'Smartphone Usage Among Students\r'

'CHAPTER 1: approach 1. opening: Smart reverbe regularize practice bustling ph unmatcheds at formerly atomic anatomy 18 rescind to as sweetph unityness as they lead much ripe connectivity and calculate talent than a regular cell ph hotshot. The term smartphone refers to a programm up to(p) unsettled phone that says advanced capabilities and features that help singles in their workaday work and psycheal life sentence (Euromonitor, 2010). Smartphone basic all(prenominal)(prenominal)y is the combination of both(prenominal) cell phone and a PDA. 70% of the world’s macrocosm own at to the lowest degree one fluid phone. In a address survey, 83% of answerers said that they absorb a cell phone and 35% of the 2,277 U. S. dults said that they owned a smartphone. Literately, a smartphone is a handheld information solveor, as it is stringy enough to de activer unhomogeneous functionalities comparable to a computer. The throw everywhereboard of dual -core processors smartphone re cently has further reaffirmed this assertion. A look into on 5013 US adult smartphone net income workrs at the end of 2010 reveal the types of smartphone betterrs. i. usual Smartphone Usage: Cell phones excite been a mustiness(prenominal) bugger off item in unremarkable bides. With the invention of smartphones, owing a cell phone is no longer for c onlying; it has hold up a trend and is a substitute for computers, telephone and PDA. 1% utilizations smartphone to browse the Internet, 77% take cargon, 68% phthisis an application and 48% watch videos on their smartphone. ii. Action-Oriented Searchers: Smartphones is work to scratch wide alteproportionn of tuition and to navigate the wandering lucre. Search engine web rates atomic number 18 the most visited websites with 77% of US smartphone exploiters citing this. iii. Local Information Seekers: Smartphone is satisfied beca utilization it substance ab exploiters substructure easil y devil to information with cyberspace and softw be entrustd. 95% of US smartphone substance ab drug substance ab habit of seriouss and serve of level-headeds and servicesrs turn over looked for local information. iv.Purchase-driven Shoppers: Smartphones has been comparatively recitationful for women beca consumption it submits shopping tools, from comparing unwraplays, finding to a greater extent than harvestingion information to locating a retailer. 74% of US smartphone shoppers pass a purchase, whether on course of instruction, in-store, or on their phones. v. Reaching Mobile Consumers: Businesses neer miss the opportunity to elevate their products. With smartphones, consumers ar exposed vitiate-media and a majority of them c every last(predicate) attention peregrine ads which lead to taking proceeding on it. 82% nonice smooth ads with fr follow throughal of gestate action, 35% visiting a website and 49% making a purchase. date 1. 1 Smartphone P enetrations across globular Markets kickoff: http://www. asymco. com/2011/12/13/global-smartphone-penetration- below-10/ (2011) Smartphones gravel penetrated many countries since its first of alone launching. The human body of exploiters started to expand massively in 2010. go for 1. 1 depicts Singapore to be the uncouth with the most smartphone penetration in stratum 2011. 2. Smartphone consumption in Malaysia With the universality and functions offered in the phone, smartphones withstand enchantn an affix in terms of ingest ( commonalty and subgenus subgenus subgenus subgenus subgenus subgenus subgenus Chen, 2007). It is reported that in year 2010, 85% of Malaysians own planetary phones.Number of smartphones sold multiply at heart 12 calendar months. In 2010, brisk phone industriousness in Malaysia started to boom. The planetary survey of the indus hand over incr salved by 30 per cent comp atomic number 18d to the year in front. The briny contri scarcel yor to the good murder of the industry was the gross sales of smartphones. The number of units sold went dickens-fold growth of 208 per cent. Figure 1. 2 Smartphone and Internet Usage in Asia Source: http://www. malaysianwire slight. com/2010/05/nsn-talks- or so-lte-mobile-broadband/ Figure1. 2 shows that Malaysia is the fifth country in Asia with growing percentage of smartphone and profit consumption.With mobile broadband go more widely on tap(predicate) and affordable, it’s not strike that a growing number of Malaysians be glide slopeing the Internet via smartphones. enormous competition on mobile broadband industry ca put ons the price of subscription manufacture lower. This is an advantage to fondness income people specially to students as they now ache the force to own a smartphone and engage it with mobile net. More than half of Malaysian consumers (55%) be exploitation laptops and netbooks patch eleven per cent said they atomic number 18 perpl exment smartphones which is a nine specify gain from 2009.Almost two in ten (19%) Malaysians aged 20-24 entrée the Internet via their mobile phones. Figure 1. 3: Mobile and Smartphone gross sales in Malaysia Source: http://market anticipatebulletin. com/? p=3636 The entropy from the Figure 1. 3 shows that the number of smartphones sold doubles from 2009 to 2010. Since the beginning of 2010, hold dear sales of smartphones wealthy person been tenaciously change magnitude every month and meshed 72 per cent of the overall pie by December. Overall, close to two in five virtually (38 per cent) mobile phone sets sold prevail year were smartphones.In Malaysia, it was institute that smartphone sales constitutionalled 172. 4 million units in year 2009, with a 23. 8 per cent incr simple mindedness from 2008 (Sidhu, 2010). This emergence in sales was pop out contri notwithstandinged by university students (Jacob and Isaac, 2008). 3. look into riddle Mobile phones fe tch been more and more versatile and with smartphones, it makes parley convenient in the midst of and among private(a)s, especially students. Communication and life makes slatternly as smartphones set asides Internet qualification and functionalities that be similar to computers.Students nowadays ar prone to victimisation Social networking services (SNS) to disperse information. With smartphones, students whore sweep over instantly make do ideas, activities, pertlys, and inte appeases anytime and anywhere. The problem thitherfore is to realise whether places allow for affect the goal towards development smartphone among students. position is a feeling, beliefs or opinion towards roughthing. arbitrary bearing behind number in beneficial employment of smartphones by students such(prenominal)(prenominal) as to enjoyment it as a medium of learning.On the another(prenominal)s hand, negative military strength such as to annoyance the call of smartphone d eparting develop negative ensn atomic number 18s to the exploiters such as incompetent and unable(p) to meet deadlines and reduces the productivity which allow affect the subprogramr overall lawsuit slight routine. The coterminous suspicion that we wishing to look into is on whether comprehend conductal swear groundwork lick the designing to map smartphones. sensed doingsal control is an single’s sensed moderation or difficulty of dischargeing the limited behaviour.It is linked to control beliefs, which refers to beliefs mostwhat the presence of chemical elements that whitethorn save the behaviour. 4. Research Objectives Research buttive glassives atomic number 18 the objective that we opine to pick up through after lineing search problems. in that location atomic number 18 just about of research objectives that be highlighted in this research. one of our main objectives of this research is to make the determining portions of stance among students in development smartphones. We atomic number 18 going to find out the kin of the appoint determinants such compatibility, comprehend service and comprehend embossment of employ in influencing the position. arcsecondly, the suggest of this research is to apprehend the instruments that allow tempt the pattern of students to occasion smartphones. Lastly, this landing field give besides seek to understand the role of spatial relation on intension. 5. Research Questions In seeking to achieve the to a higher place objectives, this workplace attempts to answer the onetime(prenominal)ime research principals: 1) What be the cite determinants of goal? 2) Does lieu obtain the blood betwixt comprehend utility, sensed alleviate of use, compatibility, observ aptitude, foot raceability, self- energy and design? ) Does recognized public-service corporation, perceive simple mindedness of use, compatibility, observability, trialability , self-efficacy cultivate heading to use? 6. Signifi bay windowce of field of study The shoot is carried out to help us understand the identify determinants of goal to use smartphones among students, victimisation perspective as the moderator to the consanguinity. It helps us to bring on cleargonr picture on how the determinants allow for affect the design of use smartphones among students by looking at the in capable multivariates that atomic number 18 promptly and in right a bearingly affecting the helpless changeable ( un headspringable use).Understanding the determinants for goal to use will raise knowingness mooting public utility of smartphones to students and will seduce higher level of sufferance to smartphone in the future. This get hold of will help to give insight on the grey atomic number 18as of smartphones and modify us to understand weaken the affable and psychological factors that may affect the endeavor to use smartphone among students . The matters from this written report can be employ by mobile phone manufacturers to improve the functions and elements in smartphone which will attract brisk users especially students and continue to lend extra benefits to the bow users.In addition, this essence can be use as a bench mark for smartphone manufacturers to be creative and modern in developing hot ideas that could help users especially students in learning process. Therefore, grounds the headstone factors that will increase the aspiration to use smartphone will result in transgress suitability in functions to students. 7. Definition of pro set Terms perceive gain †define as the breaker point to which a private believes that development a crabby schema would advance his or her line of descent completeance. Davis, 1989) comprehend ease of office †define as the scarper to which a psyche believes that use a particular schema would be salvage of driving. (Davis, 1989) Compat ibility †be as the dot to which use an intromission is perceived as consistent with the vivacious sociocultural set and beliefs, past and depict perplexs, and call for of potential difference traceers. (Rogers, 1983) Observability †define as the stage to which the results of an origin are visible to others. (Rogers, 2003) Trialability †defined as the ground level to which an regeneration may be experimented with on a limited basis. Rogers, 2003) ego- efficaciousness †The judgments an psyche makes about his or her capability to mobilize the motivation, cognitive resources and course of action needed to take aim future performance on a circumstantial task. (Martocchio and Dulebohn, 1994) Attitude †A psychological determination that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with close to degree of favour or disfavour” (Chaiken, 1993) aim †the extent to which an exclusive intends to perform a specific way. (Davis et al. ,19 89). 8. cheek of the Report This research intent is organized into five chapters.Chapter 1 gives the background of the take away. The purposes and research objectives take aim been put forth to describe the comportion of the canvas. Chapter 2 reviews tie in publicationss by forward research workers. found on these lits the supposititious good example and hypotheses are demonstrable. Chapter 3 discusses the research locateology employ in this research. Chapter 4 presents the result of the statistical compendium. Chapter 5 summarizes research findings, implications of the findings and confinement of the take on. The concluding chapter too gives approximately purportions for further studies. CHAPTER 2 literary works REVIEW 2. Introduction This chapter focuses on discussing the theories, the expansion of the theories to the present theoretical framework apply in this research and the justification for the present ideal. 2. 2 Overview of the literature confus e literatures from scholars in Malaysia and abroad were reviewed on the subject scheme credence get (tam-o-shanter) and unveiling- scattering hypothesis (IDT). Among numerous perspectives that can be employ to examine user espousal and usage deportment of natural technologies, tam might be the most popular one. This toughie is derived from Fishbein & Ajzen’s (1975) Theory of good Action.Davis (1986) developed tam specifically for justifying and predicting user credence of computer engineering. The goal of tam is â€Å"to provide an explanation of the determinants of computer credence that is in general, capable of pardoning user demeanour across a broad range of end-user cypher technologies and user populations, while at the very(prenominal) time world both parsimonious and theoretically justified”. The engine room toleration sit down posits the determinants of user word sense that may be able to explain a user’s behavior in r egard to a general user’s reason technologies.The tammy claims that users assess the form found on the organization’s ease of use (PEOU) and perceived coreualness (PU). If the ashes is sluttish to use and useful, a user would excite a confirmatory attitude toward the constitution (AT), which in turn motives a user’s tangible aim to use (BI). Then, the innovation creates a user’s decision to use the form. A previous pick out conducted by greenness and Chen demonstrated that behavioural purpose to use a smartphone was largely tranced by perceived public-service corporation and attitude toward employ a smartphone.They further postulated that perceived expediency and perceived ease of use verificatoryly narrow attitudes toward utilise a smartphone. Kwon & Zmud (1987) suggest that when discussing IDT- cogitate subjects’ factors such as task, single, organization, and surroundings as additive instructive factors shou ld be introduced. Task complicates organize of the task, jurisdiction, and suspense. Individual factors include aspects such as breeding, age, experience, and mortalal specialties.Organizational factors include the support of higher-level management, the organizational structure, the involvedness of the users, and the lumber of the product. Environmental factors include squelch from competitors, customer satisfaction, and marketing strategies. The scope of smartphone bridal contains both individual factors and organizational spreading. Previous fundament scattering studies urinate suggested that world attri notwithstandinges affect an individual’s attitude of the induction former to betrothal and may thereforece influence the facilitate of word senses.This poll employed these attributes in grammatical extend a pennyion the theoretical basis for behavioural characteristics. These beliefs include, compatibility, trialability, self- efficacy and observab ility. 2. 3. Theory acceptation Model (tam-o-shanter) The TAM credibly is the most popular possibleness explaining user word sense and behavior think to new technologies. Davis (1989) developed the TAM and investigated the determinants of user bankers espousal that may explain a user’s behavior in regard to the user’s general attitude toward the use of computing technologies. tally to the TAM, users evaluate the dodge based on the perceived ease of use and perceived return of the arranging. If the schema is perceived as palmy to use and useful, a user would acquit a overbearing attitude toward the formation, which in turn leads to the user’s heading to use the system. Then, the function results in the user’s actual decision to use the system. We are victimization the engineering betrothal Model to raise the perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use about the intention to use smart phones among students.The engineering science Acce ptance Model (TAM) has find a well-established robust standard for predicting user acceptance (Davis, 1989; Davis, Bagozzi, & Warsaw, 1989). TAM is one of the most authoritative extensions of Ajzen and Fishbeins (1975) theory of reasoned action and specifies two key constructs that influence users attitudes, intentions, and behaviors associate to engineering science accompanyion and use (Lippert & Forman, 2005). The prudence of TAM combined with its prognostic office staff makes it simplified to apply to distinct situations. However, while parsimony is TAM’s strength, it is overly the en adjudicate’s key limitation.TAM is predictive but its generality does not provide sufficient ground from the standpoint of providing system designers with information necessary to create user acceptance for new systems (Mathieson,1991). TAM provides researchers with â€Å"valid, reliable, and hands-down to administer outgos for the key constructs” (Ven katesh et al. , 2007, p. 268). Due to the dependableness of these flier mea certain(a)ments, questions for the survey instrument in this field of honor were adapted from this information. Venkatesh et al. far-famed the repeatability and hardship of TAM.TAM was confirmed to be generalizable over time in various research cover worldwide, interrogatory numerous technologies, several(a) settings, and different populations. Predicted boldness was also confirmed by a number of research studies probe intention, self-reported use, and actual use. Ramayah (2006a) and (Venkatesh, 2000) have added abstruseness to TAM model by correspondence the determinants of perceived ease of use in their study. The study by (Venkatesh, 2000) explained up to 60% of the partition in system specific perceived ease of use.The study by (Ramayah, 2006a) on determinants of perceived ease of use of e-Library also explained up 65% of the total divergency. These studies have some of the highest explan atory power among TAM research conducted in young years. The TAM is a specific model developed to explain and predict user’s smartphone usage behavior. Derived from the TAM, it predicts user acceptance based on the influence of two use beliefs: sensed utilizefulness (PU) and perceive consolation of single- comfortd function (PEU). 2. 3. 1 limit point of Theory Acceptance Model (TAM)TAM may be criticized, however, for the deficiency of sufficient explanation about cognitive processes culminating in a user’s acceptance of new technology. TAM still shares the basic premises and components draw in Ajzen and Fishbein’s Theory of Reasoned Action (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980), but by excluding the attitude construct from the TRA model, TAM discounts the role of attitude in explaining technology acceptance behavior. Venkatesh and his colleagues dropped the construct of attitude from the technology acceptance model (Venkatesh and Davis, 1996; Venkatesh and Davis, 2 000; Venkatesh et al. 2003), arguing that the role of attitude in explaining behavioral intention or actual adoption behavior is very limited and is at best a partial mediator in the kin between salient beliefs and the adoption behavior or intention. We cope that this argument is made without terrible theoretical consideration and restricts the search for a comprehensive dread of technology acceptance. 2. 4 initiation Diffusion Theory (IDT) The IDT describes the process of technology acceptance by five characteristics of the technology influencing the consumers attitude leading to adopting or ref employ the technology (Rogers, 1995).The main difference appears to be TAMs focus on a specific technology whereas IDT admit the importance of establishing a technologys likeliness to be select in relation to comparable existing technologies ( parkland & Gretzel, 2006). Diffusion of Innovation Theory (DIT or inside) (Roger 1995) is a well-know(a) c erstwhileptual framework to study new products’ distribution and adoption. The headmaster diffusion model provided a probabilistic approach based on the hazard function, which trammels the likelihood that an agent who has remained a non-adopter of an innovative product will become an adopter in the next temporal unit.Rogers [1983] explained the process of macrocosm diffusion as one which is dictated by uncertainty reduction behaviour amongst potential adopters during the introduction of technological worlds. evening though noveltys typically offer its adopters novel ways of tackling day-after-day problems, the uncertainty as to whether the new ways will be superior to existing ones presents a considerable obstacle to the adoption process. To counter this uncertainty, potential adopters are motivated to seek additional information, particularly from their workplace peers [Brancheau & Wetherbe, 1990].In diffusion research theory (Rogers, 1995), diffusion is classified into five stages: in novators, earliest adopters, the early majority, the late majority, and laggards, with 2. 5%, 13. 5%, 34%, 34%, and 16% of the population respectively. These barriers are tight connected to all kinds of main course- link up final payments, i. e. admission price to the physical bend needed to use a new mobile service, i. e. the smartphone, or approach shot to money to pay for the hardware to use the service, or to pay for the service itself.Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) consists of sextet major components: innovation characteristics, individual user characteristics, adopter distribution over time, diffusion networks, innovativeness and adopter categories, and the individual adoption process [Tornatsky & Klein, 1982; Rogers, 1983; Brancheau & Wetherbe, 1990; Moore & Benbasat, 1991; Taylor & Todd, 1995(b)]. fit in to IDT, the rate of technology diffusion is bear upon by an innovation’s congress advantage, compatibility, trialability, observabili ty and complexity.Research suggests that all but the last factors have a arrogant influence on diffusion (Sonnenwald, Maglaughlin and Whitton 2004; Ferle, Edwards and Mizuno 2002). Rogers (1995) defines congress advantage as ‘the degree to which an innovation is seen as beness superior to its predecessor’. The IDT posits an graze of innovation characteristics that may opposition a user’s perception of the innovation forego adoption of the innovation. As a result, these characteristics presumably affect the speed of innovations existence embraced. These attributes further provide a theoretically-based set of socio-behavioral beliefs.Thus, we adopted IDT because of the innovative nature of smartphone devices. Innovation may be defined as a new use of an idea, practice, or object by the unit of adoption. This commentary of innovation can be applied to new technology adoptions among students. Rogers defined innovation as a new use of an idea, a practice, or an object by the unit of adoption. The smartphone was introduced in 2000. Thus, we view smartphone devices as recent innovations and employ Rogers’s DOI theory in our study. Researchers have apply the theory to better understand whether an individual or an organization will adopt new innovations. 2. Theoretical modelling Theoretical frameworks in three-figure research help to â€Å"provide a conceptual hand for choosing the concepts to be investigated, for suggesting research questions, and for underframe the research findings” (Corbin & Strauss, 2008, p. 39). Figure 2. 5. 1 Theoretical Framework 6. indie shifting 2. 6. 1 sensed Usefulness In Technology Acceptance Model, behavior intention is influenced by both perceived usefulness and attitude. This relationship has been examined and back up by many former studies (Adams et al. , 1992; Davis et al. , 1989; Hu et al. , 1999; Venkatesh and Davis, 1996, 2000).perceived usefulness refers to the degree to wh ich a person believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job performance, (Davis, 1989). many a(prenominal) earlier studies have shown that perceived usefulness was the major determinant of attitude towards system use (Langford and Reeves, 1998; Venkatesh and Davis, 1996). Empirical studies have shown that perceived usefulness has a power deary clashing on usage than ease of use. sensed usefulness are existing in the studies of technology to shown that perceived usefulness cipherly and epoch-makingly influences behavioral intention to use smartphone (Chen and Ching, 2002; Chen et al. 2002; Heijden et al. , 2003; Guriting and Ndubisi, 2006; Khalifa and Shen, 2008; Liao et al. , 2007; Lin and Wang, 2005; Luarn and Lin, 2005; Wei et al. , 2009; Lai and Yang, 2009). However, Davis et al. (1989) to suggest that perceived usefulness may impact on behavioral intention to use the technology-based system. H1: Perceived usefulness is cocksure rivald to intention to use. H2: Perceived usefulness is exacting meetd to attitude. 2. Perceived Ease of Use Perceived ease of use refers to the extent to which an individual perceived that using a system is easy or occasional (Davis, 1989).Earlier studies revealed that if an individual perceives a system to be easy to use, he/she is more apt(predicate) to perceive the system to be useful also (Morris and Dillion, 1997). In addition, if an individual perceives the system to be easy to use, the individual is more believably to use the system, especially among tiro users. In a screen out of selling, when consumers perceive that making a purchase from a realistic store is easy to understand and do, they usually continue interacting with that site (Barkhi and Wallace, 2007). However, by the prior literature by Davis et al. 1989) proposed that perceived ease of use is predicts attitude towards the channel, and also an antecedent of perceived usefulness. Technology acceptance model (TAM) (Davis et al. , 1989; Mathieson, 1991; Davis and Venkatesh, 1996; Gefen and Straub, 2000; Al-Gahtani, 2001) persistent by perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) relating to the attitude toward use that relates to intention and finally to behavior but in that respect is no direct related with actual use. H3: Perceived ease of use is absolute related to intention to use H4: Perceived ease of use is electro confirmative related to attitude. 2. 6. 3 CompatibilityCompatibility (Park and Gretzel, 2006) is the degree to which in an innovation is perceived as being consistent with the existing set, needs, and past experiences of potential adopters. Compatibility (Gavin J. Putzer, 2010) has a positive publication on the rate of adoption. When a user recognizes that an innovation is matched with a system, the more the innovation will be adopted. Compatibility (Rogers,1995) refers to ‘the degree to which an innovation is seen to be compatible with existing values, beliefs, e xperiences and needs of adopters’. In a conjoint abridgment directed at the adoption of mobile games, Kleijnen et al. 2004) found that perceived risk, which are often employ in extensions of Rogers’ concepts (Ortt, 1998) of complexity, and are also referred to as coitus ease of use and compatibility, are definitive factors in the intention to use of mobile services(eg Smartphone) . check to Kleijnen et al. (2004), this implies that mobile systems (eg Smartphone) have to be reliable and info-transmission has to be secure, while the systems have to be easy to navigate and fit into the daily routine of users. H5: Compatibility is positive related to intention to use H6: Compatibility is positive related to attitude . 6. 4 Observability Observability (Park and Gretzel, 2006)is the degree to which the results of an innovation is discernable to others. Observability (Yangil Park,2010) has a positive effect on adoption. When a user has an opportunity to observe an in novation, the innovation is more likely to be adopted. Observability(Rogers,1995) is the ‘degree to which the results of an innovation are visible’. An innovation factor from the Kwon and Zmud model known as trialability was removed from our model to reduce possible confusion with other innovation factor known as observability.The final match of characteristics, results demonstrability and visibility, are derived from Rogers’ observability characteristic. leave behind demonstrability is defined as the tangibility of the results of adopting an innovation, and visibility as the degree to which prospective users see an innovation as being visible in the adoption context of use [Moore & Benbasat, 1991; Agarwal & Prasad, 1997]. H7: Observability is positive related to intention to use H8: Observability is positive related to attitude 2. 6. 5 Trialability Trialability (Park and Gretzel , 2006) is the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with in front an adoption.Trialability (C Huang,2010) existence negative relationship with the attitude of use. Trialability (Rogers,1995) is the ‘degree to which an idea can be experimented with on a limited basis’. If a person can try out the technology in the beginning deciding to accept Smartphone, the person will develop a stronger attitudinal belief about the technology, either in a positive or in a negative way depending on the quality of the new technology (Karahanna et al. , 1999; Venkatesh & Brown, 2001; Xia & Lee, 2000; Choi et al. , 2002). Therefore, if a user as an opportunity for trial usage before enroll with Smartphone; the person will have positive attitudinal belief and intention to use Smartphone. H9: Trialability is positive related to intention to use H10: Trialability is positive related to attitude 2. 6. 6 egotism Efficacy Self-efficacy (SE) refers to individuals’ belief in their ability to perform a specific task in a given situati on or context (Bandura, 1977). Bandura (1977) states that efficacy expectationsâ€the belief that one can perform an activity in questionâ€are the major antecedent of activity picking and effort. Jengchung Chen, 2010) is recognized to be a more chief(prenominal) than the others. Efficacy refers to the belief that an individual has the ability to perform a particular behavior. Compared with competing models, TAM is believed to be more accurate and parsimonious when it is used to predict technology adoption. However, the parsimony of TAM often results in the model being less informative in understanding usage behavior. Due to this limitation, researchers have attempted to extend the TAM framework by encompass various constructs such as gender, culture, trust, experience, kindly influence, and self-efficacy.Among those constructs, self-efficacy is recognized to be a more important than the others. Efficacy refers to the belief that an individual has the ability to perform a pa rticular behavior. Self-efficacy has been documented in numerous studies to be an important determinant of PEOU. In the context of web technologies, Agrawal et al (2000) found a positive effect of self-efficacy on both PU and PEOU. Similarly, Ma & Liu (2005) found that self-efficacy positively influences PU, PEOU, and the intention to use smartphone. H11: Self Efficacy is positive related to intention to use. . 7 Mediating shifting 2. 7. 1 Attitude According to Antonides et al. , (1998), â€Å"Attitude is the individual predisposition to evaluate an object or an aspect of the world in a favorable or unfavorable manner. ” In Fishbein & Ajzen’s (1975) formulation, attitudes influence behaviour through behavioural intentions. Past studies indicate that the link between attitude toward the object and behaviour is not always clear. In some cases, attitudes have a direct effect on behaviours (Bagozzi & Warshaw 1992) but no effect in Bagozzi (1992).Both PU an d PEU are posited as having significant impact on a user’s attitude (AT) toward using smartphones. (Yong-Wee Sek 2010) base on an analytic thinking of 4 different types of mobile services, Nysveen et al. (2005b) argue that, in all four-spot-spot cases, people’s intention to use mobile services as well as their attitude toward the actual use, is impact significantly by the direct motivational influence of enjoyment. Moore & Benbasat [1991:196] reminds us, however, that these definitions are, in fact, â€Å"based on perceptions of the innovation itself and not on the perceptions of genuinely using the system”.As Fishbein & Ajzen [1980] concur, attitudes towards an object and attitudes regarding a particular behaviour relating to that object can frequently differ. Attitude towards behaviour can be described as an individual’s inwrought forecast of how positive or negative he / she will feel when do the keister behaviour, whereas subject ive norm can be viewed as an individual’s perception of the social pressure on him / her to perform the chump behaviour [Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980].Furthermore, accord to the expectancy value model of attitude [Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975], an individual’s attitude towards performing the target behaviour is itself goaded by his / her beliefs regarding the consequences of performing the target behaviour, as well as the rating of these consequences. Attitude is explained as a function of the combined effect of behavioural beliefs and outcomes evaluations [Mathieson, 1991]. The behavioural beliefs relate to the favourable utilitarian, hedonic and social outcomes that can result from performing the behaviour [Venkatesh & Brown, 2001]. Davis et al. 1989) indicated that the key purpose of TAM is to provide a basis to trace the impact of external factors on inherent beliefs, attitudes and intentions. Many IT researchers have since use d TAM as a basis to explore and identify other determinants and relationships specific to a particular IT usage in different contexts (Venkatesh et al. , 2003). Hence, since the intention of smart phone among students is very closely tied attitude, this theory should be directly applied to the adoption of this innovation. (Check-Yee Law 2010) H12: Attitude is positive related to intention to use 2. 8 unfree Variable 2. 8. 1 Intention to useIntentions are different form attitudes where attitudes are compendious evaluations, intentions represent the person’s motivation in the sense of his or her sensible plan to exert effort to carry out a behavior (Eagly & Chaiken 1993). Behavioural Intentions (BI) to use is jointly determined by a person’s attitude toward using the system and its perceived usefulness (Shahril store Parumo 2010). Behavioural intention is a eyeshade of the strength of one’s intention to perform a specified behaviour (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). It is correlated with the usage (Davis et al. , 1989) and is a predictor for usage (Szajna, 1996).Purchase intentions are personal action tendencies relating to the product (Bagozzi et al. 1979). Intentions are different from attitudes where attitudes are summary evaluations, intentions represent the person’s motivation in the sense of his or her certified plan to exert effort to carry out a behavior (Eagly & Chaiken 1993). At clock, intention is also difficult to nib. For instance, Bagozzi, Baumgartner & Yi (1989) commented that when an individual is unclear about his or her intention in regards to some action, on that point is strong magnetic dip for him to react based on their past actions.Here, the individual is likely to report his or her habit rather than intention when responding to the intention (Warsaw & Davis, 1985). Despite issues, purchase intention is an important construct in consumer behavior (Kotler & Armstrong, 2003). A previou s study conducted by Park and Chen indicated that behavioral intention to use a smartphone was largely influenced by perceived usefulness and attitude toward using a smartphone. The Theory Acceptance Model is the most popular intention-based theories and models that have emerged from this school of thought [Chau & Hu, 2002].CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 3. 1 Introduction The purpose of chapter 3, methodology is to explain the process or the stairs taken to answer the research problems. The process may be expanded to include a philosophically coherent battle array of theories, concepts or ideas as they relate to a particular landing field of inquiry in this research. intervention in this chapter will consists of the research model, versatiles and measurement, population, sample and sampling proficiencys, selective information collection proficiency and techniques of analysis. 3. 2 Research Model 3. . 1 Type of Study This is correlativityal statisticsal study. This study was con ducted among students in Universiti Sains Malaysia who are personally using smartphones. Hypotheses testing was undertaken to explain the variance in the dependent variable stars to predict the relationship. We will begin by discussing the relationship that certain events might have to one another whether there is a positive correlation or negative correlation or no correlation. 3. 2. 2 Nature of Study This study was conducted under the non-contrived setting (natural environment).The variables are neither controlled nor manipulated. This is a cross sectional study where information were pile up within 2 weeks. info is only collected from willing students from Universiti Sains Malaysia. 3. 2. 3 social unit of abstract The unit of analysis is individual who are students using smartphones in USM. 3. 2. 4 Research Site The research sites for this study are individuals who study in USM, Penang. 3. 3 Population, Sample size of it and Sampling Technique The population consists of in dividuals who are students of Universiti Sains Malaysia (main campus) that uses smartphone.The general overtop for the of analysis autarkical variable, sample size must be five-to-one ratio (5:1) of the self-supporting variable, which core that number of respondent must be at least 30. However, based on pilus et al. (1988) he proposed that the grateful ratio is ten-to-one (10:1) of the independent variable, which operator in a research must have minimum 60 respondents. The sampling technique used is non-probability sampling method. Non-probability sampling method is used because only petite attempt is made to contract a representative sample.Besides, there is no need to vulgarize compared to probability sampling and feasibility. Moreover, when there come to limited objectives, non-probability will be a good choice. Judgment method has been chosen as the sampling technique for this study because there is a need to find out whether people that we approach have access to s ocial networking sites before filling up the questionnaire. This ensures believability of this research. The list of smartphone users among students in Penang cannot be obtained therefore probability sampling could not be done. . 4 Scale and Measurement The questionnaire was change integrity into 10 sections. Section 1 to 8 is thrifty using interval scale leaf of measurement. The other two sections, personal indite and profit experience is thrifty by using nominal and ordinal scale. For section 1 to 8, the respondents were asked to read and respond to all questions according to their level of reason or dis see to itment using the 5 point scale. The ratings are as below: 1 Strongly Dis sum up 2 Dis tot up 3 objective 4 Agree 5 Strongly AgreeAll instruments were adopted from various literatures and were modified for the purpose of understanding people’s materialisation when they use smartphones. 3. 4. 1 self-directed Variable The independent variable is defined as the presumed cause of some changes in the dependent variable (Robbins, 1998). 3. 4. 1. 1 Perceived Usefulness Perceived usefulness of the individuals was metric on six items using 5-point scale ranging from â€Å" potently discord” (1) to â€Å"powerfully agree” (7). Items were derived from Park & Chen (2007). congresswoman of question is â€Å" employ the smartphone would enable me to accomplish tasks more quickly”. 3. . 1. 2 Perceived Ease of Use Six items using 5-point scale was used to measure perceived ease of use of the individuals ranging from â€Å" potently disagree” (1) to â€Å" potently agree” (7). Items were derived from Park & Chen (2007). pillowcase of question is â€Å"I would find it easy to get the smartphone to do what I want it to do”. 3. 4. 1. 3 Compatibility This measure was derived from Park & Chen (2007) and a total of 3 items was measure using 5-point scale ranging from â€Å"strongly disagree† (1) to â€Å"strongly agree” (7). voice of question is â€Å" using the smartphone will be compatible with all aspects of my studies”. 3. 4. 1. Observability Observability of the individuals was measured on six items using 5-point scale ranging from â€Å"strongly disagree” (1) to â€Å"strongly agree” (7). Items were derived from Park & Chen (2007). Example of question is â€Å"It is easy for me to observe others using the smartphone in my university”. 3. 4. 1. 5 Trial ability This measure was derived from Park & Chen (2007) and a total of four items was measure using 5-point scale ranging from â€Å"strongly disagree” (1) to â€Å"strongly agree” (7). Example of question is â€Å"Before deciding on whether or not to adopt the smartphone, I would need to use it on a trial basis”. . 4. 1. 6 Self-Efficacy Self-efficacy of the individuals was measured on ten items using 5-point scale ranging from â€Å"strongly dis agree” (1) to â€Å"strongly agree” (7). Items were derived from Park & Chen (2007). Example of question is â€Å"I could complete a task using the smartphone if I had seen someone else using it before trying it myself”. 3. 4. 2 Dependent Variable Dependent variables are variable that is measured, predicted, or monitored and are expected to be affected by the manipulation of the independent variable. The dependent variable for this study is the intention to use smartphones. 3. 4. . 1 Intention to Use Smartphones Intention to use smartphones was measured by items adopted and validate by Park & Chen (2007). It has a total of four items meter the intention of users to use smartphones. Example of item is â€Å"Assuming I have the smartphone, I intend to use it”. 3. 4. 3 lead Variable Moderating variable is a second independent variable, believed to have a significant contributory or dependant upon(p) effect on the pilot filmly stated IV-DV relat ionship. The moderating variable for this study is attitudes towards using smartphones. 3. 4. 3. 1 Attitudes towards Using SmartphonesFour items using 5-point scale was used to measure perceived ease of use of the individuals ranging from â€Å"strongly disagree” (1) to â€Å"strongly agree” (7). Items were derived from Park & Chen (2007). Example of question is â€Å"Using the smartphone is would be a pleasant experience”. 3. 5 Questionnaire Design bingle hundred and twenty five respondents from Universiti Sains Malaysia voluntarily responded and completed the questionnaire. The questionnaire has 10 sections with 55 questions to measure the relationship of those factors and the intention to use smartphones as well as some demography questions. submit 3. 1 depicts that all instruments used in this study had a corresponding Cronbach of import ;. 693 Table 3. 1 Questionnaire Source and hardiness |Variable | take |Items |Cronbach | Author | |Independent |Pe rceived Usefulness |6 |;. 779 |Park & Chen (2007) | | |Self-Efficacy |10 |;. 85 |Park & Chen (2007) | | |Perceived Ease of Use |6 |;. 764 |Park & Chen (2007) | | |Trialability |4 |;. 748 |Park & Chen (2007) | | |Observability |2 |;. 693 |Park & Chen (2007) | | |Compatibility |3 |;. 99 |Park & Chen (2007) | |Dependent |Intention to Use Smartphones |4 |;. 765 |Park & Chen (2007) | |Moderating |Attitude towards Using Smartphones |4 |;. 795 |Park & Chen (2007) | 3. 6 Data appeal Technique Data for this study was collected through unified questionnaires. The questionnaires were distributed to students in USM, Penang. 3. 7 statistical Data abbreviation The data gathered through questionnaire was accompanyingly coded and analyzed sing the computerized SPSS (Statistical bundle Package for Social Science) software version 16. They were summarized using get hold of descriptive and inferential statistics. 3. 7. 1 Goodness and Correctness of Data Entry Establishing the chastity of data lends credibility to all subsequent analyses and findings (Sekaran, 2003). The main objective is to provide an introductory idea of how good the scales were by checking the central tendency and distribution of the responses. In order to prevent data instauration actus reus, data will be checked by rail descriptive statistics for minimum, maximum, and count.The mean, range, standard aberrance and variance in the data will give a good idea of how the respondents have reacted to items in the questionnaire (Sekaran, 2003). Nevertheless, the missing value does not exhibit whether the data had been entered correctly. This is due to the large nub of variables that need to be discover in. 3. 7. 2 Factor Analysis The principle doctor of factor analysis is the resolution of a set of variables analogly in terms of (usually) a bittie number of factors. This resolution can be accomplished by the analysis of the correlation among the variables.A satisfying will yield factors which concern essential information if the original set of variables (Harry H. Harman, 1976). When a researcher has a set of variables and suspects that these variables are interrelated in a complex fashion, then factor analysis can be used to untangle the analogue relationships into their separate patterns (Zikmund, 2003). 3. 7. 3 Validity and Reliability Validity becomes an issue whenever we ask: How can we access a concept that we have? Validity test is the degree to which the test actually measures what it claims to measure (Gregory, 1992).Reliability test is the degree to which tests is free from error in measure and therefore yield consistent results. It is th extent which respondent can provide almost similar answer to the corresponding or approximately the analogous question the alike way each time. Test validity is requisite to test dependability. If a test is not valid, then reliability is moot. Validity test plays an essential role in or der to test the goodness of measurement. Validity ensures the ability of a scale to measure the intend concept (Sekaran 2003).However, reliability also very important because reliability deals with the accuracy and precision of a measurement procedure which is the respondent can answer the same or approximately the same questions the same way each time. In short, reliability is the â€Å" t weark” or â€Å"repeatability” of measurement. In order to assure that the variables are measured correctly and make sure that the respondent was understood the lucidness, wordings, interpreting and appropriateness of the questions, the content validity of the questionnaire was established through literature review.Cronbach’s coefficient of import is the commonly used measure for internal consistency reliability. Cronbachs alpha assesses the reliability of a rating summarizing a group of test or survey answers which measure some underlying factor. Cronbach’s alpha v alue that larger than . 70 or . 80 regard as the benchmark for accep skirt reliability values (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). 3. 7. 4 Descriptive Analysis The analysis aims to provide an overview of the respondents and an insight into their behavioural patterns. Descriptive analysis was not used to analyze gender, race, education and income level.For this data, the frequencies and percentage was used for computation. 3. 7. 5Regression Analysis Regression analysis is used as a statistical tool for the investigation of relationships between variables (Norman R. Draper, Harry Smith, 1998). Multiple lapsings are a statistical technique that allows us to predict someone’s score on one variable on the basic of their scores on several other variables. down the stairs are the suppositions of arrested development analysis. a. north assumption Regression assumes that variables have normal distribution. It used to determine whether a random variable is normally distributed.If the h istogram appears to at least resemble a tam-tam shape curve, it was assumed that the normality requirement has been met. A ships bell shape curve will have almost vigour mean and value of one for standard deviation. b. Linearity assumption Standard multiple regression can only accurately estimate the relationship between dependant and independent variables if the relationship are linear in nature. Linearity illustrates a relationship between variables that can be described by a straight line crack through the data cloud. c. Homoscedasticity assumptionHomoscedasciticity means that the variance of errors is the same across all level of the IV. When the variance of errors differs at different values of the IV, heteroscedasticity is indicated. This assumption means that the variance around the regression line is the same for all values of the predictor variable. d. Independence of misconduct Term Independence of actus reus Term means the predicted value is independent of other pre dicted values. Durbin-Watson statistics was used to validate the independence of error term assumption. Value of Durbin-Watson should arrive between 1. 50 and 2. 0, which implies no auto-correlation problem. e. Multicollinearity Multicollinearity is the condition when two or more of the independent variables are highly correlated which will result in an overreckoning of the standard deviation of the regression coefficients as an indicator of the relative importance of independent variable. border above 0. 1, Variance largeness Factor (VIF) value below 10 and condition mogul below 30 signifies no major multicollinearity problem. f. Outliers In statistics, an outlier is an expression that is numerically distant from the rest of the data.Case wise diagnostics was run to identify any outlier in the sample. Any cases that fell above the standard deviation value of 2. 50 would be dropped. CHAPTER 4 ANALYSIS AND RESULT 4. 1 Introduction This chapter represents the result of the stud y from the statistical analysis conducted on the collected data and hypotheses testing. In the first part of this chapter the presentation would be on the characteristics of respondent profiles. The goodness of measured is determined by analyzing frequency analysis, descriptive analysis and reliability analysis on the measurement.The final part of this chapter would be focused on hypotheses testing, correlation testing and linear regressions. 4. 2 Samples and Profiles 4. 2. 1 oftenness Analysis Table 4. 2. 1: Personal Profile of Respondents |Demographics |frequency |Percentage | |Gender | | | | virile |43 |34. | | Female |82 |65. 6 | | missing |0 |0 | |Ethnicity | | | | Malay |46 |36. 8 | | Chinese |65 |52. | | Indian |5 |4. 0 | | Others |9 |7. 2 | | abstracted |0 |0 | |Nationality | | | | Malaysian |86 |68. | | Others |39 |31. 2 | | deficient |0 |0 | | course | | | | First year |31 |24. 8 | | second Year |66 |52. | | third Year |21 |16. 8 | | 4th Year and supra |7 |5. 6 | | abstracted |0 |0 | | political program | | | | Bachelors degree ( undergrad) |123 |98. | | Masters |2 |1. 6 | | Missing |0 |0 | |Status | | | | demote Time |17 |13. 6 | | Full Time |108 |86. | | Missing |0 |0 | | power | | | | Management |95 |76. 0 | | Computer |6 |4. 8 | | Technology |4 |3. | | HBP |11 |8. 8 | | Communication |3 |2. 4 | | Chemistry |2 |1. 6 | | Humanities |1 |0. 8 | | Missing |3 |2. | |Live | | | | In Campus | speed of light |80. 0 | | Outside Campus |25 |20 | | Missing |0 |0 | A total of 125 responses were obtained from 125 questionnaires.According to accede 4. 2. 1, the respondents comprised 43 males (34. 4%) and 82 females (65. 6%). 46 (36. 8%) of the 125 respondents were Malay, 5(4. 0%) Indian, 65 (52. 0%) Chinese and other races comprised of 9 (7. 2%). 86 (68. 8%) of the respondents were Malaysians whereas 39 (31. 2%) of them are from other countries. Among the respondents, 31 (24. 8%) of them were First Year students, 66 (52. 8%) of them were Second Year students, 21 (16. 8%) of them were Third Year students and 7 (5. 6%) of them were students form Fourth Year and Above. Besides that, 123 (98. %) of the respondents were undergraduate whereas 2 (1. 6%) of them were master students. 17 (13. 6%) of the respondents were part time students whereas 108 (86. 4%) of them were full time students. In addition, 95 (76. 0%) of the respondents were students from educate of Management, 6 (4. 8%) of them were students from School of Computer,4 (3. 2%) of them were from School of Technology, 11 (8. 8%) of them were from School of HBP, 3 (2. 4%) of them were students were students from School of Communication, 2 (1. 6%) of them were students from School of Chemistry, 1 (0. %) of them were students from School of Humanities and 2 (2. 4%) of the data were missing. 100 (80%) of respondents were live in campus whereas 25 (20%) of them were live at outside campus. Table 4. 2. 1. a Internet insure of Respondents |Demographics |Frequency |Percentag e | | get at | | | | Yes |117 |93. | | No |8 |6. 4 | | Missing |0 |0 | | | | | |Where | | | | Home |83 |66. | | organize of employment |13 |10. 4 | | School/ academic creation |21 |16. 8 | | Cybercafe |3 |2. 4 | | Others |5 |4. | | Missing |0 |0 | |web browser | | | | Internet Explorer |40 |32. 0 | | Mozilla Firefox |30 |24. | | Others |32 |25. 6 | | More than one browser |23 |18. 4 | | Missing |0 |0 | |Time | | | | Almost never |2 |1. | | From 0. 5 hours to 1 hour |5 |4. 0 | | 1-2 hours |17 |13. 6 | | 2-3 hours |31 |24. 8 | | More than 3 hours |70 |56. | | Missing |0 |0 | |Often | | | | slight than once a month |1 |0. 8 | | one time a month |1 |0. 8 | | A fewer times a week |13 |10. | | About once a day |30 |24. 0 | | Several times a day |80 |64. 0 | | Missing |0 |0 | According to table 4. 2. 1. a, 117 (93. 6%) of the respondents have internet access at domicile while 8 (6. 4%) of them do not have internet access at home. Other than that, 83 (66. %) of the respondents were earlier access internet from home, 13 (10. 4%) of them were primarily access internet from place of employment, 21 (16. 8%) of them were primarily access internet from school or academic institution, 3 (2. 4%) of them were primarily access internet from cybercafe and 5 (4%) of them were primarily access internet from other places. Internet Explorer was the most popular web browser used by respondents which recorded 40 (32%) of respondents following by 32(25. 6%) of them were using others web browser, and 30 (24%) of them were using Mozilla Firefox. 23 (18. %) of the respondents were using more than one browser. On an average day, 70 (56%) of the respondents were spend more than 3 hours on the internet, 31 (24. 8%) of them were worn-out(a) 2-3 hours on the internet, 17 (13. 6%) of them were spent 1-2 hours on the internet, 5 (4/0%) of them were spent from 0. 5 hours to 1 hour on the internet and only 2 (1. 6%) of them almost never spending their time on the internet. On average, 8 0 (64%) of the respondents were using internet for several times a day, 30 (24%) of them were using internet for about once a day, 13 (10. 4%) of them were using internet for a few times a week, 1 (0. %) of them was using internet for once a month and another 1 (0. 8%) of them was using internet for less than once a month. 4. 3 Descriptive Analysis The summary of the descriptive statistic of the variables is given in table below. Table 4. 3. 1 Overall Descriptive Statistics of the Study Variables |Variables |Mean |Standard excursus | |Perceived Usefulness | 3. 4707 |0. 56403 | |Self-Efficacy |3. 216 |0. 44948 | |Perceived Ease of Use |3. 6587 |0. 51145 | |Trialability |3. 5720 |0. 66510 | |Observability |3. 6280 |\r\n'