Relationship between Perceived Benefits and Social Influence towards Self-Disclosure and Behavioral Intention in Web 2.0

The data gathering was conducted from September 2011 until October 2011 using Google document online survey. A total of 201 university students which comprises respondents from two faculties, Labuan School of International Business and Finance (LSIBF) and Labuan School of Informatics Science (LSIS) participated in the online survey. The main objective of the research is to explore the relationship between performance expectancy, effort expectancy and social influence towards behavioral intention as well as self-disclosure intention in Web 2.0. One of the key findings in this area of research was although an innovation or technology tool may be useful and ease to use, users may not be able to see the relevant of exposing private information about themselves to an unknown person online or even to the service provider. Furthermore, the analysis also revealed that social influence has a significant effect on self-disclosure intention. Another key finding proposed that the dimension of perceived benefits (combination of two original dimensions namely performance expectancy and effort expectancy) be used to understand users perception on Web 2.0.

[1]  Holtjona Galanxhi-Janaqi,et al.  Privacy Issues in the Era of Ubiquitous Commerce , 2006, Electron. Mark..

[2]  Mark Keil,et al.  Usefulness and ease of use: field study evidence regarding task considerations , 1995, Decis. Support Syst..

[3]  Kenneth C. Laudon,et al.  E-Commerce: Business, Technology, Society (3rd Edition) , 2006 .

[4]  Chen Wang,et al.  Consumer privacy concerns about Internet marketing , 1998, CACM.

[5]  Ms Elaine Mackey,et al.  The regulation of the personal , 2004 .

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

[7]  Kenneth C. Laudon,et al.  E-commerce: Business, Technology, Society , 2002 .

[8]  Ellen R. Foxman,et al.  Information Technology, Marketing Practice, and Consumer Privacy: Ethical Issues , 1993 .

[9]  Danah Boyd,et al.  Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[10]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

[11]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: three experiments , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[12]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1964 .

[13]  John G. Breslin,et al.  The Future of Social Networks on the Internet: The Need for Semantics , 2007, IEEE Internet Computing.

[14]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies , 2000, Management Science.

[15]  Yun Wan,et al.  Will the Overseas Expansion of Facebook Succeed? , 2008, IEEE Internet Computing.

[16]  Shin-Yuan Hung,et al.  Critical factors of WAP services adoption: an empirical study , 2003, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl..

[17]  J. Cho.  The mechanism of trust and distrust formation and their relational outcomes , 2006 .

[18]  Venkateshviswanath,et al.  A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model , 2000 .