Predicting Public Bicycle Adoption Using the Technology Acceptance Model
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Background
3. Conceptual Development and Hypotheses
3.1. TAM Relationships
H1: Perceived quality will be positively associated with public bicycle sharing systems adoption intention.
H2: Perceived convenience will be positively associated with public bicycle sharing systems adoption intention.
3.2. The Role of Perceived Value
H3: Perceived quality will be positively associated with perceived value.
H4: Perceived convenience will be positively associated with perceived value.
H5a: Perceived value will be positively associated with public bicycle sharing systems adoption intention.
H5b: Perceived value partially mediates the relationship between perceived quality and public bicycle sharing systems adoption intention.H5c: Perceived value partially mediates the relationship between perceived convenience and public bicycle sharing systems adoption intention.
4. Method
4.1. Measures
4.2. Participants
Demographic Characteristic | Frequency | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Female | 215 | 51.07% |
Male | 206 | 48.93% | |
Age | 18–25 | 257 | 61.05% |
26–35 | 117 | 27.79% | |
36–45 | 24 | 5.70% | |
46–55 | 12 | 2.85% | |
56–65 | 6 | 1.43% | |
66+ | 5 | 1.19% | |
Income (Yuen) | <50,000 | 128 | 30.40% |
50,000–100,000 | 154 | 36.58% | |
100,001–200,000 | 107 | 25.42% | |
200,001–500,000 | 26 | 6.18% | |
>500,000 | 6 | 1.43% | |
Education | High school | 46 | 10.93% |
Bachelor’s degree | 297 | 70.55% | |
Master’s degree | 70 | 16.63% | |
Doctor’s degree | 8 | 1.90% | |
Area | Urban | 381 | 90.50% |
Suburban | 28 | 6.65% | |
Rural | 12 | 2.85% |
5. Analysis and Results
5.1. Preliminary Analysis
Items | Mean | SD | Standardized Loading | z-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|
Adoption Intention 1 | 4.50 | 2.000 | 0.775 | - |
Adoption Intention 2 | 5.16 | 1.797 | 0.835 | 13.363 |
Perceived Quality 1 | 4.41 | 1.711 | 0.533 | - |
Perceived Quality 2 | 4.16 | 1.599 | 0.881 | 10.197 |
Perceived Quality 3 | 3.97 | 1.553 | 0.797 | 10.390 |
Perceived Convenience 1 | 5.82 | 1.460 | 0.756 | - |
Perceived Convenience 2 | 5.81 | 1.543 | 0.789 | 19.576 |
Perceived Convenience 3 | 5.89 | 1.471 | 0.788 | 16.451 |
Perceived Convenience 4 | 5.69 | 1.486 | 0.778 | 16.158 |
Perceived Convenience 5 | 5.86 | 1.442 | 0.844 | 17.673 |
Perceived Convenience 6 | 5.81 | 1.529 | 0.694 | 14.214 |
Perceived Convenience 7 | 5.81 | 1.472 | 0.789 | 16.427 |
Perceived Value 1 | 5.07 | 1.655 | 0.705 | - |
Perceived Value 2 | 5.40 | 1.616 | 0.859 | 11.755 |
Factor | Mean | SD | CA | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Perceived Convenience | 5.81 | 1.22 | 0.917 | 0.780 | |||
2. Perceived Quality | 4.18 | 1.34 | 0.766 | 0.206 | 0.752 | ||
3. Adoption Intention | 4.83 | 1.73 | 0.789 | 0.497 | 0.347 | 0.812 | |
4. Perceived Value | 5.24 | 1.47 | 0.754 | 0.496 | 0.335 | 0.492 | 0.786 |
5.2. Model Fit
Fit Indices | Recommended Value | Result Value |
---|---|---|
χ2 | p > 0.05 | 206.346 (p < 0.001) |
d.f. | - | 119 |
Normed χ2 | ≤3.0 | 1.734 |
GFI = | ≥0.9 | 0.948 |
CFI = | ≥0.9 | 0.972 |
SRMR = | ≤0.1 | 0.055 |
RMSEA = | ≤0.08 | 0.042 [0.032, 0.051] |
5.3. Findings
Effect | S.E. | C.R. | p-Value | 0.95 LCL | 0.95 UCL | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AI ← PQ | 0.352 | 0.096 | 3.681 | <0.001 | - | - |
AI ← PC | 0.558 | 0.096 | 5.790 | <0.001 | - | - |
PV ← PQ | 0.353 | 0.074 | 4.786 | <0.001 | - | - |
PV ← PC | 0.594 | 0.068 | 8.706 | <0.001 | - | - |
AI ← PV | 0.347 | 0.100 | 3.466 | <0.001 | - | - |
AI ← PV ← PQ | 0.123 | 0.066 | - | 0.003 | 0.034 | 0.289 |
AI ← PV ← PC | 0.206 | 0.087 | - | 0.004 | 0.069 | 0.408 |
6. Discussion and Conclusions
6.1. Theoretical Implications and Future Research
6.2. Practical Implications
6.3. Limitations
6.4. Concluding Remarks
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix
Adoption Intention (AI) |
|
|
Perceived Quality (PQ) |
|
|
|
Perceived Convenience (PC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perceived Value (PV) |
|
|
References
- Parkes, S.D.; Marsden, G.; Shaheen, S.A.; Cohen, A.P. Understanding the diffusion of public bikesharing systems: Evidence from Europe and North America. J. Transp. Geogr. 2013, 31, 94–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shaheen, S.A.; Zhang, H.; Martin, E.; Guzman, S. China’s Hangzhou public bicycle: Understanding early adoption and behavioral response to bikesharing. Transp. Res. Rec. 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.H.; Zhang, J.; Duan, Z.; Bryde, D. Sustainable bike-sharing systems: Characteristics and commonalities across cases in urban China. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 97, 124–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fishman, E.; Washington, S.; Haworth, N. Bike share: A synthesis of the literature. Transp. Rev. 2013, 33, 148–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fishman, E.; Washington, S.; Haworth, N. Barriers and facilitators to public bicycle scheme use: A qualitative approach. Transp. Res. Part F 2012, 15, 686–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhao, J.; Deng, W.; Song, Y. Ridership and effectiveness of bike-sharing: The effects of urban features and system characteristics on daily use and turnover rate of public bikes in China. Transp. Policy 2014, 35, 253–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herlihy, D.V. Bicycle: History; Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989, 13, 319–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raidl, B.R.; Hu, B.; Rainer-Harbach, M.; Papazek, P. Balancing Bicycle Sharing Systems: Improving a VNS by Efficiently Determining Optimal Loading Operations; Hybrid Metaheuristics Workshop: Naples, Italy, 2013; pp. 130–143. [Google Scholar]
- Midgley, P. The role of smart bike-sharing systems in urban mobility. Journeys 2009, 2, 23–31. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, J.R.; Yang, T.H. Strategic design of public bicycle sharing systems wiht service level contstraints. Transp. Res. Part E 2011, 47, 284–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bordagaray, M.; Ibeas, A.; Dell’Olio, L. Modeling user perception of public bicycle services. Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 54, 1308–1316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fuller, D.; Gauvin, L.; Kestens, Y.; Daniel, M.; Fournier, M.; Morency, P.; Drouin, L. Use of a new public bicycle share probram in Montreal, Canada. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2011, 41, 80–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fuller, D.; Gauvin, L.; Kestens, Y.; Daniel, M.; Fournier, M.; Morency, P.; Drouin, L. Impact evaluation of a public bicycle share program on cycling: A case example of Bixi in Montreal, Quebec. Am. J. Public Health 2013, 103, 85–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bechand-Marleau, J.; Lee, B.H.Y.; El-Geneidy, A.M. Better understanding of factors influencing likelihood of using shared bicycle systems and frequency of use. J. Transp. Res. Board 2012, 2314, 66–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sherwood, K.; Murphy, J. Expanding a municipal bike share system into an urban national park through community partnerships: The city of San Antonio and Antonio missions national historical park. In Proceedings of the 93rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, USA, 12–16 January 2014.
- Lathia, N.; Ahmed, S.; Capra, L. Measuring the impact of opening the London shared bicycle scheme to casual users. Transp. Res. Part C 2012, 22, 88–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xinhua Net. Why the Public Bicycle System is Not Popular. Available online: http://news.xinhuanet.com/local/2014-04/24/c_1110398169.htm (accessed on 24 April 2015). (In Chinese)
- Xinhua Net. The Sharp Decline of Bicycling in Beijing. Available online: http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2014-07/23/c_126787679.htm (accessed on 23 July 2015). (In Chinese)
- Beijing Municipal Government. The Plan of Construcing Harmonious, Advanced and Green Transportation (2009–2015). Available online: http://zhengwu.beijing.gov.cn/ghxx/qtgh/t1066279.htm (accessed on 1 October 2015). (In Chinese)
- Beijing Municipal Government. The Opinion of Relieving Urban Transport Jam and Promoting the Development of Urban Transport. Available online: http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2010-12/24/content_1771925.htm (accessed on 1 October 2015). (In Chinese)
- Beijing Municipal Commission of Transport. Green Travelling in Beijing. Available online: http://shipin.beijing.gov.cn/index.php?option=com_content&id=5949 (accessed on 2 September 2014). (In Chinese)
- Beijing Municipal Commission of Transport. Transportation Admistration of Beijing Municipal Commission of Transport Enhances the Dispatch and Building of Public Bicycle Stations and Improves the Rate of Usage. Available online: http://www.bjjtw.gov.cn/bjggzxc/Home_index_1_1.html (accessed on 1 October 2015). (In Chinese)
- Fishbein, M.; Ajzen, I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
- Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandura, A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Venkatesh, V.; Davis, F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Manag. Sci. 2000, 45, 186–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V.; Bala, H. Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decis. Sci. 2008, 39, 273–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Autry, C.W.; Grawe, S.J.; Daugherty, P.; Richey, R.G., Jr. The effects of technological turbulence and breadth on supply chain technology acceptance and adoption. J. Oper. Manag. 2010, 28, 522–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hazen, B.T.; Wu, Y.; Sankar, C.S. Factors that influence dissemination in engineering education. IEEE Trans. Educ. 2012, 55, 384–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V.; Morris, M.G.; Davis, G.B.; Davis, F.D. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003, 27, 427–478. [Google Scholar]
- Venkatesh, V.; Thong, J.Y.L.; Xu, X. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Q. 2012, 36, 157–178. [Google Scholar]
- Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, F.D.; Bagozzi, R.P.; Warshaw, P.R. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Manag. Sci. 1989, 35, 982–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schepers, J.; Wetzels, M. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Inf. Manag. 2007, 44, 90–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeithaml, V.A. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. J. Mark. 1988, 52, 2–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berry, L.L.; Seiders, K.; Grewal, D. Understanding service convenience. J. Mark. 2002, 66, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cronin, J.J., Jr.; Brady, M.K.; Hult, G.T.M. Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. J. Retail. 2000, 76, 193–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lapierre, J. Customer-perceived value in industrial contexts. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 2000, 15, 122–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dodds, W.B.; Monroe, K.B.; Grewal, D. Effect of price, brand name, and store name on buyer’s perception of product quality. J. Mark. Res. 1991, 28, 307–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eboli, L.; Mazzula, G. How to capture the passengers’ point of view on a transit service through rating and choice options. Transp. Rev. 2010, 30, 435–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanchez-Fernandez, R.; Iniesta-Bonillo, M.A. The concept of perceived value: A systematic review of the research. Mark. Theory 2007, 7, 427–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolton, R.N.; Drew, J.H. A multistage model of customers’ assessments of service quality and value. J. Consum. Res. 1991, 17, 375–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, T.Z.; Wildt, A.R. Price, product information, and purchase intention: An empirical study. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1994, 22, 16–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Z.; Dubinsky, A.J. A conceptual model of perceived customer value in e-commerce: A preliminary investigation. Psychol. Mark. 2003, 20, 323–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turel, O.; Serenko, A.; Bontis, N. User acceptance of wireless short messaging services: Deconstructing perceived value. Inf. Manag. 2007, 44, 63–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sweeney, J.C.; Soutar, G.N. Customer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale. J. Retail. 2001, 77, 203–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hazen, B.T.; Cegielski, C.G.; Hanna, J.B. Diffusion of green supply chain management: Examining perceived quality of green reverse logistics. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2011, 22, 373–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogilvie, F.; Goodman, A. Inequities in usage of a public bicycle sharing scheme: Socio-demographic predictors of uptake and usage of the London (UK) cycle hire scheme. Prev. Med. 2012, 55, 40–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Virgina Tech. Capital Bikeshare Study: A Closer Look at Casual Users and Operation; Virgina Tech: Arlington, VA, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Lewis, T. Has London’s cycle hire scheme been a capital idea? Gaurdian, 10 July 2011. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- LDA Consulting. Capital Bikeshare 2011 Member Survey Report; LDA Consulting: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Sharma, S. Applied Multivariate Techniques; John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Segars, A.H. Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: A paradigm and illustration within the context of information systems research. Omega 1997, 25, 107–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.-Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Preacher, K.J.; Coffman, D.L. Computing Power and Minimum Sample Size for RMSEA (Computer Software). 2006. Available online: http://quantpsy.Org/ (accessed on 25 February 2015).
- Saldanha, T.J.V.; Melville, N.P.; Ramirez, R.; Richardson, V.J. Information systems for collaborating versus transacting: Impact on manufacturing plant performance in the presence of demand volitility. J. Oper. Manag. 2013, 31, 313–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, X.; Lynch, J.G., Jr.; Chen, Q. Reconsidering baron and kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. J. Consum. Res. 2010, 37, 197–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shrout, P.E.; Bolger, N. Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychol. Methods 2002, 7, 422–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, H.; Lu, Y.; Gupta, S.; Zhao, L.; Chen, A.; Huang, H. Understanding the antecedents of customer loyalty in the Chinese mobile service industry: A push-pull-mooring framework. Int. J. Mob. Commun. 2014, 12, 551–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2015 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hazen, B.T.; Overstreet, R.E.; Wang, Y. Predicting Public Bicycle Adoption Using the Technology Acceptance Model. Sustainability 2015, 7, 14558-14573. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71114558
Hazen BT, Overstreet RE, Wang Y. Predicting Public Bicycle Adoption Using the Technology Acceptance Model. Sustainability. 2015; 7(11):14558-14573. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71114558
Chicago/Turabian StyleHazen, Benjamin T., Robert E. Overstreet, and Yacan Wang. 2015. "Predicting Public Bicycle Adoption Using the Technology Acceptance Model" Sustainability 7, no. 11: 14558-14573. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71114558
APA StyleHazen, B. T., Overstreet, R. E., & Wang, Y. (2015). Predicting Public Bicycle Adoption Using the Technology Acceptance Model. Sustainability, 7(11), 14558-14573. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71114558