Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTamilmani, Kuttimani
dc.contributor.authorRana, Nripendra P.
dc.contributor.authorDwivedi, Y.K.
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-25T10:21:22Z
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-30T13:04:47Z
dc.date.available2020-09-25T10:21:22Z
dc.date.available2020-09-30T13:04:47Z
dc.date.issued2019-01
dc.identifier.citationTamilmani K, Rana NP and Dwivedi YK (2019) Use of ‘Habit’ Is not a Habit in Understanding Individual Technology Adoption: A Review of UTAUT2 Based Empirical Studies. In: Elbanna A, Dwivedi Y, Bunker D and Wastell D. (eds) Smart Working, Living and Organising. TDIT 2018. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, Vol 533, pp 277-294. Springer.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10454/18059
dc.descriptionyesen_US
dc.description.abstract‘Habit’ was the most important theoretical addition into UTAUT2 to challenge the role of behavioural intention as a lone predictor of technology use. However, systematic review and meta-analysis of Price value the other UTAUT2 additional construct revealed major inconsistency of the model with just 41% UTAUT2 based studies including the construct in their research. Thus, the aim of this research is to understand the appropriateness of ‘habit’ construct usage among UTAUT2 based empirical studies and their reason for omission or inclusion. The findings from 66 empirical studies revealed only 23 studies a meagre (35%) utilised ‘habit’ construct and the remaining massive 43 studies (65%) excluded the construct from their research model. The major reason for studies not including “habit” construct was they were examining users of new technology at early stage of adoption where sufficient time hasn’t elapsed for users to form habit. Moreover this study caution the use of experience as an alternative for habit. Since experience can be gained under mandatory settings which is not sufficient enough to form habit that occurs more naturally under voluntary settings. This study also provided number of recommendations for theory and practice based on the findings.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.isreferencedbyhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04315-5_19en_US
dc.rights© 2019 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing. Reproduced in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. The final authenticated publication is available online at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04315-5_19en_US
dc.subjectHabiten_US
dc.subjectMeta-analysisen_US
dc.subjectTechnology adoptionen_US
dc.subjectUnified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT2)en_US
dc.titleUse of ‘Habit’ is not a habit in understanding individual technology adoption: A review of UTAUT2 based empirical studiesen_US
dc.status.refereedyesen_US
dc.date.application2018-12-07
dc.typeConference paperen_US
dc.type.versionAccepted manuscripten_US
dc.date.updated2020-09-25T09:21:24Z
refterms.dateFOA2020-09-30T13:07:10Z


Item file(s)

Thumbnail
Name:
29-48014.pdf
Size:
230.1Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Main article

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record