IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Measuring System Usage: Implications for IS Theory Testing

  • Detmar Straub

    (College of Business Administration, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia 30302)

  • Moez Limayem

    (Universite Laval, Apvillon Palasis Prince, Quebec, Quebec, Canada G1K 7P1)

  • Elena Karahanna-Evaristo

    (University of Cyprus, Nicosia 141, Cyprus)

Registered author(s):

    There is widespread agreement among researchers that system usage, defined as the utilization of information technology (IT) by individuals, groups, or organizations, is the primary variable through which IT affects white collar performance. Despite the number of studies targeted at explaining system usage, there are crucial differences in the way the variable has been conceptualized and operationalized. This wide variation of system usage measures hinders the efforts of MIS researchers to compare findings across studies, thus impeding the accumulation of knowledge and theory in this area. The purpose of this paper is to address conceptual as well as methodological issues related to measuring system usage. First, via LISREL measurement modeling techniques, we compare subjective and objective measures of system usage, namely, self-reported versus computer-recorded measures. Next, using a modified form of Davis' Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as a nomological net, we test the nomological validity of these system usage constructs and measures. Results of the LISREL measurement and nomological net analysis suggest that system usage should be factored into self-reported system usage and computer-recorded system usage. Contrary to expectations, these constructs do not appear to be strongly related to each other. Moreover, while self-reported measures of system usage are related to self-reported measures of TAM independent variables, objective, computer-recorded measures show distinctly weaker links. In the face of such counter-evidence, it is tempting to argue that research that has relied on subjective measures of system usage (for example, research confirming TAM) may be artifactual. There are several alternative explanations, though, that maintain the integrity of TAM and studies that measure system usage subjectively. These alternative explanations suggest directions for further research as well as new approaches to measurement.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.41.8.1328
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by INFORMS in its journal Management Science.

    Volume (Year): 41 (1995)
    Issue (Month): 8 (August)
    Pages: 1328-1342

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:41:y:1995:i:8:p:1328-1342
    Contact details of provider: Postal: 7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA
    Phone: +1-443-757-3500
    Fax: 443-757-3515
    Web page: http://www.informs.org/Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:41:y:1995:i:8:p:1328-1342. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.