Technology acceptance model and the World Wide Web

Decision Support Systems

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 269-282

  Lederer, Albert L ^a   Maupin, Donna J ^b   Sena, Mark P ^c   Zhuang, Youlong ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^c XAVIER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; ELECTRONIC MAIL; INFORMATION USE; JOB ANALYSIS; TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING; WORK SIMPLIFICATION;

INFORMATION QUALITY; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL (TAM);

WORLD WIDE WEB;

EID: 0034302004     PISSN: 01679236     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-9236(00)00076-2     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Adams D.A., Nelson R.R., Todd P.A. Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: a replication. MIS Quarterly. 16(2):1992;227-247. June.
2. Ajzen I., Fishbein M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. 1980;Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
3. Anthony R.N. Planning and Control Systems: A Framework for Analysis. 1965;Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
4. Bagozzi R.P., Davis F.D., Warshaw P.R. Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations. 45(7):1992;659-686. July.
5. E. Boling, Usability testing for Web sites, Learning for the Global Community: Seventh Annual Hypermedia '95 Conference, URL=http://www.indiana.edu/~iirg/ARTICLES/usability/usability.main.html , February 22, 1997.
6. Chau P.Y.K. An empirical assessment of a modified technology acceptance model. Journal of Management Information Systems. 13(2):1996;185-204. Fall.
7. Churchill G.A. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research. 16:1979;64-73. February.
8. Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 13(3):1989;319-339.
9. Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P., Warshaw P.R. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science. 35(8):1989;982-1003. August.
10. Gefen D., Straub D.W. Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: an extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly. 21(4):1997;389-400. December.
11. Greene C.N., Organ D.W. An evaluation of causal models linking the perceived role with job satisfaction. Administrative Science Quarterly. 18:1973;95-103.
12. Griffin R.W. Management. 3rd edn. 1990;Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
13. Harman H.H. Modern Factor Analysis. 1976;University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
14. Hatcher L. A Step-by-Step Approach to Using the SAS System for Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling. 1994;SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
15. Haynes R.M., Thies E.A. Management of technology in service firms. Journal of Operations Management. 10(3):1991;388-397. August.
16. Hendrickson A.R., Collins M.R. An assessment of structure and causation of IS usage. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems. 27(2):1996;61-67. Spring.
17. Igbaria M., Guimaraes T., Davis G.B. Testing the determinants of microcomputer usage via a structural equation model. Journal of Management Information Systems. 11(4):1995;87-114. Spring.
18. Levi M.D., Conrad F.G. A heuristic evaluation of a World Wide Web Prototype. Interactions. 3(4):1996;50-61. July-August.
19. Lightner N., Bose I., Salvendy G. What is wrong with the World Wide Web? A diagnosis of some problems and prescription of some remedies. Ergonomics. 39(8):1996;995-1004.
20. Mathieson K. Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research. 2(3):1991;173-191. September.
21. Morris M.G., Dillon A. How user perceptions influence software use, decision support systems. IEEE Software. 1997;58-65. July-August.
22. Nunnally J.C., Bernstein I.H. Psychometric Theory. 1994;McGraw-Hill, New York.
23. Pitkow J.E., Kehoe C.M. Emerging trends in the WWW user population. Communications of the ACM. 39(6):1996;106-108. June.
24. Podsakoff P.M., Organ D.W. Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. Journal of Management. 12(4):1986;531-544.
25. Podsakoff P.M., Todor W.D., Grover R.A., Huber V.L. Situational moderators of leader reward and punishment behaviors: fact or fiction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 34:1984;21-63.
26. Schreisheim C.A. The similarity of individual-directed and group-directed leader behavior description. Academy of Management Journal. 22:1979;345-355.
27. Schreisheim J.F. The social context of leader-subordinate relations: an investigation of the effects of group cohesiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology. 65:1980;183-194.
28. Shaw M.J., Gardner D.M., Thomas H. Research opportunities in electronic commerce. Decision Support Systems. 21:1997;149-156.
29. Stevens J. Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences. 1996;Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
30. Straub D., Limayem M., Karahanna-Evaristo E. Measuring system usage: implications for IS theory testing. Management Science. 41(8):1995;1328-1342. August.
31. Szajna B. Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science. 42(1):1996;85-92. January.
32. Taylor S., Todd P. Assessing IT usage: the role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly. 19(4):1995;561-570. December.
33. Teo T.S.H., Lim V.K.G., Lai R.Y.C. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in internet usage. Omega. 27:1999;25-37.
34. Thompson R. Extending the technology acceptance model with motivation and social factors. Proceedings of Association for Information Systems Annual Conference. 1998;757-759. August.
35. Yang H., Mason R.M. The internet, value chain visibility, and learning. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 1998;23-32.