Cited by 343Technology Adoption and User BehaviourInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Persuasive messages on information system acceptance: A theoretical extension of elaboration likelihood model and social influence theory

Li, Chia-Ying·2013·Computers in Human Behavior

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2012.09.003

Cites

91 of 91 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, C.-Y.
Affiliations
National Taichung University of Science and Technology (TW)
Corresponding author
Li, Chia-Ying
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-01
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
264-275
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1982353417
Cited by
343
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 3
FWCI
17.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
information system acceptance, persuasive messages, elaboration likelihood model, social influence theory, source credibility, argument quality, emotional responses, cognitive responses, behavioral intention, employee acceptance

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