Int. J. Mobile Learning and Organisation, Vol. 7, No.

1, 2013

29

Applying the technology acceptance model to the

introduction of mobile voting
Mohammed-Issa Riad Jaradat
Management Information Systems,
Department of Information Systems,
Faculty of Prince Hussein Bin Abdullah for Information Technology,
Al al-Bayt University, Mafraq, Jordan
Email: mi_jaradat@aabu.edu.jo
Email: mi_jaradat@yahoo.com
Abstract: This study presents an extended technology acceptance model to
explore the factors that affect intention to mobile voting. This study aims to
explore the utilisation of mobile phones in the education environment and
investigate the expectations and intentions towards mobile voting in public
Jordanian Universities. The proposed model was empirically tested using data
collected from a survey containing 30 questions. The partial least squares
structural equation analysis was used to evaluate the causal model. The
researcher finds that all variables significantly affect students (voters)
behavioural intention except perceived price level. This study gives quantified
indicators about mobile voting and a model that might help in understanding
the mobile voting environment and avoids spending thousands or millions of
dollars that may invest in this field without ensuring that the students (voters)
will actually use the mobile voting in Jordan.
Keywords: MV; mobile voting; TAM; technology acceptance model; S&P;
security and privacy; TMV; trust; PPL; perceived price level; SN; subjective
norm; CMV; compatibility; students union.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Jaradat, M.R.M. (2013)
Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of mobile
voting, Int. J. Mobile Learning and Organisation, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp.2947.
Biographical notes: Mohammed-Issa Riad Mousa Jaradat is an Assistant
Professor in the Department of Information Systems/Management Information
Systems in the faculty of Prince Hussein Bin Abdullah for Information
Technology Al al-Bayt University, Mafraq, Jordan. He earned a Doctorate in
Management Information Systems. His research interests cover IT innovation
adoption, learning technology, e-business, mobile technology, knowledge
management, e-government, mobile government and mobile commerce. He
was awarded for his best effort in computer programming by Philadelphia
University for the year 2004.

Introduction

Manual voting has several drawbacks such as printing of ballot paper is expensive,
voting consumes a lot of time, there is no good relationship and a lack of trust between
the governments and popular, sometimes government forced the voters to vote for a
Copyright 2013 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

30

M.R. Jaradat

particular candidate, and eliminate them from voting freely. Some candidates trying to
win by buying the votes from the voters, Government can cheat by substitute the original
ballot by derivative ones (Kalaichelvi and Chandrasekaran, 2011). Also inaccuracy
in ballot counting, votes lost through unclear or invalid ballot marks, limited
accommodations for people with disabilities and the delayed announcement of election
results. To overcome these drawbacks, the electronic voting (e-voting) technique
appeared, e-voting refers to the use of computers or computerised equipment to cast
votes in an election. e-voting aims at increasing participation, lowering the costs of
running elections and improving the accuracy of the results (Qadah and Taha, 2007).
Kumar et al. (2008) claimed that e-voting systems offer multiple advantages over
manual voting (traditional voting) those advantages are first reduced costs through
reduced materials required for printing and distributing ballots. Second, increased
participation and voting options through increased convenience to the voter, encourages
more voters to cast their votes remotely, and increases the likelihood of participation for
mobile voters. Third, greater speed and accuracy placing and tallying votes step-by-step
processes help minimise the number of miscast votes. Fourth, greater accessibility for the
disabled because they support a variety of interfaces and accessibility features, they can
vote independently and privately. Finally, flexibility through support multiple languages
and multiple designs. By using e-voting, the voters can vote at anytime and anywhere,
rather than voting still by behind the cables from a specific place.
Economides and Grousopoulou (2010) claimed that Mobile devices have become
some of the fastest advancing communication gadgets. Mulliah and Stroulia (2009)
claimed that Mobile devices are becoming increasingly powerful and accessible as
wireless networks cover most of our daily environment and a variety of software
frameworks. Moreover, Nor Shahriza et al. (2006) said that the widespread use of
mobile phones among students might have also lead to the positive opinion and
perception on its application. Eschenbrenner and Nah (2007) identify the benefits of
using mobile technology in education which gives greater efficiencies and effectiveness,
increased individual support and opportunities for personal development, better methods
of collaborating and communicating, and greater exposure to technology. Therefore, the
students can now elect without stepping into a university as long as they carry their
mobile phones.
Mobile phone services have become a mass market commodity; more people use
mobile phone worldwide. It becomes the most adopted means of communication both
in the developing and the developed countries. In Jordan, according to Jordan
telecommunication market establishment statistics (Telecommunication Regulatory
Commission Jordan, 2012), there are 419,533 fixed telephone lines and 7,758,968 mobile
lines which exceed the number of the population. This implies that mobile phone is not
an option for our life but now it turned out to be a necessity of life and it is increasing
continuously and rapidly.
Mobile voting refers to the use of mobile device or mobile equipment to cast votes in
an election without the need of cables at anytime anywhere. Mobile voting aims to
increase participation more than e-voting because of the spread and adoption means of
mobile communication both in the developed and the developing countries. It is also
lowering the costs of running elections and improving the accuracy of the results. Even
that the disabled persons and persons in hospitals can also cast their votes.

Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of mobile voting

31

Kalaichelvi and Chandrasekaran (2011) showed the requirements of e-voting which

apply for manual (paper) voting and also for mobile voting:

Fairness: No one can learn the voting outcome before the tally.

Eligibility: Only eligible voters are permitted to vote.

Uniqueness: No voter should be able to vote more than once.

Privacy: No one can access any information about the voters vote.

Completeness/Accuracy: All valid votes should be counted correctly.

Soundness: Any invalid vote should not be counted.

Uncoercibility: No voter can prove how he/she voted to others to prevent bribery.

Efficiency: The computations can be performed within a reasonable amount of time.

Robustness: A malicious voters cannot frustrate or disturb the election.

Mobile voting is already in use in many countries all over the world; such as UK and
Switzerland have pioneered mobile voting in local elections. In Asia, Korea leads the
way in mobile voting through its use in the selection of presidential candidates
(Georgescu, 2010).
This research avoids spending thousands or millions of dollars that may invest in this
field without ensuring that the student (voter) will actually use mobile voting. This paper
examines the factors to adopt, design and implementation of a mobile voting system
suitable for a university setting, where students can elect their union (students union)
by casting their votes anytime, anywhere without the need of cables by using mobile
devices including personal computers, personal digital assistants, and smart and regular
mobile phones.

Theoretical background

In this study, the researcher investigates key factors that affect students (voters)
intention to use mobile voting in public Jordanian universities. These key factors include
(security and privacy, trust, perceived price level, subjective norm, and compatibility).
The researcher evaluated the effects of these factors by using the Technology Acceptance
Model (TAM), a well-known model of information technology adoption and use.

2.1 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)

TAM was initially introduced by Davis (1989). It has become one of the most widely
used models in the investigation of user acceptance of information technology. TAM has
been evaluated to be not only a powerful model for representing the determinants of
system usage but also a valuable tool for system planning, since the system designers
have some degree of control over easiness and usefulness (Taylor and Todd, 1995).
The theoretical basis of the model was derived from the Theory of Reasoned Action
(TRA) by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975). The original TAM depicted in Figure 1 is an
information system acceptance theory, whose main purpose is simply to predict and
explain the user acceptance of information technology. TAM is constructed from several
indicators including Perceived Usefulness (PU), Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU),

32

M.R. Jaradat

Attitudes Towards Using (ATU), Behavioural Intention (BI), and Actual Usage (AU) and
are defined as follows: Perceived Usefulness (PU) is defined as the degree to which a
person believes that using IT system would improve his/her job performance (Davis,
1989; Davis et al., 1989; Davis and Cosenza, 1993). Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) is
defined by Adams et al. (1992) as the degree to which a person believes that using an
information technology would be free of effort. Attitudes Towards Using (ATU) is
defined by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975); Fishbein and Ajzen (1979); Davis and Cosenza
(1993); and Yogesh and Dennis (1999) as a function of beliefs, positively or
unfavourably towards the behaviour. Behavioural Intention (BI) is defined by Fishbein
and Ajzen (1975); Fishbein and Ajzen (1979); and Davis and Cosenza (1993) as
behavioural intentions are our goals, aspirations and expected responses to the attitude
object. Actual Usage (AU) is defined by Chen et al. (2002) as the frequency of using a
new technology system such as mobile voting and the approximate number of times the
user uses it in a given period of time.
Figure 1

Original technology acceptance model

Many researchers have suggested that TAM needs to be given additional variables to
provide an even stronger model (Legris et al., 2003). Venkatesh and Davis (2000)
proposed an extension, TAM2, which included social influence processes and cognitive
instrumental processes, but they omitted ATU due to weak predictors of either BI or AU.
This is consistent with prior research finding by Taylor and Todd (1995). Their research
indicated that both social influence processes and cognitive instrumental processes
significantly influenced user acceptance and that PU and PEOU indirectly influenced AU
through BI.
The interest of the current study is the acceptance of new information technology
mobile voting; thus, a review of prior studies suggested the theoretical foundations of the
formulations used in our hypotheses. Much research also indicated that TAM needed
integration with additional variable(s) in order to improve its prediction of system use
(Szajna, 1996; Lucas and Spitler, 2000). To this end, this study examines a prevalent
theory (i.e. TAM) for investigating individual acceptance of mobile voting context with
external variables (security and privacy, trust, perceived price level, subjective norm, and
compatibility).

2.2 Security and privacy in mobile voting

Khalifa and Ning shen (2008) defined Security as the safety of exchanged information
regardless of the level of privacy involved. In otherwise NECCC (2001) defined security
as the protection from intended and unintended threats that would result in the loss or
dissemination or steal of data such as personal data, social security number and credit

Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of mobile voting

33

card numbers. Ghosh and Swaminatha (2001) said that security is the safety of
exchanging information regardless of the level of privacy involved. In addition to
electronic security measures associated with data transmission (e.g. encryption) and
storage (e.g. firewalls), mobile security should also include mobile devices, which can
store highly sensitive data.
Khalifa and Ning shen (2008) defined privacy as the extent to which customers have
control over the timing, and circumstances of sharing oneself (physically, behaviourally
or intellectually) with others. In otherwise, Legnini (2006) defined privacy as the right to
be left alone and to control the conditions under which information pertaining to you is
collected, used and disseminated. As personal information is important for delivering
customised/personalised services, some individuals may be willing with more privacy
than others, so if the student (voter) lost his privacy he will not use the system (mobile
voting) again.
Liu and Amet (2002) claimed that the second important driver in their study is
privacy. And the privacy issue is more salient in mobile commerce than in e-commerce;
because mobile service providers have access to sensitive information related to personal
data. With more private information exposed to service providers, mobile customers
require more assurance of privacy protection and more control over the information that
can be released.
According to this study, Security and Privacy (S&P) is introduced as an external
variable of the suggested model. It is hypothesised that the security and privacy to TAM
causal relationships may potentially explain a greater proportion of the variance in user
BIs towards the use of mobile voting. It is expected that the study will show that security
and privacy will have some effect on the adoption and use of mobile voting.

2.3 Trust in mobile voting

Lee (1998) defined trust as a complex social phenomenon that reflects technological,
behavioural, social, psychological as well as organisational aspects of interactions among
various human and non-human agents. Kini and Choobineh (1998) showed in the
theoretical framework of trust that trust is defined in the Webster Dictionary as:

An assumed reliance on some person or thing. A confident dependence on the

character, ability, strength or truth of someone or something.

A charge or duty imposed in faith or confidence or as a condition of a relationship.

To place confidence (in an entity).

According to them they define trust as a belief that is influenced by the individuals
opinion about certain critical system features. Gefen et al. (2003) defines trust as the
expectation that the trusted party will behave in an ethical, dependable and socially
appropriate manner and will fulfil their expected commitments in conditions of
interdependence and potential vulnerability.
Dahlberg et al. (2003) and Grandison and Sloman (2000) showed that trust is the key
to success and major facilitator of wireless transactions because of the natural human
needs to understand the social surroundings of the virtual environment.
Bhattacherjee (2002) theoretically conceptualised and empirically validated a scale to
measure individual trust in online firms. He found that ones willingness to interact with
an online firm may be predicted by additional variables, above and beyond trust, such as
perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use of such interactions.

34

M.R. Jaradat

Mukherjee and Nath (2003) tested a model of trust in India in which shared value,
communication and opportunistic behaviuor were antecedents of trust. They
concluded that both shared value and communication played a significant positive role on
trust and that trust had a significant positive influence on commitment.
Doney and Cannon (1997) and Garbarino and Johnson (1999) claimed that trust is the
essential ingredient for successful long-term business relationships with individuals.
Gefen et al. (2003) introduced trust as another construct of Davis TAM. An
empirical investigation that included 213 subjects confirmed the positive relationship
between trust and intended usage of E-commerce websites. The researcher found that
perceived ease of use of the site positively influenced the degree of trust in the site.
Dahlberg et al. (2003) proposed the application of trust enhanced technology
acceptance model in order to investigate user acceptance of internet applications.
According to this study, trust is introduced as an external variable of the suggested
model. It is hypothesised that the trust to TAM causal relationships may potentially
explain a greater proportion of the variance in user behavioural intentions towards the use
of mobile voting. It is expected that the study will show that trust will have some effect
on the adoption and use of mobile voting.

2.4 Perceived price level in mobile voting (PPL)

Cheong and Park (2005) said that the Perceived Price Level (PPL) of using mobile
internet acceptance in Korea can be categorised into two types. First, the initial cost such
as the cost of the devices. Second, the subscription service provider cost such as service
fee and communication fee. They defined PPL in their research as The willingness to
pay for the service. They found that PPL has a negative role in developing the attitude as
well as the intention.
Rupp and Smith (2002) defined PPL (cost) as the possible expenses of using, i.e.
equipment costs, access cost, transaction fee, etc. Pin and Hsin-Hui (2004) defined cost
as the extent to which a person believes that using a service such as mobile voting will
cost money. They found that financial cost had a significant effect on BI to use.
Yi-Shun et al. (2006) found that the higher perceived financial resources will lead to
higher BI to use mobile service and higher perceived financial resources will lead to
higher PU of mobile service. On other hand, they found that the higher perceived
financial resources will not lead to higher PEOU mobile service.
Qingfei et al. (2008) claimed that cost is a users assessment of the object world or
reality, not his/her perception. Cost factor should thus be included because it will directly
affect the users adoption behaviour. Also, they believe that cost factor will significantly
affect mobile commerce user acceptance. Wu Jen-Her et al. (2007) claimed that cost is
one of major concerns in the initial stage and important predictors of M-commerce
adoption and has a significantly negative direct effect on behavioural intention to use
from consumer perspective.
Jaradat (2010) claimed that there is no statistically significant relationship discovered
between cost and ATU, PU and PEOU to use mobile university services in Jordan. But
he found that the arithmetic grand mean of cost equal to 3.34 which is greater than the
agreement point (+3). So this means it is under the category (high) except the sentence
number two I think the equipment cost is expensive to use mobile university services, it
is under category low. But they agree that the cost in general will not be a barrier to use a
mobile university services in Jordan and that may be due to the following reasons:

Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of mobile voting

35

Competition and the prices of mobile services and devices are generally low.

Grateful features of mobile devices such as portability and mobility, flexibility and
utility.

Students do not use mobile university services and do not know about this new
technology cost.

The cost of the technology is relatively cheap.

According to this study, PPL is introduced as an external variable of the suggested

model. It is hypothesised that the perceived price level to TAM causal relationships may
potentially explain a greater proportion of the variance in user BIs towards the use of
mobile voting. It is expected that the study will show that PPL will have some effect on
the adoption and use of mobile voting.

2.5 Subjective norm in mobile voting (SUN)

Subjective Norm (SN) was earlier proposed in the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) by
Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) and they defined it as the persons perception that most
people who are important to him approve or disapprove his performing a given
behaviour. Subjective norm was also included as a direct determinant to behavioural
intention in Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) by Ajzen (1991). SN is defined as the
persons perception that most people who are important to him think he should or should
not perform the behavior in question (Dillon and Morris, 1996). SN describes the
individuals social influences towards adopting the service whether perform or not the
behaviour in question (Taylor and Todd, 1995).
Ching and John (2009) claim that people may choose to perform the behaviour even
if they are not favourable to perform if they believe that people who are important to him
think he/she should or should not perform it.
SN was found to have an effect on intention to use and usage behaviour on
technology adoption studies (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Venkatesh and Davis, 2000;
Khalifa and Ning shen, 2008; Jaradat, 2010). Nor et al. (2008) in Malaysia found that
subjective norm positively and significantly effecting intention. AL-Majali (2011) in
Jordan found that customers attitude and their belief about social influence play a vital
role in influencing the intention. In addition, attitude and subjective norm are influenced
by attitudinal belief and normative belief structures. Additionally, family and mass media
are significant factors that influence subjective norm.
According to this study, SN is introduced as an external variable of the suggested
model. It is hypothesised that the subjective norm to TAM causal relationships may
potentially explain a greater proportion of the variance in user BIs towards the use of
mobile voting. It is expected that the study will show that subjective norm will have
some effect on the adoption and use of mobile voting.

2.6 Compatibility in mobile voting

Compatibility was defined by Rogers (1995) as the degree to which an innovation is seen
to be compatible with values, experiences, beliefs, and needs of adopters. The concept of
compatibility captures a students (voters) perception of the congruence of mobile voting
with students (voters) lifestyle. And he said (Rogers, 2003) compatibility is one of the
important innovation characteristics.

36

M.R. Jaradat

Teo and Pok (2003) claimed in the context of WAP-enabled mobile phone that a
persons life styles will strongly influence his/her decision to adopt the technology.
Especially a person, who leads a busy life, will be more likely to adopt a mobile phone
services. Lee and Cheng (2003) found that compatibility played the most significant
direct factor of individuals intent to adopt university smart card. Wu Jen-Her et al.
(2005) indicated that compatibility has a significant effect on behavioural intention to
use. Wu and Wang (2005) claimed that compatibility has the most important effect on
behavioural intention to use and the second most important effect on the actual use. This
is indicated that high compatibility will lead to preferable adoption. Wu Jen-Her et al.
(2007) found that compatibility has a direct effect on behavioural intention to use, and
has the strongest significant and positive effects.
Prior researches indicated that compatibility had strong direct impact; according to
this study, compatibility is introduced as an external variable of the suggested model. It is
hypothesised that the compatibility to TAM causal relationships may potentially explain
a greater proportion of the variance in user behavioural intentions towards the use of
mobile voting. It is expected that the study will show that compatibility will have some
effect on the adoption and use of mobile voting.

Research model and hypotheses

3.1 Research model

The present study uses TAM and incorporates variables (security and privacy, trust,
perceived price level, subjective norm and compatibility) as external variables. The
research model tested in this study is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2

Research model of the study

Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of mobile voting

37

3.2 Research hypotheses

This section presents the hypotheses to be tested and tests the effects of the external
variables (security and privacy, trust, perceived price level, subjective norm, and
compatibility) and their relationship with a well-known model, i.e. TAM, as shown in
Figure 3. Table 1 presents a summary of the interrelationships between hypotheses in the
research model.
Figure 3

Table 1

Proposed research model for mobile voting acceptance

Hypotheses of the study

Hypothesis

Independent

Dependent

H1:

Behavioural intention to use mobile voting has a direct

effect on future actual use of mobile voting in Jordan.

BI

AU

H2a:

Perceived ease of use has a direct effect on behavioural

intention to use mobile voting in Jordan.

PEOU

BI

H2b:

Perceived ease of use has a direct effect on perceived

usefulness of using mobile voting in Jordan.

PEOU

PU

H3:

Perceived usefulness of mobile voting has a direct effect on

behavioural intention to use mobile voting in Jordan.

PU

BI

H4:

Compatibility has a direct effect on behavioural intention to

use mobile voting in Jordan.

CMV

BI

H5:

Subjective norm has a direct effect on behavioural intention

to use mobile voting in Jordan.

SN

BI

PPL

BI

H6:

Perceived price level has a direct effect on behavioural

intention to use mobile voting in Jordan.

H7:

Trust has a direct effect on behavioural intention to use

mobile voting in Jordan.

TMV

BI

H8:

Security and privacy has a direct effect on behavioural

intention to use mobile voting in Jordan.

S&P

BI

38

M.R. Jaradat

Research design and method

4.1 Population and sample

This study was conducted at public universities in Jordan as shown in Table 2 below,
which have approximately 167,551 students from all Jordanian territories. The data was
randomly gathered from undergraduate students by using a stratified random sample.
Table 2

Public universities in Jordan

University name

Number of student

Percentage

Jordan University

35,099

20.9%

Hashemite University

22,943

13.7%

Al Balqa Applied University

8,746

5.2%

Yarmouk University

33,500

20%

Jordan University for Science and Technology

22,600

13.5%

Al al-Bayt University

13,350

7.8%

Mutah University

17,890

10.7%

Al-Hussein Bin Talal University

7,498

4.5%

Tafila Technical University

5,925

3.5%

Total
Note:

167,551

German Jordanian University does not have a students Union. So, it excluded
from the survey.

According to Sekaran (2006), sample size can be defined as the number of elements to be
included in the study, a sample of 417 students was selected for the study.

4.2 Measuring the constructs

The researcher developed a questionnaire to achieve the objectives based on literature
review of the study. The questionnaire consisted of multiple items and its organisation
based on ten groups using a five point Likert scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree
to (5) strongly agree.
Measurement items used in this study were adapted from previously validated
measures such as Davis (1989), Davis and Cosenza (1993), Davis and Venkatesh (1995),
Lin and Wu (2002), Luarn and Lin (2005), Venkatesh et al. (2003), Yang and Peterson
(2001); they were derived from thorough consultation with IS/IT experts to ensure their
reliability and validity. The questionnaire was given to a number of referees. The
questionnaire statements were modified based on the results of the referees, specifically
the general information and the translation of the statement from Arabic to English.
A pilot test of the measures was conducted on a representative sample of 30 students
(voters) and some statements on the questionnaire were modified based on the results of
the pilot test.

4.3 Data collection procedure

For this study, the researcher utilised a survey. The questionnaire was distributed to
a representative sample including prospective mobile voting students (voters). All

Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of mobile voting

39

participants were selected from public Jordanian universities randomly by using a

stratified random sample. The researcher used computer software for the analysis; Partial
Least Squares (PLS) structural equation analysis to test the hypotheses. Statistical
descriptive was used to find out the respondents demographic and general characteristics
to provide a descriptive profile of the respondents by using SPSS 16.0.

4.4 Data analysis

The data for this research has been collected by using a questionnaire containing
30 questions describing nine latent constructs: S&P, TMV, PPL, SN, CMV, PU, PEOU,
BI to use and AU. About 381 returned questionnaires were received after the follow-up
activities from 417. Ten participants gave incomplete answers and their results were
dropped from the study. This left 371 sets of data for statistical analysis, with 89% valid
return rate.
The PLS structural equation analysis was used to test the hypotheses. PLS employs a
component-based approach for estimation purposes and can readily handle formative
factors and also places minimal restrictions on the sample size and residual distributions
Chin et al. (2003).
To validate the measurement model, convergent validity was evaluated by examining
composite reliability and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) from the measures. Values
for composite reliability are recommended to exceed 0.70 (Chin et al., 2003) and AVE
values should be greater than the generally recognised cut-off value of 0.50 (Fornell and
Larcker, 1981).
All composite reliability and AVE values meet the recommended threshold values
except perceived price level. Table 3 summarises the results.
Table 3

Composite reliability, AVE, and of constructs values

Composite
reliability

AVE

Security and
privacy

0.829 0.618 0.786

2 Trust

0.859 0.550 0.630 0.742

Perceived
price level

0.846 0.734 0.158 0.083 0.856

Subjective
norm

0.792 0.567 0.513 0.548 0.140 0.753

5 Compatibility 0.882 0.714 0.510 0.521 0.130 0.573 0.849

6

Perceived
usefulness

0.841 0.643 0.552 0.607 0.128 0.577 0.695 0.802

Perceived
easy of use

0.872 0.630 0.512 0.466 0.121 0.544 0.588 0.649 0.794

Behavioural
intonation

0.921 0.795 0.556 0.576 0.154 0.559 0.639 0.677 0.622 0.892

9 Actual use
Note:

0.920 0.854 0.439 0.517 0.098 0.578 0.565 0.602 0.523 0.786 0.924

Square roots of the AVE are the bolded diagonal values.

40

M.R. Jaradat

The AVE for each variable was obtained to check discriminant validity (Campbell,
1960). As shown in Table 3, the square root of AVE for each construct is greater than the
correlations between the constructs and all other constructs, indicating that these
constructs have discriminant validity (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).

4.5 Reliability and validity

We used Cronbachs alpha to measure internal consistency for state survey and research
variables. The results of the reliability test for the measures suggest that all the measures
in this study are reliable. The alpha coefficients for the measures ranged from 0.62
to 0.87 as presented in Table 4. According to Hair et al. (2003) values greater than
0.6 (60%) are a satisfactory level of internal consistency of measure.
Table 4

An illustration of Cronbachs alpha of the study variables

Variables

Cronbachs alpha

Actual use

0.823623

BI

0.871083

Compatibility

0.800290

Perceived ease of use

0.804038

Perceived usefulness

0.717936

Perceived price level

0.706685

Security and privacy

0.691758

Subjective norm

0.622675

Trust

0.793910

Heneman and Judge (2003) defined validity as the degree to which an instrument
measures the attribute or construct it intends to measure. Therefore, we distributed a
questionnaire to a number of referees and a group of participants and both of them agreed
that the questionnaire measured the attributes it intended to measure.

Results

5.1 Descriptive statistics (demographic profile of respondents)

This section describes respondents personal background such as gender, age and
monthly income. The demographic profile of the respondents is illustrated in Table 3.
As depicted in Table 5, about 57.1% of the respondents were female. The majority of
the respondents ages were students in the range of 20-25 years old (which was 72.2%
of respondents) while 96 were 19 years old or younger (a total of 25.9% of respondents)
and the fewest respondents were in the range of 26 years old or older (only 1.9%).
The majority of the respondents monthly expenses were students with 51-100 JD
(44.2%), 84 when the monthly expenses were 101-200 JD (22.6%), 89 when the monthly
expenses of 50 or less (24%), and 34 with monthly expenses that are more than
201 (9.2%).

Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of mobile voting

Table 5

41

Demographic profile of respondents

Variable

Gender

Age (years)

Frequency

Percentage

Female

212

57.10

Male

159

42.90

19 or Less

96

25.90

2025

268

72.20

More than 26

1.90

50 or Less

89

24.00

51100

164

44.20

101200

84

22.60

More than 201

34

9.20

Monthly
expense

5.2 Arithmetic grand mean for the scores of responses for all study
variables statements
Table 6 illustrates the arithmetic grand mean for the scores of responses for all the study
variables statements. When this grand mean is compared with the 5-points scale from
1 to 5 (High > 3, Neutral = 3 and Low < 3), it is found that results of the respondents
categorisation of the main study is greater than the agreement point (+3). So, this means
all the study variables are under the category (High) except PPL under the category
(low).
Table 6

Arithmetic grand mean for the scores of responses for all study variables statements

No.

Variable

Grand Mean

Security and privacy

3.35

Trust

3.24

Perceived price level

2.96

Subjective norm

3.23

Compatibility

3.68

Perceived usefulness

3.70

Perceived easy of use

3.72

Behavioural intonation

3.59

Actual use

3.69

5.3 Hypotheses test

Figure 4 presents the significant structural relationship among the research variables and
the standardised coefficients for each independent variable, and total variance explains
for each dependent variable. All the hypotheses are strongly supportive except for the
relationship between perceived price level and behavioural intention to use. As shown in
Figure 4 and Table 7, the results indicate that behavioural intention to use mobile voting
has a significant effect on the actual use (H1: = 0.786, P < 0.001). This means that
users behavioural intention is an important determinant of mobile voting usage. The data

42

M.R. Jaradat

also shows that perceived ease of use of mobile voting has a significant effect on
behavioural intention to use mobile voting (H2a: = 0.189, P < 0.001) Moreover, it does
have a significant indirect effect on both behavioural intention to use and actual use
through perceived mobile voting usefulness, and also has a significantly positive direct
effect on perceived mobile voting usefulness (H2b: = 0.649, P < 0.001). The data also
shows that perceived usefulness significantly and directly influences the behavioural
intention to use (H3: = 0.216, P < 0.001) and indirectly influences actual use. The data
also shows that compatibility significantly and directly influences the behavioural
intention to use (H4: = 0.179, P < 0.001) and indirectly influences actual use. The data
also shows that subjective norm significantly and directly influences the behavioural
intention to use (H5: = 0.145, P < 0.001) and indirectly influences actual use. For
hypothesis 6 which is proposed that perceived price level has a direct effect on
behavioural intention to use mobile voting in Jordan, the data shows that it is not
supported (H6: = 0.036, P < 0.05). The data also shows that trust significantly and
directly influences the behavioural intention to use (H7: = 0.124, P < 0.01) and
indirectly influences actual use. For hypothesis 8, the security and privacy has a
significant direct effect on the behavioural intention to use mobile voting (H8: = 0.089,
P < 0.05) and indirectly influences actual use.
Figure 4

Table 7

The empirical results for mobile voting acceptance

An illustration of the results of the hypotheses of the study

Independent

Dependent

Result

H1:

BI

AU

Supported

H2a:

PEOU

BI

Supported

H2b:

PEOU

PU

Supported

H3:

PU

BI

Supported

H4:

CMV

BI

Supported

H5:

SN

BI

Supported

H6:

PPL

BI

Rejected

H7:

TMV

BI

Supported

H8:

S&P

BI

Supported

Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of mobile voting

43

Discussion and Conclusions

This study attempts to analyse the adoption and the factors that affect intention to use
mobile phones in the educational environment at public Jordanian universities.
Moreover, it assists developers in building and quantifying indicators about mobile
voting and a model that might help in understanding mobile voting environment to avoid
spending thousands or millions of dollars that may be invested in this field without
ensuring that the students (voters) will actually use the mobile voting system through the
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) with external variables (security and privacy,
trust, perceived price level, subjective norm and compatibility). The findings generally
supported the hypotheses derived from the model as well as earlier empirical studies
except the Perceived Price Level (PPL).
First, this study confirms that Perceived Usefulness (PU) has the most important
direct effect on predicting students (voters) behavioural intention to adopt and use of
mobile voting in public Jordanian universities, as well as many ICT technologies in other
TAM research. This implies that the service and content provider should take advantage
of the value adding features and functions of mobile voting services. Second, Perceived
Ease of Use (PEOU) comes after the perceived usefulness and it has an important effect
on predicting students (voters) behavioural intention to adopt and use of mobile voting
even direct or indirect through perceived usefulness, this result indicates that the progress
of student (voter) acceptance in mobile voting could be made by focusing on easy-to-use
interface design so the developers should keep developing user oriented easy-to-use and
user friendly interface. As can be seen from Figure 4, perceived usefulness and perceived
ease of use will indirectly influence the actual usage through behavioural intention to use
mobile voting. Third, compatibility has a direct effect on behavioural intention to use
mobile voting and indirectly influences the actual usage through behavioural intention.
Wu, Jen-Her et al. (2007) claimed that besides developing useful and easy to use
systems, mobile IT/IS designers should also pay more attention to user requirements
analysis to determine their expectations and requirements. Only when participants have
higher perceptions in compatibility with their previous or current practice, values,
experiences, beliefs and need there is a higher possibility to achieve successful
acceptance. This indicates that high compatibility will lead to preferable adoption, our
findings confirm those of other researchers such as Rogers (2003), Teo and Pok (2003),
Wu Jen-Her et al. (2005), Wu and Wang (2005) and Wu Jen-Her et al. (2007). Forth,
Subjective Norm (SN) has a direct effect on behavioural intention to use mobile voting
and indirectly influences the actual usage through behavioural intention. This implies that
the students (voters) may choose to perform the behaviour even if they are not favourable
to perform if they believe that students (voters) who are important to him think he/she
should or should not perform it (Ching and John, 2009). Our findings confirm those of
other researchers such as Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), Venkatesh and Davis (2000),
Khalifa and Ning shen (2008), Nor and Pearson (2008), Jaradat (2010) and AL-Majali
(2011). Fifth, trust has a direct effect on behavioural intention to use mobile voting
and indirectly influences the actual usage through behavioural intention. This implies that
the students (voters) willingness to rely on the service provider and the university
administration.

44

M.R. Jaradat

Sixth, security and privacy has a direct effect on behavioural intention to use mobile
voting and indirectly influences the actual usage through behavioural intention. This
conclusion is in accordance with the research results of Ghosh and Swaminatha (2001),
Liu and Amet (2002).
Seventh, the study finds that PPL in mobile voting does not have any significant
effect on behavioural intention and even indirectly to the actual usage through
behavioural intention; also the results of the respondents categorise less than the
agreement point (3) with 2.96 grand mean. So this means that perceived price level falls
under the category (low). Some studies found opposite results which state that cost
influences the use and adoption of technology (Pin and Hsin-Hui, 2004; Wu and Wang,
2005; Yi-Shun et al., 2006; Qingfei et al., 2008). However, in the development of
behavioural intention, individuals may compare the benefit from the service to the cost of
using it. In this study, the researcher found that there are no statistically significant
relationships according to perceived price level and our findings confirm those of other
researchers such as Cheong and Park (2005) and Jaradat (2010).
Finally, user adoption and use of mobile voting can be predicted from the students
behavioural intentions, which are affected significantly by perceived usefulness,
perceived ease of use, compatibility, subjective norm, trust, and security and privacy. As
an ultimate aspiration, the researcher finds that there is a direct effect between
behavioural intention and actual use towards using mobile voting in public Jordanian
universities.
This research presents a new opportunity for further research in the field of mobile
voting adoption in a country like Jordan, which actually focuses on improving and
developing the information technology in all fields. This research avoids spending
thousands or millions of dollars that may be invested in this field without ensuring that
the student will actually use the mobile voting. This research could assist decision maker
and IT/IS developers, and could help in future researches by deploying other external
variables which are suitable for educational environment in Jordan.

References
Adams, D., Nelson, R. and Todd, P. (1992) Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of
information technology: a replication, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 227247.
Ajzen, I. (1991) The theory of planned behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 50, pp.179211.
AL-Majali, M. (2011) The use of theory reasoned of action to study information technology in
Jordan, Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce (JIBC), Vol. 16, No.2, pp.0111.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2002) Individual trust in online firms: scale development and initial test,
Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 211241.
Campbell, D.T. (1960) Recommendations for APA test standards regarding construct, trait, or
discriminant validity, The American Psychologist, Vol. 15, pp.546553.
Chen, L., Gillenson, M. and Sherrell, D. (2002) Enticing online consumers: an extended
technology acceptance perspective, Information and Management, Vol. 39, No. 8, pp.705719.
Cheong, J. and Park, M. (2005) Mobile internet acceptance in Korea, Internet Research:
Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, Vol. 15, pp.125140.

Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of mobile voting

45

Chin, W.W., Marcolin, B.L. and Newsted, P.R. (2003) A partial least squares latent variable
modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: results from a Monte Carlo simulation
study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study, Information Systems Research, Vol. 14,
No. 2, pp.189217.
Ching, S.Y. and John, W.H.H. (2009) Factors affecting the adoption of mobile commerce in
Malaysia, The IUP Journal of Information Technology, Vol. V, No. 3, pp.2437.
Dahlberg, T., Mallat, N. and rni, A. (2003) Trust enhanced technology acceptance model
consumer acceptance of mobile payment solutions, Proceedings of the Stockholm Mobility
Roundtable, Stockholm.
Davis, F. (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information
technology, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp.318339.
Davis, F. and Venkatesh, D. (1995) Measuring user acceptance of emerging information
technologies: an assessment of possible method biases, 28th Annual Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, IEEE computer society press, Los Alamitos, Calif,
pp.729736.
Davis, D. and Cosenza, R. (1993) Business Research for Decision Making, Wadsworth Publishing
Co., Belmont, CA.
Davis, F., Bagozzi, R. and Warshaw, P. (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: a
comparison of two theoretical models, Management Science, Vol. 35, No. 8, pp.9821003.
Dillon, A. and Morris, M. (1996) User acceptance of information technology: theories and
models, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 31, pp.332.
Doney, P. and Cannon, J. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller
relationships, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 61, No. 2, pp3551.
Economides, A. and Grousopoulou, A. (2010) Mobiles in education: students usage, preferences
and desires, Int. J. Mobile Learning and Organisation, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp.235252.
Eschenbrenner, B. and Nah, F. (2007) Mobile technology in education: uses and benefits, Int. J.
Mobile Learning and Organisation, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp.159183.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intentions and Behavior: An Introduction to
Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Boston.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1979) A theory of reason action: some application sand implications,
in Howe, H. and Page, M. (Eds): Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, University of Nebraska
Press, Lincoln, NB, pp.65116.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, F.L. (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18, pp.3950.
Garbarino, E. and Johnson, M. (1999) The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in
consumer relationships, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, No. 2, pp.7087.
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E. and Straub, D. (2003) Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated
model, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp.5190.
Georgescu, M. (2010) Mobile government: an emerging direction,. analele stiintifice ale
universitatii, alexandru ioan cuza din iasi, Stiinte Economice, No. special, pp.380386.
Ghosh, A.K. and Swaminatha, T.M. (2001) Software security and privacy risks in mobile
e-commerce, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 44. No. 2, pp.5157.
Grandison, T. and Sloman, M. (2000) A survey of trust in internet applications, IEEE
Communications Surveys, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp.216.
Hair, J., Babin, B., Money, A. and Samouel, P. (2003) Essentials of Business Research Methods,.
Lehigh Publishing, Inc.
Heneman, H. and Judge, T. (2003) Staffing Organisation, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
Jaradat, M-I.R.M. (2010) Understanding the acceptance of mobile university services: an
empirical analysis, Int. J. Mobile Learning and Organisation, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp.407427.

46

M.R. Jaradat

Kalaichelvi, V. and Chandrasekaran, R.M. (2011) Secured single transaction e-voting protocol:
design and implementation, European Journal of Scientific Research, Vol. 51, No. 2,
pp.276284.
Khalifa, M. and Ning shen, K. (2008) Drivers for transactional B2C mobile commerce adoption:
extended theory of planned behavior, Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 48,
No. 3, pp.111117.
Kini, A. and Choobineh, J. (1998) Trust in electronic commerce: definition and theoretical
considerations, 31st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii,
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel4/5217/14270/00655251.pdf
Kumar,M., Suresh Kumar, T.V., Hanumanthappa, M. and Evangelin Geetha, D. (2008) Secure
Mobile Based Voting System, Emerging Technologies in E-Governmen-SIGeGov
Publications, http://www.csi-sigegov.org/emerging_pdf/ 35_324-330.pdf, pp.324330.
Lee, H. (1998) Do Electronic Marketplaces Lower the Price of Goods? Communications of the
ACM, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp.7380.
Lee, C.H.M. and Cheng, Y.W. (2003) Comparing smart card adoption in Singapore and Australian
universities, Int. J. Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 58, No. 3, pp.307325.
Legnini, M. (2006) Privacy act, Privacy and You. Available online at: http://www.doiu.
nbc.gov/orientation/privacy_act.html (accessed 2012).
Legris, P., Ingham, J. and Collerette, P. (2003) Why do people use information technology? A
critical review of the technology acceptance model, Information & Management, Vol. 40,
No. 3, pp.191204.
Lin, S. and Wu, S. (2002) Exploring the impact of online service quality on portal site usage,
Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Vol. 7, p.206.
Liu, C. and Amet, K.P. (2002) Raising a red flag on global WWW privacy policies, Journal of
Computer Infonnation Systems, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp.117127.
Luarn, P. and Lin, H. (2005) Toward an understanding of the behavioural intention to use mobile
banking,. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 21, No. 6, pp.873891.
Lucas, H.C. and Spitler, V.K. (2000) Implementation in a world of workstations and networks,
Information & Management, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 119128.
Mukherjee, A. and Nath, P. (2003) A model of trust in online relationship banking, International
Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp.515.
Mulliah, A. and Stroulia, E. (2009) Mobile devices for collaborative learning in practicum
courses, International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, Vol. 3, No.1 pp.4459.
NECCC (2001) Enterprise electronic government: E2Gov, Paper presented at the National
Electronic Commerce Coordinating Council 2001 Symposium, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Nor Shahriza, A., Siti Hawa, D. and Ramlah, H. (2006) Mobile phone applications in academic
library services: a students feedback survey, Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 23,
No. 1, pp.3551.
Nor, K., Shanab, E. and Pearson, J. (2008) Internet banking acceptance in Malaysia based on the
theory of reasoned action, Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management,
Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.0314.
Pin, L. and Hsin-Hui, L. (2004) Toward an understanding of the behavioural intention to use
mobile university, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 21, No. 6, pp.873891.
Qadah Ghassan, Z., Taha, R. (2007) Electronic voting systems: requirements, design, and
implementation, Computer Standards & Interfaces, Vol. 29, pp.376386.
Qingfei, M., Ji, S. and Gang, Q. (2008) Mobile commerce user acceptance study in China: a
revised UTAUT model, Tsinghua Science and Technology, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp.257264.
Rogers, E.M. (1995) Diffusion of Innovations, The Free Press, New York.
Rogers, E.M. (2003) The Diffusion of Innovation, 5th ed., Free Press, New York.
Rupp, W. and Smith, A. (2002) Mobile commerce: new revenue machine or black hole?,
Business Horizons, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp.2629.

Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of mobile voting

47

Sekaran, U. (2006) Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach, 4th ed.,
John Wiley & Sons, New Delhi.
Szajna, B. (1996) Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model, Management
Science, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 8592.
Taylor, S. and Todd, P. (1995) Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing
models, Information Systems Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp.143176.
Telecommunication Regulatory Commission Jordan (2012) Available online at: http://www.trc.
gov.jo (accessed on 2012).
Teo, T.S.H. and Pok, S.H. (2003) Adoption of WAP-enabled mobile phones among internet
users, The International Journal of Management Science (Omega), Vol. 31,No. 6,
pp.483498.
Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F. (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model:
four longitudinal field studies, Management Science, Vol. 46, No. 2, pp.186204.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, E.D. (2003) User acceptance of information
technology: towards a unified view, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 425478.
Wu, J-H., Wang, S-C. and Lin, L-M. (2005) What drives mobile health care? an empirical
evaluation of technology acceptance, Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, 0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) IEEE.
Wu, J. and Wang, S. (2005) What drives mobile commerce? an empirical evaluation of the revised
technology acceptance model, Information and Management, Vol. 42, No. 5, pp.719729.
Wu, J-H., Wang, S-C. and Lin, L-M. (2007) Mobile computing acceptance factors in the
healthcare industry: a structural equation model, International Journal of Medical
Informatics, Vol. 7, No. 6, pp.6677.
Yang, Z. and Robin, T.P. (2001) Exploring underlying services quality dimension of internet
purchasing: suggestions from customers, Electronic World-of-Mouth, Submit to the 2001
EIASM-Workshop on Management and Innovation of Services.
Yi-Shun, W., Hsin-Hui, L. and Pin, L. (2006) Predicting consumer intention to use mobile
service, Information Systems Journal, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp.157179.
Yogesh, M. and Dennis, F. (1999) Extending the technology acceptance model to account for
social influence: theoretical bases and empirical validation, Thirty-Second Annual Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences, Vol. 1, p.1006, IEEE.