4.5 Article

Explaining the adoption of transactional B2C mobile commerce

期刊

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/17410390810851372

关键词

Electronic commerce; Mobile communication systems; Modelling

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose - Given the proliferation of mobile devices, m-commerce is expected to experience a substantial growth. However, most m- commerce applications except for a few have failed to meet expectations. In this study, the authors aim to examine specific factors pertaining to the individual adoption of B2C transactional mobile commerce. Design/methodology/approach - A comprehensive framework integrating well established theories of technology adoption - i.e. the technology acceptance model (TAM) and the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) - is developed. More specifically, perceived usefulness is re-conceptualized to enhance the specificity of these theories to mobile commerce. The resulting model is empirically tested with mobile device users who have not adopted mobile commerce yet. Findings - The empirical results provide strong support for the integrative approach, shedding light on the significance and relative importance of specific technological characteristics. The theoretical and empirical implications of these results are discussed. Originality/value - The paper demonstrates the need to develop the innovation diffusion theory and TAM further by including the effects of social influence and individual characteristic variables. Furthermore, the paper also shows the usefulness of accounting for the specificity of the IT artifact in general and m-commerce applications in particular. In this study, the specificity of the IT artifact is accounted for by decomposing perceived usefulness into specific considerations that are relevant to m- commerce adoption. Such an approach presents a major advantage. Indeed, the significance and magnitude of the formative measures show which characteristics of m- commerce are adoption drivers.

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

4.5
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