400 likes | 792 Views
Outline. TAM overview and evolutionTAM metaanalysesParadigms and scientific progressCurrent TAM impasseGaps and limitations in TAM researchPromising directions for TAM researchCognitive Neuroscience and Neuro IS. TAM Overview. Problem StatementHigh failure rate of IS implementations1980
E N D
1. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Research Progress, Current Controversies, and Emerging Paradigms Fred Davis
Walton College of Business
University of Arkansas
December 8, 2007
Workshop on HCI Research in MIS
2. Outline TAM overview and evolution
TAM metaanalyses
Paradigms and scientific progress
Current TAM impasse
Gaps and limitations in TAM++ research
Promising directions for TAM research
Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuro – IS
3. TAM Overview Problem Statement
High failure rate of IS implementations
1980’s IS Implementation Research
Mixed and inconclusive
Keen 1980 “reference disciplines and cumulative tradition”
TAM
Theoretical foundations
Psychometrically validated measures
IT Design Characteristics
Functionality
User Interface
4. Technology Acceptance Model(TAM) Usage determined by intention which in turn is determined by U and EOU.
Define U and EOU.
Explain link between EOU and U.
Role of external variables.Usage determined by intention which in turn is determined by U and EOU.
Define U and EOU.
Explain link between EOU and U.
Role of external variables.
5. Summary of Key Findings from Early TAM Research Perceived usefulness is key determinant of acceptance
Perceived ease of use is a secondary determinant (direct and indirect effect on BI)
TAM compares favorably with other models
TAM is robust across populations, settings, technologies
TAM has been APPLIED a lot, extended very little.TAM has been APPLIED a lot, extended very little.
6. TAM Evolution 1990’s Proliferation
Consolidation
1999 antecedents of EOU
2000 antecedents of Usefulness
2003 Unified Theory (UTAUT)
Metaanalyses (2003-2007)
Citations
1989 MISQ cited 900+ times
1989 Mgt Sci cited 750+ times
TAM in Workshop on HCI in MIS, ICIS
7. Process expectancy--has to do with the effort.
Much more reliant on direct experience.
Individuals bring prior information to setting--classical case of anchoring and adjustment; human decision-making is based on anchoring and adjustment.Process expectancy--has to do with the effort.
Much more reliant on direct experience.
Individuals bring prior information to setting--classical case of anchoring and adjustment; human decision-making is based on anchoring and adjustment.
8. Anchors are individual difference variables.
Adjustments are system-specific constructs.
Interesting finding: anchors always important (as long as expectations are realistic).
Role of PEC: general to system-specific.
Anchors are individual difference variables.
Adjustments are system-specific constructs.
Interesting finding: anchors always important (as long as expectations are realistic).
Role of PEC: general to system-specific.
9. Venkatesh & Davis 2000 Mgt SciDeterminants of Usefulness Use-Performance contingency; outcome expectancy--what results do I get by using the system?
Influence of others.
Cognitive underpinnings related to the job and the system.
Ability to assess without much experience.Use-Performance contingency; outcome expectancy--what results do I get by using the system?
Influence of others.
Cognitive underpinnings related to the job and the system.
Ability to assess without much experience.
10. Social Influence Processes A--compliance.
B--internalization.
C--identification.A--compliance.
B--internalization.
C--identification.
11. Cognitive Instrumental Processes How the system works in the context of one’s job?How the system works in the context of one’s job?
12. Venkatesh et al 2003 MISQUnified Model
13. Different Types of Technology Individual productivity tools
Groupware
Enterprise systems
E-Commerce
Workflow
Mobile technology
14. King & He 2006 I&M Meta-analysis of 88 studies
“The results show TAM to be a valid and robust model that has been widely used, but which potentially has wider applicability.”
Moderators
User types
Usage types
15. Jeyaraj, et al. 2006 JIT Metaanalysis of 99 adoption studies
48 individual level studies
51 organizational level studies
Best individual adoption predictors
Perceived Usefulness
Top Management Support
Computer Experience
User Support
Behavioral Intention
Best organizational adoption predictions
Top Management Support
External Pressure
Professionalism of IS unit
External Information Sources
Top Management Support was main linkage between individual and organizational IT adoption
Identify 10 areas for further exploration
16. Schepers & Wetzels 2007 I&M Metaanalysis of 63 TAM studies
Focused on role of subjective norm
Confirmed original TAM relationships
Large effect sizes of SN
On usefulness (internalization)
On intention (compliance)
17. Sun & Zhang 2006 IJHCS Role of moderating factors in technology acceptance
Low explanatory power of TAM models (<60%)
Inconsistent relationships found
69 studies reviewed
Ten moderating factors in three groups
Organizational factors (voluntariness, nature of task and profession)
Technology factors (complexity, purpose, individual vs. group)
Individual factors (gender, intellect, experience, age, culture)
Moderators increase explanatory power
18. Sabherwal et al 2006 Mgt Sci Individual and organizational determinants
Metaanalysis of 121 studies
Integrated, emergent model
Top mgmt support
Facilitating conditions
User experience, attitude, training, participation
System Quality
Perceived usefulness
User satisfaction
System use
Consistent with prior research on technology adoption and use
19. Scientific Progress
Every scientific truth goes through three states:
first, people say it conflicts with the Bible;
next, they say it has been discovered before
lastly, they say they always believed it.
Louis Agassiz
20. Nature of Scientific Progress Role of Paradigms (e.g., Kuhn 1962)
Container (how much can it hold)
Vehicle (how far can it go? How fast?)
Advantage – enables research progress
Disadvantage – constrains research progress
Theory can obstruct research progress
Selective filter, lens
Confirmation bias
Revolution vs. Evolution
Parsimony, Power, Generality
21. TAM Research Impasse JAIS Special Issue April 2007
Lucas, Swanson, & Zmud “Implementation…”
Benbasat & Barki “Quo Vadis, TAM?”
Proliferation of ad hoc incremental extensions with no overarching conceptual structure
Successive studies that provide diminishing marginal contributions
IS researchers’ attention being overly restricted to minor extensions of TAM
22. “Restlessness and discontent are the first necessities of progress. “
Thomas Edison
23. Recommended Directions for TAM Benbasat & Barki
Go back to TRA/TPB
Better conceptualization of system usage
Longitudinal, multi-stage models
Impact of IT design characteristics
Objective usefulness
Bagozzi
Goal self-regulation
Group, cultural, social aspects
Emotions
24. Return to TRA/TPB? Benbasat &Barki 2007 JAIS advocate this
Claim that UTAUT does this
Provides structure for expanding TAM
Pavlou & Fygenson 2006 MISQ
B2C top beliefs elicited
Usefulness, ease of use, trust
TPB omits direct influence of beliefs on BI
Bagozzi 2007 JAIS
TPB has many same limitations as TAM
25. Usage Reconceptualizations Beyond frequency & duration
Burton-Jones & Straub 2006 ISR
User-System-Task
Cognitive Absorption
Deep structure usage (task-relevant feature use)
Objective performance
Barki et al 2007 ISR
Task-technology-individual
Hierarchical goal-oriented actions
Task-technology adaption
Individual adaption
26. Three Key Limitations of TAM++ Paradigm Static, cross-sectional, snapshot-oriented
Individual level of analysis
Limited span across causal chain
Emphasis on controlled, conscious processing
Exclusion of automatic processing
Overlook multitasking
Limited account of social processes
Knowledge collaboration
Collective processes
27. Longer span across causal chain:Wixom & Todd 2005 ISR Theoretical Integration of User Satisfaction and Technology Acceptance
Bridge from design and implementation of system characteristics (a strength of the user satisfaction literature) to prediction of usage (a strength of the TAM literature)
28. Venkatesh 2006 Dec Sci Business process change; process standards
Business process characteristics
Interventions (e.g., simulation based training)
Supply-chain technologies
Multi-stakeholder technologies
Interventions to reduce goal incongruence and information assymetry
Services
Service quality, failure, recovery
Service design characteristics
29. Major Theoretical Extensions of TAM Principal-Agent Theory
Ba, et al. 2001 Mgt Sci; Bhattacherjee 1998 Dec Sci; Pavlou et al 2007
Multi-level studies of adoption
Lapointe & Rivard 2005 MISQ, 2007 ISR; Frambach & Schillewaert 2002 J. Bus Res; Gopalakrishnan, et al. IEEE TEM
Longitudinal multi-stage modeling
Kim et al 2006 Mgt Sci
30. Devaraj & Kohli 2005 Mgt Sci Performance Impacts of Information Technology: Is Actual Usage the Missing Link?
“actual usage” may be a key variable in explaining the impact of technology on performance…omittion of this variable may be a missing ling in IT payoff analyses
31. Automaticity and Multitasking TAM++ models presume conscious processing
Conscious intentions and beliefs
Theory of Reasoned Action/Planned Behavior
Cognitive skill acquisition
Habit versus intention
Intention-behavior relationship weakens with habit
Habits toward previous behavior can undermine intentions to adopt new behavior
32. Dual Processing and Economics Daniel Kahneman 2002
Two modes of cognitive processing
System 1 (intuition) – fast, automatic, effortless, associative, difficult to modify
System 2 (reasoning) – slower, serial, effortful, deliberately controlled, rule-governed, flexible
Vernon Smith 2002
“human activity is diffused and dominated by unconscious, autonomic, neuropsychological systems that enable people to function effectively without calling upon the brain’s scarcest resource – attentional and reasoning circuitry”
33. Automaticity in IS Research Habit in IS Continuance
Mindfulness-Mindlessness Paradox
Butler & Gray 2006 MISQ
Routine-based reliability
Mindfulness-based reliability
Individual and collective mindfulness
34. Dual-Task Interference Primary task demands most attention
Secondary task can be performed with limited attention
Bottlenecks, working memory load
Task and tool as dual tasks
Electronic brainstorming
Heninger et al 2006 ISR
35. Neuro-IS Dimoka, Pavlou, & Davis 2007 ICIS
“The potential of cognitive neuroscience for IS Research”
Neural underpinnings of cognitive processes
Brain scanning (fMRI, etc.)
Many recent discoveries
Decision making, risk, uncertainty
Trust, cooperation, competition
Goal self-regulation
Automaticity and multitasking
36. Major Areas of the Brain
37. Brain Areas Activated for Focal Processes
38. Neuro-IS and TAM++ Research Neural correlates of perceived usefulness and ease of use
Social influence processes and “theory of mind”
Automaticity and habit
Goal Self-regulation
Emotional processes
39. Genetic Epistemology and Piaget’s Philosophy of Science Piaget (vs. Kuhn) on Scientific Progress
J.Y. Tsou 2006 Theory and Research
Continuity vs. discontinuity
Series of successive approximations to truth
Equilibration
Assimilation and accommodation of existing knowledge structures (reorganization)
Progress as integrative, cumulative process
40. Summary Reaching the limits of TAM++ paradigm
Need to identify and remove limitations of TAM++ paradigm
Emphasize impact of IT design characteristics
Integrate across levels of analysis
From static to dynamic analyses of complex adoption processes
Neuro-IS
Build upon and go beyond accumulated knowledge
41. “However much our knowledge of human behavior falls short of our need for such knowledge, still it is enormous”
Herbert Simon 1978