The long-term development of mobile banking (m-banking) relies on users’ continued usage. Motivated by the need to better understand the motivations and barriers of users’ continuance intention towards m-banking, this study develops a research model based on the incorporation of the technology acceptance model (TAM): task-technology fit model (TTF) and perceived risk into the expectance-confirmation model (ECM). Empirical data from 434 users who had prior experience with m-banking were tested against the proposed research model by using structural equation modeling (SEM). The results indicate that satisfaction, perceived usefulness, perceived task-technology fit, and perceived risk are the main predictors of continuance intention, satisfaction, in turn, is determined by confirmation, perceived usefulness, and perceived risk. Perceived usefulness is affected by confirmation, perceived ease of use, and perceived task-technology fit. However, the direct effect of perceived ease of use to continuance intention is not significant. The results also show that gender significantly moderates the effect of perceived risk to continuance intention. Implications of the findings and future research directions are discussed.

No abstract

This paper presents a review of open data research based on bibliometric analysis of publications in Web of Science from 1998 to 2016. It shows that research on open data has grown rapidly since 2009 with the development of various open data initiatives. We identify the different themes using science mapping and performance analysis. The most important themes are semantic web, open government, and crowdsourcing. The basic and transversal themes are data sharing and public sector information. As for the emerging themes, these are Big Data and open government data. In addition, data journalism, monitoring, and recommender systems are specific themes that deserve special attention. The UK and the USA are the leading publishing countries, both in theoretical and practical research on open data. In China, most researchers focus on practical research, and there have been efforts to promote the development of open data. Papers introducing large‐scale projects receive more attention and citation quickly. Recently, researchers have been publishing more on objective topics, including possible issues and dilemmas in the era of Big Data and many problems such as budgets, ownership, licensing, culture, and sustainable development.

No abstract

PurposeThe main purpose of this paper is to measure the scholarly impact of LIS (Library and Information Science) open access journals (OA journals), most of which are not indexed by the Web of Science (WoS). In addition, the paper seeks to discuss measurement methods beyond citation analysis.Design/methodology/approachThe study selected 97 LIS OA journals as a sample and measured their scholarly impact on the basis of citations and links. The citation counts in WoS, coverage in LISA, Web links, WIFs and Page Rank of the journals are retrieved and calculated, and correlations between citation counts, links, pages, WIFs, and Page Rank are also analyzed.FindingsThe results indicate that LIS OA journals have become a significant component of the scholarly communication system. The Journal of the Medical Library Association enjoys the highest citation counts in WoS. This journal, together with D‐Lib Magazine, Information Research, Ariadne, Cybermetrics, and First Monday are the six most important LIS OA journals. With regard to coverage in LISA, Bulletin des Bibliothèques de France (2151) performs best. As a whole, the Page Rank is relatively high, mostly at 6, 7, or 8. The study finds that correlation between citation‐based measurements and link‐based measurements tends to be significant.Originality/valueThis paper uses the web as a global resource to measure the impact of LIS OA journals by analyzing citation, coverage, web links and Page Rank. The focus of this study is the value of the web as a source of impact indices, rather different from the traditional research methods. It contributes to the scholarly impact measurements of OA journals.