Individual reactions to new technologies in the workplace: The role of gender as a psychological construct

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 445-467

  Venkatesh, Viswanath ^a,d   Morris, Michael G ^b   Sykes, Tracy Ann ^a   Ackerman, Phillip L ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^c GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2642524670     PISSN: 00219029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02556.x     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
3. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.
4. Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354-364.
5. Bollen, K. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
6. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995a). Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills. Information Systems Research, 6, 118-143.
7. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995b). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189-211.
8. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-339.
9. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982-1002.
10. Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 269-277.
11. Gefen, D., & Straub, D. W. (1997). Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: An extension of the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly, 21, 389-400.
12. Gianakos, I., & Subich, L. M. (1988). Student sex and sex role in relation to college major choice. Career Development Quarterly, 36, 259-268.
13. Harrison, D. A., Mykytyn, P. P., & Riemenschneider, C. K. (1997). Executive decisions about adoption of information technology in small business: Theory and empirical tests. Information Systems Research, 8, 171-195.
14. Hunter, J. E. (1976). Images of woman. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 7-17.
15. Kagan, J. (1964). Acquisition and significance of sex-typing and sex role identity. In M. L. Hoffman & L. W. Hoffman (Eds.), Review of child development research (Vol. 1, pp. 137-167). New York, NY: Sage.
16. Kohlberg, L. (1966). A cognitive-developmental analysis of children's sex-role concepts and attitudes. In E. E. Maccoby (Ed.), The development of sex differences (pp. 82-173). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
17. Landauer, T. K. (1995). The trouble with computers: Usefulness, usability, and productivity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
19. Markus, H., Crane, C., Bernstein, S., & Saladi, M. (1982). Self-schemas and gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 38-50.
20. Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research, 2, 173-191.
21. Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcoming of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
22. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
23. Pedhazur, E. J., & Tetenbaum, T. J. (1979). The Bem Sex-Role Inventory: A theoretical and methodological critique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 996-1016.
24. Powell, M., & Ansic, D. (1997). Gender differences in risk behavior in financial decision making: An experimental analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18, 605-628.
25. Steffen, T. M., & Nystrom, P. C. (1988). Problem solving by hospital managers. Health Care Management Review, 13, 25-32.
26. Talaga, J. A., & Beehr, T. A. (1995). Are there gender differences in predicting retirement decisions? Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 16-29.
27. Tashakkori, A. (1993). Gender, ethnicity, and the structure of self-esteem: An attitude theory approach. Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 479-488.
28. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6, 144-176.
29. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.
30. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., & Ackerman, P. (2000). A longitudinal field investigation of gender differences in individual technology adoption decision-making processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83, 33-60.
31. Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don't men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24, 115-139.
32. Venkatesh, V., & Speier, C. (1999). Computer technology training in the workplace: A longitudinal investigation of the effect of mood. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79, 1-28.
33. Wilson, J. S., Stocking, V. B., & Goldstein, D. (1994). Gender differences in motivations for course selection: Academically talented students in an intensive summer program. Sex Roles, 31, 349-350.