Technology acceptance: a meta‐analysis of the TAM: Part 1

Purpose – This paper is the first of two concerned with a meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model (TAM). This part aims to present a narrative literature review of 145 papers published on the TAM. Design/methodology/approach – The approach takes the form of a literature review of 145 papers on the TAM. Findings – The review identifies TAM as a basis for identifying gaps and providing guidelines for implementation of management and the conduct of future research. Originality/value – The paper presents a comprehensive literature review and a rigorous meta-analysis to progress towards a unified view of the TAM.

[1]  Kalyan Moy Gupta,et al.  An Empirical Study of Factors Affecting Software Package Selection , 1996, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[2]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease-of-use , 1999, Inf. Manag..

[3]  Henry C. Lucas,et al.  Implementation in a world of workstations and networks , 2000, Inf. Manag..

[4]  Stephanie Watts,et al.  Informational Influence in Organizations: An Integrated Approach to Knowledge Adoption , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[5]  Kun Chang Lee,et al.  A cognitive map simulation approach to adjusting the design factors of the electronic commerce web sites , 2003, Expert Syst. Appl..

[6]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  Technology acceptance in the banking industry: A perspective from a less developed country , 2000, Inf. Technol. People.

[7]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  Explaining Software Developer Acceptance of Methodologies: A Comparison of Five Theoretical Models , 2002, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[8]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  A Motivational Model of Microcomputer Usage , 1996, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[9]  Fred D. Davis.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: System Characteristics, User Perceptions and Behavioral Impacts , 1993, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[10]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and Discriminant Validity by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix,” Psychological Bulletin (2), March, pp. . , 1959 .

[11]  Tino Fenech,et al.  Web retailing adoption: exploring the nature of internet users Web retailing behaviour , 2003 .

[12]  D. Gefen,et al.  E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust , 2000 .

[13]  J. N. Fry,et al.  Personality Variables and Cigarette Brand Choice , 1971 .

[14]  Robert Phelps,et al.  Managing the risks of intranet implementation: an empirical study of user satisfaction , 1999, J. Inf. Technol..

[15]  Terry L. Childers,et al.  HEDONIC AND UTILITARIAN MOTIVATIONS FOR ONLINE RETAIL SHOPPING BEHAVIOR , 2001 .

[16]  Chang Liu,et al.  Technology acceptance model for wireless Internet , 2003, Internet Res..

[17]  M. Brosnan.  Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing , 1999 .

[18]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Measuring System Usage: Implications for IS Theory Testing , 1995 .

[19]  Girish H. Subramanian,et al.  A Replication of Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use Measurement , 1994 .

[20]  Patrick Y. K. Chau,et al.  An empirical investigation on factors affecting the acceptance of CASE by systems developers , 1996, Inf. Manag..

[21]  Subhash Sharma,et al.  Identification and Analysis of Moderator Variables , 1981 .

[22]  Andrew Dillon,et al.  How User Perceptions Influence Software Use , 1997, IEEE Softw..

[23]  Dorothy Leon Ard-Barton.  Implementation Characteristics of Organizational Innovations , 1988 .

[24]  Craig C. Lundberg,et al.  Social change in complex organizations , 1970 .

[25]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Prediction of goal directed behaviour: Attitudes, intentions and perceived behavioural control , 1986 .

[26]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology , 1998, Inf. Syst. Res..

[27]  Thompson S. H. Teo,et al.  Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in Internet usage , 1999 .

[28]  Kar Yan Tam,et al.  Understanding user acceptance of digital libraries: what are the roles of interface characteristics, organizational context, and individual differences? , 2002 .

[29]  Jae-Shin Lee,et al.  Technology Acceptance and Social Networking in Distance Learning , 2003, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[30]  D. R. Saunders.  Moderator Variables in Prediction , 1956 .

[31]  Peter D. Bennett,et al.  The Role of Confidence in Understanding and Predicting Buyers' Attitudes and Purchase Intentions , 1975 .

[32]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: An Integrated Model , 2003, MIS Q..

[33]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Gender Differences in the Perception and Use of E-Mail: An Extension to the Technology Acceptance Model , 1997, MIS Q..

[34]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  Extending the technology acceptance model: the influence of perceived user resources , 2001, DATB.

[35]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  The Relative Importance of Perceived Ease of Use in IS Adoption: A Study of E-Commerce Adoption , 2000, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[36]  Said S. Al-Gahtani,et al.  The Applicability of TAM Outside North America: An Empirical Test in the United Kingdom , 2001, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[37]  Bernadette Szajna,et al.  Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model , 1996 .

[38]  Mark Keil,et al.  Usefulness and ease of use: field study evidence regarding task considerations , 1995, Decis. Support Syst..

[39]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  Personal Computing Acceptance Factors in Small Firms: A Structural Equation Model , 1997, MIS Q..

[40]  Ronald M. Lee,et al.  A logic programming framework for planning and simulation , 1986 .

[41]  Bill C. Hardgrave,et al.  Toward an information systems development acceptance model: the case of object-oriented systems development , 2003, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[42]  Anthony R. Hendrickson,et al.  An assessment of structure and causation of IS usage , 1996, DATB.

[43]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Power, politics, and MIS implementation , 1987, CACM.

[44]  IgbariaMagid,et al.  Why do individuals use computer technology , 1995 .

[45]  Mark Vandenbosch,et al.  Research Report: Richness Versus Parsimony in Modeling Technology Adoption Decisions - Understanding Merchant Adoption of a Smart Card-Based Payment System , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[46]  P. M. Podsakoff,et al.  Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects , 1986 .

[47]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  The future of diffusion research , 2001, DATB.

[48]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[49]  C. Whan Park,et al.  Students and Housewives: Differences in Susceptibility to Reference Group Influence , 1977 .

[50]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Inexperience and experience with online stores: the importance of TAM and trust , 2003, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[51]  S.-S. Liaw,et al.  Understanding user perceptions of World-wide web environments , 2002, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[52]  Gary Hackbarth,et al.  Computer playfulness and anxiety: positive and negative mediators of the system experience effect on perceived ease of use , 2003, Inf. Manag..

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

[54]  William S. Peters,et al.  THE USE OF MODERATED REGRESSION IN JOB REDESIGN DECISIONS , 1979 .

[55]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Predicting E-Services Adoption: A Perceived Risk Facets Perspective , 2002, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[56]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  IT acceptance in a less-developed country: a motivational factor perspective , 2002, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[57]  Peter A. Todd,et al.  Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use, and Usage of Information Technology: A Replication , 1992, MIS Q..

[58]  Adel M. Aladwani.  The development of two tools for measuring the easiness and usefulness of transactional Web sites , 2002, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[59]  Ulrike Gretzel,et al.  Tourism Managers’ Adoption of Marketing Decision Support Systems , 2000 .

[60]  D. Gustafson,et al.  An empirical study of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use on computerized support system use over time , 1994 .

[61]  K. E. Ghorab,et al.  The impact of technology acceptance considerations on system usage, and adopted level of technological sophistication: An empirical investigation , 1997 .

[62]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Information Technology Adoption Across Time: A Cross-Sectional Comparison of Pre-Adoption and Post-Adoption Beliefs , 1999, MIS Q..

[63]  Elena Karahanna,et al.  Time Flies When You're Having Fun: Cognitive Absorption and Beliefs About Information Technology Usage , 2000, MIS Q..

[64]  Idries Shah,et al.  Caravan of Dreams , 1968 .

[65]  Y K ChauPatrick,et al.  Examining a Model of Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals , 2002 .

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

[67]  Rajiv Kohli,et al.  Antecedents of B2C Channel Satisfaction and Preference: Validating e-Commerce Metrics , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[68]  M. Conner,et al.  The Theory of Planned Behaviour , 2004 .

[69]  Afzaal H. Seyal,et al.  Determinants of academic use of the Internet: A structural equation model , 2002, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[70]  Catherine M. Ridings,et al.  Applying TAM to a Paralell Systems Conversion Strategy , 2000 .

[71]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies , 2000, Management Science.

[72]  Mun Y. Yi,et al.  Predicting the use of web-based information systems: self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[73]  J. J. Burnett,et al.  An appraisal of the use of student subjects in marketing research , 1986 .

[74]  Hung-Pin Shih,et al.  An empirical study on predicting user acceptance of e-shopping on the Web , 2004, Inf. Manag..

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

[76]  Susan A. Brown,et al.  Do I really have to? User acceptance of mandated technology , 2002, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[77]  M. Browne,et al.  Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit , 1992 .

[78]  David Gefen,et al.  TAM or Just Plain Habit: A Look at Experienced Online Shoppers , 2003, J. Organ. End User Comput..

[79]  Paul Pavlou,et al.  Consumer Intentions to Adopt Electronic Commerce - Incorporating Trust and Risk in the Technology Acceptance Model , 2001 .

[80]  Moez Limayem,et al.  E-Mail and V-Mail Usage: Generalizing Across Technologies , 2000, J. Organ. Comput. Electron. Commer..

[81]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Creation of Favorable User Perceptions: Exploring the Role of Intrinsic Motivation , 1999, MIS Q..

[82]  Henry C. Lucas,et al.  Technology Use and Performance: A Field Study of Broker Workstations* , 1999 .

[83]  Young-Gul Kim,et al.  Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context , 2000, Inf. Manag..

[84]  Ron Henderson,et al.  Perceived usefulness, ease of use and electronic supermarket use , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[85]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

[86]  Patrick Y. K. Chau,et al.  An Empirical Assessment of a Modified Technology Acceptance Model , 1996, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[87]  Peter Roberts,et al.  Information technology acceptance in a sample of government employees: a test of the technology acceptance model , 2000, Interact. Comput..

[88]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  User acceptance of microcomputer technology: An empirical test , 1993 .

[89]  R. L. Horton.  Some Relationships between Personality and Consumer Decision Making , 1979 .

[90]  Dale Goodhue,et al.  Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance , 1995, MIS Q..

[91]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  An exploratory investigation of the antecedents and impact of internet usage: An individual perspective , 2000, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[92]  Younghwa Lee,et al.  The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and Future , 2003, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

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

[94]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage , 1995 .

[95]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  Are Individual Differences Germane to the Acceptance of New Information Technologies , 1999 .

[96]  Diane M. Strong,et al.  Perceived critical mass effect on groupware acceptance , 2000, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[97]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace1 , 1992 .

[98]  Paul Jen-Hwa Hu,et al.  Investigating healthcare professionals' decisions to accept telemedicine technology: an empirical test of competing theories , 2002, Inf. Manag..

[99]  Hans van der Heijden,et al.  Factors influencing the usage of websites: the case of a generic portal in The Netherlands , 2003, Inf. Manag..

[100]  Mahmut Arslan,et al.  A Cross Cultural Comparison of Consumers' Acceptance of the Web Marketing Facilities , 2001 .

[101]  Marios Koufaris,et al.  Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and Flow Theory to Online Consumer Behavior , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

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

[103]  Bernadette Szajna,et al.  Software Evaluation and Choice: Predictive Validation of the Technology Acceptance Instrument , 1994, MIS Q..

[104]  Paul Jen-Hwa Hu,et al.  Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals: A Model Comparison Approach , 2001, Decis. Sci..

[105]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  User Acceptance Enablers in Individual Decision Making About Technology: Toward an Integrated Model , 2002, Decis. Sci..

[106]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using Multivariate Statistics , 1983 .

[107]  Ingoo Han,et al.  The Impact of Customer Trust and Perception of Security Control on the Acceptance of Electronic Commerce , 2003, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[108]  C. Green,et al.  Normative Influence on the Acceptance of Information Technology , 1998 .

[109]  Mark T. Dishaw,et al.  Extending the Technology Acceptance Model , 1997 .

[110]  Anol Bhattacherjee,et al.  An empirical analysis of the antecedents of electronic commerce service continuance , 2001, Decis. Support Syst..

[111]  DevarajSarv,et al.  Antecedents of B2C Channel Satisfaction and Preference , 2002 .

[112]  Anthony R. Hendrickson,et al.  Desktop video conferencing in virtual workgroups: anticipation, system evaluation and performance , 2001, Inf. Syst. J..

[113]  G. Rose,et al.  PREDICTING GENERAL IT USE : APPLYING TAM TO THE ARABIC WORLD , 1998 .

[114]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  Testing the Determinants of Microcomputer Usage via a Structural Equation Model , 1995, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[115]  Juhani Iivari,et al.  Why do individuals use computer technology? A Finnish case study , 1995, Inf. Manag..

[116]  Hock-Hai Teo,et al.  Evaluating information accessibility and community adaptivity features for sustaining virtual learning communities , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[117]  Hsi-Peng Lu,et al.  Enterprises' Perceptions on Business Process Re-engineering: a Path Analytic Model , 1998 .

[118]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences , 1979 .

[119]  M. D. Dunnette,et al.  Development of moderator variables to enhance the prediction of managerial effectiveness. , 1967, The Journal of applied psychology.

[120]  Roger J. Calantone,et al.  A comparison of three models to explain shop‐bot use on the web , 2002 .

[121]  Ingoo Han,et al.  Effect of trust on customer acceptance of Internet banking , 2002, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl..

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

[123]  Cynthia K. Riemenschneider,et al.  Understanding it adoption decisions in small business: integrating current theories , 2003, Inf. Manag..

[124]  Fred L. Collopy,et al.  Biases in retrospective self-reports of time use: an empirical study of computer users , 1996 .

[125]  Susan Wiedenbeck,et al.  The influence of interaction style and experience on user perceptions of software packages , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[126]  Paul Jen-Hwa Hu,et al.  Examining a Model of Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals: An Exploratory Study , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[127]  T. Cook,et al.  Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings , 1979 .

[128]  Kenneth K. Boyer,et al.  Factors influencing the utilization of Internet purchasing in small organizations , 2003 .

[129]  Ephraim R. McLean,et al.  Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[130]  Roger J. Calantone,et al.  International Technology Adoption , 1994 .

[131]  Said S. Al-Gahtani,et al.  Attitudes, satisfaction and usage: Factors contributing to each in the acceptance of information technology , 1999, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[132]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: A three country study , 1997, Inf. Manag..

[133]  Anthony R. Hendrickson,et al.  Using Davis's Perceived Usefulness and Ease-of-use Instruments for Decision Making: A Confirmatory and Multigroup Invariance Analysis , 1998 .

[134]  Edwin E. Ghiselli,et al.  Moderating effects and differential reliability and validity. , 1963 .

[135]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  A field study of the adoption of software process innovations by information systems professionals , 2000, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[136]  PAUL VAN SCHAIK,et al.  Involving users in the specification of functionality using scenarios and model-based evaluation , 1999, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[137]  Donaldo de Souza Dias.  Managers’ motivation for using information technology , 1998 .

[138]  Timothy Paul Cronan,et al.  On the Test-Retest Reliability of Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use Scales , 1993 .

[139]  Paul van Schaik,et al.  Clinical acceptance of a low-cost portable system for postural assessment , 2000, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[140]  John Lim,et al.  A conceptual framework on the adoption of negotiation support systems , 2003, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[141]  T. M. Rajkumar,et al.  The Application Development Outsourcing Decision: An Application of the Technology Acceptance Model , 2002, J. Comput. Inf. Syst..

[142]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  Training experiences and usage intentions: a field study of a graphical user interface , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[143]  Subhasish Dasgupta,et al.  User Acceptance of E-Collaboration Technology: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model , 2002 .

[144]  Shu-Sheng Liaw,et al.  An investigation of user attitudes toward search engines as an information retrieval tool , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[145]  Lei-da Chen,et al.  Enticing online consumers: an extended technology acceptance perspective , 2002, Inf. Manag..

[146]  Albert L. Lederer,et al.  The technology acceptance model and the World Wide Web , 2000, Decis. Support Syst..

[147]  Paul Jen-Hwa Hu,et al.  Examining technology acceptance by school teachers: a longitudinal study , 2003, Inf. Manag..

[148]  Albert H. Segars,et al.  Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness , 1993 .

[149]  R. Bagozzi.  A Field Investigation of Causal Relations among Cognitions, Affect, Intentions, and Behavior , 1982 .

[150]  Richard J. Whiddett,et al.  A Technology Acceptance Model for Inter-Organisational Electronic Medical Records Systems , 2001, Australas. J. Inf. Syst..

[151]  Cynthia K. Riemenschneider,et al.  Explaining Software Development tool Use with the Technology Acceptance Model , 2001, J. Comput. Inf. Syst..

[152]  Kar Yan Tam,et al.  Determinants of User Acceptance of Digital Libraries: An Empirical Examination of Individual Differences and System Characteristics , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[153]  R. Zmud.  INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND MIS SUCCESS: A REVIEW OF THE EMPIRICAL LITERATURE* , 1979 .

[154]  Sudha Ram,et al.  “Forced” adoption of innovations in organizations: Consequences and implications , 1991 .

[155]  R. Sitgreaves.  Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). , 1979 .

[156]  Hsi-Peng Lu,et al.  The effects of cognitive style and model type on DSS acceptance: An empirical study , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[157]  Chris W. Clegg,et al.  Explaining intranet use with the technology acceptance model , 2001, J. Inf. Technol..

[158]  Akhilesh Bajaj,et al.  A feedback model to understand information system usage , 1998, Inf. Manag..

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

[160]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  An attitudinal model of technology-based self-service: Moderating effects of consumer traits and situational factors , 2002 .

[161]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  An examination of the factors contributing to microcomputer technology acceptance , 1994 .

[162]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  On the use, usefulness, and ease of use of structural equation modeling in MIS research: a note of caution , 1995 .

[163]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[164]  Edwin E. Ghiselli,et al.  The Prediction of Predictability , 1960 .

[165]  Hassan M. Selim,et al.  An empirical investigation of student acceptance of course websites , 2003, Comput. Educ..

[166]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[167]  Ko de Ruyter,et al.  Moderated group chat: an empirical assessment of a new e‐service encounter , 2002 .

[168]  Hun Choi,et al.  An empirical study on the adoption of information appliances with a focus on interactive TV , 2003, Telematics Informatics.

[169]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  Investigating Determinants of Software Developers' Intentions to Follow Methodologies , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[170]  Gordon Lowry,et al.  Modelling user acceptance of building management systems , 2002 .

[171]  Diane M. Strong,et al.  Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs , 1999, Inf. Manag..

[172]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  The Role of Innovation Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of Information Technologies , 1997 .

[173]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model , 2003, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[174]  David Gefen,et al.  The impact of developer responsiveness on perceptions of usefulness and ease of use: an extension of the technology acceptance model , 1998, DATB.

[175]  S. Zedeck.  Problems with the use of "moderator" variables. , 1971 .

[176]  Fred J. Heemstra,et al.  Senior executives' use of information technology , 2001, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[177]  Qingxiong Ma,et al.  The Technology Acceptance Model: A Meta-Analysis of Empirical Findings , 2004, J. Organ. End User Comput..

[178]  Helen J. Richardson,et al.  A ‘smart house’ is not a home: The domestication of ICTs , 2009, Inf. Syst. Frontiers.

[179]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. , 1959, Psychological bulletin.

[180]  John E. Hunter,et al.  Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings , 1991 .

[181]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Why Don't Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Influence, and Their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior , 2000, MIS Q..

[182]  Cynthia M. Jackson,et al.  Toward an Understanding of the Behavioral Intention to Use an Information System , 1997 .

[183]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: three experiments , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[184]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  Adoption intention in GSS: relative importance of beliefs , 1995, DATB.

[185]  Patrick Y. K. Chau,et al.  Influence of Computer Attitude and Self-Efficacy on IT Usage Behavior , 2001, J. Organ. End User Comput..

[186]  Lawrence Loh,et al.  The adoption of Internet-based stock trading: a conceptual framework and empirical results , 1998, J. Inf. Technol..

[187]  Judy Chuan-Chuan Lin,et al.  Towards an understanding of the behavioural intention to use a web site , 2000, Int. J. Inf. Manag..