CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 9,150Technology Adoption and User BehaviourInnovation Diffusion and ForecastingAgricultural Innovations and Practices

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation

Moore, Gary C., Benbasat, Izak·1991·Information Systems Research
DOI 10.1287/isre.2.3.192
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper reports on the development of an instrument designed to measure the various perceptions that an individual may have of adopting an information technology (IT) innovation. This instrument is intended to be a tool for the study of the initial adoption and eventual diffusion of IT innovations within organizations. While the adoption of information technologies by individuals and organizations has been an area of substantial research interest since the early days of computerization, research efforts to date have led to mixed and inconclusive outcomes. The lack of a theoretical foundation for such research and inadequate definition and measurement of constructs have been identified as major causes for such outcomes. In a recent study examining the diffusion of new end-user IT, we decided to focus on measuring the potential adopters' perceptions of the technology. Measuring such perceptions has been termed a “classic issue” in the innovation diffusion literature, and a key to integrating the various findings of diffusion research. The perceptions of adopting were initially based on the five characteristics of innovations derived by Rogers (1983) from the diffusion of innovations literature, plus two developed specifically within this study. Of the existing scales for measuring these characteristics, very few had the requisite levels of validity and reliability. For this study, both newly created and existing items were placed in a common pool and subjected to four rounds of sorting by judges to establish which items should be in the various scales. The objective was to verify the convergent and discriminant validity of the scales by examining how the items were sorted into various construct categories. Analysis of inter-judge agreement about item placement identified both bad items as well as weaknesses in some of the constructs' original definitions. These were subsequently redefined. Scales for the resulting constructs were subjected to three separate field tests. Following the final test, the scales all demonstrated acceptable levels of reliability. Their validity was further checked using factor analysis, as well as conducting discriminant analysis comparing responses between adopters and nonadopters of the innovation. The result is a parsimonious, 38-item instrument comprising eight scales which provides a useful tool for the study of the initial adoption and diffusion of innovations. A short, 25 item, version of the instrument is also suggested.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/isre.2.3.192

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 44 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 801–900 of 1,048

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I.
Affiliations
  • University of Calgary (CA)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
ORCID
Benbasat, Izak
Venue
Information Systems Research
Publisher
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
Published
1991-09
Volume
2
Issue
3
Pages
192-222
ISSN
  • 1047-7047 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5536
DOI
10.1287/isre.2.3.192
OpenAlex
W2100408980
Cited by
9,150
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 245 · 2025: 313 · 2024: 362 · 2023: 410 · 2022: 483 · 2021: 506 · 2020: 443 · 2019: 446 · 2018: 390 · 2017: 398 · 2016: 403 · 2015: 477 · 2014: 503 · 2013: 472 · 2012: 455
FWCI
43.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Information Systems Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agricultural Innovations and Practices
Keywords
information technology adoption, diffusion of innovations, instrument development, scale development, construct validity, convergent and discriminant validity, inter-judge agreement, factor analysis

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