The goal of this dissertation is to study the motivation of underrepresented minorities to adopt, diffuse and use new, innovative technologies. Specifically, this study examined the effect of ethnic identification and its intensity as a moderator variable in this motivation.
Chapter 3 described the methodology used to test the hypotheses detailed after the literature review in Chapter 2 of this dissertation. This chapter will present the collected demographic characteristics of the sample as well as the results of the SEM analysis described in Chapter 3.
Organization of Data Analysis
The data in this chapter will be presented two parts. The first part incorporates the components of hypothesis one and two, where the entire sample was used in the SEM analysis. The second part is comprised of the components of hypothesis 3 where the sample was divided into two groups in order to perform a multiple group analysis.
I will first present the descriptive statistics for the demographic characteristics of the survey sample. Following, I will then introduce the data in the two parts mentioned above. In Part 1, first the hypothesis will again be presented, followed by the validation of the measurement model. Unstandardized and standardized estimates as well as goodness-of-fit statistics will also be presented for this entire-sample measurement model. Reports of each construct’s reliability will be presented following the validation of the measurement model.
Following the report of construct reliability, the results for the causal model will be presented as well as the unstandardized and standardized estimates of the casual paths and their
significance. Next, goodness-of-fit statistics will be presented for the causal model. I will then present result of post hoc analyses as well as the unstandardized and standardized
estimates of the casual paths and their significance. The goodness-of-fit statistics for the post hoc causal model will then be presented.
In Part 2, first the hypothesis will again be presented, followed by the validation of the multi-group measurement model. The two groups used in this multi-group model will be those that more highly identify with their ethnic affiliation (higher-identifiers) and those that identify with their ethnic affiliation to a lower extent (lower-identifiers). Unstandardized and standardized estimates as well as goodness-of-fit statistics will also be presented for this multi-group measurement model. The results then for the multi-group causal model will be presented as well as the unstandardized and standardized estimates of the casual paths and their significance. Goodness-of-fit statistics will then be presented for the multi-group causal model. Following the multi-group casual model presentation, nested model comparisons of both the multi-group models’ unconstrained and constrained versions will be conducted followed by a chi-square difference test for significance of group invariance. I will then present result of post hoc analyses as well as the unstandardized and standardized estimates of the casual paths and their significance. The goodness-of-fit statistics for the post hoc causal model will then be presented. Following the post hoc multi-group model analysis, nested model comparisons of both the post hoc multi-group models’ unconstrained and constrained versions will be conducted followed by a chi-square difference test for significance of group invariance.
Presentation of Descriptive Characteristics of Respondents
At total of two-hundred fifty-seven (257) respondents completed the online survey. Although demographic variables were not included in the analysis of the data (i.e. are not part of the proposed models and were not used to determine any endogenous variables), their descriptive frequencies are presented here so illustrate the spread of survey participants completing the online survey.Table 3 shows the number of responses available for the age demographic variable. Of the 257 completed and valid survey participants, one (.4%) was 17 and thirty-six (14%) chose not to answer these questions. Seventy-eight (30.4%) were between ages 18 – 20, fifty-six (21.8%) were between the ages of 21 – 23 and thirty (11.7%) were between the ages of 24 – 26 yielding a total of 63.9% of the survey population between the ages of 18 – 26. This age group represents the U.S. average of the undergraduate student.
Age Frequency Percent <NR> 36 14.0 <= 17 1 .4 >30 30 11.7 18-20 78 30.4 21-23 56 21.8 24-26 30 11.7 27-30 26 10.1 Total 257 100.0
Table 3: Age Frequencies of Research Participants
Table 4 shows the available responses available across gender for this study. Of the 257 valid and completed surveys, 108 (42%) are female and the remaining 149 (58%) are male.
Gender Frequency Percent Female 108 42.0 Male 149 58.0 Total 257 100.0
Table 4: Gender Frequencies of Research Participants
Tables 5 and 6 show the available responses of participants as it relates to their parents’ education and income levels, respectively. Slightly over half of the survey participants’ parents have completed some college (26.1%), received their Associate’s degree (4.7%) or their Bachelor’s degree (26.1%) as Table 5 demonstrates.
Parental Education Frequency Percent Associate Degree 12 4.7 Bachelor's Degree 67 26.1 Doctorate (includes M.D., Ph.D., Ed.D., J.D. etc.) 6 2.3
High School / GED 24 9.3 Master's Degree 44 17.1
Some College 67 26.1
Some Graduate School 15 5.8 Some High School 13 5.1 Total 257 100.0
Table 5: Parental Education Frequencies of Research Participants
Concerning parental income, Table 6 shows that 34.6% of the participants’ parents earn less than $30,000 per year. Over half of the survey populations’ parents (50.2%) earn less than $48,000 per year.
Parent Income Frequency Percent < $30,000 89 34.6 > $100,000 29 11.3 $30,000 - $48,000 40 15.6 $48,000 - $78,000 62 24.1 $78,000 - $100,000 37 14.4 Total 257 100.0
Table 6: Parental Education Frequencies of Research Participants
Finally, Tables 7 and 8 show the available responses of participants’ geographic origin and geographic region of the college they are attending, respectively. The greatest number of participants (31.9%) are from the South Eastern region of the U.S. as denoted in Table 7.
Region of
Origin Frequency Percent International 46 17.9 Mid-West 70 27.2 North East 14 5.4 South East 82 31.9 South West 40 15.6 West 5 1.9 Total 257 100.0
Table 7: Region of Origin Frequencies of Research Participants
Table 8 indicates that the greatest representation of regions from which participants are attending college is the Mid-West with 40.5%.
Region -
College Frequency Percent International 6 2.3 Mid-West 104 40.5 North East 13 5.1 South East 80 31.1 South West 49 19.1 West 5 1.9 Total 257 100.0
Table 8: College Attending Frequencies of Research Participants
Research Questions and Associated Hypotheses
The purpose of this study is to examine the motivation of underrepresented minorities to adopt, diffuse and use new, innovative technologies. Specifically, this study examined the effect of ethnic identification and its intensity as a moderator variable in this motivation.