Research Article
No access
Published Online: 8 September 2015

Can Coolness Predict Technology Adoption? Effects of Perceived Coolness on User Acceptance of Smartphones with Curved Screens

Publication: Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking
Volume 18, Issue Number 9

Abstract

This study proposes an acceptance model for curved-screen smartphones, and explores how the sense of coolness induced by attractiveness, originality, subcultural appeal, and the utility of the curved screen promotes smartphone adoption. The results of structural equation modeling analyses (N = 246) show that these components of coolness (except utility) increase the acceptance of the technology by enhancing the smartphones' affectively driven qualities rather than their utilitarian ones. The proposed coolness model is then compared with the original technology acceptance model to validate that the coolness factors are indeed equally effective determinants of usage intention, as are the extensively studied usability factors such as perceived ease of use and usefulness.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

References

1.
Lin C. Exploring the relationship between technology acceptance model and usability test. Information Technology & Management 2013; 14:243–255.
2.
Sundar SS. (2008) The MAIN Model: a heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In Metzger MJ, Flanagin AJ, eds. Digital media, youth, and credibility. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 72–100.
3.
Kim KJ. Heuristics in digital communication media: theoretical explications and empirical observations. Quality & Quantity 2015; in press. DOI.
4.
Sundar SS, Tamul D, Wu M. Capturing “cool”: measures for assessing coolness of technological products. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 2014; 72:169–180.
5.
Levy S. (2006) The perfect thing: how the iPod shuffles commerce, culture, and coolness. New York: Simon & Schuster.
6.
Kim KJ, Sundar SS, Park E. (2011) The effects of screen-size and communication modality on psychology of mobile device users. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, pp. 1207–1212.
7.
Kim KJ, Sundar SS. Does screen size matter for smartphones? Utilitarian and hedonic effects of screen size on smartphone adoption. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:466–473.
8.
Kim KJ, Sundar SS. Does panel type matter for LCD monitors? A study examining the effects of S-IPS, S-PVA, and TN panels in video gaming and movie viewing. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2011; 6947:281–288.
9.
Kim KJ, Park E, Sundar SS. IPS vs. AMOLED: effects of panel type on smartphone users' viewing and reading experience. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering 2012; 182:77–84.
10.
Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Process 1997; 50:179–211.
11.
Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 1989; 13:19–33.
12.
Kim KJ, Shin DH. An acceptance model for smart watches: implications for the adoption of future wearable technology. Internet Research 2015; 25:527–541.
13.
Shin D. Understanding e-book users: uses and gratification expectancy model. New Media and Society 2011; 13:260–278.
14.
Park E, Kim KJ. An integrated adoption model of mobile cloud services: exploration of key determinants and extension of technology acceptance model. Telematics & Informatics 2014; 31:376–385.
15.
Kwon SJ, Park E, Kim KJ. What drives successful social networking services? A comparative analysis of user acceptance of Facebook and Twitter. The Social Science Journal 2014; 51:534–544.
16.
Dion K, Berscheid E, Walster E. What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 1972; 24:285–290.
17.
Tractinsky N, Katz AS, Ikar D. What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers 2000; 13:127–145.
18.
Snyder CR. Product scarcity by need for uniqueness interaction: a consumer catch-22 carousel? Basic & Applied Social Psychology 1992; 13:9–24.
19.
Nail PR. Toward an integration of some models and theories of social response. Psychological Bulletin 1986; 100:190–206.
20.
Snyder CR, Fromkin HL. Abnormality as a positive characteristic: the development and validation of a scale measuring need for uniqueness. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 1977; 86:518–527.
21.
Sundar SS, Marathe SS. Personalization versus customization: the importance of agency, privacy, and power usage. Human Communication Research 2010; 36:298–322.
22.
Kron J. (1983) Home-psych: the social psychology of home and decoration. New York: Potter.
23.
Southgate N. Coolhunting with Aristotle. International Journal of Market Research 2003; 45:167–189.
24.
Horton M, Read JC, Fitton D, et al. Too cool at school—understanding cool teenagers. PsychNology Journal 2012; 10:73–91.
25.
Tian KT, Bearden WO, Hunter GL. Consumers' need for uniqueness: scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research 2001; 28:50–66.
26.
McAlister L, Pessemier E. Variety seeking behavior: an interdisciplinary review. Journal of Consumer Research 1982; 9:311–322.
27.
Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science 1989; 35:982–1003.
28.
Bhattacherjee A, Premkumar G. Understanding changes in belief and attitude toward information technology usage: a theoretical model and longitudinal test. MIS Quarterly 2004; 28:229–254.
29.
Szajna B. Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science 1996; 42:85–92.
30.
Preacher KJ, Coffman DL. (2006) Computing power and minimum sample size for RMSEA. www.quantpsy.org (accessed Nov. 20, 2014).
31.
MacCallum RC, Browne MW, Sugawara HM. Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods 1996; 1:130–149.
32.
Bentler PM, Bonett DG. Significance tests and goodness-of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin 1980; 88:588–606.
33.
Bentler PM. Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin 1990; 107:238–246.
34.
Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 1999; 6:1–55.
35.
Forgas JP. Mood and judgment: the Affect Infusion Model (AIM). Psychological Bulletin 1995; 117:39–66.
36.
Chaiken S. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 1980; 39:752–766.
37.
Chaiken S, Liberman A, Eagly AH. (1989) Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In Uleman JS, Bargh JA, eds. Unintended thought. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 212–252.
38.
Jackson LA, Zhao Y, Kolenic AIII, et al. Race, gender, and information technology use: the new digital divide. CyberPsychology & Behavior 2008; 11:437–442.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

cover image Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking
Volume 18Issue Number 9September 2015
Pages: 528 - 533
PubMed: 26348813

History

Published online: 8 September 2015
Published in print: September 2015

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Topics

Authors

Affiliations

Ki Joon Kim
Department of Interaction Science, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea.
Dong-Hee Shin
Department of Interaction Science, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea.
Eunil Park
Department of Business, KAIST, Deajun, Korea.

Notes

Address correspondence to:Dr. Dong-Hee Shin25-2 Sungkyunkwan-roJongro-guSeoul 110-745KoreaE-mail: [email protected]

Author Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export citation

Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.

View Options

Get Access

Access content

To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.

Society Access

If you are a member of a society that has access to this content please log in via your society website and then return to this publication.

Restore your content access

Enter your email address to restore your content access:

Note: This functionality works only for purchases done as a guest. If you already have an account, log in to access the content to which you are entitled.

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/ePub

Full Text

View Full Text

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share on social media

Back to Top