Understanding the dynamics of technology acceptance by intended users has proved a very difficult problem but it remains a key question for developers, implementers and system procurers. In the present paper we draw on existing findings from two independent research traditions (HCI and MIS) to propose a unified model of the factors that seem to be important determinants of use. This model is represented in conceptual terms and it is proposed as an enabling framework for human factors practitioners to apply the basic principles of acceptance throughout the development and implementation process.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsD. A.NelsonR. R.ToddP. A. (1992). Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use, and Usage of Information Technology: A Replication,MIS Quarterly16(2): 227-247.
2.
BaileyR. (1993). Performance versus preference. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Conference. HFES: 316-320.
3.
BrancheauJ. C.WetherbeJ. C. (1990). The Adoption of Spreadsheet Software: Testing Innovation Diffusion Theory in the Context of End-User Computing,Information Systems Research (2): 115-143.
4.
DavisF. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions, and behavioral impacts,International Journal of Man-Machine Studies38: 475-487.
5.
DavisF.BagozziR.WarshawP. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models,Management Science35(8): 982-1003.
6.
DillonA. (1987). Knowledge acquisition and conceptual models: a cognitive analysis of the interface. In: DiaperD.WinderR.People and Computers III. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
DillonA.SweeneyM.MaguireM. (1993) A survey of usability evaluation practices and requirements in the European IT industry. In. AltyJ.GuestS.DiaperD. HCI-93. People and Computers VII. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
DillonA.MorrisM. (1996) User acceptance of information technology: theories and models. In: WilliamsM., Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 31, (WilliamsM., ed.), Medford, NJ: Information Today.
9.
FichmanR. G. (1992). Information Technology Diffusion: A Review of Empirical Research,Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Information Systems, Dallas, Texas: 195-206.
10.
HartwickJ.BarkiH. (1994). Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use,Management Science40(4): 440-465.
11.
Leonard-BartonDDeschampsI. (1988). Managerial Influence in the Implementation of New Technology, Management Science34(8): 1252-1265.
12.
LucasH. C.Jr. (1975). Performance and Use of an Information System,Management Science20(8): 908-919.
13.
MathiesonK. (1991). Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior,Information Systems Research2(3): 173-191.
14.
MooreG. C. (1987). End User Computing and Office Automation: A Diffusion of Innovations Perspective,INFOR25(3): 214-235.
15.
MorrisM.DillonA. (1997). How user perceptions influence software use,IEEE Software (14)4: 58-65.
ShackelB. (1991). Usability Context, Framework, Definition, Design, and Evaluation. In ShackelB.RichardsonS.. Human Factors for Informatics Usability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
TaylorS.ToddP. A. (1995). Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models,Information Systems Research6(2): 144-176.
19.
TractinskyN (1997) Aesthetics and apparent usability: empirically assessing cultural and methodological issues. Proceedings of CHI-97, ACM Press, 115-121.
