CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,237Technology Adoption and User BehaviourGender and Technology in EducationInformation Systems Theories and Implementation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 138 of the 139 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Differences in Individual Technology Adoption Decision-Making Processes

Venkatesh, Viswanath, Morris, Michael G., Ackerman, Phillip L.·2000·Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
DOI 10.1006/obhd.2000.2896
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This research investigated gender differences in the overlooked context of individual adoption and sustained usage of technology in the workplace using the theory of planned behavior (TPB). User reactions and technology usage behavior were studied over a 5-month period among 355 workers being introduced to a new software technology application. When compared to women's decisions, the decisions of men were more strongly influenced by their attitude toward using the new technology. In contrast, women were more strongly influenced by subjective norm and perceived behavioral control. Sustained technology usage behavior was driven by early usage behavior, thus fortifying the lasting influence of gender-based early evaluations of the new technology. These findings were robust across income, organization position, education, and computer self-efficacy levels. Copyright 2000 Academic Press.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/obhd.2000.2896

Cites

138 of 138 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Hodgson, 1987, Gender-integrated management teams, Business Quarterly, 52, 68
  2. Thoits, 1987, Gender and marital status differences in control and employment, Monthly Labor Review, 114, 10

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1,237

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., & Ackerman, P. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
  • U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology (US)
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
ORCID
Venue
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-09
Volume
83
Issue
1
Pages
33-60
ISSN
0749-5978 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1006/obhd.2000.2896
OpenAlex
W2118816802
Cited by
1,237
References
139
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 71 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 68 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 56 · 2016: 58 · 2015: 55 · 2014: 73 · 2013: 66 · 2012: 60
FWCI
30.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Technology in Education
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
Keywords
gender differences, technology adoption, theory of planned behavior, workplace technology, attitudes toward technology, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, user response, computer self-efficacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review