An Unified Behaviour Model to Predict Web 2.0 Adoption as a Tool for Software-Knowledge Sharing

Manuel Fernández-Utrilla, Pilar Fernández-Utrilla, Gonzalo Mariscal

2014

Abstract

The most powerful tool for software developers to connect with each others is social networking. These applications are normally free of charge. The professional use of these applications exceeds beyond the fun. An unified behaviour model to predict web 2.0 adoption as a tool for Software-Knowledge sharing based on two solid and tested theories, theory of planned behaviour and self-determination theory, will be reached by this study. A single model, which will join these theories, will accurately predict a use of these communication tools to set connections among professional groups: software developers in particular. These models determine the factors that mainly affect the intention to use described in order to improve these tools with a high probability of success. These professionals could share knowledge, keys and bugs in order to find the best solution. A representative number of software developers have participated in this study in order to research what the reason is because these professionals do not use these tools with that aim.

References

  1. ONTSI (2012). “Servicios utilizados por los usuarios de Internet”.
  2. Hartshorne, R., & Ajjan, H. (2009). Examining student decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. [Advance online publication]. Journal of Computing in Higher Education.
  3. Conole, G. and McAndrew, P. (2010), A new approach tosupporting the design and use of OER: Harnessing the power of web 2.0.
  4. Orehovacki, T., G. Bubas & M. Konecki. (2009). Web2.0 in Education and Potential Factors of Web 2.0 Use by Students of Information Systems. 31st International Conf. on Information Technology Interfaces, 2009. ITI 7809. Proceedings of the ITI 2009. pp: 443-448
  5. Gill, L. & Dalgarno, B. (2008). Influences on pre-service teachers?preparedness to use ICTs in the classroom. Accepted paper for 'Hello! Where are you in the landscape of educational technology?78 25th Annual conf. of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia
  6. Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioural control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 665-683.
  7. J. A. Barnes, (1954). “Class and committees in a Norwegian islan parish”. Department of Sociology, London School of Economics.
  8. Chatzisarantis, N. L., Hagger, M. S., Biddle, S. J. H., Smith, B., & Wang, C. K. (2003). A meta-analysis of perceived locus on causality in expercise, sport, and physical education contexts. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 25, 284-306.
  9. Hagger, M. S., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. (2007). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in exercise and sport. Champaigne, IL: Human Kinetics.
  10. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination Theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and Well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.
  11. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The 'what' and 'why' of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
  12. Edmunds, J., Ntoumanis, N., & Duda, J. L. (2007). Adherence and well-being in overweight and obese patients referred to an exercise on prescription scheme: A selfdetermination theory perspective. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8, 722-740.
  13. Edmunds, J., Ntoumanis, N., & Duda, J. L. (2007). Perceived autonomy support and psychological need satisfaction as key psychological constructs in the exercise domain. In M. Hagger & N. L. D. Chatzisarantis (Eds.), Self-determination in exercise and sport (pp. 35-51). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  14. Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Soenens, B., & Lens, W. (2007). Willen, Moeten En Structuur: Over Het Bevorderen Van Een Optimaal Leerproces. [To Want, To Have and Structure: On Faciliating an Optimal Learning Process]. Begeleid Zelfstandig Leren, 37,1-27
  15. Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need-satisfaction, and longitudinal well-being: The self-concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 482-497.
  16. Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L., & Biddle, S. J. H. (2002). The influence of autonomous and controlling motives on physical activity intentions within the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Health Psychology, 7, 283-297.
  17. Chatzisarantis, N. L., Hagger, M. S., Biddle, S. J. H., & Karageorghis, C. (2002). The cognitive processes by which perceived locus of causality predicts participation in physical activity. Journal of Health Psychology, 7, 685-699.
  18. Hagger, M. S., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. (2009). Integrating the theory of planned behaviour and self-determination theory in health behaviour: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Health Psychology, 14, 275-302.
  19. Sadaf, A., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2012). An empirical investigation of the factors that influence pre-service teachers' intentions to use Web 2.0 technologies in the classroom using decomposed theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45 (2), 171-195.
  20. Hambleton, R. K. (1996). Adaptación de tests para su uso en diferentes idiomas y culturas: fuentes de error, posibles soluciones y directrices prácticas. En J. Muñiz (coord.): Psicometría. Madrid: Universitas.
  21. Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, designs and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures. R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda y S.D. Spielberger (eds.): Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment (pp. 3- 38). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  22. Ringle Christian M, Wende Sven, Will Alexander, (2005). SmartPLS 2.0. Hamburg.
  23. Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295-236). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  24. Wankel, L. M. (1993) “The importance of enjoyment to adherence and psychological benefits from physical activity”. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 24, 151-169.
  25. Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 27-58.
  26. Ajzen, I. (1991). “The theory of planned behaviour”, Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50, pp. 179-211.
  27. Carsten Röcker (2010). “Why Traditional Technology Acceptance Models Won't Work for Future Information Technologies?” World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 65.
  28. Lee, J., Cerreto, F. A., & Lee, J. (2010). “Theory of Planned Behaviour and Teachers' Decisions Regarding Use of Educational Technology”. Educational Technology & Society, 13 (1), 152-164.
  29. Millie J. Darvell, B.Behav.Sc, Shari P. Walsh, Ph.D., and Katherine M. White, Ph.D. (2011). “Facebook Tells Me So: Applying the Theory of Planned Behaviour to Understand Partner-Monitoring Behaviour on Facebook”. Cyberpsychology, Behaviour and Social Networking, Volume 14, Number 12.
  30. Ming-Chi Lee and Tzung-Ru Tsai (2010). “What Drives People to Continue to Play Online Games? An Extension of Technology Model and Theory of Planned Behaviour”. INTL. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 26(6), 601-620.
  31. Susan Michei, Wendy Hardeman, Tom Fanshawe, A. Toby Prevost, Lyndsay Taylor & Ann Louise Kinmonth (2008). “Investigating theoretical explanations for behaviour change: The case study of ProActive”. Psychology and Health, 23(1): 25-39.
  32. Nele Jacobs, Martin S. Hagger, Sandra Streukens, Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij and Neree Claes (2010). “Testing an integrated model of the theory of planned behaviour and selfdetermination theory for different energy balance-related behaviours and intervention intensities”. British Journal of Health Psychology (2011), 16, 113-134.
  33. Yann Truong (2009). “An Evaluation of the Theory of Planned Behaviour in Consumer Acceptance of Online Video and Television Services”. Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation Volume 12 Issue 2 (177 - 186).
  34. Ayesha Sadaf, Timothy J. Newby and Peggy A. Ertmer (2012). “Exploring Factors that Predict Preservice Teachers' Intentions to Use Web 2.0 Technologies Using Decomposed Theory of Planned Behaviour”. JRTE, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 171-195.
  35. Netta Weinstein & Richard M. Ryan (2011). “A Self-determination Theory Approach to Understanding Stress Incursion and Responses”. Stress and Health 27: 4-17.
  36. Dirk Heerwegh and Geert Loosveldt (2009). “Explaining the intention to participate in a web survey: a test of the theory of planned behaviour”. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 12, No. 3, 181-195.
  37. Sarah McLachlan & Martin S. Hagger (2011). “The Influence of Chronically Accessible Autonomous and Controlling Motives on Physical Activity within an Extended Theory of Planned Behaviour”. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 2, pp. 445-470.
  38. Shirley Taylor and Peter A. Todd (1995). “Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models”. Information Systems Research (6:2), pp 144-176.
  39. Segal, Judith (2009). Software development cultures and cooperation problems: a field study of the early stages of development of software for a scientific community. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 18(5-6), pp. 581-606.
  40. Lei, Pui-Wa, & Wu, Qiong. (2007). “An NCME Instructional Module on Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling: Issues and Practical Considerations.” http://ncme.org/ linkservid/47EFEB5A-1320-5CAE-6EC90BFDF09AA39E/showMeta/0/, downloaded: June 14th 2014.
  41. Toth, Jozsef (2013). “Trust - Networking - Innovation”. Proceedings of the 7th International Management Conference "New Management for the New Economy", November 7th-8th, Bucharest, Romania
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Fernández-Utrilla M., Fernández-Utrilla P. and Mariscal G. (2014). An Unified Behaviour Model to Predict Web 2.0 Adoption as a Tool for Software-Knowledge Sharing . In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Software Knowledge - Volume 1: SKY, (IC3K 2014) ISBN 978-989-758-051-2, pages 3-18. DOI: 10.5220/0005165900030018


in Bibtex Style

@conference{sky14,
author={Manuel Fernández-Utrilla and Pilar Fernández-Utrilla and Gonzalo Mariscal},
title={An Unified Behaviour Model to Predict Web 2.0 Adoption as a Tool for Software-Knowledge Sharing},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Software Knowledge - Volume 1: SKY, (IC3K 2014)},
year={2014},
pages={3-18},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0005165900030018},
isbn={978-989-758-051-2},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Software Knowledge - Volume 1: SKY, (IC3K 2014)
TI - An Unified Behaviour Model to Predict Web 2.0 Adoption as a Tool for Software-Knowledge Sharing
SN - 978-989-758-051-2
AU - Fernández-Utrilla M.
AU - Fernández-Utrilla P.
AU - Mariscal G.
PY - 2014
SP - 3
EP - 18
DO - 10.5220/0005165900030018