Exploring the relationship between technology acceptance model and usability test | Information Technology and Management Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Exploring the relationship between technology acceptance model and usability test

  • Published:
Information Technology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the past, most studies used the technology acceptance model (TAM) to survey the subjective perception of users in using information technology. The usability test was also used to assess the ease of use of user interfaces. This study introduces a conceptual framework to explore the relationship between user’s beliefs of TAM and usability testing attributes. Usability testing was conducted on an eCampus learning system with a mobile device. TAM data was collected from the participants for analyzing a possible relationship. The findings of this study reveal that TAM results contradict the usability test results in certain areas. The focus of our proposed research model is supported from the causality between perceived ease of use and usability; however, the correlation between perceived usefulness and usability remains unclear.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adeoye B, Wentling RM (2007) The relationship between national culture and the usability of an e-learning system. Int J E-Learn 6(1):119–146

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bruner GC, Kumar A (2005) Explaining consumer acceptance of handheld Internet devices. J Bus Res 58(5):553–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Calisir F, Calisir F (2004) The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. Comput Hum Behav 20(4):505–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chang HH, Wang IC (2008) An investigation of user communication behavior in computer mediated environments. Comput Hum Behav 24(5):2336–2356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cheung W, Chang M, Lai V (2000) Prediction of Internet and World Wide Web usage at work: a test of an extended triandis model. Decis Support Syst 30(1):83–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cowen LL, Ball J, Delin J (2002) An eye-movement analysis of web-page usability. In: Proceedings of HCI 2002: People and Computers XVI—Memorable yet Invisible, London, pp 317–335

  7. Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13(3):319–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manag Sci 35(8):982–1002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dishaw MT, Strong DM (1999) Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs. Inf Manag 36(1):9–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fukuda R, Bubb H (2003) Eye tracking study on Web-use: comparison between younger and elderly users in case of search task with electronic timetable service. PsychNology J 1(3):202–228

    Google Scholar 

  11. Goldberg HJ, Kotval XP (1999) Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs. Int J Ind Ergon 24:631–645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gulliver SR, Serif T, Ghinea G (2004) Pervasive and standalone computing: the perceptual effects of variable multimedia quality. Int J Hum Comput Stud 60:640–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Henderson R, Divett MJ (2003) Perceived usefulness, ease of use and electronic supermarket use. Int J Hum-Comput Stud 59(3):383–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Holzinger A (2005) Usability engineering methods for software developers. Commun ACM 48(1):71–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. ISO 9241-11 (1998) Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs)—part 11: guidance on usability

  16. Jacob RJK, Karn KS (2003) Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: Ready to deliver the promise. In: Hyona J, Radach R, Deubel H (eds) The mind’s eyes: cognitive and applied aspects of eye movements. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 573–603

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jasperson J, Cater PE, Zmud RW (2005) A comprehensive conceptualization of post adoptive behavior associated with information technology enabled work systems. MIS Q 29(3):525–557

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jiang J, Hsu M, Klein G, Lin B (2000) E-commerce user behavior model: an empirical study. Hum Syst Manag 19:265–276

    Google Scholar 

  19. Josephson S, Holmes ME (2002) Visual attention to repeated images on the World-Wide Web: another look at scanpath theory. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 34(4):539–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kaikkonen A, Kekäläinen A, Cankar M, Kallio T, Kanainen A (2005) Usability testing of mobile applications: a comparison between laboratory and field testing. J Usability Stud 1(1):4–16

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kjeldskov J, Stage J (2004) New techniques for usability evaluation of mobile systems. Int Hum Comput Stud 60(4):599–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Klopping IM, McKinney E (2004) Extending the technology acceptance model and the task-technology fit model to consumer e-commerce. Inf Technol Learn Perform J 22(1):35–48

    Google Scholar 

  23. Koufaris M (2002) Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online consumer behavior. Inf Syst Res 13(2):205–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kushniruk AW, Triola MM, Borycki EM, Stein B, Kannry JL (2005) Technology induced error and usability: the relationship between usability problems and prescription errors when using a handheld application. Int Med Inform 74:519–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee YS, Hong SW, Smith-Jackson TL, Nussbaum MA, Tomioka K (2006) Systematic evaluation methodology for cell phone user interfaces. Interact Comput 18:304–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Liu I-F, Chen MC, Sun YS, Wible D, Kuo C-H (2010) Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Comput Educ 54(2):600–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Martins LL, Kellermanns FW (2004) A model of business school students’ acceptance of a web-based course management system. Acad Manag Learn Educ 3(1):7–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Moon JW, Kim YG (2001) Extending the TAM for a world-wide-web context. Inf Manag 38(4):217–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Moore GC, Benbasat I (1991) Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Inf Syst Res 2(3):192–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Nielsen J (1993) Usability engineering. Morgan Kaufman, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  31. Öquist G, Goldstein M (2003) Towards an improved readability on mobile devices: evaluating adaptive rapid serial visual presentation. Interact Comput 15(4):539–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Padilla-Melendez A, Garrido-Marrino A, Aguilla-Obra AR (2008) Factors affecting e-collaboration technology use among management students. Comput Educ 51(2):609–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Parush A, Yuviler-Gavish N (2004) Web navigation structures in cellular phones: the depth/breadth trade-off issue. Int Hum Comput Stud 60:753–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Poole A, Ball LJ (2005) Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research. In: Ghaoui C (ed), Encyclopedia of human computer interaction. Idea Group, Pennsylvania, pp 211–219

  35. Reuss E, Menozzi M, Büchi M, Koller J, Krueger H (2004) Information access at the point of care: what can we learn for designing a mobile CPR system? Int Med Inform 73:363–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Roca JC, Chiu CM, Martínez FJ (2006) Understanding E-learning continuance intention: an extension of the technology acceptance model. Int J Hum comput Stud 64(8):683–696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Rubin J (1994) Handbook of usability testing: how to plan, design, and conduct effective tests. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  38. Russell MC (2005) Investigating contributions of eye-tracking to website usability testing. Wichita State University, Dissertation

    Google Scholar 

  39. Saadé R, Bahli B (2005) The impact of cognitive absorption on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in on-line learning: an extension of the technology acceptance model. Inf Manag 42:317–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Song L, Singleton ES, Hill JR, Koh MH (2004) Improving online learning: student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. Internet High Educ 7(1):59–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Taylor S, Todd PA (1995) Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Inf Syst Res 6(6):144–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Venkatesh V (2000) Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Inf Syst Res 11(4):342–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Venkatesh V, Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manag Sci 46(2):186–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Virzi RA (1992) Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough? Hum Factors 34(4):457–468

    Google Scholar 

  45. Wu JH, Wang SC, Lin LM (2007) Mobile computing acceptance factors in the healthcare industry: a structural equation model. Int J Med Inform 76:66–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Yi MY, Jackson JD, Park JS, Probst JC (2006) Understanding information technology acceptance by individual professionals: toward an integrative view. Inf Manag 43(3):350–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Yoon SY, Laffey J, Oh H (2008) Understanding usability and user experience of Web-based 3D graphics technology. Int J Hum Comput Interact 24(3):288–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Zhang D, Adipat B (2005) Challenges, methodologies, and issues in the usability testing of mobile applications. Int J Hum Comput Interact 18(3):293–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is supported by the National Science Council of the Republic of China under Grant No. NSC 99-2218-E-164-001.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing and Distribution Management, Hsiuping University of Science and Technology, No. 11 Gongye Rd, Dali, Taichung, 412-80, Taiwan, ROC

    Chin-Chao Lin

Authors
  1. Chin-Chao Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chin-Chao Lin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lin, CC. Exploring the relationship between technology acceptance model and usability test. Inf Technol Manag 14, 243–255 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-013-0162-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-013-0162-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation