Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

University libraries are undergoing critical smart transformations to provide accurate, convenient, and efficient services through smart technology. However, prior studies on determinants of university library smart services continued use willingness (CUW) predominantly examined isolated dimensions without proposing comprehensive models that integrate system level, individual user, and external environmental influence factors. This study aims to identify the determinants of users’ CUW for smart services in university libraries. It seeks to construct an integrated theoretical model that addresses gaps in prior frameworks by incorporating factors such as social influence, convenience conditions, personal characteristic, and perceived risk. An integrated model was developed by synthesizing constructs from the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Information Systems Success Model (D&M), and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). Employing stratified random sampling, we collected 309 valid questionnaires from university library users of China. Statistical analyses included reliability/validity tests, correlation analysis, and linear regression to examine relationships between variables. Information quality, system quality, service quality, personal characteristic, performance expectation, effort expectation, and convenience condition had a significant positive impact on user satisfaction. Conversely, perceived risk and social influence had no significant impact. For CUW, information quality, system quality, service quality, performance expectation, and convenience condition showed significant positive effects, while personal characteristic, effort expectation, perceived risk, and social influence were non-significant. Key challenges included deficiencies in information quality, system limitations, and service shortfalls. The validated framework emphasizes convenience condition, information quality, and system quality as primary drivers of university library users’ CUW. Recommendations include modernizing infrastructure, fostering collaborative resource ecosystems, and implementing AI-driven personalized services to enhance user retention. This study provides theoretical and practical insights for optimizing smart library services globally, though future research should expand cross-cultural comparisons, mixed research etc.

Keywords

university library smart services user behavior continued use willingness influence factors

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aleksandar

(2022) London Public Library. Available at: http://wwlondonpubliclibrary.ca/ (accessed 5 April 2022).

Bai

Zhao

, et al. (2024) Research on the construction and application of a smart library services maturity evaluation system based on CMM. Electronic Library 42(5): 766–794.

Bhattacherjee

(2001) Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly 25(3): 351–370.

Bhattacherjee

Perols

Sanford

(2008) Information technology continuance: A theoretic extension and empirical test. Journal of Computer Information Systems 49(1): 17–26.

Bilandzic

Foth

(2013) Libraries as coworking spaces: Understanding user motivations and perceived barriers to social learning. Library Hi Tech 31(2): 254–273.

Chen

Liu

Luo

, et al. (2019) Construction of library personalized smart service model framework based on user portrait. Library Work and Research 6: 72–78.

Chen

Tan

(2018) Research on user adoption behavior of mobile libraries based on UTAUT and TTF models. Modern Intelligence 38(1): 60–68.

Chen

(2018) Research on the application of blockchain technology in library smart services. Modern Intelligence 38(11): 6.

Davis

(1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3): 319–340.

10.

Davis

Venkatesh

(1996) A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: Three experiments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 45(1): 19–45.

11.

Delone

Mclean

(1992) Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information System Research 3(1): 1–11.

12.

Delone

McLean

(2003) The DeLone and McLean model of Information Systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems 19(4): 9–30.

13.

Deng

Yang

(2018) Library space reconstruction under the perspective of aesthetics and experience marketing. Library and Information Work 62(9): 8.

14.

Deng

Yang

(2014) Analysis of influencing factors on behavioral persistence of university students’ use of mobile libraries and countermeasures research-based on the extended persistent use model. Library Forum 34(2): 63–68.

15.

Fan

Shao

(2018) Innovative practices and reflections on intelligent robot book inventory management: A case study of nanjing university library. Library 288(9): 96–100.

16.

Goodsett

(2020) Best practices for teaching and assessing critical thinking in information literacy online learning objects. Journal of Academic Librarianship 46(3): 102163.

17.

Hamad

Al-Fadel

Fakhouri

(2023) The provision of smart service at academic libraries and associated challenges. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 55(4): 960–971.

18.

Hoseth and Amy (2015) Hoopla. Charleston Advisor 17(1): 30–33.

19.

Khan

Jan

Khan

, et al. (2025) Smart services utilization in academic libraries: An assessment of student behavior based on expectation confirmation model. Serials Review (Early Access): 1–14. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2025.2490301.

20.

Kim

(2011) A critical review of valuation studies to identify frameworks in library services. Library & Information Science Research 33(2): 112–119.

21.

Kwak

Noh

(2021) A study on the current state of the library's AI services and the service provision plan. Journal of Korean Library Cand Information Science Society 52(1): 155–178.

22.

(2019) A study of library intelligence researchers’ perceived risk of scientific data sharing in university libraries. Research in Librarianship 9: 44–53.

23.

(2020) Optimal design of knowledge map and dynamic service transformation of university library users under AI environment. The Library Science Journal 42(2): 81–86.

24.

Liu

(2020) Research on the analysis of library users’ digital resource usage behavior in the context of smart services. New Century Library 8: 62–67.

25.

Liu

(2021) Research on the formation and influence factor model of library smart service quality from the perspective of user perception. Library Science Studies 494(3): 59–70.

26.

Liu

Ren

(2022) Research on library privacy management in China in the era of big data. Library Construction 315(3): 70–77.

27.

(2024) Research on user privacy protection strategies in university library smart services under the background of artificial intelligence. Journal of Henan Library 44(10): 91–94.

28.

Markakis

Samaras

Polycarpou

, et al. (2013) An RFID-enabled library management system using low-SAR smart bookshelves. 2013 International Conference on Electromagnetics in Advanced Applications (ICEAA), pp. 227–230. DOI:10.1109/ICEAA.2013.6632228.

29.

Maxwell

Oyarzun

Kim

, et al. (2025) Generative AI in higher education: Demographic differences in student perceived readiness, benefits, and challenges. TechTrends (Early Access): 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-025-01109-6.

30.

Meng

(2019) Research on the intelligent service path of digital library under user interaction behavior. Frontier Economy and Culture 185(5): 107–109.

31.

Meng

Zhu

(2022) Construction and empirical research of a mobile visual search user experience model. Library and Information Science 66(05): 80–92.

32.

Ode

Nana

Boro

, et al. (2025) A cross-country analysis of self-determination and continuance use intention of AI tools in business education: Does instructor support matter? Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 8: 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100402.

33.

Peng

(2025) Research on factors influencing continuous usage intention of university library website users. Journal of Literature and Data 7(1): 102–113.

34.

Ramadhan

Hidayanto

Evik

, et al. (2022) Factors affecting the continuation to use and e-WOM intention of online library resources by university students: A study in Indonesia. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 48(6): 102592.

35.

Raunik

Browning

(2015) Smart libraries build smart communities in Queensland. Available at: http://conferences.alia.org.au/online2003/papers/raunik.html (accessed 28 November 2015).

36.

Song

Xia

(2018) Exploration and practice of library intelligence service based on SPARK big data processing platform. Intelligence Science 36(6): 45–49+56.

37.

Van den Abeele

Vanwesenbeeck

Hudders

(2024) Child’s privacy versus mother’s fame: Unravelling the biased decision-making process of momfluencers to portray their children online. Information Communication & Society 27(2): 297–313.

38.

Venkatesh

Davis

(1996) A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences 27(3): 451–481.

39.

Venkatesh

Morris

Davis

, et al. (2003) User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27(3): 425–478.

40.

Willems

Schmid

Vanderelst

, et al. (2023) AI-driven public services and the privacy paradox: Do citizens really care about their privacy? Public Management Review 25(11): 2116–2134.

41.

Yan

(2013) A study on the continuous use model of electronic resources in university libraries. Library Forum 33(3): 43–50+30.

42.

(2022) Research on the influencing factors of users’ willingness to use short videos in public libraries. Central China Normal University, Wu Han.

43.

Yuan

Yang

(2024) On factors affecting users’ willingness to participate in the smart services of academic library. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 56(2): 291–307.

44.

Zhao

Wang

(2018) Research on the continuous use intention of wearable device users: An extended model based on ECM-IS. Journal of Northeastern University (Social Sciences Edition) 20(4): 366–372.

45.

Zhi

(2020) Research on the application of 5G + blockchain technology in library smart services. Library Work and Research 10: 6.

Determinants of continued use willingness for library smart services: Evidence from university libraries in China

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References