Journal of librarianship and information science 2009-aharony-227-42

Journal of Librarianship and Information Science
http://lis.sagepub.com/

The influence of LIS students' personality characteristics on their perceptions towards Web 2.0 use
Noa Aharony
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 2009 41: 227
DOI: 10.1177/0961000609345088

The online version of this article can be found at:
http://lis.sagepub.com/content/41/4/227

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Journal of Librarianship and Information Science can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://lis.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://lis.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations: http://lis.sagepub.com/content/41/4/227.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Nov 20, 2009

What is This?

Downloaded from lis.sagepub.com at Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) on May 19, 2012

Noa Aharony received her PhD in 2003 from
the School of Education at Bar-Ilan University,
Israel. Her research interests are in education
The influence of LIS
for library and information science, school
librarianship, knowledge economy, marketing,
educational technology and Web 2.0.
students’ personality
Dr Aharony has published in refereed IS and
education journals and teaches courses in
information literacy, distance learning, school
characteristics on their
librarianship, knowledge management and
social science resources at the School of perceptions towards
Web 2.0 use
Information Science at Bar-Ilan University
and at the School of Information Science at
Beit Berl Academic College.

NOA AHARONY

The information world in which library and information science (LIS) stu-
dents study and are being educated is in a state of constant change. As Web
2.0 is becoming an important and central topic in our information world, the
research reported here explores whether LIS students are familiar with tech-
nological changes and innovations, and whether they make use of the dif-
ferent Web 2.0 applications. The research examined whether personality
characteristics (learning strategies, resistance to change and cognitive
appraisal), as well as learning facilitators such as motivation, capacity and
importance of studying and integrating different applications of Web 2.0 in
the future, influenced LIS students’ perceptions towards Web 2.0 use.
Different questionnaires were distributed to 160 randomly selected Israeli
students from three different LIS programmes. The research revealed a
moderate tendency of LIS students to use Web 2.0 applications. It was found
that personality characteristics as well as learning facilitators influenced LIS
students’ perceptions towards Web 2.0 use.

KEYWORDS: cognitive appraisal; learning strategies; LIS students; resistance
to change; Web 2.0

INTRODUCTION
The term Web 2.0 was first coined and conceptualized by Tim O’Reilly and Dale
Dougherty in 2004 to describe the terms and business models that survived the
technology sector market crash in the 1990s (O’Reilly, 2005). Many people asso-
ciate Web 2.0 with terms such as blogs, wikis, podcasts, RSS feeds and social
web. Tim Berners-Lee (2006), the inventor of the Web, claims that Web 2.0 is no
different from Web 1.0. According to Berners-Lee, the goal of Web 1.0 was to
connect people, and Web 2.0 is only jargon – nobody really knows what it
means. Web 2.0 emphasizes the value of user-generated content. It is about
Address: Department of Information Science sharing and about communication and it opens the long tail which allows small
Bar-Ilan University groups of individuals to benefit from key pieces of the platform while fulfilling
Ramat Gan, their own needs (Miller, 2006). As Web 2.0 is becoming an important and central
Israel 52900 topic in our information world, the current research explores whether LIS stu-
Tel: +972 3 6352173 dents are familiar with the technological changes and innovations, and whether
Fax: +972 3 5354325 they make use of the different Web 2.0 applications. Do they understand the
E-mail: aharonn1@mail.biu.ac.il power of Web 2.0 applications that can improve libraries’ services and image?
Will they be ready to use in the future non-traditional tools such as wikis or
Copyright © The Author(s), 2009.
Reprints and permissions:
http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
Vol 41 (4): 227–242
[DOI: 10.1177/0961000609345088]

JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP AND INFORMATION SCIENCE, 41 (4) DECEMBER 2009 227

The influence of LIS students’ personality characteristics on their perceptions towards Web 2.0 use

blogs in the library? Will they enable patrons to con- and librarians as patrons ask questions and other users or
tribute comments, add tags, rate library items and get librarians answer them. The wiki can contain reference
them involved in interactive and collaborative activities? materials as well as various patrons’ and librarians’ rec-
Personality is ‘a pattern of characteristics thoughts, ommendations and it may also serve as a group study
feelings and behavior that distinguishes one person from room (Maness, 2006). In addition, librarians can use wikis
another’ (Phares, 1991). As personality is an influential for the purpose of library instruction or as a platform for
variable on information behaviour and is the most impor- book recommendations, cataloguing and tagging, all
tant psychological mechanism that guides behaviour created by library users (Aharony, 2008).
(Heinstrom, 2006), the current research focused on per- Regarding wiki use in an academic setting, Raman
sonality characteristics. The research explored whether et al. (2005) have suggested that wikis can support collab-
personality characteristics (learning strategies, resistance orative knowledge creation and sharing in an academic
to change and cognitive appraisal), as well as learning environment. However, success depends on certain
facilitators such as motivation, capacity, and importance variables – familiarity with wiki technology, careful plan-
given to studying and integrating different applications ning for implementation and use, appropriate class size,
of Web 2.0 in the future, influence LIS students’ perceptions and motivation of students to engage in discovery learning.
towards Web 2.0 use. Furthermore, Aharony (2009b) found in her study that
the wiki platform enables students in an academic setting
LITERATURE REVIEW to use profound levels of discussion and interaction.
The third application considered is tagging. A tag is
Key Web 2.0 services and their a keyword that is added to a digital object in order to
applications to the library describe it, but not as a part of a formal classification
and education worlds system. The tagging is done in a social environment
There are a number of web services or applications which (Vandar Wal, 2005) and allows users to change not only
are considered to be key concepts in Web 2.0. First among the content, but also the metadata. Libraries can allow
them is the blog. The web log, which John Berger called users to add tags to their catalogues, as on the Library
blog in 1997, refers to a webpage that contains posts – Thing site (http://www.librarything.com/) which enables
opinions, information, personal diary entries or links. users to ‘tag’ their books, catalogue their books and to
These posts appear in chronological order of their being recommend books.
entered, with the most recent first, and in many ways, a Social bookmarking is another Web 2.0 application
blog is an online journal (Doctorow et al., 2002). Most of interest. It allows users to create common lists of
blogs allow visitors to add a comment below the entry. ‘favourites’ and to store them on a remote server, so that
The blog allows a ‘weighted conversation’ (Benkler, 2006) the list can be shared with other users of the system.
between the primary author and his comment contribu- Libraries can use social networks like Del.icio.us in order
tors. Each post is ‘tagged’ with a keyword or two, and to enable users to share Web resources.
contains several links which deepen the conversational An additional application is the podcast, an audio
nature of the blogosphere (Anderson, 2007), the ‘world’ recording which can be played on a desktop computer or
of bloggers who operate in their own environment. on a wide range of MP3 devices. A podcast is made by
Libraries can use blogs as a form of publication (Maness, creating an MP3 format audio file, uploading it to a host
2006) or as tools for marketing their resources and events server, and then publicizing it through the use of RSS
(Stephens, 2007). Moreover, Bar Ilan (2007) proposed that (Patterson, 2006). Academic libraries may use podcasts
library blogs are ideal for disseminating, commenting for conveying different instructions such as information
and expressing opinions. literacy instruction, to highlight new resources or to offer
Concerning the educational environment, several tours of the library. Furthermore, public libraries may
researchers have proclaimed that teachers use blogs to offer podcasts in order to promote recordings about the
promote conversations about topics and experiences in library’s services and programmes and different activi-
school (Oatman, 2005; West et al., 2006). Moreover, other ties which take place in the library (Stephens, 2007).
researchers have noted that blogging enhances compre- With regard to the educational perspective of
hension, communication and literacy among students podcasts, Meng (2005) describes different educational
(Huffaker, 2004; Poling, 2005), and that it may serve as a applications of podcasting, such as recordings of lectures
platform that motivates students to reflect on their learning for those students unable to attend the lecture or audio
process (Clyde, 2005). recordings of textbooks allowing students to review texts
The second application considered here is the wiki. while walking or driving to class.
A wiki is a webpage that can be easily edited by anyone RSS is a format that allows users to find out about
who is allowed access (Edersbach et al., 2006). It is a collab- updates without actually visiting a website. Information
orative tool that facilitates the production of group work. from the Web is collected within a feed, and ‘piped’ to the
A library wiki can enable social interaction among users user in a process called syndication (Anderson, 2007). In

228 JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP AND INFORMATION SCIENCE, 41 (4) DECEMBER 2009

NOA AHARONY

order to use a feed, the user must install a software tool Various studies have dealt with the relation between
called an aggregator or feed reader onto the computer learning strategies and personality dimensions. Heinstrom
desktop. Libraries may create RSS feeds that include (2006, 2006–7), in her studies of students’ information-
updates on new items or new collections, available for seeking behaviour, examined whether there was a relation
the patrons (Stephens, 2007). Furthermore, the RSS aggre- between personality traits and learning approaches
gator may enable users to have a single library page that and based her studies on the five personality dimension
syndicates all library content that interests them. (Costa and McCrae’s model, 1992). She found that surface
The final application considered is social net- learning was connected to low levels of conscientiousness,
working sites such as MySpace or Facebook. These sites to a conservative character with low openness to experience;
enable libraries to reach young patrons. Using these while deep learning was associated with deep diving
sites, librarians may interact with students, answer ques- which was linked to openness to experience. In contrast
tions and provide information about library services to these findings, Aharony (2002) in her dissertation which
(Stephens, 2007). Even OCLC has recently created a focused on learning English as a second language in an
WorldCat application in Facebook where the user can Internet environment, showed that learning strategies
search WorldCat databases without entering the OCLC (deep or surface) were not associated with personality
site (Aharony, 2008). dimensions (field dependence or independence).
The following sections focus on personality charac-
teristics which may influence LIS students’ perceptions Resistance to change
towards use of some of these Web 2.0 applications. The next personality variable that this research concen-
trated on was resistance to change. The earliest work on
Learning strategies: Deep and surface this topic dealt with resistance in terms of behaviour
For the purpose of this paper, consideration of learning (Lewin, 1952). From observed instances of successful
processes is based on Biggs’ (1993) teaching–learning change, Lewin (1951) concluded that there are three
model. Biggs suggested that a student’s approach toward phases: unfreezing, moving and refreezing. Lewin
the learning process is a combination of the motivation believed that the stability of human behaviour is based
and the strategy that he or she adopts during the learning on an equilibrium between driving and restraining
process. In the present research, the author distinguishes forces. The equilibrium needs to be unfrozen, disrupted,
between ‘deep’ learning approaches and ‘surface’ learning before the old behaviour can be discarded (unlearnt) and
approaches, terms first coined by Marton and Saljo new behaviour successfully adopted. Research on resis-
(1976a, b), and based on qualitative analysis aimed at tance to change is examined on the individual level and
defining the differences in the students’ approaches on the organizational one. In the past 20 years research
toward written texts. began to focus more on the psychological perspective
Deep learning strategy is characterized by the ability and on the individual.
to relate new information to previously acquired knowl- Changes in organizations are often perceived as
edge; to study different aspects of the material in order to stressors by the workers (Judge et al., 1999). Workers tend
obtain the entire picture; to search for a relevant meaning to resist change because of difficulties that may arise while
and a connecting point between the learning material, coping with it. Individuals may feel uncertain about their
daily life and personal experiences. Additional character- future in the organization; they may be worried about
istics of this approach include the student’s tendency to reduced status, job loss and new tasks and may be stressed
use meta-cognitive skills, to develop learning materials because of potential conflicts at work as well as by threats
that create a basis for new ideas, to offer other solutions to their psychological well-being (Ashford, 1988; Schweiger
from an inquisitive-critical perspective, and from there, and DeNisi, 1991).
to search and discover his/her ‘inner self’ (Beishuizen Over the past few years, research has adopted a
and Stoutjesdijk, 1999; Biggs, 1993; Entwistle, 1977). psychological perspective in investigating organizational
Surface learning is characterized by a student’s ten- change. Wanberg and Banas (2000) noted five variables
dency to choose the quickest way to accomplish the task; as likely to affect employees’ openness toward change:
to acquire the learning material without asking in- receipt of information about the change, participation in
depth questions and to study the material in a linear the change process, change-specific self-efficacy, available
manner; to relate to minimal aspects of material or to a social support and the impact of the change upon the
problem without showing interest or needing to under- individual. Judge et al. (1999) asserted that coping with
stand it in its entirety; to learn by rote by relying on mem- organizational change was related to extrinsic career out-
ory and not on comprehension; and to be concerned with comes (salary, job level, plateauing, job performance) and
the time needed to fulfil the learning task (Biggs, 1993). to intrinsic career outcomes (organizational commitment,
This learning approach, which focuses on memorizing job satisfaction). Oreg (2003) designed a resistance to change
the main elements, has almost no use for or expression scale, based on individual differences, and identified four
of meta-cognitive skills. factors related to the individual’s personality which can



cause resistance to change: (1) routine seeking – a preference RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
for routine over changes in life; (2) emotional reaction to
imposed change; (3) short-term focus – the immediate 1. A deep learning strategy will be associated with high
inconveniencing effects of a change; and (4) decisiveness – scores of students’ Web 2.0 use.
the ease and frequency with which individuals change 2. A high degree of resistance to change will be associated
their minds. with low scores of students’ Web 2.0 use.
3. High scores of challenge will be associated with high
scores of students’ Web 2.0 use, while high scores in
Cognitive appraisal: Threat versus challenge threat will be associated with low scores of Web 2.0 use.
The Lazarus stress theory portrays two central processes 4. High scores of students’ computer use, motivation,
which are very important to the person–environment importance and capacity will be associated with high
relationship – cognitive appraisal and coping (Lazarus and scores of students’ Web 2.0 use.
Folkman, 1986). Cognitive appraisal refers to the individ- 5. There will be a significant difference between university
ual’s evaluation of the significance of what is happening students and professional academic school students
for his or her well-being, and coping with the individ- in Web 2.0 use.
ual’s efforts in thought and action to manage specific
demands (Lazarus, 1993). The appraisal concept may PROCEDURES
explain individual differences in coping with emotions in
environments which are objectively similar. In addition, The research was conducted in the second semester of the
these appraisals are determined by personal and situa- 2007 academic year. In Israel there are about 900 LIS stu-
tional factors. The most important factors on the personal dents and questionnaires were distributed to 160 ran-
side are motivational dispositions such as goals, values domly selected students; 148 questionnaires were fully
and expectations, and the most important situational fac- answered. The students belonged to three different LIS
tors are predictability, controllability and imminence of a programmes – two taught at two universities, in which 89
potentially stressful event (Krone, 2002). students (67 percent) were enrolled, and one in a profes-
Threat and challenge are part of stressful appraisals: sional academic school for information science, in which
threat refers to potential future harm and is accompanied 49 students (33 percent) were enrolled. The professional
by fear (Lazarus, 1991; Lazarus and Folkman, 1984), and academic school is part of an academic college in Israel
challenge pertains to situations in which there is potential and it provides professional librarian or information
for gain or benefit. The emotions associated with chal- specialist certificates. Of the participants, 134 were female,
lenge are excitement, eagerness, happiness or joy 14 male; 35 percent were 20–30 years of age, 23 percent
(Lazarus, 1991). Several researchers (Blascovich et al., were 30–40, 25 percent were 40–50, 10 percent age 50–60,
2000) have alleged that threat takes place when, following and 7 percent over 60.
the individual’s evaluations, resources do not meet situa- The research tools used for the present study
tional demands. Challenge occurs when as a result of the included a personal details questionnaire, learning
individual’s evaluations resources meet situational strategies questionnaire (Part A), a resistance to change
demands. Examining the literature reviews reveals that questionnaire (Part B), a cognitive appraisal question-
threat suggests potential danger to one’s well-being or naire, threat versus challenge (Part C), Web 2.0 use ques-
self-esteem (Lazarus, 1991; Lazarus and Folkman, 1984; tionnaire (Part D), and learning facilitators questionnaires
Rapee and Heimberg, 1997; Sarason and Sarason, 1990). which included the following questionnaires: computer
Those who experience anxiety in stressful or social situa- use questionnaire (Part E), importance of studying and
tions, in tests and sports, anticipate failure and negative integrating different applications of Web 2.0 in future
evaluation which cause threats to self-identity and self- (Part F), motivation questionnaire (Part G), capacity
esteem (Beck et al., 1985; Rapee and Heimberg, 1997; questionnaire (Part H).
Schlenker and Leary, 1982; Wilson and Eklund, 1998). The learning strategies questionnaire (Part A) con-
Conversely, a challenge appraisal portrays confidence sists of 14 statements rated on a 5-point scale (1 – disagree;
that the demands of a stressful situation can be overcome 5 – agree). This questionnaire, which was previously vali-
(Lazarus et al., 1980; Park and Folkman, 1997). Those indi- dated (Aharony, 2002, 2006), consists of two factors –
viduals focus on opportunities for success, social rewards deep and surface learning strategies with seven items
and personal growth (Lazarus, 1991; Lazarus and each (alpha Cronbach was 0.76 for both factors).
Folkman, 1984; Lazarus et al., 1980). According to social The resistance to change questionnaire (Part B) con-
psychologists, challenge and threat are context bound and sists of 12 statements rated on a 6-point scale (1 – disagree;
occur only in motivated performance situations which are 6 – agree). This questionnaire was previously validated
goal relevant to the performer, require instrumental cog- (Aharony, 2009a; Oreg, 2003). The alpha Cronbach coeffi-
nitive responses, and are active (Blascovich et al., 2000). cient for this questionnaire was 0.87 which indicates


NOA AHARONY

good internal reliability. The respondents’ scores were
aggregated into one measure according to the mean of 90.00
the item scores. Higher scores indicated higher resistance 80.00
70.00

percentage
to change. 60.00
The threat versus challenge questionnaire (Part C) 50.00
consists of 10 statements rated on a 6-point scale (1 – dis- 40.00
30.00
agree; 6 – agree). This questionnaire was previously vali- 20.00
dated (Yekutiel, 1990), and consists of two factors – threat 10.00
(six items) and challenge (four items). Alpha Cronbach 0.00
blogs wikis flicker rss social
was 0.90 and 0.72 respectively. Web 2.0 use question- network
naire (Part D) consists of five yes/no questions focusing applications
on Web 2.0 applications use. The respondents had to
answer if they used the applications listed. Scores were Figure 1. Frequency of Web 2.0 applications use
aggregated into one measure according to the number of
applications the respondents used. The higher the
respondents’ score, the more they used Web 2.0.
To test whether there is a difference between uni-
With regard to learning facilitator questionnaires
versity students and those who study at a professional
(computer use questionnaire, importance given to studying
academic school for information science in learning
and integrating different applications of Web 2.0 in
strategies, resistance to change, cognitive appraisal,
future, motivation questionnaire and capacity question-
learning facilitators and Web 2.0 use, a one-way
naire), the respondents’ scores were aggregated into one
MANOVA was performed. In this analysis, a significant
measure according to the mean of the item scores. Higher
difference was found, F (9,137) = 4.22, p < .001, eta² = .22.
scores indicated higher computer use, importance, moti-
Table 1 presents the means and standard deviation
vation and capacity.
of the different measures and the results of a univari-
The computer use questionnaire (Part E) consists of
ate ANOVA for each measure separately. Table 1 also
four statements relating to Office software (Word,
shows significant differences between the two groups
PowerPoint, Excel and Access). The respondents’ scores
regarding learning strategies, challenge, motivation and
were rated on a 2-point scale (1 – low; 2 – high).
Web 2.0 use. The students who study at the professional
The importance questionnaire (Part F) included nine
academic school are more deep learners, less surface
statements which reflected the importance toward
learners, more challenged, more motivated and use
studying and integrating different applications of Web
more Web 2.0.
2.0 in the future. The respondents’ scores were rated on a
In order to examine the correlation between personal
5-point scale (1 – not important at all; 5 – very important).
characteristics, computer use, personality characteristics
The alpha Cronbach coefficient for the importance was
(cognitive appraisal (threat versus challenge), learning
0.86, which indicates good internal reliability.
strategies, resistance to change), learning facilitators
The motivation questionnaire (Part G) consists of six
(importance, motivation, and capacity) and Web 2.0 use,
statements pointing to the level of motivation toward
Pearson correlations were performed and are presented
learning Web 2.0 applications. The respondents’ scores
in Table 2.
were rated on a 5-point scale (1 – disagree; 5 – agree). The
Table 2 shows that significant positive correlation
alpha Cronbach coefficient for the motivation was 0.95,
was found between age, education and motivation
which indicates good internal reliability.
toward learning Web 2.0. The older and more educated
The capacity questionnaire (Part H) consists of six
the students are, the higher their motivation to learn Web
statements aimed at examining the respondents’ capacity
2.0. Significant positive correlation was also found
to master the different applications of Web 2.0. The respon-
between education and Web 2.0 use. The more educated
dents’ scores were rated on a 5-point scale (1 – disagree;
the students are, the higher their Web 2.0 use. With
5 – agree). The alpha Cronbach coefficient for the capacity
regard to students’ computer use, significant positive cor-
was .91, which also indicates good internal reliability.
relations were found between computer use importance,
RESULTS capacity and Web 2.0 use. It seems that the more the stu-
dents use the computer, the higher the importance they
An examination of the results of Web 2.0 use question- attribute to Web 2.0 applications, the higher their capacity
naire demonstrates that 45.3 percent of the participants and the more they use Web 2.0. Referring to personality
use blogs, 89.2 percent use wikis, 20.3 percent use Flicker, characteristics and concentrating first on learning strate-
18.9 percent use RSS and 37.2 percent use social net- gies, significant positive correlations were found between
works. Web 2.0 applications use is presented in Figure 1. deep strategy and importance and motivation and



Table 1. Means and standard deviation of different measures among
university and professional school students

Measures Type of educational institution

University Professional school

M SD M SD F (1,145) eta²

Learning strategies
Deep 3.28 .62 3.70 .69 14.03*** .09
Surface 2.41 .73 2.03 .66 9.26** .06
Change 3.09 .70 2.91 .70 2.15 .02
Cognitive appraisal
Threat 2.06 1.09 2.15 .99 .22 .00
Challenge 4.01 1.05 4.46 .95 6.67* .04
Learning facilitators
Importance 3.92 .61 4.06 .70 1.50 .01
Motivation 4.03 .80 4.40 .83 6.74* .04
Capacity 3.39 .97 3.18 1.10 1.10 .01
Web 2.0 use 1.89 1.09 2.53 1.40 9.32** .06
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001

Table 2. Pearson correlations between personal characteristics, computer use, personality characteristics,
learning facilitators and Web 2.0 use (N = 148)

Measures Importance Motivation Capacity Web 2.0 use

Personal characteristics
Age .05 .23** −.00 .11
Education .10 .20* −.08 .24***
Computer use .15* .14 .41*** .26***
Personality characteristics
Cognitive appraisal
Threat −.20* −.32*** −.35*** −.22***
Challenge .25** .38*** .23** .19*
Learning strategies
Deep .18* .42*** .13 .29***
Surface −.10 −.32*** −.05 −.06
Resistance to change −.13 −.23** −.18* −.18*
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001

Web 2.0 use. The more deep learners the students are, the resistance to change and motivation, capacity and Web
higher the importance they attribute to Web 2.0 applica- 2.0. The more resistant to change the students are, the less
tions, the higher their motivation toward learning Web they are motivated to learn Web 2.0; the lower their
2.0 and the higher their Web 2.0 use. A significant nega- capacity, the less they use Web 2.0. Table 2 shows that sig-
tive correlation was found between surface strategy and nificant correlations were found between cognitive
motivation. The more surface learners the students are, appraisal (threat versus challenge) and importance, moti-
the lower their motivation toward learning Web 2.0. vation, capacity and Web 2.0 use. The correlations with
Significant negative correlations were found between challenge were positive while the correlations with threat


NOA AHARONY

Table 3. Hierarchical regression coefficients of Web 2.0 use, on personal characteristics, personality
characteristics, cognitive appraisal and learning facilitators

Beta Steps

Predictors 1 2 3 4

Personal characteristics
Age .02 −.03 −.05 −.04
University/Professional .32*** .30** .32*** .28**
Computer use .31*** .27** .12 .15*
Learning strategies
Deep .13 .14 .09
Surface .10 .11 .08
Change −.11 −.05 −.03
Cognitive appraisal
Threat −.12 −.09
Challenge .01 .05
Learning facilitators
Importance .13 .12
Motivation −.09 −.05
Capacity .29** .28**
University–professional X
Challenge .18*
R² .17*** .19*** .31*** .33***
DR² .17*** .03* .10*** .03*

were negative. The more the students feel threatened, the This regression explained 33 percent of Web 2.0 use. Table 3
lower the importance they attribute to Web 2.0 applica- presents the hierarchical regression of Web 2.0 use.
tions, the lower their motivation, capacity and Web 2.0 An examination of the first step (personal character-
use. In contrast to this, the more challenged they are, the istics) reveals that the university–professional variable
higher the importance they attribute to Web 2.0 applica- and the computer use variable contributed significantly
tions, the higher their motivation, capacity and Web 2.0 and added 17 percent to the explained variance. As seen
use. In addition, Pearson correlations were performed in Table 1, students who study in the professional school
between importance, motivation, capacity and Web 2.0 make more use of Web 2.0 than university students. This
use. Significant positive correlations were found between first step also shows that the more the students use com-
motivation, r = .23, p < .01, capacity, r = .38, p < .001 and puters, the more they use Web 2.0. The second step, which
Web 2.0 use. The more motivated the students are, the included the personality characteristics (learning strategies,
higher their capacity and the higher their Web 2.0 use. resistance to change), did not contribute significantly to
A hierarchical regression analysis, in which the the explained variance. This finding is in contrast to a pre-
dependant variable was Web 2.0 use, was conducted. The vious one which showed a significant positive correlation
predictors were entered in four steps. In the first step per- between deep learning strategy and Web 2.0 use. Perhaps
sonal characteristics and computer use were entered and because personal characteristics were already entered in
it allows us to examine the contribution of the other vari- the first step, the contribution of the deep strategy to the
ables after partialling out the explained variance caused explained variance was low and insignificant. The third
by personal characteristics. The second step included the step included the two variables of cognitive appraisal and
personality characteristics which are general (learning the learning facilitators. Regarding the learning facilitators,
strategies, resistance to change) variables. The third step only the capacity variable contributed significantly and
added the more specific variables: cognitive appraisal added 10 percent to the explained variance. The more
(threat versus challenge) and the learning facilitators the students feel capable of using Web 2.0 applications,
(importance, motivation and capacity). In the fourth step the more they use Web 2.0. At the fourth step the inter-
interactions between the research variables were entered. action university–professional × challenge contributed



significantly and explained 3 percent of the explained demonstrated that deep learners had high attitudes toward
variance. In order to understand this interaction, the broadening the curricula and including the subject of
students’ group was divided into two sub-groups according information economics in it. Furthermore, deep learners
to their place of learning (university or professional have a personal commitment to the learning process as
school), and in each group the correlation between chal- well as a desire to search for self-fulfillment, which Biggs
lenge and Web 2.0 use was examined. A low and not sig- (1993) calls deep motivation. In the present research, the
nificant correlation was found among students who surface learners presented low motivation to learn the
study at the university, r = –.01, p > .05. A significant cor- subject of Web 2.0 and this echoes their surface motivation
relation was found among those students who study at toward the whole process of learning.
the professional school, r = .44, p < .01. Among these, the H2 was also confirmed and indicated that the more
more challenged they are, the more they use Web 2.0. resistant to change the students are, the less they are
motivated to learn Web 2.0, the lower their capacity and
DISCUSSION the less they use Web 2.0. The present finding is not sur-
prising and echoes the professional literature that claims
The present research aimed to explore whether LIS students that people resist change because of the difficulties inher-
are familiar with technological changes and innovations ent in coping with it. Individuals may feel uncertain
and whether personality characteristics influence their about what the future holds; they may be worried about
perceptions towards Web 2.0 use. job loss, new tasks, or about their psychological well-being
Focusing on Web 2.0 use shows that the most common (Ashford, 1988; Schweiger and DeNisi, 1991). The research
use among LIS students is that of wikis, the next one is finding confirms another study concerning resistance to
blogs, followed by social networks and ending with change (Aharony, 2009a) that found that the more open
Flicker and RSS. It seems that about 90 percent use wikis, to change librarians are, the more they reveal positive
and less than half (45 percent) use blogs. These findings attitudes toward marketing libraries. In the current research
indicate that the students are quite familiar with some these students who resist change express low motivation
Web 2.0 applications and make use of them. However, to learn a new discipline, which they probably view as
they should be exposed to additional applications. This threatening, unknown, and perhaps too demanding.
finding may be associated with a previous one (Aharony, Their low use of Web 2.0 compared to other students may
2008), which indicated that LIS schools in the United mirror their difficulties in getting used to change, specif-
States are not adequately prepared for the rapid changes ically new technological applications.
in web technology and use, and do not offer full courses The results pertaining to H3 demonstrate that this
that focus on the new concept of Web 2.0. The present hypothesis was also accepted. The more challenged the
research examined Israeli LIS students and not American students are, the higher the importance they attribute to
ones, but one can infer that the situation in Israeli LIS Web 2.0 applications, the higher their motivation, capacity
schools is not very different from that in the United States. and Web 2.0 use. In contrast to this, the more the students
One can assume that if Israeli LIS schools offered more feel threatened, the lower the importance they attribute
courses on Web 2.0 concepts, the students would better to Web 2.0 applications, the lower their motivation,
know, use and appreciate the benefits and advantages of capacity and Web 2.0 use. This result is commensurate
this platform. with research on threat and challenge that portrays that
We will now turn to a discussion about the research those people who experience challenge are characterized
hypotheses. H1 was confirmed. The current research results by higher coping expectancies, lower subjective stress
show that the more deep learners the students are, the and higher perceptions (Blascovich and Tomaka, 1996;
higher the importance they attribute to Web 2.0 applica- Blascovich et al., 2000; Tomaka et al., 1997). Conversely,
tions, the higher their motivation toward learning Web those people who experience threat assume that there is
2.0 and the higher their Web 2.0 use. In addition, it was potential danger to their well-being or self-esteem
found that the more surface learners the students are, the (Lazarus, 1991; Lazarus and Folkman, 1984; Rapee and
lower their motivation toward learning Web 2.0. These Heimberg, 1997; Sarason and Sarason, 1990). In the pre-
findings are not surprising and reflect the basic charac- sent study, those students who are challenged are ready
teristics of deep learners who would like to reach a and willing to learn about Web 2.0. They would like to
complete understanding of the subject matter, to study practise the different applications it offers and they
different aspects of the material in order to obtain the full believe that they are capable of working and applying it
picture, to relate new information to previously acquired to their present and future professional careers.
knowledge, and to search for relevant meaning and a The fourth hypothesis discussed in this research
connecting point between the learning material and daily was whether computer use, motivation, importance and
life and personal experiences (Beishuizen and Stoutjesdijk, capacity would be associated with high scores of students’
1999; Biggs, 1993; Entwistle, 1977). The present findings Web 2.0 use. Results indicate that H4 was accepted. The
support another study (Aharony and Raban, 2008) which more the students use the computer, the more they feel


NOA AHARONY

capable of using Web 2.0, the higher the importance they understand that in order to survive and to succeed in this
attribute to Web 2.0 applications, the higher their motiva- profession they should be familiar with a variety of new
tion to study and master this subject – and the more they technological applications.
use Web 2.0. These findings are encouraging, as they sug-
gest that those students who are technology oriented will SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
not have problems in working with it, experiencing inte-
grating new and modern technologies into their future jobs, The present research revealed a moderate tendency of
and this ability, may, in turn, change and upgrade their LIS students to use Web 2.0. It turned out that the per-
individual position as well as their profession of choice. sonality characteristics as well as the learning facilitators
The last hypothesis was also confirmed and revealed played a major role in LIS students’ perceptions towards
that there is a difference between students who study at Web 2.0 use. One should also bear in mind the difference
the university and students who study at the professional between the two groups of students, and try to facilitate
academic school. Those who study at the professional university LIS students to become deep learners who are
academic school are more deep learners, less surface more motivated to study. Finally, the researcher suggests
learners, more challenged, more motivated and use more that further studies include students from other disci-
Web 2.0 than their counterparts at the university. This plines as well as from other countries, in order to have a
result may be associated with Aharony’s (2006) previous broader perspective of students’ perceptions towards
research that found differences between LIS university Web 2.0 use.
students and professional academic LIS school students
regarding the image of the librarian and of the information REFERENCES
scientist. The current result may be explained in the
following way: students at the professional academic Aharony, N. (2002) The Correlation between the Pupil’s
school are usually university graduates (with first, second Cognitive Style (Field Dependence and Independence)
and sometimes even third degrees). They come to the and the Learning Approaches: Deep and Surface and
professional academic institute in order to obtain a pro- its Effect on English Achievement in an Internet
fessional diploma which they expect will be of practical Environment and on School Satisfaction. PhD disserta-
use to them in their present or future careers. They are tion. Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University.
mature and motivated, and this research indicates that
Aharony, N. (2006) ‘The Librarian and the Information
they are deep learners who would like to practise and
Scientist: Different Perceptions among Israeli
experience new things. Their counterparts at the univer-
Information Science Students’, Library and
sity, who were found to be less deep learners and less
Information Science Research 28 (2): 235–49.
motivated to learn Web 2.0, study in order to achieve
their academic degree and not a practical diploma. Aharony, N. (2008) ‘Web 2.0 in Schools of Library and
Perhaps the university students perceive their study as Information Science in the USA: Are we Missing the
more theoretical and therefore they do not consider the Boat?’, Ariadne, 54, URL (consulted July 2009):
subject of Web 2.0 as very important, in contrast to their http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue54/aharony/
colleagues at the professional academic school who like
to experience and practise new applications. The results Aharony, N. (2009a). ‘Librarians’ Attitudes towards
also indicate that among those students who study at the Marketing Library Services’, Journal of Librarianship
professional academic school, the more challenged they and Information Science 41 (1): 39–50.
are, the more they use Web 2.0. These participants are not Aharony, N. (2009b) ‘The Use of Wiki as an Instructional
threatened by new technological surroundings. Quite the Tool: A Qualitative Investigation’, Journal of Web
opposite, they are challenged and motivated to experience Librarianship 3 (1): 35–53.
these surroundings and as a result they use them more often
than their counterparts. Aharony, N. and Raban, D.R. (2008) ‘Economics of
Turning to the personal characteristics of age and Information Goods: An Interdisciplinary Subject for
education, results indicate that the older and more edu- Israeli LIS and MBA Curricula’, Library and
cated the students are, the higher their motivation to Information Science Research 30 (2): 102–7.
learn about Web 2.0, and that the more educated the stu-
Anderson, P. (2007) ‘What is Web 2.0? Ideas, Technologies
dents are, the higher their Web 2.0 use. It seems that older
and Implications for Education’, JISCTechWatch
students are more motivated to learn about Web 2.0. This
Report2–64, URL (consulted July 2009): http://www.
finding may reflect a situation where older students
jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/twweb2.aspx
would like to be deep learners and to understand the
new technological environment that surrounds them. Ashford, S.J. (1988) ‘Individual Strategies for Coping
Furthermore, the more educated the students are, the with Stress during Organizational Transitions’,
higher their motivation and Web 2.0 use. Possibly, they Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 24: 19–36.



Bar-Ilan, J. (2007) ‘The Use of Weblogs (blogs) by Heinstrom, J.H. (2006–7) ‘Fast Surfing, Broad Scanning
Librarians and Libraries to Disseminate and Deep Diving: The Influence of Personality
Information’, Information Research 12 (4): 323, URL and Study Approach on Students’ Information-
(consulted July 2008): http://InformationR.net/ Seeking Behaviour’, Managing Information 13 (10):
ir/12-4/paper323.html 32–8.
Beck, A.T., Emery, G. and Greenberg, R. (1985) Anxiety Huffaker, D. (2004) ‘The Educated Blogger: Using
Disorders and Phobias: A Cognitive Perspective. New Weblogs to Promote Literacy in the Classroom’, First
York: Basic Books. Monday, URL (consulted July 2008): http://www.
firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_6/huffaker/
Beishuizen, J.J. and Stoutjesdijk, E.T. (1999) ‘Study Strategies #author
in a Computer Assisted Study Environment’, Learning
and Instruction 9 (3): 281–301. Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.K., Pucik, V. and Welbourne,
T.M. (1999) ‘Managerial Coping with Organizational
Benkler, Y. (2006) The Wealth of Networks: How Social Change: A Dispositional Perspective’, Journal of
Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Applied Psychology 84: 107–22.
Haven, London: Yale University Press.
Krone, H.W. (2002) ‘Stress and Coping Theories’, URL
Berners-Lee, T. (2006) Developer Works Interviews: Tim (consulted April 2007): berlin.de/~schuez/folien/
Berners-Lee, URL (consulted April 2007): http:// Krohne_Stress.pdf
www.ibm.com/developerworks/podcast/dwi/
cm-int082206txt.html Lazarus, R.S. (1991) Emotion and Adaptation. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Biggs, J. (1993) ‘What do Inventories of Students’ Learning
Process Really Measure? A Theoretical Review and Lazarus, R.S. (1993) ‘Coping Theory and Research: Past,
Clarification’, British Journal of Educational Psychology Present and Future’, Psychosomatic Medicine 55: 234–
63: 3–19. 47.
Blascovich, J. and Tomaka, J. (1996) ‘The Biopsychosocial Lazarus, R.S. and Folkman, S. (1984) Stress, Appraisal and
Model of Arousal Regulation’, in M.P. Zanna (ed.) Coping. New York: Springer.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 28,
pp. 1–51. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Lazarus, R.S. and Folkman, S. (1986) ‘Cognitive Theories
of Stress and the Issue of Circularity’, in M.H.
Blascovich, J., Mendes, W.B., Hunter, S.B. and Lickel, B. Appley and R. Trumbull (eds) Dynamics of Stress:
(2000) ‘Stigma, Threat and Social Interactions’, in Physiological, Psychological and Social Perspectives,
T. Heatherton, R. Kleck and J.G. Hull (eds) The Social pp. 63–80. New York: Plenum.
Psychology of Stigma, pp. 307–33. New York, London:
Guilford Press. Lazarus, R.S., Kanner, A.D. and Folkman, S. (1980)
‘Emotions: A Cognitive-Phenomenological Analysis’,
Clyde, L.A. (2005) ‘Educational Blogging’, Teacher Librarians in R. Plutchik and H. Kellerman (eds) Emotion:
32 (3): 43–5. Theory, Research and Experience, pp. 189–217. New
York: Faculty Press.
Costa, P.T. and McCrae, R.R. (1992) NEOPI-R Professional
Manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Lewin, K. (1951) Field Theory in Social Science. New York:
Resources, Inc. Harper.
Doctorow, C., Dornfest, F., Johnson, J. and Powers, S. Lewin, K. (1952) Readings in Social Psychology. New York:
(2002) Essential Blogging. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly. Holt.
Edersbach, A., Glaser, M. and Heigl, R. (2006) Wiki: Web Maness, J.M. (2006). ‘Library 2.0 Theory: Web 2.0 and its
Collaboration. Berlin, New York: Springer. Implications for Libraries’. Webology, 3 (2): URL
(consulted July 2008): http://www.webology.ir/
Entwistle, N.J. (1977) ‘Strategies of Learning and 2006/v3n2/a25.html
Studying: Recent Research Findings’, British Journal
of Educational Psychology 25 (3): 225–37. Marton, F. and Salijo, R. (1976a) ‘On Qualitative
Differences in Learning: 1-Outcome and Process’,
Heinstrom, J.H. (2006) ‘Fast Surfing, Broad Scanning and British Journal of Educational Psychology 46: 4–11.
Deep Diving: The Influence of Personality and
Study Approach on Students’ Information-Seeking Marton, F. and Salijo, R. (1976b) ‘On Qualitative
Behaviour’, Managing Information 13 (9): 49–54. Differences in Learning: 2-Outcome as a Function of


NOA AHARONY

the Learner’s Conception of the Task’, British Journal Stephens, M. (2007) ‘Web 2.0, Library 2.0, and the
of Educational Psychology 46: 115–27. Hyperlinked Library’, Serials Review 33 (1): 253–6.
Meng, P. (2005) ‘Podcasting and Vodcasting: A White Tomaka, J., Blascovich, J., Kibler, J. and Ernst, J.M. (1997)
Paper ’, URL (consulted July 2008): http:// ‘Cognitive and Physiological Antecedents of Threat
edmarketing.apple.com/adcinstitute/wp-content/ and Challenge Appraisal’, Journal of Personality and
Missouri_Podcasting_White_Paper.pdf Social Psychology 73: 63–72.
Miller, P. (2006) ‘Web. 2: Building the New Library Gang. Vandar Wal, T. (2005) ‘Folksonomy Definition and
Recorded Telephone Conference’, URL (consulted Wikipedia’, URL (consulted April 2007): http://
April 2007): http://talk.talis.com/archives/2006/ www.vanderwal.net/random/entrysel.php?
02/introducing_the.html blog=1750
Oatman, E. (2005) ‘Blogomania!’, School Library Journal Wanberg, C.R. and Banas. J.T. (2000) ‘Predictors and
51: 36–9. Outcomes of Openness to Changes in a
Reorganizing Workplace’, Journal of Applied
Oreg, S. (2003) ‘Resistance to Change: Developing an Psychology 85: 132–42.
Individual Differences Measure’, Journal of Applied
Psychology 88 (4): 680–93. West, E.R., Wright, G., Gabbitas, B. and Graham, C.H.
(2006) ‘Reflections from the Introduction of Blogs
O’Reilly, T. (2005) ‘What is Web. 2?’, URL (consulted April and RSS Feeds into a Preservice Instructional
2007): http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/ Technology Course’, TechTrends 50 (4): 54–60.
tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html
Wilson, P. and Eklund, R.C. (1998) ‘The Relationship
Park, C.L. and Folkman, S. (1997) ‘The Role of Meaning in between Competitive Anxiety and Self-Presentational
the Context of Stress and Coping’, General Review of Concerns’, Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology
Psychology 2: 115–44. 20: 81–97.
Patterson, L. (2006) ‘The Technology Underlines Yekutiel, S. (1990) Fathers’ and Mothers’ Confrontation with
Podcasts’, Computer 39 (10): 103–5. the Transition of Parenthood. Masters thesis. Ramat-
Phares, E.J. (1991) Introduction to Psychology, 3rd edn. Gan: Bar-Ilan University.
New York: Harper Collins.
Poling, C. (2005) ‘Blog On: Building Communication and APPENDIX A
Collaboration among Staff and Students’, Learning
Personal Details:
and Leading with Technology 32 (6): 12–15.
Male / Female
Raman, M., Ryan, T. and Olfman, L. (2005). ‘Designing
Knowledge Management Systems for Teaching Age: 20–30; 31–40; 41–50; 51–60; over 60
and Learning with Wiki Technology’, Journal of
Level of education:
Information Systems Education 16: 311–21.
Rapee, R.M. and Heimberg, R.G. (1997) ‘A Cognitive-
Behavioral Model of Anxiety in Social Phobia’, Bachelor’s Master’s Doctorate
Behaviour Research and Therapy 35 (8): 741–56. degree degree

Sarason, I.G. and Sarason, B.R. (1990) ‘Test Anxiety’, in 1st year
H. Leitenberg (ed.) Handbook of Social-Evaluative 2nd year
Anxiety, pp. 475–95. New York: Plenum. 3rd year
Schlenker, B.R. and Leary, M.R. (1982) ‘Social Anxiety and
Self-Presentation: A Conceptualization and Model’, Previous education:
Psychological Bulletin 92: 641–69.
Bachelor’s degree in: information science/other
Schweiger, D. and DeNisi, A. (1991) ‘Communication
Master’s degree in: information science/other
with Employees Following a Merger: A Longitude’,
Academy of Management Journal 34 (1): 110–35. Doctorate: information science/other



LEARNING STRATEGIES
Listed below are several statements regarding one’s general beliefs and attitudes towards the learning process.
Please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with each statement by marking X the appropriate column of
the scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Inclined to Agree Strongly
disagree agree agree

1. I find that the learning process causes
me great satisfaction
2. I would like to pass the course with
minimum effort
3. I find that most of the learning subjects
are interesting and I am ready to devote
a lot of time outside class to enrich my
knowledge
4. I do not find any course as interesting;
therefore I do not make many efforts
to study
5. I compare the learning process to
listening to a good concert or to
enjoying a good film
6. I find it easier to learn by rote and not
to try to understand the whole issue
7. I devote a lot of time to learning
because I find it very interesting
8. I think it’s enough to have minimal basic
understandings in the material
9. In my leisure time I look for further
information in reference books
10. I think lecturers should understand that
students will not learn material which is
not going to be included in tests
11. I read all the additional material which
the professor suggests
12. I usually limit my learning process to
certain items, which are going to
appear in the final test
13. I usually come to class with some
questions, and I expect they will be
answered at the end of the lecture
14. I learn things by heart, even if I do not
understand them


NOA AHARONY

CHANGE SCALE
Listed below are several statements regarding one’s general beliefs and attitudes towards change.
Please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with each statement by marking X the appropriate column of
the scale (1 = strongly disagree, 6 = strongly agree).

1 2 3 4 5 6
Strongly Disagree Inclined to Inclined to Agree Strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

1. I generally consider changes to be
a negative thing
2. I’ll take a routine day over a day
full of unexpected events any time
3. I like to do the same old things
rather than try new and different
ones
4. Whenever my life forms a stable
routine, I look for ways to change
5. I’d rather be bored than surprised
6. If I were to be informed that there’s
going to be a significant change
regarding the way things are done
at school, I would probably feel
stressed
7. When I am informed of a change
of plans, I tense up a bit
8. When things don’t go according to
plans, it stresses me out
9. If my boss changed the criteria
for evaluating employees, it
would probably make me feel
uncomfortable even if I thought I’d
do just as well without having to
do any extra work
10. Changing plans seems like a real
hassle to me
11. Often, I feel a bit uncomfortable
even about changes that may
potentially improve my life
12. When someone pressures me to
change something, I tend to resist it
even if I think the change may
ultimately benefit me



COGNITIVE APPRAISAL QUESTIONNAIRE: THREAT VERSUS CHALLENGE
Below are statements concerning your attitudes towards new situations. Please mark with X the column which
describes your accordance with the following statements (1 = not at all; 6 = at a very high level)

1 2 3 4 5 6
Not at all Very Slightly Average More than At a very
Slightly level average high level

1. The situation stresses me
2. The situation seems difficult
to me
3. The situation threatens me
4. The situation challenges me
5. The situation will harm me
6. You think you can benefit
from this situation
7. The situation makes me
angry
8. This situation causes anxiety
9. This situation causes
certainty
10. The situation enables me to
show my capacity

WEB 2.0 USE QUESTIONNAIRE COMPUTER EXPERTISE QUESTIONNAIRE
Read the following questions and mark X at the
Yes No appropriate column.

1. Do you read blogs?
Level of control Low Average High
2. Do you add posts to blogs?
3. Do you read entries in Wikipedia? Word
4. Do you add entries to Wikipedia? Power point
5. Do you edit entries in Wikipedia? Excel
6. Do you take pictures from Flicker? Access

7. Do you add pictures to Flicker?
8. Do you use RSS?
9. Do you participate in a social
network?
10. Do you think that in the future you
will use web 2.0 applications?


NOA AHARONY

IMPORTANCE OF STUDYING AND INTEGRATING DIFFERENT
APPLICATIONS OF WEB 2.0 IN FUTURE QUESTIONNAIRE
Below you will find statements regarding importance of studying and integrating different applications of Web 2.0 in
future. Please mark with X the column which describes your attitude (5 = very important; 1 = not important at all).

1 2 3 4 5
Not important Not Quite Important Very
at all important important important

Web 2.0
Library 2.0
Content sharing
Blogs
Wikis
RSS
Social networks
Tagging
Instant messages

MOTIVATION QUESTIONNAIRE
Below are statements concerning Web 2.0. Please mark with X the column which describes your attitude (5 = strongly
agree; 1 = disagree).

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Inclined Agree Strongly
disagree to agree agree

1. I’m ready to study new subjects
relating to Web 2.0
2. I’m ready to devote a lot of time in
order to master Web 2.0 principles
3. Web 2.0 interests me a lot
4. I’m ready to make many efforts in
order to master this subject
5. Understanding of Web 2.0 is very
important to me
6. I’ll be very happy to know this
subject in depth



CAPACITY QUESTIONNAIRE
Below are statements concerning Web 2.0 applications. Please mark with X the column which you think, describes your
capacity to master each application (1 = very low; 5 = very high).

1 2 3 4 5
Very low Low Moderate High Very high

Blogs
Wikis
Flicker
RSS
Social networks
Youtube


Journal of librarianship and information science 2009-aharony-227-42

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Destacado

Destacado (7)

Similar a Journal of librarianship and information science 2009-aharony-227-42

Similar a Journal of librarianship and information science 2009-aharony-227-42 (20)

Último

Último (20)

Journal of librarianship and information science 2009-aharony-227-42