Mobile computing: a user study on hedonic/ utilitarian mobile device usage

Transcription

1 (2006) 1, & 2006 Operational Research Society Ltd. All rights reserved X/06 $ Mobile computing: a user study on hedonic/ utilitarian mobile device usage Robin L. Wakefield 1 and Dwayne Whitten 2 1 Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University, Waco, TX, U.S.A; 2 Mays School of Business, Information and Operations Management Department, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, U.S.A. Correspondence: Assistant Professor Robin L. Wakefield, Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University, One Bear Place 9800, Waco, TX 76798, USA. Tel: þ ; Robin_wakefield@baylor.edu Abstract Intrinsic motivators of technology beliefs have received scant attention in the technology acceptance literature despite indications of their efficacy. This study uses the framework of TAM to explore the effect of intrinsic variables on technology beliefs and user behavior. Specifically, we examine the effect of cognitive absorption and playfulness on user beliefs including perceived enjoyment and perceived usefulness within the context of mobile devices. Moreover, we manipulate the hedonic and utilitarian purpose of the mobile device to determine how the nature of the device influences user beliefs. Findings indicate that cognitive absorption and user playfulness significantly impact beliefs and that the hedonic or utilitarian orientation of the technology has implications for maximizing use. (2006) 1, doi:10.107/palgrave.ejis Keywords: mobile computing; hedonic; utilitarian; TAM; cognitive absorption; playfulness Received: 11 November 200 Revised: 1 February 2006 Accepted: 20 February 2006 Introduction M-commerce is a natural extension of e-commerce that is enabled by mobile devices. However, the use of mobile devices is hindered by numerous factors including complexity of the devices and interface issues (Islam & Fayad, 200). If users believe that mobile devices are complicated to use, they are less likely to use them. What, then, is the motivation to use mobile technologies when technical issues may sabotage the utility of the devices? What users believe about the purpose of a technology has implications for actual usage and mobile devices demonstrate a diversity of purpose. They serve utilitarian functions and they can also deliver new services to individuals such as entertainment, distance education and music on demand (Varshney & Vetter, 2000). Hence, purpose may drive the use of mobile devices despite technical complexities. For example, cell phone games represent a cultural phenomenon for mass transit riders in Japan with over 2. million subscribers to Sega mobile entertainment services (Becker, 2002). If users perceive mobile devices as purely functional, beliefs about the usefulness or the ease of use of the system may uniquely influence usage behavior in contrast to users that perceive the device as hedonic (e.g. pleasure-oriented). The technology acceptance model (TAM) supports the significance of the beliefs perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) on user behavior. PU is the dominant belief when TAM is applied across utilitarian contexts. However, recent research shows that in a hedonic context different beliefs (i.e. perceived enjoyment; PE) govern user behavior of technology (Van der Heijden, 200). Van der Heijden (200) finds that

2 Mobile computing Robin L. Wakefield and Dwayne Whitten 29 TAM is bounded by the nature of the system being examined (e.g. utilitarian or hedonic) which may overshadow other user beliefs. Prior studies also indicate that intrinsic motivators such as cognitive absorption (i.e. captivation with technology) and playfulness are influential antecedents of technology beliefs (Webster & Martocchio, 1992; Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000). Building upon prior research, we incorporate intrinsic motivators within the traditional TAM framework using both functional and hedonic contexts to explicate antecedents of mobile technology use. We examine how the intrinsic motivators, playfulness and absorption, influence user beliefs. Theoretically, this study enlarges the domain of technology acceptance to include intrinsic motivators and the nature of a technology. In a practical sense, we demonstrate the effect of technology orientation on user beliefs and usage behavior. Theoretical background Based on motivational theory (Deci, 197) in which extrinsic and intrinsic rationale determine user behavior, TAM is the dominant paradigm for technology acceptance research. Since organizations are most concerned with performance outcomes in utilitarian contexts, IS researchers often evaluate information processing models in which PEOU and PU are relatively robust in explaining rational user behavior. These beliefs are motivated by extrinsic factors related to the functionality of the technologies and practical benefits to the user. The belief-intention relationship in TAM is based on the theory of reasoned action (TRA; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). TRA posits that the effect of external variables on behavioral intentions is mediated by cognitive beliefs (e.g. PEOU, PU). PEOU reflects the belief that interacting with technology is relatively free of cognitive effort and PU is the belief that using a technology enhances job performance (Davis, 1989). Substantial research supports the predictive ability of PEOU and PU on intentions to use technology in utilitarian contexts (e.g. Davis, 1989; Mathieson, 1991; Szajna, 1996; Venkatesh, 1999). Due to the predominant work-related nature of TAM research, intrinsic beliefs such as PE (see Davis et al., 1992) receive little attention. PE is a hedonic-oriented factor in which the activity of using technology is enjoyable apart from technology performance or other external user benefits (Davis et al., 1992). As an intrinsic motivator, enjoyment is derived from technology interactions and is internal to the user. Since mobile devices may be used functionally and hedonically, we explore user behavior in both contexts in relation to extrinsic and intrinsic technology beliefs. Hypotheses The hypotheses examine the effect of CA, playfulness and PEOU on the dependent variables PE, PU and intentions within the context of hedonic/utilitarian mobile devices. TAM research supports the robustness of extrinsic beliefs (i.e. PEOU, PU) and the weaker affect of intrinsic beliefs (i.e. PE) regarding functional technology use. Thus, the first hypothesis reflects the supposition that the hedonic/ utilitarian nature of the device has a significant effect on users beliefs and usage intentions. H1: There are significant differences in PE, PU and intentions among users of hedonic and utilitarian mobile devices. The effect of cognitive absorption on user beliefs and intentions The study of absorption in IS research shows the potential for intrinsic variables to advance TAMs (see Venkatesh 1999, 2000; Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000). The psychology literature defines absorption as a phenomenon involving an openness to experience emotional and cognitive alterations across varying situations (Roche & McConkey, 1990). It is also defined as a disposition for episodes of total attentional engagement (Wild et al., 199) and is described as an aesthetic experience, flow, intrinsic motivation, and peak experience (Roche & McConkey, 1990). Agarwal & Karahanna (2000) conceptualize CA by integrating the personality trait of absorption (see Tellegen & Atkinson, 197), the state of flow (see Csikszentmihalyi, 197), and the concept of cognitive engagement (see Webster & Ho, 1997). CA is characterized as an intrinsic motivator in which the outcome is pleasure or enjoyment (Agarwal & Karahanna (2000)). CA also describes a readiness to respond to new stimuli and a willingness to try new activities (McCrae & Costa, 198). Thus, users with high CA may be more willing to engage new technologies because they are attracted to the potential for an experience that is both engulfing and enjoyable. These users may also believe that technology has greater usefulness if it delivers a positive experience. Additionally, the influence of CA on intentions is not fully mediated by beliefs (Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000) implying that as CA increases, usage increases. This leads to the following hypotheses: H2: High/Low CA results in significant differences in PE, PU and intentions among users of mobile devices (main effects). H: There are significant differences in PE, PU and intentions among high CA users of utilitarian mobile devices compared to high CA users of hedonic mobile devices (interaction effects). The effect of playfulness on user beliefs and intentions Microcomputer playfulness is the tendency to interact spontaneously, creatively, and imaginatively with computers (Webster & Martocchio, 1992). Playfulness is positively related to involvement (Csikszentmihalyi, 197), perceptions of pleasure (Webster & Martocchio, 199), and learning (Lieberman, 1977). Positive affect

3 29 Mobile computing Robin L. Wakefield and Dwayne Whitten (i.e. pleasure) characterizes playfulness in the context of technology use. IS researchers describe portions of technology use as an inherent interest that extends into a pleasurable experience (Trevino & Webster, 1992), with enjoyment derived from the activity (Ghani & Deshpande, 199) and greater intentions to use the technology (Venkatesh, 1999). Playfulness is an intrinsic motivator that prompts users to engage technology for internal benefits, namely enjoyment. Consequently, highly playful users are likely to expect more enjoyment and have greater usage intentions. More playful users may also believe that technology has greater usefulness when internal benefits (i.e. pleasure) increase leading to the following hypotheses: H: High/Low playfulness results in significant differences in PE, PU and intentions among users of mobile devices (main effects). H: There are significant differences in PE, PU and intentions among high playfulness users of utilitarian mobile devices compared to high playfulness users of hedonic mobile devices (interaction effects). The effect of ease of use on user beliefs and intentions When users believe that technology interactions are relatively effortless (i.e. high PEOU), it is likely that enjoyment, usefulness and intentions increase as the cognitive burden associated with use is relieved (Davis, 1989). This leads to the following hypotheses: H6: High/Low PEOU results in significant differences in PE, PU and intentions among users of mobile devices (main effects). H7: There are significant differences in PE, PU and intentions among users with high PEOU of utilitarian mobile devices compared to users with high PEOU of hedonic mobile devices (interaction effects). Methodology This research involved two treatment groups and a survey instrument to collect data from undergraduate students at a large southwestern university. The Blackberry PDA was chosen for the procedure because it is a prevalent technology in mobile computing and is relatively novel to the subjects. Thus, users hedonic and utilitarian perceptions toward the device are not well-formed leaving them receptive to the functional/hedonic treatment. The treatment defines the dominant role of the Blackberry PDA and the data captures a priori perceptions of PU, PEOU, PE, CA and intentions. A total of 18 subjects participated for extra class credit. The questionnaire was distributed and completed in two parts. The first section gathered demographic and experience data. The researchers then projected a picture of the Blackberry PDA on a large screen so all subjects could view the technology in multiple dimensions. A picture of the Blackberry PDA with functional or hedonic specifications and uses was randomly distributed to each participant. The second part of the questionnaire gathered perceptions of PU, PEOU, PE, CA and intentions. The use of descriptive scenarios for experimental treatments is a common research method in information processing studies (e.g. Baker et al., 2002; Aggarwal & Law, 200; Barone et al., 200). Respondents included 108 (8%) male and 77 (2%) female participants with an average age of 19.. On a 7- point scale measuring frequency of use, the subjects indicated a high level of PC use (x ¼ 6., SD ¼ 1.2) and a low level of PDA use (x ¼ 2.1, SD ¼ 1.7). Measures All variables were measured using multiple items on 7- point scales (see Appendix A). The scale assessing user playfulness is derived from (Webster & Martocchio, 1992). Play 1 was removed from the analysis due to a low factor loading. The absorption scale consists of 1 items originating from Agarwal & Karahanna s (2000) 20-item scale. The original CA scale is multi-dimensional incorporating control, curiosity, focused immersion, temporal dissociation and heightened enjoyment. Four items measuring heightened enjoyment were treated as a separate construct for several reasons. First, the dimensions of control, curiosity, immersion and dissociation represent cognitive functions. In contrast, enjoyment is an affective construct. Second, cognitive theory holds that affective and cognitive components of attitude have distinct relationships with behavior and that cognitive functions generally precede affective responses (see Schacter & Singer, 1962; Breckler, 198; Miller & Tesser, 1986). Third, Davis et al. (1992) identify PE as a distinct user belief variable with important implications as an intrinsic motivator in technology acceptance and use. Finally, combining enjoyment in the CA scale masks the variance unique to this affective construct as well as the relationships between enjoyment and extrinsic beliefs (i.e. PEOU, PU). Two original scale items (CA 8 and CA 1) were removed from the analysis due to low factor loadings. The scales for PEOU and PU originate from Davis (1989) and the behavioral intention scale was developed from the work of Ajzen & Fishbein (1980). Analysis and results The descriptive statistics of the constructs are shown in Table 1 and the correlation matrix in Table 2. Appendix A includes individual item factor loadings. With the exception of Play 1, CA 8 and CA 1, which were removed from the analysis, the loadings indicate a strong correspondence between the observed variables and their factors with all loadings above the 0.0 minimum (Hair et al., 1998).

4 Mobile computing Robin L. Wakefield and Dwayne Whitten 29 Table 1 Descriptive statistics and scale reliability Constructs Mean Standard deviation Composite reliability AVE Cognitive absorption Playfulness Perceived ease of use Perceived usefulness Enjoyment Intentions Table 2 Correlation matrix PU Enjoyment PEOU Intent CA Playful PU Enjoyment PEOU Intent CA Playful The unidimensionality and convergent validity of the constructs were evaluated using the estimates of composite reliability and average variance extracted (AVE) (Table 2). Composite reliability represents the extent to which each construct is represented by the items. The AVE represents the amount of construct-related variance captured in relation to error variance. Recommended minimum levels are 0.7 for composite reliability and 0. for AVE (Hair et al., 1998). Each construct exceeds the recommended minimums, supporting the scale items as representative of each construct. A manipulation check tests for significant differences between the hedonic and utilitarian PDA contexts. Respondents indicated on a 7-point scale the purpose of the Blackberry PDA using semantic differentials including: practical-fun, functional-enjoyment, work-pleasure. T-test analysis showed significant differences in responses between the two groups (t ¼.6; Po0.001). A two-step MANOVA process of analysis tests for the main effects of the independent variables on the dependent variables PE, PU and intentions. We report the multivariate results followed by specific interaction effects of the independent variables on the dependent variables in Table. Post hoc univariate F tests show significant differences among group means (Table ). MANOVA results H1 states the hypothesis of significant differences in PE, PU and intentions between users of hedonic and utilitarian mobile devices. H1 is partially supported in that users of utilitarian mobile devices indicate significantly greater PU compared to users of hedonic mobile devices. This result is not unexpected given the workrelated nature of the PU measures. However, the orientation of the mobile device does not significantly influence PE or intentions. For ease of comparison in examining H2 H7, the independent variables were categorized into high/low groups via a median split. 1 In so doing, we analyze whether users with greater CA, playfulness and PEOU differ from users with lower CA, playfulness and PEOU. The interaction effects of playfulness and CA for both functional and hedonic mobile devices are also evaluated. Cognitive absorption Results support H2 stating significant main effects for PE, PU and intentions among users with high/low CA. When CA is high, users indicate significantly greater enjoyment, usefulness, and usage intentions compared to users with low CA (Table ). The interaction proposed in H is also supported. Significant differences are indicated among users of utilitarian versus hedonic devices in terms of high/low CA. Compared to those using hedonic devices, users with high CA using functional devices indicate greater usefulness and usage intentions (Table ). In contrast, users with high CA using mobile devices hedonically indicate the greatest enjoyment. It appears that CA is an important intrinsic motivator of enjoyment in the hedonic use of mobile devices, but has less impact on prolonged use. Figures 1a c depict these interactions. Playfulness H is supported driven by the significant main effects of PE, PU and intentions among users with high/low playfulness. Users with high playfulness indicate significantly greater enjoyment, usefulness and usage intentions. In comparing hedonic and functional mobile devices, the interactions hypothesized in H are also supported. Users with higher playfulness also have greater usage intentions and enjoyment with hedonic mobile devices (Table ). However, functional devices maintain the greatest usefulness for highly playful users. Ease of use Partial support is found for H6 due to the significant main effects associated with PE and intentions, with no significant effect for PU. Users with high PEOU indicate significantly greater enjoyment and usage intentions compared to users with low PEOU regardless of the purpose of the device. Thus, user-friendly devices are more likely to increase positive affect that motivates usage. However, users with high PEOU do not indicate different perceptions of PE, PU and intentions using functional or hedonic devices. H7 is not supported. 1 The independent variables can also be modeled as continuous data with identical results.

5 296 Mobile computing Robin L. Wakefield and Dwayne Whitten Table Manova results Dependent variables df Wilkes L F Sig. H1: /functional Main effects, Between-subjects Enjoyment Intentions Usefulness H2: High/low CA Main effects, Between-subjects Enjoyment Intentions Usefulness H: Version* high/low CA Interaction effects, Between-subjects Enjoyment Intentions Usefulness H: High/low playful Main effects, Between-subjects Enjoyment Intentions Usefulness H: Version*high/low playful Interaction effects, Between-subjects Enjoyment Intentions Usefulness H6: High/low ease of use Main effects, Between-subjects Enjoyment Intentions Usefulness H7: Version*high/low ease of use Interaction effects, Between-subjects Enjoyment Intentions Usefulness Table /hedonic means according to low/high CA and playfulness Low CA High CA Low playfulness High playfulness Enjoyment Intentions Usefulness

6 Mobile computing Robin L. Wakefield and Dwayne Whitten 297 a a... Intentions. Intentions. 2. Low CA High CA 2 Low Play High Play b 6 b 6.. Enjoyment. Enjoyment... Low CA High CA Low Play High Play c. c. Usefulness.. Usefulness. Low CA High CA Figure 1 Low/high cognitive absorption among users of functional/hedonic mobile devices. Low Play High Play Figure 2 Low/high playfulness among users of functional/ hedonic mobile devices. Discussion Cognitive absorption The results indicate that as users are more absorbed with the device, they will enjoy using the device more and intend to use it more. Interestingly, the interaction effect shows that those who are more immersed in the use of functional devices perceive greater usefulness, but this effect does not hold for hedonic devices (see Figure 1c). This implies that when people are having fun (i.e. are absorbed) with a mobile device, usefulness is not an important criteria. However, in utilitarian contexts absorption with the device is likely to motivate stronger beliefs about the usefulness of the device and prolonged use. Playfulness When individuals perceive that interaction with the mobile device is more playful, we find that subjects generally believe the device is more useful and enjoyable and subjects intend to use it more frequently (compared to those who do not perceive the interaction as playful). Importantly, enjoyment and intentions are highest when the user believes the device is for hedonic use and perceives the experience to be more playful. With respect to intentions to use, the worst-case scenario is when users evaluate a mobile device in a hedonic context, but do not find it very playful. In contrast, intentions to use the device and enjoyment are maximized when the device is positioned for hedonic use and the interaction is playful (see Figures 2a and b). In sum, CA and playfulness are important antecedents of user beliefs (i.e. PE, PU) and intentions to use mobile devices. Prior studies find that enjoyment is the weakest belief in predicting technology acceptance in workrelated settings (Taylor & Todd, 199; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). However, for Internet-related use PE is a strong

7 298 Mobile computing Robin L. Wakefield and Dwayne Whitten predictor (Van der Heijden, 200). We find that for mobile technologies, PE is an intrinsic belief that is likely to maximize use of the device for users that expect immersing and playful interactions with the device. This suggests that unique features or components that increase CA or playfulness will generate positive feelings that motivate usage behavior. Furthermore, the marketing or positioning of a mobile device may have implications for its frequency of use. For example, promoting a device as purely utilitarian is likely to hinder use of the device for users that are more playful toward technology; whereas positioning the device as fun and enjoyable to use may maximize use. The generation of positive affect may be crucial to optimize the acceptance and use of predominantly functional mobile devices. Limitations and conclusion Like all research, the finding should be evaluated in light of the limitations. First, the use of a student sample and the Blackberry PDA present constraints in that the findings may not be reproducible with other populations or with other mobile devices. However, the study as performed investigates belief variables supported in prior IS research and antecedents (i.e. CA, playfulness) that are individualistic rather than group-based. Furthermore, the approach we used is common to other researchers examining similar cognitive and affective phenomenon. In that sense, the experimental approach possesses the same strengths (viz., control) and limitations (viz., generalizability) common to lab experiments. Further research is necessary to determine differences (e.g. gender, age, technology) that may bias the results of this study. Despite the practical limitations, this study shows the complex nature of belief and attitude formation and that technology acceptance is a broad concept that transcends utilitarian models. Evaluating technology interactions requires a framework encompassing the whole nature of users as intrinsic variables influence both user beliefs and behaviors. Moreover, the results corroborate the findings of Van der Heijden (200) that technology purpose is integral to technology beliefs. Continued research in this area will enrich TAMs and optimize the success of m- commerce. About the authors Robin L. Wakefield is an Assistant Professor of Management Information Systems in the Hankamer School of Business at Baylor University. Her research appears in several information systems journals including Information & Management, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Journal of Organizational and End User Computing and Journal of Computer Information Systems. Her main research interests include virtual teams, trust, and human computer interactions involving social cognition and affect. Dwayne Whitten is an Assistant Clinical Professor of Information Systems in the Mays School of Business at Texas A&M University. His main research interests include IT outsourcing, IT governance, switching costs, and technology acceptance. He has published in several business and information systems related journals including the Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Communications of the AIS, Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, Journal of Computer Information Systems, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Journal of International Technology and Information Management, International Journal of Mobile Communications, International Journal of Electronic Healthcare, and International Journal of Human Resources Management. References AGARWAL R and KARAHANNA E (2000) Time flies when you re having fun: cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly 2(), AGGARWAL P and LAW S (200) Role of relationship norms in processing brand information. Journal of Consumer Research 2(), 6. AJZEN I and FISHBEIN M (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. BAKER J, PARASURAMAN A, GREWAL D and VOSS G (2002) The influence of multiple store environment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions. Journal of Marketing 66(2), BARONE MJ, TAYLOR VA and URBANY JE (200) Advertising signaling effects for new brands: the moderating role of perceived brand difference. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 1(1), 1 1. BECKER D (2002) Sega forms mobile games division. News.com April 17. BRECKLER S (198) Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 7, CSIKSZENTMIHALYI M (197) Beyond Boredom and Anxiety: the Experience of Play in Work and Games. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. DAVIS FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 1(), DAVIS FD, BAGOZZI RP and WARSHAW PR (1992) Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 22(1), DECI EL (197) Intrinsic Motivation. Plenum Press, New York. GHANI JA and DESHPANDE SP (199) Task characteristics and the experience of optimal flow in human-computer interaction. Journal of Psychology 128(), HAIR JF, ANDERSON RE, TATHAM RL and BLACK WC (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. ISLAM N and FAYAD M (200) Towards ubiquitous acceptance of ubiquitous computing. Communications of the ACM 6(2), LIEBERMAN JN (1977) Playfulness. Academic Press, New York, NY. MATHIESON K (1991) Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research 2(),

8 Mobile computing Robin L. Wakefield and Dwayne Whitten 299 MCCRAE RR and COSTA Jr. PT (198) Joint factors in self-reports and ratings: neuroticism, extraversion and openness to experience. Personality and Individual Differences (), 2 2. MILLER MandTESSER A (1986) Effects of affect and cognitive focus on the attitude/behavior relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1, ROCHE SM and MCCONKEY KM (1990) Absorption: nature, assessment, and correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 9(1), SCHACTER S and SINGER J (1962) Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of emotional states. Psychological Review 6, SZAJNA B (1996) Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science 2(1), TAYLOR SandTODD PA (199) Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Information Systems Research 6(2), TELLEGEN A and ATKINSON G (197) Openness to absorbing and selfaltering experiences, a trait related to hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 8, TREVINO LK and WEBSTER J (1992) Flow in computer-mediated communication: electronic mail and voice mail evaluation and impacts. Communication Research 19(), 9 7. VAN DER HEIJDEN H (200) User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quarterly 28(), VARSHNEY U and VETTER R (2000) Emerging mobile and wireless networks. Communications of the ACM (6), VENKATESH V (1999) Creation of favorable user perceptions: exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly 2(2), VENKATESH V (2000) Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research 11(), 2 6. VENKATESH V and DAVIS FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal case studies. Management Science 6(2), WEBSTER J and HO H (1997) Audience engagement in multi-media presentations. Data Base for the Advances in Information Systems 28(2), WEBSTER J and MARTOCCHIO JJ (1992) Microcomputer playfulness: development of a measure with workplace implications. MIS Quarterly 16(2), WEBSTER J and MARTOCCHIO JJ (199) Turning work into play: implications for microcomputer software training. Journal of Management 19(1), WILD TC, KUIKEN D and SCHOPFLOCHER D (199) The role of absorption in experiential involvement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69(), Appendix A Scale Items (see Table A1). Table A1 Playfulness Factor loadings 1 7 Scale; InaccurateyVery Accurate Play Spontaneous Play Imaginative Play 0.67 Flexible Play 0.89 Creative Play 0.7 Playful Play Original Play Inventive Cognitive absorption: dimension 1 7 Scale, Strongly DisagreeyStrongly Agree CA 1: dissociation Time would appear to go by very quickly when I am using a Blackberry. CA Sometimes I would lose track of time when I am using a Blackberry. CA I would spend more time using a Blackberry than I had intended. CA Most times that I use a Blackberry, I would end up spending more time than I planned. CA 0.8 Time would fly when I used a Blackberry. CA 6: immersion 0.79 While using a Blackberry, I would be able to block out most other distractions. CA While using a Blackberry, I would be absorbed in what I am doing. CA While using a Blackberry, I would get distracted by other things very easily. CA While using a Blackberry, my attention would not get diverted very easily. CA While using a Blackberry, I would be immersed in the task I am performing. CA 11: curiosity 0.71 Using a Blackberry would arouse my imagination. CA Interacting with a Blackberry would make me curious. CA Using a Blackberry would excite my curiosity. CA 1: control 0.6 When using a Blackberry I would feel in control. CA I would feel that I have no control over my interaction with a Blackberry. (r) CA A Blackberry would allow me to control my interaction with the technology. Enjoyment 1 7 Scale; Strongly DisagreeyStrongly Agree Enjoyment I would have fun interacting with a Blackberry. Enjoyment Using a Blackberry would provide me with a lot of enjoyment. Enjoyment 0.97 I would enjoy using a Blackberry. Enjoyment Using a Blackberry would bore me. (r) Perceived Usefulness 1 7 Scale; Strongly DisagreeyStrongly Agree

9 00 Mobile computing Robin L. Wakefield and Dwayne Whitten Table A1 Continued Playfulness Factor loadings 1 7 Scale; InaccurateyVery Accurate PU Using a Blackberry would enable me to accomplish tasks more quickly. PU Using a Blackberry would improve my job performance. PU 0.96 Using a Blackberry in my job would increase my productivity. PU Using a Blackberry would enhance my effectiveness on the job. PU 0.91 Using a Blackberry would make it easier for me to do my job. PU I would find a Blackberry useful in my job. Ease of Use 1 7 Scale; Strongly DisagreeyStrongly Agree PEOU Learning to operate a Blackberry would be easy for me. PEOU I would find it easy to get a Blackberry to do what I want it to do. PEOU My interaction with a Blackberry would be clear and understandable. PEOU I would find a Blackberry to be flexible to interact with. PEOU I would find a Blackberry easy to use. PEOU It would be easy for me to become skillful at using a Blackberry. Intentions 1 7 Scale; Strongly DisagreeyStrongly Agree Int It is very likely that I would use the Blackberry. Int I will use the Blackberry the next time I need a PDA. Int 0.88 I will definitely try a Blackberry