The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Legacy of the Technology Acceptance Model and a Proposal for a Paradigm Shift.
Abstract
This article presents a critique of a number of shortcomings with the technology acceptance model (TAM) and points to specific remedies in each case. In addition, I present a model for the purposes of providing a foundation for a paradigm shift. The model consists first of a decision making core (goal desire → goal intention → action desire → action intention) that is grounded in basic decision making variables/processes of a universal nature. The decision core also contains a mechanism for self-regulation that moderates the effects of desires on intentions. Second, added to the decision making core are a number of causes and effects of decisions and self-regulatory reasoning, with the aim of introducing potential contingent, contextual nuances for understanding decision making. Many of the causal variables here are contained within TAM or its extensions; also considered are new variables grounded in emotional, group/social/cultural, and goal-directed behavior research.
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
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
Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.98.2.224 · Cited by 21,995
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
Self-citationIntrinsic and extrinsic motivation
Benabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2003) · Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1111/1467-937x.00253 · Cited by 2,913
Dabholkar, P. A., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2002) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1177/0092070302303001 · Cited by 1,898
Self-citation
Cited by
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41410412 · Cited by 15,756
The Technology Acceptance Model: Its past and its future in health care
Holden, R. J., & Karsh, B.-T. (2010) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2009.07.002 · Cited by 2,669
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology: A Synthesis and the Road Ahead
University of Arkansas, Venkatesh, V., Thong, J., Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Xu, X., & The Hong Kong Polytechnic University (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00428 · Cited by 2,513
Pappas, I. O., & Woodside, A. G. (2021) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102310 · Cited by 2,254
Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews
Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008 · Cited by 1,987
Metadata
- Authors
- University of Michigan, & Bagozzi, R.
- Venue
- Journal of the Association for Information Systems
- Publisher
- Association for Information Systems
- Published
- 2007-04
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 244-254
- ISSN
- 1536-9323 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2150376909
- Cited by
- 2,035
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 79.83
- 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
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.
