Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 277

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

PERCEIVED USEFULNESS OF INFORMATION: A PSYCHOMETRIC EXAMINATION*

Larcker, David F., Lessig, V. Parker·1980·Decision Sciences

Abstract

The perceived usefulness of information is an important construct for the design of management information systems. Yet an examination of existing measures of perceived usefulness shows that the instruments developed have not been validated nor has their reliability been verified. In this paper a new instrument for measuring two dimensions of perceived usefulness is developed. The results of an empirical study designed to test the reliability and construct validity of this instrument in a capital‐budgeting setting are presented.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1980.tb01130.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 277

Metadata

Authors
Larcker, D. F., & Lessig, V. P.
Venue
Decision Sciences
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1980-01
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
121-134
ISSN
  • 0011-7315 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-5915
OpenAlex
W1978794113
Cited by
277
References
1
FWCI
24.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: PERCEIVED USEFULNESS OF INFORMATION: A PSYCHOMETRIC EXAMINATION*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1980.tb01130.x
The paper
Larcker, D. F., & Lessig, V. P. (1980). PERCEIVED USEFULNESS OF INFORMATION: A PSYCHOMETRIC EXAMINATION*. Decision Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1980.tb01130.x

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.