The Effect of Perceived Novelty on the Adoption of Information Technology Innovations: A Risk/Reward Perspective

Decision Sciences

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 813-843

  Wells, John D ^a   Campbell, Damon E ^b   Valacich, Joseph S ^c   Featherman, Mauricio ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^b MILLSAPS COLLEGE   (United States)

^c WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Affective beliefs; Behavioral intention; Biometrics; Innovativeness; IT; Novelty; Personal innovativeness in IT; Structural equation modeling; Technology ss

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649598671     PISSN: 00117315     EISSN: 15405915     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2010.00292.x     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1997). The role of innovation characteristics and perceived voluntariness in the acceptance of information technologies. Decision Sciences, 28(3), 557-582.
2. Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1998a). The antecedents and consequents of user perceptions in information technology adoption. Decision Support Systems, 22, 15-29.
3. Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1998b). A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Information Systems Research, 9(2), 204-215.
4. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
5. Alhakami, A. S., & Slovic, P. (1994). A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. Risk Analysis, 14(6), 1085-1096.
6. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). 1988 structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
7. Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 244-254.
8. Benbasat, I., & Barki, H. (2007). Quo vadis, tam Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 211-218.
9. Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York Appleton-Century-Crofts.
10. Berlyne, D., Graw, M., Salapatek, P. H., & Lewis, J. (1963). Novelty, complexity, incongruity, extrinsic motivation and the gsr. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(6), 560-567.
11. Bhatnagar, A., Misra, S., & Rao, H. R. (2000). On risk, convenience, and internet shopping behavior. Communications of the ACM, 43(11), 98-105.
12. Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351-371.
13. Blythe, J. (1999). Innovativeness and newness in high-tech consumer durables. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 8(5), 415-429.
14. Bobbitt, L. M., & Dabholkar, P. A. (2001). Integrating attitudinal theories to understand and predict use of technology-based self-service. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(5), 423-450.
15. Bodur, H. O., Brinberg, D., & Coupey, E. (2000). Belief, affect, and attitude: Alternative models of the determinants of attitude. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(1), 17-28.
16. Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 36(2), 129-148.
17. Brown, S. A., Fuller, R. M., & Vician, C. (2004). Who's afraid of the virtual world? Anxiety and computer-mediated communication. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 5(2), 79-107.
18. Brown, S. A., & Venkatesh, V. (2005). Model of adoption of technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 399-426.
19. Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ Erlbaum.
20. Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P. J.-H. (2001). Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: A model comparison approach. Decision Sciences, 32(4), 699-719.
21. Clark, M. S. (1982). A role for arousal in the link between feeling states, judgments and behavior. In M. S. Clark & S. Fiske (Eds.), Affect and cognition (pp. 263-289). Hillsdale, NJ L. Erlbaum.
22. Clore, G. L. (1992). Cognitive phenomenology: Feeling and the construction of judgement. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), The construction of social judgments (pp. 133-164) Hillsdale, NJ Erlbaum.
23. Cox, D. S., & Locander, W. B. (1987). Product novelty: Does it moderate the relationship between ad attitudes and brand attitudes Journal of Advertising, 16(3), 39-44.
24. Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to non-normality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16-29.
25. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-339.
26. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
27. Dennis, A., & Valacich, J. (2001). Conducting research in information systems. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 7, 1-40.
28. Donnelly, J. H., & Etzel, M. J. (1973). Degrees of product newness and early trial. Journal of Marketing Research, 10(3), 295-300.
29. Eckfeldt, B. (2005). What does rfid do for the consumer Communications of the ACM, 48(9), 77-79.
30. Featherman, M., & Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 59(4), 451-474.
31. Fichman, R. G., & Kemerer, C. F. (1993). Adoption of software engineering process innovations: The case of object orientation. Sloan Management Review, 34, 7-22.
32. Finucane, M. L., Alhakami, A. A., Slovic, P., & Johnson, S. M. (2000). The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 1-17.
33. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA Addison-Wesley.
34. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equations models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
35. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and tam in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51-90.
36. Hair, J. F., Jr, Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis with readings (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice Hall.
37. Hirschman, E. C. (1980). Innovativeness, novelty seeking, and consumer creativity. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 283-295.
38. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1992). Can test statistics in covariance structural analysis be trusted Psychological Bulletin, 112, 351-362.
39. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
40. Jain, A., Hong, L., & Pankanti, S. (2000). Biometric identification. Communications of the ACM, 43(2), 91-98.
41. James, T., Pirim, T., Boswell, K., Reithel, B., & Barkhi, R. (2006). Determining the intention to use biometric devices: An application and extension of the technology acceptance model. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 18(3), 1-24.
42. Jarvenpaa, S. L., Tractinsky, N., & Vitale, M. (2000). Consumer trust in an internet store. Information Technology and Management, 1(1-2), 45-71.
43. Kim, J., Lim, J.-S., & Bhargava, M. (1998). The role of affect in attitude formation: A classical conditioning approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(2), 143-152.
44. Lin, C.-H., & Yu, S.-F. (2006). Consumer adoption of the internet as a channel: The influence of driving and inhibiting factors. Journal of American Academy of Business, 9(2), 112-117.
45. Lindel, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114-121.
46. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. (1995). A simulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30(1), 41-62.
47. Mandler, G. (1982). The structure of value: Accounting for taste. In M. S. Clark & S. Fiske (Eds.), Affect and cognition (pp. 55-78). Hillsdale, NJ L. Erlbaum.
48. Mayer, J. D., Gaschke, Y. N., Braverman, D. L., & Evans, T. W. (1992). Mood-congruent judgment is a general effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(1), 19-132.
49. McGrath, J. E. (1982). Dilematics: The study of research choices and dilemmas. In J. E. McGrath (Ed.), Judgment calls in research (pp. 69-80). Beverly Hills Sage.
50. Midgley, D. F., & Dowling, G. R. (1993). A longitudinal study of product form innovation: The interaction between predispositions and social messages. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(4), 611.
51. Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perception of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-223.
52. Mukherjee, A., & Hoyer, W. D. (2001). The effect of novel attributes on product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 462-472.
53. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York McGraw-Hill.
54. Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 101-131.
55. Pham, M. T. (1998). Representativeness, relevance, and the use of feelings in decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(2), 144-159.
56. Plouffe, C. R., Hulland, J. S., & Vandenbosch, M. (2001). Research report: Richness versus parsimony in modeling technology adoption decisions-understanding merchant adoption of a smart card-based payment system. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 208-222.
57. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York The Free Press.
58. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1988). Scaling corrections for chi square statistics in covariance structure analysis. American Statistical Association 1988 Proceeding of the Business and Economic Sections. Alexandria, VA American Statistical Association, 308-313.
59. Schwartz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgements of well-being-informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(3), 513-523.
60. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts abotu affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24(4), 311-322.
61. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2007). The affect heuristic. European Journal of Operational Research, 177, 1333-1352.
62. Smith, C. A., & Ellsworth, P. C. (1985). Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 813-838.
63. Straub, D. W., Bourdreau, M.-C., & Gefen, D. (2004). Validation guidelines for is positivist research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13(24), 380-427.
64. Swanson, E. B., & Ramiller, N. C. (1997). The organizing vision in information systems innovation. Organization Science, 8(5), 458-474.
65. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(1), 144-176.
66. Thatcher, J. B., & Perrewe, P. L. (2002). An empirical examination of individual traits as antecedents to computer anxiety and computer self-efficacy. MIS Quarterly, 26(4), 381-396.
67. Trafimow, D., & Sheeran, P. (1998). Some tests of the distinction between cognitive and affective beliefs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 378-396.
68. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.
69. Van Der Heijden, H. (2003). Factors influencing the usage of Web sites: The case of a generic portal in the netherlands. Information & Management, 40(6), 541-549.
70. Van Der Heijden, H. (2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695-704.
71. Venkatesh, V. (1999). Creation of favorable user perceptions: Exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly, 23(2), 239-260.
72. Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342-365.
73. Venkatesh, V. (2006). Where to go from here? Thoughts on future directions for research on individual-level technology adoption with a focus on decision making. Decision Sciences, 37(4), 497-518.
74. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273-315.
75. Venkatesh, V., & Brown, S. A. (2001). A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: Adoption determinants and emerging challenges. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 71-102.
76. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27(3), 451-481.
77. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
78. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-477.
79. Werts, C. E., Linn, R. L., & Joreskog, K. (1974). Interclass reliability estimates: Testing structural assumptions. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34, 25-33.
80. Yi, M. Y., Fiedler, K. D., & Park, J. S. (2006). Understanding the role of individual innovativeness in the acceptance of it-based innovations: Comparative analyses of models and measures. Decision Sciences, 37(3), 393-426.
81. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35(2), 151-175.