First:The emergence of theory

Genesis of theory

The diffusion of innovations theory is one of the theories developed to explain human behavior in order to embrace the adoption of ideas or the consumption of new products in human societies. This theory emerged during the last years of the fifties and sixties influenced by the theory of flow of information on two stages presented by Lazsfield and his colleagues where and with the same The method, rural sociologists found that the model of disseminating information to farmers can be understood in the context of the flow of information in two phases, and that the process of disseminating modern ideas among farmers can be seen as quite similar to the voting process in elections Advice in both cases is met through personal contact and influence of opinion leaders who agree and share their characteristics just as electoral voting studies have concluded.

The origins of the theory of the spread of innovations are due to separate studies carried out by social researchers in several fields such as anthropology, education and agriculture to know how farmers adopt new ideas related to modern farming methods. Researchers in the field of education also took care of them by trying to publish new teaching methods or the idea of ​​family planning or the acquisition Organs, their uses, and other various fields to know their effects in the existing social system. This theory focuses on disseminating information related to innovations and innovation among members of society or a sector of it with the aim of achieving development.

And innovation according to this theory is any new idea or a new method or pattern that is used in life. The idea of ​​family planning or the introduction of new methods in agriculture or the development of a means of communication such as a mobile phone or otherwise is considered innovation.

According to this theory, the presence of new innovations introduced into the social system may have a gradual acceptance over time according to a set of variables and conditions that pertain to that social environment to which these innovations are introduced.

The acceptance by the social system and its individuals of these innovations or new ideas can be measured by knowing how many individuals are affected by this idea or who have acceptance of this product.

Second: Rogers and Shoemaker's model for the diffusion of innovations: Rogers and his colleague described the elements of the information flow process for the diffusion of innovations by quoting from David Pirlo's model as follows:

1- Source: Inventors, scholars, agents of social change and opinion leaders.

2- Mission: New innovation.

3- The medium: media channels and personal communication channels.

4- The future: members of the public in the social system.

5- Impact: a change in thoughts, attitudes, and behavior.

Third: The theory hypothesis:

This theory is based on the assumption that channels and media are more effective in increasing knowledge about innovations as personal communication channels are more effective in shaping attitudes about new innovations.

The entrance to the diffusion of innovations also comes close to the two-stage flow of information, which assumes that media messages reach the public through individuals who are distinguished from others by being more connected and active in their dealings with the mass media and are called "opinion leaders".

The concept of opinion leaders in this approach is "the entrance of the spread of innovations". It does not differ much from the entrance of information transmission in two stages, but it adds more details about the personality of opinion leaders.

Fourth: determinants of acceptance and spread of innovations:

Of course, not all ideas and innovations have one degree of spread and spread because they are not the same in characteristics and qualities, which makes some of them more popular and more receptive than others, Rogers and Shoemaker singled out the determinants and characteristics that determine the extent of the spread and spread of innovations as follows:

1- The comparative advantage: the speaker or the innovator may be something similar to another thing that already exists, but the important thing is the extent of the individual’s awareness of the comparative advantages of the new idea, whether economically or socially. The comparative advantage usually means the extent of the economic benefit accruing to the person who adopts the new idea or method. .

2- The degree of complexity: that is, the extent of the individual’s awareness of the innovator or the innovator, as it is easy to understand and use, and the users differ in how easy they are to understand and deal with, so the more easily the new idea is easy to handle and understand, the faster its spread.

3- Convenience: That is, the more an individual realizes that these innovations are consistent with his previous values, meetings and experiences, the faster they will spread.

 4- Testability: It means the extent of the individual's ability to experience the user on a specific scale and before making the final decision about it. Therefore, the more the individual is on the experience of the innovator, the more an opportunity for alerting him so that he can learn about the comparative advantages of the innovator / innovator through this preview.

5- Acceptance of the result: that is, the extent of clarity of the use or adoption of the innovator, the ease with which the individual and the group notice the results of the adoption of the innovator increase the possibility of its spread and this feature allows the individual to talk about the innovator with others, which may increase their convictions about its benefits.

* Despite the importance of these characteristics, they do not represent all the characteristics that innovations can be characterized by, and that these characteristics are not of equal importance to its spread, there are a number of other determinants or characteristics that affect the process of spreading innovations, including:

The nature and quality of society and the dominant ideological pattern (paradigm)

Fifth: Criticisms of the Theory of Innovative Spread:

The model of diffusion of innovations was common and widespread in the early 1960s, especially in third world countries, but later in the 1970s it faced a number of criticisms:

1- That the application and implementation of this model in the third countries of the world led to the widening of the information gap and the increase of social and economic differences between groups of society because the economically and socially advanced groups encourage more than others to renew and practice it by receiving information more than other poor groups.

2- To support the agreement of researchers and scholars of this "proliferation" model to a specific definition of development.

3- The belief of researchers, led by Rogers, strongly of the influence of the means of communication on opinion leaders, in particular and their effectiveness from regions or the influence of magic shot theory, meaning that the diffusion model took the principle of the flow of information in one direction, i.e. from the government and development centers to the receiving audience.

4- The great association of the model of the spread of innovations with the four systems theories of the media because of its conviction of the importance of the media and its power and the pretext of development and service of its programs.

HAIDER FALAH ALKHAFAJI