The UTAUT and Electronic Brainstorming in a Wiki
(This research proposal was submitted to A/P Angeline Khoo in April 2005 for the “MSS802: Implications of Social Psychology Theories & Research for Educators” module at the National Institute of Education, Singapore.)
1. Research question
Will Ngee Ann Polytechnic (or most polytechnic) students be motivated into active electronic brainstorming in a Wiki environment, as predicted in the Unified Theory of Acceptance & Use of Technology (Venkatesh, Morris & Davis, 2003)?
2. Significance
The Unified Theory of Acceptance & Use of Technology (UTAUT) was formulated by Venkatesh, Morris, Davis & Davis (2003) based on the Davis’ Technology Acceptance Model (1989) as well as empirical comparisons, testing and integration of seven other prominent models of information technology acceptance. Many of these models have social psychological underpinnings, for example, the Theory of Reasoned Action (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991), and the Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986).
As a result, the four determinants of user acceptance and usage behavior in the UTAUT (Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, Facilitating Conditions and Social Influence) correspond quite closely to two “big ideas in social psychology” (Myers, 2005, p.6), namely, “Attitudes shape behavior”, “Social influences shape our behavior”. Three moderators in the UTAUT (Gender, Age and Experience), on the other hand, correspond closely to the third “big idea”, “Dispositions shape behavior”.
According to Venkatesh, et al (2003), the UTAUT “provides a useful tool for managers (facilitators) to assess the likelihood of success for new technology introductions and helps them understand the drivers of acceptance in order to proactively design interventions (including training, marketing, etc.) targeted at populations of users that may be less inclined to adopt and use new systems.”
To verify whether the determinants actually translate into expected behavior, it is essential to measure the actual behavior and not just the attitude or intention. So, I have chosen to apply the UTAUT on the usage of electronic brainstorming.
Brainstorming is a well-known tool of creative problem solving (Fernald & Nickolenko, 1993; Leclef, 1994). It is also simple, easy to learn and has potential to dramatically improve group idea generation and enjoyment with the activity itself (Isaksen, 1998). Osborn (1967) made some bold assertions regarding brainstorming’s effectiveness and backed up his claims by indicating that, in one study, a group using brainstorming produced 44% more worthwhile ideas than individuals thinking up suggestions without the benefit of group discussion.
However, time and again, researchers have found that people working alone usually will generate more good ideas than will the same people in a group. Large brainstorming groups are especially inefficient, causing some individuals to free-ride on others’ efforts or to feel apprehensive about voicing oddball ideas. In addition, while new categories are being primed by the group, individuals’ ideas are often impeded by the context that only allows one person to speak at a time (Myers, 2005).
