↓ Skip to main content

Difference between Leisure and Work Contexts: The Roles of Perceived Enjoyment and Perceived Usefulness in Predicting Mobile Video Calling Use Acceptance

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
133 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Difference between Leisure and Work Contexts: The Roles of Perceived Enjoyment and Perceived Usefulness in Predicting Mobile Video Calling Use Acceptance
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00350
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ronggang Zhou, Caihong Feng

Abstract

There is a rapidly growing body of literature on mobile video calling, which is a promising communication technology; however, little research has focused on user acceptance of mobile video calling, especially in different use contexts. This study explored factors (especially perceived enjoyment) influencing the intention of users to employ video calling in different contexts (a work and a leisure context) by applying the technology acceptance model (TAM) combined with the theory of planned behavior. The revised research model differentiated external factors (subjective norms and personal innovativeness) from internal factors (perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use (PEU), perceived enjoyment, and intention to use mobile video calling). In addition, the current study investigated predictors of perceived enjoyment across these two contexts. With the use of a structured questionnaire, participants were divided in two groups and completed self-report measures related to one context; a total of 386 student respondents' responses were analyzed. The results indicated that users' intentions were directly predicted by their perceived enjoyment of video calling (β ≥ 0.35) and the call's perceived usefulness (β ≥ 0.27) and PEU (β = 0.13, only for the leisure context), which jointly explained at least 55.6% of the variance in use intention. In addition to the effects of these predictors on mobile video calling use acceptance, an assessment of the moderating effects of different contexts indicated that perceived enjoyment played a more important role in influencing intention for the leisure context, while perceived usefulness appeared to be more important for the work context. This study's findings are important in that they provide strong support for the necessity of distinguishing among different types of contexts when predicting users' intentions to use video calling. Furthermore, the results showed that perceived enjoyment was most significantly influenced by perceived usefulness (β ≥ 0.61), followed by PEU (β ≥ 0.13). In summary, the roles of core TAM variables (especially perceived enjoyment and perceived usefulness) and of external factors (subjective norms and personal innovativeness) differed between the leisure and work contexts. The implications of these findings are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 133 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Student > Master 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Researcher 7 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Other 20 15%
Unknown 69 52%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 20 15%
Psychology 7 5%
Computer Science 6 5%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 4%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 76 57%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 March 2017.
All research outputs
#20,410,007
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,301
of 30,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,349
of 308,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#476
of 536 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,112 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,016 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 536 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.