Towards the integration of culture into the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology

Educational technology is increasingly used in multicultural contexts and across national cultures. Educational technology users with different national and professional backgrounds may, however, exhibit different attitudes towards technology. Previous research provides isolated evidence of the relationship between learning technology acceptance and culture, and so an overall picture is missing. Therefore, this study attempts to integrate culture (sensu Hofstede, 2001) into an established technology acceptance model (ie. the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, UTAUT, Venkatesh, Morris, Davis & Davis, 2003). Examining a large sample (N = 2866) of learning technology users from Germany and Romania by means of questionnaire survey, we investigate the differences in culture and technology acceptance between sample subgroups. The collected data reveal the presence of cultural differences both between countries and between professions. In line with previous research, these differences are associated with dissimilar acceptance profiles, ie. different values of acceptance variables and of path coefficients between them. Based on the findings, this study makes headway in cross-cultural research by proposing an extended model of UTAUT – one which integrates three of Hofstede’s culture dimensions. As a practical implication, national and professional culture may shape computer-based learning environments

Correctional Practitioners on Reentry: A Missed Perspective

Much of the literature on reentry of formerly incarcerated individuals revolves around discussions of failures they incur during reintegration or the identification of needs and challenges that they have during reentry from the perspective of community corrections officers. The present research fills a gap in the reentry literature by examining the needs and challenges of formerly incarcerated individuals and what makes for reentry success from the perspective of correctional practitioners (i.e., wardens and non-wardens). The views of correctional practitioners are important to understand the level of organizational commitment to reentry and the ways in which social distance between correctional professionals and their clients may impact reentry success. This research reports on the results from an email survey distributed to a national sample of correctional officials listed in the American Correctional Association, 2012 Directory. Specifically, correctional officials were asked to report on needs and challenges facing formerly incarcerated individuals, define success, identify factors related to successful reentry, recount success stories, and report what could be done to assist them in successful outcomes. Housing and employment were raised by wardens and corrections officials as important needs for successful reentry. Corrections officials adopted organizational and systems perspectives in their responses and had differing opinions about social distance. Policy implications are presented

Factors that promote or inhibit the implementation of e-health systems: an explanatory systematic review

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature on the implementation of e-health to identify: (i) barriers and facilitators to e-health implementation, and (ii) outstanding gaps in research on the subject.METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PSYCINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched for reviews published between 1 January 1995 and 17 March 2009. Studies had to be systematic reviews, narrative reviews, qualitative metasyntheses or meta-ethnographies of e-health implementation. Abstracts and papers were double screened and data were extracted on country of origin; e-health domain; publication date; aims and methods; databases searched; inclusion and exclusion criteria and number of papers included. Data were analysed qualitatively using normalization process theory as an explanatory coding framework.FINDINGS: Inclusion criteria were met by 37 papers; 20 had been published between 1995 and 2007 and 17 between 2008 and 2009. Methodological quality was poor: 19 papers did not specify the inclusion and exclusion criteria and 13 did not indicate the precise number of articles screened. The use of normalization process theory as a conceptual framework revealed that relatively little attention was paid to: (i) work directed at making sense of e-health systems, specifying their purposes and benefits, establishing their value to users and planning their implementation; (ii) factors promoting or inhibiting engagement and participation; (iii) effects on roles and responsibilities; (iv) risk management, and (v) ways in which implementation processes might be reconfigured by user-produced knowledge.CONCLUSION: The published literature focused on organizational issues, neglecting the wider social framework that must be considered when introducing new technologies.<br/

Analysis of the Factors that Influence Online Purchasing

This paper reviews recent studies related to the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in order to derive an extended model that examines online purchasing by consumers. Our model expands the original TAM by including additional constructs including privacy, trust, perceived risk, e-satisfaction, and e-loyalty. We surveyed over 1,850 consumers in the United States and Australia using an instrument that yielded respectable reliability and validity. The findings suggest that our expanded model serves as a very good predictor of consumers\u27 online purchasing behaviors. The linear regression model shows a substantial amount of variance explained for Behavioral Intention (R2 = .637). We also discover interesting but unexpected results that provide the need for future research. This paper adds to our understanding of the factors influencing online purchasing. Future researchers can refine our model and instrument to further explain consumers’ acceptance of Internet-based applications

Examining the Influence of Time-Use Preferences on Technology Acceptance: The Role of Computer Polychronicity

Past research recognizes the important influence of individual beliefs on technology acceptance and use. This line of research has also identified a variety of factors that drive the formation of these beliefs. One category of variables that has not received much attention in this research stream consists of individual preferences, in particular time-use preferences. In the current study we add to the literature on technology acceptance, and belief formation in particular, by introducing and empirically testing a new construct labeled computer polychronicity, which captures individuals’ time-use preferences regarding IT. Computer polychronicity is positioned in this study as a key driver of perceived usefulness, mediating the effects of computer anxiety and computer playfulness. Overall, the results support the notion that preferences play important roles in the formation of technology-related beliefs

Users' trust in information resources in the Web environment: a status report

This study has three aims; to provide an overview of the ways in which trust is either assessed or asserted in relation to the use and provision of resources in the Web environment for research and learning; to assess what solutions might be worth further investigation and whether establishing ways to assert trust in academic information resources could assist the development of information literacy; to help increase understanding of how perceptions of trust influence the behaviour of information users

Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap : systematic reviews of reviews

Acknowledgements The Evidence to Practice Project (SPCR FR4 project number: 122) is funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (SPCR). KD is part-funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Research and Care West Midlands and by a Knowledge Mobilisation Research Fellowship (KMRF-2014-03-002) from the NIHR. This paper presents independent research funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. Funding This study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (SPCR).Peer reviewedPublisher PD