An Application of the Hedonic Technology Acceptance Model (TAM): A Case Study of Online Gaming Adoption in New Jersey
Session Title
Session 4-2-E: Interactive Gaming Policies
Presentation Type
Event
Location
The Mirage Hotel & Casino, Las Vegas, Nevada
Start Date
10-6-2016 10:30 AM
End Date
10-6-2016 12:00 PM
Disciplines
Business Administration, Management, and Operations | Business Intelligence | E-Commerce | Economics | Gaming and Casino Operations Management | Hospitality Administration and Management | Marketing | Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration
Abstract
Is there a probable continuation of a general rejection or the lack of technology acceptance by the populace of the domestic United States of America of legalized Intrastate Internet gaming because of a basic expectation gap caused by over promising and under deliverance? Pre-2006 Passage of the Unlawful Internet Enforcement Act (UIGEA), Internet gaming, was, by most measures, a successful, if commercially legally gray, industry activity. With the technical frustration points and mass reduction in liquidity (the amount of wagering monies that might by wagered) since the games participants were geographically reduced from a world-wide base to ones limited by state boundaries, the frictionless gaming experience scenario leveraged on economies of scale and scope continue to be artificially, terrestrially limited. Still, a fundamental query of whether the thus far fiscally underperforming offering of Internet Poker and Internet traditional casino games is complementing or substituting the allocation of monies for casino wagering activity within Atlantic City’s legacy terrestrial properties.
Does a generalizable and quantifiably accountable level of patron hardship endurance that can, and arguably did occur, during a technology product’s initial evaluative roll out period exist (in the case of New Jersey, the evaluative period consists of the first quarter of NJ Internet gaming active year (i.e., January 1st to March 31st, 2013)?
The three explicit hardships to be gauged and are to be measured by continuation or extinguishment of activity include (as indicators of one of three core predicators, Perceived Ease of Use – (PE) the ability to establish gaming accounts using both Know Your Customer (KYC) casino client identification systems coupled with geo-location verification. Secondly, the ability to establish and continuously maintain adequate electronic gaming funds will be determined via proxy cessation thresholds (e.g., after three times trying to verify geo-location but failing or two times trying to use a credit cards for funding but not being successful and consequently ceasing to attempt to engage with the Internet gaming system. The second core predicator in the modified hedonic technology acceptance model is (Perceived Usefulness – (PU)). This element will be determined using standard tools of perception measurement (e.g., a Likert scale) and will assess the chasm between a patron’s historic and contemporary legal status of Intrastate Internet gaming comprehension.
A memory cue will be provided of the tainted legal, ethical, and monetary legacy stigma of pre-legalized (primarily internationally based) Internet gaming that PokerStars.com™ in-house collusion scandal and the expatriation of online poker wagering funds on Black Friday, April 15, 2011 as well as a brief explanation of current state enforced gaming regulations as per the codified legislative stipulations established by the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (NJDGE) and New Jersey Casino Control Commission (NJCCC) respectively.
Keywords
Legalized Intrastate Internet Gaming, New Jersey, Atlantic City, Hardship, Tolerance, Know Your Customer, Geo-Location, Liquidity
Streaming Media
An Application of the Hedonic Technology Acceptance Model (TAM): A Case Study of Online Gaming Adoption in New Jersey
The Mirage Hotel & Casino, Las Vegas, Nevada
Is there a probable continuation of a general rejection or the lack of technology acceptance by the populace of the domestic United States of America of legalized Intrastate Internet gaming because of a basic expectation gap caused by over promising and under deliverance? Pre-2006 Passage of the Unlawful Internet Enforcement Act (UIGEA), Internet gaming, was, by most measures, a successful, if commercially legally gray, industry activity. With the technical frustration points and mass reduction in liquidity (the amount of wagering monies that might by wagered) since the games participants were geographically reduced from a world-wide base to ones limited by state boundaries, the frictionless gaming experience scenario leveraged on economies of scale and scope continue to be artificially, terrestrially limited. Still, a fundamental query of whether the thus far fiscally underperforming offering of Internet Poker and Internet traditional casino games is complementing or substituting the allocation of monies for casino wagering activity within Atlantic City’s legacy terrestrial properties.
Does a generalizable and quantifiably accountable level of patron hardship endurance that can, and arguably did occur, during a technology product’s initial evaluative roll out period exist (in the case of New Jersey, the evaluative period consists of the first quarter of NJ Internet gaming active year (i.e., January 1st to March 31st, 2013)?
The three explicit hardships to be gauged and are to be measured by continuation or extinguishment of activity include (as indicators of one of three core predicators, Perceived Ease of Use – (PE) the ability to establish gaming accounts using both Know Your Customer (KYC) casino client identification systems coupled with geo-location verification. Secondly, the ability to establish and continuously maintain adequate electronic gaming funds will be determined via proxy cessation thresholds (e.g., after three times trying to verify geo-location but failing or two times trying to use a credit cards for funding but not being successful and consequently ceasing to attempt to engage with the Internet gaming system. The second core predicator in the modified hedonic technology acceptance model is (Perceived Usefulness – (PU)). This element will be determined using standard tools of perception measurement (e.g., a Likert scale) and will assess the chasm between a patron’s historic and contemporary legal status of Intrastate Internet gaming comprehension.
A memory cue will be provided of the tainted legal, ethical, and monetary legacy stigma of pre-legalized (primarily internationally based) Internet gaming that PokerStars.com™ in-house collusion scandal and the expatriation of online poker wagering funds on Black Friday, April 15, 2011 as well as a brief explanation of current state enforced gaming regulations as per the codified legislative stipulations established by the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (NJDGE) and New Jersey Casino Control Commission (NJCCC) respectively.
Comments
Audio recording of this presentation is attached as a downloadable MP3 audio file, 49.5 MB
This presentation begins at 25:07