MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Theory of Planned Behavior and Reasoned Action in Predicting Technology Adoption Behavior

2009· book-chapter· en· W2477449683 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmud Akhter Shareef, Vinod Kumar, Uma Kumar, Ahsan Akhter Hasin

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheory of reasoned actionTheory of planned behaviorInformation and Communications TechnologyAffect (linguistics)PsychologyTechnology acceptance modelInnovation diffusionKnowledge managementAction (physics)Diffusion theoryDiffusion of innovationsInformation technologyUnified theory of acceptance and use of technologySocial psychologyMarketingBusinessControl (management)Social influenceComputer scienceUsabilityHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research related to the impact of individual characteristics in their acceptance of online systems driven by information and communication technology (ICT) observed that dissimilarities among individuals influence their adoption and use of the systems. Thus, research streams investigating this issue generally follow the traditions of the theory of reasoned action (TRA) or the theory of planned behavior (TPB). Research reveals that individual characteristics, mediated by beliefs, affect attitudes, which affect intentions and behaviors. These two major behavioral theories related to technology acceptance and the intention to use technology might provide significant theoretical paradigms in understanding how online system adoption and diffusion, driven by information technology, can vary globally. In this study, the authors’ first objective is to understand TRA and TPB as they study ICT-based online adoption and diffusion globally. Then, based on that theoretical framework, their second objective focuses on developing a theory of ICT adoption and diffusion as an online behavior.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207