Individual Adoption of Convergent Mobile Technologies In Italy
The present study integrates the technology acceptance and convergence streams of research to develop and test a model of individual adoption of convergent mobile technologies. Adopting structural equation modeling, we hypothesize that relative advantage, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions affect directly individual attitude and, indirectly the intention to use convergent mobile technologies. The model explains a highly significant 53.2% of the variance for individual attitude, while individual attitude accounts for 33.9% of the variance in behavioral intention.
KeywordsBehavioral Intention Relative Advantage Technology Adoption Mobile Technology Technology Acceptance Model
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Google Scholar
- 4.Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model for longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46, 186-204 Google Scholar
- 6.Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (fifth edition). New York: The Free Press Google Scholar
- 7.Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., and Davis, F.D. (2003). User acceptance of infor-mation technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478 Google Scholar
- 9.Tornatzky, L.G. and Klein, K.J. (1982). Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption im-plementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 29 (1),28-44 Google Scholar
- 14.Agarwal, R. (2000). Individual acceptance of information technologies. In R. W. Zmud (Ed.), Framing the domains of IT management: Projecting the future from the past (pp. 85-104). Cincinnati: Pinnaflex Educational Resources Google Scholar
- 17.Lewis, W., Agarwal, R., and Sambamurthy, V. (2003). Sources of influence on beliefs about information technology use: An empirical study of knowledge workers. MIS Quarterly, 27(4),657-678Google Scholar
- 18.Gallivan, M.J., Spitler, V.K., and Koufaris, M. (2005). Does information technology training really matter? A social information processing analysis of coworkers’ influence on IT usage in the workplace. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(1), 153-192 Google Scholar
- 20.Brown, S.A. and Venkatesh, V. (2005). Model of Adoption of Technology in Households: A Baseline Model Test and Extension Incorporating Household Life Cycle. MIS Quarterly, 29 (3),399-426Google Scholar
- 23.Ahuja, M.K. and Thatcher, J.B. (2005). Moving beyond intentions and toward the theory of trying: Effects of work environment and gender on post-adoption information technology use. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 427-459 Google Scholar
- 25.Chin, W. (1998). Issues and opinions on structural equation modeling. MIS Quarterly, 22(1),7-10Google Scholar