Advertisement

Data Analysis

  • Mohamed Mahmood
Chapter
Part of the Springer Theses book series (Springer Theses)

Abstract

Over the years, citizens’ trust and confidence in their governments has continued to decline and digital government is expected to reverse this trend. An enormous amount of money has been spent worldwide, on electronic government initiatives that are focused on improving performance, reducing costs and enhancing citizens' trust and confidence in their governments. Yet, of the many initiatives that have been implemented, very few have achieved real transformation of government (i.e. fundamental changes to the way core functions of government are performed to achieve noticeable gains in performance and efficiency). As such, there is a need to understand how transformation of government as a construct affects citizens’ trust and confidence in government in the presence of factors such as, government performance and citizen satisfaction. This research empirically investigates the influence of digital transformation of government on citizens’ trust and confidence in the context of the Kingdom of Bahrain. Bahrain is a top ranking country in terms of use of ICT in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region. A conceptual model was developed and validated using an online survey targeting randomly citizens of the Kingdom of Bahrain. Based on 313 responses, the findings of this research suggest that citizens' trust and confidence in their government is positively influenced by transformation of government, mediated by government performance and citizens’ satisfaction. The study found that e-government and technology are not enough for achieving a real transformation of government, and therefore, in tackling the decline in citizens’ trust and confidence in government. Other factors were found to be important in this equation, including transparency and accountability of government functions and activities in meeting citizens' expectations. The research offer multiple policy implications and theoretical contributions, in addition to helping understand how digital transformation of government can enhance citizens' trust and confidence in government, improve government-to-citizen relationship, and increase the adoption of digital services offered by governments. From a policy perspective, this research offers a validated conceptual model that can be used as a frame of reference when planning ICT-enabled transformation projects in government. From a theoretical context, this study is the first to investigate the relationship between transformation of government and citizens' trust and confidence in government.

References

  1. Bartko JJ (1966) The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Psychol Rep 19(1):3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown JD (1996) Testing in language programs. Prentice Hall Regents, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  3. Cabrera-Nguyen P (2010) Author guidelines for reporting scale development and validation results. J Soc Soc Work Res 1(2):99–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Comrey A, Lee H (1992) A first course in factor analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  5. Field A (2006) Discovering statistics using SPSS, 2nd edn. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18(1):39–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fowler FJ Jr (2002) Survey research methods. Sage Publications Inc., LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Hair JF, Tatham RL, Anderson RE, Black W (2006) Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  9. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Babin BJ, Black WC (2010) Multivariate data analysis: a global perspective, vol 7. Pearson, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  10. Henson RK, Roberts JK (2006) Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educ Psychol Measur 66(3):393–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M (2008) Structural equation modelling: guidelines for determining model fit. Articles p 2Google Scholar
  12. Hox JJ, Bechger TM (1998) An introduction to structural equation modelling. Fam Sci Rev 11:354–373Google Scholar
  13. Hu L-T, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6:1–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Iacobucci D (2010) Structural equations modeling: fit indices, sample size, and advanced topicsGoogle Scholar
  15. Jackson DL, Gillaspy JA Jr, Purc-Stephenson R (2009) Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations. Psychol Methods 14(1):6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lee Rodgers J, Nicewander WA (1988) Thirteen ways to look at the correlation coefficient. Am Stat 42(1):59–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lee J, Lee JN, Tan BC (2015) Antecedents of cognitive trust and affective distrust and their mediating roles in building customer loyalty. Inf Syst Front 17(1):159–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Li DX (1999) Value at risk based on the volatility. Skewness and kurtosis. RiskMetrics GroupGoogle Scholar
  19. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Pallant J (2010) SPSS survival manual, 4th edn. Allen and Unwin Book Publishers, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  21. Pigott TD (2001) A review of methods for missing data. Educ Res Eval 7(4):353–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Robinson JP, Shaver PR, Wrightsman LS (1991) Criteria for scale selection and evaluation. Measures Pers Soc Psychol Attitudes 1(3):1–16Google Scholar
  23. Schreiber JB, Nora A, Stage FK, Barlow EA, King J (2006) Reporting structural equation modelling and confirmatory factor analysis results: a review. J Educ Res 99(6):323–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sekaran U (2000) Research methods for business: a skill-building approach. Willey, USAGoogle Scholar
  25. Suhr D (2006) The basics of structural equation modeling. In: SAS User Group of the Western Region of the United States (WUSS), IrvineGoogle Scholar
  26. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS, Osterlind SJ (2001) Using multivariate statistics. Pearson, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Taylor R (1990) Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: a basic review. J Diagn Med Sonography 6(1):35–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Thompson B (2004) Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: understanding concepts and applications. American Psychological AssociationGoogle Scholar
  29. Venkatraman N, Grant JH (1986) Construct measurement in organizational strategy research: a critique and proposal. Acad Manag Rev 11(1):71–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Williams B, Onsman A, Brown T (2010) Exploratory factor analysis: a five-step guide for novices. Australas J Paramedicine 8(3)Google Scholar
  31. Worthington R, Whittaker T (2006) Scale development research: a content analysis and recommendations for best practices. Counseling Psychol 34:806–838CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Brunel Business SchoolBrunel University LondonUxbridge, LondonUK

Personalised recommendations