CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 582Technology Adoption and User BehaviourUsability and User Interface DesignSoftware Engineering Techniques and Practices

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 76 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Toward Preprototype User Acceptance Testing of New Information Systems: Implications for Software Project Management

Davis, F.D., Venkatesh, V.·2004·IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management
DOI 10.1109/tem.2003.822468
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Errors in requirements specifications have been identified as a major contributor to costly software project failures. It would be highly beneficial if information systems developers could verify requirements by predicting workplace acceptance of a new system based on user evaluations of its specifications measured during the earliest stages of the development project, ideally before building a working prototype. However, conventional wisdom among system developers asserts that prospective users must have direct hands-on experience with at least a working prototype of a new system before they can provide assessments that accurately reflect future usage behavior after workplace implementation. The present research demonstrates that this assumption is only partially true. Specifically, it is true that stable and predictive assessments of a system's perceived ease of use should be based on direct behavioral experience using the system. However, stable and behaviorally predictive measures of perceived usefulness can be captured from target users who have received information about a system's functionality, but have not had direct hands-on usage experience. This distinction is key because, compared to ease of use, usefulness is generally much more strongly linked to future usage intentions and behaviors in the workplace. Two longitudinal field experiments show that preprototype usefulness measures can closely approximate hands-on based usefulness measures, and are significantly pr…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tem.2003.822468

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 78 references

2 of the 78 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb01822.x · DOI · Paper page
  2. jones, 1996, Patterns of Software Systems Failure and Success
  3. 1994, Charting the Seas of Information Technology
  4. pfleeger, 1998, Software Engineering Theory and Practice
  5. markus, 1994, if we build it, they will come: designing information systems that people want to use, Sloan Manage Rev, 11
  6. mann, 2002, why software is so bad, Technol Rev, 33

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–581 of 581

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Davis, F. D., & Venkatesh, V.
Affiliations
  • University of Arkansas at Fayetteville (US)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
ORCID
Davis, F.D.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management
Publisher
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Published
2004-02
Volume
51
Issue
1
Pages
31-46
ISSN
0018-9391 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1109/tem.2003.822468
OpenAlex
W2130427181
Cited by
582
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 18
FWCI
40.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplorehelp/downloads/license-information/IEEE.html (vor)
Locations
IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
Keywords
user acceptance testing, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, requirements verification, software project management, intention to use, information system development, requirements errors

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