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].