Technology acceptance model: A replicated test using TETRAD

International Journal of Intelligent Systems

Volumn 24, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 1230-1242

  Liu, Liping ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AKRON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

E-COMMERCE APPLICATIONS; EASE OF USE; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL; USER ACCEPTANCE;

ELECTRONIC COMMERCE;

EID: 70350147562     PISSN: 08848173     EISSN: 1098111X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/int.20382     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley; 1975.
2. Davis F. Technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA; 1986.
3. Legris P, Ingham J, Collerette P. Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Inform Manage 2003;40:191-204.
4. Ma Q, Liu L. The technology acceptance model: a meta-analysis of empirical findings. J End User Comput 2004;16:59-72.
5. Venkatesh V, MorrisMG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q 2003;27:425-478.
6. Venkatesh V. Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into technology acceptance model. Inform Syst Res 2000;11:342-365.
7. Taylor S, Todd P. Assessing IT usage: the role of prior experience. MIS Q 1995;19:561-570.
8. Gefen D, Keil M. The impact of developer responsiveness on perceptions of usefulness and ease of use: an extension of the technology of the technology acceptance model. DATA BASE Adv Inform Syst 1998;29:35-49.
9. Igbaria M, Zinatelli N, Cragg P, Cavaye ALM. Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: a structural equation model. MIS Q 1997;21:279-305.
10. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: development and test. Decis Sci 1996;27:451-481.
11. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci 2000;46:186-204.
12. Straub DW. The effect of culture on IT diffusion: e-mail and fax in Japan and the U.S. Inform Syst Res 1994;5:23-47.
13. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 1989;13:319-340.
14. Bailey JE, Pearson SW. Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Manage Sci 1983;29:530-545.
15. Pitt LF, Watson RT, Kavan CB. Service Quality: A measure of information systems effectiveness. MIS Q 1995;19(2):173-187.
16. Pitt LF, Watson RT, Kavan CB. Measuring information systems service quality: concerns for a complete canvas. MIS Q 1997;21(2):209-221.
17. Locke EA. The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In: Dunnette MD, editor. Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston; 1976. pp 1297-1349.
18. Oliver RL. Measurement and evaluation of satisfaction process in retail settings. J Retailing 1981;57:25-48.
19. Doll WJ, Torkzadeh G. The measurement of end user computing satisfaction. MIS Q 1988;12:259-274.
20. Halstead D, Hartman D, Schmidt SL. Multisource effects on the satisfaction formation process. J Acad Mark Sci 1994;22:114-129.
21. Triandis HC. Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behaviors, Nebraska symposium on motivation. In: Beliefs, attitudes, and values. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press; 1979. pp 195-259.
22. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR.User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci 1989;35:982-1003.
23. Nunnally JC Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1967.
24. Gefen D, Straub DW, Boudreau M. Structural equation modeling and regression: guidelines for research practice. Commun Assoc Inform Syst 2000;(4):Article 7.
25. Gefen D, Straub D. The relative importance of perceived ease-of-use in is adoption: A study of e-commerce adoption. Department of Computer Information Systems, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA; 2000.
26. Keil M, Beranek PM, Konsynski BR. Usefulness and ease of use: field study evidence regarding task considerations. Decis Support Syst 1995;13:75-91.
27. Whittaker J. Graphical models in applied multivariate statistics. New York: Wiley; 1990.
28. Pearl J. Causality: models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
29. Simon HA. Spurious correlation: a causal interpretation. J AmStat Assoc 1954;49:467-479.
30. Wermuth N, Lauritzen S. Graphical and recursive models for contingency tables. Biometrika 1983;(72):537-552.
31. Cooper G, Herskovits E. A Bayesian method for the induction of probabilistic networks from data. Mach Learn 1992;(9):309-347.
32. Glymour G, Scheines R, Spirtes P, Kelly K. Discovering causal structure: artificial intelligence, philosophy of science, and statistical modeling. New York: Academic Press; 1987.
33. Scheines R. Inferring causal structure among unmeasured variables. In: Chessman P. and Oldford RW, editors. Selecting models from data: AI and statistics IV. New York: Springer- Verlag; 1994. pp 197-204.
34. Spirtes P, Glymour C, Scheines R. Causation, prediction, and search. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2000.
35. Scheines R, Spirtes P, Glymour C, Meek C, Richardson T. User manual for TETRAD III: Tools for causal modeling. Carnegie Mellon University, 1996, last accessed: March 10, 2004, at http://ashgabat.hss.cmu.edu/projects/tetrad/tet3/ master.htm.
36. Spirtes P, Scheines R, Glymour C. Simulation studies of the reliability of computer-aided model specification using the TETRAD II, EQS, and LISREL programs. Social Methods Res 1990;(19):3-66.
37. Klein HK, Lyytinen K. The poverty of scientism in information systems. In: Mumford E, Hirschheim R, Fitzgerald G, Wood-Harper AT, editors. Research methods in information systems. Amsterdam: North-Holland; 1985.
38. Lee B, Barua A, Whinston AB. Discovery and representation of causal relationships in MIS research: a methodological framework. MIS Q 1997;21:109-136.
39. Fisher R. Smoking: The cancer controversy. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd; 1959.