Effects of interface style on user perceptions and behavioral intention to use computer systems

Computers in Human Behavior

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 3025-3037

  Hasan, Bassam ^a   Ahmed, Mesbah U ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO   (United States)

Author keywords

Behavioral intention; Interface style; IS acceptance; Perceived ease of use; Perceived usefulness; TAM; Technology acceptance model

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; COMPUTER SYSTEMS;

BEHAVIORAL INTENTION; PERCEIVED USEFULNESS; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL (TAM);

USER INTERFACES;

EID: 34250028440     PISSN: 07475632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2006.08.016     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Ajzen I., and Fishbein M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior (1980), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
2. Bostrom R.P., Olfman L., and Sein M.K. The importance of learning style in end-user training. MIS Quarterly 14 1 (1990) 101-119
3. Bryman A., and Cramer D. Quantitative data analysis for social scientists (1994), Rutledge, NY
4. Chau P.Y.K. The influence of computer attitude and self-efficacy on IT usage behavior. Journal of End User Computing 13 1 (2001) 26-33
5. Davis F.D. User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 38 3 (1993) 457-487
6. Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13 3 (1989) 319-340
7. Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P., and Warshaw P.R. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science 35 8 (1989) 982-1003
8. Davis S.A., and Bostrom R.P. An experimental investigation of the roles of the computer interface and individual characteristics in learning of computer systems. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 4 (1992) 143-172
9. Doll W.J., Hendrickson A., and Deng X. Using Davis's perceived usefulness and ease-of-use instrument for decision making: A confirmatory and multigroup invariance analysis. Decision Sciences 29 4 (1998) 839-869
10. Durham A.G., and Emurian H.H. Learning and retention with a menu and a command line interface. Computers in Human Behavior 14 4 (1998) 597-620
11. Eberts R.E., and Bittianda K.P. Preferred mental models for direct manipulation and command-based interfaces. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 38 5 (1993) 769-785
12. Gururajan, R., & Fink, D. (2002). A study of influences of application interfaces on end user training outcomes. Informing Science and IT Education Conference, Cork, Ireland.
13. Hong W., Thong J., Wong W.M., and Tam K.Y. Determinants of user acceptance of digital libraries: An empirical examination of individual differences and system characteristics. Journal of Management Information Systems 18 3 (2002) 97-124
14. Hu P.J., Chau P.Y.K., Liu S.O.R., and Tam K.Y. Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. Journal of Management Information Systems 16 2 (1999) 91-112
15. Huang H.M., and Liaw S.S. Exploring users' attitudes and intentions toward the Web as a survey tool. Computers in Human Behavior 21 5 (2005) 729-743
16. Igbaria M. User acceptance of microcomputer technology: An empirical test. Omega 21 1 (1993) 73-90
17. Kumar R.L., Smith M.A., and Bannerjee S. User interface features influencing overall ease of use and personalization. Information and Management 41 3 (2004) 289-302
18. Legris P., Ingham J., and Colleertte P. Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information and Management 40 (2003) 191-204
19. Luarn P., and Lin H.H. Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use mobile banking. Computers in Human Behavior 21 6 (2005) 873-891
20. Ma Q., and Liu L. The technology acceptance model: A meta-analysis of empirical findings. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing 16 1 (2004) 59-72
21. Mahmood M.A., Hall L., and Swanberg D.L. Factors affecting information technology usage: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 11 2 (2001) 107-130
22. Mathieson K. Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research 2 3 (1991) 173-191
23. Mathieson K., and Keil M. Beyond the interface: Ease of use and task/technology fit. Information and Management 34 (1998) 221-230
24. Moon J.W., and Kim Y.G. Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information and Management 38 4 (2001) 217-230
25. Speier C., and Morris M.G. The influence of query interface design on decision-making performance. MIS Quarterly 27 3 (2003) 397-423
26. Taylor S., and Todd P.A. Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Information Systems Research 6 2 (1995) 144-175
27. Venkatesh V. Creation of favorable user perceptions: Exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly 23 2 (1999) 239-260
28. Venkatesh V., and Davis F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model, four longitudinal field studies. Management Science 46 2 (2000) 186-204
29. Venkatesh V., and Morris M. 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 1 (2000) 115-139
30. Warshaw P.R., and Davis F.D. Disentangling behavioral intention and behavioral expectation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 21 (1985) 213-228
31. Wiedenbeck S., and Davis S. The influence of interaction style and experience on user perceptions of software packages. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 46 (1997) 563-588