Literature Review Ar

Association of Big Five Personality Traits and Emotional
Intelligence with Augmented Reality

1. Introduction and gap area
Augmented Reality (AR) is defined as a “medium in which digital information is overlaid on the
physical world that is in both spatial and temporal registration with the physical world and that is
interactive in time” (Craig, 2013). Augmented Reality is a technology that creates an
environment which superimposes a computer generated image over a user’s view of real world
thus providing a composite view. It is actually a complement of virtual reality whereas, in virtual
reality the whole environment is computer generated. The benefits of this technology flow across
various fields such as marketing, military, education, entertainment and many other sectors.
Likewise, AR has been studied and applied in various contexts, such as tourism (Jung, Chung
and Leue, 2015), museums (tom Dieck and Jung, 2018), retailing (Spreer and Kallweit, 2014;
Rese et al., 2017) and others (Javornik, 2016a, 2016b; Stockinger, 2016).
Personality is described as the individual’s responses to particular situations (Ercis and Deniz,
2008). Personality is that pattern of characteristic thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that
distinguishes one person from another and that persists over time and situations (Phares, 1997).
Personality is a consistent, stable and conventional relationship of individual with his internal
and external environments and is interrelated with all of the personal characteristics (Erkuş and
Tabak, 2009). Personality as an exogenous variable is hypothesized to lead to beliefs related to
the behavior (Devaraj, Easley and Crant, 2008). There is some evidence on how personal
differences may influence the technology acceptance of individuals (Shih and Fan, 2013).
(Glassberg, 2000) documented that optimum stimulation level, as a personal characteristics,
significantly positively influenced both perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use.
One of the mostly influential and generally accepted personality theories is the Big-Five
personality theory which includes five basic traits: Agreeableness (A), Conscientiousness (C),
Extraversion (E), Neuroticism (N), and Openness (O), to form human personality. From the
point of view of behavior, agreeableness reflects the individual behavioral characteristics, such
as conducting help, cooperation and sympathy for others. Conscientiousness includes elements
of self-discipline, organization and thoroughness of planning, as well as the need for
achievement. Extraversion is directly related to social skills, talkative ability and personal charm.
Neuroticism reflects the degree of emotional stability, and has a close link to mental health
(depression and anxiety). Openness reflects the richness of the individual imagination, aesthetic
feelings, degree of dedication, and curiosity about new things (Bai, Hao, Li, Yuan, Gao, Zhu,
2013).
Emotional Intelligence, according to Daniel Goleman, “is the ability to sense, understand, value
and effectively apply the power of emotions as a source of human energy, information, trust,
creativity and influence”. Emotional intelligence refers to the ability to perceive, control, and
evaluate emotions. Emotional Intelligence (EI) must somehow combine two of the three states of
mind cognition and affect, or intelligence and emotion (Kannaiah, Shanthi, 2015). Emotional
Intelligence is a set of qualities and competencies that captures a broad collection of individual
skills and dispositions, usually referred to as soft skills or inter and intra-personal skills, that are
outside the traditional areas of specific knowledge, general intelligence, and technical or
professional skills. Emotions are an intrinsic part of our biological makeup, and every morning
they march into the office with us and influence our behavior (Gupta, 2014).
Augmented reality and marketing
AR is not closed off from reality, but melds the real and virtual worlds together (Javornik,
2016a; Scholz and Smith, 2016). So far, research in the marketing field focused on the
acceptance of the AR technology (Huang & Liao, 2015; Kang, 2014; Olsson & Salo, 2011; Rese,
Schreiber, & Baier, 2014), the perception of AR ads (Sung & Cho, 2012; Yaoyuneyong et al.,
2016), guidance for the design of the AR experience (Javornik et al., 2017; Scholz & Smith,
2016), the anticipated consumer responses to media characteristics of AR (Javornik, 2016), post-
use evaluations of individuals (Kim & Forsythe, 2008), and the influence on purchase intention
for apparel shopping (Schwartz, 2011). Augmented reality is quickly becoming one of the hottest
trends in the marketing and advertising industries, recognized as an innovative and creative way
of connecting with customers and increasing engagement. The technology has significantly
grown in popularity over the last few years, and the AR market is expected to continue in this
trend. Based on the study by Schwartz (2011), AR has the potential to provide online shoppers
with a more direct and engaging product experience, and thus can lead to a decrease in returns
and increase in conversions. Furthermore, it has the capability to attract the attention of
consumers in advertising (Javornik et al., 2017). Ana Javornik classified the support of
augmented reality in the field of prevalent market functions into three basic types. The first one
is the promotion or advertisement of the product through augmented content, gamification, 4D
projection and also through interactive stores. The second classification includes product
management which is done through personalized augmentation and simulation (virtual try on);
interactive stores and augmented content also help in this function. The last one includes
customer services which are through technical assistance through AR apps and wearable
technology.
Technology acceptance research
Since the advent of computer technologies, researchers have been studying the dynamics and the
influential factors on individual’s acceptance of information technologies. Although various
theories and approaches have been suggested in the field of information systems to address this
issue, the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) has received the highest level of attention and
application among the researchers (Davis, 1989; King and He, 2006). TAM is a simple,
parsimonious and powerful model to explain the use of a new technology (King and He, 2006).
TAM is rooted in behavioral research about attitude and behavior formation (e.g., Theory of
Reasoned Action) and psychology research about behavior regulation and change (e.g., Social
Cognitive Theory) (Davis, 1989; Davis, Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1989). TAM proposes that the
individuals’ behavioral intention to adopt/use a new technology is determined both by perceived
ease of use, defined as ‘the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system
would be free of effort” (Davis, Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1989), and perceived usefulness, defined
as “the degree to which a person thinks that using a particular system would enhance his or her
job performance” (Davis, Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1989). Furthermore, many studies indicate that
perceived usefulness partially mediates the relationship between perceived ease of use and
behavioural intention. TAM and its extensions have been valued for their application flexibility
in different contexts. In particular, these models allow researchers to include variables that are
only relevant in specific contexts. Therefore, in this paper, researcher used TAM model in
framework.
Personality traits and high perceived ease of use of AR
In order to address the first objective, it is open to question whether personality traits of
individuals are related with AR. In this aspect, some studies like (Preece, Rogers and Sharp,
2002) reports that designing interactive technologies with consumers’ needs and personal
characteristics in mind results in effective use of these technologies and excellent adoption
experiences. Study of (Kim et al., 2016) showed that there were differences in the duration of
when the participants were looking at the VH during the interaction according to their
extraversion-introversion traits.
H1. (a) High neuroticism, (b) high extroversion, (c) high openness, (d) high agreeableness, and
(e) high conscientiousness will be associated with high perceived ease of use of AR.
Personality traits and high perceived usefulness of AR
TAM is the most influential and widely used model for technology acceptance. Perceived
Usefulness is defined as "the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system
would be free from effort" (Davis, 1989). As TAM is increasingly used in various fields, its
interaction with personal traits of individuals is less. For example, a limited number of
researchers used the five factor model of personality in studies concerning technology
acceptance like AR. Some researchers argued that people with a higher degree of extraversion,
openness and agreeableness would have a higher degree of technology acceptance (Keeton,
2008). People who are open to change are assumed to be willing to try new and different things.
Similarly, extravert individuals are more open to adopt innovation to gain social status. Devraj,
Easley and Crant found that agreeableness is positively associated with PU; neuroticism is
negatively associated with perceived usefulness and conscientiousness moderates the
relationship between PU (Devaraj, Easley and Crant, 2008). Openness is found to be
significantly positively related to personal innovativeness in information systems (Nov and Ye,
2008). Individuals who have low levels of extroversion and high levels of neuroticism had a
higher propensity to use social services (chatting, seeking people etc.) on the internet. To sum
up, extant literature provides us some evidence on the effect of personality traits on individuals’
attitudes and intentions to accept and use new technology. Personality factors may influence
users’ beliefs and attitudes about the perceived usefulness of a new technology and to subjective
norms (Özbek et al., 2014).
H2. (a) High neuroticism, (b) high extroversion, (c) high openness, (d) high agreeableness, and
(e) high conscientiousness will be associated with high perceived usefulness of ARAR.
EI with (a) perceived ease of use of AR and (b) perceived usefulness of ARAR.
Emotion-Enabled Augmented Reality applications has the emotion layer is integrated into them
using a Software Development Kit (SDK) and Cloud-based Application Program Interface
(API). It is used to develop emotional awareness by measuring the emotional and facial
expressions of the surrounding individuals and cross referencing it with the
available emotion database. These programs analyze the subtle facial expressions to identify
human emotions. Companies like Affectiva are already having working products like “Emotion
SDK and API”. Emotion recognition will give rapid feedback on how the person in view is
feeling and this will the help the person to make decisions by taking into consideration of the
emotional factor. This process is more likely to help individuals to grow their emotional
intelligence to reduce social barriers and increase empathy. Ruiz-Ariza et al analysed the effect
of 8 weeks of Pokmon GO on cognitive performance (memory, selective attention,
concentration, mathematical calculation and linguistic reasoning) and emotional intelligence
(well-being, self-control, emotionality and sociability) in Spanish adolescents between 12 and 15
years(Ruiz-Ariza et al., 2018) .
H3. EI will be associated with (a) perceived ease of use of AR and (b) perceived usefulness of
ARAR.
Computer Self-Efficacy with (a) high perceived ease of use of AR, & (b) high perceived
usefulness of ARAR
(Yusoff et al., 2009) notes that many studies have been conducted to reveal the relationship
between computer self-efficacy and technology acceptance as a psychological quality. Thus,
computer self-efficacy is a determinant of acceptance of technology and Perceived Ease of Use.
Advances in computer technology and the diffusion of personal computers, productivity
software, multimedia, and network resources heralded the development and implementation of
new and innovative teaching strategies (Hong, Thong and Tam, 2006). Acquiring this
knowledge, as explained by the authors, requires computer self-efficacy which is a significant
factor relating to achieving information and computing literacy skills which can lead to the ease
of use of educational technology. Therefore, computer self-efficacy can be defined as confidence
demonstrated by individuals in making the right choice of action necessary to meet specific
requirement in situation that will lead to maximum benefit from the use of computer resources
(Yusoff et al., 2009). (Kurbanoglu, Akkoyunlu and Umay, 2006) hold that accomplishment is
not only based on the acquisition of expertise, it also requires the assurance to use these skills
well.
(Davis, 1989) argued that perceived ease of use is the extent to which an individual considers
that making use of a specific system would be effortless and hassle free; in other words, ease of
use means freedom from complexity and trouble. Thus, an application that is perceived to be
easier to use is generally accepted and utilized by more people. (Zhu, Lin and Hsu, 2012) add
that Perceived Ease of Use signifies the degree to which an individual accepts that using certain
technology would be effortless and hassle free. The system characteristics can help the ease of
use of technology and system usage can equally lead to the acquisition of Information Literacy
skill. (Barranis, 2011) enumerates certain factors that may influence the ease of use of modern
resources such as characteristics of information resources, the job experience, technical
equipment and support, etc. The following are the factors to consider when evaluating Perceived
Ease of Use: computer self-efficacy, perception of external control, internet selfefficacy,
computer anxiety, information anxiety, perceived enjoyment and objective, usability and
behavioural intention to use.
Access to information offers the possibility for improved human competence. (Lombardi, 2007)
observed that the acquisition of capacity to access authentic information is prevented by users’
reluctance to accept and use available strategies and techniques to access the information.
Perceived usefulness, according to (Davis, 1989), is the extent to which a person believes that
utilising a particular method or technique would enhance his or her job performance or routine
responsibility. This perception, he explains, is anchored on the consideration that the capacity
acquired will strengthen performance. Furthermore, (Davis, 1989) believes that people are
naturally reinforced for better performance by raises, promotions, bonuses, and other rewards.
The TAM undoubtedly presents value to many researchers because it has effectively
demonstrated how such value can improve users' job performance. Perceived Usefulness has
proven to be a very important factor for technology adoption in most recent studies (e.g. (Yeh
and Teng, 2012)).
H4. Computer Self-Efficacy will be associated with (a) high perceived ease of use of AR, & (b)
high perceived usefulness of ARAR.
Subjective norms with (a) perceived ease of use of AR and (b) high perceived usefulness of
ARAR
Subjective norms considers an individual’s perception of their significant others concerning if

they would want them to perform a specific behaviour or not (Fielding, McDonald and Louis,
2008). (López-Nicolás, Molina-Castillo and Bouwman, 2008) indicate that existing social norms
can have an important impact on an individual’s behavioural intentions. Social norms, also
referred to as subjective norms, stem from various cultural or religious differences that exist
within society (Yang and Jolly, 2009). In modern times, social norms are formed through
influences on social media, as well as the opinions of family members, peers and friends. These
social norms shape an individual’s belief that certain actions are deemed acceptable, while others
may be unacceptable (Teo et al., 2012). As such, the study of subjective norms and its impact on
a person’s behavioural intentions has become important to researchers wanting to understand an
individual’s decision-making process (Fielding, McDonald and Louis, 2008). Limited research
exists that explains the influence of subjective norms on the adoption of mobile games.
(Synodinos, Price and Bevan-Dye, 2017)determined the influence of flow, subjective norms and
attitude on Generation Y students’ behavioural intention to adopt augmented reality mobile
games in South Africa.
H5. Subjective norms will be associated with (a) perceived ease of use of AR and (b) high
perceived usefulness of ARAR.
High perceived ease of use of AR and high perceived usefulness of ARAR
Perceived ease of use reflects complexity, which is the degree to which an innovative technology
is perceived as difficult to understand and use (Wu and Wang, 2005). According to Davis et al.
(1992) shows that Perceived ease of use implicates that the user does not need to exhaust too
many cognitive resources for using a technology. In this case, perceived ease of use does not
affect behavior directly but influences it indirectly through perceived usefulness. Perceived ease
of use is indirect in influencing intentions to use a given technology (Carvalho et al., 2012).
High perceived ease of use of AR and high perceived usefulness of ARAR and Attitude
towards AR
Daugherty et al. (2017) revealed the AR print ad was preferred, yielding higher perceptions of
informativeness, novelty, and effectiveness among consumers. investigated the user experiences
of AR advertisement, using experiments examining the perspective of a new ad type, AR ad.
Similarly, the study of Ross and Harisson (2016) investigated the consumers’ perceptions of
AR’s usefulness and ease of use; their attitudes regarding AR; and their behavioral intentions
towards AR enabled apparel.Sung & Cho (2012), who identified that informativeness and
interactivity have a significant effect on shaping the attitude of customers towards a product and
brand
H6. (a)High perceived ease of use of AR and (b) high perceived usefulness of ARAR will be
associated with Attitude towards AR.
Perceived ease of use of AR and high perceived usefulness of ARAR will be associated with
Attitude towards AR
H7. (a) Perceived usefulness of ARAR and (b) Attitude towards AR will be associated with
Intention to use AR
Perceived usefulness of ARAR and Attitude towards AR will be associated with Intention
to use AR
First, perceived usefulness, a powerful construct in the technology acceptance literature (King
and He, 2006) is proposed to influence the adoption intention. According to (Wu et al., 2011),
the TAM has been the predominant theory to examine technology acceptance since its
development by Davis in 1986. The TAM incorporates users’ attitudes and beliefs into the
intention to adopt new technologies. (Ha and Stoel, 2009) and (Wojciechowski and Cellary,
2013) confirmed the significance of enjoyment for the intention to use new technologies.One of
the main factors in the original TAM model that has been known for its influence on adoption
behaviour is perceived ease of use of the technology. The TAM scholars have widely studied the
role of perceived ease of use as a determinant to adoption and use. Reviewing these studies
shows that there is a general consensus in the scientific community that perceived ease of use has
either a direct or indirect effect on consumers’ behavioural intention to use new technologies in
various contexts. This finding has also been supported in technology acceptance studies in the
context of wearable technologies (Lee, 2009). Therefore, we propose that perceived ease of use
is also positively related to adoption intention in the context of Augmented Reality Smart
Glasses.
6 References
1. Courneya KS, Bobick TM, Schinke RJ. Does the Theory of Planned Behavior Mediate the
Relation Between Personality and Exercise Behavior? Basic Appl Soc Psych [Internet].
1999 Dec;21(4):317–24. Available from:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15324834BASP2104_5
2. Rhodes RE, Courneya KS. Investigating multiple components of attitude, subjective norm,
and perceived control: An examination of the theory of planned behaviour in the exercise
domain. Br J Soc Psychol [Internet]. 2003 Mar;42(1):129–46. Available from:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1348/014466603763276162
3. Bosnjak M, Bratko D, Galesic M, Tuten T. Consumer personality and individual
differences: Revitalizing a temporarily abandoned field. J Bus Res [Internet]. 2007
Jun;60(6):587–9. Available from:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0148296306002220
4. Funder DC. Global Traits: A Neo-Allportian Approach to Personality. Psychol Sci
[Internet]. 1991 Jan 25;2(1):31–9. Available from:
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00093.x
5. James LR, Mazerolle MD. Personality in Work Organizations [Internet]. New York City,
New York, United States: SAGE Publications; 2002. 252 p. Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Personality_in_Work_Organizations.html?id=jA4
5DQAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y
6. Picard RW, Klein J. Computers that recognise and respond to user emotion: theoretical
and practical implications. Interact Comput [Internet]. 2002 Feb;14(2):141–69. Available
from: https://academic.oup.com/iwc/article-lookup/doi/10.1016/S0953-5438(01)00055-8
7. Pemberton AE, Pemberton JM, Williamson JM, Lounsbury JW. RIM professionals: a
distinct personality. Inf Manag [Internet]. 2005;39(5). Available from:
https://www.questia.com/magazine/1P3-897505611/rim-professionals-a-distinct-
personality
8. Vance A, Siponen M, Pahnila S. Motivating IS security compliance: Insights from Habit
and Protection Motivation Theory. Inf Manag [Internet]. 2012 May;49(3–4):190–8.
Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378720612000328
9. Kajzer M, D’Arcy J, Crowell CR, Striegel A, Van Bruggen D. An exploratory
investigation of message-person congruence in information security awareness campaigns.
Comput Secur [Internet]. 2014 Jun;43:64–76. Available from:
10. Burnett JJ, Oliver RL. Fear Appeal Effects in the Field: A Segmentation Approach. J
Mark Res [Internet]. 1979 May;16(2):181. Available from:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3150682?origin=crossref
11. Nieß C, Zacher H. Openness to Experience as a Predictor and Outcome of Upward Job
Changes into Managerial and Professional Positions. Roma PG, editor. PLoS One
[Internet]. 2015 Jun 25;10(6):e0131115. Available from:
http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131115
12. Antinori A, Carter OL, Smillie LD. Seeing it both ways: Openness to experience and
binocular rivalry suppression. J Res Pers [Internet]. 2017 Jun;68:15–22. Available from:
13. Kaufman SB, Quilty LC, Grazioplene RG, Hirsh JB, Gray JR, Peterson JB, et al.
Openness to Experience and Intellect Differentially Predict Creative Achievement in the
Arts and Sciences. J Pers [Internet]. 2016 Apr;84(2):248–58. Available from:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/jopy.12156
14. McCabe KO, Fleeson W. What Is Extraversion For? Integrating Trait and Motivational
Perspectives and Identifying the Purpose of Extraversion. Psychol Sci [Internet]. 2012
Dec 25;23(12):1498–505. Available from:
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797612444904
15. Roslan NS, Izhar LI, Faye I, Saad MNM, Sivapalan S, Rahman MA. Review of EEG and
ERP studies of extraversion personality for baseline and cognitive tasks. Pers Individ Dif
[Internet]. 2017 Dec;119:323–32. Available from:
16. Cellar DF, Nelson ZC, Yorke CM, Bauer C. The five‐factor model and safety in the
workplace: Investigating the relationships between personality and accident involvement.
J Prev Interv Community [Internet]. 2001 Apr;22(1):43–52. Available from:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10852350109511210
17. Geller ES, Wiegand DM. People-Based Safety: Exploring the role of personality in injury
prevention. Prof Saf [Internet]. 2005;14(12):26–41. Available from:
https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-963507131.html
18. Booth-Kewley S, Vickers RJ. Associations between major domains of personality and
health behavior. J Pers [Internet]. 1994;62(3):281–98. Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7965560
19. Hu Q, Dinev T, Hart P, Cooke D. Top Management Championship and Individual
Behaviour Towards Information Security: An Integrative Model. In: ECIS 2008
Proceedings [Internet]. European Conference on Information Systems; 2008. p. 54.
Available from:
http://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1247&context=ecis2008
20. McCrae RR, John OP. An Introduction to the Five-Factor Model and Its Applications. J
Pers [Internet]. 1992 Jun;60(2):175–215. Available from:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x
21. Watson D, Hubbard B. Adaptational Style and Dispositional Structure: Coping in the
Context of the Five-Factor Model. J Pers [Internet]. 1996 Dec;64(4):737–74. Available
from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1996.tb00943.x
22. Ilies R, Scott BA, Judge TA. The Interactive Effects of Personal Traits and Experienced
States on Intraindividual Patterns of Citizenship Behavior. Acad Manag J [Internet]. 2006
Jun;49(3):561–75. Available from:
http://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amj.2006.21794672
23. Chenoweth T, Minch R, Tabor S. Expanding views of technology acceptance: seeking
factors explaining security control adoption. In: AMCIS 2007 Proceedings [Internet]. New
York City, New York, United States: Americas Conference on Information Systems;
2007. p. 1–6. Available from:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a7c5/70aa37f98975d5bc537db49f50dbf78e1f31.pdf
24. Devaraj S, Easley RF, Crant JM. Research Note —How Does Personality Matter?
Relating the Five-Factor Model to Technology Acceptance and Use. Inf Syst Res
[Internet]. 2008 Mar;19(1):93–105. Available from:
http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/isre.1070.0153
25. Shropshire J, Warkentin M, Johnston A, Schmidt M. Personality and IT security: An
application of the five-factor model. In: Twelfth Americas Conference on Information
Systems [Internet]. Acapulco, Mexico: Americas Conference on Information Systems;
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b3b4/f45d7046a759b741f5fda95256663db7eb6c.pdf
26. John OP, Srivastava S. The Big Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and
theoretical perspectives. In: Handbook of personality: Theory and research [Internet]. 2nd
ed. New York City, New York, United States: Guilford Press; 1999. p. 102–38. Available
from: http://moityca.com.br/pdfs/bigfive_John.pdf
27. Rogelberg SG. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology
[Internet]. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, United States: SAGE Publications;
2016. 2008 p. Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/The_SAGE_Encyclopedia_of_Industrial_and.html
?id=-INrjwEACAAJ&redir_esc=y
28. Organ DW, Paine JB. A new kind of performance for industrial and organizational
psychology: Recent contributions to the study of organizational citizenship behavior. In:
Cooper CL, Robertson IT, editors. International review of industrial and organizational
psychology [Internet]. 14th ed. New York City, New York, United States: John Wiley &
Sons Ltd; 1999. p. 337–68. Available from: http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1999-02322-008
29. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Paine JB, Bachrach DG. Organizational Citizenship
Behaviors: A Critical Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature and Suggestions
for Future Research. J Manage [Internet]. 2000 Jun;26(3):513–63. Available from:
30. Konovsky MA, Organ DW. Dispositional and contextual determinants of organizational
citizenship behavior. J Organ Behav [Internet]. 1996 Mar;17(3):253–66. Available from:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/%28SICI%291099-
1379%28199605%2917%3A3%3C253%3A%3AAID-JOB747%3E3.0.CO%3B2-Q
31. Warkentin M, McBride M, Carter L, Johnston A. The Role of Individual Characteristics
on Insider Abuse Intentions. In: Eighteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems
[Internet]. Seattle, Washington, USA: Americas Conference on Information Systems;
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/eb02/1b1bcb7f401cb075b552404c3cb61704e90f.pdf
32. Chaturvedi M, Chander R. Development of emotional stability scale. Ind Psychiatry J
[Internet]. 2010;19(1):37. Available from:
http://www.industrialpsychiatry.org/text.asp?2010/19/1/37/77634
33. Madhavan V. Emotional Stability and Adjustment Perspective of Mental Health among
Rural School Students in Tiruchirappalli District. In: International Conference On Well
Being Of Children, Youth And Adults: A Global Social Work Perspective [Internet].
IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science; 2017. p. 44–7. Available from:
http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Conf.17004/Volume-4/10. 44-47.pdf
34. Brose A, Scheibe S, Schmiedek F. Life contexts make a difference: Emotional stability in
younger and older adults. Psychol Aging [Internet]. 2013;28(1):148–59. Available from:
http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0030047
35. Petrides K V., Pita R, Kokkinaki F. The location of trait emotional intelligence in
personality factor space. Br J Psychol [Internet]. 2007 May;98(2):273–89. Available from:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1348/000712606X120618
36. Mayer JD, Salovey P. What is emotional intelligence? In: Salovey P, Sluyter DJ, editors.
Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications [Internet].
New York: Harper Collins; 1997. p. 3–34. Available from: http://ei.yale.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2014/02/pub219_Mayer_Salovey_1997.pdf
37. Brannick MT, Wahi MM, Arce M, Johnson H-A, Nazian S, Goldin SB. Comparison of
trait and ability measures of emotional intelligence in medical students. Med Educ
[Internet]. 2009 Nov;43(11):1062–8. Available from:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03430.x
38. Devonish D, Greenidge D. The Effect of Organizational Justice on Contextual
Performance, Counterproductive Work Behaviors, and Task Performance: Investigating
the moderating role of ability-based emotional intelligence. Int J Sel Assess [Internet].
2010 Mar;18(1):75–86. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1468-
2389.2010.00490.x
39. Bar-On R. The Emotional Intelligence Inventory (EQ-i). Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health
Systems; 1997.
40. Goleman D. Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ [Internet]. London,
United Kingdom: Bloomsbury; 1996. 352 p. Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Emotional_Intelligence.html?id=AcJ7dwsnWiIC&
redir_esc=y
41. Payne W. A Study of Emotion: Developing Emotional Intelligence, Self-integration,
Relating to Fear, Pain and Desire [Internet]. UMI; 1995. 934 p. Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/A_Study_of_Emotion.html?id=JF-
3QwAACAAJ&redir_esc=y
42. Salovey P, Mayer JD. Emotional Intelligence. Imagin Cogn Pers [Internet].
1990;9(3):185–211. Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2190/DUGG-
P24E-52WK-6CDG
43. Petrides K V., Furnham A. Trait emotional intelligence: behavioural validation in two
studies of emotion recognition and reactivity to mood induction. Eur J Pers [Internet].
2003 Jan;17(1):39–57. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/per.466
44. Sevdalis N, Petrides KV, Harvey N. Trait emotional intelligence and decision-related
emotions. Pers Individ Dif [Internet]. 2007 May;42(7):1347–58. Available from:
45. Craig AB. Understanding Augmented Reality: Concepts and Applications [Internet].
Oxford, United Kingdom: Newnes; 2013. 296 p. Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Understanding_Augmented_Reality.html?id=7_O
5LaIC0SwC&redir_esc=y
46. Javornik A. Augmented reality: Research agenda for studying the impact of its media
characteristics on consumer behaviour. J Retail Consum Serv [Internet]. 2016
May;30:252–61. Available from:
47. Scholz J, Smith AN. Augmented reality: Designing immersive experiences that maximize
consumer engagement. Bus Horiz [Internet]. 2016 Mar;59(2):149–61. Available from:
48. tom Dieck MC, Jung T. A theoretical model of mobile augmented reality acceptance in
urban heritage tourism. Curr Issues Tour [Internet]. 2018 Jan 22;21(2):154–74. Available
from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13683500.2015.1070801
49. Jung T, Chung N, Leue MC. The determinants of recommendations to use augmented
reality technologies: The case of a Korean theme park. Tour Manag [Internet]. 2015
Aug;49:75–86. Available from:
50. Spreer P, Kallweit K. Augmented Reality in Retail: Assessing the Acceptance and
Potential for Multimedia Product Presentation at the PoS. SOP Trans Mark Res [Internet].
2014 May 30;1(1):23–31. Available from:
http://www.scipublish.com/journals/MR/papers/172
51. Rese A, Baier D, Geyer-Schulz A, Schreiber S. How augmented reality apps are accepted
by consumers: A comparative analysis using scales and opinions. Technol Forecast Soc
Change [Internet]. 2017 Nov;124:306–19. Available from:
52. Stockinger H. The future of augmented reality - an Open Delphi study on technology
acceptance. Int J Technol Mark [Internet]. 2016;11(1):55. Available from:
http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=73372
53. Javornik A. ‘It’s an illusion, but it looks real!’ Consumer affective, cognitive and
behavioural responses to augmented reality applications. J Mark Manag [Internet]. 2016
Jun 12;32(9–10):987–1011. Available from:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0267257X.2016.1174726
54. Olsson T, Salo M. Online user survey on current mobile augmented reality applications.
In: 2011 10th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality [Internet].
IEEE; 2011. p. 75–84. Available from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6162874/
55. Kang J-YM. Augmented reality and motion capture apparel e-shopping values and usage
intention. Int J Cloth Sci Technol [Internet]. 2014 Oct 28;26(6):486–99. Available from:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/10.1108/IJCST-05-2013-0055
56. Rese A, Schreiber S, Baier D. Technology acceptance modeling of augmented reality at
the point of sale: Can surveys be replaced by an analysis of online reviews? J Retail
Consum Serv [Internet]. 2014 Sep;21(5):869–76. Available from:
57. Huang T-L, Liao S. A model of acceptance of augmented-reality interactive technology:
the moderating role of cognitive innovativeness. Electron Commer Res [Internet]. 2015
Jun 12;15(2):269–95. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10660-014-9163-
2
58. Kim J, Forsythe S. Adoption of Virtual Try-on technology for online apparel shopping. J
Interact Mark [Internet]. 2008 Jan;22(2):45–59. Available from:
59. Javornik A, Rogers Y, Gander D, Moutinho A. MagicFace. In: Proceedings of the 2017
CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ’17 [Internet]. New
York, New York, USA: ACM Press; 2017. p. 4838–49. Available from:
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=3025453.3025722
60. Sung J, Cho K. User Experiences with Augmented Reality Advertising Applications:
Focusing on Perceived Values and Telepresence Based on the Experiential Learning
Theory. In: Park J, Jin Q, Sang-soo YM, Hu B, editors. Human Centric Technology and
Service in Smart Space [Internet]. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer; 2012. p. 9–15.
Available from: http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/978-94-007-5086-9_2
61. Yaoyuneyong G, Foster J, Johnson E, Johnson D. Augmented Reality Marketing:
Consumer Preferences and Attitudes Toward Hypermedia Print Ads. J Interact Advert
[Internet]. 2016 Jan 2;16(1):16–30. Available from:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15252019.2015.1125316
62. Schwartz AM. Augmenting Purchase Intent: An Empirical Study on the Effects of
Utilizing Augmented Reality in Online Shopping. SSRN Electron J [Internet].
2011;1(1):53. Available from: http://www.ssrn.com/abstract=1858976
63. Davis FD. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of
Information Technology. MIS Q. 1989 Sep;13(3):319.
64. King WR, He J. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Inf Manag
[Internet]. 2006 Sep;43(6):740–55. Available from:
65. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A
Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Manage Sci [Internet]. 1989 Aug;35(8):982–
1003. Available from: http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
66. Reynolds C, Picard RW. Evaluation of Affective Computing Systems from a Dimensional
Metaethical Position. In: First Augmented Cognition International Conference [Internet].
2005. p. 10. Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/215439661_Evaluation_of_Affective_Computin
g_Systems_from_a_Dimensional_Metaethical_Position
67. Brave S, Nass C, Hutchinson K. Computers that care: investigating the effects of
orientation of emotion exhibited by an embodied computer agent. Int J Hum Comput Stud
[Internet]. 2005 Feb;62(2):161–78. Available from:
68. Phares EJ. Introduction to Personality [Internet]. 4th ed. Harlow, United Kingdom:
Longman; 1997. 718 p. Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Introduction_to_Personality.html?id=tMhtAAAA
MAAJ&redir_esc=y
69. Shih Y-C, Fan S-T. Adoption of Instant Messaging ByTravel AgencyWorkersin Taiwan:
IntegratingTechnology Readiness with the Theory of Planned Behavior. Int J Bus Inf
[Internet]. 2013;8(1):120–35. Available from: https://ijbi.org/ijbi/article/view/78/84
70. Glassberg BC. Individual Use of Web Technology: A Reconceptualization and Empirical
Test of the Technology Acceptance Model [Internet]. Columbia, USA: University of
South Carolina; 2000. 510 p. Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Individual_Use_of_Web_Technology.html?id=hi6
_SgAACAAJ&redir_esc=y
71. Erkuş A, Tabak A. The effect of five factor personnels on conflict management staff of
the employee: a research in defense industry. Ataturk Univ J Econ Adm Sci [Internet].
2009;23(2):213–42. Available from: http://dergipark.gov.tr/atauniiibd/issue/2696/35515
72. Preece J, Rogers Y, Sharp H. Interaction Design: Beyond Human-computer Interaction
[Internet]. Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: John Wiley & Sons; 2002. 519 p.
Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Interaction_Design.html?id=yIC9kgEACAAJ&red
ir_esc=y
73. Kim K, Bruder G, Maloney D, Welch G. The influence of real human personality on
social presence with a virtual human in augmented reality. In: ICAT-EGVE ’16
Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Artificial Reality and Telexistence
and the 21st Eurographics Symposium on Virtual Environments [Internet]. Arkansas:
Little Rock; 2016. p. 10. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3061346
74. Keeton KE. An extension of the utaut model: how organizational factors and individual
differences influence technology acceptance [Internet]. University of Houston; 2008.
Available from: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1559576
75. Nov O, Ye C. Personality and Technology Acceptance: Personal Innovativeness in IT,
Openness and Resistance to Change. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008) [Internet]. IEEE; 2008. p.
448–448. Available from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4439153/
76. Özbek V, Alnıaçık Ü, Koc F, Akkılıç ME, Kaş E. The Impact of Personality on
Technology Acceptance: A Study on Smart Phone Users. Procedia - Soc Behav Sci
[Internet]. 2014 Sep;150:541–51. Available from:
77. Tett RP, Fox KE, Wang A. Development and Validation of a Self-Report Measure of
Emotional Intelligence as a Multidimensional Trait Domain. Personal Soc Psychol Bull
[Internet]. 2005 Jul 2;31(7):859–88. Available from:
78. Petrides K., Frederickson N, Furnham A. The role of trait emotional intelligence in
academic performance and deviant behavior at school. Pers Individ Dif [Internet]. 2004
Jan;36(2):277–93. Available from:
79. Pérez JC, Petrides K V., Furnham A. Measuring Trait Emotional Intelligence. In: Schulze
R, Roberts RD, editors. Emotional intelligence: An international handbook [Internet].
Ashland, OH, US: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers; 2005. p. 181–201. Available from:
http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2005-06828-009
80. Ruiz-Ariza A, Casuso RA, Suarez-Manzano S, Martínez-López EJ. Effect of augmented
reality game Pokémon GO on cognitive performance and emotional intelligence in
adolescent young. Comput Educ [Internet]. 2018 Jan;116:49–63. Available from:
81. Kluwe C. How augmented reality will change sports… and build empathy [Internet].
TED. 2014 [cited 2018 May 31]. Available from:
https://www.ted.com/talks/chris_kluwe_how_augmented_reality_will_change_sports_and
_build_empathy#t-535803
82. Sahota M. How to Express Empathy – Avoid the Traps! [Internet]. Agilitrix. 2013 [cited
2018 May 31]. Available from: http://agilitrix.com/2013/01/how-to-express-empathy-
avoid-the-traps/
83. Yusoff YM, Muhammad Z, Mohd Zahari MS, Pasah ES, Robert E. Individual
Differences, Perceived Ease of Use, and Perceived Usefulness in the E-Library Usage.
Comput Inf Sci [Internet]. 2009 Jan 19;2(1). Available from:
http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/cis/article/view/1859
84. Kurbanoglu SS, Akkoyunlu B, Umay A. Developing the information literacy self‐efficacy
scale. J Doc [Internet]. 2006 Nov;62(6):730–43. Available from:
https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/10.1108/00220410610714949
85. Zhu D-S, Lin TC-T, Hsu Y-C. Using the technology acceptance model to evaluate user
attitude and intention of use for online games. Total Qual Manag Bus Excell [Internet].
2012 Aug;23(7–8):965–80. Available from:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14783363.2012.704269
86. Barranis NJ. Altering User Perceptions of Applications: How System Design Can Impact
Playfulness and Anxiety [Internet]. University of Illinois; 2011. Available from:
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/24139/Barranis_Nanthida.pdf
87. Yeh RK-J, Teng JTC. Extended conceptualisation of perceived usefulness: empirical test
in the context of information system use continuance. Behav Inf Technol [Internet]. 2012
May;31(5):525–40. Available from:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0144929X.2010.517272
88. Ikegune DO, Abiola AO. Computer Self-efficacy and Perceived ease-of-use of Personal
Digital Assistants for Academic activities by Undergraduates in University of Ibadan. Libr
Philos Pract [Internet]. 2016;9(1):1–22. Available from:
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4049&context=libphilprac
89. Gong M, Xu Y, Yu Y. An Enhanced Technology Acceptance Model for Web-Based
Learning. J Inf Syst Educ [Internet]. 2004;15(4):365–74. Available from:
https://search.proquest.com/openview/acc05f1a742ea815f9bb67845236ff31/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=25848
90. Fielding KS, McDonald R, Louis WR. Theory of planned behaviour, identity and
intentions to engage in environmental activism. J Environ Psychol [Internet]. 2008
Dec;28(4):318–26. Available from:
91. Yang K, Jolly LD. The effects of consumer perceived value and subjective norm on
mobile data service adoption between American and Korean consumers. J Retail Consum
Serv [Internet]. 2009 Nov;16(6):502–8. Available from:
92. López-Nicolás C, Molina-Castillo FJ, Bouwman H. An assessment of advanced mobile
services acceptance: Contributions from TAM and diffusion theory models. Inf Manag
[Internet]. 2008 Sep;45(6):359–64. Available from:
93. Teo AC, Tan GWH, Cheah CM, Ooi KB, Yew KT. Can the demographic and subjective
norms influence the adoption of mobile banking? Int J Mob Commun [Internet].
2012;10(6):578. Available from: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=49757
94. Synodinos C, Price D, Bevan-Dye A. The influence of flow, subjective norms and attitude
on generation y students’ adoption intentions toward mobile games. Int J Ebus
egovernment Stud [Internet]. 2017;9(2):72–84. Available from:
http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/440442
95. Teh P-L, Yong C-C, Chong C-W, Yew S-Y. Do the Big Five Personality Factors affect
knowledge sharing behaviour? A study of Malaysian universities. Malaysian J Libr Inf Sci
[Internet]. 2011;16(1):47–62. Available from:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/75a0/9dbd0322951372b308b762910e54c09c116a.pdf
96. Huang Q, Davison RM, Gu J. Impact of personal and cultural factors on knowledge
sharing in China. Asia Pacific J Manag [Internet]. 2008 Sep 29;25(3):451–71. Available
from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10490-008-9095-2
97. Vallerand RJ, Deshaies P, Cuerrier J-P, Pelletier LG, et al. Ajzen and Fishbein’s theory of
reasoned action as applied to moral behavior: A confirmatory analysis. J Pers Soc Psychol
[Internet]. 1992;62(1):98–109. Available from:
http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0022-3514.62.1.98
98. Chang MK. Predicting Unethical Behavior: A Comparison of the Theory of Reasoned
Action and the Theory of Planned Behavior. J Bus Ethics [Internet]. 1998;17(16):1825–
1834. Available from:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1005721401993
99. Wu J-H, Wang S-C. What drives mobile commerce? Inf Manag [Internet]. 2005
Jul;42(5):719–29. Available from:
100. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use
Computers in the Workplace1. J Appl Soc Psychol [Internet]. 1992 Jul;22(14):1111–32.
Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x
101. Carvalho ML d., Guimarães H, Ferreira JB, Freitas A. Intention to use M-learning: An
extension of the technology acceptance model. In: n 19th International Conference on
Recent Advances in Retailing and Consumer Services Science. Vienna, Austria; 2012. p.
9–12.
102. Tornatzky LG, Klein KJ. Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-
implementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Trans Eng Manag [Internet].
1982;EM-29(1):28–45. Available from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6447463/
103. Pfeffer J. Organizations and organization theory [Internet]. London, United Kingdom:
Pitman Publishing; 1982. 378 p. Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Organizations_and_organization_theory.html?id=x
Vm3AAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y
104. Schein EH. Organizational Psychology [Internet]. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, New
Jersey, United States: Prentice-Hall; 1988. 274 p. Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Organizational_Psychology.html?id=rwBiQgAAC
AAJ&redir_esc=y
105. Vroom VH. Work and Motivation [Internet]. Oxford, England, UK: R.E. Krieger
Publishing Company; 1964. 331 p. Available from:
https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Work_and_Motivation.html?id=b-
q_QgAACAAJ&redir_esc=y
106. Li H, Daugherty T, Biocca F. Impact of 3-D Advertising on Product Knowledge, Brand
Attitude, and Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Presence. J Advert [Internet].
2002 Oct 31;31(3):43–57. Available from:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00913367.2002.10673675
107. Ross HF, Harrison T. Augmented Reality Apparel: An Appraisal of Consumer
Knowledge, Attitude and Behavioral Intentions. In: 2016 49th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) [Internet]. Koloa, HI, USA: IEEE; 2016. p.
3919–27. Available from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7427672/
108. Wu K, Zhao Y, Zhu Q, Tan X, Zheng H. A meta-analysis of the impact of trust on
technology acceptance model: Investigation of moderating influence of subject and
context type. Int J Inf Manage [Internet]. 2011 Dec;31(6):572–81. Available from:
109. Ha S, Stoel L. Consumer e-shopping acceptance: Antecedents in a technology acceptance
model. J Bus Res [Internet]. 2009 May;62(5):565–71. Available from:
110. Wojciechowski R, Cellary W. Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES
augmented reality environments. Comput Educ [Internet]. 2013 Oct;68:570–85. Available
from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0360131513000535
111. Lee H-M. A Study on the Acceptance of Wearable Computers based on the Extended
Technology Acceptance Model. Res J Costume Cult [Internet]. 2009;17(6):1155–72.
Available from:
http://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/ArticleFullRecord.jsp?cn=BSMHBM_2009_v17n6_
1155
7 Appendix

Literature Review Ar

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Literature Review Ar

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Association of Big Five Personality Traits and Emotional

Intelligence with Augmented Reality

Augmented reality and marketing

Technology acceptance research

Personality traits and high perceived usefulness of AR

Subjective norms considers an individual’s perception of their significant others concerning if

High perceived ease of use of AR and high perceived usefulness of ARAR

You might also like