Measuring information system usage: Replication and extensions

Journal of Computer Information Systems

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 76-85

  Barnett, Tim ^a   Kellermanns, Franz W ^a   Pearson, Allison W ^a   Pearson, Rodney A ^a  

^a MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Objective usage; Perceived usage; Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)

Indexed keywords

OBJECTIVE USAGE; PERCEIVED USAGE; SINGLE MODELS; TECHNOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL; USAGE DATA;

COMPUTER SCIENCE; HARDWARE;

INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

EID: 33947396028     PISSN: 08874417     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Ajzen, I. Attitudes, Personality and Behavior. Chicago: Dorsey, 1988.
2. Ajzen, I. and M. Fishbein. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980.
3. Armitage, C.J. and C. Julie. "Basic and Applied Research on the Theory of Planned Behavior," Current Psychology: Developmental, Learning, Personality, Social, 22:3, 2003, pp. 187-195.
4. Barrick, M.R. and M.K. Mount. "The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance: A Meta Analysis," Personnel Psychology, 44, 1991, pp. 1-26.
5. Benamati, J. and T.M. Rajkumar. "The Application Development Outsourcing Decision: An Application of the Technology Acceptance Model," Journal of Computer Information Systems, 42:4, 2002, pp. 35-44.
6. Campbell, K.E. and T.T. Jackson. "The Role of and Need for Replication Research in Social Psychology," Replications in Social Psychology, 1, 1979, pp. 3-14.
7. Colvin, C.A. and A. Gosh. "Validation of the Technology Acceptance Model for Police," Journal of Criminal Justice, 33:1, 2005, pp. 89-95.
8. Davis, F. "Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology," MIS Quarterly, 13:3, 1989, pp. 319-340.
9. Davis, F. "A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New-end-user Information Systems: Theory and Results, 1986, Sloan School of Management, MIT.
10. Goodhue, D.L. and R.L. Thompson. "Task-technology Fit and Individual Performance," MIS Quarterly, 19, 1995, pp. 213-236.
11. Hersen, M. and D. Barlow. Single Case Experimental Designs: Strategies for Studying Behavior Change. New York: Pergamon, 1976.
12. Hu, L.T. and P.M. Bentler. "Evaluating Model Fit." In Hoyle, R.H. (Ed.). Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1995, pp. 76-99.
13. Huang, L., M. Lu, and B.K. Wong. "The Impact of Power Distance on Email Acceptance: Evidence from the PRC," Journal of Computer Information Systems, 44:1, 2003, pp. 93-101.
14. Kline, R.B. "Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling." In Kenny, D.A. (Ed.). Methodology in the Social Sciences. New York: Guilford Press, 1998.
15. Lai, V.S. and L. Honglei. "Technology Acceptance Model for Internet Banking: An Invariance Analysis," Information and Management, 42:2, 2005, pp. 373-386.
16. Lamal, P.A. "On the Importance of Replication." In Neuliep, J.W. (Ed.). Replication Research in the Social Sciences. London: Sage, 1991, pp. 31-35.
17. Lee, J. "Discriminant Analysis of Technology Adoption Behavior: A Case of Internet Technologies in Small Business," Journal of Computer Information Systems, 44:4, 2004, pp. 57-66.
18. Li, D., et al. "The Effect of Affiliation Motivation on the Intention to Use Groupware in an MBA Program," Journal of Computer Information Systems, 44:3, 2004, pp. 1-8.
19. Mahoney, M.J. "Open Exchange and Epistemic Progress," American Psychologist, 40, 1985, pp. 29-39.
20. McClosley, D. "Evaluation Electronic Commerce Acceptance with the Technology Acceptance Model," Journal of Computer Information Systems, 44:2, 2004, pp. 49-57.
21. Moore, G.C. and I. Benbasat. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, 2:3, 1991, pp. 192-222.
22. Mulaik, S.A., et al. "Evaluation of Goodness-of-fit for Structural Equation Models," Psychological Bulletin, 105:3, 1989, pp. 430-445.
23. Podsakoff, P.M., et al. "Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies," Journal of Applied Psychology, 88:5, 2003, pp. 879-903.
24. Podsakoff, P.M. and D.W. Organ. "Self-reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Perspectives," Journal of Management, 12, 1986, pp. 531-544.
25. Straug, D., M. Limayem, and E. Krahnna-Evaristo. "Measuring System Usage: Implications for Theory Testing," Management Science, 41:8, 1995, pp. 1328-1342.
26. Straug, D.W. and J.C. Wetherbe. "Information Technologies for the 1990s: An Organizational Impact Perspective," Communications of the AMC, 32:11, 1989, pp. 1328-1339.
27. Taylor, S. and P. Todd. "Assessing IT Usage: The Role of Prior Experience," MIS Quarterly, 19:4, 1995, pp. 561-570.
28. Trice, A.W. and M.E. Treacy. "Utilization as a Dependent Variable in MIS Research," Proceedings of the Seventh International on Information Systems, San Diego, CA, 1986.
29. Tsang, E.W.K. and K. Kwan. "Replication and Theory Development in Organizational Science: A Critical Realist Perspective," Academy of Management Review, 24, 1999, pp. 759-780.
30. Venkatesh, V. and F.D. Davis. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Adoption Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, 46:2, 2000, pp. 186-204.
31. Venkatesh, V., et al. "User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View," MIS Quarterly, 27:3, 2003, pp. 425-478.
32. Zigurs, I. and B.K. Buckland. "A Theory of Task/Technology Fit and Group Support Systems Effectiveness," MIS Quarterly, 22:3, 1998, pp. 313-334.