The role of organizational and individual characteristics in technology acceptance

International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction

Volumn 25, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 623-646

  Lee, Dongseop ^a   Rhee, Youngho ^b   Dunham, Randall B ^c  

^a Korea University   (South Korea)

^b SAMSUNG Electronics   (South Korea)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EASE-OF-USE; INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS; ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS; PERCEIVED EASE OF USE; PERCEIVED USEFULNESS; SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE; USER SATISFACTION;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; PSYCHOLOGY COMPUTING;

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 77949358912     PISSN: 10447318     EISSN: 15327590     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10447310902963969     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Al-Gahtani, S. S., & King, M. (1999). Attitudes, satisfaction and usage: Factors contributing to each in the acceptance of information technology. Behavior and Information Technology, 18, 277-297.
2. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
3. Bagozzi, R. P., & Phillips, L. W. (1982). Representing and testing organizational theories: A holistic construal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 459-489.
4. Bailey, J. E., & Pearson, S. W. (1983). Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Management Science, 29, 530-545.
5. Baroudi, J., Olson, M., & Ives, B. (1986). An empirical study of the impact of user involvement on system usage and information satisfaction. Communication of the ACM, 29, 232-238.
6. Bikson, T. K., & Gutek, B. A. (1983). Advanced office systems: An empirical look at use and satisfaction. Proceedings National Computer Conference, 52, 319-328.
7. Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (1999). The right way to manage expats. Harvard Business Review, 77, 52-61.
8. Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenskins, G. D., Jr., & Klesh, J. R. (1983). Assessing the attitudes and perceptions of organizational members. In S. E. Seashore, E. E. Lawler, P. Mirvis, & C. Cammann (Eds.), Assessing organizational change: a guide to methods, measures, and practices (pp. 71-138). New York: Wiley.
10. Carayon, P. (1992). The use of computer in office: Impact of computer system performance on characteristics and worker stress. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction, 4, 245-261.
11. Clegg, C., Axtell, C., Damodaran, L., Farbey, B., Hull, R., Lioyd-Jones, R., et al. (1997). Information technology: A study of performance and the role of human and organizational factors. Ergonomics, 40, 851-871.
12. Cohen, S. (1980). Aftereffects of stress on human performance and social behavior: A review of research and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 82-108.
13. Conway, J. M. (2002). Method variance and method bias in industrial and organizational psychology. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 344-365). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
14. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-339.
15. Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavior impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38, 475-487.
16. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: Aa comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982-1003.
17. DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3, 60-95.
18. Dunham, R. B., Grube, J. A., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., & Pierce, J. L. (1989). The development of an Attitude toward Change Instrument. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, DC, August, 1989.
19. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intentions, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
20. Fisher, W., Lind, M., & Zmud, R. (1989). The impact of organizational size and structure. Information and Management, 16, 157-162.
21. Fornell, C., & Larker, D. F. (1981), Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
22. Franz, C. R., & Robey, F. (1986). Organizational context user involvement, and the usefulness of information systems. Decision Sciences, 17, 329-356.
23. Friend, K. E. (1982). Stress and performance: Effects of subjective work load and time urgency. Personnel Psychology, 35, 623-633.
24. George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2008). Understanding and managing organizational behavior (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
25. Gray-Toft, P., & Anderson, J. G. (1981). The nursing stress scale: Development of an instrument. Journal of Behavioral Assessment, 3, 11-23.
26. Henderson, R., & Divett, M. J. (2003). Perceived usefulness, ease of use and electronic supermarket use. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 59, 383-395.
27. Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. K. (1994). Realizing emancipatory principles in information systems development: The case for ethics. MIS Quarterly, 18, 83-109.
28. Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. C. (1982). Subjective correlates of stress and human performance. In E.A. Alluisi & E. A. Fleishman (Eds.), Human performance and productivity: Stress and performance effectiveness (pp. 141-163). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Horton, R. P., Buck, T., Waterson, P. E., & Clegg, C. W. (2001). Explaining intranet use with the technology acceptance model. Journal of Information Technology, 16, 237-249.
30. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424-453.
31. Hull, J. G., & Mendolia, M. (1991). Modeling the relations of attributional style, expectancies, and depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 85-97.
32. Igbaria, M. (1993). User acceptance of microcomputer technology: An empirical test. OMEGA International Journal of Management Science, 21, 73-90.
33. Igbaria, M., Zinatelli, N., Cragg, P., & Cavaye, A. L. M. (1997). Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: a structural equation model. MIS Quarterly, 21, 279-302.
34. Igbaria, M., Schiffman, S. J., & Wieckowski, T. J. (1994). The respective roles of perceived usefulness and perceived fun in the acceptance of microcomputer technology. Behavior and Information Technology, 13, 349-361.
35. Ives, B., Olson, M. H., and Baroudi, J. J. (1983). The measurement of user information satisfaction. Communications of the ACM, 26, 785-793.
36. Keen, P. G. W. (1981). Information systems and organizational change, Communications of the ACM, 24, 24-33.
37. Korunka, C., Weiss, A., & Zauchner, S. (1997). An interview study of continuous implementations of information technology. Behavior and Information Technology, 16, 3-16.
38. Lazarus, R. S., Deese, J., & Osler, J. F. (1952). The effects of psychological stress on Performance. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 293-316.
39. Lewin, K. (1951), Group decision and social change. In I. L. Newcomb & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 459-473). New York: Henry Holt.
40. Lim, V. K., & Teo, T. S. H. (1999). Occupational stress and IT personnel in Singapore: Factorial dimensions and differential effects. Internal Journal of Information Management, 19, 277-291.
41. Marakas, G. M., & Hornik, S. (1996). Passive resistance misuse: Overt support and covert recalcitrance in IS implementation. European Journal of Information Systems, 5, 208-219.
42. Motowidlo, S. J., Packard, J. S., & Manning, P. R. (1986). Occupational Stress: Its causes and consequences for job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 618-629.
43. Nath, R. (1989). Are frequent computer users more satisfied? Information Processing and Management, 25, 557-562.
44. Nunnally, J. C. (1967), Psychometric theory. New York, McGraw-Hill.
45. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: the moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 135-146.
46. Rai, A., Laung, S. S., & Welker, R. B. (2002). Assessing the validity of IS Success Models: An empirical test and theoretical analysis. Information Systems Research, 13, 50-69.
47. Raymond, L. (1987). The presence of end-user computing in small business: An exploratory investigation of its distinguishing organizational and information systems context. Infor, 25, 198-213.
48. Reeder, L. G., Schrama, P. G., & Dirker, J. M. (1973). Stress and cardiovascular health: An international cooperative study. Social Science Medicine, 7, 753-784.
49. Revicki, D. A., & May, H. J. (1989). Organizational characteristics, occupational stress, and mental health in nurse. Behavioral Medicine, 15, 30-36.
50. Rivard, S., & Huff, S. (1984). Factors of success for end-user computing. Communications of the ACM, 31, 552-561.
51. Roberts, P., & Henderson, R. (2000). Information technology acceptance in a sample of government employees: A test of the technology acceptance model. Interacting With Computers, 12, 427-443.
52. Schelling, T. C. (1984). Choice and consequences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
53. Schiffman S., Meile, L., & Igbaria M. (1992). An examination of end user types. Information and Management, 22, 207-215.
54. Seddon, P. B. (1997). A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Information Systems Research, 8, 240-253.
55. Seddon, P. B., & Kiew, M. Y. (1994). A partial test and development of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, 99-110.
56. Shani, A. B., & Sean, J. A. (1994). Information technology and the integration of change: Socio-technical system approach. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 30, 247-270.
57. Smith, M. J., & Carayon, P. C. (1994). New technology, automation and work organization: Stress problems and improved technology implementation strategies. International Journal of Human Factors in Manufacturing, 5, 99-116.
58. Smith, M. J., Cohen, B. G. F., Stammerjohn, L. W., & Happ, A. (1981). An investigation of health complaints and job stress in video display operations. Human Factors, 23, 387-400.
59. Straub, D. W. (1994). The effect of culture on IT diffusion: Email and fax in Japan and the U.S. Information System Research, 5, 23-47.
60. Suh, H. S. (2000). The risk perception in work organization, musculoskeletal discomfort and stress. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
61. Szajna, B. (1996). Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science, 42, 85-92.
62. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1994). Influence of experience on personal computer utilization: testing a conceptual model. Journal of Management Information System, 11, 167-187.
63. Veiga, J. F., Floyd, S., & Dechant, K. (2001). Toward modeling the effects of national culture on IT implementation and acceptance. Journal of Information Technology, 3, 145-158.
64. Weber, Y., & Pliskin, N. (1996). The effects of information systems integration and organizational culture on a firm's effectiveness. Information and Management, 30, 81-90.
65. Weber, Y., & Schweiger, D. M. (1992). Top management culture conflict in mergers and acquisitions: a lesion from anthropology. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 3, 285-302.
66. Westman, M., & Eden, D. (1996). The inverted-U relationship between stress and performance: A field study. Work and Stress, 10, 165-173.
67. Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459-482.