conditions are ‘compatibility’ from the DOI model and
perceived behavioral control from TPB/DTPB,
TAM/TPB, and MPCU (Yeow & Loo, 2009).
5.5 UTAUT2: An Extension of the UTAUT
Model
In 2012, Venkatesh, Thong, and Xu revised and updated
UTAUT and included various constructs such as habit,
hedonic motivation, and price value. The new model is
called the modified (or extended) unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT2). The validation of
the study of UTAUT2 included two-stage online survey
results of 1512 mobile consumers in Hong Kong in the
context of the adoption of mobile phones (Venkatesh et al.,
2012, p. 166).
Constructs of UTAUT2: The UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al.,
2012) model has two dependent variables: ‘behavioral
intention’ and ‘usage behavior’. The independent variables
of UTAUT2 include: ‘effort expectancy’, ‘performance
expectancy’, ‘social influence’, ‘facilitating conditions’,
‘hedonic motivation’, ‘habit’, and ‘price value’. The gender,
age, and experience act as moderating variables of UTAUT2
(Venkatesh et al., 2003). Venkatesh et al. (2012) added three
new variables (hedonic motivation, habit, and price value)
with UTAUT2 in the context of mobile phones.
• Hedonic Motivation (HM): According to Venkatesh
et al. (2012) hedonic motivation is “the fun or pleasure
derived from using a technology” (p. 161). According to
Brown and Venkatesh (2005), as cited by Venkatesh et al.
(2012), hedonic motivation “plays an important role in
determining technology acceptance and use” (p. 161) and
it is a significant predictor of technology adoption (Brown
& Venkatesh, 2005; Van der Heijden, 2004). In IS
research, the hedonic motivation, also known as perceived enjoyment, is the key variable that impacts an
individual to adapt and use the technology (Thong et al.,
2006).
• Habit: Habit is the automatic behavior that enables
learning on how to use the technology. The previous use
of technology becomes a habit, and habit becomes a
significant determinant of future use (Kim & Malhotra,
2005). Venkatesh et al. (2012) outlined the difference
between habit and previous experience. According to
Venkatesh et al. (2012), the ‘experience’ refers to an
opportunity to use new technology and is normally
operationalized gradually from the initial use of a technology by a user, whereas ‘habit’ is related to the automatic behavior of people because of the learning.
Experience is associated with the chronological time that
results in the formation of different levels of habit. For
instance, over three months, different people will have
different levels of habit depending upon the use of technology (Venkatesh et al., 2012). Limayem, Hirt and
Cheung (2007) stated that habit is not only linked with
the usage of technology, but it also moderates the impact
of intention on the usage of technology such that
behavioral intention becomes less important with the
increase of habit. The empirical findings show that habit
influences technology use (Venkatesh et al., 2012).
• Price Value: The cost or price may be the key influence
of a user’s technology adoption and use (Venkatesh et al.,
2012). The pricing and cost issues may have an impact on
the consumers’ technology use (Abdullah & Khanam,
2016), but this study deals with the LMS adoption by the
instructors. The cost or price structure of the LMS is
relevant to higher management or with the organizational
settings; the employees (instructors) do not bear the
monetary cost (Venkatesh et al., 2012) of LMS. Therefore, the construct ‘Price Value’ has been excluded from
this research.
Figure 5.13 represents the original UTAUT2 model.
UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al., 2012) is different from the
original UTAUT (Venkatesh et al., 2003) model because of
the models such as the MPCU, UTAUT, TAM, TAM2, and
TAM3 were formulated in an organizational and business
context, whereas UTAUT2 was developed to predict the
user behavior of consumers in the context of mobile phones.
In UTAUT2, the moderating variable, ‘voluntariness’
between social influence and behavioral intention has been
removed. In UTAUT2, three new variables, that is, price
value, habit, and hedonic motivation have been added as
independent with the behavioral intention (BI).
5.6 Variables Considered for UTAUT
and UTAUT2
It is evident from Table 5.1 that UTAUT and UTAUT 2
included almost all variables used in other models (San
Martin & Herrero, 2012).
5.4 Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT)
37
perceived behavioral control from TPB/DTPB,
TAM/TPB, and MPCU (Yeow & Loo, 2009).
5.5 UTAUT2: An Extension of the UTAUT
Model
In 2012, Venkatesh, Thong, and Xu revised and updated
UTAUT and included various constructs such as habit,
hedonic motivation, and price value. The new model is
called the modified (or extended) unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT2). The validation of
the study of UTAUT2 included two-stage online survey
results of 1512 mobile consumers in Hong Kong in the
context of the adoption of mobile phones (Venkatesh et al.,
2012, p. 166).
Constructs of UTAUT2: The UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al.,
2012) model has two dependent variables: ‘behavioral
intention’ and ‘usage behavior’. The independent variables
of UTAUT2 include: ‘effort expectancy’, ‘performance
expectancy’, ‘social influence’, ‘facilitating conditions’,
‘hedonic motivation’, ‘habit’, and ‘price value’. The gender,
age, and experience act as moderating variables of UTAUT2
(Venkatesh et al., 2003). Venkatesh et al. (2012) added three
new variables (hedonic motivation, habit, and price value)
with UTAUT2 in the context of mobile phones.
• Hedonic Motivation (HM): According to Venkatesh
et al. (2012) hedonic motivation is “the fun or pleasure
derived from using a technology” (p. 161). According to
Brown and Venkatesh (2005), as cited by Venkatesh et al.
(2012), hedonic motivation “plays an important role in
determining technology acceptance and use” (p. 161) and
it is a significant predictor of technology adoption (Brown
& Venkatesh, 2005; Van der Heijden, 2004). In IS
research, the hedonic motivation, also known as perceived enjoyment, is the key variable that impacts an
individual to adapt and use the technology (Thong et al.,
2006).
• Habit: Habit is the automatic behavior that enables
learning on how to use the technology. The previous use
of technology becomes a habit, and habit becomes a
significant determinant of future use (Kim & Malhotra,
2005). Venkatesh et al. (2012) outlined the difference
between habit and previous experience. According to
Venkatesh et al. (2012), the ‘experience’ refers to an
opportunity to use new technology and is normally
operationalized gradually from the initial use of a technology by a user, whereas ‘habit’ is related to the automatic behavior of people because of the learning.
Experience is associated with the chronological time that
results in the formation of different levels of habit. For
instance, over three months, different people will have
different levels of habit depending upon the use of technology (Venkatesh et al., 2012). Limayem, Hirt and
Cheung (2007) stated that habit is not only linked with
the usage of technology, but it also moderates the impact
of intention on the usage of technology such that
behavioral intention becomes less important with the
increase of habit. The empirical findings show that habit
influences technology use (Venkatesh et al., 2012).
• Price Value: The cost or price may be the key influence
of a user’s technology adoption and use (Venkatesh et al.,
2012). The pricing and cost issues may have an impact on
the consumers’ technology use (Abdullah & Khanam,
2016), but this study deals with the LMS adoption by the
instructors. The cost or price structure of the LMS is
relevant to higher management or with the organizational
settings; the employees (instructors) do not bear the
monetary cost (Venkatesh et al., 2012) of LMS. Therefore, the construct ‘Price Value’ has been excluded from
this research.
Figure 5.13 represents the original UTAUT2 model.
UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al., 2012) is different from the
original UTAUT (Venkatesh et al., 2003) model because of
the models such as the MPCU, UTAUT, TAM, TAM2, and
TAM3 were formulated in an organizational and business
context, whereas UTAUT2 was developed to predict the
user behavior of consumers in the context of mobile phones.
In UTAUT2, the moderating variable, ‘voluntariness’
between social influence and behavioral intention has been
removed. In UTAUT2, three new variables, that is, price
value, habit, and hedonic motivation have been added as
independent with the behavioral intention (BI).
5.6 Variables Considered for UTAUT
and UTAUT2
It is evident from Table 5.1 that UTAUT and UTAUT 2
included almost all variables used in other models (San
Martin & Herrero, 2012).
5.4 Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT)
37