Article

Information Development
2016, Vol. 32(2) 161–174
Understanding users’ continuance ª The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
intention toward smartphone DOI: 10.1177/0266666914535119
idv.sagepub.com
augmented reality applications

Keesung Kim, Jiyeon Hwang, Hangjung Zo

Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)

Hwansoo Lee
Dankook University

Abstract
In spite of high expectations for augmented reality (AR) technology, many smartphone AR applications have
failed and terminated their services in Korea because of low usage rates. As failures of smartphone AR appli-
cations have increased, investigating factors that influence users’ continuance intention to use the AR applica-
tions become an important topic. This study develops a theoretical model that explains continuance intention
of users based on AR and motivation theories, and empirically examines the influencing factors with collected
data from smartphone AR application users. The results showed that information quality was the most influen-
cing factor for AR continuance intention among AR factors, while perceived enjoyment was not a significant
antecedent. The implications of this study provide additional insights for smartphone AR researchers and
developers.

Keywords
augmented reality, smartphone applications, motivation theory, continuous intention, Korea

Users’ views of usefulness are very important for the commercialization of augmented
reality smartphone applications.

Introduction location-based AR application providing various infor-

Gartner (2010) predicted that augmented reality (AR)
‘‘is one of the promising top 10 technologies’’ by
mapping its ‘‘hype cycle,’’ which is a means of pre-
dicting information technology (IT) trends and invest-
ment prospects. As predicted by the Gartner hype
cycle, a variety of fields have begun utilizing AR
technology, including the medical, education, enter-
tainment, and robotics fields. In particular, there has
been active development and service launches of var-
ious smartphone applications using AR technology
around the world.
However, AR mobile applications have often failed
despite the fact that the market for them is expected to
grow and the applications have no technical problems.
In the case of Korea, many AR applications have ter-
minated their services due to low usage rates. For
example, the application ‘Scansearch’, which is a
mation to users, was terminated in June of 2013.
‘Ovjet’ was another AR mobile application that pro-
vided a service similar to ‘Scansearch’. That applica-
tion changed from a service providing information to
a location-based social network service in January of
2013. These changes came despite the fact that these
well-known applications had many users in Korea.
Previous AR studies mainly concentrated on the
technological aspects. For instance, Kato and Billing-
hurst (1999) conducted a study that focused on precise
virtual object registration technology. Wagner and
Corresponding author:
Hwansoo Lee, Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in IT Law,
Dankook University, 152 Jukjeon-ro, Suji-gu, Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-
do 448-701, Republic of Korea. Voice: þ82-31-8005-3278.
Email: hanslee992@gmail.com
162
Figure 1. Virtuality Continuum.
Schmalstieg (2003) studied handheld AR, considering
the hardware set-up and software components needed
to use AR and ways to represent a clear image and
optimal tracking of virtual objects. With these techni-
cal studies of AR, understanding the user perspective
is also an important topic when attempting to find
effective ways to improve the completeness of AR
technology and enhance its usage. However, only a
few studies have investigated AR technology from the
perspective of its users (Chang et al., 2014; Wojcie-
chowski and Cellary, 2013).
The purpose of this study is to enhance our under-
standing of user behavior and provide practical
suggestions to improve user retention, which are
important when mobile application programmers
develop applications. Most studies of AR only explain
the attributes of AR, whereas only a few empirical
studies investigate user behavior. In order to explain
user behavior using AR smartphone applications, this
study proposes a comprehensive model that utilizes the
technology acceptance model (TAM), the expectation-
confirmation model (ECM), and motivation theory.
Based on various information system (IS) theories,
this study investigates the main success factors of
AR mobile applications that affect continuous usage
behavior.
Literature review
Augmented reality
The field of computer science research has defined
AR concepts in different ways. Milgram and Kishino
(1994) suggested that ‘real’ and ‘virtual’ environ-
ments are on a continuum of mixed reality and that
AR is on the spectrum. Mixed reality (MR) is defined
as ‘‘the integration and merging of the real and virtual
worlds in which physical and virtual objects comple-
ment and interact with each other’’ (Olsson et al.,
2009: 20). As shown in Figure 1, MR can be classified
by how much a user’s environments are real or virtual.
These environments, on a scale from real to virtual,
include real environments, augmented reality (AR),
augmented virtuality (AV), and virtual environments
Information Development 32(2)
(Theng et al., 2007). A real environment is one in
which the environment consists only of real objects,
whereas a virtual environment implies that an envi-
ronment consists of all virtual objects. Thus, augmen-
ted reality can be defined as a real environment which
includes some virtual objects.
The concept of AR can be applied to any tech-
nology that comingles virtual and real information
(Klopfer, 2008). Klopfer and Squire (2008: 205) argued
that AR is ‘‘a situation in which a real world context is
dynamically overlaid with coherent location or context
sensitive virtual information’’. Thus, AR technology
provides a computer-mediated absorbing experience
in mixed reality in which a user’s perception is aug-
mented (Dunleavy et al., 2009). Azuma (1997) sug-
gested three characteristics of AR: a combination of
the real and virtual world, interactivity in real time,
and registration in 3-D. Based on these three charac-
teristics, AR supplements the real world by superim-
posing virtual objects onto it and improving its users’
perceptions and interactions between the real envi-
ronment and the virtual objects. Narzt et al. (2006)
also proposed two characteristics of AR. First, AR
systems offer precise and intuitive depictions of vir-
tual objects and real environments. Second, AR sys-
tems have a natural interface for interacting. These
two characteristics of AR emphasize user interaction
and the balance between virtual objects and the real
environment.
AR mobile applications and success factors
Recent handheld devices, such as smartphones that
utilize AR technology, have been rapidly developed,
as opposed to traditional devices. Many programmers
are actively developing an ever-increasing number of
mobile applications using diverse technologies, and
various AR mobile applications have now appeared
worldwide. Mobile AR is defined as ‘‘AR created and
accessed with mobile devices in mobile contexts of
use’’ (Olsson et al., 2013: 288).
Mobile AR is classified into two categories: marker-
less and marker-based. The concept of marker-less
means that it uses location data from the mobile
device or image recognition to determine the
user’s location and superimpose virtual information.
Marker-less mobile applications can operate any-
where and visualize virtual objects related to a user’s
immediate environment (Olsson et al., 2013). On
the other hand, marker-based mobile applications
require specific items, such as a bar code or a QR code
Kim et al: Understanding users’ continuance intention toward smartphone augmented reality applications
(Pence, 2010). Therefore, marker-based mobile
applications require a phone camera to catch a spe-
cific code to access the desired information through
a code recognition process.
According to previous AR technology studies, tele-
presence is the most important factor that determines
quality of the technology (Nee et al., 2012; Bimber
et al., 2005; Wu et al., 2012). Telepresence is mediated
perception through a communication medium in a real
environment (Steuer, 1992). Walker and Sheppard
(1997: 1) argued that ‘‘telepresence is enabling human
interaction at a distance, creating a sense of being pres-
ent at a remote location.’’ As a virtual environment,
unlike a natural environment, has temporal and spatial
differences from real environments, a sense of being
there is a crucial factor for AR (Reeves, 1991).
Telepresence is jointly evoked by two sub-factors:
interactivity and vividness. Interactivity means ‘‘the
extent to which users can participate in modifying the
form and content of a mediated environment in real
time’’ (Steuer, 1992: 87). In AR smartphone applica-
tions, interactivity is the ability of users to manipulate
virtual objects and virtual environments. Nee et al.
(2012) reported that the ability to manipulate virtual
object enhances the immersive and interactive sensa-
tion to a user. Azuma et al. (2001) also noted that many
researchers are focused on how users will interact with
AR applications, while Narzt et al. (2006) proposed
that a natural interaction interface is one of the major
concepts of an AR system. It affects user perception
and immersion in AR mobile applications. Therefore,
the interaction between virtual objects and a user is one
of the success factors of an AR mobile application.
Vividness refers to the ‘‘representational richness
of a mediated environment as defined by its formal
features, that is, the way in which an environment pre-
sents information to the senses’’ (Steuer, 1992: 84).
Vividness is also divided into two dimensions:
breadth and depth. Breadth ‘‘is the number of differ-
ent senses that a medium can engage’’ and depth is
‘‘how closely a medium can replicate parts of the
human sensory system’’ (Coyle and Thorson, 2001:
67). Narzt et al. (2006: 177) noted that the clear and
intuitive depiction and perception of information are
two other major concepts of an AR system. These are
also related to the high-quality rendering of a virtual
object, as emphasized by AR researchers in AR tech-
nology. Vividness is also important in AR smartphone
applications because it is related to the clear expres-
sion of virtual objects and the natural combination
of virtual objects and the real environment. That is,
163
vividness indicates the degree of the clear depiction
of a virtual image or the degree of the combination
of the real and the virtual. If vividness is of a high
quality, it can represent a high visual quality of virtual
information and enhance user perception. Therefore,
vividness can also be said to be visual quality. Thus,
depending on the degree of visual quality and interac-
tivity, users may feel that the application is useful and
enjoyable.
Following the concept of telepresence, accuracy is
also considered to be an important factor. The accu-
racy of an AR application pertains to the quality of the
information that the application processes or gener-
ates. Bimber et al. (2005) argued that virtual objects
must maintain correct and consistent registration with
a real environment to provide accurate information.
Nee et al. (2012), Regenbrecht et al. (2002) and Papa-
giannakis et al. (2008) also insisted that an AR appli-
cation requires the accurate tracking and overlaying
of virtual objects with the real environment. Informa-
tion quality can be widely defined, depending on
one’s viewpoint, and accuracy is one of the dimen-
sions of information quality (Knight and Burn,
2005). In the context of accuracy, information quality
is defined as ‘‘the extent to which data are correct,
reliable and certified free of error’’ (Knight and Burn,
2005: 162). To achieve the precise tracking and regis-
tration of virtual information onto the real environ-
ment means that a high information quality level is
required. Accordingly, information quality is consid-
ered as one of the most important elements in AR
mobile application. In summary, based on previous
research, interactivity, visual quality, and information
quality are the three major important factors of AR
mobile applications.
Theories of information systems usage
The technology acceptance model (TAM), a well-
known theory in the information systems (IS) research
field, has been continuously utilized in various fields
to explain the intentions of individual behaviors
(Davis, 1989). TAM posits two important factors,
perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, as
the key determinants of behavioral intention. Davis
(1989) initially suggested that perceived ease of use
indirectly influences behavioral intentions through
attitude in the original model. However, the attitude
construct was later discarded by Davis et al. (1989)
in the model due to the weak mediation effect of
attitude. His subsequent study also showed that the
164
two behavioral beliefs, perceived usefulness and
perceived ease of use, are directly associated with beha-
vioral intention (Venkatesh and Davis, 1996). TAM
has been expanded and supplemented by a hedonic
factor, which is perceived enjoyment. Van der Heijden
(2004) expanded the initial TAM and explained that
hedonic value is also a key determinant of the intention
of individual behavior. Employing TAM and expanded
TAM, the field of IS has continuously expanded the
research with new technology concepts.
However, TAM does not explain post-adoption
behavior or the continuance intention of IS. Accord-
ingly, Bhattacherjee (2001) designed an expectation-
confirmation model (ECM) to explain the continuance
intention of IS adoption. The ECM implied that user
satisfaction is a critical factor influencing the continu-
ance intention of IS. Satisfaction is explained in terms
of an overall evaluation of IT products or services.
According to the ECM, satisfaction is determined by
two important factors: confirmation of expectation
and perceived usefulness. Expectation is defined as
‘‘individual beliefs or sum of beliefs about the levels
of attributes possessed by a product or service’’ (Thong
et al., 2006: 801). If a user’s expectation is confirmed,
it has a positive effect on perceived usefulness and
satisfaction. After such a confirmation, users can under-
stand the usefulness of the IS, or feel satisfaction.
Perceived usefulness has two effects. One is a direct
effect on continuance intention; the other is an indi-
rect effect through satisfaction.
Major theories explain IS adoption or continuance
intention, but these theories cannot completely support
utilitarian value and hedonic value at the same time.
Therefore, this study introduces a new approach to
explain the combination of utilitarian value and hedo-
nic value and its effect on continuance intention of IS.
Motivation theory
Motivation theory consists of two elements: 1) extrin-
sic motivation and 2) intrinsic motivation. Extrinsic
motivation is defined as ‘‘the performance of an activ-
ity because it is believed to be instrumental in achiev-
ing valued outcomes that are separate from the
activity’’ (Atkinson and Kydd, 1997: 54). Lee et al.
(2005: 1097) explained that ‘‘behavior is driven by its
perceived values and benefits derived.’’ Intrinsic
motivation is defined as ‘‘doing an activity simply for
the enjoyment of the activity itself, rather than its
instrumental value’’ (Ryan and Deci, 2000: 55); this
concept was explained by Lee et al. (2005), who noted
Information Development 32(2)
that ‘‘behavior is evoked from the feeling of pleasure,
joy, and fun’’ (Lee et al., 2005: 1097).
Davis et al. (1992) verified that extrinsic and intrin-
sic types of motivation are important determinants of
behavior intention in IS technology. Other studies
also found that the two motivation types influenced
the usage adoption of new technology (e.g., World
Wide Web) (Atkinson and Kydd, 1997). Many IS
studies that find perceived usefulness, as a form of
external motivation, has positive effects on IS adop-
tion and usage behavior (Hsieh and Hsu, 2013; Zhou,
2011). With regard to internal motivation, perceived
enjoyment is recognized for having a positive effect
on IS adoption and usage behavior (Olatokun and
Nwafor, 2012). In terms of continuance intention,
existing IS studies have shown that extrinsic motiva-
tion and intrinsic motivation are key determinants
(Thong et al., 2006; Kim, 2010). As a result, these
studies support the view that these two types of moti-
vation positively affect continuance intention. How-
ever, these studies do not sufficiently address AR
technology or AR smartphone applications.
Research model and hypotheses building
This study proposes an AR application continuance
model based on motivation theory and ECM, which
have been widely applied in the literature on IS.
According to ECM, the perceived ease of use, an
important construct in TAM, is appropriate for
explaining usage behavior at the initial stage, whereas
it is not effective when used to explain continu-
ance intention at a later stage (Bhattacherjee, 2001).
Because the focus of this study is to examine continu-
ance usage behavior of users, perceived ease of use
was not considered in the model. Further, ECM has
a number of limitations with regard to its ability to
conceptualize and fully explain users’ continuance
behavior with AR applications.
First, it is difficult to measure confirmed usefulness
and perceived usefulness separately in a cross-
sectional study, though this can be done in longitudi-
nal studies. Because the meaning of confirmation in
ECM overlaps perceived usefulness as an outcome
variable, it becomes problematic when describing the
relationship between behavior intention and actual
behavior in a cross-sectional study (Armitage and
Conner, 1999). Therefore, the confirmation variable
was excluded in our research model, and we extended
the exogenous factors (information quality, interactiv-
ity, and visual quality) instead.
Kim et al: Understanding users’ continuance intention toward smartphone augmented reality applications
Second, ECM does not cover the hedonic nature of IS
continuance. In existing IS studies, however, perceived
enjoyment has been recognized for having a positive
effect on the adoption and continuance intention of spe-
cific types of IS. Thus, this study extends ECM with the
perspective of motivation using exogenous factors.
Based on the modified ECM, we conceptualized the the-
oretical framework and formulated 12 hypotheses.
There are many studies which conclude that infor-
mation quality influences perceived usefulness. Saeed
and Abdinnour-Helm (2008) suggested that information
quality influences perceived usefulness in IS and that
it eventually influences the post adoption usage of IS.
In addition, other researchers have noted that informa-
tion usefulness influences customer decision-making and
that information quality is an important factor when
seeking to understand customers’ thinking (Larcker
and Lessig, 1980). From this point of view, virtual
objects require precise tracking and registration in
an AR mobile application, and with a high level of
information quality, user will feel that it is helpful.
Therefore, it may also be possible that the information
quality of an AR mobile application is related to per-
ceived usefulness. It follows that:
H1. Information quality will positively affect per-
ceived usefulness.
The quality of information is essential to satisfy user
expectations. High information quality means that infor-
mation systems provide appropriate information to the
user. Appropriate information has sub-features such as
relevance, timeliness, believability, completeness, and
concise representation (Knight and Burn, 2005). Previ-
ous studies have shown that all sub-dimensions are
equally important for information quality and that the
overall information quality, including the sub-factors,
has an impact on the perceived enjoyment of information
systems (Shin, 2007). For AR mobile applications, pro-
viding appropriate information is significant because the
applications process various types of information (e.g.,
location, time, view, and direction). As a result, users
expect AR mobile applications to provide accurate,
timely, and credible information (Kim, 2013). If users
are not provided with information of an overall high
quality level, the AR application user may feel that the
experience is not enjoyable. This can influence the flow
of AR application usage.
H2. Information quality will positively affect per-
ceived enjoyment.
165
In another studies, researchers found that telepre-
sence influences perceived usefulness. Kwon and
Wen (2010) discovered that user perception is influ-
enced by telepresence. In their paper, an increasing
degree of telepresence is considered positively to
affect perceived usefulness in a social network ser-
vice. Moreover, telepresence can be used to explain
user behavior, and it positively affects perceived
usefulness in a user-created content (UCC) service
(Oum and Han, 2011). In further detail, interactivity
can affect utilitarian and hedonic value. Yoo et al.
(2010) reported that interactivity influences user
perceptions and that it was related to a user’s achiev-
ing functional objectives and pleasant feelings in
e-commerce. In addition, high interactivity in a virtual
world provides a sense of autonomy and control in
a user’s mind, which reinforces a sense of perceived
enjoyment (Animesh et al., 2011). In an AR interface,
the ability to manipulate virtual objects influences
perceived usefulness and perceived enjoyment
(Wojciechowski and Cellary, 2013). It follows that:
H3. Interactivity will positively affect perceived
usefulness.
H4. Interactivity will positively affect perceived
enjoyment.
If the visual quality level is high, it has a positive
influence on user perception. Lee and Lehto (2013)
noted that a higher level of visual quality increased
the representational richness of information presented
on ‘YouTube’ and had a positive effect on perceived
usefulness. Visual quality is also means that if infor-
mation is depicted concretely or the presentation of
a product is shown realistically in e-commerce, users
can perceive information clearly. As a result, a higher
level of visual quality has a positive effect on
e-commerce and is a strong predictor of perceived
enjoyment (Jiang and Benbasat, 2007). This study
extends the relationships among visual quality, per-
ceived usefulness and perceived enjoyment to an
AR mobile application context. It follows that:
H5. Visual quality will positively affect perceived
usefulness.
H6. Visual quality will positively affect perceived
enjoyment.
In addition to the studies noted above, other research
results indicate that perceived enjoyment influences
perceived usefulness. In another study, Teo and Noyes
166
(2011) proposed that if education system users feel that
the system is enjoyable, that feeling is connected to the
feeling that the system is useful. Therefore, their study
reported that the perceived enjoyment of an education
system has a significant influence on the perceived use-
fulness of the education system. Liaw (2002) and Liaw
and Huang (2003) also investigated how the extrinsic
motivation (usefulness) of world-wide web environ-
ments is influenced by a users’ levels of intrinsic moti-
vation (enjoyment); their study concluded that a user’s
intrinsic motivation has a positive effect on behavior
intention. The present study focuses on the user per-
spective to predict that a user’s intrinsic motivation
toward their AR smartphone application can influence
extrinsic motivation. It follows that:
H7. Perceived enjoyment will positively affect per-
ceived usefulness.
User satisfaction is linked to user perception, and a
user’s pleasurable fulfillment is connected to their
post-usage intention (Chiou, 2004). In previous
research, McDougall and Levesque (2000) proposed
that perceived value is the most important factor affect-
ing user satisfaction in the service industry. Patterson
and Spreng (1997) also reported that user satisfaction
is influenced by perceived usefulness and perceived
enjoyment in a business-to-business (B2B) service.
The present study attempts to apply these previous
results to an AR mobile application context. An AR
mobile application’s level of user satisfaction is
affected by utilitarian and hedonic value. If an AR
mobile application is useful and enjoyable, users feel
profound satisfaction. Therefore, it follows that:
H8. Perceived usefulness will positively affect user
satisfaction.
H9. Perceived enjoyment will positively affect user
satisfaction.
Continuance intention at the user level is an impor-
tant behavior that has been investigated in various IS
studies. Based on the ECM of IS, it was empirically
shown that perceived usefulness and satisfaction are
strong predictors of a user’s continuance intention.
This approach explains continuance behavior with
regard to traditional systems, but current systems must
consider the ‘‘enjoyment view’’ (Van der Heijden,
2004). For smartphone AR applications, there are
many hedonic aspects. Perceived enjoyment can
also be an important factor as an antecedent of
Information Development 32(2)
continuance intention. Based on motivation theory,
Thong et al. (2006) found that perceived usefulness,
perceived enjoyment and satisfaction are the key
determinants of a user’s continuance intention. Barnes
(2011) also proved that hedonic values are the key
determinants of existing users’ continuance inten-
tions in virtual worlds. Therefore, this study concep-
tualizes a model by incorporating both aspects based
on motivation theory. It follows that:
H10. Perceived usefulness will positively affect con-
tinuous intention.
H11. Perceived enjoyment will positively affect con-
tinuous intention.
H12. User satisfaction will positively affect continu-
ous intention.
Research methodology and results
This study used a survey method to test the model. All
measurement items were adopted from previous stud-
ies, and modified for the AR context (See Table 1).
A seven-point Likert type scale (Strongly disagree ¼ 1,
Neutral ¼ 4, strongly agree ¼ 7) was used to measure
all items. The questionnaires were distributed to 1,200
smartphone users in July, 2013 by OVEY, that is a
renowned mobile survey company in Korea. First, a
questionnaire was provided to 1,200 smartphone
users, and only 200 users responded that they had pre-
viously used AR smartphone applications. Among
the 200 respondents, some of them chose the same
answers, and the others chose contradictory responses
to reverse questionnaires. As a result, 22 samples
were discarded as invalid. Table 2 shows the demo-
graphics of the 178 valid samples.
Data analysis was performed based on partial least
squares (PLS) analysis by using ‘Smartpls 2.0’(Ringle
et al., 2005). The evaluation of the measurement model
was validated with three main criteria: (1) Reliability,
(2) Convergent validity, and (3) Discriminant validity.
The reliability of each item was assessed by calcu-
lating Cronbach Alpha and Composite Reliability
(CR). Nunnally (1978) reported that the recommended
threshold of Cronbach Alpha is above 0.7 but 0.6 is a
generally acceptable value. The acceptable criterion
of Composite Reliability is also greater than 0.7
(Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). As shown in Table 1, all Cron-
bach Alpha and Composite Reliability values satisfied
each cut-off value. Convergent validity was assessed
by Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and factor
loadings. The study by Fornell and Larcker (1981)
Kim et al: Understanding users’ continuance intention toward smartphone augmented reality applications 167

Information
Quality H1(+)
Perceived
H2(+)
Usefulness
H10(+)
H8(+)
H3(+)
H12(+) Continuous
Interactivity H4(+) H7(+) Satisfaction
Intention

H9(+)
H5(+) H11(+)
Perceived
H6(+) Enjoyment
Visual
Quality

Figure 2. Research model.

Table 1. Measurement items.

Construct Item No. Measurement items Reference

Information INF1 The AR application provides precise information that the user needs. Seddon and Kiew
Quality INF2 The AR application provides up-to-date information. (2007)
INF3 Information that is provided by the AR application is clear and
understandable.
Interactivity INT1 I am in control over the composition of the display when using Cyr et al. (2009)
the AR application. Animesh et al.
INT2 I am in control over the content of the AR applications that I want (2011)
to see.
INT3 I can control of the virtual objects and virtual environment in the AR
application.
Visual VSQ1 The virtual objects on the screen of the AR application are lively. Jiang and Benbasat
Quality VSQ2 The virtual objects on the screen of the AR application are (2007)
described in practical terms.
VSQ3 The virtual objects on the screen of the AR application are
expressed vividly.
Perceived PU1 The AR application is useful in my daily life. Thong et al. (2006)
Usefulness PU2 The AR application provides useful information. Davis (1989)
PU3 The AR application helps improve work efficiency.
Perceived PE1 Using the AR application is enjoyable. Thong et al. (2006)
Enjoyment PE2 Using the AR application is pleasurable.
PE3 I have fun when using the AR application.
Satisfaction SAT1 I am satisfied with using the AR application. Thong et al. (2006)
SAT2 I am not complaining about using the AR application.
SAT3 The AR application fulfills my demand.
Continuous CI1 I intend to continue using the AR application in the future. Thong et al. (2006)
Intention CI2 I will use the AR application more often in my daily life. Lin et al. (2005)
CI3 I will share the AR application with others.

suggested that AVE and factor loadings should be threshold value. Discriminant validity is assessed by
greater than 0.50. As shown in Table 1, research instru- the square root of AVE. As shown in Table 2, all of the
ments of factor loading values and AVE satisfied each diagonal values in under-line value mean that the
168 Information Development 32(2)

Table 2. Respondents Demographics.

Demographic Category (N¼178) Frequency Percentage (%)

Gender Male 78 43.8

Female 100 56.2
Age 19 or younger 12 6.7
20-29 90 50.6
30-39 54 30.3
40-49 16 9.0
50-59 5 2.8
60-69 1 0.6
Occupation Student 42 23.6
Management / Administrative 9 5.1
Office / Technical 56 31.5
Public Official 13 7.3
Sales 7 3.9
Free/Specialized 21 11.8
Self-employed 5 2.8
Others 25 14.0
Operating System (OS) iOS 10 5.6
Android 168 94.4
Application use Rarely used 43 24.2
1-2 per month 60 33.7
1-2 per week 54 30.3
1-2 per day 15 8.4
More frequently used 6 3.4

square root of AVE and each of the values are greater
than the corresponding row and column values. The
results imply that discriminant validity is acceptable.
Table 1 and Table 2 show the results of the validity test.
In order to test the significance and strength of the
proposed hypotheses, a 500 subsample bootstrap
method was used. The bootstrap method is one in
which ‘‘a large number of random samples are gener-
ated from the original dataset by sampling with
replacement’’ (Brown and Chin, 2004). This method
is executed based on the number of samples, where
500 or 1000 bootstrap re-sampling are commonplace
(Chin, 2010). Efron and Tibshirani (1994) suggested
that a re-sampling size of more than 500 is acceptable.
Because our sample size was relatively small, we con-
ducted a bootstrap procedure with a re-sampling size of
500. Figure 3 represents the results of the testing struc-
tural model. The proposed model explained 60.4% of
the variance in continuance intention and 44.1% of the
variance for user satisfaction by the antecedent vari-
ables. In addition, the proposed model explained
53.6% of the variance in perceived usefulness and
24.6% of the variance for perceived enjoyment by
the antecedent variables. Among the 12 hypotheses,
most of them were supported with an over 95 percent
confidence interval for a two-tailed test. As shown in
figure 3, only H3 and H11 were not supported.
Discussion
Discussion of the key findings
This study has several meaningful findings. The
results make several interesting contributions to the
literature on AR applications.
First, perceived usefulness was a strong predictor
of the continuous intention of an AR application.
Although an AR smartphone application has utilitar-
ian and hedonic characteristics, perceived usefulness
has a direct effect on satisfaction and continuance
intention. That is, perceived usefulness significantly
affects a user’s continuance intention, which implies
that AR mobile application developers should be
more concerned with improving the usefulness fac-
tors of their applications than the enjoyment factors
when seeking to influence continuous usage applica-
tions. This result is consistent with the findings of
earlier research which argued that perceived useful-
ness is a strong predictor of user satisfaction and
continuous intention with IS (Bhattacherjee, 2001;
Barnes, 2011).
Kim et al: Understanding users’ continuance intention toward smartphone augmented reality applications 169

Information .36***
Quality
Perceived
.22* Usefulness
(R2=53.6%)
.39*** .18**
.08
Continuous
Interactivity
Satisfaction .58*** Intention
.15* .31*** (R2=44.1%)
(R2=60.4%)
.36***
.10
.18* Perceived
.22** Enjoyment
Visual (R2=24.6%)
Path significance: *p < .05, **p < .01, *** p < .001.
Quality

Figure 3. Results of the Structural Model.

Table 3. Measurement model.

Cronbach’s Composite Average Variance

Construct FactorLoading t-value Alpha(a) Reliability (C.R) Extracted (AVE)

Information Quality (INF) INF1 .80 11.36 .72 .84 .64

INF2 .85 23.37
INF3 .76 13.48
Interactivity (INT) INT1 .86 12.52 .79 .87 .70
INT2 .88 26.94
INT3 .76 9.30
Visual Quality (VSQ) VSQ1 .79 11.19 .79 .88 .70
VSQ2 .88 24.46
VSQ3 .84 21.49
Perceived Usefulness (PU) PU1 .75 8.84 .76 .86 .68
PU2 .86 18.19
PU3 .86 26.90
Perceived Enjoyment (PE) PE1 .94 69.37 .92 .95 .86
PE2 .92 39.84
PE3 .91 44.78
Satisfaction (SAT) SAT1 .91 43.80 .85 .91 .76
SAT2 .81 14.14
SAT3 .90 41.33
Continuous Intention (CI) CI1 .93 48.51 .91 .95 .85
CI2 .93 46.18
CI3 .91 35.69

Second, perceived enjoyment had an indirect effect
through perceived usefulness or satisfaction. In previ-
ous research, perceived enjoyment was shown to be a
strong predictor of continuous intention (Van der Heij-
den, 2004). However, the current study shows different
results. In the early stages, the technological features of
the AR application stimulate early adopters’ curiosity
and increased the popularity of the application. For
example, an AR educational book stimulates children’s
curiosity in the early stages. Teaching materials that
use AR technology can raise a student’s curiosity such
that they actively participate (Ucelli et al., 2005; Chen
et al., 2011). However, our results show that this does
not guarantee the survival of an AR application; focus-
ing on the hedonic nature of AR mobile application
users may explain the failure.
Third, this study supports the finding that the
level of information quality has a relatively strong
170
Table 4. Construct correlations and Discriminant Validity.
Construct INF INT
INF .80
INT .55 .83
VSQ .57 .46
PU .63 .47
PE .43 .38
SAT .54 .48
CI .47 .41
*Note: The table in under-line values means the square root of AVE.
influence on perceived usefulness and perceived enjoy-
ment. This is consistent with the findings of previous
research. According to Saeed and Abdinnour-Helm
(2008) and Yang et al. (2005), the level of information
quality directly influences the perceived usefulness of
an IS and is an important antecedent of the degree of
perceived usefulness. Moreover, the results indicate
that information and service of a high quality pro-
vided by technologies influences users’ perceived
enjoyment of the mobile Internet (Shin, 2007). In this
respect, this result is meaningful because it extends
the results of previous research to the new context
of AR smartphone applications.
Fourth, two factors of telepresence were analyzed
in this study, and the effects of the two factors were
found to be different. As expected, visual quality has
a positive influence on perceived usefulness and per-
ceived enjoyment. When AR application users use a
display, a well-represented virtual image or a natural
expression of an image is an important factor for the
user. Interactivity also has a positive influence on per-
ceived enjoyment in an AR smartphone application
context. Interaction with the mobile AR service sti-
mulates a users’ participation (Kim, 2013). In addi-
tion, interaction with virtual objects in an AR
learning system gives the user a chance to manipulate
virtual objects, and active participation is connected
to perceived enjoyment, improving learner motivation
for learning (Wojciechowski and Cellary, 2013).
Therefore, users experience more enjoyment through
the manipulation of virtual objects in an AR smart-
phone application.
However, interactivity did not have a significant
impact on perceived usefulness. Although interactiv-
ity was an important factor in previous research (Nee
et al., 2012), Hürst and van Wezel (2013) argued that
the interactivity of mobile AR applications mainly
influences their fun and entertainment factors. This
study shows that the interactivity in mobile AR
Information Development 32(2)
VSQ PU PE SAT CI
.84
.55 .82
.42 .57 .93
.57 .59 .58 .87
.44 .59 .55 .75 .92
applications is closely related to the hedonic feature
and that AR application users recognize the level of
usefulness through the information quality and the
visual quality rather than the interactivity factor.
Another possible explanation is the limits of current
smartphones. One of the main limitations of a mobile
AR system is limited user control due to the screen
size (Pence, 2010), and most smartphone screen sizes
and user interfaces (UIs) are similar. As a result, it is
not easy for users to recognize the usefulness of the
AR application through interaction. Moreover, infor-
mation and visual quality are strongly associated with
perceived usefulness as opposed to interactivity;
therefore, interactivity does not have a significant
relationship with perceived usefulness.
Theoretical and practical implications
A primary contribution of this study is the identifica-
tion of success factors for AR smartphone applications.
Azuma (1997) and Nee et al. (2012) discussed only the
theoretical features of AR without an empirical analy-
sis; therefore, the necessity of statistical verification
to explain the major factors of AR applications is
required. Based on previous studies, this study con-
firmed three major factors: information quality, inter-
activity, and visual quality, and it explored the most
important determinant affecting users’ intentions to
continue to use AR smartphone applications.
Second, this study provides a comprehensive
research model that clarifies our understanding of
the behavior of smartphone AR users. In existing
AR studies, information quality, interactivity, and
visual quality were utilized as exogenous variables
that influence the focal constructs (perceived useful-
ness, perceived enjoyment and satisfaction) of moti-
vation theory and ECM. With these variables, this
study extends previous AR theories and conceptua-
lizes the causal relationships pertaining to the
Kim et al: Understanding users’ continuance intention toward smartphone augmented reality applications
continuance usage of AR smartphone applications.
In addition, this study empirically proved that infor-
mation quality and visual quality are more important
than interactivity.
Third, this study discussed user perspectives in an
AR mobile application context. Previous studies
mainly focused on the technical aspects of AR to
improve the functional performance of an AR system.
For example, effective technologies of virtual object
tracking, a method of interaction between users and
virtual objects, and 3D-image generation technology
were discussed (Kato and Billinghurst, 1999). How-
ever, this study considers user perspectives in an
effort to investigate AR smartphone applications
based on various IS theories. Therefore, this study
proposes a different perspective compared to earlier
studies with assumed a technical perspective.
Lastly, this study reviews AR technology and
mobile AR synthetically. In the beginning, this paper
shows the development history of AR technology as
well as the present and future. Wu et al. (2012)
referred to the definitions, taxonomies, and technolo-
gical features of the AR, and Pence (2010) organized
mobile AR applications. Based on previous studies,
this study summarizes this concept in terms of the
major characteristics of AR technology.
This study also has two practical contributions.
First, this study emphasizes the importance of infor-
mation quality and visual quality to AR smartphone
application developers. According to Carmigniani
et al. (2011), AR applications are divided into four
types: the advertising and commercial, entertainment
and education, medical, and mobile types. Each appli-
cation has different purposes, and different important
factors are considered for each purpose. For example,
an advertising AR application is required to have
good visual quality of the advertising elements,
whereas a medical application needs to produce accu-
rate information. In this way, the process of AR
mobile applications can be positively influenced to
help developers establish criteria for the successful
development of AR smartphone applications accord-
ing to the application type.
Second, the results imply that users’ views of use-
fulness are very important with regard to the commer-
cialization of AR smartphone applications. According
to Carmigniani et al. (2011), an AR mobile applica-
tion not only has an entertainment purpose, but also
educational, navigational, and information purposes
that are emphasized from a utilitarian perspective.
For example, the navigational function of an AR
171
application guides the user to find the nearest destina-
tion desired by the user, and the user can easily
acquire knowledge using an AR educational applica-
tion. Although hedonic purposes are important, the
utilitarian purpose is emphasized more. As shown in
the results, a user’s intention to continue their use of
an application is influenced by the usefulness of the
application, and practitioners should therefore focus
more on improving an application’s usefulness.
Limitations
This study has a few limitations. The sample data was
gathered from a single country, and the number of
samples was relatively small. However, the results
of this study should be meaningful for other countries
starting to build AR applications. As Korea is an
advanced country in the IT industry and actively
develops AR smartphone applications currently, our
results show how new developers in other countries
can design AR smartphone applications. In the future,
more samples and data from other countries would be
effective to generalize the results, and an international
comparison based on this study would also be useful.
References
Animesh A, Pinsonneault A, Yang S-B, et al. (2011) An
odyssey into virtual worlds: exploring the impacts of
technological and spatial environments on intention to
purchase virtual products. MIS Quarterly 35(3):
789–813.
Armitage CJ and Conner M (1999) The theory of planned
behaviour: Assessment of predictive validity and’ per-
ceived control. British Journal of Social Psychology
38(1): 35–54.
Atkinson M and Kydd C (1997) Individual characteristics
associated with World Wide Web use: an empirical
study of playfulness and motivation. ACM SIGMIS
Database 28(2): 53–62.
Azuma R, Baillot Y, Behringer R, et al. (2001) Recent
advances in augmented reality. Computer Graphics and
Applications, IEEE 21(6): 34–47.
Azuma RT (1997) A survey of augmented reality. Presence
6(4): 355–385.
Bagozzi RP and Yi Y (1988) On the evaluation of structural
equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science 16(1): 74–94.
Barnes SJ (2011) Understanding use continuance in virtual
worlds: Empirical test of a research model. Information
& Management 48(8): 313–319.
Bhattacherjee A (2001) Understanding information sys-
tems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model.
MIS Quarterly 25(3): 351–370.
172
Bimber O, Raskar R and Inami M (2005) Spatial augmen-
ted reality: AK Peters Wellesley.
Brown SP and Chin WW (2004) Satisfying and retaining
customers through independent service representatives.
Decision Sciences 35(3): 527–550.
Carmigniani J, Furht B, Anisetti M, et al. (2011) Augmen-
ted reality technologies, systems and applications. Mul-
timedia Tools and Applications 51(1): 341–377.
Chang K-E, Chang C-T, Hou H-T, et al. (2014) Develop-
ment and behavioral pattern analysis of a mobile guide
system with augmented reality for painting appreciation
instruction in an art museum. Computers & Education
71(1): 185–197.
Chen Y-C, Chi H-L, Hung W-H, et al. (2011) Use of tangi-
ble and augmented reality models in engineering gra-
phics courses. Journal of Professional Issues in
Engineering Education & Practice 137(4): 267–276.
Chin WW (2010) Bootstrap cross-validation indices for
PLS path model assessment. Handbook of Partial Least
Squares . Springer, 83–97.
Chiou J-S (2004) The antecedents of consumers’ loyalty
toward Internet service providers. Information & Man-
agement 41(6): 685–695.
Coyle JR and Thorson E (2001) The effects of progressive
levels of interactivity and vividness in web marketing
sites. Journal of Advertising 30(3): 65–77.
Cyr D, Head M and Ivanov A (2009) Perceived interactiv-
ity leading to e-loyalty: Development of a model for
cognitive–affective user responses. International Jour-
nal of Human-Computer Studies 67(10): 850–869.
Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of
use, and user acceptance of information technology.
MIS Quarterly 13(3): 319–340.
Davis FD, Bagozzi RP and Warshaw PR (1989) User
acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of
two theoretical models. Management Science 35(8):
982–1003.
Davis FD, Bagozzi RP and Warshaw PR (1992) Extrinsic
and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the work-
place. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 22(14):
1111–1132.
Dunleavy M, Dede C and Mitchell R (2009) Affordances
and limitations of immersive participatory augmented
reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal
of Science Education and Technology 18(1): 7–22.
Efron B and Tibshirani RJ (1994) An introduction to the
bootstrap. CRC press.
Fornell C and Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural
equation models with unobservable variables and mea-
surement error. Journal of Marketing Research 18(1):
39–50.
Gartner (2010) Gartner’s 2010 Hype Cycle Special Report
evaluates maturity of 1,800 technologies. Available at:
http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/1447613 (accessed
10 May 2013)
Information Development 32(2)
Hürst W and van Wezel C (2013) Gesture-based interaction
via finger tracking for mobile augmented reality. Multi-
media Tools and Applications 62(1): 233–258.
Hsieh S-T and Hsu P-Y (2013) Mentoring effects in the
successful adaptation of information systems. Informa-
tion Development. Epub ahead of print 16 December
2013. DOI: 0266666913511263
Jiang Z and Benbasat I (2007) Research note—investigat-
ing the influence of the functional mechanisms of online
product presentations. Information Systems Research
18(4): 454–470.
Kato H and Billinghurst M (1999) Marker tracking and
hmd calibration for a video-based augmented reality
conferencing system Augmented Reality, 1999.
(IWAR’99) Proceedings . 2nd IEEE and ACM Interna-
tional Workshop on San Francisco, CA, 20 Oct 1999,
pp. 85-94. IEEE
Kim B (2010) An empirical investigation of mobile data
service continuance: Incorporating the theory of planned
behavior into the expectation–confirmation model.
Expert Systems with Applications 37(10): 7033–7039.
Kim MJ (2013) A framework for context immersion in
mobile augmented reality. Automation in Construction
33(1): 79–85.
Klopfer E (2008) Augmented learning: Research and
design of mobile educational games: The MIT Press.
Klopfer E and Squire K (2008) Environmental Detectives—
the development of an augmented reality platform
for environmental simulations. Educational Technology
Research and Development 56(2): 203–228.
Knight S-A and Burn JM (2005) Developing a framework
for assessing information quality on the World Wide
Web. Informing Science: International Journal of an
Emerging Transdiscipline 8(5): 159–172.
Kwon O and Wen Y (2010) An empirical study of the fac-
tors affecting social network service use. Computers in
Human Behavior 26(2): 254–263.
Larcker DF and Lessig VP (1980) Perceived usefulness of
information: a psychometric examination. Decision
Sciences 11(1): 121–134.
Lee DY and Lehto MR (2013) User acceptance of YouTube for
procedural learning: an extension of the technology accep-
tance model. Computers & Education 61(1): 193–208.
Lee MK, Cheung CM and Chen Z (2005) Acceptance of
Internet-based learning medium: the role of extrinsic
and intrinsic motivation. Information & Management
42(8): 1095–1104.
Liaw S-S and Huang H-M (2003) An investigation of user
attitudes toward search engines as an information retrie-
val tool. Computers in Human Behavior 19(6): 751–765.
Liaw SS (2002) Understanding user perceptions of world
wide web environments. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning 18(2): 137–148.
Lin CS, Wu S and Tsai RJ (2005) Integrating perceived
playfulness into expectation-confirmation model for
Kim et al: Understanding users’ continuance intention toward smartphone augmented reality applications
web portal context. Information & Management 42(5):
683–693.
McDougall GH and Levesque T (2000) Customer satisfac-
tion with services: putting perceived value into the equa-
tion. Journal of Services Marketing 14(5): 392–410.
Milgram P and Kishino F (1994) A taxonomy of mixed
reality visual displays. IEICE TRANSACTIONS on
Information and Systems 77(12): 1321–1329.
Narzt W, Pomberger G, Ferscha A, et al. (2006) Augmen-
ted reality navigation systems. Universal Access in the
Information Society 4(3): 177–187.
Nee A, Ong S, Chryssolouris G, et al. (2012) Augmented
reality applications in design and manufacturing. CIRP
Annals-Manufacturing Technology 61(2): 657–679.
Nunnally J (1978) Psychometric methods. McGraw-Hill,
New York, NY.
Olatokun W and Nwafor CI (2012) The effect of extrinsic
and intrinsic motivation on knowledge sharing inten-
tions of civil servants in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Informa-
tion Development 28(3): 216–234.
Olsson T, Ihamäki P, Lagerstam E, et al. (2009) User expec-
tations for mobile mixed reality services: an initial user
study European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics:
Designing beyond the Product–Understanding Activity
and User Experience in Ubiquitous Environments pp.
19. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
Olsson T, Lagerstam E, Kärkkäinen T, et al. (2013)
Expected user experience of mobile augmented reality
services: a user study in the context of shopping centres.
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 17(2): 287–304.
Oum S and Han D (2011) An empirical study of the deter-
minants of the intention to participate in user-created
contents (UCC) services. Expert Systems with Applica-
tions 38(12): 15110–15121.
Papagiannakis G, Singh G and Magnenat-Thalmann N
(2008) A survey of mobile and wireless technologies for
augmented reality systems. Computer Animation and
Virtual Worlds 19(1): 3–22.
Patterson PG and Spreng RA (1997) Modelling the rela-
tionship between perceived value, satisfaction and
repurchase intentions in a business-to-business, services
context: an empirical examination. International Jour-
nal of Service Industry Management 8(5): 414–434.
Pence HE (2010) Smartphones, smart objects, and aug-
mented reality. The Reference Librarian 52(1-2):
136–145.
Reeves B (1991) Being there: Television as symbolic ver-
sus natural experience. Unpublished manuscript, Insti-
tute for Communication Research, Stanford University,
Stanford, CA.
Regenbrecht HT, Wagner M and Baratoff G (2002) Magic-
meeting: A collaborative tangible augmented reality
system. Virtual Reality 6(3): 151–166.
Ringle CM, Wende S and Will A (2005) SmartPLS 2.0
(beta). Hamburg, Germany.
173
Ryan RM and Deci EL (2000) Intrinsic and extrinsic moti-
vations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contem-
porary Educational Psychology 25(1): 54–67.
Saeed KA and Abdinnour-Helm S (2008) Examining the
effects of information system characteristics and per-
ceived usefulness on post adoption usage of information
systems. Information & Management 45(6): 376–386.
Seddon P and Kiew M-Y (2007) A partial test and develop-
ment of DeLone and McLean’s model of IS success. Aus-
tralasian Journal of Information Systems 4(1): 90–109.
Shin D-H (2007) User acceptance of mobile Internet:
Implication for convergence technologies. Interacting
with Computers 19(4): 472–483.
Steuer J (1992) Defining virtual reality: Dimensions deter-
mining telepresence. Journal of Communication 42(4):
73–93.
Teo T and Noyes J (2011) An assessment of the influence
of perceived enjoyment and attitude on the intention to
use technology among pre-service teachers: A structural
equation modeling approach. Computers & Education
57(2): 1645–1653.
Theng Y-L, Mei-Ling CL, Liu W, et al. (2007) Mixed real-
ity systems for learning: a pilot study understanding user
perceptions and acceptance. Virtual Reality. Springer,
pp. 728–737.
Thong JY, Hong S-J and Tam KY (2006) The effects of
post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-confirmation
model for information technology continuance. Interna-
tional Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64(9):
799–810.
Ucelli G, Conti G, De Amicis R, et al. (2005) Learning
using augmented reality technology: multiple means of
interaction for teaching children the theory of colours.
Intelligent Technologies for Interactive Entertainment.
Springer, 193–202.
Van der Heijden H (2004) User acceptance of hedonic
information systems. MIS Quarterly 28(4): 695–704.
Venkatesh V and Davis FD (1996) A model of the antece-
dents of perceived ease of use: Development and test.
Decision Sciences 27(3): 451–481.
Wagner D and Schmalstieg D (2003) First steps towards
handheld augmented reality. Seventh IEEE International
Symposium on Wearable Computers White Plains,
New York, USA, Oct 21, pp. 127. IEEE.
Walker G and Sheppard P (1997) Telepresence-The future
of telephony. British Telecommunications Technology
Journal, Special Issue on Telepresence.
Wojciechowski R and Cellary W (2013) Evaluation of
learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented
reality environments. Computers & Education 68(1):
570–585.
Wu H-K, Wen-Yu Lee S, Chang H-Y, et al. (2012) Cur-
rent status, opportunities and challenges of augmented
reality in education. Computers & Education 62(1):
41–49.
174
Yang Z, Cai S, Zhou Z, et al. (2005) Development and vali-
dation of an instrument to measure user perceived ser-
vice quality of information presenting web portals.
Information & Management 42(4): 575–589.
Yoo W-S, Lee Y and Park J (2010) The role of interactivity in
e-tailing: Creating value and increasing satisfaction. Jour-
nal of Retailing and Consumer Services 17(2): 89–96.
Zhou T (2011) The effect of initial trust on user adoption
of mobile payment. Information Development 27(4):
290–300.
About the authors
Keesung Kim is a Master degree student in the Department
of Business and Technology management at Korea
Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST).
He received his Bachelor’s degree in information and com-
puter engineering and business administration from Ajou
University. His current research interests include user accep-
tance of information system, e-business, information privacy
and business value of information system. His research work
has been presented at the International Conference on ICT
Convergence. Contact: Department of Business and Tech-
nology Management, Korea Advanced Institute of Science
and Technology (KAIST), 291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu,
Daejeon 305-701, Republic of Korea. Voice: þ82-42-350-
6338. Email: kisung1201@kaist.ac.kr
Jiyeon Hwang is a PhD student in the Department of Busi-
ness and Technology Management at Korea Advanced Insti-
tute of Science and Technology (KAIST). She received her
Master degree in sociology. Her research focuses on Collec-
tive Behavior and Deviant Behavior in virtual community.
She also has well-qualified experience in related works at the
research institute ‘Future Thinknet’ as a chief researcher.
Contact: Department of Business and Technology Manage-
ment, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology
(KAIST), 291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-701,
Information Development 32(2)
Republic of Korea. Voice: þ82-42-350-6338. Email:
bandal@kaist.ac.kr
Hangjung Zo is Associate Professor of MIS in the Depart-
ment of Business and Technology Management at Korea
Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST).
He received his PhD in MIS from the University of Wis-
consin–Milwaukee. His research interests include Web ser-
vices and Web-based systems, e-business, e-government,
software engineering, business process management, and
IT strategy. His papers have appeared in IEEE Transac-
tions on Systems Man & Cybernetics, Decision Support
Systems, Journal of Business Research, Electronic Com-
merce Research and Applications, Computers & Educa-
tion, Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems, HICSS,
among others. He was the chair for the ICT Innovations and
Progresses in Developing Countries Workshop at ICCIT
2009. Contact: Department of Business and Technology
Management, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and
Technology (KAIST), 291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon
305-701, Republic of Korea. Voice: þ82-42-350-6311.
Fax: þ82-42-350-6339. Email: joezo@kaist.edu
Hwansoo Lee is Research Professor in the Interdisciplinary
Graduate Program in IT Law at Dankook University. His
research focuses on Information Privacy, Electronic Com-
merce, Platform Business, and Enterprise Information Sys-
tem. His papers have appeared in Behaviour & Information
Technology, Journal of Global Information Management,
Information Development, and several international confer-
ences. He also has well-qualified experiences in related works
at information systems area as developer and system analyst.
He has received the Best Papers awards at various interna-
tional and domestic conferences. Contact: Interdisciplinary
Graduate Program in IT Law, Dankook University, 152
Jukjeon-ro, Suji-gu, Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-do 448-701,
Republic of Korea. Voice: þ82-31-8005-3278. Email:
hanslee992@gmail.com