4.7 Article

Value-based adoption of mobile internet: An empirical investigation

期刊

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS
卷 43, 期 1, 页码 111-126

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.dss.2005.05.009

关键词

mobile internet; value-based adoption model; technology adoption model

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines the adoption of Mobile Internet (M-Internet) as a new Information and Communication Technology (ICT) from the value perspective. M-Internet is a fast growing enabling technology for Mobile Commerce. However, despite its phenomenal growth and although M-Internet essentially provides the same services as stationary Internet, its adoption rate in many countries is very low compared to that of stationary Internet. The well-known Technology Adoption Model (TAM) has been used for explaining the adoption of traditional technologies. Most adopters and users of traditional technologies (e.g., spreadsheet, word processor) are employees in an organizational setting who use the technology for work purposes, and the cost of mandatory adoption and usage is borne by the organization. In contrast, adopters and users of M-Internet are individuals who play the dual roles of technology user and service consumer. Most of them adopt and use it for personal purposes, and the cost of voluntary adoption and usage is borne by the individuals. Thus, the adopters of new ICT, especially M-Internet, are also consumers rather than simply technology users. By adopting the theory of consumer choice and decision making from economics and marketing research, this study develops the Value-based Adoption Model (VAM) and explains customers' M-Internet adoption from the value maximization perspective. The findings demonstrate that consumers' perception of the value of M-Internet is a principal determinant of adoption intention, and the other beliefs are mediated through perceived value. The theoretical and practical implications of VAM related to M-Internet are discussed. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据