Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology: A replication


MIS Quarterly

June 1992, vol. 16, n°2, pp.227-247

Departments: Information Systems and Operations Management, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Keywords: User acceptance, end-user computing, user measurement

This paper presents the findings of two studies that replicate previous work by Fred Davis on the subject of perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology. The two studies focus on evaluating the psychometric properties of the ease of use and usefulness scales, while examining the relationship between ease of use,usefulness, and system usage. Study 1 provides a strong assessment of the convergent validity of the two scales by examining heterogeneous user groups dealing with heterogeneous implementations of messaging technology. In addition, because one might expect users to share similar perspectives about voice and electronic mail, the study also represents a strong test of discriminant validity. In this study a total of 118respondents from 10 different organizations were surveyed for their attitudes toward two messaging technologies: voice and electronic mail. Study 2 complements the approach taken inStudy 1 by focusing on the ability to demonstrate discriminant validity. Three popular software applications (WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, and Harvard Graphics) were examined based on the expectation that they would all be rated highly on both scales. In this study a total of 73 users rated the three packages in terms of ease of use and usefulness.The results of the studies demonstrate reliable and valid scales for measurement of perceived ease of use and usefulness. In addition, the paper tests the relationships between ease of use, usefulness, and usage using structural equation modelling. The results of this model are consistent with previous research for Study 1, suggestingthat usefulness is an important determinant of system use. For Study 2 the results are somewhat mixed, but indicate the importance of both ease of use and usefulness. Differences in conditions of usage are explored to explain these findings