從系統品質及資訊品質的角度探討WWW網站的接受程度

全文

(1)

(2)

(3) WWW Acceptance Model: From the Perspective of Information System Quality .

(4) . !"# $%&'()*+,-./)01 2345567 89*+,-(+1 . affect customer’s perception about the acceptance of a Web site are unclear. This paper addresses why users accept or reject a Web site and how user acceptance is affected by the features (i.e. information quality of a Web site, response time and system accessibility) provided by a Web site. A study with 145 users of a Web site was conducted to test the hypothesized model. The results showed that TAM fully mediated the usage behavior even in the Internet environment, accounting for 64% of the variance in usage. Furthermore, response time of a Web site is an important factor in affecting the user’s beliefs of such a Web site. This showed that Web page providers not only have to make the content informative and timely, but they also need to design a speedy Web page by not putting in unnecessary pictorial data as it might jeopardize the display time..

(5) . !"#$ %. &'()*+,-./ 01 2 3; 4567$89:;<=>?-@ABC. DE#F" GHIJKLM@ANOPTechnology Acceptance Model QR TAMS THI-UV WXYZ[\]PInformation QualityS^-6_ àPResponse TimeS^bcdebBC PAccessibilitySfg$-Y@AC aY Ehi"HIjklmnopqr TAM st@ACYuvwx 64%"y` -Y 6_àz{|$-Y8}=# F"#$ ~oWX1` V WX Z[Y\]bbì _- Y6_à u+,1Y/" LM@ANO^WWW^Z[cd\] Abstract. Keywords: Technology Acceptance Model, WWW,. The growing popularity of Internet has IS Quality resulted in opening up exciting opportunities for companies to reach out for customers with

(6) very little additional costs. In order to 8PInternetS communicate with the potential customers _1 ~Yi Internet through WWW effectively, a well-designed 8¡48¢£¤vY¥¦ ![5 6 10 12 Web page is needed. Yet, the factors that 1.

(7) . 14]"Uj§¨©ª«¬Y®Z[(WWW)o 1Y_z¯°±Y²³,#$´¨. GHIJ=>?rK9:. µµ¶·¸- WWW Tf/x¹ºY »¼

(8) ½¾v"¿À IDC research ÁÂYÃ. LM>?LM@ANOoYpqrYstu. [15] 1998 ®1YÄÅÆ ÇÈÉÊË ÅÌÆÍÎY Ï$8ÐYÑÒ. v". !xY. NM>?Z[\]zO{|-Y@ACP. ÓÔi i ÕibÖ×b`ØÈÙi [16 17] ÚÛÁÎ 2003 ÜÝKËÞÌÅÆÍ. QM>?cdUYcd6_àfebCzO{|. ÎYßàáN"#$ âuã$8Ð. -Y@ACP. ! Üä¯°åæ;Y½¾v". rGHIV¯ j*". ç4 èç~éyVÇT Y¥¦êë ìíîïY_ðTÊ°

(9) . ¿ÀDERSTUPV8Slm VWXYY. ^ñòó^ô4#$4õÔYö¨"÷. Z[cd\] Z0¡ÄP-VWXYZ[\. ø1 xùŸ-om8úû. ]^-6_àêbCSf 1^. ü[4] ýxþ VWXYZ[K. Cbg-YxfÒé[\x].

(10) Ð ^. ÉYDE". 4Yêk"#$%&¶·8. Table 1. Correlation analysis. ä/Y- 4/g$bC z<. Intention Preference. !gY8}=. ":". Usefulness. Ease. Information quality. 0.51***. 0.52***. 0.62*** 0.51***. Response time. 0.60***. 0.67***. 0.67*** 0.66***. ÖTxEYDEHID#$% DERS^lm¡Ä aY__ìE. x&'gopqU%&W(/CW). ?*[13 18 19] ì+,-oi>? ./xD a b>¨¡ÄY#kNc GHI4: dTU"e8VmfdTU jk". E 0HI>?opqU {|/g@AC #F"4/g-

(11) @AY 12. e8lm TAM ästo gqr Beliefs u34./$- 4ÇÈó^"#$ IS Quality 2 YLM@ABCPR =0.64S h¯ Yz GH Perceived Usefulness >?$8HI56)z8789Y÷" 0.34** R =0.59 InformationIjk0AøbiHI jké[xg quality 0.27** 2. 0.38**. Attitude GHILM@ANOPTAMS[7 8]:; jk-Y 1åé[ÒT¯l[1 Preference to Web site. Response time. R =0.61 0.25* < =§Z[cd\]UY¡Ä %Z[\]^ 2 3 11 20]"÷ø1e8lm jk 2. 0.33** -Y 1lAé[ÒY{|"ì- -6_à^bDE>?ªYebBCÙ@o¡ System accessibility 0.40** 0.43** Ä[9] >?g-@A 1"KøAHI g-YmCöyÀg$-Y 0.48** Perceived Ease of. 2 R =0.49 = 0.61S" TBsTAM g>ªLMP% WWW 1Y homepageS é[Òfé[xY{|PR Use. 2. 0.26*. CiYstuv .4>?-ïY. *p < 0.01, **p < 0.001. D# Eu ÕFGÈHIYêk" Figure 1. Web site acceptance: path analysis. 2. Intentions Intention to reuse the Web site R2=0.64.

(12) Information Technologies,” Decision Sciences (28:3), Summer 1997, pp. 557-581.. *{|g-Yxé[J=f$ -VWXYZ[\]f-Y6_àxlY EaPR2 = 0.59S UnZ[\]Y{|ål. 4.. Angehrn, A.and Meyer, J. “Developing Mature Internet Strategies,” Information System Management, Summer, 1997, pp. 37-43.. 5.. Benjamin, R. and Wigand, R. “Electronic Markets and Virtual Value Chains on the Information Superhighway,” Sloan Management Review, winter, pp. 62-72.. 6.. Butler, P. and Peppard, J., “Consumer Purchasing on the Internet: Processes and Prospects,” European Management Journal (16:5), October 1998, pp. 600 – 610.. 7.. Davis, F. D. “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology,” MIS Quarterly (13:3), September 1989, pp. 319-337.. 8.. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P. and Warshaw, P. R. “Uer Acceptance of Computer Technology: a Comparison of Two Theoretical Model,” Management Science (35:8), August 1989, pp. 982-1003.. Abdul-Gader, A., “The Impact of User Satisfaction on Computer-Mediated Communication Acceptance: A Causal Path Model,” Information Resources Management Journal, Winter 1996, pp. 17 – 26.. 9.. DeLone, W. and McLean, E., “Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable,” Information Systems Research (3:1), March 1992, pp. 60 –95.. Agarwal, R. and Prasad, J. “The Role of Innovation Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of. 11. Gefen, D. and Straub, D. W. “Gender Differences in the Perception and Use of E-Mail: An Extension to the Technology. "4-Y6_àfebCo{|g 2. $-YÒé[PR = 0.49S Ï6_àY p oåcdYebCTY}="#$ 1j klm â=q-ï _r}-VWX YZ[zOu y`0_sã-Y 6_à #$t)g8-Yé[u hP0fé[xfÒSxv@ Ea ÏJK $8é[uh Z[\]f6_àÜa@{| g-YmCbjkY 1" Gwxy¥aFlVxÚ HIz {"jkøAbLM@ANOop qrYstuv 4ÏWXb|8ú}¶ ï-_ Y~fD &fø~g x8YBs" GwxYDEjkUû&*û . *ÕF@ &fH?"8 ÅÕZ[. H? îoU". . 1.. 2.. 3.. 10. Dutta, S., Kwan, S. and Segev, a. “Business Transformation in Electronic Adams, D. A., Nelson, R. R. and Todd, P. Commerce: A Study of Sectoral and A. “Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use Regional Trends,” European Management and Usage of Information Technology: A Journal (16:5), October 1998, pp. 540 – Replication,” MIS Quarterly (16:2), June 551. 1992, pp. 227-247.. 3.

(13) 17. Peterson, R. A., Balasubramanian, S. and Bronnenberg, B. J. “Exploring the Implications of the Internet for Consumer Marketing,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing science (25:4), Fall 1997, pp. 329-346.. Acceptance Model,” MIS Quarterly, December 1997, pp. 389-400. 12. Ghosh, S. “Making Business Sense of Internet,” Harvard Business Review, March-April 1998, pp. 127-135. 13. Hagel, J. III and Armstrong, A. G. “Net Gain:. 18. Rayport, J. F. and Sviokla, J. J. “Exploiting the Virtual Value Chain,” Harvard Business Review, November-December, 1995, pp. 75-85.. Expanding Markets Through Virtual Communities,” McKinsey Quarterly (1), 1997, pp. 140-153.. 14. Hoffman, D. L. and Novak, T. P. “A New 19. Rayport, J. F. and Sviokla, J. J. “Managing in the Marketspace,” Marketing Paradigm for Electronic Harvard Business Review, Commerce,” Information Society (13), November-December 1994, pp. 141-150. 1997, pp. 43-54. 20. Szajna, B. “Empirical Evaluation of the 15. IDC, International Data Corporation, Revised Technology Acceptance Model,” 1998 [http://www.idcresearch.com]. Management Science (42:1), January 16. Palmer, J. W. and Griffith, D. A. “An 1996, pp. 85-92. Emerging Model of Web Site Design for Marketing,” Communications of the ACM (41:3), March 1998, pp. 44 – 51.. 4.

(14)