IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v25y2014i1p111-136.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Framework and Guidelines for Context-Specific Theorizing in Information Systems Research

Author

Listed:
  • Weiyin Hong

    (Department of ISOM, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong; and Lee Business School, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada 89120)

  • Frank K. Y. Chan

    (Department of Information Systems, Decision Sciences and Statistics, ESSEC Business School, 95021 Cergy Pontoise Cedex, France)

  • James Y. L. Thong

    (Department of ISOM, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong)

  • Lewis C. Chasalow

    (Lebanon Valley College, Annville, Pennsylvania 17003)

  • Gurpreet Dhillon

    (School of Business, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia 23284)

Abstract

This paper discusses the value of context in theory development in information systems (IS) research. We examine how prior research has incorporated context in theorizing and develop a framework to classify existing approaches to contextualization. In addition, we expound on a decomposition approach to contextualization and put forth a set of guidelines for developing context-specific models. We illustrate the application of the guidelines by constructing and comparing various context-specific variations of the technology acceptance model (TAM)---i.e., the decomposed TAM that incorporates interaction effects between context-specific factors, the extended TAM with context-specific antecedents, and the integrated TAM that incorporates mediated moderation and moderated mediation effects of context-specific factors. We tested the models on 972 individuals in two technology usage contexts: a digital library and an agile Web portal. The results show that the decomposed TAM provides a better understanding of the contexts by revealing the direct and interaction effects of context-specific factors on behavioral intention that are not mediated by the TAM constructs of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. This work contributes to the ongoing discussion about the importance of context in theory development and provides guidance for context-specific theorizing in IS research.

Suggested Citation

  • Weiyin Hong & Frank K. Y. Chan & James Y. L. Thong & Lewis C. Chasalow & Gurpreet Dhillon, 2014. "A Framework and Guidelines for Context-Specific Theorizing in Information Systems Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 111-136, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:25:y:2014:i:1:p:111-136
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.2013.0501
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.2013.0501
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.2013.0501?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Se-Joon Hong & Kar Yan Tam, 2006. "Understanding the Adoption of Multipurpose Information Appliances: The Case of Mobile Data Services," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 162-179, June.
    2. Rajiv Sabherwal & Anand Jeyaraj & Charles Chowa, 2006. "Information System Success: Individual and Organizational Determinants," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1849-1864, December.
    3. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    4. Ritu Agarwal & Jayesh Prasad, 1998. "A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 204-215, June.
    5. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    6. Barbara H. Wixom & Peter A. Todd, 2005. "A Theoretical Integration of User Satisfaction and Technology Acceptance," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 85-102, March.
    7. Allen S. Lee & Richard L. Baskerville, 2003. "Generalizing Generalizability in Information Systems Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 221-243, September.
    8. Levent V. Orman, 2002. "Electronic Markets, Hierarchies, Hubs, and Intermediaries," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 213-228, July.
    9. Whetten, David A., 2009. "An Examination of the Interface between Context and Theory Applied to the Study of Chinese Organizations," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 29-56, March.
    10. Zahra, Shaker A., 2007. "Contextualizing theory building in entrepreneurship research," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 443-452, May.
    11. Wanda J. Orlikowski & C. Suzanne Iacono, 2001. "Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the “IT” in IT Research—A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 121-134, June.
    12. Sung S. Kim & Naresh K. Malhotra, 2005. "A Longitudinal Model of Continued IS Use: An Integrative View of Four Mechanisms Underlying Postadoption Phenomena," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 741-755, May.
    13. Hsinchun Chen & Tobun D. Ng & Joanne Martinez & Bruce R. Schatz, 1997. "A concept space approach to addressing the vocabulary problem in scientific information retrieval: An experiment on the Worm Community System," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 48(1), pages 17-31, January.
    14. Ritu Agarwal & V. Sambamurthy & Ralph M. Stair, 2000. "Research Report: The Evolving Relationship Between General and Specific Computer Self-Efficacy—An Empirical Assessment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 418-430, December.
    15. Christopher R. Plouffe & John S. Hulland & Mark Vandenbosch, 2001. "Research Report: Richness Versus Parsimony in Modeling Technology Adoption Decisions—Understanding Merchant Adoption of a Smart Card-Based Payment System," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 208-222, June.
    16. Wynne W. Chin & Barbara L. Marcolin & Peter R. Newsted, 2003. "A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Study and an Electronic-Mail Emotion/Adoption Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 189-217, June.
    17. Jonathan W. Palmer, 2002. "Web Site Usability, Design, and Performance Metrics," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 151-167, June.
    18. Tsui, Anne S., 2006. "Contextualization in Chinese Management Research," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(01), pages 1-13, March.
    19. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    20. Shirley Taylor & Peter A. Todd, 1995. "Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 144-176, June.
    21. Pierre Berthon & Leyland Pitt & Michael Ewing & Christopher L. Carr, 2002. "Potential Research Space in MIS: A Framework for Envisioning and Evaluating Research Replication, Extension, and Generation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 416-427, December.
    22. Jiing-Lih Farh & Chen-Bo Zhong & Dennis W. Organ, 2004. "Organizational Citizenship Behavior in the People's Republic of China," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 241-253, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jeeyeon Jeong & Yaeri Kim & Taewoo Roh, 2021. "Do Consumers Care About Aesthetics and Compatibility? The Intention to Use Wearable Devices in Health Care," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, August.
    2. Deborah Compeau & Barbara Marcolin & Helen Kelley & Chris Higgins, 2012. "Research Commentary ---Generalizability of Information Systems Research Using Student Subjects---A Reflection on Our Practices and Recommendations for Future Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1093-1109, December.
    3. Rajak, Manindra & Shaw, Krishnendu, 2021. "An extension of technology acceptance model for mHealth user adoption," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Nan Zhang & Xunhua Guo & Guoqing Chen, 2011. "Why adoption and use behavior of IT/IS cannot last?—two studies in China," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 381-395, July.
    5. Wen-Lung Shiau & Yogesh K. Dwivedi, 2013. "Citation and co-citation analysis to identify core and emerging knowledge in electronic commerce research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1317-1337, March.
    6. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Banita Lal & Michael D. Williams & Marc Clement, 2017. "Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 549-568, June.
    7. Lionel P. Robert Jr. & Tracy Ann Sykes, 2017. "Extending the Concept of Control Beliefs: Integrating the Role of Advice Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 84-96, March.
    8. Türker, Cansu & Altay, Burak Can & Okumuş, Abdullah, 2022. "Understanding user acceptance of QR code mobile payment systems in Turkey: An extended TAM," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    9. Iviane Ramos-de-Luna & Francisco Montoro-Ríos & Francisco Liébana-Cabanillas, 2016. "Determinants of the intention to use NFC technology as a payment system: an acceptance model approach," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-314, May.
    10. Verhagen. T. & Feldberg, F. & Hooff, B. van den, 2008. "Explaining user adoption of virtual worlds: towards a multipurpose Explaining user adoption of virtual worlds: towards a multipurpose motivational model," Serie Research Memoranda 0006, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    11. Wajeeha Aslam & Marija Ham & Imtiaz Arif, 2017. "Consumer Behavioral Intentions towards Mobile Payment Services: An Empirical Analysis in Pakistan," Tržište/Market, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, vol. 29(2), pages 161-176.
    12. Cansu TÜRKER & Abdullah OKUMUŞ, 2019. "Mobil Ödeme Kullanımına Yönelik Niyet ve Algıların SosyoDemografik Özelliklere Göre Farklılıklarının İncelenmesi," Istanbul Management Journal, Istanbul University Business School, vol. 0(87), pages 111-139, December.
    13. Hsiao, Chun Hua & Yang, Chyan, 2011. "The intellectual development of the technology acceptance model: A co-citation analysis," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 128-136.
    14. H Dhami & M Grabowski, 2011. "Technology impacts on safety and decision making over time in marine transportation," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 225(3), pages 269-292, September.
    15. Viswanath Venkatesh & Ritu Agarwal, 2006. "Turning Visitors into Customers: A Usability-Centric Perspective on Purchase Behavior in Electronic Channels," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 367-382, March.
    16. Hart O. Awa & Ojiabo Ukoha & Bartholomew C. Emecheta, 2016. "Using T-O-E theoretical framework to study the adoption of ERP solution," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1196571-119, December.
    17. Agarwal, Reeti & Rastogi, Sanjay & Mehrotra, Ankit, 2009. "Customers’ perspectives regarding e-banking in an emerging economy," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 340-351.
    18. Ravi Bapna & Paulo Goes & Kwok Kee Wei & Zhongju Zhang, 2011. "A Finite Mixture Logit Model to Segment and Predict Electronic Payments System Adoption," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 118-133, March.
    19. Nathalie Demoulin & Kristof Coussement, 2018. "Acceptance of text-mining systems: The signaling role of information quality," Post-Print hal-02111772, HAL.
    20. Nastjuk, Ilja & Herrenkind, Bernd & Marrone, Mauricio & Brendel, Alfred Benedikt & Kolbe, Lutz M., 2020. "What drives the acceptance of autonomous driving? An investigation of acceptance factors from an end-user's perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:25:y:2014:i:1:p:111-136. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.