SINTA

0.0

Impact

Google Scholar

14

H-Index

SYNAPSI: Journal of Information Systems and Informatics Education

an Open Access Journal

The Influence of Student Perceptions on the Quality of Library Services and Learning Facilities in Increasing User Satisfaction in University Libraries

Joni Karman
Vocational High School Yudika
Indonesia
jonikarman90@gmail.com
Utama Khalid Lubis
Bina Darma University
Indonesia
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study aims to analyze the influence of students’ perceptions of library service quality and learning facilities on user satisfaction in university libraries, particularly at the Central Library of Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta (UNY).

    Methodology This study employed a quantitative ex-post facto approach involving 251 university students as respondents. Data were collected through Likert-scale questionnaires and analyzed using multiple linear regression with SPSS for Windows. Instrument validity was tested using Pearson Product Moment, while reliability was tested using Cronbach’s Alpha. Classical assumption tests included normality, multicollinearity, and heteroscedasticity tests.

    Main Findings: The results showed that library service quality and learning facilities had positive and significant effects on user satisfaction both partially and simultaneously. Library service quality had the strongest influence on user satisfaction with a significance value of 0.000, while learning facilities also significantly influenced satisfaction with a significance value of 0.001. The coefficient of determination (R²) indicated that both variables contributed 43.2% to user satisfaction.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: The novelty of this study lies in the integration of library service quality and learning facilities into a single quantitative model for analyzing user satisfaction in university libraries. This research highlights the importance of modern learning facilities and digital-based services in supporting students’ academic experiences and positions university libraries as collaborative learning and digital literacy centers.

  • How to cite

    Karman, J. ., & Khalid Lubis, U. (2026). The Influence of Student Perceptions on the Quality of Library Services and Learning Facilities in Increasing User Satisfaction in University Libraries. SYNAPSI: Journal of Information Systems and Informatics Education, 1(1), 50-58. https://doi.org/10.37251/synapsi.v1i1.3208

    More Citation Formats

  • 65
    Abstract views
    28
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. V. T. T. Nguyen, H. Le, and T. D. Nguyen, “Enhancing wow in blended learning : The role of service quality, image and social value,” Cogent Bus. Manag., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–24, 2025, doi: 10.1080/23311975.2025.2577866. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2577866
    2. A. Howlett, E. Colla, R. Joyce, A. Howlett, and E. Colla, “Toward redefining library research support services in australia and aotearoa new zealand: An evidence-based practice approach,” New Rev. Acad. Librariansh., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 24–51, 2024, doi: 10.1080/13614533.2024.2306360. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2024.2306360
    3. K. Mwantimwa and G. Msoffe, “Application of generative artificial intelligence in library operations and service delivery: A scoping review,” Tech. Serv. Q., vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 139–168, 2025, doi: 10.1080/07317131.2025.2467574. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2025.2467574
    4. K. Halliday et al., “Decolonising and diversifying the library through student partnerships,” New Rev. Acad. Librariansh., vol. 30, no. 2–3, pp. 153–167, 2024, doi: 10.1080/13614533.2023.2287470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2023.2287470
    5. S. Datta and T. Ghosh, “Streaming quality unveiled : A grounded theory approach to deciphering video on demand service attributes,” Cogent Bus. Manag., vol. 12, no. 1, p., 2025, doi: 10.1080/23311975.2025.2498626. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2498626
    6. X. Ai, L. Wang, R. Huang, W. Zhang, and J. Huang, “Developing a service quality standard for collaborative integrated healthcare institutions in guangdong, China: A delphi-analytic hierarchy process study,” Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy, pp. 3963–3975, 2025, doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S549814. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S549814
    7. D. Wells and A. Sallenbach, “Print books and ebooks: The new equilibrium in an academic library,” J. Aust. Libr. Inf. Assoc., vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 166–177, 2023, doi: 10.1080/24750158.2023.2183560. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2023.2183560
    8. D. Wilmott, “A comparison study on the influence of social movements on collection building and use of print monographs at a large research university library a large research university library,” Tech. Serv. Q., vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 141–161, 2026, doi: 10.1080/07317131.2026.2632492. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2026.2632492
    9. R. Ismailova et al., “A comparative analysis of service quality and student perceptions in Kyrgyzstan’ s higher education institutions,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2502202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2502202
    10. H. Murphy and H. Murphy, “Understanding the value of digital archival collections to faculty at maynooth university library,” New Rev. Acad. Librariansh., vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 423–439, 2022, doi: 10.1080/13614533.2021.1976233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2021.1976233
    11. P. Dangaiso and M. Tsvere, “Linking service quality to academic achievement : Student perspectives from a Zimbabwean public university,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2533302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2533302
    12. P. Sjökvist, “The books of king sigismund at uppsala university library,” Scando-Slavica ISSN, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 213–223, 2022, doi: 10.1080/00806765.2022.2144696. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00806765.2022.2144696
    13. P. Dangaiso and M. Tsvere, “The nexus between higher education service quality and student academic achievement: A structural equation modelling approach,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2556893. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2556893
    14. P. Odonnell and L. Anderson, “New review of academic librarianship the university library : Places for possibility the university library : Places for possibility,” New Rev. Acad. Librariansh., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 232–255, 2022, doi: 10.1080/13614533.2021.1906718. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2021.1906718
    15. P. Marzec, D. M. Piotrowski, and M. Jarocki, “Exploring analytical tools in the optimization of library information and instruction services,” J. Libr. Inf. Serv. Distance Learn., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 43–62, 2025, doi: 10.1080/1533290X.2025.2525079. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1533290X.2025.2525079
    16. J. Choi, J. Park, S. Eun, and D. Kang, “Disability and rehabilitation : Assistive technology reducing upper-limb strain in rehabilitation : Usability evaluation of a detachable bidirectional propulsion device for spinal cord injury users,” Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 925–936, 2026, doi: 10.1080/17483107.2025.2565407. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2025.2565407
    17. P. Chibangwa and J. Chigwada, “Challenges affecting physically disadvantaged users in accessing library services in polytechnical colleges,” J. Access Serv., vol. 22, no. 1–3, pp. 41–53, 2025, doi: 10.1080/15367967.2025.2542161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15367967.2025.2542161
    18. P. Monteiro et al., “Beyond the hands: Evaluating the usability of hands-free methods and controllers for menu Selection during an immersive vr experience,” Int. J. Human–Computer Interact., vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 6380–6417, 2026, doi: 10.1080/10447318.2025.2553776. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2025.2553776
    19. A. Sayed, A. O. Mathew, and L. L. R. Rodrigues, “Developing and validating the augmented reality- enabled e-commerce questionnaire ( ARECQ ): An extended technology acceptance model for Gen Z,” Cogent Soc. Sci., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–26, 2026, doi: 10.1080/23311886.2025.2604876. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2025.2604876
    20. H. Chen, H. Li, and S. Han, “Negative emotion , positive effect ? An empirical study of the impact of fear on user satisfaction in immersive virtual reality sports negative emotion , positive effect ? An empirical study of the impact of fear on user satisfaction in immersive virtual ,” Int. J. Human–Computer Interact., vol. 41, no. 22, pp. 14571–14583, 2025, doi: 10.1080/10447318.2025.2484419. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2025.2484419
    21. M. King and L. Whitson, “Bursaries reimagined: Addressing digital inequity through a library-led, university-wide laptop bursary program,” Int. Inf. Libr. Rev., vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 169–175, 2023, doi: 10.1080/10572317.2023.2198877. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10572317.2023.2198877
    22. H. Choi and S. Jang, “Mediating effect of reflection types : Feedback on reflection-for-action and student perception of patient-centredness,” Med. Educ. Online, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2022, doi: 10.1080/10872981.2022.2127166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2022.2127166
    23. W. Rahayu et al., “A rasch and factor analysis of an Indonesian version of the student perception of opportunity competence development (SPOCD) questionnaire,” Cogent Educ., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2020, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2020.1721633. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1721633
    24. M. Elzayyat, J. N. Mohammad, and S. Zaqout, “Assessing llm-generated vs. expert-created clinical anatomy mcqs: A student perception- based comparative study in medical education,” Med. Educ. Online, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2025, doi: 10.1080/10872981.2025.2554678. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2025.2554678
    25. W. Rahayu, M. Dwirifqi, K. Putra, P. Deniyanti, and N. S. Zahra, “Student perception of opportunity competence development in mathematics : Is it a unidimensional or multidimensional construct ?,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2566884. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2566884
    26. M. Ravi and M. Besharat, “A holistic consideration of authentic assessments : Student perception of assessment design, delivery, flexibility and creativity,” Eur. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 25–42, 2026, doi: 10.1080/03043797.2025.2480116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2025.2480116
    27. T. J. Smith et al., “Teacher characteristics as predictors of mathematics attitude and perceptions of engaged teaching among 12 grade advanced mathematics students in the U . S,” Educ. Inq., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 338–353, 2022, doi: 10.1080/20004508.2021.1883910. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2021.1883910
    28. R. Adade et al., “Perception of Ghanaian healthcare students towards the learning of sign language as course,” Cogent Public Heal., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2023, doi: 10.1080/27707571.2023.2192999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/27707571.2023.2192999
    29. E. M. Corrado, “Accreditation standards and academic library requirements,” Tech. Serv. Q., vol. 42, no. 3–4, pp. 328–340, 2025, doi: 10.1080/07317131.2025.2571142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2025.2571142
    30. K. Helker-schlotmann, I. M. M. J. Reymen, M. Bruns, D. Jan, K. Helker-schlotmann, and M. Bruns, “Re-designing to challenge-based learning – what does it mean for student learning processes and outcomes ? student learning processes and outcomes ?,” Eur. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 3797, pp. 1–17, 2026, doi: 10.1080/03043797.2026.2645648. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2026.2645648