21 Appendix

Appendix A
TRA, TPB, TAM and IDT at a Glance
Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) Core Definitions
Constructs
Drawn from social psychology, TRA is Attitude Toward “an individual’s positive or
one of the most fundamental and Behavior negative feelings
influential theories of human behavior. (evaluative affect) about
It has been used to predict a wide performing the target
range of behaviors. Davis et al. (1989) behavior” (Fishbein and
applied TRA to individual acceptance Ajzen 1975, p. 216).
of technology and found that the
variance explained was largely Subjective “the person’s perception
consistent with studies that had Norm that most people who are
employed TRA in the context of other important to him think he
behaviors. should or should not
perform the behavior in
question” (Fishbein and
Ajzen 1975, p. 302).
Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) Core Definitions
Constructs
TPB extended TRA by adding the Attitude Toward Adapted from TRA.
construct of perceived behavioral Behavior
control. In TPB, perceived behavioral
146
control is theorized to be an additional Subjective Adapted from TRA.
determinant of intention and behavior. Norm
Ajzen (1991) presented a review of
several studies that successfully used Perceived “the perceived ease or
TPB to predict intention and behavior Behavioral difficulty of performing the
in a wide variety of settings. TPB has Control behavior” (Ajzen 1991, p.
been successfully applied to the 188).
understanding of individual acceptance
and usage of many different
technologies (Mathieson, 1991). A
related model is the Decomposed
Theory of Planned Behavior (DTPB). In
terms of predicting intention, DTPB is
identical to TPB. In contrast to TPB but
similar to TAM, DTPB “decomposes”
attitude,
subjective norm, and perceived
behavioral control into it’s the
underlying belief structure within
technology adoption contexts.
Technology Acceptance Model Core Definitions
(TAM) Constructs
147
TAM is tailored to IS contexts, and was Perceived “the degree to which a
designed to predict information Usefulness person believes that using a
technology acceptance and usage on particular system would
the job. Unlike TRA, the final enhance his or her job
conceptualization of TAM excludes the performance” (Davis 1989,
attitude construct in order to better p. 320).
explain intention parsimoniously. TAM
has been widely applied to a diverse Perceived Ease “the degree to which a
set of technologies and users. of person believes that using a
Use particular system would be
free of effort” (Davis 1989,
p. 320).
Subjective Adapted from TRA/TPB.
Norm
Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) Core Definitions
Constructs
Grounded in sociology, IDT (Rogers Relative “the degree to which an
1995) has been used since the 1960s Advantage innovation is perceived as
to study a variety of innovations, being better than its
ranging from agricultural tools to precursor” (Moore and
organizational innovation (Tornatzky Benbasat 1991, p. 195).
and Klein 1982). Within information Complexity “the degree to which a new
systems, Moore and Benbasat (1991) product is difficult to
adapted the characteristics of understand or use”
148
innovations presented in Rogers and Observability “the degree to which one
refined a set of constructs that could be can see others using the
used to study individual technology system in the organization”
acceptance. Moore and Benbasat (adapted from Moore and
(1996) found support for the predictive Benbasat 1991).
validity of these innovation Compatibility “the degree to which an
characteristics. innovation is perceived as
being consistent with the
existing values, needs, and
past experiences of
potential adopters” (Moore
and Benbasat 1991, p.
195).
Trialability “The degree to which a new
product is capable of being
tried on limited basis”
149
Appendix B
A Summary of Research Studies Which Used TRA, TPB, TAM and IDT for
Exploring Internet Shopping and Related Technologies
No Research Purpose Model/s Construct/s, Attribute/s
Used Used
1 Gefen and Straub, To study gender TAM SPIR, PU, PEOU, U,
(1997) differences in the GENDER
perception and use of
E-Mail/To examine the
effect of gender on
TAM
2 Malhotra and To extend the TAM to TAM, TRA PU, PEOU, A, BI, U,
Galletta, (1999) account for social and (Kelman, Psychological
influence 58)’s study Attachment
3 Moon and Kim, To Extend the TAM TAM PEOU, PU, A, BI, U,
(2001) for a WWW context Perceived Playfulness
4 Mccloskey, (2004) To Evaluate electronic TAM PEOU, PU, Security
commerce Concerns, E-Commerce
acceptance with the Participation
TAM
5 Chen, Gillenson To examine customer TRA, TAM, COMPATIBILITY, PU,
and Sherrell, behavior in the virtual IDT PEOU, A, BI, U
(2002) store context
6 Szajna, (1996) To provide a TAM, Revised PU, PEOU, BI, U
150
confirmatory, TAM
empirical test of the
revised TAM/To
introduce an objective
measure: Actual
Usage
7 Mathieson, (1991) To compare TAM with TAM, TPB EV, PU, PEOU, A, BI, A,
TPB BB, NB, CB, A, SN, PBC,
I, B(U)
8 Koufaris, (2002) To apply TAM and TAM, Flow Product Involvement,
Flow Theory to Theory Web Skills, Value-Added
Internet customer Search Mechanisms,
behaviour Challenges, PC,
Shopping Enjoyment,
Concentration, PU,
PEOU, Unplanned
Purchases, Intention to
Return
9 Amoako-Gyampah To extend the TAM in TAM PU, A, PEOU, BI
and Salam, (2004) an ERP
implementation
environment
10 Davis, Bagozzi, To compare TRA and TRA, TAM All from TRA, TAM
and Warshaw TAM
(1989)
151
11 Pederson and To study the effect of - Degree of Goal Oriented
Nysveen, (2003) website visitors’ Search Mode, BI,
degree of goal- Product Knowledge,
oriented search mode Product Risk, Product
on purchase intention Involvement, Internet
in Internet Experience
environment
12 Chen, Gillenson To extend the TAM TAM, IDT Compatibility, PU,
and Sherrell, and the IDT PEOU, A, BI, U
(2003) To provide operative
CSFs for virtual stores
13 Ristola, (2004) To predict and TAM, TPB,
understand customer UTAUT
acceptance of mobile
services
14 Leelayouthayotin To propose a TAM Product and Company
L. and Lawley M., conceptual model for Attributes, Perceived
(2004) Internet purchasing Risk, PEOU, Customer
intention Experience, PU, BI
16 Cho and Cheung, To study online legal TRA, TPB, PEOU, PU,
(2003) service adoption in TAM, IDT, Compatibility, Perceived
Hong Kong Triandis Risk, Trust, A, BI,
Model Facilitating Conditions
17 Park and Jun, To study cross- TAM, IDT Hours Online Per Week,
(2002) cultural comparison of Length of Internet Use,
152
Internet buying Perceived Risk,
intention Innovativeness,
Frequency of Internet
Shopping, BI
18 Venkatesh, Morris, To formulate a unified TRA, TAM, Performance
Davis and Davis, model that integrates MM Expectancy, Effort
(2003) elements across the (Motivational Expectancy, A, Social
eight models Model), TPB, Influence, Facilitating
IDT Conditions, Self-Efficacy,
Anxiety, BI
19 Dahlberg, Mallat To study whether TAM User Acceptance
and Oorni, (2003) TAM offers Enablers, Intrinsic
comprehensive Motivation, PEOU,
explanation for Extrinsic Motivation, BI,
customer decision Short Term Use, Long
related to adoption of Term Use
mobile payments
20 Lederer, Maupin, To investigate TAM TAM
Sena and Zhuang, for work-related tasks
(2000) with the www as the
application
21 Childers, Carr, To develop an TAM Navigation,
Peck and Carson, attitudinal model for Convenience, Sub-
(2001) Internet retail Experience, PU, PEOU,
shopping behavior Enjoyment, A
153
22 Straub, (1994) To examine the effect TAM, IDT SPIR, PU, PEOU, B
of culture on IT (Media Use), Productivity
diffusion Benefits
154
Appendix C
Statistics on E-Commerce activity
155
http://www.internetworldstats.com/asia.htm
156
Appendix D
Shopping Orientation Scale Items
Home Shopping Orientation
1. I like to shop from home (for example, using mail-order catalogues, the TV or the
Internet)
2. I shop from home because I cannot find what I want in local stores
3. Shopping from home is more convenient than going to the store
Economic Shopping Orientation
1. I make it a rule to shop at a number of stores before I buy
2. I can save a lot of money by shopping around
3. I like to have a great deal of information before I buy
Mall-Socializing Shopping Orientation
1. I enjoy going to big shopping malls
2. Shopping malls are the best places to shop
3. I like to go shopping with a friend
4. I often combine shopping with lunch or dinner at a restaurant
5. Shopping gives me a chance to get out and do something
Personalizing Shopping Orientation
1. I like to shop where people know me
2. I owe it to my community to shop at local stores
157
Appendix E
Construct Measure Items
Perceived Usefulness (PU)
1. Using Internet Shopping would enable me to accomplish shopping more quickly
2. Using Internet Shopping would improve my shopping experience
3. Using Internet Shopping would increase my shopping productivity
4. Using Internet Shopping would enhance my shopping effectiveness
5. Using Internet Shopping would make it easier to do shopping
6. I would find Internet Shopping useful
Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU)
1. Doing Internet shopping would be easy for me
2. I would find it easy to shop what I want through Internet shopping
3. My experience with Internet shopping would be clear and understandable
4. I would find Internet shopping to be flexible to interact with
5. It would be easy for me to become skillful at using Internet shopping
6. I would find Internet shopping easy to use
Behavioral Intention to Use (BI)
1. I intend to use Internet Shopping
Attitude Towards Using (A)
1. Shopping through Internet is convenient
2. Shopping through Internet saves time
158
3. The fact that I cannot visit actual store makes me think twice about using Internet
Shopping
4. Shopping through Internet is not secure
5. Shopping through Internet puts my privacy at risk
6. Shopping through Internet makes me lose social contact
7. Shopping through Internet saves me money
8. Shopping through Internet provides me a larger selection than traditional
shopping
Knowledge (K)
1. I feel very knowledgeable about Internet Shopping
2. I have enough knowledge about Internet Shopping to give others advice about it
3. Others often seek my advice regarding Internet Shopping
4. I feel very confident about what is relevant when shopping through Internet
Security/Privacy (S)
1. It bothers me when the Internet store asks me for personal information
2. I am concerned that the Internet store is collecting too much personal information
from me
3. I am concerned that the Internet store will use my personal information for other
purposes without my authorization
4. I am concerned that the Internet store will share my personal information with
other companies without my authorization
5. I am concerned my personal information in the Internet store database is not
accurate
159
6. I am concerned that unauthorized people (i.e. hackers) have access to my
personal information
7. I am concerned about the security of my personal information during
transmission
8. In general, I do not trust the Internet store as much as I trust traditional store
Actual Behavior (B)
1. I often do shopping through Internet
2. In last 6 months I have done Internet Shopping many times
160
Appendix F
Final Survey Questionnaire
Dear Participant,
I am a Doctoral Student at the Institute of Management, Nirma University of Science and
Technology, Ahmedabad. I am studying the “Customer Acceptance of Internet Shopping
in India: Impact of Shopping Orientations, Knowledge and Security” for my Ph.D. thesis
research.
As a part of my doctoral research, I would request you to respond to the questionnaire
enclosed herewith. It is intended to examine the different aspects of Internet shopping of
Electronic gadgets and Home appliances
Your responses would be kept strictly confidential and would be used only for academic
purposes. They will be merged with the responses of other respondents. Please be as
honest and frank as possible so as to enhance the validity and utility of the present
research. Kindly respond to all the sections.
Your assistance and cooperation in the matter would be highly appreciated and would
facilitate me in the completion of my Ph.D thesis.
Thank you for supporting my research work!
With kind regards,
Yours Sincerely,
161
Darshan Parikh
____________________________________________________
Contact: Darshan Parikh,
Ph.D. Student,
Institute of Management,
Nirma University of Science and Technology,
Sarkhej-Gandhinagar Highway,
Ahmedabad 382481, India
Phone: 91-02717- 241900/01/02/03/04
Residence: 0265-26305099
Cell: +1(847)973-2457
Email: darshanjparikh@gmail.com
162
Please indicate your agreement or disagreement with the following statements by putting
a tick mark (√) in the appropriate column as per the given scale:
Sr. Statements 1 2 3 4 5
No Strongly Disagree Somewhat Agree Strongly
. Disagree Agree/ Agree
Somewhat
Disagree
1. I like to shop from home (for
example, using mail-order
catalogues, the TV or the Internet)
2. I shop from home because I
cannot find what I want in local
stores
3. Shopping from home is more
convenient than going to the store
4. I make it a rule to shop at a
number of stores before I buy
5. I can save a lot of money by
shopping around
6. I like to have a great deal of
information before I buy
7. I enjoy going to big shopping malls
8. Shopping malls are the best
163
places to shop
9. I like to go shopping with a friend
10. I often combine shopping with
lunch or dinner at a restaurant
11. Shopping gives me a chance to
get out and do something
12. I like to shop where people know
me
13. I owe it to my community to shop
at local stores
14. Using Internet Shopping would
enable me to accomplish
shopping more quickly
improve my shopping experience
increase my shopping productivity
enhance my shopping
effectiveness
make it easier to do shopping
19. I would find Internet Shopping
useful
20. Doing Internet shopping would be
164
easy for me
21. I would find it easy to shop what I
want through Internet shopping
22. My experience with Internet
shopping would be clear and
understandable
23. I would find Internet shopping to
be flexible to interact with
24. It would be easy for me to become
skillful at using Internet shopping
25. I would find Internet shopping
easy to use
26. I intend to use Internet Shopping.
27. Shopping through Internet is
convenient
28. Shopping through Internet saves
time
29. The fact that I cannot visit actual
store makes me think twice about
using Internet Shopping
Sr. Statements 1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Somewhat Agree Strongly
No Disagree Agree/ Agree
Somewhat
. Disagree
30. Shopping through Internet is not
secure
165
31. Shopping through Internet puts my
privacy at risk
32. Shopping through Internet makes
me lose social contact
33. Shopping through Internet saves
me money
34. Shopping through Internet
provides me a larger selection
than traditional shopping
35. I feel very knowledgeable about
Internet Shopping
36. I have enough knowledge about
Internet Shopping to give others
advice about it
37. Others often seek my advice
regarding Internet Shopping
38. I feel very confident about what is
relevant when shopping through
Internet
39. It bothers me when the Internet
store asks me for personal
information
40. I am concerned that the Internet
store is collecting too much
personal information from me
166
store will use my personal
information for other purposes
without my authorization
store will share my personal
information with other companies
without my authorization
43. I am concerned my personal
information in the Internet store
database is not accurate
44. I am concerned that unauthorized
people (i.e. hackers) have access
to my personal information
45. I am concerned about the security
of my personal information during
transmission
46. In general, I do not trust the
Internet store as much as I trust
traditional store
47. I often do shopping through
Internet
48. In last 6 months I have done
Internet Shopping many times
167
Personal Details
49 Have you used the Internet? 1___Yes 2___No
50 What is the highest level of education you have completed?
1___ High school 2___Technical diploma 3___1-3 years of college
4___Bachelor’s degree 5___Post Graduate degree or More
51 Please indicate your marital status.
1___Single 2___Married 3___Divorced 4___Separated 5___Widowed
52 Which of the following age groups are you in?
1___Under 18 2___18-24 3___25-34 4___35-44
5___45-54 6___55-64 7___65-74 8___75 and older
53 Please indicate your gender.
1___Female 2___Male
54 Approximately, what is your total household income (Rupees per Annum)?
1__Less than 30,000 2__30,000 to 59,999 3__60,000 to 99,999
4__100,000 to 1,99,999 5__200,000 to 2,99,999 6__300,000 or greater
55 Your contact (E-mail/ Phone/Mobile): __________________________________
(optional)
56 Your Hometown: City/District______________________
168
57 How long have you been living in this city?______________ Years
Thank you very much for completing this questionnaire. Please feel free to write any
comments in the space below.
_____________________________________________________________________
____________
______________________________________________________________________
___________
_____________________________________________________________________
____________
______________________________________________________________________
____________
______________________________________________________________________
____________
______________________________________________________________________
____________
169
Appendix G
A Note on Canonical Correlation Analysis
Canonical correlation analysis is a multivariate statistical model that facilitates the study
of interrelationships among sets of multiple dependent variables and multiple
independent variables. Whereas multiple regression predicts a single dependent
variable from a set of multiple independent variables, canonical correlation
simultaneously predicts multiple dependent variables from multiple independent
variables.
Prior to interpreting the canonical functions and variables, there is a stage of deriving
and selecting canonical functions for interpretation which is discussed as follows.
Deriving Canonical Functions
The first step of canonical correlation analysis is to derive one or more canonical
functions. Each function consists of a pair of variates, one representing the independent
variables and the other representing the dependent variables. The derivation of
successive canonical variates is similar to the procedure used with unrotated factor
analysis. The first pair of canonical variates is derived so as to have the highest
intercorrelation possible between the two sets of variables. Successive pairs of
canonical variates are based on residual variance, and their respective canonical
correlations become smaller as each additional function is extracted.
170
Selecting Functions for Interpretation
Given that the canonical correlation analysis results yield a number of functions,* (as
described above), three criteria are used in conjunction with one another to decide which
canonical functions should be interpreted (Hair et al, 1998). The three criteria are (1)
level of statistical significance of the function, (2) magnitude of the canonical correlation,
and (3) redundancy measure for the percentage of variance accounted for from the two
data sets. These are discussed as follows:
Level of significance.
The generally minimum acceptable level for considering a correlation coefficient
statistically significant is the .05 level (along with the .01 level).
Magnitude of the canonical relationships (canonical correlation).
It is represented by the size of the canonical correlations. Canonical correlation is a
measure of the strength of the overall relationships between the linear composites
(canonical variates) for the independent and dependent variables. In effect, it represents
the bivariate correlation between the two canonical variates. It is to be noted that no
generally accepted guidelines have been established regarding suitable sizes for
canonical correlations (Hair et al, 1998). Rather, the decision is usually based on the
contribution of the findings to better understanding of the research problem being
studied. When squared, the canonical correlation represents the amount of variance in
*
The maximum number of canonical functions that can be extracted from the set of
variables equals the number of variables in the smallest data set, independent or
dependent.
171
one canonical variate accounted for by the other canonical variate. This may also be
called the amount of shared variance between the two canonical variates. Squared
canonical correlations are called canonical roots or eigenvalues.
Redundancy measure of shared variance.
There is an inherent bias and uncertainty in using canonical roots (squared canonical
correlations) as a measure of shared variance and therefore a redundancy index has
been proposed (Stewart et al, 1968). This is a measure of the amount of variance in a
canonical variate (dependent or independent) explained by the other canonical variate in
the canonical function. It can be computed for both the dependent and the independent
canonical variates in each canonical function. The redundancy measure is perfectly
analogous to multiple regressions’ R2 statistic and its value as an index is similar.
The calculation of the redundancy index is a three-step process.
Step 1-Amount of Shared variance: The firsts step involves calculating the amount of
shared variance in the dependent or independent variable set included in its own
canonical variate. To calculate the amount of shared variance explained by the
canonical variate, a simple average of the sum of squared canonical loadings of each of
the concerned variable in the variate is used. Canonical loadings are discussed in the
following section.
Step 2- The amount of explained variance: The second step involves the percentage of
variance in the dependent canonical variate that can be explained by the independent
canonical variate. This is simply the squared correlation between the independent
canonical variate and the dependent canonical variate, which is otherwise known as the
172
canonical correlation. The squared canonical correlation is commonly called the
canonical R2.
Step 3-The Redundancy index: The redundancy index of a variate is then derived by
multiplying the two components (shared variance of the variate multiplied by the squared
canonical correlation) to find the amount of shared variance that can be explained by
each canonical function. To have a high redundancy index, one must have a high
canonical correlation and a high degree of shared variance explained by the concerned
variate. Redundancy indices are calculated for both the dependent and the independent
variates, although in most instances, the researcher is concerned only with the variance
extracted from the dependent variable set, which provides a more realistic measure of
the predictive ability of canonical relationships. Lambert and Durand (1975) recommend
the redundancy index as a more indicative measure of the explanatory capability of
canonical analysis in accounting for criterion variance. No generally accepted guidelines
have been established for the for the minimum acceptable redundancy index.
Interpreting the Canonical Functions and Variables
Three methods have been proposed to interpret the results of canonical correlation.
These involve examining the canonical weights, canonical loadings and canonical cross-
loadings.
Canonical weights.
The traditional approach to interpreting canonical functions involves examining the sign
and the magnitude of the canonical weight assigned to each variable in its canonical
173
variate. Variables with relatively larger weights contribute more to the variate and vice
versa. Similarly, variables whose weights have opposite signs exhibit an inverse
relationship with each other, and variables with weights of the same sign exhibit a direct
relationship. To avoid the problem of signs of weights arising from collinearity issues,
canonical loadings instead of canonical weights are estimated, and these loadings are
used to study the canonical correlation, as discussed below.
Canonical loadings.
Canonical loadings measure the simple linear correlation between an original observed
variable in the dependent or independent set and the set’s canonical variate. The
canonical loading reflects the variance that the observed variable shares with the
canonical variate and can be interpreted like a factor loading in assessing the relative
contribution of each variable to each canonical function.
Canonical cross-loadings.
Although canonical loadings are considered relatively more valid than weights as a
means of interpreting the nature of canonical relationships, however, they are still
subject to considerable variability from one sample to another. Hence, canonical cross-
loadings have been suggested as an alternative to canonical loadings (Dillon and
Goldstein, 1984). The canonical cross-loading is a measure of the correlation of each
observed independent or dependent variable with the opposite canonical variate.
Lambert and Durand (1975) have suggested .30 level as an acceptable minimum
loading value. While several different methods for interpreting the nature of canonical
relationships have been discussed, the cross-loadings approach is preferred. The
174
loadings approach is recommended as the best alternative to the canonical cross-
loadings approach.
175
Appendix H
Assumptions of Multivariate Analysis-NPP Charts of Original Variables
Normal P-P Plot of Shopping Orientation Var 1 Normal P-P Plot of Shopping Orientation Var 2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
Exp ected Cu m Prob Exp ected Cu m Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Observed Cum Prob Observed Cum Prob
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of Shopping Orientation Var 6

1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4 0.4
Exp ected Cu m Prob

Exp ected Cu m Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
176
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
Exp ected Cum Prob
Exp ected Cu m Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
Exp ected Cu m Prob Expected Cu m Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
177
Normal P-P Plot of PU Var 1
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4 0.4
Exp ected Cu m Prob

Expected Cu m Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of PU Var 2 Normal P-P Plot of PU Var 3
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
Exp ected Cu m Prob
Exp ected Cu m Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
178
Normal P-P Plot of PU Var 6 Normal P-P Plot of PEOU Var 1
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of PEOU Var 2 Normal P-P Plot of PEOU Var 3
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of PEOU Var 5

Normal P-P Plot of PEOU Var 4
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4 0.4
Exp ected Cu m Prob

Exp ected Cu m Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
179
Normal P-P Plot of PEOU Var 6 Normal P-P Plot of BI
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of A Var1 Normal P-P Plot of A Var2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
Expected Cum Prob Exp ected Cu m Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
180
Normal P-P Plot of A Var6
Normal P-P Plot of A Var5
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
Exp ected Cu m Prob
Expected Cum Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of K Var1 Normal P-P Plot of K Var2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
Exp ected Cum Prob Exp ected Cu m Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
181
Normal P-P Plot of K Var3
Normal P-P Plot of K Var4
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of Security/Privacy Var1 Normal P-P Plot of Security/Privacy Var2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
Expected Cum Prob

Exp ected Cu m Prob
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
182
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of Actual Actual Behavior Var2

Normal P-P Plot of Actual Behavior Var1
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
183
Appendix I
Assumptions of Multivariate Analysis-NPP Charts of Factor Scores
Normal P-P Plot of Home Normal P-P Plot of Economical
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
Expected Cum Prob
Expected Cum Prob

0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of Personalizing

Normal P-P Plot of Mall Socializing
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
ExpectedCumProb
ExpectedCumProb
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of PEOU

Normal P-P Plot of PU
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
Expected Cum Prob
Expected Cum Prob
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
184
Normal P-P Plot of BI Normal P-P Plot of A
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
ExpectedCumProb
ExpectedCumProb
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normal P-P Plot of Security/Privacy

Normal P-P Plot of Knowledge
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
ExpectedCumProb
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
Exp ected Cu m Prob
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Observed Cum Prob
Observed Cum Prob
Normal P-P Plot of Actual Behavior
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
Exp ected Cu m Prob
0.2
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Observed Cum Prob
185
Appendix J
Data Reduction for Attitude Towards Using (A) Construct: SPSS Output
a) Inverse of Correlation Matrix
VAR27 VAR28 VAR29 VAR30 VAR31 VAR32 VAR33 VAR34

VAR27 2.56 -0.08 0.33 0.09 0.41 0.35 -0.60 -0.44
VAR28 -0.08 2.49 0.21 0.19 0.45 0.47 -0.42 -0.39
VAR29 0.33 0.21 2.52 -0.06 -0.43 -0.50 0.39 0.34
VAR30 0.09 0.19 -0.06 2.72 -0.53 -0.66 0.42 0.53
VAR31 0.41 0.45 -0.43 -0.53 2.97 -0.06 0.57 0.37
VAR32 0.35 0.47 -0.50 -0.66 -0.06 2.983 0.45 0.36
VAR33 -0.60 -0.42 0.39 0.42 0.57 0.45 3.50 -0.62
VAR34 -0.44 -0.39 0.34 0.53 0.37 0.36 -0.62 3.15
b) KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling
Adequacy. 0.96
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 3217.37

Sphericity df 28
Sig. 0.00
c) Component Score Coefficient Matrix
Component
1
VAR27 0.14
VAR28 0.14
VAR29 -0.14
VAR30 -0.14
VAR31 -0.15
VAR32 -0.15
VAR33 0.15
VAR34 0.15
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
Component Scores.
186
Appendix K
Histograms of individual Variables
200 300
250
150
200
Frequency
Frequency
100 150
100
50
50
Mean = 2.336 Mean = 2.3988

Std. Dev. = 1.26394 Std. Dev. = 1.29812
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00001 VAR00002
250
200
200
150
Frequency
150
Frequency
100
100
50
50
Mean = 2.3084 Mean = 2.1886

Std. Dev. = 1.23162 Std. Dev. = 1.20522
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00003 VAR00004
187
200
200
150
150
Frequency
Frequency
100
100
50 50
Mean = 2.2534 Mean = 2.2377

Std. Dev. = 1.17244 Std. Dev. = 1.13831
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00005 VAR00006
250
250
200
200
150
F re q u e n c y
Frequency
150
100
100
50 50
Mean = 2.6346 Mean = 2.6758

Std. Dev. = 1.28286 Std. Dev. = 1.33067
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00007 VAR00008
250
200
200
150
Frequency
150
Frequency
100
100
50
50
Mean = 2.0806 Mean = 2.2849

Std. Dev. = 1.14646 Std. Dev. = 1.29937
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00009 VAR00010
188
250
250
200
200
Frequency
150
Frequency
150
100
100
50
50
Mean = 2.1415
Std. Dev. = 1.32645 Mean = 2.1925
N = 509 Std. Dev. = 1.05099
N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00011 VAR00012
250
200
200
150
Frequency
150
Frequency
100
100
50
50
Mean = 2.2868
Std. Dev. = 1.00209 Mean = 2.7741
N = 509 Std. Dev. = 1.21589
N = 509
0
0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00013 VAR00014
189
200
200
150
150
Frequency
Frequency
100 100
50 50
Mean = 2.5914 Mean = 2.7937

Std. Dev. = 1.26195 Std. Dev. = 1.09521
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00015 VAR00016
200 250
200
150
Frequency
Frequency
150
100
100
50
50
Mean = 2.7407 Mean = 2.7544

Std. Dev. = 1.0956 Std. Dev. = 1.07614
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00017 VAR00018
190
200
200
150
150
F req ue nc y
Frequency
100
100
50 50
Mean = 2.8212 Mean = 2.6189

Std. Dev. = 1.25862 Std. Dev. = 1.12598
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00019 VAR00020
200
200
150
150
F re q u e n c y
Frequency
100
100
50
50
Mean = 2.7859 Mean = 2.6994

Std. Dev. = 1.06266 Std. Dev. = 1.17303
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00021 VAR00022
191
200
250
200
150
F re q u e n c y
150
F req u en cy
100
100
50
50
Mean = 2.6169 Mean = 2.7819

Std. Dev. = 1.19735 Std. Dev. = 0.94201
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00023 VAR00024
250
250
200
200
F req u e n c y
150
Frequency
150
100
100
50
50
Mean = 2.7819 Mean = 2.8212

Std. Dev. = 0.99684 Std. Dev. = 1.01051
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00025 VAR00026
192
250
200
200
150
F req uency
150
Frequency
100
100
50
50
Mean = 2.7603
Mean = 2.7701
Std. Dev. = 0.98488
Std. Dev. = 1.04439
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00027 VAR00028
200
200
150
150
F req u e n c y
Frequency
100
100
50
50
Mean = 3.2652
Mean = 3.2377
Std. Dev. = 1.10496 Std. Dev. = 1.10937
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00029 VAR00030
193
250
250
200
200
Frequency
150
Frequency
150
100
100
50 50
Mean = 3.2888 Mean = 3.3438

Std. Dev. = 1.14547 Std. Dev. = 1.07845
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00031 VAR00032
250
250
200
200
F req u e n c y
150
Frequency
150
100
100
50 50
Mean = 2.723 Mean = 2.7662

Std. Dev. = 1.10291 Std. Dev. = 1.0585
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00033 VAR00034
194
250
250
200 200
Frequency
150
Frequency
150
100 100
50 50
Mean = 2.7583 Mean = 2.7544

Std. Dev. = 1.0752 Std. Dev. = 1.08343
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00035 VAR00036
250
250
200
200
150
F re q u e n c y
Frequency
150
100
100
50 50
Mean = 2.7976 Mean = 2.7112

Std. Dev. = 1.08874 Std. Dev. = 1.14203
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00037 VAR00038
250
250
200
200
150
F re q u e n c y
Freq u ency
150
100
100
50
50
Mean = 3.2672
Mean = 3.3261
Std. Dev. = 1.12913 Std. Dev. = 1.14144
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00039 VAR00040
195
200
250
200
150
Frequency
Frequency
150
100
100
50
50
Mean = 3.2515 Mean = 3.2711

Std. Dev. = 1.21167 Std. Dev. = 1.0764
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00041 VAR00042
250
250
200
200
Frequency
150
F re q u e n c y
150
100
100
50 50
Mean = 3.334 Mean = 3.2279

Std. Dev. = 1.09331 Std. Dev. = 1.17014
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00043 VAR00044
196
250
250
200
200
F req u e n c y
150
Frequency
150
100
100
50
50
Mean = 3.279 Mean = 3.2947

Std. Dev. = 1.12101 Std. Dev. = 1.12575
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00045 VAR00046
200
200
150
150
F re q u e n c y
Frequency
100
100
50
50
Mean = 2.7623 Mean = 2.723

Std. Dev. = 1.17908 Std. Dev. = 1.13111
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
VAR00047 VAR00048
197
250
500
400 200
Frequency
150
Frequency
300
200 100
100 50
Mean = 1.6405 Mean = 2.9804

Std. Dev. = 0.48033 Std. Dev. = 0.95551
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
Internet_used Education_group
400
400
300
300
Frequency
Frequency
200
200
100
100
Mean = 1.5796 Mean = 3.0786

Std. Dev. = 0.99014 Std. Dev. = 0.77973
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00
Marital_status Age_group
500
250
400
200
Frequency
300
Frequency
150
200
100
100
50
Mean = 1.6405
Std. Dev. = 0.48033 Mean = 3.611
N = 509 Std. Dev. = 0.9851
N = 509
0
0
0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Gender Income_group
198
100
150
80
120
Frequency
60
Frequency
90
40
60
20
30
Mean = 3.00 Mean = 5.3674

Std. Dev. = 1.43082 Std. Dev. = 3.80486
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00
Hometown Years_lived_in_city
70
70
60
60
50
50
F re q u e n c y
F re qu e n c y
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
Mean = -1.1882856E- Mean = -1.1590121E-
16 16
Std. Dev. = 1.00000 Std. Dev. = 1.00000
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
-1.00000 0.00000 1.00000 2.00000 -1.00000 0.00000 1.00000 2.00000
PU PEOU
250 70
60
200
50
F re q u e n c y
150
Frequency
40
30
100
20
50
10
Mean = 2.8212 Mean = 4.907099E-16
Std. Dev. = 1.01051 Std. Dev. = 1.00000
N = 509 N = 509
0 0
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 -1.00000 0.00000 1.00000 2.00000
BI A
199
120
120
100
100
80
80
Frequency
Frequency
60
60
40
40
20 20
Mean = -1.3509159E- Mean = 5.1586339E-16

16 Std. Dev. = 1.00000
Std. Dev. = 1.00000 N = 509
0 N = 509 0
-1.50000 -0.50000 0.50000 1.50000 -2.00000 -1.00000 0.00000 1.00000
-1.00000 0.00000 1.00000 2.00000 -1.50000 -0.50000 0.50000 1.50000
Knowledge Trust
140
120
100
Frequency
80
60
40
20
Mean = -1.678345E-16
Std. Dev. = 1.00000
0 N = 509
-1.50000 -0.50000 0.50000 1.50000
-1.00000 0.00000 1.00000 2.00000
Use
200

21 Appendix

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

21 Appendix

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Appendix A

TRA, TPB, TAM and IDT at a Glance

Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) Core Definitions

one of the most fundamental and Behavior negative feelings

influential theories of human behavior. (evaluative affect) about

It has been used to predict a wide performing the target

range of behaviors. Davis et al. (1989) behavior” (Fishbein and

applied TRA to individual acceptance Ajzen 1975, p. 216).

of technology and found that the

variance explained was largely Subjective “the person’s perception

employed TRA in the context of other important to him think he

behaviors. should or should not

perform the behavior in

question” (Fishbein and

Ajzen 1975, p. 302).

Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) Core Definitions

construct of perceived behavioral Behavior

control. In TPB, perceived behavioral

determinant of intention and behavior. Norm

Ajzen (1991) presented a review of

several studies that successfully used Perceived “the perceived ease or

TPB to predict intention and behavior Behavioral difficulty of performing the

in a wide variety of settings. TPB has Control behavior” (Ajzen 1991, p.

been successfully applied to the 188).

understanding of individual acceptance

and usage of many different

technologies (Mathieson, 1991). A

related model is the Decomposed

Theory of Planned Behavior (DTPB). In

terms of predicting intention, DTPB is

identical to TPB. In contrast to TPB but

similar to TAM, DTPB “decomposes”

subjective norm, and perceived

behavioral control into it’s the

underlying belief structure within

technology adoption contexts.

Technology Acceptance Model Core Definitions

designed to predict information Usefulness person believes that using a

technology acceptance and usage on particular system would

conceptualization of TAM excludes the performance” (Davis 1989,

attitude construct in order to better p. 320).

explain intention parsimoniously. TAM

set of technologies and users. of person believes that using a

Use particular system would be

free of effort” (Davis 1989,

Subjective Adapted from TRA/TPB.

Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) Core Definitions

Grounded in sociology, IDT (Rogers Relative “the degree to which an

to study a variety of innovations, being better than its

ranging from agricultural tools to precursor” (Moore and

organizational innovation (Tornatzky Benbasat 1991, p. 195).

systems, Moore and Benbasat (1991) product is difficult to

adapted the characteristics of understand or use”

used to study individual technology system in the organization”

acceptance. Moore and Benbasat (adapted from Moore and

(1996) found support for the predictive Benbasat 1991).

validity of these innovation Compatibility “the degree to which an

characteristics. innovation is perceived as

being consistent with the

existing values, needs, and

potential adopters” (Moore

and Benbasat 1991, p.

Trialability “The degree to which a new

product is capable of being