Web Survey Bibliography
Title Web acceptance and usage model: A comparison between goal-directed and experiential web users
Author Sánchez-Franco, M. J., Roldán, J. L.
Source Internet Research, 15, 1, pp. 21-48
Year 2005
Database Ingenta Select
Access date 25.07.2005
Abstract Purpose - To analyse the web acceptance and usage between goal-directed users and experiential users, incorporating intrinsic motives to improve the particular and explanatory TAM (technology acceptance model) value - traditionally related to extrinsic motives. Design/methodology/approach - A survey instrument was used to gather data to test the relationships shown in the research model. Data were collected from a sample of online questionnaires filled out by subscribers located in three discussion-mailing lists - administered by RedIris - about different topics (e.g. experimental sciences, social sciences and humanities). A structural equation modeling (SEM), specifically partial least squares (PLS), is proposed to assess the relationships between the constructs together with the predictive power of the research model. Findings - The empirical development suggests that there is scope for further extension of TAM to adapt to the web-based usage and its profitable consequences. The article may help to further the empirical research and to clarify and examine a web acceptance and usage model. In general, experiential and goal-directed behaviours moderate the key relationships in the model. Experiential and goal-directed users do not weigh extrinsic and intrinsic motives in the same way when on the web. Goal-directed users are more driven by instrumental factors and focused on their decision-making process while experiential users are more motivated by process.. Research limitations/implications - First, constructs of enjoyment and concentration are used to define flow. However, because of the flow definition's conceptual-vagueness, operationalising the flow construct has been questioned in the previous empirical works. Second, the cross-sectional study is also an important limitation. Since the users' perception and intention can change over time, it is important to measure these quantities at several points of time. Third, the sample sizes are relatively small. Fourth, the model needs to be tested with more objective measures to compare possible divergences. Finally, the model clearly does not include all the relevant variables. Practical implications - The results could be used to explain and to improve the experiential and goal-directed users' experience of being and to return to the web. Originality/value - The value of this study is to reveal the moderating influences of browsing-modes on relationship between flow and TAM-beliefs on the web, and, also, how the flow impacts the attitude and intention to use web between experiential and goal-directed users.
Access/Direct link
Database (abstract)
Year of publication2005
Bibliographic typeJournal article
Web survey bibliography - 2005 (76)
- The ethics of research using electronic mail discussion groups; 2005; Kralik, D., Warren, J., Koch, T., Pignone, G., Price, K.
- The Analyses of Domestic Study about Internet Survey; 2005; Rui, L., Tie-ying, S.
- Controlling the Baseline Speed of Respondents: An Empirical Evaluation of Data Treatment Methods of...; 2005; Mayerl, J.
- Determinanten der Rücklaufquote in Online-Panels; 2005; Batanic, B., Moser, K.
- On the cost-efficiency of probability sampling based mail surveys with a Web response option; 2005; Werner, P.
- Expert workshop on mixed mode data collection in comparative social surveys; 2005; Roberts, C.
- The Effect Of A Simultaneous Mixed-Mode (Mail And Web) Survey On Respondent Characteristics And Survey...; 2005; Brennan, M.
- The total survey error approach. A guide to the new science of survey research; 2005; Weisberg, H. F.
- The professional respondent problem in online panel surveys today; 2005; Fulgoni, G.
- Satisficing behavior in online panelists; 2005; Downes-Le Guin, T.
- Reading behavior in the digital environment: Changes in reading behavior over the past ten years; 2005; Liu, Z.
- Rating versus comparative trade-off measures. Trending changes in political issues across time and predictive...; 2005; Thomas, R. K., Behnke, S., Johnson, Al., Sanders, M.
- Publication bias: Recognizing the problem, understanding its origins and scope, and preventing harm; 2005; Dickersin, K.
- Panel proliferation and quality concerns; 2005; Faasse, J.
- Gricean effects in self-administered survey. Ph.D. Dissertation; 2005; Yan, T.
- Drop-down boxes, radio buttons, or fill-in-the-blank? Web survey scale-type effects; 2005
- Does weighting for nonresponse increase the variance of survey means?; 2005; Little, R. J., Vartivarian, S.
- Big scale observations gathered with the help of client side paradata; 2005; Haraldsen, G., Kleven, O., Sundvoll, A.
- User Interface Design and Evaluation ; 2005; Stone, D., Jarrett, C., Woodroffe, M., Minocha, S.
- Adding Value to Data Through Improved Access. The Case for Web Portals; 2005; Baker, R. P.
- Multi-Mode Research and Data Linkage. Theoretical and Practical Advice; 2005; Terhanian, G.
- Architectural Design of a Survey Questionnaire and Respondent Data Repository. Practical Considerations...; 2005; Cookson, P., Sobell, J.
- Developing and validating a nursing website evaluation questionnaire; 2005; Tsai, S. - L., Chai, S.-K.
- Workaround: Site’s surveys beat pop-up blockers, yield responses; 2005; Arnold, C.
- The Story of Subject Naught: A Cautionary but Optimistic Tale of Internet Survey Research; 2005; Konstan, J. A., Ross, M. W., Rosser, B. R. S., Stanton, J. M., Edwards, W. M.
- Standards in Online Surveys. Sources for Professional Codes of Conduct, Ethical Guidelines and Quality...; 2005; Kaczmirek, L., Schulze, N.
- Computer adaptive testing; 2005; Gershon, R. C.
- Ego control and ego-resiliency: Generalization of self-report scales based on personality descriptions...; 2005; Block, J., Funder, D. C., Letzring, T. D.
- The Web experiment list: A Web service for the recruitment of participants and archiving of Internet...; 2005; Reips, U. -D., Lengler, R.
- Survey of substance use among high school students in Taipei: Web-based questionnaire versus paper-and...; 2005; Wang, Y. C., Lee, C. M., Lew-Ting, C. Y., Hsiao, C. K., Chen, W. J.
- Web Surveys. A Brief Guide on Usability and Implementation Issues; 2005; Kaczmirek, L.
- An assessment of measurement invariance between online and mail surveys ; 2005; Deutskens, E., de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M.
- E-mail versus Web survey response rates among health education professionals; 2005; Kittleson, M. J., Brown, S. L.
- Toward An Open-Source Methodology: What We Can Learn From The Blogosphere; 2005; M.
- Aux Abonnes Absents: Liste Rouge Et Telephone Portable Dans Les Enquetes En Population Generale Sur...; 2005; Beck, F., ., Peretti-Watel, P.
- Web Versus Paper Questionnares: A Design and Functionality - Comparison; 2005; Jones, Ja., Fraser, C., Dowling, Z.
- Web Surveys and the new Disability Discrimination Act; 2005; Macer, T.
- Mixed-mode Surveys Using Mail and Web Questionnaires; 2005; Meckel, M., Baugh, P., Walters, D.
- Sampling procedure, questionnaire design, online implementation; 2005; Jackob, N., Arens, J., Zerback, T., Jowell, R., de Rouvray, C.
- Simple Approaches to Estimating the Variance of the Propensity Score Weighted Estimator Applied on Volunteer...; 2005; Isaksson, A., Lee, S., de Rouvray, C.
- Simple Approaches to Estimating the Variance of the Propensity Score Weighted Estimator Applied on Volunteer...; 2005; Isaksson, A., Lee, S.
- Alternative Modes for Health Surveillance Surveys: An Experiment with Web, Mail, and Telephone; 2005; Link, M. W., Mokdad, A.
- An Experimental Comparison Of Web And Telephone Surveys; 2005; Fricker, S., Galesic, M., Tourangeau, R., Yan, T.
- Organizational Virtual Communities: Exploring Motivations Behind Online Panel Participation; 2005; Daugherty, T., Lee, W.-N., Gangadharbatla, H., Kim, K., Outhavong, S.
- Promoting Uniform Question Understanding in Today's and Tomorrow's Surveys; 2005; Conrad, F. G., Schober, M. F.
- Is a Web survey as effective as a mail survey? A field experiment among computer users; 2005; Kiernan, N. E., Kiernan, M., Oyler, M. A., Gilles, C.
- The effect of personalization on response rates and data quality in web surveys; 2005; Heerwegh, D., Vanhove, T., Matthijs, K., Loosveldt, G.
- When Methodology Interferes With Substance; 2005; Schoen, H., Faas, T.
- Web-based and Mailed Questionnaires: A Comparison of Response Rates and Compliance; 2005; Baelter, K., Balter, O., Fondell, E., Trolle-Lagerros, Y.
- Bleeding Edge or Proven Technology? The Fact and the Fiction of Mobile Survey Computing; 2005; Cameron, M. R.