pu, peu

A study on determinant factors to purchase for tablet PC and smartphone by a comparative analysis

Kiwon Lee, Euiho Suh, Jihye Park

Pohang University of Science and Technology [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract

Recently, tablet personal computers (PCs) have become popular because of their good portability and performance in the mobile PC market. Smartphones have also rapidly emerged as popular digital multi-devices. The market for these devices is growing. Tablet PCs and smartphones have similar features but different buyers. To show how they can have different markets while having similar characteristics, it is necessary to find the differentiating factors from the perspective of IT producers. Initially, this study offers definitions of the tablet PC and the smartphone to distinguish these two smart devices. Subsequently, this study analyzes the determinant factors influencing the purchase of tablet PCs and smartphones and conducts an empirical comparative analysis of those factors. The study uses the expanded Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to conduct the comparative analysis on the equivalent purchase factors. Current and potential users of tablet PCs and smartphones were surveyed online for this study. Keywords: Tablet PC, Smartphones, TAM, Determinant factors to purchase, SEM 1. Introduction

Today, tablet personal computers (PCs) and smartphones are among IT products that are taking center stage. Their markets are growing dramatically. According to the 2011 report by Berg Insight1), the firm estimated that global smartphone shipments increased 74% from 2009 to 2010, underscoring the rapid growth of the smartphone market. Only three years after the iPhone was launched, the smartphone market is bigger than the PC market. IDC (International Data Corporation)2), a market research company, reported that 101 million smartphones were sold in the fourth quarter of 2011 versus only 92

1) Epstein, Z., "Berg: Smartphone shipments grew 74% in 2010".

Boy Genius Report(2011). Retrieved 2012-06-16 2) Blodget, H., “IT’S OFFICIAL: The smartphone market is now

bigger than the PC market”, Business insider(2011). Retrieved 2012-06-16

million PCs. Additionally, a recent survey showed that the size of smartphones being sold has become increasingly bigger. According to a Nielsen report3) in 2012, approximately 50% of the US mobile phone owners have smartphones. At current growth rates, smartphones could account for 70% of all US mobile devices by the next year. Smartphones have already changed many aspects of personal and social life (Sohn, 2010).

According to the 2011 report by NPD DisplaySearch4), tablet PC shipments, estimated at approximately 73 million units, and represented over 25% of all mobile PC shipments in 2011. In their 2012 report, IDC5) stated that worldwide tablet PC shipments rose by 56.1% on a continual basis in the fourth quarter of 2011, to reach 28.2 million units worldwide. Moreover, tablet PC shipments are expected to reach approximately 50% of all mobile PCs shipments in 2017. This implies that strong demand for tablets may be a growth accelerant in the overall mobile PC market in the short term. At the same time, the expanding market for tablets has altered the demand for desktop PCs by, for example, taking over the role of technology hub for various connected devices in a digital home.

Tablet PCs and smartphones have similar characteristics; they are portable devices with touch screen displays, run computer operating systems, easily interconnect with applications, and offer multiple wireless connectivity options, such as Wi-Fi, 3G, and LTE. Some specialize in entertainment activities, such as web surfing, watching videos, and playing games. Others specialize in work tools, such as document editing and presentation creation. Nevertheless, tablet PCs and smartphones have different markets. IT manufacturers, such as Google, Samsung, and Apple, are in intense competition in the smart device market segment. To create a competitive edge, these producers are establishing

3) Hardawar, D., "The magic moment: Smartphones now half of

all U.S. mobiles", venturebeat.com(2012). Retrieved 2012-06-13

4) Himuro, H. and R. Shim, “Quarterly Mobile PC Shipment and Forecast Report”, NPD DisplaySearch(2011)

5) IDC, “Media Tablet Shipments Outpace Fourth Quarter Targets; Strong Demand for New iPad and Other Forthcoming Products Leads to Increase in 2012 Forecast, According to IDC”, IDC(2012). Retrieved 2012-06-16

2012 한국경영과학회 추계학술대회/ 2012 방위사업청 무기체계 시험평가 세미나 논문집

233

marketing and development strategies for smart devices.

Only a few studies have conducted a comparative analysis of purchase factors for smartphones and tablet PCs. Therefore, this study empirically analyzes the determinants that influence the purchase of smart devices from the customer’s perspective. To do this effectively, this study starts by defining tablet PCs and smartphones. Subsequently, we use the expanded Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to conduct a comparative analysis of equivalent factors influencing the purchase of tablet PCs and smartphones to find the key determinants. For this research, users and potential users of tablet PCs and smartphones have been surveyed online. This study also aims to show a possible differentiation strategy through the analysis of these determinant factors.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 defines tablet PCs and smartphones, reviews previous researches on them and TAM to analyze the relationship among determinant factors for purchase of them. Section 3 suggests a research framework including variables and structure, and also explains instrument development and analyzes a research model. Section 4 shows the validity of the research model and hypotheses testing as the result of this study. Section 5 discusses the results of this study, and Section 5 concludes this paper. 2. Literature Review 2.1 Definitions of smartphones and tablet PCs

Establishing definitions for tablet PCs and smartphones is crucial for analyzing their determinant purchase factors and for a clear competitive analysis. This study begins by establishing definitions and focusing on the differences between tablet PCs and smartphones.

The smartphone market has been rapidly expanding since Steve Jobs launched the iPhone in 2007. After that, several types of smartphones have been made to satisfy customer demand. Some researchers became interested in the issue of smartphones and their definition in the marketplace. Kong (2010) refers to smartphones as portable PCs that can freely remove and add applications based on general PC operating systems. Chen et al. (2009) mentions that smart phones are equipped with features that were originally found solely in Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs). Furthermore, Zheng et al. (2006) suggests that a smart phone is a next generation, multifunctional cell phone that provides voice communication and text messaging capabilities, and facilitates data processing and enhanced wireless connectivity (even though we still lack a clear distinction between a cell phone and a smartphone).

In this study, a smartphone is defined as a mobile computing phone with a touch screen interface and a diagonal dimension that is seven inches or less.

There are many terms for tablet computers, including smart pads, smart books, and media tablets. These terms have been used in various materials. A number of researchers have been reviewing the concept of the tablet, reflecting the growing importance of the device in the marketplace. Mock (2004) defines a tablet PCs as a traditional notebook computer with the added ability to process digital ink when writing with a stylus. Jung (2011) defines a tablet PC as a mobile computer, larger than a mobile phone or PDA, integrated with a flat screen and primarily operated by touching the screen rather than a physical keyboard. It may offer users an on screen virtual keyboard, a passive stylus pen, or a digital pen. Kim (2011) refers to a tablet PC as the device that can be differentiated from the Smartphone or Smart TV in terms of user experience (UX), because it has both a strong information search experience using a larger screen size than the screen of smartphone, and a better mobile TV experience than Smart TV. Sim (2011) offers a definition of a tablet PC as a complex device that has the functionality of a MP3 player, a PMP, a netbook, and a smart phone with a touch screen interface for writing with a stylus. In Gartner’s IT glossary, the definition of a media tablet is a device with a touchscreen display (typically with a multi-touch interface) whose primary purpose is the consumption of media. Examples of media include web pages, music, videos, and games. The device can also facilitate content entry through an on-screen keyboard or a supplementary external device such as a keyboard or pen. Future iterations may also incorporate gesture and voice controls. In this study, a tablet PC is a wireless and portable personal computer with a touch screen interface and a diagonal dimension of over seven inches.

2.2 Smartphones and Tablet PCs

A number of researchers have been reviewing the smartphones variously, reflecting the growing importance of the device in the marketplace around the world. Especially, since a compulsory installation of Wireless Internet Platform for Interoperability (WIPI) in mobile phones was abolished from the 1st April 2009, a smartphone market has been growing rapidly in Korea. Active and vibrant researches field of smartphones have been launched from 2010. The field of smartphones classify by three subjects: a study on utilizing service and appliance by smartphones (Chang et al., 2009; Lee, 2010), a study on various market linked with smartphones (Barnes, 2002; Kong, 2010;, Han 2010), and an empirical study on determinants for accepting an application and appliance of smartphones. (Chen et al., 2009; Kwon, 2010; Hwang et al., 2010). Above all, the


234

third subject is related with our topic. Therefore, it is necessary to inspect closely previous researches.

Chen et al. (2009) studied the acceptance and diffusion of the innovative smart phone use based on TAM. They found variables which have a positive effect on attitude: self-efficacy, ease of use, usefulness, compatibility, observable, testability, task, individual, organization, and environment. However, the result of this study doesn’t connect Korea cases directly. Kwon (2010) researched an empirical study on potential smartphone users. He used the method linked between TAM and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). He results that personal innovativeness has a positive effect on a behavioral intention. The shortage of this research is that the result cannot be generalized because he chose only potential smartphone users. They cannot reflect intent of current smartphone users. Hwang et al. (2010) studied of knowing the intention to adopt smartphone by extending TAM. At that time, domestic smartphone market was initial stage. Therefore, the number of smartphone users is a little more than one year. Currently, almost of smartphone users have been using the smartphone more than two years. It means that the market is changed. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the changed situation of smartphone market. To sum up, we can know that TAM is the most used method for determinants for accepting an application and appliance of smartphones. The authors tend to consider similar but different attributes like social influence and environment. Therefore, this study makes an attempt to homogenize the definition and term of attributes to reflect our topic well. It is necessary to study on determinants for purchasing smartphones because of the change of smartphone market.

Although there are many literatures on analyzing purchase factor of smartphones, literatures on tablet PCs are focused on the design usability and utilization of tablet PCs. In terms of tablet PCs utilization, it is mainly emphasized on the education field. Kim(2011) analyzed the user experience design base on the types of usage of tablet PCs, and No and Wei (2011) develop a design to improve usability of tablet PC electronic magazine navigation. Alvarez et al.(2011) conducted comparative analysis to explore potential of netbooks and tablet PC in the classroom and determine which of the two device types is more suitable. Park et al.(2011) analyzed e-learning market by emerging of tablet PCs and suggested development direction of its potential market in terms of humanities, science and design contents. Siozos et al.(2009) identified key challenges faced by computer-based assessment in secondary education by using tablet PCs. However in the situation of increasing of tablet PC market, there are rarely previous researches on the attractive factors to

purchase tablet PCs cope with customer’s needs. There are some literatures having relationship with tablet PCs’ purchase. Sim(2011) defined factors which can be occurred in emerging devices and found out factors making differentiated by comparing the structural equation model of the Tablet PC and the e-Book Reader based on the TAM model. He set external factors to have an effect on usefulness and ease of use into four: playfulness, functionality, cost level, and complexity. The shortage of this research is that it couldn’t distinguish the difference between smartphones and tablet PCs even they have similar functions and properties.

2.3 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)

Davis (1989) established the TAM as a methodology for predicting and explaining technology use. This methodology is based on the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), which verifies the interrelationship of belief, attitude, intention, and behavior.

Perceived usefulness is the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job performance. It significantly correlates with both self-reported current usage and self-predicted future usage (Davis, 1989). Perceived ease of use is the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be free of effort (the word “ease” means freedom from difficulty or great effort). Perceived ease of use is significantly correlated with current usage and future usage (Davis, 1989). Behavioral intention to use is the degree of positive or negative feelings that people hold about performing specific activities, and how sure they are regarding the result of those activities. In other words, the more favorable the attitude of a person is toward the activities of the system, the more his/her behavioral intention to perform those activities increases (Ajzen et al., 1980; Davis, 1986).

As smart devices have evolved, many researchers have applied and expanded TAMs in the field. This research attempts to understand the relationship between behavioral intentions to use and factors having an influence on Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use based on the different characteristics of smart devices. 3. Research model and hypotheses

This study puts forth a research model with additional external variables. These external variables comprise social influence, playfulness, functionality, and complexity. The suggested research model is shown in [Figure 1].

Social influence is the degree to which a person’s marginal group believes that he/she should use a tablet PC or smartphone. The motives for buying and consuming products are influenced by


235

how customers view themselves or wish to be viewed by others (Kim, 2011). Earlier studies have included external social relationship variables or parameters such as social standard, subjective standard and social links in their research models (e.g., Kang, 2009; Chau & Hu, 2001)

[Figure 1] Research model

Playfulness is the degree to which a person feels

intrinsic enjoyment, interest, fun, or curiosity, generated from engaging in absorbing interactions with the tablet PC or smartphone (Moon et al., 2001). Attitudinal outcomes include the pleasure and satisfaction that result from a playful experience (Sandelands et al., 1983). The consumption of goods and services is frequently associated with emotional response, contributing to an enhanced emotional value for the consumer (Kim, 2011).

Complexity is the degree to which a person

easily understands the characteristics of the tablet PC or smartphone and their functions. Complexity was measured by the complexity of the device structure, method of use of the digital devices, and method of function (Sim, 2011)

Perceived usefulness is the degree to which a person believes that using a tablet PC or smartphone would enhance his or her job performance. People are generally reinforced for good performance by raises, promotions, bonuses, and other rewards (Pfeffer, 1982; Vroom, 1964). Therefore, a system with high-perceived usefulness is one where a user believes in the existence of a positive use/performance relationship (Davis, 1989).

Perceived ease of use is the degree to which a person believes that using a tablet PC or smartphone would be free of effort. Effort is a finite resource that people may allocate to various activities that they are responsible for (Radner et al., 1975). When an application is perceived to be easier to use than another one, it is more likely to be accepted by users (Davis, 1989).

Intention to purchase a digital device is a significant determinant of a tablet PC or smartphone purchase. Ultimately, all of the variables influence the intention to purchase. Based on the earlier

research, this study sets up the following hypotheses, and measurements of the research model are shown in <Table 1>.

<Table 1> Measurements of the research model

Construct Indicator Measures

Social influence

(SI)

SI1 My social circle supports my decision to use tablet PCs/smartphones.

SI2 Those around me think that using a tablet PC/smartphone is helpful.

SI3 Those around me have a positive attitude about using tablet

Playfulness(PL)

PL1 Using tablet PCs/smartphones stirs my curiosity.

PL2 Using tablet PCs/smartphones makes me happy.

Functionality(FU)

FU1 Tablet PCs/smartphones have an acceptable standard of quality.

FU2 The download performance of tablet PCs/smartphones is excellent.

FU3 The error frequency of tablet PCs/smartphones is low.

Complexity(CP)

CP1 It is easy to use tablet PCs/smartphones.

CP2 The functionality of tablet PCs/smartphones is easy to understand.

Perceived usefulness

(PU)

PU1 Using tablet PCs/smartphones improves performance.

PU2 Using tablet PCs/smartphones reduces the time taken to complete work.

PU3 Using tablet PCs/smartphones minimize work effort.

Perceived ease of use (PE)

PE1 I feel it is easy to use tablet PCs/smartphones.

PE2 I get the result I expect when using tablet PCs/smartphones.

PE3 I can efficiently use tablet PCs/smartphones.

Intention to purchase

(PI)

PI1 I intend to purchase a tablet PC/smartphone.

PI2 If I buy a tablet PC/smartphone, there is a high probability that I will use it

PI3 There is a high probability that I will purchase a tablet PC/smartphone.

H1. Social influence has a positive effect on

perceived usefulness. H2. Playfulness has a positive effect on perceived

ease of use. H3. Functionality has a positive effect on perceived

usefulness. H4. Functionality has a positive effect on perceived

ease of use. H5. Complexity has a positive effect on perceived

ease of use. H6. Perceived ease of use has a positive effect on

perceived usefulness.


236

H7. Perceived usefulness has a positive effect on the intention to purchase tablet PCs or smartphones.

H8. Perceived ease of use has a positive effect on the intention to purchase tablet PCs or smartphones

4. Results <Table 2> Demographic attributes of the respondents

Category Item Frequency Percentage

Gender Male 60 62.5%

Female 36 38.5%

Age

Under 19 1 1.0%

20~29 86 89.6%

30~39 8 8.3%

Over 40 1 1.0%

Smartphone Experience

No exp. or less than 1 month

3 3.1%

1 month ~ 1 year 14 14.6%

1 year ~ 2 years 52 54.2%

Over 2 years 27 28.1%

Tablet PC Experience

No exp. or less than 1 month

73 76.0%

1 month ~ 1 year 14 14.6%

1 year ~ 2 years 6 6.3%

Over 2 years 3 3.1%

Total 96 100%

<Table 3> Convergent validity of smartphone model

Construct Indicator Standardized

estimate AVE

Construct reliability

Social influence

SI1 0.802

0.675 0.862 SI2 0.869

SI3 0.836

Playfulness PL1 0.939

0.653 0.788 PL2 0.755

Functionality

FU1 0.826

0.504 0.752 FU2 0.830

FU3 0.766

Complexity CP1 0.924

0.779 0.876 CP2 0.917

Perceived

Usefulness

PU1 0.840

0.630 0.836 PU2 0.870

PU3 0.775

Perceived Ease

of Use

PE1 0.743

0.560 0.791 PE2 0.884

PE3 0.708

Intention to

Purchase

PI1 0.915

0.782 0.915 PI2 0.827

PI3 0.900

<Table 4> Discriminant validity Smartphones SI PL FU CP PU PE PI AVE

SI 1 .675

PL .35 1 .653

FU .19 .09 1 .504

CP .42 .21 .46 1 .779

PU .29 .44 .41 .26 1 .630

PE .59 .38 .34 .55 .43 1 .560

PI .46 .50 .19 .35 .38 .56 1 .782

<Table 5> Convergent validity of tablet PC model

Construct IndicatorStandardized

estimate AVE

Construct reliability

Social influence

SI1 0.767

0.554 0.788 SI2 0.910

SI3 0.774

PlayfulnessPL1 0.838

0.638 0.778 PL2 0.967

Functionality

FU1 0.760

0.468 0.725 FU2 0.777

FU3 0.783

ComplexityCP1 0.930

0.720 0.837 CP2 0.870

Perceived

Usefulness

PU1 0.820

0.585 0.807 PU2 0.865

PU3 0.661

Perceived Ease

of Use

PE1 0.798

0.584 0.808 PE2 0.827

PE3 0.855

Intention to

Purchase

PI1 0.901

0.717 0.884 PI2 0.916

PI3 0.915

<Table 6> Discriminant validity of tablet PC model

SI PL FU CP PU PE PI AVE

SI 1 .554

PL .56 1 .638

FU .36 .34 1 .468

CP .23 .42 .69 1 .720

PU .47 .40 .51 .35 1 .585

PE .59 .64 .43 .37 .53 1 .584

PI .49 .70 .43 .54 .49 .72 1 .717


237

For this study, online-based survey had been conducted and the results were analyzed via AMOS 16 application, Structural Equation Modeling statistical software package. Existing validated scales were used wherever possible and then adapted to reflect the context of this study. All items were measured on a seven-point Likert scale where 1 is strong disagreement and 7 is strong agreement, comprising 38 questions shown in <Table 1>. Separate survey instruments were developed for the smartphone and tablet; however, subjects completed the surveys simultaneously. The survey was conducted over a period of two weeks. <Table 2> shows the demographic attributes of the respondents. The percentage of male respondents was larger than female, and major responds were concentrated on the 20s. The majority of respondents had an experience using smart phone, but less than 1 month using tablet PC.

<Table 7> Result of hypothesis tests of smartphones

Path Standardized

coefficient S.E C.R p-value

SI PU 0.088 0.120 0.768 0.442

PL PE 0.374 0.107 3.198 0.001

FU PU 0.288 0.102 2.420 0.016

FU PE 0.096 0.090 0.858 0.391

CP PE 0.417 0.094 3.401 <0.001

PE PU 0.288 0.135 2.271 0.023

PU PI 0.170 0.118 1.544 0.123

PE PI 0.504 0.142 4.036 <0.001

χ2

=201.362, df=138, p=0.000, χ2

/df=1.459

RMSEA=0.070, RMR=0.122, GFI=0.835, AFGI=0.773, NFI=0.837,

CFI=0.941

[Figure 2] Influence factors in smartphone model

The result of confirmatory factor analysis of the research model is illustrated from <Table 3> to <Table 6>. Convergent validity and discriminant validity of both smart phone and tablet PC research model have satisfied to the suggested criteria (AVE > 0.5, Construct reliability > 0.7, Square of correlation

> pertinent AVE). AVE value of the construct ‘Functionality’ in tablet PC model shows under 0.5 value, but it satisfied construct reliability criteria. It is occurred due to small sample size, so we assumed it satisfied the convergent validity.

The result of structural model of the research is illustrated from <Table 7>, <Table 8> and [Figure 2], [Figure 3]. Due to the lack of sample size, some structural model fit indices of both smart phone and tablet PC research model are not satisfied their suggested criteria (GFI > 0.9, NFI > 0.9), but the fit indices which are not affected by sample size show good model fit (RMSEA < 0.08, TLI > 0.9, CFI > 0.9). Also structural model fit was adequate in terms of normed χ2 (χ2/df < 3). The smart phone’s results in [Figure 2] showed that functionality (H3), and perceived ease of use (H6) influenced the perceived usefulness. Playfulness (H2) and complexity (H5) influenced the perceived ease of use. Perceived ease of use (H8) influenced the intention to purchase smart phone. The tablet PC’s results in [Figure 3] showed that social influence (H1) and functionality (H3) and perceived ease of use (H6) influenced the perceived usefulness. Playfulness (H2) and functionality (H4) influenced the perceived ease of use. Perceived usefulness (H8) influenced the intention to purchase a tablet PC.

<Table 8> Result of hypothesis tests of tablet PCs

Path Standardized

coefficient S.E C.R p-value

SI PU 0.212 0.126 1.696 0.090

PL PE 0.685 0.076 5.877 < 0.001

FU PU 0.296 0.119 2.260 0.024

FU PE 0.316 0.129 2.215 0.027

CP PE -0.040 0.111 -0.293 0.769

PE PU 0.258 0.145 1.776 0.076

PU PI 0.072 0.130 0.708 0.479

PE PI 0.782 0.167 6.033 < 0.001

χ2

=164.135, df=137, p=0.057, χ2

/df=1.198

RMSEA=0.046, RMR=0.109, GFI=0.857, AFGI=0.801, NFI=0.878,

CFI=0.977

[Figure 3] Influence factors in tablet PC model


238

5. Discussion

The determinant factors for purchasing smartphones and tablet PCs are quite different based on this research. Perceived ease of use is an important factor for purchasing smartphones and tablet PCs rather than perceived usefulness. It implies that young generations concern the easiness of the smart devices and relatively not to use for their work area. It is also explained by that the both smart device’s playfulness is a significant determinant factor to purchase intention. Perceived ease of use has a stronger effect on intention to purchase for tablet PCs than for smartphones. It is strongly shown in tablet PCs case, and it means customers usually use and purchase tablet PCs for fun comparing with smartphones. Therefore, smartphones and tablet PC providers should design their products in manner that emphasizes the ease of use and playfulness of products with lesser focus on usefulness.

Both functionality factors have an effect on perceived usefulness and functionality of tablet PCs has an effect on perceived ease of use. It is interpreted that customers are expected to the higher performance of tablet PCs rather than smartphones. In addition, Complexity is a significant factor on perceived ease of use in smartphones case, but it is not significant in tablet PCs case. Larger screen of tablet PCs reduces the complexity of using devices, so complexity is not considered to buy tablet PCs comparing with smartphones. It is analyzed that social influence has no significant effect on perceived usefulness for smartphones. It seems that people specially don’t mention and emphasize on the use of smartphones because many of them already have and use smartphones. On the other hand, there are seldom users of tablet PCs, so social influence has a significant effect on perceived usefulness for tablet PCs. 6. Conclusion

Tablets and smartphones are a major phenomenon in the 21-century mobile industry. Smartphones have changed various dimensions of personal and social life and many customers and providers are expecting that tablet PCs will become globally pervasive. This study was conducted to determine the differences in the determinants that influence the purchase of tablet PCs or smartphones. Many people already have and use smartphones (96.9% of sample in this survey); however, the market penetration of tablet users is only 24%. This indicates that the purchase of tablet PCs and smartphone are influenced by different customer determinants. Therefore, product producers need to analyze these differences to create a market differentiation strategy. Each attribute of the structural model had a different

influence on the intention to buy and we found the following differences on comparing the results for tablets and the smartphones:

Perceived ease of use has a stronger effect on intention to purchase for tablet PCs than for smartphones. Perceived usefulness doesn’t affect intention to purchase both smartphones and tablet PCs. Playfulness has a stronger effect on perceived ease of use for tablet PCs than for smartphones. Social influence has a significant effect on the perceived usefulness of tablet PCs, but it is not in smartphones case. Complexity has a significant effect on the perceived ease of use of smartphones, but it is not in tablet PCs case. Therefore, smartphones and tablet PC providers should design their products considering above analysis results.

This study attempted to identify potential differentiation strategies by comparing the determinant factors that influence the purchase of similar smart devices, but it has some limitations. First, this study only considers tablet PCs and smartphones, although there are many other smart or mobile devices such as netbooks, e-book readers, and notebooks, etc. We need to expand the area of study to gather more insights about the larger mobile market. Second, this study was conducted using survey-based data, and the number of responds is quite small. It hinders concluding delicate results of analysis. We need to expend survey respondents for securing larger sample size and collecting respondents from work area. Lastly, the suggested constructs may not have been sufficient to explain all the aspects of the determinants that influence the purchase of these devices. Further research needs to be conducted to overcome, to the extent possible, the limitations of this study, such as cost level of smart devices.

References [1] Ajzen, I. and M. Fishbein, "Understanding

attitudes and predicting social behavior", Prentice-Hall, 1980.

[2] Alvarez, C., C. Brown, and M. Nussbaum, "Comparative study of netbooks and tablet PCs for fostering face-to-face collaborative learning", Coomputers in Human Behavior, Vol.27(2011), pp.834-844.

[3] Barnes, J., "The mobile commerce value chain: analysis and future developments", International Journal of Information Management, Vol.22(2002), pp.91-108

[4] Chang, Y., C. Chen, and H. Zhou, "Smart phone for mobile commerce", Computer Standards & Interfaces, Vol.31(2009), pp.740-747

[5] Chau, P. and P. Hu, "Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: A model comparison approach", Decision Science,


239

Vol.32, No.4(2001), pp.699-719. [6] Chen, J, D. Yen and K. Chen, “The acceptance

and diffusion of the innovative smart phone use: A case study of a delivery service company in logistics”, Information & Management, Vol.46(2009), pp.241-248.

[7] Davis, F., "A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results", Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology(1986)

[8] Davis, F., "Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology", MIS Quarterly, Vol.13, No.3(1989), pp.319-340.

[9] Han, E.Y., "The digital divide trend and the diffusion of smartphones in USA" (in Korean), Korean Institute of Science and Technology Information, Vol.24, No.11(2012), pp.41-48

[10] Hwang, I.J., S.I. Lee, "The study of knowing the intention to adopt smartphone by extending Technology Acceptance Model", Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers of the 2010 winter conference(2010)

[11] Jung, S.Y., "The research on the Usability for Smart Pad Design", Journal of the Korean Society of Design Culture, Vol.17, No.2(2011), pp.528-537.

[12] Kang, J.W. and E.J. Kim, "An Exploratory Study on Audio-Visual UCC (User Created Content) Uses of College Students : A TPB-TAM Integrated Model", Korean Society for Journalism & Communication studies, Vol.53, No.1(2009), pp.187-208.

[13] Kim, G.D., "A study on the User Experience Design based on the Types of usage of Smart Pad", Korean Society of Basic Design & Art, Vol.12, No.3(2011), pp.49-59.

[14] Kim, H.W., "Investigating the intention to purchase digital items in social networking communities: A customer value perspective", Information & Management, Vol.48(2011), p.228-234.

[15] Kong, Y.I., "The undertone and implication of smartphones" (in Korean), Policies of Broadcasting and Telecommunication, Vol.22, No.4(2010), pp.1-22.

[16] Kwon, O.J., "An Empirical Study on Potential Smartphone Users", Internet and Information Security, Vol.1, No.1(2010), pp.55-83

[17] Lee, S.H., "the innovative strategy applying smartphones and Location-based Service in service industry" (in Korean), SERI management note, Vol.62(2010)

[18] Mock. K., “Teaching with tablet PC’s”, journal of circuits, systems and computers, Vol.20, No.1(2004), pp.17-27

[19] Moon, J.W. and Y.G. Kim, "Extending the tam

for a world-wide-web context", Information & Management, Vol.38, No.4(2001), pp.217-230.

[20] No, S.K. and H.S. Wei, "A Study of Tablet PC Electronic Magazine Navigation Design to Improve Usability", Korean Design Knowledge Society, Vol.19(2011), pp.164-172.

[21] Park M.R., S.I. Jung, and S.I. Kim, "A Study on Application and Prospect with Prevalence Tablet PC -An Approach of Humanities, Science and Design", Korean Design Knowledge Society, Vol.18(2011), pp.84-93.

[22] Pfeffer, J., "Organizations and Organization theory", Pitman, Boston, MA, 1982.

[23] Radner, R. and M. Rothschild, "On the Allocation of Effort", Journal of Economic Theory, Vol.10(1975), pp.358-376.

[24] Sandelands, L., S. Ashford, and J.E. Dutton, "Reconceptualizating the overjustification effects: a template-matching approach", Motivation and Emotion, Vol.7(1983), pp.229-255.

[25] Sim, J.B., "A study on differentiation strategy for tablet PC and e-book reader by a comparative analysis of acceptance·diffusion factors", The Korean Operations Research and Management Science Society, Vol.28, No.1(2011), pp.25-39.

[26] Siozos, P., G. Palaigeorgiou, G. Triantafyllakos, and T. Despotakis, "Computer based testing using digital ink Participatory design of a Tablet PC based assessment application for secondary education", Computers & Education, Vol.52(2009), pp.811-819.

[27] Sohn, S.H., Y.J. Choi, and H.S. Hwang, “Understanding Acceptance of Smartphone among Early Adopters Using Extended Technology Acceptance Model”, Korean Society for Journalism & Communication studies, Vol.55, No.2(2010), pp.228-251.

[28] Vroom, V., "Work and Motivation", Wiley, New York, NY, 1964.

[29] Zheng, P. and L. Ni, "Spotlight: The Rise of the Smart Phone", IEEE Distributed Systems Online, Vol.7, No.3(2006).


240

pu, peu

Documents