Journal of Hospitality and Tourism TechnologyAn empirical examination of guests' adoption of interactive mobile technologies inhotels: Revisiting cognitive absorption, playfulness, and securityWenyue Wendy Zhu Cristian Morosan

Article information:To cite this document:Wenyue Wendy Zhu Cristian Morosan , (2014),"An empirical examination of guests' adoption of interactivemobile technologies in hotels", Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, Vol. 5 Iss 1 pp. 78 - 94Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-09-2013-0029

Downloaded on: 09 October 2014, At: 23:49 (PT)References: this document contains references to 54 other documents.To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.comThe fulltext of this document has been downloaded 158 times since 2014*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Jin Young Im, Murat Hancer, (2014),"Shaping travelers’ attitude toward travel mobile applications",Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, Vol. 5 Iss 2 pp. 177-193 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-11-2013-0036Timothy Teo, Ömer Faruk Ursava#, Ekrem Bahçekapili, (2011),"Efficiency of the technology acceptancemodel to explain pre#service teachers' intention to use technology: A Turkish study", Campus-WideInformation Systems, Vol. 28 Iss 2 pp. 93-101Boonlert Watjatrakul, (2013),"Intention to use a free voluntary service: The effects of social influence,knowledge and perceptions", Journal of Systems and Information Technology, Vol. 15 Iss 2 pp. 202-220

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 374558 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald forAuthors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelinesare available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well asproviding an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committeeon Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archivepreservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

An empirical examination ofguests’ adoption of interactivemobile technologies in hotels

Revisiting cognitive absorption,playfulness, and security

Wenyue Wendy ZhuDP Consulting, Houston, Texas, USA, and

Cristian MorosanConrad N. Hilton College of Hotel and Restaurant Management,

University of Houston, Houston, Texas, USA

Abstract

Purpose – Interactive mobile technologies (IMT) offered to hotel guests during their stay represent aninteresting development in consumer technologies in the hotel industry. Such technologies are designedto facilitate transactions and enhance the quality of guest experience. This research explains how hotelguests develop attitudes and intentions to use IMT in hotels. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Design/methodology/approach – Using data from students enrolled in a large hospitalityprogram located in the Southwestern USA, the study validates a variant of the technology acceptancemodel, extended with constructs such as cognitive absorption and security that capture better thecontext of IMT in hotels.

Findings – The conceptual model explained a large part of variability in intentions to use IMT.Among several predictors, cognitive absorption was the stronger predictor of attitudes. The analysisalso revealed the dimensions of cognitive absorption as a second-order factor in the context of mobilecommerce in the hotel industry.

Research limitations/implications – This research offers a number of notable theoreticalcontributions. First, it provides an unique perspective on adoption of immersive technologies thatenhance the experiential value of the hotel stay. Second, it revisits and validates the multidimensionalconstruct of cognitive absorption. Finally, it ascertains the roles of cognitive absorption, playfulness,and security in the adoption of IMT.

Practical implications – This research provides specific suggestions to integrate IMT in hotelsbased on system characteristics and users’ perceptions.

Originality/value – To date, the research examining the immersive aspects of technology is scant.This research provides a novel platform for the systematic examination of the adoption of immersivetechnologies as they mediate the experiences in hotel service settings.

Keywords Security, Technology acceptance model, Cognitive absorption,Interactive in-room mobile technologies, Playfulness

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionIn recent years, the hotel industry has experienced numerous transformationsfacilitated by developments in information technology. Yet, while the industry is not atthe forefront of innovation, it seems to be animated in terms of information technologydeployment (“A sample of recent installations”, 2013). Despite the discrepancy among

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1757-9880.htm

Received 25 September 2013Revised 5 December 2013Accepted 3 February 2014

Journal of Hospitality and TourismTechnologyVol. 5 No. 1, 2014pp. 78-94q Emerald Group Publishing Limited1757-9880DOI 10.1108/JHTT-09-2013-0029

JHTT5,1

78

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

the fragmented industry players in the pace and magnitude of technology adoption(Minghetti and Buhalis, 2010), there are several technologies that undoubtedlybring value to the industry, and therefore, have been deployed enthusiastically(e.g. e-distribution systems, mobile commerce platforms) (Spencer et al., 2012).Additionally, there are technologies that can potentially bring benefits to hotels byenhancing the quality of guests’ experiences and facilitating easier completion ofguest-related tasks (Morosan, 2012a). Generally, the value proposition of the hotelexperience can be enhanced if hotels are able to anticipate new advances in technologyand implement them into their current systems (Magnini et al., 2003). Among suchtechnologies, one that is gaining increasing ground among both hotels and guests isthe generically-called in-room interactive mobile technologies (IMT) (Intelity, 2013a).

Generally, IMT denote technologies offered to guests to facilitate certain tasks andenhance the overall hotel stay experience. They represent a combination of hardware(e.g. tablets) and software (e.g. brand- or vendor-specific applications) connected toWi-Fi networks. Using IMT, guests can order products, find destination information,interact with the hotel’s staff, or control room features. Hotels typically offer the use ofIMT for free to their guests for the duration of their stay (Intelity, 2013b). As with anyin-room technology, the costs of development, deployment, operation, and maintenanceIMT can be substantial. Yet, even though the deployment of IMT has been sporadic,wherever adopted, IMT are demonstrating their value to both hotels and guests(Eftekari, 2013; Krige, 2013; Mastroberte, 2012).

While the trade literature generally converges toward optimistic views regardingthe fate of IMT in hotels (De Lollis, 2012), the scholarly literature remains limited(Beldona and Cobanoglu, 2007). To date, it is not clear what factors facilitate guests’development of attitudes and intentions to use IMT in hotels. Yet, understandingguests’ adoption of IMT would allow hoteliers to deploy IMT designed to enhance thehotel stay experiences of guests while increasing hotel revenues. In this context, themain goal of this research is to examine the factors leading to guests’ developmentof attitudes and intentions to use IMT in hotels. Drawing upon classicattitudinal-behavioral technology adoption (Davis, 1989) and cognitive absorptionand flow theories (Agarwal and Karahanna, 2000; Csikszentmihaiyi, 1990), thisresearch follows four objectives:

(1) validates the classic technology adoption constructs as primary drivers ofintentions to use IMT in hotels;

(2) clarifies the structure and role of cognitive absorption in the adoptionframework of IMT;

(3) explicates how playfulness influences cognitive absorption; and

(4) examines the role of users’ security perceptions as a determinant of hotel guests’attitudes toward using IMT.

Review of literatureModel developmentTheoretical base: the technology acceptance model. Technology adoption theoriesabound in the literature, and generally explain adoption based on fundamentalrelationship between system beliefs and evaluative outcomes (e.g. attitudes,behaviors). More than 80 theories and models explaining technology adoption were

Empiricalexamination of

guests’ adoption

79

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

initially considered as a theoretical foundation for this research (e.g. innovationdiffusion theory, technology acceptance model (TAM), unified theory of adoption anduse of technology). However, the classic TAM (Davis, 1989) was chosen as the maintheoretical foundation in this research for three main reasons, namely disciplinary fit,context appropriateness, and empirical validation. First, TAM is among a very fewtheories that are disciplinary native to information technology. Second, TAM lends itselfto extension to capture the basics of new technologies or industry contexts. Over time,the TAM was utilized with extensions in directions that are descriptive of specificbusiness environments (e.g. consumers (Morosan, 2012a), and markets (Mozeik et al.,2009)). Finally, a plethora of studies have successfully used the classic TAM to examinethe acceptance of consumer technologies, providing overwhelming empirical validation(Chen et al., 2002; Kulviwat et al., 2007). Despite its shortfalls (arguably too parsimonious,too strongly belief-based), to date, the TAM remains arguably the most popular theoryfor examining technology adoption (Stern et al., 2008). Even though TAM evolved intonewer theories (e.g. TAM2, TAM3), the classic TAM was chosen in this research as itsparsimony allowed it to be extended only with constructs that are relevant to the contextof this particular research, rendering the rival theoretical bases unfit.

The original TAM was modified from the theory of reasoned action (TRA)(Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975) to explain consumer adoption of technology via based ontwo important system beliefs (i.e. usefulness, ease of use), which influence users’attitudes and, subsequently, their intentions to use a technology. Perceived usefulnessis defined as the degree to which a person believes that using a particular technologywould enhance his or her task performance (Davis, 1989). Usually, perceived usefulnessreflects a measure of technology utility, and is present in one form or another in almostall technology adoption theories. Of the two predictors of attitudes in the TAM,perceived usefulness seems to be the stronger predictor, outlining the fact that userswould rather use a technology that performs the task with more utility than atechnology that is merely easy to use (Kim and Forsythe, 2008). In the context of IMT,it is necessary that the technology facilitate task completion. Today’s tablet-based IMToffers guests the possibility of purchasing hotel products, and are generallycharacterized by efficiency, speed, and the opportunity to optimize the interaction withthe hotel (Intelity, 2013a, b). All of these conditions being met, the technology willinfluence users’ attitudes toward the technology (Morosan, 2012a), with an impact ontheir intentions to use. In this context, the following hypothesis was developed:

H1. A guest’s perceived usefulness of IMT positively influences the guest’sattitudes toward using IMT in hotels.

Perceived ease of use is defined as the degree to which a user believes that using atechnology would allow him/her to complete a task with minimum effort (Davis, 1989).Individuals are likely to prefer a technology when it does not require extensive mentaland physical effort during the interaction, as well as when the technology ischaracterized by ease of learning (Castaneda et al., 2007). Previous research hasdemonstrated that technologies that are easy to use influence consumers’ attitudestowards using them (Kim and Forsythe, 2008; Morosan, 2012a). The examples of IMTavailable to date overwhelmingly support the idea that IMT systems are easy to use,and guests can use them without much effort (De Lollis, 2012). Moreover, in hotels,guests usually do not have an extensive period of time in which they can learn how to

JHTT5,1

80

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

use a specific technology. Thus, most IMT guest systems are designed with ease of usein mind, in order to facilitate utilization (Intelity, 2013a). In this context, the followinghypothesis was developed:

H2. A guest’s perceived ease of use of IMT positively influences the guest’sattitudes toward using IMT in hotels.

The classic TAM predicates a relationship between perceived ease of use andperceived usefulness, founded on the notion that a technology that is easy to use wouldseem to be efficient and helpful to consumers (Davis, 1989). Such a relationship hasbeen validated in a variety of contexts (Kim and Forsythe, 2008), including hospitalityand adjacent fields (Morosan, 2012a). In the context of IMT, the hardware and softwareplatforms are designed with low complexity to allow users to complete hotel relatedtasks with ease (Intelity, 2013a). Based on these theoretical foundations, it is expectedthat the perceived ease of use is likely to influence the perceived usefulness of IMT inhotels, in line with the following hypothesis:

H3. A guest’s perceived ease of use of IMT positively influences the guest’sperceived usefulness of IMT in hotels.

The relationship between attitudes and intentions to use a technology is fundamentalwithin the rich technology adoption literature (Davis, 1989). In a hotel context, it isbelieved that once consumers develop positive attitudes towards using specifictechnologies, they will develop intentions to use those technologies, with furtherpositive impact in shaping actual behaviors (Morosan and Jeong, 2008). Therelationship between attitudes and intentions with respect to hotel technologies hasbeen validated in a number of studies, especially in contexts where consumers have achance to voluntarily use a specific technology (Morosan, 2012a). In this context, thefollowing hypothesis was developed:

H4. A guest’s attitude toward hotel in-room IMT positively influences the guest’sintentions to use IMT in hotels.

Despite the popularity of the TAM, the model remains slightly deficient in capturingall industry and technology contexts. Thus, over time, the theory has been extended ina variety of ways to capture specific contexts. To reflect the context of IMT in hotels,the TAM has been extended in this research with the constructs of cognitiveabsorption, playfulness, and perceived security.

Cognitive absorption. Most technology adoption literature focuses on validatinglinks between system beliefs and attitudinal and behavioral responses influenced bythose beliefs (Morosan, 2012b). Yet, consumers have their own ways of interacting withtechnology, which usually results in holistic experiences. Such experiences arenot typically accounted for in most theoretical frameworks in technology adoption.In the context of IMT in hotels, guests’ experiences utilizing the technology to orderhotel products and services cannot be only episodic. They require a higher-orderinteraction with the technology, especially if technology is designed with consumer’sexperience in mind. To capture the context of these holistic experiences, this researchused the concept of cognitive absorption (Agarwal and Karahanna, 2000), which wasdeveloped based several paradigms reflecting absorption, engagement, and flow.

Empiricalexamination of

guests’ adoption

81

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

Cognitive absorption stemmed from the trait of absorption, which reflects anindividual’s disposition to engage with total attention in an activity or toward an object.Initially conceptualized as a trait, the notion of absorption has been eventually viewedboth as a state and as a trait (Kulviwat et al., 2007). Cognitive absorption is also basedon flow theories (Csikszentmihaiyi, 1990). In a state of flow, individuals seem to be soconcentrated in an activity that “nothing else seemed to matter” (Csikszentmihaiyi,1990). The concept of flow can be applied to individuals interacting within theframework of physical activities, but most importantly, while interacting withtechnologies such as computer languages (Agarwal and Karahanna, 2000). Thus, flowwas conceptualized from a technology point of view, and characterized by both theconcentration related to an activity and the enjoyment experienced as a result ofengaging in that activity (Ghani and Deshpande, 1994). According to Agarwaland Karahanna (2000), cognitive absorption is a multidimensional construct, beingformed of dimensions such as temporal dissociation, focused immersion, heightenedenjoyment, control, and curiosity. The overall construct has been found to influencesystem beliefs such as perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in researchinvolving the TAM (Agarwal and Karahanna, 2000).

To reflect best the context of IMT in hotels, the conceptualization of cognitiveabsorption does not include all the dimensions originally attributed to the construct. Thatis, two dimensions of the original cognitive absorption, namely control and heightenedenjoyment have been removed. The role of control over the interaction with the IT withinthe literature is inconclusive, being validated as either an antecedent (Ghani andDeshpande, 1994; Webster and Ho, 1997) or dimension of flow (Trevino and Webster,1992). Webster and Ho (1997) conceptualized flow as a multidimensional constructfounded on interest, curiosity, and attention focus, but without control, and named it“cognitive engagement”. Cognitive engagement was found to be related to playfulness(Webster and Ho, 1997). Similarly, heightened enjoyment has been viewed as bothantecedent (Ghani and Deshpande, 1994) or as a core dimension of flow (Trevino andWebster, 1992), with an unclear role within the dimensionality of cognitive absorption.Given the mobile, novel, and immersive character of IMT in hotels, the cognitiveabsorption, or engagement of the guest within the use of the technology can be predicatedby focused immersion, curiosity, and temporal dissociation. Thus, given the considerationsabove, in the context of IMT in hotels, the following hypotheses were developed:

H5a. Temporal dissociation is a dimension of cognitive absorption of guests’ use ofIMT in hotels.

H5b. Curiosity is a dimension of cognitive absorption of guests’ use of IMT in hotels.

H5c. Focused immersion is a dimension of cognitive absorption of guests’ use ofIMT in hotels.

H6. A guest’s cognitive absorption related to IMT in hotels positively influencesthe guest’s attitudes toward using IMT in hotels.

H7. A guest’s cognitive absorption related to IMT in hotels positively influencesthe guest’s perceived usefulness of IMT in hotels.

H8. A guest’s cognitive absorption related to IMT in hotels positively influencesthe guest’s perceived ease of use of IMT in hotels.

JHTT5,1

82

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

Playfulness. Playfulness can be defined as a measure of an individual’s use of a productreflected by a belief that this activity is perceived as enjoyable without anyperformance consequences (Davis et al., 1992). Moon and Kim (2001) observed theplayfulness has a significant positive relationship with individual’s attitude towardinformation system. Lin et al. (2005) confirmed perceived playfulness is a criticalvariable to continue using a technology. Several other studies showed that playfulnesswas an important factors for consumer to adopt a new technology in hospitality(Morosan and Jeong, 2008) and beyond (Hackbarth et al., 2003). Yet, most cognitiveabsorption work views playfulness as an antecedent of cognitive absorption (Agarwaland Karahanna, 2000). Based on the above considerations, the following hypothesiswas developed:

H9. A guest’s playfulness positively influences the guest’s cognitive absorptionrelated to IMT in hotels.

Security. In any technology framework, security plays a critical role, as informationthat is exchanged using technology might be perceived as vulnerable to breaches(Chang et al., 2011). Due to the fragmented character of the hotel industry, securityplays an increasingly important role in hotel technology (Cobanoglu and DeMicco,2007). In the absence of knowledge allowing users to engage in objective evaluations ofsecurity of a technology, they resort to conceptualizing perceived security, whichrepresents user’s beliefs that a technology is secure (Chang et al., 2011). Given theirmobile platform support, there can be a number of important security considerationsof IMT. First, mobile devices seem to have by default a lower perception of securitythan wired devices, usually due to the wireless character of the information exchange(Wu and Wang, 2005). Second, consumers do not exactly know how exactly thetransaction information will be used by firms, given the ambiguity surroundinge-commerce transactions (Morosan, 2012b). In a variety of technology contexts,perceived security was validated as an antecedent of behavioral outcomes related totechnology (e.g. intentions to use) (Shin, 2009). In these conditions, by enhancingsecurity perceptions of hotel guests when using IMT, they may actually developpositive attitudes. In this context, the following hypothesis was developed:

H10. A guest’s perceived security of IMT positively influences the guest’s attitudestoward using IMT in hotels.

A representation on the conceptual model used in this research is provided in Figure 1.

MethodologyInstrument developmentThe survey instrument was based on the rich literature on technology adoption andcognitive absorption. Perceived usefulness was measured using four items adaptedfrom Lopez-Nicolas et al. (2008), which generally tapped into the extent to which usingIMT for purchasing would allow users to make more accurate ordering, improve thequality of stay, allow respondents to do things faster. Perceived ease of use wasmeasured with four items gauging the extent to which learning to deal with IMT wasgenerally easy (Lopez-Nicolas et al., 2008; Lu et al., 2008). Attitudes were measuredwith two items adapted from Ahn et al. (2007) and Lee and Kozar (2008) assessing theextent to which using IMT is foolish/wise and a bad/good idea. Intentions were

Empiricalexamination of

guests’ adoption

83

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

measured via four items adapted from Venkatesh et al. (2012), measuring the extent towhich respondents generally intend to use IMT in hotels.

Cognitive absorption was measured via its adapted dimensions (Agarwal andKarahanna, 2000). For example, temporal dissociation was measured using four items,gauging the extent to which time would go by quickly when using IMT. Curiosity wasmeasured using three items, generally assessing the extent to which using IMT wouldexcite respondents’ curiosity. Focused immersion was measured using three items,tapping into the extent to which respondents would block out most distractionswhen using IMT. Perceived playfulness was measured using three items that tappedinto the extent respondents were imaginative, creative, and playful when usingtablet technologies (Agarwal and Karahanna, 2000). Finally, perceived security wasmeasured using four items, which gauged the extent to which IMT are secure systemsthrough which one could send sensitive information (Vatanasombut et al., 2008).All items were anchored in five-point Likert-type scales, (5 – “strongly agree”) whilethe attitudes scale was a five-point semantic differential scale.

Instrument administrationThe survey asked respondents to read a scenario, in which they were assumed to beguests in a hotel offering IMT. The scenario provided a basic description of the IMT,to flatten the inherent levels of familiarity of respondents with IMT. Data werecollected online in January-February 2013 from students enrolled in a hospitalityprogram at a public university from a metropolitan area in Southwestern USapproximately, 1,250 students received initial e-mail invitations and two subsequentreminders over the course of three weeks. Upon deleting the records containingheavy missing values, a total of 262 responses were kept in the analysis(approximately 21 percent response rate). Non-response bias was analyzed bycomparing early with late respondents, as suggested by Ary et al. (1996).No significant differences between early and late respondents were found, and it wasconcluded that non-response bias was not a problem.

Figure 1.Proposed conceptualmodel and hypotheses

JHTT5,1

84

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

ResultsDemographic and behavioral analysisFirst, an analysis of the demographic and behavioral profile of respondents wasconducted, using SPSS 20.0. The demographic profile of respondents (Table I)corresponded to a typical sample of students: the majority was female (67.4 percent),

Category Frequency (%)

GenderMale 32.6Female 67.4AgeUnder 24 73.025-30 18.931-35 3.936-40 1.541-50 1.5Over 50 1.2Marital statusSingle 84.6Couple without children 11.9Couple with children 3.5Employment statusEmployed full time 21.6Employed part time 46.7Self-employed/owner 1.9Unemployed 29.7Income (annual )Less than $20,000 45.3$20,000-$35,000 14.7$35,001-$50,000 14.3$50,001-$75,000 11.2$75,001-$100,000 8.1More than $100,000 6.2Hotel stay frequencyLess than once a year 16.21-2 times a year 40.83-6 times a year 33.87-12 times a year 6.2More than 12 times a year 3.1Average length of stay in hotels1 night 16.92-3 nights 68.54-7 nights 12.78-14 nights 1.5More than 14 nights 0.4Hotel typeLuxury 1.9Upscale 8.1Upper midscale 43.8Midscale 39.2Economy 5.8Other 1.2

Table I.Demographic and

behavioral profile ofrespondents

Empiricalexamination of

guests’ adoption

85

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

under 24 years old (73 percent) and single (84.6 percent). A substantial proportionof respondents were employed (68.3 percent) and the majority of them reportedincomes under $35,000 annually (60 percent). In terms of travel behavior, respondentsstayed one-two times per year in hotels (40.6 percent), in average for two-three nights(68.5 percent), mostly in midscale properties (82.8 percent).

Measurement model analysisTo test hypotheses, the conceptual model was subjected to a two-step procedure, in whichthe model was assessed for its psychometric properties before being tested for fit(Hu and Bentler, 1998). First, two analyses of the measurement model were performed, usingAMOS 19.0. Since the model included a second-order factor (cognitive absorption) with threedimensions (i.e. temporal dissociation, curiosity, and focused immersion), a confirmatoryfactor analysis was performed on this model alone (Figure 2). The model had a x 2 of 83.68with 29 degrees of freedom (p , 0.001), resulting in a normed x 2 of 2.89, which indicatesappropriate fit (Hair et al., 2009). Additional absolute and relative fit indexes were calculated,namely CFI ¼ 0.97, TLI ¼ 0.95, and RMSEA ¼ 0.085. All item loadings and squaredmultiple correlations were significant (p , 0.001) and exceeded their recommended values(0.7 and 0.5, respectively) (Hair et al., 2009). Overall, even though the RMSEA exceeded therecommended value of 0.08, the multiple indicators computed to assess fit showed thatthe second-order factor model has appropriate psychometric properties (Toh et al., 2006).

In order to test the psychometric properties of the full model, a second confirmatoryfactor analysis was conducted (Agarwal and Prasad, 1998). The item loadings were allsignificant and exceeded the 0.7 cutoff values. The squared multiple correlations werealso significant and exceeded their recommended threshold values (0.5). The modelfit the data well, with a x 2 of 707.32 ( p , 0.001) and a normed x 2 of 1.742. A number of

Figure 2.Measurement modelanalysis for thesecond-order factor

Cognitiveabsorption

0.88

0.62

0.78

Temporaldissociation

SMC = 0.77

SMC = 0.38

Curiosity

SMC = 0.61

Focusedimmersion

Notes: All loadings and squared multiple correlations (SMC)are significant at: p<0.001; model fit: c2 = 83.68, df = 29,normed c2 = 2.89, CFI = 0.97, TLI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.085

JHTT5,1

86

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

absolute and incremental fit indexes were computed as follows: CFI ¼ 0.95,TLI ¼ 0.94, and RMSEA ¼ 0.053. The indexes indicated that the model fit the datawell, in the sense outlined by Browne and Cudeck (1992) and Hair et al. (2009).

To complete the assessment of the psychometric properties of the instrument, anassessment of reliability and validity (convergent and discriminant) was performed(Table II). Reliability was assessed using composite reliability measures of the latentconstructs. The values exceeded the recommended value of 0.8 indicating appropriatereliability (Hair et al., 2009). Convergent validity was assessed by examining the factor

Constructs and items Factor loadings Squared multiple correlations Composite reliabilities

Perceived usefulness 0.917PU1 0.851 0.724PU2 0.879 0.773PU3 0.776 0.602PU4 0.919 0.845

Perceived ease of use 0.891PEOU1 0.810 0.656PEOU2 0.843 0.711PEOU3 0.759 0.576PEOU4 0.863 0.745

Attitudes 0.845ATT1 0.877 0.769ATT2 0.833 0.694

Intentions 0.904INT1 0.833 0.694INT2 0.806 0.650INT3 0.896 0.803INT4 0.812 0.659

Cognitive absorption 0.793Temporal dissociation 0.757 0.573 0.886

TEMP1 0.830 0.689TEMP2 0.768 0.590TEMP3 0.915 0.837TEMP4 0.728 0.530

Curiosity 0.775 0.601 0.898CUR1 0.809 0.654CUR2 0.964 0.929CUR3 0.852 0.726

Focused immersion 0.713 0.508 0.906IMM1 0.773 0.598IMM2 0.898 0.806IMM3 0.942 0.887

Playfulness 0.897PLAY1 0.960 0.922PLAY2 0.822 0.676PLAY3 0.798 0.637

Security 0.881SEC1 0.741 0.549SEC2 0.873 0.762SEC3 0.706 0.498SEC4 0.892 0.796

Table II.Measurement

model analysis

Empiricalexamination of

guests’ adoption

87

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

loadings and calculating the average variance extracted (AVE) values, which should begreater than 0.5 for each latent construct (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). All item loadingswere greater than 0.7 and significant and all AVE values were greater than 0.5, thusindicating appropriate convergent validity (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988).Discriminant validity was assessed by comparing the AVE values with the squaredinter-construct correlations. To establish discriminant validity, the AVE value of eachconstruct should be higher than the squared inter-construct correlation correspondingto that construct (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). As shown in Table III, all AVE exceededtheir corresponding squared inter-construct correlations. Overall, based on thecalculations described above, the instrument was believed to display appropriatepsychometric properties and it was deemed acceptable for further analyses.

Research model analysisUpon validation of the instrument, an analysis of the research model was performedusing AMOS 19.0. The model had a x 2 of 739.02 and a normed x 2 of 1.776 ( p , 0.001).Absolute and relative fit indices were calculated as follows: CFI ¼ 0.94; TLI ¼ 0.94,and RMSEA ¼ 0.055, which indicates appropriate fit of the model (Browne andCudeck, 1992; Hair et al., 2009). All the proposed relationships were found to besignificant (Figure 3) providing support for hypotheses in their predicted directions.

In line with existing theory, the strongest relationship was the one betweenattitudes and intentions to use (b ¼ 0.94; p , 0.001), confirming that attitudes have astrong role in influencing consumers behavior. Perceived usefulness was a slightlybetter predictor of attitudes than was perceived ease of use, although both systembeliefs were significant predictors of attitudes (b ¼ 0.26 and 0.17, respectively;p , 0.001). The relationship between perceived ease of use and perceived usefulnesswas also validated (b ¼ 0.39; p , 0.001), thus providing full support for the originalTAM within the context of the current research. The study also validated a number ofextensions to the original TAM. The second-order factor, cognitive absorption, wasfound to be the strongest predictor of attitudes (b ¼ 0.52; p , 0.001), indicating thatthe manner in which consumers interact with the technology is decisive to thedevelopment of attitudes and intentions to adopt IMT in hotels. Overall, the fourpredictors explained approximately 62 percent of variability in attitudes to use IMT inhotels. It was also found that cognitive absorption is a significant predictor, althoughweak, of perceived usefulness (b ¼ 0.21; p , 0.05) and perceived ease-of-use (b ¼ 0.42;p , 0.01). Of the three dimensions of cognitive absorption, the most critical seem to be

Constructs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Perceived usefulness 0.7362. Perceived ease of use 0.181 0.6723. Attitudes 0.092 0.065 0.7324. Intentions 0.236 0.213 0.352 0.7015. Cognitive absorption 0.078 0.067 0.142 0.278 0.5616. Playfulness 0.042 0.108 0.149 0.191 0.287 0.7457. Security 0.036 0.071 0.127 0.146 0.103 0.109 0.651

Note: The values on the diagonal represent the average variance extracted and the values below thediagonal represent the squared inter-construct correlations

Table III.Convergent anddiscriminant validityanalysis

JHTT5,1

88

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

curiosity, followed by temporal dissociation, indicating that the immersive role of thetechnology is critical in guiding consumers through the use of IMT in hotels. Also,perceived playfulness was found to be a strong predictor of cognitive absorption(b ¼ 0.71; p , 0.001). Finally, perceived security was validated as a significant,although relatively weak, antecedent of attitude (b ¼ 0.20; p , 0.001).

ConclusionsAs all hypotheses have been supported in their predicted directions, this research hasexplained the adoption process of IMT in hotels. First, the model validated the originalTAM theory by confirming that relationships among perceived usefulness, perceivedease of use, attitudes, and intentions to use IMT. Overall, the model explainedapproximately 89 percent of the variability in intentions to adopt IMT, indicating thatthis model is appropriate for the examination of the adoption of such technologies inhotels. Further, it is important to recognize the multidimensional structure of cognitiveabsorption. Complementing the extant literature, this research underlines that the mostcritical dimensions of cognitive absorption are curiosity and temporal dissociation.That is, in the context of the hotel industry, IMT that stimulates consumers’ curiosityand immerses them in the experience could influence the development of adoptionattitudes and behaviors.

It is also important to recognize the predictive role of cognitive absorption in theadoption framework. This research shows that adoption is influenced more strongly by“experiential” predictors, such as cognitive absorption, and to a lesser extent by“traditional” system beliefs such as perceptions of usefulness and ease of use, orpredominantly hygienic factors (e.g. perceived security). It is also important to note theimpact of cognitive absorption on both perceived usefulness and ease of use. That is,the effect of cognitive absorption is stronger on ease of use than is on usefulness,possibly indicating that a deeper immersion within the task environment could lead tolearning, which, in turn, may influence guests’ perceptions of ease of use. However, theimmersion of consumers in the experience does not exercise a strong influence on

Figure 3.Model testing result

Temporaldissociation

SMC = 0.69

SMC = 0.35

SMC = 0.51

SMC = 0.27

SMC = 0.18

SMC = 0.62 SMC = 0.89

SMC = 0.43

Curiosity

Focusedimmersion

Playfulness

Cognitiveabsorption

0.65

0.83

0.59

0.71

0.42**

0.520.39

0.26

0.17

0.20

0.94

0.21*

Perceivedease of use

Perceivedusefulness

Security

Attitudes Intentions

Notes: Relationship is significant at: *p<0.05 and **p<0.01; all other relationships aresignificant at: p<0.001; model fit: c2 =739.02, df = 416, normed c2 =1.776, CFI = 0.94,TLI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.055

Empiricalexamination of

guests’ adoption

89

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

perceived usefulness, which may also be a factor of learning though absorption.As expected, playfulness played an important role in influencing cognitive absorption,reinforcing that today’s technology should be appealing to consumers who also have aplayful side in their interactions with technology. In conclusion, this research hasproposed and validated empirically a model in which traditional and experientialfactors have been validated as predictors of adoption, thus offering a comprehensivebasis for the development of attitudes and intentions to adopt IMT in hotels.

ContributionsTheoretical contributionsAiming to extend the existing theory, this research offers four important theoreticalcontributions. First, it recognizes the holistic foundation of technology adoption inhotels, as being driven not only by task-related system beliefs, but also by experientialdrivers that are formative of an increasingly engaging user experience. It connects thetraditional technology adoption theory to theoretical frameworks explicating theimmersive/flowing character of interactions between humans and technology. Thus,this research provides a new direction in the technology adoption research that focuseson interactive service experiences that are provided to consumers using mobiletechnologies. Second, this research deconstructed, re-conceptualized, and validatedcognitive absorption as an important multidimensional predictor of attitudes andperceptions of IMT in hotels. This research recognizes three dimensions (i.e. curiosity,temporal dissociation, focused immersion) and provides empirical validation of thesedimensions. Thus, this research supports the notion that engaging the consumers viacaptivating technologies leads them to follow a different adoption path than thatmerely resulting from system beliefs, which advances the theory on consumer behaviorin experiential technology-mediated service settings. Third, this research examinedplayfulness, as a consumer characteristic, within the extended adoption of IMT inhotels. Finally, this research confirms the role of security as a significant predictor ofattitudes, and contributes to the overall body of research in the area of informationsecurity by explicating the role of security in adoption of immersive technologies.Thus, the contributions to the literature extend by providing a unique account of therole of consumers’ characteristics and their relationship with the interactiveenvironment provided developed using the technology.

Practical contributionsThe research outlined here is descriptive of the evolutionary direction of hospitalityservices toward increasingly experiential products mediated by informationtechnology. In such environments, consumers seem to enjoy using the technology bypurchasing ancillary products and services, enhancing their stay experiences. In addition,such adoption behaviors prove to be profitable for hotels. As such, as it provides theblueprint for the adoption of IMT in hotels, this research has two actionable practicalimplications. First, in order to stimulate technology adoption, hotel decision-makerscould emphasize the immersive focus of consumer technologies, and improve themanner in which users interact with the technology. If the novel technologies can absorbthe users by monetizing users’ own characteristics (e.g. playfulness, curiosity), thetechnology is likely to result in attitudes and intentions to use the technology. Thisapproach allows consumers to increase their roles in the co-creation of experiences,

JHTT5,1

90

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

which is developing to become the primary value driver in hospitality. Moreover, thelessons learned from the development of highly immersive experiences on the propertycan be applied when designing all consumer interfaces of the firm. That is, if IMTenables cognitive absorption, such design philosophies can be utilized in web design(especially when designing storefront websites) or advertising, with long-term strategicbenefits for the hotel.

Second, this research has implications for product development, as it indicates thatfacilitating consumer experiences via highly immersive technology environments canactually constitute the new direction product/process design in the hotel industry.Aided by segmentation, a set of products can be designed specifically for userscharacterized by a strong technology orientation – which are known by the hotel dueto the technology-intensive consumer processes in today’s lodging industry – forwhich interacting with the technology in the co-creation of value represents a way toenhance an already increasingly comprehensive hospitality experience. Furthermore,by focusing on the characteristics of users, hotels can rethink their positioningstrategies, and can uniquely position products (possibly through reverse-positioning),as provision of such immersive experiences would draw the attention of consumers forwhom the interaction with the technology results in a high value proposition.

Limitations and directions for further researchAs all research in social sciences, this research has a couple of limitations. Thus,generalizing the results beyond the current setting should be done with caution. Whilea sample of the general population was desirable, this study allowed the investigatorsto have tighter control over certain factors that could have biased the results, such asthe variability of technology literacy (Stern et al., 2008), previous exposure to mobiletechnology (eMarketer, 2013), and common use in theory development (Calder et al.,1981). The respondents in this sample may have levels of familiarity with suchtechnologies that will eliminate bias in data due to knowledge of a novel technology.In addition, this research sought to validate relationships among latent variables ratherthan focusing on point or interval estimates of the magnitude of those relationships.In addition, the hotel stay patterns of the respondents reflect those of the generalpopulation, which makes these respondents a valid sample for the context of this study(Millar et al., 2012; Tanford, 2013). Second, all studies based on perceptions of utility(usefulness) and effort (ease of use) are limited to a specific task environment, which iscommon among all research based on the TAM.

Being the first to examine the role of cognitive absorption in guests’ adoption ofIMT, this research paves the way for several interesting directions for further study.One direction is understanding the extent to which immersive experiences can becreated only with the help of software provided by the hotel, while the hardwarenecessary for the completion of the experience is brought by guests. Thus, from adesign perspective, it would be valuable to examine the role of security perceptions,along with cost and obsolescence issues, which could influence adoption. Furtherresearch could also have an in depth focus on the various drivers of consumer adoptionacross various consumer segments (e.g. leisure vs business; families vs singletravelers). Finally, an interesting direction would be to engage in a longitudinalexamination of cognitive absorption, which would provide insight into the dynamics ofthe process in which the hotel experiences move beyond the core service.

Empiricalexamination of

guests’ adoption

91

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

References

Agarwal, R. and Karahanna, E. (2000), “Time files when you are having fun: cognitive absorptionand beliefs about information technology usage”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 665-694.

Agarwal, R. and Prasad, J. (1998), “A conceptual and operational definition of personalinnovativeness in the domain of information technology”, Information Systems Research,Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 204-215.

Ahn, T., Ryu, S. and Han, I. (2007), “The impact of web quality and playfulness on useracceptance of online retailing”, Information & Management, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 263-275.

Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural equation modeling in practice: a review andrecommended two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 10, pp. 411-423.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. and Razavieh, A. (1996), Introduction to Research in Education, 5th ed.,Rinehart and Winston, Inc., Fort Worth, TX.

“A sample of recent installations” (2013), Hospitality Upgrade, Fall, pp. 110-113, available at:http://mag.hospitalityupgrade.com/publication/frame.php?i¼178981&p¼&pn¼110(accessed November 30, 2013).

Beldona, S. and Cobanoglu, C. (2007), “Importance-performance analysis of guest technologies inthe lodging industry”, Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 48 No. 3,pp. 299-312.

Browne, M.W. and Cudeck, R. (1992), “Alternative ways of assessing model fit”, SociologicalMethods & Research, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 230-258.

Calder, B.J., Phillips, L.W. and Tybout, A.M. (1981), “Designing research for applications”,Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 197-207.

Castaneda, J.A., Munoz-Leiva, F. and Luque, T. (2007), “Web acceptance model (WAM): moderatingeffects of user experience”, Information & Management, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 384-396.

Chang, S.E., Chen, S.Y. and Chen, C.Y. (2011), “Exploring the relationship between IT capabilitiesand information security management”, International Journal of Technology Management,Vol. 54, p. 147.

Chen, L.D., Mark, L.G. and Daniel, L.S. (2002), “Enticing online consumers: an extendedtechnology acceptance perspective”, Information & Management, Vol. 39, pp. 705-719.

Cobanoglu, C. and DeMicco, F. (2007), “To be secure or not to be: this is the question! A criticallook at hotel’s network security”, International Journal of Hospitality and TourismAdministration, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 43-59.

Csikszentmihaiyi, M. (1990), Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, Harper & Row,New York, NY.

Davis, F.D. (1989), “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance ofinformation technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 319-340.

Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1992), “Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to usercomputers in the workplace”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 22, pp. 1111-1132.

De Lollis, B. (2012), “Bigger, better, interactive: the future of hotel TVs”, Ehotelier.com,available at: http://ehotelier.com/hospitality-news/item.php?id¼23546_0_11_0_C&utm_source¼feedburner&utm_medium¼feed&utm_campaign¼Feed:þ ehotelierþ(eHotelierþGlobalþHospitalityþNews) (accessed March 22, 2013).

Eftekari, M. (2013), “Four Seasons Hotel Los Angeles at Beverly Hills”, available at: http://intelitycorp.com/main/company/fourseasonsla.php (accessed November 30, 2013).

eMarketer (2013), “‘Generation Y’ leads the way on smartphones”, available at: www.emarketer.com/Articles/Print.aspx?R¼1009604 (accessed April 5, 2013).

JHTT5,1

92

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975), Belief, Attitudes, Intentions, and Behavior: An Introduction toTheory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservablevariables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-42.

Ghani, J.A. and Deshpande, S.P. (1994), “Task characteristics and the experience of optimal flowin human-computer interaction”, The Journal of Psychology, Vol. 128 No. 4, pp. 381-391.

Hackbarth, G., Grover, V. and Yi, M.Y. (2003), “Computer playfulness and anxiety positive andnegative mediators of the system experience effect on perceived ease of use”, Information& Management, Vol. 40, pp. 221-232.

Hair, F.C., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2009), Multivariate Data Analysis,Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Hu, L. and Bentler, P.M. (1998), “Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity tounderparameterized model misspecification”, Psychology Methods, Vol. 3, pp. 424-453.

Intelity (2013a), “Intelity’s ICE now covers five continents”, Travel Communication, available at:http://travelcommunication.net/8831/intelitys-ice-now-covers-five-continents/ (accessedMarch 22, 2013).

Intelity (2013b), “Notable quotes”, available at: http://intelitycorp.com/main/company/notablequotes.php (accessed November 30, 2013).

Kim, J. and Forsythe, S. (2008), “Sensory-enabling technology acceptance model (SE-TAM):a multiple-group structural model comparison”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 9,pp. 901-922.

Krige, S. (2013), “The Plaza Hotel”, available at: http://intelitycorp.com/main/company/plaza.php(accessed November 30, 2013).

Kulviwat, S., Bruner, G.C., Kumar, A., Nasco, S.A. and Clark, T. (2007), “Toward a unified theoryof consumer acceptance technology”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 24, pp. 1059-1084.

Lee, Y. and Kozar, K.A. (2008), “An empirical investigation of anti-spyware software adoption:a multitheoretical perspective”, Information & Management, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 109-119.

Lin, C.S., Wu, S. and Tsai, R.J. (2005), “Integrating perceived playfulness into expect-confirmationmodel for web portal context”, Information & Management, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 683-693.

Lopez-Nicolas, C., Molina-Castillo, F.J. and Bouwman, H. (2008), “An assessment of advancedmobile services acceptance: contributions from TAM and diffusion theory models”,Information & Management, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 359-364.

Lu, J., Liu, C., Yu, C.-S. and Wang, K. (2008), “Determinants of accepting wireless mobile dataservices in China”, Information & Management, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 52-64.

Magnini, V., Honeycutt, E. and Hodge, K. (2003), “Data mining for hotel firms: use and limitations”,Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 94-105.

Mastroberte, T. (2012), “Smartphones on track to become room control devices”, HospitalityTechnology, November 12, available at: http://hospitalitytechnology.edgl.com/top-stories/Smartphones-on-Track-to-Become-Room-Control-Devices83585 (accessed March 22, 2013).

Millar, M., Mayer, K.J. and Baloglu, S. (2012), “Importance of green hotel attributes to businessand leisure travelers”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, Vol. 21 No. 4,pp. 395-413.

Minghetti, V. and Buhalis, D. (2010), “Digital divide in tourism”, Journal of Travel Research,Vol. 49 No. 3, pp. 267-281.

Moon, J.W. and Kim, Y.G. (2001), “Extending the TAM for the world wide web context”,Information & Management, Vol. 38, pp. 217-230.

Empiricalexamination of

guests’ adoption

93

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

Morosan, C. (2012a), “Theoretical and empirical considerations of guests’ perceptions ofbiometric systems in hotels: extending the technology acceptance model”, Journal ofHospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 52-84.

Morosan, C. (2012b), “Understanding the antecedents of perceived value of registered travelerbiometric systems”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, Vol. 21 No. 8,pp. 872-896.

Morosan, C. and Jeong, M. (2008), “Users’ perceptions of two types of hotel reservation web sites”,International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 284-292.

Mozeik, C.K., Beldona, S., Cobanoglu, C. and Poorani, A. (2009), “The adoption of restaurant-basede-service”, Journal of Foodservice Business Research, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 247-265.

Shin, D.H. (2009), “Determinants of customer acceptance of multi-service network: an implicationfor IP-based technologies”, Information & Management, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 16-22.

Spencer, A.J., Buhalis, D. and Moital, M. (2012), “A hierarchical model of technology adoptionfor small owned-managed firms: an organizational decision-making and leadershipperspective”, Tourism Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 1195-1208.

Stern, B.B., Royne, M.B., Stafford, T.F. and Bienstock, C.C. (2008), “Consumer acceptance ofonline auctions: an extension and revision of the TAM”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 25,pp. 619-636.

Tanford, S. (2013), “The impact of tier level on attitudinal and behavioral loyalty of hotel rewardprogram members”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 34 No. 3,pp. 285-294.

Toh, R.S., Lee, E. and Hu, M.Y. (2006), “Social desirability bias in diary panels is evidentin panelists’ behavioral frequency”, Psychological Reports, Vol. 99, pp. 322-334.

Trevino, L.K. and Webster, J. (1992), “Flow in computer-mediated communication: electronicmail and voice mail evaluation and impacts”, Communication Research, Vol. 19 No. 5,pp. 539-573.

Vatanasombut, B., Igbaria, M., Stylianou, A.C. and Rodgers, W. (2008), “Information systemscontinuance intention of web-based applications customers: the case of online banking”,Information & Management, Vol. 45 No. 7, pp. 419-428.

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y.L. and Xu, X. (2012), “Consumer acceptance and use of informationtechnology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology”, MISQuarterly, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 157-178.

Webster, J. and Ho, H. (1997), “Audience engagement in multi-media presentations”, Data Basefor the Advances in Information Systems, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 63-77.

Wu, J.H. and Wang, S.C. (2005), “What drives mobile commerce? An empirical evaluation of therevised technology acceptance model”, Information&Management, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 719-729.

Further reading

Adams, D., Nelson, R. and Todd, P. (1992), “Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage ofinformation technology: a replication”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 227-247.

Corresponding authorCristian Morosan can be contacted at: cmorosan@central.uh.edu

JHTT5,1

94

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Bir

min

gham

At 2

3:49

09

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)