The Technology Integration Model (TIM). Predicting the continued use of technology

Abstract

The human-computer relationship is often convoluted, and despite decades of progress, many relationships relating to continued use are unclear and poorly defined. This may be due to a lack of interdisciplinary collaboration, especially from a theoretical standpoint between computer science and psychology. Following a review of existing theories that attempt to explain continued technology use, we developed the Technology Integration Model (TIM). In sum, the main objective of TIM is to outline the processes behind continued technology use in an individual's everyday life. Here we present the model alongside a description of its scope and the relationships between constructs. This can help generate research questions relating to technology use while simultaneously addressing many previous shortcomings of existing models. As a unifying theory, TIM can quickly be adopted by researchers and developers when designing and implementing new technologies.

Investigating the factors that influence higher education instructors’ decisions to adopt a flipped classroom instructional model

“…Fourth section contains 10 items that were used to identify the participants’ adoption decisions of the flipped classroom. Items in third and fourth sections were adapted from recognized studies and were modified to fit the context of this study (Aldunate & Nussbaum, ; Chopdar et al ., ; Khan et al ., ; Lee, Lim et al ., ; Shaw et al ., ; Venkatesh et al ., ). A five‐point Likert scale was used as the measurement scale for all questions in third and fourth sections as following: “Strongly Disagree,” “Disagree,” “Neutral,” “Agree,” to “Strongly Agree.”…”

“…This study hypothesized that the four determinants in the UTAUT framework, which are performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitation condition, were predictive to higher education instructors’ adoption decisions of the flipped classroom. Two other factors, technology self‐efficacy, and openness to change, were added in the proposed framework because they could directly affect instructors’ decisions to adopt technological innovations in related studies (Koral Gümüşoğlu & Akay, ; Lee, Kim et al ., ; Shaw et al ., ).…”

“…Technology self‐efficacy is an instructor’s belief that s/he can use the instructional technology to improve students’ learning experiences (Compeau & Higgins, ). Previous studies identified technology self‐efficacy as a factor that significantly influenced an instructor’s decision to integrate technologies into his/her classrooms (Khan et al ., ; Shaw et al ., ). Internet‐based, multimedia, and mobile technologies, were typically and widely used in the flipped classroom courses to enhance students’ pre‐class self‐directed subject matter knowledge learning and in‐class practices (Long et al ., ; Brame, ; Lee, Lim et al ., ; Lopes & Soares, ).…”

“…Although UTAUT is recognized to be well‐meaning and thoughtful, it has been criticized for showing bias across different contexts (Negahban & Chung, ; Teo, ), and still leaving out important variables (Bagozzi, ). Therefore, the UTAUT framework has also been modified and employed to examine the user acceptance of a variety of technologies among various user groups, and still has been widely used as a theoretical lens in empirical studies on users’ technology adoptions (Chopdar, Korfiatis, Sivakumar, & Lytras, ; Khan et al ., ; Lee, Kim, & Wang, ; Shaw, Ellis, & Ziegler, ).…”

Ordinary User Experiences at Work

“…Structure also includes temporal contexts of use. Shaw et al [99] proposed that a technology will stay in use for a long period of time if it repeatedly satisfies the user's motivation and continually extends the user's capabilities and identity. That said, it appears that the UX at the time of introducing a novel system differs from that of long-term use [56].…”