1

B004020003
USER ACCEPTANCE OF INFO B004020007
B004020013
RMATION TECHNOLOGY: TO B004020019

WARD A UNIFIED VIEW B004020036

B004020047
OUTLINE
a. Abstract
b. Empirical Comparison of the Eight
Models
c. Formulation of the Unified Theory of
Acceptance and Use of Technology
d. Empirical Validation of UTAUT

2
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT
(1) Review user acceptance literature and disc
uss eight prominent model
1. the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA)
2. the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
3. the Motivational Model (MM)
4. the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)
5. a model Combining the Technology Acceptance M
odel and the Theory of Planned Behavior (C-TAM-T
PB)
6. the Model of PC Utilization (MPCU)
7. the Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT)
8. the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) 4
ABSTRACT
(2) Empirically compare the eight model and their
extensions
1. 17 ~ 53% of the variance in user intention
2. Within-subjects, longitudinal validation and comparison
3. A baseline assessment of the relative explanatory

5
ABSTRACT
(3) Formulate a unified model that integrates
elements across the eight models
four core determinants of intention and usage, and f
our moderators of key relationship

6
ABSTRACT
(4) Empirically validate the unified model
1. UTAUT outperforms each of the eight original models
2. UTAUT is cross-validated using data from two new org
anization

7
INTRODUCTION
a. Since the 1980s, 50 percent investment in or
ganizations used for IT.
b. Technologies to improve productivity, they m
ust be accepted and used by employees in o
rganizations.
c. Research in this area roots in IS, psychology,
and sociology.
d. Researchers are confronted with a choice a
mong a multitude of models.
8
DESCRIPTION OF MODELS
AND CONSTRUCT
a. IS research has long studied how and w
hy individuals adopt new information te
chnologies.
b. There have been several streams of rese
arch
One stream of research focuses on individual ac
ceptance of technology about intention or usage.
Other stream have focused on implementation s
uccess at the organizational level and task-techn
ology fit. 9
DESCRIPTION OF MODELS
AND CONSTRUCT
Figure 1 presents the basic conceptual explainin
g individual acceptance of information technolo
gy that forms the basis of this research.

Figure 1. Basic Concept Underlying User

Acceptance Models
10
TABLE 1. THEORY OF
REASONED ACTION (TRA)
Model Core Definitions
Constructs
Attitude individuals positive or negative
Toward feelings about performing the
Theory of Behavior target behavior
Reasoned the persons perception that most
Action (TRA) Subjective people who are important to him
Norm think he should or should not
perform the behavior in question

11
TABLE 1. TECHNOLOGY
ACCEPTANCE MODEL
(TAM)
Model Core Definitions
Constructs
the degree to which a person
Perceived believes that using a particular
Usefulness system would enhance job
Technology performance
Acceptance the degree to which a person
Perceived
Model (TAM) believes that using a particular
Ease of Use
system would be free of effort
Subjective Adapted from TRA/TPB. Included in
Norm TAM2 only

12
TABLE 1. TECHNOLOGY
ACCEPTANCE MODEL
(TAM)

13
 TABLE 1. TECHNOLOGY
ACCEPTANCE MODEL
2(TAM2)
Social Influence Processes

Cognitive Instrumental Processes

14
TABLE 1. MOTIVATIONAL
MODEL (MM)
Model Core Definitions
Constructs
The perception that users want to
perform an activity because it is
perceived to be instrumental in
Extrinsic
achieving valued outcomes that
Motivation
are distinct from the activity itself,
Motivational such as improved job performance,
Model (MM) pay, or promotions
The perception that users want to
perform an activity for no
Intrinsic
apparent reinforcement other than
Motivation
the process of performing the
activity per se

15
TABLE 1. THEORY OF
PLANNED BEHAVIOR
(TPB)
Model Core Definitions
Constructs
Attitude Adapted from TRA
Toward
Behavior
Theory of Subjective Adapted from TRA
Planned Norm
Behavior the perceived ease or difficulty of
(TPB) Perceived performing the behavior
Behavioral In context of IS research,
Control perceptions of internal and
external constraints on behavior

16
TABLE 1. THEORY OF
PLANNED BEHAVIOR (TPB)

17
TABLE 1. C-TAM-TPB
Model Core Definitions
Constructs
Attitude Adapted from TRA/TPB
Toward
Behavior
Combined Subjective Adapted from TRA/TPB
TAM and TPB Norm
(C-TAM-TPB) Perceived Adapted from TRA/TPB
Behavioral
Control
Perceived Adapted from TAM
Usefulness

18
TABLE 1. C-TAM-TPB

19
TABLE 1.MODEL OF PC
UTILIZATION (MPCU)
Model Core Definitions
Constructs
the extent to which an individual
believes that using [a technology]
Job-fit
can enhance the performance of
Model of PC his or her job
Utilization the degree to which an innovation
(MPCU) Complexity is perceived as relatively difficult to
understand and use
Long-term Outcomes that have a pay-off in
Consequenc the future
es

20
TABLE 1.MODEL OF PC
UTILIZATION (MPCU)
Model Core Definitions
Constructs
feelings of joy, elation, or pleasure,
Affect or depression, disgust, displeasure,
Towards Use or hate associated by an individual
with a particular act
the individuals internalization of
Model of PC
the reference groups subjective
Utilization
Social culture
(MPCU)
Factors specific interpersonal agreements
that the individual has made with
others, in specific social situations
Objective factors in the
Facilitating
environment that observers agree 21
Conditions
make an act easy to accomplish
TABLE 1. INNOVATION
DIFFUSION THEORY (IDT)
Model Core Definitions
Constructs
Innovation Relative the degree to which an innovation
Diffusion Advantage is perceived as being better than
Theory (IDT) its precursor
Ease of Use the degree to which an innovation
is perceived as being difficult to
use
Image The degree to which use of an
innovation is perceived to enhance
ones image or status in ones
social system

22
TABLE 1. INNOVATION
DIFFUSION THEORY (IDT)
Model Core Definitions
Constructs
Innovation Visibility The degree to which one can see
Diffusion others using the system in the
Theory (IDT) organization
Compatibility the degree to which an innovation
is perceived as being consistent
with the existing values, needs,
and past experiences of potential
adopters
Results the tangibility of the results of
Demonstrabil using the innovation, including
ity their observability and
communicability
Voluntariness the degree to which use of the
of Use innovation is perceived as being 23
INNOVATION DIFFUSION
THEORY STRUCTURE

24
SOCIAL COGNITIVE
THEORY STRUCTURE

25
TABLE 1. SOCIAL COGNIT
IVE THEORY (SCT)
Model Core Definitions
Constructs
Outcome The performance-related
Expectations consequences of the behavior.
Specifically, job-related outcomes
Performance
Outcome The personal consequences of the
Expectations behavior. Specifically, individual
Social esteem and sense of
Cognitive Personal accomplishment
Theory (SCT) Judgment of ones ability to use a
Self-efficacy technology to accomplish a
particular job or task.
26
An individuals liking for a
Affect
particular behavior
Evoking anxious or emotional
KEY MODERATING VARIABL
ES
1. Experience
2. Voluntariness
3. Gender
4. Age

27
TABLE 2. ROLE OF MODERA
TORS IN EXISTING MODELS
Model Experience Voluntariness Gender Age
More
experience Less voluntary
TRA Attitude N/A N/A
Subjective norm
Subjective norm

Men
Perceived usefulness
Within TAM2:
More Mandatory and Women
TAM
experience limited Perceived ease of use
(and N/A
experience
TAM2) Women in the early
Ease of use
Subjective norm stages of
experience
Subjective norm
MM N/A N/A N/A N/A

28
TABLE 2. ROLE OF MODERA
TORS IN EXISTING MODELS
Voluntarin
Model Experience
ess Gender Age

Men Younger
Attitude workers
Less Women in the Attitude
More Older workers
voluntary early
TPB experience Perceived
Subjective norm
stages of behavioral
Subjective experience
control
norm Subjective norm Older women
Perceived
Subjective norm
behavioral control

More
experience
Perceived
Combin usefulness
ed Attitude toward
behavior N/A N/A N/A
TAM-
Perceived
TPB behavioral control 29
TABLE 2. ROLE OF MODERA
TORS IN EXISTING MODELS
Gend Ag
Model Experience Voluntariness
er e
Less experience
Complexity
Affect toward use
MPCU Social factors N/A N/A N/A
Facilitating conditions
More experience
Long-term consequences
For adoption (no/low
experience) Voluntariness was
Relative advantage, Ease of use, not tested as a
Trialability, Results moderator, but was
IDT demonstrability and Visibility
N/A N/A
shown to have a
For usage (greater direct effect on
experience) Intention
Relative advantage and image
SCT N/A N/A N/A N/A
30
 TABLE 3. REVIEW OF PRIOR MODEL COMPARISONS
Model Theorie Context of Participa Newness Number of Cross- Findings
Comparis s/ Study nts of Points of Sectional
on Models (Incl.Technol Technolo Measurem or
Studies Compar ogy) gy ent Longitudi
ed Studied nal
Analysis
Davis et TRA, Within- 107 new to the 214 Cross- The
al. TAM subjects students technology weeks sectional variance in
(1989) intention and apart intention
use of a word and use
processor TRA 32% ,
26%
TAM 47% ,
51%
Mathieson TAM, Between- 262 Some 1 Cross- The
(1991) TPB subjects students familiarity sectional variance in
intention to with the intention
use a technology TAM 70%
spreadsheet TPB 62%
and calculator
Taylor and TAM, Within- 786 Many For a three- Cross- The
Todd TPB/DTP subjects students students month sectional variance in
(1995b) B intention to were period intention
use a already TAM 52%
computing familiar TPB 57%
resource with the DTPB 60%
center center
Plouffe et TAM, IDT Within- 176 Survey 1 Cross- The
al. subjects merchants administer sectional variance in
31
(2001) intention to ed intention
 TABLE 3. REVIEW OF PRIOR MODEL COMPARISONS
Model Theorie Context of Participa Newness Number of Cross- Findings
Comparis s/ Study nts of Points of Sectional
on Models (Incl.Technol Technolo Measurem or
Studies Compar ogy) gy ent Longitudi
ed Studied nal
Analysis
Davis et TRA, Within- 107 new to the 214 Cross- The
al. TAM subjects students technology weeks sectional variance in
(1989) intention and apart intention
use of a word and use
processor TRA 32% ,
26%
TAM 47% ,
51%
Mathieson TAM, Between- 262 Some 1 Cross- The
(1991) TPB subjects students familiarity sectional variance in
intention to with the intention
use a technology TAM 70%
spreadsheet TPB 62%
and calculator
Taylor and TAM, Within- 786 Many For a three- Cross- The
Todd TPB/DTP subjects students students month sectional variance in
(1995b) B intention to were period intention
use a already TAM 52%
computing familiar TPB 57%
resource with the DTPB 60%
center center
Plouffe et TAM, IDT Within- 176 Survey 1 Cross- The
al. subjects merchants administer sectional variance in
32
(2001) intention to ed intention
PRIOR MODEL TESTS AND
MODEL COMPARISONS
Five limitations of these prior model tests and co
mparisons:
1. Technology studied
Prior : simple, individual-oriented IT
UTAUT : complex, organizational IT, managerial concern
2. Participants
Prior : most are students
UTAUT : employees in organizations
3. Timing of measurement
Prior : after the participants acceptance or rejection decision
UTAUT : from the initial introduction to stages of greater experience
33
PRIOR MODEL TESTS AND
MODEL COMPARISONS
4. Nature of measurement
Prior : cross-sectional and/or between-subjects compariso
ns
UTAUT : various stages of experience with a new technolo
gy and compares all models on all participants

5. Voluntary vs. mandatory contexts

Prior : voluntary usage contexts
UTAUT : both voluntary and mandatory contexts

34
EMPIRICAL COMPARISON
Settings and Participan
ts

OF THE EIGHT MODELS

Measurement
Results

35
SETTINGS AND
PARTICIPANTS
We sampled for heterogeneity across :
1. technologies
2. organizations
3. industries
4. business functions

And nature of use :

voluntary vs. mandatory

36
SETTINGS AND
PARTICIPANTS

37
SETTINGS AND
PARTICIPANTS
Measuring constructs from all eight models was
administered at three different points in time:
T1:post-training
T2:one month after implementation
T3:three month after implementation

38
MEASUREMENT
A questionnaire was created with items validate
d in prior research.
Behavioral intention to use the system was mea
sured using a three-item scale.
Seven point scales were used for all of the afore
mentioned constructs measurement.
Actual usage behavior was measured as duratio
n of use via system logs.

39
RESULTS - USING PARTIAL L
EAST SQUARES (PLS)

40
RESULTS - USING PARTIAL L
EAST SQUARES (PLS)
Key findings :
1. Variance in intention explained ranging from 17 pe
rcent to 42 percent.
2. Constructs related to social influence were more si
gnificant in the Mandatory settings .
3. Some determinants going from significant to nonsi
gnificant with increasing experience.

41
RESULTS - USING PARTIAL L
EAST SQUARES (PLS)
The data were pooled across studies and time perio
ds.
1. Voluntariness
2. Gender
3. Age
4. Experience
Pooling the data across the three points of measure
ment
Time1+Time2+Time3 = 215x3= 645(N)

42
RESULTS - USING PARTIAL L
EAST SQUARES (PLS)
There is an increase
in the variance expl
ained in the case of
TAM2

43
RESULTS - USING PARTIAL L
EAST SQUARES (PLS)
1. With the exception of MM and SCT, the pre
dictive validity of the models increased afte
r including the moderating variables.

2. The extensions to the various models mostl

y enhance the predictive validity of the vari
ous models beyond the original specificatio
ns.

44
RESULTS - USING PARTIAL L
EAST SQUARES (PLS)
1. There was at least one construct that was sig
nificant in all time periods.
2. Several other constructs were initially signific
ant, but then became nonsignificant over tim
e.
3. The voluntary vs. mandatory context did have
an influence on the significance of constructs
related to social influence
4. Unified theory of acceptance and use of tech
nology(UTAUT) 45
FORMULATION OF THE UNIFIED
THEORY OF ACCEPTANCE AND UTAUT

USE OF TECHNOLOGY
THE UTAUT RESEARCH
MODEL

47
UTAUT RESEARCH MODEL

48
PERFORMANCE EXPECTANC
Y
Definition
The degree to which an individual believes that using t
he system will help him or her to attain gains in job pe
rformance.
Construct Source Model
Perceived TAM/TAM2/C-TAM-
Usefulness TPB
Extrinsic Motivation MM
Job-fit MPCU
Relative Advantage IDT
Outcome
SCT 49
Expectations
TABLE 9. FIVE CONSTRUCTS
OF PERFORMANCE
EXPECTANCY

50
PERFORMANCE EXPECTANC
Y
It has two moderating variables with
gender and age.
Gender:
It has a more significant effect on men.
Age:
Stronger for Younger workers.

51
 PERFORMANCE EXPECTANC
Y
H1 :
The influence of performance expectancy on behavioral intentio
n will be
Moderated by
1. Gender
2. Age

Such that the effect will be stronger for

3. men
4. particularly younger men

52
EFFORT EXPECTANCY
Definition
The degree of ease of associated with the use of sy
stem

Construct Source Model

Perceived ease of
TAM/TAM2
use
Complexity MPCU
Ease of use IDT

53
TABLE 10. THREE OF EFFOR
T EXPECTANCY

54
EFFORT EXPECTANCY
It has three moderating variables with
gender, age and experience.
Gender:
It has a more significant effect on women.
Age:
It is significant by older worker.
Experience:
Person has few experience with system.

55
EFFORT EXPECTANCY
H2 :
The influence of effort expectancy on behavioral intention wi
ll be
Moderated by
1. Gender
2. Age
3. Experience

Such that the effect will be stronger for

4. women
5. particularly older workers
6. particularly at the early stages of experience

56
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Definition :
The degree to which an individual perceives that import
ant others believe he or she should use the new system.

Construct Source Model

TRA, TAM2, TPB/DTPB

Subjective Norm
and C-TAM-TPB

Social Factors MPCU

Image IDT

57
58
SOCIAL INFLUENCE

T1 T2 T3

In Voluntary Nonsignifica Nonsignifica Nonsignifica

Settings nt nt nt

In
Nonsignifica
Mandatory Significant Significant
nt
Settings
Experience and Voluntariness of use59are

moderating variables.
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Gender :
Women tend to be more salient when forming an intension to
use technology, with the effect declining with experience.
Age :
Older workers are more likely to place increased salience on s
ocial influences, with the effect declining with experience.

Gender and Age are moderating variables

61
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
H3 :
The influence of social influence on behavioral intention will
be
Moderated by
1. Gender
2. Age
3. Voluntariness
4. Experience

Such that the effect will be stronger for

5. women
6. particularly older women
7. particularly in mandatory settings in the early stages of experienc
e 62
FACILITATING CONDITIONS
Definition :
The degree to which an individual believes that an organiza
tional and technical infrastructure exists to support use of
the system.

Construct Source Model

Perceived behavioral
TPB/DTPB, C-TAM-TPB
control
Facilitating conditions MPCU
Compatibility IDT

63
64
FACILITATING CONDITIONS
Perceived behavioral control
T1 T2 T3
In
Nonsignific Nonsignific
Voluntary Significant
ant ant
Settings
In
Nonsignific Nonsignific
Mandator Significant
ant ant
y Settings

65
FACILITATING CONDITIONS
When both performance expectancy constructs
and effort expectancy constructs are present fa
cilitating conditions becomes non-significant in
predicting intention.

H4a:
Facilitating conditions will not have a significant influence on
behavioral intention.

66
FACILITATING CONDITIONS
Experience :
The effect will be stronger with increasing experience.

Age :
Older workers attach more importance to receiving help and
assistance on the job.

Experience and Age are moderating varia

bles
67
FACILITATING CONDITIONS
H4b :
The influence of facilitating conditions on usage will be
Moderated by
1. Age
2. Experience

Such that the effect will be stronger for

3. Older workers
4. particularly with increasing experience

68
CONSTRUCTS THEORIZED NOT
TO BE DIRECT DETERMINANTS
OF INTENTION
1. Self-efficacy
2. Anxiety
3. Attitude toward using technology

69
SELF-EFFICACY AND ANXIET
Y
1. Self-efficacy and anxiety have been modeled as
indirect determinants of intention fully mediate
d by perceived ease of use

2. We expect self-efficacy and anxiety to behave si

milarly, that is , to be distinct from effort expect
ancy and to have no direct effect on intention a
bove and beyond effort expectancy

70
SELF-EFFICACY AND ANXIET
Y
H5a:
Computer self-efficacy will not have a significant influence o
n behavioral intention.

H5b:
Computer anxiety will not have a significant influence on be
havioral intention.

71
ATTITUDE TOWARD USING
TECHNOLOGY
Definition :
An individuals overall affective reaction to using a system.

Construct Source Model

Attitude toward TRA,TPB/DTPB, C-
behavior TAM-TPB
Intrinsic motivation MM
Affect toward use MPCU
Affect SCT

72
73
ATTITUDE TOWARD USING
TECHNOLOGY

T1 T2 T3
TRA,
TPB/DTPB, Significant Significant Significant
MM

TAM-TPB, Nonsignific Nonsignific Nonsignific

MPCU, SCT ant ant ant

74
ATTITUDE TOWARD USING
TECHNOLOGY
We expect strong relationships in UTAUT between per
formance expectancy and intention, and between eff
ort expectancy and intention
We believe that attitude toward using technology will
not have a direct or interactive influence on intention.

H5c:
Attitude toward using technology will not have a significant influence
on behavioral intention.

75
BEHAVIORAL INTENTION

Consistent with the underlying theory for all of

the intention models discussed in this paper, w
e expect that behavioral intention will have a si
gnificant positive influence on technology usag
e.

H6:
Behavioral intention will have a significant influence on usage.

76
EMPIRICAL VALIDATI Preliminary Test of UTA
UT

ON OF UTAUT
Cross-Validation of UTA
UT

77
EMPIRICAL VALIDATION OF
UTAUT
1. UTAUT was then tested using the original data
and found to outperform the eight individual
models (adjusted R2 of 69%).
2. UTAUT was then confirmed with data from two
new organizations with similar results (adjuste
d R2 of 70%)
79
PERFORMANCE EXPECTANCY
- FIVE CONSTRUCTS

U1-6

JF1-6

81
RA1-5

OE1-7

82
83
84
85
86
PRELIMINARY TEST OF UTA
UT
Performance expectancy
The effect was moderated by gender and age such that
it was more salient to younger worker, particularly me
n

87
SUPPORTING H1

Effect stronger for

H1 men and younger
worker

88
PRELIMINARY TEST OF UTA
UT
Effort expectancy
The effect was moderated by gender and age,
and effect decreasing with experience

89
SUPPORTING H2
Effect stronger for
women, older
worker,and those
with limited
H2 experience

90
PRELIMINARY TEST OF UTA
UT
Social influence
Its role being more important in the context of mandatory
use, and more so among older women, more significant i
n the early stages of individual experience with the techn
ology

91
SUPPORTING H3
Effect stronger for
women, older
worker, under
conditions of
mandatory use,
and with limited
experience

H3

92
PRELIMINARY TEST OF UTA
UT
Facilitating condition
In predicting usage behavior, facilitating conditions were signifi
cant, with the latters effect being moderated by age (more imp
ortant to order worker), and with increasing experience

93
SUPPORTING H4B
Effect stronger for
older worker with
increasing
experience

H4
b

94
PRELIMINARY TEST OF UTA
UT
Behavioral intention
In predicting usage behavior, the effect of behavior inte
ntion were significant

95
SUPPORTING H6

Direct effect

H6

96
CROSS-VALIDATION OF UTA
UT

97
98
CROSS-VALIDATION OF UTA
UT

99
CROSS-VALIDATION OF UTA
UT

100
101
CONTRIBUTION
1. UTAUT was able to account for 70 percent of variance
2. Integrate the main 32 effects and 4 moderator into 4 main ef
fects and 4 moderators

102
103
CONCLUSION
1. UTAUT provides a refined view of how the determinan
ts of intention and behavior evolve over time
2. Social influence construct has been controversial
3. Focus on integrating UTAUT with research that has ide
ntified causal antecedents of the constructs used withi
n the model
4. Identify and test additional boundary conditions of th
e model

104
Q&A