The DOI matches its Crossref record; 135 of the 135 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 55 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions
Open accessAbstract
ABSTRACT Prior research has provided valuable insights into how and why employees make a decision about the adoption and use of information technologies (ITs) in the workplace. From an organizational point of view, however, the more important issue is how managers make informed decisions about interventions that can lead to greater acceptance and effective utilization of IT. There is limited research in the IT implementation literature that deals with the role of interventions to aid such managerial decision making. Particularly, there is a need to understand how various interventions can influence the known determinants of IT adoption and use. To address this gap in the literature, we draw from the vast body of research on the technology acceptance model (TAM), particularly the work on the determinants of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, and: (i) develop a comprehensive nomological network (integrated model) of the determinants of individual level (IT) adoption and use; (ii) empirically test the proposed integrated model; and (iii) present a research agenda focused on potential pre‐ and postimplementation interventions that can enhance employees' adoption and use of IT. Our findings and research agenda have important implications for managerial decision making on IT implementation in organizations.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
51 Own result · 35 Own interpretation · 21 No full text of the sources · 13 Sources not found · 7 Own method · 5 Not checked yet · 2 No basis given · 1 Supported · 1 Partly supported · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Venkatesh and Speier (1999) investigated the effect of mood during training on user acceptance and found that mood during training played an important role in forming individuals' perceptions of a new IT.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Training
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Venkatesh & Speier, 1999 source
The Short-Term Mood Effects section links mood during computer training to perceptions of enjoyment in using the technology. The Discussion reports that negative mood during training reduced intrinsic motivation and intentions to use it, supporting the citing sentence’s broad characterization of the finding. The copy provides no page numbers for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The two-way interaction between subjective norm and voluntariness (SN × EXP) indicated that the effect of subjective norm on behavioral intention was stronger in a mandatory context.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Behavioral Intention and Use
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found that experience moderated the effect of computer anxiety on perceived ease of use such that the effect became weaker with increasing experience (CANX × EXP).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“experience moderated the effect of perceived ease of use on perceived usefulness such that with increasing experience the effect became stronger.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, TAM3 was able to explain between 52% and 67% of the variance in perceived usefulness across different time periods and models (see Table 5).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found that job relevance and output quality had an interactive effect on perceived usefulness such that with increasing output quality, the effect of job relevance on perceived usefulness was stronger.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found that experience, in fact, moderated the effect of perceived ease of use (PEOU × EXP) on behavioral intention such that with increasing experience the effect became weaker.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Behavioral Intention and Use
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct was higher than the correlations across constructs.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As Table 4 shows, internal consistency reliabilities (ICRs) were greater than .70 for all constructs at all points of measurement.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Table 3 shows that the item loadings were greater than or at least equal to .70 for all constructs at all time periods.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 25
- The quote only partly states this claim. 4
- Probably not a substantial claim. 26
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Further, incentive alignment, and an important extrinsic reward, may reduce anxiety and increase perceived enjoyment as extrinsic rewards are considered important drivers of intrinsic motivations (Vallerand, 1997;Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999;Ryan & Deci, 2000).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Incentive alignment
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Vallerand, 1997 source
- Partly supportedcites Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report that verbal rewards (positive feedback) enhanced self-reported interest, which offers limited support for the possibility that an extrinsic reward could increase enjoyment. But the paper does not assess incentive alignment or anxiety, and its Concluding Comments (pp. 658–659) say tangible rewards generally diminish rather than promote intrinsic motivation. The cited source therefore does not support the proposed effect of incentive alignment. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ryan & Deci, 2000 source
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found that perceived ease of use, subjective norm, image, and result demonstrability were significant predictors of perceived usefulness at all time periods (see Table 5).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While perceived ease of use was significant at T1 and T2, it was not significant at T3, suggesting a moderating effect of experience in the relationship between perceived ease of use and behavioral intention.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Behavioral Intention and Use
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the adjustments-that is, perceived enjoyment and objective usability-were not significant at T1, but they were significant at both T2 and T3.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“OU × EXP | | | | .20 * *”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Objective Usability (OU) | .04 | .19 * * | .23 * * * | .03”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CANX × EXP | | | | .21 * * *”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Subjective Norm (SN) | .40 * * * | .32 * * * | .13 * | .04”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SN × VOL | .29 * * * | .22 * * * | .17 * | .03”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived Enjoyment (ENJ) | .02 | .22 * * * | .24 * * * | .04”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Result Demonstrability (RES) | .22 * * * | .26 * * * | .28 * * * | .26 * * *”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CPLAY × EXP | | | | -.22 * * *”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) | .22 * * * | .26 * * * | .33 * * * | .08”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ENJ × EXP | | | | .18 * *”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) | .24 * * * | .17 * | .05 | .04”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although longitudinal studies were conducted, the specific moderating role by experience was not tested in Venkatesh (2000).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Venkatesh, 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, in the context of enterprise systems, if an individual perceives that his or her use of the system does not benefit the members of his or her work units but rather benefits members from other work units, the user will perceive a lack of incentive alignment that may lead to low user acceptance and use of the system.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Incentive alignment
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we conducted Harmon's single factor test and marker variable test (we used job satisfaction as a marker variable) and did not find any significant common method bias.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We used validated items from prior research to test TAM3.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our research design allowed us to collect the use data separate from its determinants (e.g., behavioral intention, perceived usefulness, etc.).Particularly, there was at least a 1-month gap between the collection of survey data and the measurement of use.”
- Also stated in: § Measurement · plain
“Such a design approach helped us overcome the problems associated with common method biases.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Measurement · plain
In the paper
“Operationalization of the determinants of perceived ease of use (i.e., computer self-efficacy, perceptions of external control, computer playfulness, computer anxiety, objective usability, and perceived enjoyment) was consistent with Venkatesh (2000).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Venkatesh (2000)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“It posits that individuals' behavioral intention to use an IT is determined by two beliefs: perceived usefulness, defined as the extent to which a person believes that using an IT will enhance his or her job performance and perceived ease of use, defined as the degree to which a person believes that using an IT will be free of effort.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > BACKGROUND
What the sources say
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Ba et al. (2001) argued that while aspects of software engineering (e.g., system characteristics) and technology acceptance (e.g., perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, user satisfaction) are important considerations for system development processes, organizations may fail to gain expected benefits from employees' effective utilization of a system unless employees find that the system fe”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Incentive alignment
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ba et al., 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All constructs at each time period exhibited strong psychometric properties and satisfied the criteria of reliability and convergent and discriminant validity.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“According to Ba et al. (2001), incentive alignment does not necessarily mean organizational rewards for using a system.It is a broad concept that entails an individual's perception that the IT fits with his or her job requirements and value system.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Incentive alignment
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ba et al., 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Chin, Marcolin, and Newsted (2003) noted that PLS has minimal restrictions in terms of distributional assumptions and sample size.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > We used Partial Least Squares (PLS), a component-based structural equation modeling technique, to analyze our data. PLS-Graph, version 3, build 1126 was used
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Chin, Marcolin, and Newsted (2003) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mean-centering helps limit potential multicollinearity, evidenced by the low variation inflation factors (VIFs) for all constructs in our model.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > We used Partial Least Squares (PLS), a component-based structural equation modeling technique, to analyze our data. PLS-Graph, version 3, build 1126 was used
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived usefulness is an instrumental belief that is conceptually similar to extrinsic motivation and is a cognition (as opposed to emotion) regarding the benefits of using a system.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Crossover Effects
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It further theorizes that the effect of external variables (e.g., design characteristics) on behavioral intention will be mediated by perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > BACKGROUND
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Davis et al., 1989 source
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The research sites represented different industries, organizational contexts, and functional areas.Further, the types of ITs were different across the sites.Such variability in organizational settings and types of technologies adds to the potential generalization of our findings.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > METHOD
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“TAM constructs-that is, perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU), and behavioral intention (BI)-were operationalized using items adapted from Davis (1989) and Davis et al. (1989).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Incentive alignment has been suggested as the third dimension in systems design (Ba, Stallaert, & Whinston, 2001).The other two dimensions are software engineering and technology acceptance (Ba et al., 2001).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Incentive alignment
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ba et al., 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, the modification and enhancement activities performed by peers will increase job relevance of a system, improve the output quality of a system, and reduce anxiety related to system use.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Peer support
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The implementation of interventions is, of course, not a silver bullet for greater IT adoption and effective utilization.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Implications for Decision Making
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“He also found that the effect of perceived ease of use on behavioral intention to use a system was stronger for individuals who received game-based training.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Training
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Venkatesh, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If we can develop a rich understanding of the determinants of IT adoption and use and interventions that can favorably influence these determinants, managers can proactively decide on implementing the right interventions to minimize resistance to new ITs and maximize effective utilization of ITs.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: ITs are becoming increasingly complex and implementation costs are very high.
- Rests on an assumption: Implementation failures of many of today's ITs cost millions of dollars for organizations.
In the paper
“Training has been suggested as one of the most important postimplementation interventions that leads to greater user acceptance and system success (see Sharma & Yetton, 2007).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Training
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sharma & Yetton, 2007 source
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Organizational support captures the role of both internal and external experts who can help users deal with the complexity associated with new systems as well as business processes.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Organizational support
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Implementation of interventions can increase system development costs substantially.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Implications for Decision Making
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TAM3 emphasizes the unique role and processes related to perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use and theorizes that the determinants of perceived usefulness will not influence perceived ease of use and vice versa.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Theoretical Contributions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Prior research has suggested that employees' perceptions regarding organizational support-that is, facilitating conditions or perceptions of external control (Taylor & Todd, 1995;Venkatesh, 2000;Venkatesh et al., 2003)-will lead to greater user acceptance of new systems.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Organizational support
What the sources say
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our key argument in this article is that unless organizations can develop effective interventions to enhance IT adoption and use, there is no practical utility of our rich understanding of IT adoption.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Theoretical Contributions
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: There is little or no scientific research aimed at identifying and linking interventions with specific determinants of IT adoption.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We suggest that interventions discussed in this article can help organizations generate favorable individuals' reactions toward business process changes and process standards implementation.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Implications for Decision Making
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“For example, while self-efficacy may have weak influence on perceived usefulness as shown in Agarwal and Karahanna (2000), we argue that this influence will become nonsignificant in the presence of other important social and cognitive constructs.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Theoretical Contributions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Agarwal and Karahanna (2000) source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TAM3 posits that perceptions of external control are important and stable determinants of perceived ease of use.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Organizational support
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Organizational support is a key source of perceptions of external control.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Organizational support
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, experts can help employees modify certain aspects of a new system, thus increasing job relevance, output quality, and results demonstrability of a system.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Organizational support
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Due to the complexity of ITs, it is increasingly difficult for employees to make effective decisions about adoption, utilization, and coping with new ITs.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Implications for Decision Making
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: ITs are becoming increasingly complex and implementation costs are very high.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Some employees may react favorably to these changes, while the others may perceive these changes as a threat to their well-being (Orlikowski, 2000;Boudreau & Robey, 2005).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Postimplementation Interventions
What the sources say
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TAM3 posits that with increasing experience, while the effect of perceived ease of use on behavioral intention will diminish, the effect of perceived ease of use on perceived usefulness will increase.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Theoretical Contributions
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We suggest that the role of training will be even more important in the context of complex systems (e.g., enterprise systems) that are more central to employees' work life.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Training
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: Much prior research on training in the context of IT adoption has been conducted for simple ITs, such as word processing and e-mail.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As these systems are more likely to invoke negative reactions from employees because of their disruptive nature, effective training interventions can mitigate these negative reactions and help employees form favorable perceptions toward these systems.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Training
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
“Out of 50 potential users of the system who participated in the training, 39 provided usable responses at all points of measurement.”
“Out of 51 potential users of the new system who attended the training, 43 provided usable responses at all points of measurement.”
“Out of 51 potential users of the new system, 36 provided usable responses at all points of measurement.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
“Data were collected from four different organizations-sites A through D-implementing new ITs.”
“The research sites represented different industries, organizational contexts, and functional areas.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Management support in individual-level IT adoption literature has been conceptualized and operationalized as organizational mandate and compliance.
“While management support has been conceptualized and operationalized as organizational mandate and compliance, particularly in the individual-level IT adoption literature, we suggest that there is a need to develop a richer conceptualization of management support to enhance our understanding of its role in IT adoption contexts.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is limited research on the role of incentive alignment in IT adoption contexts.
“There is limited research on the role of incentive alignment in IT adoption contexts.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Much prior research on training in the context of IT adoption has been conducted for simple ITs, such as word processing and e-mail.
“However, much of the prior research on training in the context of IT adoption has been conducted for simple ITs, such as word processing and e-mail.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is little or no research on the role of peer support in the context of IT adoption.
“While peer support is potentially an important intervention that can lead to greater user acceptance, there is little or no research on the role of peer support in the context of IT adoption.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is little or no scientific research aimed at identifying and linking interventions with specific determinants of IT adoption.
“However, there is little or no scientific research aimed at identifying and linking interventions with specific determinants of IT adoption.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There have been numerous cases of enterprise system failures because of user resistance.
“There have been numerous cases of enterprise system failures because of user resistance.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In many cases, users stopped using an enterprise system because they saw no benefits of using the new system.
“In many cases, the users stopped using an enterprise system, as they saw no benefits of using the new system.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Other types of reactions, such as avoidance, sabotage, workarounds, and shortcuts, are prevalent.
“Other types of reactions, such as avoidance, sabotage, workarounds, and shortcuts are also prevalent.”
The paper relies on this without support.
ITs are becoming increasingly complex and implementation costs are very high.
“ITs are becoming increasingly complex and implementation costs are very high.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Implementation failures of many of today's ITs cost millions of dollars for organizations.
“Implementation failures of many of today's ITs cost millions of dollars for organizations.”
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?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“the extensive focus of TAM on technology to the neglect of social and psychological parameters (Agarwal & Prasad, 1998;Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) limits its explanatory and predictive utilities, and therefore demands its integration with other frameworks”
From Using T-O-E theoretical framework to study the adoption of ERP solution (2016) · cites this paper as Venkatesh & Bala, 2008
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A technology that provides information quickly and easily will lead to improvements in job performance, which in turn will encourage greater use of a given technology (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Venkatesh and Bala, 2008
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The adoption of new technologies is shaped by user perceptions and usage patterns (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) as well as student characteristics and experiences (Abdaljaleel et al., 2023; Tiwari et al., 2024).”
From “ChatGPT seems too good to be true”: College students’ use and perceptions of generative AI (2024) · cites this paper as Venkatesh & Bala, 2008
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It is proposed that perceived enjoyment is positively related to perceived ease of use [12].”
From Gender and Acceptance of E-Learning: A Multi-Group Analysis Based on a Structural Equation Model among College Students in Chile and Spain (2015) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The scales applied have been verified in preceding studies [12, 28].”
From Gender and Acceptance of E-Learning: A Multi-Group Analysis Based on a Structural Equation Model among College Students in Chile and Spain (2015) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Moreover, it is proposed that perception of external control is an element that conditions perceived ease of use [12].”
From Gender and Acceptance of E-Learning: A Multi-Group Analysis Based on a Structural Equation Model among College Students in Chile and Spain (2015) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It is proposed that result demonstrability is an antecedent of perceived usefulness [12].”
From Gender and Acceptance of E-Learning: A Multi-Group Analysis Based on a Structural Equation Model among College Students in Chile and Spain (2015) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“which explains that users’ decisions to accept and use a technology are influenced by perceived usefulness, ease of use, and social influence of others.”
From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [253]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Some of the themes identified in this review overlap with previous models conceptualizing engagement with digital health interventions, as well as general technology acceptance and health behavior, such as the Efficiency Model of Support [251], Technology Acceptance Model [253], and Health Belief Model [249].”
From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [253]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Our findings are in line with the Technology Acceptance Model”
From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [253]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Information-related characteristics of a system can impact its PU as they can improve productivity and performance (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Venkatesh and Bala, 2008
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Firstly, considering usability , a reliable, flexible and user-friendly system is more likely to create a positive user experience (Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Venkatesh and Bala 2008
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A typical criticism of the TAM is in relation to its lack of practical managerial guidance (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Venkatesh and Bala, 2008
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Venkatesh and Bala (2008) present four generic antecedents to the TAM: i ndividual differences , system characteristics , social influence , and facilitating conditions .”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Venkatesh and Bala (2008)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The model explains approximately 40% of the variance in individuals’ intention to use a new technology and actual use [39].”
From An Assessment of How Clinicians and Staff Members Use a Diabetes Artificial Intelligence Prediction Tool: Mixed Methods Study (2023) · cites this paper as [39]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It theorizes that individuals’ intention to use new technology is determined by perceived usefulness, defined as “the extent to which a person believes that using [a new technology] will enhance his or her job performance,” and perceived ease of use, defined as “the degree to which a person believes that using [a new technology] will be free of effort” [39].”
From An Assessment of How Clinicians and Staff Members Use a Diabetes Artificial Intelligence Prediction Tool: Mixed Methods Study (2023) · cites this paper as [39]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“TAM's assertion that perceived usefulness is a primary determinant of technology acceptance and subsequent usage behaviors (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
From The impact of AI-assisted pair programming on student motivation, programming anxiety, collaborative learning, and programming performance: a comparative study with traditional pair programming and individual approaches (2025) · cites this paper as Venkatesh & Bala, 2008
In the citing paper
“Currently, many studies contributing to the adoption research of mHealth for youths are based on the technology acceptance model, an information systems theory that models user’s acceptance of technology mainly based on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use [48-50].”
From Understanding Mobile Health and Youth Mental Health: Scoping Review (2023) · cites this paper as [50]
In the citing paper
“Currently, many studies contributing to the adoption research of mHealth for youths are based on the technology acceptance model, an information systems theory that models user’s acceptance of technology mainly based on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use [48-50].”
From Understanding Mobile Health and Youth Mental Health: Scoping Review (2023) · cites this paper as [50]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement
“Specifically the measurements of use and its determinants were separated by 1 month (T1-T2), 3 months (T2-T3) and 2 months (T3-T4).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Procedure
“after initial training (T1), 1 month after implementation (T2), and 3 months after implementation (T3).We also measured self-reported usage at T2, T3, and 5 months after implementation (T4).”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Additional information
“a All items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale (where 1: strongly disagree; 2: moderately disagree, 3: somewhat disagree, 4: neutral (neither disagree nor agree), 5: somewhat agree, 6: moderately agree, and 7: strongly agree), except computer self-efficacy, which was measured using a 10-point Guttman scale.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Additional information
“Use (USE) USE1 On average, how much time do you spend on the system each day?”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Behavioral Intention and Use
“The two-way interaction between subjective norm and voluntariness (SN × EXP) indicated that the effect of subjective norm on behavioral intention was stronger in a mandatory context.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
“| SN × VOL | .29 * * * | .22 * * * | .17 * | .03 |”
Citations
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
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
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035
Self-citation(1975) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 36,737
Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions
(1992) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.29-3352 · Cited by 36,647
User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · Cited by 25,709
Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions
Aiken, L., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1037/10520-147 · Cited by 24,912
A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 · Cited by 23,066
Self-citationIntrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 · Cited by 18,666
Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800313 · Cited by 13,287
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Beach L. R., 1996, Decision making in the workplace: A unified perspective, 1
- Cohen D. S., 2005, Why change is an affair of the heart, CIO Magazine
- Gross G., 2005, Standards a must for adoption for health‐care IT, CIO Magazine
- Koch C., 2004, Nike rebounds: How (and why) Nike recovered from its supply chain disaster, CIO Magazine
- Mennecke B. E., 1998, Discovering and overcoming the hidden profile bias in group decision making: The influence of group history and use of a group support system, Journal of MIS, 15, 173
- Overby S., 2002, How to win friends and influence users, CIO Magazine
- Saga V. L., 1994, Diffusion, transfer and implementation of information technology, 67
- Vallacher R. R., 1996, The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior, 260
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,801–1,900 of 8,090
Program Studi Pendidikan Ekonomi, U. N. J., Asja, H. J., Susanti, S., Program Studi Pendidikan Ekonomi, U. N. J., Fauzi, A., & Program Studi Pendidikan Ekonomi, U. N. J. (2021) · Jurnal Akuntansi Keuangan dan Manajemen · doi:10.35912/jakman.v2i4.495 · Cited by 28
von Terzi, P., Tretter, S., Uhde, A., Hassenzahl, M., & Diefenbach, S. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.718315 · Cited by 30
Cui, Q., Hu, X., Liu, X., Zhao, L., & Wang, G. (2021) · Buildings · doi:10.3390/buildings11100448 · Cited by 28
PLS-SEM bias: traditional vs consistent
Yıldız, O. (2022) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-021-01289-2 · Cited by 32
“The study also suggests new concepts as determinants of the perceived usefulness and the perceived ease of use, namely individual differences, system characteristics, social influence, and facilitating conditions (Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
BackgroundMethodDeterminants of precision agriculture technology adoption in developing countries: a review
Nguyen, L. L. H., Halibas, A. S., & Nguyen, T. Q. (2022) · Journal of Crop Improvement · doi:10.1080/15427528.2022.2080784 · Cited by 33
“TOE, introduced as a firmlevel framework and widely applied in information system studies, is an organizational-level theory that only considers the influences of elements of a firm’s context regarding technology-adoption decisions (Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
BackgroundTremblay-Cantin, C.-A., Mellouli, S., Cheikh‐Ammar, M., & Khechine, H. (2023) · Digital Government Research and Practice · doi:10.1145/3580369 · Cited by 28
“The theory of reason actioned (TRA), the theory of planned behavior (TPB) [13], the technology acceptance model (TAM) [20] and its extensions TAM2 [53] and TAM3 [50], and, the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) [52], are some of the most widely used theories.”
BackgroundSoodan, V., Jamwal, M., Rana, N. P., Sharma, D., & Chakraborty, S. (2023) · Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies · doi:10.1108/jadee-05-2022-0087 · Cited by 36
Customer Attitude toward Digital Wallet Services
Ilieva, G., Yankova, T., Dzhabarova, Y., Ruseva, M., Angelov, D., & Klisarova-Belcheva, S. (2023) · Systems · doi:10.3390/systems11040185 · Cited by 28
de Andrés-Sánchez, J., & Albesa, J. G. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2227833 · Cited by 29
“We have developed our analysis by following the classical technology acceptance model (TAM) proposed by Davis (1989) and extended by Venkatesh and Davis (2000) and Venkatesh and Bala (2008), as displayed in Figure 1.”
Influentialde Luna, I. R., Montoro-Ríos, F. J., Molinillo, S., & Liébana-Cabanillas, F. J. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2233135 · Cited by 29
“Most previous studies on the adoption of mobile payment systems (Appendix 1) propose their models using classic and well-established theoretical approaches as the basis to study the intention to use mobile payments, such as the DIT — diffusion of innovation theory (Rogers, 1962), TRA — Theory of reasoned action (Fishb…”
Assuring graduate competency: a technology acceptance model for course guide tools
Atif, A., Richards, D., Busch, P. A., et al. (2015) · Journal of Computing in Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s12528-015-9095-4 · Cited by 28
“Second, TAM is a well-researched model with a strong theoretical base and has been validated by a set of psychometric measurement scales (such as Likert scales used in the questionnaire to measure the attitudes and intentions about the acceptance of UGIS) (Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
MethodFactors impacting end-users' usage of ERP in China
Zhang, S., Gao, P., & Ge, Z. (2013) · Kybernetes · doi:10.1108/k-11-2012-0099 · Cited by 28
“Venkatesh and Bala (2008) find that the mood during training plays an important role in framing individuals’ perceptions.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialInfluence of age in the adoption of new mobile payment systems
Liébana-Cabanillas, F. J., Muñoz‐Leiva, F., & Sánchez‐Fernández, J. (2015) · Review of Business Management · doi:10.7819/rbgn.v17i58.1989 · Cited by 28
“Likert of 7 points 1 = Entirely disagree 7 = Entirely agree Venkatesh and Bala (2008) The interaction with the tool does not require mental effort.”
BackgroundBrand identity and online self-customisation usefulness perception
He, H., Harris, L. C., Wang, W.-Y., & Haider, K. (2016) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2016.1170720 · Cited by 31
“Perceived usefulness refers to the degree to which consumers believe that a particular technology will facilitate the process (e.g. Davis, 1989; Pavlou, 2003; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundChen, C.-M., Wu, Y. Y., Wen, M., & Hsu, I.-T. (2016) · Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education · doi:10.12973/eurasia.2016.1517a · Cited by 28
An Empirical Investigation on Taxi Hailing Mobile App Adoption: A Structural Equation Modelling
Haba, H. F., & Dastane, O. (2018) · Business Management and Strategy · doi:10.5296/bms.v9i1.13006 · Cited by 28
García, M. V., López, M. F. B., & Castillo, M. Á. S. (2019) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119783 · Cited by 28
The adoption of electronic records management system (ERMS) in the Yemeni oil and gas sector
Hawash, B., Mokhtar, U. A., Yusof, Z. M., & Mukred, M. (2020) · Records Management Journal · doi:10.1108/rmj-03-2019-0010 · Cited by 38
Beyond the “Wow” Factor: Using Generative AI for Increasing Generative Sense-Making
Makransky, G., Shiwalia, B. M., Herlau, T., & Blurton, S. (2025) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-025-10039-x · Cited by 27
“This positive emotional experience can reinforce satisfaction with the learning process and increase the intention to continue using AI-enhanced educational platforms (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), leading to sustained engagement and ultimately more widespread adoption (Dai et al., 2024).”
Hypercasual and Hybrid-Casual Video Gaming: A Digital Leisure Perspective
Pizzo, A. D. (2023) · Leisure Sciences · doi:10.1080/01490400.2023.2211056 · Cited by 27
Increasing mobile health application usage among Generation Z members: evidence from the UTAUT model
Aydın, G. (2023) · International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing · doi:10.1108/ijphm-02-2021-0030 · Cited by 40
Virtual reality public speaking training: effectiveness and user technology acceptance
Bachmann, M., Subramaniam, A., Born, J., & Weibel, D. (2023) · Frontiers in Virtual Reality · doi:10.3389/frvir.2023.1242544 · Cited by 39
Green, G. (2023) · Journal of Professional Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2023.11.003 · Cited by 27
Şahin, F., Kızılaslan, A., & Şimşek, Ö. (2023) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12383-3 · Cited by 33
“ANX is defined as the emotional response, encompassing feelings of anxiety and fear, experienced by an individual during the execution of a task (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
Akyürek, S., Genç, G., ÇALIK, İ., & Şengel, Ü. (2024) · Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport & Tourism Education · doi:10.1016/j.jhlste.2024.100503 · Cited by 48
Börekci, C., & Çelik, Ö. (2024) · Sakarya University Journal of Education · doi:10.19126/suje.1468866 · Cited by 42
Osakwe, C. N., Říha, D., Elgammal, I. M. Y., & Ramayah, T. (2024) · International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management · doi:10.1108/ijrdm-09-2023-0552 · Cited by 28
Revisiting the TAM: adapting the model to advanced technologies and evolving user behaviours
Ishengoma, F. (2024) · The Electronic Library · doi:10.1108/el-06-2024-0166 · Cited by 27
Adoption of UPI among Indian users: Using extended meta-UTAUT model
Razi-ur-Rahim, M., Rabbani, M. R., Uddin, F., & Shaikh, Z. H. (2024) · Digital Business · doi:10.1016/j.digbus.2024.100093 · Cited by 49
Kadri, M., Boubakri, F.-E., Teo, T. P., Kaghat, F.-Z., Azough, A., & Zidani, K. A. (2024) · Displays · doi:10.1016/j.displa.2024.102870 · Cited by 27
Unveiling barriers and drivers of AI adoption for digital marketing in Malaysian SMEs
Enshassi, M., Nathan, R. J., Soekmawati, S., & Ismail, H. (2025) · Journal of Open Innovation Technology Market and Complexity · doi:10.1016/j.joitmc.2025.100519 · Cited by 52
A Systematic Review of User Attitudes Toward GenAI: Influencing Factors and Industry Perspectives
Chen, J., Wei, X., Xie, Q., Hu, A., Qiao, Y., Wan, R., & Liu, Y. (2025) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence13070078 · Cited by 41
“Venkatesh et al. also mentioned that when the majority of users perceive technology as “easy to use”, the variable will lose its ceiling effect, thus affecting its statistical significance (Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
Koutromanos, G., Styliaras, G., & Christodoulou, S. (2014) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-013-9302-8 · Cited by 29
“2003 for the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology ; Venkatesh and Bala 2008 for TAM 3 ) and some researchers suggested that it should be modified to include and other external and internal variables in order to provide a broader view and a better explanation of technology adoption .”
BackgroundMobile learning adoption from informal into formal
Sánchez‐Prieto, J. C., Migueláñéz, S. O., & García‐Peñalvo, F. J. (2014) · Ninth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM'21) · doi:10.1145/2669711.2669961 · Cited by 29
“The TAM2 [67] that incorporated to the diagram factors such as the subjective norm, the previous experience or the voluntariness and the TAM3 [68], which main innovation is the proposal of factors of adjustment and anchor that affect the perceived ease of use.”
BackgroundFactors Explaining Physicians' Acceptance of Electronic Health Records
Steininger, K., Stiglbauer, B., Baumgartner, B., & Engleder, B. (2014) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.1109/hicss.2014.347 · Cited by 27
“Research in psychology proves social norm to be an important determinant of intention to use a system and its perceived usefulness [10,46,48].”
BackgroundKhan, H. U., Artail, H. A., Malik, Z., et al. (2014) · doi:10.1109/ice2t.2014.7006207 · Cited by 27
Sánchez‐Prieto, J. C., Migueláñéz, S. O., & García‐Peñalvo, F. J. (2017) · Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED) · doi:10.6018/red/52/5 · Cited by 28
Toward understanding outcomes associated with data quality improvement
Hazen, B. T., Weigel, F. K., Ezell, J. D., Boehmke, B. C., & Bradley, R. V. (2017) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.08.027 · Cited by 27
McLoughlin, S., Prendergast, D. K., & Donnellan, B. (2018) · International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems · doi:10.5220/0006777402940303 · Cited by 27
“An interview schedule was designed to generate themes surrounding such aspects as lifestyle, health, mobility needs and mobility experience etc. Theories of technology adoption were reviewed (i.e. UTAUT2 and TAM3 (Venkatesh & Bala 2008; Venkatesh et al. 2016)) and questions reflected core concepts including Habit, Hed…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialBelletier, C., Robert, A., Moták, L., & Izaute, M. (2018) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.029 · Cited by 27
Engin, M., & Gürses, F. (2019) · International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management · doi:10.1142/s0219877019500433 · Cited by 27
Heitplatz, V. N., Bühler, C., & Hastall, M. R. (2019) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-23563-5_9 · Cited by 26
Falcão, R. P. D. Q., Ferreira, J. B., & Filho, M. C. M. D. C. (2019) · Information Technology & Tourism · doi:10.1007/s40558-019-00154-1 · Cited by 29
Telemedicine and Gynecologic Cancer Care
Shalowitz, D. I., & Moore, C. (2020) · Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.ogc.2020.02.003 · Cited by 29
Heitplatz, V. N. (2020) · Social Inclusion · doi:10.17645/si.v8i2.2578 · Cited by 27
“Experiences are one of the most important factors for technology acceptance (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundToward ontology‐based risk management framework for software projects: An empirical study
Abioye, T. E., Arogundade, O. '., Misra, S., et al. (2020) · Journal of Software Evolution and Process · doi:10.1002/smr.2269 · Cited by 27
“TAM, according to Venkatesh and Bala, 54 is widely used as one of the prominent information system theories and gives a better view of the information system user's acceptance.”
MethodWeidinger, J., Schlauderer, S., & Overhage, S. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2020.3044720 · Cited by 26
“This might be reflected by the Perceived Enjoyment construct from the technology acceptance literature [31].”
BackgroundMatarirano, O., Jere, N. R., Sibanda, H. S., & Panicker, M. (2021) · International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET) · doi:10.3991/ijet.v16i01.16821 · Cited by 27
Siedl, S. M., Wolf, M., & Mara, M. (2021) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) · doi:10.1145/3434074.3447200 · Cited by 29
“Considering the perceived change in work speed when testing different types of exoskeletons as an indicator of perceived usefulness, which is a key determinant of intention to use in the Technology Acceptance Model [9, 20], these findings are also in line with this popular research framework.”
ResultNguyen, X.-A., Hòa, P. Đ., Luong, D., & Xuan-thuc-anh, C. A. O. (2021) · Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education · doi:10.17718/tojde.961828 · Cited by 27
Agnihotri, R., Mani, S., Chaker, N. N., Daugherty, P. J., & Kothandaraman, P. (2020) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/deci.12489 · Cited by 27
Kemp, A., Palmer, E., Strelan, P., & Thompson, H. (2022) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.7338 · Cited by 28
“Attitude was removed in a revised TAM (TAM-R) (Davis, 1989) because it had no additional power when preceded by perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, a finding replicated in other studies (Teo, 2009; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000).”
ResultMustofa, R. H., Pramudita, D. A., Atmono, D., Priyankara, H. P. R., Asmawan, M. C., Rahmattullah, M., Mudrikah, S., & pamungkas, L. N. S. (2022) · International Review of Economics Education · doi:10.1016/j.iree.2022.100236 · Cited by 32
Investigating Pre-Service Teachers’ Behavioral Intentions to Use Web 2.0 Gamification Tools
Turan, Z., Küçük, S., & Karabey, S. Ç. (2022) · Participatory Educational Research · doi:10.17275/per.22.85.9.4 · Cited by 27
Wang, Y.-M., Wei, C., & Wang, M.-W. (2022) · Library Hi Tech · doi:10.1108/lht-12-2021-0506 · Cited by 27
Understanding the determinants of ePharmacy services: the moderating effect of technology discomfort
Gani, M. O., Rahman, M. S., Faroque, A. R., Sabit, A. A., & Abdelfattah, F. (2022) · The Bottom Line Managing Library Finances · doi:10.1108/bl-03-2022-0045 · Cited by 27
AL-Sayid, F., & Kirkil, G. (2022) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2022.2087013 · Cited by 27
“And several studies employed several measures to prove the main factors of engagement in TAM (Al-ammari & Hamad, 2008; Phua et al., 2012; Venkatesh, 2000; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000), and have found that behaviour intention (BI) has a close correlation with U and EoU.”
BackgroundSathar, M. B. A., Rajagopalan, M., Naina, S. M., & Parayitam, S. (2022) · Journal of Asia Business Studies · doi:10.1108/jabs-03-2022-0089 · Cited by 27
Exploring physicians’ continuous use of clinical decision support systems
Abouzahra, M., Guenter, D., & Tan, J. (2022) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1080/0960085x.2022.2119172 · Cited by 33
“For example, Venkatesh et al. (2008a), when developing version 3 of TAM, used the D&M model and included system quality as a predictor of usefulness and information quality as a predictor of ease of use, Xu et al. (2013) used the D&M model to predict usefulness and ease of use of e-services, and…”
MethodConnecting Digital Channels to Consumers’ Purchase Decision-Making Process in Online Stores
Pires, P. B., Santos, J. D., Brito, P. Q., & Marques, D. N. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su142114392 · Cited by 41
Exploring smart retailing: anthropomorphism in voice shopping of smart speaker
Jang, Y.-T. J., Liu, A. Y., & Ke, W.-Y. (2022) · Information Technology and People · doi:10.1108/itp-07-2021-0536 · Cited by 27
Can I Trust My Phone to Replace My Wallet? The Determinants of E-Wallet Adoption in North Cyprus
Kınış, F., & Tanova, C. (2022) · Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · doi:10.3390/jtaer17040086 · Cited by 40
Financial Technology Adoption – A Case of Indian MSMEs
Gupta, U., Agarwal, B., & Nautiyal, N. (2022) · Finance: Theory and Practice · doi:10.26794/2587-5671-2022-26-6-192-211 · Cited by 67
Bialas, C., Bechtsis, D., Aivazidou, E., Achillas, C., & Aidonis, D. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15065541 · Cited by 34
Exploring E-Health Literacy and Technology-Use Anxiety among Older Adults in Korea
Kim, J., Jeon, S., Byun, H., & Yi, E.-S. (2023) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare11111556 · Cited by 28
“In the case of technology-use anxiety, four computer anxiety questions used in the study by VenKatech and Bala [30] were modified and supplemented with terms and sentences suitable for technology-use anxiety in smart devices.”
MethodAjina, A. S., Joudeh, J. M. M., Ali, N. N., Zamil, A. M. A., & Hashem, T. N. (2023) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2023.2229544 · Cited by 63
“According to Venkatesh and Bala (2008) and Beldad and Hegner (2017), perceived usefulness is a strong predictor of m-wallet desire, and it is essential to determine why customers embrace a particular application or service.”
BackgroundStoryfier: Exploring Vocabulary Learning Support with Text Generation Models
Peng, Z., Wang, X., Han, Q., Zhu, J., Ma, X., & Qu, H. (2023) · ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST) · doi:10.1145/3586183.3606786 · Cited by 40
“acceptance model [79, 81] to the perceived usefulness (four items,”
BackgroundMethodInformation Systems Success Research: The “20-Year Update?” Panel Report from PACIS, 2011
Tate, M., Sedera, D., McLean, E. R., & Burton‐Jones, A. (2014) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.03463 · Cited by 27
Bourdon, I., & Hollet-Haudebert, S. (2014) · Systèmes d information & management · doi:10.3917/sim.091.0009 · Cited by 26
Course management system adoption and usage: A process theoretic perspective
Dutta, A., Roy, R. K., & Seetharaman, P. (2013) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.010 · Cited by 30
“Venkatesh and Bala (2008) present a research agenda on interventions for enhancing use, where they discuss pre-implementation interventions including design, user participation, management support, incentive alignment; post implementation interventions include training, organizational support and…”
BackgroundSezgın, E., & Özkan, S. (2015) · Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy · doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2015.12.006 · Cited by 27
A review on objective measurement of usage in technology acceptance studies
Walldén, S., Mäkinen, E., & Raisamo, R. (2015) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-015-0443-y · Cited by 28
“TAM3 considers two system characteristics-related adjustments, namely perceived enjoyment and objective usability.”
ResultOnline Social Network Adoption: A Cross-Cultural Study
Hartzel, K. S., Marley, K. A., & Spangler, W. E. (2016) · Journal of Computer Information Systems · doi:10.1080/08874417.2016.1117367 · Cited by 27
“Subsequent research has extended the model through what have been termed “ TAM2 ” and “ TAM3, ” primarily by adding the antecedents of PEOU and PU as well as the consequent of behavior intent; i.e., actual behavior (AB) or usage [48 – 50].”
MethodUniversity of South Alabama, Howard, M. C., Hair, J. F., & University of South Alabama (2023) · AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.17705/1thci.00084 · Cited by 27
“For instance, the TAM-3 identifies a host of antecedent effects to perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness but its core elements remain the same as in the original model.”
InfluentialAdoption Decisions for Medical Devices in the Field of Cardiology: Results from a European Survey
Hatz, M. H. M., Schreyögg, J., Torbica, A., Boriani, G., & Blankart, C. R. (2017) · Health Economics · doi:10.1002/hec.3472 · Cited by 27
“1): 124–144 (2017) DOI: 10.1002/hec and Davis, 2000; Venkatesh and Bala, 2008), and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) (Venkatesh et al., 2003).”
BackgroundInfluentialBernotat, J., & Eyssel, F. (2017) · IEEE RO-MAN · doi:10.1109/roman.2017.8172370 · Cited by 29
“Nevertheless, it is also related to characteristics of a specific system, like perceptions of external control and objective usability of technology [9].”
BackgroundDidehvar, N., Teymourifard, M., Mojtahedi, M., & Sepasgozar, S. M. E. (2018) · Buildings · doi:10.3390/buildings8060080 · Cited by 29
“Sepasgozar et al. [19] classifies the technology adoption into three major clusters from different perspectives: (i) Socio-economic perspective [20]; (ii) managerial perspective [8]; and (iii) psychological perspective [21,22].”
BackgroundAdvanced Driver Assistance Systems for Aging Drivers
Braun, H., Gärtner, M., Trösterer, S., et al. (2019) · International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI) · doi:10.1145/3342197.3344517 · Cited by 27
“Therefore, several attempts to include more variables and scales have been carried out so far and resulted, among others, in the creation of the TAM 2 [28] and the TAM 3 [27].”
BackgroundUnderstanding purchasing intentions in secondary sports ticket websites
Ahn, T., Suh, Y. I., Lee, J., & Pedersen, P. M. (2014) · International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship · doi:10.1108/ijsms-16-01-2014-b004 · Cited by 27
“Thus, many studies attempted to extend the model with fundamental antecedents of technology acceptance (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundThe Use of Mobile Technologies in Physical Stores: The Case of Fashion Retailing
Perry, P., Kent, A., & Bonetti, F. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-98273-1_8 · Cited by 30
STUDYING ACCEPTANCE OF ONLINE BANKING INFORMATION SYSTEM: A STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODEL
Chandio, F. H. (2011) · Brunel University Research Archive (BURA) (Brunel University London) · Cited by 27
Guo, Q., Zhen, J., Wu, F., He, Y., & Qiao, C. (2025) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/07356331241312365 · Cited by 28
“The technology acceptance and application ability scale utilized dimensions from the technology acceptance model by Venkatesh and Bala (2008).”
A qualitative study of physician perspectives on adaptation to electronic health records
Sieck, C. J., Pearl, N., Bright, T. J., & Yen, P.-Y. (2020) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/s12911-020-1030-6 · Cited by 26
“For example, studies often examine technology use through the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) which considers perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude toward using and behavioral intention to use a particular technology as predicting actual technology use [19, 20].”
BackgroundThe Purposeful Presentation of AI Teammates: Impacts on Human Acceptance and Perception
Flathmann, C., Schelble, B. G., McNeese, N. J., Knijnenburg, B. P., Gramopadhye, A. K., & Madathil, K. C. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2254984 · Cited by 31
“…helpful the AI teammate is to other teams First Hand Experience (Amershi et al., 2019) Human Override List of ways that humans can override the actions and behaviors of their AI teammate if they see fit Feeling of Control (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) significantly improved the linear model (Table 11).”
InfluentialAlrishan, A. M. H. (2023) · International Journal of Learning Teaching and Educational Research · doi:10.26803/ijlter.22.12.10 · Cited by 37
“Earlier research (Alharbi & Drew, 2014; Elkaseh, Wong, & Fung, 2016; Venkatesh, & Bala, 2008) has established that both PU and PEOU significantly influence users' attitudes and intentions towards technology adoption.”
MethodLiang, X., Rasheed, U., Cai, J., Wibranek, B., & Awolusi, I. (2024) · Journal of Construction Engineering and Management · doi:10.1061/jcemd4.coeng-14390 · Cited by 27
Ekanayake, B., Wong, J. K. W., Fini, A. A. F., Smith, P., & Thengane, V. (2024) · Project Leadership and Society · doi:10.1016/j.plas.2024.100149 · Cited by 46
“The Technology Acceptance Model suggests that for project managers to adopt these tools, they must perceive them as enhancing their efficiency and effectiveness without requiring extensive technical expertise (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundChoudhury, A., Shahsavar, Y., & Shamszare, H. (2025) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/72867 · Cited by 35
“…models often posit linear relationships among constructs such as ease of use, perceived usefulness, and intention to adopt , scholars have long recognized scenarios where user perceptions follow threshold or plateau patterns rather than increasing in a straightforward incremental manner [11,12].”
Vietnamese Consumers’ Intention to Use Online Shopping: The Role of Trust
Do, H. L., & Chen, Y. (2014) · International Journal of Business and Management · doi:10.5539/ijbm.v9n5p145 · Cited by 26
“…attitude and behavioral intention to that technology (Davis, 1989; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000); In recent studies in the context of online shopping (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Ha & Stoel, 2009; Çelik & Veysel, 2011), it has been shown that the relations between PEOU, PU, attitudes and intentions are…”
BackgroundMaking and Breaking the User-Usage Model: WhatsApp Adoption Amongst Emergent Users in India
Balkrishan, D. K., Joshi, A. N., Rajendran, C., et al. (2016) · Indian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (IndiaHCI) · doi:10.1145/3014362.3014367 · Cited by 26
“More quantitative variables are added to the set by TAM‘s later versions [16, 17].”
BackgroundMethodThe Impact of Trust on the Adoption of Cloud Computing Services by University Students
Almazroi, A. A., Shen, H., & Mohammed, F. (2018) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-99007-1_84 · Cited by 26
Abejirinde, I. O., Zweekhorst, M. B. M., Bardají, A., Abugnaba-Abanga, R., Apentibadek, N., Brouwere, V. D., van Roosmalen, J., & Marchal, B. (2018) · JMIR mhealth and uhealth · doi:10.2196/11468 · Cited by 28
“The theoretical bases of knowledge on adoption and postadoption have been largely developed in the field of management information systems with a focus on higher-income countries [23,24].”
Ho, K.-F., Chang, P., Kurniasari, M. D., Susanty, S., & Chung, M. (2020) · JMIR Medical Informatics · doi:10.2196/15686 · Cited by 34
“…the use of a target system [11] Perception of external control Individuals’beliefs regarding their abilities to use information technology [11] Computer self-efficacy An individual’s degree of fear or apprehension when they use or consider using a target system [10,18] Computer anxiety…”
InfluentialEnsuring continued use of a digital library: a qualitative approach
Rahman, A. R. A., & Mohezar, S. (2020) · The Electronic Library · doi:10.1108/el-12-2019-0294 · Cited by 26
Strategies for the use of open access institutional repositories at universities in Ghana
Kodua‐Ntim, K., & Fombad, M. C.-A. (2020) · Library Management · doi:10.1108/lm-02-2020-0023 · Cited by 26
Analysis Of Use Of Mobile Banking With Acceptance And Use Of Technology (Utaut)
Rachmawati, I. K., Bukhori, M., Majidah, Y., Hidayatullah, S., & Waris, A. (2020) · International journal of scientific and technology research · Cited by 27
Watkinson, F., Dharmayat, K. I., & Mastellos, N. (2021) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-021-06771-z · Cited by 22
Palacios‐Rodríguez, A., Almenara, J. C., Tena, R. R., & Cejudo, M. D. C. L. (2021) · Contemporary Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/cedtech/10874 · Cited by 32
“…model has evolved towards other versions, such as TAM 2 (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000), 5 / 17 the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (Bervell & Naufal Umar, 2017; Venkatesh et al. 2003), or the integration model of acceptance of technology and user satisfaction (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundMobile Augmented Reality Applications in Teaching: A Proposed Technology Acceptance Model
Koutromanos, G., & Mikropoulos, T. A. (2021) · International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN) · doi:10.23919/ilrn52045.2021.9459343 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Arkansas at Fayetteville (US)
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Venkatesh, Viswanath
- Bala, Hillol
- Venue
- Decision Sciences
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-05
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 273-315
- ISSN
- 0011-7315 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5915
- OpenAlex
- W2112042732
- Cited by
- 8,159
- References
- 135
- Citations by year
- 2026: 909 · 2025: 912 · 2024: 780 · 2023: 746 · 2022: 717 · 2021: 645 · 2020: 556 · 2019: 499 · 2018: 396 · 2017: 379 · 2016: 320 · 2015: 324 · 2014: 287 · 2013: 266 · 2012: 186
- FWCI
- 175.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Decision Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › ERP Systems Implementation and Impact
- Keywords
- technology acceptance model, information technology adoption, information technology use, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, management interventions, IT implementation, organizational decision-making, nomological network
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-30, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-30 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
