IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/padigm/v22y2018i1p65-79.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intentions to Use Social Networking Sites (SNS) Using Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)

Author

Listed:
  • Ruchi V. Dixit
  • Gyan Prakash

Abstract

This article intends to empirically test and analyse Social Networking Sites (SNS) usage pattern applying Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and predict user’s intention to use SNS. This information would help in understanding better its remarkable marketing potential in India to practice and to create user value. The researchers explored intentions to use SNS using Davis (1985) TAM in Indian context and applied confirmatory factor analysis using structural equation modelling (SEM) technique to check the model fitness. To commensurate this, a survey was carried out through a well-structured questionnaire of 172 respondents of North India, particularly from western UP covering different age groups, income level, educational background and professions. To explore the degree of fitness of TAM factors in SNS, six hypotheses were formulated and tested, where four were accepted and two were rejected. Findings revealed that the TAM fits with the data to interpret and analyse intentions to use SNS in the target population. Since the survey was conducted in and around Mathura (UP), this work could be extended to further research covering bigger geographical areas and sample size to have more accurate predictions regarding diversified SNS usage pattern in India. To evaluate the integration of new technologies, traditional TAM is extensively used. The ‘Intention to Use SNS’ is studied comparatively less in Indian context. This study explores and underlines the diversified potential of these networks. To gauge detailed information, the researcher added five items in ‘Perceived Usefulness’ construct and one item in ‘Intention to Use’ construct of TAM. The objective is to critically analyse and interpret respondent’s viewpoints regarding diversified SNS usage intentions, in addition to viewing and communicating with old and new friends.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruchi V. Dixit & Gyan Prakash, 2018. "Intentions to Use Social Networking Sites (SNS) Using Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)," Paradigm, , vol. 22(1), pages 65-79, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:padigm:v:22:y:2018:i:1:p:65-79
    DOI: 10.1177/0971890718758201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0971890718758201
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0971890718758201?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. Dellarocas, Chrysanthos, 2003. "The Digitization of Word-of-mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Working papers 4296-03, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    2. Kieran Mathieson, 1991. "Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 173-191, September.
    3. Chrysanthos Dellarocas, 2003. "The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(10), pages 1407-1424, October.
    4. Henrikki Tikkanen & Joel Hietanen & Tuomas Henttonen & Joonas Rokka, 2009. "Exploring virtual worlds : success factors in virtual world marketing," Post-Print hal-02313353, HAL.
    5. Malthouse, Edward C. & Haenlein, Michael & Skiera, Bernd & Wege, Egbert & Zhang, Michael, 2013. "Managing Customer Relationships in the Social Media Era: Introducing the Social CRM House," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 270-280.
    6. 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.
    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. Roma, Paolo & Aloini, Davide, 2019. "How does brand-related user-generated content differ across social media? Evidence reloaded," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 322-339.
    2. Wang, Zhan & Kim, Hyun Gon, 2017. "Can Social Media Marketing Improve Customer Relationship Capabilities and Firm Performance? Dynamic Capability Perspective," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 15-26.
    3. Fang, Mingyue & Nie, Huihua & Shen, Xinyi, 2023. "Can enterprise digitization improve ESG performance?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    4. Hasan, Rajibul & Lowe, Ben & Petrovici, Dan, 2020. "Consumer adoption of pro-poor service innovations in subsistence marketplaces," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 461-475.
    5. Yucheng Zhang & Zhiling Wang & Lin Xiao & Lijun Wang & Pei Huang, 2023. "Discovering the evolution of online reviews: A bibliometric review," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-22, December.
    6. Edgardo Arturo Ayala Gaytán, 2009. "Social network externalities and price dispersion in online markets," Ensayos Revista de Economia, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon, Facultad de Economia, vol. 0(2), pages 1-28, November.
    7. Chrysanthos Dellarocas & Charles A. Wood, 2008. "The Sound of Silence in Online Feedback: Estimating Trading Risks in the Presence of Reporting Bias," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(3), pages 460-476, March.
    8. Ravi Bapna & Chrysanthos Dellarocas & Sarah Rice, 2010. "Vertically Differentiated Simultaneous Vickrey Auctions: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(7), pages 1074-1092, July.
    9. Liuan Wang & Lu (Lucy) Yan & Tongxin Zhou & Xitong Guo & Gregory R. Heim, 2020. "Understanding Physicians’ Online-Offline Behavior Dynamics: An Empirical Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 537-555, June.
    10. Tobias Gesche, 2022. "Reference‐price shifts and customer antagonism: Evidence from reviews for online auctions," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 558-578, August.
    11. Nan Yang & Renyu Zhang, 2022. "Dynamic pricing and inventory management in the presence of online reviews," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(8), pages 3180-3197, August.
    12. Gary E. Bolton & Elena Katok & Axel Ockenfels, 2004. "How Effective Are Electronic Reputation Mechanisms? An Experimental Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1587-1602, November.
    13. Venkatesh, Viswanath & Maruping, Likoebe M. & Brown, Susan A., 2006. "Role of time in self-prediction of behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 160-176, July.
    14. Kenju Kamei & Louis Putterman, 2018. "Reputation Transmission Without Benefit To The Reporter: A Behavioral Underpinning Of Markets In Experimental Focus," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 158-172, January.
    15. Heyes, Anthony & Kapur, Sandeep, 2012. "Angry customers, e-word-of-mouth and incentives for quality provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 813-828.
    16. Nuria Huete-Alcocer & Miguel Ángel Valero-Tévar, 2021. "Impact of Information Sources on Promoting Tourism in a Rural Region: The Case of the Roman Villa of Noheda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-23, July.
    17. Garima Malik & A. Sajeevan Rao, 2019. "Extended expectation-confirmation model to predict continued usage of ODR/ride hailing apps: role of perceived value and self-efficacy," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 461-482, December.
    18. Judy E. Scott & Dawn G. Gregg & Jae Hoon Choi, 2015. "Lemon complaints: When online auctions go sour," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 177-191, February.
    19. Andrew W. Bausch, 2014. "Evolving intergroup cooperation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 369-393, December.
    20. Khim-Yong Goh & Cheng-Suang Heng & Zhijie Lin, 2013. "Social Media Brand Community and Consumer Behavior: Quantifying the Relative Impact of User- and Marketer-Generated Content," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 88-107, March.

    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:sae:padigm:v:22:y:2018:i:1:p:65-79. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.