The role of the technology acceptance model in explaining effects of image interactivity technology on consumer responses

Abstract

Purpose

The impact of web site interactivity on e‐commerce has been emphasized in industry and empirical literature. The purpose of this paper is to focus on image interactivity technology (IIT) of a web site and apply the technology acceptance model (TAM) to examine factors influencing consumers' attitude toward an online retailer.

Design/methodology/approach

Data were collected from 206 respondents using a between‐subject experimental design and were analyzed using LISREL 8.54 to examine a proposed model.

Findings

Results of the present study support the positive effect of web site IIT on attitude and behavioral intention toward the online retailer and show TAM aspects help explain the effects of IIT on consumer responses. All three aspects of TAM, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and perceived enjoyment, significantly enhanced consumer attitude and behavioral intention towards an online retailer. Hedonic shopping orientation had a significant effect on one aspect of TAM (perceived enjoyment) and utilitarian shopping orientation had a significant effect on two TAM aspects (perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use).

Research limitations/implications

Limitations of the present study include sampling, which prevent the generalization of our results to all internet users.

Practical implications

IIT may be a valuable strategy for online retailers; however, these retailers need to develop useful, easy to use, and enjoyable IIT features that appeal to both hedonic and utilitarian shoppers.

Originality/value

The study was the first attempt to examine the role of TAM in explaining the relationship between IIT and resulting consumer responses.

Citation

Lee, H., Fiore, A.M. and Kim, J. (2006), "The role of the technology acceptance model in explaining effects of image interactivity technology on consumer responses", International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 34 No. 8, pp. 621-644. https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550610675949