Technology Acceptance Models pada Teknologi Digital: Survey Paper
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24002/konstelasi.v2i2.5347Keywords:
TAM, Digital Technology, Systematic literature review.Abstract
Pertumbuhan teknologi yang pesat membawa dampak yang besar bagi masyarakat dan membawa masyarakat untuk mampu beradaptasi dengan terbukanya informasi. Banyak bidang mengintegrasikan teknologi dalam pekerjaannya. Akan tetapi, persoalan adaptasi akan menjadi persoalan yang besar bagi masyarakat di saat teknologi baru bermunculan. Untuk mengevaluasi dan memprediksi perilaku masyarakat dibutuhkan kerangka kerja yaitu TAM (Teori Acceptance Model) di mana model ini populer dan banyak digunakan dalam studi perilaku saat menggunakan teknologi. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk 1) melihat TAM dari sudut pandang kerangka kerja dan perluasan TAM, 2) tujuan menggunakan TAM, 3) variabel eksternal yang digunakan selain konstruksi TAM, 4) identifikasi bidang apa saja yang menggunakan TAM pada teknologi digital dalam tahun 2021 dengan menggunakan SLR (Systematic Literature Review), serta 5) mengidentifikasi pada topik penelitian dan menjawab pertanyaan penelitian dan didapatkan selama tahun 2021. Kerangka kerja TAM dengan dua konstruksi utama PEUO dan PU masih bersifat adaptif dan kontekstual dalam berbagai bidang. Contohnya pendidikan, bisnis, akomodasi, pariwisata, dan perbankan dengan tujuan menguji, mengidentifikasi, menyelidiki, dan menguji akuntabilitas faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi perilaku dengan beberapa variabel tambahan.
References
M. Ugur and A. Mitra, “Technology Adoption and Employment in Less Developed Countries: A Mixed-Method Systematic Review,” World Dev., vol. 96, pp. 1–18, Aug. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.03.015.
R. Estriegana, J.-A. Medina-Merodio, and R. Barchino, “Student acceptance of virtual laboratory and practical work: An extension of the technology acceptance model,” Comput. Educ., vol. 135, pp. 1–14, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.02.010.
H.-H. Yang and C.-H. Su, “Learner Behaviour in a MOOC Practice-oriented Course: In Empirical Study Integrating TAM and TPB,” Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn., vol. 18, no. 5, Aug. 2017, doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.2991.
Y. Lee, K. A. Kozar, and K. R. T. Larsen, “The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and Future,” Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst., vol. 12, 2003, doi: 10.17705/1CAIS.01250.
I. D. G. R. Dwiyana Putra, “THE EVOLUTION OF TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL (TAM) AND RECENT PROGRESS ON TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE RESEARCH IN ELT: STATE OF THE ART ARTICLE,” Yavana Bhasha J. English Lang. Educ., vol. 1, no. 2, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.25078/yb.v1i2.724.
F. Enu-Kwesi and M. O. Opoku, “Relevance of the technology acceptance model (TAM) in information management research: a review of selected empirical evidence,” Pressacademia, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 34–44, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.17261/Pressacademia.2020.1186.
S. . & M. D. Chakraborty, “A study of Consumer Adoption of Digital Wallets in India. ,” Int. J. Consum. Relation, 6(1), 38., 2018.
M. A. . & A.-S. N. A. Al-hadi, “An extended ERP model for Yemeni universities using TAM model. ,” Int. J. Eng. Comput. Sci. 6(7), 22084-22096. , 2017.
B. Šumak, M. Heričko, and M. Pušnik, “A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning technology types,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 2067–2077, Nov. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.005.
F. Pradana, F. A. Bachtiar, and B. Priyambadha, “Penilaian Penerimaan Teknologi E-Learning Pemrograman berbasis Gamification dengan Metode Technology Acceptance Model (TAM),” J. Teknol. Inf. dan Ilmu Komput., vol. 6, no. 2, p. 163, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.25126/jtiik.2019621288.
S. Abrahim, B. A. Mir, H. Suhara, F. A. Mohamed, and M. Sato, “Structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis of social media use and education,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 16, no. 1, p. 32, Dec. 2019, doi: 10.1186/s41239-019-0157-y.
Ö. Efiloğlu Kurt and Ö. Tingöy, “The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in higher education: an empirical study in Turkey, and the UK,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 14, no. 1, p. 26, Dec. 2017, doi: 10.1186/s41239-017-0064-z.
H. Rafique, A. O. Almagrabi, A. Shamim, F. Anwar, and A. K. Bashir, “Investigating the Acceptance of Mobile Library Applications with an Extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM),” Comput. Educ., vol. 145, p. 103732, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103732.
Z. Papamitsiou and A. A. Economides, “Temporal learning analytics visualizations for increasing awareness during assessment,” RUSC. Univ. Knowl. Soc. J., vol. 12, no. 3, p. 129, Jul. 2015, doi: 10.7238/rusc.v12i3.2519.
Z. Zaremohzza, B. A. Samah, S. Z. Omar, J. Bolong, and H. A. M. Shaffril, “Fisherman’s Acceptance of Information and Communication Technology Integration in Malaysia: Exploring the Moderating Effect of Age and Experience,” J. Appl. Sci., vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 873–882, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.3923/jas.2014.873.882.
R. Cheung and D. Vogel, “Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning,” Comput. Educ., vol. 63, pp. 160–175, Apr. 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.003.
M. D. R. N. P. D. Y. K. Williams, “The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): a literature review. .,” J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 28(3), 443–488, 2015.
M. N. Ardiansah, A. Chariri, S. Rahardja, and U. Udin, “The effect of electronic payments security on e-commerce consumer perception: An extended model of technology acceptance,” Manag. Sci. Lett., pp. 1473–1480, 2020, doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2019.12.020.
R. Lindsay, T. W. Jackson, and L. Cooke, “Adapted technology acceptance model for mobile policing,” J. Syst. Inf. Technol., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 389–407, Nov. 2011, doi: 10.1108/13287261111183988.
A. TAHAR, H. A. RIYADH, H. SOFYANI, and W. E. PURNOMO, “Perceived Ease of Use, Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Security and Intention to Use E-Filing: The Role of Technology Readiness,” J. Asian Financ. Econ. Bus., vol. 7, no. 9, pp. 537–547, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no9.537.
B.A. Kitchenham, “Procedures for Undertaking Systematic Reviews,” , Jt. Tech. Report, Comput. Sci. Dep. Keele Univ. Natl. ICT Aust. Ltd., 2004.
H. A. Alfadda and H. S. Mahdi, “Measuring Students’ Use of Zoom Application in Language Course Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM),” J. Psycholinguist. Res., vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 883–900, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10936-020-09752-1.
S. Alharbi and S. Drew, “Using the Technology Acceptance Model in Understanding Academics’ Behavioural Intention to Use Learning Management Systems,” Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl., vol. 5, no. 1, 2014, doi: 10.14569/IJACSA.2014.050120.
P. Surendran, “Technology Acceptance Model : A Survey of Literature,” pp. 175–178, 1989.
M. M. Ujakpa and D. Heukelman, “Proposed Expanded TAM in the Sub-Saharan African Context: Theoretical Underpinnings Towards the Acceptance of Technological Tools for Supporting Co-teaching, Co-researching, and Co-learning,” in Digital Literacy and Socio-Cultural Acceptance of ICT in Developing Countries, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021, pp. 243–260.
M. Mailizar, A. Almanthari, and S. Maulina, “Examining Teachers’ Behavioral Intention to Use E-learning in Teaching of Mathematics: An Extended TAM Model,” Contemp. Educ. Technol., vol. 13, no. 2, p. ep298, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.30935/cedtech/9709.
I. A. Castiblanco Jimenez, L. C. Cepeda García, M. G. Violante, F. Marcolin, and E. Vezzetti, “Commonly Used External TAM Variables in e-Learning, Agriculture and Virtual Reality Applications,” Futur. Internet, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 7, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.3390/fi13010007.
M. Sciarelli, A. Prisco, M. H. Gheith, and V. Muto, “Factors affecting the adoption of blockchain technology in innovative Italian companies: an extended TAM approach,” J. Strateg. Manag., vol. ahead-of-print, no. ahead-of-print, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1108/JSMA-02-2021-0054.
F. Velicia-Martin, J.-P. Cabrera-Sanchez, E. Gil-Cordero, and P. R. Palos-Sanchez, “Researching COVID-19 tracing app acceptance: incorporating theory from the technological acceptance model,” PeerJ Comput. Sci., vol. 7, p. e316, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.7717/peerj-cs.316.
H. E. A. Baharuddin, A. F. Othman, H. Adnan, and N. A. A. Ismail, “Evaluating the Influence of Training on Attitudes to Building Information Modelling (BIM) Adoption in Malaysian Construction Industry by Using Extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM),” 2021, pp. 577–582.
V. Cardullo, C. Wang, M. Burton, and J. Dong, “K-12 teachers’ remote teaching self-efficacy during the pandemic,” J. Res. Innov. Teach. Learn., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 32–45, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1108/JRIT-10-2020-0055.
N. S. Subawa, “Differences of Gender Perception in Adopting Cashless Transaction Using Technology Acceptance Model,” SSRN Electron. J., 2021, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3948415.
A. L. S. Hoong, L. S. Thi, and M.-H. Lin, “Affective Technology Acceptance Model: Extending Technology Acceptance Model with Positive and Negative Affect,” in Knowledge Management Strategies and Applications, InTech, 2017.
B. T. Khoa, N. M. Ha, T. V. H. Nguyen, and N. H. Bich, “Lecturers’ adoption to use the online Learning Management System (LMS): Empirical evidence from TAM2 model for Vietnam,” HCMCOUJS - Econ. Bus. Adm., vol. 10, no. 1, May 2020, doi: 10.46223/HCMCOUJS.econ.en.10.1.216.2020.
M. Y. Doo and C. J. Bonk, “Cognitive Instrumental Processes of Flipped Learners: Effects of Relevance for Learning, Quality of Learning Outcomes, and Result Demonstrability,” J. Educ. Comput. Res., vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 1093–1113, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1177/0735633121989128.
V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis, “A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies,” Manage. Sci., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186–204, Feb. 2000, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.
H. Taherdoost, “A review of technology acceptance and adoption models and theories,” Procedia Manuf., vol. 22, pp. 960–967, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2018.03.137.
N. Marangunić and A. Granić, “Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013,” Univers. Access Inf. Soc., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 81–95, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1007/s10209-014-0348-1.
D. A. Jeffrey, “Testing the Technology Acceptance Model 3 ( TAM 3 ) with the Inclusion of Change Fatigue and Overload , in the Context of Faculty from Seventh- day Adventist Universities : A Revised Model,” vol. 3, no. Tam 3, 2015.
S. S. Al-gahtani, “Empirical investigation of e-learning acceptance and assimilation : A structural equation model,” Appl. Comput. Informatics, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 27–50, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.aci.2014.09.001.
A. Q. Salimon, M.G., Kareem, O., Mokhtar, S.S.M., Aliyu, O.A., Bamgbade, J.A. and Adeleke, “Malaysian SMEs m-commerce adoption: TAM 3, UTAUT 2 and TOE approach,” J. Sci. Technol. Policy Manag., vol. ahead-of-p, no. ahead-of-print, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-06-2019-0060.
S. Raeisi, “THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & MANAGEMENT Factors Influencing to M-Commerce Adoption in China,” no. April, 2016.
H. Venkatesh, V. and Bala, “Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions Model,” Decis. Sci., vol. 39, no. 2, 2008, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x.
K. Magsamen-Conrad, S. Upadhyaya, C. Y. Joa, and J. Dowd, “Bridging the divide: Using UTAUT to predict multigenerational tablet adoption practices,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 50, pp. 186–196, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.032.
S. Rahi, M. M. Othman Mansour, M. Alghizzawi, and F. M. Alnaser, “Integration of UTAUT model in internet banking adoption context,” J. Res. Interact. Mark., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 411–435, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1108/JRIM-02-2018-0032.
S. Rahi and M. Abd. Ghani, “The role of UTAUT, DOI, perceived technology security and game elements in internet banking adoption,” World J. Sci. Technol. Sustain. Dev., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 338–356, Oct. 2018, doi: 10.1108/WJSTSD-05-2018-0040.
F. Abdullah and R. Ward, “Developing a General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-Learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 56, pp. 238–256, Mar. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.036.
R. Hoque and G. Sorwar, “Understanding factors influencing the adoption of mHealth by the elderly: An extension of the UTAUT model,” Int. J. Med. Inform., vol. 101, pp. 75–84, May 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.02.002.
H. San Martín and Á. Herrero, “Influence of the user’s psychological factors on the online purchase intention in rural tourism: Integrating innovativeness to the UTAUT framework,” Tour. Manag., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 341–350, Apr. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2011.04.003.
Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis, “User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View,” MIS Q., vol. 27, no. 3, p. 425, 2003, doi: 10.2307/30036540.
M. A. Almaiah, M. M. Alamri, and W. Al-Rahmi, “Applying the UTAUT Model to Explain the Students’ Acceptance of Mobile Learning System in Higher Education,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 174673–174686, 2019, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2957206.
S. Walldén, E. Mäkinen, and R. Raisamo, “A review on objective measurement of usage in technology acceptance studies,” Univers. Access Inf. Soc., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 713–726, Nov. 2016, doi: 10.1007/s10209-015-0443-y.
F. M. Abubakar and H. B. Ahmad, “The Moderating Effect of Technology Awareness on the Relationship between UTAUT Constructs and Behavioural Intention to Use Technology: A Conceptual Paper,” Aust. J. Bus. Manag. Res., vol. 03, no. 02, pp. 14–23, Feb. 2013, doi: 10.52283/NSWRCA.AJBMR.20130302A02.
V. Venkatesh, J. Thong, and X. Xu, “Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology: A Synthesis and the Road Ahead,” J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 328–376, May 2016, doi: 10.17705/1jais.00428.
K. Nikolopoulou, V. Gialamas, and K. Lavidas, “Acceptance of mobile phone by university students for their studies: an investigation applying UTAUT2 model,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 4139–4155, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10639-020-10157-9.
F. J. R.-C. J. A.-G. F. M.-V. Patricio Ramírez-Correa, “Analysing the acceptation of online games in mobile devices: An application of UTAUT2,” J. Retail. Consum. Serv., vol. 50, pp. 85–93, 2019.
F. J. Rondan-Cataluña, J. Arenas-Gaitán, and P. E. Ramírez-Correa, “A comparison of the different versions of popular technology acceptance models,” Kybernetes, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 788–805, May 2015, doi: 10.1108/K-09-2014-0184.
A. Shanthi, N. I. Jamil, and L. Teck Heng, “Assessing Student Inclination for Language Learning Via Open Distance Learning During Covid-19 Pandemic,” Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci., vol. 11, no. 10, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i10/11011.
V. Mathew and M. Soliman, “Does digital content marketing affect tourism consumer behavior? An extension of t echnology acceptance model,” J. Consum. Behav., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 61–75, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1002/cb.1854.
B. Hawash, U. Asma’, N. A. Mokhtar, and Z. M. Yusof, “Users’ acceptance of an electronic record management system in the context of the oil and gas sector in Yemen: an application of ISSM-TAM,” Int. J. Manag. Enterp. Dev., vol. 20, no. 1, p. 75, 2021, doi: 10.1504/IJMED.2021.113661.
C. S. L. M. . I. N. D. B. . & T. M. D. A. K. Lazim, “Application of technology acceptance model (TAM) towards online learning during covid-19 pandemic,” Account. students Perspect. Int. J. Bus. Econ., pp. 13–20, 2021.
A. Hussain, M. S. Hussain, M. Y. K. Marri, and A. Zafar, “Acceptance of Electronic Banking among University Students in Pakistan: An Application of Technology Acceptance Model (TAM),” Pakistan J. Humanit. Soc. Sci., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 101–113, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.52131/pjhss.2021.0902.0117.
J. Jung, E. Park, J. Moon, and W. S. Lee, “Exploration of Sharing Accommodation Platform Airbnb Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 3, p. 1185, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13031185.
R. Scherer, F. Siddiq, and J. Tondeur, “The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education,” Comput. Educ., vol. 128, pp. 13–35, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009.
G. . L. M. . & D. T. Romeo, “Teaching teachers for the future: How, what, why, and what next? . ,” Aust. Educ. Comput., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 3–12, 2013.
J. Fraillon, J. Ainley, W. Schulz, T. Friedman, and E. Gebhardt, Preparing for Life in a Digital Age. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2014.
E. T. Straub, “Understanding Technology Adoption: Theory and Future Directions for Informal Learning,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 625–649, Jun. 2009, doi: 10.3102/0034654308325896.
G. Husband, “The impact of lecturers’ initial teacher training on continuing professional development needs for teaching and learning in post-compulsory education,” Res. Post-Compulsory Educ., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 227–244, Apr. 2015, doi: 10.1080/13596748.2015.1030262.
M. Najib and F. Fahma, “Investigating the Adoption of Digital Payment System through an Extended Technology Acceptance Model: an Insight from the Indonesian Small and Medium Enterprises,” Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol., vol. 10, no. 4, p. 1702, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.18517/ijaseit.10.4.11616.
E. E. Grandón, B. Díaz-Pinzón, S. R. Magal, and K. Rojas-Contreras, “Technology Acceptance Model Validation in an Educational Context: A Longitudinal Study of ERP System Use,” J. Inf. Syst. Eng. Manag., vol. 6, no. 1, p. em0134, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.29333/jisem/9582.
J. Lyu and J. Zhang, “An Empirical Study into Consumer Acceptance of Dockless Bikes Sharing System Based on TAM,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 1831, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13041831.
