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 3,301–3,400 of 8,090
Acceptance of IoT Technology for Smart Homes:A Systematic Literature Review
Hussin, S. F., Abdollah, M. F., & Ahmad, I. B. (2022) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-16865-9_16 · Cited by 9
Golz, C., Aarts, S., Hacking, C., Hahn, S., & Zwakhalen, S. M. G. (2022) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-022-08823-4 · Cited by 13
“Job relevance and output quality are known to have an interactive effect on perceived usefulness [27].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialThe Role of Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness on Personality Traits among Adults
Salar, H. C., & Hamutoğlu, N. B. (2022) · Open Praxis · doi:10.55982/openpraxis.14.2.142 · Cited by 10
Ha, Q.-A., Le, N. Q. T., Nguyen, T. T. T., Pham, T. T. T., Pham, B. A., & Le, N. Q. L. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2188538 · Cited by 10
“The perceived enjoyment of a person using technology impacts the intention and intensity of using the technology (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundAdoption of 5G in developing economies: A supply side perspective from India
Sargam, S., Gupta, R., Sharma, R., & Jain, K. (2023) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2023.102034 · Cited by 9
Factors Influencing E-learning Technology Among Youth in India: An Extended TAM Model
Sharma, B. K., Kumar, V. V. R., & Bhatt, V. (2023) · Management and Labour Studies · doi:10.1177/0258042x231208588 · Cited by 12
“Perceived usefulness (PU) is defined as ‘the extent to which a person believes that using technology will enhance her/his productivity’ (Schneberger et al., 2007; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
Attuquayefio, S. N. B., Aboagye-Darko, D., & Okronipa, A. Q. (2023) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12286-3 · Cited by 9
“This finding is inconsistent with prior research (e.g., Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
InfluentialGrabowski, A., Bereska, D., Probierz, E., & Gałuszka, A. (2023) · Displays · doi:10.1016/j.displa.2023.102621 · Cited by 9
The Impact of Perceived Risk and Technology Acceptance Model on Gen Z’s Adoption of Digital Banking
Julia, L., Linggam, P. S., Hibatullah, R., & Justianto, J. S. (2023) · WSEAS TRANSACTIONS ON COMPUTER RESEARCH · doi:10.37394/232018.2024.12.1 · Cited by 10
das Neves, C. P. P. C., Oliveira, T., Santini, F. D. O., & Ladeira, W. J. (2024) · Electronic Commerce Research · doi:10.1007/s10660-023-09795-1 · Cited by 13
“Perceived usefulness (PU): perceived usefulness is related to the perception of how technology will aid the consumer’s performance and assist in providing a new technological service [54].”
University Students’ Acceptance of A Web-Based Course Management System
Duyck, B. P. P. D. J. T., & Duyck, P. (2011) · SensePublishers eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-6091-487-4_7 · Cited by 9
Future Research on Cloud Computing Adoption by Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises
Saedi, A., & Iahad, N. A. (2013) · International Journal of Actor-Network Theory and Technological Innovation · doi:10.4018/jantti.2013040101 · Cited by 9
Macharia, J. K. N., & Maroa, C. (2014) · IST-Africa Conference (IST-Africa) · doi:10.1109/istafrica.2014.6880631 · Cited by 9
“The constructs in this study were adapted from prior studies including that of (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialA Technology Adoption Model for Broadband Internet Adoption in India
Fletcher, J., Sarkani, S., & Mazzuchi, T. (2014) · Journal of Global Information Technology Management · doi:10.1080/1097198x.2014.951294 · Cited by 12
“Multiple studies have attempted to consolidate models (Venkatesh et al., 2003; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Zhou, Lu, & Wang, 2010), but this trend is increasing overall, which will result in a lack of convergence upon a common model, or fracturing of existing models.”
BackgroundGirish, G. P., Joseph, D., Roy, S., et al. (2015) · International Review of Management and Marketing · Cited by 9
Health users' perception of biometric authentication technologies
Rodrigues, P., & Santos, H. (2013) · Proceedings - IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems · doi:10.1109/cbms.2013.6627809 · Cited by 9
“The data collection instrument was developed adapting the constructs of TAM [42] and adoption studies of such technologies.”
MethodThe Realist Survey: How Respondents’ Voices Can Be Used to Test and Revise Correlational Models
Schoonenboom, J. (2015) · Journal of Mixed Methods Research · doi:10.1177/1558689815610997 · Cited by 9
“One common criticism of TAM is its lack of actionable guidance for practitioners (Lee et al., 2003; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundMethodBoubker, O., & Chafik, K. (2016) · European Scientific Journal ESJ · doi:10.19044/esj.2016.v12n28p397 · Cited by 9
Factors Influencing User Acceptance of Web-Based Decision Support Systems
Hung, S., & Wu, H.-L. (2012) · Journal of Computer Information Systems · doi:10.1080/08874417.2012.11645578 · Cited by 10
“This argument has been identified by many empirical studies [32, 45, 46].”
How Do Emotions Impact Mobile Services Acceptance? A Systematic Literature Review
Ovčjak, B., Heričko, M., & Polančič, G. (2016) · Mobile Information Systems · doi:10.1155/2016/8253036 · Cited by 9
Onan, A., & Şimşek, N. (2017) · Health Informatics Journal · doi:10.1177/1460458217704252 · Cited by 9
Acceptance of e-Learning Systems: a Serial Multiple Mediation Analysis
Balog, A. (2015) · Studies in Informatics and Control · doi:10.24846/v24i1y201511 · Cited by 9
“Drawing on the findings from extant literature on technology acceptance, this study developed and tested a multiple mediator model using the TAM3 framework and concepts.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialMetamorphose zur intelligenten und vernetzen Fabrik
Geleç, E., Kern, M., Schneider, B., et al. (2017) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-54317-7_3 · Cited by 9
Ali, M. S. Y. (2017) · Journal of Islamic marketing · doi:10.1108/jima-10-2015-0078 · Cited by 9
Wong, E. Y.-C., Kong, K. H., & Hui, R. T. (2017) · IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering · doi:10.1109/tale.2017.8252315 · Cited by 9
Social Innovation Adoption Behavior: The Case of Zumbara
Demirel, B., & Payne, A. K. H. (2018) · International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management · doi:10.1142/s0219877018500165 · Cited by 9
Determinants of Academic E-Learning Systems Acceptance
Wrycza, S., & Kuciapski, M. (2018) · Lecture notes in business information processing · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-00060-8_6 · Cited by 9
Factors Contributing to the Level of Acceptance of Technology in Affluent Private Schools
Maré, M. G. J., & Mihai, M. A. (2018) · Journal of Research on Technology in Education · doi:10.1080/15391523.2018.1508389 · Cited by 11
“In correspondence with the research of Venkatesh and Bala (2008), this study reflected the influences that individual differences, system characteristics, social influences, and facilitating conditions have in the PEOU and PU of teachers.”
An examination of the e-commerce technology drivers in the real estate industry
Al-Abdallah, G. M., Abou-Moghli, A. A., & Al-Thani, A. H. (2018) · Problems and Perspectives in Management · doi:10.21511/ppm.16(4).2018.39 · Cited by 9
“TAM3 is a model that presents the drivers, which influence the adoption of information technology (IT) and its implementation within an organization (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
The Adoption and Diffusion of Wearables
Spil, T. A. M., Kijl, B., & Romijnders, V. (2019) · IFIP advances in information and communication technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-20671-0_4 · Cited by 9
Teachers’ adoption of 1:1 iPad implementation in the classroom
Lestari, N. N., & Indrasari, S. Y. (2019) · Interactive Technology and Smart Education · doi:10.1108/itse-06-2018-0041 · Cited by 9
Gamification of a Stress Management App: Results of a User Study
Hoffmann, A., Christmann, C. A., Zolynski, G., & Bleser, G. (2019) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-23538-3_23 · Cited by 9
Ogbanufe, O., Dinulescu, C. C., Liu, X., & Kucuk, C. Y. (2019) · ACM SIGMIS Database the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3353401.3353408 · Cited by 10
Mobile Technology Acceptance Among Turkish Travelers
Binbaşıoğlu, H., & Türk, M. (2019) · Advances in marketing, customer relationship management, and e-services book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-9783-4.ch006 · Cited by 9
Šarkovská, K., & Chytková, Z. (2019) · Economic Trends and Economic Policy · doi:10.15179/pkiep.27.2.2 · Cited by 9
Co‐presence and mobile apps: Technology's impact on being with others
Clauzel, A., Riché, C., Hegarat, B. L., & Zerbib, R. (2019) · Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · doi:10.1002/cjas.1553 · Cited by 9
Παρίση, Μ., Komis, V., Lavidas, K., Dumouchel, G., & Karsenti, T. P. (2019) · Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire · doi:10.18162/ritpu-2019-v16n1-05 · Cited by 9
“Venkatesh and Bala (2008), confirm that teaching interventions that help users obtain accurate perceptions of the characteristics and benefits of a system are of crucial importance during the initial phase of learning the system.”
BackgroundInfluentialMich, O., Schiavo, G., Ferron, M., & Mana, N. (2019) · International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction · doi:10.4018/ijmhci.2020010102 · Cited by 9
Examining the Perceived Consequences and Usage of MOOCs on Learning Effectiveness
Tamjidyamcholo, A., Gholipour, R., & Kazemi, M. A. (2020) · Iranian journal of management studies · doi:10.22059/ijms.2020.281597.673640 · Cited by 11
“According to the TRA (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980) and TAM (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), the intention to use or behavioral intention can accurately predict behavior.”
MethodAnastasia, N., & Santoso, S. (2020) · SHS Web of Conferences · doi:10.1051/shsconf/20207601032 · Cited by 9
Delgado, J. C. S. (2020) · e-Ciencias de la Información · doi:10.15517/eci.v10i2.38946 · Cited by 9
Al-Mekhlafi, M. A. A. (2020) · doi:10.47340/mjellt.v1i1.1.2020 · Cited by 9
“Some researchers believe that the successful integration of technology in school and university instruction depends mainly on the students’ and teachers’ attitudes (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008; Teo et al., 2015).”
BackgroundEvaluating User eXperience as a Means to Reveal the Potential Adoption of Innovative Ideas
Pallot, M., Pawar, K. S., Krawczyk, P., Topolewski, M., Lecossier, A., & Razek, A. R. A. (2020) · IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC) · doi:10.1109/ice/itmc49519.2020.9198368 · Cited by 8
“Later on, Venkatesh and Bala [37] have proposed another evolution of the TAM model with the effect of perceived ease-of-use on behavioral intention will decrease while the effect of perceived ease-of-use on perceived usefulness will increase due to the increasing experience of a technology [35].”
BackgroundThe Moderating Effects of Experience and Training on Students’ Use of a Learning Management System
Alshehri, A., Rutter, M. J., & Smith, S. (2020) · International Journal of Information and Education Technology · doi:10.18178/ijiet.2020.10.9.1444 · Cited by 9
“This finding is in compliance with the Venkatesh & Bala [26]’s conclusion in which the influence of perceived ease of use on usefulness will be stronger with advanced users.”
Jeske, T., & Lennings, F. (2020) · Ifaa-Edition · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-61584-3 · Cited by 9
Use of a Socially Assistive Robot to Promote Physical Activity of Older Adults at Home
Ruf, E., Lehmann, S., & Misoch, S. (2021) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-70807-8_5 · Cited by 10
Why Do Generation Y Consumers Adopt Online Luxury Technologies: A Values Approach
Erdoğmuş, İ. E., Eskiyenentürk, G., & Arslan, M. K. (2021) · Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ) · doi:10.1177/1839334921999500 · Cited by 9
“…(Tynan et al., 2009; Vigneron & Johnson, 2004; Wiedmann et al., 2009), luxury online marketing (Brun et al., 2013; Kluge & Fassnacht, 2015), TAM (Rauschnabel & Ro, 2016; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000), and Generation Y consumers (Blazquez et al., 2020; Faschan et al., 2020).”
BackgroundMethodChai, P. R., Bustamante, M. J., Goodman, G. R., Mohamed, Y., Najarro, J., Sullivan, M. C., Castillo‐Mancilla, J., Coyle, R. P., Mayer, K. H., Rosen, R. K., et al. (2021) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/26213 · Cited by 9
“Accordingly, we developed a brief training program with features addressing the 3 pillars of the TAM to teach individuals how to operate and incorporate the DPS into their daily routine.”
InfluentialFactors Affecting Behavioral Intention to Use Learning Management Systems by Instructors
Aqlan, A. A., Alhakimi, W., Grada, M. S., Abdulrab, M., Al‐Mamary, Y. H., & Alquhaif, A. (2021) · Dimensión Empresarial · doi:10.15665/dem.v19i2.2728 · Cited by 9
Bakar, M. R. A., Razali, N. A. M., Wook, M., Ismail, M. N., & Sembok, T. M. T. (2021) · MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY · doi:10.21062/mft.2021.055 · Cited by 11
Technology Adoption Propensity Among Hungarian Business Students
Berényi, L., Deutsch, N., Pintér, É., Bagó, P., & Nagy-Borsy, V. (2021) · European Scientific Journal ESJ · doi:10.19044/esj.2021.v17n32p1 · Cited by 9
Ownby, R. L., & Kim, J. H. (2021) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2021.766311 · Cited by 12
Xhafaj, E., Qendraj, D. H., Xhafaj, A., & Gjikaj, N. (2021) · International Journal of Decision Support System Technology · doi:10.4018/ijdsst.286697 · Cited by 9
Varajão, J. E., Carvalho, J. Á., Silva, T. M., et al. (2022) · Information · doi:10.3390/info13020048 · Cited by 9
“It contemplates a comprehensive nomological network of the determinants of IT adoption and use by individuals [33].”
BackgroundPuccinelli‐Ortega, N., Cromo, M., Foley, K. L., Dignan, M., Dharod, A., Snavely, A. C., & MILLER, D. P. (2022) · Applied Clinical Informatics · doi:10.1055/s-0041-1740481 · Cited by 10
Perceptions on Implications of Delayed Marriage: A Case Study of Married Adults in Kuala Lumpur
Karamat, K. (2015) · International Journal of Social Science and Humanity · doi:10.7763/ijssh.2016.v6.713 · Cited by 9
Nyarko, J., & Serwornoo, M. Y. W. (2022) · Journal of Creative Communications · doi:10.1177/09732586221096346 · Cited by 9
“This buttresses TAM assertions that system acceptance is determined by its PU and PEU variables (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) by users.”
BackgroundRokhim, R., Mayasari, I., Wulandari, P., & Haryanto, H. C. (2022) · VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems · doi:10.1108/vjikms-04-2022-0113 · Cited by 10
Ma, Y., Zuo, M., Yan, Y., Wang, K., & Luo, H. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su142315691 · Cited by 13
Shopfloor Management Acceptance in Global Manufacturing
Kandler, M., Dierolf, L., Bender, M., Schäfer, L., May, M. C., & Lanza, G. (2022) · Procedia CIRP · doi:10.1016/j.procir.2022.10.072 · Cited by 10
Student diversity and e-exam acceptance in higher education
Froehlich, L., Sassenberg, K., Jonkmann, K., Scheiter, K., & Stürmer, S. (2023) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12794 · Cited by 8
Exploring teachers’ technology acceptance during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review (2020-2022)
Chun, T. W., & Yunus, M. M. (2023) · International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE) · doi:10.11591/ijere.v12i2.25398 · Cited by 10
Abubakari, M. S., & Zakaria, G. A. N. (2023) · Canadian Journal of Educational and Social Studies · doi:10.53103/cjess.v3i4.153 · Cited by 17
Factors Influencing Students’ Use of e-Learning Technologies
Oyetade, K., Harmse, A., & Zuva, T. (2023) · International Journal of Learning Teaching and Educational Research · doi:10.26803/ijlter.22.9.33 · Cited by 17
Application and device characteristics as drivers for smart mobile device adoption and productivity
Ally, M., & Gardiner, M. (2012) · University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland) · Cited by 9
Acceptance of e-Government Services in Sudan: an Empirical Investigation
Ahmed, T., Alhadi, N., & Seliaman, M. E. (2015) · doi:10.1109/cloudcomp.2015.7149625 · Cited by 9
El estilo cognitivo dependencia-independencia en el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje
Tinajero, C., & Fernández, M. F. P. (2013) · Revista Colombiana de Educación · doi:10.17227/01203916.64rce57.78 · Cited by 9
Factors determining learners’ acceptance of Facebook in a higher education classroom
Thongmak, M. (2014) · Knowledge Management & E-Learning An International Journal · doi:10.34105/j.kmel.2014.06.021 · Cited by 9
“TAM has been changed over time to TAM3 (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundTechnology impacts on safety and decision making over time in marine transportation
Dhami, H., & Grabowski, M. (2011) · Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part O Journal of Risk and Reliability · doi:10.1177/1748006xjrr359 · Cited by 9
Using Self-Regulation Theory to Inform Technology-Based Behavior Change Interventions
Soror, A. A., & Davis, F. D. (2014) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.1109/hicss.2014.373 · Cited by 9
“In contrast with models predicting acceptance and use (e.g. TAM [16], UTAUT [51], and TAM3 [49]), TTF attempts to explain the performance of IS users.”
BackgroundImpact of Demographic Factors on Technological Orientations of BOP Entrepreneurs in Ghana
Acheampong, G., Braimah, M., Quaye, D. M., & Buame, S. C. K. (2014) · International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management · doi:10.1142/s0219877014500370 · Cited by 9
The Impact of User Quality and Information Quality on the IS Success in Healthcare Context
Monem, H., Afrasiabi, M. H., Rezvan, P., & Dehkordi, S. A. (2013) · Cited by 9
Experimental Evaluation of Affective Embodied Agents in an Information Literacy Game
Guo, Y. R., Goh, D. H., Muhamad, H. B. H., Ong, B. K., & Lei, Z. (2016) · ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries · doi:10.1145/2910896.2910897 · Cited by 9
“It was measured using three items [36].”
BackgroundDo Mobile Technologies Have a Place in Universities?
Sánchez‐Prieto, J. C., Migueláñéz, S. O., & García‐Peñalvo, F. J. (2016) · Advances in mobile and distance learning book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-0256-2.ch002 · Cited by 9
Investigating Communal Interactive Video Viewing Experiences Online
Liu, L., Suh, A., & Wagner, C. (2016) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-39513-5_50 · Cited by 9
Sánchez‐Prieto, J. C., Migueláñéz, S. O., & García‐Peñalvo, F. J. (2016) · International Symposium on Computers in Education · doi:10.1109/siie.2016.7751847 · Cited by 9
“This variable has been frequently used in combination with the TAM model, and it is integrated in its two later versions: TAM2 [32] and TAM3 [33], as well as the C-TAM-TPB [34], a theory that combines the constructs from the two proposals.”
MethodA user study on personalized adaptive stiffness control modes for human-robot interaction
Gopinathan, S., Ötting, S. K., & Steil, J. J. (2017) · IEEE RO-MAN · doi:10.1109/roman.2017.8172399 · Cited by 9
“The items used for this were selected items from the sub-scales perceived ease of use, perceived enjoyment, and perception of external control from the Technology Acceptance Model [22], supplemented with items”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialEden, R., Akhlaghpour, S., Spee, P., Staib, A. N., Sullivan, C. M., & Burton‐Jones, A. (2018) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.24251/hicss.2018.381 · Cited by 9
“What does it take to use an organizational information system effectively? Although much is known about how to get individuals to use information systems more (rather than less) [15, 32, 33], researchers have begun shifting attention to the lessstudied topic of what it takes to use them effectively [1, 3, 19, 28], whe…”
BackgroundExtending Technology Acceptance Model for Proximity Mobile Payment via Organisational Semiotics
Pan, Y.-C., Jacobs, A., Tan, C., & Askool, S. (2018) · IFIP advances in information and communication technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-94541-5_5 · Cited by 9
Marques, L., Nakamura, W. T., Valentim, N., et al. (2018) · Proceedings/Proceedings of the ... International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering · doi:10.18293/seke2018-161 · Cited by 9
“The utility, ease of use and intention to use the methods were obtained through the TAM3 (Technology Acceptance Model) [14].”
MethodOrehovački, T., Etinger, D., & Babić, S. (2019) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-019-00673-y · Cited by 9
Bamigbola, A. A., & Adetimirin, A. E. (2020) · The International Information & Library Review · doi:10.1080/10572317.2019.1662261 · Cited by 9
“Apparently, perceived ease of use is based on external variables; that is, user and system characteristics namely anchor and adjustment factors (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundInfluentialZabukovšek, S. S., Tominc, P., Bobek, S., & Štrukelj, Т. (2020) · ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · doi:10.3390/ijgi9070421 · Cited by 9
“In the case of the relationship between perceived ease of use (PEOU) and behavioral intention (BI), we followed recommendations of TAM 3 [45].”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialAn ontology-based framework for a Less Invasive Domestic Management System (LIDoMS)
Spoladore, D., Mondellini, M., Sacco, M., Spoladore, D., & Trombetta, A. (2020) · International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IE) · doi:10.1109/ie49459.2020.9155023 · Cited by 9
“The validation sessions foresee a brief explanation about LIDoMS’ functioning and functionalities, then the participants will be auto-administered a questionnaire based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM3) [64]: in particular the questions will be aimed at investigating the perceived ease of use and the perceived…”
MethodCetto, A., Klier, J., & Klier, M. (2015) · University of Regensburg Publication Server (University of Regensburg) · doi:10.18151/7217285 · Cited by 9
“Researchers argue that the adoption of technology in general is determined by utilitarian influence factors like Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989; Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundMethodTechnology Acceptance and Organizational Change: An Integration of Theory
Brown, S. (2009) · Cited by 9
Rogers, A. D. (2016) · ScholarWorks (Walden University) · Cited by 9
An Artificial Intelligence Adoption Model for Large and Small BusinessesPreprint
Nascimento, A., & Meirelles, F. D. S. (2022) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4194043 · Cited by 14
Silva, M. D. S. T., Correia, S. É. N., Machado, P. D. A., & Oliveira, V. M. D. (2020) · Teoria e Prática em Administração · doi:10.21714/2238-104x2020v10i2-51923 · Cited by 8
“For Venkatesh & Bala (2008), support and top management are interventions to be adopted in the pre-implementation of IT in order to minimize initial resistance and provide prior knowledge about the use of the system.”
BackgroundExamining Information Quality and Perceived Learning Performance in a Gamified Environment
Ofosu‐Ampong, K., Boateng, R., Kolog, E. A., & Anning‐Dorson, T. (2020) · IEEE Conference on Business Informatics · doi:10.1109/cbi49978.2020.10052 · Cited by 8
“The items for website and user characteristics were adopted from [17]; social characteristics were adopted from [30], task”
BackgroundMethodChaudhuri, R., Chatterjee, S., Vrontis, D., & Begalli, D. (2023) · International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education · doi:10.1108/ijshe-09-2021-0401 · Cited by 8
Does value matter? Predicting hotel employees’ intentions towards the adoption of Technologies 4.0
Osei, B. A., & Rasoolimanesh, S. M. (2024) · Technology Analysis and Strategic Management · doi:10.1080/09537325.2023.2298823 · Cited by 9
“In line with Venkatesh and Bala (2008) anxiety was operationalised as user apprehension or fear when he/she is faced with the possibility of using the systems.”
Why and Why Not? Systematic Review of the Willingness to Accept Drone and Robot Deliveries
Kim, W., & Hur, S. H. (2024) · Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · doi:10.1177/03611981241248439 · Cited by 10
“The willingness or behavioral intention is often considered as a predictor of an actual usage of a technology, as in the well-known TAM ( 23 ) and its variants ( 24 , 25 , 105 , 106 ).”
Impact of Digital Technology on the Quality of Life of Older Adults - Literature Review
Vincek, V., Rogina, Ž. K., & Bogataj, D. (2024) · IFAC-PapersOnLine · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2024.07.168 · Cited by 14
Beyond Brick and Mortar: Unveiling the Willingness to Adopt E-Banking Services
Awajneh, A. M. H., & Abdalrahman, M. (2024) · International Journal of Technology Innovation and Management (IJTIM) · doi:10.54489/0kgj6523 · Cited by 8
“Consumer Attitudes: Venkatesh and Bala [28] suggested the idea of performance expectancy, which represents a person's expectation that employing a given technology is going to enhance their achievements, make tasks more manageable, or speed up fulfilling goals.”
BackgroundLi, J. H., & He, Y. (2024) · Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics · doi:10.1108/apjml-10-2023-0979 · Cited by 8
Ankamah, S., Gyesi, K., & Amponsah, V. (2024) · Information Development · doi:10.1177/02666669241283790 · Cited by 12
“TAM aims to understand and predict user acceptance of modern technologies within organizational and individual contexts (Venkatesh et al., 2003; Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
Nguyen, L. L. H., Halibas, A. S., & Nguyen, T. Q. (2024) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.143724 · Cited by 8
Hou, M., & Shen, Y. (2024) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.23295 · Cited by 9
Singha, S., & Chakraborty, A. (2024) · Serbian Journal of Management · doi:10.5937/sjm19-45512 · Cited by 8
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
