Gender differences in intentional social action: we-intention to engage in
social network-facilitated team collaboration
Shen, Aaron Xl; Lee, Matthew KoView
Profile; Cheung, Christy MkView Profile; Chen, Huaping (Jun 201) View Profile.
Journal of Information Technology, suppl. Special Issue on Social Networking 25.2
0. 152-169.
Shen,
A. X., Lee, M. K., Cheung, C. M., & Chen, H. (2010). Gender differences in
intentional social action: We-intention to engage in social network-facilitated
team collaboration. Journal
of Information Technology, 25(2),
152-169. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jit.2010.12
Shen, A. X., Lee, M. K., Cheung, C.
M., & Chen, H. (2010). Gender differences in intentional social action:
we-intention to engage in social network-facilitated team collaboration. Journal
of Information Technology, 25(2), 152-169.
Note: Ini hanya sebuah catatan pribadi, mohon rujuk sumber asli
Abstrac
The growth and popularity of Web 2.0
applications help people to build and maintain their social networks online and
further encourage social network-facilitated team collaboration. In this study,
we conceptualized the use of instant messaging in social network-facilitated
team collaboration as an intentional social action and further investigated the
effect of gender differences in the development of we-intention (i.e.
collective intention) to engage in such collaboration. A research model was
developed and empirically tested with 482 university students in Mainland
China. The results demonstrated that the effects of attitude, positive
anticipated emotions, and group norms on we-intention were more important for
men, whereas the effects of social identity and negative anticipated emotions
were more significant for women to collectively participate in social
network-facilitated team collaboration. We believe the implications of this
study would shed considerable light on both research and practice.
Keywords: we-intention;
gender; instant messaging; social networking; anticipated emotions; social influence
Introduction
Today, there are more than 1 billion
individuals around the world connected and networked together through Internet
to communicate, collaborate, and contribute their knowledge and wisdom (Arena
and Benjamin, 2009). In recent years, the growth and popularity of Web 2.0
applications have greatly facilitated the development of online social networks
for individuals with common interests to communicate and work together. In
fact, social networking in itself is a collective effort by more than one
person to create something together. Nowadays, social networks connect people
not only in their private time but also for work-related issues. It offers new
opportunities for communication and collaboration among team members. Some
business initiatives have started to employ social networking tools for
effective team collaboration in a workplace context. For example,
OwnerServer.com provides a collaborative platform for people to schedule
events, create voting survey, share documents, and be more productive in a
deeply connected environment. These features have also appeared in public
social networking websites, such as Facebook and MySpace, and communication
technologies, such as instant messaging (IM) and weblogs, which support the
development of online social networks. Recent studies indicate that IM has now
become an important and integral part of everyday life (e.g. Lenhart et
al., 2007). The number of IM users was expected to grow from 432 million in
2006 to 650 million in 2010 (Radicati Group Inc, 2006). Some people use IM to
expand and maintain their professional and social circles, and more people are
beginning to use IM at work with other employees in their organizational
networks to discuss task-related issues and share calendars or documents.
Despite the importance and great
potential of IM in supporting networking and collaboration, its value will
never be realized if people are not willing to use IM together with others in
their social networks. Different from other common personal productivity tools
(such as word processing), the adoption and use of IM, in some sense, is
basically a collective action and emphasizes more on social interaction and
collaboration. The adoption and usage decision thus depends more on the
(perceived) simultaneous behavior of their partners and it is important to
recognize that mutual acceptance is a necessary condition for social
network-facilitated team collaboration to occur. Over the past two decades,
Information Systems (IS) researchers have demonstrated considerable interests
in measuring usage intentions of
information technology (Davis et al., 1989; Venkatesh and Davis,
2000; Venkatesh et al., 2003). However, the intention construct investigated in prior
studies focused more on an individual's own intention to
act but neglected the possible mutual dependence in the decision-making
processes. Bagozzi (2007) has forcefully argued that traditional
behavioral intention studies in
the IS field needs to change and it is necessary to re-specify intentions when decisions involve 'mutual,
shared, or in some other way joint processes' (p. 249). In an attempt to help
fill this research gap, this study employs the concept of we-intention,
implying commitment and agreement by the collectivity, to investigate
participation in social network-facilitated team collaboration, in the specific
context of social networks enabled by IM.
Some recent studies have
demonstrated that the Internet gender gap is being bridged (Cobbs and Sentinel,
2005). Men no longer dominate the Internet population. Although men and women
flock in almost equal percentages in terms of the use of the Internet, they may
use it for very different reasons. For example, women are more enthusiastic
about using email to communicate with friends and family, whereas men often use
email more than women to communicate with various organizations. In addition,
men are more likely to use the Internet to download music, play online games,
listen to radio, and participate in sports fantasy leagues (Fallows, 2005). A
recent study on the use of social networking sites in teens (Lenhart and
Madden, 2007) has also identified many gender differences. For example, girls
use social networking sites mainly to reinforce pre-existing friendships,
whereas boys use the sites to flirt and make new friends. These variations
yield some interesting gender-specific results that need further exploration.
Specifically, it would be interesting to explore how males and females are
different in terms of participation in online intentional social action in
general and in social network-facilitated team collaboration in particular.
The purpose of this paper thus is to develop and test a
preliminary model of we-intention to use IM in social
network-facilitated team collaboration. By synthesizing and extending current
research on goal-directed emotions, social influence theory, and prior
literature on gender differences, this study aims to
identify the key antecedents of we-intention and further examine possible
gender differences in engaging in social network-facilitated team
collaboration.
The rest of the paper is structured
as follows. In next section, we address
the theoretical background of this study. In the following section, we develop a research model of we-intention and
further propose the research hypotheses. This is followed by a detailed
description of research methodology and results of data analysis.
Finally, we conclude by
discussing the key findings, the limitations of the study, and the implications
for both research and practice.
Theoretical background
In this section, the theoretical
background of the study is reviewed. Specifically, the concept of we-intention is
first discussed, followed by a discussion of the theory of reasoned action
(TRA), research on goal-directed emotions, social influence theory, and
previous gender research in IS field.
We-intention
Philosophical studies on we-intention
The study of usage intention in the IS literature focuses on
an individual's personal intention where
one is in full charge of his/her own behavior. However, using IM for team
collaboration within social networks definitely involves more than one person
and they share joint control over the usage behavior. In this respect, prior
philosophical studies have demonstrated that different types of conceptual
schemes are required when plural subjects are involved (Gilbert, 1989).
Philosophers examined the concept of group intention,
which is often labeled as 'collective intention'
(Searle, 1990), 'we-intention' (Tuomela, 1995), and 'shared intention' (Bratman, 1997). In these previous
studies, we-intention was originally defined as a 'commitment of an
individual to participate in joint action, and involves in an implicit and
explicit agreement between the participants to engage in that joint action'
(Tuomela, 1995: 2). This definition emphasizes the joint commitment and the
mutual acceptance among group participants. It also clarifies the context
within which we-intention is applicable and the mechanism
through which we-intention may be developed.
In the past decade, scholars in
philosophy have contributed a lot to the conceptual and logic foundation ofwe-intention.
For example, Tuomela (2006) has identified four presumptions for we-intention to
occur: (1) a group member intends to do his or her own part of the group
activity, (2) each member believes that the opportunities for joint action, to
some extent, exist and other members will perform their parts; in addition (3)
there is a mutual belief among all the participants that the joint action
opportunities will hold, and finally, (4) the intention to participate and perform the group activity
depends on (2) and (3). In addition, Tuomela (2005) maintained that the beliefs
required for we-intention are purely subjective and
represent one's own perception of the reality. Therefore, if the above
conditions are satisfied, a member may be the only agent withwe-intention in
a focal group (Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2002). In this regard, we-intention can
be considered as an individual's subjective perception of the extent to which
all participants in a collectivity will engage in a group activity together.
Distinctions between i-intention and we-intention
As shown in Table 1 (See PDF/
ORIGINAL SOURCE), there are several features distinguishing we-intention from
I-intention. First of all, there are
differences in main targets and goal achievement processes. For I-intention, the referred target is a single
person and the intention content
is privately accepted. In contrast, plural subjects are involved in we-intention and
participants collectively accept the intention content
together. Second, reasons for acting are also different for the two kinds
of intentions. People with we-intention are
mainly motivated by group reasons, whereas people with I-intention are primarily motivated by
personal reasons. Third, there are differences concerning commitment and
behavioral control. In the circumstance of we-intention, people have a joint commitment and a
shared authority over the collective action. However, this is contrary to I-intentionwhere an individual is privately
committed to and has full control over a personal activity. Finally,
satisfaction conditions are also different between I-intention and we-intention. It is obvious that we-intention has
necessary simultaneous satisfaction among all the participants as its special
feature. We-intention and I-intention may
co-exist in some specific contexts. For example, some social computing
technologies, such as Wikipedia and del.icio.us, are rather useful in
themselves and thus I-intention and we-intention can
exist simultaneously. This is because one can use these technologies both
individually and collectively to achieve his/her own goals, such as contributing
knowledge regarding an interested event or building one's own net digest.
However, for some other social computing tools such as groupware and social
networking technologies, people cannot use these tools independently because
such technologies themselves can make sense only when groups of people use them
together. In this case, the usage behavior greatly depends on other
participants' simultaneous usage and therefore only we-intention (but
not I-intention) exists in this
situation.
We-intention research
in social psychology and IS fields
The measurement and validation
issues of the concept of we-intention recently have attracted much
attention in social psychology research. As pioneers in this field, Bagozzi and
his colleagues have done extensive empirical research on we-intention.
Both individual-referent (e.g., attitude, perceived behavioral control,
positive and negative anticipated emotions) and group-referent factors (e.g.,
group norms and social identity) are found to be significant in determining we-intention (Bagozzi
and Lee, 2002; Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2002, 2006a, b; Dholakia et al., 2004;
Cheung et al., 2010; Shen et al., 2010). In addition,
there are several moderators that influence this effect. For example, we-intention is
primarily determined by social identity in interdependent-based culture,
whereas by group norms in independent-based culture (Bagozzi and Lee, 2002).
Results also indicated that the effect of group norms is more significant for
users with lower usage experience, whereas the effect of social identity is
more significant for users with higher usage experience (Bagozzi and Dholakia,
2006a; Shen et al., 2010). The relationship between we-intention and
actual behavior has also been examined across a wide range of group activities,
from virtual community participation (Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2006a) to outing
with motorcycle club friends (Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2006b). In the IS field,
researchers are beginning to empirically examine the concept of 'we' in many different IT-enabled behavioral
contexts, including digital piracy (Kwong and Lee, 2004), e-collaboration
(Cheung et al., 2007), social networking websites (Cheung et
al., 2010), and group work (Shen et al., 2010). Table 2 (See PDF/
ORIGINAL SOURCE) provides a comprehensive summary of previous we-intention research
in social psychology and IS fields.
Theory of reasoned action
The TRA (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975)
provides a useful theoretical basis for the current study. In the past two
decades, the TRA has been widely used by IS researchers to understand
information technology adoption and usage behavior (Davis et al.,
1989; Venkatesh et al., 2003). In the TRA, an individual's behavior
is affected by behavioral intention,
which in turn, is predicted by attitude toward the behavior and subjective norms
surrounding the performance of the behavior. Although the TRA is successful in
explaining a wide variety of behaviors, it has often been criticized for
neglecting the affective aspects of attitude, and the weak predictive ability
of subjective norms (Armitage and Conner, 2001; French et al.,
2005). To address these weaknesses, this study extends the TRA by integrating
it with goal-directed emotions and social influence theory.
Goal-directed emotions
As we mentioned above, attitude in the TRA is defined as 'a
person's general feeling of favorableness and un-favorableness toward some
stimulus object' (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975: 216). The authors of
TRA have provided clear guidance on how to elicit the behavioral beliefs, that
is, asking the respondents what they think would be the advantages and
disadvantages of performing a behavior (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). Following
this recommendation, prior studies took a very narrow view of attitude and
regarded it as an overall judgment of the utilitarian benefits derived from a
particular behavior (Venkatesh et al., 2000; Morris et al.,
2005). A number of prior studies have demonstrated that the relationships in
TRA have not sufficiently captured the affective aspects in making a decision
(Crites et al., 1994; Manstead and Parker, 1995; van der
Pligt et al., 1998; French et al., 2005). In addition
to the advantages and disadvantages, affective questions, such as like/enjoy
and dislike/hate, are also crucial for TRA studies in identifying a number of
other salient beliefs (French et al., 2005). The affective aspect
of attitude can be regarded as the 'emotions and drives engendered by the
prospect of performing a behavior' (French et al., 2005: 1825). In
this study, the importance of including affective factors heavily relies on the
assumption that decision-making involves both reasoning and feeling (Komiak and
Benbasat, 2006).
One response to this concern is to
include goal-directed emotions as the predictors of behavioral intention (Richard et al., 1998;
Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2006a). Goal-directed anticipated emotions refer to the
affective responses where an individual imagines the emotional consequences of
goal achievement and goal failure before deciding to act (Bagozzi et al.,
1998). The rationale for the effects of anticipated emotions on behavioralintention is based on the argument that
people will take emotional consequences into account before they decide to act
in a goal-directed situation. Prior research has shown that anticipated affect
provides additional explanation on behavioral intention beyond that of TRA variables (Conner and Armitage,
1998). Some recent studies on we-intention have also demonstrated that
anticipated emotions are important predictors of virtual community
participation we-intention (Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2002,
2006a).
Social influence theory
Subjective norms are often
considered as one of the least understood aspects in TRA (Fishbein and Ajzen,
1975: 304). In a comparison study of TRA and technology acceptance model,
Davis et al. (1989) have emphasized the role of social
influence in information technology acceptance and usage behavior and further
suggested that Kelman's social influence theory can be considered as a
theoretical framework for developing knowledge in this area. Kelman (1958) has
distinguished three distinct aspects of social influence processes, including
compliance, internalization, and identification. Compliance occurs when an
individual accepts the influence to get support, approval or a favorable
reaction from significant others. The acceptance of compliance therefore is
because of the accompanied 'social effects.' Subjective norms in the TRA are
often used to reflect the influence of social normative compliance and
typically operationalized in terms of influence from general public whose
opinions are important. Internalization represents the process through which
people incorporate external things into one's own psychological processes and
it occurs when an individual accepts the influence because of the content of
the targeted behavior. The behavior thus is intrinsically rewarding and
congruent with one's own goals or values. Such values may include beliefs,
attitudes or more abstract moral tenets (Bagozzi and Lee, 2002). Accordingly,
internalization can be achieved mainly because of the relevance of the themes
and issues. Finally, identification refers to one's conception of self in terms
of thinking, feeling and acting on the basis of a 'group level of self' (as a
member of the group) instead of a 'personal self' (Turner, 1987).
Identification occurs when an individual accepts the influence to establish or
maintain a satisfying self-defining relationship with another person or group.
Therefore, the adoption of a targeted behavior through identification is
primarily because of the desired relationships and social interactions.
Gender and IS research
There is a growing body of research
in the investigation of gender differences in information technology adoption
and diffusion (Adam, 2002; Wilson, 2004). As shown in Table 3 (See PDF/
ORIGINAL SOURCE), gender has been widely studied as an independent or moderator
variable in prior IS research. These studies indicated that men are more likely
to engage in task-oriented or instrumental behavior and therefore attitude
toward the use of IT will be more salient for men than women (Venkatesh et
al., 2000, 2004; Morris et al., 2005). In contrast, women are
more likely to conform to a majority opinion and more relationship-oriented
than men (Venkatesh et al., 2000). As a result, subjective norms
and identification will influence women more strongly than men (Venkatesh and
Morris, 2000; Morris et al., 2005). In addition, men and women have
different perceptions of innovation characteristics (Gefen and Straub, 1997;
Van Slyke et al., 2002) and Internet usage patterns (Teo, 2001).
The different influence patterns between men and women therefore demonstrate
the moderating effect of gender (Ilie et al., 2005). Recently, the
gender differences in the use of social networking technologies were also
reported (Lenhart and Madden, 2007). For youth aged between 15 and 17, 70% of
girls have used online social network services, whereas only 54% of boys have
done so. In addition, teen boys are more likely to actually use different
online networking features in social networking communities, whereas teen girls
mainly use social networking to keep contact with old friends. Most recently,
Zhang et al. (2009) have empirically demonstrated the
existence of gender effects in post-adoption behavior in the context of
blogger's switching their blog services. Table 3 (See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE)
provides a more detailed summary of prior empirical IS research on gender
differences.
Research framework
Figure 1 - See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE,
depicts the research framework used in this study. This framework integrates
anticipated emotions and social influence theory into the TRA. We expect gender will moderate the effects
of attitude, positive/negative anticipated emotions, and social influence
factors on we-intention to use IM in social
network-facilitated team collaboration. The constructs and their relationships
are discussed in detail in the following sections.
Attitude toward using IM
Using IM in social
network-facilitated team collaboration in some sense is a collective action.
This is because a person cannot use this technology on an individual basis
until his/her partners in the social networks use it together. Compared to the
traditional I-intention approach, we-intention captures
the perception of 'we' and the joint
commitment among members in one's social networks. It reflects an individual's
perception of the extent to which people in his/her social networks are jointly
willing to act something together. In this regard, the traditional
individual intention in the TRA
is replaced by we-intention in the current study. Consistent
with the assumptions outlined in the TRA, we-intention thus is assumed as determined by
attitude toward the use of IM. In addition, prior gender research on
information technology adoption consistently suggested that attitude is more
important for men than for women because men focus more on instrumentality and
goals of a particular behavior (Venkatesh et al., 2000;
Morris et al., 2005). Based on the discussion above
H1a:
Attitude will have a positive impact
on we-intention to
use IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration.
H1b:
The impact of attitude on we-intention to
use IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration will be stronger for
men than for women.
Goal-directed emotions
As we discussed above, prior studies that built on the TRA have
used a more utilitarian perspective to measure attitude. The affective aspects
in making a decision are addressed in this study through goal-directed
emotions. Goal-directed emotions in this study are defined as the affective
responses where an individual imagines the emotional consequences of using or
not using IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration. The existing
literature on goal-directed emotions suggested that both positive and negative
anticipated emotion should be considered in understanding human behavior.
Positive anticipated emotion refers to the affective reactions toward being
able to do something, whereas negative anticipated emotion results from being
unable to do this. An individual has both positive and negative anticipated
emotions simultaneously because of the different affective responses from goal
achievement and goal failure. However, positive and negative anticipated
emotions in this context are not mirror images of each other and they may well
be asymmetric since they arise from different events. It is quite possible that
a person may become exceedingly happy if his/her goal is achieved (e.g. wining
a lottery) but at the same time not too disappointed if he/she fails to meet
the goal. Consistent with previous literature (Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2002,
2006a), if people anticipate positive emotions toward being able to using IM in
social network-facilitated team collaboration, they will be more likely to form
a we-intention to
obtain these positive emotions. On the other hand, if they anticipate negative
emotions from being unable to use IM in social network-facilitated team
collaboration, they will try to develop a we-intention with other participants together
in order to avoid the negative emotions. Therefore
H2a:
Positive anticipated emotions from
being able to use IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration will have
a positive impact on we-intention to do so.
H3a:
Negative anticipated emotions from
being unable to use IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration will
have a positive impact on we-intention to do so.
Empirical studies in psychology and
consumer research have provided ample evidence that men place more value on
positive emotions and in contrast, women place more value on negative emotions
(Roberts, 1991; Dube and Morgan, 1996; Putrevu, 2001). This may be because of
the fact that men are more self-confident and independent compared to women
(Venkatesh et al., 2000). In addition, prior research has
consistently reported that women are more sensitive to the negative effects,
such as sadness and anxiety, than men (Fujita et al., 1991;
Thomsen et al., 2005). In the current study, positive anticipated
emotions represent affective responses toward successfully using IM, whereas
negative anticipated emotions represent affective responses toward
unsuccessfully using IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration. Based
on prior findings in gender research, the impacts of positively affective
response in this study may be stronger for men, whereas the impact of
negatively affective response may be stronger for women. Therefore
H2b:
The impact of positive anticipated
emotions on we-intention to use IM in social
network-facilitated team collaboration will be stronger for men than for women.
H3b:
The impact of negative anticipated
emotions on we-intention to use IM in social
network-facilitated team collaboration will be stronger for women than for men.
Social influence processes
Social influence underlying the
compliance process is represented by subjective norms in this study. Subjective
norms have received considerable empirical support as an important antecedent
of behavioral intention (Fishbein
and Ajzen, 1975; Venkatesh et al., 2003). In the current context,
if people believe the use of IM in social network-facilitated team
collaboration will bring a favorable reaction from significant others, they
will be more likely to have a we-intention to use it together. In addition,
prior studies involving comparison between women and men in terms of compliance
indicated that women are more likely to comply, in contrast men tend to rebel
an order (Stockard et al., 1988). Recent IS research on gender
difference also reported similar results that the effects of subjective norms
will be more significant to women than men (Venkatesh et al., 2003).
Therefore
H4a:
Subjective norms will have a
positive impact on we-intention to use IM in social
network-facilitated team collaboration.
H4b:
The impact of subjective norms
on we-intention to
use IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration will be stronger for
women than for men.
Internalization process is
represented in the current research through the effects of group norms. Social
influence in this way is captured by the similarity of one's goals or values
with that of their referent group. In the current study, if people think the
use of IM is useful for supporting team collaboration with other members in
their social networks or find it congenial to their own values and goals, they
will be motivated by internalized values and be more likely to have a we-intention to
use it with others together. Since men are more task-oriented (Venkatesh and
Morris, 2000), if they find the use of IM is congruent with their goals and
values, such as enabling convenient communication or facilitating team
collaboration, they will have a higher chance than women to adopt and use IM in
social network-facilitated team collaboration. Therefore
H5a:
Group norms will have a positive
impact on we-intention to use IM in social network-facilitated team
collaboration.
H5b:
The impact of group norms on we-intention to
use IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration will be stronger for
men than for women.
The third social influence process
is identification, which is characterized by social identity in the current
study. Ellemers et al. (1999) suggested that social identity
involves three related but distinct aspects, including 'a cognitive component
(a cognitive awareness of one's membership in a social group -
self-categorization), an evaluative component (a positive or negative value
connotation attached to this group membership - group self-esteem), and an
emotional component (a sense of emotional involvement with the group -
affective commitment)' (p. 372). As we mentioned
before, an individual accepts the identification influence in order to build or
maintain a close relationship with another person or group. Prior studies have
demonstrated that if people identify themselves with a social group, they will
be more likely to form a we-intention to engage in the group
activities because of the desired relationships (Bagozzi and Lee, 2002; Bagozzi
and Dholakia, 2006a). In addition, previous research on gender differences have
found that women are more relationship-oriented compared to men (Minton and
Schneider, 1980); therefore they tend to pursue some activities that are
related to relationship building and maintenance, and accordingly the effect of
identification may be more important for women than for men. Based on the
discussion above
H6a:
Social identity will have a positive
impact on we-intention to use IM in social network-facilitated team
collaboration.
H6b:
The impact of social identity
on we-intention to
use IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration will be stronger for
women than for men.
Research method
The objective of this study is to
identify factors predicting we-intention to use IM in social
network-facilitated team collaboration, and to investigate whether gender
differences exist within this context. The current study was conducted in
Mainland China during May to July 2006. Measurements, data collection method,
and survey responses are reported in this section in detail.
Measurements
All measures used in this study have
been validated in prior studies (as shown in Appendix A). Minor changes in the
wordings were made so as to fit the specific research context. We adapted items for attitude, subjective
norms, group norms, social identity, and we-intention from Bagozzi and Lee (2002) and
items for positive and negative anticipated emotions from Bagozzi et
al. (1998). Since this study was conducted in Mainland China, the
questionnaire was translated into Chinese first and a backward translation
method was used to ensure the consistency between the Chinese and the English
version of the questionnaire. A pilot test was also conducted to refine the
questionnaire wordings, assess logical consistencies, judge ease of
understanding, and identify areas for improvement. Overall, the questionnaire
was regarded as concise and easy to complete.
Data collection method
University students who use QQ IM
for group communication and collaboration (e.g., discussing group projects or
class assignments) were invited to participate. QQ is the most popular IM in
Mainland China and estimated to have over 300 million active accounts at the
end of March 2008. More important, it provides QQ Groups for users with common
interests or experiences to communicate and collaborate together (as shown in
Figure 2 - See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE,). Each member in QQ Group can initiate a
discussion by sending a message to the group and it thus provides a shared
online space for effective social network-facilitated team collaboration. Both
a paper-and-pencil survey and an online survey were used for data collection.
This mixed-mode approach is designed to mitigate against coverage errors or
other biases resulting from data collection method (Wallace et al., 2004).
All participation in this study was voluntary and yet motivated by a lucky draw
among successful respondents.
The reason why we choose survey method is that it has
some clear advantages over other types of data collection methods in our
current research settings. Particularly, it is an efficient way of collecting
information from a large number of respondents and it is relatively easy to
administer since only question of interests are asked, collected and analyzed.
In addition, it is very attractive because it allows researchers to determine
the values and the relations of variables, provides responses that can be generalized
to other populations, offers a way to compare responses across different
groups, times and places, allows the testing of theoretical propositions in an
objective fashion, and helps to confirm the findings from qualitative research
(Newsted et al., 1998).
A screening question was used to
identify respondents who have experience with the use of IM in social
network-facilitated team collaboration. This study was then introduced as an
'opinion survey.' Respondents were asked to imagine that they are using IM to
discuss a topic with the group of friends that they frequently communicate or
collaborate with. They were further required to 'picture briefly in your mind
the name and image of each friend and write your nickname and their nicknames
in the table below.' These instructions were designed to capture the group with
which the respondents develop we-intention to use IM in social
network-facilitated team collaboration.
A group of business students in a
local university in Mainland China were invited to participate in the
paper-and-pencil survey. Students from six randomly selected classes were
encouraged to complete the questionnaire. Before they filled in the
questionnaire, the purpose and
the scenario of the survey were first instructed. Only students who have used
IM for group discussion with friends in their social networks were asked to
fill in the questionnaire. A total of 319 students participate and finally 301
usable questionnaires were returned in this part of the survey, with a 94.4%
response rate.
A self-administrative online
questionnaire was posted in the Bulletin Board System (BBS) of this university
simultaneously. Online survey design has
lots of advantages, including lower overall costs, allowing electronic input,
reducing response bias, facilitating data collection from a large amount of
respondents, convenience to having automated data collection and more
flexibility in questionnaire design (Boyer et
al., 2002). Finally, a total of 181 usable questionnaires were collected
through this method.
Survey responses
The final sample consists of a total
of 482 respondents, out of which 313 were male (64.9%) and 169 were female
(35.1%). A large majority (60.6%) of the respondents were aged between 21 and
25 years. On the whole, the respondents were relatively experienced with more
than 2 years in using IM (89.4%) and spent more than 1 h on IM per day (85.5%).
Table 4 (See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE) provides a summary of the overall sample
characteristics of the respondents.
Data analysis and results
PLS-Graph (Partial Least Squares)
version 3.00 was used to test the proposed research framework. The PLS
procedure (Wold, 1989) is a second-generation multivariate technique which can
assess the measurement model and the structural model simultaneously in one
operation. Different from the covariance-based SEM (Structural Equation
Modeling) approach (i.e., LISREL) that is more suitable for theory testing, the
component-based SEM approach (i.e., PLS) is more predictive-oriented (Joreskog
and Wold, 1982) and is considered to be most appropriate in the initial
exploratory stages of theory development (Chin, 1998). As we discussed before, this study tries to
identify the factors determining we-intention to engage in social
network-facilitated team collaboration, thus it is exploratory in nature. Based
on this reasoning, we have
chosen PLS as the primary data analysis technique. Following the two-step
analytical procedures, the measurement model was first examined and then the
structural model was assessed (Hair et al., 1998).
Measurement model
Convergent validity indicates to
what extent the items of an instrument that are theoretically related should be
related in reality. We assessed
the convergent validity by examining the composite reliability and the average
variance extracted from the measures (Hair et al., 1998). Composite
reliability refers to the internal consistency of the indicators measuring a
given factor and average variance extracted indicates the amount of variance
captured by a construct as compared to the variance caused by the measurement
error. A composite reliability of 0.70 or above and an average variance
extracted of more than 0.50 are deemed acceptable (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
As shown in Table 5 (See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE) , all the measures exceed the
recommended thresholds. In addition, Table 6 (See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE)
exhibits the loadings of the construct measures and the descriptive statistics
of the measures, including mean, standard deviation, minimum and maximum. The
results indicated that all measures are statistically significant on their path
loadings at the level of 0.01.
Discriminant validity indicates the
extent to which a given construct differs from other constructs. To demonstrate
the adequate discriminant validity of the constructs, the square root of the
average variance extracted for each construct should be greater than the
correlations between that construct and all other constructs (Fornell and
Larcker, 1981). Table 5 (See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE) presents the correlation
matrix of the constructs and the square roots of the average variance
extracted. The results demonstrate an adequate level of discriminant validity
of the measurements.
Structural model
The results of data analysis are
summarized in Table 7 (See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE) . Test of significance of all
paths were performed using the bootstrap re-sampling procedure. The research
model with full sample accounts for 44 % of the variance in we-intention to
use IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration. The results indicate
that positive anticipated emotions have the strongest impact on we-intention,
with a path coefficient at 0.292, followed by social identity, group norms,
attitude and negative anticipated emotions, with path coefficients at 0.186,
0.159, 0.149 and 0.140, respectively. Subjective norms, however, do not have a
statistically significant impact on we-intention (H4a is not supported).
To evaluate the moderating effect of
gender, the data were divided into two groups for further analysis. As shown in
Table 7 (See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE) , different influence patterns have been
found between women and men. The research model accounts for 48.8% of the
variance in we-intention for the subgroup of women and
42.4% of the variance in we-intention for the subgroup of men.
Anticipated emotions and social identity were significant predictors of we-intention to
use IM in social network-facilitated team collaboration for women, and all
factors (except subjective norms) exerted significant effects on we-intention for
men. Subjective norms were not found to be statistically significant for both
groups, indicating no difference between men and women (H4b is not supported).
The significance of difference in path coefficients between the two subgroups
was calculated using the procedure described in Keil et al. (2000)
(see Appendix B). As we expected,
the results demonstrated that the effects of negative anticipated emotions and
social identity were more significant for women, whereas the effects of
attitude, positive anticipated emotions, and group norms were more significant
for men. A summary of the results pertaining to each hypothesis in the current
study is shown in Table 8 (See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE) .
Discussion and conclusion
IM services provide online social
networking platforms for people with common interests and goals to communicate
and work together. Building on recent studies and practices demonstrating the
potentials of social networking in team coordination and collaboration, this
study aims to examine the
factors affecting we-intention to use IM in social
network-facilitated team collaboration, and the effect of gender differences in
the collective acceptance of instant messaging. This section first discusses
the key findings, and then addresses the limitations of this study, followed by
the implications for both research and practice.
Discussion of key findings
The research model extends the TRA
into a social networking environment where participants develop we-intention to
use Im for team collaboration together with other partners in their social
networks. We integrate
goal-directed emotions and social influence theory into the TRA to provide a
more comprehensive picture through looking at the effects of cognition,
emotions, and social influence. The measurement model is confirmed with
adequate convergent and discriminant validity for all the measures. The
structural model explains 44% of the variance in we-intention for the
full sample, 48.8% of the variance in we-intention for women and 42.4% of the
variance in we-intention for men. The results support
most of the hypotheses proposed in the research model.
The roles of anticipated emotions
and social influence
Goal-directed emotions and social
influence processes are included in our research model. Both positive and
negative anticipated emotions are found to be significant predictors of we-intention.
This finding is consistent with recent studies investigating anticipated
emotions in virtual communities (Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2002, 2006a). If IM
users anticipate positive emotions from the usage behavior, they will be more
likely to form we-intention to use it with friends in their
social networks. On the other hand, if they foresee the possible negative
emotions from being unable to use Im, they thus will try to avoid the negative
emotions through using Im with others together.
Among the three social influence
processes, the effect of subjective norms is not found to be significant in
determining we-intention. One possible explanation is
that we used a student sample
and the use of Im for team collaboration among university students tends to be
voluntary. In addition, they already have a lot of experience with the use of
Im (as shown in Table 4 (See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE) , nearly 90% of the
respondents have used Im more than 2 years). Prior research has demonstrated
that subjective norms matter only when the technology in question was mandatory
and users had limited technical experiences (Karahanna et al., 1999;
Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). Another explanation (as suggested by the anonymous
reviewers to whom we are
grateful) is that in a group action context individual's behavioral tendency
seem to be influenced more by the group-referent social influences, such as
group norms and social identity, rather than the general public's opinions,
such as subjective norms. This is because the target action only occurs within
the group and people may not really care about how other people outside the
group think. According to this reasoning, the effect of subjective norms
on we-intention seems
insignificant in the current context. Instead, in voluntary collaboration
contexts and with the richness of user experience, internalization and
identification play a more important role (Venkatesh et al., 2003;
Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2006a). In the current study, group norms and social
identity exert significant effects on we-intention to use Im. This finding also echoes
with previous literature demonstrating that internalization and identification
are the two most important social influence processes in online virtual
communities (Dholakia et al., 2004).
The roles of gender
Consistent with previous gender
research on information technology usage, factors determining the use of Im in
social network-facilitated team collaboration are very different between men
and women. Specifically, attitude, positive anticipated emotions and group
norms are more significant for men. The significance of attitude and group
norms rests on the fact that men are more likely to assess the advantages and
disadvantages of a given behavior (Venkatesh et al., 2000;
Ilie et al., 2005). If using Im for team collaboration is
beneficial and congenial to their goals, men always tend to use it. In
addition, because men tend to be more self-confident in their behaviors and
focus more on positive implications of their involvement, they will be more
likely to be influenced by positive anticipated emotions. In contrast, women
tend to report more negative affects (Thomsen et al., 2005) and
place more value on negative emotions arise from goal failure (Dube and Morgan,
1996; Putrevu, 2001); therefore, negative anticipated emotions were more
pronounced for women in this study. In addition, since women tend to be more
relationship-oriented than men (Minton and Schneider, 1980), as we hypothesized, social identity thus
exerts a more significant effect on we-intention for women.
Limitations of this study
Before highlighting the
implications, the limitations of this study are first discussed. First of all,
this study was conducted in Mainland China. Therefore it is possible that
culture may bias the development of we-intention to use Im in social
network-facilitated team collaboration (Bagozzi and Lee, 2002). Future
cross-cultural studies should further examine these issues. Second, actual
usage and participation behavior were not examined in this study. Therefore, a
longitudinal study is highly recommended in future research to determine the
effect ofwe-intention on
actual behavior. Third, some scales adopted from previous studies need further
refinement (e.g., two-item only scales). In addition, future research should
continue to develop and validate the factors specific to we-intention,
such as joint commitment and shared authority as identified in Table 1 (See PDF/
ORIGINAL SOURCE) , to provide a more comprehensive explanation of we-intention.
Finally, the overall research model explains 44% of the variance in we-intention to
use Im for team collaboration. Although an R -square figure of
44% in social science research is considered very adequate, future research
should nonetheless extend this line of research and further investigate the
effects of other important factors, such as trust (e.g. Lee and Turban, 2001),
in the collective participation of social network-facilitated team
collaboration.
Implications for research
The concept of we-intention is
especially important for studies on social network-facilitated team
collaboration because using Im in team collaboration can make sense only when
groups of people want to adopt and use it together on a regular basis. The
current study explored this fundamental issue by focusing on the factors
affecting we-intention to use Im and the gender differences in the
variables predicting we-intention. The rationality of the inclusion
of we-intention is
built on the fact that people's decisions are interdependent in the area of
social networks and the group goal cannot be achieved by a person individually.
This study thus provides a starting point for future research into Web 2.0
technology in general and social networking in particular. Bagozzi and Lee
(2002) have also suggested that the social antecedents and the group action can
be measured based on shared consciousness or understanding perceived by a focal
member in the group. Therefore, future research employing a group-level
analysis is highly recommended in this area. Some potential issues in this area
may include the roles of group size and composition. In addition, to the best
of our knowledge, this study represents the first theory-driven empirical
investigation examining gender differences in the formation of we-intention.
This study thus is expected to enrich existing gender literature by examining
how men and women are different in the process of participating in social
network-facilitated team collaboration.
This study also contributes to
existing social computing research by adding to the limited research done on
the group use of Im and allows future research to build upon it. Group norms
and social identity are the two most important social influence processes
determining we-intention to use Im in social
network-facilitated team collaboration. Future research on social computing
tools should take these two processes into account, especially in a voluntary
usage context. In addition, as we had
expected, both positive and negative anticipated emotions exert significant
effects on we-intention, providing additional explanation on
how we-intention to
use Im for team collaboration are formed. Positive and negative emotions in
this context are independent states (i.e. not mirror images) arising from
different instances of the goal (i.e. success and failure). They are very
likely asymmetric as the intensity of emotion generated by goal success and
goal failure may be very different. The role of emotions in the acceptance and
use of social computing technologies, and factors contributing to anticipated
emotions thus should deserve greater attention in future research.
Finally, this study contributes to
research on team collaboration, especially in the context of Im -supported
social networks. As a convenient Internet-based communication medium, Im has
gained widespread popularity among youths. When they enter the workplace, they
will naturally use Im for work discussion with their colleagues. However, there
may be some differences between the two types of use. For example, the use of
Im for team collaboration may be more task-oriented in the workplace and more
social-emotion-oriented in conversations with friends (Liu, 2002). It is thus
necessary to investigate the formation of we-intention to use Im in social
network-supported team collaboration in the two different contexts in future
research.
Implications for practice
Although this study leads to several
interesting implications for research, it also offers some practical
implications for practitioners. Prior studies dealing with the use of Im in the
workplace have consistently suggested that Im was primarily used for complex
work discussions with other colleagues in one's professional social networks
(Isaacs et al., 2002). This issue is also managerially important
because the use of Im in the workplace continues to grow at a steady pace.
Osterman Research (2006) predicted that by the end of 2009, almost 99% of
organizations in North America would have adopted and used Im as one of their
basic communication tools. From a practical perspective, a major implication of
this study is that anticipated emotions and social influence are two of the
most important determinants of participation in social network-facilitated team
collaboration. In addition, gender diversity is apparent in the use of Im.
Based on these findings, several useful guidelines may be developed.
First, the significance of both
positive and negative anticipated emotions indicates that decision-making
regarding the use of Im in social network-facilitated team collaboration is
closely related to the expected results from usage behavior. Therefore,
managers should present and demonstrate to employees some successful examples
of using Im in team collaboration. In addition, managers should circulate
information regarding the possible benefits from goal achievement and the
possible loss arising from goal failure to team members who may use Im with
co-workers in their professional social networks.
Second, the finding of study
demonstrated that group norms and social identity play important roles in
determining we-intention to use Im in social network-facilitated
team collaboration. Therefore, people use Im to communicate and collaborate
with others in their social networks mainly because they think it is congruent
with their own goals or values and they want to develop satisfying
self-defining relationships with their peers. In this regard, managers could
emphasize the importance of Im in efficiently completing group task and
ultimately improving team performance. In addition, managers could recommend
some special features of Im, such as chat room and e-cards, to users to help
them better manage their online relationships more easily and efficiently.
Third, gender difference reminds
managers should adopt different strategies in promoting social
network-facilitated team collaboration for men and for women. According to the
results of this study, the effects of attitude, positive anticipated emotions
and group norms are more salient for men. Therefore, managers should try to
highlight the usefulness and effectiveness of Im in team collaboration and further
demonstrate some successful case examples to men. On the other hand, the
effects of negative anticipated emotions and social identity are more salient
for women. Managers thus should nourish the confidence of women in the use of
Im for social network-facilitated team collaboration and better cultivate a
close relationship between women and other team members.
In summary, this study provides a
good starting point and new insight into the main issues regarding we-intention to
use Im in social network-facilitated team collaboration. As an important and
interesting concept involved in social networking, 'we-intention' should
deserve more attention in the future. We believe
that this study would have the potential to contribute significantly to studies
on Web 2.0 applications, especially in the context of using social networking
platforms for team collaboration. In addition, future research also should
continue this line of research by investigating the pertinent issues in the
context of some other widespread social networking websites, such as Facebook,
Friendster and MSN Space.
References
Adam, A. (2002). Exploring the
Gender Question in Critical Information Systems, Journal of Information
Technology 17 : 59-67.
Ahuja, M.K. and Thatcher, J.B.
(2005). Moving Beyond Intentions and
Toward the Theory of Trying: Effects of work environment and gender on
post-adoption information technology use, MIS Quarterly 29 (3):
427-459.
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M.
(1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior ,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Arena, M. and Benjamin, S. (2009).
Leading in a Hyper-Connected Society, Pegasus Communication 19 (9):
10-11.
Armitage, C.J. and Conner, M.
(2001). Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behavior: A meta-analytic
review, British Journal of Social Psychology 40 :
471-499.
Bagozzi, R.P. (2007). The Legacy of
the Technology Acceptance Model and a Proposal for a Paradigm Shift,Journal
of the Association for Information Systems 8 (4): 244-254.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Dholakia, U.M.
(2002). Intentional Social Action in Virtual Communities, Journal of
Interactive Marketing 16 (2): 2-21.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Lee, K.H. (2002).
Multiple Routes for Social Influence: The role of compliance, internalization,
and social identity, Social Psychology Quarterly 65 (3):
226-247.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Dholakia, U.M.
(2006a). Open Source Software User Communities: A study of participation in
Linux user groups, Management Science 52 (7):
1099-1115.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Dholakia, U.M.
(2006b). Antecedents and Purchase Consequences of Customer Participation in
Small Group Brand Communities, International Journal of Research in
Marketing 23 (1): 45-61.
Bagozzi, R.P., Baumgartner, H. and
Pieters, R. (1998). Goal-Directed Emotions, Cognition and Emotion 12 (1):
1-26.
Boyer, K.K., Olson, J.R., Calantone,
R.J. and Jackson, E.C. (2002). Print vs Electronic Surveys: A comparison of two
data collection methodologies, Journal of Operations Management 20 :
357-373.
Bratman, M.E. (1997). I Intend
that We J, in G.H. Hintikka and
R.T. Dordrecht (eds.) Contemporary Action Theory, Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers, pp. 49-63.
Cheung, C.M.K., Lee, M.K.O. and
Chiu, P. (2010). Online Social Networks: Why do we use facebook? Computers in Human Behavior ,
(in press).
Cheung, C.M.K., Shen, A.X.L., Lee,
M.K.O. and Wang, W.P. (2007). Let's Work Together! - We-intention to
use instant messaging for e-collaboration, in H. Osterle, J. Schelp and R.
Winter (eds.) Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Information
Systems (St. Gallen, Switzerland, June 2007); University of St. Gallen.
Chin, W. (1998). The Partial Least
Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling, in G.A. Marcoulides (ed.)Modern
Methods for Business Research , New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Cobbs, C. and Sentinel, O. (2005).
Women narrow online gender divide, [WWW document]
http://wvvw.pewinternet.org/Media-Mentions/2005/Women-narrow-online-gender-divide.aspx
(accessed 30th October 2009).
Conner, M. and Armitage, C.J.
(1998). Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior: A review and avenues for
future research, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 28 :
1429-1464.
Crites, S.L., Fabrigar, L.R. and
Petty, R.E. (1994). Measuring the Affective and Cognitive Properties of
Attitudes: Conceptual and methodological issues, Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin 20 : 619-634.
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and
Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A comparison of
two theoretical models, Management Science 35 (8):
982-1003.
Dholakia, U.M., Bagozzi, R.P. and
Pearo, L.K. (2004). A Social Influence Model of Consumer Participation in
Network- and Small-group-based Virtual Communities, International
Journal of Research in Marketing 21 : 241-263.
Djamasbi, S. and Loiacono, E.T.
(2008). Do Men and Women Use Feedback Provided by their Decision Support
Systems (DSS) Differently? Decision Support Systems 44 :
854-869.
Dube, L. and Morgan, M.S. (1996).
Trend Effects and Gender Differences in Retrospective Judgments of Consumption
Emotions, Journal of Consumer Research 23 :
156-162.
Durndell, A. and Haag, Z. (2002).
Computer Self-efficacy, Computer Anxiety, Attitudes toward the Internet and
Reported Experience with the Internet, by Gender, in an East European
Sample, Computers in Human Behavior18 : 521-535.
Ellemers, N., Kortekaas, P. and
Ouwerkerk, J.W. (1999). Self-Categorisation, Commitment to the Group and Group
Self-Esteem as Related but Distinct Aspects of Social Identity, European
Journal of Social Psychology 29(2/3): 371-389.
Fallows, D. (2005). How women and
men use the internet, [WWW document] http://www.pewinternet.org/∼/media//Files/Reports/2005/PIP_Women_and_Men_online.PDF/
original source.PDF/ original source (accessed 30th October 2009).
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I.
(1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention,
and Behavior: An introduction to theory and research , Reading, Ma:
Addison-Wesley.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F.
(1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variable and
Measurement Error, Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1):
39-50.
French, D.P., Sutton, S., Hennings,
S.J., Mitchell, J., Wareham, N.J., Griffin, S., Hardeman, W. and Kinmonth, A.L.
(2005). The Importance of Affective Beliefs and Attitudes in the Theory of
Planned Behavior: Predictingintention to
increase physical activity, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 35 (9):
1824-1848.
Fujita, F., Diener, E. and Sandvik,
E. (1991). Gender Differences in Negative Affect and Well-being: The case for
emotional intensity, Personality Processes and Individual Differences 61 :
427-434.
Gefen, D. and Straub, D.W. (1997).
Gender Differences in the Perception and Use of E-mail: An extension to the
theory acceptance model, MIS Quarterly 21 (4):
389-400.
Gilbert, M. (1989). On
Social Facts , London: Routledge.
Hair, J.F., Tatham, R.L., Anderson,
R.E. and Black, W. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis ,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ilie, V., Van Slyke, C., Green, G.
and Lou, H. (2005). Gender Differences in Perceptions and Use of Communication
Technologies: A diffusion of innovation approach, Information Resources
Management Journal 18(3): 13-31.
Isaacs, E., Walendowski, A.,
Whittaker, S., Schiano, D.J. and Kamm, C. (2002). The Character, Functions, and
Styles of Instant Messaging in the Workplace, in E.F. Churchill, J. McCarthy,
C. Neuwirth and T. Rodden (eds.) Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on
Computer Supported Cooperative Work (New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 16-20
November 2002); New Orleans, Louisiana, USA: ACM Press.
Joreskog, K.G. and Wold, H. (1982).
The ML and PLS Techniques for Modeling with Latent Variables: Historical and
comparative aspects, in K.G. Joreskog and H. Wold (eds.) Systems Under
Indirect Observation: Causality, structure, prediction (Vol. I) ,
Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 263-270.
Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W. and
Chervany, N.L. (1999). Information Technology Adoption across Time: A
cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs, MIS
Quarterly 23 (2): 183-213.
Keil, M., Tan, B.C.Y., Wei, K.K. and
Saarinen, T. (2000). A Cross-Cultural Study on Escalation of Commitment
Behavior in Software Project, MIS Quarterly 24 (2):
299-325.
Kelman, H.C. (1958). Compliance,
Identification, and Internalization: Three processes of attitude change,Journal
of Conflict Resolution 2 (1): 51-60.
Komiak, X. and Benbasat, I. (2006).
The Effects of Personalization and Familiarity on Trust and Adoption of
Recommendation Agents, MIS Quarterly 30 (4): 941.
Kwong, T.C.H. and Lee, M.K.O.
(2004). Understanding the Behavioral Intention to
Digital Piracy in Virtual Communities - A propose model, in e-Technology,
e-Commerce and e-Service, in K.-J. Lin and J. Ho (eds.) IEEE International
Conference, (Taipei, Taiwan, 29-31 March 2004); Taipei: ACM Press, pp. 223-226.
Lee, M.K.O. and Turban, E. (2001). A
Trust Model for Consumer Internet Shopping, International Journal of
Electronic Commerce 6 (1): 75-91.
Lenhart, A. and Madden, M. (2007).
Social networking websites and teens: An overview, [WWW document]
http://www.pewinternet.org/∼/media//Files/Reports/2007/PIP_SNS_Data_Memo_Jan_2007.PDF/
original source.PDF/ original source (accessed 30th October 2009).
Lenhart, A., Madden, M., Macgill,
A.R. and Smith, A. (2007). Teens and social media, [WWW document]
http://www.pewinternet.org/∼/media//Files/Reports/2007/PIP_Teens_Social_Media_Final.PDF/
original source.PDF/ original source (accessed 30th October 2009).
Liu, Y. (2002). What Does Research
Say About the Nature of Computer-Mediated Communication: Task-oriented,
social-emotion-oriented, or both? Electronic Journal of Sociology 6 (1),
[www document] http://www.sociology.org/content/vol006.001/liu.html (accessed
29th March 2010).
Manstead, A.S.R. and Parker, D.
(1995). Evaluating and Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior, European
Review of Social Psychology 6 : 69-95.
Minton, H.L. and Schneider, F.W.
(1980). Differential Psychology , Prospect Heights, IL:
Waveland Press.
Morris, M.G., Venkatesh, V. and
Ackerman, P.L. (2005). Gender and Age Differences in Employee Decisions about
New Technology: An extension to the theory of planned behavior, IEEE
Transactions on Engineering Management 52 (1): 69-84.
Newsted, P.R., Huff, S.L. and Munro,
M.C. (1998). Survey Instruments in Information Systems, MIS Quarterly 22(4):
553-554.
Ong, C. and Lai, J. (2006). Gender
Differences in Perceptions and Relationships among Dominants of e-Learning
Acceptance, Computers in Human Behavior 22 :
816-829.
Osterman Research (2006). Instant
messaging tough enough for business: No server required, [WWW document]
http://www.webex.com/PDF/ original source/wp_instant_messaging.PDF/ original
source (accessed 30th October 2009).
Putrevu, S. (2001). Exploring the
Origins and Information Processing Differences between Men and Women:
Implications for advertisers, Academy of Marketing Science Review 10 ,
[www document] http://www.amsreview.org/articles/putrevu10-2001.PDF/ original
source (accessed 29th March 2010).
Radicati Group Inc (2006). Instant
Messaging Market: 2006-2010 , Palo Alto, CA: The Radicati Group, Inc.
Richard, R., de Vries, N.K. and van
der Pligt, J. (1998). Anticipated Regret and Precautionary Sexual Behavior,Journal
of Applied Social Psychology 28 : 1411-1428.
Roberts, T. (1991). Gender and the
Influence of Evaluations in Self Assessment in Achievement Settings,Psychological
Bulletin 109 : 297-308.
Searle, J.R. (1990).
Collective Intentions and
Actions, in P. Cohen, J. Morgan and M. Pollack (eds.) Intentions in Communication ,
Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 401-415.
Shen, A.X.L., Cheung, C.M.K., Lee,
M.K.O. and Chen, H. (2010). How Social Influence Affects We-Intention to
Use Instant Messaging: The moderating effect of usage experience, Information
Systems Frontier , (in press).
Stockard, J., Van-de-Kragt, A.J. and
Dodge, P.J. (1988). Gender Roles and Behavior in Social Dilemmas: Are there sex
differences in cooperation and in its justification? Social Psychology
Quarterly 51 : 154-163.
Teo, T.S.H. (2001). Demographic and
Motivation Variables Associated with Internet Usage Behavior, Internet
Research 11 (2): 125-137.
Thomsen, D.K., Mehlsen, M.Y.,
Viidik, A., Sommerlund, B. and Zachariae, R. (2005). Age and Gender Differences
in Negative Affect - Is there a role for emotion regulation? Personality
and Individual Differences 38 : 1935-1946.
Tuomela, R. (1995). The
Importance of Us: A philosophical study of basic social notions ,
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Tuomela, R. (2005). We-intention Revisited, Philosophical
Studies 125 (3): 327-369.
Tuomela, R. (2006). Joint Intention, We-Mode
and I-Mode, Midwest Studies in Philosophy 30 (1):
35-58.
Turner, J.C. (1987). Rediscovering
the Social Group: A self-categorization theory , Oxford: B. Blackwell.
van der Pligt, J., Zeelenberg, M.,
van Dijk, W.W., de Vries, N.K. and Richard, R. (1998). Affect, Attitudes, and
Decisions: Let's be more specific, European Review of Social Psychology 8 :
33-66.
Van Slyke, C., Comunale, C.L. and
Belanger, F. (2002). Gender Differences in Perceptions of Web-based
Shopping, Communication of the ACM 45 (7): 82-86.
Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D.
(2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four
longitudinal field studies, Management Science 46 (2):
186-204.
Venkatesh, V. and Morris, M.G.
(2000). Why Don't 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., Morris, M.G. and
Ackerman, P.L. (2000). A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Difference
in Individual Technology Adoption Decision-Making Processes, Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes 83 (1): 33-60.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis,
G.B. and Davis, F.D. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward
a unified view, MIS Quarterly 27 (3): 425-478.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Sykes,
T.A. and Ackerman, P.L. (2004). Individual Reactions to New Technologies in the
Workplace: The role of gender as a psychological construct, Journal of
Applied Social Psychology 34 (3): 445-467.
Wallace, D.W., Giese, J.L. and
Johnson, J.L. (2004). Customer Retailer Loyalty in the Context of Multiple
Channel Strategies, Journal of Retailing 80 (4):
249-263.
Wilson, M. (2004). A Conceptual
Framework for Studying Gender in Information Systems Research, Journal
of Information Technology 19: 81-92.
Wold, H. (1989). Introduction to the
Second Generation of Multivariate Analysis, in H. Wold (ed.) Theoretical
Empiricism, New York: Paragon House.
Zhang, K.Z.K., Lee, M.K.O., Cheung,
C.M.K. and Chen, H. (2009). Understanding the Role of Gender in Bloggers'
Switching Behavior, Decision Support Systems 47 (4):
540-546.
Appendix
Appendix A
Questionnaire items
Attitude
Using instant messaging to
communicate with the group of your friends would be: (7-point semantic scale)
(1) Foolish-Wise, (2)
Harmful-Beneficial, (3) Bad-Good
Positive anticipated emotions
If I am able to use instant
messaging to communicate with the group of my friends, I will feel: (7-point
'not at all-very much' scale)
(1) Excited, (2) Delighted, (3)
Happy, (4) Glad, (5) Satisfied
Negative anticipated emotions
If I am unable to use instant
messaging to communicate with the group of my friends, I will feel: (7-point
'not at all-very much' scale)
(1) Angry, (2) Frustrated, (3) Sad,
(4) Disappointed, (5) Depressed, (6) Worried, (7) Uncomfortable, (8) Anxious
Subjective norms
Most people who are important to me
think that I should/should not use instant messaging to communicate with the
group of my friends. (7-point 'should-should not' scale)
Most people who are important to me
would approve/disapprove of me using instant messaging to communicate with the
group of my friends. (7-point 'approve-disapprove' scale)
Group norms
Using instant messaging to
communicate with the group of your friends that you identified above can be
considered as a goal. For you and your friends, please estimate the strength to
which each holds the goal. (7-point 'weak-strong' scales)
Strength of the shared goal by
yourself
Average of the strength of the
shared goal for other friends
Social identity
Please indicate to what degree your
self-image overlaps with the identity of the group of your friends with whom
you communicate using instant messaging. (7-point 'not at all-very much' scale)
How attached are you to the group of
your friends with whom you communicate using instant messaging? (7-point 'not
at all-very much' scale)
How strong would you say your
feelings of belongingness are toward the group of your friends with whom you
communicate using instant messaging? (7-point 'not at all-very much' scale)
I am a valuable member of the group.
(7-point 'does not describe me at all-describes me very well' scale)
I am an important member of the
group. (7-point 'does not describe me at all-describes me very well' scale)
We-Intention (7-point
'disagree-agree' scale)
I intend that our group use instant
messaging to communicate together.
We intend to use instant messaging to communicate
together.
Appendix B
Procedure for the comparison of path
coefficients
(Formula Omitted: See PDF/ ORIGINAL
SOURCE) (Formula Omitted: See PDF/ ORIGINAL SOURCE) where Spooled is
the pooled estimator for the variance;t the t -statistic
with N1 +N2 -2 degrees of
freedom; Ni the sample size of data set for
sample i ; SEi is the standard
error of path in structural model of sample i ; PCi is
the path coefficient in structural model of sample i .
About the authors
Aaron X.L. Shen is currently a senior research assistant in the
Department of Information Systems at the City University of Hong Kong. He
received his Ph.D. from City University of Hong Kong and University of Science
and Technology of China. His research interests include IT adoption and
diffusion, virtual community, electronic commerce and knowledge management. He
has published in International Conference on Information Systems ,Journal
of Information Technology and Information Systems Frontier .
Dr. Shen was also the Ph.D. research fellow of 2008 PACIS Doctoral Consortium.
Matthew K.O. Lee is Associate Dean and Chair Professor of Information
Systems & E-Commerce at the College of Business, City University of Hong
Kong. His research interests extend across innovation adoption and diffusion,
knowledge management, e-commerce, and social media. He is an Assessor of the
Innovation and Technology Commission in Hong Kong and a member of the Hong Kong
Research Grant Council (RGC) Business Studies Panel. He has published well over
100 research articles in international journals, conference proceedings, and
research textbooks. His work has appeared in leading research journals
(e.g. Journal of MIS ,Communications of the ACM , MIS
Quarterly , Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology , Decision Support Systems , Information
& Management , and Journal of International Business
Studies). He serves on the editorial board of a number of journals and is a
special Associate Editor of MISQ . He holds a Ph.D. from the
University of Manchester, UK (see http://www.cb.cityu.edu.hk/mlee).
Christy M.K. Cheung is an assistant professor at Hong Kong Baptist
University. She received her Ph.D. from City University of Hong Kong. Her
research interests include virtual community, knowledge management, social
computing technology, and IT adoption and usage. Her research articles have
been published in MIS Quarterly ,Information &
Management , Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology , e-Service Journal ,
and Information Systems Frontiers . Christy received the Best
Paper Award at the 2003 International Conference on Information Systems and was
the Ph.D. fellow of 2004 ICIS Doctoral Consortium.
Huaping Chen is a professor at Department of Computer Science and
Technology, University of Science and Technology of China. He has received his
Ph.D. from University of Science and Technology of China. His research
interests include grid computing, information strategies, business intelligence
and application. His work has been published in research journals,
including Journal of Management Information Systems , Decision
Support Systems , International Journal of Electronic Commerce ,
etc.
AuthorAffiliation
[1] Department of Information
Systems, USTC-CityU Joint Research Center, China
[2] Department of Information
Systems, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong
[3] Department of Finance and
Decision Sciences, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon, Hong Kong
[4] Department of Information
Systems, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, P.R. China
Correspondence: AXL Shen, Department
of Information Systems, USTC-CityU Joint Research Center, China. Tel: +86 852
3442 5836; Fax: +86 852 2788 8694
Acknowledgements
The work described in this paper was
partially supported by a grant from the Research Grant Council of the Hong Kong
Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. CityU 145907). The authors
acknowledge with gratitude the generous support of the Hong Kong Baptist
University for the project (FRG/08-09/II-58) without which the timely
production of the current report/publication would not have been feasible.
Note: Ini hanya sebuah catatan pribadi, mohon rujuk sumber asli
Komentar
Posting Komentar