Faculty's acceptance of computer based technology: Cross-validation of an extended model

Australasian Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 268-279

  Ahmad, Tunku Badariah Tunku ^a   Madarsha, Kamal Basha ^a   Zainuddin, Ahmad Marzuki ^a   Ismail, Nik Ahmad Hisham ^a   Nordin, Mohamad Sahari ^a  

^a INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955811166     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14495554     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.14742/ajet.1095     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
2. Birch, D. & Burnett, B. (2009). Bringing academics on board: Encouraging institution-wide diffusion of e-learning environments. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(1), 117-134. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet25/birch.html
3. Compeau, D. R. & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189-211.
4. Dabholkar, P. A. & Bogazzi, R. (2002). An attitudinal model of technology-based self-service: Moderating effect of consumer traits and situational factors. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 30(3), 184-202.
5. Dasgupta, S., Granger, M. & McGarry, N. (2002). User acceptance of e-collaboration technology: An extension of technology acceptance model. Group Decisions and Negotiations, 11, 87-100.
6. Davis, F., Bagozzi, R. P. & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 38(8), 982-1003.
7. Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.
8. Deng, X., Doll, W. J. & Truong, D. (2004). Computer self-efficacy in an ongoing use context. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23(6), 395-412.
9. Dishaw, M. T., Strong, D. M. & Bandy, D. B. (2002). Extending the task-technology fit model with self-efficacy constructs. In Human-Computer Interaction Studies in MIS. Eighth Americas Conference on Information Systems. [viewed 1 Mar 2009, verified 29 Mar 2010] http://sigs.aisnet.org/SIGHCI/amcis02_minitrack/RIP/Dishaw.pdf
10. Ellen, P. S., Bearden, W. & Sharma, S. (1991). Resistance for technological innovations: An examination of the role of self-efficacy and performance satisfaction. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 19(4), 297-307.
11. Gefen, D. & Straub, D. (2000). The relative importance of perceived ease-of-use in IS adoption: A study of e-commerce adoption. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 1(8), 1-28.
12. Goodhue, D. L. & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 213-236.
13. Hall, G.E. (1979). The concerns-based approach to facilitating change. Educational Horizons, 57, 202-208.
14. Hong, W., Wong, J. Y. L. & Tam, K. Y. (2002). Determinants of user acceptance of digital libraries: An empirical examination of individual differences and system characteristics. Journal of MIS, 18, 97-124.
15. Hu, P., Clark, T. & Ma, W. (2003). Examining technology acceptance teachers: A longitudinal study. Information & Management, 41, 227-249.
16. Igbaria, M. & Iivari, J. (1995). The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage. Omega, 23, 587-605.
17. Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., Bennett, S., Judd, T., Gray, K. & Chang, R. (2008). Immigrants and natives: Investigating differences between staff and students' use of technology. In Hello! Where are you in the landscape of educational technology? Proceedings ascilite Melbourne 2008. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne08/procs/kennedy.pdf
18. Kimmel, E. & Killbride, M. P. (1991). Attribution training for teachers. Unpublished Research Report. [ERIC Reproduction Service No ED335345].
19. Kwon, O., Choi, K., & Kim, M. (2007). User acceptance of context-aware services: Self-efficacy, user innovativeness and perceived sensitivity on contextual pressure. Behavior & Information Technology, 26(6), 483-498.
20. Lowry, G. (2002). Modeling user acceptance of building management systems. Automation in Construction, 11(6), 695-705.
21. Ma, Q. & Liu, L. (2004). Technology acceptance model: A meta-analysis of empirical findings. Journal of Organizational End User Computing, 16, 59-72.
22. Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intention: Comparing the TAM with the theory of planned behavior. Information System Research, 2, 173-191.
23. Ndubisi, N. O. (2006). Factors of online learning adoption: A comparative juxtaposition of the theory of planned behavior and the technology acceptance model. International Journal on E-learning, 5(4), 571-591.
24. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. Free Press: New York.
25. Saade, R. G., Nebebe, F. & Tan, W. (2007). Viability of the "technology acceptance model" in multimedia learning environments: A comparative study. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 175-184. [verified 29 Mar 2010] http://www.ijello.org/Volume3/IJKLOv3p175-184Saade393.pdf
26. Sahari, M. (2001). Sense of efficacy among Malaysian secondary school teachers. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 21, 66-74.
27. Sam, H. K., Othman, A. E. A. & Nordin, Z. S. (2005). Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, and attitudes toward the Internet: A study among undergraduates in Unimas. Educational Technology & Society, 8(4), 205-219. http://www.ifets.info/journals/8_4/19.pdf
28. Schepers, J. & Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effect. Information & Management, 44, 90-103.
29. Selwyn, N. (2006). The use of computer technology in university teaching and learning: A critical perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 83-94.
30. Shih, H. P. (2004). An empirical study on predicting user acceptance of e-shopping on the web. Information & Management, 41, 351-369.
31. Salomon, G. (1984). Television is "easy" and print is " tough" : The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 647-658.
32. Straub, D. W., Keil, M. & Brenner, W. (1997). Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: A three country study. Information & Management, 33, 1-11.
33. Straub, E. T. (2009). Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 625-649.
34. Teo, T. (2008). Pre-service teachers' attitudes towards computer use: A Singapore survey. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(4), 413-424. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet24/teo.html
35. Venkatesh, V. & Davis, F. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46, 186-204.
36. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B. & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Towards a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 37(3), 425-478.
37. Yi, M. Y. & Hwang, Y. (2003). Predicting the use of web-based information system: Self-efficacy, enjoyment learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model. International Journal of H-C Studies, 59, 431-449.
38. Yousafzai, S. Y., Foxall, G. R. & Pallister, J. G. (2007). Technology acceptance: A meta-analysis of the TAM (Part 1). Journal of Modeling in Management, 2(3), 251-280.