Integrating social capital theory, social cognitive theory, and the technology acceptance model to explore a behavioral model of telehealth systems

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Volumn 11, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 4905-4925

  Tsai, Chung Hung ^a  

^a TZU CHI COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Institutional trust; Social participation; Social trust; System self efficacy; Technology acceptance model; Telehealth

Indexed keywords

COGNITION; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH SERVICES; RURAL AREA; SOCIAL CAPITAL; SOCIAL PARTICIPATION; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION; THEORETICAL STUDY;

AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HUMAN; INTEGRATING SOCIAL CAPITAL THEORY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; ORGANIZATIONAL DOWNSIZING; ORGANIZATIONAL EFFICIENCY; PROCESS DEVELOPMENT; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY CONTROL; SELF CONCEPT; SOCIAL ATTITUDE; SOCIAL CAPITAL; SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY; SOCIAL INTERACTION; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL; TELEHEALTH; VALIDATION PROCESS; VERY ELDERLY; COGNITION; CONSUMER; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; QUESTIONNAIRE; RURAL POPULATION; SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY; TAIWAN; TECHNOLOGY; TELEMEDICINE; THEORETICAL MODEL;

NANTOU; TAIWAN;

COGNITION; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RURAL POPULATION; SELF EFFICACY; SOCIAL CAPITAL; SOCIAL THEORY; TAIWAN; TECHNOLOGY; TELEMEDICINE;

EID: 84900487717     PISSN: 16617827     EISSN: 16604601     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph110504905     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Huang, J.C. Innovative health care delivery system-A questionnaire survey to evaluate the influence of behavioral factors on individuals' acceptance of telecare. Comput. Biol. Med. 2013, 43, 281-286.
2. Güler, N.F.; Übeyli, E.D. Theory and applications of telemedicine. J. Med. Syst. 2002, 26, 199-220.
3. Hendy, J.; Barlow, J. The adoption of telecare in the community. Community Pract. 2012, 85, 41-43.
4. Moffatt, J.J.; Eley, D.S. The reported benefits of telehealth for rural Australians. Aust. Health Rev. 2010, 34, 276-281.
5. Young, L.B.; Foster, L.; Silander, A.; Wakefield, B.J. Home telehealth: Patient satisfaction, program functions, and challenges for the care coordinator. J. Gerontol. Nurs. 2011, 37, 38-46.
6. Johnston, B.; Kidd, L.; Wengstrom, Y.; Kearney, N. An evaluation of the use of telehealth within palliative care settings across Scotland. Palliat. Med. 2011, 26, 152-161.
7. Venkatesh, V.; Davis, F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Manag. Sci. 2000, 46, 186-204.
8. Hasan, B. Examining the effects of computer self-efficacy and system complexity on technology acceptance. Inform. Resour. Manag. J. 2007, 20, 76-88.
9. Liu, C.F.; Tsai, Y.C.; Jang, F.L. Patients' acceptance towards a web-based personal health record system: An empirical study in Taiwan. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 2013, 10, 5191-5208.
10. Rahimpour, M.; Lovell, N.H.; Celler, B.G.; McCormick, J. Patients' perceptions of a home telecare system. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2008, 77, 486-498.
11. Wade, R.; Cartwright, C.; Shaw, K. Factors relating to home telehealth acceptance and usage compliance. Risk Manag. Healthc. Pol. 2012, 5, 25-33.
12. Davis, F.D. User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. Int. J. Man. Mach. Stud. 1993, 38, 475-487.
13. Putnam, R. Making Democracy Work-Civic Traditions in Modern Italy; Princeton University Press: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1993.
14. Kawachi, I.; Kennedy, B.P. Health and social cohesion: Why care about income inequality. Brit. Med. J. 1997, 314, 1037-1040.
15. Bandura, A. Social Foundation of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986.
16. Venkatesh, V.; Davis, F.D. A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decis. Sci. J. 1996, 27, 451-481.
17. Dewsbury, G. "Defining Telecare?" Available online: http://thetelecareblog.blogspot.tw/ 2009/02/defining-telecare.html (accessed on 5 May 2014).
18. Lee, C.Y.; Huang, E.W.; Chiou, S.F.; Yang, R.J.; Chao, P.J.; Hung, R.S.; Lin, Y.T. Design and development of a new community healthcare management model by using telehealth service system. J. Taiwan Assoc. Med. Inform. 2009, 18, 39-53.
19. Brownsell, S.; Blackburn, S.; Hawley, M.S. An evaluation of second and third generation telecare services in older people's housing. J. Telemed. Telecare 2008, 14, 8-12.
20. Miller, T.W.; Miller, J.M.; Kraus, R.F.; Kaak, O.; Sprang, R.; Veltkamp, L.J. Telehealth: A clinical application model for rural consultation. Consult. Psychol. J. Pract. Res. 2003, 55, 119-127.
21. Ahn, T.; Ryu, S.; Han, I. The impact of web quality and playfulness on user acceptance of online retailing. Inform. Manage. 2007, 44, 263-275.
22. Davis, F.D.; Bagozzi, R.P.; Warshaw, P.R. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Manag. Sci. 1989, 35, 982-1002.
23. Or, C.; Karsh, B.T.; Severtson, D.J.; Burke, L.J.; Brown, R.L.; Brennan, P.F. Factors affecting home care patients' acceptance of a web-based interactive self-management technology. J. Amer. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2011, 18, 51-59.
24. DeLone, W.H.; McLean, E.R. The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. J. Manage. Inform. Syst. 2003, 19, 9-30.
25. Mathieson, K. Predicting user intention: comparing the technology acceptance model with theory of planned behavior. Inform. Syst. Res. 1991, 2, 173-191.
26. Jackson, C.M.; Chow, S.; Leitch, R.A. Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use an information system. Decision Sci. 1997, 28, 357-389.
27. Williams, M.D.; Slade, E.L.; Dwivedi, Y.K. Consumers' intentions to use e-readers. J. Comput. Inform. Syst. 2014, 54, 66-76.
28. Hu, P.J.; Chau, P.Y.K.; Liu Sheng, O.R.; Kar, Y.T. Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. J. Manage. Inform. Syst. 1999, 16, 91-112.
29. Bourdieu, P. The Forms of Capital. In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education; Richardson, J.G., Ed.; Greenwood: New York, NY, USA, 1985.
30. Coleman, J. Foundations of Social Theory; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1990.
31. Woolcock, M. Social capital and economic development: Toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework. Theor. Soc. 1998, 27, 151-208.
32. Nahapiet, J.; Ghoshal, S. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1998, 23, 242-266.
33. Felício, J.A.; Couto, E.; Caiado, J. Human capital and social capital in entrepreneurs and managers of small and medium enterprises. J. Bus. Econ. Manage. 2012, 13, 395-420.
34. Adler, P.S.; Kwon, S.W. Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Acad. Manage. Rev. 2002, 27, 17-40
35. Kawachi, I.; Kennedy, B.P.; Glass, R. Social capital and self-rated health: A contextual analysis. Amer. J. Publ. Health 1999, 89, 1187-1193.
36. Lindstrom, M.; Janzon, E. Social capital, institutional (vertical) trust and smoking: A study of daily smoking and smoking cessation among ever smokers. Scand. J. Public Health 2007, 35, 460-467.
37. Nummela, O.; Sulander, T.; Rahkonen, O.; Karisto, A.; Uutela, A. Social participation, trust, and self-rated health: A study among ageing people in urban, semi-urban and rural settings. Health Place 2008, 14, 243-253.
38. Mohseni, M.; Lindstrom, M. Social capital, trust in the health-care system and self-rated health: The role of access to health care in a population-based study. Soc. Sci. Med. 2007, 64, 1373-1383.
39. Russell, S. Treatment seeking behaviour in urban Sri Lanka: Trusting the state, trusting private doctors. Soc. Sci. Med. 2005, 61, 1396-1407.
40. Cattell, V. Poor people, poor places, and poor health: The mediating role of social networks and social capital. Soc. Sci. Med. 2001, 52, 1501-1516.
41. Wang, L.; Graddy, E. Social capital, volunteering, and charitable giving. Int. J. Volunt. Nonprofit Organ. 2008, 19, 23-42.
42. Reid, M. Integrating trust and computer self-efficacy with TAM: An empirical assessment of customers' acceptance of banking information systems (BIS) in Jamaica. J. Inter. Bank. Commerce 2008, 12, 1-18.
43. Gefen, D.; Karahanna, E.; Straub, D.W. Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. MIS Quart. 2003, 27, 51-90.
44. Pavlou, P.A. Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. Int. J. Electron. Commerce 2003, 7, 101-134.
45. Chow, W.S.; Chan, L.S. Social network, social trust and shared goals in organizational knowledge sharing. Inform. Manage. 2008, 45, 458-465.
46. Shu, Q.; Tu, Q.; Wang, K. The impact of computer self-efficacy and technology dependence on computer-related technostress: A social cognitive theory perspective. Int. J. Human-Computer Interact. 2011, 27, 923-939.
47. Gist, M.E. Self-efficacy: Implications for organizational behavior and human resource management. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1987, 12, 472-485.
48. Compeau, D.R.; Higgins, C.A. Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quart. 1995, 19, 189-211.
49. Venkatesh, V. Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Inform. Syst. Res. 2000, 11, 342-365.
50. Ong, C.S.; Lai, J.Y.; Wang, Y.S. Factors affecting engineers' acceptance of asynchronous e-learning systems in high-tech companies. Inform. Manage. 2004, 41, 795-804.
51. Hung, S.Y.; Liang, T.P. Effect of computer self-efficacy on the use of executive support systems. Industrial Manage. Data Syst. 2001, 101, 227-237.
52. Davis, F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart. 1989, 13, 319-340.
53. Bentler, P.M. Handbook of Multivariate Experimental Psychology; Plenum: New York, NY, USA, 1988.
54. Anderson, J.C.; Gerbing, D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol. Bull. 1988, 103, 411-423.
55. Hair, J.F.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L.; Black, W.C. Multivariate Data Analysis; Prentice-Hall: Englewood, NJ, USA, 1998.
56. Nunnally, J.C. Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1978.
57. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Market Res. 1981, 18, 39-50.
58. Liu, I.F.; Chen, M.C.; Sun, Y.S.; Wible, D.; Kuo, C.H. Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Comput. Educ. 2010, 54, 600-610.
59. Holbert, R.L.; Stephenson, M.T. The importance of indirect effects in media effects research: Testing for mediation in structural equation modeling. J. Broadcast. Electron. 2003, 47, 4, 556-572.
60. Chau, P.Y.K. Influence of computer attitude and self-efficacy on IT usage behavior. J. End-User Comput. 2001, 13, 1, 40-52.
61. Kwak, N.; Shah, D.V.; Holbert, R.L. Connecting, trusting, and participating: The direct and interactive effects of social associations. Polit. Res. Quart. 2004, 57, 643-652.
62. Bakken, S.; Grullon-Frigueroa, L.; Izquierdo, R.; Lee, N.J.; Morin, P.; Palmas, W.; Teresi, J.; Weinstock, R.S.; Shea, S.; Starren, J. Development, validation, and use of English and Spanish versions of the telemedicine satisfaction and usefulness questionnaire. J. Amer. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2006, 13, 660-667.