IS Continuance — Bhattacherjee (2001)
The IS Continuance model (Bhattacherjee, 2001) has four constructs: confirmation, perceived usefulness, satisfaction and IS continuance intention, measured with 7-point Likert and semantic-differential items. It explains why people keep using an information system after first adoption, based on expectation-confirmation theory. Continuance intention has 3 items.
What it measures
Bhattacherjee (2001) models continued use of an information system through four constructs: confirmation (how far experience met expectations), perceived usefulness, satisfaction and IS continuance intention (intention to keep using the system). It draws on expectation–confirmation theory from consumer research.
The constructs are reflective multi-item factors (satisfaction is often measured with semantic-differential items), so the model is typically estimated with SEM. Report reliability and validity per construct.
Scale items
The item wording is under the publisher’s copyright, so we do not reproduce it here. You can find the full items in the original article (see the citation below). In Explonia, signed-in users get this scale complete in the built-in library and can add it to their own study — no need to find the items yourself. For use in your own research; please cite the original source.
How to use and cite it
Cite Bhattacherjee (2001), MIS Quarterly, in your Methods section and note any wording you adapt to your system. The item wording is copyright; read it in the original article.
In Explonia (Academic tier) you can build the four constructs, collect data, and run reliability, CFA and CB-SEM with an exportable APA paragraph. See how to find a validated scale for guidance.
Reporting reliability and validity
Report internal consistency for each construct (alpha, omega or composite reliability ≥ .70) and, in a CFA/SEM, convergent validity (AVE ≥ .50) and discriminant validity — continuance intention and satisfaction in particular should be empirically distinct. Keep at least three items per reflective factor, and treat reliability and validity as separate pieces of evidence.
Reference table
| Property | Detail |
|---|---|
| Construct | Confirmation, perceived usefulness, satisfaction, IS continuance intention |
| Type | Reflective; multidimensional model |
| Number of items | Multi-item per construct (e.g., continuance intention 3 items; satisfaction measured with semantic-differential items) |
| Response format | 7-point Likert and semantic-differential items |
| Original source | Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351–370. |
| DOI | 10.2307/3250921 |
| Reported reliability | Good reliability per construct in the original validation |
| Domain | Information systems / continued use |
Frequently asked questions
How is IS continuance different from initial adoption?
Adoption models (like TAM) explain a first decision to use a system, while Bhattacherjee's IS continuance model explains continued use afterward. It centres on confirmation of prior expectations, satisfaction, and the intention to keep using the system.
Which constructs do I measure?
Confirmation, perceived usefulness, satisfaction and IS continuance intention — each as a reflective multi-item construct. Report reliability and validity per construct and confirm discriminant validity between satisfaction and continuance intention.
How to cite this page
If this page helped your research, you can cite it (APA 7):
Szymkowiak, A. (2026). IS Continuance Scale (Bhattacherjee 2001). Explonia. https://explonia.com/scales/is-continuance-bhattacherjee/
Last updated: September 2026
Run your whole study in one place
Build it, collect it, and get publication-grade analysis with a draft APA paragraph you can edit. Free to start. No credit card.
Start free