PDF (English)
FLIP
Autores
Resumo
Falsifiability determines whether an empirical theory is scientific or not, hence any theory that aims at complying this feature must satisfy such condition. Despite its relevance in other areas of science the use of the concepts pertaining to falsifiability to evaluate the empirical nature of hypotheses in the field of new technologies of information and communication or, in particular, in the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (hereafter, UTAUT) is infrequent. This paper analyzes three hypotheses advanced by the UTAUT to explain factors that favor the use of technology in several fields in order to determine whether those hypotheses satisfy the condition of falsifiability and whether they perform well according to several empirical tests. To do this, we took into account 6 research papers on the UTAUT published between 2003 and 2023, then we analyzed falsifying instances which allowed us to evaluate, by usin Popper’s theory of science, the main hypotheses selected. The results show that the central hypotheses of UTAUT were falsified as made clear by the six research works analyzed which counterexamples refute the following claims: Performance Expectative (PE), Behavioral Intention (BI) and Social Influence (SI). Our results are consistent with Popper’s views about the falsifiability of any kind of empirical theory and support the conclusion that the UTAUT is a scientific theory.
Referências
Chang I.-C., Hwang H.-G., Hung W.-F., Li Y.-C. (2007). Physicians’ acceptance of pharmacokinetics-based clinical decision support systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 33(2): 296–303.
Chiu C.-M., Huang H.-Y., Yen C.-H. (2010). Antecedents of trust in online auctions. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9(2): 148–159.
García Duque C.E. (2019). Karl Popper: el conocimiento objetivo y el mundo 3.Editorial Universidad de Caldas.
King W.R., He J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model.Information & Management, 43(6): 740–755.
Lee Y., Kozar K.A., Larsen K.R.T. (2003). The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 12(1): 50.
Miller D. (2007). The objectives of science. Philosophia Scientiae, 11(1): 21–43.
Newton I. (1993). Principios matemáticos de la filosofía natural [1687: Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica], trad. y estudio preliminar A. Escohotado, Altaya, Barcelona,.
Popper K. (1991b). “Los dos significados de falsabilidad.” Revista de Filosofía 3a Época, IV(5): 3–11.
Popper K.C. (1962). Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Basic Books,New York.
POPPER K.R. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery, I934. English Edition:Hutchinson,.
Van Biljon J., Renaud K. (2008). A qualitative study of the applicability of technology acceptance models to senior mobile phone users. Advances in Conceptual Modeling–Challenges and Opportunities: ER 2008 Workshops CMLSA, ECDM, FP-UML, M2AS, RIGiM, SeCoGIS, WISM, Barcelona Spain, October 20-23, 2008. Proceedings 27, 228–237.
Venkatesh V., Morris M.G., Davis G.B., Davis F.D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 425–478.
Venkatesh V., Thong J.Y.L., Xu X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 157–178.
Wang Y.-S., Shih Y.-W. (2009). Why do people use information kiosks? A validation of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology.
Government Information Quarterly, 26(1): 158–165.
Williams M.D., Rana N.P., Dwivedi Y.K. (2015). The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): a literature review. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(3): 443–488.
