E-Government in Singapore: Demographics, usage patterns, and perceptions

Journal of E-Government

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 29-54

  Li, Hairong ^a   Detenber, Benjamin H ^b   Lee, Wai Peng ^b   Chia, Stella ^b  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Channel selection; Civic participation; Government Websites; Internet use; Online privacy and security; Perceived ease of use; Perceived usefulness; User demographics

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248054442     PISSN: 15424049     EISSN: 15424057     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J399v01n03_03     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. AAPOR (American Association for Public Opinion Research) (2000). Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for RDD Telephone Survey and In-Person Household Surveys. Ann Arbor, Mich. Available online at http://www.indiana.edu/~csr/aapor93.html.
2. The Census Bureau (2002). A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use of the Internet (Research report). Washington, DC. Available online at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/index.html.
3. Chua, B.H. (1995). Communitarian Ideology and Democracy in Singapore. London: Routledge.
4. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
5. Forman, M. (2002). E-Government Strategy: Implementing the President's Management Agenda for E-Government. Washington, DC: Office of Management and Budget.
6. Haggard, S. (1998). An External View of Singapore's Developed Status. In L. Low (Ed.), Singapore: Towards a Developed Country Status (pp. 345-375). Singapore: Oxford University Press.
7. Hart-Teeter (2003). The New E-Government Equation: East, Engagement, Privacy and Protection. A report available online at http://www.excelgov.org.
8. IDA (Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore) (2002). Annual Survey of Infocomm Usage in Households and by Individuals for 2002.
9. IDA (Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore) (2003a). eCitizen Helper 3P Partnership Programme. A report available online at http://www.ida.gov.sg.
10. IDA (Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore) (2003b). e-Government Action Plan II: 2003-2006. A report available online at http://www.ida.gov.sg.
11. IDA (Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore) (2003c). Fact Sheet of Public Services Infrastructure. A report available online at http://www.ida.gov.sg.
12. IDA (Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore) (2003d). An Overview of eCitizen (pp. 8). A report available online at http://www.ida.gov.sg.
13. Kennedy, J. M. (1993). A Comparison of Telephone Survey Respondents Selection Procedure. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research.
14. Kuo, E. C. Y., Choi, A., Mahizhnan, A., Lee, W. P., & Soh, C. (2002). Internet in Singapore: A Study on Usage and Impact. Singapore: Times Academic Press.
15. Kuo, E. C. Y., & Low, L. (2001). Information Economy and Changing Occupational Structure in Singapore. The Information Society, 17, 281-293.
16. Larsen, E., & Rainie, L. (2003). The Rise of the E-Citizen (Research report). Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life. Available online at http://www. pewinternet.org.
17. Lee, H. L. (2003). Speech at the Launch of the e-Government Action Plan II. Available at http://www.egov.gov.sg.
18. Leong, W.K. (2000). The Silent Majority. The Straits Times (August 15), p. 35.
19. Lieberman, J. (2001). E-Government Act of 2001. Unpublished manuscript, Washington, DC. Available online at http://lieberman.senate.gov.
20. Ling, O. G., Ser, T. E., &Koh, G. (1999). Political Participation in Singapore: Findings of a National Survey. Asian Journal of Political Science, 7(2), 126-141.
21. Low, L. (1998). The Elusive Developed Country Status. In L. Low (Ed.), Singapore: Towards a Developed Country Status (pp. 376-398). Singapore: Oxford University Press.
22. Milne, G. R., & Culnan, M. J. (2002). Using the Content of Online Privacy Notices to Inform Public Policy: A Longitudinal Analysis of the 1998-2001 U.S. Web Surveys. The Information Society, 18, 345-359.
23. Mower, M. (2001, April). The Electronic Evolution in Local Government. Management Services, 18-19.
24. National Telecommunication and Information Administration (1999). Fall Through the Net: Defining the Digital Divide. Available online at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn99/contents.html.
25. Policy, U. C. f. C. (2003). The UCLA Internet Report 2002: Surveying the Digital Future (Year Three). Los Angeles, CA. Available online at http://ccp.ucla.edu/pdf/UCLA-Internet-Report-2001.pdf.
26. Sheehan. (2002). Toward a Typology of Internet Users and Online Privacy Concerns. The Information Society, 18, 21-32.
27. Tan, M. (2001). Plugging into the Wired World: Some Reflections on the Digital Divide. In G. Bradley (Ed.), Humans on the Net (pp. 177-195). Sweden: Prevent.
28. Taylor, H. (2001). Opinion Surveys: What Consumers Have to Say About Information Privacy. In the Prepared Witness Testimony at the House of Committee on Energy and Commerce (http://energycommerce.house.gov/107/hearings/05082001Hearing209/Taylor310.htm).
29. Tolbert, C., Mossberger, K., & McNeal, R. (2002). Beyond the Digital Divide: Exploring Attitudes About Information Technology, Political Participation, and Electronic Government. Unpublished manuscript.
30. UCLA Center for Communication Policy (2002). The UCLA Internet Report 2001: Surveying the Digital Future (Year Two). Los Angeles, CA. Available online at http://ccp.ucla.edu/pdf/UCLA-Internet-Report-2001.pdf.
31. UN-DPEPA (United Nations Division for Public Economics and Public Administration) (2001). Benchmarking E-government: A Global Perspective.
32. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
33. Wang, J. C. F. (1994). Comparative Asian Politics: Power, Policy, and Change. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
34. Warschauer, M. (2001). Singapore's Dilemma: Control vs. Autonomy in IT-Led Development. The Information Society, 17, 305-311.
35. West, D. M. (2002). Global E-Government 2002 (Research report). Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University. Available online at http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt02int.PDF.
36. West, D. M. (2003). Global E-Government 2003 (Research report). Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University. Available online at http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt03int.pdf.
37. Willnat, L., Lee, W. P., & Detenber, B. H. (2002). Individual-Level Predictors of Public Outspokenness: A Test of the Spiral of Silence Theory in Singapore. International Journal of Public Opinion, 14(4), 391-412.