The DOI matches its Crossref record; 91 of the 91 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Expectation Disconfirmation and Technology Adoption: Polynomial Modeling and Response Surface Analysis1
Abstract
Individual-level information systems adoption research has recently seen the introduction of expectation–disconfirmation theory (EDT) to explain how and why user reactions change over time. This prior research has produced valuable insights into the phenomenon of technology adoption beyond traditional models, such as the technology acceptance model. First, we identify gaps in EDT research that present potential opportunities for advances—specifically, we discuss methodological and analytical limitations in EDT research in information systems and present polynomial modeling and response surface methodology as solutions. Second, we draw from research on cognitive dissonance, realistic job preview, and prospect theory to present a polynomial model of expectation– disconfirmation in information systems. Finally, we test our model using data gathered over a period of 6 months among 1,143 employees being introduced to a new technology. The results confirmed our hypotheses that disconfirmation in general was bad, as evidenced by low behavioral intention to continue using a system for both positive and negative disconfirmation, thus supporting the need for a polynomial model to understand expectation disconfirmation in information systems.
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
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
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-citationMultiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions
(1992) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.29-3352 · Cited by 36,654
Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1988) · Decision, Probability and Utility · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609220.014 · Cited by 32,474
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
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241
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-citationThe Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 18,497
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
(2017) · Macat Library eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781912282432 · Cited by 18,122
Cited by
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., Chan, F. K. Y., Hu, P. J.-H., & Brown, S. A. (2011) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2011.00373.x · Cited by 852
Self-citationAdoption and use of AI tools: a research agenda grounded in UTAUT
Venkatesh, V. (2022) · Annals of Operations Research · doi:10.1007/s10479-020-03918-9 · Cited by 676
Self-citationPredicting m-commerce adoption determinants: A neural network approach
Chong, A. Y.-L. (2013) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.07.068 · Cited by 454
Conceptualizing models using multidimensional constructs: a review and guidelines for their use
Polites, G. L., Roberts, N., & Thatcher, J. (2012) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1057/ejis.2011.10 · Cited by 340
Understanding fintech continuance: perspectives from self-efficacy and ECT-IS theories
Shiau, W.-L., Yuan, Y., Pu, X., Ray, S., & Chen, C. C. (2020) · Industrial Management & Data Systems · doi:10.1108/imds-02-2020-0069 · Cited by 322
Metadata
- Authors
- Venkatesh, V., & Goyal, S.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2010-06-01
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 281-303
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W2157186607
- Cited by
- 481
- References
- 91
- FWCI
- 52.35
- 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: Expectation Disconfirmation and Technology Adoption: Polynomial Modeling and Response Surface Analysis1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/20721428
- The paper
- Venkatesh, V., & Goyal, S. (2010). Expectation Disconfirmation and Technology Adoption: Polynomial Modeling and Response Surface Analysis1. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/20721428
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.