Abstract
Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use are important instruments for evaluating information system applications and predicting usage. Using a sample of 902 respondents, this research conducts: (1) a confirmatory analysis to assess the validity and reliability of the original instrument proposed by Davis, and (2) a multi-group invariance analysis to assess the equivalence of these instruments across sub-groups based on type of application, experience with computing, and gender. The results provide strong support for the validity and reliability of Davis's instruments. With exemptions for word processing applications and users with no prior computing experience, this research provides evidence that these instruments can be considered robustness across spread sheet, database, and graphic applications.