Communication Channels

Diffusion is a type of communication whereby participants create and exchange

information to reach a mutual understanding concerning a new idea (Rogers, 2003). In its simplest form the process of diffusion involves: (i) an innovation; (ii) an individual (or other unit of adoption) that has either knowledge or experience of the innovation; (iii) an

individual (or other unit of adoption) that does not have either knowledge or experience of the innovation; (iv) a communication channel that connects the two individuals (or units of adoption).

A communication channel is the mode by which information is transferred. The nature and characteristics of the information transfer determines both the conditions under which the information will or will not be transferred and the subsequent effect (Rogers, 2003). Mass

93

media channels (such as television, radio, newspapers, etc) provide a very rapid form of information transfer, in which it is possible to communicate with a large number of

recipients. In contrast, interpersonal channels involve face-to-face information exchange, but are more effective at persuading individuals to adopt (Rogers, 2003).

Rogers (2003) highlights that diffusion studies have shown that “most individuals do not evaluate an innovation on the basis of scientific studies of its consequences” (Rogers, 2003 p18), but rather on a subjective evaluation of an innovation “that is conveyed to them from other individuals like themselves who have already adopted the innovation” (Rogers, 2003 p18). This fundamental involvement of peer networks makes diffusion a social process, which involves interpersonal communication relationships. The transfer of ideas occurs most frequently between two individuals who are similar, which Rogers (2003) defines this as homophilous communication. Homophily is “the degree to which two or more individuals who interact are similar in certain attributes, such as beliefs, education, socioeconomic status, and the like” (Rogers, 2003 p19). In contrast, heterophily is defined as “the degree to which two or more individuals who interact are different in certain

attributes” (Rogers, 2003 p19). Rogers (2003) argues that homophilous interpersonal communication (e.g. via neighbours, work colleagues and friends) produces the most effective form of communication, because it is likely to produce a more enjoyable and rewarding communication experience.

3.8.3 Time

Time is involved in diffusion in a number of different ways: (i) the innovation-decision process; (ii) the degree of innovativeness (the relative earliness or lateness of the adoption); (iii) the innovations rate of adoption through an overall social system. The innovation-decision process occurs when an individual (or decision-making unit) passes from first knowledge of an innovation to the confirmation of this decision. Rogers (2003) has conceptualised five key steps in the innovation-decision process.

1. Knowledge: when knowledge of the innovation‟s existence is gained and a degree of understanding concerning its function is realised. An individual‟s socioeconomic

94

and personal characteristics can influence this stage of the innovation decision (Rogers, 2003);

2. Persuasion: when an individual gains either a favourable or unfavourable attitude toward the innovation. The attitude formation includes the active gathering of information to assist the evaluation of the characteristics of the innovation. Rogers‟

(2003) contends that main type of thinking is affective (or feeling) at this stage, as opposed to cognitive (or knowing) at the knowledge stage;

3. Decision: when an individual engages in activities that lead to a choice to either adopt or reject the innovation;

4. Implementation: when an individual uses the innovation;

5. Confirmation: when an individual looks for verification for the innovation-decision that has been made (this decision may be reversed if the individual is subject to conflicting messages about the innovation).

Figure 3-9 shows the innovation-decision process and although the sequence of these five steps is not definitive, they do provide a simple rationale for the way in which individuals decide to adopt an innovation (Rogers, 2003). In essence the innovation-decision process is as an information gathering and processing activity, whereby an individual goes through a process of reducing the uncertainty about the innovation and its potential consequences.

Within this process mass media can significantly influence the early knowledge seeking stage, however as evaluations become more reliant on specific information the influence of interpersonal communication becomes predominant. This is because interpersonal

communication provides more detailed information and reassurance, which reduces uncertainty (Rogers, 2003).

95 Figure 3-9 The Innovation-decision process (Rogers, 2003)

96

The innovation-decision process requires time for the five steps to be completed.

Individuals vary in the time necessary to go through this process, which is dependent on the individual‟s (or groups) characteristics and the conditions under which it takes place (Rogers, 2003). Rogers describes five main categories of innovativeness.

1. Innovators are active seekers of information about new ideas, and generally have a high level of mass media exposure and interpersonal networks that extend outside their local system. Innovators are the first to adopt and are able to deal with uncertainty (Rogers, 2003).

2. Early adopters are a more integrated part of the social system and look for advice and information from early adopters before adopting the idea. Due to early adopters possessing a reasonably high degree of innovativeness, they serve as role models for the social system and help to generate the critical mass in the diffusion process (Rogers, 2003).

3. Early majority adopters tend to adopt an innovation just prior to the average members of a system. They interact frequently with their peers but, rarely occupy positions of opinion leadership with a system. They provide the key

interconnections within the social system‟s interpersonal networks (Rogers, 2003).

4. Late majority adopters tend to adopt the innovation closely after the average member of the system. Adoption may result from increased peer pressure or the economic necessity emanating from the existing level of adoption (Rogers, 2003).

Innovations are evaluated with considerable care and will not be adopted without the majority of the system having already adopted the innovation (i.e. uncertainty must be reduced to a minimum) (Rogers, 2003).

5. Laggards are the final social group to adopt the innovation. They have almost no opinion leadership and can be consider as possessing very limited interpersonal connections. They possess conservative values and use the past as a central point of reference. Much of their social interactions are predominantly with other

97

traditionalists and adoption only occurs when they are certain that an innovation will be successful (Rogers, 2003).

Figure 3-10 shows how the diffusion of an innovation within a social system generally follows an S-shaped distribution curve. More recent research has suggested that the diffusion curve may be too simplistic for some innovations (Kauffman and

Techatassanasoontorn, 2006). Nevertheless, despite adjustments and criticisms, “the basics of it still remain valid” (De Marez Lieven and Verleye Gino, 2004 p238).

Figure 3-10 Diffusion of innovations curve (Rogers, 2003)