Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 463

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Relationship Between User Participation and User Satisfaction: An Investigation of Four Contingency Factors

McKeen, James D., Guimaraes, Tor, Wetherbe, James C.·1994·MIS Quarterly

Abstract

User participation has been widely touted by the MIS community as a means to improve user satisfaction within systems development. This claim, however, has not been consistently substantiated in the empirical literature. In seeking to explain such equivocal results, the effects of four contingency factors—task complexity, system complexity, user influence, and userdeveloper communication—on the relationship between user participation and user satisfaction were investigated. As suggested in the literature, this research tests hypotheses that these specific contingency factors should aid in identifying situations where user participation would have a strong relationship with satisfaction. Analysis of 151 independent systems development projects in eight different organizations indicated that user participation has a direct relationship with user satisfaction. In addition, the four contingency factors were found to play key roles on this relationship. Task complexity and system complexity proved to be pure moderators. That is, the strength of the participation-satisfaction relationship depended on the level of these factors. In projects where there was a high level of task complexity or system complexity, the relationship between user participation and user satisfaction was significantly stronger than in projects where task complexity or system complexity was low. User influence and user-developer communication were shown to be independent predictors of user satisfaction. That is, user influence, or user-developer communication, was positively related to user satisfaction regardless of the level of participation. The results help explain the relationship between user participation and user satisfaction by suggesting the nature of the relationship under different sets of conditions. The implications are relevant to systems developers and to academicians seeking to explain how, when, why, and where user participation is needed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/249523

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 463

Metadata

Authors
McKeen, J. D., Guimaraes, T., & Wetherbe, J. C.
Venue
MIS Quarterly
Publisher
MIS Quarterly
Published
1994-12-01
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
427-451
ISSN
  • 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-9730
OpenAlex
W2163950848
Cited by
463
References
6
FWCI
18.34
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.