(彰化师大)資訊管理調查研究方法

null資訊管理調查研究方法 資訊管理調查研究方法 主講人：王怡舜 博士 國立彰化師範大學資訊管理學系討論大綱討論大綱科學之輪 因果關係成立之必要條件 研究方法分類 調查研究法 v.s. 實驗研究法 調查研究論文撰寫方法 調查研究論文範例 Q & A科學之輪科學之輪科學之輪(續) –演繹法實例科學之輪(續) –演繹法實例慎思行動理論(TRA)：態度行為意向 演繹假說：顧客滿意度顧客再購買意願 社會認知理論(SCT)：自我效能行為 演繹假說：Internet自我效能網路報稅使用科學之輪(續) -歸納法與演繹法科學之輪(續) -歸納法與演繹法科學之輪(續) -歸納法與演繹法科學之輪(續) -歸納法與演繹法歸納法：著重經驗觀察、發現理論 演繹法：著重邏輯推理、驗證理論 邏輯推理與經驗觀察並重 歸納法發現的知識無法被證明為真 例如：胃潰瘍成因 理論或模式仍無法代表真實世界因果關係成立之必要條件因果關係成立之必要條件實證相關性：兩變項存在正相關或負相關 醫生人數 + 傳染病死亡人數 冰淇淋銷售量 +淹死人數 阿扁得票率 +廢票率 產品價格 +需求量，需求法則例外? 時間順序性：先有因再有果 排除其他可能因素對兩個變項的同時影響社會科學困難之處社會科學困難之處不易實驗 IT投資組織獲利 不易做控制的觀察(因果關係不易發現) [廣告支出銷售金額]X1(季節),X2(競爭者),….Xn 變數不易測量 很少定律或根本沒有定律 研究方法分類研究方法分類定量方法(quantitative method) 調查研究法(survey research) 實驗研究法(experiments) 彙總研究法(meta analysis) 定性方法(qualitative method) 個案研究法(case study) 內容分析法(content analysis) 定量與定性混合法研究方法分類(續)研究方法分類(續)探索性研究 變數有那些不清楚、缺乏理論 適用個案研究法 敘述性研究 探討who, what, when, where, 及how等研究主題 適用調查研究法 因果性研究 驗證變數間的因果關係 適用調查研究法及實驗研究法調查研究法 v.s. 實驗研究法調查研究法 v.s. 實驗研究法真實驗設計的特性 至少兩個群組 一組接受實驗處理，其他群組接受不同實驗處理或不接受實驗處理 至少操弄一個自變數 隨機指派受測者到各群組 各實驗群組隨機施予實驗操弄 如何進行研究設計：Mozart musicIQ 如何進行研究設計：IT導入組織績效調查研究論文撰寫方法調查研究論文撰寫方法一、研究背景與動機 什麼環境下衍生了你的研究問題？ 研究問題為何？ 為何該研究問題值得研究？ 該研究問題對實務界及學術界有何重要性？ 過去研究有何不足？ 研究議題具有創新性嗎？ 研究議題會引起興趣嗎？調查研究論文撰寫方法(續)調查研究論文撰寫方法(續)二、理論與文獻基礎 闡述及定義研究環境 闡述研究中將引用的理論或文獻基礎，為後續研究模式的導出鋪路 如果研究問題那麼重要，先前的研究都是怎麼做的？解決了那些問題？那些問題尚未解決？先前文獻的忽略點？你要如何解決先前研究之不足？ 探討及概念化新的構念(construct)調查研究論文撰寫方法(續)調查研究論文撰寫方法(續)三、研究方法 研究模式中的變數與假說的提出是基於什麼理論、文獻、邏輯推論、實證資料、質性個案資料之基礎。 研究模式中變數的概念性與操作性定義為何？ 量表問項是否有理論或文獻支持？ 分析單位為何?抽樣方法為何？抽樣框架為何？樣本是否有代表性？抽樣方法有何限制？ 變數測量工具是否具有信度、內容效度、收歛效度與區別效度？ 統計方法的使用是否適當？ 研究程序是否嚴謹？內部效度與外部效度如何？調查研究論文撰寫方法(續)調查研究論文撰寫方法(續)四、研究結果與討論 統計分析結果解釋是否正確？ 研究假設是否接受？ 研究結果與以往研究有何異同？ 研究結果對學術界(理論發展與貢獻)的意涵為何？ 研究結果對實務界的意涵為何？ 研究限制為何？抽樣方法、樣本代表性、環境(跨文化)、一般化能力(generalizability)、測量工具、統計方法、模式變數與假說、解釋力等。調查研究論文範例調查研究論文範例Wang, Yi-Shun (2003). The adoption of electronic tax-filing systems: An empirical study. Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 333-352. (SSCI).IntroductionIntroductionIn 1998, all three systems—manual, Internet, and 2D bar code—were available to taxpayers in Taiwan. Despite all the efforts aimed at developing better and easier electronic tax-filing systems, these tax-filing systems remained unnoticed by the public, or were seriously underused in spite of their availability.Introduction (cont.)Introduction (cont.)The primary objective of this research is to extend the TAM in the context of electronic tax-filing systems. The findings of this research not only can help the government authorities to develop a better user-accepted electronic tax-filing system, but also provide insights into how to promote the new IT to potential users. Tax Filing Systems in TaiwanTax Filing Systems in TaiwanManual filing is the most traditional and popular method of filing individual tax returns in Taiwan. 2D bar-code filing was first introduced in Taiwan by the Taiwanese government in 1998. Internet filing was launched in Taiwan by the tax agency in 1998. Tax Filing Systems in Taiwan (cont.)Tax Filing Systems in Taiwan (cont.) Source: The Taiwanese Government Tax Agency Technology Acceptance Model, TAM Technology Acceptance Model, TAM The TAM postulates that user adoption of a new information system is determined by their intention to use the system, which in turn is determined by their beliefs about the system. The TAM further suggests that two beliefs—perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use—are instrumental in explaining the variance in the users’ intention. Technology Acceptance Model, TAM (cont.)Technology Acceptance Model, TAM (cont.)Empirical research has also found significant relationships between individual differences and IT acceptance via TAM. It is now possible to propose a more complete explanation of how individual differences influence the adoption of electronic tax-filing systems, via intervening TAM variables. Technology Acceptance Model, TAM (cont.)Technology Acceptance Model, TAM (cont.)Most users who decline to provide personal information to Web sites report it is because they do not trust those who are collecting the data. A new construct (“perceived credibility”) is included in the extended TAM to enhance our understanding of an individual’s acceptance behavior of electronic tax-filing systems in the Internet context. Research ModelResearch ModelComputer self-efficacyComputer self-efficacyComputer self-efficacy is defined as the judgment of one’s ability to use a computer (Compeau & Higgins, 1995) The proposed relationship between computer self-efficacy and perceived ease of use is based on the theoretical argument by Davis (1989) and Mathieson (1991). Computer self-efficacy (cont.)Computer self-efficacy (cont.)Based on the social cognitive theory developed by Bandura (1986), Igbaria and Iivari (1995) postulated that computer self-efficacy affects an individual’s computer anxiety, which, in turn, influences perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and system usage. Computer experience might be positively related to the existence of concerns regarding the privacy and security of online exchanges.Computer self-efficacy (cont.)Computer self-efficacy (cont.)H1a: Computer self-efficacy will have a positive effect on perceived usefulness of the electronic tax-filing systems. H1b: Computer self-efficacy will have a positive effect on perceived ease of use of the electronic tax-filing systems. H1c: Computer self-efficacy will have a negative effect on perceived credibility of the electronic tax-filing systems.Perceived Ease of UsePerceived Ease of UsePerceived ease of use is defined as the extent to which a person believes that using a particular system will be free of effort. Extensive research over the past decade provides evidence of the significant effect of perceived ease of use on usage intention, either directly or indirectly through its effect on perceived usefulness (Agarwal & Prasad, 1999; Davis et al., 1989; Hu et al., 1999; Jackson et al., 1997; Venkatesh, 1999, 2000; Venkatesh & Davis, 1996, 2000; Venkatesh & Morris, 2000). Perceived Ease of Use (cont.)Perceived Ease of Use (cont.)H2: Perceived ease of use will have a positive effect on perceived usefulness of the electronic tax-filing systems. H3: Perceived ease of use will have a positive effect on perceived credibility of the electronic tax-filing systems. H4: Perceived ease of use will have a positive effect on behavioral intention to use the electronic tax-filing systems.Perceived UsefulnessPerceived UsefulnessPerceived usefulness is defined as the extent to which a person believes that using a particular system will enhance his or her job performance. There is also extensive research in the IS community provides evidence of the significant effect of perceived usefulness on usage intention (Agarwal & Prasad, 1999; Davis et al., 1989; Hu et al., 1999; Jackson et al., 1997; Venkatesh, 1999, 2000; Venkatesh & Davis, 1996, 2000; Venkatesh & Morris, 2000). Perceived Usefulness (cont.)Perceived Usefulness (cont.) H5: Perceived usefulness will have a positive effect on behavioral intention to use the electronic tax-filing systems. Perceived Credibility Perceived Credibility Perceived credibility refers to the two important dimensions – security and privacy – that are identified across studies in affecting the users’ intention to adopt the online transaction systems. H6:Perceived credibility will have a positive effect on behavioral intention to use the electronic tax-filing systems. Measures of the Constructs Measures of the Constructs Items selected for the constructs were mainly adapted from prior studies to ensure content validity. One advantage of using the TAM to examine electronic tax-filing systems acceptance is that it has a well-validated measurement inventory. Items for the perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness were taken from the previous validated inventory, and then modified to fit the specific technology being studied. Measures of the Constructs (cont.)Measures of the Constructs (cont.)The items to measure behavioral intention were taken from previous applications of TAM. Four items for the computer self-efficacy construct were adapted from the original instrument of computer self-efficacy as developed by Compeau and Higgins. Perceived credibility was measured by two statements specifically developed for this study. Measures of the Constructs (cont.)Measures of the Constructs (cont.)Likert scales (1~7), with anchors ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” were used for all questions except for the items measuring computer self-efficacy. The anchors of the items measuring computer self-efficacy ranged from “not at all confident” to “totally confident”. Measures of Perceived Ease of UseMeasures of Perceived Ease of UsePEU1 Learning to use the electronic tax-filing systems (2-D bar code or Internet filing) is easy for me. PEU2 It would be easy for me to become skillful at using the electronic tax-filing systems. PEU3 I would find the electronic tax-filing systems easy to use.Measures of Perceived UsefulnessMeasures of Perceived UsefulnessPU1 Using the electronic tax-filing systems would improve my performance in preparing income tax return. PU2 Using the electronic tax-filing systems would enable me to accomplish my income tax return more effectively. PU3 Using the electronic tax-filing systems makes it easier for me to prepare income tax return.Measures of Perceived CredibilityMeasures of Perceived Credibility PC1 Using the electronic tax-filing systems would not divulge my personal information. PC2 I would find the electronic tax-filing systems secure in preparing income tax returns. Measures of Behavioral IntentionMeasures of Behavioral Intention BI1 Assuming that I have access to the electronic tax-filing systems, I intend to use it. BI2 I intend to increase my use of the electronic tax-filing systems in the future. Measures of Computer Self-efficacyMeasures of Computer Self-efficacyI could prepare my income tax return using the electronic tax-filing systems… CS1 …if I could call someone for help if I got stuck. CS2 …if someone else had helped me get started. CS3 …if I had just the built-in help facility for assistance. CS4 …if someone showed me how to do it first.Data CollectionData CollectionRespondents were screened for whether they had ever filed an income tax return. The interviews were conducted over a period of three weeks by a team of 3 interviewers. Out of 335 interviews conducted, 260 interviews of those with experience of filing income tax return were obtained for data analysis. Model-data Fit Indices Model-data Fit Indices Measurement ModelMeasurement ModelReliability and Validity Reliability and Validity CR = Composite Reliability Diagonal elements are the average variance extracted. Off-diagonal elements are the shared variance. Structural Model Structural Model ImplicationsImplicationsIt is not enough to develop a useful system and make the system easy to interact with. It is of paramount importance to develop electronic tax-filing systems that provide a solid trustworthy protection regarding security and privacy for the users. The attention of management might be more fruitfully focused on the “development” of belief. Implications (cont.)Implications (cont.)The results of this study provide evidence of the significant effect of computer self-efficacy on behavioral intention through perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and perceived credibility. Alleviating the digital divide resulting from family income, educational attainment, occupation, employment status, race, gender, age, and geography. Limitations Limitations Caution needs to be taken when generalizing my findings and discussion to other technologies or groups. This research did not incorporate actual usage behavior in the proposed model. There may be a need to search for additional variables that improve our ability to predict usage intentions more accurately. Limitations (cont.)Limitations (cont.)This study was conducted with a snapshot research approach. Longitudinal evidence might enhance our understanding of the causality and interrelationships between or among variables important to electronic tax-filing systems acceptance by individuals. ConclusionsConclusionsThe contributions of this study to technology acceptance research are twofold. First, it has successfully applied the extended TAM in a new information context (i.e., electronic tax filing), which is very different from the systems examined in prior studies. Conclusions (cont.)Conclusions (cont.)Second, computer self-efficacy was found to be an important determinant of perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and perceived credibility of the electronic tax-filing systems. The findings of this study provide important implications for developing effective electronic government services in general and effective electronic tax-filing systems in particular.null感 謝 耐 心 聆 聽歡迎指教