IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v6y1995i2p177-188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research Report ---A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the User Information Satisfaction Instrument

Author

Listed:
  • William J. Doll

    (The University of Toledo, 2801 W. Bancroft Street, Toledo, Ohio 43606)

  • T. S. Raghunathan

    (Department of Information Systems & Operations Management, The University of Toledo, 2801 W. Bancroft Street, Toledo, Ohio 43606)

  • Jeen-Su Lim

    (The University of Toledo, 2801 W. Bancroft Street, Toledo, Ohio 43606)

  • Yash P. Gupta

    (The University of Colorado at Denver, Denver, Colorado 80217)

Abstract

The structure and dimensionality of the user information satisfaction (UIS) construct is an important theoretical issue that has received considerable attention. Building upon the work of Bailey and Pearson (Bailey, J. E., S. W. Pearson. 1983. Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Management Sci. 29 (5, May) 530--545.), Ives et al. (Ives, B., M. Olson, J. J. Baroudi. 1983. The measure of user information satisfaction. Comm. ACM 26 (10, October) 785--793.) conduct an exploratory factor analysis and recommend a 13-item instrument (two indicators per item) for measuring user information satisfaction. Ives et al. also contend that UIS is comprised of three component measures (information product, EDP staff and services, and user knowledge or involvement). In a replication using exploratory techniques, Baroudi and Orlikowski (Baroudi, J. J., W. J. Orlikowski. 1988. A short-form measure of user information satisfaction: A psychometric evaluation and notes on use. J. Management Inform. Systems 4 (4, Spring) 44--59.) confirm the three factor structure and support the diagnostic utility of the three factor model. Other researchers have suggested a need for caution in using the UIS instrument as a single measure of user satisfaction; they contend that the instrument's three components measure quite different dimensions whose antecedents and consequences should be studied separately. The acceptance of UIS as a standardized instrument requires confirmation that it explains and measures the user information satisfaction construct and its components. Based on a sample of 224 respondents, this research uses confirmatory factor analysis (LISREL) to test alternative models of underlying factor structure and assess the reliability and validity of factors and items. The results provide support for a revised UIS model with four first-order factors and one second-order (higher-order) factor. To cross-validate these results, the authors reexamine two data sets, including the original Baroudi and Orlikowski data, to assess the revised UIS model. The results show that the revised model provides better model-data fit in all three data sets. Thus, the evidence supports the use of: (1) the 13-item instrument as a measure of an overall UIS; and (2) four component factors for explaining the UIS construct.

Suggested Citation

  • William J. Doll & T. S. Raghunathan & Jeen-Su Lim & Yash P. Gupta, 1995. "Research Report ---A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the User Information Satisfaction Instrument," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 177-188, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:6:y:1995:i:2:p:177-188
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.6.2.177
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.177
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.6.2.177?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Um, Ki-Hyun & Kim, Sang-Man, 2019. "The effects of supply chain collaboration on performance and transaction cost advantage: The moderation and nonlinear effects of governance mechanisms," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 97-111.
    2. Zhou, Guiqin & Liu, Wei, 2022. "Consumer choice in online vegetable distribution terminals: A Planned Behavior approach," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    3. Masuku, Micah B. & Kirsten, Johann F. & Owen, R., 2007. "A Conceptual Analysis of Relational Contracts in Agribusiness Supply Chains: The Case of the Sugar Industry in Swaziland," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 46(1), pages 1-22, March.
    4. Morote, Roxanna & Anyan, Frederick & Las Hayas, Carlota & Gabrielli, Silvia & Zwiefka, Antoni & Gudmundsdottir, Dora Gudrun & Ledertoug, Mette Marie & Olafsdottir, Anna S. & Izco-Basurko, Irantzu & Fu, 2020. "Development and validation of the theory-driven School Resilience Scale for Adults: Preliminary results," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. Juan Manuel Ramon-Jeronimo & Raquel Florez-Lopez & Maria Angeles Ramon-Jeronimo, 2017. "Understanding the Generation of Value along Supply Chains: Balancing Control Information and Relational Governance Mechanisms in Downstream and Upstream Relationships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-31, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:6:y:1995:i:2:p:177-188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.