Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya • ISSN 2075-7999
peer-reviewed • open access journal
      

 

Kalinichenko N.S., Velichkovsky B.B., Abbakumov D.F. Empirical evaluation of Russian version of the Technology Acceptance Questionnaire

Full text in Russian: Калиниченко Н.С., Величковский Б.Б., Аббакумов Д.Ф. Эмпирическая верификация русскоязычной версии опросника Принятия информационных технологий

National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, Moscow, Russia
Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

About author
Suggested citation

Nowadays one could hardly imagine the information systems evaluation without taking into account user motivation usually operationalized by survey methods. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) proposed by F. Davis, as the most universal, powerful, and cited model is widely used in the field of distance learning, healthcare, and public services. TAM has become an early attempt to capture psychological factors for studying different features of user`s adaptation and actual usage of information technologies by the target populations. In the West, the questionnaires based on TAM are used by system designers to get feedback on various characteristics and functions of the interface, as a justification for choosing between software packages, for evaluating the effectiveness of training. The study provides the analysis of reliability-consistency of TAM scales: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitudes toward using and behavioral intention (Cronbach's alpha), homogeneity-uniformity (Pearson correlation coefficient) and discrimination (Guildford criterion) of individual items, the reliability of the whole test (half-split) and factorial validity of the Russian version of the questionnaire (confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory structural equation modeling). The listed tools of the classical test theory were supplemented by the method of modern psychometrics for the analysis of polytomous scales (generalized partial credit model). The overall reliability index of the questionnaire was 0,872; the factor structure identified largely corresponds to the initial theoretical framework.

Keywords: technology acceptance, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, user experience 

Full text in Russian >>

References
Cyrillic letters are transliterated according to BSI standards. The titles are given in author’s translation.

Abdullah F., Ward R. Developing a general extended technology acceptance model for e-learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 2016, 56, 238–256. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.036.

Adams D.A., Nelson R.R., Todd P.A. Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: a replication. MIS Quarterly, 1992, 16(2), 227–247. doi: 10.2307/249577.

Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decisions Process-es, 1991, 50(2), 179–211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.

Aloysius J.A., Davis F.D., Wilson D.D., Taylor A.R., Kottemann J.E. User acceptance of multi-criteria decision support systems: the impact of preference elicitation techniques. European Journal of Operational Research, 2006, 169(1), 273–285.

Asparouhov T., Muthén B. Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary approach, 2009, 16(3), 397–438. doi: 10.1080/10705510903008204.

Bach M.P., Čeljo A., Zoroja J. Technology Acceptance Model for business intelligence systems: pre-liminary research. Procedia Computer Science, 2016, 100, 995-1001. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.270.

Baran K.S., Stock W.G. Between the profiles: another such bias. Technology acceptance studies on social network services. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, 2015. pp. 71–77.

Baturin N.A., Kim T.D., Naumenko A.S. Mnogourovnevaya model' innovatsionnogo poten-tsiala professionala i podkhody k ee operatsionalizatsii. Vestnik YuUrGU. Seriya «Psikhologiya», 2010, 4(8), 48–57. (in Russian)

Buslaeva E. Technology Acceptance Model: evidence from mobile banking in Russia. Master thesis. National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, Moscow, 2016. 

Davis F.D. A Technology Acceptance Model for empirically testing new end-user information sys-tems: theory and results. PhD dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, 1985.

Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technolo-gy. MIS Quarterly, 1989, 13(3), 319-340. doi: 10.2307/249008.

Davis F.D. User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal Man-Machine Studies, 1993, 38, 475–487.

DeLone W., McLean E.R. Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Infor-mation Systems Research, 1992, 3(4), 60–95. doi: 10.1287/isre.3.1.60.

DeVellis R.F. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 2012.

Gorry G.A., Morton M.S.S. A framework for management information systems. Working paper Al-fred P. Sloan School of Management, 1971, 510 – 571.

Hartley C., Brecht M., Pagerly P., Weeks G., Chapanis A. & Hoecker D. Subjective time estimates of work times by office workers. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 1977, 50, 23–36.

Karahanna E., Straub D.W. The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease of use. Infor-mation & Management, 1999, 35, 237–250. doi:10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00096-2.

Lee D.Y., Lehto M.R. User acceptance of YouTube for procedural learning: an extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Computers & Education, 2013, 61, 193–208.

Lee Y., Kozar K.A., Larsen K.R.T. The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and the Future. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 2003, 12(50), 752–780.

Leonova A.B., Motovilina I.A. Professional'nyi stress v protsesse organizatsionnykh izmenenii. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal, 2006, No. 2, 78–92. (in Russian)

Leven E.I., Suslov A.B. Uroven' vladeniya tsifrovymi navykami v Rossii i stranakh ES. Ekspress-informatsiya ISIEZ NIU VShE, July 9, 2020. https://issek.hse.ru/news/377859466.html.

Marangunić N., Granić A. Technology Acceptance Model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Universal Access in the Information Society, 2015, 14(1), 81–95.

Mashin V.A. Metodicheskoe rukovodstvo po otsenke testovykh protsedur, primenyaemykh pri rabote s personalom, 2008. http://mashinva.narod.ru/arch/PSY13a.pdf. (in Russian)

Mkrtychyan G.A., Isaeva O.M. Prichiny soprotivleniya personala organizatsionnym iz-meneniyam: vzglyad menedzherov kak agentov peremen. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya, 2015, 5(1), 22–33. (in Russian)

Mathieson K. Predicting user intentions: comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theo-ry of Planned Behavior. Information Systems Research, 1991, 2(3), 173–191.

Park N., Rhoads M., Hou J., Lee K.M. Understanding the acceptance of teleconferencing systems among employees: an extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Computers in Human Behav-ior, 2014, 39, 118–127.

Pikkarainen T., Pikkarainen K., Karjaluoto H., Pahnila S. Consumer acceptance of online banking: an extension of the technology acceptance model, Internet Research, 2004, 14(3), 224–235.

Platonov V.V. «Paradoks Solou» dvadtsat' let spustya, ili ob issledovanii vliyaniya in-novatsii v in-formatsionnykh tekhnologiyakh na rost proizvoditel'nosti. Finansy i Biznes, 2007, No. 3, 28–38. (in Russian)

Rahman M.M., Lesch M.F., Horrey W.J., Strawderman L. Assessing the utility of TAM, TPB, and UTAUT for advanced driver acceptance systems. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2017, 108, 361–373.

Rao P., Seetharamaiah P. Organizational strategies and social interaction influence in software devel-opment effort estimation. Journal of Computer Engineering, 2014, 16(2), 29–40.

Schepers J., Wetzels M. A meta-analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model: investigating subject-ing norms and moderation effects. Information & Management, 2007, 44, 90–103.

Shmelev A.G. Prakticheskaya testologiya. M.: OOO «IPTs “Maska”», 2013. (in Russian)

Suris L.M. (Red.). Bol'shoi slovar' inostrannykh slov. M.: Adept, 2003. (in Russian)

Svendsen G.B., Johnsen J.K., Almas-Sorensen L., Vitterso J. Personality and technology acceptance: the influence of personality factors on the core constructs of the Technology Acceptance Model. Be-havior & Information Technology, 2013, 32(4), 323–334.

Swanson E.B. Information System Implementation Bridging the Gap between Design and Utilization, Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1988.

Tarhini A., Hone K., Liu X. Measuring the moderating effect of gender and age on e-learning ac-ceptance in England: a structural equation modelling approach for an extended Technology Ac-ceptance Model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2014, 51(2), 163–184. doi:10.2190/EC.51.2.b.

Tkhostov A.Sh. Kul'turno-istoricheskaya patopsikhologiya. M.: Kanon-plyus, 2020.

Van Schaik P.V., Bettany-Saltikov J.A., Warren J.G. Critical acceptance of a low-cost portable sys-tem for postural assessment. Behaviour & Information Technology, 2002, 21(1), 47–57.

Venkatesh V., Davis F.D. A theoretical extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: four longi-tudinal field studies. Management Science, 2000, 46(2), 186–204.

Voiskunskii A.E. Issledovaniya v oblasti psikhologii komp'yuterizatsii: istoriya i aktual'noe sos-toyanie. Natsional'nyi psikhologicheskii zhurnal, 2006, 1(1), 58–62. (in Russian)

Wu M., Chou H., Weng Y., Huang Y. TAM2-based study of website user behavior – using web 2.0 websites as an example. WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics, 2011, 8(4), 133–151.

Yi M.Y., Hwang Y. Predicting the use of web-based information systems: self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2003, 59, 431–449.

Zagvyazinskii V.I., Strokova T.A. Sposoby profilaktiki soprotivleniya innovatsiyam. Innovatsionnye proekty i programmy v obrazovanii, 2014, No.6, 29–35. (in Russian) 

Received 06 November 2020. Date of publication: 01 September 2021.

About author

Kalinichenko Nadezhda S. Postgraduate student, National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, ul. Myasnitskaya, 20, 101000 Moscow, Russia.
E-mail: Этот адрес электронной почты защищен от спам-ботов. У вас должен быть включен JavaScript для просмотра.

Velichkovsky Вoris B. Doctor of Psychology, Associate professor of the Department of Psychology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, ul. Mokhovaya, 11/9, 125009 Moscow, Russia.
E-mail: Этот адрес электронной почты защищен от спам-ботов. У вас должен быть включен JavaScript для просмотра.

Abbakumov Dmitry F. Doctor of Educational Sciences (KU Leuven, Belgium), National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, ul. Myasnitskaya, 20, 101000 Moscow, Russia.
E-mail: Этот адрес электронной почты защищен от спам-ботов. У вас должен быть включен JavaScript для просмотра.  

Suggested citation

Kalinichenko N.S., Velichkovsky B.B., Abbakumov D.F. Empirical evaluation of Russian version of the Technology Acceptance Questionnaire. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya, 2021, Vol. 14, No. 78, p. 7. http://psystudy.ru

Permanent URL: http://psystudy.ru/index.php/eng/2021v14n78e/1930-kalinichenko78e.html

Back to top >>