Post on 21-Jan-2017
Doctoral Study Oral DefenseProposal Defense
Medical Identity Theft, Palm Vein AuthenticationThe Manager’s Perspective
Supervisory Committee
Chair: Dr. Nikunja Swain
2nd Committee Member: Dr. Anthony Lolas
URR: Dr. Raghu Korrapati
2 Oral Defense
Section 1: Background
3 Oral Defense
Medical Identity Theft
???
Palm Vein Authentication
???
Section 1: Background (cont.)
4 Oral Defense
Investments in IT held in high regard
Biometrics customers purchase
solutions not devices
Rise in medical identity
theft
Financial burden
Safety challenges
Funding consideration at https://www.gofundme.com/CruzCerdaPhD2016
Section 1: Problem Statement bullets/citations
Hook: The FBI, cyber actors, and health care systems
Anchor: In 2014 - 2.32 million victims, 21.7% increase, 481,657 new cases
General Problem: Information theft
Specific Problem: Uncertaintysurrounding the benefits of PVA
5 Oral Defense
Section 1: Purpose Statement
The focus of this quantitative correlational
study will be to understand the
effectiveness of PVA technology as perceived by healthcare managers
and doctors.
Impact of this issue, project managers and
challenges and barriers of implementation.
More effective/efficient implementation of PVA
systemImproved understanding and use of technology
6 Oral Defense
Section 1: Purpose Statement – Social Impact (3)
1. Consumers/Patients
2. Suppliers/Management, Doctors, Providers
3. Insurers
7 Oral Defense
Section 1: Purpose Statement – Social Impact Summary
Cost of medical fraud
decreases
Positive Social
Change
8 Oral Defense
Section 1: Research Questions 1, 2
9 Oral Defense
RQ 1: adoption of PVA system and
perceived usefulness
RQ 2: adoption of PVA system and
ease of use
Section 1: Research Questions 3, 4
10 Oral Defense
RQ 3: adoption of a PVA system and
awareness
RQ 4: adoption of a PVA system and
peer influence
Section 1: Research Questions 5, 6
11 Oral Defense
Research Question 5: usage of a PVA system
and resource facilitating conditions
Research Question 6:adoption of a PVA
system and technology facilitating conditions
Section 1: Research Questions 7, 8
12 Oral Defense
RQ 7: adoption of a PVA system and
self efficacy
RQ 8: adoption (usage) of a PVA
system and security
Section 1: Research Questions 9, 10
13 Oral Defense
RQ 9: adoption (usage) of a PVA
system and compatibility
RQ 10: adoption of a PVA system and
relative advantage
Section 1: Research Question 11
14 Oral Defense
RQ 11: adoption of a PVA system
and complexity
Section 1: Hypotheses for RQs 1, 2
15 Oral Defense
• H1o: There is no statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and perceived usefulness.
• H1a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and perceived usefulness.
• H2o : There is no statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and ease of use.
• H2a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and ease of use.
Section 1: Hypotheses for RQs 3, 4
16 Oral Defense
• H3o: There is no statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and awareness.
• H3a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and awareness.
• H4o : There is no statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and peer influence.
• H4a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and peer influence.
Section 1: Hypotheses for RQs 5, 6
17 Oral Defense
• H5o: There is no statistically significant relationship between the usage of a PVA system and resource facilitating conditions.
• H5a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the usage of a PVA system and resource facilitating conditions.
• H6o : There is no statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and technology facilitating conditions.
• H6a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and technology facilitating conditions.
Section 1: Hypotheses for RQs 7, 8
18 Oral Defense
• H7o: There is no statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and self efficacy.
• H7a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and self efficacy.
• H8o : There is no statistically significant relationship between the adoption (usage) of a PVA system and security.
• H8a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the adoption (usage) of a PVA system and security.
Section 1: Hypotheses for RQs 9, 10
19 Oral Defense
• H9o: There is no statistically significant relationship between the adoption (usage) of a PVA system and compatibility.
• H9a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the adoption (usage) of a PVA system and compatibility.
• H10o : There is no statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and relative advantage.
• H10a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and relative advantage.
Section 1: Hypotheses for RQ 11
20 Oral Defense
• H11o : There is no statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and complexity.
• H11a: There is a statistically significant relationship between the adoption of a PVA system and complexity.
Section 1: Theoretical framework
• TRA• TAM• MM• TPB•C-TAM-TPB•MPCU• IDT• SCT
• 70% BI, 50% AU
Unified Theory of Acceptance
and Use of Technology
Theory authored by Venkatesh,
Morris, Davis, & Davis
This theory was developed in
2003
Incorporating eight competing
models to explain user
acceptance of IT
21 Oral Defense
Section 1: Theoretical framework (cont.)
Comprehensive model to examine
factors that contribute to the
successful adoption of a new technology
system
The theory interfaces with the proposed study by exploring• Four determinants of
user acceptance of IT (adoption, usage)• Performance
expectancy• Effort expectancy• Social influence• Facilitating conditions
22 Oral Defense
Section 1: Theoretical framework (cont.)
23 Oral Defense
Section 2: Method/Design chosen to help add new insights
Quantitative Study
Explore Variables
Questionnaire Survey Methodology
To Examine Technology Adoption Issues
24 Oral Defense
Section 2: Participants and sample size
Population
healthcare managers and doctors purposive sampling
Minimum sample size Parameters
spearman rho correlation
a priori power analysis
medium effect size 0.3 alpha 0.05 power 0.95
25 Oral Defense
Section 2: Data Source and Collection Technique Plans
26 Oral Defense
Section 2: Data Analysis Plan
• Exploratory investigation • Effect size• Demographic characteristics / occupational experiences
– Gender, Age, Highest level of education, years of professional experience, years of employment at present location, full time versus part-time
• Demographic characteristics / occupational experiences• Frequency and Percentages for categorically scaled variables• Range for continuously scaled variables
27 Oral Defense
Summary
Proposal
Alignment
Problem Statement
Purpose Statement
Research Questions
HypothesesTheoretical Framework
Method/Design of Study
Data Source
Data Collection
Data Analysis
Oral Defense28
Closing
Thank you Dr. Swain and Dr. Lolas
This concludes my proposal oral defense presentation. I would now like to invite your questions
29 Oral Defense