The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Measurement of End-User Computing Satisfaction
Abstract
This article contrasts traditional versus end-user computing environments and reports on the development of an instrument which merges ease of use and information product items to measure the satisfaction of users who directly interact with the computer for a specific application. Using a survey of 618 end users, the researchers conducted a factor analysis and modified the instrument. The results suggest a 12-item instrument that measures five components of end-user satisfaction — content, accuracy, format, ease of use, and timeliness. Evidence of the instrument’s discriminant validity is presented. Reliability and validity is assessed by nature and type of application. Finally, standards for evaluating end-user applications are presented, and the instrument’s usefulness for achieving more precision in research questions is explored.
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
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116
User Involvement and MIS Success: A Review of Research
Ives, B., & Olson, M. H. (1984) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.30.5.586 · Cited by 1,318
Management Information Systems: Appreciation and Involvement
Swanson, E. B. (1974) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.21.2.178 · Cited by 529
Goodwin, N. C. (1987) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/214748.214758 · Cited by 277
Cited by
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model1
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250921 · Cited by 8,767
Kim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L., & Rao, H. R. (2008) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2007.07.001 · Cited by 3,613
“759 [49] Privacy protection (PPP) Reflective 3.”
MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2011) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/23044045 · Cited by 3,165
A Theoretical Integration of User Satisfaction and Technology Acceptance
Wixom, B. H., & Todd, P. A. (2005) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1050.0042 · Cited by 2,835
Metadata
- Authors
- Doll, W. J., & Torkzadeh, G.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 1988-06-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 259-274
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1954663826
- Cited by
- 2,412
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 67.05
- 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.
