Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Local e-government and user satisfaction with city portals – the citizens’ service preference perspective

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the past decade, governments all over the world have incrementally employed E-Government websites to improve public administration efficiency by augmenting the effectiveness, quality, transparency and availability of information and services for their citizens. Despite the increased interest in providing E-Government services, knowledge about the success of E-Government remains limited. In terms of an efficient provision of E-Government services for citizens, a user-oriented approach needs to be considered. In this context, user satisfaction is a crucial factor for the success or failure of E-Government. Hence, a primary challenge for local E-Government city portals is the identification of key factors that determine user satisfaction. Therefore, this study develops a model for user satisfaction of E-Government city portals by applying a mixed method approach. The results of this paper, which are based on binary logistic regression, indicate that integration of downloadable forms, integration of a powerful search function, full online availability of E-Government Services, and Perceived Ease of Use positively influence user satisfaction with E-Government city portals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. see Literature Review in Section 2

  2. Apart from the analysis of best practice examples, our explorative Website analysis has considered the city portals of medium-sized municipalities (Berlin and Mainz) as this approach prevents biases for questionnaires development and as the additional medium-sized city portal cases reflect the structure of the basic population for the present study.

References

  • Abdellatif, A., Ben Amor, N., Mellouli, S. (2013). An intelligent framework for e-government personalized services. Proceedings of the 14th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, 120–126.

  • Accenture Institute for health and public service value (2009). From e-Government to e-Governance with citizens. Using new technologies to strengthen relationships http://nstore.accenture.com/egovernance/x/From%20e-Government%20to%20e-Governance.pdf. Accessed 18 October 2014.

  • Alawneh, A., Al-Refai, H., & Batiha, K. (2013). Measuring user satisfaction from e-government services: lessons from Jordan. Government Information Quarterly, 30(3), 277–288. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2013.03.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Hossienie, C. A., & Barua, S. K. (2013). Applications of e-governance towards the establishment of digital Bangladesh: prospects and challenges. Journal of E-Governance, 36, 152–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alias, E. S., Mohd Idris, S. H., Ashaari, N. S., Kasimin, H. (2011). Evaluating e-government services in Malaysia using the EGOVSAT model. Electrical Engineering and Informatics (ICEEI), 2011 International Conference on, 1–5.

  • Al-Nuaim, H. (2011). An evaluation framework for Saudi e-government. Journal of E-Government Studies and Best Practices, 1–12. DOI: 10.5171/2011.820912.

  • Al-Sebie, M. (2014). Organizational challenges facing integrating e-government systems: an empirical study. European Scientific Journal, 10(10), 236–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Sebie, M., & Irani, Z. (2005). Technical and organizational challenges facing transactional eGovernment systems: an empirical study. Electronic Government: An International Journal, 2(3), 247–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arduini, D., Zanfei, A., Denni, M., Giungato, G. (2011). The egovernment services delivery of the Italian municipalities. Electronic Government, 144–158.

  • Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(3), 396–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Assar, S., Boughzala, I., & Boydens, I. (2011). Practical studies in e-government. Best practices from around the world. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, J. E., & Pearson, S. W. (1983). Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Management Science, 29(5), 530–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. T. (2006). Data triangulation and web quality metrics: a case study in e-government. Information & Management, 43(6), 767–777. doi:10.1016/j.im.2006.06.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity (1st ed.). New York, USA: Wiley-Interscience.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bergkvist, L., & Rossiter, J. R. (2007). The predictive validity of multiple-item versus single-item measures of the same constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(2), 175–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergkvist, L., & Rossiter, J. R. (2009). Tailor-made single-item measures of doubly concrete constructs. International Journal of Advertising, 28(4), 607–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2012). Promoting transparency and accountability through ICTs, social media, and collaborative e-government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 6(1), 78–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonsón, E., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Flores, F. (2012). Local e-government 2.0: social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29(2), 123–132. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2011.10.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryer, T. A. (2011). The costs of democratization - social media adaptation challenges within government agencies. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 33(3), 341–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capgemini, Rand Europe, IDC, Sogeti, DTi (2012). Public Services Online. Digital by Default or by Detour? Assessing User Centric eGovernment performance in Europe – eGovernment Benchmark 2012. http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/eGov%20Benchmark%202012%20insight%20report%20published%20version%200.1%20_0.pdf. Accessed 22 October 2014.

  • Carrasco M., & Fetherston J. (2011). Citizens, are you being served? A people-first approach to transforming government services. http://www.bcg.de/documents/file92110.pdf. Accessed 3 November 2014.

  • Carrasco, M., & Goss, P. (2014). Digital government: turning the rhetoric into reality. https://www.bcgperspectives.com/content/articles/public_sector_center_consumer_customer_insight_digital_government_turning_rhetoric_into_reality/. Accessed 4 November 2014.

  • Chan, F., Thong, J. Y. L., Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., Hu, P.-H., & Tam, K. Y. (2010). Modeling citizen satisfaction with mandatory adoption of an e-government technology. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 11(10), 519–549.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, I.-C., Li, Y.-C., Hung, W.-F., & Hwang, H.-G. (2005). An empirical study on the impact of quality antecedents on tax payers’ acceptance of Internet tax-filing systems. Government Information Quarterly, 22(3), 389–410. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2005.05.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C.-W. (2010). Impact of quality antecedents on taxpayer satisfaction with online tax-filing systems—an empirical study. Information & Management, 47(5–6), 308–315. doi:10.1016/j.im.2010.06.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christodoulides, G., & Michaelidou, N. (2011). Shopping motives as antecedents of e-satisfaction and e-loyalty. Journal of Marketing Management, 27(1–2), 181–197. doi:10.1080/0267257X.2010.489815.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. E. (2006). Citizen satisfaction with contacting government on the internet. Information Polity, 11, 51–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Zhang, W. (2009). The application of mixed methods designs to trauma research. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 22(6), 612–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Avanzo, E., & Kuflik, T. (2013). E-commerce websites services versus buyers expectations: an empirical analysis of the online marketplace. International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, 12(4), 651–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, D., Golicic, S., & Boerstler, C. (2011). Benefits and challenges of conducting multiple methods research in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(3), 467–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 60–95.

  • Drolet, A. L., & Morrison, D. G. (2001). Do we really need multiple-item measures in service research? Journal of Service Research, 3(3), 196–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fassnacht, M., & Koese, I. (2006). Quality of electronic services conceptualizing and testing a hierarchical model. Journal of Service Research, 9(1), 19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London, GB: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floropoulos, J., Spathis, C., Halvatzis, D., & Tsipouridou, M. (2010). Measuring the success of the Greek taxation information system. International Journal of Information Management, 30(1), 47–56. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2009.03.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freed, J. (2009). Travel web sites try waiving fees. Business Week Online, 9.

  • Georgiadis, C. K., & Stiakakis E. (2010). Extending an e-Government Service Measurement Framework to m-Governement Services. Mobile Business and 2010 Ninth Global Mobility Roundtable (ICMB-GMR), 2010 Ninth International Conference on. IEEE, 2010.

  • Green, D. T., & Pearson, J. M. (2011). Integrating website usability with the electronic commerce acceptance model. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30(2), 181–199. doi:10.1080/01449291003793785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M. (2004). Survey errors and survey costs: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermana, B., & Silfianti, W. (2011). Evaluating e-government implementation by local government: digital divide in internet based public services in Indonesia. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(3), 156–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homser, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000). Applied logistic regression (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horan, T. A., & Abhichandani, T. (2006). Evaluating user satisfaction in an e-government initiative: results of structural equation modeling and focus group discussion. Journal of Information Technology Management, 17(4), 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, P. J.-H., Brown, S. A., Thong, J., Chan, F., & Tam, K. Y. (2009). Determinants of service quality and continuance intention of online services: the case of eTax. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2), 292–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hung, S.-Y., Chang, C.-M., & Yu, T.-J. (2006). Determinants of user acceptance of the e-government services: the case of online tax filing and payment system. Government Information Quarterly, 23(1), 97–122. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2005.11.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, J., de Vries, S., & van Schaik, P. (2010). The contextual benchmark method: benchmarking e-government services. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 213–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, X. (2011). Enhancing users’ continuance intention to egovernment portals: An empirical study. Management and Service Science (MASS), 2011 International Conference on. IEEE. 1–4.

  • Kaisara, G., & Pather, S. (2011). The e-government evaluation challenge: a South African Batho Pele-aligned service quality approach. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), 211–221. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2010.07.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khoshgoftaar, T. M., & Allen, E. B. (1999). Logistic regression modeling of software quality. International Journal of Reliability, Quality and Safety Engineering, 6(4), 303–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinbaum, D. G. (1994). Logistic regression: A self - learning text. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kohli, R., Devaraj, S., & Macmood, A. (2004). Understanding determinants of online consumer satisfaction: a decision process perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21(1), 115–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozinets, R. V. (1998). On netnography: initial reflections on consumer research investigations of cyberculture. Advances in Consumer Research, 25(1), 366–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, C., & Pires, G. (2010). Testing of a model evaluating e-government portal acceptance and satisfaction. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation, 13(1), 35–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, G., & Kwak, Y. H. (2012). An open government maturity model for social media-based public engagement. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 492–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lili, Q. (2009). A framework for perception of citizen demand in e-government services. Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2009 International Conference on, 4, 468–471.

  • Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 446–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., Chen, X., Wang, X. (2010). Evaluating government portal websites in China. Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, 880–890.

  • Long, J. S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magoutas, B., & Mentzas, G. (2010). SALT: a semantic adaptive framework for monitoring citizen satisfaction from e-government services. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(6), 4292–4300. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2009.11.071.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989). Generalized linear models (2nd ed.). London, GB: Chapman and Hall.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McHaneya, R., Hightowerb, R., & White, D. (1999). EUCS test-retest reliability in representational model decision support systems. Information & Management, 36, 109–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, A. J. (2011). Networked coproduction of public services in virtual communities: from a government-centric to a community approach to public service support. Public Administration Review, 71(4), 598–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohamed, N., Hussin, H., & Hissein, R. (2009). Measuring users’ satisfaction with Malaysia’s electronic government systems. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 7(3), 283–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohamed, N., Hussein, R., Hidayah Ahmad Zamzuri, N., & Haghshenas, H. (2014). Insights into individual’s online shopping continuance intention. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 114(9), 1453–1476. doi:10.1108/IMDS-07-2014-0201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molina Azorín, J., & Cameron, R. (2010). The application of mixed methods in organisational research: a literature review. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 8(2), 95–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgeson, F. V., Van Amburg, D., & Mithas, S. (2011). Misplaced trust? Exploring the structure of the e-government-citizen trust relationship. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(2), 257–283. doi:10.1093/jopart/muq006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muylle, S., Moenaert, R., & Despontin, M. (2004). The conceptualization and empirical validation of web site user satisfaction. Information & Management, 41(5), 543–560. doi:10.1016/S0378-7206(03)00089-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ong, C.-S., & Chang, S.-C. (2013). Explore the web-site satisfaction and continue use intention by system, behavior and social aspects. The Marketing Review, 10(1), 61–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osman, I. H., Anouze, A. L., Irani, Z., Lee, H., Balcı, A., Medeni, T. D., Weerakkody, V. (2011). A new Cobras framework to evaluate e-government services: A citizen centric perspective. tGov Workshop’11, March.

  • Ozkan, S., & Kanat, I. E. (2011). E-government adoption model based on theory of planned behavior: empirical validation. Government Information Quarterly, 28(4), 503–513. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2010.10.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pampel, F. C. (2000). Logistic regression: A primer Sage University papers series on quantitative applications in the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Piehler, R.; Wirtz, B. W.; Daiser, P. (2014). An Analysis of Continuity Intentions of eGovernment Portal Users. Public Management Review: 1–36. DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2014.965270.

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PwC (2012) A closer look at e-government, http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/psrc/publications/assets/pwc-a-closer-look-at-e-government.pdf. Accessed 15 November 2014.

  • Pynnonen, M., & Kytola, O. (2008). From business concept innovation to a business system: a case study of a virtual city portal. International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 2(3), 314–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rana, N. P., Williams, M.D., Dwivedi, Y.K., Williams, J. (2011). Diversity and diffusion of theories, models, and theoretical constructs in egovernment research. Electronic Government. 1–12.

  • Reddick, C. G., & Roy, J. (2013). Business perceptions and satisfaction with e-government: findings from a Canadian survey. Government Information Quarterly, 30(1), 1–9. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter, J. R. (2002). The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19(4), 305–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, J. (2006). E-government and local governance in Canada: an examination of front line challenges and federal tensions. Public Administration and Management, 11(4), 306–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruxton, G. D. (2006). The unequal variance t-test is an underused alternative to student’s t-test and the Mann–Whitney U test. Behavioral Ecology, 17(4), 688–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sackett, P. R., & Larson, J.R. Jr. (1990). Research strategies and tactics in industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette, & L. M. Hough (eds.) Handbook of industrial and organization psychology 2. edition, 419–489.

  • Saez Vegas, L., & Periáñez Cañadillas, I. (2013). Market orientation in local government through the analysis of municipal website content: a framework for its measurement. Global Journal of Business Research, 7(2), 47–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2012). Are government internet portals evolving towards more interaction, participation, and collaboration? Revisiting the rhetoric of e-government among municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 72–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schellong, A., & Mans, S. (2004). Citizens preferences towards one-stop government. Proceedings of the 2004 annual national conference on Digital government research.

  • Singha, H., & Singh, H. (2013). E-filing system for tax returns and forms: landmark e-governance initiative by the government of India. Journal of E-Governance, 36, 125–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sung, Y. H., Liu, S. H., Liao, H. L., & Liu, C. M. (2009). Service quality between e-government users and administrators. I-WAYS-The Journal of E-Government Policy and Regulation, 32(4), 241–248.

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using mulitvariate statistics (4th ed.). Needham Hights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, C.-W., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. T. (2013). IT-mediated customer service content and delivery in electronic governments: an empirical investigation of the ancedents of service quality. MIS Quarterly, 37(1), 77–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang, R., Zhang, Z., Guan, X., & Wang, L. (2013). A new user segmentation model for e-government. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), 11(2), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teo, T., Srivastava, S. C., & Jinnang, L. (2008). Trust and electronic government success: an empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(3), 99–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolbert, C., & Mossberger, K. (2006). The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review, 66(3), 354–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udo, G. J., Bagchi, K. K., & Kirs, P. J. (2012). Exploring the role of espoused values on e-service adoption: a comparative analysis of the US and Nigerian users. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1768–1781. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.04.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2014). United Nations e-government survey 2014: E-government for the future we want. http://unpan3.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/2014-Survey/E-Gov_Complete_Survey-2014.pdf. Accessed 28 December 2014.

  • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of infor-mation technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Chan, F. K. Y., & Thong, J. Y. L. (2012). Designing e-government services: key service attributes and citizens’ preference structures. Journal of Operations Management, 30(1–2), 116–133. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2011.10.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verdegem, P., & Verleye, G. (2009). User-centered e-government in practice: a comprehensive model for measuring user satisfaction. Government Information Quarterly, 26(3), 487–497. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2009.03.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y.-S. (2003). The adoption of electronic tax filing systems: an empirical study. Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 333–352. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2003.08.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waseda University (2013). Waseda University International e-government ranking 2013. Tokyo, Japan. http://www.e-gov.waseda.ac.jp/pdf/Press_Released_on_e-Gov_ranking_2013.pdf. 22 October 2014.

  • Webster, J., & Ahuja, J. S. (2006). Enhancing the design of web navigation systems: the influence of user disorientation on engagement and performance. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 661–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz, B. W., & Daiser, P. (2015). E-government: strategy process instruments. Textbook for the Digital Society. http://berndwirtz.com/downloads/WirtzDaiser_2015_E-Government.pdf. Accessed 10 October 2015.

  • Wirtz, B.W. and Kurtz, O.T. (2016). Determinants of Citizen Usage Intentions in eGovernment. An Empirical Analysis. Public Organization Review, doi:10.1007/s11115-015-0338-7, forthcoming.

  • Wirtz, B. W., Schilke, O., & Ullrich, S. (2010). Strategic development of business models: implications of the web 2.0 for creating value on the internet. Long Range Planning, 43(2/3), 272–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz, B. W., Mory, L., Piehler, R., & Daiser, P. (2014a). Measuring e-government portal management on the local level: results from a survey of public administration officials. International Public Management Review, 15(2), 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz, B. W., Nitzsche, P. T., & Ullrich, S. (2014b). User integration in social media: an empirical analysis. International Journal of Electronic Business, 11(1), 63–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz, B. W., Piehler, R., & Daiser, P. (2015). E-government portal characteristics and individual appeal: an examination of e-government and citizen acceptance in the context of local administration portals. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 27(1), 70–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, R. E. (1995). Logistic regression. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Youngblood, N. E., & Mackiewicz, J. (2012). A usability analysis of municipal government website home pages in Alabama. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 582–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zviran, M., & Erlich, Z. (2003). Measuring is user satisfaction: review and implications. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 12, 81–103.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. German University of Administrative Sciences Speyer, Freiherr-vom-Stein-Str. 2, 67346, Speyer, Germany

    Bernd W. Wirtz & Oliver Tuna Kurtz

Authors
  1. Bernd W. Wirtz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Oliver Tuna Kurtz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernd W. Wirtz.

Appendices

Appendix A

Term

Definition

Logit = Natural log of odds

Regression model that linearly links the logit transformation of predicted probabilities with a set of parameters

\( \mathrm{Logit}\left(\mathrm{Y}\right)= \ln \left(\mathrm{odds}\right)= \ln \left(\frac{\mathrm{p}}{1-\mathrm{p}}\right)=\upalpha +\upbeta \mathrm{X} \)

Whereby;

p = probability that Y = 1 and 1-p = probability that Y = 0

Odds

\( \left(\frac{\mathrm{p}}{1-\mathrm{p}}\right) \) = likelihood of p

Odds ratio

Relative effect on the odds of an event by a one unit change in the independent variable.

\( \frac{\left(\frac{\mathrm{p}1}{1-\mathrm{p}1}\right)}{\left(\frac{\mathrm{p}0}{1-\mathrm{p}0}\right)} \), where p1 = probability of an event given the membership in group 1, p0 = probability of an event given the membership in group 0.

An odds ratio greater than 1 implies an increased likelihood. An odds ratio less than 1 implies a decreased likelihood.

Appendix B

Estimated logistic regression model for user satisfaction with E-Government city portals:

$$ \mathrm{Logit}\left(\mathrm{Y}\right)=-10.082+0.142\ {\mathrm{X}}_1+0.383\ {\mathrm{X}}_2+0.746\ {\mathrm{X}}_3+0.470\ {\mathrm{X}}_4+1,262\ {\mathrm{X}}_5 $$

Whereby;

Y = User Satisfaction with E-Government city portals, X1 = Social Media integration, X 2 = Full Online Services, X3 = Downloadable forms, X4 = Search function integration, X5 = Perceived Ease of Use.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wirtz, B.W., Kurtz, O.T. Local e-government and user satisfaction with city portals – the citizens’ service preference perspective. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark 13, 265–287 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-015-0149-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-015-0149-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation