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 4,301–4,400 of 8,090
Ibrahim, Y. M., & Hidayat-ur-Rehman, I. (2025) · Asian Education and Development Studies · doi:10.1108/aeds-06-2024-0134 · Cited by 7
Bøyum, I., & Khosrowjerdi, M. (2025) · Information Research · doi:10.47989/ir30colis52285 · Cited by 4
Koerich, A. B., Mussi, C. C., Guerra, J. B. S. O. D. A., & Casagrande, J. L. (2025) · The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries · doi:10.1002/isd2.70018 · Cited by 5
Developing an Institutional AI Digital Assistant in an Age of Industry 5.0
Rienties, B., Ullmann, T., Tessarolo, F. M., et al. (2025) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app15126640 · Cited by 4
“In this follow-up study, we report on the detailed qualitative findings from a beta-test of i-AIDA with 18 students in January 2025, whereby we specifically sampled students with a mix of perspectives on i-AIDA and experience of GenAI in general using the Technology Acceptance Model [19,20,39].”
InfluentialXu, W., Zhu, K., Zhou, D., Wang, C., & Wen, C. (2025) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci15070828 · Cited by 4
Driving sustainable transportation: analyzing consumer behavior toward used electric vehicles
Zhang, Y., Wisedsind, N., & Thavorn, J. (2025) · Sustainable Futures · doi:10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100978 · Cited by 6
Wei, F., & Hwang, B. (2025) · Journal of Management in Engineering · doi:10.1061/jmenea.meeng-6921 · Cited by 5
Harder, A., & Schumann, S. (2025) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci15091099 · Cited by 4
Webb, B., & Potts, R. (2025) · International Planning Studies · doi:10.1080/13563475.2025.2550966 · Cited by 4
“Computer self-efficacy is the key anchor in the TAM 3 (see Figure 1) and is considered a significant determinant of individuals’ use of ICTs according to SCT (Middleton, Hall, and Raeside 2019; Taherdoost 2018; Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
Negm, E. M. (2025) · Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education · doi:10.1108/jarhe-04-2025-0275 · Cited by 5
Shields, A. U., Neumann, D. L., & Stainer, M. J. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0334167 · Cited by 4
Digital exclusion and citizen engagement with e-government services in China
Li, J., Dong, Y., & Siemers, O. (2025) · International Journal of Public Sector Management · doi:10.1108/ijpsm-03-2025-0135 · Cited by 5
Fink, F., Otto, S. C., Grünthal, M., Lehmann, A., & Jahn, P. (2025) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/80320 · Cited by 5
Assessment of Technology Acceptance in Intensive Care Units
Portela, F., Aguiar, J., Santos, M. F., et al. (2014) · International Journal of Systems and Service-Oriented Engineering · doi:10.4018/ijssoe.2014070102 · Cited by 4
“The questions should be focused in the four constructs of TAM in order to evaluate not only the technical features, but also the environment, behaviours and other aspects.”
MethodInfluentialShin, M.-H. (2014) · Journal of Digital Convergence · doi:10.14400/jdc.2014.12.8.197 · Cited by 4
“1] Technology acceptance model, Davis et al.(1989), p.985 200 ❙Journal of Digital Convergence 2014 Aug; 12(8): 197-209 이후 Venkatesh & Bala(2008)는 기술수용모형의 지 각된 유용성과 사용편이성에 영향을 주는 외부변수로 개 인적 차이점, 시스템 특성, 사회적 영향력, 촉진조건을 제 시하였다[11].”
InfluentialTowards a calculative model of supply chain enabling IT implementation
Power, D., & Gruner, R. L. (2016) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/ijopm-02-2014-0068 · Cited by 6
Sprejemanje informacijsko-komunikacijske tehnologije - Dejavniki in modeli
Kristl, N. (2016) · Andragoška spoznanja · doi:10.4312/as.22.4.7-28 · Cited by 4
Die Bedeutung der Usability für das Lernen mit digitalen Medien
Karapanos, M., Becker, C., & Christophel, E. (2018) · MedienPädagogik Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung · doi:10.21240/mpaed/00/2018.05.09.x · Cited by 4
Motivations et autogestion des apprenants
Ettien, F. A. K. (2018) · La Revue des sciences de gestion/La Revue des sciences de gestion, Direction et gestion · doi:10.3917/rsg.291.0053 · Cited by 4
Tjondro, E., & Prayogo, E. K. (2019) · Journal of Accounting Finance and Auditing Studies · doi:10.32602/jafas.2019.35 · Cited by 4
“TAM is developed for predicting individual adoption and new Information Technology (IT) use and declaring that individual behavioral intentions to use a technology is determined by two believes: perceived usefulness and ease of use (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundDeterminants of mobile health application awareness and use in India
Pai, R. R., & Alathur, S. (2020) · International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance · doi:10.1145/3428502.3428589 · Cited by 4
“…to e-commerce and healthcare sectors by considering components of trust, perceived risk, compatibility, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, personal innovativeness, and situational factors associated with the system access and utilization, acceptance and behavioural intent [22, 30].”
BackgroundMedienpädagogische Professionalisierung von Lehrpersonen in einer mediatisierten Welt
Dertinger, A. (2021) · MedienPädagogik Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung · doi:10.21240/mpaed/jb16/2021.01.10.x · Cited by 4
Bamigbola, A. A. (2021) · IFLA Journal · doi:10.1177/0340035220983360 · Cited by 4
“Anchor factors and the use of institutional repositories by lecturers Venkatesh and Bala (2008) added anchor factors to TAM, which comprise four elements that are external factors and influence the perceived ease of use and, eventually, use of any system.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialGrau, I., Pantoja, P. E., Grajales, F. J., III, Kostov, B., Aragunde, V., Puig-Soler, M., Roca, D., Couto, E., & Sisó‐Almirall, A. (2021) · JMIR mhealth and uhealth · doi:10.2196/17660 · Cited by 4
“For example, theoretical frameworks like the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) address some of the needs from behavioral research but fall short in terms of mHealth evaluation methods.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialIgudia, O. E., & Mr, S. T. O. (2021) · Lincoln (University of Nebraska) · Cited by 4
Social and Situational Influences on Customer Shift Towards Self-Service Technologies
Galdolage, S. (2022) · Advanced technologies · doi:10.31357/ait.v2i1.5498 · Cited by 2
“The TAM has been regularly upgraded as TAM 2 [34] and TAM 3 [35] to incorporate elements pertinent to e-commerce, such as trust and perceived risk associated with system use.”
BackgroundExploring the Influential Factors of Continuous Online Shopping Intention
Tung, C.-M. (2022) · International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction · doi:10.4018/ijthi.304091 · Cited by 4
“Both Perceived usefulness (PU) and satisfaction with the ECM may be affected by external factors (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundAref, M. M., & okasha, A. A. O. (2023) · المجلة العلمیة للدراسات والبحوث المالیة والتجاریة · doi:10.21608/cfdj.2023.258054 · Cited by 4
“On the other hand, Venkatesh and Bala (2008) revealed that when people use the system for some time, the importance of effort expectancy to explain the acceptance tends to decline.”
BackgroundUnderstanding the Utilization of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics in the Service Sector
Çallı, B. A., & Çallı, L. (2022) · Accounting, finance, sustainability, governance & fraud · doi:10.1007/978-981-16-8997-0_14 · Cited by 7
Mingyan, Z. H. A. O. (2022) · International Journal of Educational Research Review · doi:10.24331/ijere.1199264 · Cited by 4
“All the measurements in this part were adapted from previous studies (e.g., Teo, 2013; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), including grow up with technology (Tech, 5 items), comfortable with multitasking (Multi, 5 items), reliant on graphics for communication (Graphics, 7 items), thrive on instant…”
Um Estudo de Viabilidade sobre a Assistente Virtual ADA Blocks com Professores do Ensino Médio
Perin, A. P. J., Silva, D. E. D. S., & Valentim, N. (2022) · Anais do ... Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação/Anais do Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação · doi:10.5753/sbie.2022.224682 · Cited by 6
“Por conseguinte, foram definidos os questionários de coleta de dados, sendo: questionário de caracterização, e o questionário adaptado do Technology Acceptance Model (TAM 3), definido por Venkatesh and Bala (2008) .”
BackgroundPotential for remote vital sign monitoring to improve hospital patient sleep: A feasibility study
Beaman, H., Douglas, V. C., Patel, K., Boscardin, W. J., Youn, J., & LaHue, S. C. (2022) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2022.104970 · Cited by 5
What should AI see? Using the public’s opinion to determine the perception of an AI
Chan, R., Dardashti, R., Osinski, M., Rottmann, M., Brüggemann, D., Rücker, C., Schlicht, P., Hüger, F., Rummel, N., & Gottschalk, H. (2023) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-022-00248-3 · Cited by 4
“Relying on the Technology Acceptance Model, perceived ease of use is one of the two key factors (besides perceived usefulness), which shapes an individual’s attitude towards a technology and therefore serves as a predictor for its adoption [41].”
BackgroundMethodSnavely, A. C., Foley, K. L., Dharod, A., Dignan, M., Brower, H. H., Wright, E., & MILLER, D. P. (2023) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-023-07273-5 · Cited by 4
Audrey, J., Adaora, C., Justianto, J. S., & Amanda, I. B. (2023) · International Journal of Social Service and Research · doi:10.46799/ijssr.v3i2.263 · Cited by 4
Factors Affecting the Adoption of Cloud for Software Development: A Case from Turkey
Pisirir, E., Chouseinoglou, O., Sevgi, C., & Uçar, E. (2023) · International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making · doi:10.1142/s0219622023500517 · Cited by 4
Common or Not? Variations in E-Commerce Adoption Factors Between India and the USA
Asir.T, R. G. (2023) · Journal of Global Information Technology Management · doi:10.1080/1097198x.2023.2200382 · Cited by 4
“Studies by Fletcher et al (2014) share the weakness of TAM model with respect to IT Adoption, the TAM3 model is evolved to address the evolving needs by adding the constructs Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness per Venkatesh and Bala (2008).”
MethodProspective Teachers’ Perceptions, Reliance, and Barriers to ICT Integration in Mathematics Learning
Zamir, S., & Ali, H. (2023) · Journal of Education and Educational Development · doi:10.22555/joeed.v10i1.800 · Cited by 4
“The technology acceptance model shows the user’s intention, and perceived ease of use as determinants of individuals’ adaptation and use of information technology (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundRosman, D., Wahyuningtias, D., Levyta, F., et al. (2023) · International Conference on Business and Industrial Research (ICBIR) · doi:10.1109/icbir57571.2023.10147705 · Cited by 4
“A person’s perceptions about how simple it is to operate a piece of technology are referred to as their perceived ease of use, also known as PEU [26] to adopt technological advancements that require less effort [24].”
BackgroundZulherman, Z., Diana, P. A., Salsabila, I., Putri, E. A., Ashari, H. M. W., & Ningsih, M. W. (2023) · International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE) · doi:10.11591/ijere.v12i3.25261 · Cited by 6
“These findings are confirmed by the original theory of TAM [37], [38], as well as additional studies [39], [40].”
Evaluating the User Experience of Music Streaming Services
Fumić, R., Rumac, M., & Orehovački, T. (2023) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-37717-4_43 · Cited by 4
The Impact of Information and Communication Technologies on Job Demands and Job Control
Medzo-M’engone, J., Chaumon, M.-É. B., Préau, M., & Lheureux, F. (2023) · European Journal of Psychology Open · doi:10.1024/2673-8627/a000048 · Cited by 5
Design of the Attitudinal Assessment Scale Towards Artificial Intelligence (EVAIA-1)
Subía-Arellano, A., Pérez-Vega, D., Guillen-García, S., et al. (2023) · IEEE Ecuador Technical Chapters Meeting (ETCM) · doi:10.1109/etcm58927.2023.10309057 · Cited by 4
“On the Avoidance Attitudes toward Virtual Assistants scale [14], the following factors are considered: behavioral beliefs, normative beliefs, and control beliefs.”
BackgroundHizkia, M., & Ariadi, G. (2023) · MIX JURNAL ILMIAH MANAJEMEN · doi:10.22441/jurnal_mix.2023.v13i3.001 · Cited by 4
“The indicators for Perceived Usefulness are adopted by Venkatesh & Bala (2008), consisting of four items that improve working, boost practical tasks, increase task productivity, and help accomplish the task.”
MethodATIAS: A Model for Understanding Intentions to Use AI Technology
Faruqe, F., Medsker, L., & Watkins, R. (2023) · Studies in computational intelligence · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-44127-1_5 · Cited by 4
Schiele, M., Rowcliffe, J. M., Clark, B., et al. (2023) · Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation · doi:10.1002/rse2.378 · Cited by 4
“We are also applying and adapting established technology adoption and acceptance methods (Hahn et al., 2022; Rezaei et al., 2020; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) to understand and where possible alleviate barriers to long-term use of this (and other) UAV systems in the hands of local users in the Global…”
MethodTechnology in community development: A comparative review of USA and African Projects
Okunade, B. A., Adewusi, O. E., Adediran, F. E., Odulaja Bukola, A., Daraojimba, R. E., & Igbokwe, J. C. (2024) · International Journal of Science and Research Archive · doi:10.30574/ijsra.2024.11.1.0183 · Cited by 4
Using an Instrument to Assess Trust, Knowledge, Learning, and Motivation of Agile Teams
Dutra, E., Cerdeiral, C., Lima, P., et al. (2023) · iSys - Brazilian Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.5753/isys.2023.3005 · Cited by 4
Delbes, L., Mascret, N., Goulon, C., & Montagne, G. (2024) · Gait & Posture · doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2024.02.009 · Cited by 4
Adoption of Cybersecurity Innovations—A Systematic Literature Review
Vestad, A., & Yang, B. (2024) · Springer proceedings in complexity · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-6974-6_16 · Cited by 4
Lyu, X., Dastane, O., & He, X. (2024) · Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management · doi:10.1108/jstpm-02-2023-0021 · Cited by 4
Assessing the acceptance of mobile phone technology in Tanzanian SMEs
Mushi, R. M. (2024) · Journal of Electronic Business & Digital Economics · doi:10.1108/jebde-10-2023-0026 · Cited by 4
Zabukovšek, S. S., & Bobek, S. (2024) · Advances in information quality and management · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-7366-5.ch073 · Cited by 4
Use Intention of Mobile Music and Audio Platforms Among Middle-Aged and Older Chinese Adults
Luan, X., & Zhong, R. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2338665 · Cited by 4
“As the information technology (IT) environment has become increasingly complex, a comprehensive nomological network of IT adoption, TAM3, was developed and validated to discuss interventions in IT adoption contexts and support managerial decision making (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY IN THE ZAKAT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: A CONCEPTUAL RESEARCH
Nazeri, A. N. N. B., & Nor, S. M. (2023) · Journal of Information Systems and Digital Technologies · doi:10.31436/jisdt.v5i2.419 · Cited by 4
Prasidhati, S. K., Ramadhani, A., & Setiawati, F. (2024) · Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada · doi:10.1590/pboci.2024.038 · Cited by 4
Resistance to online learning technology: Theoretical and empirical perspectives
Ambalov, I. A. (2024) · Information Development · doi:10.1177/02666669241257197 · Cited by 4
“While the development of TAM resulted in several extensions, including TAM2 (Venkatesh and Davis, 2000) and TAM3 (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008), these models are not relevant to the purpose of this study.”
Importance of voluntary usage among customers with difficulty using self-service technology (SST)
Ting, L., & Ahn, J. (2024) · The International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer Research · doi:10.1080/09593969.2024.2358788 · Cited by 4
“Thus, the degree of effort in using SST is a key determinant of customer willingness to voluntarily adopt technology (Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
Unlocking RPA potential: understanding the use of Robotic Process Automation by finance employees
Hoenderdos, J., & van Triest, S. (2024) · Maandblad Voor Accountancy en Bedrijfseconomie · doi:10.5117/mab.98.109880 · Cited by 5
Artificial Intelligence Usefulness Effect on Business Performance with Trust
Güven, S. B., Bolatan, G. İ. S., & Daim, T. U. (2024) · Contributions to management science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-58704-7_5 · Cited by 7
Evolving role of public-private stakeholders in technology mediated teaching
Upadhyay, P., Kumar, A., & Mukerji, M. (2024) · Digital Policy Regulation and Governance · doi:10.1108/dprg-09-2023-0130 · Cited by 4
Abbas, S. K., Kő, A., & Szabó, Z. (2022) · Hungarian Statistical Review · doi:10.35618/hsr2022.02.en054 · Cited by 4
INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO ENHANCING USER SATISFACTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Ameen, A. K., Maolood, I. Y., & Abdullah, D. A. (2024) · Science Journal of University of Zakho · doi:10.25271/sjuoz.2024.12.3.1323 · Cited by 4
“These findings provide support to the improved model of user satisfaction that includes motivational factors as proposed by Venkatesh and Bala (2008) and the Dillon and McLean (2003).”
BackgroundInfluentialCyber-Physical Systems and Their Role in Industry 4.0
Mutua, E. (2024) · Journal of Technology and Systems · doi:10.47941/jts.2149 · Cited by 4
“In Industry 4.0, the successful implementation and optimization of CPS are heavily dependent on how well these technologies are accepted and utilized by end-users, including engineers, operators, and managers (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
MethodInfluentialDİJİTALLEŞMENİN İŞ PERFORMANSI ÜZERİNDEKİ BELİRLEYİCİLİĞİ: HAVA TAŞIMACILIĞI SEKTÖRÜ ÖRNEĞİ
Vural, S. (2024) · Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi · doi:10.35408/comuybd.1511978 · Cited by 4
Revolutionizing finance: a comprehensive analysis of digital banking adoption and impact
Chinnasamy, G., Vinoth, S., & Jain, A. (2024) · International Journal of Systems Assurance Engineering and Management · doi:10.1007/s13198-024-02531-4 · Cited by 8
Badraoui, B., & Smith, S. J. (2024) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights · doi:10.1108/jhti-05-2024-0479 · Cited by 4
AI Chatbots in the Office: Unveiling the Social Impacts on Future Workplace Harmony
Krishnasamy, S. K. L., & Lee, C. (2024) · International Conference on ICT for Smart Society (ICISS) · doi:10.1109/iciss62896.2024.10751425 · Cited by 5
Gao, F., Ma, Y., Qiao, F., Yan, P., & Niu, Z. (2024) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-78524-x · Cited by 5
Chatterjee, D., Pati, S., Dhaigude, A. S., & Kamath, G. B. (2024) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2024.2439544 · Cited by 4
“While taM accounts for approximately 40% of the variance in an individual’s intention to use a new technological system (Mcfarland & hamilton, 2006; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), it is not without its limitations.”
Understanding Educators’ Hesitation to Adopt Tailored Digital Gamification
Lan, D. H., & Oanh, V. T. K. (2024) · Psychological Science and Education · doi:10.17759/pse.2024290605 · Cited by 6
Modelling of online shopping behavior in the Czech online environment
Svatošová, V., & Dvorský, J. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0308725 · Cited by 6
UX-MAPPER: An automated approach to analyze app store reviews with a focus on UX
Nakamura, W. T., de Oliveira, E. C. C., de Oliveira, E. H. T., et al. (2025) · Journal on Interactive Systems · doi:10.5753/jis.2025.4099 · Cited by 4
Jiang, J., Hu, J., & Feng, T. (2025) · Asia Pacific Journal of Education · doi:10.1080/02188791.2025.2467942 · Cited by 4
Jiang, Y., Yuan, Y., & He, Z. (2025) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2025.2470321 · Cited by 4
“In this context, Venkatesh and Bala (2008) suggested that PU and PEU can be influenced by external circumstances.”
Designing worker assistance systems–Methodology development and industrial validation
Bründl, P., Wegener, C., Stoidner, M., Bayer, J., Scheffler, B., Nguyen, H. G., & Franke, J. E. (2025) · Journal of Manufacturing Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jmsy.2025.02.022 · Cited by 5
Krishnanraw, J., & Ismail, K. B. (2025) · Management and Accounting Review · doi:10.24191/mar.v24i01-17 · Cited by 5
“Empirical studies (Chang & Tung, 2007; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) have highlighted PU as a critical determinant of technology use intentions, often outpacing Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) in predicting user behaviour.”
Ngala, O. M. (2024) · Teacher Education through Flexible Learning in Africa (TETFLE) · doi:10.35293/tetfle.v6i1.4687 · Cited by 4
Kiruthu-Kamamia, C., Berner-Rodoreda, A., O’Bryan, G., Sande, O., Huwa, J. M., Thawani, A., Tweya, H. M., Groot, W. N. J., Pavlova, M., & Feldacker, C. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0303416 · Cited by 8
“While TAM2 provided a strong foundation for analyzing technology adoption, newer extensions such as TAM3 [35] introduce additional determinants, including experience as a moderator and intervention-based influences.”
Generative AI Adoption and Use by Micro-enterprises: Validation of the Measurement Instrument
Strzelecki, A., Pankowska, M. B., & Rizun, M. (2025) · Smart innovation, systems and technologies · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-3077-6_5 · Cited by 5
Case Study 3: Exploring Open Educational Resources for Informal Learning
Mikroyannidis, A., & Connolly, T. (2014) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02399-1_6 · Cited by 4
“The basic research instrument deployed in the different events was the Perceived Usefulness and Ease of Use (PUEU) Survey, which has been based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Venkatesh and Bala 2008; Venkatesh and Davis 2000).”
MethodEnhancing the adoption of educational technologies in a postsecondary environment
Kent, J. L. (2015) · VIUSpace (Vancouver Island University Library) · Cited by 4
Between the Profiles: Another such Bias. Technology Acceptance Studies on Social Network Services
Baran, K. S., & Stock, W. G. (2015) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21383-5_12 · Cited by 4
“TAM 2 [21], the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) [22], the Model of Adoption of Technology in Households (MATH) [4], TAM 3 [20], the DeLone and McLean model [6, 7], the Jennex and Olfman model [10] or the Information Service Evaluation Model (ISE) [16] try to measure information systems’ qual…”
MethodResponsive Open Learning Environments at the Open University
Mikroyannidis, A., & Connolly, T. (2012) · Open Research Online (The Open University) · Cited by 4
Antecedents of Post-adoption Expectations: A Study in the e-Learning Context
Islam, A. K. M. N. (2011) · IFIP International Federation for Information Processing/IFIP · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-27260-8_22 · Cited by 4
“Social norm has been shown to have a direct impact on behavioral intention in literature [3].”
BackgroundLilienthal, M., Messerschmidt, C. M., & Skiera, B. (2010) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · Cited by 4
A Study of Ontology Construction
Abdullah, N. S., Sadiq, S. W., & Indulska, M. (2012) · Advances in knowledge acquisition, transfer, and management book series/Advances in knowledge acquisition, transfer and management book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-1993-7.ch016 · Cited by 4
A Technology Acceptance Model for a User-Centred Culturally-Aware E-Health Design
Mohamed, A. H. H. M., Tawfik, H., Norton, L., & Al‐Jumeily, D. (2013) · International Conference on Developments in eSystems Engineering (DeSE) · doi:10.1109/dese.2013.30 · Cited by 4
Adoption und Weiterempfehlung neuer Technologien: Die Bedeutung von Trendsetting
Gunnesch‐Luca, G., Moser, K., & Klöble, U. (2010) · der markt · doi:10.1007/s12642-010-0026-7 · Cited by 4
The acceptance and adoption of mobile telephony by Bangladeshi farmers: a qualitative enquiry
Dey, B. L., Binsardi, B., & Ahmed, M. (2013) · International Journal of Management Practice · doi:10.1504/ijmp.2013.055830 · Cited by 4
Diffusion Pattern Recognition of Technology Vendors in Construction
Sepasgozar, S. M. E., & Davis, S. (2014) · ASCE Construction Research Congress (CRC) · doi:10.1061/9780784413517.214 · Cited by 4
“Generally this is based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which has passed through several versions (Davis et al. 1989, Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
MethodHazen, B. T., & Sankar, C. S. (2015) · International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management · doi:10.1142/s0219877015500133 · Cited by 4
Bopape, S. T. (2010) · South African Journal of Libraries and Information Science · doi:10.7553/76-2-76 · Cited by 4
A survey of issues and approaches to remote laboratory adoption by teacher-academics
Tuttle, S. W., Lowe, D. B., & Moulton, B. D. (2011) · IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) · doi:10.1109/fie.2011.6143128 · Cited by 4
“TAM asserts that two key individual-is-likely-to-adopt-some-technology indicators are ‘perceived usefulness’ and ‘perceived ease-ofuse’ [13,16].”
BackgroundChênerie, I. (2011) · Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire · doi:10.7202/1005780ar · Cited by 4
Diffusion and Infusion of Information and Communication Technologies in Kenyan Higher Education
Pelser, T., & Macharia, J. K. N. (2016) · South African Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.20853/27-3-257 · Cited by 4
“This important theoretical relationship has significant practical utility, as there have been increasing concerns about the utilisation of ICT to facilitate learning, particularly enterprise systems that are inherently complex to understand and use (Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
Culture and Social Media: Changing Service Expectations
Pookulangara, S. (2011) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-1554-1_11 · Cited by 4
The Five Forces of Technology Adoption
McAran, D., & Manwani, S. (2016) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-39396-4_50 · Cited by 4
USER ADOPTION OF MANDATORY E-GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS: NOTARIAL SYSTEM IN ALBANIA, AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSE
Kasaj, A. (2016) · CBU International Conference Proceedings · doi:10.12955/cbup.v4.810 · Cited by 4
“The strength of TAM3 was its comprehensiveness and potential for actionable guidance.”
BackgroundInfluentialEnjoyment, resistance to change and mlearning acceptance among pre-service teachers
Sánchez‐Prieto, J. C., Migueláñéz, S. O., & García‐Peñalvo, F. J. (2016) · Ninth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM'21) · doi:10.1145/3012430.3012594 · Cited by 4
“The items for the constructs of behavioral intention, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use were adapted from TAM3 [14]:”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Metadata
- Authors
- Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Arkansas at Fayetteville (US)
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Venkatesh, Viswanath
- Bala, Hillol
- Venue
- Decision Sciences
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-05
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 273-315
- ISSN
- 0011-7315 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5915
- OpenAlex
- W2112042732
- Cited by
- 8,159
- References
- 135
- Citations by year
- 2026: 909 · 2025: 912 · 2024: 780 · 2023: 746 · 2022: 717 · 2021: 645 · 2020: 556 · 2019: 499 · 2018: 396 · 2017: 379 · 2016: 320 · 2015: 324 · 2014: 287 · 2013: 266 · 2012: 186
- FWCI
- 175.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Decision Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › ERP Systems Implementation and Impact
- Keywords
- technology acceptance model, information technology adoption, information technology use, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, management interventions, IT implementation, organizational decision-making, nomological network
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-30, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-30 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
