| Click
here for construct definitions* Source:
Venkatesh,
V., Morris, M.G., Davis, F.D., and Davis, G.B. “User Acceptance
of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View,” MIS Quarterly, 27,
2003, 425-478. [Abstract] | | Click
here for construct definitions*
Source:
Venkatesh, V. and Bala, H. “TAM 3: Advancing the Technology Acceptance
Model with a Focus on Interventions,” Manuscript in-preparation.
| |
Click
here for construct definitions*
Source:
Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. "A
Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal
Field Studies," Management Science, 46, 2000, 186-204. [Abstract]
| | Click
here for construct definitions*
Source:
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi,
R. P., and Warshaw, P. R. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology:
A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science,
35, 1989, 982-1003. [Abstract]
Construct
Definitions Attitude: Individual's
positive or negative feeling about performing the target behavior
(e.g., using a system). Behavioral
intention: The
degree to which a person has formulated conscious plans to perform or
not perform some specified future behavior. Computer
anxiety: The degree of an
individual’s apprehension, or even fear, when she/he is
faced with the possibility of using computers. Computer
playfulness: The degree of cognitive
spontaneity in microcomputer interactions. Computer
self-efficacy: The degree to which
an individual beliefs that he or she has the ability to perform
specific task/job using computer. Effort
expectancy: The
degree of ease associated with the use of the system.Facilitating
conditions: The
degree to which an individual believes that an organizational and
technical infrastructure exists to support use of the system.Image: The
degree to which use of an innovation is perceived to enhance one's
status in one's social system.Job
relevance: Individual's
perception regarding the degree to which the target system is relevant
to his or her job. Objective
usability: A comparison
of systems based on the actual level (rather than perceptions)
of effort required to complete specific tasks. Output
quality: The degree to which an
individual believes that the system performs his or her job tasks
well.Performance
expectancy: The
degree to which an individual believes that using the system
will help him or her to attain gains in job performance.Perceived
ease of use: See
the definition of effort expectancy.Perceived
enjoyment: The extent to which
the activity of using a specific system is perceived to be enjoyable
in it’s own right, aside from any performance consequences
resulting from system use. Perceived
usefulness: See
the definition of performance expectancy.Perception
of external control: See
the definition of facilitating conditions.Result
demonstrability: Tangibility
of the results of using the innovation. Social
influence: The
degree to which an individual perceives that important others
believe he or she should use the new system.Subjective
norm: Person's
perception that most people who are important to him think he should
or should not perform the behavior in question.Voluntariness: The
extent to which potential adopters perceive the adoption decision
to be non-mandatory.
| | |
| |
|
