A Model of 3G Adoption

10th Americas Conference on Information Systems, AMCIS 2004

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 2755-2762

  Xin, Xu ^a  

^a HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

3G; knowledge transfer; mobile data services; upgrade

Indexed keywords

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT;

3G; ADOPTION BEHAVIOR; BEHAVIOR-BASED; END-USERS; KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER; MARKETING RESEARCH; MOBILE DATA SERVICE; TECHNOLOGICAL ARCHITECTURES; THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS; UPGRADE;

MARKETING;

EID: 85138995510     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., and Davis, F. D. “User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View,” MIS Quarterly (27:3), 2003, pp. 425-478.
2. Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W., and Chervany, N. L. “Information Technology Adoption Across Time: A Cross-Sectional Comparison of Pre-Adoption and Post-Adoption Beliefs,” MIS Quarterly (23:2), 1999, pp. 183-213.
3. Gefen, D. & Straub, D. “Gender Difference in the Perception and Use of E-Mail: An Extension to the Technology Acceptance Model,” MIS Quarterly (21:4), 1997, pp. 389-400.
4. Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. “A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies,” Management Science (46:2), 2000, pp. 186-204.
5. Gregan-Paxton, J. and John, D. R. “Consumer Learning by Analogy: A Model of Internal Knowledge Transfer,” Journal of Consumer Research (24:3), 1997, pp. 266-284.
6. Moreau, C. P. Lehmann, D. R., and Markman, A. B. “Entrenched Knowledge Structures and Consumer Response to New Products,” Journal of Marketing Research (38:1), 2001, pp. 14-29
7. Lyytinen, K. and Rose, G. M. “The Disruptive Nature of Information Technology Innovations: The Case of Internet Computing In Systems Development Organizations,” MIS Quarterly (27:4), 2003, pp. 557-595.
8. Norton, J. A. and Bass, F. M. “A Diffusion Theory Model of Adoption and Substitution for Successive Generations of High-Technology Products,” Management Science (33:9), 1987, pp. 1069-1086.
9. Sawhney, M. S. “Leveraging High-Variety Strategies: From Portfolio Thinking to Platform Thinking,” Academy of Marketing Science Journal (26:1), 1998, pp. 54-61.
10. nd Ed., Hypercollins Publishers, New York, 1999.
11. John, G., Weiss, A. M., and Dutta, S. “Marketing in Technology-Intensive Markets: Toward a Conceptual Framework”, Journal of Marketing (63: Special), 1999, pp. 78-91.
12. S. Zhao, R. J. Meyer, and Jin Han, “The Enhancement Bias in Consumer Decisions to Adopt and Utilize Product Innovations,” Working Paper, 2003
13. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., and Warshaw, P. R. “User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models,” Management Science (35:8), 1989, pp. 982-1002.
14. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K., and Grewal, D., “Effects of Price, Brand, and Store Information on Buyers’ Product Evaluation,” Journal of Marketing Research (28:3), 1991, pp. 307-319.
15. Mukherjee, A. and W. D. Hoyer, “The Effect of Novel Attributes on Product Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28(Dec), 2001.
16. th Ed., Free Press, New York, 1995.
17. Bauer, R. A. “Consumer Behavior as Risk Taking,” Dynamic Marketing for a Changing World, Robert S. Hancock ed. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1960, pp. 289-398.
18. Gatignon, H., Tushman, M. L., Smith, W., and Anderson, P. “A Structural Approach to Assessing Innovation: Construct Development of Innovation Locus, Type, and Characteristics,” Management Science (48:9), 2002, pp. 1103-1122.
19. McGrath, M. E. Product Strategy for High-Technology Companies, 1995, Homewood, IL: Irwin.
20. Straub, D. W. “Validating Instruments in MIS Research,” MIS Quarterly (13:2), 1989, pp. 147-169.
21. Gefen, D., Straub, D. W., and Boudreau, M. C. “Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice,” Communications of the Association for Information Systems (4:7), 2000, pp. 1-70.
22. Anderson, J. C. and Gerbing, D. W. “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach,” Psychological Bulletin (103:3), 1988, pp. 411-423.
23. Hayduk, L. A. Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, London: John Hopkins, 1987.
24. Hu, L. T., and Bentler, P. M. “Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives,” Structured Equation Modeling (6:1), 1999, pp. 1-55.
25. Hair, J. F. J., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., and Black, W. C. Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1998.
26. Bentler, P. and Bonett, D. “Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures,” Psychological Bulletin (88:3), 1980, pp. 588-606.
27. Joreskog, K. G., and Sorbom, D. LISREL VI: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by the Method of Maximum Likelihood, Chicago: National Educational Resources, 1984.