You are here:

Determinant Factors of Information Use or Misuse in Wikipedia PROCEEDINGS

, , Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Toronto, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-81-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Abstract

Wikipedia, biggest multilingual free-content encyclopedia on the Internet, is popular with students. Is Wikipedia a bane or wane for our students? This paper describes an empirical study to investigate determinant factors of information use or misuse in Wikipedia. We developed a research model based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UATAUT). Seventy-three students of a local university took part in the survey. Findings indicate that respondents’ performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and social influence were significant in encouraging information use. The paper concludes with implications for educators.

Citation

Theng, Y.L. & Jiang, T. (2010). Determinant Factors of Information Use or Misuse in Wikipedia. In J. Herrington & C. Montgomerie (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2010--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 3153-3161). Toronto, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved November 14, 2018 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
  2. Almeida, R.B., Mozafari, B., Cho, J. (2007). On the evolution of Wikipedia. In Proceedings International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.
  3. Anderson, J.E., Schwager P.H. (2004). SME adoption of wireless LAN technology: Applying the UTAUT mode. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference of the Southern Association for Information Systems, 39-43.
  4. Armitage, C.J., Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behavior: A British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-499.
  5. Bandura, A. (2002). Social Cognitive Theory in Cultural Context: An International Review. Applied Psychology, 51, 269-290.
  6. Chau, P.Y.K., Hu, P.J.H. (2001). Information technology acceptance by professionals: A model comparison approach. Decision Sciences, 32(4), 699-719.
  7. Compeau, D., Higgins, C.A., Huff, S. (1999). Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: a longitudinal study. MIS Quarterly, 23(2), 145-158,
  8. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-339.
  9. Davis, F.D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology; system characteristics, use and behavior impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38, 475-87.
  10. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111-1132.
  11. Fitzgerald, L.M., Kiel, G.C. And Boyle, M.V. (2001). An exploratory study of comsumers' perceptions and experiences with online purchasing. In Bridging Marketing Theory and Practice, Massey University, Auckland, NZ, 1-5 December, 2001.
  12. Francik, E., Rudman, S.E., Cooper, D., Levine, S. (1991). Putting Innovation to Work: Adoption Strategies for Multimedia Communication Systems. Communications of the ACM archive, 34(12), 52-63.
  13. Garfield, M.J. (2005). Acceptance of Ubiquitous Computing. Information Systems Management, 22(4), 24-31.
  14. Giles, J. (2005). Internet encyclopaedias go head to head. Retrieved July 12, 2008, from http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html
  15. Glassberg, B.C, Grover, V. & Teng, J.T.C. (2006). Information Systems Research with an Database for Advances in Information Systems 37(2/3), 76-86.
  16. Harrison, A.W., Rainer, R.K., Hochwarter, W.A., Thompson, K.R. (1997). Testing the self-efficacyperformance linkage of social-cognitive theory. The Journal of Social Psychology, 137(1), 79-87.
  17. Hausenblas, H.A., Carron, A.V., Mack, D.A. (1997). The theories of reasoned action and planned behavior: A meta analysis. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 19 (1): 47-62.
  18. Hu, P.J., Chau, P.Y., Sheng, O.R.L., Tam, K.Y. (1999). Examining the Technology Acceptance Model
  19. Igbaria, M. (1994) An Examination of the Factors Contributing to Technology Acceptance, Management and Information Technologies, 4(4), 205-224 Jaschik, S. (2007). A Stand Against Wikipedia. Retrieved August http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki Jiang, J.J., Hsu, M.K., Klein, G., Lin, B. (2000). E-commerce user behavior model: an empirical study. Human Systems Management, 19(4), 265-76.
  20. Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., Chervany, N.L. (1999). Information technology adoption across time: cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Quarterly, 23(2), 183-213.
  21. Landis, D., Triandis, H.C., Adamopoulos, J. (1978). Habit and behavioral intentions as predictors of social behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 106, 227-237.
  22. Landry, B.J., Griffeth, R., Hartman, S. (2006). Measuring student perceptions of blackboard using the technology acceptance model. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(1), 87-99.
  23. Legris, P., Ingham, J., Collerette, P. (2003). Why do People Use Information Technology? A Review of the Technology Acceptance Model. Information and Management, 40, 191-204.
  24. Leone, L., Perugini, M., Ercolani, A.P. (1999). A comparison of three models of attitude-behavior relationships on studying behavior domain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 161-189
  25. Locke, E.A., Frederick, E., Lee, C., Bobko, P. (1984). Effect of self-efficacy, goals, and task strategies on task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(2), 241-251.
  26. Lu, J., Yu, C., Liu, C., Yao, J. (2003). Technology acceptance model for wireless internet. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Polic, (13)3, 206-222.
  27. Ma, Q. And Liu, L. (2004). The Technology Acceptance Model: A Meta-Analysis of Journal of End User Computing, 16(1), 59--72.
  28. Marchewka, J.T., Liu, C., Kostiwa, K. (2007). An application of the UTAUT model for understanding student perceptions using course management software. Communications of the IIMA, 7(2), 93-104.
  29. Moore, G.C., Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 92-222.
  30. Notani, A.S. (1998). Moderators of Perceived Behavioral Control’s Predictiveness in the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(3), 247-271.
  31. O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0. Retrieved August 1, 2008, from http://www.oreilly.de/artikel/web20.html
  32. Plouffe, C., Hulland, J., Vandenbosch, M. (2001). Richness versus Parsimony in Modeling Technology
  33. Rosenzweig, R. (2006). Can History Be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past. American History, 93(1), 117-146.
  34. Sheppard, B.H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P.R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: A metaanalysis
  35. Tan, M., Teo, T.S.H. (1998). Factors influencing the adoption of the Internet. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2(3), 5-18.
  36. Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A., Howell, J.M. (1991). Personal computing: toward a utilization. MIS Quarterly 15(1), 124-143.
  37. Triandis, H.C. (1977). Interpersonal behavior. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Conceptual model of Journal of
  38. Vallerand, R.J., Bissonnette, R. (1992). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivational styles as predictors of behavior: A prospective study. Journal of Personality, 60, 599-620.
  39. Venkatesh, V., Davis, F.D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
  40. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and user behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 15-39.
  41. Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating perceived behavioral control, computer anxiety and enjoyment into the technology acceptance model, Information Systems Research 11(4), 342-365.
  42. Venkatesh, V., Davis, F.D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
  43. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115-139.
  44. Vuong, B.Q., Lim, E.P., Sun, A., Le, M.T., Lauw, W.H., Chang, K. (2008) On Ranking Controversies Wikipedia: Models and Evaluation, In Proceedings of WSDM 2008, 171-182.
  45. Wixom, B.H., Todd, P.A. (2005). A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology Information Systems Research, 16(1), 85-102.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.