Factors Affecting Usage İntention of Shared Electric Scooter Services

Year 2021, Volume: 35 Issue: 3, 1101 - 1123, 15.07.2021

Mehmet Cem Bölen , Orhan Çeliker

https://doi.org/10.16951/atauniiibd.898594

Cited By: 1

Abstract

In this study, the factors affecting consumers' adoption of shared e-scooter services were examined from the perspective of “Value-based Adoption Model”. The structural equation modeling technique (SEM) was employed to evaluate the proposed research model, and the proposed model was empirically tested using data collected from 118 actual users of shared e-scooter services in Turkey. The results showed that consumers perceive shared e-scooter services as a useful and enjoyable means of transportation. On the other hand, it was observed that the perceived price of e-scooter shared services was negatively associated with perceived value. Lastly, It has been demonstrated that consumers see shared e-scooter services as a valuable service, and this strongly affects their use of these services.

Keywords

Shared E-Scooter, Value based Adoption Model, Micro-mobility

Paylaşımlı Elektrikli Scooter Hizmetlerini Kullanma Niyetinde Etkili Olan Faktörler

Abstract

Bu çalışmada tüketicilerin paylaşımlı e-scooter hizmetlerini benimsemelerinde etkili olan faktörler “Değer Temelli Benimseme Modeli” perspektifinden incelenmiştir. Bu kapsamda geliştirilen araştırma modeli, daha önce Türkiye’de paylaşımlı e-scooter hizmetini kullanmış 118 kişiden toplanan veriler kullanılarak yapısal eşitlik modellemesi tekniği ile analiz edilmiştir. Analiz sonucunda tüketicilerin, paylaşımlı e-scooter hizmetlerini kullanışlı ve eğlenceli bir ulaşım aracı olarak gördükleri sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bununla birlikte paylaşımlı e-scooter hizmetleri ücretlerinin, bu hizmetlerin tüketiciler için sundukları değeri olumsuz etkilediği gözlemlenmiştir. Son olarak tüketicilerin, paylaşımlı e-scooter hizmetlerini değerli bir hizmet olarak gördükleri ve söz konusu hizmetleri kullanmalarını güçlü şekilde etkilediği ortaya koyulmuştur.

Keywords

Paylaşımlı E-Scooter, Değer Temelli Benimseme Modeli, Mikro Mobilite

References

• Allem, J.-P., & Majmundar, A. (2019). Are electric scooters promoted on social media with safety in mind? A case study on Bird’s Instagram. Preventive medicine reports, 13, 62–63.
• Altunışık, R., Coşkun, R., Bayraktaroğlu, S., & Yıldırm, E. (2005). Sosyal Bilimlerde Arastirma Yöntemleri SPSS Uygulamali. Adapazari: Sakarya Kitabevi.
• Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological bulletin, 103(3), 411.
• Boksberger, P. E., & Melsen, L. (2011). Perceived value: A critical examination of definitions, concepts and measures for the service industry. Içinde Journal of Services Marketing (C. 25, Sayı 3, ss. 229–240). https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041111129209.
• Carlsson, C., Carlsson, J., Hyvönen, K., Puhakainen, J., & Walden, P. (2006). Adoption of mobile devices/services - Searching for answers with the UTAUT. Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 6. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2006.38.
• Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Mis Quarterly, 319–340.
• Degele, J., Gorr, A., Haas, K., Kormann, D., Krauss, S., Lipinski, P., Tenbih, M., Koppenhoefer, C., Fauser, J., & Hertweck, D. (2018). Identifying E-Scooter Sharing Customer Segments Using Clustering. 2018 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation, ICE/ITMC 2018 - Proceedings, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICE.2018.8436288.
• Dillon, A. (2001). User acceptance of information technology. London: Taylor and Francis.
• Dodds, W., & Monroe, K. (1985). The effect of brand and price information on subjective product evaluations. Advances in consumer research, 12(1), 85–90. https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/6364/volumes/v12/NA - 12.
• Doğan, D. (2019). SmartPLS İle Veri Analizi 2. Baskı. Ankara: Zet Yayınları.
• Dursun, Y., & Çerçi, U. M. (2004). Algılanan sağlık hizmeti kalitesi, algılanan değer, hasta tatmini ve davranışsal niyet ilişkileri üzerine bir araştırma. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 23.
• Eccarius, T., & Lu, C. C. (2020). Adoption intentions for micro-mobility – Insights from electric scooter sharing in Taiwan. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102327.
• Ercan, İ., & Kan, İ. (2004). Ölçeklerde güvenirlik ve geçerlik.
• Erdem, H. K. (2011). Kurumsal kaynak planlama sistemlerinin kullanımında etkili olan faktörlerin genişletilmiş teknoloji kabul modeli ile incelenmesi. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
• Gärling, T., & Axhausen, K. W. (2003). Introduction: Habitual travel choice. Transportation, 30(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021230223001.
• Gärling, T., & Schuitema, G. (2007). Travel demand management targeting reduced private car use: Effectiveness, public acceptability and political feasibility. Journal of Social Issues, 63(1), 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00500.x
• Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152.
• Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage publications.
• Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.
• Hair, J. F, Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). European Business Review, 26(2), 106–121.
• Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(1), 2–20.
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Içinde New challenges to international marketing. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
• Hsiao, K. L., & Chen, C. C. (2017). Value-based adoption of e-book subscription services: The roles of environmental concerns and reading habits. Telematics and Informatics, 34(5), 434–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.09.004.
• Hsu, C.-L., & Lin, J. C.-C. (2015). What drives purchase intention for paid mobile apps? – An expectation confirmation model with perceived value. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 14(1), 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2014.11.003.
• Ketchen Jr, D. J., & Bergh, D. D. (2006). Research methodology in strategy and management. Emerald Group Publishing.
• Kim, H.-W., Chan, H. C., & Gupta, S. (2007). Value-based Adoption of Mobile Internet: An empirical investigation. Decision Support Systems, 43(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2005.05.009.
• Kim, Yonghee, Park, Y., & Choi, J. (2017). A study on the adoption of IoT smart home service: using Value-based Adoption Model. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 28(9–10), 1149–1165. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2017.1310708.
• Kim, Young, & Srivastava, J. L. B. (2007). Impact of social influence in e-commerce decision making. Proceedings of the ninth international conference on Electronic commerce, 293–302.
• Kopplin, C. S., Brand, B. M., & Reichenberger, Y. (2021). Consumer acceptance of shared e-scooters for urban and short-distance mobility. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102680.
• Laa, B., & Leth, U. (2020). Survey of E-scooter users in Vienna: Who they are and how they ride. Journal of Transport Geography, 89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102874.
• Lee, H., Baek, K., Chung, J. H., & Kim, J. (2021). Factors affecting heterogeneity in willingness to use e-scooter sharing services. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102751.
• Lin, T. C., Cheng, H. K., Wang, F. S., & Chang, K. J. (2012). A Study of Online Auction Sellers’ Intention to Switch Platform: The Case of Yahoo!Kimo Versus Ruten_eBay. Decision Sciences, 43(2), 241–272.
• Mathew, J. K., Liu, M., & Bullock, D. M. (2019). Impact of weather on shared electric scooter utilization. 2019 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC), 4512–4516.
• McKenzie, G. (2019). Spatiotemporal comparative analysis of scooter-share and bike-share usage patterns in Washington, DC. Journal of transport geography, 78, 19–28.
• Mitra, R., & Hess, P. M. (2021). Who are the potential users of shared e-scooters? An examination of socio-demographic, attitudinal and environmental factors. Travel Behaviour and Society, 23, 100–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2020.12.004.
• Molin, E., & Maat, K. (2015). Bicycle parking demand at railway stations: Capturing price-walking trade offs. Research in Transportation Economics, 53, 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2015.10.014.
• Neves, A., & Brand, C. (2019). Assessing the potential for carbon emissions savings from replacing short car trips with walking and cycling using a mixed GPS-travel diary approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 123, 130–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.08.022.
• Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (Third Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Park, C., & Young Sohn, S. (2017). An Optimization Approach for the Placement of Bicycle-sharing stations to Reduce Short Car Trips: An Application to the City of Seoul. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 105, 154–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.08.019.
• Patterson, P. G., & Spreng, R. A. (1997). Modelling the relationship between perceived value, satisfaction and repurchase intentions in a business-to-business, services context: An empirical examination. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 8(5), 414–434. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564239710189835.
• Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21(2), 173–184.
• Ribeiro, S. K., Kobayashi, S., Beuthe, M., Gasca, J., Greene, D., Lee, D. S., Muromachi, Y., Newton, P. J., Plotkin, S., Sperling, D., & others. (2007). Transport and its infrastructure in ipcc fourth assessment report: Working group iii report mitigation of climate change. Içinde Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (s. 376). Cambridge Univ. Press Cambridge, England, UK.
• Rigdon, E. E. (2014). Rethinking partial least squares path modeling: breaking chains and forging ahead. Long range planning, 47(3), 161–167.
• Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. revised. New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Henseler, J., & Hair, J. F. (2014). On the emancipation of PLS-SEM: A commentary on Rigdon (2012). Long range planning, 47(3), 154–160.
• Schellong, D., Sadek, P., Schaetzberger, C., & Barrack, T. (2019). The promise and pitfalls of e-scooter sharing. Europe, 12, 15.
• Shaheen, S. A., & Cohen, A. P. (2019). Shared Micromoblity Policy Toolkit: Docked and Dockless Bike and Scooter Sharing. UC Berkeley: Transportation Sustainability Research Center, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.7922/G2TH8JW7
• Shin, D. H. (2009). Determinants of customer acceptance of multi-service network: An implication for IP-based technologies. Information & Management, 46(1), 16–22.
• Smith, C. S., & Schwieterman, J. P. (2018). E-scooter scenarios: evaluating the potential mobility benefits of shared dockless scooters in Chicago.
• Tavşancıl, E. (2006). Tutumların Ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
• Tezer, A., & Bodur, H. O. (2020). The Greenconsumption Effect: How Using Green Products Improves Consumption Experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 47(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucz045
• Turel, O., Serenko, A., & Bontis, N. (2007). User acceptance of wireless short messaging services: Deconstructing perceived value. Information and Management, 44(1), 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.10.005
• Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
• Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298805200302
• Zhou, H., Norman, R., Xia, J., Hughes, B., Kelobonye, K., Nikolova, G., & Falkmer, T. (2020). Analysing travel mode and airline choice using latent class modelling: A case study in Western Australia. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 137, 187–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.04.020
• Habertürk, 2020. https://www.haberturk.com/elektrikli-scootera-yasal-duzenleme-2801100-ekonomi, Erişim Tarihi: 10/11/2020.
• Joyride, 2020. https://joyride.city/electric-scooter-sharing-market-size-by-the-numbers, Erişim Tarihi: 10/11/2020.
• NACTO, 2018. https://nacto.org/shared-micromobility-2018, Erişim Tarihi: 09/11/2020.
• Tack, A., Klein, A., ve Bock, B, (2019.) "E-Scooters in Germany”, https://scooters.civity.de/en#conculsion, Erişim Tarihi: 09/11/2020.