Advertisement

Dimensions of Mobile Information Behavior

  • Zuraidah ArifEmail author
  • Abd Latif Abdul Rahman
  • Asmadi Mohamed Ghazali
Conference paper

Abstract

The aim of this study was to develop and validate new dimension of mobile information behavior for Small Medium Enterprise (SME) workers in Malaysia. The items of this new developed scale were derived from previous study on information behavior. SME managers were participating in this study. A Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) show that samples met the factor analysis criteria adequacy was 0.79 which indicates the appropriateness of the input in factor analysis. In addition Bartlett test was statistically significant with 0.000. The principal components method with varimax rotation was conducted to extract common factors. Item with factor loading >00.5 were selected to ensure a stable factor structure with adequate sample size. Factor extracted based on eigen-values greater than 1. Item with factor loading less than 0.5 and cross loading were removed. All items group into four dimensions are acquired based on the result of the rotated component matrix. Validity for the new dimension of mobile information behavior was found. Four dimensions were categorized as experiential need, social functional need, physical intellectual access, and social access. Result support validation of mobile information behavior dimensions for Malaysia SME workers.

Keywords

Mobile information behavior Factor analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Research Acculturation Grant- RAGS-600-RMI/RAGS/5/3 (103/2014) managed by the Research Management Institute (RMI), UiTM. The authors wish to thank the Ministry of Education, Malaysia and Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Kedah, Malaysia for the support in this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Robson, A., Robinson, L.: Building on models of information behavior: linking information seeking and communication. J. Doc. 69(2), 169–193 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    The Statistic Portal (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Faibisoff, S.G., Ely, D.P.: Information and information need. Information Report and Bibliographies, 5(5) (1974)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tojib, D., Tsarenka, Y., Sembada, A.Y.: The facilitating role of smartphones in increasing use of value-added mobile services. New Media Soc. 17(8), 1220–1240 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ellis, D., et al.: Information seeking and mediated searching. Part 5.User–intermediary interaction. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 53(11), 883–893 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grant, I., O’Donohoe, S.: Why young consumers are not open to mobile marketing communications. Int. J. Advert. 26(2), 223–246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2007.11073008 (2007)
  7. 7.
    Sheth, J.N., Newman, B.I., Gross, B.L.: Why we buy what we buy: a theory of consumption values. J. Bus. Res. 22, 159–170 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jarenfors, O.A., Sturesson, S.H.: Value creation through smartphones: an ethnographic study about consumer value and social interaction through smartphones. Master thesis-marketing and consumption (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Balasubramanian, S., Peterson, R.A., Jarvenpaa, S.L.: Exploring the implications of m-commerce for markets and marketing. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 30(4), 348–361 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baird, T.D., Hartter, J.: Livelihood diversification, mobile phones and information diversity in Northern Tanzania. Land Use Policy (2017) http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.05.031
  11. 11.
    Mathiesen, K., Fallis, D.: Information ethics and the library profession. In: Himma, K.E., Tavanni, H.T. (eds.) The Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Buckland, M.K.: Information as thing. JASIS 42(5), 351–360 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jaeger, P.T., Bowman, C.A.: Understanding Disability: Inclusion, Access, Diversity, and Civil Rights. Praeger, Westport, CT (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith, A.: U.S. smartphone use in 2015. Pew Research Center (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Grunewald, M.H.: E-FOIA and the “mother of all complaints:” Information delivery and delay reduction. Adm. Law Rev. 50(2), 345–369 (1998)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tankersley, M.E.: How the electronic freedom of information act amendments of 1996 update public access for the information age. Adm. Law Rev. 50(2), 421–458 (1998)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hair, J.F., et al.: Multivariet data analysis: a global perspective. Pearson, Upper Saddle River (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wilson, T.D.: On studies and information needs. J. Doc. 37(1), 3–15 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leckie, G.J, Pettigrew, K.E., Sylvain, C.: Modeling the information seeking of professionals: a general model derived from research on engineers, health care professionals and lawyers. Libr. Q. 66(2), 161–193 (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oliver, R.: Interactive information systems: information access and retrieval. Electron. Libr. 13(3), 187–194 (1995)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zuraidah Arif
    • 1
    Email author
  • Abd Latif Abdul Rahman
    • 1
  • Asmadi Mohamed Ghazali
    • 1
  1. 1.Universiti Teknologi MARA CawBedongMalaysia

Personalised recommendations