CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 707Technology Adoption and User BehaviourTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationInformation Systems Theories and Implementation

Examining a model of information technology acceptance by individual professionals: an exploratory study

Chau, Patrick Y.K., Hu, Paul J.·2002·Journal of Management Information Systems
DOI 10.1080/07421222.2002.11045699
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The recent proliferation of information technology designed to support or enhance an individual professional's task performance has made the investigation of technology acceptance increasingly challenging and significant. This study investigates technology acceptance by individual professionals by examining physicians' decisions to accept telemedicine technology. Synthesized from relevant prior research, a generic research framework was built to provide a necessary foundation upon which a research model for telemedicine technology acceptance by physicians could be developed. The research model was then empirically examined, using data collected from more than 400 physicians practicing in public tertiary hospitals in Hong Kong. Results of the study suggest several areas where individual "professionals" might subtly differ in their technology acceptance decision-making, as compared with end users and business managers in ordinary business settings. Specifically, physicians appeared to be fairly pragmatic, largely anchoring their acceptance decisions in the usefulness of the technology rather than in its ease of use. When making decisions to accept a technology, physicians expressed considerable concerns about the compatibility of the technology with their practices, placed less importance on controlling technology operations, and attached limited weight to peers' opinions about using the technology. Based on results obtained from this study, the initially proposed framework for technology acceptance by individual professionals was revised to a "hierarchical, three-layer" structure with the individual context at the inner core, the implementation context on the outermost layer, and the technological context residing in the middle. Implications for information systems research and telemedicine management practice that have emerged from the study's findings are also discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07421222.2002.11045699

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Among the reviewed studies, voluntary IT use was more common in studies with non-significant SN effects, while mandatory IT use was more common in studies with significant SN effects.

    “In opposition to that hypothesis, in three of four studies with non-significant SN effects, IT use was voluntary [49,97] or was perceived to be voluntary [108], and IT use was mandatory in two of four studies with significant SN effects [102,110].”

    From The Technology Acceptance Model: Its past and its future in health care (2010) · cites this paper as [49]

  • Variables related to compatibility between health IT and clinical work processes were commonly added in the reviewed studies.

    “For example, the common addition of variables related to compatibility between the health IT and clinical work processes in the reviewed studies [48, 49, 98, 103, 105, 106, 109] is in line with growing interest in the concept of “fit” as a critical need for successful IT design [131, 132], especially in health care [21, 28, 57, 62, 72, 100, 133-135].”

    From The Technology Acceptance Model: Its past and its future in health care (2010) · cites this paper as [49]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P. J.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Management Information Systems
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2002-03
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
191-229
ISSN
  • 0742-1222 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-928X
DOI
10.1080/07421222.2002.11045699
OpenAlex
W1601464326
Cited by
707
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 51 · 2013: 51 · 2012: 33
FWCI
39.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Management Information Systems (publishedVersion)
  • The HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
Keywords
technology acceptance, telemedicine, physicians, technology acceptance model, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, technology compatibility, peer influence, Hong Kong hospitals

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