Introduction

Research plays an important role in facilitating the prosperity of a nation and the well-being of her people. Through research, Universities and other higher institutions of learning make important contributions to the growth and development of vital sectors of a nation, thereby promoting national and global development. Most of the research work in Nigeria occurs in the universities. Research is a process of rigorous, systematic, validating, verifiable, empirical, critical, analyzing and interpreting information to answer questions. It is a conscious effort to collect, verify, and analyze information. Mason (2011) defined research as "the systematic quest for knowledge". Research provides good platform for Lecturers to become accomplished scholars. Research outputs come in the form of journal articles, published books, chapters in books, technical reports, conference papers, seminar papers, edited works, workshop papers, thesis and other types of publications. These research outputs enable lecturers to earn recognition in academic circles nationally and internationally. Also, University recognition and advancement of academic staff depend largely on the quantity and quality of research productivity. Research productivity often serves as a major role in attaining success in academic circle as it is related to promotion, tenure, salary etc, of academic staff (Okonedo, 2015).

For a meaningful research to take place, scholars should be aware of the state of the existing knowledge and have access to information which will help them to build up their own theories and findings. An important variable that may influence research productivity of lecturers in private universities in Nigeria is the academic library resources. All through the history of the world, libraries have been important institutions for the conservation and preservation of human knowledge. Generally, the library is unique in that, it does not only select, organize, store and retrieve information; it also creates access, protects intellectual freedom and provides direct assistance and instruction to its users in the use of its information resources. In recent times, new technologies and communication tools have revolutionized the format and style of libraries services. The channels to access and distribution of information and knowledge have become much more diverse. While libraries will not be replaced, they will need to adapt new methodologies in order to take advantage of the new tools.

Okonedo (2015) opined that there is a direct correlation between utilization of library resources and research productivity of lecturers. Okonedo recommended that academic libraries in Nigeria should be equipped with both print and electronic resources in order to attract more users especially lecturers. This study therefore further investigates the nexus between utilization of library resources and research productivity of lecturers in Private Universities in South--South Nigeria.

Research Questions

The following research questions were raised to guide the study:

i What is the extent of utilization of academic library resources by lecturers in private Universities in South-south, Nigeria?

ii What is the extent of research productivity among lecturers in private universities in South-south, Nigeria?

iii What are the challenges lecturers experience in their quest for research productivity in Private Universities in South-south, Nigeria?

Research Hypothesis

The following hypothesis was formulated and tested at 0.05 significance level.

[HO.sub.1] There is no significant relationship between utilization of academic library resources and research productivity among lecturers in private universities in South-South Nigeria.

Review of Related Literature

Information plays vital roles in the lives of lecturers. They need information to enhance their professional career, promote their research activities, to keep up with the current development in their fields of study, and to develop competence in their teaching skills, among others. The use of Library resources by patrons sometimes determine their information seeking behavior. Kannappanavar and Manjunatha (2010) opined that information seeking behaviour has been a popular area of research for information Scientists. They further pointed out that information seeking behaviour and needs of social scientists are fewer than those involved in the natural science. According to Mason (2011), scholars are required to spend forty percent of their time doing research, and producing important, original work. Kannappanavar and Manjunatha (2010) reported that lecturers made use of their University libraries to access information for teaching and research. Harvard University (2009) and Baylor University (2012) posited that libraries play a central role in academic work.

Considering the role and importance of the library, Ifijeh (2011) opined that, the library is the only centralized location where new and emerging information technologies can be confined with traditional knowledge resources in a user-focused environment that supports today's social and educational patterns of learning, teaching, and research. Academic libraries today are complex institutions with multiple roles and a host of related operation and services developed over the years. Yet, their fundamental purpose have remained the same: to provide access to trustworthy, and authoritative sources of knowledge. Consequently, academic libraries, along with their private and government counterparts, have long stood unchallenged throughout the world as the primary providers of recorded knowledge and historical records. Within the context of high education especially, when users wanted dependable information, they turned to academic libraries (Odaro, 2010).

There is a relationship between library use and academic productivity (Baylor University, 2012; Kim, 2006). Okonedo (2015) reported that there is a decline in lecturers' research productivity in South-West Nigeria. She examined research productivity among academic librarians and lecturers in selected Universities in South-west Nigeria. The study revealed that a total of 726 articles were published by 124 lecturers and academic librarians between the periods of five years (2009-2014). Tsafe, Basaka and Mohammed (2016) analyzed the research productivity of academics in sixteen (16) Universities in Northern Nigeria from 2000 -2012. The study indicated that 165 academics produced 373 publications within the period under review. This is quite low.

This is a need to identify the factors responsible for low research productivity among lecturers in Nigeria. Studies have shown an inter-relatedness between the use of information resources in a library setting, and the effects of such use on research publications amongst a specialized user group (Ajegbomogun and Fagbola, 2015). The latter also observed that there was low publication output among lecturers, but noted also that, most other studies that reported low publications levels in Nigeria, were done at periods when electronic information resources were not readily available especially in libraries. There is a gap in literature on current trends on the relationship between use of library resources and research productivity of lecturers especially in South-South Nigeria. This study fills that gap.

Methodology

Descriptive research design was adopted for this study. The population of the study was 1841 private universities lecturers in South-south Nigeria. Private Universities were chosen because they are relatively new and their lecturers are motivated to conduct research and publish their findings. A sample of 368 lecturers was used for the study. The figures are further displayed in the Table 1 below.

The research instrument employed for data collection was a self constructed questionnaire. The questionnaire was titled Utilization of Academic Library Resources for Research Productivity among Lecturers in Private University Questionnaire (UALRRPLPUQ).

The instrument was tested for reliability using test-retest reliability test technique. The split half reliability was employed using 15 academic staff from Micheal and Cecillia Ibru University, Owhrodo, Delta State. Using the questionnaire forms that are not part of the sample size on two different occasions. The time lapse between the two tests was two weeks. The scores of the two sets of test were computed. The Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to calculate the reliability and the reliability value of 0.73 was obtained making the instrument reliable.

The researcher, with the help of two trained research assistants administered copies of the questionnaire to private university lecturers in their various offices. The researcher used a period of 5 weeks to complete the administration of the questionnaires. This yielded 63% response rate (231) from the respondents.

The generated data for this study were analyzed using mean, median and t-test statistic to analyze the data of the respondents. The Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient (PPMCC) was used to test the hypothesis.

Data Analysis, Results and Discussion of Findings

Analysis of the Demographic details of Findings

From Table 2, it can be seen that there are 151(65.4%) males and 80(34.6%) females. This implies that there are more male lecturers in the private universities in South-South Nigeria than their female colleagues.

Table 3 shows that there are 118(51.1%) lecturers with M.Sc./equivalent degree, 107(46.3%) of them with Ph.D. degree and 6(2.6%) with B.Sc/equivalent. This implies that majority of the lecturers in private universities in South-South Nigeria possess either an M.Sc. or a Ph.D. degree.

Table 4 shows the academic status of the respondents. There are 67(29%) lecturers who are Assistant lecturers, 57(24.7%) of them are Lecturer I, 50(21.6%) of them are Lecturer II, 25(10.8%) of them are Associate Professors, while 14(6.1%) are Professors. This implies that, majority of the lecturers are Assistant lecturers.

Answering of the Research Questions

Research Question 1: What is the extent of utilization of academic library resources by lecturers in private universities in South-south Nigeria?

The results in Table 5 shows that the extent of utilization of academic library resources among lecturers in private universities is high. This is because, the aggregate mean of 3.41 is greater than the criterion mean of 2.50.

Research Question 2: What is the extent of research productivity among lecturers in private universities in South-south Nigeria between 2014-2016?

Table 6 shows the level of research productivity among lecturers in private universities in South-south Nigeria in three years-2014, 2015 and 2016. The lecturers indicated the number of publications made in 3 years. Majority of the lecturers noted that they have published between 1-5 times in the past three years (2014-2016). They have published research reports/ monograph written for a funded project-174(75.3%, articles published in an academic book-140(60.0%), professional article written for a newspaper or magazine-135 (58.4%, artistic work performed or exhibited-126(54.5%, videos or films produced-84(0.4%), and computer program written for public use-83(2.2%).

Research Question 3: What are the challenges lecturers experience in their quest for research productivity in private universities in South-south Nigeria.

Table 7 shows the challenges lecturers experienced in their research productivity in private universities in South-South Nigeria. The lecturers indicated the following as the challenges they face in their research productivity. They include cost of publication-220(95.2%), time pressure and deadline-217(93.9%), students projects/thesis supervision-216(93.5%), delays in the implementation of promotion and entitlement-211(91.3%), excess work load-210(90.9%), attendance to lectures/seminars-206(89.2%), inadequate research personnel for instrumentality and analysis-204(83.3%), preparation of examination results-199(86.1%), participation in institutional administration-194(84.0%), poor research orientation-186(80.5%), and declining research infrastructure (such as computer)-184(79.7%). This implies that the major challenges facing lecturers' research productivity are cost of publication, time pressure and deadline, students' projects/thesis supervision, delays in the implementation of promotion and entitlement, excess work load, and attendance to lectures/seminars.

Testing of the Research Hypothesis

There is no significant relationship between lecturers' use of academic library resources and research productivity in private universities in South-south Nigeria.

From Table 8, Pearson Correlation Coefficient r = (0.225). Since the significant value (Sig.2-tailed) is 0.001 (which is less than 0.05), it can be concluded that there is a significant relationship between lecturers' use of academic library resources and research productivity in private universities in South-South Nigeria. The null hypothesis is therefore rejected implying that an increase in lecturers' use of academic library resources may lead to a corresponding increase in research productivity. This means that lecturers' use of academic library resources influences their research productivity.

Discussion of the Findings

The Extent of Utilization of Academic Library Resources by Lecturers in Private Universities in South--south Nigeria

Findings from the study revealed that the extent of utilization of academic library resources by lecturers in private universities in South-south Nigeria was high. This agrees with the position of Ifijeh (2011) that most lecturers visits the library either to borrow books or use the internet facilities at the library's media center. Majority of the lecturers borrow books from the library and sometimes, the library staff assist the lecturer to borrow books, journals etc. from another university library (Inter-library loan) for research and teaching. This supports Odaro (2010) who said that "academic library is the primary provider of recorded knowledge and historical records for users". Recorded knowledge can either be in print or electronic format such as books, e-books, thesis, conference proceedings, etc; these are primary providers of present and past information which lecturers consult often times in the library. Also, Alebaikan (2010) in his study on blended learning observed that professionals from different disciplines make use of library materials for teaching and research. These include Doctors, Engineers, Biochemists, Lawyers, Pharmacists etc., they use the library resources to enhance their professionalism. It is pertinent to note that the rate at which lecturers make use of the library cannot be overemphasized based on what Emorjorho (2013) opined that, majority of lecturers make use of library resources. Though, not all lecturers go to the library, some see it as a waste of time when you can actually access library resources in your phone or laptop at home but most lecturers use the library resources because, it reduces cost of accessing books, journal and other information resources in your phones or other electronic gadgets.

The Extent of Research Productivity among Lecturers in Private Universities in South-south Nigeria

The finding further revealed that the extent of research productivity of lecturers in private universities publications was on the average. This means that the lecturers published between 1-5 times in 3 years. This is in line with the finding by Tsafe, Busaka and Mohammed (2016) that the most commonly used criteria to measure productivity are: counts of articles written, count of publication pages, citation to published articles and impact--weighted counts of pages where impact is gauged by the citation to the journal in which the publication occurs.

Betsey (2007) further stated that, "citation counting" is a tenuous basis for evaluating lecturers and universities. In the evaluation of the level of research productivity in this study, it was observed that the frequency in research productivity of the lecturers that published books and articles in journal is 1-5 times, this means their productivity level is neither low nor high (average). On the other hand, one may associate low level of research productivity among lecturers in Nigeria to their low level of library resources utilization. By not utilizing library resources much, these lecturers obviously will lack the necessary information for high level publication output. This is because, output is a fundamental product of adequate utilization of library resources but some challenges can hamper the high publication output even if the use of library resources is high.

Challenges in Research Productivity among Lecturers in Private Universities in South--south Nigeria

In this study, it was observed that the major challenges facing lecturers' research productivity are cost of publication, time pressure and deadlines, students 'project/thesis supervision, delays in the implementation of promotion and entitlement, excess work load and attendance to lectures/seminars. This agrees with Omuniyi (2013)'s finding that a low level of productivity by African researchers in international journals is due to the above mentioned challenges. Many articles/scholarly works from Africa are rejected for publication in international journals due to poor quality (Olukoja, 2004). The identified challenges played a role in the average level of research productivity among the respondents in this study, despite their high extent of utilization of library materials.

Relationship between Utilization of Academic Library Resources and Research Productivity among Lecturers' in Private Universities in South-south Nigeria.

Finally, the study revealed that there was significant relationship between utilization of academic library resources for research productivity among lecturers' in private universities in South-South Nigeria. The null hypothesis was rejected, implying that an increase in lecturers' use of academic library resources can lead to a corresponding increase in research productivity. This means that lecturers' use of academic library resources influences their research productivity. The finding corresponds with the one by Chinamasa (2015) that, the availability of library resources are more directly associated with research productivity. Also, in the discovery, Alshahrani, (2013) posited that lecturers will benefit from obtaining relevant and up-to-date information from the internet to perform their duty; improved access to relevant information will reflect an increase in research productivity.

Conclusion

The utilization of academic library resources by lecturers is imperative for attaining high level research productivity. Delay in the implementation of entitlement, cost of publication, time pressure etc have affected the extent of research productivity by lecturers in private Universities in South--south Nigeria. University management should ensure that necessary facilities that enhance high level of utilization of library resources are adequately provided and work pressure should be reduced. This will make lecturers bear up the challenges of research productivity.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations were made:

i. The University Management should increase budget for the acquisition of library resources such as: Books, Journals, Thesis, Periodicals, etc. (both print and electronic copies), which have significant influence on lecturers' research productivity. The availability of up-to-date library resources by University Management will influence lecturers' research productivity.

ii. Work pressure on lecturers should be reduced by employing more academic staff. This would enable lecturers make out time for research.

iii. Research productivity should be encouraged with adequate funding by the University Management. University Management should provide grants to lecturers irrespective of their level and rank. Lecturers' promotion and entitlement should not be delayed.

iv. Libraries and Librarians should embark on awareness and information literacy programs in order to improve on library patronage.

REFERENCES

Ajegbomogun, F., & Fagbola, O. (2015). Electronic resources, access and usage for scholarly research work by postgraduate students. Information and Knowledge, 5(5), 142-149

Alebaikan, R. (2010). Perceptions of Blended Learning in Saudi Universities: A Doctoral Thesis submitted to the University of Exerter, Devon, South West England, United Kingdom.

Alshahrani, S. (2013). The Impact of Website Use on Students' Perception of the Student-Lecturer Relationship within Higher Education in Saudi Arabia: A Doctoral Thesis Submitted to the University of Huddersfield, West Yorkshire England.

Baylor University (2012). Lecturer handbook. Retrieved from www.Baylor.edu/lecturer handbook/index.php?=70690

Betsey, C.L. (2007). Lecturer research productivity. Institutional and personal determinants of lecturer publication. The review of Black Political Economy, 34[1-2]53-85

Chinamasa, E. (2015). Development of Lecturers' Research Skills in Higher Education Institutions in Zimbabwe: A Doctoral Thesis, submitted to the University of South Africa

Emojorho, D. (2013). Utilizing Academic Library by Lecturers and Students for Research Productivity: A Survey of Delta State University, Abraka, Nigeria. Information Technologist, 10(1)

Harvard University (2009). Report of the task force on: university libraries. Harvard University, 3-55. Retrieved from www.provost.harvard.edu/report/library-Task-Force-Report.pdf

Ifijeh, G. (2011). Use of ICT in Reference Services Provision: A Survey of Selected Academic Libraries in Southwest Nigeria. An MLIS project Submitted to the Department of Library and Information Studies, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.

Kannappanavar, B.U., & Manjunatha, K.V. (2010). Library use pattern by the Lecturers of the engineering colleges in Karnataka: A study, International Journal of Library and Information Science, 2(8), 155-163

Mason, J. (2011). Facet Methodology: The case for an Inventive Research Orientation. Methodological Innovations Online, 6(3), 75-92

Odaro, S. (2010). Electronic Security Systems in Academic Libraries in South-West Nigeria: An MLIS project Submitted to the Department of library, Archival and Information Studies, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.

Ofodile, F. & Ifijeh, G. (2013). Current Trends in Library Patronage by Faculties in Nigerian Universities. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 60 (1), 27-35

Okonedo, S. (2015). Research and Publication Productivity of Librarians in Public Universities In Southwest Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1297

Olukoja, A. (2004). The crises of research and Academic Publishing in Nigerian Universities. African Universities in the 21st century. CODESTRIA, pp36

Omoniyi, M.B. (2013). Source of workplace stressors among University lecturers in Southwest Nigeria: Implication for counseling. 1st Annual International Interdisciplinary Conference, ALLC 2013, 24-26 April, Azores, Portugal-proceeding

Tsafe, G., Busaka, B., & Mohammed, C. (2016). Scholarly Publications of Librarians in Universities in Nigeria, 2000-2012: A Bibliometric Analysis. Library Philosophy and Practice. Retrieved from www.digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1394

BY

Blessing Ajelomohie Ifijeh

Department of Library and Information Science

Delta State University, Abraka, Nigeria.

M. O OGBOMO (PhD)

Department of Library and Information Science

Delta State University, Abraka, Nigeria

And

Goodluck Ifijeh

Centre for Learning Resources

Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria

Independent Variable                           Dependent Variable
Utilisation of Academic                        Research
Library resources                              productivity by
by private University Lecturers                Lecturers in private
                                               Universities

Library Resources                   High/Low   Number of Journal
                                               articles published
Borrow books                          High     in referred and non-
Reference service                     High     referred journals.
Magazine/Newspaper                    High     Number of Books
Journal/E-Journal                     High     published.
Inter-library loan                    High     The number of Book
Thesis                                High     reviews.
Conference proceedings                High     The number of
Government publications               High     conference
Projects, Thesis, Dissertation,       High     presentations.
Map, Year Books, Directories,         High     Number of grants
Dictionaries, Encyclopedia,           High     obtained
Atlases, Gazetteers.                  High

Table 1: Study population of University Lecturers

S/N    Name of Universities                 Population   Sampled size

1.     Igbinedion University Okada, Edo        217            43
       state

2.     Benson Idahosa University Benin         204            41
       city Edo state

3.     Novena University Ogume, Delta          193            39
       State

4.     Obong University Obong Ntak, Akwa       238            48
       Ibom State

5.     Rhema University Obeama-Asa,            236            47
       Cross River state

6.     Ritma University, Ikot Ekpene,          135            27
       Akwa Ibom State

7.     Wellspring University Evbuobanosa       176            35
       Edo state

8.     Western Delta University Oghara         207            41
       Delta state

9.     Arthur Jarvis Akpabuyo                  235            47
       University, Calabar, Cross Rivers

       TOTAL                                   1841          368

Table 2: Gender of the Respondent

Gender         Frequency   Percentage (%)

Male              151           65.4
Female            80            34.6
Total             231          100.0

Table 3: Educational Qualification of the Respondents

Educational Qualification      Frequency   Percentage (%)

B.Sc/Equivalent                    6            2.6
M.Sc./Equivalent                  118           51.1
PhD.                              107           46.3
Total                             231          100.0

Table 4: Academic Status of the Respondents

Academic Status        Frequency   Percentage (%)

Professor                 14            6.1
Associate professor       25            10.8
Senior lecturer           18            7.8
Lecturer I                57            24.7
Lecturer II               50            21.6
Assistant lecturer        67            29.0
Total                     231          100.0

Table 5: Extent of Utilization of Academic Library Resources

Library Resources                Mean

Books                            3.66
Year book                        3.42
E-book                           3.50
Magazine/Newspaper               3.58
Journal                          3.63
Dictionaries                     3.51
Electronic database              3.52
E-Dictionary                     3.46
E-Journal                        3.44
Government publication           3.03
E-map                            3.50
Online Public Access Catalog     3.19
Encyclopedia                     3.58
Library catalog                  3.09
CD-ROM database                  3.12
Atlases, Gazettes, Map           2.97

Aggregate Mean =                 3.41

Criterion Mean =                 2.50

Table 6: Extent of Lecturers' Research productivity

   Research Productivity      1-5 times            6-10 times

                              Frequency   %        Frequency   %

Scholarly books you           135         58.4     21          9.1
authored

Scholarly books coauthored    126         54.5     27          11.7

Scholarly books you edited    108         46.8     50          21.6

Scholarly books you           98          42.4     61          26.4
co-edited

Articles published in an      140         60.6     46          19.9
academic book

Articles published in a       121         52.4     61          26.4
journal

Paper presented at a          115         49.8     55          23.8
scholarly conference

Artistic work performed or    134         58.0     48          20.8
exhibited

Video or film produced        84          36.4     14          6.1

Research report/monograph     174         75.3     30          13.0
written for a funded
project

Computer program written      83          35.9     60          26.0
for public use

Patent secured on a           104         45.0     53          22.9
process or invention

Professional article          136         58.9     51          22.1
written for a newspaper or
magazine

   Research Productivity      11-15 times          Above 15 times

                              Frequency   %        Frequency   %

Scholarly books you           --          --       6           2.6
authored

Scholarly books coauthored    6           2.6      3           1.3

Scholarly books you edited    38          16.5     12          5.2

Scholarly books you           42          18.2     18          7.8
co-edited

Articles published in an      25          10.8     5           2.2
academic book

Articles published in a       34          14.7     8           3.5
journal

Paper presented at a          36          15.6     14          6.1
scholarly conference

Artistic work performed or    16          6.9      4           1.7
exhibited

Video or film produced        8           3.5      1           0.4

Research report/monograph     8           3.5      1           0.4
written for a funded
project

Computer program written      13          5.6      5           2.2
for public use

Patent secured on a           16          6.9      3           1.3
process or invention

Professional article          31          13.4     3           1.3
written for a newspaper or
magazine

Table 7: Challenges Facing Lecturers' Research productivity

                                Agree             Disagree

         Challenges             No.      %        No.      %

Declining research              184      79.7     47       20.3
infrastructure (such as
computer)

Delays in the                   211      91.3     20       8.7
implementation of promotion
and entitlement

Time pressure and deadline      217      93.9     14       6.1

Inadequate research             204      88.3     27       11.7
personnel for
instrumentality and
analysis

work load                       210      90.9     21       9.1

Preparation of examination      199      86.1     32       13.9
results

Attendance to                   206      89.2     25       10.8
lectures/seminars

Participation in                194      84.0     37       16.0
institutional
administration

Students projects/thesis        216      93.5     15       6.5
supervision

Cost of publication             220      95.2     11       4.8

Poor research orientation       186      80.5     45       19.5

Table 8: Relationship between lecturers' use of academic library
resources and research productivity

                                        Extent of         Level of
                                      utilization of     lecturers'
                                     academic library     research
                                        resources       productivity

Extent of      Pearson Correlation                 1        .225 **
utilization    Sig. (2-tailed)                                 .001
of academic    N                                 231            231
library
resources

Level of       Pearson Correlation           .225 **              1
lecturers'     Sig. (2-tailed)                  .001
research       N                                 231            231
productivity