ISRI - Information Systems Research Indicators

Context: Not Specified

Note: This list contains all the constructs (and corresponding measuring variables) as defined by the authors when proposing/using/applying the theories/models in the selected context. It also includes the scales used to measure the variables.

Construct (Theory/Model): Information Quality (DM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Users receive reports in a timely manner.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Users receive accurate information output.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Users receive current information output.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Users receive complete (thorough) information output.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Users receive relevant information output.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Users receive reliable information output.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)

Construct (Theory/Model): Net Benefits (DM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Not Specified	Not Specified

Construct (Theory/Model): Intention to Use (Use) (DM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Not Specified	Not Specified

Construct (Theory/Model): Communication Quality (DM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Communication systems are available for use 24 hours per day, seven days per week.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Communication systems response times are adequate to keep users satisfied.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Communication systems exhibit high degrees of reliability.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Communication systems uptimes are comparable to available user time.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)

Construct (Theory/Model): Hardware Quality (DM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Hardware and operating systems are available for use 24 hours per day, seven days a week.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Hardware and operating systems response times are adequate to keep users satisfied.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Hardware and operating systems exhibit high degrees of reliability.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Hardware and operating systems uptime are comparable to available user time.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)

Construct (Theory/Model): Impact of Operational IS Use (DM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Activities associated with purchasing inputs (raw materials) required by your firm.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Receiving, storing, and disseminating inputs to the products (e.g., materials handling, warehousing).	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Transforming inputs into final product (e.g., cutting, assembly).	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Collecting, storing, and distributing the final product to your firm’s customers (e.g., order processing, scheduling).	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Providing service to maintain or enhance the value of the product (e.g., maintenance notices, upgrades).	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Improving your firm’s products and processes (e.g., R&D).	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Coordinating different activities described above (e.g., purchasing, order processing, marketing, etc.).	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Interacting and coordinating activities with customers.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)

Construct (Theory/Model): Impact of Strategic IS Use (DM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
IT has enabled your firm to gain market share.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
IT has enabled your firm to establish competitive barriers.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
IT has enabled your firm to establish a defensible market.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)

Construct (Theory/Model): Impact of Tactical IS Use (DM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
IT has enabled your firm to improve administrative efficiency.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
IT has enabled your firm to improve productivity.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
IT has enabled your firm to improve allocation of scare resources.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
IT has enabled your firm to improve internal services.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
IT has enabled your firm to improve external services.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)

Construct (Theory/Model): Plan Quality (DM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
IT department’s planning supports your firm’s ability to keep up with changing technology.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
IT department’s services evolve to meet your firm’s changing needs and capabilities.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Long-term data infrastructure plans exist and are followed.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)
Long-term network infrastructure plans exist and are followed.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006)

Construct (Theory/Model): Observability (IDT)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Not Specified	Not Specified

Construct (Theory/Model): Individual Characteristics (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Not Specified	Not Specified

Construct (Theory/Model): Individual Adaptation Behaviors (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I communicated with colleagues in order to better understand how this system operates.	Scale 0 to 10, Disagree to Agree	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
I communicated with IT specialists in order to better understand how this system operates.	Scale 0 to 10, Disagree to Agree	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
I researched, on my own initiative, in order to increase my knowledge and my mastery of this system.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at all to Very Much	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
I explored several information sources, on my own initiative, concerning this system.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at all to Very Much	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
How much effort (in time and energy) did you spend to (disagree to agree) learn about this system?	Scale 0 to 10, a Little to a Lot	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
I invested much effort (in time and energy) in order to better use this system.	Scale 0 to 10, a Little to a Lot	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)

Construct (Theory/Model): Individual Performance Impact (Performance Impact of Computer Systems) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
The company computer environment has a large, positive impact on my effectiveness and productivity in my job.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
IS computer systems and services are an important and valuable aid to me in the performance of my job.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Perceived Individual Benefits (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Knowledge gained using this system will be helpful to me with other systems in the future.	Scale 0 to 10, Disagree to Agree	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
Using this system allows me to be more efficient at my job.	Scale 0 to 10, Disagree to Agree	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
Knowing how to use this system makes me more marketable.	Scale 0 to 10, Disagree to Agree	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)

Construct (Theory/Model): Perceived Organizational Benefits (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Overall, the benefits of this system for my organization are.	Scale 0 to 10, Low to High	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
This system improved the operations of my organization.	Scale 0 to 10, Disagree to Agree	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
This system improved the performance of my organization.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at all to Very Much	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task Characteristics (Task Equivocality) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I frequently deal with ill-defined business problems.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
I frequently deal with ad-hoc, non-routine business problems.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
Frequently the business problems I work on involve answering questions that have never been asked in quite that form before.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task Characteristics (Task Interdependence) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
The business problems I deal with frequently involve more than one business function.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
The problems I deal with frequently involve more than one business function.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Adaptation Behaviors (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
How much effort (in time and energy) did you spend recommending or suggesting improvements to this system’s functionalities.	Scale 0 to 10, a Little to a Lot	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
How much effort (in time and energy) did you spend recommending or suggesting improvements to this system’s interface.	Scale 0 to 10, a Little to a Lot	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
How much effort (in time and energy) did you spend recommending or suggesting improvements to this system’s hardware.	Scale 0 to 10, a Little to a Lot	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
How much effort (in time and energy) did you spend recommending or suggesting modifications to your tasks so that they better fit this system.	Scale 0 to 10, a Little to a Lot	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
How much effort (in time and energy) did you spend recommending or suggesting modifications to this system so that it better fits your tasks.	Scale 0 to 10, a Little to a Lot	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
Overall, how much effort (in time and energy) did you spend so that your system and your business processes fit each other?	Scale 0 to 10, a Little to a Lot	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
Overall, how much effort (in time and energy) did you spend so that your system and your business processes would be in harmony with each other?	Scale 0 to 10, a Little to a Lot	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Authorization) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Data that would be useful to me is unavailable because I don't have the right authorization.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
Getting authorization to access data that would be useful in my job is time consuming and difficult.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Compatibility) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
There are times when I find that supposedly equivalent data from two different sources is inconsistent.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
Sometimes it is difficult for me to compare or consolidate data from two different sources because the data is defined differently.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
When it's necessary to compare or consolidate data from different sources, I find that there may be unexpected or difficult inconsistencies.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Ease of Use /Training /Training) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
There is not enough training for me or my staff on how to find, understand, access or use the company computer systems.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
I am getting the training I need to be able to use company computer systems, languages, procedures and data effectively.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Ease of Use /Training/Ease of Use of Hardware & Software) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
It is easy to learn how to use the computer systems I need.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
The computer systems I use are convenient and easy to use.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Locatability) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
It is easy to find out what data the corporation maintains on a given subject.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
It is easy to locate corporate or divisional data on a particular issue, even if I haven't used that data before.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Locatability/Meaning) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
The exact definition of data fields relating to my tasks is easy to find out.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
On the reports or systems I deal with, the exact meaning of the data elements is either obvious, or easy to find out.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Production Timeliness/Timeliness (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
IS, to my knowledge, meets its production schedules such as report delivery and running scheduled jobs.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
Regular IS activities (such as printed report delivery or running scheduled jobs) are completed on time.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Quality/Currency) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I can't get data that is current enough to meet my business needs.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
The data is up to date enough for my purposes.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Quality/Right Data) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
The data maintained by the corporation or division is pretty much what I need to carry out my tasks.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
The computer systems available to me are missing critical data that would be very useful to me in my job.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Quality/Right Level of Detail) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
The company maintains data at an appropriate level of detail for my group's tasks.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
Sufficiently detailed data is maintained by the corporation.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Relationship with Users/Consulting) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Based on my previous experience I would use IS technical and business planning consulting services in the future if I had a need.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
I am satisfied with the level of technical and business planning consulting expertise I receive from IS.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Relationship with Users/IS Interest and Dedication) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
IS takes my business group's business problems seriously.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
IS takes a real interest in helping me solve my business problems.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Relationship with Users/IS Performance) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
IS delivers agreed-upon solutions to support my business needs.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Relationship with Users/IS Understanding of Business) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
The IS people we deal with understand the day-to-day objectives of my work group and its mission within our company.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
My work group feels that IS personnel can communicate with us in familiar business terms that are consistent.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Relationship with Users/Responsiveness) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
It often takes too long for IS to communicate with me on my requests.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
I generally know what happens to my request for IS services or assistance or whether it is being acted upon.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
When I make a request for service or assistance, IS normally responds to my request in a timely manner.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Task-Technology Fit (Systems Reliability) (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I can count on the system to be "up" and available when I need it.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
The computer systems I use are subject to unexpected or inconvenient down times which makes it harder to do my work.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)
The computer systems I use are subject to frequent problems and crashes.	Not Specified	(Goodhue & Thompson, 1995)

Construct (Theory/Model): Technology Interaction Behaviors (TTF)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I use this system (or application) to solve various problems.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at all to Very Much	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
I use this system (or application) to justify my decisions.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at all to Very Much	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
I use this system (or application) to exchange with other people.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at all to Very Much	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
I use this system (or application) to plan or follow up on my tasks.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at all to Very Much	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
I use this system (or application) to coordinate activities with others.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at all to Very Much	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
I use this system (or application) to serve customers.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at all to Very Much	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
For accomplishing my tasks, this system is essential.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at all to Very Much	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)
When you perform a task that you know the system supports, what percentage of time do you use the system?	Percentage	(Barki, Titah, & Boffo, 2007)

Construct (Theory/Model): Actual System Use (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Not Specified	Not Specified

Construct (Theory/Model): Behavioral Intention (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Assuming I had access to the system, I intend to use it.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
Given that I had access to the system, I predict that I would use it.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
I plan to use the system in the next -n- months.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)

Construct (Theory/Model): Computer Anxiety (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Computers do not scare me at all.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
Working with a computer makes me nervous.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
Computers make me feel uncomfortable.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
Computers make me feel uneasy.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)

Construct (Theory/Model): Computer Playfulness (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
The following questions ask you how you would characterize yourself when you use computers: spontaneous; creative; playful; unoriginal.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)

Construct (Theory/Model): Computer Self-efficacy (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I could complete the job using a software package if there was no one around to tell me what to do as I go.	Guttman 1-10	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
I could complete the job using a software package if I had just the built-in help facility for assistance.	Guttman 1-10	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
I could complete the job using a software package if someone showed me how to do it first.	Guttman 1-10	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
I could complete the job using a software package if I had used similar packages before this one to do the same job.	Guttman 1-10	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)

Construct (Theory/Model): Experience (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Not Specified	Not Specified

Construct (Theory/Model): External Variables (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Not Specified	Not Specified

Construct (Theory/Model): Image (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
People in my organization who use the system have more prestige than those who do not.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
People in my organization who use the system have a high profile.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
Having the system is a status symbol in my organization.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)

Construct (Theory/Model): Intention to Use (Use) (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Assuming I had access to the system, I intend to use it.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)
Given that I had access to the system, I predict that I would use it.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)

Construct (Theory/Model): Job Relevance (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
In my job, usage of the system is important.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
In my job, usage of the system is relevant.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
The use of the system is pertinent to my various job-related tasks.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)

Construct (Theory/Model): Objective Usability (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Not Specified	Not Specified

Construct (Theory/Model): Output Quality (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
The quality of the output I get from the system is high.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
I have no problem with the quality of the system’s output.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
I rate the results from the system to be excellent.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)

Construct (Theory/Model): Perceived Ease of Use (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
My intention with the system is clear and understandable.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)
Interacting with the system does not require a lot of my mental effort.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)
I find the system to be easy to use.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)
I find it easy to get the system to do what I want it to do.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)

Construct (Theory/Model): Perceived Enjoyment (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I find using the system to be enjoyable.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
The actual process of using the system is pleasant.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
I have fun using the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)

Construct (Theory/Model): Perceived Usefulness (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Using the system improves my performance in my job.	Likert 1-5 and 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015) (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)
Using the system in my job increases my productivity.	Likert 1-5 and 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015) (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)
Using the system enhances my effectiveness in my job.	Likert 1-5 and 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015) (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)
I find the system to be useful in my job.	Likert 1-5 and 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015) (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)

Construct (Theory/Model): Perceptions of External Control (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I have control over using the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
I have the resources necessary to use the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
Given the resources, opportunities and knowledge it takes to use the system, it would be easy for me to use the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
The system is not compatible with other systems I use.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)

Construct (Theory/Model): Result Demonstrability (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I have no difficulty telling others about the results of using the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
I believe I could communicate to others the consequences of using the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
The results of using the system are apparent to me.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
I would have difficulty explaining why using the system may or may not be beneficial.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)

Construct (Theory/Model): Subjective Norm (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
People who influence my behavior think that I should use the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)
People who are important to me think that I should use the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000)
The senior management of this business has been helpful in the use of the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
In general, the organization has supported the use of the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008)
People who influence my behavior (e.g., coworkers, supervisors, clients) think that I should use the IS.	Likert 1-5, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
People who are important to me (e.g., coworkers, supervisors, clients) think that I should use the IS.	Likert 1-5, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
People who influence my behavior (e.g., coworkers, supervisors, clients) would welcome my use of the IS in my work.	Likert 1-5, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)

Construct (Theory/Model): Use Behavior (TAM)

Construct (Theory/Model): Voluntariness (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
My use of the system is voluntary.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
My supervisor does not require me to use the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)
Although it might be helpful, using the system is certainly not compulsory in my job.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000)

Construct (Theory/Model): Continuance Behavior (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
What percentage of your clients do you serve using the system?	Percentage	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
What percentage of your working hours do you spend on using the IS?	Percentage	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
What percentage of your workload do you deal with using the IS?	Percentage	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)

Construct (Theory/Model): Continuance Intention (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I intend to continue using the IS rather than discontinue its use.	Likert 1-5, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
My intentions are to continue using the IS rather than manual processing or other alternative means.	Likert 1-5, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
I plan to continue using the IS in my job.	Likert 1-5, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)

Construct (Theory/Model): Disconfirmation (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Comparing my initial expectations about the IS with my actual usage experience, I found that The IS improved my sales performance better than I initially expected.	Likert 1-4	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
Comparing my initial expectations about the IS with my actual usage experience, I found that The IS increased my personal productivity better than I initially expected.	Likert 1-4	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
Comparing my initial expectations about the IS with my actual usage experience, I found that The IS enhanced my job effectiveness better than I initially expected.	Likert 1-4	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
Comparing my initial expectations about the IS with my actual usage experience, I found that The IS was more helpful for my job than I initially expected.	Likert 1-4	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)

Construct (Theory/Model): Habit (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Using the IS has become automatic to me.	Likert 1-5, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
Using the IS comes naturally to me.	Likert 1-5, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
When faced with a particular task, using the IS is an obvious choice for me.	Likert 1-5, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
I have a habit of using the IS.	Likert 1-5, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)

Construct (Theory/Model): Prior Computer Experience (TAM)

Construct (Theory/Model): Satisfaction (TAM)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
How do you feel about your overall experience of IS usage.	Scale 1 to 5, Very Dissatisfied to Very Satisfied	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
How do you feel about your overall experience of IS usage.	Scale 1 to 5, Very Displeased to Very Pleased	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
How do you feel about your overall experience of IS usage.	Scale 1 to 5, Very Frustrated to Very Contented	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)
How do you feel about your overall experience of IS usage.	Scale 1 to 5, Absolutely Terrible to Absolutely Delighted	(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015)

Construct (Theory/Model): External Task Environment (TOE)

Construct (Theory/Model): Organization (TOE)

Construct (Theory/Model): Technology (TOE)

Construct (Theory/Model): Attitude Towards the Behavior (TPB)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
All things considered, using the system is a foolish move...wise move.	Scale 0 to 10	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
All things considered, using the system is a negative step...positive step.	Scale 0 to 10	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
All things considered, using the system is a ineffective idea...effective idea.	Scale 0 to 10	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
Using the system is a (bad/good) idea.	Scale 1 to 7	(Kim, 2009)
Using the system is a (foolish/wise) idea.	Scale 1 to 7	(Kim, 2009)
I (dislike/like) the idea of using the system.	Scale 1 to 7	(Kim, 2009)
Using the system is (unpleasant/pleasant).	Scale 1 to 7	(Kim, 2009)

Construct (Theory/Model): Behavior (TPB)

Construct (Theory/Model): Intention (TPB)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I intend to continue using this system to solve various problems.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at All to Very Much	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
I intend to continue using this system to justify my decisions.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at All to Very Much	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
I intend to continue using this system to exchange with other people.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at All to Very Much	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
I intend to continue using this system to plan or follow-up on my tasks.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at All to Very Much	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
I intend to continue using this system to coordinate with others.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at All to Very Much	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
I intend to continue using this system to serve customers.	Scale 0 to 10, Not at All to Very Much	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
Assuming I had access to the system, I intend to use it.	Likert 1-7	(Kim, 2009)
Given that I had access to the system, I predict that I would use it.	Likert 1-7	(Kim, 2009)

Construct (Theory/Model): Perceived Behavioral Control (TPB)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I have control over using the system.	Likert 1-7	(Kim, 2009)
I have the resources necessary to use the system.	Likert 1-7	(Kim, 2009)
I have the knowledge necessary to use the system.	Likert 1-7	(Kim, 2009)
Given the resources, opportunities and knowledge it takes to use the system, it would be easy for me to use the system.	Likert 1-7	(Kim, 2009)
The system is not compatible with other systems I use.	Likert 1-7	(Kim, 2009)

Construct (Theory/Model): Subjective Norm (TPB)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
People who are important to me think that I should use the system.	Likert 1-7 and Scale 0 to 10, Disagree Completely to Agree Completely	(Kim, 2009) (Titah & Barki, 2009)
People who influence me think that I should use the system.	Likert 1-7 and Scale 0 to 10, Disagree Completely to Agree Completely	(Kim, 2009) (Titah & Barki, 2009)

Construct (Theory/Model): Facilitating Conditions (TPB)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I have the human and technological resources necessary to use the system.	Scale 0 to 10, Disagree Completely to Agree Completely	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
I have the knowledge necessary to use the system.	Scale 0 to 10, Disagree Completely to Agree Completely	(Titah & Barki, 2009)
A specific person (or group) is available for assistance with system difficulties.	Scale 0 to 10, Disagree Completely to Agree Completely	(Titah & Barki, 2009)

Construct (Theory/Model): Behavior (TRA)

Construct (Theory/Model): Behavioral Intention (UTAUT)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I intend to use the system in the next -n- months.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
I predict I would use the system in the next -n- months.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
I plan to use the system in the next -n- months.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
I like to spend time mastering [the system].	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)
Using [the system] is personally meaningful to me.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)
I really feel [the system] is my system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)

Construct (Theory/Model): Effort Expectancy (UTAUT)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
My interaction with the system would be clear and understandable.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
It would be easy for me to become skillful at using the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007) (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
I would find the system easy to use.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007) (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
Learning to operate the system is easy for me.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007) (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)

Construct (Theory/Model): Facilitating Conditions (UTAUT)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I have the resources necessary to use the system.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
I have the knowledge necessary to use the system.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
The system is not compatible with other systems I use.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
A specific person (or group) is available for assistance with system difficulties.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
Due to lack of technical support, I have found [the system] difficult to use.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)
The current hardware in this organization does not support [the system].	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)
There are several organizational barriers preventing me from using [the system] effectively.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)

Construct (Theory/Model): Performance Expectancy (UTAUT)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I would find the system useful in my job.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
Using the system enables me to accomplish tasks more quickly.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
Using the system increases my productivity.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
If I use the system, I will increase my chances of getting a raise.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
[The system] will improve my job performance.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)
[The system] will make it easier for me to do my job.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)
[The system] will increase my productivity.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)

Construct (Theory/Model): Social Influence (UTAUT)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
People who influence my behavior think that I should use the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007) (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
People who are important to me think that I should use the system.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007) (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
The senior management of this business has been helpful in the use of the system.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
In general, the organization has supported the use of the system.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
My friends in this organization think I should use [the system].	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)
My colleagues in this organization think I should use [the system].	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)

Construct (Theory/Model): Use Behavior (UTAUT)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
When I can avoid using [the system], I do.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)
When given the choice between using or not using [the system] for a task, I usually choose not to use it.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)
When I can do a task using [the system], I will sometimes choose to use other ways to complete the task.	Likert 1-7, Strongly Disagree to Agree	(Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007)

Construct (Theory/Model): Anxiety (UTAUT)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I feel apprehensive about using the system.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
It scares me to think that I could lose a lot of information using the system by hitting the wrong key.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
I hesitate to use the system for fear of making mistakes I cannot correct.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
The system is somewhat intimidating to me.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)

Construct (Theory/Model): Attitude toward using technology (UTAUT)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
Using the system is a bad/good idea.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
The system makes work more interesting.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
Working with the system is fun.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
I like working with the system.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)

Construct (Theory/Model): Self-Efficacy (UTAUT)

Indicator	Scale	Reference(s)
I could complete a job or task using the system if there was no one around to tell me what to do as I go.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
I could complete a job or task using the system if I could call someone for help if I got stuck.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
I could complete a job or task using the system if I had a lot of time to complete the job for which the software was provided.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)
I could complete a job or task using the system if I had just the built-in help facility for assistance.	Scale 1 to 7	(Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003)