Common theories used in IS research - acceptance & usage + limitation of TAM
From: Mads Bødker, Greg Gimpel and Jonas Hedman, 2009, p. 2In the study of adoption and use of information technology, researchers have adopted and applied different behavioral models from cognitive psychology (Benbasat and Barki, 2007). To explain the adoption and use of information technology in different contexts, a significant body of literature has built upon the Theory of Reasoned Action (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975), Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1985, 1991), Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1989; Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw, 1989) and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis, 2003). Recently, TRA has been used to gage attitudes about mobile advertising (Wong and Tang, 2008) and to shed light on blog participation (Hsu and Lin, 2008). The Theory of Planned Behavior continues to advance ICT research by expanding to include new types of IT systems (Dinev and Qing, 2007) and to the acceptance of broadband among different groups (Hsieh, Rai, and Keil, 2008). Other studies use UTAUT to study computer applications in non-Western countries (Al-Gahtani, Hubona, and Wang, 2007) or to investigate the adoption of ecommerce in developing nations (Uzoka, 2008). The most established is the Technology Acceptance Model, which has been and still is used widely in information systems research (Venkatesh et al., 2007), including the recent study of topics such as wireless data networks (Yoon and Kim, 2007) and mobile communications (Zhang and Mao, 2008). Even though TAM is among the most influential behavioral models, recent literature has questioned whether it directs researchers’ attention away from the antecedents of belief and does not take into account the IT artifact or its design; thus neglecting important outcomes of information technology (Benbasat and Barki, 2007). Other have argued that TAM is reaching maturity (Venkatesh et al., 2007). This, coupled with the need for alternative perspectives (Venkatesh et al., 2007), establish the need to explore alternative theories that may explain the adoption and use of advanced wireless devices.