Document Type : Original Research Paper


1 Educational Management, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Urmia University, Iran

2 Department of Educational Management, University of Urmia, Iran


This aim of this study is to consider the influencing factors in information technology acceptance among university student. The developed model of acceptance, stress parameters, computers effectively organizational support and cultural values entered into it. 295 students of Uromiye University were selected as samples to answer the questionnaire. The result showed that the technology acceptance model structure is able to make prediction, in order to decide about using the computer and it can predict18 percent. Computer self efficiency has a positive effect and computer stress has a negative effect on ease of use. Ambiguity aversion and power have a positive effect on computer stress and ambiguity aversion has a negative effect on computer self efficiency. The effect of organizational support was a negative on computer stress and a positively on comport self efficiency.  This project showed that the personal, organizational, and cultural factors generally are effective on technology acceptance and it is necessary for programmer to consider these elements.


Main Subjects

[1]Sobhani Nezhad, M., Norouzi, A., Amani, J., & Hayat, A., Role of organizational support, computer experience, anxiety and self efficacy in predicting computer use. Journal of educational psychology studies. Vol. 11, 2009, pp. 45-68. [2]Dewan, S. and Min, C., The Substitution of Information Technology for OtherFactors of Production: A Firm Level Analysis. Management Science,Vol, 43, No. 12. 1997 ,pp.1660-1675. [3]Igbaria, M. and Iivari, J., The effects of selfefficacy on computer usage. Omega, International Journal of Management Science, Vol, 23, No. 6. 1995, pp.587-605. [4]Akour, I., Factors influencing faculty computer literacy and use in Jordan: A multivariate analysis. D.B.A. dissertation, Louisiana Tech University, United States -- Louisiana. Retrieved March 13, 2010, [5]Davis, F., Bagozzi, R. and Warshaw, P., User Acceptance of Computer ,computer self-efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice. Computers & Education, Vol. 50, No. 3, 1989, pp.1084–1091. [6]Kim, Yong Jin, Chun, Jae Uk, Song, Jaeki., Investigating the role of attitude in technology acceptance from an attitude strength perspective, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 29, 2009, pp. 67–77. [7]Teo, Timothy., Modeling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers, Computers & Education, Vol. 52, 2009, pp. 302–312. [8]Teo, T., Assessing the computer attitudes of students: An Asian perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 24, 2008, pp. 1634–1642. [9]Ejei, J., Amani Saribaglou, J., Khezri Azar, H., & Gholami, M.T. The role of cognitive beliefs in relationship between individual and organizational factors with information technology acceptance. Journal of Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2012, pp. 1-11. [10]Amani-Saribagloo J., Gholamali-Lavasani M., Ejei J., & Khezri-Azar H. The relationship between cultural values and individual variables with computer use among university students. Journal of Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2011, pp. 1-10. [11]Dorani K, & Rashidi Z. (2007). A study of determinant factors in Information Technology Acceptance by teachers of smart schools in Tehran. Research in Educational systems, 2007, Vol.1, No. 1, pp. 23-46. [12]Davis, F. D., Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, Vol.13, No. 3, 1989, pp. 319–340. [13]Srite, M., Thatcher, J.B., Galy, E., Does withinculture variation matter? An empirical study of computer usage. Journal of Global Information Management, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2008, pp. 1-25. [14]Fagan, M., Neill, S. and Wooldridge, B., An Empirical Investigation Into the Relationship Between Computer Self-Efficacy, Anxiety, Experience, Support and Usage. Journal of Computer Information Systems AA, Vol. 2, 2004, pp. 95-104 [15]Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., & Papagianni, A. Individual characteristics and Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, Vol. 35, No. 8, 2008, pp. 982-1003. [16]Gholamali-Lavasani M. The relationship between individual variables with computer anxiety among undergraduate students of Tehran University. Journal of Psychology and Education. Vol. 33, No. 2, 2002, pp. 107-33. [17]Coffin, R.J. and Maclntyre, P.D., "Motivational Influences on Computer-related Affective States," Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 15, 1999, pp. 549-569. [18]Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. j., & Minkov, M., Culture and organization: Software of the mind. (3ed). New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010. [19]Hofstede, G., Cultural consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1980. [20]Srite, M., The influence of national culture on the acceptance and use of information technologies: An empirical study. Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, 2000. [21]Hooman H. Structural equation modeling with Lisrel application. Tehran: Samt Publication; 2008. [22]Compeau, D.R., & Higgins, C.A., Computer selfefficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 1995b, 189-211. [23]Thatcher, J. and Perrewe, P., An Empirical Examination of Individual Traits as Antecedent to Computer Anxiety and Computer SelfEfficacy. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 4, 2002, pp. 381-398. [24] Srite, M., Karahanna, E., The role of espoused national cultural values in technology acceptance. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 3, 2006, pp. 679–704. [25]Gefen D, Straub DW. Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research and practice. Communication of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2000, p.p.1-79. [26]Namlu, A.G. The effect of learning strategy on computer anxiety. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 19, 2003, p.p. 565–578.