Construct · 6 names · 10 citations
Different names. Different fields. One construct. One map.
● jangle · six names, one construct Nearest construct by meaningperceptions of external controlcompare 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 facilitating conditions is perceptions of external control.
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 the names and the models that coined them; dashed arcs are borrowings. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.
Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each name appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.
The degree to which an individual believes that an organizational and technical infrastructure exists to support use of the system, Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis's 2003 definition, pooling perceived behavioural control, facilitating conditions from the PC-utilization model, and compatibility. The four items ask about resources, knowledge, compatibility with other systems, and the availability of help. In 2003 the construct predicted use directly but not intention, because effort expectancy absorbed its effect on intention, and it mattered more for older and more experienced workers. UTAUT2 in 2012 gave it a path to intention as well, on the argument that consumers have no help desk and must weigh support before they decide.[1][2][3]
The perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behaviour, assumed to reflect past experience as well as anticipated impediments and obstacles, Ajzen's 1991 construct, added to the theory of reasoned action so it could cover behaviours not fully under volitional control. It predicts intention and, where perception tracks reality, behaviour directly. Taylor and Todd decomposed it for information systems in 1995 into self-efficacy, resource facilitating conditions, and technology facilitating conditions, and found the resource and technology halves behaved differently from the self-efficacy half. UTAUT kept the two external halves and sent self-efficacy elsewhere.[4][5]
Objective factors in the environment that observers agree make an act easy to do, Triandis's construct, which Thompson, Higgins, and Howell carried into their 1991 model of personal-computer utilization and operationalized as the availability of guidance, specialised instruction, and help with software and hardware. The name UTAUT chose comes from here. The definition is about the environment as it is, not the belief about it; the items nonetheless ask the user, and in the 1991 test the construct did not predict utilization. UTAUT kept the name, the items, and the direct path to use.[6]
The degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters, one of Rogers's five attributes of innovations, measured for information technology by Moore and Benbasat's 1991 PCI instrument with items on fit with work style and with the way the respondent likes to work. UTAUT pooled it into facilitating conditions on the strength of one item about compatibility with other systems. Rogers's construct is about fit with values and habits; UTAUT's item is about fit with other software. This is the loosest of the mergers on the map.[7][8]
Management support, internal computing support, internal training, and their external equivalents, Igbaria, Zinatelli, Cragg, and Cavaye's 1997 organizational factors, modelled as antecedents of usefulness and ease of use in a structural-equation test of TAM in New Zealand small firms. Their measures ask whether managers encourage use, whether trained staff are available in-house, and whether outside consultants and vendors supply help; in small firms, which rarely have a computing department, external support carried much of the weight. The construct is the same infrastructure UTAUT's items describe, placed one step earlier in the causal chain and split by source. It is also measured as a perception, despite the organizational label.[9]
The degree to which an individual believes that organizational and technical resources exist to support the use of the system, Venkatesh's 2000 construct, one of four anchors of perceived ease of use, measured with items that later became UTAUT's facilitating-conditions scale. In this model it predicts ease of use, not use; three years later the same words and items were given a direct path to behaviour under a different name. The construct was renamed when its position in the model changed, which is a jangle produced by one author moving one box.[10]
Next
Combine items across the facilitating conditions 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