Extending the technology acceptance model to account for social influence: theoretical bases and empirical validation

The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) represents an important theoretical contribution toward understanding IS usage and IS acceptance behaviors. However, as noted by several IS researchers, TAM is incomplete in one important respect: it doesn't account for social influence in the adoption and utilization of new information systems. Davis (1986) and Davis et al. (1989) noted that it is important to account for subjective norm (SN), the construct denoting social influence. However, they observed that the conceptualization of SN based on TRA (Theory of Reasoned Action) has theoretical and psychometric problems. Specifically, they observed that it is difficult to distinguish if usage behavior is caused by the influence of referents on one's intent or by one's own attitude. They suggested that this problem may be circumvented by using an alternative theoretical basis for conceptualizing SN, specifically in terms of Kelman's (1958, 1961) processes of social influence (compliance, identification and internalization). Within the context of organizational enterprisewide implementation and adoption of collaboration and communication technologies, this study establishes theoretical and empirical bases for the above conceptualization originally suggested by Davis and his colleagues. The construct of social influence is operationalized in terms of Kelman's processes of internalization, identification and compliance. Analyses of field study data provide evidence of the reliability and validity of the proposed constructs, factor structures and measures. The findings enable future researchers to account for social influence in further investigating TAM.

[1]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test† , 1996 .

[2]  Fred D. Davis A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems : theory and results , 1985 .

[3]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. , 1977 .

[4]  Peter A. Todd,et al.  Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models , 1995, Inf. Syst. Res..

[5]  H. Kelman Compliance, identification, and internalization three processes of attitude change , 1958 .

[6]  A ToddPeter,et al.  Understanding Information Technology Usage , 1995 .

[7]  Carl D. Riegel,et al.  The Multidimensional View of Commitment and the Theory of Reasoned Action: A Comparative Evaluation , 1995 .

[8]  K. Klein,et al.  The Challenge of Innovation Implementation , 1996 .

[9]  Jennifer A. Chatman,et al.  Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. , 1986 .

[10]  N. Melone A theoretical assessment of the user-satisfaction construct in information systems research , 1990 .

[11]  Kieran Mathieson,et al.  Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[12]  Ellen M. Hufnagel,et al.  User Response Data: The Potential for Errors and Biases , 1994, Inf. Syst. Res..

[13]  R. Vandenberg,et al.  A Critical Examination of the Internalization, Identification, and Compliance Commitment Measures , 1994 .

[14]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[15]  Allison W. Harrison,et al.  Validity Assessment of Compliance, Identification, and Internalization as Dimensions of Organizational Commitment , 1993 .

[16]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models , 1989 .

[17]  Daniel Robey,et al.  Research Commentary: Diversity in Information Systems Research: Threat, Promise, and Responsibility , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[18]  J. Nunamaker,et al.  Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences , 1999 .

[19]  Jennifer A. Chatman,et al.  PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE: A PROFILE COMPARISON APPROACH TO ASSESSING PERSON-ORGANIZATION FIT , 1991 .

[20]  Fred D. Davis Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[21]  Gilbert A. Churchill,et al.  Marketing Research: Methodological Foundations , 1976 .

[22]  H. Kelman PROCESSES OF OPINION CHANGE , 1961 .

[23]  Terry Burridge Disillusionment , 2000 .

[24]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..