The Influence of TRI Factor on The Use of IoTs Behavior Intention

Kritiya Rangsom, Wasun Khan-Am

Abstract


this article is an ongoing article which was the consequence of the previous two presented articles in this journal which mentioned about explore the clear intention of using the Internet of things and analyze confirmatory factor analysis of the technology readiness index version 2.0 under the context of the Internet of Things. The objective of this research is to study the influence of Technology Readiness Index factors on the use of Internet of Things behaviors intention in Bangkok and its connection area, the results of the previous two articles will be used to form the research model. The research population is people who are living or working in the Bangkok metropolitan area with the internet user experience. The sample size is 402 respondents which are administered by the purposive method. By using structural equations with four latent variables including perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, Technology Readiness Index 2.0, and Internet of Things usage behavioral intention. The result of the analysis is chi-square = 34.268, degree of freedom = 28, p = 0.192, Chi-square/df. = 1.224, GFI=.985 and RMR = 0.016. The most factor affecting the use of Internet of Things behavior intention is TRI factor.

Keywords-component; Technology Readiness Index; Technology Readiness and Acceptance Model; TAM; Internet Of Things


Full Text:

PDF

References


K. Ashton, “That ‘Internet of Things’ Thing”, RFID Journal. Jun 22, 2009[online]. Available: http://www.rfidjounal.com/articles/view?4986. [Accessed Nov. 18, 2018].

A. Gabbai, “Kavin Ashton ‘the Internet of Things’”, Smithsonian Magzazine, Jan. 2015. [Online], Available: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/kevin-ashton-describes-the-internet-of-things-180953749. [Accessed Nov. 18, 2018].

M. Fishbein, and I, Ajzen, Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley, 1975

I. Ajzen, M. Fishbein., Understading, attitudes, and prediction social behavior, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 1980.

F.D. Davis, A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information system: theory and results, (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge., 1986,

F.D. Devis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quaterly., Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 319-340, 1989

F.D. Devis, V. Venkatesh, “A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: Three experiments Internet.” J. Human-Comput. Stud. Vol 45 pp.19-45, 1996.

A. Parasuramen, “Technology readiness Index (TRI): A multiple item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies,” J. Serv. Res. Vol. 2, No, 4, pp. 307-320, 2000.

A. Parasuraman, C.L., Colby, “Technology Readiness Index (TRI) a multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies,” J. Serv. Res. Vol. 18, No 1. pp. 59-74, 2014.

C. Lin, H. Shih, and P.J. Sher, “Integrating technology readiness into technology acceptance: The TRAM model,” Phychol. Mark., Vol. 24, 2007.

N. Larasati, Widyawan, and P.I. Santosa, “Technology Readiness and Technology Acceptance Model in new Technology Implementation Process in Low Technology SMEs,” International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, Vol. 8, No. 2, April 2017.

W. Khan-am, and K. Rangsom, “Develop Indicator for Attribute of Rate of Adoption to AEC Entrace in Pathum thani Province”, RMUTT GLOBAL BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS REVIEW. Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 73-85, 2016.

K. Rangsom, W. Khan-Am. “An Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Developing TRI 2.0 Structured Model under Internet of Things Context”,International Journal of Applied Computer Technology and Information Systems. Vol. 8 No. 1 pp. 45 – 49. Apr. 2018 – Sep. 2018.

K. Rangsom, W. Khan-Am, “Examine Behavioral Intention to Use Internet of Thing into TRAM”, International Journal of Applied Computer Technology and Information Systems. Vol. 7 No. 2. pp. 67 – 71. October 2017 – March 2018.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.