User decision-making factors in software interface design acceptance

Interface Design & Software Acceptance

Interface Design & Software Applications

Previous research efforts have focused on particular pre-existing software with little focus on behavioral antecedents. Theoretical perspectives highlight the need for marketers to understand the importance of the adoption and acceptance process of next generation software in the current market. Conclusions from research have indicated a gap for behavioral antecedents that have led to a void in marketer's ability to understand and predict consumer behavior.

Lack of user acceptance impedes the success of new software. User acceptance is a pivotal factor in whether software will be used. Usability involves effectiveness, efficiency, engagement, error tolerance, and ease of learning (Quesenbery, n.d.). Accessibility involves usefulness to measure whether the actual users can achieve the goals (Anon., 2000). Interface design affects whether users use particular software. The study is to determine how users make decisions to use software based on the interface design. How the user experiences the end product is key to acceptance (Usernomics, n.d.). There are new trends of cluster computing that are creating standardization for the abilities of third party independent software suppliers to produce building blocks to support trends of off-the-shelf hardware and software that can be pieced together creating specifications for products to be built with the promise of interchangeability (Macwan, 2006). Reliability has become a vast and critical area.

1.2 Background

a) Previous research efforts focused on particular pre-existing technology with little focus on behavioral antecedents (Anon., 2008). Behavioral antecedents can help marketers and practioners understand why consumers purchase particular interface designs in software. There needs to be more research on the behavioral antecedents in an effort to determine more human factors involved in the decisions on interface design.

b) Previous studies focused on consumer habits and old technologies without any focus on new technology and how the interface design is used to make decisions about the acceptance of software. There is interest among practioners and researchers in understanding why people accept technologies for the better methods of design, evaluation, and prediction for how users will respond with new technologies (Dillon, 1996). While the elements of software are usability and flexibility (Anon., 2006) the degree an individual may function can be affected by accessibility, situational factors, and subjective perception (Axup, 2004). Usage philosophy is influenced by cultural differences that can cause acceptance problems or rejection (Zuhlke, 2006). Developers have a different view of the product, a different skill set, and often enforce their own desires instead of those from the end user (Giuliana, 2002). The human factor goals with software are the intuitive interface, easiest interaction possible, and help to complete tasks. What people see influences how they feel and what they understand (Daniel, 1999). Factors involved are development factors, visibility factors, and acceptance factors (Martin, n.d.). Actual results may differ materially from those stated or implied (Anon., 2012).

1.3 Research Aims & Objectives

This research aims to determine what factors of interface design users use to determine what software they will use to meet their goals. This research will need a survey of questions with the answers being analyzed with statistical methods to determine how what factors about interface design they use to make decisions about software use. It aims to lead to prediction, explanation, and understanding.

1.4 Research questions: This study will answer the question of what factors about interface design influences users to use software. It is important for practioners and marketers to understand why people would use particular software to determine consumer needs and desires.

1.5 Hypothesis:

(H1) Perceived ease of use will have a significant positive influence of attitude toward using. (H2) Perceived usefulness will have a significant positive influence on use. (H3) Behavioral intentions will have a significant positive influence of actual use.

1.6 Rationale

The reason for this research would be to determine the human factors that play into the factors of interface design in making decisions for software use.

1.7 Reflections

The study focuses on decision making process of how consumers make decisions for products and services they need and concludes that there is a research gap for behavioral antecedents that has led to a void in marketer's ability to understand and predict consumer behavior.

1.8 Scope

The scope of the study is to have participants use new software and answer questions on the questionnaire. Limitations may occur from participants not understanding or misunderstanding the questions. Participants may not give honest answers for fear of impressing the researcher.

1.12 Research Design

A survey research methodology is considered appropriate. It is concerned with drawing a sample from a population, studying results from the questionnaire, and making inferences about the population. It will follow a three phase approach. Phase one will be an indepth analysis of relevant literature. In order to generalize about regularities in human and social behavior, it will require a sample of sufficient size. Phase two will be an empirical study with the selected sample to gather relevant data to test the hypothesis in using chosen emerging software. Data from surveys enable the use of hypothetico-deductive methodology. In phase three the researcher will arrive at conclusions by interpreting the meanings from the results of the data analysis.

1.13 Analysis and discussion:

Hierarchical multiple regression was used to assess overall model and the impact of each variable in determining actual use. Cronbach's Alpha (Morris, 1997) was used to access scale reliability and establish validity and reliability of scales. The reliability analysis was used to access the stability of scales.

1.14 Implementation of Research project

Implementation will start off the project with a mailing to invite participants to the study.

1.15 Research Evaluation

Research evaluation will be conducted using statistical analysis of the results from the methodology results in a deductive methodology manner.

1.16 Conclusions

Previous research indicates the need for further investigation into the behavioral antecedents that determine the decisions consumers make about interface design for the use of software.

1.17 Recommendations and future work

More research needs to be done regarding the behavioral antecedents that determine how consumers make decisions regarding the use of software.

1.18 References

Ajzen, I., 1985. From intention to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior, Volume Kuh, J. & Beckham, J. eds, pp. 11-39.

Anon., 2000. Usaility in Software Design. [Online]

Available at: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms997577.aspx [Accessed 18 Aug 2012].

Anon., 2006. On the Importance of Good User Interface Design. [Online]

Available at: http://www.articlesbase.com/software-articles/on-the-importance-of-good-user-interface-design-73538.html

[Accessed 18 Aug 2012].

Anon., 2008. Modeling the Acceptance of Next Generation ICTs: A Critical Approach. [Online]

Available at: http://tara.tcd.ie/bitstream/2262/29486/1/paper%20doc%20AM2008.doc

[Accessed 18 Aug 2012].

Anon., 2012. Fujitsu Introduces First Smartphone with Immersion Hd Haptics. [Online]

Available at: http://it.tmcnet.com/news/2012/08/02/6483623.htm

[Accessed 18 Aug 2012].

Axup, J., 2004. Effects of Interface Design on Mobile, Group Behavior. [Online]

Available at: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com/2004/'09/effects-of-interface-design-on-mobile.html

[Accessed 18 Aug 2012].

Baggozzi, R.P. & W.P.R., 1990. Trying to Consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, Volume 17, pp. 127-140.

Compeau, D.R. & H.C.A., 1995. Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), pp. 189-211.

Daniel, M.P.M. & T.M., 1999. User Interface Design. [Online]

Available at: http://members.tripod.com/the_packrat/ui_design.html

[Accessed 18 Aug 2012].

Dillon, A. & M.M.G., 1996. User acceptance of new information technology: theories and models. M. Williams (ed.) Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Volume 31, pp. 3-32.

Giuliana, D., 2002. User Interface Design Explained. [Online]

Available at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/16257/User-Interface-Design-Explained

[Accessed 18 Aug 2012].

Howard, J.A., 1989. Consumer Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Macwan, A.P.H.R.S. & M.K.K., 2006. Reliability and communications networks. Bell Labs Technical Journal, 11(3), pp. 1-6.

Martin, S., n.d. Effective Visual Communication for Graphical User Interface. [Online]

Available at: http://web.cs.wpi.edu/~matt/courses/cs563/talks/smartin/int_design.html

[Accessed 18 Aug 2012].

Morris, M.D.A., 1997. How User Perceptions Influence Software Use. IEEE Software, 14(4), pp. 58-65.

Quesenbery, W., n.d. More than ease of use. [Online]

Available at: http://wgusability.com/articles/more-than-ease-of-use.html

[Accessed 18 Aug 2012].

Shih, Y. & F.K., 2004. The use of a decomposed theory of planned behaviour to study internet banking in Taiwan. Internet Research, 14(3), pp. 213-223.

Usernomics, n.d. User Interface Design. [Online]

Available at: http://www.usernomics.com/user-interface-design.html

[Accessed 18 Aug 2012].

Venkatesh, V.M.M.G.D.G.B. & D.F.D., 2003. User acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), pp. 425-478.

Zuhlke, D., 2006. The Impact of Globalization on user-interface design. [Online]

Available at: http://www.tekom.de/index_neu.jsp?url=/servlet/ControllerGUI?action=voll&id=1879

[Accessed 18 Aug 2012].