usage of video sharing websites: drivers and barriers
TRANSCRIPT
Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Telematics and Informatics
journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate / te le
Usage of video sharing websites: Drivers and barriers
0736-5853/$ - see front matter � 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.tele.2012.01.003
⇑ Tel.: +1 703 993 3165; fax: +1 703 993 3175.E-mail address: [email protected]
Jiyoung Cha ⇑Film and Video Studies Program, College of Visual and Performing Arts, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, MS 3E6, Fairfax, VA 22030, United States
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history:Received 4 August 2011Received in revised form 4 October 2011Accepted 21 January 2012Available online 4 February 2012
Keywords:Video sharingOnline videoTechnology acceptance modelUses and gratifications
Using a technology acceptance model (TAM) and uses and gratification theory (U&G) asprimary theories, this exploratory study investigates what factors promote or hinder theuse of video sharing websites. Theoretically, this study attempts to examine the integrationof TAM and U&G with other perceptions of video sharing sites and consumer characteris-tics. Practically, the investigation provides video sharing websites with insights into theappeal of their sites to audiences. In addition, this study may help offline video mediacounter the threats from the drastic growth of video sharing websites. The findings con-cludes that those males who use the Internet for emotional pleasure and excitement, per-ceive video sharing websites to have greater usefulness, ease of use, substitutability, andcontent variety are more frequently using video sharing websites. With respect to serviceevaluation factors, content variety appears to mitigate the negative effects of content qual-ity, loading speed, screen size, display resolution, and audio quality on video sharingwebsites.
� 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Thanks to the increasing penetration of broadband Internet connections, more and more people are watching videos viathe Web. According to ComScore (2011), 81.9% of US Internet users watched online videos in April 2011. According to asurvey conducted in 2010, approximately 40% of American households with broadband Internet access use the Internet towatch television programs and movies (Parks Associates, 2010). While the Web is increasingly utilized to watch televisionprograms or movies created by media companies, it is also becoming a useful platform for amateurs to share the videos theyproduce with other Internet users.
Video sharing websites are a driving force behind this rise of the Web as an alternative platform for viewing videocontent. ComScore Media Metrix (2006) pointed out the gaining popularity of video sharing websites as one of the markedchanges in its monthly analysis of US consumer activities in 2006. The most popular US video sharing website, YouTube, wasranked third with respect to website traffic in the United States, following Google and Facebook, as of June 2011(Quantcast, 2011a). Other video sharing websites, such as Vevo, Dailymotion, allow people to upload and watch videosthrough streaming technologies; these sites are also growing (ComScore, 2011).
Advertisers respond quickly to the exponential growth of video sharing websites. The top 25 companies that spent themost on advertising over the last five years also significantly cut their spending in traditional media, according to AdvertisingAge and TNS Media Intelligence (Story, 2007). Instead, advertisers increasingly invest their money in commercials online.Nike is just one of the representative examples that describes the shift of ad trends. Nowadays, Nike shows many of theirads only on the Internet. In 2005, Nike posted an ad that stars the Brazilian soccer player Ronaldinho online instead of onTV. The company said that more than 17 million viewers watched the ad on YouTube (Story, 2007).
J. Cha / Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26 17
While advertisers embrace video sharing websites, other media firms such as television networks and film studios aresubstantially concerned about the violation of copyrights on video sharing websites. In March 2007, Viacom sued YouTubeand its parent company, Google, for more than $1 billion, saying the companies are infringing on Viacom’s copyrights be-cause almost 160,000 unauthorized video clips are available for viewing on YouTube. Several media firms including CBSCorp., Dailymotion, Fox Entertainment Group, Microsoft Corp., MySpace, NBC Universal, Veoh Networks Inc., Viacom Inc.and The Walt Disney Co. emphasize the importance of protecting copyrights. They argue that filtering technologies that rec-ognize content under copyright protection should be effective (Dauman, 2007). In response, YouTube eventually launchedvideo identification technology that filters videos under copyright protections when one uploads videos (Auchard, 2007),and a video verification program that helps copyright holders locate and remove video content that meets the copyrightinfringement criteria (YouTube, 2011).
Despite the notable growth and impact of video sharing websites on the media landscape, there is no research on thereasons behind the growing popularity of video sharing websites. Using a technology acceptance model (TAM) as well asuses and gratification (U&G) theory as primary theories, this study investigates what factors promote people to use videosharing websites and hinder the visits of video sharing websites. Theoretically, the present study attempts to examinethe integration of TAM and U&G with other perceptions of video sharing sites and consumer characteristics. Practically,the investigation provides video sharing websites with insights into the appeal of their sites to audiences. In addition, thisstudy may help offline video media counter the threats from the drastic growth of video sharing websites.
2. Literature review
2.1. Definition of video sharing websites
Even though audiences and news are buzzing about video sharing websites, none of the research defines what video shar-ing websites are. The term ‘‘video sharing websites’’ is occasionally interchangeably used with other terms such as ‘‘user-generated content sites’’ or ‘‘webcasters.’’ It appears that what each of these terms refers to is actually different.
Focusing on the creators of content, the boundary of user-generated content (UGC) sites is narrower than that of videosharing websites in that UGC sites refer to only the sites offering content produced by individual users. PC Magazine refersto user-generated content as ‘‘wikis and blogs in which content is created by the general public rather than paid profession-als’’ (PC Magazine, 2007). The term ‘‘user-generated content (UGC) sites’’ is avoided in this study because the focus of thisstudy is not limited to content produced only by amateurs. Apparently, video sharing websites are primary outlets for ama-teurs to share their videos with the general public. However, user-generated content is not the only available content onvideo sharing websites. Numerous videos originally created by media firms are also available on video sharing websites.In addition, the focus of this study centers on videos rather than content, which is a broader category than videos, includingtexts, videos, static photos, and so forth.
Meanwhile, webcasting is defined as ‘‘the delivery of audio and video content to large groups either locally or globallydistributed over the Internet’’ (Boettcher and Nardick, 2001, p. 52). Webcasters primarily use streaming technologies asdo video sharing websites (Boettcher and Nardick, 2001), so under this definition, it seems very possible for amateurs towebcast nowadays. However, Overton (2006) pointed out that corporations and larger businesses are the main producersof webcasts in discussing webcasting in general. Lin (2004), in her study of webcasting adoption, implicitly defines webcast-ing as streaming of sports, news, and selected programs by broadcast and cable television networks. Given the differentmeanings of the terms, video sharing websites over UGC sites and webcasters are used consistently in this research.
In this study, video sharing websites are defined as venues where people are able to both watch and upload videos forfree. Content available on video sharing websites is classified into two categories: (1) videos created by individual Internetusers (i.e., amateurs) and (2) videos originally produced by media firms but uploaded by individuals Internet users or mediafirms such as advertisers or media marketers. The technology involved with viewing is confined to streaming technologies.
2.2. Perceived usefulness and ease of use
TAM is a prevalent theory that is employed to explain the intention to use a particular technology (Gefen et al., 2003).Derived from the theory of reasoned action (TRA), TAM suggests that acceptance and rejection of information communica-tion technologies are explained by users’ beliefs and attitudes (Yang, 2005). TAM posits that perceived usefulness and per-ceived ease of use of a particular information technology are the central drivers in the attitudes toward and intentions toadopt it (Davis, 1989; Davis et al., 1989). Perceived usefulness is defined as ‘‘the degree to which an individual believes thatusing a particular system would enhance his/her job performance’’ (p. 320). Perceived ease of use refers to ‘‘the degree towhich an individual believes that using a particular system would be free of physical and mental efforts (Davis, 1989, p. 323).
While TRA focuses on explaining behavioral intention in general from a social psychology perspective, TAM centers spe-cifically on predicting behavioral intention to use and the actual use of an information technology from information systemsand management perspectives. TRA posits that attitude and subjective norm affect intention. Subjective norm refers to anindividual’s belief that she or he should perform a certain behavior because other people important to the individual expectthe behavior (Fishbein and Aizen, 1975). Adapting the generic behavior model to the specific domain of technology
18 J. Cha / Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26
acceptance, TAM replaces TRA’s attitudinal determinants with perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use (Bagozzi et al.,1992). Also, TAM omits subjective norm because subjective norm does not significantly influence intention over and aboveperceived usefulness and perceived ease of use (Davis, 1989). Building upon the robustness of TAM, researchers expandedthe model to TAM2, adding the impacts of three interrelated social forces on individuals’ adoption of a new technology(Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). TAM2 incorporated subjective norm, voluntariness, and image with the original TAM. TAM2takes into account the influence of social forces on the adoption decision. However, the three constructs in TAM2 act asmoderating factors of perceived usefulness, or antecedents affecting perceived usefulness of a technology, not as directdeterminants of the technology use. The united theory of acceptance and technology use (UTAUT), a variation of TAM,proposes social influences as direct determinants of technology adoption, but none of the social influence constructs arefound significant in influencing technology use in voluntary contexts where individuals are not mandated to use thetechnology (Venkatesh et al., 2003).
Numerous empirical studies in different technologies and settings proved the parsimoniousness, theoretical soundness,and robustness of TAM in predicting technology acceptance behaviors (Gefen et al., 2003; van der Heijden, 2003). In the con-text of the Internet, TAM is primarily employed to explain the adoption consumers’ attitudes of or adoption intentions ofe-commerce (Järveläinen, 2007). Recent studies have applied TAM to examine acceptance of various Internet-based technol-ogies, such as email (Gefen and Straub, 1997), Web (Chen et al., 2002; Fenech, 1998; Lederer et al., 2000), virtual store (Chenet al., 2002; Gefen et al., 2003; O’Cass and Fenech, 2003), and electronic commerce (Cheng et al., 2006; Chu and Lu, 2007;Kamis and Stohr, 2006; Selim, 2003). Specifically, Gefen and Straub (2000) applied TAM to the use of websites and confirmedthat perceived usefulness and ease of use are salient factors that affect consumers’ adoption and continuous use of particularwebsites. Given the aim of the present study to identify direct determinants of video sharing site use, and the robust roles ofperceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in explaining a technology use in prior studies, the following hypotheses aresuggested:
H1. Perceived usefulness is positively associated with the use of video sharing websites.H2. Perceived ease of use is positively associated with the use of video sharing websites.
2.3. Motives for using the Internet
Thanks to its parsimoniousness and robustness, TAM has been a widely accepted way to explain adoption of various infor-mation communication technologies. On the flip side, TAM is too parsimonious to predict the adoption rate of a certaintechnology. Therefore, researchers have used TAM in conjunction with other theories. Although TAM has been tested in bothorganizational and individual settings (e.g., Schepers and Wetzels, 2007; Verkasalo et al., 2010; Yang, 2005), it was originallydeveloped for testing in workplace settings (Choudrie and Dwivedi, 2005; López-Nicolás et al., 2008; Venkatesh et al., 2003).Thus, TAM alone does not adequately address intrinsic motivations affecting consumer media use (Al-Omoush and Shaqrah,2010; Huang, 2008; Luo et al., 2006). To better capture intrinsic and extrinsic motivations for using media and to add moreconsumer characteristics, previous studies suggested that TAM should be combined with U&G theory (Al-Omoush andShaqrah, 2010; Huang, 2008; King and He, 2006; Schepers and Wetzels, 2007; Stafford et al., 2004). The integration ofU&G theory with TAM has been increasingly observed in the recent literature (Al-Omoush and Shaqrah, 2010; Cha,2010a; Huang, 2008; Luo et al., 2006).
U&G theory is a widely used theoretical framework to explain adoption and use of a new medium (Atkin et al., 1998; Lin,1996; Morris and Ogan, 1996). Uses and gratifications theory posits that individuals are active audiences of media, becausethey select and use a medium to gratify their needs (Blumler and Katz, 1974). Many studies employed U&G theory to identifymotives as the predictors of the behavioral use or adoption interests of a particular medium such as the Internet, television,and online chatting rooms (Leung, 2001; Lin, 2004; Papacharissi and Rubin, 2000). Others utilized U&G theory to understandthe consumption of a specific content such as news or reality TV shows (Diddi and LaRose, 2006; Papacharissi andMendelson, 2007). Since the introduction of the Internet, several studies have indicated that U&G theory was successfullyapplied to the Internet and Internet-related communications (Ferguson and Perse, 2000; Flaherty et al., 1998; Leung,2001; Lin, 2006; Morris and Ogan, 1996; Papacharissi and Rubin, 2000).
Papacharissi and Rubin (2000) identified interpersonal utility, passing time, information seeking, convenience, and enter-tainment as five motives for using the Internet. More recently, Yang and Kang (2006) added habit and escapism motives tothe motives of the entertainment, social interaction and information suggested by Papacharissi and Rubin (2000).Papacharissi and Rubin (2000) found that convenience and interpersonal utility motivations predict the duration of overallInternet use and amount of Internet exposure, respectively.
While Papacharissi and Rubin (2000), and Yang and Kang (2006) specified the motives for using the Internet in detail,others categorize gratifications for Internet use into two broad categories. Philaretou et al. (2005) suggested that utilitarianand experiential values explain Internet behaviors. Utilitarian Internet users consider the Internet as a means to accomplishtheir tasks (Assael, 1998; Barbin et al., 1994; Hoffman and Novak, 1996; Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2001). In contrast, experi-ential users visit websites for psychological, physiological, and emotional pleasure and excitement (Novak et al., 2003, 2000).Utilitarian or experiential motives in computer-mediated environments are characterized along the following dimensions:intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation, ritualistic versus instrumental orientation, enduring versus situational involvement,hedonic versus utilitarian benefits, non-directed versus directed search, and navigational versus goal-directed choice
J. Cha / Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26 19
(Hoffman and Novak, 1996; Jain, 2003). Researchers consistently found that relaxation and entertainment are the primarymotives for watching television (Rubin, 1981, 1984). Enjoyment, pleasure, and escape are the most salient motives forwatching movies frequently (Austin, 1986). Given the dominant experiential motives for video consumption, it is presumedthat people who use the Internet for experiential motives are more likely to use video sharing websites. On the other hand, itis proposed that utilitarian motives for Internet use have a negative association with video sharing site use.
H3. Utilitarian motives behind Internet use are negatively associated with the use of video sharing websites.H4. Experiential motives behind Internet use are positively associated with the use of video sharing websites.
2.4. Substitutability
Whether a new medium changes the consumption of existing media has been a persistent question over the past decades.Researchers have attempted to investigate the displacement effect of television (Belson, 1961; Mendelsohn, 1964; Williams,1986), cable television (Kaplan, 1978; Sparkes, 1983), VCR (Harvey and Rothe, 1985; Henke and Donohu, 1989) andcomputer-related communications technologies (Finholt and Sproull, 1990; Robinson et al., 1997). Interestingly, the findingsof the research that examined whether traditional media and non-media activities are displaced by new technologies arecontradictory.
On one hand, some researchers found that the emergence of television caused people to spend less time with other mediasuch as radio and even non-media activities (Weiss, 1968; Robinson, 1981). In the context of computer-mediated technol-ogies, James et al. (1995) suggested that the use of computer bulletin boards reduce time spent with television viewing, bookreading, telephone talking, and letter writing. More recently, Kayany and Yelsma (2000) pointed out that online media havedisplacement effects on telephone use, newspaper reading, and domestic conversations. On the other hand, other studiesfound a complementary relationship between a new medium and traditional media. Interestingly, Robinson et al. (1997) dis-covered that computer-mediated communications increase the use of print media. Grotta and Newsom (1982) showed thatthe use of cable television rather boosts television consumption. The lingering question regarding media substitution mech-anism suggests that the audience may abandon the old medium and replace it with the new based on the new medium’srelative functional desirability compared to the old medium (Lin, 1994).
Some of the research assumed that audiences have limited time for media and non-media activities. Thus, the addition ofa new medium causes the audiences to spend less time on the existing media or to disregard the new medium. This is basedon a zero–sum relationship for the amount of time invested for each of the media (Kayany and Yelsma, 2000). However, theassumption may not be always true. Rather, an important construct in research on displacement effect may be whether thenew medium is functionally similar to the old medium and more functionally desirable as well. Lin (1994) argued thataudiences displace an old medium by a new medium when they view the new medium as more functionally desirable thanthe old one. In that case, the new and old media should essentially be functionally similar to some degree. If the old and newmedia do not possess functional similarity, but are compatible, then there are possibilities that those two media willcomplement one another. For instance, VCRs complement with television because VCRs and television have different rolesin audiences’ viewing. Thus, the relationship between VCR and television is closer to complementary. However, if the focus ison the real time viewing, it can be seen that VCRs displace real time viewing on television (Lin, 2001).
The emergence of the Internet has enabled consumers to have online viewing as another option in having access to thevideos originally delivered via offline video media. Interestingly, previous studies failed to show the displacement effect ofthe Internet on traditional media. Industry reports (Jessell, 1995; Snider, 1997) showed that the adoption of online media didnot decrease the time spent with other media. Shapiro (1998) noted that frequent online users are more likely to be frequenttelevision viewers. Note that those studies did not see whether audiences perceive the Internet as functionally similar ordesirable to the traditional media they examined before they addressed the displacement effect.
In that regard, the present study addresses how perceived substitutability of video sharing websites for offline video med-ia is associated with the actual use of video sharing websites. In fact, Lin (2004) examined how substitutability of offline con-tent by online content predicts the interest of webcasting adoption. The finding indicated that magazine content substitutionof webcasting influences the adoption interest of shopping/recreation webcasting adoption. Considering that video sharingwebsites are functionally similar to offline video media such as television, DVD players, and movie theaters to some degreeand that some of the content produced by media firms is available on video sharing sites, the following hypothesis is argued:
H5. Perceived substitutability of video sharing sites for other offline video media is positively associated with the use ofvideo sharing websites.
2.5. Service evaluation factors
Atkin (2002) asserted that the technology’s tangible features (e.g., transmission speed, storage capacity, audiovisual qual-ity, transferability) determine substitutability of a new medium for an old medium. In fact, research suggests that serviceevaluation factors are intimately related to the adoption of a new technology. Anil et al. (2003) identified lack of content,high usage cost, difficulty in establishing connection, high cost of Internet-ready handsets, screen limitation, slow loading
20 J. Cha / Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26
speed, difficulty inputting data, no standard means of payment, concerns about security, and concerns about privacy asdeterrents in adopting value-added services on mobile phone.
Content on video sharing websites can be classified into two broad categories – (1) videos that are created by individualusers and (2) videos that are originally produced by media companies but uploaded by individual users or media companies.Considering the two types of video content, video sharing sites apparently diversify content. Additionally, many of the videoson the sites are originally produced by international entities. In contrast, audiences of traditional video media are not likelyable to have access to as great a variety videos. Thus, it is logical to view the content variety as an advantage of video sharingwebsites. However, the content variety of video sharing websites may have tradeoff for overall content quality, loadingspeed, screen size, display resolution, audio quality. Applying the theories to video sharing websites, the present studyfocuses on the impact of video sharing websites’ tangible features on the use of the sites. The following hypothesis ismaintained:
H6. Perceived service evaluation factors (i.e., overall content quality, content variety, loading speed, screen size, displayresolution, and audio quality) are positively associated with the use of video sharing websites.
2.6. Gender
Previous studies found that males have more experience and favorable attitudes toward computers than females(Durndell and Thomson, 1997; Whitely, 1997). In the nascent age of the Internet, this phenomenon was attributed to genderdiscrepancy with respect to Internet use. However, the gender gap in Internet consumption critically decreased in the UnitedStates in recent years. According to E-Marketer (2009), 51.8% of women and 48.2% of men were Internet users as of 2009.Nevertheless, research still supports the male gender as a prevalent position regarding the adoption of a particularcomputer-mediated technology. Men are more likely than women to be avid users of computer video games (Hartmannand Klimmt, 2006). Recent studies showed that males are also more likely to adopt e-commerce and e-learning than females(Doolin et al., 2005; Ong and Lai, 2006). Based on the greater propensity of males to adopt Internet-based technologies, asfound in aforementioned studies, the following hypothesis is postulated:
H7. The male gender is positively associated with the use of video sharing websites.
3. Method
3.1. Sample and procedures
The data to investigate the hypotheses were gathered through a survey. The survey was carried out using a sample of 284college students enrolled in three large introductory communication courses at a large southeastern university. College stu-dents were chosen as a sample for this study because people ages 18–24 are more likely to use video sharing websites, ascompared to the overall Internet-using population (NB, 2008). Also, college students are early adopters and heavy users ofthe Internet compared to the general population (Jones et al., 2009; Jones, 2002; Nie et al., 2005). The sample was composedof 36.3% male and 63.7% female; 2.1% of the students were first-year, 30.3% sophomore, 35.9% junior, and 31.7% senior. Themean age of the participants was 20.51 years old (SD = 2.15). A majority of the respondents have experienced video sharingwebsites. 93.7% of the participants (n = 266) said that they have used video sharing websites. Only 6.3% have never usedvideo sharing websites. With respect to the frequency of using video sharing websites, 37.3% of the participants said that
Table 1Descriptive statistics.
Constructs M SD
Use of video sharing websites 4.44 1.28Watching videos produced by individual users 4.16 1.28Watching videos produced by media firms 4.29 1.33Perceived usefulness 4.56 1.22Perceived ease of use 5.90 .92Utilitarian motive 5.59 1.10Experiential motive 5.92 .91Perceived substitutability 3.44 1.71Overall content quality 5.17 1.01Content variety 6.41 .93Loading speed 5.38 1.13Screen size 4.31 1.45Display resolution 4.03 1.34Audio quality 4.61 1.26
Table 2Predictors of the use of video sharing websites.
Type Constructs B S.E. b
Perceptions of video sharing websites Perceived usefulness .353 .067 .297***
Perceived ease of use .384 .092 .253***
Perceived substitutability .105 .044 .122**
Overall content quality .012 .079 .009Content variety .135 .077 .099*
Loading speed .052 .073 .040Screen size �.012 .067 �.012Display resolution �.067 .081 �.061Audio quality �.003 .073 �.002
Consumer characteristics Utilitarian motives for using the Internet �.153 .070 �.115**
Experiential motives for using the Internet .184 .088 .116***
Male gender .289 .157 .096*
R2 = .360Adjusted R2 = .331F = 12.684*** (12, 271)
* p < .05 (one-tailed test).** p < .01 (one-tailed test).
*** p < .001 (one-tailed test).
J. Cha / Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26 21
they use video sharing websites sometimes. 22.5% and 10.2% use the sites often or very often, respectively. And 7.4% of theparticipants answered that they use video sharing websites all the time.
3.2. Measurement
Appendix 1 provides in detail all the measurement items for the constructs. The use of video sharing websites was mea-sured via the ongoing frequency of using video sharing websites on a 7-point scale (7 = all the time, 1 = never). To representperceived usefulness and ease of use, three items for each of the constructs were employed from Davis (1989) and Davis et al.(1989). Participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each statement on a 7-point Likert-type scale(7 = strongly agree, 1 = strongly disagree). For substitutability, three items were adapted from Lin (2004). The participantswere asked how much they agree with the three statements that video sharing websites can be a substitute for television,movie theaters, and DVD players, respectively, on a 7-point Likert-type scale (7 = strongly agree, 1 = strongly disagree). Tomeasure service evaluation factors, the respondents were asked to rate each of the six service evaluation factors – overallcontent quality, content variety, loading speed, screen size, display resolution, and audio quality - using 7-point semanticdifferential scales. Five items adopted from Davis (1989) were used to measure utilitarian and experiential Internet motiveson a 7-point Likert-type scale (7 = strongly agree, 1 = strongly disagree). To assess construct validity of the measures, explor-atory factor analysis with varimax rotation was performed. As seen in Appendix 2, all of the measurement items convergedwell from theoretically-supported constructs. To ensure reliability of constructs, the Chronbach’s alpha values for measure-ment items were examined. The Chronbach’s alpha values for the constructs ranged from .83 to .88 (see Appendix 1). Theconstructs had no problems with reliability. The measurement items for each construct were averaged to create summatedscales. Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations for major constructs.
4. Results
The hypotheses were tested through a multiple regression; Table 2 presents the results. The proposed conceptual modeldid not have a multicollinearity problem. Variance inflation factor (VIF) values ranged from 1.10 to 2.28. Overall, the pro-posed model to predict the use of video sharing websites was significant, explaining 36% of the total variance (F = 12.68,p < .001). Specifically focusing on each of the constructs as a predictor, hypotheses 1 and 2 proposed that the perceived use-fulness and ease of use are positively associated with the use of video sharing websites. Both hypotheses were supported(b = .297, p < .001; b = .253, p < .001, respectively). Hypothesis 3 posited that utilitarian motives for using the Internet arenegatively associated with the consumption of video sharing websites. The hypothesis was supported (b = �.115, p < .01).Hypothesis 4 proposed that experiential motives for using the Internet are positively associated with the use of video sharingwebsites. The hypothesis was also supported (b = .116, p < .001). Hypothesis 5 postulated that the greater perceived substi-tutability of video sharing websites for offline video media leads to the more frequent use of video sharing websites. Thehypothesis was supported (b = .122, p < .01). Hypothesis 6 argued the positive association between service evaluation factorsand the use of video sharing websites. The hypothesis was partly supported, but perceived content variety was the only onethat has a statistically significant positive association with the use of video sharing websites (b = .099, p < .05). The remain-ders of the service evaluation factors – perceived overall content quality, loading speed, screen size, display resolution, and
22 J. Cha / Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26
audio quality – were not statistically significant in predicting the use of video sharing websites. Hypothesis 7 postulated thatmales are more likely to use video sharing websites than females. The results supported the hypothesis (b = .289, p < .05).
5. Discussion and conclusion
Not only do the findings of this study present the factors affecting the frequency of using video sharing websites, but theyalso imply how offline video media cope with the threats generated from video sharing websites. The present study foundthat those males who use the Internet for psychological, physiological, emotional pleasure and excitement, and who perceivevideo sharing websites to have greater usefulness, ease of use, substitutability, and content variety are more frequent usersof video sharing websites. In contrast, the more individuals use the Internet to accomplish specific goals, the less frequentlythey use video sharing sites. The perceived overall content quality, loading speed, screen size, display resolution, and audioquality of video sharing sites did not predict the frequency of using video sharing websites.
Perceived usefulness and ease of use were salient factors that influenced the frequent use of video sharing websites. Aspredicted, the association of perceived usefulness and ease of use with the use of video sharing websites were positive. Thesetwo constructs had the strongest influences in predicting the frequent use of video sharing sites. Between these two,perceived usefulness had a larger impact than perceived ease of use; however both of them had direct influences on the ac-tual usage of video sharing websites.
It is, however, noteworthy that some of the previous studies suggested that perceived ease of use has rather indirect influ-ences on the intention to adopt a particular technology as an antecedent of perceived usefulness (Davis, 1989; Davis et al.,1989; Venkatesh and Morris, 2000). In that regard, there is a need to think about the unique characteristics of video sharingwebsites, which are somewhat different from offline video media such as television or DVD players. While offline video med-ia allowed people to merely watch the provided television programs, movies, or commercials, video sharing websites allowpeople to search, watch, store, and upload content they wanted. The role of audiences on offline video media such as tele-vision, DVD players, and movies are relatively passive, whereas audiences on video sharing websites are comparatively ac-tive. Those activities on video sharing websites can be time consuming and laborious to some users. Järveläinen (2007)suggested that the effect of perceived ease of use is direct and central in accepting a technology that requires more timeand labor. In that vein, the perceived ease of use had a direct and central effect on the actual use of video sharing websites.
Also, the findings of this study indicated that the more that people perceive video sharing websites to be substitutes foroffline video media, the more frequently they use video sharing websites. The key of the finding is that the present studyconfirmed the positive association between substitutability of video sharing websites for other offline video media andthe actual behavioral use of video sharing websites. This can be further incorporated with the finding from Cha (2010b),who distinguished video sharing sites from television network-affiliated websites in categorizing online video services.Cha (2010b) found that the time spent using video sharing sites reduces the time spent using television. Taking the findingfurther, the current study suggests that video sharing sites can pose a threat to the usage of traditional video platforms asmore people begin to perceive video sharing sites as a substitute for offline video media platforms – particularly television,movie theaters, and DVD players. However, the descriptive statistics indicate that the perceived substitutability betweenvideo sharing sites and these offline video platforms is relatively low compared to the other perceptions of video sharingsites, including all the TAM constructs (i.e., perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use) and service evaluation factors(e.g., overall content quality, content variety, screen size, etc.).
Interestingly, service evaluation factors did not show significant effects on the consumption of video sharing websitesexcept for the content variety factor. A possible explanation behind this finding is that content variety may mitigate theimpacts of the other service evaluation factors as deterrents for using video sharing websites. Indeed, college students gavethe highest evaluation for content variety (M = 6.41) on video sharing websites but they contrastingly gave relatively lowevaluations for display resolution (M = 4.03), screen size (M = 4.31), and audio quality (M = 4.61). As a matter of fact, Lin(2001) asserted that superior content is one of the functional desirabilities. Given that greater functional desirability leadsto the adoption of a new medium, content variety on video sharing websites plays a critical role in reducing other weak-nesses of video sharing websites that deter people from using video sharing websites. Moreover, content variety and qualityseem to outweigh the other service evaluation factors in the context of media serving a certain type of content. Focusing onmusic services on mobile phones, Vlachos et al. (2003) found that respondents locate more importance to the variety ofcontents and quality of contents than to price in adopting a music service via mobile phone. The discoveries from the presentand prior studies imply that content variety would be one of the strongest advantages of video sharing websites.
Content variety presumably is a critical reason why ethnic minorities in the US are more likely than the general US Inter-net population to use video sharing sites. According to Quantcast, African Americans, Asians, and Hispanics in the US aremuch more likely than the general US Internet population to use video sharing sites, such as YouTube and Daily Motion(Quantcast, 2011b,c). The emergence of multichannel video programming distributers (MVPD), including cable and satellitesystem operators, do provide multiple channels and diversified video content. However, television still has a limited amountof video content specifically tailored to ethnic minorities. Prime time television show casts still have fewer ethnic minoritiesthan Caucasians (Mastro and Greenberg, 2000; Monk-Turner et al., 2010). Therefore, the greater variety of videos on videosharing sites specifically designed for ethnic minorities and from foreign countries presumably attracts ethnic minorities tothe video sharing sites. To sustain a competitive strategy in competing with television firms, video sharing sites can utilize
J. Cha / Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26 23
focus on providing video content specific to different customer segments. To attract these minority audiences, it is critical fortelevision firms to ensure content variety and offer diverse package options that meet the desires of ethnic minorities.
The findings also pointed out that experiential motives for using the Internet are positively associated with the use ofvideo sharing websites. On the other hand, there is a negative influence of utilitarian Internet motive on the use of videosharing websites. The combined findings indicate that video sharing sites tend to be utilized to gratify psychological, phys-iological, and emotional pleasure and excitement, rather than accomplishing specific tasks of users. Researchers consistentlyfound that relaxation and entertainment are the primary motives for watching television (Rubin, 1981, 1984). Regarding spe-cific content genres, experiential motives are associated with watching drama, comedy, and sporting events on television.Although information seeking is associated with watching news on television (Rubin, 1981; Rubin et al., 1985), entertain-ment still is a pivotal factor for watching news on television, as compared to reading newspapers and news magazines.
While information seeking and entertainment were found to be the two most salient motives for Internet use in general(Papacharissi and Rubin, 2000), the present study indicates that the salient motives for using video sharing sites are closer tothe ones for television rather than the ones for the Internet. Video sharing sites aggregate video content just as televisionservice providers offer multiple channels as a package. Given that similarity, consumers appear to use video sharing sitesfor emotional pleasure rather than for a specific purpose, just as they do with television. The result of this study confirmsprior studies, maintaining that determinants of a system or a medium use differ according to individual services of themedium (Bouwman et al., 2008; Verkasalo et al., 2010).
New video platforms, such as the Internet and mobile phones, gave rise to the terms ‘‘lean-back’’ and ‘‘lean-forward’’ incategorizing audiences. This study suggests that frequent users of video sharing sites are more likely to lean back, just likefrequent television users. It is easy to classify audiences as being either lean back or lean forward based on the frequency ofusing a type of video platform (e.g., the Internet, mobile phones, television). However, this study maintains that the classi-fication between lean-back and lean-forward audiences may depend on individual vehicles (e.g., video sharing sites, televi-sion network sites) – even within a video platform (e.g., the Internet).
It is notable that a particular television network site, such as NBC.com, does not provide as great a variety of video contentas video sharing sites. With this in mind, television network sites could offer more lean-forward audience experiences, suchas searching for specific video content and gaining knowledge of the video content. Since television network sites differsfrom video sharing sites in providing video content, this may cause utilitarian motives to have a positive relationship withthe frequent use of television network websites to view video content. Future studies can examine motivational differencesbetween the use of television network sites and video sharing sites, and can further examine how similar or different thosetwo types of online video venues are when compared to television.
With the nature of an exploratory study, this study acts as a starting point for addressing issues pertaining to the growthof video sharing websites. As mentioned previously, the data for the study was gathered through a convenient studentsample. People ages 18–24 are more likely to use video sharing websites compared to overall Internet population (NB,2008), and college students are early adopters and heavy users of the Internet compared to the general population (Joneset al., 2009; Jones, 2002; Nie et al., 2005). Nevertheless, a sample from a single university cautions the generalizability ofthe findings. Future studies can examine how factors affecting the use of video sharing websites are different between agroup of individuals who actively upload content and another group of individuals who passively watch videos uploadedby other people. Other studies can also investigate how the factors are similar or different between viewers of contentgenerated by individuals and of content originally produced by media firms.
Appendix 1
Construct measures and reliability.
Construct
Measurement itemPerceived usefulness(Cronbach’s a = .83)
1. Video sharing websites are (would be) useful for me2. Video sharing websites (would) make me more efficient3. Video sharing websites (would) make my life easier
Perceived ease of use 1. Video sharing websites are (would be) easy to use
(Cronbach’s a = .84) 2. Learning to use video sharing websites is (would be) easy for me3. It is (would be) easy to get video sharing websites to do what I want to do
Substitutability (Cronbach’s 1. Video sharing websites can be a substitute for television
a = .88) 2. Video sharing websites can be a substitute for movie theaters3. Video sharing websites can be a substitute for DVD players
Utilitarian motive (Cronbach’sa = .88)
1. I use the Internet to improve my work performance2. I use the Internet because the Internet is useful for my work3. I use the Internet to enhance my effectiveness in my work
(continued on next page)
24 J. Cha / Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26
Appendix 1 (continued)
Construct
Measurement item4. I use the Internet because the Internet provides me with information that wouldlead to better decisions5. I use the Internet to increase my work productivity
Experiential motive (Cronbach’sa = .86)
1. I use the Internet because it is enjoyable2. I use the Internet because it amuses me3. I use the Internet because the actual process of using the Internet is entertaining4. I use the Internet because using the Internet is fun5. I use the Internet because I find using the Internet to be interesting
Appendix 2
Exploratory factor analysis.
Measurement item
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5Experiential motive 1
.82 .13 .26 .04 �.02 Experiential motive 2 .85 .07 .21 �.01 .05 Experiential motive 3 .68 .14 �.05 .06 .26 Experiential motive 4 .90 .12 .08 .06 .12 Experiential motive 5 .84 .14 .10 .01 .09 Utilitarian motive 1 .11 .83 .02 .07 .11 Utilitarian motive 2 .15 .80 .04 .03 �.01 Utilitarian motive 3 .06 .89 .06 .05 .06 Utilitarian motive 4 .15 .70 .13 .01 .01 Utilitarian motive 5 .08 .87 �.01 �.01 .06 Perceived ease of use 1 .24 .03 .85 .06 .11 Perceived ease of use 2 .14 .11 .90 .05 .07 Perceived ease of use 3 .09 .06 .82 .08 .15 Substitutability 1 .06 .08 .13 .84 .11 Substitutability 2 .03 .01 .02 .92 .08 Substitutability 3 .02 .04 .02 .91 .08 Perceived usefulness 1 .29 .04 .25 .08 .71 Perceived usefulness 2 .07 .13 .05 .09 .89 Perceived usefulness 3 .08 .10 .10 .14 .88 Eigenvalue 5.59 2.77 2.49 1.80 1.61 % of variance explained 19.04 18.41 12.87 12.82 11.86References
Al-Omoush, K.S., Shaqrah, A.A., 2010. An empirical study of household Internet continuance adoption among Jordanian users. International Journal ofComputer Science and Network Security 10 (1), 32–44.
Anil, S., Ting, L.T., Moe, L.H., Jonathan, G.P.G., 2003. Overcoming barriers to the successful adoption of mobile commerce in Singapore. International Journalof Mobile Communications 1 (1/2), 194–231.
Assael, H., 1998. Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action, 6th ed. South Western Publishing, USA.Atkin, D., 2002. Convergence across media. In: Lin, C.A., Atkin, D.J. (Eds.), Communication Technology and Society: Audience Adoption and Uses. Hampton
Press, Cresskill, NJ, pp. 23–39.Atkin, D., Jefres, L., Neuendorf, K., 1998. Understanding Internet adoption as telecommunications behavior. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 42,
317–336.Auchard, E., 2007, October 15. YouTube begins public test of anti-piracy database. Washingtonpost.com. Retrieved October 20, 2007 from <http://
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/15/AR2007101501320.html>.Austin, B.A., 1986. Motivations for movie attendance. Communication Quarterly 34 (2), 115–126.Bagozzi, R.P., Davis, F.D., Warshaw, P.R., 1992. Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations 45, 659–687.Barbin, B.J., Darden, W.R., Griffin, M., 1994. Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research 20, 644–656.Belson, W.A., 1961. Effect of television on the reading and buying of newspapers and magazines. Public Opinion Quarterly 25, 366–381.Blumler, J.G., Katz, E., 1974. The Uses of Mass Communication. Sage, Newbury Park, CA.Boettcher, J.V., Nardick, D.L., 2001, November 1. Reaching out to IT professionals with webcasting. Educause Quarterly. Retrieved September 15, 2007 from
<http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EQM0149.pdf>.
J. Cha / Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26 25
Bouwman, H., Carlsson, C., Molina-Castillo, F.J., Walden, P., 2008. Trends in mobile services in Finland 2004–2006 from ringtones to mobile Internet. Info 10(2), 75–92.
Cha, J., 2010a. Factors affecting the frequency and amount of social networking site use: Motivations, perceptions, and privacy concerns. First Monday 15(12). Retrieved July 4, 2011 from <http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2889/2685>.
Cha, J., 2010b. The channel cannibalization effect of online video platforms on television. The annual conference of Broadcast Education Association, LasVegas, 2010, April 14–17.
Chen, L., Gillenson, M.L., Sherrell, D.L., 2002. Enticing online consumers: an extended technology acceptance perspective. Information and Management 39(8), 705–719.
Cheng, T.C.E., Lam, D.Y.C., Yeung, A.C.Y., 2006. Adoption of internet banking: an empirical study in Hong Kong. Decision Support Systems 42, 1558–1572.Chu, C.W., Lu, H.P., 2007. Factors influencing online music purchase intention in Taiwan. Internet Research 17 (2), 139–155.Choudrie, J., Dwivedi, Y., 2005. A survey of citizens adoption and awareness of e-government initiatives. The government gateway: a United Kingdom
perspective. E-government workshop. Brunet University, West London.ComScore, 2006, August 15. Online video officially goes mainstream as YouTube.com breaks into the comScore Media Metrix top 50. Retrieved September 5,
2007 from <http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=982>.ComScore, 2011, May 18. ComScore Releases April 2011 US Online Video Rankings. Retrieved June 27, 2011 from <http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/
Press_Releases/2011/5/comScore_Releases_April_2011_U.S._Online_Video_Rankings>.Dauman, P., 2007, October 18. Media companies unveil copyright guidelines for online content. Computer World <http://www.computerworld.com/action/
article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9043251&intsrc=hm_list>.Davis, F.D., 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technologies. MIS Quarterly 13 (3), 319–340.Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R., Warshaw, P.R., 1989. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science 35 (8),
982–1003.Diddi, A., LaRose, R., 2006. Getting hooked on news: uses and gratifications and the formation of news habits among college students in an Internet
environment. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 50 (2), 193–210.Doolin, B., Dillon, S., Thompson, F., Corner, J.L., 2005. Perceived risk, the Internet, shopping experience, and online purchasing behavior: a New Zealand
perspective. Journal of Global Information Management 13 (2), 66–88.Durndell, A., Thomson, K., 1997. Gender and computing: a decade of change. Computers and Education 28 (1), 1–9.E-Marketer, 2009. Men Online. Retrieved July 3, 2011 from <http://www.emarketer.com/Report.aspx?code=emarketer_2000574>.Fenech, T., 1998. Using perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness to predict acceptance of the World Wide Web. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems
30, 629–630.Ferguson, D.A., Perse, E.M., 2000. The World Wide Web as a functional alternative to television. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 44 (2), 155–
174.Finholt, T., Sproull, L., 1990. Electronic groups at work. Organization Science 1 (1), 41–64.Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I., 1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Reading, MA.Flaherty, L.M., Pearce, K.J., Rubin, R.B., 1998. Internet and face-to-face communication: not functional alternatives. Communication Quarterly 46, 250–268.Gefen, D., Straub, D.W., 1997. Gender differences in perception and adoption of e-mail: an extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly 21
(4), 389–400.Gefen, D., Straub, D.W., 2000. The relative importance of perceived ease of use in IS adoption: a study of ecommerce adoption. Journal of the Association for
Information Systems 1 (8), 1–30.Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., 2003. Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. MIS Quarterly 27 (1), 51–90.Grotta, G.L., Newsom, D., 1982. How does cable television in the home relate to other media use patterns? Journalism Quarterly 59, 588–591.Hartmann, T., Klimmt, C., 2006. Gender and computer games: Exploring female dislikes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11 (4), http://
jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue4/hartmann.html.Harvey, M.G., Rothe, J.T., 1985. Video cassette recorders: their impact on viewers and advertisers. Journal of Advertising Research 25 (6), 19–27.Henke, L., Donohu, T.R., 1989. Functional displacement of traditional TV viewing by VCR owners. Journal of Advertising Research 29 (April/May), 18–23.Hoffman, D.L., Novak, T.P., 1996. Marketing in hypermedia computer mediated-environments: conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing 60, 50–68.Huang, E., 2008. Use and gratification in e-consumers. Internet Research 18 (4), 405–426.Jain, R., 2003. Experiential computing. Communications of ACM 46, 48–55.James, M.L., Wotring, C.E., Forrest, E.J., 1995. An exploratory study of the perceived benefits of electronic bulletin board use and their impact on other
communication activities. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 39, 30–50.Järveläinen, J., 2007. Online purchase intentions: an empirical testing of a multiple-theory model. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic
Commerce 17 (1), 53–74.Jessell, M., 1995, November 6. Internet begins to cut into TV viewing. Broadcasting and Cable, 125, 113.Jones, S., 2002. The Internet Goes to College. Pew Internet & American Life Project, Washington, DC.Jones, S., Johnson-Yale, C., Millermaier, S., Perez, F.S., 2009. Everyday, life, online: US College Students’ use of the Internet. First Monday 14 (10). Retrieved
September 2, 2010 from <http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2649/2301>.Kamis, A.A., Stohr, E.A., 2006. Parametric search engines: what makes them effective when shopping online for differentiated products? Information and
Management 43 (7), 904–918.Kaplan, S.J., 1978. The impact of cable television services on the use of competing media. Journal of Broadcasting 22 (Spring), 155–165.Kayany, J.M., Yelsma, P., 2000. Displacement effects of online media in the socio-technological contexts of households. Journal of Broadcasting and
Electronic Media 46 (2), 215–229.King, W.R., He, J., 2006. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information and Management 43, 740–755.Lederer, A.L., Maupin, D.J., Sena, M.P., Zhuang, Y., 2000. The technology acceptance model and the World Wide Web. Decision Support Systems 29, 269–282.Leung, L., 2001. College student motives for chatting on ICQ. New Media and Society 3 (4), 483–500.Lin, C.A., 1994. Audience fragmentation in a competitive video marketplace. Journal of Advertising Research 34 (6), 1–17.Lin, C.A., 1996. Looking back: the contribution of Blumler and Katz’s uses of mass communication to communication research. Journal of Broadcasting and
Electronic Media 40, 574–581.Lin, C.A., 2001. Audience attributes, media supplementation and likely online service adoption. Mass Communication and Society 4 (1), 19–38.Lin, C.A., 2004. Webcasting adoption: technology, user innovativeness, and media substitution. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 48 (3), 446–
465.Lin, C., 2006. Predicting satellite radio adoption via listening motives, activity, format preference. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 50 (1), 140–
159.López-Nicolás, C., Molina-Castillo, F.J., Bouwman, H., 2008. An assessment of advanced mobile services acceptance: contributions from TAM and diffusion
theory models. Information and Management 45 (6), 359–364.Luo, M.M., Remus, W., Chea, S., 2006. Technology acceptance of Internet-based information services: an integrated model of TAM and U&G theory. AMCIS
2006 Proceedings.Mastro, D., Greenberg, B., 2000. The portrayal of racial minorities on prime time television. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 44, 690–703.Mendelsohn, H., 1964. Listening to Radio. Free Press, New York.Monk-Turner, E., Heiserman, M., Johnson, C., Cotton, V., Jackson, M., 2010. The Portrayal of racial minorities on prime time television: a replication of the
mastro and greenberg study a decade later. Studies in Popular Culture 32 (2), 101–114.
26 J. Cha / Telematics and Informatics 31 (2014) 16–26
Overton, G., 2006. Are you casting or podcasting? Laser Focus World 42 (6), 61–63.Morris, M., Ogan, C., 1996. The Internet as mass medium. Journal of Communication 46 (1), 39–50.NB, 2008, July 28. US TV watching by age groups. ZDNet. Retrieved September 4, 2010 from http://www.zdnet.com/blog/itfacts/us-tv-watching-by-age-
groups/14723.Nie, N.H., Simpser, A., Stepanikova, I., Zheng, L., 2005. Ten years after the birth of the Internet, how do Americans use the Internet in their daily lives?
Stanford Institution for the Quantitative Study of Society, Stanford, CA.Novak, T.P., Hoffman, D.L., Duhachek, A., 2003. The influence of global-directed and experiential activities on online flow experiences. Journal of Consumer
Psychology 13, 3–16.Novak, T.P., Hoffman, D.L., Yung, Y., 2000. Measuring consumer experience in online environments: a structural modeling approach. Marketing Science 19,
22–42.O’Cass, A., Fenech, T., 2003. Web retailing adoption: exploring the nature of Internet users’ Web retailing behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services 10, 81–94.Ong, C.-S., Lai, J.-Y., 2006. Gender differences in perceptions and relationships among dominants of e-learning acceptance. Computers in Human Behaviour
22 (5), 816–829.Papacharissi, Z., Rubin, A.M., 2000. Predictors of Internet use. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 44, 175–196.Papacharissi, Z., Mendelson, A.L., 2007. An exploratory study of reality appeal: uses and gratifications of reality TV shows. Journal of Broadcasting and
Electronic Media 51 (2), 355–370.Parks Associates, 2010. Consumption of PC video is increasing, but TV still main video source for households. Retrieved April 5, 2011 from http://
www.parksassociates.com/press/press_releases/2010/aug17-onlinevideo.html.PC Magazine, 2007. Retrieved September 15, 2007 from http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=usergenerated+content&i=56171,00.Philaretou, A.G., Mahfouz, A.Y., Allen, K.R., 2005. International Journal of Men’s Health 4 (2), 149–169.Quantcast, 2011a. Quantcast Rankings for the United States. Retrieved June 27, 2011 from http://www.quantcast.com/top-sites.Quantcast, 2011b. Quantcast Youtube.com. Retrieved July 13, 2011 from http://www.quantcast.com/youtube.com.Quantcast, 2011c. Quantcast Dailymotion.com. Retrieved July 13, 2011 from http://www.quantcast.com/dailymotion.com.Robinson, J., 1981. Television and leisure time: a new scenario. Journal of Communication 31 (Winter), 120–130.Robinson, J.P., Barth, K., Kohut, A., 1997. Social impact research: personal computers, mass media and use of time. Social Science Computer Review 15 (1),
65–82.Rubin, A.M., 1981. A multivariate analysis of ‘‘60 minutes’’ viewing motivations. Journalism Quarterly 58, 529–533.Rubin, A.M., 1984. Ritualized and instrumental television viewing. Journal of Communication 34, 67–77.Rubin, A.M., Perse, E.M., Powell, R.A., 1985. Loneliness, parasocial interaction, and local television news viewing. Human Communication Research 12, 155–
180.Schepers, J., Wetzels, M., 2007. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information and
Management 44, 90–103.Selim, H.M., 2003. An empirical investigation of student acceptance of a course websites. Computers and Education 40 (4), 343–360.Shapiro, E., 1998, June 12. Web Lovers Love TV, Often it’s Not Coming Out of the Same Box. The Wall Street Journal, p. B9.Snider, M., 1997. Growing on-line population making Internet ‘‘mass media’’. USA Today.Sparkes, V.M., 1983. Public perception of and reaction to multi-channel cable television service. Journal of Broadcasting 27 (Spring), 163–175.Stafford, T.F., Stafford, M.R., Schkade, L.L., 2004. Determining uses and gratification for the Internet. Decision Sciences 35 (2), 259–288.Story, L., 2007, October 14. A new advertising outlet: Your life. New York Times. Retrieved July 2, 2011 from <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/
business/media/14ad.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1>.van der Heijden, H., 2003. Factors influencing the usage of websites: the case of a generic portal in the Netherlands. Information and Management 40, 541–
549.Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., 2000. Why do not men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and
usage behavior. MIS Quarterly 24 (1), 115–139.Venkatesh, V., Davis, G.B., 2000. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science 46, 186–
204.Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, E.D., 2003. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 21, 425–478.Verkasalo, H., López-Nicolás, C., Molina-Castillo, F.J., Bouwman, H., 2010. Analysis of users and non-users of smartphone applications. Telematics and
Informatics 27, 242–255.Vlachos, P., Vrechopoulos, A.P., Doukidis, G., 2003. Exploring consumer attitudes towards mobile music services. International Journal on Media
Management 5 (2), 138–148.Weiss, W., 1968. The impact of mass media. In: Lindzey, G., Aaronson, E. (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 5. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, pp. 77–
195.Whitley, B.E., 1997. Gender differences in computer-related attitudes and behavior: a meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior 13 (1), 1–22.Williams, T.M., 1986. The Impact of Television. Academic Press, New York.Wolfinbarger, M., Gilly, M.C., 2001. Shopping online for freedom, control, and fun. California Management Review 43 (2), 34–55.Yang, K.C.C., 2005. Exploring factors affecting the adoption of mobile commerce in Singapore. Telematics and Informatics 22, 257–277.Yang, K.C.C., Kang, Y., 2006. Exploring Factors Influencing Internet users’ Adoption of Internet Television in Taiwan. First Monday 11 (3). Retrieved
November 20, 2006, from <http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_3/yang/index.html>.YouTube, 2011. Content Verification Program. Retrieved July 20, 2011 from http://www.youtube.com/t/copyright_program.