The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Explaining Intranet use with the Technology Acceptance Model
Open accessAbstract
This paper considers the application of the technology acceptance model (TAM) in explaining intranet usage in two organizations. The TAM was originally developed for explaining technology acceptance and has since been successfully applied to a number of technologies. Its suitability for modelling intranet use is considered here. The model is tested in two UK companies from the banking and engineering sectors. Study 1 finds that the TAM may be valuable as a tool for helping with analysing and understanding intranet usage. The second study indicates that its applicability may be variable between intranets and demonstrates that self-report and actual measures of usage are not interchangeable when applying such a model. The findings have implications for previous and current research employing the TAM and for intranet research in general.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815355 · Cited by 35,324
Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace 1
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x · Cited by 6,231 · cited 2×
“This is an established model of computer usage and has been validated through testing with a number of technologies (Davis et al ., 1989, 1992; Davis, 1993; Igbaria, 1993; Igbaria et al ., 1994; Lederer et al ., 1998; Dishaw and Strong, 1999) and cultures (Straub et al ., 1997).”
BackgroundMethodEmpirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model
Szajna, B. (1996) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.42.1.85 · Cited by 1,656
Information Seeking in Electronic Environments
Marchionini, G. (1995) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511626388 · Cited by 833
Cited by
A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model
King, W. R., & He, J. (2006) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2006.05.003 · Cited by 2,906
Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013
Marangunić, N., & Granić, A. (2015) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-014-0348-1 · Cited by 2,458
Does the technology acceptance model predict actual use? A systematic literature review
Turner, M., Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Charters, S., & Budgen, D. (2010) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2009.11.005 · Cited by 851
Exploring factors affecting the adoption of mobile commerce in Singapore
Yang, K. C. C. (2005) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2004.11.003 · Cited by 656
Technology acceptance: a meta‐analysis of the TAM: Part 1
Yousafzai, S. Y., Foxall, G. R., & Pallister, J. G. (2007) · Journal of Modelling in Management · doi:10.1108/17465660710834453 · Cited by 624
Metadata
- Authors
- Horton, R. P., Buck, T., Waterson, P. E., & Clegg, C. W.
- Venue
- Journal of Information Technology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2001-12
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 237-249
- ISSN
- 0268-3962 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4437
- OpenAlex
- W1993358844
- Cited by
- 287
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 5.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Explaining Intranet use with the Technology Acceptance Model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02683960110102407
- The paper
- Horton, R. P., Buck, T., Waterson, P. E., & Clegg, C. W. (2001). Explaining Intranet use with the Technology Acceptance Model. Journal of Information Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/02683960110102407
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
