An empirical evaluation of E-government inclusion among the digitally disadvantaged in the United States

Information Resources Management Journal

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 21-39

  Sipior, Janice C ^a   Ward, Burke T ^a   Connolly, Regina ^b  

^a VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b DUBLIN CITY UNIVERSITY   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Accessibility; Digital Inequity; E Government; IS Policy; IS Utilization; Novice Users; Social Impacts; System Acceptance

Indexed keywords

ACCESSIBILITY; DIGITAL INEQUITY; E-GOVERNMENT; IS POLICY; IS UTILIZATION; NOVICE USER; SOCIAL IMPACT; SYSTEM ACCEPTANCE;

COMPUTER SCIENCE; HOUSING; INFORMATION SERVICES; WEBSITES;

GOVERNMENT DATA PROCESSING;

EID: 78649355019     PISSN: 10401628     EISSN: 15337979     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4018/irmj.2010100102     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
2. Althoff, S. (2004, March 7). Point, Click, Elect Should Voting Be That Easy? Boston Globe, 26.
3. Australian Government. (n.d.). Mandatory Requirements. Retrieved December 1, 2008, from http://webpublishing.agimo.gov.au/Mandatory-Requirements
4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
5. Berry, W., & Feldman, S. (1985). Multiple regression in practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6. Borgida, E., Sullivan, J., Oxendine, A., Jackson, M., Riedel, E., & Gangl, A. (2002). Civic culture meets the digital divide: the role of community electronic networks. The Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 125-141. doi:10.1111/1540-4560.00252
7. Brookes, R. (2004, June). Slipping Through the Net? A Study of the Effectiveness of Current UK Policy Regarding Public Access to Information Communications Technology. In Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on E-Government, Dublin, Ireland (pp. 91-98).
8. Bu, D. (2005, August 15-17). The Application Study on Chinese e-Government Construction. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on E-Commerce, Xi'an, China.
9. Carter, L. (2008). E-government diffusion: a comparison of adoption constructs. Transforming Government: People Process and Policy, 2(3), 147-161.
10. Carter, L., & Belanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e-government services: citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 5-25. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2005.00183.x (Pubitemid 40163171)
11. Carter, L., & Weerakkody, V. (2008). E-government adoption: A cultural comparison. Information Systems Frontiers, 10(4), 473-482. doi:10.1007/s10796-008-9103-6
12. Chang, I. C., Li, Y. C., Hung, W. F., & Hwang, H. G. (2005). An empirical study on the impact of quality antecedents on tax payers' acceptance of Internet tax-filing systems. Government Information Quarterly, 22(3), 389-410. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2005.05.002 (Pubitemid 41478699)
13. Charbaji, A., & Mikdashi, T. (2003). A Path Analytic Study of the Attitude Toward E-Government in Lebanon. Corporate Governance, 3(1), 76-82. doi:10.1108/14720700310459872
14. Clements v. City of Chester. (1990, June 28). 1990 WL 92523, E.D.Pa.
15. Council of the City of Chester. (1994). Chester City Vision 2000, Comprehensive Plan & Economic Development Strategy.
16. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1002. doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
17. Deng, X., Doll, W. J., Hendrickson, A. R., & Scazzero, J. A. (2005). A Multi-group analysis of structural invariance: an illustration using the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 42(5), 745-759. doi:10.1016/j.im.2004.08.001 (Pubitemid 40655118)
18. Dimitrova, D. V., & Chen, Y. (2006). Profiling the adopters of e-government information and services: the influence of psychological characteristics, civic mindedness, and information channels. Social Science Computer Review, 24(2), 172-188. doi:10.1177/0894439305281517 (Pubitemid 43536532)
19. Dooley, D. (2001). Social Research Methods. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
20. Dugdale, A., Daly, A., Papandrea, F., & Maley, M. (2005). Accessing e-government: challenges for citizens and organizations. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 71, 109-118. doi:10.1177/0020852305051687 (Pubitemid 40595134)
21. Fox, J. (1997). Applied Regression Analysis, Linear Models, and Related Models. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. Hansen, J. A. (2008). A Comparison of Parametric and Nonparametric Techniques Used to Estimate School District Production Functions: Analysis of Model Response to Change in Sample Size and Multicollinearity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University
23. Hasson, J. (2002, December 16). E-Gov Act signed into law. Federal Computer Week. Retrieved November 10, 2009, from http://www.fcw.com/fcw/ articles/2002/1216/web-egov-12-17-02.asp
24. Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T., & Schlosser, A. (2000). The evolution of the digital divide: how gaps in internet access may impact electronic commerce. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(5). Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol5/issue3/hoffman.html.
25. Holmes, T. E. (2002, April). Crossing the Digital Divide. Black Enterprise, 51.
26. Hsieh, J. J. P., Rai, A., & Keil, M. (2008). Understanding Digital Inequality: Comparing Continued Use Behavioral Models of the Socio-Economically Advantaged and Disadvantaged. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 32(1), 97-126.
27. Huang, W., D'Ambra, J., & Bhalla, V. (2002). An empirical investigation of the adoption of egovernment in Australian citizens: some unexpected research findings. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 43(1), 15.
28. I. C. T. Results (2008, August 11). Citizen-inspired e-government for 'thin-skinned' cities. Retrieved November 10, 2009, from http://cordis.europa. eu/ictresults/index.cfm?section=news&tpl=article&BrowsingType= Features&ID=89957
29. Jung, J. Y., Qiu, J. L., & Kim, Y.-C. (2001). Internet Connectedness and Inequality: Beyond the 'Divide'. Communication Research, 28(4), 507-525. doi:10.1177/009365001028004006
30. Karahanna, Agarwal, & Angst. (2006). Reconceptualizing compatibility beliefs in technology acceptance research. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 30(4), 781-804.
31. Ke, W., & Wei, K. K. (2004). Successful e-Government in Singapore. Communications of the ACM, 47(6), 95-99. doi:10.1145/990680.990687
32. Kennedy, P. (2003). A Guide to Econometrics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. King, D., & Brown, S. (2009). Emerging Trends, 2.0, and Libraries. The Serials Librarian, 56(1-4), 32. doi:10.1080/03615260802672452
34. King, W. R., & He, J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43, 740-755. doi:10.1016/j.im.2006.05.003 (Pubitemid 44287241)
35. Kretzmann, J., & McKnight, J. P. (1993). Building Communities from the Inside Out. Chicago: ACTA Publications.
36. Lamb, J. (2004, March 24). Epublic: Access: A personal map of cyberspace. The Guardian, 9.
37. Lau, E. (2003, November 5) Challenges For EGovernment Development. In Proceedings of the 5th Global Forum on Reinventing Government, Mexico City, Mexico.
38. Lee, C. B. P., & Lei, U. L. E. (2007). Adoption of egovernment services in Macao. In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series 232, Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Theory and practice of electronic governance, Macao, China.
39. Lee, J., & Rao, H. R. (2008). Complexity of compliance tasks and user acceptance of G2C online compliance services. In Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Digital Government Research (pp. 363-364).
40. Lenhart, A. (2002, October 14). Barriers to Internet Access: From the Non-user and New User Perspective. In Proceedings of the Association of Internet Researchers Conference 3.0, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
41. Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 171-191. doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.173
42. Mellor, N. (2006). E-citizen; Developing researchbased marketing communications to increase awareness and take-up of local authority e-channels. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 58(5), 436-446.
43. Novak, T., & Hoffman, D. (2000). Bridging the Digital Divide: The Internet of Race on Computer Access and Internet Use. Retrieved November 10, 2009, from http://elab.vanderbilt.edu/research/papers/html/manuscripts/race/ science.html
44. NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (2002). A nation online: how Americans are expanding their use of the internet. Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce.
45. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
46. OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2001). Understanding the Digital Divide. Retrieved November 10, 2009, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/38/57/1888451.pdf
47. Oh, S., Ahn, J., & Kim, B. (2003). Adoption of broadband internet in Korea: the role of experience in building attitudes. Journal of Information Technology, 18(4), 267-280. doi:10.1080/0268396032000150807 (Pubitemid 38079932)
48. Ostberg, O. (2003, December 18). A Swedish view on mobile government. In Proceedings of International Symposium on E- & M-Government, Seoul, Korea.
49. Phang, C. W., Sutanto, J., Kankanhalli, A., Li, Y., Tan, B. C. Y., & Teo, H. (2006). Senior citizens' acceptance of information systems: a study in the context of e-government services. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(4), 555-569. doi:10.1109/TEM.2006.883710 (Pubitemid 44680693)
50. Pilling, D., & Boeltzig, H. (2007, May 20-23). Moving Toward E-Government - Effective Strategies for Increasing Access and Use of the Internet Among Non-Internet Users in the U.S. and U.K. In Proceedings of the 8th annual international conference on Digital government research: bridging disciplines & domains, Philadelphia.
51. Porter, C. E., & Donthu, N. (2006). Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine internet usage: the role of perceived access barriers and demographics. Journal of Business Research, 59, 999-1007. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.06.003 (Pubitemid 44464190)
52. PR Newswire, P. R. (2000, September12). Congress Seeks to Bridge Gap between Tech Haves and Have Nots; Legislation Aimed at Inner Cities, Rural America, 13 New Co-Sponsors Join Bills Bridging Digital Divide Possible.
53. Prattipati, S. N. (2003). Adoption of e-Governance: Differences between countries in the use of online government services. Journal of American Academy of Business, 3(1/2), 386.
54. Rimmer, J. (2003, December 10-12). Australian Country Statement. Paper presented at the World Summit on the Information Society, Geneva, Switzerland.
55. Rodríguez-Ardura, I., Meseguer-Artola, A., & Vilaseca-Requena, J. (2008). Factors Influencing the Evolution of Electronic Commerce: An Empirical Analysis in a Developed Market Economy.Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 3(2), 18-29. doi:10.4067/S0718- 18762008000100003
56. Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of innovations (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
57. Rossel, P., & Finger, M. (2007). Conceptualizing e-Governance. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Theory and practice of electronic governance, ACM International Conference Proceeding Series 232, Macao, China (pp. 399-407).
58. Saeed, K., & Abdinnour-HeIm, S. (2008). Examining the effects of information system characteristics and perceived usefulness on post adoption usage of information systems. Information & Management, 45(6), 376-386. doi:10.1016/j.im.2008.06.002
59. Sahu, G. P., & Gupta, M. P. (2007). Users' Acceptance of E-Government: A Study of Indian Central Excise. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 3(3), 1-21.
60. Schaupp, L. C., & Carter, L. (2005). E-voting: from apathy to adoption. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 18(5/6), 586. doi:10.1108/17410390510624025 (Pubitemid 41374255)
61. Schwarz, A., & Chin, W. (2007). Looking Forward: Toward an Understanding of the Nature and Definition of IT Acceptance. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 232-243.
62. Shelley, M. C. II, Le, T., & Shulman, S. W. (2006). Lost in cyberspace: barriers to bridging the digital divide in e-politics. International Journal of Internet and Enterprise Management, 4(3), 228-243. doi:10.1504/IJIEM.2006.010916
63. Sipior, J. C., & Ward, B. T. (2005, November). Bridging the Digital Divide for e-Government Inclusion: A United States Case Study. Electronic. Journal of E-Government, 3(3), 137-146.
64. Sipior, J. C., Ward, B. T., Volonino, L., & Marzec, J. Z. (2004, January). A Community Initiative that Diminished the Digital Divide. Communications of the AIS, 13(5), 29-56.
65. Symonds, M. (2000, June 24). Government and the Internet: Digital Democracy. The Economist.
66. Tan, C., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. T. (2008). Building citizen trust towards e-government services: do high quality websites matter? In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI (p. 217).
67. Thomas, J. C., & Streib, G. (2003). The New Face of Government: Citizen-Initiated Contacts in the Era of E-Government. Journal of Public Administration: Research and Theory, 13(1), 83-102. doi:10.1093/jpart/mug010
68. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 15(1), 124-143. doi:10.2307/249443
69. Thorndike, R. M. (1996). Measurement and Evaluation in Psychology and Education (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
70. Triandis, H. C. (1977). Interpersonal Behavior. Monterey, CA: Brooke/Cole.
71. Trimi, S., & Sheng, H. (2008, May). Emerging trends in M-government. Communications of the ACM, 51(5), 53-58. doi:10.1145/1342327.1342338 (Pubitemid 351690937)
72. Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., Peters, O., & Ebbers, W. (2008). Explaining the acceptance and use of government internet services: a multivariate analysis of 2006 survey data in The Netherlands. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 379-399. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2007.09.006
73. Venkatesh, V., & Brown, S. A. (2001). A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: adoption determinants and emerging challenges. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 25(1), 71-102. doi:10.2307/3250959
74. Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don't men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 24(1), 115-139. doi:10.2307/3250981
75. Wang, Y. S. (2003). The adoption of electronic tax filing systems: an empirical study. Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 333-352. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2003.08.005 (Pubitemid 37527833)
76. Wangpipatwong, S., Chutimaskul, W., & Papasratorn, B. (2008). Understanding citizen's continuance intention to use e-government website: a composite view of technology acceptance model and computer self-efficacy. Electronic . Journal of E-Government, 6(1), 55-64.
77. Wilhelm, A. G., & Thierer, A. D. (2000, September 4). Should Americans Be Concerned about the Digital Divide. Insight on the News, 16(33).
78. Williams, R. (2005). Multicollinearity. Retrieved November 10, 2009 from http://www.nd.edu/~rwilliam/stats2/l11.pdf
79. Worsham, J. B. L. (2000). Disparate Impact Lawsuits Under Title VI, Section 602: Can A Legal Tool Build Environmental Justice? Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review. Boston College. Law School, 27(631).