Measurement and exploration of individual beliefs about the consequences of building information modelling use

References

• Adriaanse, A., Voordijk, H. and Dewulf, G. (2010) The use of interorganisational ICT in United States construction projects. Automation in Construction, 19(1), 73–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ajzen, I. (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
   Google Scholar
• Amoako-Gyampah, K. and Salam, A.F. (2004) An extension of the technology acceptance model in an ERP implementation environment. Information & Management, 41(6), 731–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagozzi, R.P. (2007) The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 244–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1982) Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baruch, Y. and Holtom, B.C. (2008) Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61(8), 1139–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beatty, C.A. and Gordon, J.R.M. (1988) Barriers to the implementation of CAD/CAM systems. Sloan Management Review, 29(4), 25–33.
   Google Scholar
• Benbasat, I. and Barki, H. (2007) Quo vadis, TAM. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 211–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandon, P., Li, H. and Shen, Q. (2005) Construction IT and the ‘tipping point’. Automation in Construction, 14(3), 281–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, G. and Gajendram, T. (2011) Attitudinal, behavioural, and cultural impacts on e-business use in a project team: a case study. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 16, 637–52.
   Google Scholar
• Burton-Jones, A. and Gallivan, M.J. (2007) Toward a deeper understanding of system usage in organizations: a multilevel perspective. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 657–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cattell, R.B. (1966) The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1(2), 245–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
   Google Scholar
• Crotty, R. (2011) The Impact of Building Information Modelling: Transforming Construction, Spon Press, London.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, F.D. (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, K.A. and Songer, A.D. (2008) Resistance to IT change in the AEC industry: an individual assessment tool. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 13, 56–68.
   Google Scholar
• Department for Business Innovation & Skills (2012) Building Information Modelling, BIS, London.
   Google Scholar
• Dinauer, L.D. and Fink, E.L. (2005) Interattitude structure and attitude dynamics. Human Communication Research, 31(1), 1–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doherty, N.F., Coombs, C.R. and Loan-Clarke, J. (2006) A re-conceptualization of the interpretive flexibility of information technologies: redressing the balance between the social and the technical. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(6), 569–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An introduction to Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, S. and Hietanen, J. (2007) Interorganizational use of building information models: potential for automational, informational, transformational effects. Construction Management and Economics, 25(3), 289–96.
   Google Scholar
• Gann, D.M. and Salter, A.J. (2000) Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: the construction of complex products and systems. Research Policy, 29(7–8), 955–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorsuch, R. (1983) Factor Analysis, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
   Google Scholar
• Green, S.D. (2011) Making Sense of Construction Improvement, Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester.
   Google Scholar
• Hartmann, T., van Meerveld, H., Vossebeld, N. and Adriaanse, A. (2012) Aligning building information model tools and construction management methods. Automation in Construction, 22, 605–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunter, J.E., Levine, R.L. and Sayers, S.E. (1976) Attitude change in hierarchical belief systems and its relationship to persuasibility, dogmatism, and rigidity. Human Communication Research, 3(1), 3–28.
   Google Scholar
• Huy, Q.N. (2001) In praise of middle managers. Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 72–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobsson, M. and Linderoth, H.C. (2010) The influence of contextual elements, actors’ frames of reference, and technology on the adoption and use of ICT in construction projects: a Swedish case study. Construction Management and Economics, 28(1), 13–23.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobsson, M. and Linderoth, H.C.J. (2012) User perceptions of ICT impacts in Swedish construction companies: ‘it’s fine, just as it is’. Construction Management and Economics, 30(5), 339–57.
   Google Scholar
• Jernigan, F. (2007) Big BIM Little BIM, 4Site Press, Salisbury, MD.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, M.D. and Fornell, C. (1991) A framework for comparing customer satisfaction across individuals and product categories. Journal of Economic Psychology, 12(2), 267–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, E.J. and Payne, J.W. (1985) Effort and accuracy in choice. Management Science, 31(4), 395–414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karahanna, E., Agarwal, R. and Angst, C.M. (2006) Reconceptualizing compatibility beliefs in technology acceptance research. MIS Quarterly, 30(4), 781–804.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, W.R. and He, J. (2006) A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43(6), 740–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kline, P. (1993) The Handbook of Psychological Testing, Routledge, London.
   Google Scholar
• Krosnick, J.A. (1999) Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 537–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Legris, P., Ingham, J. and Collerette, P. (2003) Why do people us information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 40(3), 191–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linderoth, H. (2010) Understanding adoption and use of BIM as the creation of actor networks. Automation in Construction, 19(1), 66–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Love, P.E.D. and Irani, Z. (2001) Evaluation of IT costs in construction. Automation in Construction, 10(6), 649–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowry, G. (2002) Modelling user acceptance of building management systems. Automation in Construction, 11(6), 695–705.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, A., Radcliffe, D. and Isokangas, E. (2009) A perception-influence model for the management of technology implementation in construction. Construction Innovation, 9(2), 168–83.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, G.C. and Benbasat, I. (1991) Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting in information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Building Specification (2012) National BIM Report 2012, National Building Specification, Newcastle.
   Google Scholar
• Nikas, A., Poulymenakou, A. and Kriaris, P. (2007) Investigating antecedents and drivers affecting the adoption of collaboration technologies in the construction industry. Automation in Construction, 16(5), 632–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunnally, J. (1978) Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York.
   Google Scholar
• Peansupap, V. and Walker, D.H.T. (2006) Innovation diffusion at the implementation stage of a construction project: a case study of information communication technology. Construction Management and Economics, 24(3), 321–32.
   Google Scholar
• Peansupap, V. and Walker, D.H.T. (2005) Factors enabling information and communication technology diffusion and actual implementation on construction organisations. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 10, 193–218.
   Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, C.E. and Donthu, N. (2006) Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine internet usage: the role of perceived access barriers and demographics. Journal of Business Research, 59(9), 999–1007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rediker, K.J., Mitchell, T.R., Beach, L.R. and Beard, D.W. (1993) The effects of strong belief structures on information-processing evaluations and choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 6(2), 113–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rezgui, Y., Zarli, A. and Hopfe, C. (2009) Editorial: building information modeling applications, challenges and future directions. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 14, 613–16.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E.M. (1983) Diffusion of Innovations, The Free Press, New York.
   Google Scholar
• Rosch, E., Mervis, C.B., Gray, W.D., Johnson, D.M. and Boyes-Braem, P. (1976) Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8(3), 382–439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuelson, O. (2011) Adoption processes for EDM, EDI and BIM in the Swedish construction industry. Paper presented at the CIB W78-W102 2011 International Conference, Sophia Antipolis, France, 26–28 October.
   Google Scholar
• Sapsford, R. (2006) Survey Research, Sage, London.
   Google Scholar
• Schepers, J. and Wetzels, M. (2007) A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & Management, 44(1), 90–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shih, H.P. (2004) Extended technology acceptance model of internet utilization behavior. Information & Management, 41(6), 719–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• So, S. and Sun, H. (2011) An extension of IDT in examining the relationship between electronic-enabled supply chain integration and the adoption of lean production. International Journal of Production Research, 49(2), 447–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Son, H., Park, Y., Kim, C. and Chou, J.S. (2012) Toward an understanding of construction professionals' acceptance of mobile computing devices in South Korea: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Automation in Construction, 28, 82–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanaka, J.W. and Taylor, M. (1991) Object categories and expertise: is the basic level in the eye of the beholder?. Cognitive Psychology, 23(3), 457–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, R.C. and Hunt, J.G. (1996) Inside the black box of alpha, beta, and gamma change: using a cognitive-processing model to assess attitude structure. Academy of Management Review, 21(3), 655–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A. and Howell, J.M. (1991) Personal computing: toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 124–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Triandis, H.C. (1980) Values, attitudes and interpersonal behaviour. in Howe, H. and Page, M. (eds.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 1979: Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, pp. 195–259.
   Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, V. and Bala, H. (2008) Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D. (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vroom, V.H. (1964) Work and Motivation, Wiley, New York.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, J.P. (1988) Selectivity and selective perception: an investigation of managers’ belief structure and information processing. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 873–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winch, G. (1998) Zephyrs of creative destruction: understanding the management of innovation in construction. Building Research & Information, 26(5), 268–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yousafzai, S.Y., Foxall, G.R. and Pallister, J.G. (2007a) Technology acceptance: a meta-analysis of the TAM: Part 1. Journal of Modelling in Management, 2(3), 251–80.
   Google Scholar
• Yousafzai, S.Y., Foxall, G.R. and Pallister, J.G. (2007b) Technology acceptance: a meta-analysis of the TAM: Part 2. Journal of Modelling in Management, 2(3), 281–304.
   Google Scholar