Keywords:-

Keywords: Theoretical Review, TAM, UTAUT, EUCS, DeLone & McLean, Academic Information System

Article Content:-

Abstract

This study presents a comparative theoretical review of four major models is Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), End-User Computing Satisfaction (EUCS), and the DeLone & McLean IS Success Model in the context of Academic Information Systems (AIS). Drawing from literature published between 2000 and 2025, with emphasis on recent studies (2021–2025), the paper highlights the strengths and limitations of each framework. The findings indicate that TAM is simple and effective for explaining early adoption, UTAUT provides a more comprehensive analysis by including organizational and social factors, EUCS is suitable for assessing student satisfaction, and the DeLone & McLean model offers a holistic view of AIS success. The main contribution of this paper is to provide theoretical guidance for both researchers and practitioners in selecting appropriate models for AIS evaluation. As a conceptual review, this study does not include empirical testing; therefore, future research should validate these insights using methods such as PLS-SEM or SmartPLS and consider hybrid approaches that integrate multiple models.

References:-

References

I. Putriyani, B. Bayu Sugiharto, and F. Ramadhan, “Analisis Literatur Tentang Peran Sistem Informasi Akademik Dalam Meningkatkan Efisiensi Administrasi Di Institusi Perguruan Tinggi,” J-CEKI : Jurnal Cendekia Ilmiah, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 2283–2289, Dec. 2024,

doi: 10.56799/JCEKI.V4I1.5881.

R. A. Sunarjo, M. H. R. Chakim, S. Maulana, and G. Fitriani, “Management of Educational Institutions through Information Systems for Enhanced Efficiency and Decision-Making,” International Transactions on Education Technology (ITEE), vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 47–61, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.33050/itee.v3i1.670.

I. Maskanah, U. Kristen Satya Wacana Herlin Lusiana Sae, and U. Kristen Satya Wacana, “Efektivitas Penggunaan Teknologi Dalam Pembelajaran Daring Di Masa Pandemi Covid-19,” JURNAL JENDELA PENDIDIKAN, vol. 1, no. 04, pp. 279–285, Nov. 2021,

doi: 10.57008/JJP.V1I04.60.

R. Aprianto, E. P. Lestari, Sadan, and E. Fletcher, “Harnessing Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: Balancing Innovation and Ethical Challenges,” International Transactions on Education Technology (ITEE), vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 84–93, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.33050/ITEE.V3I1.680.

K. Dwi, S. 11, T. Chamidy, and M. Faisal, “Analysis of Academic Information System Using Information System Success Model and System Quality Model Case Study of Institut Teknologi Nasional Malang,” Transactions on Informatics and Data Science, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 33–44, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.24090/TIDS.V1I1.12234.

A. Permadi, T. Irawati, and B. Widada, “Analisis Perilaku Pengguna Website Sistem Informasi Akademik Menggunakan Technology Acceptance Model (TAM),” Jurnal Teknologi Informasi dan Komunikasi (TIKomSiN), vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 17–24, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.30646/tikomsin.v11i1.728.

S. A. Melgis, R. Aryani, D. Lestari, and M. N. A. Abdulnazar, “Analyzing the Quality of Academic Information Systems on System Success,” INTENSIF: Jurnal Ilmiah Penelitian dan Penerapan Teknologi Sistem Informasi, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 144–165, Feb. 2024,

doi: 10.29407/INTENSIF.V8I1.21512.

S. Yusuf, M. I. Abas, S. Syahrial, and R. Lamusu, “Penerapan Model Unified Theory Of Acceptance And Use Of Technology (Utaut) Terhadap Penggunaan Sistem Informasi Akademik Universitas Muhammadiyah Gorontalo,” Jurnal Ilmu Komputer (JUIK), vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 31–36, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.31314/JUIK.V2I2.1714.

F. D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Q, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319–339, 1989, doi: 10.2307/249008.

O. Tikaromah, A. Yahya, T. Hidayat, and F. Ekonomi dan Bisnis, “Technology Acceptance Model dalam Mendorong Intention to use pada Sistem Informasi Akuntansi,” Jurnal Akuntansi Bisnis Pelita Bangsa, vol. 9, no. 02, pp. 246–256, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.37366/AKUBIS.V9I02.2278.

M. Y. Rukmana, F. A. Bactiar, and S. R. Akbar, “Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) on distance learning in University of Brawijaya,” Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 331–348, Jan. 2025,

doi: 10.25126/JITECS.93724.

A. Azimah and R. Ria, “The Role of Technology Acceptance Model for Exploring Application of Accounting Information System Based on Artificial Intelligence,” Kurdish Studies, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 5571–5581, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.58262/ks.v12i2.413.

A. Budiyanto, “Penerapan Metode Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) Terhadap Penggunaan Aplikasi Sistem Informasi Akademik Institut Bisnis Nusantara,” Jurnal Esensi Infokom : Jurnal Esensi Sistem Informasi dan Sistem Komputer, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 98–102, Nov. 2023,

doi: 10.55886/INFOKOM.V7I2.776.

T. Chuenyindee et al., “The perceived usability of the learning management system during the COVID-19 pandemic: Integrating system usability scale, technology acceptance model, and task-technology fit,” Work, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 41–58, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.3233/WOR-220015.

L. Xue, A. M. Rashid, and S. Ouyang, “The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) in Higher Education: A Systematic Review,” Sage Open, vol. 14, no. 1, Jan. 2024,

doi: 10.1177/21582440241229570.

Y. Dai, X. Lin, and L. Li, “Technology Acceptance of LMS—Do Previous Online Learning Experiences Matter?,” Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange (JETDE), vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 75–90, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.18785/jetde.1402.04.

V. S. Sukandi and M. Ariyanti, “Analysis acceptance and use of CeLOE learning management system (LMS) Telkom University using unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) and Delone-McLean Model,” Contemporary Research on Management and Business, pp. 252–255, Sep. 2022,

doi: 10.1201/9781003295952-64.

N. Annamalai, T. Ramayah, J. A. Kumar, and S. Osman, “Investigating the Use of Learning Management System (LMS) for Distance Education in Malaysia: A Mixed-Method Approach,” Contemp Educ Technol, vol. 13, no. 3, p. ep313, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.30935/CEDTECH/10987.

A. Padalia, Jamilah, Syakhruni, Y. S. Rini, and A. M. Idkhan, “E-Learning Application Usage in Higher Education with Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) for Students’ Assessment,” Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 1059–1067, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.18517/IJASEIT.13.3.18691.

V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” MIS Q, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003, doi: 10.2307/30036540.

K. Tamilmani, N. P. Rana, S. F. Wamba, and R. Dwivedi, “The extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2): A systematic literature review and theory evaluation,” Int J Inf Manage, vol. 57, p. 102269, Apr. 2021,

doi: 10.1016/J.IJINFOMGT.2020.102269.

D. A. Sitar-Taut and D. Mican, “Mobile learning acceptance and use in higher education during social distancing circumstances: an expansion and customization of UTAUT2,” Online Information Review, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 1000–1019, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1108/OIR-01-2021-0017.

P. Deng, B. Chen, and L. Wang, “Predicting students’ continued intention to use E-learning platform for college English study: the mediating effect of E-satisfaction and habit,” Front Psychol, vol. 14, p. 1182980, Jun. 2023,

doi: 10.3389/FPSYG.2023.1182980/BIBTEX.

S. S. Chand, B. aklesh Kumar, M. S. Goundar, and A. Narayan, “Extended UTAUT Model for Mobile Learning Adoption Studies,” International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–20, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.4018/IJMBL.312570.

A. Strzelecki, “Students’ Acceptance of ChatGPT in Higher Education: An Extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology,” Innov High Educ, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 223–245, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.1007/S10755-023-09686-1/TABLES/4.

S. Yulianti and R. Widayanti, “Pengukuran Tingkat Kepuasan Pengguna E-Learning Menggunakan Model End User Computing Satisfaction (EUCS) di Universitas Esa Unggul,” IKRA-ITH Teknologi Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1–10, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.37817/IKRAITH-TEKNOLOGI.V8I3.4160.

W. J. Doll and G. Torkzadeh, “The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction,” MIS Q, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 259–273, 1988, doi: 10.2307/248851.

C. Angrayni and E. S. Panjaitan, “Evaluating User Interfaces in E-Learning Satisfaction Using EUCS Method,” Brilliance: Research of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 343–354, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.47709/BRILLIANCE.V5I1.6302.

A. K. Ameen, I. Y. Maolood, and D. A. Abdullah, “Innovative Approaches to Enhancing User Satisfaction in Higher Education Information Systems,” Science Journal of University of Zakho, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 337–340, Jul. 2024,

doi: 10.25271/sjuoz.2024.12.3.1323.

M. N. Amin, E. Saputra, M. L. Hamzah, and M. Rahmawita, “Penerapan Metode EUCS terhadap Kepuasan Pengguna Sistem Informasi Akademik,” Jurnal Teknologi Sistem Informasi dan Aplikasi, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1013–1020, Jul. 2024,

doi: 10.32493/JTSI.V7I3.41296.

N. A. Hidayah, E. Fetrina, and A. Z. Taufan, “Model Satisfaction Users Measurement of Academic Information System Using End-User Computing Satisfaction (EUCS) Method,” Applied Information System and Management (AISM), vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 119–123, Oct. 2020,

doi: 10.15408/aism.v3i2.14516.

A. Padalia and T. Natsir, “End-User Computing Satisfaction (EUCS) Model: Implementation of Learning Management System (LMS) on Students Satisfaction at Universities,” International Journal of Environment, Engineering and Education, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 100–107, Dec. 2022,

doi: 10.55151/ijeedu.v4i3.72.

A. Saputri and E. Mulyani, “The Impact of Academic Information System to Students’ Satisfaction in Higher Education,” Studies in Educational Management, vol. 12, pp. 1–9, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.32038/SEM.2022.12.01.

Niel Agrisman Barus, Iskandar Muda, and Sambas Ade Kesuma, “A Systematic Review of the DeLone & McLean Model in Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems Success,” Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, vol. 21, no. 3, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.17265/1548-6583/2025.03.002.

M. Darriel, A. Aksana, A. Pratama, and S. Mukaromah, “Evaluating ERP System Success Through the DeLone and McLean Model in Financial Organizations,” bit-Tech, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 243–253, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.32877/BT.V8I1.2513.

H. A. Faris et al., “DeLone and McLean Model Analysis of Success Factors of SIDEMANG Application in Palembang City,” Jurnal Sisfokom (Sistem Informasi dan Komputer), vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 154–161, Jun. 2024,

doi: 10.32736/SISFOKOM.V13I2.1894.

W. H. DeLone and E. R. McLean, “The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 9–30, 2003, doi: 10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748.

K. Çelik and A. Ayaz, “Validation of the Delone and McLean information systems success model: a study on student information system,” Educ Inf Technol (Dordr), vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 4709–4727, May 2022,

doi:10.1007/S10639-021-10798-4/METRICS.

V. Sarasi, I. Chaerudin, and I. A. Sundoro, “The DeLone and McLean model for measuring success in online learning systems: Indonesian evidence,” Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 566–574, Nov. 2023,

doi: 10.11591/EDULEARN.V17I4.20839.

T. Widyaningrum, Q. Sholihah, and B. S. Haryono, “The Delone and McLean Information System Success Model: Investigating User Satisfaction in Learning Management System,” Journal of Education Technology, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 86–94, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.23887/JET.V8I1.71080.

V. S. Sukandi and M. Ariyanti, “Analysis acceptance and use of CeLOE learning management system (LMS) Telkom University using unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) and Delone-McLean Model,” Contemporary Research on Management and Business, pp. 252–255, Sep. 2022,

doi: 10.1201/9781003295952-64.

J. A. Luft, S. Jeong, R. Idsardi, and G. Gardner, “Literature Reviews, Theoretical Frameworks, and Conceptual Frameworks: An Introduction for New Biology Education Researchers,”

https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.21-05-0134, vol. 21, no. 3, p. rm33, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.1187/CBE.21-05-0134.

M. J. Page et al., “The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews,” BMJ, vol. 372, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1136/BMJ.N71.

A. Carrera-Rivera, W. Ochoa, F. Larrinaga, and G. Lasa, “How-to conduct a systematic literature review: A quick guide for computer science research,” MethodsX, vol. 9, p. 101895, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1016/J.MEX.2022.101895.

D. Turnbull, R. Chugh, and J. Luck, “Systematic-narrative hybrid literature review: A strategy for integrating a concise methodology into a manuscript,” Social Sciences & Humanities Open, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 100381, Jan. 2023,

doi: 10.1016/J.SSAHO.2022.100381.

S. Sarkar and G. Bhatia, “Writing and appraising narrative reviews,” Journal of Clinical and Scientific Research, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 169–172, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.4103/JCSR.JCSR_1_21.

Downloads

Citation Tools

How to Cite
Ramadhani, S., Widodo, A., & Nugraheni, D. M. (2025). Comparative Study of Technology Acceptance Models for Academic Information Systems: A Theoretical Review. International Journal Of Mathematics And Computer Research, 13(10), 5676-5685. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmcr/v13i10.01