Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.023291955 = product of:
  0.04658391 = sum of:
    0.04658391 = product of:
      0.09316782 = sum of:
        0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09316782 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Many scientific fields share common interests for research and education. Yet, very often, these fields do not communicate to each other and are unaware of the work in other fields. Understanding the commonalities and differences among related fields can broaden our understanding of the interested phenomena from various perspectives, better utilize resources, enhance collaboration, and eventually move the related fields forward together. In this article, we present a conceptual framework, namely the Information-Model or I-model, to describe various aspects of information related fields. We consider this a timely effort in light of the evolutions of several information related fields and a set of questions related to the identities of these fields. It is especially timely in defining the newly formed Information Field from a community of twenty some information schools. We posit that the information related fields are built on a number of other fields but with their own unique foci and concerns. That is, core components from other fundamental fields interact and integrate with each other to form dynamic and interesting information related fields that all have to do with information, technology, people, and organization/society. The conceptual framework can have a number of uses. Besides providing a unified view of these related fields, it can be used to examine old case studies, recent research projects, educational programs and curricula concerns, as well as to illustrate the commonalities and differences with the information related fields.

0.023291955 = product of:
  0.04658391 = sum of:
    0.04658391 = product of:
      0.09316782 = sum of:
        0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 1876) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09316782 = score(doc=1876,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 1876, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1876)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Affect factors have gained researchers' attention in a number of fields. The Information Systems (IS) literature, however, shows some gaps and inconsistencies regarding the role of affect factors in human-computer interaction. Building upon prior research, this study aims at a better understanding of affect factors by clarifying their relationships with each other and with other primary user acceptance factors. Two affect variables that are different in nature were examined: computer playfulness (CP) and perceived enjoyment (PE). We theoretically clarified and methodologically verified their mediating effects and causal relationships with other primary factors influencing user technology acceptance, namely perceived ease of use (PEOU), perceived usefulness (PU), and behavioral intention (BI). Quantitative data were analyzed using R.M. Baron and D. Kenny's (1986) method for mediating effects and P.R. Cohen, A. Carlsson, L. Ballesteros, and R.S. Amant's (1993) path analysis method for causal relationships. These analyses largely supported our hypotheses. Results from this research indicate that a PE -> PEOU causal direction is favored, and PEOU partially mediates PE's impacts on PU whereas PE fully mediates CP's impact on PEOU. With the increased interest in various affect factors in user technology acceptance and use, our study sheds light on the role of affect factors from both theoretical and methodological perspectives. Practical implications are discussed as well.

0.008563388 = product of:
  0.017126776 = sum of:
    0.017126776 = product of:
      0.034253553 = sum of:
        0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034253553 = score(doc=1344,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1344, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1344)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 8.2014 16:55:39