TAM (Davis 1989Davis F (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3):319-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(98)00028-0 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(98)00...
) |
|
External variables, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude, intention to use |
|
Used in the study due to higher suitability of the constructs to the study objective. TAM is more suitable to be used in this study because it does not have constructs and variables associated with consumption or financial aspects that are not applicable to the work context |
TAM 1 (Davis and Venkatesh 1996Davis FD, Venkatesh V (1996) A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sci 27(3):451-481. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb01822.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996...
) |
|
External variables, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, behavioral intention |
|
The TAM 1 was adapted to assess the adoption of information systems, with the following items being incorporated into its external variables: system characteristics, involvement of the user in the system development and nature of the deployment process. We considered the variables incorporated to the TAM 1 as incompatible to the goal of this study and therefore we discarded their use in the research |
TAM 2 (Venkatesh 2000Venkatesh V (2000) Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, acceptance model. Information Systems Research 11(4):342-365. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872 https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11...
) |
|
Subjective norm, image, job relevance, output quality, result demonstrability, experience, voluntariness, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, intention to use, use behavior |
|
The TAM 2 followed the same objective of the TAM 1 in the sense of adding variables that could explain the adoption of information systems in a better way. Variables that preceded the perceived usefulness construct, such as: Job Relevance, Output Quality, Result Demonstrability and Voluntariness were added to the model. These variables are not related to the goal of this study and therefore we discarded the model |
UTAUT (Venkatesh et al. 2003Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27(3):425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540 https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540...
) |
|
Performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, behavioral intention, use behavioral |
|
The UTAUT was developed with the purpose of unifying the previous proposals of models that has been developed so far (TAM, TAM 1 and TAM 2). The following constructs were added: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions. The model was maintained with the purpose of assessing information systems. We discarded this model due to the inadequacy of the constructs to the research goal |
TAM 3 (Venkatesh and Bala 2008Venkatesh V, Bala H (2008) Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions. Decision Sciences Institute 39(2):273-315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008...
) |
|
Experience, voluntariness, subjective norm, image, job relevance, output quality, result demonstrability, anchor, adjustment, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, behavioral intention, use behavior |
|
The TAM 3 was presented some years after the UTAUT model and brought several changes, especially with regard to constructs that preceded the perceived usefulness and ease of use. The ‘anchor’ and ‘adjustment’ of constructs had variables that are not applicable to the context of this study; therefore, the model was disregarded due to the inadequacy of the constructs to the research goal |
UTAUT 2 (Venkatesh, Thong and Xu 2012Venkatesh V, Thong J, Xu X (2012) Consumer acceptance and user of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1):157-178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412 https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412...
) |
|
Performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, hedonic motivation, price value, habit, behavioral intention, use behavioral, age, gender, experience |
|
The UTAUT 2 was developed in order to provide the analysis of the consumer’s behavior. The UTAUT 2 model focus on the behavior analysis that is not related to the goal of this study, and its use was discarded. |