Elsevier

Information & Management

Volume 43, Issue 6, September 2006, Pages 740-755
Information & Management

A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.05.003Get rights and content

Abstract

A statistical meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model (TAM) as applied in various fields was conducted using 88 published studies that provided sufficient data to be credible. The results show TAM to be a valid and robust model that has been widely used, but which potentially has wider applicability. A moderator analysis involving user types and usage types was performed to investigate conditions under which TAM may have different effects. The study confirmed the value of using students as surrogates for professionals in some TAM studies, and perhaps more generally. It also revealed the power of meta-analysis as a rigorous alternative to qualitative and narrative literature review methods.

Section snippets

Summarizing TAM research

Meta-analysis, as used here, is a statistical literature synthesis method that provides the opportunity to view the research context by combining and analyzing the quantitative results of many empirical studies [31]. It is a rigorous alternative to qualitative and narrative literature reviews [80], [108]. In the social and behavioral sciences, meta-analysis is the most commonly used quantitative method [34]. Some leading journals have encouraged the use of this methodology [e.g., 21].

TAM has

Methodology of our study

The papers included in the analysis were identified using “TAM” and “Technology Acceptance Model” as keywords and specifying “article” as the document type in the social science citation index (SSCI) in the fall of 2004. The initial search produced 178 papers. The elimination of irrelevant papers (such as those referring to tamoxifen in pharmacology, transfer appropriate monitoring in experimental psychology and Tam as a family name) produced a total of 134 papers.

This search was supplemented

Analysis

This meta-analysis was conducted on a “random effects” basis. The assumption underlying this was that the samples in individual studies are taken from populations that had varying effect sizes. This appeared to be a more descriptive assumption than the alternative (a “fixed effects” model that assumed that there was a single true effect in the “super population” from which the populations were drawn) [24]. The possible differential effect of moderators across studies, such as the nature of

Conclusions

This meta-analysis of 88 TAM studies involving more than 12,000 observations provided powerful large-sample evidence that:

  • (a)

    The TAM measures (PU,U, and BI) are highly reliable and may be used in a variety of contexts.

  • (b)

    TAM correlations, while strong, have considerable variability, suggesting that moderator variables can help explain the effects. The experience level of users was shown to be a moderator in a number of studies but was not pursued here because of the difficulty in identifying the

Summary

The meta-analysis rigorously substantiates the conclusion that has been widely reached through qualitative analyses: that TAM is a powerful and robust predictive model. It is also shown to be a “complete mediating” model in that the effect of ease of use on behavioral intention is primary through usefulness.

The search for moderators in terms of type of user and type of use demonstrated that professionals and general users produce quite different results. However, students, who are often used as

William R. King holds the title university professor in the KATZ Graduate School of Business at the University of Pittsburgh. He has published more than 300 papers and 15 books in the areas of information systems, management science, and strategic planning. He has served as founding president of the Association for Information Systems, President of TIMS (now INFORMS) and editor-in-chief of the MIS Quarterly.

References (48)

  • J. Cohen

    A power primer

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1992)
  • F.D. Davis

    Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology

    MIS Quarterly

    (1989)
  • F.D. Davis et al.

    User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models

    Management Science

    (1989)
  • F.D. Davis et al.

    Toward preprototype user acceptance testing of new information systems: implications for software project management

    IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management

    (2004)
  • D. Eden et al.

    From the editors: replication, meta-analysis, scientific progress, and AMJ's publication policy

    Academy of Management Journal

    (2002)
  • A.P. Field

    Meta-analysis of correlation coefficients: a Monte Carlo comparison of fixed- and random-effects methods

    Psychological Methods

    (2001)
  • A.P. Field

    The problem in using fixed-effects models of meta-analysis on real-world data

    Understanding Statistics

    (2003)
  • M. Fishbein et al.

    Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research

    (1975)
  • D. Gefen

    What makes an ERP implementation relationship worthwhile: linking trust mechanisms and ERP usefulness

    Journal of Management Information Systems

    (2004)
  • D. Gefen et al.

    Inexperience and experience with online stores: the importance of TAM and trust

    IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management

    (2003)
  • G.V. Glass

    Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research

    Educational Researcher

    (1976)
  • B.C. Hardgrave et al.

    Investigating determinants of software developers’ intentions to follow methodologies

    Journal of Management Information Systems

    (2003)
  • L.V. Hedges et al.

    Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis

    (1985)
  • Cited by (1895)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    William R. King holds the title university professor in the KATZ Graduate School of Business at the University of Pittsburgh. He has published more than 300 papers and 15 books in the areas of information systems, management science, and strategic planning. He has served as founding president of the Association for Information Systems, President of TIMS (now INFORMS) and editor-in-chief of the MIS Quarterly.

    Jun He is an assistant professor of MIS at the University of Michigan-Dearborn. He has an MBA from Tsinghua Univeristy and a PhD degree from the University of Pittsburgh. His research interests include systems design and development, knowledge management, and methodological issues. He has presented a number of papers at meetings of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and the Americas’ Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), published in Communications of the Association for Information Systems, and in a book of Current Topics in Management.

    View full text