Usage variety

For any application to succeed it must address a market requirement or user need [Balaji et al., 2005]. Apart from business applications, mobile phones are used to address/satisfy a variety of needs including [Ling and Yttri, 1999; Kwon and Chidambaram, 2000; Ling and Haddon, 2001; Marcus, 2005b] :

• Increasing safety and security, e.g. calling for help in emergencies

• Constant accessibility

• Source of information

• Display: Status enhancement via display

• Maintenance of social network

• Entertainment

• Coordination of everyday life: Micro-coordination, referring to the use of mobile phones for logistical purposes (organisation of personal and social activities), and hyper-coordination, referring to the use of a mobile phone for self-presentation and personal expression.

Repeating safety and security, coordination and the degree to which the handset is perceived as an artefact of personal display from the list above, Campbell and Russo [2003] adds the following factors that affect perceptions and uses of mobile phones:

• Attitudes about mobile phone use while driving

• Comfort with mobile phone services

• Attitudes about mobile phone use in public

• Comfort with mobile phone technology.

As discussed in Chapter 3, Ling, R. and Haddon [2001] note that the influence of generation on various orientations, e.g. accessibility and display, is generally more important to teenagers, micro-coordination to families with children, and safety and security to older people.

Tamminen et al. [2004] identify three kinds of motivational needs relating to mobile telephony:

A model for representing the motivational and cultural factors that influence mobile phone usage variety 78 • Navigation or way-finding needs born of a need to know or to optimise.

• Social needs, which reflect an awareness of changes in schedule and social activities.

Trying to make sense of all these various use varieties, Marcus and Chen [Marcus and Chen, 2002b, 2002a] proposed a set of mobile phone usage spaces (as depicted in Figure 4.4).

Figure 4.4: Usage Spaces based on Marcus and Chen [Marcus and Chen, 2002a; Marcus, 2005b] To organise the complexity of people’s behaviour and relate the various use varieties, Marcus and Chen [Marcus and Chen, 2002a; Marcus, 2005b] proposed a set of mobile phone usage spaces (as depicted in Figure 4.4). These usage spaces provide a feasible starting point for reasoning about uses and needs, which can then be used as a point of departure in determining the required functionality (features).

We will now discuss each of these mobile device usage spaces in more detail by giving Marcus’ description, followed by other support from the literature.

• Identity usage space: Being at the centre of the five usage spaces, this space contains information about the user. Besides the communication possibilities, personalisation of a mobile phone to reflect the user’s identity and make it more individually meaningful and symbolic is an important factor in the adoption of the phone [Teo and Pok, 2003a; Hansen et al., 2005]. Personalisation is also used as a strategy to filter the information, services and applications available on the Internet and make it relevant to the user [Katz and Sugiyama, 2005].

• Relationships usage space: This space describes the extending of existing social protocols [Marcus & Chen, 2002a]. Above and beyond traditional phone calls, text messages have proved to be very successful and the possibilities are being enhanced with the addition of MMS and video [Jenson, 2004]. Mobile phones connect an individual to friends, strangers and the wider community in previously unknown ways. Khalil and Connelly [2005a] attribute a new social order to the

Relationships Entertainment Commerce Self-Enhancement Information IDENTITY Relationships Entertainment Commerce Self-Enhancement Information IDENTITY

A model for representing the motivational and cultural factors that influence mobile phone usage variety 79 prevalence of mobile phones, which they describe as a shift from place-to-place communication to person-to-person communication. Mobile phones allow for opportunities to activate, manage and enhance relationships and build trust under the time and space constraints of contemporary life [Licoppe and Heurtin, 2001]. Mobile computing renders possible applications like electronic newspapers, stock trading and e-commerce. These applications take on added value when users are mobile or working away from their offices or homes [Agrawal & Famolari, 1999]. However, user value in mobile phones still seems to focus on communications [Jarvenpaa et al., 2003; Teo and Pok, 2003a; Adomi, 2006].

• Entertainment usage space: ‘This space represents the enjoyment of portable media such as music, games and other leisure activities.’ [Marcus and Chen, 2002b]. Wong and Hiew [2005] see mobile entertainment as a subset of mobile commerce, since it involves transactions of economic value. They define mobile entertainment as services that utilize wireless telecommunication networks that incur a cost upon usage [Wong and Hiew, 2005]. Mobile phones offer a wide range of possibilities for entertainment systems such as playing games and downloading music [Jarvenpaa et al., 2003; Teo and Pok, 2003a], albeit within a very constrained environment [Coulton et al., 2005].

• Commerce usage space: ‘This space refers to the enabling of commercial services such as

electronic banking’ [Marcus and Chen, 2002b]. Unlike the other spaces, m-commerce involves services being provided from the business world to the individual. E-commerce is performed on the Internet connected with fixed computers while M-commerce refers to a mobile environment connected via mobile devices. While the potential of mobile commerce has been negatively affected by uncertain technology standards, the complexities of interactive multi-media applications and the threat of governmental regulation, there are many technological and business factors driving m-commerce [Jarvenpaa et al., 2003; Keshav, 2005].

• Self-enhancement usage space: ‘Self-Enhancement is about enhancing aspects of personal value to the user’ [Marcus and Chen, 2002a]. For example, enhancing personal safety, improving efficiency in organising their personal life and health monitoring. Thimbleby [2001] notes that mobile phones are valued for their status more than for their effectiveness of communication. Education may also slot into this sphere. The new paradigm of ‘anytime, anywhere computing’ effects a shift from ‘electronic’ to ‘mobile’ services and the benefits of this newly-gained mobility are expected to be reflected in more efficient education and improved learning results [Palen and Salzman, 2001; Lehner et al., 2003].

• Information usage space: This relates to personal information e.g. phone numbers and

appointments listed for personal organisation as well as non-personal information. Non-personal information comprises reference information such as weather reports, dictionaries and business information [Marcus and Chen, 2002b]. Khalil and Connelly [2005a] found that cell phones are the dominant platform for Internet access in terms of numbers. While few people currently use cell phones for data access, they expect this to change as technology and services develop [Alahatuha

A model for representing the motivational and cultural factors that influence mobile phone usage variety 80 et al., 2005]. Mobile phones offer an efficient means disseminating information to a large consumer population by broadcasting information of common interest to many users such as stock prices, weather information or for advertising [Tsalgatidou et al., 2000] .

Besides these usage spaces identified by Marcus, the literature study has also provided support for the following spaces:

• Image (including self-image): This relates to the identity usage space but here it is viewed as an independent space (not the intersection of other spaces). Mobile phones were introduced as business tools, yet personal use is the fastest-growing sector of the market [Kwon and Chidambaram, 2000; Coen et al., 2002]. Besides the communication possibilities, personalisation of a mobile phone to reflect the user’s identity is an important factor in adoption [Hansen et al., 2005]. Mobile phones are presented as an embodiment of youth, modernism and futurism, being of high status and socially desirable [Katz and Sugiyama, 2005]. Consequently mobile phones are perceived as a means of decorative, personal display and by some even as fashion accessories [Campbell and Russo, 2003; Ling and Hwang, 2005]. Mobile phones are used to project information about the user’s style and how the user wants other people to see them [Pedersen, 2003; Katz and Sugiyama, 2005]. Mobile phones offer the opportunity to become connected to a group. This is especially important to people not so well connected [Wei and Lo, 2006] .

• Safety and security: The use of a cell phone for ensuring safety and security [Ling and Yttri, 1999; Kwon and Chidambaram, 2000]. People state that being able to summon aid or assistance in emergencies is one of the primary reasons for having a cell phone [Campbell and Russo, 2003; Katz and Sugiyama, 2005]. Parents buy children mobile phones for enhancing personal safety. Though this may lead to a false sense of security, enhancing safety is a perceived use of mobile phones. Mobile phones can be used in health monitoring, which then makes them essential devices for the user’s safety. While Marcus lists safety and security under self-enhancement, other researchers, notably Ling & Yttri [Ling and Yttri, 1999] and Katz and Sugiyama [Katz and Sugiyama, 2005] consider it as an independent usage space.

• Micro-coordination: The instrumental use of the mobile phone for logistical purposes, e.g. co- ordinating appointments while on the move. For example, confirming the venue for a meeting or changing the schedule [Ling and Haddon, 2001; Campbell and Russo, 2003; Nickerson and Isaac, 2006].

• Hyper-coordination: Using the mobile phone in the social presentation of self and personal expression in social encounters [Ling and Yttri, 1999; Campbell and Russo, 2003]. This also includes the physical appearance of the phone as a form of expression. This space encompasses the self-enhancement and identity spaces as identified by Marcus [Marcus, 2005b].

A model for representing the motivational and cultural factors that influence mobile phone usage variety 81

4.5 SUMMARY

This chapter has reviewed technology acceptance and use models. Adoption was considered by looking at Rogers’s model for the innovation of diffusions, which originated in sociology but was later applied in the field of marketing. The domestication model for technology consumption from sociology and CSCW was then considered as a model that went beyond adoption to address usage as well.

However, the main focus was on TAM and two other models who were based on TAM, namely UTAUT and a model by Kwon and Chidambaram [2000] which has been applied to study mobile phone adoption both from a marketing perspective and an HCI perspective.

The TAM, together with the adaptations proposed to the original TAM, provides a tangible starting point to consider the factors that influence mobile phone adoption. The TAM has been applied to model mobile phone adoption and usage and the findings were that perceived ease of use significantly affected users' extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, while apprehensiveness about cellular technology was found to have had a negative effect on intrinsic motivation [Kwon and Chidambaram, 2000].

After considering several studies on technology adoption and specifically mobile phone adoption, the view of the UTAUT is taken, namely that adoption and usage models consist of the direct determinants of usage behaviour like ease of use, usefulness, social factors, facilitating factors, attitude towards adoption and use and behavioural intention to use. The impact of these determinants on usage intention are mediated by demographic, and socio-economic as described in the UTAUT model [Venkatesh et al., 2003].

In this study the demographic variables of age, gender and ethnic culture (as indicated by mother- tongue) will be monitored. Socio-economic variables will not be investigated but participants in the research will be selected on the basis of similar job status and income to control the influence of this variable. Social influence will be captured by questions aimed at relating mobile phone use to cultural dimensions. Technological advancement, which can be viewed as a demographic variable or a cultural dimension, will be captured along with technological orientation as a personal factor.

TAM was developed for technology adoption in organisations [Malhotra and Galletta, 1999; Kleijnen et al., 2004]. In organisations the infrastructure and cost factors may have less of an influence than in individual use and therefore facilitating conditions will have to be monitored since this study deals with personal mobile phone usage.

Having considered technology adoption and usage models, the chapter moved on to a discussion of the factors that influence mobile phone adoption and usage. The usability of mobile phones, the cognitive load that mobile phone usage entails, the selection of features and user segmentation were the issues considered. Many mobile phone users are not coping with the continuous interruption and increased cognitive load caused by the advancement in technology and escalation in features. The discussion on mobile phone features led to the conclusion that the constant addition of new features is technology and market-driven and therefore likely to continue. Nevertheless, adding features is not always beneficial to usability and there is a need for guidelines or models on how to select the optimal features for a specific target group.

A model for representing the motivational and cultural factors that influence mobile phone usage variety 82 Reflecting on user segmentation and mobile phone usage variety, it became evident that mobile users are not a homogeneous group. Research studies have shown the effect of individual differences (e.g. age, gender, education, culture and personal orientation) on the use of information technology [Kwon and Chidambaram, 2000; Kleijnen et al., 2004]. This means that there is a need for diversification on other grounds than cost.

The current approach where cost is the primary factor determining the number of features is already leading to usability problems caused by cognitive overload [Ziefle and Bay, 2005]].

This review on mobile phone adoption and use supports the need for modelling mobile phone usage variety in order to help users understand and express their needs. The model for mobile phone adoption presented by Kwon and Chidambaram [Kwon and Chidambaram, 2000] does not address motivational and cultural needs.

Mobile phone usage spaces as proposed by [Ling and Yttri, 2002; Marcus and Chen, 2002a; Marcus, 2005b] provided a starting point in trying to develop a reusable model of mobile usage variety. Marcus’s usage spaces provide a useful and understandable base for understanding and organising user behaviour, but no empirical evidence could be found to support the model.

This study will look into providing empirical evidence for Marcus’s usage spaces and the other usage spaces of image, security and organisation (micro and hyper organisation) as identified in existing literature.

Another aim of this research is to consider how usage spaces are related to features. Relating features to usage spaces provides a way to understand and manage the selection of features. Existing usage space models do not specifically relate features to usage spaces.

Usage spaces are labelled by using non-technical terms that users can understand, while designers and marketers can use the spaces to identify required features. By managing the selection of features when purchasing or using a phone, the usability problem of cognitive overload caused by the escalating number of features in mobiles is addressed.

Reconsidering the research questions, the following findings from this chapter are relevant:

Does infrastructure influence mobile phone usage? According to this literature survey, infrastructure such as cost (billing), system quality and system reliability does influence mobile phone use [Kleijnen et al., 2004; Roberts, 2004]. The implications for this study are that infrastructure will have to be controlled in the research design.

Do cultural and social factors influence mobile phone usage? The fact that social factors, which include cultural factors, influence mobile phone adoption is well-known [Kwon and Chidambaram, 2000; Pedersen, 2003; Meso et al., 2005]. However, the influence of these factors on usage is not as well- researched [Pedersen et al., 2002]. Mobile phone usage has been researched by using aggregate diffusion theories that consider the importance of communication between network members and the social position of network members. However, this perspective does not consider the technology user perspective (applying TAM and other traditional adoption models) or the user-as-consumer perspective (applying consumer behaviour models). Pedersen [Pedersen et al., 2002] recommends triangulating models from the

A model for representing the motivational and cultural factors that influence mobile phone usage variety 83 technology user, network member and consumer perspectives to address this problem. This research considers the user as an individual with emotional and cognitive issues and also explores the social and cultural contexts. The perspective of the user as a network member is not considered.

How can motivational user needs be related to mobile phone use? Organising mobile phone behaviour into usage space provides one approach to investigating this question. The usage spaces described are based on observations and argument rather than on empirical evidence. If usage spaces can be based on some theoretical foundation, they can be used to describe usage variety. This will also address the final question, i.e how can usage variety be described?

A model for representing the motivational and cultural factors that influence mobile phone usage variety 84