Factors Affecting the Adoption of eGovernance by

Teachers in Greece
Ioannis Karavasilis1, Kostas Zafiropoulos1 and Vasiliki Vrana2
1
University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece
2
Technological Education Institute of Serres, Greece
karavasil@sch.gr
kz@uom.gr
vrana@teiser.gr
Abstract: One of the primary objectives of governments currently, is to improve the services rendered to citizens
and to this end, governments invest in eGovernance services. However citizens’ are not fully engaged in
available eGovernance services. Moreover Greece falls back in adoption of eGovernance with regards to other
EU countries. The degree to which governments invest in electronic services is based on their understanding of
what citizens need and without taking into consideration the factors that increase the willingness of citizens to
adopt eGovernment services. The purpose of this paper is to investigate factors influencing eGovernance
acceptance in the field of education as teachers represent a percentage of 40.69% of the permanent civil
servants. The Greek educational system is centralized and is characterized by intense bureaucracy, strict
hierarchical structures, extensive legislation and formalism. Previous studies have shown that bureaucracy in an
organization strongly affects adoption of eGovernance. The study analyzes the impact of trust and risk
perceptions and user satisfaction on the intention of teachers to continue using an educational eGovernance
website. Trust in eGovernance websites consists of disposition to trust, trust to Internet and trust in government.
Primary and secondary education teachers responded to an online survey resulting to 230 questionnaires.
LISREL is used to analyze the data. Model estimation is done using the maximum likelihood approach, with the
item covariance matrix used as input. A SEM validation of the proposed model reveals that that trust, perceived
risk and satisfaction are key research constructs influencing directly or indirectly intention to continue using
eGovernance websites. Although a limited number of factors that influence eGovernance websites adoption by
teachers were identified, the study could help policy makers in the public sector to develop and implement new
eGovernance plans.

Keywords: eGovernance adoption, continuance intention, structural equation modeling, LISREL, education,
trust, risk, satisfaction, Greece

1. Introduction
Nowadays, governments are moving forward in eGovernment development around the world
(Panayis et al., 2008). Greece falls behind the other EU states (The Economist Intelligence Unit,
2009) and in global terms the United Nations (2008) eGovernment readiness report (2008) ranked
Greece’s eGovernment project as number 44 worldwide with an eGovernment readiness index
0.5718. The eGovernment readiness index is a composite index comprising the web measure index,
the telecommunication infrastructure index and the human capital index. It should also be noted that
Greece dropped from the 35th position in 2005, to the 44th in 2008. Governments’ investment in
electronic services is based on their understanding of what citizens’ need, without measuring what
increases their willingness to adopt eGovernment services. Trust issues (Belanger and Carter, 2008;
Carter and Weerakkody, 2008; Colesca, 2009) risk issues (Belanger and Carter, 2008) and “digital
divide’’ (Mofleh and Wanous, 2008) can impact on adoption eGovernment services. Therefore,
“governments must first understand variables that influence citizens’ adoption of eGovernment in
order to take them into account when delivering services online” (Mofleh and Wanous, 2008 p.1).

Given the above context and taking into consideration that a percentage of 40.69% of permanent civil
servants and 16.38% of all civil servants in Greece (Ministry of Interior, http://www.ypes.gr) are
teachers, it is interesting to investigate factors that affect adoption of educational eGovernance
websites by them. The term “educational eGovernance websites” refers to the webpages of Greek
School Network, the Ministry of Education, Lifelong Learning and Religious affairs and websites of
Regional and Local Primary and Secondary Education Administrations.

This study uses an online survey to record teachers; opinions and attitudes. Colesca (2009, p32)
wrote: “nonusers haven’t favorable attitudes towards the use of electronic services in relation with the
governmental agencies”. Therefore, the research does not investigate people who are electronically
incapable of accessing services and takes into consideration the intention to continue using

221
 Ioannis Karavasilis et al.

eGovernance websites. It analyzes the data using a refinement procedure, controlling reliability and
validity, and validates the proposed model using Structural Equation Modeling.
2. Trust and risk in eGovernance
Trust is central to daily interactions, transactions, and practices and is considered as a crucial enabler
in eGovernance adoption (Al-adawi, 2005; Belanger and Carter, 2008; Colesca, 2009). Trust is
difficult to observe and measure directly. Recent studies consider trust as dynamic concept with
different developmental stages each with specific characteristics rather than a static phenomenon.
This dynamic view of trust “has led to the development of different trust models that identify different
relationships and actors” (Tassabehji and Elliman, 2006 p.3).

A well accepted trust model for citizens’ trust leading to adoption and use of eGovernment systems
has two dimensions: trust in government and trust to the Internet (Belanger and Carter, 2008;
Colesca, 2009; Warkentin et al, 2002). Trust in government has been recognized as an important
determinant of public action and cooperation by many researchers and Welch et al. (2005, p. 376)
mentioned “citizen trust in government is built upon expectations conditioned by some type of social
context or interaction”.Trust to the internet is trust in the security measures, safety nets and
performance structures of this electronic channel (Belanger and Carter, 2008). Teo et al. (2008)
examined the role of trust in eGovernment success using the updated DeLone and McLean (1992) IS
success model. In their model, there are two dimensions of citizen’s trusting beliefs toward an
eGovernment website—trust in government and trust in technology.

Figure 1: Teo’s et al. (2008) research model

Disposition to trust is defined as “one’s general propensity to trust others” (Belanger and Carter, 2008
p. 167). McKnight et al., (1998) highlighted that disposition is especially important in the initial phases
of a relationship and as eGovernment is still in its infancy even though it is growing in popularity
(Belanger and Carter, 2008) it is crucial to take it into consideration.

Figure 2: Belanger and Carter’s (2008) research model

Perceived risk is defined as “the citizen’s subjective expectation of suffering a loss in pursuit of a
desired outcome” (Warkentin et al., 2002, p. 160) and gives the trust dilemma its basic character (Al-
adawi et al., 2005). Trust is needed only when uncertain situations exist (Johnson-George and Swap,

222
 Ioannis Karavasilis et al.

1982). According to Pavlou (2003), in eCommerce perceived risk comprise behavioral and
environmental uncertainty. Behavioral uncertainty arises because online service providers have the
chance to behave in an opportunistic manner by taking advantage of the impersonal nature of the
electronic environment. Environmental uncertainty exists mainly because of the unpredictable nature
of the Internet. Belanger and Carter (2008) claimed that the same happens for eGovernment.
Previous research has discussed the role of trust in reducing the risk as well the role of perceived risk
in reducing users’ intentions to exchange information and complete transactions (Pavlou, 2003;
Warkentin et al., 2002). “Different types of risks and uncertainties prevail in online transactions”
mentioned Teo et al. (2008). For these reasons Al-adawi et al., (2005) claimed that perceived risk
must be considered to explain citizens’ intention to use eGovernance websites.
3. Satisfaction
Satisfaction is “a subjective evaluation of the various consequences evaluated on a pleasant–
unpleasant continuum” (Seddon, p. 246) and is related to system use. Sang and Lee (2009) proposed
that the same relationship holds true in the context of eGovernance and low level of user satisfaction
may cause users to abandon it. Welch et al. (2005) investigated the relation among eGovernance
websites use, satisfaction and trust in government and found that eGovernance websites use is
positively associated with eGovernment satisfaction and website satisfaction and that eGovernment
satisfaction is positively associated with trust in government. Colesca and Dobrica (2008) investigated
the factors that facilitate the adoption of eGovernance and they found that the citizen’s higher
perception of usefulness, ease of use, quality and trust of eGovernment services directly enhanced
their satisfaction and implicitly the level of eGovernance adoption.

Figure 3: Colesca and Dobrica’s (2008) research model

Positive or negative perceptions of users toward e governance websites may influence the users’
intention for continued usage of the website as a means for interacting with the government agencies
(Teo et al., 2008). Consequently, satisfaction is taken into consideration in the model.
4. Methodology
An empirical research study was conducted using an online survey. Internet users were chosen to be
surveyed. The reason is that lack of eGovernment usage focus primarily on the ‘‘digital divide’’
(Mofleh and Wanous, 2008). Colesca (2009, p32) wrote: “nonusers haven’t favorable attitudes
towards the use of electronic services in relation with the governmental agencies”. Therefore, the
research does not investigate people who are electronically incapable of accessing services. A link to
the main webpage of the Greek School Network (http://www.sch.gr) notified users of the website
about the online questionnaire website. Users willing to participate visited a tailor made web site and
responded to the questionnaire. The data were recorded to a database. The Greek School Network
offers e-mail accounts (username@sch.gr form) and fully personalized access to education staff. In
order to ensure that the responder was a teacher, the e-mail of the responder was recorded. From all
questionnaires that were received only those of username@sch.gr form were admitted. Finally, 230

223
 Ioannis Karavasilis et al.

completed and usable questionnaires were received. The questionnaire used in this study was
adopted from previous studies. Five point Likert scales are used ranging from strongly disagree to
strongly agree. The questionnaire consists of eight parts: 1) Disposition to trust, 2) Trust in
government. 3) Trust to internet, 4) Trust in eGovernance websites, 5) Perceived Risk, 6) Satisfaction,
7) Continuance Intention. A pilot study using an extended questionnaire containing all the scales
proposed in the literature review was conducted by administering the questionnaire to 50 primary and
secondary education teachers. Finally, for each construct the scale presenting the largest Cronbach’s
alpha was decided to be included in the final questionnaire, since Cronbach’s alpha provides the
lower-bound estimate for the Composite Score Reliability, which is eventually used in the analysis of
the resulting questionnaire (Table 1).
Table 1: Items used

Disposition to trust
adopted from Belanger and Carter (2008)
1 I generally do not trust other people
2 I generally have faith in humanity
3 I feel that people are generally reliable
4 I generally trust other people unless they give me reason not to
Trust in government
adopted from Teo et al. (2009). Construct also tested in pilot study: Colesca and Dobrica (2008)
1 I feel that government acts in citizen’s best interest
2 I feel fine interacting with the government since government generally fulfils its duties efficiently
3 I always feel confident that I can rely on government to do their part when I interact with them
4 I am comfortable relying on the government to meet their obligations
Trust to the internet
adopted from Teo et al. (2009). Constructs also tested in pilot study: Colesca and Dobrica’s (2008),
Riemenschneider’s et al. (2009)
1 The Web has enough safeguards to make me feel comfortable using it to transact personal business.
2 I feel assured that legal and technological structures adequately protect me from problems on the Web.
3 I feel confident that encryption and other technological advances on the Web make it safe for me to do
business there.
4 In general. the Web is now a robust and safe environment in which to transact business.
Trust in e-governance websites
adopted from Teo et al. (2009). Constructs also tested in pilot study: Colesca and Dobrica’s (2008),
Sang’s et al.(2009).
1 e-government Web sites are trustworthy
2 e-government Web sites are seem to be honest and truthful to me
3 e-government Web sites can be trusted
Risk
adopted from Belanger and Carter (2008)
1 The decision of whether to use a state e-government service is risky
2 In general, I believe using state government services over the Internet is risky
Satisfaction
adapted from Colesca and Dobrica’s (2008). Construct also tested in the pilot study: Teo et al. (2009)
1 I am satisfied using e-government websites
2 I am satisfied with the content of e-government websites
3 I am satisfied with the interface of e-government websites
4 I am satisfied with the speed of e-government websites
5 I am satisfied with the security of e-government websites
6 I am satisfied with the quality of e-government services offered on websites
7 e-government websites provide relevant information
8 e-government websites provide easy-to-understand information
9 e-government websites provide accurate information
10 e-government websites provide reliable information
Continuance Intention
adopted from Teo et al. (2009) Construct also tested in the pilot study: Wangpipatwong et al. (2008)
1 In the future, I would not hesitate to use e-Government websites.
2 In the future, I will consider e-Government websites to be my first choice to do business with the
government.
3 In the future, I intend to increase my use of e-Government websites.
The following hypotheses are tested (Figure 4):
H1. Disposition to trust has a direct effect on trust to government

224
 Ioannis Karavasilis et al.

H2. Disposition to trust has a direct effect on Trust to the internet.

H3. Trust in government has an effect on Trust in government websites.
H4. Trust to the internet has a positive effect on trust in government websites.
H5. Trust in government has a direct effect on perceived risk.
H6. Trust to the internet has an effect on perceived risk.
H7. Trust in government websites has a direct effect on perceived risk.
H8. Trust in government websites has a direct effect on satisfaction.
H9. Perceived risk has an effect on satisfaction.
H10. Trust in government has an effect on continuance intention.
H11. Trust to the internet has an effect on continuance intention.
H12. Trust to government websites has a positive effect in continuance intention
H13. Perceived risk has a direct effect on continuance intention.
H14. Satisfaction has a direct effect on continuance intention.

Figure 4: The research model

5. Findings

5.1 Reliability and validity of the instrument

LISREL 8.8 was used to analyze the data using the maximum likelihood approach, with the item
covariance matrix used as input.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used for model refinement. Testing the measurement model
involves examining the convergent validity, discriminant validity, and internal consistency of the
constructs. Reliability and convergent validity of the measurements are estimated by the item factor
loadings, Composite Reliability, and Average Variance Extracted (Fornell and Larcker ,1981).

225
 Ioannis Karavasilis et al.

Convergent validity refers to the extent to which the items under each construct are actually
measuring the same construct. Two methods were applied to assess convergent validity. First, item
reliability was examined for each item, which suggested that the factor loading of each item on its
corresponding construct must be higher than 0.55 (Teo et al. 2009). All items had a loading above the
suggested threshold. Convergent validity was assessed by examining the average variance extracted
(AVE) for each construct. The AVE for a construct reflects the ratio of the construct’s variance to the
total variances among the items of the construct. The average extracted variances are all above the
recommended 0.50 level (Hair et al. 1998, Teo et al. 2009), Table 2.

Discriminant validity refers to the extent to which a given construct differs from other constructs. As all
items loaded more heavily on their corresponding constructs rather than on other constructs,
discriminant validity was satisfied. Further, the square roots of all AVEs were larger than correlations
among constructs, thereby satisfying discriminant validity. Table 3 shows that all the inter-construct
correlations are below 0.9. In addition to the above the estimated correlation between all construct
pairs is below the suggested cutoff of 0.9 and this implies distinctness in construct content or
discriminant validity (Gold et al. 2001, Teo et al. 2009).

As shown in Table 2, Composite Reliabilities are above the threshold of 0.7. Overall, the measures in
this study are reliable and valid.
Table 2: Composite Reliability (CR), and Average Variance Extracted (AVE)
Composite Reliability (CR)(>0.7) Average Variance Extracted (AVE) (>0.50)
Disposition to trust 0.772 0.568
Trust in government 0.904 0.703
Trust to the internet 0.809 0.653
Trust in eGovernance 0.939 0.837
websites
Perceived Risk 0.913 0.840
Satisfaction 0.932 0.534
Continuance Intention 0.863 0.680
Table 3: Inter-construct correlations
Disposition Trust in Trust to the Trust in Risk Satisfaction
to trust government internet government
Web site
Trust in -0.20
government
Trust to the -0.30 0.36
internet
Trust in -0.26 0.27 0.57
eGovernance
website
Risk 0.15 0.07 -0.37 -0.49
Satisfaction -0.04 0.42 0.42 0.53 -0.29
Continuance -0.11 0.18 0.42 0.54 -0.44 0.48
Intention

5.2 Model testing

The first step in model testing is to estimate the goodness-of-fit of the research model. Recommended
fits are suggested from previous studies (Bagozzi and Yi 1988, Hair et al. 1988): goodness-of-fit index
(GFI), Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI), normed fit index (NFI), non-normed fit index (NNFI),
comparative fit index (CFI), and the root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) as the indices
for evaluating the overall model fitness. The chi-square test provides a statistical test for the null
hypothesis that the model fits the data, but it is too sensitive to sample size differences, especially
where the sample sizes exceed 200 respondents (Fornell and Larcker 1981). Bagozzi and Yi (1988)
suggested a chi-square per degrees of freedom instead. All of the fit indexes indicate that the
structural model has a good fit (Table 4):

The second step in model estimation is to examine the path significance of each postulated
2
association in the research model and variance explained (R ) by each path. The standardized path
coefficients, and explained variances of the structure model are shown in Figure 5.

226
 Ioannis Karavasilis et al.

Hypotheses H1 and H2 are supported. Disposition to trust has a direct effect on trust to government
and trust to the internet but only to a moderate degree since R2 are low. However H3, stating that
Trust in government has an effect on Trust in government websites, is not supported. Trust to the
internet has a positive and significant effect ( =0.55, R2=0.32) on trust in government websites,
supporting in this way H4.
Table 4: Analysis of the goodness-of-fit of the overall model
Fit index Recommended value Research model
Chi-square/d.f. !3.0 2.42
GFI "0.80 0.82
AGFI "0.80 0.80
NFI "0.90 0.92
NNFI "0.90 0.95
RMSEA !0.08 0.079
CFI "0.90 0.95
Trust in government has a direct effect, =0.25, on perceived risk, thus H5 is supported. This finding
seems peculiar at a first glance since it states that those who trust the government appear to have
higher risk levels. A possible explanation would be that people, who trust governmental agencies,
actually trust the employees who work there. Thus people who declare that they trust the government
probably have high trust levels to the civil servants with whom they communicate and have good
interpersonal relations. By using eGovernment practices, those people, might be afraid that they will
lose this interpersonal relation with the civil servants, and this situation may increase perceived risk
for the citizens. Dashti et al.(2009, p.3) mentioned: “A key distinction between public servants working
in government and those working in eGovernment lies in their level of visibility and direct contact with
the public, which in turn influences how much the public trusts them”.

Further, H6 is supported. The direct effect of Trust to the internet on perceived risk is =-0.20 and the
indirect effect via trust in government is #=-0.2365. Thus H6 is satisfied. Trust in government websites
has a direct effect on perceived risk ( =-0.43), thus H7 is supported. H8. Trust in government
websites has a strong direct effect on satisfaction ( =0.52) (H9 is supported).

Trust in government has no significant direct effect on continuance intention, but it does have a
moderate indirect on it via perceived risk (#=0.05). Thus H10 seems not to be fully supported.
Likewise Trust to the internet has only an indirect effect on continuance intention via Trust in
government and perceived risk, but a direct one. Consequently, H11 is partially supported. Trust to
government websites has a positive direct effect on continuance intention ( =0.25) and an indirect
one through perceived risk and satisfaction, thus H12 is fully supported.

Finally, H13 is supported because Perceived risk has a direct effect on continuance intention ( =-
0.21). Also, H14: Satisfaction has a direct effect on continuance intention, is supported ( =0.24).
6. Discussion and implication
The findings show that trust, perceived risk and satisfaction are key research constructs influencing
directly or indirectly intention to continue using eGovernment websites. To maintain continuance of
using eGovernance websites, state government agencies should communicate websites to citizens
through widespread and attractive awareness campaigns. Moreover, governments should make
available successful eGovernance practices to the public. Emphasizing their security and low risk on
one hand and the advantages of the websites and real benefits that users would gain on the other,
will lead to higher levels of satisfaction along with lower levels of perceived risk. These will
subsequently lead to higher levels of continuance intention. Governments should also conduct
eGovernance user satisfaction surveys. By making public statistics of citizens who are pleased with
eGovernance services would positively affect citizens’ intention to continue using eGovernment
websites and convince current non-users to change their habits and move to government online.
However, governments should investigate factors and website attributes that increase users’
satisfaction while using an eGovernance website and obtain useful information about what actions are
needed in the future in order to enhance satisfaction and use of eGovernance services.

The findings indicate also that Trust affects attitudes towards eGovernment continuance intention. In
a country like Greece where the use of eGovernment services is limited and considerations about
security and Trust to the internet are widespread, it becomes more important to raise the issue of

227
 Ioannis Karavasilis et al.

Trust. If the state wishes to promote the use of eGovernment services then it is at its best interest to
alter Trust of the citizens to eGovernment. The importance of this issue is greater if we consider the
second finding of the paper. Greek primary and secondary education teachers’ trust in eGovernment
is not affected by trust in government but rather only by trust to the internet, despite the fact that trust
to the government and the state is widely and at large discussed in Greece, and the fact that
teachers’ trust in government is low. Perhaps this happens because government has not effectively
communicated eGovernance practices and has not investigated factors that are influencing positively
eGovernance adoption. However, this factor does not affect trust to eGovernment. Instead, trust to
eGovernment is considered as an effect of trust in the internet. Considering this finding, policy makers
could focus on raising teachers’ trust to the internet as a means of getting information and
accomplishing transactions, training for example teachers in IT and internet skills on a regular basis.
Moreover, the currently implemented “Digital Convergence” operational program aims at increasing
internet access in households in Greece. As people use the Internet, they gain experience and skills
and undermine distrust (Dutton and Shepherd, 2003). This should elevate trust to eGovernment
practices, regardless of what the teachers’ trust to the government is.
7. Conclusions
Culture, welfare state, and political system influence the usage of eGovernance (Patel and Jacobson;
2008) and citizens behavior differs among countries (Colesca 2009). For these reasons it is important
to identify factors that determine acceptance under specific circumstances prevailing in each country
and give strategic insight to increase the usage of eGovernance. The paper provides preliminary
insights into the teachers’ adoption of eGovernance websites. Based on the previous work we
grounded the constructs of trust, perceive risk and satisfaction and then applied them in the context of
eGovernance. A limited number of factors that influence eGovernance websites adoption by teachers
were identified. The findings give some clues and directions for planning effective eGovernment
practices and could assist policy-makers with the first guidelines about which areas should be
improved in order to enhance eGovernance services. Governments must acknowledge and enhance
citizens’ views concerning trust and risk in eGovernance services and identify the factors that can
increase users’ satisfaction. Further exploration and integration of additional adoption constructs is
needed in order to develop a more comprehensive, yet parsimonious model of eGovernance
adoption. Even though the study offers the first piece of evidence on eGovernance website adoption
by teachers, the recommendations would be helpful in developing and implementing new
eGovernance plans.
References
Al-adawi, $., Yousafzai, $ and Pallister, J (2005) “Conceptual Model of citizen adoption of eGovernment” Paper
presented at The Second International Conference on Innovations in Information Technology (IIT’05)
Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y., (1988) “On the evaluation of structure equation models” Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 16, pp. 74-94.
Belanger, F. and Carter, L. (2008) “Trust and risk in eGovernment adoption” Journal of Strategic Information
Systems Vol. 17, No 2, pp. 165–176
Carter, L and Weerakkody, V. (2008), “EGovernment Adoption: A Cultural Comparison”, Information Systems
Frontiers, Springer, Vol. 10, No 4, pp. 473-482.
Colesca S. E. (2009) “Increasing e-trust: a solution to minimize risk in the eGovernment adoption”, Journal of
applied quantitative methods, Vol 4. No. 1, pp. 31-44
Colesca S. E. and Dobrica, L. (2008) “Adoption and use of eGovernment services: The case of Romania” Journal
of Applied Research and Technology, Vol. 6, No.3, pp. 204-217.
Dashti, A. Benbasat, I and Burton-Jones, A. (2009) “Developing trust reciprocity in electronic government: The
role of felt trust”. European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems 2009 (EMCIS2009) July
13-14 2009, Crowne Plaza Hotel, Izmir [on line]
http://www.iseing.org/emcis/EMCIS2009/Proceedings/Presenting%20Papers/C16/C16.pdf
DeLone, W. And McLean, E. (1992) “Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable”
Information Systems Research, Vol 3, No 1, pp. 60–95.
Dutton, W. and Shepherd, A. (2003) “Trust in the Internet: The Social Dynamics of an Experience Technology”
Oxford Internet Institute, Research Report No.3 [online]
http://www.worldinternetproject.net/publishedarchive/RR3.pdf
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F., (1981) “Evaluating structural equation models with unbearable and measurement
error” Journal of Marketing Research, No. 18, pp. 39-50.
Gold, A.H., Malhotra, A. and Segars, A.H. (2001) “Knowledge management: an organization capabilities
perspective” Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 185-214.
Hair, Jr.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998) Multivariate data analysis, 5th ed. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

228
 Ioannis Karavasilis et al.

Hung, S-Y., Chang, C-M. and Yu, T-Y (2006) “Determinants of user acceptance of the eGovernment services:
The case of online tax filing and payment system” Government Information Quarterly Vol. 23, No. 1 pp. 97–
122
Johnson-George, C. and Swap, W. (1982) “Measurement of Specific Interpersonal Trust: Construction and
Validation of a Scale to Access Trust in a Specific Other”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology No
43, pp. 1306-1317.
McKnight, D.H., Cummings, L.L. and Chervany, N.L. (1998) “Initial trust formation in new organizational
relationships” Academy of Management Review Vol. 23, No 3, pp. 473–490.
Mofleh, S. and Wanous, M. (2008) “Understanding Factors Influencing Citizens Adoption of eGovernment
Services in the Developing World: Jordan as a Case Study” Journal of Computer Science, Vol. 7, No.2,
pp.1-11
Panagis, Y., Sakkopoulos, E., Tsakalidis, A., Tzimas, G., Sirmakessis, S. and Lytras, M.D. (2008) “Techniques
for mining the design of eGovernment services to enhance end-user experience’, Int. J. Electronic
Democracy, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.32–50.
Patel, H. and Jacobson, D. (2008) “Factors Influencing Citizen Adoption of EGovernment: A Review and Critical
Assessment” In 16th European Conference on Information Systems (Golden W, Acton T, Conboy K, van
der Heijden H, Tuunainen VK eds.), (pp.1058-1069), Galway, Ireland. (ISBN 978-0-9553159-2-3)
Riemenschneider, C., Jones, K and Leonard, L (2009). “Web trust – A moderator of the Web’s Perceived
Individual Impact” Journal of Computer Information Systems, Summer 2009 pp.10-18 [online]
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5785/is_200907/ai_n35629544/?tag=content;col
Sang, S., Lee, J-D. and Lee J. (2009) “A Conceptual Model of eGovernment Acceptance in Public Sector” 2009
Third International Conference on Digital Society.
Seddon, P.B., and Kiew, M.Y (1996) “A partial test and development of the DeLone and McLean model of IS
success”, Australasian Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp 90–109.
Tassabehji, R and Elliman, T. (2006) “Generating citizen trust in eGovernment using a trust verification agent: a
research note”, European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (EMCIS) 2006, July 6-7
2006, Costa Blanca, Alicante, Spain [on-line]
http://www.iseing.org/emcis/EMCIS2006/Proceedings/Contributions/EGISE/eGISE4.pdf
Teo, T., Srivastava , S. and Jiang, L (2008) “Trust and Electronic Government Success: An Empirical Study”
Journal of Management Information Systems Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 99–131
The Economist Intelligence Unit (2009) ‘E-readiness ranking 2009. The usage imperative’ [on line] http://www-
935.ibm.com/services/us/gbs/bus/pdf/e-readiness_rankings_june_2009_final_web.pdf
United Nations(2008) “UN eGovernment survey 2008. From EGovernment to connected governance” [on-line]
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN/UNPAN028607.pdf
Wangpipatwong, S., Chutimaskul, W. and Papasratorn, B. (2008) “Understanding Citizen’s Continuance Intention
to Use eGovernment Website: a Composite View of Technology Acceptance Model and Computer Self-
Efficacy” The Electronic Journal of eGovernment Vol. 6 No. 1, pp 55 - 64, [on-line] www.ejeg.com
Warkentin, M., Gefen, D., Pavlou, P. A. and Rose, G.(2002) “Encouraging Citizen Adoption of eGovernment by
Building Trust”, Electronic Markets, Vol. 12, No.3, pp. 157-162
Welch,E., Hinnant, C. and Moon M-J (2005). “Linking Citizen Satisfaction with EGovernment and Trust in
Government” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 371-391

229