Factors Affecting Intention to Use E-government Services: The Case of Non-adopters

  • Stellios Rallis
  • Dimitrios Chatzoudes
  • Symeon Symeonidis
  • Vasillis Aggelidis
  • Prodromos Chatzoglou
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 341)


‘E-government’ is an extremely interesting research field, with numerous academic and practical implications. Its empirical investigation gives rise for significant observations, since the existing international literature offers several research gaps. The aim of the present study is twofold: (a) to develop an original conceptual framework (research model) examining the factors that have an impact on the intention to use of e-government services, (b) to empirically test that framework, using primary data collected from non-adopters of e-government located in Greece. The proposed framework is tested using data collected with a newly-developed structured questionnaire in a sample of Greek internet users. The ten independent factors incorporated into the proposed research framework are measured with a series of questions (items) which have been adopted from various other studies found in the international literature. The empirical data are analyzed using the ‘Structural Equation Modeling’ technique. The main findings suggest that Perceived Usefulness, Peer Influence, Computer Self-efficacy, and Perceived Risk are the main factors affecting the intention of non-users to use e-Government services.


e-Government Intention to use Non-adopters Perceived usefulness Peer influence Structural equation modelling 


  1. 1.
    Ajzen, I.: The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50(2), 179–211 (1991). Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Somali, S.A., Gholami, R., Clegg, B.: An investigation into the acceptance of online banking in Saudi Arabia. Technovation 29(2), 130–141 (2009). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alateyah, S.A., Crowder, R.M., Wills, G.B.: Identified factors affecting the citizen’s intention to adopt e-government in Saudi Arabia. Int. J. Soc., Hum. Sci. Eng. 7(8), 601–606 (2013). Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alghamdi, I.A., Goodwin, R., Rampersad, G.: E-government readiness assessment for government organizations in developing countries. Comput. Inf. Sci. 4(3), 3 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alghamdi, S., Beloff, N.: Towards a comprehensive model for e-government adoption and utilisation analysis: the case of Saudi Arabia. In: 2014 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, pp. 1217–1225, September 2014.
  6. 6.
    Bandura, A.: The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 4(3), 359–373 (1986). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bélanger, F., Carter, L.: Trust and risk in e-government adoption. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 17(2), 165–176 (2008). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carter, L., Bélanger, F.: The utilization of e-government services: citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Inf. Syst. J. 15(1), 5–25 (2005). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cheng, T.E., Lam, D.Y., Yeung, A.C.: Adoption of internet banking: an empirical study in Hong Kong. Decis. Support Syst. 42(3), 1558–1572 (2006). Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cheong, J.H., Park, M.: Mobile internet acceptance in Korea. Internet Res. 15(2), 125–140 (2005). Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cho, J.: Likelihood to abort an online transaction: influences from cognitive evaluations, attitudes, and behavioral variables. Inf. Manag. 41(7), 827–838 (2004). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Colesca, S.E.: Increasing e-trust: a solution to minimize risk in egovernment adoption. J. Appl. Quant. Methods 4, 31–44 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Compeau, D.R., Higgins, C.A.: Computer self-efficacy: development of a measure and initial test. MIS Q. 19, 189–211 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Conway, J.M., Huffcutt, A.I.: A review and evaluation of exploratory factor analysis practices in organizational research. Organ. Res. Methods 6(2), 147–168 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Corbitt, B.J., Thanasankit, T., Yi, H.: Trust and e-commerce: a study of consumer perceptions. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2(3), 203–215 (2003). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dashti, A., Benbasat, I., Burton-Jones, A.: Developing trust reciprocity in electronic-government: the role of felt trust. In: Proceedings of the European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, Izmir, Turkey, pp. 1–13. Citeseer (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13(3), 319 (1989). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M.: Intrinsic motivation. In: The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology, pp. 1–2. Wiley, Hoboken, January 2010.
  19. 19.
    Dwivedi, Y.K., Rana, N.P., Janssen, M., Lal, B., Williams, M.D., Clement, M.: An empirical validation of a unified model of electronic government adoption (UMEGA). Gov. Inf. Q. 34(2), 211–230 (2017). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Featherman, M.S., Pavlou, P.A.: Predicting e-services adoption: a perceived risk facets perspective. Int. J. Hum Comput Stud. 59(4), 451–474 (2003). Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I.: Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading (1975)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gefen, D., Straub, D., Mack, J., Distinguished, R.: The relative importance of perceived ease of use in IS adoption: a study of e-commerce adoption. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 1(8) (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hayton, J.C., Allen, D.G., Scarpello, V.: Factor retention decisions in exploratory factor analysis: a tutorial on parallel analysis. Organ. Res. Methods 7(2), 191–205 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Huai, J.: Quality evaluation of e-government public service. In: 2011 International Conference on Management and Service Science (MASS), pp. 1–4. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hung, S.Y., Chang, C.M., Yu, T.J.: Determinants of user acceptance of the e-Government services: the case of online tax filing and payment system. Gov. Inf. Q. 23(1), 97–122 (2006). Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hurley, A.E., et al.: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: guidelines, issues, and alternatives. J. Organ. Behav.: Int. J. Ind. Occup. Organ. Psychol. Behav. 18(6), 667–683 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jansen, A., Ølnes, S.: The nature of public e-services and their quality dimensions. Gov. Inf. Q. 33(4), 647–657 (2016). Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kaliannan, M., Awang, H., Raman, M.: Technology adoption in the public sector: an exploratory study of e-government in Malaysia. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, pp. 221–224 (2007).
  29. 29.
    Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., Chervany, N.L.: Information technology adoption across time: a cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Q. 23, 183–213 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kumar, R., Sachan, A., Mukherjee, A.: Qualitative approach to determine user experience of e-government services. Comput. Hum. Behav. 71, 299–306 (2017). Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kurfal, M., Arifolu, A., Tokdemir, G., Paçin, Y.: Adoption of e-government services in Turkey. Comput. Hum. Behav. 66, 168–178 (2017). Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lee, M.C.: Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking: an integration of TAM and TPB with perceived risk and perceived benefit. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 8(3), 130–141 (2009). Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nam, T.: Determining the type of e-government use. Gov. Inf. Q. 31(2), 211–220 (2014). Scholar
  34. 34.
    Osman, I.H., et al.: COBRA framework to evaluate e-government services: a citizen-centric perspective. Gov. Inf. Q. 31(2), 243–256 (2014). Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pikkarainen, T., Pikkarainen, K., Karjaluoto, H., Pahnila, S.: Consumer acceptance of online banking: an extension of the technology acceptance model. Internet Res. 14(3), 224–235 (2004). Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pires, G., Stanton, J., Eckford, A.: Influences on the perceived risk of purchasing online. J. Consum. Behav. 4(2), 118–131 (2004). Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ramayah, T., Maruf, J.J., Jantan, M., Osman, M.: Technology acceptance model: is it applicable to users and non users of internet banking. In: The Proceedings of the International Seminar, Indonesia-Malaysia, the Role of Harmonization of Economics and Business Discipline in Global Competitiveness, Banda Aceh, Indonesia, pp. 14–15 (2002)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sá, F., Rocha, Á., Pérez Cota, M.: From the quality of traditional services to the quality of local e-Government online services: a literature review. Gov. Inf. Q. 33(1), 149–160 (2016). Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sang, S., Lee, J., Lee, J.: E-government adoption in ASEAN: the case of Cambodia. Internet Res. 19(5), 517–534 (2009). Scholar
  41. 41.
    Seo, D.B., Bernsen, M.: Comparing attitudes toward e-government of non-users versus users in a rural and urban municipality. Gov. Inf. Q. 33(2), 270–282 (2016). Scholar
  42. 42.
    Shareef, M.A., Kumar, V., Kumar, U., Dwivedi, Y.K.: e-Government adoption model (GAM): differing service maturity levels. Gov. Inf. Q. 28(1), 17–35 (2011). Scholar
  43. 43.
    Stefanovic, D., Marjanovic, U., Delić, M., Culibrk, D., Lalic, B.: Assessing the success of e-government systems: an employee perspective. Inf. Manag. 53(6), 717–726 (2016). Scholar
  44. 44.
    Suh, B., Han, I.: Effect of trust on customer acceptance of internet banking. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 1(3–4), 247–263 (2002). Scholar
  45. 45.
    Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A., Howell, J.M.: Personal computing: toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Q. 15(1), 125 (1991). Scholar
  46. 46.
    Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D.: User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27(3), 425 (2003). Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Lin, H., Tang, T.: Determinants of user acceptance of internet banking: an empirical study. Int. J. Serv. Ind. Manag. 14(5), 501–519 (2003). Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wangpipatwong, S., Chutimaskul, W., Papasratorn, B.: Understanding citizen’s continuance intention to use e-government website: a composite view of technology acceptance model and computer self-efficacy. Electron. J. e-Gov. 6(1), 55–64 (2008)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ebrahim, Z., Irani, Z., Al Shawi, S.: A strategic framework for E-government adoption in public sector organisations. In: AMCIS 2004 Proceedings, pp. 1116–1125 (2004)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ziemba, E., Papaj, T., Descours, D.: Assessing the quality of e-government portals-the polish experience. In: 2014 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), pp. 1259–1267. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ziemba, E., Papaj, T., Żelazny, R.: A model of success factors for e-Government adoption - the case of Poland. Issues Inf. Syst. 14(2), 87–100 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stellios Rallis
    • 1
  • Dimitrios Chatzoudes
    • 1
  • Symeon Symeonidis
    • 2
  • Vasillis Aggelidis
    • 1
  • Prodromos Chatzoglou
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Production and Management EngineeringDemocritus University of ThraceXanthiGreece
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringDemocritus University of ThraceXanthiGreece

Personalised recommendations