Advertisement

What Is the Issue with Internet Acceptance among Elderly Citizens? Theory Development and Policy Recommendations for Inclusive E-Government

  • Bjoern Niehaves
  • Ralf Plattfaut
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6228)

Abstract

Digital divide is still a big topic in information systems and e-government research. In the past, several tracks and workshops on this topic existed. As information technology and especially the internet become more and more important governments cannot ignore the fact that elderly citizens are excluded from the benefits related to internet usage. Although e-Inclusion programmes and initiatives changed over the years and, moreover, although the amount of e-Inclusion literature is constantly growing, there is still no thorough understanding of potential factors influencing private internet usage. Hence, in this study we identify important influencing factors based on the literature on technology acceptance and digital divide. We develop a model based on these factors and test it against comprehensive survey data (n=192). Our theoretical model is able to explain more than 70% of the variation in private internet usage. We derive policy recommendations based on the results and discuss implications for future research.

Keywords

Digital Divide e-Inclusion UTAUT Quantitative Study 

References

  1. 1.
    Afifi, A.A., Elashoff, R.M.: Observations in Multivariate Statistics: I. Review of the Literature. Journal of the American Statistical Association 61(315), 595–604 (1966)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agerwal, R., Animesh, A., Prasad, K.: Social Interactions and the “Digital Divide”: Explaining Variations in Internet Use. Information Systems Research 20(2), 277–294 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Al-Shafi, S., Weerakkody, V.: Understanding Citizens’ Behavioural Intention in the Adoption of E-Government Services in the State of Qatar. In: European Conference on Information Systems, Verona, Italy (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Becker, J., Niehaves, B., Bergener, P., Fielenbach, K., Räckers, M., Weiß, B.: The Digital Divide in E-Government - A Quantitative Analysis. In: Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference e-Society, Algarve, Portugal, pp. 337–344 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bélanger, F., Carter, L.: The Impact Of The Digital Divide On E-Government Use. Communications of the ACM 52(4), 132–135 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brandtweiner, R., Donat, E.: Digital Divide in Austria - Any Reasons for Enthusiasm? The Case of Austria. In: Proceedings of the 20th Bled eConference – eMergence: Merging and Emerging Technologies, Processes and Institutions, Bled Slovenia, June 3-6 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brown, S.A., Venkatesh, V.: Model of Adoption of Technology in Households: A Baseline Model Test and Extension Incorporating Household Life Cycle. MIS Quarterly 29(3), 399–426 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brown, S.A., Venkatesh, V., Bala, H.: Household technology Use: Integrating Household Life Cycle and the Model of Adoption of Technology in Households. The Information Society 22, 205–218 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cabinet Office: Transformational Government – Enabled by Technology. Strategy Document, London, UK (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cabinet Office: Transformational Government – Implementation Plan, London, UK (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Compeau, D.R., Higgins, C.A., Huff, S.: Social Cognitive Theory and Individual Reactions to Computing Technology: A Longitudinal Study. MIS Quarterly 23(2), 145–158 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Costa, P.T., McCrae, R.R.: Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa (1992)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3), 319–339 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Diamantopoulos, A., Siguaw, J.A.A.: Formative versus Reflective Indicators in Organizational Measure Development: A Comparison and Empirical Illustration. British Journal of Management 17(4), 263–282 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Duff, A.S., Craig, D., McNeill, D.A.: A note on the origins of ‘information society’. Journal of Information Science 22(5), 122–171 (1996)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Eastman, J.K., Iyer, R.: The elderly’s uses and attitudes towards the internet. Journal of Consumer Marketing 21(3), 208–220 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    EHEMU: Are we living longer, healthier lives in the EU? European Health Expectancy Monitoring Unit Technical report 2, Montpellier, France (2005), http://www.hs.le.ac.uk/reves/ehemutest/pdf/techrep20507.pdf
  18. 18.
    European Commission: eInclusion@EU: Strengthening eInclusion & eAccessibility across Europe. Analytic framework - eInclusion and eAccessibility priority issues (2004a)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    European Commission: The impact of ageing on public expenditure: projections for the EU 25 Member States on pensions, health care, long-term care, education and unemployment transfers (2004-2005), European Commission, Brussels (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    European Commission: Top of the web. User Satisfaction and Usage Survey of E-Government services, Kopenhagen (2004b)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Ferro, E., Gil-Garcia, J.R., Helbig, N.: The Digital Divide Metaphor: Understanding Paths to IT Literacy. In: Wimmer, M.A., Scholl, J., Grönlund, Å. (eds.) EGOV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4656, pp. 265–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I.:: Belief, attitude, intention, and behaviour : An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Reading (1975)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fishbein, M.: Attitude and the prediction of behaviour. In: Fishbein, M. (ed.) Readings in attitude theory and measurement, pp. 477–492. Wiley, New York (1967)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fornell, C., Larker, D.F.: Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics. Journal of Marketing Research 18(3), 382–388 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fougère, M., Mérette, M.: Population ageing and economic growth in seven OECD countries. Economic Modelling 16, 411–427 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gilly, M.C., Enis, B.M.: Recycling the Family Life Cycle: A Proposal for Redefinition. Advances in Consumer Research 9, 271–276 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hauser, P.M., Duncan, O.D.: The Study of Population. An Inventory and Appraisal, Chicago (1959)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Henseler, J., Fassott, G.: Testing Moderating Effects in PLS Path Models: An Illustration of Available Procedures. In: Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods and Applications in Marketing and Related Fields. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hinton, P.R., Brownlow, C., McMurvay, I., Cozens, B.: SPSS explained. Routledge Inc., East Sussex (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Irani, Z., Elliman, T., Jackson, P.: Electronic transformation of government in the U.K.: a research agenda. European Journal of Information Systems 16, 327–335 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kiel, J.: The digital divide: Internet and e-mail use by the elderly. Medical Informatics & the Internet in Medicine 30(1), 19–23 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kraner, S.: Bridging the Digital Divide in E-Government, Zürich (2004)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Machlup, F.: The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1962)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Marcoulides, G.A., Chin, W.W., Saunders, C.: A Critical Look at Partial Least Squares Modeling’. MIS Quarterly 33(1), 171–175 (2009)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Milner, H.: UK online centres: Transformational Government for the Citizen. Research report, Sheffield, UK (2009)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Moore, G.C., Benbasat, I.: Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation. Information Systems Research 2(3), 192–222 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Morgan, S.P., Hagewen, K.J.: Handbook of Population (2006)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Niehaves, B., Becker, J.: The Age-Divide in E-Government - Data, Interpretations, Theory Fragments. In: Proceedings of the 8th IFIP Conference on e-Business, e-Services, and e-Society (I3E 2008), Tokyo, Japan, pp. 279–287 (2008)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Population Reference Bureau: World Population Data Sheet 2006, Washington, DC (2006), http://www.prb.org/pdf06/06WorldDataSheet.pdf
  41. 41.
    Ringle, C.M., Wende, S., Will, S.: SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) Beta, Hamburg (2005), http://www.smartpls.de
  42. 42.
    Smith, P.: A Blueprint for Transformation. E-Government Bulletin (2006), http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/news/pdf/ABlueprintForTransformation.pdf
  43. 43.
    Taylor, S., Todd, P.A.: Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models. Information Systems Research 6(4), 570–591 (1995)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A., Howell, J.M.: Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization. MIS Quarterly 15(1), 124–143 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    van Dijk, J.A.G.M.: Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics 34(4-5), 221–235 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Venkatesh, V., Brown, S.A., Maruping, L.M., Bala, H.: Predicting Different Conceptualizations of System Use: The Competing Roles of Behavioural Intention, Facilitating Conditions, and Behavioural Expectation. MIS Quarterly 32(3), 483–502 (2008)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G., Davis, F.: User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly 27(3), 425–478 (2003)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wagner, J., Hanna, S.: The Effectiveness of Family Life Cycle Variables in Consumer Expenditure Research. Journal of Consumer Research 10, 281–291 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bjoern Niehaves
    • 1
  • Ralf Plattfaut
    • 1
  1. 1.European Research Center for Information SystemsWestfälische Wilhelms-Universität MünsterMünster

Personalised recommendations