在資訊科技迅速發展的今日，電腦的使用已是相當普遍的工具。本研究為探討資訊科技用於電腦相關工作成效的決定因素，提出了以個人滿意度取代電腦學習成效的理論模型。基於社會認知理論（SCT）和電腦相關文獻，本研究認為電腦自我效能、電腦知能、短期效益、長期效益是影響個人使用電腦的滿意度之決定因素。
本研究用問卷調查方式進行，以高雄縣鳳山市的8所國民中學的學生為調查對象，共14,145位學生，發出560份問卷，回收506份，回收率為90.4%，扣除16份無效卷，共得有效問卷490份，問卷回收有效率為87.5%。
本研究經SPSS套裝軟體進行獨立樣本T檢定、單因子變異數分析、相關分析與結構方程模式等統計方法，獲得以下研究結果：
1.「電腦自我效能」和「電腦知能」有顯著影響。電腦自我效能對電腦知能是一個有力且明顯的因素。然而，電腦自我效能和認知結果間，呈現「電腦自我效能」和「短期效益」有顯著相關性，但和「長期效益」卻無顯著相關性。
2.「電腦知能」和認知結果（即「短期效益」與「長期效益」）有顯著差異。「電腦知能」與「電腦滿意度」間亦有明顯的影響。因此，電腦知能直接、間接地影響個人使用電腦的滿意度。
3.認知結果和「電腦滿意度」關係中，「短期效益」和「電腦滿意度」有顯著差異，然「長期效益」和「電腦滿意度」並沒有呈現明顯差異。
依據研究結果，本研究對於教育行政機關、學校、教師及未來研究提出具體建議。

Today when computing technology is developed rapidly, the use of the computer has already been a quite general tool. To explore the determinants of the success in applying computing technology to computer-related work, this study proposed a theoretical model that adopts individual satisfaction as a surrogate for the success of computer learning. Based on social cognitive theory (SCT) and competence-related literature, this study considered computer self-efficacy, computer competence and near-term and long-term consequences as the determinants of individual satisfaction with computer use.
The study took the junior high school students at eight school in Fong Shan city, Kaohsiung County, total 14,145 students, and sent out 560 questionnaires. As a result, 506 questionnaires were returned, achieving a return rate of 90.4%. After deducting 16 invalid questionnaires from the total, achieving an effective return rate of 87.5%.
The study was processed data by the SPSS-for-window software with statistical method, T-test, One-way ANOVA, Pearson Product-moment Correlation, Structural equation model analysis and so on. The research result show as followings:
1.”Computer self-efficacy” was the effects of “computer competence”. Computer self-efficacy was a strong and positive antecedent of computer competence. However, between computer self-efficacy and perceived consequences, showed” computer self-efficacy” had significant effect on “Near-term consequence”, but had no correlation with “Long-term consequence”.
2. “Computer competence” had significant differences in perceived consequences (those were “Near-term consequence” and “Long-term consequence”.). “Computer competence” also had significant effect on “computer satisfaction”. Therefore, “Computer competence” affected individual satisfaction with computer use directly and indirectly.
3. Between perceived consequences and “computer satisfaction”, “Near-term consequence” had significant difference to “computer satisfaction” , but “Long-term consequence” had no significant difference.
According to research result, some recommendations were suggested for the educational agencies, junior high schools, junior high school teachers and further studies.

中文摘要 Ⅰ
英文摘要 Ⅱ
謝辭 Ⅳ
目錄 Ⅴ
圖錄 Ⅶ
表錄 Ⅷ
第一章 緒 論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的與問題 4
第三節 研究範圍 6
第四節 研究結構與流程 7
第二章 文獻回顧 9
第一節 電腦自我效能 9
第二節 電腦知能 19
第三節 「科技接受模式」與「任務/科技配適模型」 26
第四節 電腦自我效能、電腦知能、認知結果與電腦滿意度之關係 42
第三章 研究方法 45
第一節 研究架構 45
第二節 研究假設 46
第三節 研究變項的操作性定義 47
第四節 研究對象與抽樣方法 49
第五節 研究工具 52
第六節 資料分析方法 58
第四章 研究結果與分析 61
第一節 信、效度分析 61
第二節 研究架構描述性統計分析 64
第三節 研究架構差異分析 73
第四節 研究模式與假設檢定 85
第五章 結論與建議 92
第一節 結 論 92
第二節 建 議 95
參考文獻 99
一、中文部分 99
二、英文部分 103
附 錄 112

一、中文部分

1.王克先, 1997 學習心理學。台北：桂冠圖書公司。
2.王受榮, 1992 「我國國民中小學教師效能感及其影響因素之研究」。臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
3.王宗立, 2002 「個人沉浸體驗、任務�科技配適度及科技接受之實徵研究－以電子郵件使用為例」。樹德科技大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
4.何文斌, 2001 「國小行政人員網路素養對行政網路資訊系統接受度之研究 －以台南市為例」。臺南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文
5.李祐榮, 2002 「知識管理系統接受度影響因素之研究」。國立中山大學資訊管理學系研究所碩士論文。
6.吳正己、邱貴發, 1996 資訊社會國民的電腦素養教育。社會教育雙月刊。73，p.13-18。
7.吳文雄, 2002 電腦技能學習者過去的績效、目標認同、電腦自我效能及電腦積效因果關係證―社會認知理論與目標設定理論的整合。師大學報：科學教育類，47（1），p.39-54。
8.吳文雄、郭峰淵, 2000 以社會認知理論探討學習者自律之實證研究電腦技能訓練的應用。資訊管理學報，第六卷，第二期。
9.吳怡靜, 2000 決定下一輪國家競爭力。天下雜誌，2000年教育特刊，p.36-44。
10.何榮桂, 2001 他山之石可以攻錯∼亞太地區（臺、港、新、日、韓）資訊教育的發展與前瞻。資訊與教育，81，p.1-6。
11.何榮桂, 2001 從九年一貫新課程規劃看我國資訊教育未來的發展。資訊與教育雙月刊，85，p.5-14。
12.何榮桂, 2001 資訊教育的發展趨勢。資訊與教育，85，p.1-4。
13.沈雯, 2002 「國小教師電腦自我效能與電腦焦慮之研究」。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
14.周素華, 1993 「電子通訊科技使用行為之研究－以交大學生為例」。國立交通大學土木工程研究所碩士論文。
15.吳俊毅&周惠文, 2000 「科技接受模型之實徵研究—從動機角度」。國立中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
16.岳修平、林一鵬、蕭芝殷,2001 資訊教育課程實施問題研究。資訊傳播與圖書館學。7(3)，P.65-71。
17.姚登元, 2005 「電腦自我效能對ERP系統使用績效之影響」。國立中央大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
18.高雄縣教育局, 2006 高雄縣立中小學資訊。
取自http://campus.ks.edu.tw/info/SchoolQuery/SchoolList.aspx
19.教育部, 2003 國民中小學課程綱要--六大議題-資訊教育。取自http://teach.eje.edu.tw/data/890930九年一貫綱 要/總目錄、標題/總目錄.htm。
20.施宏諭, 2004 「嘉義市國小高年級學童使用網路遊戲與資訊能力之相關研究」。嘉義大學教育科技研究所碩士論文。
21.范家敏, 2004 「高雄縣國小高年級學童電腦遊戲使用行為與電腦態度、電腦自我效能之相關研究」。臺東大學教育研究所碩士論文。
22.麥孟生, 2000 「個人心理類型、自我效能及態度對電腦學習成效之影響」。中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
23.徐強, 2000 社會學習化 學習終身化。成人教育，6，p.11-13。
24.莊妙華, 2001 「網路商店使用智慧型店員對消費者購買意願影響之研究」。國立中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
25.許芳菊, 1996 未來學校。天下雜誌，1996年度特刊，p.36-39。
26.唐文儀, 1994 南部地區國小電腦素養相關因素之比較研究。台南師院學生學刊。15期，p.75-82。
27.翁淑緣,2000 影響國中學生電腦學習意願之個人特性探討。教育與心理研究。23，p.147-172。
28.陳銘城, 2004 「國小學童的電腦態度及其相關因素之研究─以台中縣國小六年級學生為例」。東海大學教育研究所碩士論文。
29.陳焜元, 1995 「行政管理資訊系統使用者參與效果之研究─技術接受性模式檢證.」。國立政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文。
30.葉景琳, 2000 「應用自我效能理論探討創意支援系統對於創造力提昇之研究」。國立中正大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
31.張素貞, 2003 九年一貫之「一貫」、「統整」、「計畫」與「組織」探悉與地位。取自http://teach.eje.edu.tw/9CC/textbook%20source/teacher_handbook.pdf
32.張春興, 1999 教育心理學：三化取向的理論與實踐。台北市：東華書局。
33.張紹勳, 1997 電腦態度、電腦知能、電腦焦慮及其相關因素之研究。國際資訊管理研討會論文集。
34.黃郁雯, 2002 「電腦自我效能、電腦經驗及他人支持三者與電腦態度及電腦焦慮之關係」。政治大學心理學研究所碩士論文。
35.黃聰銘, 2000 「綜合所得稅申報方式的電腦相關因素研究」。大葉大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
36.黃文俊, 2001 「網路教學環境中群組互動對學習成效之影響」。國立中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
37.黃兆震, 2001 「網路購物意願之研究－以電腦通訊產品為例」。國立台灣科技大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
38.覃業明, 2001 「科技接受模型之實證研究－以國內醫療網站為例」。國立成功大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
39.馮炫俊, 2000 「消費者使用電子銀行之行為研究－以ATM、電話銀行、網路銀行為例」。私立元智大學管理研究所碩士論文。
40.溫嘉榮、吳明隆, 1999 新時代資訊教育的理論與實務應用。台北市：松崗電腦圖書資料股份有限公司。
41.楊桂鳳, 2002 「台灣公共衛生護理人員基本電腦能力、遠距學習態度與遠距學習行為意向之探討」。陽明大學社區護理研究所碩士論文。
42.蔡淑娥, 1984 「高中生的電腦態度、電腦成就及其相關因素之研究」。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
43.謝碧惠, 2004 「供應商使用供應鏈管理系統之滿意度研究-以富強鑫體系為例」。國立高雄第一科技大學資訊管理所碩士論文。
44.謝靜慧, 2000 「國民中小學教師之電腦焦慮、電腦自我效能、電腦因應策略與電腦素養之相關研究」。中山大學教育研究所碩士論文。
45.蕭蕙君、邱貴發, 1998 歐亞地區中小學資訊教育之概況。台灣教育，572，p.37-45。
46.韓善民, 2001 資訊教育的發展與前瞻。資訊與教育，81，p.7-12。

二、英文部分

1. Adams, Dennis A, Nelson, R. Ryan, Todd, Peter A. 1992 “Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use and Usage of Information Technology: A Replication.” MIS Quarterly, 16（2）:227-247.
2.Bagozzi, R. P. 1982 “A field investigation of causal relations among cognitions, affect, intentions and behavior.” Journal of Marketing Research, 19（11）: 562-584.
3.Bandura 1978 A. Bandura, Reflections on self-efficacy, Advances in Behavioral Research and Therapy ,1（1978）（4）: 237–269.
4.Bandura 1986 A. Bandura, Social foundations of though and action, Prentice-Hall. Englewood Cliffs.
5.Bandura 1997 A. Bandura, Self-efficacy: The exercise of control, W.H. Freeman. New York.
6. Barkhi, R. Winter 2001-2002 “The effects of decision guidance and problem modeling on group decision making.” Journal of Management Information Systems, 18（3）:259-282.
7.Bassellier et al. 2001 G. Bassellier, B.H. Reich and I. Benbasat, ”Information technology competence of business managers: A definition and research model” Journal of Management Information Systems ,17（2001）（4）: 159–182.
8.Benbasat, I., Dexter, A. S., & Todd, P. 1986 “An experimental program investigating color-en-hanced and graphical information presentation: an integration of the findings.” Communications of the ACM, 29（11）:1094-1105.
9.Boynton et al. 1994 A.C. Boynton, R.W. Zmud and G.C. Jacobs, “The influence of IT management practice on IT use in large organizations.” MIS Quarterly,18 （1994）（3）:299–318.
10.Brancheau and Wetherbe 1987 J.C. Brancheau and J.C. Wetherbe, “Key issues in information systems management.” MIS Quarterly ,11（1987）（1）: 23–45.
11.Bryson, D. M. 1991 “The computer-literate nurse.” Comput Nurse, 9:100-107.
12.Burkhardt, M.E., & Brass, D. J. 1990 “Changing patterns or patterns of change: The effects of a change in technology on social network structure and power.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 35:104-127.
13.Busch, T. 1995 “Gender differences in self-efficiency and attitudes toward computers.” Journal of Educational Computing Research,12（2）:147-158.
14.Chau 1996 P.Y.K. Chau, “An empirical assessment of a modified technology acceptance model. “ Journal of Management Information Systems, 13（1996）（2）: 185–204.
15.Chang and Cheung 2001 M.K. Chang and W. Cheung,”Determinants of the intention to use Internet/WWW at work: A confirmatory study.” Information and Management, 39（2001）（1）:1–14.
16.Cheney and Nelson 1988 P.H. Cheney and R.R. Nelson, “A tool for measuring and analyzing end user computing abilities.”Information Processing and Management, 24（1988）（2）:199–203.
17.Compeau and Higgins 1995 D.R. Compeau and C.A. Higgins,”Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills.” Information Systems Research, 6（1995）（2）: 118–143.
18.Compeau and Higgins 1995 D.R. Compeau and C.A. Higgins,”Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test.” MIS Quarterly,19 （1995）（2）: 189–211.
19.Compeau et al. 1999 D.R. Compeau, C.A. Higgins and S. Huff, “Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: A longitudinal study.” MIS Quarterly, 23（1999）（2）: 145–158.
20.Cooper, R., & Zmud, R. 1990 “Information technology implementation research: a technological diffusion approach.” Management Science, 36（2）: 123-139.
21.Cronan, T. P., & Douglas, D. E. 1990 ”End-user training and computing effectiveness in public agencies.” Journal of Management Information Systems, 6（4）:123-139.
22.Culnan, M. J. 1983 “Environmental scanning: the effects of task complexity and source accessibility on information gathering behavior.” Decision Sciences,14:194-206.
23.Daft, R. L., & Macintosh, N. B. 1981 “ A tentative exploration into the amount and equivocality of information processing in organizational work units. “Ad Science Quarterly, 26:207-224.
24.Davis, F.D. 1989 “Perceive Usefulness, Perceived of Ease of Use, and End User Acceptance of Information Technology,.” MIS Quarterly, 13（3）:319-340.
25.Davis, F.D., R.P. Bagozzi, & P.R. Warshaw 1989 “User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models.” Management Sciencs,35（8）:982-1003.
26.Delcourt, M. A.,B., ＆ Kinzie, M. B. 1993 “Computer technologies in teacher education: The measurement of attitudes and self-efficacy.” Journal of Research and Development,27（1）:35-41.
27.Delone, W., & E. Mclean 1992 “Information System Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable.” Information Systems Research ,3（1）:60-95.
28.Denning 2002 P.J. Denning, “The profession of IT: Career redux.” Communications of the ACM ,45（2002）（9）:21–26.
29. Detmar, S., & Adrew, B. J. 2002 Reconceptualizing the system usage construct （Working Draft）.Uiversity of Georgia Terry College of Business, MIS Workshop.
30.Dickson, G. W., DeSanctis, G.., & McBride, D. J. 1986 “Understanding the effectiveness of computer graphics for decision support: a cumulative experimental approach.” Communications of the ACM, 29（1）: 40-47.
31.Dishaw, M. T., & Strong, R. M. 1999 “Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs.“ Information and Management, 36: 9-21
32.Fann, G.L., D.H. Lynch, and C. Murranka 1989 “Integrating technology: Attitudes as a determinant of the use of microcomputers.” Journal of Education Technology Systems, 17（4）:307-317.
33.Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. 1975 Belief, attitude, intentions and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
34.Foster and Flynn 1984 L.W. Foster and D.M. Flynn, “Management information technology: Its effects on organizational form and function.” MIS Quarterly,8 （1984）（3）: 229–236.
35.Franz, C. R., & Robey, D. 1986 “Organizational context, user involvement, and the usefulness of information systems.” Decision Sciences, 17（3）: 329-356.
36.Fry, L. W., & Slocum, J. W. 1984 “Technology, structure, and workgroup effectiveness: a test of a contingency model.” Academy of Management Journal, 27（2）:221-246.
37.Fulk, J., & Ryu, D. 1990 Perceiving electronic mail systems: Partial test of the social information processing model. Paper presented to the International Communication Association, Dublin, Ireland.
38.Geissler and Horridge 1993 J.E. Geissler and P. Horridge, “University students’ computer knowledge and commitment to learning.” Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25（1993）: 347–365.
39. Gist, M. E., Schwoerer, C., & Rosen, B. 1989 “Effects of alternative training methods on self-efficacy and performance in computer software training.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 74（6）: 884-891.
40.Goodhue & Thompson 1995 D.L. Goodhue and R.L. Thompson, “Task-technology fit and individual performance.” MIS Quarterly, 19 （1995）（2）:213–236.
41.Goodhue, D. L. 1998 “Development and measurement validity of a task-technology fit instrument for user evaluations of information systems.” Decision sciences, 29（1）:105-137.
42.Goodhue, D. L., Barbara, D. K., & Salvatore, T. M. 2000 “ User evaluations of IS as surrogates for objective performance.” Information and Management, 38（2）:87-101.
43.Hartwick, J., & Barki, H. 1994 “Explaining the role of user participation in information system use.” Management Science, 40（4）:440-465.
44. Hill, T., Smith, N. D., & Mann, M. F. 1987 “Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the decision to use advanced technologies: The case of computers.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 72: 307-313.
45.Hung-Pin Shih 2004 “Assessing the effects of self-efficacy and competence on individual satisfaction with computer use: an IT student perspective.” Computer in Human Behavior,22（2006）:1012-1026.
46. Igbaria, M., & Parasurman, S., &Baroudi, J. 1996 “A motivational model of microcomputer usage.” Journal of Management Information Systems, 13（1）:127-143.
47.Igbaria M. 1990 “End- user Computing Effectiveness: A Structural Equation model, ” Omega, 18（6）:637-652.
48.Igbaria, M., J. Iivari, & H. Maragahh 1995 “Why Do Individuals Use Computer Technology? A Finnish Case Study, ” Information & Management,29（5）:227-238.
49.Igbaria, M., S.Parasuraman, & J.J.Baroudi 1996 “A Motivational model of Microcomputer Usage.” Journal of Management Information Systems, 13（1）:127-143.
50.Igbaria, M., T. Guimaraes, & G. B. Davis, 1995 “Testing the Determinants of Microcomputer Usage via a Structural Equation model.” Journal of Management Information Systems,11（4）:87-114.
51.Jarvenpaa, S. L 1989 “The effect of task demands and graphical format on information processing strategies.” Management Science, 35（3）: 285-303.
52.Kagan, D.M. 1998 “Learning how to program or use computers: a review of six applied suties.” Educational Technology, 28（3）:49-51.
53.Leidner and Jarvenpaa 1995 D.E. Leidner and S.L. Jarvenpaa, “The use of information technology to enhance management school education: A theoretical view.” MIS Quarterly ,19 （1995）（3）: 265–291.
54.Mager, R. F. 1992 “No self-efficacy, no performance.” Training,4,32-36.Media Analysis Laboratory（1998）.Video Game Culture: Leisure and Play Preferences of B.C. Teens.
http://www.media-awareness.ca/eng/issues/violence/resource/reports/ vgames.htm.
55.Marakas et al. 1998 G.M. Marakas, M.Y. Yi and R.D. Johnson,”The multilevel and multifaceted character of computer self-efficacy: Toward clarification of the construct and an integrative framework for research.” Information Systems Research, 9 （1998）（2）: 126–163.
56.Marcolin et al. 2000 B.L. Marcolin, D.R. Compeau, M.C. Munro and S.L. Huff, “Assessing user competence: Conceptualization and measurement” Information Systems Research ,11（2000）（1）: 37–60.
57.Mathieson, K. 1991 “Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior.” Information Systems Research, 2（3）:173-191.
58.Munro et al. 1997 M.C. Munro, S.L. Huff, B.L. Marcolin and D.R. Compeau, “Understanding and measuring user competence.” Information and Management, 33 （1997）（1）: 45–57.
59.Murphy, C. A., Coover, D., & Owen, S. V. 1989 “ Development and validity of the computer self-efficacy scale.” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49:893-899.
60.Oliver 1980 R.L. Oliver 1980 “A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions.” Journal of Marketing Research ,17:460–469.
61.Oliver 1993 R.L. Oliver, “Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response.” Journal of Consumer Research, 20 （1993）（3）:418–430.
62.O'Reilly, Charles A. 1982 “Variations in decision makers' use of information sources: the impact of quality and accessibility of information.” Academy of Management Journal, 25（4）: 756-771.
63.Perrow, C. 1967 “A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations.” American Sociological Review, 32（2）:194-208.
64.Rackoff et al. 1985 N. Rackoff, C. Wiseman and W.A. Ullrich,”Information systems for competitive advantage: Implementation of a planning processes.” MIS Quarterly, 9 （1985）（4）: 285–294.
65.Raymond 1985 L. Raymond, “Organizational characteristics and MIS success in the context of small business.” MIS Quarterly, 9 （1985）（1）:37–52.
66.Schein 1987 E.H. Schein, ”Individuals and careers. In: J.W. Lorsch, Editor, Handbook of organizational behavior.” Prentice-Hall, Englewood, Cliffs, NJ: 155–171.
67.Straub, D., D. Limayem & E. Karahanna-Evaristo 1995 “Measuring System Usage: Implications for IS Theory Testing.” Management Science,41（8）1995:1328-1342.
68.Szajna, B. 1996 “Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model.” Management Science,42（1）:85-92.
69.Thompson, J. D. 1967 Organizations in Action, New York: McGraw-Hill.
70.Thompson et al. 1991 R.L. Thompson, C.A. Higgins and J.M. Howell,”Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization.” MIS Quarterly ,15（1991） （1）: 125–143.
71.Thompson et al. 1994 R.L. Thompson, C.A. Higgins and J.M. Howell, “Influence of experience on personal computer utilization: Testing a conceptual model.” Journal of Management Information Systems,11（1994）（1）: 167–187.
72.Torkzadeh,G.,＆Koufteros,X. 1994 “Factorial validity of a computer self-efficacy scale and the impact of computer training.” Educational and Psychological Measurement,54（3）:813-821.
73.Tornatzky, L. G., & Klein, K. J. 1982 “Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-im-plementation: a meta-analysis of findings.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 29（1）: 28-45.
74.Triandis 1980 H.C. Triandis, Values, attitude and interpersonal behavior. In: H.E. Howe, Editor, Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1979: Beliefs, attitudes and values, University of Nebraska Press.
75.Venkatesh, Viswanath 1996 “A Model of the Antecedents of Percieved Ease of Use: Development and Test.” Decision Sciences, 27（3）:451-481.
76.Venkatesh, Viswanath 1999 “Creation of Favorable User Perceptions: Exploring the Role of Intrinsic Motivation,” MIS Quarterly, 23（2）:239-260.
77.Venkatesh, Viswanath; Davis, Fred D. 2000 “Determinants of Percieved Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model,” Information Systems Research,11（4）:342-365.
78.Vessey, I. 1991 “Cognitive fit: a theory-based analysis of the graphs vs. Tables literature.” Decision Sciences, 22（2）:219-240.
79.Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. 1992 “ Microcomputer playfulness: Development of a measure with workplace implications.” MIS Quarterly, 16（2）:201-226.
80.Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. 1993 “Turning work into play: Implications for microcomputer software training.” Journal of Management, 19:127-146.
81.White and Leifer 1986 K.B. White and R. Leifer,”Information systems development success: Perspectives from project team participants.” MIS Quarterly ,10 （1986）（3）:214–223.
82.Yoon et al. 1995 Y. Yoon, T. Guimaraes and Q. O’Neal, “Exploring the factors associated with expert systems success.” MIS Quarterly ,19 （1995）（1）:83–106.