Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
https://doi.org/10.4...arrow_drop_down
https://doi.org/10.4018/978159...
Part of book or chapter of book . 2011 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-...
Part of book or chapter of book . 2007 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Technology Acceptance Model

Authors: M. McCord;

Technology Acceptance Model

Abstract

The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989) measures perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use as predictors of a user’s intent to use computer technology, and their actual usage on the job. The measure first appeared in 1989, in an MIS Quarterly article by Fred Davis and in a coauthored article in Management Science(Davis, 1989; Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989). Extending the Theory of Reasoned Action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980) to technology, Perceived usefulness (U) is defined as “the degree to which a person believes a particular system would enhance his or her job performance.” Perceived ease of use (EOU) is defined as “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be free of effort.” ‘Usage intentions’ (BI) was measured through self-predicted future usage and ‘user acceptance’ was measured through self-reported current usage. Although information technology is adopted to improve employee performance, these gains are often lost or diminished by users’ unwilling to accept and use the information system. Davis wanted to understand why users rejected or accepted information technologies, to better predict, explain and increase user acceptance. The TAM model has since become one of the most established models for predicting user acceptance.

Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    7
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
7
Top 10%
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!