The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Adoption intention in GSS: relative importance of beliefs
Abstract
Models used to study information technology (IT) adoption were adapted and applied to the group support systems (GSS) domain to determine their applicability and to assess the relative importance of beliefs about GSS in the context of adoption. The beliefs examined were relative advantage, ease of use, compatibility, and enjoyment. Four methods of measuring the relative importance of the belief constructs in predicting GSS adoption intention were evaluated. The methods involved Likert-scaled measures, conjoint measures, direct ratings of importance, and paired comparisons. Compositional analyses using three distinct models, regression, molar, and molecular, were conducted to examine the data collected under the first method. The results of the study demonstrated that the models and constructs used in other IT domains are indeed applicable in the GSS context. The relative importance of the beliefs did not converge across methods, although there was some agreement among the three compositional approaches as well as among the conjoint, direct rating, and paired comparison methods. The results point to the need for caution in utilizing and interpreting regression results and demonstrate the viability of alternative methods of studying adoption.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
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
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace 1
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x · Cited by 6,231 · cited 15×
“The Enjoyment construct used by Davis, et al. (1992) is also included in the model because it has been found to account for influences beyond those accounted for by the extrinsic factors (Davis, et al., 1992) identified by Davis, et al. (1989) and Moore and Benbasat (1991).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialMathieson, K. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.173 · Cited by 4,216
A leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation
Efron, B., & Gong, G. (1983) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1080/00031305.1983.10483087 · Cited by 3,229
Cited by
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.14.2.189.16018 · Cited by 6,479
Self-citationStructural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice
Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M.-C. (2000) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.00407 · Cited by 6,416
(2003) · International Journal of Electronic Commerce · doi:10.1080/10864415.2003.11044275 · Cited by 5,715
Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & van Oppen, C. (2009) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/20650284 · Cited by 4,944
An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions
Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1060.0080 · Cited by 2,640
Metadata
- Authors
- Chin, W. W., & Gopal, A.
- Venue
- ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems
- Published
- 1995-05
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2-3
- Pages
- 42-64
- ISSN
- 0095-0033 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-0936
- OpenAlex
- W2083045424
- Cited by
- 840
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 18.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Adoption intention in GSS: relative importance of beliefs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/217278.217285
- The paper
- Chin, W. W., & Gopal, A. (1995). Adoption intention in GSS: relative importance of beliefs. ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/217278.217285
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.