Patent Applying or Not Applying: What Factors Motivating Students’ Intention to Engage in Patent Activities

Mei-Lan Lin; Tai-Kuei Yu

doi:10.29333/ejmste/85420

Full Text (PDF)

Mei-Lan Lin ¹, Tai-Kuei Yu ² ^*

More Detail

¹ Department of Hospitality Management, Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology, TAIWAN² Department of Business Administration, National Quemoy University, TAIWAN^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the roles of growth need strength and the perceived benefits of innovation as antecedent predictors of students’ intentions to participate in patent activities using the theory of planned behaviour (TPB). This study compared three models that predicted business and management students’ intentions to perform patent activities. Results from structural equation modelling applied to undergraduate students supported that the effects of growth need strength and the perceived benefits of innovation influenced students’ intentions through a TPB model with the antecedents of attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. The research proposed model was superior to the other models and explained 74% of the variance in behavioral intentions to engage in patent activities. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Keywords

patent activities
growth need strength
perceived benefits
theory of planned behaviour model

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2018, Volume 14, Issue 5, 1843-1858

https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/85420

Publication date: 18 Feb 2018

Article Views: 1590

Article Downloads: 849

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and Human Decision Process, 50, 179-211.
Al-Emadi, M. A., & Marquardt, M. J. (2007). Relationship between employees’ beliefs regarding training benefits and organizational commitment in a petroleum company in the state of Qatar. International Journal of Training and Development, 11(1), 49-70.
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-499.
Baard, S. K., Rench, T. A., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2014). Performance adaptation a theoretical integration and review. Journal of Management, 40(1), 48-99.
Bagozzi, R. P. (1992). The self-regulation of attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55(2), 178-204.
Barclay, D. W., Higgins, C., & Thompson, R. (1995). The partial least square (PLS) approach to causal modeling: personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technology Studies, 2(2), 285-309.
Binnewies, C., & Gromer, M. (2012). Creativity and innovation at work: The role of work characteristics and personal initiative. Psicothema, 24(1), 100-105.
Busing, M. E., & Palocsay, S. W. (2016). Operations management in the design and execution of MBA programs. Journal of Education for Business, 91(2), 75-82.
Caro, A., Mazzon, J. A., Caemmerer, B., & Wessling, M. (2011). Innovation, involvement, attitude and experience in buying online. Rae-Revista de Administracao de, 51(6), 568-584.
Cerasoli, C. P., Nicklin, J. M., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 980-1008.
Cheng, E. W., & Chu, S. K. (2016). Students’ online collaborative intention for group projects: Evidence from an extended version of the theory of planned behaviour. International Journal of Psychology, 51(4), 296-300.
Cheng, P.-Y., & Chiou, W. B. (2010). Rejection or selection: influence of framing in investment decisions. Psychological Reports, 106(1), 247-254.
Chernev, A. (2001). The impact of common features on consumer preferences: A case of confirmatory reasoning. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(4), 475-488.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295-336). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Chou, C. J., Chen, K. S. & Wang, Y. Y. (2012). Green practices in the restaurant industry from an innovation adoption perspective: Evidence from Taiwan. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(3), 703-711.
Chu, T. H., & Chen, Y. Y. (2016). With good we become good: Understanding e-learning adoption by theory of planned behavior and group influences. Computers & Education, 92, 37-52.
Chudry, F., Foxall, G. & Pallister, J. (2011). Exploring attitudes and predicting intentions: Profiling student debtors using an extended theory of planned behaviour, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(1), 119-149.
Clinebell, S. K., & Clinebell, J. M. (2008). The tension in business education between academic rigor and real-world relevance: The role of executive professors. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(1), 99-107.
De Jong, R. D., Van Der Velde, M. E., & Jansen, P. G. (2001). Openness to experience and growth need strength as moderators between job characteristics and satisfaction. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9(4), 350-356.
Elias, S. M. (2009). Employee commitment in times of change: assessing the importance of attitudes toward organizational change. Journal of Management, 35(1), 37-55.
Enkel, E., & Bader, K. (2016). Why do experts contribute in cross‐industry innovation? A structural model of motivational factors, intention and behavior. R&D Management, 46(S1), 207-226.
Falk, R. F., & Miller, N. B. (1992). A primer for soft modeling. Ohio: The University of Akron Press.
Fayolle, A., & Liñán, F. (2014). The future of research on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Research, 67, 663-666.
Fok, L. Y., Hartman, S. J., Patti, A. L., & Razek, J. R., (2000). The relationships between equity sensitivity, growth need strength, organizational citizenship behavior, and perceived outcomes in the quality environment: A study of accounting professionals. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15(1), 99-120.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
Genco, N., Hölttä‐Otto, K., & Seepersad, C. C. (2012). An experimental investigation of the innovation capabilities of undergraduate engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(1), 60-81.
Goepel, M., Hölzle, K., & Knyphausen-Aufseß, D. Z. (2012). Individuals’ innovation response behaviour: a framework of antecedents and opportunities for future research. Creativity and Innovation Management, 21, 412-426.
Gundry, L. K., Ofstein, L. F., & Monllor, J. (2016). Entrepreneurial team creativity: Driving innovation from ideation to implementation. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 24(01), 55-77.
Hagger, M. S., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. (2016). The trans-contextual model of autonomous motivation in education conceptual and empirical issues and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 360-407.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Horwitch, M., & Stohr, E. A. (2012). Transforming technology management education: Value creation-learning in the early twenty-first century. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 29(4), 489-507.
Jabade, S., Abhyankar, H., & Ganguli, P. (2008). Model IPRinternaliseTM – Integrating Intellectual Property Rights in technical education. World Patent Information, 30, 220-224.
Jiang, C., Zhao, W., Sun, X., Zhang, K., Zheng, R., & Qu, W. (2016). The effects of the self and social identity on the intention to microblog: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 754-759.
Kim, W. (2015). The current transition in management of technology education: The case of Korea. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 100, 5-20.
Krueger, N., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5–6), 411–432.
Kwantes, C. T., Karam, C. M., Kuo, B. C., & Towson, S. (2008). Culture’s influence on the perception of OCB as in-role or extra-role. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32(3), 229-243.
Liberty Times Net. (2016, Nov 28). The number of patent applications of Taiwan Universities. Retrieved January 16, 2018 from http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/paper/1056372.
Liem, G. A. D., & Bernardo, A. B. (2010). Epistemological beliefs and theory of planned behavior: Examining beliefs about knowledge and knowing as distal predictors of Indonesian tertiary students’ intention to study. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 19(1), 127-142.
Liñán, F., Rodríguez-Cohard, J., & Rueda-Cantuche, J. (2011). Factors affecting entrepreneurial intention levels: A role for education. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 7(2), 195–218.
Lisak, A., Erez, M., Sui, Y., & Lee, C. (2016). The positive role of global leaders in enhancing multicultural team innovation. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(6), 655-673.
Mok, M. S, Sohn, S. Y., & Ju, Y. H. (2010). Conjoint analysis for intellectual property education. World Patent Information, 32, 129-134.
Newman, A., Thanacoody, R., & Hui, W. (2011). The impact of employee perceptions of training on organizational commitment and turnover intentions: a study of multinationals in the Chinese service sector. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(8), 1765-1787.
Ning, H. K., & Downing, K. (2012). Influence of student learning experience on academic performance: the mediator and moderator effects of self-regulation and motivation. British Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 219-237.
Noe, R. A., & Wilk, S. L. (1993). Investigation of factors that influence employees’ participation in development activities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2), 291-302.
Petrides, K. V., & Frederickson, N. (2011). An application of belief-importance theory in the domain of academic achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 97-111.
Plant, R., & Ren, J. (2010). A comparative study of motivation and entrepreneurial intentionality: Chinese and American perspectives. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 15(2), 187–204.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891.
Schlaegel, C., & Koenig, M. (2014). Determinants of entrepreneurial intent: A meta‐analytic test and integration of competing models. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(2), 291-332.
Shally, C. E. (1995). Effects of coactions, expected evaluation, and goal setting on creativity and productivity. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 483-503.
Shally, C. E., & Gilson, L. L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity? The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 33-53.
Shally, C. E., Gilson, L. L., & Blum, T. C. (2009). Interactive effects of growth need strength, self-reported creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 489-505.
Somaya, D. (2012). Patent strategy and management: an integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1084-1114.
Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S., & Al-Laham, A. (2007). Do entrepreneurship programs raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(4), 566–591.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1999). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Macon.
Tang, J. (2016). Linking personal turbulence and creative behavior: The influence of scanning and search in the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Research, 69(3), 1167-1174.
Trank, C. Q., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Who moved our cheese? Reclaiming professionalism in business education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2(2), 189-205.
van Gelderen, M., Brand, M., Van Praag, M., Bodewes, W., Poutsma, E., & Van Gils, A. (2008). Explaining entrepreneurial intentions by means of the theory of planned behavior. Career Development International, 13(6), 538–559.
Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Soenens, B., Luyckx, K., & Lens, W. (2009). Motivational profiles from a self-determination perspective: The quality of motivation matters. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 671-688.
Wu, S., & Wu, L. (2008). The impact of higher education on entrepreneurial intentions of university students in China. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(4), 752-774.
Wurthmann, K. (2014). Business students’ attitudes toward innovation and intentions to start their own businesses. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-013-0249-4.
Yu, T.-K., & Yu, T.-Y. (2010). Modelling the factors that affect individuals’ utilization of online learning systems: An empirical study combining the task technology fit model with the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), 1003-1017.
Zacher, H., Ambiel, R. A., & Noronha, A. P. P. (2015). Career adaptability and career entrenchment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 88, 164-173.

How to cite this article

APA

Lin, M.-L., & Yu, T.-K. (2018). Patent Applying or Not Applying: What Factors Motivating Students’ Intention to Engage in Patent Activities. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(5), 1843-1858. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/85420

Vancouver

Lin ML, Yu TK. Patent Applying or Not Applying: What Factors Motivating Students’ Intention to Engage in Patent Activities. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2018;14(5):1843-58. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/85420

AMA

Lin ML, Yu TK. Patent Applying or Not Applying: What Factors Motivating Students’ Intention to Engage in Patent Activities. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2018;14(5), 1843-1858. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/85420

Chicago

Lin, Mei-Lan, and Tai-Kuei Yu. "Patent Applying or Not Applying: What Factors Motivating Students’ Intention to Engage in Patent Activities". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2018 14 no. 5 (2018): 1843-1858. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/85420

Harvard

Lin, M.-L., and Yu, T.-K. (2018). Patent Applying or Not Applying: What Factors Motivating Students’ Intention to Engage in Patent Activities. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(5), pp. 1843-1858. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/85420

MLA

Lin, Mei-Lan et al. "Patent Applying or Not Applying: What Factors Motivating Students’ Intention to Engage in Patent Activities". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 14, no. 5, 2018, pp. 1843-1858. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/85420