참고문헌 (52)

1. National Research and Development Innovation Act. No. 18645. 

2. Aaker, J. L., Brumbaugh, A. M., & Grier, S. A. (2000). Nontarget markets and viewer distinctiveness: The impact of target marketing on advertising attitudes. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(3), 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP0903_1 

   상세보기

3. Barriball, K. L. & While, A. (1994). Collecting data using a semi-structured interview: A discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing-Institutional Subscription, 19(2), 328-335. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01088.x 

   상세보기

4. Belzowski, N., Ladwig, J. P., & Miller, T. (2013). Crafting identity, collaboration, and relevance for academic librarians using communities of practice. Collaborative Librarianship, 5(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.29087/2013.5.1.04 

   상세보기

5. Butler, B. S. (2001). Membership size, communication activity, and sustainability: a resource-based model of online social structures. Information Systems Research, 12(4), 346-362. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.4.346.9703 

   상세보기

6. Cahill, D. J. (1997). Target marketing and segmentation: valid and useful tools for marketing. Management Decision, 35(1), 10-13. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251749710160133 

   상세보기

7. Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294-320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113500475 

   상세보기

8. Coburn, E. & Johnston, L. (2020). Testing our assumptions: preliminary results from the data curation network. Journal of EScience Librarianship, 9(1), 4. http://doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.2020.1186 

   상세보기

9. Constantopoulos, P., Dallas, C., Androutsopoulos, I., Angelis, S., Deligiannakis, A., Gavrilis, D., Kotidis, Y., & Papatheodorou, C. (2009). DCC&U: An extended digital curation lifecycle model. International Journal of Digital Curation, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v4i1.76 

   상세보기

10. Cronin, B. (2008). On the epistemic significance of place. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 1002-1006. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20774 

    상세보기

11. Cummings, J. N. & Kiesler, S. (2005). Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 703-722. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705055535 

    상세보기

12. Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6 

    상세보기

13. Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by Expanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

14. Engestrom, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133-156. 

    상세보기

15. Fischer, G. (2001). Communities of interest: Learning through the interaction of multiple knowledge systems. In Proceedings of the 24th IRIS Conference. Department of Information Science, Bergen. 

16. Fu, H. & Stvilia, B. (2016). Knowledge curation discussions and activity dynamics in a short lived social Q&A community. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM/IEEE-CS on Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL '16). New York. https://doi.org/10.1145/2910896.2925432 

    

17. Gannon-Leary, P. & Fontainha, E. (2007). Communities of practice and virtual learning communities: benefits, barriers and success factors. Barriers and Success Factors. eLearning Papers, 5. 

18. Gusfield, J. R. (1975). Community: A Critical Response. New York: Harper & Row. 

19. Hashim, N. H. & Jones, M. L. (2007). Activity theory: A framework for qualitative analysis. 4th International Qualitative Research Convention (QRC), PJ Hilton, Malaysia. 

20. Higgins, S. (2008). The DCC curation lifecycle model. International Journal of Digital Curation, 3(1), 134-140. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v3i1.48 

    상세보기

21. Hockx-Yu, H. (2006). Digital preservation in the context of institutional repositories. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, 40(3), 232-243. https://doi.org/10.1108/00330330610681312 

    상세보기

22. Ilyenkov, E. V. (2008). Dialectical Logic; Essays on its History and Theory. New Delhi: Aakar Books. 

23. Johnston, L. R., Carlson, J., Hudson-Vitale, C., Imker, H., Kozlowski, W., Olendorf, R., ... & Hull, E. (2018). Data curation network: a cross-institutional staffing model for curating research data. International Journal of Digital Curation, 13(1), 125-140. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v13i1.616 

    상세보기

24. Kaptelinin, V. & Nardi, B. (2012). Activity theory in HCI: fundamentals and reflections. Synthesis Lectures Human-Centered Informatics, 5(1), 1-105. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00413ED1V01Y201203HCI013 

    상세보기

25. Kaptelinin, V. (2005). The object of activity: Making sense of the sense-maker. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 4-18. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca1201_2 

    상세보기

26. Karanasios, S., Riisla, K., & Simeonova, B. (2017). Exploring the Use of Contradictions in Activity Theory Studies: An Interdisciplinary Review. Loughborough: Loughborough University. 

27. Kazmer, M. M. & Xie, B. (2008). Qualitative interviewing in Internet studies: playing with the media, playing with the method. Information, Community and Society, 11(2), 257-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180801946333 

    상세보기

28. Kazmer, M. M. (2010). Disengaging from a distributed research project: refining a model of group departures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(4), 758-771. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21281 

    상세보기

29. Kraut, R. E. & Resnick, P. (2012). Building Successful Online Communities: Evidence-based Social Design. Massachusetts: MIT Press. 

30. Landis, J. R. & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310 

    상세보기

31. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

32. Lazar, J. & Preece, J. (2002). Social Considerations in Online Communities: Usability, Sociability, and Success factors. London: Psychology Press. 

33. Leimeister, J. M., Sidiras, P., & Krcmar, H. (2004). Success factors of virtual communities from the perspective of members and operators: an empirical study. In Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 37), Big Island, Hawaii. 

34. Leont'ev, A. (1978). Activity, Consciousness, and Personality. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 

35. Lompscher, J. (2006). The cultural-historical activity theory: some aspects of development. Critical Perspectives on Activity: Explorations across Education, Work, and Everyday Life, 35-51. 

36. McCarthy, J. F., McDonald, D. W., Soroczak, S., Nguyen, D. H., & Rashid, A. M. (2004). Augmenting the social space of an academic conference. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 39-48. https://doi.org/10.1145/1031607.1031615 

    

37. Michener, W. K. & Jones, M. B. (2012). Ecoinformatics: supporting ecology as a data-intensive science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27(2), 85-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.11.016 

    상세보기

38. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. California: Sage Publications. 

39. Nardi, B. A. (1996). Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction, 436, 7-16. 

40. O'Connor, C. & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220 

    상세보기

41. OECD (2006). Recommendation of the Council concerning Access to Research Data from Public Funding. Available: https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECDLEGAL-0347 

42. Sanchez-Cardona, I., Sanchez-Lugo, J., & VZlez-Gonzalez, J. (2012). Exploring the potential of communities of practice for learning and collaboration in a higher education context. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1820-1825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.385. 

    상세보기

43. Schieffer, L. (2016). The benefits and barriers of virtual collaboration among online adjuncts. Journal of Instructional Research, 5, 109-125. 

    상세보기

44. Tammaro, A. M., Ross, S., & Casarosa, V. (2014). Research data curator: the competencies gap. BOBCATSSS 2014 Proceedings, 1(1), 95-100. 

45. Vallance, M., Towndrow, P. A., & Wiz, C. (2010). Conditions for successful online document collaboration. TechTrends, 54(1), 20-24. 

    상세보기

46. Van Der Vegt, G. S., Bunderson, S., & Kuipers, B. (2010). Why turnover matters in self-managing work teams: learning, social integration, and task flexibility. Journal of Management, 36(5), 1168-1191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309344117 

    상세보기

47. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Word. Massachusetts: MIT Press. 

48. Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Massachusetts: Harvard business press. 

49. Wilson, T. D. (2008). Activity theory and information seeking. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 42(1), 119-161. 

    상세보기

50. Winandy, M., Kostkova, P., de Quincey, E., St Louis, C., & Szomszor, M. (2016). Follow# eHealth2011: measuring the role and effectiveness of online and social media in increasing the outreach of a scientific conference. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18(7), e191. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4480 

    상세보기

51. Yin, R. K. (2017). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. California: Sage Publications. 

52. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications. California: Sage Publications.