IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/diw/diwwpp/dp346.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Analyzing E-Learning Adoption via Recursive Partitioning

Author

Listed:
  • Philipp Köllinger
  • Christian Schade

Abstract

The paper analyzes factors that influence the adoption of e-learning and gives an example of how to forecast technology adoption based on a post-hoc predictive segmentation using a classification and regression tree (CART). We find strong evidence for the existence of technological interdependencies and organizational learning effects. Furthermore, we find different paths to elearning adoption. The results of the analysis suggest a growing "digital divide" among firms. We use cross-sectional data from a European survey about e-business in June 2002, covering almost 6,000 enterprises in 15 industry sectors and 4 countries. Comparing the predictive quality of CART, we find that CART outperforms a traditional logistic regression. The results are more parsimonious, i. e. CARTs use less explanatory variables, better interpretable since different paths of adoption are detected, and from a statistical standpoint, because interactions between the covariates are taken into account.

Suggested Citation

  • Philipp Köllinger & Christian Schade, 2003. "Analyzing E-Learning Adoption via Recursive Partitioning," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 346, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp346
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.40405.de/dp346.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1981. "On the Diffusion of New Technology: A Game Theoretic Approach," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 48(3), pages 395-405.
    2. Stoneman, Paul & Kwon, Myung-Joong, 1994. "The Diffusion of Multiple Process Technologies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(423), pages 420-431, March.
    3. Church, Jeffrey & Gandal, Neil, 1993. "Complementary network externalities and technological adoption," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 239-260, June.
    4. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    5. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1985. "Preemption and Rent Equalization in the Adoption of New Technology," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 52(3), pages 383-401.
    6. Colombo, Massimo G & Mosconi, Rocco, 1995. "Complementarity and Cumulative Learning Effects in the Early Diffusion of Multiple Technologies," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 13-48, March.
    7. Frank M. Bass, 1969. "A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 215-227, January.
    8. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    9. William D. Nordhaus, 2002. "Productivity Growth and the New Economy," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 33(2), pages 211-265.
    10. Jensen, Richard, 1982. "Adoption and diffusion of an innovation of uncertain profitability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 182-193, June.
    11. Georg Götz, 1999. "Monopolistic Competition and the Diffusion of New Technology," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(4), pages 679-693, Winter.
    12. Dale W. Jorgenson, 2001. "Information Technology and the U.S. Economy," Higher School of Economics Economic Journal Экономический журнал Высшей школы экономики, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 5(1), pages 3-34.
    13. Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2003. "Computing Productivity: Firm-Level Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 793-808, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schade, Christian & Köllinger, Philipp, 2004. "Adoption of e-business: patterns and consequences of network externalities," Papers 2004,05, Humboldt University of Berlin, Center for Applied Statistics and Economics (CASE).
    2. Stoneman, Paul & Battisti, Giuliana, 2010. "The Diffusion of New Technology," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 733-760, Elsevier.
    3. Baldwin, John R. & Raffiquzzaman, Mohammed, 1998. "The Determinants of the Adoption Lag for Advanced Manufacturing Technologies," Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series 1998117e, Statistics Canada, Analytical Studies Branch.
    4. Pulkki-Brännström, Anni-Maria & Stoneman, Paul, 2013. "On the patterns and determinants of the global diffusion of new technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1768-1779.
    5. Brant Callaway & Vivek Ghosal, 2012. "Adoption and Diffusion of Health Information Technology - The Case of Primary Care Clinics," CESifo Working Paper Series 3925, CESifo.
    6. repec:diw:diwwpp:dp562 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Koellinger, Ph.D. & Schade, C., 2010. "The Influence of Installed Technologies on Future Adoption Decisions: Empirical Evidence from E-Business," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2010-012-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    8. Rachel BOCQUET (IREGE, IUT-University of Savoie) & Olivier BROSSARD (LEREPS-GRES), 2006. "Information Technologies (IT) Adoption and Localized Knowledge Diffusion: an Empirical Study," Cahiers du GRES (2002-2009) 2006-17, Groupement de Recherches Economiques et Sociales.
    9. Koellinger, Philipp, 2008. "The relationship between technology, innovation, and firm performance--Empirical evidence from e-business in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1317-1328, September.
    10. Koellinger, Ph.D., 2008. "The Relationship between Technology, Innovation, and Firm Performance: Empirical Evidence on E-Business in Europe," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-031-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    11. Ana Faria & Paul Fenn & Alistair Bruce, 2002. "Determinants of adoption of flexible production technologies: Evidence from portuguese manufacturing industry," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(6), pages 569-580.
    12. Gil, Nuno & Miozzo, Marcela & Massini, Silvia, 2012. "The innovation potential of new infrastructure development: An empirical study of Heathrow airport's T5 project," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 452-466.
    13. Fuentelsaz, Lucio & Gómez, Jaime & Palomas, Sergio, 2016. "Interdependences in the intrafirm diffusion of technological innovations: Confronting the rational and social accounts of diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 951-963.
    14. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:15:y:2005:i:15:p:1-10 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Baldwin, John R. & Raffiquzzaman, Mohammed, 1998. "Les facteurs determinants des retards en matiere d'adoption des technologies de fabrication de pointe," Direction des études analytiques : documents de recherche 1998117f, Statistics Canada, Direction des études analytiques.
    16. Ariel Herbert FAMBEU, 2016. "Déterminants De L’Adoption Des Tic Dans Un Pays En Développement : Une Analyse Économétrique Sur Les Entreprises Industrielles Au Cameroun," Region et Developpement, Region et Developpement, LEAD, Universite du Sud - Toulon Var, vol. 43, pages 159-186.
    17. Rui Baptista, 1999. "The Diffusion of Process Innovations: A Selective Review," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 107-129.
    18. Elisabetta Ottoz, 2005. "Technological spillover and the time distribution of licenses," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 15(15), pages 1-10.
    19. Alberto Galasso & Mihkel Tombak, 2014. "Switching to Green: The Timing of Socially Responsible Innovation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 669-691, September.
    20. Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz: Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht [Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz:Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht]," MPRA Paper 6725, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. François Jeanjean, 2021. "Impact of Technical Progress on the Relationship Between Competition and Investment," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 81-101, March.
    22. Helen Weeds, 2002. "Strategic Delay in a Real Options Model of R&D Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(3), pages 729-747.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technology Adoption; Path Dependence; Interaction between Different Technologies; Regression Trees; Predictive Segmentation; Logistic Regression; E-Learning; E-Business;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • L29 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Other

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp346. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.