LITERATURE REVIEW
Several theoretical models have been developed to predict and assess
acceptance and behaviour in association with the use of technology,
among them, one of the best known is the Technology Acceptance Model
(TAM), which was developed by Davis in 1986. Based on behavioural
intention, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use, with these
three theoretical constructs, TAM is powerful for predicting and
explaining user behaviour [13]. TAM is one of the most influential
models that have been applied to test the acceptance of technology
innovation across a variety of contexts [25, 6].
The TAM proposes that perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of
use (PEOU) of individuals’ perceptions of technology are the key
contributors to behavioural intention (BI) to use the technology
[51].
Measures of behavioural intention may not accurately provide predictions
of actual behaviour because behaviour intention cannot be translated
into action every time, intentions could change before behaviour
performance [44]. Existing between users’ intention to specific
behaviour and their actual behaviour, the intention–behaviour gap is
defined as the degree of inconsistency [4].
Perceived usefulness is defined as „the degree to which a person
believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job
performance ” [13]. Perceived usefulness is expected to be
influenced by perceived ease of use, because „the easier a
technology is to use, the more useful it can be ” [48].
Perceived ease of use is defined as „the degree to which a person
believes that using a particular system would be free of effort ”
[13]. Research on high intensity use of information technology shows
that the system is easy to use if the technology can be used without
additional effort by the individual concerned, and then the level of
acceptance of the technology will be high [42]. Perceived ease of
use is a process of expectancy; perceived usefulness is an outcome of
expectancy [46].