Page 64 - JOURNAL OF LIBRARY SCIENCE IN CHINA 2018 Vol. 42

YAN Hui & LIU Jiqun / ICT acceptance behavior of rural digital poverty communities: 063
Field reports from China’s six provinces and municipalities

resources and subjective digital perception and constructive factors. The two dimensions intertwine
and co-impact the gaps in ICT access and usage. The interaction between behavior subjects and
contextual factors has been proved to be existing in information behavior research (Wilson, 1981).
Obvious differences in the internal and external factors among individuals and communities
produce various degrees of digital inequality, and gradually broaden the gaps between digitally rich
people and the digital poor. Corresponding with origins of digital poverty, digital behaviors could be
divided into two kinds: the first one is using aspect of ICT covering access status of ICT, using levels
and using frequency (Dimaggio, Hargittai, Celeste, & Shafer, 2004); the second is acceptance attitudes
and consciousness of ICT, including consciousness poverty, for example, purposes (Williams, 2005),
motivations (Van Dijk, 2006), interests, and attitudes (Mossberger, Mary, & Tolbert, 2003). Similar
with attributions of digital poverty, the two dimensions of digital poverty are influencing each other.
Barriers in access and usage of ICT will limit the ICT understanding depth and perception scope.
Poverty in digital consciousness will decrease their wishes and demands of ICT. Any research on ICT
acceptance of rural digitally poor residents should focus on internal and external driving forces and
barriers of ICT access and usage, and discover their looping interacting relations.

1.2 Technology acceptance literature: Variables and models

Technology acceptance behavior takes users’ technology access and using reasons for its
research objects, including users’ perceptions of usefulness, ease of use, external social norms,
and technology applying context, for instance, daily life and working tasks, and so on. Different
technologies, information behavior subjects and information practice context have been referred in
related literature, various models of technology acceptance were proposed, and empirical evidences
for the models are collected, analyzed and presented (F. D. Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Hu,
Chau, Sheng, & Tam,1999). The core concepts and frameworks of different technology acceptance
models are developed on the basis of individuals’ reactions to technology application, intentions of
technology usage, and actual use process, and analyze various representations of the core elements
in diverse contexts, and their relations(Ajzen, 1991; Taylor & Todd,1995; Venkatesh, Morris, G. B.
Davis, & F. D. Davis, 2003).
Based on applying contexts and characteristics of technologies, the models constructed four groups
of concepts. The first group is composed of applying contexts, for example, suitability of careers,
long-term effectiveness, and equipment surroundings and conditions (Thompson, Higgins, & Howell,
1991). The second group consists of various social cultural constructs, like social relations, subjective
norms and regulations (F. D. Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Venkatesh & F. D. Davis, 2000). The
third category includes subject personality, perceptions and attitudes, covering gender, age (Karahanna
& Straub, 1999), technology using experiences (F. D. Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Karahanna &
Straub, 1999), willingness of technology use (Hartwick & Barki, 1994), attitudes towards technology
using behaviors, perceptions of usefulness, perception of ease of use (Venkatesh & F. D. Davis, 2000),