Applying TAM across cultures: the need for caution

The technology acceptance model (TAM) is one of the most widely used behavioural models in the information systems (IS) field. Researchers have used the model to study many different IS adoption situations and contexts, and it usually demonstrates validity and reliability. Although TAM was developed in the U.S., the TAM model has also been used in other countries. Transferring a model to another cultural context should be subjected to rigorous testing, and a few studies have begun to examine the applicability of TAM in a small variety of cultures. This study contributes to the growing multi-cultural examination of TAM, and demonstrates that although the model has been successful in predicting adoption behaviours in some international settings, it might not hold in all cultures. Almost 4000 students from several universities around the world provided the data for the study. Data analysis revealed that the TAM model does not hold for certain cultural orientations. Most significantly, low Uncertainty Avoidance, high Masculinity, high-Power Distance, and high Collectivism seem to nullify the effects of Perceived Ease of Use and/or Perceived Usefulness. Since TAM has been shown to be widely applicable to various technological innovations, it is likely to continue to be applied broadly and globally. However, the results of this study suggest the need for caution in applying TAM in at least 20 countries.

[1]  G. Rose,et al.  PREDICTING GENERAL IT USE : APPLYING TAM TO THE ARABIC WORLD , 1998 .

[2]  Terry E. Duncan,et al.  Approaches to Testing Interaction Effects Using Structural Equation Modeling Methodology. , 1998, Multivariate behavioral research.

[3]  Hans van der Heijden,et al.  User Acceptance of Hedonic Information Systems , 2004, MIS Q..

[4]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Why Don't Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Influence, and Their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior , 2000, MIS Q..

[5]  Michael Song,et al.  Manuscript #: RRR97-0379 THE EFFECT OF PERCEIVED TECHNOLOGICAL UNCERTAINTY ON JAPANESE NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT , 1999 .

[6]  G. Hofstede,et al.  Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind , 1991 .

[7]  William J. Doll,et al.  A multi-group analysis of structural invariance: an illustration using the technology acceptance model , 2005, Inf. Manag..

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

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

[10]  Richard A. Spreng,et al.  How Does Motivation Moderate the Impact of Central and Peripheral Processing on Brand Attitudes and Intentions , 1992 .

[11]  Gordon C. Bruner,et al.  Explaining consumer acceptance of handheld Internet devices , 2005 .

[12]  Mikael Søndergaard,et al.  Research Note: Hofstede's Consequences: A Study of Reviews, Citations and Replications , 1994 .

[13]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: A three country study , 1997, Inf. Manag..

[14]  Daniel W. Russell,et al.  Maladaptive Perfectionism as a Mediator and Moderator Between Adult Attachment and Depressive Mood. , 2004 .

[15]  Karl G. Jöreskog,et al.  Lisrel 8: User's Reference Guide , 1997 .

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

[17]  John Berridge,et al.  Managing Cultural Differences: Strategies for Competitive Advantage , 1996 .

[18]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[19]  Dennis F. Galletta,et al.  A Multidimensional Commitment Model of Volitional Systems Adoption and Usage Behavior , 2005, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[20]  T. Clark,et al.  International Marketing and National Character: A Review and Proposal for an Integrative Theory , 1990 .

[21]  L. L. Langness,et al.  The study of culture , 1974 .

[22]  William R. King,et al.  A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model , 2006, Inf. Manag..

[23]  Monica Rosén,et al.  Gender differences in structure, means and variances of hierarchically ordered ability dimensions , 1995 .

[24]  G. Hofstede,et al.  Culture′s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values , 1980 .

[25]  R. Bennett,et al.  THE RELATIVE EFFECTS OF SITUATIONAL PRACTICES AND CULTURALLY INFLUENCED VALUES/BELIEFS ON WORK ATTITUDES , 1999 .

[26]  Dan Voich Comparative Empirical Analysis of Cultural Values and Perceptions of Political Economy Issues , 1995 .

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

[28]  T. Gladwin Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values , 1981 .

[29]  J. DiStefano,et al.  Cultural Dimensions at the Individual Level of Analysis , 2002 .

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

[31]  Scott McCoy,et al.  Integrating National Culture into Individual IS Adoption Research: The Need for Individual Level Measures , 2003, AMCIS.

[32]  Peter A. Todd,et al.  Assessing IT usage: the role of prior experience , 1995 .

[33]  Karen L. Newman,et al.  Culture and Congruence: The Fit Between Management Practices and National Culture , 1996 .