Evolving ease: the dynamic moderating role of perceived ease of use in the technology acceptance model
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-08-2024-0203Palabras clave:
Technology acceptance model, Technology adoption, Continued use intention, Perceived ease of use, UTAUTResumen
PurposeThis study aims to address ambiguities in the technology acceptance model (TAM) by examining the conditions under which TAM constructs positively affect technology adoption, focusing on the interactive effects of perceived ease of use (PEOU), perceived usefulness (PU) and subjective norms (SN) on behavioral intention (BI).
Design/methodology/approachThe research investigates multiple technologies over an extended period, examining conditions at the adoption moment and after three months of usage. A mediated-moderation analysis was employed to explore the interactions among TAM constructs.
FindingsPEOU functions as a moderator in the relationship among PU, SN and BI. The effects of PU and SN on BI are heightened when the technology is perceived as easy to use. After three months, a higher level of PEOU is required to sustain continued use.
Practical implicationsThe findings underscore the importance of prioritizing ease of use in technology development and marketing, as it significantly influences the impact of recommendations and PU on adoption decisions.
Originality/valueThis study introduces a novel approach by examining PEOU as a moderator within the TAM framework, providing new insights into the interactive effects of TAM constructs on technology adoption. The research contributes to resolving conflicting findings in previous TAM studies and offers valuable guidance for sustaining new technology adoption.
Descargas
Referencias
Abdullah, F., & Ward, R. (2016). Developing a general extended technology acceptance model for e-learning (GETAMEL) by analyzing commonly used external factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 238–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.036
Abdullah, F., Ward, R., & Ahmed, E. (2016). Investigating the influence of the most commonly used external variables of TAM on students’ Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) and Perceived Usefulness (PU) of e-portfolios. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.014
Abegao Neto, F. L., & Figueiredo, J. C. B. D. (2023). Effects of age and income moderation on adoption of mobile payments in Brazil. Innovation & Management Review, 20(4), 353-364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/INMR-06-2021-0109
Acikgoz, F., & Vega, R. P. (2022). The role of privacy cynicism in consumer habits with voice assistants: a technology acceptance model perspective. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 38(12), 1138-1152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1987677
Adnan, A., Irvine, R. E., Williams, A., Harris, M., & Antonacci, G. (2025). Improving Acceptability of mHealth Apps—The Use of the Technology Acceptance Model to Assess the Acceptability of mHealth Apps: Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 27, e66432. https://doi.org/10.2196/66432
Amboage, G. B., Monteiro, G. F. d. A., & Bortoluzzo, A. B. (2024). Technological adoption: The case of PIX in Brazil. Innovation & Management Review, 21(3), 198-211.https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-10-2022-0133
Baker, E. W., Al-Gahtani, S. S., & Hubona, G. S. (2010). Cultural impacts on acceptance and adoption of information technology in a developing country. Journal of Global Information Management, 18(3), 35-58. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61350-480-2.ch003
Birnholtz, J. (2010). Adopt, adapt, abandon: Understanding why some young adults start, and then stop, using instant messaging. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1427-1433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.04.021
Brokman-Meltzer, M., Perez, D., & Gelbard, R. (2021). Perceived complexity of a project’s optimal work plan influences its likelihood of adoption by project managers. Project Management Journal, 52(5), 471-487. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728211026509
Chau, P. Y., (1996). An empirical assessment of a modified technology acceptance model. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(2), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.1996.11518128
Cheung, R., and Vogel, D. (2013). Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Computers and Education, 63(C), 160–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.003
Cho, H., Chi, C., & Chiu, W. (2020). Understanding sustained usage of health and fitness apps: Incorporating the technology acceptance model with the investment model. Technology in Society, 63, 101429. https://10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101429
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Disatnik, D., & Steinhart, Y. (2015). Need for cognitive closure, risk aversion, uncertainty changes, and their effects on investment decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(3), 349-359. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0529
Faqih, K. M. (2022). Factors influencing the behavioral intention to adopt a technological innovation from a developing country context: The case of mobile augmented reality games. Technology in Society, 69, 101958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101958
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Hayes A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, New York: Guilford.
Hu, P. J.-H., Clark, T. H., & Ma, W. W. (2003). Examining technology acceptance by schoolteachers: a longitudinal study. Information and Management, 41(2), 227-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(03)00050-8
Ibrahim, F., Münscher, J. C., Daseking, M., & Telle, N. T. (2025). The technology acceptance model and adopter type analysis in the context of artificial intelligence. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 7, 1496518. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frai.2024.1496518
Jin, C. H. (2014). Adoption of e-book among college students: The perspective of an integrated TAM. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 471–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.056
Kim, H. B., Kim, T. T., & Shin, S. W. (2009). Modeling roles of subjective norms and eTrust in customers' acceptance of airline B2C eCommerce websites. Tourism Management, 30(2), 266-277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.07.001
Koufaris, M. (2002). Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online consumer behaviour. Information Systems Research, 13(2), 205-223. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.2.205.83
Kucukusta, D., Law, R., Besbes, A., & Legohérel, P. (2015). Re-examining perceived usefulness and ease of use in online booking. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27(2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-09-2013-0413
Legramante, D., Azevedo, A., & Azevedo, J. M. (2023). Integration of the technology acceptance model and the information systems success model in the analysis of Moodle's satisfaction and continuity of use. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 40(5), 467-484. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-12-2022-0231
Liu, Y., Li, H., & Carlsson, C. (2010). Factors driving the adoption of m-learning: An empirical study. Computers and Education, 55(3), 1211–1219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.018
Luo, J., Ahmad, S. F., Alyaemeni, A., Ou, Y., Irshad, M., Alyafi-Alzahri, R., Alsanie, G., & Unnisa, S. T. (2024). Role of perceived ease of use, usefulness, and financial strength on the adoption of health information systems: The moderating role of hospital size. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), Article 516. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02976-9
Marikyan, D., Papagiannidis, S., & Stewart, G. (2023). Technology acceptance research: Meta-analysis. Journal of Information Science, 01655515231191177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01655515231191177
McKinsey & Company. (2020). A global view of how consumer behavior is changing amid COVID-19. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/a-global-view-of-how-consumer-behavior-is-changing-amid-covid-19
Nagy, S., & Hajdú, N. (2021). Consumer acceptance of the use of artificial intelligence in online shopping: Evidence from Hungary. Amfiteatru Economic, 23(56), 155-173. http://dx.doi.org/10.24818/EA/2021/56/155
Razmak, J., & Bélanger, C. (2018). Using the technology acceptance model to predict patient attitude toward personal health records in regional communities. Information Technology and People, 31(2), 306-326. https://doi.org/10.1108/itp-07-2016-0160
Rogers, E. M., & Shoemaker, F. F. (1971). Communication of Innovations; A Cross-Cultural Approach. The Free Press, New York.
Schepers, J., & Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & Management, 44(1), 90-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.10.007
Shao, C., Nah, S., Makady, H., & McNealy, J. (2025). Understanding user attitudes towards AI-enabled technologies: An integrated model of Self-Efficacy, TAM, and AI Ethics. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 41(5), 3053-3065. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2331858
Shin, S., & Lee, W. J. (2021). Factors affecting user acceptance for NFC mobile wallets in the US and Korea. Innovation & Management Review, 18(4), 417-433. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-02-2020-0018
Subramanian, G.H. (1994). A replication of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use measurement. Decision Sciences, 25 (5–6), 863–874. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1994.tb00834.x
Suki, M. N., & Suki, N. M. (2017). Flight ticket booking app on mobile devices: Examining the determinants of individual intention to use. Journal of Air Transport Management, 62, 146–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2017.04.003
Šumak, B., Pušnik, M., Heričko, M., & Šorgo, A. (2017). Differences between prospective, existing, and former users of interactive whiteboards on external factors affecting their adoption, usage and abandonment. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 733-756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.006
Sun, H., & Zhang, P. (2006). The role of moderating factors in user technology acceptance. International journal of human-computer studies, 64(2), 53-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.04.013
Tao D., Shao F., Wang H., Yan M., & Qu X. (2020). Integrating usability and social cognitive theories with the technology acceptance model to understand young users’ acceptance of a health information portal. Health Informatics Journal, 1347-1362. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458219879337
Tao, D., Wang, T., Wang, T., Zhang, T., & Zhang, X. (2022). A longitudinal study of user behavior and adoption of mobile health services during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 22(1), 84. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-01821-y
Tao, D., Wang, T., Wang, T., Zhang, T., Zhang, X., & Qu, X. (2020). A systematic review and meta-analysis of user acceptance of consumer-oriented health information technologies. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, 106147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.09.023
Teo, T. S., Lim, V. K., & Lai, R. Y. (1999). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in Internet usage. Omega, 27(1), 25-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0305-0483(98)00028-0
Tsai, C. Y. (2024). Is undergraduates’ adoption of the Internet of Things rational? The role of risk perception. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 18(4). https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2024-4-6
Tsai, J. M., Cheng, M. J., Tsai, H. H., Hung, S. W., & Chen, Y. L. (2019). Acceptance and resistance of telehealth: The perspective of dual-factor concepts in technology adoption. International Journal of Information Management, 49, 34-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.03.003
Ursavaş, Ö. F., Yalçın, Y., İslamoğlu, H., Bakır-Yalçın, E., & Cukurova, M. (2025). Rethinking the importance of social norms in generative AI adoption: investigating the acceptance and use of generative AI among higher education students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(1), 1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00535-z
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly: Management information Systems, 27(3), 425–478. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412.
Wade, R., Cartwright, C., & Shaw, K. (2012). Factors relating to home telehealth acceptance and usage compliance. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 5, 25-33. https://doi.org/10.2147/rmhp.s30204
Wu, B., & Chen, X. (2017). Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.028
Yuliadewi, N. W., Kusuma, I. G. A. E. T., & Atmaja, N. P. C. D. (2024). When Fear of Covid Is Not the Main Reason to Use Online Technology. The Asian Journal of Technology Management, 17(1), 14-37. https://doi.org/10.12695/ajtm.2024.17.1.2
Zhao, Y., Ni, Q., & Zhou, R. (2018). What factors influence the mobile health service adoption? A meta-analysis and the moderating role of age. International Journal of Information Management, 43, 342–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.08.006
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Dikla Perez, Inbal Stockheim, Yael Podkamien
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
• O(s) autor(es) autoriza(m) a publicação do artigo na revista;
• O(s) autor(es) garante(m) que a contribuição é original e inédita e que não está em processo de avaliação em outra(s) revista(s);
• A revista não se responsabiliza pelas opiniões, ideias e conceitos emitidos nos textos, por serem de inteira responsabilidade de seu(s) autor(es);
• É reservado aos editores o direito de proceder ajustes textuais e de adequação do artigos às normas da publicação.
