Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Broadband adoption in the uk household: Towards reliabilty and construct validity of a survey instrument

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperpeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to develop a reliable and valid measurement of consumer adoption of broadband in the UK households. The paper validated the survey instrument in order to confirm the reliability of items and construct validity by employing a survey data randomly collected from 358 UK household consumers. Data analysis based on factor analysis and reliability test demonstrated that survey measures for all constructs were possess recommended level of construct validity and reliability. The final outcome of the instrument development process that culminated from the field test was a parsimonious, 39-item instrument, consisting of 10 scales, all with acceptable levels of reliability and construct validity. Therefore the most conspicuous contribution of this research paper is to provide a reliable instrument to measure the household consumer's perceptions of adopting broadband Internet. The developed instrument is relevant to both academic and practitioner communities who hold a particular interest in the study and management of broadband diffusion and adoption from the household consumer perspective.

Original languageEnglish
StatePublished - 2006
Externally publishedYes
Event14th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2006 - Goteborg, Sweden
Duration: 12 Jun 200614 Jun 2006

Conference

Conference14th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2006
Country/TerritorySweden
CityGoteborg
Period12/06/0614/06/06

Keywords

  • Broadband adoption
  • Construct validity
  • Method bias
  • Reliability
  • Survey instrument

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Information Systems

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Broadband adoption in the uk household: Towards reliabilty and construct validity of a survey instrument'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this