PERCEPTION AND TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE OF ELECTRIC CARS BY POTENTIAL USERS IN TÜRKİYE

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 33 Sayı: 2, 265 - 288, 31.08.2022

Üzeyir Pala , Muazzez Mola

Öz

In this study, the electric car technology perception and acceptance levels of potential electric car users in Turkey were examined based on the modified Technology Acceptance Model 3 (TAM3). For this purpose, an initial research model suitable for the conditions of the study was designed and 12 hypotheses were created to test the relationships in the model. The research was carried out through an online questionnaire with 321 people who have never used electric cars. Since the survey results do not conform to the normal distribution, Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) method, which does not require normal distribution was used as the analysis method via SmartPLS 3 software. The compatibility of the proposed initial model has been examined by evaluating the measurement model, structural model, and mediation effect. According to the analysis results obtained, gradual improvements were made on the model and a final model was reached. As a result of the compatibility analysis via fit indices, an acceptable model was obtained by reducing the initial 12 factors and 29 questions to 9 factors and 13 questions in the final model. According to the analysis results, it was determined that the Expected Ease of Use in the final model was the mediator.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Technology Acceptance Model, Perception Survey, Electric cars, Partial Least Squares (PLS)

Proje Numarası

Yok

Kaynakça

• Ajzen I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Progress, 50:179-211.
• Altunışık R., Coşkun R., Bayraktaroğlu S., Yıldırım E. (2012). Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri (SPSS Uygulamalı). Sakarya Yayıncılık, Sakarya.
• Bowen NK., Guo S. (2011). Structural Equation Modelling; Pocket Guide to Social Work Reserach Methods. Oxford University Press, Newyork.
• Cohen J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2 nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, America.
• Cortina JM. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1):98-104.
• Davis FD. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3):319-340.
• Davis FD., Bagozzi RP., Warshaw PR. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8):982-1003.
• Dijkstra TK., Henseler J. (2015). Computational statistics and data analysis. Science Direct, 81:10-23.
• Fishbein M., Ajzen I. (1975). Belief, Attitude Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, London.
• Fornell C. Larcker DF. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1):39-50.
• Gefen, D., Straub W.D. and Boudreau, M.C., 2000. Structural Equation Modelling and Regression: Guidlines for research practice, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 4(7), 1-80.
• Globisch J., Dütschke E., Schleich J. (2018). Acceptance of electric passenger cars in commercial fleets. Transportation Research Part A, 116:122-129.
• Hair, JF., Anderson RE., Tatham RL., Black WC. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis. 5 nd ed. Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey.
• Hair JF., Hult GTM., Ringle CM., Sarstedt M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). 2nd Ed. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles.
• Hair JF., Ringle CM., Sarstedt M. (2013). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling: Rigorous Applications, better results, and higher acceptance. Long Range Planning, 46:1-12.
• Hartwick J., Barki H. (1994). Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use. Management Science, 40(2):440-465.
• Henseler J., Ringle CM., Sinkovics RR. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20:277-319.
• Kerlinger FN. (1978). Foundations of Behavioral Research. McGraw Hill, Newyork.
• Kester J., Rubens GZ., Sovacool BK. , Noel L. (2019). Public perceptions of electric vehicles and vehicle to grid (V2G):Insights from a Nordic focus group study. Transportation Research Part D, 74:277-293.
• King WR., He J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Science Direct, 43:740-755.
• Kline RB. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 3 rd ed. The Guiltford Press, Newyork.
• Moore GC., Benhasat I. (1991). Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3):192-222.
• Nakip M. (2003). Pazarlama Araştırmaları: Teknikler ve (SPSS Destekli) Uygulamalar. Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
• Nitzl C., Hirsch B. (2016). The drivers of a Superior’s Trust Formation in his Subordinate: The manager- Management accountant example. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 58:1-40.
• Ringle CM., Sarstedt M., Straub DW. (2012). A Critical Look at the use of PLS-SEM in MIS Quarterly. MIS Quartely, 36(1): III-XIV.
• Sönmez Çakır F. (2019). Kısmi En Küçük Kareler Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi (PLS-SEM) ve Bir Uygulama. Sosyal Araştırmalar ve Davranış Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(9):111-128.
• Sönmez Çakır F. (2020). Kısmi En Küçük Kareler Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi (PLS-SEM): SmartPLS 3.2. Uygulamaları. Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara.
• Tavakol M., Dennick R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2:53-55.
• Tenenhaus M., Vinzi VE., Chatelin YM., Lauro C. (2004). PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48:159-205.
• Venkatesh V. (2000). Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model. Information Systems Research, 11(4):342-365.
• Venkatesh V., Bala H. (2008). Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Desicion Sciences, 39(2):273-315.
• Venkatesh V., Davis FD. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2):186-204.
• Venkatesh V., Morris MG., Davis GB., Davis FD. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3):425-478.
• Vinzi VE., Trinchera L., Amato S. (2010). PLS Path Modeling : From foundations to recent developments and open issues for model assessment and improvement. Springer Handbooks of Computational Statistics, 3:47-79.
• Wetzels M., Schröder GO., Oppen CV. (2009). Using PLS Path Modeling for Assessing Hierarchical Construct Models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly, 33(1):177-195.
• Wu J., Liao H., Ph.D., Wang J. (2020). Analysis of consumer attitudes towards autonomous, connected, and electric vehicles: A survey in China. Research in Transportation Economics, 80(100828):1-9.
• Yıldız D., Uzunsakal E. (2018). Alan Araştırmalarında Güvenilirlik Testlerinin Karşılaştırılması ve Tarımsal Veriler Üzerine Bir Uygulama. Uygulamalı Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1:14-28.
• Yılmaz V., Can Y., Aras N. (2019). Kısmi En Küçük Kareler Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesiyle (PLS-SEM) Nükleer ve Yenilenebilir Enerjiye İlişkin Tutumların Araştırılması. Alphanumeric Journal, 7(1):87-102.
• Yılmaz V., Kinaş Y. (2020). Kısmi En Küçük Kareler Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesiyle bir elektrik dağıtım şirketinin hizmet kalitesinin araştırılması. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 15(2):437-456.
• Zhou T., Lu Y., Wang B. (2010). Integrating TTF and UTAUT to Explain Mobile Banking User Adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 26:760-767.