Wireless Personal Communications

, Volume 69, Issue 3, pp 1055–1065 | Cite as

Factors Affecting Consumer Acceptance Mobile Broadband Services with Add-on Advertising: Thailand Case Study

Article

Abstract

There are two methods for mobile advertising: SMS and broadband advertisement. Previously SMS is the most common way of mobile advertising. Previous researches on consumer acceptance have been focused on SMS advertisement. This paper aims to identify factors that influence consumer’s intention to accept mobile broadband services with add-on advertising. As theory of reasoned action (TRA) has been widely used to explain user behavioral intension in previous researches, we proposed extended TRA by including six factors for testing adoption of mobile broadband services with add-on advertising: Perceived Value, Contextual Awareness, Trust, Solidarity, Familiarity and Effect. The proposed model has been tested on selected Thai mobile broadband user communities. The results from 61 valid responses during 2 weeks time period found that attitude toward mobile advertising and subjective norms have weak significance on user intention to accept add-on advertising. It is also found that Perceived value has higher significant than other proposed factors. With the proposed model, it is possible for advertisers to create an effective and pertinent mobile broadband advertising.

Keywords

Extended theory reasoned action Mobile adverting Mobile marketing Consumer acceptance Mobile broadband services Attitude toward advertising 

References

  1. 1.
    ITU (2012). Key statistical highlights: ITU data release June 2012.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alison Fennah, D. K. (2011). Global Mobile Advertising Spend 2011. New York: Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bauer, Hans H., Barnes, Stuart J., & Reichardt, Tina. (2005). Driving consumer acceptance of mobile marketing: A theoretical framework and empirical study. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 06(03), 181–192.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fishbein, M., & Azjen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    MMA (2012). Mobile Marketing Industry Glossary. http://www.mmaglobal.com/uploads/glossary.pdf. Accessed 12/08/2012 2012
  6. 6.
    Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q., 13(3), 319–340. doi:10.2307/249008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Viswanath Venkatesh, M. G. M., Davis, Gordon B., & Davis, Fred D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–475.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rajala, R., & Westerlund, M. (2010). Antecedents to Consumers’ Acceptance of Mobile Advertisements—A Hierarchical Construct PLS Structural Equation Model. In System Sciences (HICSS), 2010 43rd Hawaii international conference on, 5–8 Jan. 2010 2010 (pp. 1–10). doi:10.1109/hicss.2010.64.
  9. 9.
    Trongmateerut, P., & Sweeney, J. T. (2012). The Influence of Subjective Norms on Whistle-Blowing: A Cross-Cultural Investigation. Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1270-1.
  10. 10.
    Sathapornvajana, S., & Watanapa, B. (2012). Factors affecting student’s intention to choose IT program. Procedia Computer Science, 13, 60–67. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2012.09.114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chooprayoon, V., Chun Che, F., & Depickere, A. A. (2007). TECTAM, A modified technology acceptance model to assess E-commerce technologies adoption by Thai SME. In TENCON 2007–2007 IEEE Region 10 Conference, Oct. 30–Nov. 2 2007 (pp. 1–4). doi:10.1109/tencon.2007.4428977.
  12. 12.
    Premchaiswadi, W., Porouhan, P., & Premchaiswadi, N. (2012). An empirical study of the key success factors to adopt e-learning in Thailand. In Information Society (i-Society), 2012 International Conference on, 25–28 June 2012 (pp. 333–338).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boontarig, W., Chutimaskul, W., Chongsuphajaisiddhi, V., & Papasratorn, B. (2012). Factors influencing the Thai elderly intention to use smartphone for e-Health services. In Humanities, Science and Engineering Research (SHUSER), 2012 IEEE Symposium on, 24–27 June 2012 (pp. 479–483). doi:10.1109/shuser.2012.6268881.
  14. 14.
    Kijsanayotin, B., Pannarunothai, S., & Speedie, S. M. (2009). Factors influencing health information technology adoption in Thailand’s community health centers: Applying the UTAUT model. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 78(6), 404–416. doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2008.12.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Merisavo, M., Kajalo, S., Karjaluoto, H., Virtanen, V., Salmenkivi, S., Raulas, M. et al. (2007). An empirical study of the drivers of consumer acceptance of mobile advertising. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 7(2), 41–50Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15(4), 336–355. doi:10.1287/isre.1040.0032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Okazaki, S., Molina, F. J., & Hirose, M. (2012). Mobile advertising avoidance: exploring the role of ubiquity. Electronic Markets, 22(3), 169–183. doi:10.1007/s12525-012-0087-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Xiao, S. (2011). Consumer adoption of mobile advertising: An empirical investigation among China users. In Product innovation management (ICPIM), 2011 6th international conference on, 16–17 July 2011 (pp. 461–464). doi:10.1109/icpim.2011.5983702.
  19. 19.
    Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Drossos, D., Giaglis, G., Lekakos, G., Kokkinaki, F., & Stavraki, M. (2007). Determinants of effective SMS advertising: An experimental study. doi:citeulike-article-id:1460118.
  21. 21.
    Leppaniemi, M., & Karjaluoto, H. (2005). Factors influencing consumers’s willingness to accept mobile advertising: A conceptual model. International Journal of Mobile Communication, 3(3), 197–213. doi:10.1504/ijmc.2005.006580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen, P.-T., & Hsieh, H.-P. (2012). Personalized mobile advertising: Its key attributes, trends, and social impact. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(3), 543–557. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2011.08.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    McCrickard, D. S., Czerwinski, M., & Bartram, L. (2003). Introduction: Design and evaluation of notification user interfaces. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(5), 509–514. doi:10.1016/s1071-5819(03)00025-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yan, Z., Liu, C., Niemi, V., & Yu, G. (2010). Effects of displaying trust information on mobile application usage. In Paper presented at the proceedings of the 7th international conference on autonomic and trusted computing, Xi’an, China.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cassell, J., & Bickmore, T. (2003). Negotiated collusion: Modeling social language and its relationship effects in intelligent agents. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 13(1), 89–132. doi:10.1023/a:1024026532471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203–220. doi:10.1016/s0022-4359(01)00041-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Requirements Engineering Laboratory, School of Information TechnologyKing Mongkut’s University of Technology ThonburiBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations