR and elaborates on the fact that those e-resources are being used up to theoptimum limit. The study will assist the existing organizations in the field to understand therequirement of electronic resources and stimulate the path to revision of the same.

Originality/value – This is the first study on this topic in India, which has been carried out todiscover the importance of e-resources in the National Dairy Research Institute (NDRI) and theNational Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources (NBAGR). It will support the approach and importanceof such e-resources and their usage for intellectual investigation in the agriculture community.

Keywords Agriculture, Electronic resources, Databases, Internet, Research scholars, Teachers

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionElectronic resources have placed themselves at the top priority in academic andresearch organizations, especially in developing countries. E-resources are not only the

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-0473.htm

Usage andacceptability of

e-resources

803

Received February 2010Revised May 2010

Accepted May 2010

The Electronic LibraryVol. 29 No. 6, 2011

pp. 803-816q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0264-0473DOI 10.1108/02640471111188024

necessity of the time but also have become the face value of any academic institution.The concept of the library is changing very fast due to the impact of e-resources. Nowlibraries not only have printed material but also digital resources. The technology hasforced the library to digitize information. Electronic resources have the advantage ofbeing more current, and sometimes more comprehensive than comparable printequivalents (Pelzer and Wiese, 2006). Major journal publishers such as Elsevier,Springer, and Wiley are now making hundreds of individual titles available onlineback to their very first issues. The titles are often grouped into broad subject categoriesthat include engineering, medicine, biochemistry, agricultural, management, and evenveterinary disciplines. Even 15 years ago it was clear that print journal volumes have amuch greater potential for clearance of needed shelf space (Veenstra, 1987). Journal usestatistics that were once gathered and reported for print journals are being used to lendsupport for purchase of more e-journals with a corresponding cancellation of printtitles (Carrigan and Burford, 2003). The dawn of e-resources has drastically changedthe way of accessing the conserved information in databases, and provided marvelousspeeds for retrieving it. During the last few decades growth and demand of informationhas been multiplied many times. With the revolution of e-resources, the activities, andoperation, which were performed manually, are now being automated, thus enhancingthe role and responsibility of librarians.

BackgroundHaryana State of India is famous for agriculture and milk. It is among the top states inagro production and there are two main institutions, which are fully devoted to theresearch orientation in dairy and related technology.

The National Dairy Research Institute (NDRI) country’s premier Dairy ResearchInstitution has developed considerable expertise over the last five decades in differentareas of Dairy Production, Processing, Management and Human ResourceDevelopment. The National Dairy Research Institute metamorphosed from theerstwhile Imperial Institute for Animal Husbandry and Dairying, which wasestablished at Bangalore, India in 1923. In 1936, it was expanded and renamed ImperialDairy Institute. It was in 1955 that its Headquarters were shifted to Karnal at thelocation formerly called Central Cattle Breeding Farm (www.ndri.res.in).

The National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources (NBAGR) and the NationalInstitute of Animal genetics were set up on 21 September 1984. The Bureau is engagedin the characterization and evaluation of Livestock and Poultry genetic resources of thecountry. At present the Bureau has a fully developed Information System on Livestockand Poultry Genetic Resources. Several State Agricultural Universities arecollaborating in the characterization work through Network Projects on survey ofAnimal Genetic Resources (www.nbagr.ernet.in).

E-resources in dairy and related technology are somewhat special in nature andplay a major role because the survival of this field is exclusively based on research.Dairy scholars have their information needs met via a number of options. They neednot come physically to the library in order to use print formats but they can stay attheir place of work and access online publication via networks or authenticationmethods at any time. Due to the needs of teachers and research scholars forhigh-quality information, NDRI and NBAGR libraries were early adopters of electronicresources to provide information and services.

EL29,6

804

Objectives of the studyThe present study was carried out in two premier institutions in India in the field ofDairy and related technology, i.e. NDRI (National Dairy Research Institute) andNBAGR (National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources) Karnal, India. The mainobjectives of the study were as follows:

. to determine the faculty and research scholars’ awareness of e-resources;

. to assess the use of computerized services by teachers and research scholars;

. to examine the level of confidence and easiness among teachers and researchscholars in using e-resources;

. to know the various purposes of using e-resources by teachers and researchscholars;

. to determine the teachers’ and research scholars’ preferences in using e-resourcesand services; and

. to ascertain the problem faced by the respondents in using the e-resources.

Review of related studiesA number of relevant studies have been carried out on the use of e-resources inuniversities and research organizations. Oduwole and Akpati (2003) in their study haveclearly demonstrated the acceptability of electronic information by library clientele atthe university of Agriculture library, Abeokuta. A greater percentage of users findelectronic information to a greater or lesser extent easy to use (86 per cent); users do notneed previous training in the use of information technology; most users were satisfiedwith their search outputs; the essential electronic agricultural library (TEEAL) is themost widely consulted automated service database by library users. The study alsorevealed that the small number of terminals available for searchers constitutes a majorconstraint to use of automated system by users. Use of the internet for academicresearch by Agricultural Scientist has improved their research output. Kannappanavarand Swamy (2009) expressed users’ dissatisfaction with audiovisual materials,CD-ROM databases, e-books, and e-journals and totally inadequacy of e-resources inagricultural university libraries in South India (Oduwole, 2004) in his study on theNigerian university of Agriculture found that computer communications are used forteleconferencing, access to electronic news bulletin boards and hotlines, electronicjournals, subject databases, etc. The availability of reliable telecommunication systemsfor access to the networks is still a problem in the rural areas of Kenya (Kiplang’at,1999).

Sharma (2008) in his study on Agriculture universities observed that thee-resources, which are available in the LAN setting, should be made available at theresidences of faculty and researchers to enhance their research potential. Tahir et al.(2010) conducted a study on use of electronic information resources at the PunjabUniversity. The results of this study reveal that the availability of electronic resourceslike electronic databases (online and CD-ROM), electronic journals, digital books,internet, and e-mail has a great impact on the information-seeking behavior of thehumanists. They face many problems in retrieving and using electronic facilities, butthey perceive that their work has become easier with technology. Deng (2010) foundthat the use of electronic resources is common in the university in Australia. Amajority of respondents believed that electronic resources are useful. It was also found

Usage andacceptability of

e-resources

805

that users with different purposes differed significantly in their access and use ofelectronic resources. The awareness and the quality of the information available areimportant factors affecting the use of electronic resources. Kumar and Kumar (2010)conducted a study on Indian academics, the results of the study show that respondentsare aware of e-sources and also the internet. Even though a majority of the academiccommunity uses electronic information sources for their academic-related work, mostof them prefer print to electronic information sources.

Kaur and Verma (2009) in their study on Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi foundthat usage of e-journals is increasing; this is due to awareness among the users aboutthe library e-resources and services. Owing to an easy access available at variousplaces in the institute, users are accessing these resources at hostels and departmentsmore as compared to the library. Swain and Panda (2009) conducted a study onbusiness school libraries of India’s Orissa state and arrives at the conclusion that theinternet-based e-resources are being well used compared with CD-ROM databases.Premier web search options like Google and Yahoo! are the most frequently usedsearch engines, while the other searching options are less used. Availability of somekey online databases are exclusively confined to only a selected few B-School librariesof the state. Chirra and Madhusudhan (2009) in their study on Goa Universityinvestigated how e-journals have become vital part of information for research work.The study shows that there is need for user orientation for efficient searching ofe-journals. The most common problem faced by the respondents is that there isdifficulty in accessing full text and many of the respondents are not satisfied with theinternet facilities available in Goa University.

Haridasan and Khan (2009) found that respondents are aware of the e-resources(such as e-books, e-journals, e-encyclopedias, e-theses, CD-ROM databases, e-mail,internet and the OPAC). A large number of research scholars and faculty members areusing these e-resources for their research work. Many faculty members strongly agreedwith the necessity for computer and internet literacy to access information. A majorityof users were satisfied with the e-resources available at the NASSDOC library. Sharma(2009) observed that the availability of e-resources on the GGS Indraprastha universitycampus is almost sufficient for all the existing disciplines but the infrastructure to usethese resources is not adequate and can hinder the ability to meet the requirements ofusers. Madhusudan (2008) in his study on research scholars and students of universityof Delhi found that 78 per cent of the respondents felt that the use of the UGC-Infonete-journals has created high dependency value on their research work. Monash libraryusers are increasingly dependent on electronic resources, majority of the respondentslove databases, e-journals and e-books, but 27 per cent find them confusing orfrustrating to use (Wilson, 2005).

MethodologyThe present study is restricted to the teachers and research scholars of NDRI andNBAGR. In order to accomplish the previous set of research objectives, the surveymethod was used to collect the primary data, because it is the most proper mean toconduct such type of research. A well-structured questionnaire was designed andrandom sample method was adopted to collect the primary data from teachers andresearch scholars in the institutes during the academic year 2008-2009 in sort to knowthem using their libraries’ electronic resources and services.

EL29,6

806

The total population of the survey was 211, which includes 116 teachers and 95research scholars. In NDRI total 70 questionnaires were distributed (teachers – 35 andresearch scholars – 35) and 65 (92.86 per cent) users returned the questionnaires. InNBAGR also total 70 questionnaires were distributed (teachers – 35 and researchscholars – 35) and 62 (88.57 per cent) users returned the questionnaires. Overallresponse rate was an encouraging 90.71 per cent. The analysis and interpretation of thedata gathered through questionnaires distributed to target users is presented in thefollowing.

Findings and discussionUse of traditional and online resourcesA majority of the respondents prefer to use online resources i.e. 48 (73.85 per cent) and43 (69.35 per cent) in NDRI and NBAGR respectively. In total, 41 (63.08 per cent) and 32(51.61 per cent) respondents of NDRI and NBAGR respectively are in the favour oftraditional or printed resources. Similarly Kaur and Verma (2006) reported that printedmaterial is still the most popular medium as it is opted by 77.27 per cent respondents.Some of the respondents have selected both the options. Woo (2004) found that 68.8 percent of the respondents prefer to use online journals compared to 31.2 per cent whoprefer to use printed ones, and 71.8 per cent prefer to use printed books compared to28.2 per cent who prefer using electronic books.

Frequency of using e-resourcesA huge number of respondents make the use of e-resources usually i.e. 58 (89.23 percent) and 54 (87.10 per cent) in NDRI and NBAGR respectively. Few respondentsuse e-resources sometimes i.e. seven (10.77 per cent) and eight (12.90 per cent) inNDRI and NBAGR respectively. Haridasan and Khan (2009) found that 55.56 percent social scientists of NASSDOC used e-resources on weekly basis and 33.33 percent used them occasionally Kaur and Verma (2006) indicated that 34 per cent usersused online services daily, 4 per cent are such who used online services only fewtimes in a month. Top resources consulted on daily basis by respondents include:e-journals, e-books, e-news, medical library home page, law library homepage (Woo,2004). Ozoemelem (2009) revealed that usage of electronic resources among studentsis quite high.

Seeking information by online veterinary literatureThe majority of the respondents i.e. 30 (48.39 per cent) and 30 (46.15 per cent) ofNBAGR and NDRI respectively seek online veterinary information from a specificjournal article. In total, 24 (38.71 per cent) and 19 (29.23 per cent) respondents of NDRIand NBAGR respectively, prefer the specific source of the information for searchingveterinary literature. Of the research scholars of engineering 69.23 per cent usee-journals for research work (Eqbal and Khan, 2007). Only 7 per cent indicated thatthey used the scholarly databases to which the library subscribed (Woo, 2004).

Confidence in retrieving information by wwwTable I shows the responses retrieving information from the worldwide web (WWW).In NBAGR 35 (56.45 per cent), 33 (53.23 per cent) and 29 (46.77 per cent) respondentsare confident in retrieving veterinary literature, dairy business and feedstuffs

Usage andacceptability of

e-resources

807

respectively. In NDRI 29 (44.62 per cent) respondents are confident in retrievingveterinary literature where as 27 (41.54 per cent) respondents are confident inretrieving feedstuff and 24 (36.92 per cent) respondents are confident in retrievingdairy business. A good number of the respondents are also extremely confident inretrieving the information from WWW. Women, generally display less confidence andmore discomfort in using WWW (Dickhauser and Stiensmeier-Pelster, 2002)

Using various types of e-resourcesFigure 1 shows that e-journals are the most preferred e-resources in NDRI i.e. 50 (76.92per cent) followed by WWW 41 (63.08 per cent), e-news 27 (41.54 per cent), e-mail 25(38.46 per cent), e-databases 21 (32.31 per cent) and e-books 15 (23.08 per cent).Respondents’ preferences in NBAGR is: e-journals 48 (77.42 per cent), WWW 35 (56.45per cent), e-news 23 (37.10 per cent), e-mail 21 (33.87 per cent), e-databases 13 (20.97 percent) and e-books 11 (17.74 per cent). It is noted that respondents make use of all thee-resources more or less as per their requirements. Similar finding were also reportedby Sharma (2009) majority of the teachers 46 (88.46 per cent) and research scholar 28(93.33 per cent), who prefer to use e-journals. Second highest preference is WWW anduse of e-mail with 30 (57.69 per cent) and 41 (78.84 per cent) among teachers whereas 23(76.66 per cent) and 18 (60.00 per cent) among research scholars. Falk (2003) reportedrapid growth and use of e-books in schools, colleges and universities. The integratedaccess of all the electronic resources is also an important issue discussed by Kennedy(2004) and Cohen and Calsada (2003).

NDRI NBAGRVeterinaryliterature

Dairybusiness Feedstuffs

Veterinaryliterature

Dairybusiness Feedstuffs

OPTION SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean

Not confident 1 1.53 2 3.07 1 1.53 2 3.22 1 1.61 1 1.61Somewhat confident 10 15.38 12 18.46 16 24.61 10 16.12 9 14.51 7 11.2Confident 29 44.62 24 36.92 27 41.54 35 56.45 33 53.23 29 46.77Extremely confident 17 26.15 16 24.61 12 18.46 8 12.90 7 11.29 15 24.19Never do this 8 12.30 11 16.92 9 13.84 7 11.29 12 19.45 10 16.12

Table I.Confident in retrievinginformation by www

Figure 1.Using various types ofe-resources

EL29,6

808

Easy access of e-resourcesRespondents of NBAGR 62 (100 per cent), and 55 (84.62 per cent) respondents of NDRIcan access the various e-resources easily. Similarly Sharma (2009) reported that 42(80.77 per cent) teachers and 26 (86.67 per cent) research scholars are able to access thee-resources very easily. Results show that e-resources are much familiar among everyindividual. Ease of accessibility of information causes the users to use electronicresources more frequently (Naidu et al., 2009). Easy access is the potential advantage ofe-books (Ashcroft and Watts, 2004).

Use of e-resources in teachingA majority of respondents in both the institutions make the extensive use of e-resourcesin teaching i.e. 33 (50.77 per cent) and 27 (43.55 per cent) in NDRI and NBAGRrespectively. 28 (43.08 per cent) respondents of NDRI and 26 (41.94 per cent) respondentsof NBAGR Moderately use e-resources in teaching. Few of the respondents aretraditional and do not take the help of e-resources in teaching. Kaur and Verma (2006)indicated that 12 per cent of the respondents use e-resources for lecture preparing.

Use of power-point presentation in teachingThe maximum number of the respondents, teach with the help of power Pointpresentation i.e. 62 (95.38 per cent) in NDRI and 53 (85.48) in NBAGR. It seems that theemergence of the computer has fully diversified the teaching methods. Sharma (2009)reported that 37 (71.15 per cent) of faculty members and 26 (86.67 per cent) of researchscholars make use of Power Point in their class teaching.

Use of online forums to aid communicationMajority of the respondents in both the institutes do not use online forums to aidcommunication i.e. 39 (62.90 per cent) and 38 (58.46 per cent) in NBAGR and NDRIrespectively. Only 27(41.54 per cent) respondents of NDRI and 23(37.10 per cent)respondents of NBAGR use online forums to aid communication.

Use various types of on-line databasesFigure 2 highlights that Animal Science online is the most used database among therespondents i.e. 55 (88.71 per cent) and 40 (61.54 per cent) in NBAGR and NDRIrespectively. In total, 25 (38.46 per cent) and 14 (22.58 per cent) respondents of NBAGRand NDRI respectively prefer to use Aqricola. Web of Science is the least used databaseamong respondents. Dadzie (2005) found that scholarly databases i.e. Emerald,Academic Search Premier and Blackwell-Synergy are used by 18, 14 and 12 per centrespondents respectively. Madhusudan (2008) found that 78 per cent of the respondentsfeel that the use of the UGC-Infonet e-journals has created high dependency value ontheir research work. Sharma (2009) found that the most frequently used e-journal byresearch scholars are Science Direct and Springer Link which are opted for by 60 and53.33 per cent of research scholars respectively.

Electronically working methodMany of the respondents in NDRI and NBAGR i.e. 48 (77.42 per cent) and 41 (63.08 percent) prefer to use the computer lab of the Institute to fulfill their requirements. A largenumber of the respondents in NBAGR depend on their own PC to perform their work, i.e. 36

Usage andacceptability of

e-resources

809

(58.06 per cent), because the Institute does not have any computer lab. NDRI Library’scomputer lab also preferred by 26 (40.00 per cent) of respondents. Kaur and Verma (2006)indicated that 39.4 per cent of the users prefer library for accessing the information.

Frequency of use different types of databasesTable II shows that 45 (75.58 per cent) respondents of NBAGR often use web ofScience. Biological Abstract is among the top resources used often by the respondentsof NBAGR and NDRI i.e. 41(66.13 per cent) and 41(63.08 per cent) respectively. In total,24 (36.92 per cent) and 30 (48.38 per cent) respondents of NDRI and NBAGR use DairyBusiness sometimes. In NDRI 29 (44.61 per cent) respondents use Feedstuff sometimes.In total, 25 (40.32 per cent) respondents of NBAGR never use Dairy Herd Managementdatabase and 20 (32.24 per cent) respondents are unfamiliar with NORINA.com, whichis shocking. Dadzie (2005) reported that 5 per cent respondents always used scholarlydatabases while 14 per cent indicated that they often used them, 58 per cent of therespondents indicated that they rarely or never used them.

Reasons for using e-resourcesA majority of respondents in both the institutions feel that e-resources are time savingas compared to traditional resources i.e. 55 (88.71 per cent) and 52 (80.00 per cent) inNBAGR and NDRI respectively. In total, 28 (45.16 per cent) respondents of NBAGRand 25 (38.46 per cent) respondents of NDRI observe that e-resources are more useful.In total, 29 (44.62 per cent) and 25 (40.32 per cent) respondents of NDRI and NBAGRrespectively think that e-resources are easy to use. Similarly, Oduwole and Akpati(2003) found that greater percentage of users find electronic information to a greater orlesser extent easy to use (86.31 per cent). Respondents also prefer to use e-resourcesbecause these are time saving and more informative. Similar results are derived bySharma (2009) i.e. e-resources are much preferred by respondents due to their nature ofbeing more informative, more useful, and less expensive.

Figure 2.Use various types ofonline databases

EL29,6

810

Use

ofte

nU

seso

met

imes

Nev

eru

seU

nfa

mil

iar

wit

hN

DR

IN

BA

GR

ND

RI

NB

AG

RN

DR

IN

BA

GR

ND

RI

NB

AG

RD

atab

ases

Mea

nS

DM

ean

SD

Mea

nS

DM

ean

SD

Mea

nS

DM

ean

SD

Mea

nS

DM

ean

SD

Dai

ryb

usi

nes

s16

24.6

18

12.9

024

36.9

230

48.3

816

24.6

110

16.1

23

4.61

1016

.12

Fee

dst

uff

s12

18.4

62

3.22

2944

.61

914

.51

1320

3150

913

.84

1016

.12

Bio

log

ical

abst

ract

s41

63.0

841

66.1

211

16.9

213

20.9

68

12.3

03

4.83

11.

53–

–W

ebof

scie

nce

2843

.08

4575

.58

1929

.23

914

.51

1116

.92

34.

834

6.15

34.

83N

OR

INA

.co

m2

3.07

23.

2212

18.4

613

20.9

626

4017

27.4

119

29.2

320

32.2

4H

SL

Sel

ectr

onic

boo

ks

46.

141

1.61

1827

.69

1625

.80

2132

.30

2337

.09

1624

.61

1117

.74

Dai

ryh

erd

man

agem

ent

1421

.54

812

.90

2233

.84

1219

.35

1320

2540

.32

1218

.46

711

.29

Table II.Frequency of usedifferent type of

databases

Usage andacceptability of

e-resources

811

Frequency of using internetA total of 59 (95.16 per cent) respondents in NBAGR and 37(56.92 per cent) respondentsof NDRI use the internet on daily basis. A total of 25 (38.46 per cent) respondents ofNDRI make the use of internet two to three times in a week. Result shows theimportance of internet in individual’s life. Ono and Zavodny (2003) found women to beless frequent and less intense users of the internet.

Purpose of using internetA vast majority of respondents use internet only for educational purpose i.e. 60 (92.31per cent) and 56 (90.32 per cent) in NDRI and NBAGR respectively. Almost 85 per centof respondents of NDRI and 50 per cent of respondents of NBAGR use internet fore-mail. A total of 26 (40.00 per cent) respondents of NDRI also use internet forentertainment. Some of the respondents even use internet for news, sports and druginformation. Similarly Dadzie (2005) reported that respondents use internet for variouspurposes i.e. 27 per cent for educational, 26 per cent for news, 18 per cent forentertainment and 11 per cent for sports. Results show that respondents are very muchdependent on internet for various purposes. A total of 21 per cent of the respondentsuse e-resources for writing paper/books (Kaur and Verma, 2006). Male college studentsare more likely than their female counterparts to use the internet for recreationalpurposes (Ozoemelem, 2009). The web is a reliable source for news information.

Favourite search engineGoogle is the most favourite search engine of the respondents, as 65 (100.00 per cent),and 60 (96.77 per cent) respondents of NDRI and NBAGR respectively prefer to use it.Scirus is the least preferred search engine by respondents. Dadzie (2005) found that 65per cent respondents used search engine always however Google and Yahoo are thefavourite ones.

Operating system usedWindow XP is the most used operating system by NDRI and NBAGR respondentsi.e. 56 (86.15 per cent) and 47 (75.81 per cent) respectively. Window Vista is the leastused operating system – mainly due to its non-availability in the institutions studied.

Type of information seeking from e-resourcesFull-text journals are the most demanded resources by respondents, as preferred by 63(96.92 per cent) and 57 (91.94 per cent) respondents in NDRI and NBAGR respectively.Respondents retrieve the statistics least i.e. 6 (9.23 per cent) and 5 (8.06 per cent)respondents in NDRI and NBAGR respectively.

Information storage mediaMost of the respondents use pen drives for information storage. A total of 56 (86.15 percent) and 49 (79.03 per cent) respondents of NDRI and NBAGR respectively prefer touse pen drives for information storage. A total of 42 (67.74 per cent) and 44 (67.69 percent) respondents in NBAGR and NDRI respectively use CD for information storage.

Problem faced in using e-resourcesFigure 3 shows that the biggest problem faced by respondents is the low speed of theinternet in downloading and accessing the desired information. In total, 41 (63.08 per

EL29,6

812

cent) and 32 (51.61 per cent) respondents in NDRI and NBAGR respectively face theproblem of slow speed. A total of 26 (40 per cent) and 24 (38.70 per cent) respondents ofNDRI and NBAGR feel difficulty in retrieving the literature. A total of 15 (23.07 percent) respondents of NDRI and 15 (24.19 per cent) respondents of NBAGR opined thatweb sites they access are poorly designed. The problem of lack of desired content, hasbeen faced by ten (15.38 per cent) and 12 (19.35 per cent) respondents of NDRI andNBAGR respectively. Haridasan and Khan (2009) indicated that 55.55 per cent facultymembers and 55.81 per cent research scholars were facing technical problem whereas77.78 per cent faculty members and 76.74 per cent research scholars faced problemsrelated to internet access. 33 per cent of respondents indicated inadequate PCs, 28 percent indicated lack of information about how to use electronic resources (Dadzie, 2005).Thapa and Sahoo (2004) found that there is a problem of slow internet connectivity andirregular power supply.

ConclusionIt is concluded that the dependency of teachers and research scholars on e-resources isvery high in NDRI and NBAGR and they use these resources as a primary tool forevery kind of information or content. Results show that the majority of respondents iswell aware of various e-resources in their respective field and frequently use them; theyare able to access desired material and information easily and confidently. E-Journalsare the most preferred e-resource among the respondents and they prefer to seek onlineveterinary information from a specific journal article. Respondents seek help ofe-resources to perform their routine exercises i.e. teaching, research, entertainment andcommunication. Some major problems faced by the respondents are slow speed ofinternet, difficulty in retrieving contents and poorly designed web sites. Theseproblems may be overcome, by rendering more online resources, update infrastructure,and organizing frequent, orientation-programs. These possible solutions are requiredfor high satisfaction of respondents.

Figure 3.Problem faced in using

e-resources

Usage andacceptability of

e-resources

813

References

Ashcroft, L. and Watts, C. (2004), “Change implication related to electronic educationalresources”, Online Information Review, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 284-91.

Carrigan, E. and Burford, N. (2003), “The road to an electronic journal collection: using data topave the way”, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of Animal HealthInformation Specialists, Budapest, 6-9 August, available at: http://library.univet.hu/icahis/proc/kcarrig.pdf

Chirra, R. and Madhusudhan, M. (2009), “Use of electronic journals by doctoral research scholarsof Goa University, India”, Library Hi Tech News, Vol. 26 No. 10, pp. 12-15.

Cohen, L.B. and Calsada, M.M. (2003), “Web accessible databases for electronic resourcecollection: a case study and its implication”, Online Information Review, Vol. 21 No. 1,pp. 31-8.

Dadzie, P.S. (2005), “Electronic resources: access and usage at Ashesi University College”,Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 290-7.

Deng, H. (2010), “Emerging patterns and trends in utilizing electronic resources in a higherenvironment”, New Library World, Vol. 111 Nos 3/4, pp. 87-103.

Dickhauser, O. and Stiensmeier-Pelster, J. (2002), “Gender differences in computer work: evidencefor the model of achievement-related choices”, Contemporary Educational Psychology,Vol. 27, pp. 486-96.

Eqbal, M. and Khan, A.S. (2007), “Use of electronic journals by the research scholars of faculty ofscience and faculty of engineering”, NACLIN, pp. 309-19.

Falk, H. (2003), “Electronic campus”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 63-6.

Haridasan, S. and Khan, M. (2009), “Impact and use of e-resources by social scientists in NationalSocial Science Documentation Centre (NASSDOC), India”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 27No. 1, pp. 117-33.

Kannappanavar, B.U. and Swamy, H.M.C. (2009), “User perception of library and informationservices in agricultural science universities in South India: an evaluative study”, LibraryPhilosophy and Practice, April 1.

Kaur, B. and Verma, R. (2006), “Use of electronic resources at TIET Library Patiala: a casestudy”, ILA Bulletin, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 18-20.

Kaur, B. and Verma, R. (2009), “Use and impact of electronic journals in the Indian Institute ofTechnology”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 611-22.

Kennedy, P. (2004), “Dynamic web pages and the library catalogue”, The Electronic Library,Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 480-6.

Kiplang’at, J. (1999), “An analysis of the opportunities for information technology in improvingaccess, transfer and the use of agriculture information in the rural areas of Kenya”, LibraryManagement, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 115-28.

Kumar, B.T.S. and Kumar, G.T. (2010), “Perception and usage of e-resources and the internet byIndian academics”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 137-56.

Madhusudan, M. (2008), “Use of UGC infonet e-journals by research scholars and students ofUniversity of Delhi, Delhi”, Library Hi Tech, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 369-86.

Naidu, G.H.S., Rajput, P. and Motiyani, K. (2009), Use of Electronic Resources and Services inUniversity Libraries: a Study of DAVV Central Library, NACLIN, Indore, pp. 309-19.

Oduwole, A.A. (2004), “Impact of internet use on agricultural research outputs in NigerianUniversity of Agriculture”, Library Hi Tech News, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 12-15.

EL29,6

814

Oduwole, A.A. and Akpati, C.B. (2003), “Accessibility and retrieval of electronic information atthe University of Agriculture Library, Abeokuta, Nigeria”, Library Review, Vol. 52 No. 5,pp. 228-33.

Ono, H. and Zavodny, M. (2003), “Gender and the internet”, Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 84 No. 1,pp. 111-21.

Ozoemelem, O.A. (2009), “Use of electronic resources by postgraduate students of theDepartment of Library and Information Science of Delta State University, Abraka,Nigeria”, Library Philosophy and Practice.

Pelzer, N.L. and Wiese, W.H. (2006), Veterinary Medical Libraries in the Twenty-first Century.

Sharma, C. (2008), “A comparative study of internet use in Haryana Agriculture University andPunjab Agriculture University”, SREL Journal of Information Management, Vol. 45 No. 3,pp. 287-94.

Sharma, C. (2009), “Use and impact of e-resources at Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University(India): a case study”, Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship, Vol. 1No. 10.

Swain, D.K. and Panda, K.C. (2009), “Use of electronic resources in business school libraries of anIndian state”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 74-85.

Tahir, M., Mahmood, K. and Shafique, F. (2010), “Use of electronic information resources andfacilities by humanities scholars”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 122-36.

Thapa, N. and Sahoo, K.C. (2004), “Problems of computerization in Dr Hari Singh GourUniversity Library: a case study”, Library Herald, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 31-8.

Veenstra, R.J. (1987), “A one-year journal use study in a veterinary medical library”, Journal ofthe American Veterinary Medical Association, Vol. 190, pp. 623-6.

Wilson, J. (2005), Library User’s Survey 2005: Electronic Resources Are Easily Accessed, availableat: www.lib.monash.edu.au

Woo, H. (2004), The 2004 User’s Survey at the University of Hong Kong Libraries, available atwww.hkucc.hku.hk

Further reading

Borgman, C.L., Hirsh, S.G. and Hiller, J. (1996), “Re-thinking online monitoring method forinformation retrieval system: from search product to search process”, Journal of theAmerican Society for Information Science, Vol. 47 No. 7, pp. 568-83.

County (MS) (2006), Electronic Resources and Library Survey 2006: Findings, available at: www.shropcomm.wmids.nhs.uk

Hall, A.S. and Parsons, J. (2001), “Internet addiction: college student case study using bestpractices in cognitive behaviour therapy”, Journal of Mental Health Counselling, Vol. 23No. 4, pp. 312-27.

Harter, S.P. and Kim, H.J. (1996), Electronic Journals and Scholarly Communication: A Citationand Reference Study, available at: www.informationr.net/ir/2-1/paper9a.html

Ibrahim, A.E. (2004), “Use and user perception of electronic resources in the United ArabEmirates University”, Libri, Vol. 54 No. 3, pp. 18-29.

Issa, A.O., Blessing, A. and Daura, U.D. (2009), “Effects of information literacy skills on the use ofe-library resources among students of the University of Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria”,Library Philosophy and Practice, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, February, availableat: www.pages.uidaho.edu/mbolin/lpp.htm

Usage andacceptability of

e-resources

815

Mclay, P.N. (2003), Library Users Survey 2003, available at: www.library.lib.mcmaster.ca/morris/status.htm

Renwick, S. (2004), “Knowledge and use of electronic information resources by medical sciencesfaculty at the University of the West Indies”, Libri, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 58-64.

Resnick, T., Ugaz, A., Burford, N. and Carrigan, E. (2008), “E-resources: transforming accessservices for the digital age”, Library Hi Tech, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 141-54.

About the authorsChetan Sharma is presently working as Assistant Librarian in Guru Gobind Singh IndraprasthaUniversity, Delhi. Prior to this he has worked as a Lecturer in the Department of Library andInformation Science, KU Kurukshetra and as a Librarian in NC College of Engineering, Israna(Panipat). He obtained his MBA from Guru Jabheshwar University, and Master’s and PhD inlibrary and information science from Kurukshetra University. His research areas are ICT,universe of knowledge and user services. Chetan Sharma is the corresponding author and can becontacted at: drchetansharma@gmail.com

Lakhpat Singh is presently working as a Librarian in Maharaja Agrasen College, Jagadhri(Yamuna Nagar), Haryana, India. He obtained his MPhil in Lib. Inf. Sc. from Algappa University,and a Master’s in Library and Information Science from Kurukshetra University.

Ritu Sharma is presently working as a Librarian in Jeevan Chanan College for Women,Assandh (Karnal) Haryana, India. He obtained his MPhil in Lib. Inf. Sc. from AlgappaUniversity, and a Master’s in Library and Information Science from Kurukshetra University.

EL29,6

816

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints