Adoption of Second Life in Higher Education: Comparing the Effect of Utilitarian and Hedonic Behaviours

Adoption of Second Life in Higher Education: Comparing the Effect of Utilitarian and Hedonic Behaviours

Nauman Saeed (Faculty of Business, Economics and Law, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia) and Sukunesan Sinnappan (Faculty of Higher Education, Lilydale, Swinburne University of Technology, Lilydale, VIC, Australia)
Copyright: © 2013 |Volume: 4 |Issue: 2 |Article: 1 |Pages: 18
ISSN: 1947-8518|EISSN: 1947-8526|DOI: 10.4018/jvple.2013040101
Cite Article Cite Article

MLA

Saeed, Nauman and Sukunesan Sinnappan. "Adoption of Second Life in Higher Education: Comparing the Effect of Utilitarian and Hedonic Behaviours." IJVPLE 4.2 (2013): 1-18. Web. 1 Jan. 2019. doi:10.4018/jvple.2013040101

APA

Saeed, N., & Sinnappan, S. (2013). Adoption of Second Life in Higher Education: Comparing the Effect of Utilitarian and Hedonic Behaviours. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE), 4(2), 1-18. doi:10.4018/jvple.2013040101

Chicago

Saeed, Nauman and Sukunesan Sinnappan. "Adoption of Second Life in Higher Education: Comparing the Effect of Utilitarian and Hedonic Behaviours," International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE) 4 (2013): 2, accessed (January 01, 2019), doi:10.4018/jvple.2013040101

Export Reference

Mendeley
Favorite Full-Issue PDF

Abstract

Second Life is a three dimensional multi-user virtual environment within the Web 2.0 suite of applications which has gained wide spread popularity amongst educators in the recent years. However, limited empirical research has been reported on the adoption of Second Life, especially within higher education. The majority of technology adoption studies concentrate on analysing effects of utilitarian variables on adoption of a new technology however one should also focus on the hedonic effects when it comes to the adoption of Web 2.0 technologies which are highly interactive, involving, multi-user and entertaining. In this paper, the authors analyse the effect of utilitarian and hedonic behaviours on adoption of Second Life in a higher education context. To achieve this goal the authors propose an extension to Davis’ Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) by including emotional and imaginative responses as hedonic behaviours and usefulness, ease-of-use and computer self-efficacy as utilitarian behaviours. Empirical evaluation of the proposed model suggests that hedonic behaviours, emotional responses in particular, emerged as the strongest predictors of Second Life adoption. The study findings further suggest that traditional technology acceptance approaches may fall short in being able to explain the usage of today’s highly interactive, multi-user and entertainment-oriented technologies.

References

Alvarez, M. (2006). Second Life and school: The use of virtual worlds in high school education. Retrieved 12 November, 2011, from http://www.trinity.edu/adelwich/worlds/articles/ trinity.manny.alvarez.pdf
Bagozzi R. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift.Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 244–254.
Bandura A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
BBC. (2006). Duran Duran to give virtual gigs. Retrieved November 12, 2011, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/technology/5253782.stm
Becerra E. P. Stutts M. A. (2008). Ugly duckling by day, super model by night: The influence of body image on the use of virtual worlds.Virtual Worlds Research: Consumer Behaviour in Virtual Worlds, 1(2), 1–19.
Bell L. Peters T. Pope K. (2007). Get a (Second) Life! Prospecting for gold in a 3-D world.Computers in Libraries, 27(1), 10–15.
Bostrom R. (2008). The social construction of virtual reality and the stigmatized identity of the newbie.Virtual Worlds Research: Consumer Behaviour in Virtual Worlds, 1(2), 1–19.
Brown S. Massey A. Montaya-Weiss M. Burkman J. (2002). Do I really have to? User acceptance of mandatory technology.European Journal of Information Systems, 11(4), 283–295. 10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000438
Burkhardt M. E. Brass D. J. (1990). Changing patterns or patterns of change: The effects of a change in technology on social network structure and power.Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 104–127. 10.2307/2393552
Chakraborty I. Hu P. J. H. Cui D. (2008). Examining the effects of cognitive style in individuals' technology use decision making.Decision Support Systems, 45(2), 228–241. 10.1016/j.dss.2007.02.003
Chen, X. F., Slau, K., & Nah, F. (2008). Adoption of 3D virtual worlds for education. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS'08), Paris, France.
Childers T. L. Carr C. L. Peck J. Carson S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behaviour.Journal of Retailing, 77(4), 511–535. 10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00056-2
Chin W. W. (1998a). Issues and opinions on structural equation modelling.Management Information Systems Quarterly, 22(1), 7–16.
Chin W. W. (1998b). The PLS approach for structural equation modelling. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Coffman T. Klinger B. M. (2007). Utilizing virtual worlds in education: The implications for practice.International Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1), 29–33.
Compeau D. R. Higgins C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test.Management Information Systems Quarterly, 19(2), 189–211. 10.2307/249688
Cotterman W. Senn J. (1992). Challenges and strategies for research in systems development. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Davis F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology.Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339. 10.2307/249008
Davis F. D. Bagozzi R. Warshaw P. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models.Journal of Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003. 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
Depradine C. (2007). A role-playing virtual world for Web-based application courses.Computers & Education, 49(4), 1081–1096. 10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.002
Eschenbrenner B. Nah F. Keng S. (2009). 3-D virtual worlds in education: Applications, benefits, issues, and opportunities.Journal of Database Management, 19(4), 91–110. 10.4018/jdm.2008100106
Fornell C. Larcker D. F. (1981). SEM with un-observable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics.JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382–388. 10.2307/3150980
Gefen D. Straub D. (2005). A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-graph: Tutorial and annotated example.Communications of the AIS, 16(5), 91–109.
Halawi L. McCarthy R. (2007). Measuring faculty perceptions of Blackboard using the TAM.Issues in Information Systems, 8(2), 160–165.
Harrison R. (2009). Excavating Second Life: Cyber-archaeologies, heritage and virtual communities.Journal of Material Culture, 14(75), 75–106. 10.1177/1359183508100009
Heijden H. (2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems.Management Information Systems Quarterly, 28(4), 695–704.
Hill T. Nancy S. Mann M. (1986). Communicating innovations: Convincing computer phobics to adopt innovative technologies.Advances in Consumer Research. Association for Consumer Research (U. S.), 13(1), 419–422.
Hirschman E. C. (1983). Predictors of self-projection, fantasy, fulfilment, and escapism.The Journal of Social Psychology, 120(1), 63–76. 10.1080/00224545.1983.9712011
Hirschman E. C. Holbrook M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts, methods and propositions.Journal of Marketing, 146(3), 92–101. 10.2307/1251707
Holmberg K. Huvila I. (2008). Learning together apart: Distance education in a virtual world.[Online]. First Monday, 13(10), 1–14.
Holsapple C. W. Wu J. (2007). User acceptance of virtual worlds: The Hedonic framework.The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 38(4), 86–89. 10.1145/1314234.1314250
Hsu C. Lin J. (2008). Acceptance of blog usage: The roles of technology acceptance, social influence and knowledge sharing motivation.Journal of International Management, 45(1), 65–74.
Hsu C. Lu H. (2004). Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experiences.Journal of International Management, 41(7), 853–868.
Jennings N. Collins C. (2007). Virtual or virtually u: Educational institutions in Second Life.International Journal of Social Sciences, 2(3), 180–186.
Kim J. Forsythe S. (2007). Hedonic usage of product virtualisation technologies in online apparel shopping.Interdisciplinary Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 35(6), 502–514. 10.1108/09590550710750368
Koufaris M. (2002). Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online consumer behaviour.Information Systems Research, 13(2), 205–223. 10.1287/isre.13.2.205.83
Lacher K. T. Mizerski R. (1994). An exploratory study of the response and the relationships involved in the evaluation of, and in the intention to purchase new rock music.Consumer Research, 21(2), 366–380. 10.1086/209404
Lederer A. Maupin D. Sena M. Zhuang Y. (2000). TAM and the World Wide Web.Decision Support Systems, 29(3), 269–282. 10.1016/S0167-9236(00)00076-2
Lee M. K. Cheung C. M. Chen Z. (2005). Acceptance of internet-based learning medium: the role of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation.Information & Management, 42(8), 1095–1104. 10.1016/j.im.2003.10.007
Legris P. Ingham J. Collerette P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the Technology Acceptance Model.Information & Management, 40(3), 191–204. 10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00143-4
Lucia A. D. Francese R. Passero I. Tortora G. (2009). Development and evaluation of a virtual campus on Second Life: The case of SecondDMI.Computers & Education, 52(1), 220–233. 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.001
Lui T. W. Piccoli G. Ives B. (2007). Marketing strategies in virtual worlds.The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 38(4), 77–80. 10.1145/1314234.1314248
Ma Q. Liu L. (2004). The technology acceptance model: A meta-analysis of empirical findings.Organizational and End User Computing, 16(1), 59–72. 10.4018/joeuc.2004010104
Mun Y. Y. Hwang Y. (2003). Predicting the use of Web-based IS: Self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and TAM.Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 431–449. 10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00114-9
Nummenmaa, M. (2007). Emotions in a Web-based learning environment. Unpublished Thesis, University of Turku, Finland.
Nunnally J. C. Bernstein I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Peterson R. (2000). A meta-analysis of variance accounted for and factor loadings in exploratory factor analysis.Marketing Letters, 11(3), 261–275. 10.1023/A:1008191211004
Raaij E. M. Schepers J. L. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China.Computers & Education, 50(3), 838–852. 10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.001
Richter, J., Anderson-Inman, L., & Frisbee, M. (2007). Critical engagement of teachers in Second Life: Progress in the SaLmander project. In Proceedings of the Second Life Education Workshop 2007, Chicago, IL.
Saade R. Bahli B. (2005). The impact of cognitive absorption on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in on-line learning: An extension of the TAM.Information & Management, 42(2), 317–327. 10.1016/j.im.2003.12.013
Saade R. Nebebe F. Tan W. (2007). Viability of TAM in multimedia learning environments: A comparative study.Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3(1), 175–184.
Saeed, N., Yang, Y., & Sinnappan, S. (2009). User acceptance of Second Life: An extended TAM with hedonic consumption behaviours. In Proceedings of the 17th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS’09), Verona, Italy.
Shin D. H. Kim W. Y. (2008). Applying TAM and flow theory to Cyworld user behaviour: Implication of the Web 2.0 user acceptance.Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(3), 378–382. 10.1089/cpb.2007.011718537514
Singer J. L. (1966). Daydreaming: An introduction to the experimental study of inner experience. New York, NY: Random House.
Stevens V. (2006). Second Life in education and language learning.TESLEJ, 10(3), 1–4.
Thompson C. W. Hagstrom F. (2008). Modelling health care logistics in a virtual world.IEEE Internet Computing, 12(5), 100–104. 10.1109/MIC.2008.106
Titz K. Andrus D. Miller J. (2002). Hedonistic differences between mechanical game players and table game players: An exploratory investigation on the road to a comprehensive theory of gambling.UNLV Gaming Research & Review, 6(1), 22–32.
Venkatesh V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into technology acceptance model.Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342–365. 10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872
Venkatesh V. Davis F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test.Decision Sciences, 27(3), 451–481. 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb01822.x
Venkatesh V. Davis F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the TAM: Four longitudinal field studies.Journal of Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Venkatesh V. Morris M. G. Davis G. B. Davis F. D. (2003). User acceptance of IT: Toward a unified view.Management Information Systems Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.
Walsh, T. (2006). U2 unwittingly gives Second Life concert. Retrieved November 12, 2011, from http://www.secretlair.com/index.php?/clickableculture/entry/u2_unwittingly_gives_second_life_concert/
Yi M. Y. Hwang Y. (2003). Predicting the use of Web-based information systems: Self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the Technology Acceptance Model.Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 431–449. 10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00114-9
Yousafzai S. Y. Foxall G. R. Pallister J. G. (2007). Technology acceptance: A meta-analysis of the TAM: Part 1.Modelling in Management, 2(3), 251–280. 10.1108/17465660710834453
Zuckerman M. (1979). Sensation seeking: Beyond the optimal level of arousal. Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Association.

Request Access

You do not own this content. Please login to recommend this title to your institution's librarian or purchase it from the IGI Global bookstore.