Smart TV: Are they really smart in interacting with people? Understanding the interactivity of Korean Smart TV

Behaviour and Information Technology

Volumn 32, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 156-172

  Shin, Dong Hee ^a   Hwang, Yongsuk ^b   Choo, Hyunseung ^a  

^a Sungkyunkwan University   (South Korea)

^b Konkuk University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

adoption; interactivity; Korea; mediating effects; Smart TV; TPB; TRA

Indexed keywords

ADOPTION; INTERACTIVITY; KOREA; MEDIATING EFFECT; SMART-TV; TPB; TRA;

DIGITAL TELEVISION;

INTERACTIVE TELEVISION;

EID: 84874412416     PISSN: 0144929X     EISSN: 13623001     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2011.603360     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Ahren, R. K., Stromer-Galley, J., and, Neuman, W. R. Interactivity and structured issue comparisons on the political web: an experimental study of the 2000 New Hampshire presidential primary. Paper presented at International Communication Association. June 1-5, Acapulco, Mexico.
2. Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2): 179-211. (doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020- T)
3. Bagozzi, R. P., and, Yi, Y. 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16: 74-94. (doi:10.1007/BF02723327)
4. Baron, R. M., and, Kenny, D. 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51: 1173-1182. (doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173)
5. Beyah, G. Development of an instrument to study the use of recommendation systems. Proceedings of AMCIS 2003. August 4-6 2003, Tampa, FL. pp. 1-14.
6. Bezjian-Avery, A., Calder, B., and, Lacobucci, D. 1998. New media interactive advertising vs. traditional advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 38 (4): 23-32. (Pubitemid 128752474)
7. Carey, J. 1989. " Interactive media ". In International Encyclopedia of communications, Edited by: Barnouw, E. 328-330. New York: Oxford University Press.
8. Cesar, P., and, Chorianopoulos, K. 2009. The evolution of TV systems, content, and users toward interactivity. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction, 2 (4): 373-395. (doi:10.1561/1100000008)
9. Chung, H., and, Zhao, X. 2004. Effects of perceived interactivity on website preference and memory. JCMC, 10 (1). Article 7
10. Cho, C-H., and, Leckenby, J. D. Interactivity as a measure of advertising effectiveness. Proceedings of the American academy of advertising. Gainesville, FL. Edited by: Roberts, M. S. pp. 162-179. University of Florida.
11. Coyle, J. R., and, Thorson, E. 2001. The effects of progressive levels of interactivity and vividness in web marketing sites. Journal of Advertising, 30 (3): 65-77.
12. Cyr, D., Head, M., and, Ivanov, A. Perceived interactivity leading to e-loyalty. Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Workshop on HCI Research in MIS. Montreal, 8December 2007. Montreal, Canada: HCI Association, 46-51
13. Davis, F. D. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13 (3): 319-340. (doi:10.2307/249008)
14. Day, G. S. 1998. Organizing for interactivity. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 12 (1): 47-53. (doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6653(199824)12:1<47::AID- DIR5>3.0.CO;2-B)
15. Deng, L. 2010. User experience, satisfaction, and continual usage intention of IT. European Journal of Information Systems, 19: 60-75. (doi:10.1057/ejis.2009.50)
16. Fishbein, M., and, Ajzen, I. 1975. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
17. Fornell, C., and, Larcker, D. 1981. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (1): 39-50. (doi:10.2307/3151312)
18. Fortin, D., and, Dholakia, R. 2005. Interactivity and vividness effects on social presence and involvement with a web-based advertisement. Journal of Business Research, 58 (3): 387-396. (doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00106-1) (Pubitemid 40045800)
19. Guedj, R. A. 1980. Methodology of interaction, Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.
20. Ha, L., and, James, L. 1998. Interactivity reexamined: a baseline analysis of early business web sites. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 42 (4): 457-474. (doi:10.1080/08838159809364462) (Pubitemid 128776101)
21. Haeckel, S. H. 1998. About the nature and future of interactive marketing. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 12 (1): 63-71. (doi:10.1002/(SICI) 1520-6653(199824)12:1<63::AID-DIR8>3.0.CO;2-C) (Pubitemid 128466821)
22. Hair, J. 1995. Multivariate data analysis with readings, 4, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
23. Hanssen, L., Jankowski, N. W., and, Etienne, R. 1996. " Interactivity from the perspective of communication studies ". In Contours of multimedia: recent technological, theoretical, and empirical developments, Edited by: Jankowski, N. W. and Hanssen, L. 61-73. Luton: University of Luton Press.
24. Hassenzahlm, M. 2003. " The thing and I: understanding the relationship between user and product ". In Funology: from usability to enjoyment, Edited by: Blythe, M. A., Monk, A. F., Overbeeke, K. and Wright, P. C. 31-42. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
25. Hayashi, A. 2004. The role of social presence and moderating role of computer self efficacy in predicting the continuance usage of e-learning systems. Journal of Information Systems Educations, 15 (2): 139-154.
26. Heeter, C. 1989. " Implications of new interactive technologies for conceptualizing communication ". In Media use in the information age: emerging patterns of adoption and computer use, Edited by: Salvaggio, J. L. and Bryant, J. 217-235. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
27. Heeter, C. 2000. Interactivity in the context of designed experiences. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1 (1). Available from: http://www.jiad.org/ vol1/no1/heeter/index.html
28. Hoffman, D. L., and, Novak, T. P. 1996. Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments. Journal of Marketing, 60 (3): 50-117. (doi:10.2307/1251841)
29. Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P., and, Duhachek, A. 2003. Theinfluence of goal directed and experiential activities on on-line flow experiences. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13 (2): 3-16. (doi:10.1207/S15327663JCP13-1&2-01) (Pubitemid 36703983)
30. Jensen, J. F. 1998. Interactivity: tracing a new concept in media and communication studies. Nordicom Review, 19 (1): 185-204.
31. Jupiter Research. 2010. Prospect of STV, Boston, MA: Jupiter Research Inc.
32. Kim, J. W., and, Du, S. Design for an interactive television advertising system. Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2006 HICSS Conference). January 4-7 2006, Big Island, Hawaii. pp. 1-9.
33. Kim, Y., and, Zhang, P. Individual users adoption of smart phone services. Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Workshop on HCI Research in MIS. December 14 2009, Phoenix, Arizona. Syracuse, NY: AIS (Association of Information System).
34. Kiousis, S. Broadening the boundaries of interactivity: a concept explication. Paper presented at Association for education in journalism and mass communication annual conference. August, New Orleans, USA.
35. Lieb, T. 1998. Inactivity on interactivity. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 3 (3). Available from: http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/03-03/ lieb0303.html (doi:10.3998/3336451.0003.312)
36. Lombard, M., and, Snyder-Dutch, J. 2001. Interactive advertising and presence: a framework. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1 (2). Available from: http://jiad.org
37. McMillan, S. J. 2002. A four-part model of cyber-interactivity: some cyber-places are more interactive than others. New Media and Society, 4 (2): 271-291.
38. McMillan, S. J. Interactivity is in the eye of the beholder: function, perception, volvement, and attitude toward the web site. Proceedings of the American academy of advertising. Edited by: Shaver, M. A. pp. 71-78. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.
39. McMillan, S. J., and, Hwang, J. 2002. Measures of perceived interactivity. Journal of Advertising, 31 (3): 29-42.
40. Miles, I. 1992. " When mediation is the message: how suppliers envisage new markets ". In Contexts of computer-mediated communication, Edited by: Lea, M. 145-167. New York: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
41. Newhagen, J. E., Cordes, J. W., and, Levy, M. R. 1996. Nightly@nbc.com: audience scope and the perception of interactivity in viewer mail on the internet. Journal of Communication, 45 (3): 164-175. (doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466. 1995.tb00748.x)
42. Newhagen, J., and, Rafaeli, S. 1996. Why communication researchers should study the Internet. Journal of Communication, 46: 4-13. (doi:10.1111/j.1460- 2466.1996.tb01458.x) (Pubitemid 126040743)
43. Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., and, Yung, Y-F. 2000. Measuring the customer experience in online environments: a structural modeling approach. Marketing Science, 19 (1): 22-42. (doi:10.1287/mksc.19.1.22.15184)
44. Pavlik, J. V. 1998. New media technology: cultural and commercial perspectives, 2, Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
45. Rafaeli, S. 1988. " Interactivity: from new media to communication ". In Advancing communication science: merging mass and interpersonal process, Edited by: Hawkins, R. P., Wiemann, J. M. and Pingree, S. 110-134. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
46. Schumann, D. W., Artis, A., and, Rivera, R. 2001. The future of interactive advertising viewed through an IMC lens. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1 (2). Available from: http://jiad.org
47. Shin, D. 2009. An empirical investigation of a modified technology acceptance model of IPTV. Behaviour and Information Technology, 28 (4): 361-372. (doi:10.1080/01449290701814232)
48. Steuer, J. 1992. Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42 (4): 73-93. (doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466. 1992.tb00812.x)
49. Straubhaar, J., and, LaRose, R. 1996. Communications media in the information society, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Press.
50. Van der Heijden, H. 2004. User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quarterly, 28 (4): 695-704.
51. Venkatesh, V., and, Morris, M. G. 2000. Why don't men everstop to ask for directions?. MIS Quarterly, 24 (1): 115-139. (doi:10.2307/3250981)
52. Williams, F., Rice, R., and, Rogers, E. 1988. Research methods and the new media, New York: Free Press.
53. Wu, G. 2005. The mediating role of perceived interactivity inthe effect of actual interactivity on attitude toward thewebsite. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 5 (2): 29-39.
54. Wu, G. Perceived interactivity and attitude toward website. Proceedings of the American academy of advertising. Edited by: Roberts, M. S. pp. 254-262. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida.
55. Zack, M. H. 1993. Interactivity and communication mode choice in ongoing management groups. Information Systems Research, 4 (3): 207-239. (doi:10.1287/isre.4.3.207)