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 2,101–2,200 of 8,090
Usmanova, G., Gresh, A., Cohen, M. A., Kim, Y. M., Srivastava, A., Joshi, C. S., Bhatt, D. C., Haws, R. A., Wadhwa, R., Sridhar, P., et al. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17228333 · Cited by 21
“TAM-3 expanded on earlier versions of the model by incorporating social norms, human and social change processes, and adding additional determinants of perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness [28,31].”
BackgroundFactors influencing US speech and language therapists’ use of technology for clinical practice
Albudoor, N., & Peña, E. D. (2021) · International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders · doi:10.1111/1460-6984.12614 · Cited by 22
Building a Handoff Communication Virtual Experience for Nursing Students Using Virtual Humans
Stuart, J., Aul, K., Bumbach, M. D., Stephen, A., & Lok, B. C. L. (2021) · CIN Computers Informatics Nursing · doi:10.1097/cin.0000000000000760 · Cited by 22
Oumran, H. M., Atan, R. B., Nor, R. N. H., Abdullah, S., & Mukred, M. (2021) · Mathematical Problems in Engineering · doi:10.1155/2021/9698773 · Cited by 27
“-ese are the two significant IS adoption antecedents [74].”
BackgroundRetractedPlattfaut, R., & Koch, J. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.07.024 · Cited by 23
Blasco-Serrano, A. C., González, I. B., & Coma-Roselló, T. (2022) · Edutec Revista Electrónica de Tecnología Educativa · doi:10.21556/edutec.2022.79.2393 · Cited by 22
Game-based Learning Sustainability During Social Distance: The Role of Gamification Quality
Musyaffi, A. M., Sulistyowati, W. A., Wolor, C. W., & Sasmi, A. A. (2022) · European Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.12973/eu-jer.11.3.1289 · Cited by 22
“…consists of 4 questions (Alrousan et al., 2021). perceived ease of use consists of 4 questions, and perceived usefulness consists of 4 questions (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). student satisfaction consists of 4 questions (Kim et al., 2007), and the intention to use gamification consists of 4…”
Naeem, M., Jawaid, S. T., & Mustafa, S. (2022) · Journal of Modelling in Management · doi:10.1108/jm2-10-2021-0251 · Cited by 27
Acceptance of robots as co-workers: Hotel employees’ perspective
Sadangharn, P. (2022) · International Journal of Engineering Business Management · doi:10.1177/18479790221113621 · Cited by 23
“Individual perceptions on ease of use and usefulness of robots were present.(17,23) The IPA study established perceptions of anxiety and gratification among hotel employees because of the robot.”
BackgroundAcceptability of the COVID-19 contact-tracing app – Does culture matter?
Dzandu, M. D., Pathak, B., & de Cesare, S. (2022) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2022.101750 · Cited by 22
Frishammar, J., Essén, A., Simms, C., Edblad, R., & Hardebro, V. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2022.3187792 · Cited by 22
“The theoretical starting point for our study is the TAM, which has been used extensively to predict usage [36], [67]–[71].”
MethodHuman-machine collaboration in intelligence analysis: An expert evaluation
Toniolo, A., Cerutti, F., Norman, T. J., et al. (2022) · Intelligent Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.iswa.2022.200151 · Cited by 22
“For H2, following common research on TAM models (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008), the data collected was analysed using the Partial Least Square Path Modelling approach (PLS-PM) (Lohm ¨ oller, 1989).”
InfluentialLow, M. P., & Ramayah, T. (2022) · Smart Health · doi:10.1016/j.smhl.2022.100370 · Cited by 26
Stefan, H., Mortimer, M., Horan, B., & Kenny, G. (2023) · Safety Science · doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2023.106125 · Cited by 27
Open educational resources: Evaluation of students' intention to use and motivation to create
Adedoyın, O. B., & Altınay, F. (2023) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13313 · Cited by 35
Leinweber, J., Alber, B., Barthel, M., Whillier, A., Wittmar, S., Borgetto, B. M., & Starke, A. (2023) · Frontiers in Communication · doi:10.3389/fcomm.2023.1176827 · Cited by 22
Factors Affecting Cloud Computing Adoption in the Education Context—Systematic Literature Review
Santos, A., Martins, J., Pestaña, P., Gonçalves, R., Mamede, H. S., & Branco, F. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3400862 · Cited by 36
“• Unified Technology Acceptance and Use Model (UTAUT), created by Venkatesh et al. in 2003, which integrates multiple theories to predict technology adoption and use [18].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialInvestigating the Drivers of the Continuous Use of Social Virtual Worlds
Mäntymäki, M., & Merikivi, J. (2010) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.1109/hicss.2010.241 · Cited by 22
“While employees [51; 54], heads of household [53] students[15; 36], consumers [49] elderly people [37], and the socially advantaged and disadvantaged [23] have received attention in prior IT adoption and postimplementation literature, young users, namely teenagers, seem to be passed unnoticed in empirical investigatio…”
BackgroundLekakos, G. D., Vlachos, P. A., & Koritos, C. (2014) · Ethics and Information Technology · doi:10.1007/s10676-014-9337-6 · Cited by 25
“Finally, Venkatesh and Bala (2008) further refine and support the social influences of perceived usefulness by adding, on top of job relevance and output quality (i.e. determinants of near-term usefulness), subjective norms, user image, and result demonstrability (i.e. determinants of long-term…”
Ranking Different Factors which Affect e-Learning Outcomes
Ghazinoory, S., & Afshari-Mofrad, M. (2012) · International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering · doi:10.7763/ijcte.2012.v4.458 · Cited by 23
“In fact the second factor (i.e. perceived ease of use) poses that higher technology ease of use can lead to higher acceptance of technology by users [17].”
BackgroundGender differences in internet usage intentions for learning in higher education: An empirical study
Macharia, J. K. N., & Nyakwende, E. (2011) · Journal of Language Technology & Entrepreneurship in Africa · doi:10.4314/jolte.v3i1.66723 · Cited by 22
Age-group differences in Near Field Communication smartphone
Teh, P., Ahmed, P. K., Cheong, S.-N., & Yap, W.-J. (2014) · Industrial Management & Data Systems · doi:10.1108/imds-06-2013-0274 · Cited by 23
“…two decades, a great deal of theoretical and empirical studies (e.g. Leong et al., 2013; Chong, 2013; Tan et al., 2014; Karahanna et al., 2006) have accumulated the application of TAM to be highly predictive of individual technology adoption and use (Ant on et al., 2013; Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe effect of absorptive capacity perceptions on the context‐aware ubiquitous learning acceptance
Lin, H. (2013) · Campus-Wide Information Systems · doi:10.1108/cwis-09-2012-0031 · Cited by 22
Macharia, J. K. N., & Nyakwende, E. (2010) · Journal of Language Technology & Entrepreneurship in Africa · doi:10.4314/jolte.v2i1.52000 · Cited by 22
Beyond technology acceptance to effective technology use: a parsimonious and actionable model
Holahan, P. J., Lesselroth, B., Adams, K. A., Wang, K., & Church, V. (2015) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocu043 · Cited by 22
“Compatibility with Workplace Values A review of the literature suggests that users’ workplace values may be a potent predictor of perceived usefulness and technology acceptance.46,54,55 It is well documented that clinicians interpret differently what is useful about HIT.”
BackgroundInfluentialScheibein, F., McGirr, K., Morrison, A., Roche, W., & Wells, J. S. G. (2020) · Harm Reduction Journal · doi:10.1186/s12954-020-00406-y · Cited by 37
Dang, Y. M., Zhang, Y. G., & Morgan, J. (2015) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-015-9618-6 · Cited by 22
“…the success of information systems adoption, including the technology acceptance model (TAM) (Davis 1989), TAM2 (Venkatesh and Davis 2000), TAM 3 (Venkatesh and Bala 2008), the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) (Venkatesh et al. 2003), UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al. 2012), and…”
BackgroundMethodPacheco, V. M. S., & López, J. F. B. (2018) · Apertura · doi:10.32870/ap.v10n1.1162 · Cited by 22
Understanding the intention to use commodity futures contracts
Michels, M., Möllmann, J., & Mußhoff, O. (2019) · Agricultural Finance Review · doi:10.1108/afr-02-2019-0025 · Cited by 21
Marchak, J. G., Cherven, B. O., Lewis, R. W., Edwards, P. J., Meacham, L. R., Palgon, M., Escoffery, C., & Mertens, A. C. (2019) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-019-05199-w · Cited by 24
Su, Y., Huang, S.-T., Wu, Y., & Chen, C. (2020) · Applied Clinical Informatics · doi:10.1055/s-0040-1708838 · Cited by 27
Impact of Digital Technology Training on English for Science and Technology Teachers in India
Mahapatra, S. K. (2020) · RELC Journal · doi:10.1177/0033688220907401 · Cited by 26
“The findings of the study confirm the claim made about the role of administration by Venkatesh and Bala (2008).”
BackgroundResultExplaining factors affecting telework adoption in South African organisations pre-COVID-19
Lebopo, C. M., Seymour, L. F., & Knoesen, H. (2020) · South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists · doi:10.1145/3410886.3410906 · Cited by 25
“Management support has been defined as the degree in which an individual believes that management is committed to the success and use of an innovation [35].”
BackgroundA Semantic Model for Enterprise Digital Transformation Analysis
Wang, H., & Wang, S.-H. (2022) · Journal of Computational Information Systems · doi:10.1080/08874417.2022.2037476 · Cited by 14
“46 Research has indicated that users’ respon-sibilities and competencies are vital for success of enterprise digital transformation.”
BackgroundExamining the Role of Safety in the Low Adoption Rate of Collaborative Robots
Berx, N., Decré, W., & Pintelon, L. M. (2022) · Procedia CIRP · doi:10.1016/j.procir.2022.02.154 · Cited by 22
Peral, B. P., Arenas-Gaitán, J., & Ramón-Jerónimo, M. Á. (2014) · Revista española de investigación de marketing · doi:10.1016/s1138-1442(14)60005-x · Cited by 23
Survey data on the impact of COVID-19 on parental engagement across 23 countries
Osorio-Saez, E. M., Eryılmaz, N., Sandoval-Hernández, A., Lau, Y., Barahona, E., Bhatti, A. A., Ofoe, G. C., Ordóñez, L. A. C., Ochoa, A. A. C., Pizarro, R. Á. E., et al. (2021) · Data in Brief · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2021.106813 · Cited by 22
Lin, C.-W., Chien, C.-Y., Ou Yang, C.-P., & Mao, T.-Y. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15010589 · Cited by 22
Consumer Perception of Robotic Mobile Fulfillment Systems
Bentalha, B. (2023) · Advances in business strategy and competitive advantage book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-0458-7.ch010 · Cited by 21
de Chiusole, D., Spinoso, M., Anselmi, P., Bacherini, A., Balboni, G., Mazzoni, N., Brancaccio, A., Epifania, O. M., Orsoni, M., Giovagnoli, S., et al. (2024) · Brain Sciences · doi:10.3390/brainsci14020122 · Cited by 23
“UAS is a new questionnaire based on SUS [121,131] and TAM [122,133] that has been structured to achieve brevity and ease of comprehension.”
BackgroundMethodTian, Y., & Chan, T. J. (2024) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/21582440241292525 · Cited by 47
“As considered by Venkatesh and Bala (2008), self-efficacy refers to the level of confidence of a person performing a certain task or work using certain technology.”
Kumar, V., Kaushik, A. K., Noravesh, F., Sindhwani, R., & Mathiyazhagan, K. (2024) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123859 · Cited by 27
CreAIXR: Fostering Creativity with Generative AI in XR environments
Vallasciani, G., Stacchio, L., Cascarano, P., et al. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Metaverse Computing, Networking and Applications (MetaCom) · doi:10.1109/metacom62920.2024.00034 · Cited by 21
“Then, users answered a post-experience questionnaire, that was composed of the well-known System Usability Scale (SUS) [36] with positive (SUS+) and negative (SUS-) questions, the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) [35] to assess their perceived comfort and XR usability.”
MethodUnderstanding students’ technology acceptance behaviour: A meta-analytic study
Santini, F. D. O., Sampaio, C. H., Rasul, T., Ladeira, W. J., Kar, A. K., Perin, M. G., & Azhar, M. (2024) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102798 · Cited by 23
Schäfer, M. S., Kremer, B., Mede, N. G., & Fischer, L. (2024) · Journal of Science Communication · doi:10.22323/2.23090204 · Cited by 27
Oh, S.-W., & Jung, J. (2025) · Media and Communication · doi:10.17645/mac.9495 · Cited by 21
“TAM later evolved into TAM3 (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), which detailed variables like computer self‐efficacy and experience, and UTAUT (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology), which incorporated factors like price value and habit (Venkatesh et al., 2003), and UTAUT2 (Venkatesh et al.,…”
Wainaina, P. K., & Sun, Y. (2025) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-025-00820-z · Cited by 38
“However, TAM has been criticized for its narrow focus on individual-level perceptions, often neglecting institutional and contextual factors that also shape adoption [11, 76].”
What Tweets Tell us About MOOC Participation
Koutropoulos, A., Abajian, S. C., de Waard, I., Hogue, R. J., Özdamar, N., & Rodriguez, C. O. (2014) · International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET) · doi:10.3991/ijet.v9i1.3316 · Cited by 21
Understanding key factors affecting on hospital electronic health record (EHR) adoption
Ebnehoseini, Z., Tara, M., Tabesh, H., Dindar, F., & Hasibian, S. (2020) · Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care · doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_109_20 · Cited by 21
“[11] This finding confirmed societal pressure on users to use EHR.”
BackgroundInfluentialAdoption of supply chain finance by small and medium enterprises in China
Li, X., Jiang, B., & Li, J. (2020) · Business Process Management Journal · doi:10.1108/bpmj-09-2020-0399 · Cited by 21
Telepresence and Interactivity in Mobile Learning System: Its Relation with Open Innovation
Wei, N., & Li, Z. (2021) · Journal of Open Innovation Technology Market and Complexity · doi:10.3390/joitmc7010078 · Cited by 25
“Venkatesh and Bala [12] incorporated system characteristics into the traditional model and developed TAM3.”
MethodJeyaraj, A. (2021) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102345 · Cited by 23
Alturas, B. (2021) · Studies in systems, decision and control · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-64987-6_2 · Cited by 24
Leadership challenges in the context of university 4.0. A thematic synthesis literature review
Rocha, Á., Gonçalves, M. J., da Silva, A. F., Teixeira, S., & Silva, R. P. (2021) · Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory · doi:10.1007/s10588-021-09325-0 · Cited by 29
Feys, M., Rombaut, E., & Vanhaverbeke, L. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su13105387 · Cited by 23
“TAM further theorises that technology-specific attributes, individual differences, and social influences affect the formation of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use [28].”
BackgroundDaun, M., Brings, J., Obe, P. A., & Stenkova, V. (2021) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-021-09972-6 · Cited by 25
Kopot, C., & Cude, B. J. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su13136993 · Cited by 21
“For example, the TAM3 model [13] suggested that experience moderates the relationships between (i) perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness, (ii) computer anxiety and perceived ease of use, and (iii) perceived ease of use and behavioral intention [14].”
BackgroundFrom physical to digital: what drives generation Z for mobile commerce adoption?
Verma, D., Tripathi, V., & Singh, A. P. (2021) · Journal of Asia Business Studies · doi:10.1108/jabs-05-2020-0207 · Cited by 22
Dzogbenuku, R. K., Doe, J. K., & Amoako, G. K. (2021) · Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning · doi:10.1108/jrit-12-2020-0095 · Cited by 23
“Theoretically, the perceived usefulness construct in the TAM (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008) and IMTA (Venkatesh et al., 2002), as well as performance expectancy construct in UTAUT model (Venkatesh et al., 2003) are confirmed in this study.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialYu, Z., & Song, X. (2021) · Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · doi:10.3390/jtaer16070159 · Cited by 23
Wang, Z., Liu, J., Li, T., Chao, J., & Gao, X. (2021) · Agronomy · doi:10.3390/agronomy11122435 · Cited by 22
Shi, Y., Ding, L., He, C., et al. (2021) · International Journal of Energy Sector Management · doi:10.1108/ijesm-02-2021-0027 · Cited by 21
Habib, S., Haider, A., Suleman, S. S. M., Akmal, S., & Khan, M. A. (2022) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics11071113 · Cited by 21
“PLS-SEM is far more suited for technological acceptability study that stresses predictive modeling [1,62,65].”
BackgroundCovid-19 and consumers' online purchase intention among an older-aged group of Kosovo
Toska, A., Zeqiri, J., Ramadani, V., & Navarrete, S. R. (2022) · International Journal of Emerging Markets · doi:10.1108/ijoem-12-2021-1875 · Cited by 21
Factors affecting online knowledge sharing and its effect on academic performance
Alyouzbaky, B. A., Al-Sabaawi, M. Y. M., & Tawfiq, A. Z. (2022) · VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems · doi:10.1108/vjikms-01-2022-0015 · Cited by 21
A Study on the Motivation of Older Adults to Participate in Exercise or Physical Fitness Activities
Tsai, T.-H., Wong, M., Lee, H.-F., & Tseng, K. C. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14106355 · Cited by 28
Almazroi, A. A. (2022) · Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering · doi:10.1007/s13369-022-06954-8 · Cited by 21
“The findings support the strong positive impact of perceived behavior control on perceived ease of use (H8: β (cid:4) 0.399; p < 0.001) as found in similar studies [56, 62, 106].”
BackgroundResultInfluentialHändel, M., Bedenlier, S., Gläser‐Zikuda, M., Kammerl, R., Kopp, B., & Ziegler, A. (2022) · Journal for Educational Research Online / Journal für Bildungsforschung Online · doi:10.31244/jero.2022.01.08 · Cited by 27
Cheng, M., Tao, D., Xie, S., Cao, X., & Yuen, A. H. K. (2022) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2022.107374 · Cited by 21
Sadeck, O. (2022) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2022.906195 · Cited by 32
“…extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM; Davis, 1986; Davis et al., 1989), Technology Acceptance Model 2 (TAM2; Venkatesh and Davis, 2000); Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT; Venkatesh et al., 2003) and, the Technology Acceptance Model 3 (TAM3; Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialBiometrics Innovation and Payment Sector Perception
Mróz-Gorgoń, B., Wodo, W., Andrych, A., Caban-Piaskowska, K., & Kozyra, C. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14159424 · Cited by 21
Benge, J. F., Aguirre, A., Scullin, M. K., Kiselica, A. M., Hilsabeck, R. C., Paydarfar, D., & Douglas, M. (2022) · Work Aging and Retirement · doi:10.1093/workar/waac026 · Cited by 21
Cho, H., Lee, D., & Lee, J.-G. (2022) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-022-00913-8 · Cited by 24
Kim, E. D., Kuan, K. K. Y., Vaghasiya, M. R., Penm, J. H.-D., Gunja, N., Amrani, R. E., & Poon, S. K.-S. (2022) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2022.2117081 · Cited by 26
“While there has been abundant literature on technology acceptance and adoption in information systems (IS) over the past three decades, it should be noted that TAM (Technology Acceptance Model; Davis 1989) and its extended models such as TAM2 (Venka-tesh and Davis 2000), TAM3 (Venkatesh and Bala 2008), and UTAUT (Uni…”
BackgroundPeople’s Attitudes towards Technologies in Courts
Barysė, D. (2022) · Laws · doi:10.3390/laws11050071 · Cited by 27
“Taken together, the results of both the aforementioned studies (Xu and Wang 2019; Xu et al. 2022) and the current study support the idea that the widely used technology acceptance model (Hasani et al. 2017; Ammenwerth 2019; Venkatesh and Bala 2008) is also applicable to the legal technology field.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialAlduais, F., & Al-Smadi, M. O. (2022) · Economies · doi:10.3390/economies10100259 · Cited by 23
Assessing Social Acceptance of Urban Air Mobility using Virtual Reality
Stolz, M., & Laudien, T. (2022) · IEEE/AIAA Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC) · doi:10.1109/dasc55683.2022.9925775 · Cited by 21
“Two other items were derived from the TAM 3 related to computer anxiety (CANX) [24].”
BackgroundMcNamara, A. J., Shirowzhan, S., & Sepasgozar, S. M. E. (2022) · Construction Innovation · doi:10.1108/ci-10-2021-0191 · Cited by 21
Assessing Digital Transformation Acceptance in Public Organizations’ Marketing
Vărzaru, A. A. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15010265 · Cited by 34
Osei, B. A., & Cheng, M. (2023) · European Journal of Innovation Management · doi:10.1108/ejim-09-2022-0529 · Cited by 21
Rouidi, M., Elmajid, E. A., Hamdoune, A., & Choujtani, K. (2023) · Healthcare Technology Letters · doi:10.1049/htl2.12042 · Cited by 30
“After Venkatesh and Baia [23], they proposed TAM 3 which includes all the determinants of TAM 2 with the addition of a set of determinants for ‘Perceived ease of use’.”
MethodShah, S. A. A., Fianto, B. A., Sheikh, A. E., et al. (2023) · Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management · doi:10.1108/jstpm-06-2022-0104 · Cited by 21
Xue, J., Niu, Y., Liang, X., & Yin, S. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2227834 · Cited by 21
“Playfulness is an inclination to engage in play (Barnett, 1991), and is the intrinsic motivation for individuals to use a novel system (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), reflecting their sense of enjoyment, pleasure, and curiosity during interactions (Balkaya & Akkucuk, 2021).”
Wünderlich, N. V., Blut, M., & Brock, C. (2024) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12726 · Cited by 22
How emerging technologies shape the future of work
Blanc, P. M. L., Ulfert, A., Peeters, M. C. W., Rispens, S., & Scherer, S. (2024) · European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1080/1359432x.2024.2324937 · Cited by 24
“For example, technology acceptance theories (e.g., Technology Acceptance Model; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), aim to predict how individuals adopt technology.”
BackgroundKhashan, M. A., Alaskar, T. H., Ghonim, M. A., & Elsotouhy, M. M. (2024) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-05-2023-0225 · Cited by 28
Hossain, M. A., Tiwari, A., Saha, S., Ghimire, A., Imran, M. A. U., & Khatoon, R. (2024) · Journal of Computer and Communications · doi:10.4236/jcc.2024.128015 · Cited by 33
Kohnke, O., Wolf, T. R., & Mueller, K. (2011) · International Journal of Information Systems and Change Management · doi:10.1504/ijiscm.2011.045833 · Cited by 21
“However, most of the previous studies on user training were conducted in the context of simpler software systems, e.g., e-mail or word processing programmes (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialUnderstanding the continued use of intra-organizational blogs: An adaptive habituation model
Luo, N., Guo, X., Zhang, J., Chen, G., & Zhang, N. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.070 · Cited by 21
Ramkumar, M., & Jenamani, M. (2015) · Service Science · doi:10.1287/serv.2015.0110 · Cited by 21
Evaluation of in-air hand gestures interaction for older people
Carreira, M., Ting, K. L. H., Csobanka, P., & Gonçalves, D. J. V. (2016) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-016-0483-y · Cited by 21
“A simple usability questionnaire was preferred since from previous experience , older users seem to find exhaustive questionnaires like TAM3 [34] too complex and have difficulty discerning between questions.”
MethodFactors Associated with Auditors' Intention to Train on Optional Technology
Payne, E. A., & Curtis, M. B. (2016) · Current Issues in Auditing · doi:10.2308/ciia-51564 · Cited by 25
Engineering, Human, and Legal Challenges of Navigation Systems for Personal Mobility
Renaudin, V., Dommès, A., & Guilbot, M. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · doi:10.1109/tits.2016.2563481 · Cited by 21
“Theoretical extensions of the TAM have been published, the third version TAM 3 [28] being the most recent one.”
BackgroundAmin, R. U., Inayat, I., Shahzad, B., Saleem, K., & Aijun, L. (2016) · Annals of Telecommunications · doi:10.1007/s12243-016-0553-4 · Cited by 21
“The variants of TAM are TAM2 and TAM3 that are used to find the factors determining perceived usefulness and factors that affect the acceptance of technology, respectively [40, 41].”
BackgroundUser Acceptance Factors for Anonymous Credentials: An Empirical Investigation.
Benenson, Z., Girard, A., & Krontiris, I. (2015) · WEIS · Cited by 23
A Conceptual Model for the Organizational Adoption of Information System Security Innovations
Hameed, M. A., & Arachchilage, N. A. G. (2019) · Advances in information security, privacy, and ethics book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-9742-1.ch014 · Cited by 21
“], Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) [23], Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) [1], Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) [19], Technology Acceptance Model 2 (TAM2) [59], Technology Acceptance Model 3 (TAM3) [58], Technology, Organisation, Environment (TOE) Model [55] and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology…”
BackgroundKim, J. S., Yoon, S., & Zemke, D. M. V. (2017) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology · doi:10.1108/jhtt-03-2017-0023 · Cited by 25
Impacts on Online Impulse Purchase through Perceived Cognition
Chen, T., Yeh, T., & Lo, W.-C. (2017) · Journal of International Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1080/08961530.2017.1367208 · Cited by 21
“Venkatesh and Bala (2008) proposed UTAT (namely TAM 3) and focuses on expanding the number of determinants that affect perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use of an innovation, producing a positive behavioral intention followed by use behavior.”
BackgroundUsing UTAUT2 for cloud computing technology acceptance modeling
Nikolopoulos, F. V., & LIKOTHANASSIS, S. D. (2017) · International Conference on Internet of Things, Data and Cloud Computing (ICC) · doi:10.1145/3018896.3025153 · Cited by 21
Isiyaku, D. D., Ayub, M., & AbdulKadir, S. (2018) · Asia Pacific Education Review · doi:10.1007/s12564-018-9525-x · Cited by 22
“Computer self-efficacy is also defined as an individual’s control beliefs regarding his/her personal ability to use a computer system (Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
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
