Intentions to use mobile services: Antecedents and cross-service comparisons

  • Herbjørn Nysveen
  • Per E. Pedersen
  • Helge Thorbjørnsen


This article develops and tests a model to explain consumers’ intention to use mobile services. Through triangulating theories from the diverse fields of information systems research, uses and gratification research, and domestication research, the authors put forth an integrated model that explains intention to use mobile services. The model proposes four overall influences on usage intention: motivational influences, attitudinal influences, normative pressure, and perceived control. The authors study the type of interactivity and process characteristics associated with the service that moderate the effects on the relationship between the proposed antecedents and usage intention. The results from empirical studies of four mobile services show strong support for the effects of motivational influences, attitudinal influences, normative pressure, and perceived control on consumers’ intentions to use mobile services. Some of the effects are moderated by process characteristics (goal-directed vs. experiential services) that are associated with the service.


mobile services technology acceptance adoption structural equation modeling 


  1. Agarwal, Ritu and Elena Karahanna. 2000. “Time Hies When You’re Having Fun: Cognitive Absorption and Beliefs About Information Technology Usage.”MIS Quarterly 24:665–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajzen, Icek. 1991. “The Theory of Planned Behavior.”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50:179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arbuckle, James L. and Werner Wothke. 1999.Amos 4.0 User’s Gguide. Chicago: SmallWaters.Google Scholar
  4. Bagozzi, Richard P. 1982. “A Field Investigation of Causal Relations Among Cognitions, Affect, Intentions, and Behavior.”Journal of Marketing Research 19:562–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balasubramanian, Sridhar, Robert A. Peterson, and Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa. 2002. “Exploring the Implications of M-Commerce for Markets and Marketing.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 30 (4): 348–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhattacherjee, Anol. 2000. “Acceptance of E-commerce Services: The Case of Electronic Brokerages.”IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 30:411–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlson, Dawn S. and Pamela L. Perrewe. 1999. “The Role of Social Support in the Stressor-Strain Relationship: An Examination of Work-Family Conflict.”Journal of Management 25:513–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chin, Wynne W. 1998. “Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling.”MIS Quarterly 22:vii-xvi.Google Scholar
  9. Dabholkar, Pratibha A. and Richard P. Bagozzi. 2002. “An Attitudinal Model of Technology-Based Self-Service: Moderating Effects of Consumer Traits and Situational Factors.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 30 (3): 184–202.Google Scholar
  10. Davis, Fred D. 1989. “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology.”MIS Quarterly 13:319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. —, Richard P. Bagozzi, and Paul R. Warshaw. 1989. “User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models.”Management Science 35:982–1002.Google Scholar
  12. —— and —. 1992. “Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace.”Journal of Applied Social Psychology 22 (14): 1111–1132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Doll, William J., Anthony Hendrickson, and Xiaodong Deng. 1998. “Using Davis’s Perceived Usefulness and Ease-of-Use Instruments for Decision Making: A Confirmatory and Multigroup Invariance Analysis.”Decision Sciences 29:839–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fishbein, Martin and Ieek Ajzen. 1975.Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  15. “Fun on the Run; Games on Mobile Phones.” 2002.The Economist 363 (8273): 88.Google Scholar
  16. Hair, Joseph R, Rolph E. Anderson, Ronald L. Tatham, and William C. Black. 1998.Multivariate Data Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  17. Hoffman, Donna L. and Thomas P. Novak. 1996. “Marketing in Hypermedia Computer-Mediated Environments: Conceptual Foundations.”Journal of Marketing 60 (July): 50–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Höflich, Joachim R. and Patrick Rossler. 2001. “Mobile schriftliche Kommunikation oder: E-Mail für das Handy.”Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft 49:437–461.Google Scholar
  19. Hung, Shin-Yuan, Cheng-Yuan Ku, and Chia-Ming Chang. 2003. “Critical Factors of WAP Services Adoption: An Empirical Study.”Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 2:42–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Igbaria, Magid, Saroj Parasuraman, and Jack J. Baroudi. 1996. “A Motivational Model of Microcomputer Usage.”Journal of Management Information Systems 13 (1): 127–143.Google Scholar
  21. Johnson, Madeline, George M. Zinkhan, and Gail S. Ayala. 1998. “The Impact of Outcome, Competency and Affect on Service Referral.”Journal of Services Marketing 12 (5): 397–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaseniemi, Eija-Liisa and Pirjo Rautiainen. 2002. “Mobile Culture of Children and Teenagers in Finland.” InPerpetual Contact. Eds. James E. Katz and Mark Aakhus. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Katz, Elihu and Jay G. Blumler. 1974.The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Konana, Prabhudev and Sridhar Balasubramanian. 2005. “A Social-Economic-Psychological Model of Technology Adoption and Usage: An Application to Online Investing.”Decision Support Systems, 39 (3): 505–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Koufaris, Marios. 2002. “Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and Flow Theory to Online Consumer Behavior.”Information Systems Research 13 (2): 205–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Leung, Louis. 2001. “College Student Motives for Chatting on the ICQ.”New Media & Society 3:483–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. — and Ran Wei. 1999. “The Gratifications of Pager Use: Sociability, Information-Seeking, Entertainment, Utility, and Fashion and Status.”Telematics and Informatics 15 (4): 253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. — and —. 2000. “More Than Just Talk on the Move: Uses and Gratifications of the Cellular Phone.”Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 77:308–320.Google Scholar
  29. Lin, Carolyn A. 1996. “Looking Back: The Contribution of Blumler and Katz’s Uses of Mass Communication Research.”Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 40:574–582.Google Scholar
  30. Ling, Richard S. 2001. “It Is ‘In.’ It Doesn’t Matter if You Need It or Not, Just That You Have It: Fashion and the Domestication of the Mobile Telephone Among Teens in Norway.” Working Paper, Telenor R&D, Norway.Google Scholar
  31. —. 2004.The Mobile Connection: The Cell Phone’s Impact on Society. New York: Morgan Kaufman.Google Scholar
  32. Lovelock, Cristopher H. 1983. “Classifying Services to Gain Strategic Marketing Insights.”Journal of Marketing 47 (Summer): 9–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lutz, Richard J. 1977. “An Experimental Investigation of Causal Relations Among Cognition, Affect, and Behavioral Intention.”Journal of Consumer Research 3 (March): 197–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meuter, Matthew L., Amy L. Ostrom, Robert I. Roundtree, and Mary J. Bitner. 2000. “Self-Service Technologies: Understanding Customer Satisfaction With Technology-Based Service Encounters.”Journal of Marketing 64 (July): 50–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mittal, Banwari. 1994. “A Study of the Concept of Affective Choice Mode for Consumer Decisions.” InAdvances in Consumer Research, Vol. 21. Eds. Chris T. Allen and Deborah Roedder-John. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 256–263.Google Scholar
  36. Nunnally, Jum C. 1978.Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  37. Parasuraman, A. and George M. Zinkhan. 2002. “Marketing to and Serving Customers Through the Internet: An Overview and Research Agenda.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 30:286–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Podsakoff, Phillip M., Scott MacKenzie, Jeong-Yeon Lee, and Nathan P. Podsakoff. 2003. “Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies.”Journal of Applied Psychology 88: 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosenberg, Milton J. 1956. “Cognitive Structure and Attitudinal Affect.”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 53:367–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rust, Roland T., Choi Lee, and Ernest Valente Jr. 1995. “Comparing Covariance Structure Models: A General Methodology.”International Journal of Research in Marketing 12:279–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sherry, John, Kristen Lucas, Stephany Rechtsteiner, Christi Brooks, and Brooke Wilson. 2001. “Video Game Use and Gratifications as Predictors of Use and Game Preference.” Paper presented at the 51 th convention of the International Communication Association, May 24–28, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  42. Silverstone, Roger and Eric Hirsch. 1992.Consuming Technologies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Skog, Berit. 2002. “Mobiles and the Norwegian Teen: Identity, Gender and Class.” InPerpetual Contact. Eds. James E. Katz and Mark Aakhus. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Steuer, Jonathan. 1992. “Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence.”Journal of Communications 42 (4): 73–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stryker, Sheldon and Peter J. Burke. 2000. “The Past Present and Future of Identity Theory.”Social Psychology Quarterly 63:284–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sujan, Harish, Barton A. Weitz, and Nirmalya Kumar. 1994. “Learning Orientation, Working Smart, and Effective Selling.”Journal of Marketing 58:39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Taylor, Shirley and Peter A. Todd. 1995. “Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models.”Information Systems Research 6:144–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Te’eni, Dov. 2001. “Review: A Cognitive-Affective Model of Organizational Communication for Designing IT.”MIS Quarterly 25 (2): 251–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Teo, T. S. H. and Siau Heong Pok. 2003. “Adoption of WAP-Enabled Mobile Phones Among Internet Users.”Omega 31: 483–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Venkatesh, Viswanath. 2000. “Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion Into the Technology Acceptance Model.”Information Systems Research 11 (4): 342–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. — and Fred D. Davis. 2000. “A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies.”Management Science 46:186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Watson, Richard T, Leyland F. Pitt, Pierre Berthon, and George M. Zinkhan. 2002. “U-Commerce: Expanding the Universe of Marketing.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 30 (4): 333–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Williams, Larry J., Joseph A. Cote, and Ronald Buckley. 1989. “Lack of Method Variance in Self-Reported Affect and Perceptions at Work: Reality or Artifact?”Journal of Applied Psychology 81:88–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zinkhan, George M. and Melanie Wallendorf. 1985. “Service-Set Similarities in Patterns of Consumer Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction.”International Journal of Research in Marketing 2 (4): 227–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Herbjørn Nysveen
    • 1
  • Per E. Pedersen
    • 2
  • Helge Thorbjørnsen
    • 1
  1. 1.Norwegian School of Economics and Business AdministrationNorway
  2. 2.Agder University CollegeNorway

Personalised recommendations