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

Preview

Summary

Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology Author(s): Fred D. Davis Source: MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3 (Sep., 1989), pp. 319-340 Published by: Management Information Systems Research Center, University of Minnesota Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/s...

Description

Accelerat ing t he world's research.

Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology Sudhanshu Maurya MIS quarterly

Cite this paper

Downloaded from Academia.edu 

Get the citation in MLA, APA, or Chicago styles

Related papers

Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

IT Usefulness and Ease of Use IT Usefulness and Ease of Use IT Usefulness and Ease of Us… Ellena Yuanit a

Davis f. perceived udsefulness perceived ease of use and user accept ance of informat ion t echnology Mohamed Easwey Informat ion Technology Adopt ion Across T ime: A Cross-Sect ional Comparison of Pre-Adopt ion and P… Arslan Uppal

Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology Author(s): Fred D. Davis Source: MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3 (Sep., 1989), pp. 319-340 Published by: Management Information Systems Research Center, University of Minnesota Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/249008 Accessed: 10/12/2010 07:59 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=misrc. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Management Information Systems Research Center, University of Minnesota is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to MIS Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

ITUsefulnessand Easeof Use

Perceived Perceived and Use,

Usefulness, of

Ease User

Acceptance

of

Information

dent to perceived usefulness, as opposed to a parallel, direct determinantof system usage. Implicationsare drawn for future research on user acceptance. end user Keywords: User acceptance, computing,user measurement ACMCategories: H.1.2, K.6.1, K.6.2, K.6.3

Technology Introduction By: Fred D. Davis Computer and Information Systems Graduate School of Business Administration University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109

Abstract Validmeasurement scales for predicting user acceptance of computers are in short supply. Most subjective measures used in practice are unvalidated, and their relationship to system usage is unknown. The present research develops and validates new scales for two specific variables, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, which are hypothesized to be fundamental determinants of user acceptance. Definitionsfor these two variables were used to develop scale items thatwere pretested for content validityand then tested for reliability and construct validityin two studies involving a total of 152 users and four applicationprograms. Themeasures were refinedand streamlined, resultingin two six-item scales with reliabilities of .98 for usefulness and .94 for ease of use. The scales exhibited high convergent, and factorialvalidity.Perceivedusediscriminant, fulness was significantlycorrelatedwithbothselfreported current usage (r=.63, Study 1) and self-predictedfutureusage (r= .85, Study2). Perceived ease of use was also significantlycorrelated with currentusage (r=.45, Study 1) and futureusage (r=.59, Study 2). In both studies, usefulness had a significantlygreater correlation with usage behavior than did ease of use. Regression analyses suggest that perceived ease of use may actually be a causal antece-

Information technologyoffersthe potentialforsubstantially improving white collar performance (Curley, 1984; Edelman, 1981; Sharda, et al., 1988). But performance gains are often obstructed by users' unwillingnessto accept and use available systems (Bowen, 1986; Young, 1984). Because of the persistence and importance of this problem, explaining user acceptance has been a long-standingissue in MIS research (Swanson, 1974; Lucas, 1975; Schultz and Slevin, 1975; Robey, 1979; Ginzberg,1981; Swanson, 1987). Althoughnumerousindividual, organizational,and technologicalvariableshave been investigated(Benbasat and Dexter, 1986; Franz and Robey, 1986; Markus and BjornAnderson, 1987; Robey and Farrow,1982), research has been constrained by the shortage of high-qualitymeasures for key determinants of user acceptance. Past research indicatesthat many measures do not correlate highly with system use (DeSanctis, 1983; Ginzberg, 1981; Schewe, 1976; Srinivasan, 1985), and the size of the usage correlationvaries greatlyfromone study to the next depending on the particular measures used (Baroudi,et al., 1986; Barkiand Huff,1985; Robey, 1979; Swanson, 1982, 1987). The developmentof improvedmeasures for key theoreticalconstructs is a research priorityfor the informationsystems field. Aside fromtheir theoreticalvalue, better measures for predictingand explainingsystem use would have great practicalvalue, both for vendors who would like to assess user demand for new design ideas, and for informationsystems managers withinuser organizationswho would like to evaluate these vendor offerings. Unvalidatedmeasures are routinelyused in practice today throughout the entire spectrum of design, selection, implementationand evaluation activities.For example: designers withinvendor organizationssuch as IBM(Gould,et al., 1983), Xerox(Brewley,et al., 1983), and DigitalEquip-

MIS Quarterly/September1989 319

ITUsefulnessand Ease of Use

ment Corporation(Good, et al., 1986) measure user perceptions to guide the development of new informationtechnologies and products;industry publications often report user surveys (e.g., Greenberg,1984; Rushinekand Rushinek, 1986); several methodologies for software selection call for subjective user inputs (e.g., Goslar, 1986; Kleinand Beck, 1987); and contemporarydesign principles emphasize measuringuser reactionsthroughoutthe entiredesign process (Andersonand Olson 1985; Gould and Lewis, 1985; Johansen and Baker,1984; Mantei and Teorey, 1988; Norman,1983; Shneiderman, 1987). Despite the widespread use of subjective measures in practice, littleattentionis paid to the qualityof the measures used or how well they correlate with usage behavior. Given the low usage correlations often observed in research studies, those who base importantbusiness decisions on unvalidatedmeasures may be gettingmisinformedabout a system's acceptabilityto users. The purpose of this research is to pursue better measures for predictingand explaininguse. The investigation focuses on two theoretical constructs, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, which are theorized to be fundamental determinantsof system use. Definitions forthese constructsare formulatedand the theoreticalrationalefor their hypothesized influence on system use is reviewed.New, multi-item measurementscales for perceivedusefulness and perceived ease of use are developed, pretested, and then validatedin two separate empiricalstudies. Correlationand regression analyses examine the empiricalrelationshipbetween the new measures and self-reportedindicantsof system use. The discussion concludes by drawingimplicationsfor future research.

Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use Whatcauses people to accept or rejectinformationtechnology?Amongthe manyvariablesthat may influencesystem use, previousresearchsuggests two determinantsthat are especially important.First,people tend to use or not use an applicationto the extent they believe it willhelp them performtheir job better. We refer to this firstvariableas perceived usefulness. Second, even if potentialusers believe that a given applicationis useful, they may, at the same time,

320 MIS Quarterly/September1989

believe that the systems is too hardto use and that the performancebenefits of usage are outweighed by the effort of using the application. That is, in additionto usefulness, usage is theorizedto be influencedby perceived ease of use. Perceived usefulness is defined here as "the degree to which a person believes that using a particularsystem would enhance his or her job performance."This follows from the definition of the word useful: "capableof being used advantageously."Withinan organizationalcontext, people are generally reinforcedfor good performance by raises, promotions, bonuses, and other rewards(Pfeffer,1982; Schein, 1980; Vroom,1964). A system high in perceived usefulness, in turn,is one for which a user believes in the existence of a positive use-performance relationship. Perceived ease of use, in contrast,refersto "the degree to which a person believes that using a particularsystem would be free of effort."This follows from the definitionof "ease": "freedom from difficultyor great effort."Effortis a finite resource that a person may allocate to the various activitiesfor which he or she is responsible (Radner and Rothschild, 1975). All else being equal, we claim, an applicationperceived to be easier to use than another is more likelyto be accepted by users.

Theoretical Foundations The theoreticalimportanceof perceived usefulness and perceivedease of use as determinants of user behavioris indicatedby several diverse lines of research. The impactof perceived usefulness on system utilizationwas suggested by the workof Schultzand Slevin (1975) and Robey (1979). Schultz and Slevin (1975) conductedan exploratoryfactor analysis of 67 questionnaire items, which yielded seven dimensions. Of these, the "performance" dimension,interpreted by the authors as the perceived "effect of the model on the manager'sjob performance,"was most highlycorrelatedwithself-predicteduse of a decision model (r=.61). Usingthe Schultzand Slevinquestionnaire,Robey (1979) findsthe performance dimensionto be most correlatedwith two objectivemeasures of system usage (r=.79 and .76). Buildingon Vertinsky,et al.'s (1975) expectancy model, Robey (1979) theorizes that: "A system that does not help people perform their jobs is not likelyto be received favorably

ITUsefulness and Ease of Use

in spite of careful implementationefforts" (p. 537). Althoughthe perceived use-performance contingency, as presented in Robey's (1979) model, parallelsour definitionof perceived usefulness, the use of Schultz and Slevin's (1975) performance factor to operationalize performance expectancies is problematicfor several reasons: the instrumentis empiricallyderived via exploratoryfactoranalysis;a somewhat low ratio of sample size to items is used (2:1); four of thirteenitems have loadings below .5, and several of the items clearly fall outside the definition of expected performance improvements (e.g., "Myjob will be more satisfying,""Others will be more aware of what I am doing,"etc.). An alternativeexpectancy-theoreticmodel, derived from Vroom (1964), was introducedand tested by DeSanctis (1983). The use-performance expectancy was not analyzed separately from performance-rewardinstrumentalitiesand measrewardvalences. Instead,a matrix-oriented urementprocedurewas used to producean overall index of "motivationalforce" that combined these three constructs. "Force"had small but significant correlations with usage of a DSS withina business simulationexperiment(correlations rangedfrom.04 to .26). The contrastbetween DeSanctis's correlationsand the ones observed by Robey underscorethe importanceof measurement in predictingand explaininguse.

Self-efficacytheory The importanceof perceived ease of use is supported by Bandura's(1982) extensive research on self-efficacy, defined as "judgmentsof how well one can execute courses of action required to deal withprospectivesituations"(p. 122). Selfefficacy is similarto perceived ease of use as definedabove. Self-efficacybeliefs are theorized to functionas proximaldeterminantsof behavior. Bandura'stheory distinguishes self-efficacy judgments from outcome judgments, the latter being concerned with the extent to which a behavior,once successfully executed, is believed to be linkedto valued outcomes. Bandura's"outcome judgment"variableis similarto perceived usefulness. Bandura argues that self-efficacy and outcome beliefs have differingantecedents and that, "Inany given instance, behaviorwould be best predicted by considering both selfefficacy and outcome beliefs" (p. 140). Hill,et al. (1987) findthat both self-efficacyand outcome beliefs exert an influenceon decisions

to learn a computerlanguage. The self efficacy paradigmdoes not offer a general measure applicable to our purposes since efficacy beliefs are theorized to be situationally-specific,with measures tailored to the domain under study (Bandura, 1982). Self efficacy research does, however, provideone of several theoreticalperpectives suggesting that perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness functionas basic determinantsof user behavior.

Cost-benefitparadigm The cost-benefitparadigmfrombehavioraldecision theory (Beach and Mitchell,1978; Johnson and Payne, 1985; Payne, 1982) is also relevant to perceived usefulness and ease of use. This research explains people's choice among various decision-makingstrategies (such as linear compensatory,conjunctive,disjunctiveand elmination-by-aspects)in terms of a cognitivetradeoff betweenthe effortrequiredto employthe strategy and the quality (accuracy) of the resulting decision. This approach has been effective for explainingwhy decision makersaltertheirchoice strategies in response to changes in task complexity.Althoughthe cost-benefit approach has mainly concerned itself with unaided decision making, recent work has begun to apply the same form of analysis to the effectiveness of informationdisplay formats (Jarvenpaa, 1989; Kleinmuntzand Schkade, 1988). Cost-benefitresearch has primarilyused objective measures of accuracyand effortin research studies, downplayingthe distinctionbetween objective and subjective accuracy and effort. Increased emphasison subjectiveconstructsis warranted, however, since (1) a decision maker's choice of strategy is theorized to be based on subjectiveas opposed to objectiveaccuracyand effort(Beach and Mitchell,1978), and (2) other research suggests that subjectivemeasures are often in disagreementwiththeirojbective counterparts(Abelson and Levi, 1985; Adelbrattand Montgomery,1980; Wright,1975). Introducing measures of the decision maker'sown perceived costs and benefits, independentof the decision actually made, has been suggested as a way of mitigating criticismsthatthe cost/benefit framework is tautological(Abelson and Levi, 1985). The distinctionmade herein between perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use is similar to the distinctionbetween subjective decisionmakingperformanceand effort.

MIS Quarterly/September 1989

321

ITUsefulnessand Easeof Use

Adoptionof innovations Research on the adoption of innovations also suggests a prominentrole for perceived ease of use. Intheir meta-analysisof the relationship between the characteristicsof an innovationand its adoption,Tornatzkyand Klein(1982) findthat compatibility,relative advantage, and complexity have the most consistent significantrelationships across a broad range of innovationtypes. Complexity,defined by Rogers and Shoemaker (1971) as "the degree to which an innovation is perceived as relativelydifficultto understand and use" (p. 154), parallels perceived ease of use quite closely. As Tornatzkyand Klein(1982) pointout, however,compatibilityand relativeadvantage have both been dealt with so broadly and inconsistentlyin the literatureas to be difficult to interpret.

Evaluationof information reports Past research within MIS on the evaluation of informationreports echoes the distinctionbetween usefulness and ease of use made herein. Larckerand Lessig (1980) factor analyzed six items used to rate fourinformation reports.Three items load on each of two distinct factors: (1) perceived importance,whichLarckerand Lessig define as "the qualitythat causes a particular informationset to acquire relevance to a decision maker,"and the extent to which the informationelements are "a necessary inputfortask accomplishment," and (2) perceived usableness, which is defined as the degree to which "the informationformat is unambiguous, clear or readable"(p. 123). These two dimensionsare similarto perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use as defined above, repsectively,although Larckerand Lessig refer to the two dimensions collectivelyas "perceivedusefulness." Reliabilitiesfor the two dimensions fall in the range of .64-.77, short of the .80 minimallevel recommended for basic research. Correlations with actual use of informationreportswere not addressed in their study.

Channeldispositionmodel Swanson (1982, 1987) introducedand tested a model of "channeldisposition"forexplainingthe choice and use of informationreports.The concept of channel dispositionis defined as having

322 MIS Quarterly/September1989

two components: attributedinformationquality and attributedaccess quality.Potentialusers are hypothesized to select and use informationreports based on an implicitpsychologicaltradeoff between informationqualityand associated costs of access. Swanson (1987) performedan exploratoryfactor analysis in order to measure informationquality and access quality.A fivefactorsolutionwas obtained,withone factorcorresponding to informationquality (Factor #3, "value"),and one to access quality(Factor#2, "accessibility").Inspectingthe items that load on these factors suggests a close correspondence to perceived usefulness and ease of use. Items such as "important,""relevant,""useful,"and "valuable"load stronglyon the value dimension. Thus, value parallelsperceived usefulness. The fact that relevance and usefulness load on the same factor agrees with informationscientists, who emphasize the conceptual similaritybetween the usefulness and relevance notions (Saracevic,1975). Several of Swanson's "accessibility"items, such as "convenient,""controllable," "easy," and "unburdensome,"correspond to perceived ease of use as defined above. Althoughthe studywas more exploratorythan confirmatory,with no attempts at construct validation, it does agree withthe conceptualdistinction between usefulness and ease of use. Selfreportedinformationchannel use correlated.20 with the value dimension and .13 with the accessibilitydimension.

Non-MISstudies Outside the MIS domain, a marketingstudy by Hauserand Simmie (1981) concerninguser perceptions of alternativecommunicationtechnologies similarlyderivedtwo underlyingdimensions: ease of use and effectiveness, the latterbeing similarto the perceived usefulness constructdefined above. Bothease of use and effectiveness were influentialin the formationof user preferences regardinga set of alternativecommunication technologies. The human-computerinteraction (HCI) research community has heavily emphasized ease of use in design (Branscomb and Thomas, 1984; Card, et al., 1983; Gould and Lewis, 1985). For the most part, however, these studies have focused on objective measures of ease of use, such as task completion time and errorrates. In many vendor organizations, usabilitytesting has become a standard phase in the product development cycle, with

ITUsefulnessand Easeof Use

large investmentsintest facilitiesand instrumentation.Althoughobjective ease of use is clearly relevantto user perform...