The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quo vadis TAM?
Open accessAbstract
The Technology Acceptance model (TAM) is one of the most influential theories in Information Systems. However, despite the model's significant contributions, the intense focus on TAM has diverted researchers’ attention away from other important research issues and has created an illusion of progress in knowledge accumulation. Furthermore, the independent attempts by several researchers to expand TAM in order to adapt it to the constantly changing IT environments has lead to a state of theoretical chaos and confusion in which it is not clear which version of the many iterations of TAM is the commonly accepted one. The present commentary discusses these concerns, speculates on the possible contributions to the current state of affairs, and makes several suggestions to alleviate the problems associated with TAM and to advance IT adoption research to the next stage.
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
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
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
The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update
(2003) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748 · Cited by 11,791
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
Self-citationUnderstanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model1
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250921 · Cited by 8,767
Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: An Integrated Model1
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036519 · Cited by 8,635
Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance
Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249689 · Cited by 6,006
The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.398 · Cited by 4,957
Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250951 · Cited by 4,726
Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.12.2.121.9700 · Cited by 2,751
Cited by
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41410412 · Cited by 15,756
Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x · Cited by 8,159
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
Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study
Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., Masa'deh, R., & Sinclair, J. (2020) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004 · Cited by 1,350
Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review
Granić, A., & Marangunić, N. (2019) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12864 · Cited by 1,204
Metadata
- Authors
- University of British Columbia, C., Benbasat, I., Barki, H., & Montréal, H.
- Venue
- Journal of the Association for Information Systems
- Publisher
- Association for Information Systems
- Published
- 2007-04
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 211-218
- ISSN
- 1536-9323 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1508343863
- Cited by
- 1,363
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 142.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Quo vadis TAM? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.17705/1jais.00126
- The paper
- University of British Columbia, C., Benbasat, I., Barki, H., & Montréal, H. (2007). Quo vadis TAM? Journal of the Association for Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00126
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.
