Construct · 6 fields · 14 citations
One name. Different field. Different construct. One map.
● jingle · one name, six constructs Nearest construct by meaningattitudecompare the meaningsEvery construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to acceptance is attitude.
Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.
Spokes are fields; dashed arcs are shared lineage. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.
Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each field appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.
A user's intention to use a technology, and the use that follows. Davis fixed the frame in 1989 with the Technology Acceptance Model: perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use drive intention, and intention drives use. Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis unified eight competing models in 2003 into UTAUT (performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions, moderated by age, gender, experience, and voluntariness) and UTAUT2 extended it to consumers in 2012 with hedonic motivation, price value, and habit. Acceptance here is a self-reported intention scored on a Likert scale, and "use" is usually self-reported too; Bagozzi's critique was that the whole tradition had stopped asking what happens between wanting and doing.[1][2][3][4][5]
Whether patients or populations take up an offered intervention. Kazdin's treatment acceptability asked, in 1980, whether a therapy is judged fair, reasonable, and appropriate by the people who would receive it, a judgment made before the treatment, and separate from whether it works. Vaccine acceptance is the population version: the SAGE working group defined vaccine hesitancy in 2015 as delay in acceptance or refusal despite availability, and placed it on a continuum from full acceptance to full refusal. Public-health research increasingly borrows TAM and UTAUT to model this, which is the collision drawn on the map.[6][7]
The willingness to experience thoughts, feelings, and bodily sensations as they are, without trying to change their frequency or form, the opposite of experiential avoidance. Hayes and colleagues placed it at the centre of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy in 2006 as one of six processes of psychological flexibility, and the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire measures its absence. Nothing is being adopted or agreed to; acceptance is a stance toward one's own private events, and the outcome is not use but living according to one's values.[8][9]
The degree to which a child is liked by the members of their peer group, measured by asking the group. Coie, Dodge, and Coppotelli's 1982 sociometric method had children nominate the three classmates they liked most and least; standardized, the two counts yield social preference (acceptance) and social impact, and the combinations define the popular, rejected, neglected, controversial, and average types. Acceptance is a property of how others regard a person, not of anything the person accepts.[10]
A manifestation of assent to the terms of an offer, made in the manner the offer invites, that brings a contract into existence. The Restatement (Second) of Contracts fixes the rule: an offer creates a power of acceptance in the offeree, and acceptance may be by promise or by performance. Whether the offeree felt anything is irrelevant; what matters is what a reasonable person would take the words or conduct to mean. Acceptance is an event with a time and a legal effect, not a degree.[14][11]
The decision not to reject. Neyman and Pearson's 1933 framework divides the sample space into a rejection region and an acceptance region, and a test "accepts" the hypothesis when the statistic falls in the second, a decision with a controlled error rate, not a belief that the hypothesis is true. Dodge and Romig's acceptance sampling, from 1929, is the industrial form: inspect a sample from a lot and accept or reject the whole lot by a rule with known producer's and consumer's risks. In both, acceptance is what you do when the evidence is not strong enough to do otherwise.[12][13]
Next
Combine items across the acceptance scales to see whether the meanings separate empirically, or export every reference on this page in one click.
Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this collisionCited on this page?
If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.
Claim your construct