examining the cultural difference in acceptance of mobile augmented reality: comparison of south...

ENTER 2015 Research Track Slide Number 1

Examining the Cultural Difference in Acceptance of Mobile Augmented Reality

: Comparison of South Korea and Ireland

aHyunae Lee, bNamho Chung & cTimothy Jung

aKyungHee University, South Korea

[email protected] University, South Korea

[email protected] Metropolitan University, United Kingdom

[email protected]

http://www.ifitt.org/



CONTENT

1. Introduction

2. Theoretical background

3. Hypothesis development

4. Research method

5. Analysis and results

6. Discussion, Implication, Limitation




Introduction

virtual 3D images or information that superimposed on the real-world view

captured from camera of device

becoming more accessible to wider users with explosive growth of penetration rates of smartphone

Daehanmun gate

Junghwajeon

58m

Seokjojeon

76m

Daehanmun Gate is the main gate of

Deoksugung Palace. Located in the east, it

became the main entrance of the palace after

the completion of Wongudan Altar

(Hwangudan Altar). The original main gate

was Inhwamun. In 1970, it was moved to the

west because of the nearby expansion of

Taepyeong-no Street.

HDR




Introduction

Cultural heritage tourism (one of the most important areas served by mobile AR app)

Let tourists perceive funand usefulness

A feature of immersing its users in virtually enhanced real world (Di Serio et al., 2013)

passively participates in activities while immersed in tourism sites

AR apps are enhancing aesthetic experience of tourist

A considerable number of heritage institutions or organizations around the world have

developed and provided with their mobile AR apps.

Prevent degradation of cultural heritage sites

aggravated by frequent access by tourists

(Adhani & Awang, 2012; Portalés et al., 2009; Tutunea, 2013)

(Haugstvedt & Krogstie, 2012; Portalés et al., 2009; Stanco et al., 2012)

AR provides digitally restored artifacts




Introduction

In order to assess the influence of cultural difference, prior research papers have selected

over two countries which have similar level of social or technological development

but with very different culture profiles

(e.g., Cho & Cheon (2005) – U.S., U.K., Korea, and Japan (Because these countries are the greatest advertising

revenues in western and eastern cultures respectively but with noticeably difference

cultural profiles)

Cultural

differenceinfluence

AR

acceptancethe process having behavioral intention to use

information systems varies in different cultures

(Cho & Cheon, 2005; Harris et al., 2005; Kim et al., 2011; Srite & Karahanna, 2006)




Introduction

Richter, F. (2013, August 27). The United States Ranks 13th in Smartphone Penetration. Statista. Retrieved from http://www.statista.com/chart/1405/the-united-states-ranks-

13th-in-smartphone-penetration/

Top 15 countries with the highest smartphone penetration in Q1 2013

Investigated 15 countries that ranked as high as Korea on smartphone penetration rates




Introduction

Masculinityfeminine masculine

Ind

ivid

ual

ist

coll

ecti

vis

tIn

div

idu

ali

sm

Korea

Ireland

Power distancesmall large

stro

ng

wea

k

Un

cert

ain

ty

avoid

an

ceKorea

Ireland

Based on Hofstede (2000)




Introduction

1,634 items of including pictures, videos and

3D images related to the Deoksugung palace

and nearby point-of-interest through AR.

Deoksugung palace (One of the royal palaces in Korea)

An Post Museum(One of the historic buildings in the Dublin’s independence trail)

text, pictures and video about An Post Museum

‘Deoksugung in my hands’ ‘Dublin AR’

Both countries have actively launched AR apps in cultural heritage sites.




Introduction

Ireland

Korea- Smartphone penetration rates: 57.0% (Rank 11)

- Masculinity culture

- Low power distance culture

- Individualism

- Low uncertainty avoidance

- Smartphone penetration rates: 73.0% (Rank 2)

- Femininity culture

- High power distance culture

- Collectivism

- High uncertainty avoidance

High level of smartphone penetration rates

Interest in AR app

Noticeably different cultural profiles

(Hofstede, 2000)




Introduction

to assess the impact of aesthetics and perceived attributes including

enjoyment on behavioral intention to use AR in cultural heritage tourism sites

The aim of this study ..

to investigate the influence of cultural difference between South Korea

and Ireland on these causal sequences




Theoretical Background

1. Aesthetic and Hedonic Features of Augmented Reality

AR has a feature of immersing its users in virtually enhanced real world (Di Serio et al., 2013)

The tourists who use AR apps in tourism sites passively participate in activities and do not

directly affect or influence the performance while immersed in tourism sites

Immersion

becoming physically or

virtually a part of the

experience itself

Passive participation

(A)Esthetic experience

one of the 4 realms of experience economy Pine & Gilmore (1998)

“indulged in environments” (Oh et al., 2007)





1. Aesthetic and Hedonic Features of Augmented Reality

Perceived

usefulness

Perceived

enjoyment

Motivational

theory(Deci, 1975)

Extrinsic

motivation

Intrinsic

motivation

the drive of utilitarian

purpose of AR usage

the drive of hedonic

purpose of AR usage

Utilitarian

feature of AR

Hedonic

feature of AR

Perceived

ease of use





2. Cultural Difference

Cultural

background

and the process of IS acceptance can be influenced by culture.

We drew upon the measure of cultural dimensions of Hofstede (1980) and

examined the influence of cultural difference on AR acceptance between two countries in this study.

In tourism research

Cross-cultural difference = significant factor

∵ cultural background of tourists is related to the experience they seek.

Investigating cultural difference among the tourists has been regarded as

basis for successful marketing strategy (Landauer et al., 2013)

Tourism industry, combined with IT,

is facing increasing number of inbound tourists from various culture (Tsang& Ap, 2007)

Cultural difference = barrier to technology





2. Cultural Difference

(Hofstede, 1991)

Dimensions Definition Korea Ireland

Masculinity

(↔ Femininity)

Degree to which a society is

characterized by assertiveness (masculinity)

versus nurturance (femininity)

39

(Femininity)

68

(Masculinity)

Power distance Degree to which power and inequality are

accepted as normal by the individuals of the

society

60

(High power

distance)

28

(Low power

distance)

Individualism

(↔Collectivism)

Degree to which people in a country prefer to act

as individuals rather than as members of groups

18

(Collectivism)

70

(Individualism)

Uncertainty

avoidance

Degree to which the members of a culture feel

threatened by uncertain or unknown situations

85

(High

uncertainty

avoidance)

35

(Low

uncertainty

avoidance)

the four cultural dimensions on which countries are comparable

: masculinity/femininity; power distance; individualism/collectivism; and uncertainty avoidance

(except for long-term orientation added later by Hofstead & Bond(1988))




Hypotheses Development

Behavioral

Intention

Perceived

ease of use

Perceived

Enjoyment

Social

influence

Individualism/

Collectivism

Uncertainty

Avoidance

Masculinity/

Femininity

Aesthetics of

AR

Perceived

Usefulness

Power Distance

H6

H7

H8

H9

H4

H5

H1

H2

H3

Ha6 Ha7 Hb8 Hb9

Hc9 Hd9




Behavioral

Intention

Perceived

ease of use

Perceived

Enjoyment

Social

influence Uncertainty

Avoidance

Masculinity/

Femininity

Aesthetics of

AR

Perceived

Usefulness

Power Distance

H6

H7

H8

H9

H4

H5

H1

H2

H3

Ha6 Ha7Hb8 Hb9

Hc9

Hd9

Individualism/

Collectivism


1. Aesthetics and Beliefs

“a tendency that initial outstanding impression

or characteristics of something affect overall

judgments even after contradictory evidence is

exposed” (Rosenzweig, 2009)

Strong Halo Effect

Initial

impression

usefulness

joyfulness

Aesthetics of IS have been demonstrated that it has an effect on formulating or inducing positive beliefs

such as perceived usefulness, ease of use, and enjoyment (Cyr et al., 2006; Li & Yeh, 2010)




Behavioral

Intention

Perceived

ease of use

Perceived

Enjoyment

Social


Avoidance

Masculinity/

Femininity

Aesthetics of

AR

Perceived

Usefulness

Power Distance

H6

H7

H8

H9

H4

H5

H1

H2

H3

Ha6 Ha7Hb8 Hb9

Hc9

Hd9

Individualism/

Collectivism



Perceived ease of use positively affect the

perceived usefulness. (Davis, 1989; Haugstvedt & Krogstie,

2012; Kim et al., 2009; Van der Heijden, 2004)

In experience hierarchy, individuals act on the

basis of their emotional reactions. (Solomon, 2009)

Perceived enjoyment significantly influences on

perceived ease of use, attitude, and intention to use

user-generated media for travel planning (Ayeh et al.,

2013)

Cognitive

factorsinducesAffective

factors

Perceived enjoyment

Perceivedease of use




Behavioral

Intention

Perceived

ease of use

Perceived

Enjoyment

Social


Avoidance

Masculinity/

Femininity

Aesthetics of

AR

Perceived

Usefulness

Power Distance

H6

H7

H8

H9

H4

H5

H1

H2

H3

Ha6 Ha7Hb8 Hb9

Hc9

Hd9

Individualism/

Collectivism



3 perceptions of TAM: Critical components

predicting user’s attitude & behavioral

intention

Social influence = important only in the

early stage of individual experience with IS

in mandatory settings

AR= cutting-edge technology & feature of

interaction




Behavioral

Intention

Perceived

ease of use

Perceived

Enjoyment

Social


Avoidance

Masculinity/

Femininity

Aesthetics of

AR

Perceived

Usefulness

Power Distance

H6

H7

H8

H9

H4

H5

H1

H2

H3

Ha6 Ha7Hb8 Hb9

Hc9

Hd9

Individualism/

Collectivism



“Countries can be distinguished by the psychological

gender which the societies espouse” (Hofstede, 1984)

Masculinity

Work goals, assertiveness & material success

Perceived usefulness is related to improvement of

job performance

The Irish tend to focus on usefulness of AR

Femininity

Quality of life goals & availability of technology

support staff (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)

South Koreans tend to focus on ease of use of AR






Behavioral

Intention

Perceived

ease of use

Perceived

Enjoyment

Social


Avoidance

Masculinity/

Femininity

Aesthetics of

AR

Perceived

Usefulness

Power Distance

H6

H7

H8

H9

H4

H5

H1

H2

H3

Ha6 Ha7Hb8 Hb9

Hc9

Hd9

Individualism/

Collectivism

are more relaxed and fun-loving than ones in

lower power distance culture

induces a great demand for hedonic services

(Harris et al., 2005).

[e.g. Hong Kong (higher power distance) tends to display

more positive attitude to hedonic service than the

respondents of UK (lower power distance)]

are more concerned about complying with the

opinion or rules of superiors and group to gain

favorable reaction from the other and avoid

punishment (Hofstede, 1984; Srite & Karahanna, 2006)

Individuals in high power distance culture






Behavioral

Intention

Perceived

ease of use

Perceived

Enjoyment

Social


Avoidance

Masculinity/

Femininity

Aesthetics of

AR

Perceived

Usefulness

Power Distance

H6

H7

H8

H9

H4

H5

H1

H2

H3

Ha6 Ha7Hb8 Hb9

Hc9

Hd9

Individualism/

Collectivism

from

collectivism culture

personal preference

or needs

socially appropriate

manner

personalpreferenceor needs

sociallyappropriate

manner

people from collectivist culture are more likely to conform to

and depend on others in group (Hui & Triandis, 1986)

from

individualism culture






Behavioral

Intention

Perceived

ease of use

Perceived

Enjoyment

Social


Avoidance

Masculinity/

Femininity

Aesthetics of

AR

Perceived

Usefulness

Power Distance

H6

H7

H8

H9

H4

H5

H1

H2

H3

Ha6 Ha7Hb8 Hb9

Hc9

Hd9

Individualism/

Collectivism

In the context of usage of newly developed IS such as AR,

informational and normative influence is absolutely critical.

According to some previous research papers, informational and

normative influence from others in group reduces uncertainty

about whether usage of IS is appropriate.

(e.g. Evaristo & Karahanna, 1998; Srite & Karahanna, 2006)

Lack of

informationinduces

People to be nervous

& perceive risk

(Baird & Thomas, 1985; Vitell et al., 1993)





4. Cultural Differences in South Korea and Ireland’s Intention to use AR

The influence of

Perceived usefulness

Perceived ease of use

Perceived enjoyment

Social influence

Korea < Ireland

Korea > Ireland

Korea > Ireland

Korea > Ireland

(Ha7)

(Ha6)

(Hb8)

(Hb9) (Hc9) (Hd9)




1. Data Collection

Research Method

Korea Ireland

Date November, 2013

Place Deoksugung Palace An Post Museum

Respondents Randomly selected visitors

Process A manual is provided prior to conducting the survey to let the visitors familiarize themselves

with the application so that they can evaluate the AR more accurately

Visitors used AR app about 30 minutes and participated in the survey

All respondents received a gift certificates worth KRW5,000 (about USD 5) as a reward for

participation

A total number of

questionnaires 145 119




1. Data Collection

Research Method

Ireland Korea Ireland Korea

n % n % n % n %

Gender Current educational degree

male 21 17.6 51 35.2 High school and below 10 8.4 37 25.5

female 98 82.4 94 64.8 2-year HND course 1 0.8 45 31.0

Age 3 or 4 year degree course 89 74.8 47 32.4

20 and below 84 70.6 35 24.1 Postgraduate course and above 19 16.0 16 11.0

20-29 26 21.8 67 46.2 Job

30-39 6 5 23 15.9 student 107 89.9 87 60.0

40-49 3 2.5 16 11.0 administrator 0 0 20 13.8

50-59 0 0 4 2.8 sales 3 2.5 3 2.1

Marital status manual labor 0 0.0 3 2.1

married 4 3.4 34 23.4 professional 1 0.8 12 8.3

single 115 96.6 111 76.6 self-employed 1 0.8 0 0.0

Have you used AR in the past? civil servants 2 1.7 8 5.5

YES 11 9.2 48 33.1 house wife/husband 0 0 8 5.5

NO 108 90.8 97 66.9 other 5 4.2 4 2.8

Total 119 100 145 100

Sample description




Research Method

2. Measures

Measurement items were adopted from previous literature

(e.g., Oh et al., 2007; Van der Heijden, 2004; Venkatesh et al., 2013).

Seven-point likert scale (1-strongly disagree, 7-strongly agree)

6 constructs and 24 measurement items: aesthetic (five), perceived usefulness (four),

perceived ease of use (four), perceived enjoyment (four), social influence (four) and

behavioral intention to use AR (three)

Same questionnaire was used both South Korea and Ireland (Survey questionnaire

was translated from English into Korean)

a partial least squares (PLS) regression analysis was used. (PLS-Graph Version 3.0.)

[advantages: small sample size, and few assumptions about measurement scale and normal distribution (Ahuja &

Thatcher, 2005)]




Analysis and Results

1. Measurement Model

Measurement items

Korea Ireland

Cross

loading

t-

valueα C.R AVE

Cross

loadingt-value α C.R AVE

EST

When I used AR app in A, I felt a real sense of

harmony.0.868 30.057

0.924 0.943 0.768

0.243 13.860

0.901 0.928 0.722

When I used AR app in A, just being here was very

pleasant.0.909 48.688 0.255 16.338

When I used AR app in A, the setting was not bland. 0.903 50.612 0.238 13.215

The setting really showed attention to design detail. 0.834 25.844 0.214 11.992

The setting provided pleasure to my senses. 0.865 30.772 0.225 11.412

PU

Using AR app can improve my travel information

gathering performance.0.908 48.549

0.946 0.961 0.861

0.867 23.676

0.901 0.932 0.773

Using AR app can increase my travel information

gathering productivity.0.956 94.519 0.881 27.548

Using AR app can increase my travel information

gathering effectiveness.0.935 58.890 0.898 47.042

I find using AR app useful. 0.912 38.555 0.871 26.477

EOU

The interaction with the AR app is clear and

understandable.0.839 32.735

0.904 0.932 0.775

0.870 27.920

0.926 0.949 0.825

The interaction with the AR app does not require a

lot of effort.0.886 30.044 0.911 44.936

I find the AR app easy to me. 0.894 24.032 0.955 120.583

I find it easy to access the desired information

through the AR app.0.901 48.229 0.895 50.289

0.7↑0.7↑0.5↑ 0.7↑0.7↑0.5↑






* Note: 1) EST(Aesthetics), PU(Perceived usefulness), EOU(Perceived ease of use), ENJ(Perceived enjoyment), SI(Social influence), BI(Behavioral intention to use

AR), 2) α(Cronbach’s α), C.R(Composite Reliability), AVE(Average Variance Extracted), 3) ‘A’ means cultural heritage sites of each country (e.g. Korea-

Deoksugung palace, Ireland-An Post Museum)

Measurement items

Korea Ireland

Cross

loading

t-

valueα C.R AVE

Cross

loadingt-value α C.R AVE

ENJ

I have fun to access information through interacting

with the AR app.0.914 54.725

0.925 0.947 0.818

0.897 39.366

0.942 0.958 0.852Using the AR app brings me lots of enjoyment. 0.91 45.663 0.942 73.700

I enjoy using the AR app. 0.924 58.612 0.948 70.753

Using the AR app does not bore me. 0.868 31.074 0.905 35.043

SI

People who influence my behavior think that I

should use the AR app while visiting A.0.873 31.283

0.858 0.903 0.701

0.696 7.554

0.814 0.874 0.637

People who are important to me think that I should

use the AR app while visiting A.0.878 37.135 0.797 13.287

The Culture Heritage Administration has been

helpful in enabling me to use the AR app.0.829 22.687 0.889 37.585

In general, A has supported the use of the AR app. 0.763 15.652 0.799 18.749

BI

I intend to use the AR app in the future. 0.966 101.622

0.975 0.984 0.953

0.967 118.829

0.966 0.978 0.937I predict I will use the AR in the future. 0.983 230.549 0.966 103.117

I plan to use the AR in the future. 0.979 199.926 0.97 113.646

0.7↑0.7↑0.5↑ 0.7↑0.7↑0.5↑






Constructs Mean S.DCorrelation of constructs

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

(1) Aesthetics 5.508 1.183 0.876

(2) Perceived usefulness 5.703 1.187 0.600** 0.928

(3) Perceived ease of use 5.381 1.216 0.540** 0.577** 0.880

(4) Perceived enjoyment 5.372 1.202 0.657** 0.739** 0.621** 0.904

(5) Social influence 4.683 1.349 0.442** 0.483** 0.333** 0.509** 0.837

(6) Behavioral intention to use AR 5.655 1.293 0.611** 0.654** 0.520** 0.689** 0.524** 0.976

Constructs Mean S.Dcorrelation of constructs

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

(1) Aesthetics 5.047 1.907 0.850

(2) Perceived usefulness 5.315 1.325 0.419** 0.879

(3) Perceived ease of use 5.676 1.194 0.434** 0.603** 0.908

(4) Perceived enjoyment 5.372 1.411 0.507** 0.558** 0.701** 0.923

(5) Social influence 4.758 1.234 0.375** 0.484** 0.512** 0.450** 0.798

(6) Behavioral intention to use AR 5.471 1.497 0.475** 0.566** 0.717** 0.654** 0.508** 0.968Note: Diagonal elements in the “correlation of constructs” matrix are the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE). For adequate discriminant

validity, the diagonal elements should be greater than the corresponding off-diagonal elements. * p<0.05, ** p<0.01

Square root of the AVE

for each construct

Correlation between

that construct and

other constructs

Discriminant validity is

established

Korea

Ireland





2. Structural Model

H Path

Deoksugung palace

(Korea)

An Post Museum

(Ireland) Result

Estimates t-value Estimates t-value

H1 EST → PU 0.404 4.713 0.264 2.675 Accepted

H2 EST → EOU 0.235 2.363 0.179 2.034 Accepted

H3 EST → ENJ 0.658 10.839 0.680 12.219 Accepted

H4 EOU → PU 0.364 3.908 0.464 5.158 Accepted

H5 ENJ → EOU 0.477 4.790 0.583 7.247 Accepted

H6 PU → BI 0.235 2.226 0.123 0.978 Rejected

H7 EOU → BI 0.105 1.233 0.401 3.765 Rejected

H8 ENJ → BI 0.336 3.355 0.235 2.096 Accepted

H9 SI → BI 0.223 2.824 0.149 2.310 Accepted

R2 PU 0.457 (45.7%) 0.427 (42.7%)

PEOU 0.430 (43.0%) 0.515 (51.5%)

PENJ 0.433 (43.3%) 0.463 (46.3%)

BI 0.564 (56.4%) 0.592 (59.2%)

Aestheticshas strongest influence

on perceived enjoyment

Impact of masculinity & FemininityBehavioral intention to use AR isn’t significantly affected by perceived usefulness in

Ireland (H6) and by perceived ease of use in Korea (H7)





2. Structural Model

Hcultural difference

(Nation)

Korea IrelandResults

Estimates t-value Estimates t-value

Ha6 PU → BI Masculinity (Ireland) 0.235 2.226 0.123(rejected) 0.978 rejected

Ha7 EOU → BI Femininity (Korea) 0.105(rejected) 1.233 0.401 3.765 rejected

Hb8 ENJ → BI High Power distance (Korea) 0.336 3.355 0.235 2.096 supported

Hb9

SI → BI

High Power distance (Korea)

0.223 2.824 0.149 2.310

supported

Hc9 Collectivism (Korea) supported

Hd9

High Uncertainty Avoidance

(Korea)supported

Supported hypotheses

The relationship between enjoyment and behavioral intention was stronger in higher

power distance culture of Korea (Hb8)

The relationship between social influence and behavioral intention was stronger in

higher power distance, collectivism, & high uncertainty avoidance culture of Korea (Hb9, c9 & d9)




Discussion, Implication, Limitation

Destination marketing managers and AR developers in the cultural heritage tourism sites around the

world can refer to this study in design and actual operations of the AR app.

Theoretical implications

Roles of

aesthetics

The strongest attribute of perceived enjoyment in both countries

→ aesthetic features of IS can induce hedonic perception

This finding is remarkably meaningful ∵ most of studies have focused on utilitarian

component of AR

Cultural

difference

Only a small number of research papers have applied SEM.

This study empirically tested the impact of cultural difference on the causal sequence

toward behavioral intention to use AR

Practical implications

High power distance

High uncertainty avoidance

Collectivism culture

Aesthetics

Ease of use

Manual

Aesthetics

Usability, Enjoyment

Social influence

Low power distance

Low uncertainty avoidance

Individualism culture




Discussion, Implication, Limitation

Limitations

This study investigated two different AR apps in palace and museum:

“Deoksugung, in my hand” in South Korea and “Dublin AR” in Ireland.

Further studies should analyze the respondents belong to different culture

using the same app

to remarkably show the impact of cultural difference on behavioral intention to use AR

more accurately.

As AR apps have not yet been commercialized enough to be known to many

tourists, the manual of AR apps had to be produced and provided for respondents before

conducting survey.

Only young and highly educated people could participated in this survey

Are the subjects of this study representativeness of each culture ??

Aesthetic and functional differences between these two AR apps and survey sites were reflected in

this results.




THANK YOU : )



examining the cultural difference in acceptance of mobile augmented reality: comparison of south...

Education

research trackslide

prior research papers

mobile ar apps

highest smartphone penetration

mobile ar applet tourists

tourism sites ar apps

comparison of south

original main gate