Cited by 852Technology Adoption and User BehaviourE-Government and Public ServicesInformation Systems Theories and Implementation

Extending the two-stage information systems continuance model: incorporating UTAUT predictors and the role of context: Context, expectations and IS continuance

Venkatesh, Viswanath, Thong, James Y. L., Chan, Frank K. Y., Hu, Paul Jen-Hwa, Brown, Susan A.·2011·Information Systems Journal

Abstract

This study presents two extensions to the two-stage expectation-confirmation theory of information systems (IS) continuance. First, we expand the belief set from perceived usefulness in the original IS continuance model to include three additional predictors identified in the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, namely effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions. Second, we ground the IS continuance model in the context of transactional systems that involve transmission of personal and sensitive information and include trust as a key contextual belief in the model. To test the expanded IS continuance model, we conducted a longitudinal field study of 3159 Hong Kong citizens across two electronic government (e-government) technologies that enable citizens' access to government services. In general, the results support the expanded model that provides a rich understanding of the changes in the pre-usage beliefs and attitudes through the emergent constructs of disconfirmation and satisfaction, ultimately influencing IS continuance intention. Finally, we discuss the theoretical and practical implications of the expanded model.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2011.00373.x

Cites

67 of 67 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?

  • An integrated theory replacing fragmented theories could better explain how human and society impact adoption and implementation of technology.

    “Venkatesh, Morris, Davis and Davis [41] and Venkatesh et al. [52] advocated that an integrated theory replacing those fragmented theories (previously used eight key theories), which could better explain how human and society impact adoption and implementation of technology [44,47,53,54].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., Chan, F. K. Y., Hu, P. J.-H., & Brown, S. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Arkansas at Fayetteville (US)
  • Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
  • Venkatesh, Viswanath
  • Thong, James Y. L.
  • Chan, Frank K. Y.
  • Hu, Paul Jen-Hwa
  • Brown, Susan A.
Venue
Information Systems Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-06-30
Volume
21
Issue
6
Pages
527-555
ISSN
1350-1917 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1792124015
Cited by
852
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 53 · 2025: 76 · 2024: 82 · 2023: 85 · 2022: 100 · 2021: 81 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 60 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 9
FWCI
49.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Information Systems Journal (publishedVersion)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
Keywords
expectation confirmation theory, UTAUT, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, trust, transaction systems, sensitive data, e-government, continuance intention, disconfirmation, satisfaction, perceived usefulness

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