The use of Web 2.0 technologies in marketing classes: Key drivers of student acceptance

Ben Lowe, Steven D'Alessandro, Hume Winzar, Des Laffey, William Collier

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    33 Citations (Scopus)


    With the proliferation in Web 2.0 technologies, many marketing educators are experimenting with new teaching and learning tools (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Second Life). The benefits of such technologies are often touted by scholars, and indeed, there is a good deal of evidence to support such a view. However, increasingly, educators are highlighting some of the limitations of technology in the learning environment. To draw parallels with other new product research in marketing, the adoption of new learning technologies is often not so widespread. The literature exhibits inconsistency about the willingness of students to adopt new technology in a learning environment, but no systematic research into the factors that affect technology acceptance yet exists. This research fills a gap in the literature by applying an augmented Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to understand students' future intentions to adopt Twitter, a Web 2.0 technology shown to offer students a variety of benefits. By using partial least squares, the research shows that the main proximal driver of student adoption of Twitter is a utilitarian attitude. Students need to be convinced about ‘what's in it for me’, rather than persuaded about the technology's hedonic benefits. Other affective variables such as an individual's affinity with computers and risk tolerance were also found to be important drivers of perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness, the TAM's key antecedents.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)412-422
    Number of pages11
    JournalJournal of Consumer Behaviour
    Issue number5
    Publication statusPublished - Sept 2013


    Dive into the research topics of 'The use of Web 2.0 technologies in marketing classes: Key drivers of student acceptance'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this