The Antecedents of Facebook Check in Adoption Intention: The Perspective of Social Influence
Recently, the competition between websites becomes
intense. How to make users “adopt” their websites is an issue of urgent
importance for online communities companies. Social procedures
(such as social influence) can possibly explain how and why users’
technologies usage behaviors affect other people to use the
technologies. This study proposes two types of social influences on the
initial usage of Facebook Check In-friends and group members.
Besides, this study combines social influences theory and social
network theory to explore the factors influencing initial usage of
Facebook Check In. This study indicates that Facebook friends’
previous usage of Facebook Check In and Facebook group members’
previous usage of Facebook Check In will positively influence focal
actors’ Facebook Check In adoption intention, and network centrality
will moderate the relationships among Facebook friends’ previous
usage of Facebook Check In, Facebook group members’ previous
usage of Facebook Check In and focal actors’ Facebook Check In
adoption intention. The article concludes with contributions to
academic research and practice.
[1] A. Bandura, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social
Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1986.
[2] A. Bhattacherjee, “Understanding information systems continuance: An
expectation-confirmation model,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 25, no. 3, pp.
351-370, 2001.
[3] R.D.Blackwell, P.W. Miniard, and J.F. Engel, Consumer Behavior.
Pennsylvania: Harcourt College Publishers, 2001
[4] M.C. Boudreau, and D. Robey, “Enacting integrated information
technology: A human agency perspective,” Organization Science, vol. 16,
no. 1, pp. 3-18, 2005.
[5] R.M. Emerson, “Power-dependence relations,” American Sociological
Review, vol. 27, pp. 31-41, 1962.
[6] S.T. Fiske, and E. Dépret, “Control, interdependence and power:
Understanding social cognition in its social context,” European Review of
Social Psychology, vol. 7, pp. 31-61, 1996.
[7] J. Fulk, “Social construction of communication technology,” Academy of
Management Journal, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 921-950, 1993.
[8] J. Fulk, C. Steinfield, J. Schmitz, and J. Power, “A social information
processing model of media use in organizations,” Communication
Research, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 529-552, 1987.
[9] L.C. Freeman, “Centrality in social networks: Conceptualizations
clarification,” Social Network, vol. 1, pp. 215-239, 1979.
[10] M.A. Hogg, and D.J. Terry, “Social identity and self-categorization
processes in organizational contexts,” Academy of Management Review,
vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 121-140, 2000.
[11] S.J. Hong, and K.Y. Tam, “Understanding the adoption of multipurpose
information appliances: The case of mobile data services,” Information
Systems Research, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 162-179, 2006.
[12] C.H. Hsiao, “Predicting online consumer complaints in Northern
Taiwan,” African Journal of Business Management, vol. 5, no. 13, pp.
5281-5291, 2011.
[13] Y.S. Kang, J. Min, J. Kim, and H. Lee, “Roles of alternative and
self-oriented perspectives in the context of the continued use of social
network sites,” International Journal of Information Management, vol.
33, pp. 496-511, 2013.
[14] A. Kankanhalli, B.C.Y. Tan, and K.K. Wei, “Contributing knowledge to
electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation,” MIS
Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 113-143, 2005.
[15] H.C. Kelman, “Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three
processes of attitude change?” Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 2, no.
1, pp. 51-60, 1958.
[16] G.P. Moschis, “Social comparison and informal group influence,”
Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 237-244, 1976.
[17] M. Pitesa, and S. Thau, “Compliant sinners, obstinate saints: How power
and self-focus determine the effectiveness of social influences in ethical
decision making,” Academy of Management Journal, vol. 56, no. 3, pp.
635-658, 2013.
[18] 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, 2000.
[19] Y. Wang, D.B. Meister, and P.H. Gray, “Social influence and knowledge
management system use: Evidence from panel data,” MIS Quarterly, vol.
37, no. 1, pp. 299-313, 2013.
[20] T. Wasserman, Social media Ad spending to hit $8.3b in 2015, 2011.
[21] S. Wasserman, and K. Faust, Social Network Analysis: Methods and
Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
[22] M. Weick, and A. Guinote, “When subjective experiences matter: Power
increases reliance on the ease of retrieval,” Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, vol. 94, pp. 956-970, 2008.
[1] A. Bandura, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social
Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1986.
[2] A. Bhattacherjee, “Understanding information systems continuance: An
expectation-confirmation model,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 25, no. 3, pp.
351-370, 2001.
[3] R.D.Blackwell, P.W. Miniard, and J.F. Engel, Consumer Behavior.
Pennsylvania: Harcourt College Publishers, 2001
[4] M.C. Boudreau, and D. Robey, “Enacting integrated information
technology: A human agency perspective,” Organization Science, vol. 16,
no. 1, pp. 3-18, 2005.
[5] R.M. Emerson, “Power-dependence relations,” American Sociological
Review, vol. 27, pp. 31-41, 1962.
[6] S.T. Fiske, and E. Dépret, “Control, interdependence and power:
Understanding social cognition in its social context,” European Review of
Social Psychology, vol. 7, pp. 31-61, 1996.
[7] J. Fulk, “Social construction of communication technology,” Academy of
Management Journal, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 921-950, 1993.
[8] J. Fulk, C. Steinfield, J. Schmitz, and J. Power, “A social information
processing model of media use in organizations,” Communication
Research, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 529-552, 1987.
[9] L.C. Freeman, “Centrality in social networks: Conceptualizations
clarification,” Social Network, vol. 1, pp. 215-239, 1979.
[10] M.A. Hogg, and D.J. Terry, “Social identity and self-categorization
processes in organizational contexts,” Academy of Management Review,
vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 121-140, 2000.
[11] S.J. Hong, and K.Y. Tam, “Understanding the adoption of multipurpose
information appliances: The case of mobile data services,” Information
Systems Research, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 162-179, 2006.
[12] C.H. Hsiao, “Predicting online consumer complaints in Northern
Taiwan,” African Journal of Business Management, vol. 5, no. 13, pp.
5281-5291, 2011.
[13] Y.S. Kang, J. Min, J. Kim, and H. Lee, “Roles of alternative and
self-oriented perspectives in the context of the continued use of social
network sites,” International Journal of Information Management, vol.
33, pp. 496-511, 2013.
[14] A. Kankanhalli, B.C.Y. Tan, and K.K. Wei, “Contributing knowledge to
electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation,” MIS
Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 113-143, 2005.
[15] H.C. Kelman, “Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three
processes of attitude change?” Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 2, no.
1, pp. 51-60, 1958.
[16] G.P. Moschis, “Social comparison and informal group influence,”
Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 237-244, 1976.
[17] M. Pitesa, and S. Thau, “Compliant sinners, obstinate saints: How power
and self-focus determine the effectiveness of social influences in ethical
decision making,” Academy of Management Journal, vol. 56, no. 3, pp.
635-658, 2013.
[18] 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, 2000.
[19] Y. Wang, D.B. Meister, and P.H. Gray, “Social influence and knowledge
management system use: Evidence from panel data,” MIS Quarterly, vol.
37, no. 1, pp. 299-313, 2013.
[20] T. Wasserman, Social media Ad spending to hit $8.3b in 2015, 2011.
[21] S. Wasserman, and K. Faust, Social Network Analysis: Methods and
Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
[22] M. Weick, and A. Guinote, “When subjective experiences matter: Power
increases reliance on the ease of retrieval,” Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, vol. 94, pp. 956-970, 2008.
@article{"International Journal of Business, Human and Social Sciences:69624", author = "Hsiu-Hua Cheng", title = "The Antecedents of Facebook Check in Adoption Intention: The Perspective of Social Influence", abstract = "Recently, the competition between websites becomes
intense. How to make users “adopt” their websites is an issue of urgent
importance for online communities companies. Social procedures
(such as social influence) can possibly explain how and why users’
technologies usage behaviors affect other people to use the
technologies. This study proposes two types of social influences on the
initial usage of Facebook Check In-friends and group members.
Besides, this study combines social influences theory and social
network theory to explore the factors influencing initial usage of
Facebook Check In. This study indicates that Facebook friends’
previous usage of Facebook Check In and Facebook group members’
previous usage of Facebook Check In will positively influence focal
actors’ Facebook Check In adoption intention, and network centrality
will moderate the relationships among Facebook friends’ previous
usage of Facebook Check In, Facebook group members’ previous
usage of Facebook Check In and focal actors’ Facebook Check In
adoption intention. The article concludes with contributions to
academic research and practice.
", keywords = "Social Influence, Adoption Intention, Facebook
Check In, Previous Usage behavior.", volume = "9", number = "5", pages = "1376-4", }
