Open Access
MATEC Web of Conferences
Volume 56, 2016
2016 8th International Conference on Computer and Automation Engineering (ICCAE 2016)
Article Number 01012
Number of page(s) 6
Section Computer and Information technologies
Published online 26 April 2016
  1. F. D. Davis, A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management, (1986).
  2. M. Fishbein, I. Ajzen, Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research, Boston, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley (1975).
  3. F. D. Davis, Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart., 13(3), 319–340 (1989). [CrossRef]
  4. I. Ajzen, The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process., 50(2), 179–211 (1991). [CrossRef]
  5. F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi, P. R. Warshaw, User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Manag. Sci.’ 982–1003 (1989). [CrossRef]
  6. V. Venkatesh, F. D. Davis, A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Manag.Sci., 46(2), 186–204 (2000). [CrossRef]
  7. J. Schepers, M. Wetzels, A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Info. & Manag., 44(1), 90–103 (2007). [CrossRef]
  8. V. Venkatesh, H. Bala, Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decis. Sci., 39(2), 273–315 (2008). [CrossRef]
  9. W. R. King, J. He, A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Info. & Manag., 43(6), 740–755 (2006). [CrossRef]
  10. V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quart., 24(1), 115–139 (2000). [CrossRef]
  11. V. Venkatesh, Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion in the technology acceptance model. Info. Syst. Res., 11(4), 342–365 (2000). [CrossRef]
  12. V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G.B. Davis, F. D. Davis, User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quart., 27(3), 425–478 (2003). [CrossRef]
  13. T. J. Larsen, A. M. Sorebo, O. Sorebo, The role of task-technology fit as users motivation to continue information system use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 25(3), 778–784(2009). [CrossRef]
  14. J. M. O. Egea, M. V. R. Gonzales, Explaining physicians’ acceptance of EHCR systems: An extension of TAM with trust and risk factors. Comput. Hum. Behav., 27(1),319–332 (2011). [CrossRef]
  15. T. S. Behrend, E. N. Wiebe, J. E. London, E. C. Johnson, Cloud computing adoption and usage in community colleges. Behav. & Info. Tech., 30(2), 231–240 (2011). [CrossRef]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.