The research questions (RQ) of this study were as follows:

Several researchers have located the debate about age differences in the adoption and use of peer-reviewed electronic journals within the broader context of age differences in the use of Information Communication Technologies (ICTs), in general, and computers, in particular. Early in the life of electronic journals, Rolinson, Meadows and Smith (1995:135) pointed out that ‘it has been part of computer mythology that younger people are happier using computers than older people’. Younger people were more likely to use electronic journals, as the resources are accessed through computers and, more recently, smartphones and tablets. Waldman (2003) studied freshmen students at Baruch College, City University of New York, and found that age was a variable that correlates with comfort with computers and the use of electronic resources. Younger generations have been brought up with computers, whereas older generations may not have had as much exposure, resulting in increased computer anxiety. Tenopir (2003) found in a study at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, the United States, that younger users were more enthusiastic adopters of digital resources than the older users. Kinengyere (2007) conducted a study in academic and research institutions in Uganda and concluded that the older generation of researchers uses ICTs and e-resources less because most of them have a low level of information technology (IT) literacy. Gamage and Halpin (2007) surveyed the use of ICTs in Sri Lanka and found that most of the users were youths and adults younger than 35 years. Park (2010) opined that younger people learn about technology more easily than older ones. Tyagi (2011) found in a study in India that the ability to use e-resources efficiently depends on basic computer skills, knowledge of what is available and how to use it, and the ability to define a research problem. However, they found that age has an influence on these issues, with younger users displaying more competencies.

Turning specifically to the use of electronic journals, the trend mostly follows that of the use of ICTs and computers. Bar-llan and Fink (2005) concluded after extensive research in Israel that ‘increased age is inversely related to the use of electronic journals’. Tenopir (2003) after an analysis of several user studies noted that younger users use electronic journals more frequently than the older users. Older scholars believed that electronic journals decreased the quality and rigour of research. They also tended to complain more of unfriendly interfaces than the younger users. In a study that spanned institutions in east and southern Africa, Harle (2010) postulated that age does affect the adoption and use of electronic journals. The younger academics showed more enthusiasm when using the resources. Older academics felt more comfortable with print. Gargiulo et al. (2003) surveyed academics in 25 Italian institutions and discovered that a large percentage of the users of electronic journals fell in the 31–40 age range with 30.5% of usage. Around 26.1% of academics younger than 30 years and 25.4% of those in the 41–50 age group used electronic journals. Those aged over 50 years were the lowest at 18.1%. Bar-llan et al. (2003) conducted studies at several Israeli universities and found that academics in their 30s and 40s used electronic journals more frequently than those older than 50 years. For example, 75.4% of academics in their 30s used electronic journals, as did 68% of those in their 40s, while only 4.8% of those older than 50 years used these resources.

The survey by Sivathaasan, Achchuthan and Kajananthan (2013) on demographic variables and the usage of electronic journals among academics in Sri Lanka revealed that there were significant mean differences among age groups. University lecturers younger than 35 years had the highest mean usage, followed by those between 35 and 45 years, while lecturers between the age of 45 and 55 years accounted for the lowest usage. Findings from the one-way ANOVA (t test) revealed that usage differed significantly by age group. This finding agrees with that of Monopoli et al. (2002) who found in an online survey of e-journal usage by academics of University of Patras, Greece, that the resources were more frequently used by end-users who were 35 years and younger. Borrego et al. (2007) conducted a study at the universities belonging to the consortium of Catalonian university libraries in Spain and confirmed that age is an explanatory factor in the use of electronic journals. Use was more pronounced in the younger ages. In their study of the use of electronic journals in three countries, Finland, Australia and the United States, Tenopir et al. (2008) found that there was more use of electronic resources by the younger academics than the older ones in the overall results in Australia and the United States. King et al. (2009) studied information-seeking behaviour in US universities and reported that older academic staff were more likely to access and use print than electronic resources in their research; electronic journals were less used among the older academic staff in the universities. Deng (2010) investigated the extent of use of electronic resources in an Australian university among academic staff and students. Results showed that respondents younger than 29 years were the major users of electronic resources (52.4%), followed by those within the range of 30–39 years (21.8%), 40–49 years (12.8%), 50–59 years (11.1%) and those older than 60 years (2%).

Nigeria has more than a fair share of studies addressing the effect of age on the use of electronic journals. Amkpa (2007) conducted a study at the University of Maiduguri and found a significant age difference in the use of computer and electronic journals among undergraduate students. Younger students were more comfortable with technology. Alao and Folorunsho (2008) conducted a study on the use of Internet cybercafé and associated resources in Ilorin and found that the major users were people aged 21–30 years. Okiki and Asiru (2011) conducted a study to determine the factors influencing the use of electronic information sources by postgraduate students in Nigeria. They found significant age differences in the computer task, as measured by older adults, making few correct decisions and taking longer time to make their decisions than younger adults. Quadri (2013) studied the influence of demographic factors on the use of online library resources by undergraduate students in two private universities in Ogun State, Nigeria: Babcock University and Redeemer’s University. Results showed that younger users relied on electronic resources more heavily and rated themselves more adept at using them than the older ones. There was a significant relationship between age and the use of electronic resources. Ani (2013) studied two Nigerian universities, University of Ibadan and University of Calabar, and found no significant influence of age on accessibility and utilisation of electronic resources at the University of Ibadan although descriptive statistics still showed that younger respondents used electronic journals more than the older ones. This study found a significant difference by age at the University of Calabar. Further analysis revealed that respondents younger than 40 years significantly accessed and used e-resources more than those aged 60 years and above. Similar results were obtained between respondents aged 40–59 years and those aged 60 years and above.

While majority studies show age differences in the use of peer-reviewed electronic journals, there are few studies that are of the contrary view. Rogers (2001) conducted a study at the Ohio State University and revealed that there was little or no correlation between age and frequency of use. Bar-llan and Fink (2005) studied users at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Israel, and concluded that more than 80% of the respondents frequently used and preferred an electronic format, irrespective of age. Kurata et al. (2009) conducted a study among Japanese medical researchers and found no significant differences relating to article usage patterns by age groups. Nikkar and Mooghali (2010) conducted a study at Payam-e-Noor University, Iran, and concluded that aged faculty, with more experience, had a higher tendency of electronic journal usage. Zhang et al. (2011) argued that while many studies have shown an inverse relationship between e-journal usage and age, all ages have switched to the use of electronic journals such that impact of age as a usage determinant has dwindled.

The impact of age on the adoption and use of peer-reviewed electronic journals evidenced in most of the literature reviewed above is not without theoretical backing. One of the greatest theories to ever emerge on the prediction of user behaviour in the sphere of adoption and use of technology is the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) (Venkatesh et al. 2003). The potency of the theory is recognised internationally not least because it is an amalgamation and synthesis of eight established technology adoption models: Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Diffusion of Innovation (DOI), Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), Motivational Model (MM), Model of Personal Computer Utilisation (MPCU) and Combined Theory of Planned Behaviour/Technology Acceptance Model (TPB/TAM).

The theory hypothesises that age is one of the moderators that have an effect on the four constructs of the theory: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions. Age affects how an individual believes that using the system will enhance job performance (performance expectancy). Age has an effect on the degree of ease associated with the use of the system (effort expectancy). The theory further holds that age affects the degree to which an individual perceives that important others believe he or she should use the new system (social influence). The theory also holds that age affects the degree to which an individual believes that organisational and technical structure exists to support his or her use of the system (facilitating conditions). A summation of these four effects determines how people of different ages adopt and use a given technology, in this case peer-reviewed electronic journals. The UTAUT is diagrammatically represented in Figure 1.

Ethical clearance was sought from the University of KwaZulu-Natal’s Humanities and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee. Full approval was granted (protocol reference number HSS/0201/012D). Clearance to conduct studies in the participating universities was sought from their registrars, and permission was granted. Study participants were shown the permission letters, including a letter explaining the purpose of this study. They also signed the informed consent form before participation.

A total of 212 questionnaires were completed and returned from the 363 that were distributed. This gives a response rate of 58.4%, which was considered adequate for the purposes of this study. The age distribution of the respondents is shown in Table 2.

Academics in the 31–40 years age range made up the largest number of respondents at 44.3%, whereas those of 61 years and above constituted the least at 1%.

Results reveal that the majority of academics were aware of the existence of peer-reviewed electronic journals in their institutions. Of the 212 academics who participated in this study, 204 (96.2%) indicated that they were aware of the existence of electronic journals, whereas 8 (3.8%) indicated that they were not aware. Although descriptive statistics show slight variations in awareness by age as shown in Table 3, all ages generally have a high awareness of peer-reviewed electronic journals.

In all the age ranges, except the 61 years and above age group, more than 90% of their academics were aware of the existence of electronic journals. The percentage awareness of the 61 years and above group could have been negatively affected by the fact that only two of them responded to this study.

The high levels of awareness of peer-reviewed electronic journals across all ages established by this study are contrary to the findings of Tenopir (2003), Nwagwu, Adekannibi and Bello (2009) and Harle (2010), who found poor awareness in the institutions they studied. The results are, however, consistent with the views of Tenopir (2003), who asserted that awareness grows with time such that its effect on use decreases the longer the resources are offered. This is confirmed by studies by Tyagi (2011) and Ani (2013), who found high levels of awareness in the institutions they studied.

This study also went further to determine the depth or extent of awareness. This question only applied to the 204 academics who had indicated awareness of electronic journals. The measures of depth or extent of awareness were determined by the number of electronic databases (electronic databases house electronic journals) and the number of electronic journals academics were aware of.

Only 84 (41.2%) knew between five and 10 databases. The rest (120 or 58.8%) knew between one and four. None indicated knowing more than 10 databases. This is against the backdrop of more than 200 databases that Zimbabwean universities have access to. Of the 84 who knew between five and 10 databases, the 30 years and below age group had the highest ratio (18 of 26 or 69.2%), followed by the 31–40 years group with 41 of 91 (45.1%), followed by the 41–50 age group with 22 of 63 (34.9%), followed by the 51–60 age group with three of 23 (13%). The one academic in the 61 and above age group knew less than five databases.

Only 45 of the 204 (22.1%) academics knew between five and 10 specific electronic journals. The rest (159 or 77.9%) knew between one and four. None indicated knowing more than 10 specific electronic journals. There are thousands of electronic journals housed in the more than 200 databases that Zimbabwean universities have access to. This shows that virtually all age groups had poor knowledge of specific journals. However, age trends generally followed that of databases cited above, where awareness decreased as age increased. Studies by Amkpa (2007), King et al. (2009) and Deng (2010) confirmed that academics have unsatisfactory in-depth knowledge of electronic journals at their disposal. The same studies also found that younger users displayed more in-depth knowledge than the older academics.

Of the 212 academics who responded to this study, 193 (91%) indicated that they had adopted the use of electronic journals. Nineteen academics (9%) did not use electronic journals at all. The figure of non-users includes the eight (3.8%) who reported not being aware of the resources. Twenty-six of 27 respondents (96.3%) in the 30 years and below age category used the resources, as did 88 of 94 respondents (93.6%) in the 31–40 years age group, 58 of 64 respondents (90.6%) in the 41–50 age group, 20 of 25 respondents (80%) in the 51–60 years age group and one of two (50%) in the 61 years and above age category. The pattern that emerges from these statistics is that the percentage number of users per category decreases as the age ranges increase.

The results on adoption of electronic journals are in tandem with the expectations of the UTAUT theory that underpins this study. The theory hypothesises that age is a factor in the adoption and use of technology (Venkatesh et al. 2003). While this study did not go as far as measuring statistical significance, the descriptive results show a pattern where the level of adoption decreases with an increase in age. These results were also confirmed by researchers such as Waldman (2003), Tenopir (2003), Kinengyere (2007), Gamage and Halpin (2007) and Park (2010).

This study also considered the number of articles consulted per week by each of the age categories from the 193 academics who reported using electronic journals. Use was classified into three categories: low (one to 10 articles per week), average (11–20 articles per week) and high (21 articles and above per week). Table 4 shows the age differences in usage of electronic journals by academics.

While results cited earlier on the number of academics who have adopted the use of electronic journals revealed a pattern where the number of users decreased as the ages increased, Table 4 suggests that younger academics were actually low users of the resources. The statistics suggest that a number of young academics use electronic journals; however, they use them sparingly. Fewer academics in the older ages use electronic journals, but those who use do so in a significant way. An analysis of Table 4 reveals that 53.8% of academics in the 30 years and below age category are low users, as are 29.6% of those aged 31–40 years, 24.2% of academics in the 41–50 years age category and 25% of those aged 51–60 years, respectively. The age group with the highest number of high users is the 41–50 years category at 37.9%, followed by 31–40 age group (22.7%), 30 years and below age group (15.4%) and 51–60 years age group (10%). The lone user in the 60 years and above category is an average user. Most academics in the 31–40 and 51–60 age groups fall in the average users’ category.

Contrary to the findings of this study, past research has found that younger academics use electronic journals more heavily, accessing more articles than older academics (Borrego et al. 2007; King et al. 2009; Quadri 2013; Tenopir et al. 2008). Another school of thought points to neutrality in usage by age. Kurata et al. (2009) and Zhang et al. (2011) argued that given the time that has passed since the introduction of electronic journals, the impact of age as a usage determinant has dwindled. The findings of this study are in line with a third view that holds that the older academics use electronic journals more heavily, accessing more articles than the younger academics. Nikkar and Mooghali (2010) conducted a study in Iran and found that the more experienced and publishing-oriented older academics were heavier users of electronic journals.

The third RQ sought to establish if there were age differences among academics in Zimbabwean universities in the possession of technological skills needed to negotiate the electronic journals environment. Academics’ responses are shown in Table 5.

The results provided in Table 5 show that most academics perceived that they had low to average skills. Of the 193 users, 31 indicated low skills and 86 indicated average skills. This means that 60.6% of academics possess low to average skills, with only 39.4% (76) reporting high skills. Results also show that the younger the age the higher the skills. About 65.4% of academics in the 30 years and below category reported high skills, as did 43.2% of academics in the 31–40 years age group, 32.8% of academics in the 41–50 years age group and 10% of those in the 51–60 years age group, respectively. Many of the academics older than 30 years reported average skills. There are also a sizeable number of academics aged over 30 years who demonstrated low skills. Results of this study are consistent with the running theme in literature that younger users possess higher skills in technology use than the older academics. The UTAUT theory asserts that age influences the ‘effort expectancy’ of the user (Venkatesh et al. 2003). Researchers such as Waldman (2003), Tenopir (2003), Kinengyere (2007), Park (2010), Harle (2010) and Tyagi (2011) have all pointed to younger users having more technological skills than the older users.