The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) it’s a [information systems] theory that shapes how users come to accept and use a technology. The model suggests that when users are presented with a new software package, a number of factors influence their decision about how and when to use it, in particular:
either Perceived utility (PU)
“The degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would improve their job performance.”
by Fred Davis
either Perceived Ease of Use (EOU)
“The degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be effortless.”
by Fred Davis
The technology acceptance model. is one of the most influential extensions of Ajzen and Fishbein’s Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) in the literature. It was developed by Fred Davis and Richard Bagozzi. SIZE It replaces many of the TRA attitude measures with the two measures of technology acceptance, ease of use, and usefulness. TRA and TAM, which have strong behavioral elements, assume that when someone intends to act, they will be free to act without limitation. In the real world there will be many restrictions, such as limited capacity, time restrictions, environmental or organizational limits, or unconscious habits that will limit the freedom to act.
Theory of Reasoned Action
TRA posits that individual behavior is driven by behavioral intentions where behavioral intentions are a function of an individual’s attitude toward the behavior and subjective norms surrounding behavioral performance.
Attitude toward behavior is defined as the individual’s positive or negative feelings about performing a behavior. It is determined through an evaluation of one’s beliefs regarding the consequences that arise from a behavior and an evaluation of the desirability of these consequences. Formally, the overall attitude can be evaluated as the sum of the individual consequence x desirability evaluations for all the expected consequences of the behavior.
subjective norm It is defined as an individual’s perception of whether important people to the individual think the behavior should be performed. The opinion contribution of any given referent is weighted by the motivation an individual has to comply with the wishes of that referent. Thus, the overall subjective norm can be expressed as the sum of the individual perception x motivation ratings for all relevant referents.
algebraically TRA can be represented as B ≈ BI = w1AB + w2SN where is b behaviorBI is behavioral intentionAB is attitude toward behavior, SN is subjective normand w1 and w2 are weights that represent the importance of each term.
The model has some limitations, including a significant risk of confusion between attitudes and norms, since attitudes can often be rephrased as norms and vice versa. A second limitation is the assumption that when someone intends to act, he will be free to act without limitation. In practice, constraints such as limited capacity, time, environmental or organizational limits, and unconscious habits will limit the freedom to act. The theory of planned behavior (TPB) tries to solve this limitation.
Theory of planned behavior
TPB posits that individual behavior is driven by behavioral intentions where behavioral intentions are a function of an individual’s attitude toward the behavior, subjective norms surrounding performance of the behavior, and the individual’s perception of the ease with which the behavior (behavior) can be performed. control).
behavior control It is defined as the perception that one has of the difficulty of carrying out a behavior. TPB considers that the control that people have over their behavior is on a continuum from behaviors that are easily performed to those that require effort, resources, etc. considerable.
Although Ajzen has suggested that the link between behavior and behavior control described in the model should be between behavior and actual behavior control rather than perceived behavior control, the difficulty of assessing actual control has led to the use of the model. control perceived as proxy.
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology
He UTAUT aims to explain the user’s intentions of using an IS and the behavior of subsequent use. The theory holds that four key constructs (performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions) are direct determinants of usage intention and behavior. Gender, age, experience, and voluntary uses are postulated to mediate the impact of the four key constructs on use intention and behavior. The theory was developed through a review and consolidation of the constructions of eight models that previous research had used to explain the behavior of IS use (theory of reasoned action, model of acceptance of technology and motivational model, theory of planned behavior , a combined theory of planned behavior/technology acceptance model, PC utilization model, innovation diffusion theory, and social cognitive theory). Subsequent validation of UTAUT in a longitudinal study found that it accounted for 70% of the variance in intention to use.
Conclusion
The recent development of information technology applications aimed at highly specialized individual professionals, such as doctors and lawyers, has proliferated substantially. Given the rapid growth of these innovative technological applications aimed at individual professionals, it is important to examine the extent to which existing theories can explain or predict their technological acceptance. In this sense, the current study represents a conceptual replication of a previous model comparison by re-examining the prevailing theoretical models in a healthcare setting involving different users and technologies. Specifically, this study empirically tests the applicability of three theoretical models: the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), and a decomposed TPB model that is potentially suitable for the target professional context. Our research focus is to what extent each model can explain the acceptance of telemedicine technology by physicians.
