Information Systems Research with an Attitude

Data Base for Advances in Information Systems

Volumn 37, Issue , 2006, Pages 76-85

  Glassberg, Bonnie C ^a   Grover, Varun ^b   Teng, James T C ^c  

^a MIAMI UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CLEMSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Attitude Research; Structural Equation Modeling; Survey; Technology Acceptance

Indexed keywords

EID: 84979653692     PISSN: 00950033     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/1161345.1161356     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Agarwal, R. and Prasad, J. (1997). “The Role of Innovation Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of Information Technologies,” Decision Sciences, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 557–582.
2. Agarwal, R. and Prasad, J. (1998). “A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology,” Information Systems Research, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 204–215.
3. Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1972). “Attitudes and Normative Beliefs and Factors Influencing Behavioral Intentions,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 21, pp. 1–9.
4. Brown, S.A., Massey, A.P., Montoya-Weiss, M.M., and Burkman, J.R. (2002). “Do I Really Have to? User acceptance of Mandated Technology,” European Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 11, pp. 283 295.
5. Celuch, K. and Evans, R. (1989). “An Analysis of the Convergent and Discriminant Validity of the Personal Involvement Inventory and the Consumer Involvement Profile,” Psychological Reports, Vol. 65, No. 3 (Part 2), pp. 1291–1297.
6. Cohen, J.B., and Areni, C.S. (1991). “Affect and Consumer Behavior,” in Robertson, T.S., & Kassarjian, H.H. (Eds.), Handbook of Consumer Behavior, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, pp. 188–240.
7. Davis, F.D. (1985). “A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results,” unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
8. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., and Warshaw, P.R. (1989). “User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models,” Management Science, Vol. 35, No. 8, pp. 982–1003.
9. Fogarty, G.J. (1994). “Using the Personal Orientation Inventory to Measure Change in Student Self Actualization,” Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 435–439.
10. Hoffman, D.L. and Novak, T.P. (1996). “Marketing in Hypermedia Computer-Mediated Environments: Conceptual Foundations,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60, No. 3, pp. 50–68.
11. Johar, G.V. (1995). “Consumer Involvement and Deception from Implied Advertising Claims,” Jrl. of Marketing Research, Vol. 32, pp. 267–279.
12. Laaksonen, P. (1994). Consumer Involvement, New York: Routledge Press.
13. Laurent, G. and Kapferer, J.N. (1985). “Measuring Consumer Involvement Profiles,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 41–53.
14. Loehlin, J.C. (1998). Latent Variable Models: An Introduction to Factor, Path and Structural Analysis, Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Mathieson, K. (1991). “Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior,” Information Systems Research, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 173–191.
16. Munson, J.M. and McQuarrie, E.F. (1987). “The Factorial and Predictive Validities of a Revised Measure of Zaichowsky's Personal Involvement Inventory,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 47, pp. 773–782.
17. Neter, J., Wasserman, W., and Kutner, M.H. (1990). Applied Linear Statistical Models: Regression, Analysis of Variance, and Experimental Designs, Boston, MA: Irwin.
18. Rubin, A.M. (1984). “Ritualized and Instrumental Television Viewing,” Journal of Communication, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 67–77.
19. Shostrom, E.L. (1963). Personal Orientation Inventory, San Diego, CA: Ed ITS.
20. Steuer, J. (1992). “Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence,” Journal of Communication, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 73–93.
21. Taylor, S. and Todd, P.A. (1995). “Assessing IT Usage: The Role of Prior Experience,” MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 561–570.
22. Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A., and Howell, J.M. (1991). “Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization,” MIS Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 124–143.
23. Venkatesh, V. (1999). “Creation of Favorable User Perceptions: Exploring the Role of Intrinsic Motivation,” MIS Quarterly, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 239 260.
24. Venkatesh, V. and Brown, S.A. (2001). “A Longitudinal Investigation of Personal Computers in Homes: Adoption Determinants and Emerging Challenges,” MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 71–102.
25. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., and Davis, F. (2003). “User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View,” MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 425–478.
26. Webster, J. and Martocchio, J.J. (1992). “Micro computer Playfulness: Development of a Measure with Workplace Implications,” MIS Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 201–226.
27. Zaichkowsky, J.L. (1985). “Measuring the Involvement Construct,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 341–352.
28. Zaichkowsky, J.L. (1994). “The Personal Involvement Inventory: Reduction, Revision, and Application to Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 59–70.