The study tests a use-diffusion model in the context of home technology use. The authors combine two constructs, variety and rate of use, to yield four user segments. The results show that user segments vary on the basis of social context and technological makeup of the household as well as personal factors and external influences. Furthermore, user segments differ with regard to users’ satisfaction with technology and interest in acquiring future technologies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbaJoseph, and HutchinsonJ. Wesley (1985), “Dimensions of Consumer Expertise,”Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (March), 411–54.
2.
AndersonRobert L., and OrtinauDavid J. (1988), “Exploring Consumers’ Postadoption Attitudes and Use Behaviors in Monitoring the Diffusion of a Technological-Based Discontinuous Innovation,”Journal of Business Research, 17 (3), 283–98.
3.
BlonskiMatthias (1999), “Social Learning with Case-Based Decisions,”Journal of Economic Behavior and Organizations, 38 (1), 59–78.
4.
BoltonRuth N., and LemonKatherine N. (1999), “A Dynamic Model of Customers’ Usage of Services: Usage as an Antecedent and Consequence of Satisfaction,”Journal of Marketing Research, 36 (May), 171–86.
5.
DalyKerry J. (2001), “Deconstructing Family Time: From Ideology to Lived Experience,”Journal of Marriage and Family, 63 (2), 283–94.
6.
DavisFred D. (1989), “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology,”MIS Quarterly, 13 (September), 319–39.
7.
DickersonMary Dee, and GentryJames W. (1983), “Characters of Adopters and Non-Adopters of Home Computers,”Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (September), 225–35.
8.
DodsonJoe A.Jr., and MullerEitan (1978), “Models of New Product Diffusion Through Advertising and Word-of-Mouth,”Management Science, 24 (November), 568–78.
9.
DowningCharles E. (1999), “System Usage Behavior as a Proxy for User Satisfaction: An Empirical Investigation,”Information and Management, 35 (4), 203–216.
10.
DuttonWilliam, KovaricPeter, and SteinfieldCharles (1985), “Computing in the Home: A Research Paradigm,”Computers and the Social Sciences, 1 (1), 5–18.
11.
EllenPam Scholder, BeardenWilliam O., and SharmaSubhash (1991), “Resistance to Technological Innovation: An Examination of the Role of Self-Efficacy and Performance Satisfaction,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19 (4), 297–307.
12.
FisherRobert J., and PriceLinda L. (1992), “An Investigation into the Social Context of Early Adoption Behavior,”Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (December), 477–85.
13.
GolderPeter N., and TellisGerard J. (1998), “Beyond Diffusion: An Affordability Model of the Growth of New Consumer Durables,”Journal of Forecasting, 17 (3-4), 259–80.
14.
HahnMinhi, ParkSehoon, KrishnamurthiLakshman, and ZoltnersAndris A. (1994), “Analysis of New Product Diffusion Using a Four-Segment Trial-Repeat Model,”Marketing Science, 13 (3), 224–47.
15.
HirschmanElizabeth C. (1980), “Innovativeness, Novelty Seeking, and Consumer Creativity,”Journal of Consumer Research, 7 (3), 283–95.
16.
HochStephen J., and DeightonJoh (1989), “Managing What Consumers Learn from Experience,”Journal of Marketing, 53 (April), 1–20.
17.
HoffmanDonna L., NovakThomas P., and VenkateshAlladi (1998), “Diversity on the Internet: The Relationship of Race to Access and Usage,” in Investing in Diversity: Advancing Opportunities for Minorities and the Media, GarmerAmy K., ed. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute, 125–92.
18.
KekreSunder, KrishnanMayuram S., and SrinivasanKannan (1995), “Drivers of Customer Satisfaction for Software Products: Implications for Design and Service Support,”Management Science, 41 (9), 1456–70.
19.
KieslerSara, KrautRobert, LundmarkVicki, ScherlisWilliam, and MukhopadhyayTridas (1997), “Usability, Help Desk Calls, and Residential Internet Usage,”Conference Proceedings on Human Factors in Computing Systems, PembertonSteven, ed. New York: ACM Press, 536–37.
20.
KieslerSara, KrautRobert, LundmarkVicki, ScherlisWilliam, and MukhopadhyayTridas, ZdaniukBozena, LundmarkVicki, and KrautRobert (2001), “Troubles with the Internet: The Dynamics of Help at Home,”Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 15, 323–51.
21.
KrautRobert, RiceRonald E., CoolColleen, and FishRobert S. (1998), “Varieties of Social Influences: The Role of Utility and Norms in the Success of a New Communication Medium,”Organization Science, 9 (4), 437–53.
22.
LeeWai On (2000), “Introducing Internet Terminals to the Home: Interaction Between Social, Physical, and Technological Spaces,” in People and Computers XIV—Usability Or Else!McDonaldS., WaernY., and CocktonG., eds. New York: Springer, 14–29.
23.
LewisLaurie K., and SeiboldDavid R. (1993), “Innovation Modification During Intraorganizational Adoption,”Academy of Management Review, 18 (2), 322–54.
24.
LindolfThomas R. (1992), “Computing Tales: Parents’ Discourse About Technology and Family,”Social Science Computer Review, 10 (3), 291–309.
25.
LuptonEllen, and MillerJ. Abbott (1992), The Bathroom, the Kitchen, and the Aesthetics of Waste.Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Visual Arts Center, distributed by Princeton Architectural Press.
26.
MahajanVijay, and MullerEitan (1979), “Innovation and Diffusion and New Product Growth Models in Marketing,”Journal of Marketing, 43 (Fall), 53–68.
27.
MahajanVijay, and MullerEitan, and BassFrank M. (1990), “New Product Diffusion Models in Marketing: A Review and Direction for Research,”Journal of Marketing, 54 (January), 1–26.
28.
MickDavid, and FournierSusan (1998), “Paradoxes of Technology: Consumer Cognizance, Emotions, and Coping Strategies,”Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (2), 123–43.
29.
MidgleyDavid F., and DowlingGrahame R. (1978), “Innovativeness: The Concept and Its Measurement,”Journal of Consumer Research, 4 (March), 229–42.
30.
MukherjeeAshesh, and HoyerWayne D. (2001), “The Effect of Novel Attributes on Product Evaluation,”Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (December), 462–72.
31.
NormanDonald A. (1999), The Invisible Computer.Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
32.
OliverRichard L. (1980), “A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions,”Journal of Marketing Research, 17 (November), 460–69.
33.
OliverRichard L. (1995), “Attribute Need Fulfillment in Product Usage Satisfaction,”Psychology and Marketing, 12 (1), 1–17.
34.
PriceLinda L., and RidgewayNancy M. (1983), “Development of a Scale to Measure Use Innovativeness,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10, BagozziRichard P., and TyboutAlice, eds. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 679–84.
35.
RamS., and JungHyung-Shik (1990), “The Conceptualization and Measurement of Product Usage,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18 (1), 67–76.
36.
ReingenPeter H., and KernanJerome B. (1986), “Analysis of Referral Networks in Marketing: Methods and Illustration,”Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (November), 370–78.
37.
RidgewayNancy M., and PriceLinda L. (1994), “Exploration in Product Usage: A Model of Use Innovativeness,”Psychology and Marketing, 11 (1), 69–84.
38.
RobertsonThomas S., and GatignonHubert (1986), “Competitive Effects on Technology Diffusion,”Journal of Marketing, 50 (July), 1–12.
39.
RobinsonJohn P., and GodbeyGeoffrey (1997), Time for Life.University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
40.
RogersEverett M. (1995), Diffusion of Innovations, 4th ed.New York: The Free Press.
41.
SalazarChristine (2000), “Building Boundaries and Negotiating Work at Home,” working paper, Department of Computing and Software Systems, University of Washington.
42.
TinnellCarolyn S. (1985), “An Ethnographic Look at Personal Computers in the Family Setting,”Marriage & Family Review, 8 (1-2), 59–69.
43.
U.S. Bureau of the Census (1997), Current Population Survey, October 1997.Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.
44.
ValenteThomas W. (1995), Network Models of the Diffusion of Innovations.Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
45.
VenkateshAlladi (1996), “Computers and Other Interactive Technologies for the Home,”Communications of the ACM, 39 (12), 47–54.
46.
VenkateshAlladi, KruseErik, and ShihChuan-Fong (2003), “The Networked Home: An Analysis of Current Developments and Future Trends,”Cognition, Technology, and Work, 5 (April), 23–32.
47.
VitalariNicholas P., VenkateshAlladi, and GronhaugKjell (1985), “Computing in the Home: Shifts in the Time Allocation Patterns of the Households,”Communications of the ACM, 28 (5), 512–22.
48.
von HippelEric (1986), “Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts,”Management Science, 32 (7), 791–805.
49.
von HippelEric (1995), The Sources of Innovation.New York: Oxford University Press.
50.
WassermanStanley, and FaustKatherine (1994), Social Network Analysis.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
