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 4,701–4,800 of 8,090
Horvey, S. S., Godspower-Akpomiemie, E., & Boateng, R. A. (2025) · Journal of risk and financial management · doi:10.3390/jrfm18040209 · Cited by 7
Ho, Y., Kuo, H., Yang, K.-L., & Su, J. (2025) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2025.105947 · Cited by 4
Care Climate Impact on Technology Acceptance: Perceived Usefulness in the Healthcare Context
Hiraga, T., Suzuki, M., & Sugihara, T. (2025) · International journal of human computer interactions · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2498528 · Cited by 3
“The TAM3 includes additional leading factors for “Perceived Ease of Use” (PEOU) (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
Digital information-seeking of homebuyers on real estate platforms in Taiwan
Lee, P.-C., & Liu, P. (2025) · Electronic library · doi:10.1108/el-09-2024-0261 · Cited by 4
Källbäcker, J., Bergqvist, A., Cajander, Å., et al. (2025) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-92980-9_1 · Cited by 3
Quigley, F., Ryan, L., Bond, R., McAloon, T., Zheng, H., & Moorhead, A. (2025) · JMIR Medical Education · doi:10.2196/65949 · Cited by 3
“The training concluded with a feasibility questionnaire, adapted from the technology acceptance model [40] and the digital simulation literature.”
Luo, S., & Yang, P. (2025) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105079 · Cited by 4
The Adoption Process of Blockchain Technology Among Social Media Influencers
Doğan, M. (2025) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3583547 · Cited by 3
Negm, E. M. (2025) · Higher Education Skills and Work-based Learning · doi:10.1108/heswbl-10-2024-0315 · Cited by 3
Sofi, F., Al‐Fattal, A., & Fan, I. (2025) · Psychology International · doi:10.3390/psycholint7030057 · Cited by 3
Heinrich, K., Janiesch, C., Krancher, O., Stahmann, P., Wanner, J., & Zschech, P. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0328411 · Cited by 6
“Models such as the technology acceptance model (TAM) [8] and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) [9] assume that users initiate system use voluntarily and retain full control over when and how to engage with a system.”
Riding the Bitcoin Wave: Attitude and Adoption in Bangladesh
Islam, H., Saha, S., Siddieq, M. M., Rana, M., & Rahman, K. (2025) · Approaches to global sustainability, markets, and governance · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-5719-3_7 · Cited by 3
Cham, B., & Kefalidou, G. (2025) · International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI) · doi:10.1145/3744333.3747825 · Cited by 2
“Later models extended the original TAM [33], introducing factors associated with UX, beyond mere usability, and others have since worked to contextualise these models to domain-specific technologies like conventional vehicles, called CarTAM [25], and more recently, AVs such as AVAM [10], that built…”
Farahat, H. A. M., Sadek, M., Aly, S. G., Elkhodary, K. I., & Mougy, A. E. (2025) · International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI) · doi:10.1145/3744333.3747807 · Cited by 2
“Later, TAM3 was proposed, incorporating determinants that affect the perceived ease of use [34].”
Archetypes of assistance systems and their impacts on manufacturing performance and job quality
Nijland, K., Vries, A. W. D., Preenen, P., Kolla, S. S. V. K., & Thiede, S. (2025) · Advances in Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.aime.2025.100173 · Cited by 3
Fu, M., Han, Y., Chen, Y., et al. (2025) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app152011240 · Cited by 3
A Multidimensional Evaluation Framework for Personal Learning Environments
Law, E. L., & Wild, F. (2014) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02399-1_3 · Cited by 3
“Specifically, we highlight a list of factors critical for the technical evaluation of software, which are adopted from constructs of the Information System Success Model (ISSM) (DeLone and McLean 2003) and the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis 1989; Venkatesh et al. 2003; Venkatesh and Bala 2008) (see Table 1).”
Determinants of Continued Participation in Web-Based Co-creation Platforms
Jung, S., Hwang, J. H., & Ju, D. Y. (2014) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07293-7_64 · Cited by 3
Managing medication information with electronic patient records – a Finnish clinicians’ perspective
Heiro, E., & Mäntymäki, M. (2012) · Health and Technology · doi:10.1007/s12553-012-0025-4 · Cited by 3
“[9, 14, 32–34]) Given the exploratory nature of the present study and the limited literature focusing specifically on the core properties and value of EPRs for user’s perspective, the research hypotheses are drawn based on the findings from the qualitative analysis of the interviews as well as prior IT adoption litera…”
Method남수태, Shin, S.-Y., & 진찬용 (2014) · The Journal of the Korean Institute of Information and Communication Engineering · doi:10.6109/jkiice.2014.18.4.848 · Cited by 3
Acceptance as a success factor for planning wireless network infrastructure
Engels, A., Neunerdt, M., Mathar, R., et al. (2011) · International Symposium on Wireless Communication Systems · doi:10.1109/iswcs.2011.6125290 · Cited by 3
“and TAM3 [13].”
Beyond Demographics -- Explaining Diversity in Organizational Social Media Usage
Bucher, E. L., Fieseler, C., & Meckel, M. (2013) · Proceedings of the ... Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences/Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.1109/hicss.2013.117 · Cited by 3
“The measures for social media skill were inspired by Leung [34] and Shapiro and Hughes [35], and the Relevance Perception was derived from Venkatesh and Bala [36].”
MethodLiderazgo en adopción de TI en PYME: ¿ Solo el involucramiento del propietario importa?
Tapia, S. Á., Cataldo, A., & Alcayaga, L. Z. (2014) · Ingeniare. Revista chilena de ingeniería · doi:10.4067/s0718-33052014000300012 · Cited by 5
“Hasta ahora TAM ha sido extendido ampliamente y hoy se pueden identificar dos nuevas versiones de este modelo: TAM2 y TAM3 [4].”
BackgroundComputer security factors effects towards online usage of internet banking system
Al-Shawabkeh, M., Saudi, M. M., & Alwi, N. H. M. (2015) · The International Islamic University Malaysia Repository (The International Islamic University Malaysia) · Cited by 3
Proactive Assessment for Collaboration Success
Ju, T., Lin, Y.-C., & Ha, N.-H. (2014) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/2158244014541780 · Cited by 3
“Venkatesh and Bala (2008) further noted that the even more important issue is how managers make informed decisions about interventions that can lead to greater acceptance and effective utilization of IT.”
BackgroundFactors influencing the baby boomers’ intention to use domotics to live independently for longer
Westdorp, J. (2015) · Cited by 3
Model development for post-implementation process of advanced manufacturing technology
Yusuff, R. M., Yee, K. P., & Saberi, S. (2013) · International Journal of Information and Decision Sciences · doi:10.1504/ijids.2013.058288 · Cited by 3
Wamba, S. F., & Trinchera, L. (2014) · Americas Conference on Information Systems · Cited by 3
Defining and Evaluating Software Project Success Indicators - A GQM-based Case Study
Lavazza, L., Frumento, E., & Mazza, R. (2015) · International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications (ICSOFT-EA) · doi:10.5220/0005517301050116 · Cited by 3
Esfandiari, R., & Sokhanvar, F. (2015) · Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences · doi:10.5812/ijvlms.12010 · Cited by 3
“This factor was mostly studied with the technology acceptance model; as a result, it is considered one of the determinants of perceived ease of use (effort expectancy) [41-49].”
BackgroundA Decision Frameworkon Small and Medium Enterprises to Adopt Cloud Software as a Service
Lu, H., & Liu, Y.-Y. (2016) · MATEC Web of Conferences · doi:10.1051/matecconf/20165601012 · Cited by 3
Mobile Device Selection in Higher Education
Crisp, C. B., & Williams, M. L. (2011) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-042-6.ch074 · Cited by 3
New Perspectives on Payment Systems
de Luna, I. R., Montoro-Ríos, F. J., & Liébana-Cabanillas, F. J. (2014) · Advances in e-business research series · doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-5190-6.ch013 · Cited by 3
Step Towards Pervasive Technology Assessment in Intensive Medicine
Portela, F., Santos, M. F., Machado, J. M., et al. (2017) · International Journal of Reliable and Quality E-Healthcare · doi:10.4018/ijrqeh.2017040101 · Cited by 3
Intent to sustain use of a mental health innovation by school providers: What matters most?
Livet, M., Yannayon, M., Kocher, K., & McMillen, J. S. (2017) · Advances in School Mental Health Promotion · doi:10.1080/1754730x.2017.1295814 · Cited by 3
“…(2) individual attitudes and skills related to the innovation; and (3) organizational facilitators and barriers (e.g. sufficient resources and support; lack of competing priorities) (McIntosh, Mercer et al., 2013; Scheirer & Dearing, 2011; Stirman et al., 2012; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundMultiple Information Devices Users in the Era of Digital Convergence
Ichikohji, T., & Katsumata, S. (2017) · Annals of Business Administrative Science · doi:10.7880/abas.0170329a · Cited by 3
Montuwy, A., Cahour, B., & Dommès, A. (2017) · Biannual Conference of the Italian SIGCHI Chapter (CHItaly) · doi:10.1145/3125571.3125572 · Cited by 3
“These two UX dimensions are traditionally associated with behavioural intention in the acceptance theory [39].”
BackgroundNugroho, R. A., Kristina, S., Nurhaeni, I. D. A., Utami, W. A., Ambarwati, O. C., & Kusumawati, N. S. (2017) · International Conference on Information Management and Technology (ICIMTech) · doi:10.1109/icimtech.2017.8273552 · Cited by 4
“This finding also suggest further research to search for more complex model such as TAM 2 [22] , TAM 3[23], or UTAUT [24] to better predict the independent variable of actual system use.”
BackgroundThe NEON Evaluation Framework for Educational Technologies
Leitner, M., Hann, P., & Kickmeier-Rust, M. (2018) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-91743-6_20 · Cited by 3
Costa, N. A., Vesting, F., Dahlman, J., et al. (2018) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-94229-2_2 · Cited by 3
Implementing Tele Presence Robots in Distance Work: Experiences and Effects on Work
Ipsen, C., Nardelli, G., Poulsen, S., & Ronzoni, M. (2018) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-96080-7_42 · Cited by 3
Understanding Mobile Purchase Intentions in Poland: Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model
Trojanowski, M., & Kułak, J. (2018) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-99981-4_31 · Cited by 3
Customer Journey und digitale Kanäle – zwischen Technologieakzeptanz und Erlebniskauf
von Gizycki, V. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-21450-0_6 · Cited by 3
How to Design, Implement, and Manage Accepted Business Processes
Nissen, V., & Müllerleile, T. (2018) · Contributions to management science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-95999-3_7 · Cited by 3
A Set of Privacy Inspection Techniques for Online Social Networks
Rodrigues, A., Valentim, N., & Feitosa, E. L. (2018) · Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (IHC) · doi:10.1145/3274192.3274195 · Cited by 3
“Este questionário foi elaborado com base nos indicadores do modelo TAM ( Technology Acceptance Model ) que tem sido amplamente utilizado em diversas pesquisas [18].”
BackgroundLibrary adoption in public software repositories
Krohn, R., & Weninger, T. (2019) · Journal Of Big Data · doi:10.1186/s40537-019-0201-8 · Cited by 3
Technology-Supported Marketing for Sustainable Tourism in the Himalayas
Hassan, A. (2019) · Advances in marketing, customer relationship management, and e-services book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-0131-3.ch020 · Cited by 3
Costa, A. F. F., & Marques, A. B. (2019) · Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (IHC) · doi:10.1145/3357155.3360477 · Cited by 3
“O questionário aplicado foi desenvolvido com base no TAM3 ( Technology Acceptance Model 3) [6].”
BackgroundKrieger, P., & Lausberg, C. (2020) · Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie · doi:10.1365/s41056-020-00044-2 · Cited by 4
Technology Acceptance, a relevant step to digitalize Moroccan human development public organizations
Oumlil, R., & Aderkaoui, A. (2020) · Revue Management & Innovation · doi:10.3917/rmi.201.0119 · Cited by 3
Lussier‐Desrochers, D., Dupont, M., Lachapelle, Y., Massé, L., Martineau, A., & Pépin-Beauchesne, L. (2020) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-49108-6_4 · Cited by 4
Al‐Alawi, A. I., Al-Hammam, A. H., Al‐Alawi, S., & AlAlawi, E. I. (2020) · Advances in finance, accounting, and economics book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-3257-7.ch015 · Cited by 3
Influencing factors for acceptance of digital tools in the humanities
Simon, T., Pagel, S., & von Korflesch, H. F. O. (2020) · Mensch und Computer (MuC) · doi:10.1145/3404983.3405524 · Cited by 3
“Das R 2 stellt mit 0,570 auch im Vergleich zu anderen Untersuchungen wie z.B. der original Modellkonstruktionsstudie von Venkatesh und Bala [72] einen sehr guten Wert dar.”
BackgroundPainter, J., Turner, J., & Procter, P. M. (2021) · CIN Computers Informatics Nursing · doi:10.1097/cin.0000000000000804 · Cited by 3
“Numerous variables have been shown to affect employees' uptake of technology, and our findings certainly chimed with several well-accepted explanatory models.(16,17) Although staff could logically foresee benefits, the prospect of video consultations represented a significant and anxiety-provoking cultural shift that…”
ResultWickramasinghe, V., & Wickramasekara, J. (2021) · Public Organization Review · doi:10.1007/s11115-021-00528-2 · Cited by 3
Customer Response towards QR Codes Used in Marketing: An African Perspective
Randheer, K. (2021) · International Journal of Business and Management · doi:10.5539/ijbm.v16n9p15 · Cited by 3
“This analysis had identified six components explaining a cumulative variance of 93.693%, with the first component explaining 31.161%, which falls within less than 50% criteria, hence common method bias does not affect the study data (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialThe Smaller the Better? A Study on Acceptance of 3D Display of Exhibits of Museum’s Mobile Media
Guo, X., Qiao, J., Yan, R., Wang, Z., & Chu, J. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-78468-3_21 · Cited by 3
Stiegemeier, D., Bringeland, S., & Baumann, M. R. K. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-78358-7_32 · Cited by 3
DESIGN FOR CONTINUOUS USE OF PRODUCT-SERVICE SYSTEMS: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Nemoto, Y., Dhiman, H., & Röcker, C. (2021) · Proceedings of the Design Society · doi:10.1017/pds.2021.98 · Cited by 3
“This model has generated a new research stream where many authors have proposed subsequent models by synthesizing novel predictors of those two beliefs (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundHamed, P. K., Kayode, B. K., Miaikil, O. A. M., & Mamdouh, A. A. M. (2021) · International Conference on Smart Computing and Electronic Enterprise (ICSCEE) · doi:10.1109/icscee50312.2021.9498068 · Cited by 3
Wasomi, C. B., Waithaka, E. H., Gachari, M. K., & Kuria, D. N. (2021) · Journal of Computer and Communications · doi:10.4236/jcc.2021.910005 · Cited by 3
“Technology Acceptance Model 2 (TAM2) considers social norms for a newly developed technology through pre-implementation to post-implementation [46], whereas Technology Acceptance Model 3 (TAM 3) considers system characteristics, social influence and facilitating condition [38] [47].”
BackgroundHellwig, L., Pawlowski, J. Μ., & Schäfer, M. (2021) · International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management · doi:10.5220/0010650000003064 · Cited by 3
“Individual aspects such as "Relevance" (TAM3: "Job Relevance"), "Outcome Presentation" (TAM3: "Result Demonstrability), "Backup" (IDT: "Extent of Change Agents' Promotion Efforts") or "Promotion" (IDT: "Communication Channels") can already be found similarly in the underlying theories and models.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialTowards to Transfer the Directives of Communicability to Software Projects: Qualitative Studies
Lopes, A., Canedo, E. D., de Souza, C. S., et al. (2021) · Journal of Software Engineering Research and Development · doi:10.5753/jserd.2021.1942 · Cited by 3
Dang, M. Y., & Zhang, Y. G. (2021) · Journal of Information Technology Education Research · doi:10.28945/4881 · Cited by 3
“Introduced as an important construct in the theory of TAM 3 (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), perceived enjoyment is defined as the level of pleasure associated with an individual’s intrinsic reward system derived from the use of information technology or system.”
BackgroundIndividual End-User Training For Information Systems Using Learning Styles
Melzer, P., & Schoop, M. (2014) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · Cited by 3
Factors Affecting on IoT-Based Business Management in the Post-Pandemic Period
Miraz, M. H., Saleheen, F., Almunawar, M. N., Sumi, F. R., Sarkar, S., & Hasan, M. T. (2022) · Advances in finance, accounting, and economics book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-9664-7.ch004 · Cited by 3
An Exploration of Trust as an Antecedent of Unified Payment Interface Usage
Saha, P., & Kiran, K. B. (2022) · International Journal of Electronic Government Research · doi:10.4018/ijegr.298627 · Cited by 3
“Blockchain May Automate Jobs Done by the Boss and AI Can Predict a Heart Attack”
Sihvonen, T., Koskela, M., & Kääntä, L. (2022) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-93780-5_3 · Cited by 3
Sholihah, S. M., Subiyakto, A., Ratnawati, S., et al. (2022) · Applied Information System and Management (AISM) · doi:10.15408/aism.v5i1.10589 · Cited by 3
“This study uses a qualitative approach to explore data that cannot be presented with a quantitative approach based on the Technology Readiness Acceptance Model (TRAM) [5].”
BackgroundInfluentialThe Technology Acceptance Model on Vein Recognition Payment and Unmanned Store
Jung, S. I., & Park, J. Y. (2019) · Journal of Channel and Retailing · doi:10.17657/jcr.2019.01.31.4 · Cited by 3
Benefits and Challenges of Cloud Computing Adoption and Usage in Higher Education
Ali, M. B., Wood‐Harper, T., & Mohamad, M. (2021) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-5339-8.ch103 · Cited by 3
The Effectiveness of High-tech Product on Customer Satisfaction towards Luxury Hotel
Gao, E., & Yang, X. (2022) · BCP Business & Management · doi:10.54691/bcpbm.v20i.1073 · Cited by 3
An Industry 4.0 Intelligent Decision Support System for Analytical Laboratories
Silva, A. J., & Cortez, P. C. (2022) · IFIP advances in information and communication technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-08337-2_14 · Cited by 3
Rahman, M. M., Mamun, H. A.-R., Al-Amin, M., & Islam, M. T. (2022) · Open Journal of Social Sciences · doi:10.4236/jss.2022.105026 · Cited by 3
Szabó, B., Dirks, S., & Scherger, A.-L. (2022) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-05028-2_25 · Cited by 3
Validation of a New Telenursing Questionnaire: Testing the Test
Marco-Franco, J. E., Santos, M. R., Martínez, I. B., González-de-Julián, S., & Puig, R. C. (2022) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math10142463 · Cited by 3
Electronic payment system and financial sustainability of tertiary institutions in Nigeria
Madu, F. N., Onodugo, V. A., & Isichei, E. E. (2022) · African Journal of Economic and Management Studies · doi:10.1108/ajems-11-2021-0475 · Cited by 3
Influence of automation mode use on selection rates and subjective assessment over time
Navarro, J., Jomard, E., Saleur, É., Abrard, W., & Cegarra, J. (2022) · Cognition Technology & Work · doi:10.1007/s10111-022-00712-4 · Cited by 3
“In addition, workload, and trust in and acceptance of the different automation modes, might act as mediating variables between performance on the task and automation mode selection and use (Dzindolet et al. 2003; Lee and See 2004; Venkatesh et al. 2003; Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
BackgroundA Spontaneous Adoption of AR Technology a manufacturing industrial context
Lund, G. K., & Ortova, M. (2022) · IFIP advances in information and communication technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-16411-8_56 · Cited by 3
Generation Z & Y preferences of user acceptance of mobile health recommender systems
Alaa, G., & Said, G. R. E. (2022) · The Business & Management Review · doi:10.24052/bmr/v13nu02/art-19 · Cited by 3
“Confirming with previous research, the result of the current study suggests that Perceived Usefulness has a significant positive effect on behavioral intention to use mobile health recommender system (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialAbbad, H., Lairet, G., & Mahjoub, S. (2022) · Marché et organisations · doi:10.3917/maorg.045.0033 · Cited by 3
Experienced, Enthusiastic and Cautious: Pedagogy Profiles in Emergency and Post-Emergency
Dorfsman, M. I., & Horenczyk, G. (2022) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci12110756 · Cited by 3
Pearce, A. (2022) · Advances in Science Technology and Engineering Systems Journal · doi:10.25046/aj070601 · Cited by 4
Will Smart Improvements to Child Restraints Increase Their Popularity?
Jiang, L., Zhao, M., Lin, H., et al. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph192315727 · Cited by 3
“This element is also known as perceived ease of use in the TAM/TAM2/TAM3 models [32,33,35].”
MethodBlended learning environments to foster self-directed learning
Bergamin, N., Bergamin, P. B., Breed, B., Bunt, B. J., Dhlamini, J. P., Jagals, D., Kemp, A. C., Kruger, C., Kruger, D. J. D., Lotz, C., et al. (2022) · NWU self-directed learning series · doi:10.4102/aosis.2022.bk366 · Cited by 3
Conceptual framework of determinants of blockchain technology acceptance in banking industry
Siddiqui, A. A., & Ali, S. H. S. (2022) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/5.0119695 · Cited by 3
Manaf, K., Nurul, C. A., Subaeki, B., et al. (2022) · International Conference on Wireless and Telematics (ICWT) · doi:10.1109/icwt55831.2022.9935451 · Cited by 3
“The model used is a combination of TRI 2.0 indicators [9] and 4 indicators TAM [26].”
MethodInfluentialZhou, R., Shi-jin, L., & Yu, J. (2022) · International Conference on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (CSTE) · doi:10.1109/cste55932.2022.00014 · Cited by 3
“proposed the famous Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology(UTAUT) model by integrating the advantages of eight models, such as the Theory of Rational Behavior (TRA), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and so on [6].”
MethodCordente-Rodríguez, M., Splendiani, S., & Silvestrelli, P. (2020) · Applied Computer Science · doi:10.35784/acs-2020-11 · Cited by 4
The Impact of Augmented Reality Advertising Characteristics on Purchasing Intention
Kamel, T., Elsayed, O., & Enaba, H. M. L. (2022) · The Academic Journal of Contemporary Commerical Research · doi:10.21608/ajccr.2022.277218 · Cited by 3
“When t hese t wo elements relate to the perception of technology acceptance, they are frequently viewed as goin g together, or, as Venkatesh and Bala (2008) put it, "all factors being equal, t he bet ter a technology is to utilize, the more beneficial it can be."”
BackgroundPutra, B. P., Subekti, I., & Atmini, S. (2022) · International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478) · doi:10.20525/ijrbs.v11i10.2241 · Cited by 3
Extended Reality (XR) im Tourismus – Erlebnisse durch Augmented Reality und Virtual Reality
Brysch, A. A. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-37545-4_21 · Cited by 3
Blecker, S., Gannon, M. A., Leon, S. D., Shelley, D., Wu, W. Y., Tabaei, B. P., Magno, J., & Pham-Singer, H. (2023) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2023.107177 · Cited by 3
Tretter, S., Platz, A., & Diefenbach, S. (2023) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581529 · Cited by 3
“We only made an initial step by assessing the immediate positive reaction to the technology and the outcome of its use, which probably fosters technology acceptance [50].”
BackgroundAdoption of Robotic Process Automation in Micro Small and Medium Enterprises
Pramod, D., Bharathi, S. V., & Patil, K. P. (2023) · doi:10.1109/otcon56053.2023.10113959 · Cited by 3
“These determinants can help employees perceive RPA as easy-to-use technology [18].”
BackgroundMethodNear-1: the evaluation of usability and task load demand of a motorized lifter for patient transfer
Halim, N. S. S. A., Ripin, Z. M., Law, M. J. J., et al. (2023) · Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · doi:10.1080/17483107.2023.2210619 · Cited by 3
“Overall, assessing the usability of assistive devices is crucial for ensuring that the devices meet the nurses’ needs and positively impact their lives [18,19].”
BackgroundLee, S., Fogliasso, C. E., Jung, S., Shin, M.-H., & Shum, C. (2023) · Service Business · doi:10.1007/s11628-023-00534-y · Cited by 3
“Venkatesh and Bala (2008) introduced two additional moderating determinants, which are experience and computer anxiety, in TAM3.”
BackgroundBeng, Y. H., Yi, W. C., & Kaur, S. (2023) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/5.0127997 · Cited by 3
Salah, S., & Alyouzbaky, B. A. (2023) · International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management · doi:10.1142/s0219877023500554 · Cited by 3
Internal technology barriers, learning approaches, and technology adoption
Okur, M. R., & Hamutoğlu, N. B. (2023) · Distance Education · doi:10.1080/01587919.2023.2226623 · Cited by 3
“Studies around technology adoption in education suggest that behavioral intention is influenced by two primary factors: perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use of the technology (Davis, 1989; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000).”
Background
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
