Content uploaded by Atilla Wohllebe
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Atilla Wohllebe on Mar 16, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
IOSR Journal of Mobile Computing & Application (IOSR-JMCA)
e- ISSN: 2394-0050, P-ISSN: 2394-0042.Volume 8, Issue 1 (Jan - Feb 2021), PP 23-25
www.iosrjournals.org
DOI: 10.9790/0050-08012325 www.iosrjournals.org 23 | Page
More than Technology: Improving Mobile App Research
Through Less Mobile App Focus
Atilla Wohllebe1
1(MATE Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences – Kaposvár Campus, Hungary)
Abstract:
Background: With digitization and the spread of smartphones, mobile apps have become significantly more
relevant in recent years. Research into the acceptance of mobile apps as a technology often focuses on the
application of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Nevertheless, there are some examples in the research
that do not apply the TAM and help to identify new factors and thus improve mobile app research.
Materials and Methods: This essay discusses the TAM, as a model that focuses primarily on the technologies
themselves. It then presents examples of research results from the context of mobile apps that do not apply the
TAM.
Results: The presented literature from the context of mobile apps shows that apart from perceived usefulness
and perceived ease of use, other factors exist that explain the acceptance and use of mobile apps in different
contexts.
Conclusion: The acceptance and use of mobile apps depends on many factors. Research in this context should
therefore focus more on identifying the less researched factors away from the TAM and quantifying their
influence.
Key Word: Technology Research; Mobile Apps; Business Informatics; Consumer Behavior.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Submission: 28-02-2021 Date of acceptance: 15-03-2021
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Research on Technology Use: Focus on the Technology Itself
In business informatics, research into the use of technologies by users already has a long history. With
the "Technology Acceptance Model" (TAM), Fred D. Davis developed a model in 1985 that depicts the use of a
system via the behavioral intention to use it and the attitude toward its use as a function of the perceived
usefulness and the perceived ease of use of the technology [1]. The model is structurally based on the "Theory
of Reasoned Action" by Ajzen and Fishbein from 1980 [2]. The model has been further developed several times;
today TAM2 [3], TAM3 [4] and the “Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology” (UTAUT) [5]
exist.
However, the original model is today the quasi-standard when it comes to predicting the use of a
technology by users [6]. It has been applied in a wide variety of contexts around the world [7]–[11].
Nevertheless, it must be noted that the TAM assumes that the use of technology ultimately depends exclusively
on whether the technology is perceived as useful and whether it is perceived as easy to use. This perspective is
symptomatic - if only because of the importance of the TAM - to the study of technology acceptance as a whole:
the focus is essentially on the technology itself, leaving out even numerous other potentially relevant aspects.
These may include, for example, the manufacturer and/or the merchant of the technology, but also the context of
use or the user himself.
II. Technology Use in the Larger Context
This primarily technology-related perspective can also be observed in the context of mobile apps. With
the digitization and the spread of smartphones all over the world, also the relevance of mobile apps has
increased in the last years [12]–[14]. Research on the acceptance of mobile apps but also on other questions such
as the recommendation of mobile apps is often primarily focused on the app as a technology itself, but not on
the broader context. The interactions with other, non-technology-related variables are often not taken into
account [9], [10], [15]–[19].
As an example of more comprehensive perspectives, an article by Sirdeshmukh et al. (2002) can be
considered. While this work does not come from technology research, it provides a good example of what more
comprehensive perspectives can look like. The authors examine how the perceived value of a purchase and the
resulting customer loyalty emerge in the retail industry. They conclude that it is not just the purchase itself –
good products at a good price – that leads to customer loyalty. Instead, they show that staff on the sales floor
also play an important role. If the staff is perceived as benevolent, this has a positive effect on the perceived
More Than Technology: Enhancing Mobile App Research Through Less Mobile App Focus
DOI: 10.9790/0050-08012325 www.iosrjournals.org 24 | Page
value of the purchase and on customer loyalty - completely independently of the purchase itself. Thus, the
article exemplifies how important broader perspectives can be in business management research.
This is why it can be assumed that greater consideration of the overall context will also provide new
insights when looking at mobile apps – i.e., beyond the classic technology-oriented factors of perceived
usefulness and perceived ease of use in TAM.
III. Mobile Apps: Examples of Interactions Apart From Technology
In fact, there are already many examples in the field of mobile apps that show which factors have a
significant influence on the installation or use of a mobile app - but are not connected with the app as
technology or software.
For example, the work of Peng et al. (2014) shows that not only the mobile app with its functionalities plays an
important role in the adoption of a branded mobile app. In particular, the brand loyalty of app users influences
mobile app adoption [20].
Following on from this, work by Wohllebe et al. (2020) shows that a consumer's installation of a
retailer's app is significantly affected by whether the consumer is satisfied with the retailer overall and would
recommend it to others [21].
Conversely, observation show that consumers' use of mobile apps can be an important basis for
customer value development. Rosa (2019) shows that a good mobile app's e-service quality has a positive effect
on customer loyalty [22]. Other work suggests that mobile technologies have a positive impact on sales
generated in brick-and-mortar retail outlets [23].
Another example is the app reviews of some mobile retail apps in the Google Play Store. Although
these are actually used to evaluate the mobile app as such, some users also use the app reviews to evaluate the
selection in the store or the friendliness of the employees, for example [24].
These examples from research and practice suggest that in reality, users of technology probably take
into account many more factors than just the technology itself when considering whether they want to or will
(continue) using a technology.
IV. Research on Mobile Apps to Be More Broadly
The finding that the use of mobile apps is probably influenced by more than just the technology as such
shows that research should not only focus on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use as influencing
factors. The TAM provides a largely standardized way to compare research findings, even from different
contexts. Nevertheless, many research studies also show that there can be many other factors, some of
them highly significant, for the acceptance or use of a technology in general or a mobile app in particular.
This essay, originally prompted by the thoughts of Sirdeshmukh et al. (2002), is therefore a call to
research to consider mobile apps not only as a technology, but also more strongly in their overall context.
Specifically, this means also considering, for example, the app developer or publisher and its impact, but also,
for example, the interactions with service, employees, and other potential influencing factors. In particular, more
exploratory research could identify new potential influencing factors here.
References
[1] F. Davis, “A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems - theory and results,” PhD
Thesis, Massachusetts Inst. of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., 1985.
[2] I. Ajzen and M. Fishbein, Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior, Pbk. ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall,
1980.
[3] V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis, “A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies,”
Management Science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186–204, Feb. 2000, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.
[4] V. Venkatesh and H. Bala, “Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions,” Decision Sciences, vol. 39,
no. 2, pp. 273–315, May 2008, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x.
[5] Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis, “User Acceptance of I nformation Technology: Toward a Unified View,” MIS Quarterly, vol.
27, no. 3, p. 425, 2003, doi: 10.2307/30036540.
[6] F. D. Davis, A. Granić, and N. Marangunić, The Technology Acceptance Model: 30 Years of TAM. Springer International
Publishing, 2021.
[7] R. S. Al-Maroof, S. A. Salloum, A. Q. AlHamadand, and K. Shaalan, “Understanding an Extension Technology Acceptance Model
of Google Translation: A Multi-Cultural Study in United Arab Emirates,” International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies
(iJIM), vol. 14, no. 03, Art. no. 03, Feb. 2020, Accessed: Jun. 18, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.online -
journals.org/index.php/i-jim/article/view/11110.
[8] W. Boonsiritomachai and K. Pitchayadejanant, “Determinants affecting mobile banking adoption by generation Y based on the
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model modified by the Technology Acceptance Model concept,” Kasetsart
Journal of Social Sciences, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.kjss.2017.10.005.
[9] L. Briz-Ponce and F. J. García-Peñalvo, “An Empirical Assessment of a Technology Acceptance Model for Apps in Medical
Education,” J Med Syst, vol. 39, no. 11, p. 176, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.1007/s10916-015-0352-x.
[10] M. R. Jaradat and N. M. Twaissi, “Assessing the Introduction of Mobile Banking in Jordan Using Technology Acceptance Model,”
International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), vol. 4, no. 1, Art. no. 1, Dec. 2009, Accessed: Jun. 18, 2020.
[Online]. Available: https://www.online-journals.org/index.php/i-jim/article/view/1057.
More Than Technology: Enhancing Mobile App Research Through Less Mobile App Focus
DOI: 10.9790/0050-08012325 www.iosrjournals.org 25 | Page
[11] E. Park, S. Baek, J. Ohm, and H. J. Chang, “Determinants of player acceptance of mobile social network games: An application of
extended technology acceptance model,” Telematics and Informatics, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 3–15, Feb. 2014, doi:
10.1016/j.tele.2013.07.001.
[12] E. Diez, “Managing A Veterinary Pra ctice: A Guide To Organizational Culture In Veterinary Practice,” IJARBM, vol. 1, no. 1, pp.
18–26, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.51137/ijarbm.2020.1.1.2.
[13] F. Ross, “Hearing Aid Accompanying Smartphone Apps in Hearing Healthcare. A Systematic R eview,” Applied Medical
Informatics, vol. 42, no. 4, Nov. 2020, [Online]. Available: https://ami.info.umfcluj.ro/index.php/AMI/article/view/792.
[14] A. Wohllebe, P. Dirrler, and S. Podruzsik, “Mobile Apps in Retail: Determinants of Consumer Acceptance – a Systematic Review,”
Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol., vol. 14, no. 20, pp. 153–164, 2020, doi: 10.3991/ijim.v14i20.18273.
[15] F. Weng, R.-J. Yang, H.-J. Ho, and H.-M. Su, “A TAM -Based Study of the Attitude towards Use Intention of Multimedia among
School Teachers,” ASI, vol. 1, no. 3, p. 36, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.3390/asi1030036.
[16] T. Chuchu and T. Ndoro, “An Examination of the Determinants of the Adoption of Mobile Applications as Learning Tools for
Higher Education Students,” International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), vol. 13, no. 03, Art. no. 03, Mar.
2019, Accessed: Jun. 18, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.online-journals.org/index.php/i-jim/article/view/10195.
[17] M. Groß, “Exploring the acceptance of technology for mobile shopping: an empirical investigation among Smartphone u sers,” The
International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 215–235, May 2015, doi:
10.1080/09593969.2014.988280.
[18] A. Vahdat, A. Alizadeh, S. Quach, and N. Hamelin, “Would you like to shop via mobile app technology? The technology acceptance
model, social factors and purchase intention,” Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.01.002.
[19] C. Xu, D. Peak, and V. Prybutok, “A customer value, satisfaction, and loyalty perspective of mobile application recommendations,”
Decision Support Systems, vol. 79, pp. 171–183, Nov. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2015.08.008.
[20] K.-F. Peng, Y. Chen, and K.-W. Wen, “Bra nd relationship, consumption values and branded app adoption,” Industrial Management
& Data Systems, vol. 114, no. 8, pp. 1131–1143, Jan. 2014, doi: 10.1108/IMDS-05-2014-0132.
[21] A. Wohllebe, F. Ross, and S. Podruzsik, “Influence of the Net Promoter Score of Retailers on the Willingness of Consumers to
Install Their Mobile App,” Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol., vol. 14, no. 19, 2020, doi: 10.3991/ijim.v14i19.17027.
[22] J. T. F. Rosa, “How does mobile apps’ e -service quality impact customer loyalty? : investigating the effect of customer satisfaction
within the purchase experience,” May 2019, Accessed: Aug. 30, 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://repositorio.ucp.pt/handle/10400.14/28998.
[23] D. S. Verma and D. Verma, “Managing Customer R elationships through Mobile CRM In Organized retail outlets,” International
Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology - IJETT, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 1697–1701, 2013, Accessed: Jul. 12, 2020. [Online].
Available: http://ijettjournal.org/archive/ijett-v4i5p76.
[24] Google Play Store, “hagebau App (Google Play Store),” hagebau App (Google Play Store), Mar. 10, 2021.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.hagebau.shop&hl=de&gl=US (accessed Mar. 10, 2021).
Atilla Wohllebe. "More than Technology: Improving Mobile App Research Through Less
Mobile App Focus.” IOSR Journal of Mobile Computing & Application (IOSR-JMCA), 8(1),
(2021): pp. 23-25.
