Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2021.19.11.287

Effects of Perceived Interactions of Digital Transformed Services on Intention to Accept Technology  

Lee, Dong-Yub (Department Consulting, Kumoh National Institute of Technology)
Kim, Gwi-Gon (Dept. of Business Administration, Kumoh National Institute of Technology)
Publication Information
Journal of Digital Convergence / v.19, no.11, 2021 , pp. 287-300 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to verify the influence relationship of digitally converted services on consumers' intention to use since traditional services are being converted to digital services due to technological development and increase in non-face-to-face services. The study consisted of a program development procedure and a program effectiveness verification procedure, and bootstrapping was performed to verify the mediating effect adjusted along with multiple regression analysis. The subjects of this study were 323 university (graduate) students and the general public residing in Korea. Results. First, it was found that the three perceived interaction factors (perceived communication, perceived control, and perceived reactivity) of digital transformed services had a positive effect on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, respectively. Second, the relationship of influence of technology acceptance intention was verified. Third, it was confirmed that the effect of the three perceived interaction factors of digital transformed services on intention to use was mediated by perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Fourth, the mediating effect mediated by digital disparity was confirmed. As a result, it was confirmed that the three perceived interaction factors of the digitally converted service are important factors in the intention to use the digitally converted service. This suggests that efforts are needed to minimize the digital divide.
Keywords
Technology Acceptance Model; Digital Transformation; Digital Transformation of Services; Digital divide; Perceived interactivity;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Van Deursen, A. J., & Mossberger, K. (2018). Any thing for anyone? A new digital divide in internet-of-things skills. Policy & internet, 10(2), 122-140. DOI:10.1002/poi3.171.   DOI
2 Lombard, M., & Snyder-Duch, J. (2001). Interactive advertising and presence: A framework. Journal of interactive Advertising, 1(2), 56-65.   DOI
3 Lu, D., Lai, I. K. W., & Liu, Y. (2019). The consumer acceptance of smart product-service systems in sharing economy: the effects of perceived interactivity and particularity. Sustainability, 11(3), 928. DOI:10.3390/su11030928.   DOI
4 Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision sciences, 27(3), 451-481.   DOI
5 Pituch, K. A., & Lee, Y. K. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computers & Education, 47(2), 222-244. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2004.10.00.   DOI
6 Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS quarterly, 157-178.
7 Woxapp(2014). Digitalization Solutions Development. Woxapp(Online). https://woxapp.com/industries/digitalization-solutions-development
8 Scheerder, A., Van Deursen, A., & Van Dijk, J. (2017). Determinants of Internet skills, uses and outcomes. A systematic review of the second-and third-level digital divide. Telematics and informatics, 34(8), 1607-1624.   DOI
9 Bikse, V., Lusena-Ezera, I., Rivza, P., & Rivza, B. (2021). The Development of Digital Transformation and Relevant Competencies for Employees in the Context of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Latvia. Sustainability, 13(16), 9233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/cibmee.2019.073.   DOI
10 Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J. Q., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122, 889-901.   DOI
11 Van Dijk, J. A. (2005). The deepening divide: Inequality in the information society. Sage Publications.
12 Rogers, E. M. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. [Brochure]. New York. Simon and Schuster.
13 Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach.
14 Song, J. H., & Zinkhan, G. M. (2008). Determinants of perceived web site interactivity. Journal of marketing, 72(2), 99-113.   DOI
15 Matzner, M. et al. (2018). Digital transformation in service management, Journal of Service Management Research, 2(2), 3-21.   DOI
16 Andriushchenko, K. et al. (2020). Peculiarities of sustainable development of enterprises in the context of digital transformation. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues 7(3), 2255-2270. DOI:10.1542.   DOI
17 Berman, S. J., & Bell, R. (2011. Apr). Digital transformation: Creating new business models where digital meets physical. IBM Institute for Business Value, 1-17.
18 Manyika J, et al. (2015) Digital America: A tale of the haves and have-mores. McKinsey Global Institute. 1-120.
19 Majchrzak A, Markus ML, Wareham J. Designing for digital transformation: Lessons for information systems research from the study of ICT and societal challenges. MIS quarterly. 2016 Jun;40(2):267-277.   DOI
20 Belanger, F., & Carter, L. (2009). The impact of the digital divide on e-government use. Communications of the ACM, 52(4), 132-135.   DOI
21 Chang, Y., Shahzeidi, M., Kim, H., & Park, M. C. (2012). Gender digital divide and online participation: A cross-national analysis. EconStor, 1-14.
22 Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management science, 46(2), 186-204.   DOI
23 Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340.
24 Wu, G. (1999, March). Perceived interactivity and attitude toward web sites. In Proceedings of the conference-American Academy of Advertising (pp. 254-262). American Academy of Advertising.