Establishing gender structural invariance of technology acceptance model (TAM)

Asia-Pacific Education Researcher

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 311-320

  Teo, Timothy ^a  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Factorial invariance; Pre service teachers; Structural equation modelling; Technology acceptance model

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957168120     PISSN: 01195646     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3860/taper.v19i2.1599     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Anderson, N., Lankhear, C., Timms, C., & Courtney, L. (2008). Because it's boring, irrelevant and I don't like computers: Why high school girls avoid professionally-oriented ICT subjects. Computers & Education, 50, 1304-1318.
2. Arbuckle, J. L. (2006). AMOS (version 7.0) [Computer software]. Chicago: SmallWaters.
3. Broos, A. (2005). Gender and information and communication technologies (IT) anxiety: Male self assurance and female hesitation. CyberPsychology & Behaviour, 8 (1), 21-31.
4. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255.
5. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
6. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
7. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 39-50.
8. Gunn, Cathy. (2003). Dominant or different? Gender issues in computer supported learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 14-30.
9. Gurer, D. & Camp, T. (2002). An ACM-W literature review on women in computing. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 34(2), 121-127.
10. Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
11. Hawkins, J. (1985). Computers and girls: Rethinking the issues. Sex Roles, 13 (3/4), 165-180.
12. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
13. Kiesler, S., Sproull, L. & Eccles, J. S. (1985). Pool balls, chips, and war games: Women in the culture of computing. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9, 451-462.
14. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
15. Lee, A.C.K. (2003). Undergraduate students' gender differences in IT skills and attitudes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(4), 488-500.
16. Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information and Management, 40(3), 1-14.
17. Liaw, S. S. (2002). An Internet survey for perceptions of computers and the world wide web: Relationship, prediction, and difference. Computers in Human Behaviour, 18, 17-35.
18. Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391-410.
19. Mumtaz, S. (2001). Children's enjoyment and perception of computer use in the home and the school. Computers & Education, 36, 347-362.
20. Suri, S. (2003). Attitudinal barriers amongst teachers in distance teaching institutions of India. Paper presented at the Forum on ICTs & Gender: Optimizing Opportunities, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
21. Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52(1), 302-312.
22. Teo, T. (2010). A path analysis of pre-service teachers' attitudes to computer use: Applying and extending the Technology Acceptance Model in an educational context. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(1), 65-79.
23. Teo, T., Lee, C. B., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Understanding pre-service teachers' computer attitudes: Applying and extending the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 128-143.
24. Teo, T., & Van Schaik, P. (2009). Understanding technology acceptance among pre-service teachers: A structural-equation modeling approach. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 18(1), 47-66.
25. Teo, T., Wong, S. L., & Chai, C. S. (2008). A cross-cultural examination of the intention to use technology between Singaporean and Malaysian pre-service teachers: an application of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 11(4), 265-280.
26. Teo, T., Lee, C. B., Chai, C. S., & Wong, S. L. (2009). Assessing the intention to use technology among pre-service teachers in Singapore and Malaysia: A multigroup invariance analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Computers and Education, 53, 1000-1009.
27. Vale, C. M., & Leder, G. C. (2004). Students' views of computer-based Mathematics in the middle years: Does gender make a difference? Education Studies in Mathematics, 56(3), 287-312.
28. Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4-69.
29. Zarrett, N. R. & Malanchuk, O. (2005). Who's computing? Gender and race differences in young adults' decisions to pursue an information technology career. New Directions for Child & Adolescent Development, 110, 65-84.