Contemporary Trends and Issues in it Adoption and Diffusion Research
Abstract
The high level of investigative activity to date into information systems and information technology acceptance and diffusion has witnessed the use of a wide range of exploratory techniques, examining many different systems and technologies in countless different contexts and geographical locations. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive and systematic review of the literature pertaining to such adoption and diffusion issues in order to observe trends, ascertain the current ‘state of play’, and to highlight promising lines of inquiry including those lacking investigative activity or simply being in need of renewed interest. Previous research activity was analysed along a number dimensions including units of analysis, research paradigms, methodologies, and methods, theories and theoretical constructs, and technologies/contexts examined. Information on these and other variables was extracted during an examination of 345 papers on innovation adoption, acceptance and diffusion appearing in 19 peer-reviewed journals between 1985 and 2007. Findings suggest that the positivist paradigm, empirical and quantitative research, the survey method and Technology Acceptance Model theory (and its associated constructs) were predominantly used in the body of work examined, revealing clear opportunities for researchers to make original contributions by making greater use of the theoretical and methodological variety available to them, and consequently reducing the risk of research in the area moving toward overall homogeneity.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
TAM has been used in almost every IT research adoption theory and because of its frequent use, the quality of TAM could be at risk, as this could lead to degreed in the research field.
“It must be noted by [26] that the TAM has been used in almost every IT research adoption theory and because of its frequent use, the quality of TAM could be at risk, as this could lead to degreed in the research field.”
From A Review on TAM and TOE Framework Progression and How These Models Integrate (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Cites
Dead Or Alive? The Development, Trajectory And Future Of Technology Adoption Research.
University of Arkansas, Venkatesh, V., Davis, F., University of Arkansas, Morris, M., & University of Virginia (2007) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00120 · Cited by 789 · see citing works
Viewpoint: choosing appropriate information systems research methodologies
Galliers, R. D., & Land, F. F. (1987) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/32206.315753 · Cited by 181 · see citing works
Post-positivist Review of Technology Acceptance Model.
University of Houston, & Silva, L. (2007) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00121 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Jeyaraj, A., Clement, M., & Williams, M. D. (2019) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y · Cited by 2,137 · see citing works
Self-citationSmart cities: Advances in research—An information systems perspective
Ismagilova, E., Hughes, L., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Raman, K. R. (2019) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.004 · Cited by 848 · see citing works
Self-citationExtending the understanding of mobile banking adoption: When UTAUT meets TTF and ITM
Oliveira, T., Faria, M., Thomas, M. A., & Popovič, A. (2014) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.06.004 · Cited by 808 · see citing works
Chatterjee, S., & Bhattacharjee, K. K. (2020) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-020-10159-7 · Cited by 747 · see citing works
A Framework for Guiding and Evaluating Literature Reviews
Templier, M., & Paré, G. (2015) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.03706 · Cited by 553 · see citing works
Acceptance of mobile banking framework in Pakistan
Afshan, S., & Sharif, A. (2016) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2015.09.005 · Cited by 376 · see citing works
Rethinking determinants of ICT acceptance: towards an integrated and comprehensive overview
Verdegem, P., & De Marez, L. (2011) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2011.02.004 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
A Review on TAM and TOE Framework Progression and How These Models Integrate
Bryan, J. D., & Zuva, T. (2021) · Advances in Science Technology and Engineering Systems Journal · doi:10.25046/aj060316 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
“It must be noted by [26] that the TAM has been used in almost every IT research adoption theory and because of its frequent use, the quality of TAM could be at risk, as this could lead to degreed in the research field.”
BackgroundThe JOINT model of nurse absenteeism and turnover: A systematic review
Daouk-Öyry, L., Anouze, A.-L., Otaki, F., Dumit, N. Y., & Osman, I. (2014) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2013.06.018 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Khattak, A., Tabash, M. I., Yousaf, Z., Radulescu, M., Nassani, A. A., & Haffar, M. (2022) · Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies · doi:10.1108/jeee-08-2021-0318 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
The role of formal controls in facilitating information system diffusion
Abubakre, M. A., Ravishankar, M. N., & Coombs, C. R. (2015) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2015.04.005 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Ukoha, O., Okorie Awa, H., A. Nwuche, C., & Asiegbu, I. (2011) · Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management · doi:10.28945/1431 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
- Authors
- Williams, M. D., Dwivedi, Y. K., Lal, B., & Schwarz, A.
- Affiliations
- Swansea University (GB)
- Nottingham Trent University (GB)
- Louisiana State University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Information Technology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-10
- ISSN
- 0268-3962 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4437
- OpenAlex
- W1972828340
- Cited by
- 356
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 27
- FWCI
- 57.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Information Technology (publishedVersion)
- Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion)
- Journal of the Association for Information Systems (submittedVersion)
- Nottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Keywords
- technology adoption, technology diffusion, information technology acceptance, innovation adoption, technology acceptance model, research trends, research paradigms, research methodology, unit of analysis, theoretical constructs, information systems research
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
