a longitudinal field investigation of gender dif
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
1/28
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Vol. 83, No. 1, September, pp. 3360, 2000
doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2896, ava ilable online at ht tp://www.idealibra
A Longitudinal Field Investigatio
Differences in Individual TechnoloDecision-Making Proces
Viswanath Venkatesh
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
2/28
34 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
Organ izat iona l investm ent s in inform at ion techn olog
significan t ly in t h e pas t decade. These invest men ts s peindividua l productivity an d th us cont ribute to organ
While advances in technology continue at an astrono
these emerging information technologies has fallen w
(Johansen & Swigart, 1996; Moore, 1991; Norman, 19
ha s been ident ified as one of the plausible explana tionfrom IT investm ent s being less th an expected (Lan dau
Clear ly, un derst an ding th e factors influencing u ser acc
usage of emerging information technologies in the work
for researchers an d pra ctitioners
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
3/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
1991), includin g t ech n ology a doption an d us a ge (e.g., Ma
Todd, 1995). We conducted a longitudinal field investiences in th e r elat ive influence of at titu de toward us ing
n orm , an d perceived beha vior al con tr ol in deter min ing i
sust ained u sage of a new softwar e system in t he work
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN INDIVIDUAL DEC
ABOUT TECHNOLOGY
The th eoret ical fra mework employed in t his resea rch
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
4/28
36 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
h ospita l pr oblem solvin g (St effen & Nyst r om, 1988). Si
ers h ave rep ort ed gender d ifferen ces in wha t is per ceiveethical (e.g., Dawson, 1995; Franke, Crown, and Sp
St eph ens on , 1993). In an oth er n ota ble stu dy, Tas h ak kor
to suggest th at th e att ribut es importa nt in determ ining
an d men a re different. Often su ch a tt ributes ar e man i
pr ocess in form a tion. Schema tic pr ocessing suggests t ha tan d pr ocessed consist ent with a specific cognitive st ru c
directs an individuals perceptions (Bem, 1981). As a
making process, perceptions and actions typically ten
created by specific schemas (e g Nisbett & Ross 1980
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
5/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
that using a particular technology will enhance his or
Specifically, t he link bet ween us efuln ess percept ions a na new technology has been shown to have path coeffic
(Da vis et a l., 1989) t o .79 (Ta ylor & Todd, 1995). Given t
can con clude th at even th ough a t tit u de is an a ffective r e
at titude toward using a techn ology in th e workplace r
and extrinsic motivation to use technology.Prior research provides a basis to expect gender diff
of inst ru men ta lity in decision-mak ing processes about a
on gender differences has suggested that for men, wor
salient role while t he fam ily r ole is per ceived to be le
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
6/28
38 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
Subjective Norm
Subjective n orm (SN) refers to t he perceived social
n ot to per for m th e beh a vior (Ajzen, 1991, p. 188). In th
u sa ge, th e key factors un der lying subjective norm a re pe
or s in fluen ce (Ma t h ieson , 1991; Ta ylor & Todd, 1995).
technologies (being introduced in the organizations stwas volunt ar y, in organ izat iona l settings, th e norma tiv
ors an d peers dur ing th e ear ly stages of behavior is exp
on individual int ent . Such a direct link between subject
can be explained as compliance, where an individu
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
7/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
be more concerned (than men) with pleasing others (e.g
on a review of r esearch, Minton and Schneider (198somewhat more self-confident and independent than
people-oriented.
Another significant body of research suggests simila
basis of a different causal mechanism. There is evide
avera ge, women pay more at ten tion t o social cues a nd mto nonsocial cues such as objects and visual patterns (e.
1968; Parsons & Bales, 1955; Williams & Best, 1982).
o n a r e v i e w o f r e se a r c h i n t h e a r e a , su g g e st e d t h a t
are equally attentive and capable of processing socia
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
8/28
40 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
the behavior of interest (p. 183). Thus, in understand
in technology adoption, we focus on perceptions of ease context of technology adoption and usage in the workp
to suggest th at th e a vailability of support sta ff is an o
to help users overcome bar riers a nd h ur dles to techn olog
th e ear ly sta ges of lear ning a nd use (e.g., Bergeron, Riv
In fact, consultant support has been conceptually andinfluence per ceptions of beha viora l cont rol (Cra gg & K
al., 1997).
The resear ch bas e discuss ed in u nder sta nding gender
toward using t echn ology also helps u s u nder sta nd poten
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
9/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
H3(a): As a determ inan t of behaviora l int ent ion to u
behaviora l cont rol will influen ce women more t ha n it
H3(b): As a determinant of usage behavior, percei
will influence women more t ha n it will influen ce m en.
Behavioral In tention as a Determ inan t of S hort-Term
In ad dition to perceived beha vior al cont rol, int ent ion
system usage. There is extensive evidence in psycholog
a review; Ajzen & Madden , 1986) su pport ing th e role of
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
10/28
42 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
increasing experience of the particular behavior (i.e.,
quent behavior t ends t o be influen ced more by au tomatprocesses (Heckhausen & Beckmann, 1990) than by c
fact, in the case of habituated behaviors, based on a m
and Wood (1998) established tha t past behavior (
predictor of future behavior when compared to intenti
In predicting p ossible gender d ifferences in th e intentionsh ips, given t he fact th at women ar e more balance
in t he adoption an d u sage decisions (as out lined in H2
that past behavior may have less of an impact on futu
less responsive t o out side inpu ts F or th ose wh o tend t
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
11/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
None of the user s h ad an y prior kn owledge about th e s
being intr oduced.
Procedure
The specific softwa re being intr oduced in each organcategorized as an organization-wide system for data an
All pa r t icipa n t s received a fu ll-da y t r a inin g (six h ou r s), w
for t wo hour s, followed by t wo h ou r s of int er a ct ive lect u r
with h an ds-on u se) an d two hour s of ha nds-on use wit
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
12/28
44 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
13/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
prior experience is to examine the possible confounding
efficacy (CSE), defined as the extent to which an indivha s t he ability t o use a compu ter to complete a ta sk (s
1995). CSE is m or e likely t o pla y a role in influen cing dec
since it will reflect the feedback from experiences (i.e.
when compa red to mea sur es of just th e a mount of expe
ences a re not con fou n ded by th ese var iables, th e h ypoth edifferen ces sh ould be obser ved even a fter st a tist ica lly co
Measurement
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
14/28
46 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
TABLE 1
P r e l i m i n a r y A n a l y s i s o f D a t a P o o l e d a c r o s s O r g a n i z a t i o n
Validity
1 2
BI A
Cronbach .90 .90
BI 1 .9243 .1404 BI 2 .9094 .1702
A1 .1421 .9108
A2 .1320 .9204
A3 .1104 .8562
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
15/28
D e s c r i p t i v e S t a
Wom en Men
M S D M S D Gen der A1 SN 1 P
A1 4.12 1.03 5.10 0.90 .34*** .21* .2
SN 1 3.92 0.82 5.12 0.82 .31*** .20** .2
P BC 1 4.11 0.69 5.40 0.74 .25** .21** .27***
BI 1 3.73 0.91 5.23 1.02 .25** .46*** .17* .2
Use12 3.23 1 .40 7.93 1.88 .30*** .35*** .20** .1
A2 4.12 1.04 5.18 0.71 .35*** .32*** .15 .1
SN 2 3.80 0.89 4.87 0.79 .35*** .21* .18* .1
P BC 2 3.94 0.92 5.55 0.82 .37*** .07 .02 .3
BI 3 58 0 80 5 02 1 03 33*** 25** 20* 2
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
16/28
48 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
17/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
TABLE 4
H i e r a rc h i c a l R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i s : G e n d e r, C o n fo u n d s , a n d
o n E a r l y I n t e n t i o n s (t 1)
St ep Va r ia bles en t er ed R 2
1 A .34
SN
P BC 2 INCOME .35
ORG LE VE L
E DUCATION
CSE
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
18/28
50 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
techn ology adoption an d usa ge beha vior is cru cial. Cle
initia l decision pr ocess t h at dr ives new t ech nology ad optin t he sh ort -term , which in t ur n influences susta ined u
th at early int entions form ed by women an d m en will h
on their usage of the said new technologyit is critic
un derlying dr ivers of th ese sta ble ear ly inten tions ar e d
men . Gender differences were observed even when keyvar iables (i.e., incom e, orga nizat ion level, edu cat ion, an d
were ta ken into accoun t.
In th is resear ch, t he longitu dinal investigat ion of th
nology adoption and usage behavior confirmed tha t
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
19/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
be sen sitive to possible divers ity in decision-ma kin g pr o
an d m en. F or exam ple, sensitivity t o gender differencetions for both t r ain ing an d ma rk etin g. To m aximize over
progra ms m ight be tailored t o emph asize factors t ha t a r
For exam ple, tr ainer s sh ould be cognizan t of the n eed t
ity-enha ncement factors (e.g., u sefulness) which ar e m
They sh ould also ta ke car e to ensu re th is emph asis does of oth er factors th at ma y be more salient to women (e
other referents and availability of adequate support)
professionals may also capitalize on these findings by
cam paigns which appeal t o both women an d men t he
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
20/28
52 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
have compromised other aspects of the study (e.g., res
Given the encouraging findings regarding gender diffadoption an d usa ge decisions, fut ur e work should exa
by including the underlying belief structure to create t
organizational interventions to enhance technology ad
Another TPB-related a rea for fut ur e r esear ch to foc
techn ology ad opt ion in gener a l an d th e associat ed gen de
lar is the use of behavioral expectation (rather than b
a key predictor of behavior. The use of behavioral exp
has been shown to be important in cases where the c
volitionality are not met (e g Warshaw & Davis 198
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
21/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
u se t echn ology in t he work place. One p oten t ial extens io
der differences could be to examine the role of househomore accur at ely reflect an d reveal pat tern s of indivi
ways of thinking, in relationship to socio-economic
organization level was adapted from prior research a
th e organ izat ions stu died, but oth er schem es of opera t
level are also worthy of study. Similarly, further work
r ole of edu cat ion level should u se oth er mea su res of int
or domain knowledge (e.g., computer aptitude tests). W
in t he presen t work , th e pa rt icipatin g organ izat ions we
and therefore opposed to publications discussing findin
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
22/28
54 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
Graduated high school G
Vocational/technical school P
Annual Individual Income: Less t ha n $20,000 $
(Before Taxes) $20,000 - $29,999 $
$30,000 - $39,999 $
$40,000 - $49,999 $
$50,000 - $59,999 $
Position: Executive/Top Management Admi
Middle Management Techn
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
23/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I. (1985). Fr om int ent ions t o actions: A th eory of plan ned beh av
(Eds.), Action cont rol: From cognition to behav ior (pp. 1139). N e
Ajzen, I. (1991). Th e th eory of plan ned behavior. Organizational Be
Processes, 50, 179211.
Ajzen, I., & Driver, B. (1992). Application of the theory of planne
Journal of Leisure Research, 24, 207224.Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavi
perceived behavioral control. J ourn al of Experim ental S ocial Psyc
Bagozzi, R. P. (1981). Attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A test of s
of Personality and Social Psychology 41 607 627
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
24/28
56 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
Bren ner, O. C., Blazini, A. P., & Green ha us , J . H. (1988). An exa min at
in managerial work values. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32, 3
Carlson, R. (1971). Sex differences in ego functioning: Exploratory s
nion. J ourn al of Consu lting an d Clinical Psychology, 37, 267277
Chen, M. (1985). Gender differences in adolescents uses of and att
M. McLaughlan (Ed.), Communication yearbook, (vol. 10, pp. 200
Chodorow, N. (1974). Fa mily str uctu re a nd femin ine per sonality. In M
(Eds.), Women, culture, and society. P alo Alto: Stan ford Un iv. P res
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral scie
Erlbaum.
Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: D
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
25/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
Franke, G. R., Crown, D. F., & Spake, D. F. (1997). Gender differen
bus iness p ra ctices: A social r ole th eory per spective. J ourn al of App
Galbraith, S. , & Stephenson, H. B. (1993). Decision rules used b
students in ethical value judgements. Journal of Business Ethics,
Garai, J. E., & Scheinfeld, A. (1968). Sex differences in mental an
Psychology Monographs, 77, 169299.
Gianakos, I., & Subich, L. M. (1988). Student sex and sex role in rela
Career Developm ent Qua rterly, 36, 259268.
Gill, S., Stocka rd , J ., J ohnson, M., & William , S. (1987). Measu rin g ge
sive dimension and critique of androgyny scales. Sex Roles, 17, 37
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard U
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
26/28
58 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex diff
Un iv. P ress.
Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: Compar ing the t
with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Researc
Miller, J. B. (1976). Toward a new psychology of women . Boston: Be
Minton, C., Kagan, J., & Levine, J. A. (1971). Maternal control and o
Child Development, 42, 18731894.
Minton, H. L., & Schneider, F. W. (1980). Differential psychology.
land P ress.
Mirowsky, J ., & Ross, C. E. (1990). Contr ol or defense? Depression
good and bad outcomes. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 3
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
27/28
GENDER DIFFERENCES
Schuler, R. (1975). Sex, organizational level, and outcome importanc
Personnel Psychology, 28, 365375.
Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. R. (1988). The theory
an alysis of past r esearch with recomm enda tions for m odificat ions
of Consumer Research , 15, 325343.
Sichel, D. E. (1997). Th e com puter revolution: An econom ic perspe
Brookings Institution.
Skitka, L. J., & Maslach, C. (1996). Gender as schematic categoryS ocial Behavior and Personality, 24, 5374.
Sparks, P., Guth rie, C. A., & Sh epherd, R. (1997). The Dimensiona
Behavioral Control Construct. Journal of Applied Social Psycholo
-
8/3/2019 A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Dif
28/28
60 VENKATESH, MORRIS, AND ACKERMA
Weiner, L. R. (1993). Digit al woes : W hy we s houl d not depend
Addison-Wesley.
Weller, L., Shlomi, A., & Zimont , G. (1976). Birt h order, sex, a nd oc
of Vocational Behavior, 8, 4550.
Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1982). Measuring sex stereotypes: A
Hills: Sage.
Wilson, J . S., St ockin g, V. B., & Goldstein, D. (1994). Gend er differen
selection: Academically t alented st udents in an intensive su mm349350.
Received March 2, 1999; published online J uly 27, 2000