Examining the Technology Acceptance Model in the Adoption of Social Ne tworks

Social networks allow users to build their own webpage and share information with other internet users. In the last years, multi-purpose social networks have appeared and been eagerly adopted by consumers and companies for multiple social, communication and marketing purposes. We focus on the determinants of adoption behavior of social networks. Notably, we examine the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), a model specifically developed to explain adoption of information technologies, and test whether it can be used to explain consumers' use of Social Networks. Our results support the model and confirm that Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use impact the attitude towards using Social Networks, leading to Intention to Use these tools.

[1]  E. Rogers.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[2]  J. Hair.  Multivariate data analysis , 1972 .

[3]  Gilbert A. Churchill,et al.  Marketing Research: Methodological Foundations , 1976 .

[4]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[5]  J. Nunnally,et al.  Psychometric Theory: NY. , 1978 .

[6]  Gerald M. Hampton,et al.  Students As Subjects in International Behavioral Studies , 1979 .

[7]  Edward G. Carmines,et al.  Reliability and Validity Assessment , 1979 .

[8]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[9]  Fred D. Davis.  A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems : theory and results , 1985 .

[10]  P. M. Podsakoff,et al.  Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects , 1986 .

[11]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[12]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  On the evaluation of structural equation models , 1988 .

[13]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models , 1989 .

[14]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[15]  Ugur Yavas,et al.  Research Note: Students as Subjects in Advertising and Marketing Research , 1994 .

[16]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  Are Individual Differences Germane to the Acceptance of New Information Technologies , 1999 .

[17]  J. Hagel,et al.  The Real Value of Online Communities , 2000 .

[18]  Qingxiong Ma,et al.  The Technology Acceptance Model: A Meta-Analysis of Empirical Findings , 2004, J. Organ. End User Comput..

[19]  Brian M. Jones,et al.  An Examination of the Technology Acceptance Model in Uruguay and the US: A Focus on Culture , 2005 .

[20]  Gordon R. Foxall,et al.  Technology acceptance: a meta‐analysis of the TAM: Part 1 , 2007 .

[21]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  The Benefits of Facebook "Friends: " Social Capital and College Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[22]  John Raacke,et al.  MySpace and Facebook: Applying the Uses and Gratifications Theory to Exploring Friend-Networking Sites , 2008, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[23]  Wenyu Dou,et al.  Note from Special Issue Editors , 2008 .

[24]  Berend Wierenga,et al.  Virtual communities: A marketing perspective , 2009, Decis. Support Syst..

[25]  Sonja Grabner-Kräuter,et al.  Web 2.0 Social Networks: The Role of Trust , 2009 .

[26]  Aaron Smith,et al.  Social Media & Mobile Internet Use among Teens and Young Adults. Millennials. , 2010 .

[27]  Sally Harridge‐March,et al.  Relationships in online communities: the potential for marketers , 2010 .

[28]  Vladlena Benson,et al.  Online social networks: changing the face of business education and career planning , 2010 .

[29]  Yongjun Sung,et al.  An Explorative Study of Korean Consumer Participation in Virtual Brand Communities in Social Network Sites , 2010 .