Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 21 (8): 1357-1364, 2014

ISSN 1990-9233
© IDOSI Publications, 2014
DOI: 10.5829/idosi.mejsr.2014.21.08.14513

The Effect of Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Quality

Towards the Intention to Use Internet Financial Reporting in Malaysia

Mohd Noor Azli Ali Khan and Lee Han Siang

Department of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Management,

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to measure the level of perceived usefulness and perceived quality
of internet financial reporting (IFR) from a user’s perspective. This study uses the public investor from
online forum in Malaysia. The perceived usefulness and perceived quality are used to examine the intention
to use IFR. The result of this study indicates perceived usefulness and perceived quality are significant to the
intention to use IFR. The researcher extends prior research by conducting a research regarding Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM) and IFR.

Key words:Perceived Usefulness Perceived Quality Internet Financial Reporting User Perception
Technology Acceptance Model

INTRODUCTION in Malaysia is still in its infancy stage [4-6]. Previous

The innovation of computer and Internet allows
information sharing in just a few clicks. The most obvious
example is Facebook and Twitter, the social network used
widely in this age, especially among younger generations.
Information technology has a great influence in
accounting activity; Lymer [1] claimed that the Internet
can extend the possibilities of business information
management within and between businesses and offers
new ways of undertaking commerce and the creation of
wealth. However, the business only began to take serious
notice of it after thirty years of occurrence in 1995 with the
development of World Wide Web (WWW) [1].
When users of the Internet increase, it also arouses
the adoption of internet financial reporting (IFR) and it
becomes the major trend for public listed company. In this
research, IFR can be defined as “the public reporting of
operating and financial data by a business enterprise by
the WWW or related Internet-based communications
medium” [2]. Researchers believed this trend will bring a
significant impact on the field, such as increased auditing
problems and increased provision of information by third
parties, which benefits both preparers and users [3].
Researchers have stated that the implementation of IFR
researchers believed that the traditional printed financial
report will gradually be replaced with IFR in the future [7].
The importance of IFR cannot be denied, as it can
increase the awareness of the greenhouse effect and
encourage the implementation of environmental friendly
annual report.
Previous researches show that larger companies are
more prone to disclose their financial status via Internet
[8-12]. A number of the previous researches focus on the
determinants or factors of IFR practice [6, 10, 12-14].
Until now, only limited researches were carried out
regarding the user’s perception on the usefulness of IFR
[15]. The question arises when the asymmetrical dialogue
exists, such that the prepared IFR information does not
fulfil the needs of user and corporate information
disseminator [16]. After the extensive literature review
conducted regarding IFR, researchers found that there
is no clear empirical evidence that examines the demands
of user. Thus, there is a need to examine the user’s
requirements via an empirical study. Therefore, this
research focuses to fill in the gaps and examine the user’s
perception on the usefulness and quality of IFR in
Malaysia. The objective of this study is to measure the
level of perceived usefulness and perceived quality of

Corresponding Author: Mohd Noor Azli Ali Khan, Department of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Management,
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia.

1357
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (8): 1357-1364, 2014
IFR from a user’s perspective. The impact of this study
will show empirical evidence that is able to contribute to
the body of knowledge related to IFR research.
Literature Review and Hypotheses Development:
Many years ago, the users of financial report only can
depend on hard copies of the annual report to reach
them by mail or obtain the information from an analyst.
Today, with the popularity of the Internet, almost all large
corporations have set up their own websites and most of
them include some form of financial reporting [17].
IFR can be defined as “the public reporting of operating
and financial data of a business enterprise by the
WWW or related Internet-based communications
medium” [2]. Beside, IFR can also be defined as a
distribution of corporate financial and performance
information using Internet technologies such as WWW
[18]. Firms as practicing IFR if and only if they provide
either a comprehensive set of financial statements
(including footnotes and auditors’ report), a link to their
annual report on the Internet, or a link to the U.S [18].
Security and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) and
Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis and Retrieval
(EDGAR) system on their web sites. In this research, IFR
is defined as information reporting activities of a
corporation through their websites in the Internet to
disclose corporate related information and financial
information.
The previous research trend of IFR basically starts
from descriptive research, comparative research,
explanatory research and association research regarding
the dimension and timeliness of IFR [19]. The dimension
of content can be explained by the income statement of
current year and past year, the balance sheet of the past
year, the notes to financial statements of the current year
and cash flow statements of the current year. Moreover,
the dimension of presentation can also be explained
through the following items; loading time of the website,
link to the homepage, hyperlinks to financial analysts,
hyperlinks in the annual report and link to table of
contents [20].
Gowthorpe [21] identified the different researches
which had been done to date in this field and he
addressed some possible areas and questions that might
help in conducting further researches in the future. One of
the discussions focused on ethics, behavioural and
philosophical aspects and he mentioned that no apparent
researches have been conducted to investigate users’
perceptions of the usefulness of financial information
dissemination through the Internet. This creates a gap for
1358
future researchers to investigate IFR from a user’s point
of view. The usefulness of IFR in this case can be
associated with the value of information provided by
the preparer for the user in the decision making
process [21]. In a study regarding user perception,
Al-Htaybat et al. [21] researched the user’s perception
on IFR in Jordan. The study discovered that the
respondents from Jordan strongly agreed that IFR was
being used, is assessable easily and is a clear source of
information for user’s decision making which is available
at anytime and anywhere. They have also provided a link
to future researches based on cross-country comparison
of user perception, which investigates the association of
IFR and technology acceptance model (TAM) and
examines the influence of perceived usefulness and
perceived usability to the actual use of IFR.
Perceived Usefulness: Previous study about the
information technology acceptance by professional
members in Hong Kong shows that the perceived
usefulness was a significant determinant of attitude and
behavioural intention in TAM [22]. Their research showed
that the professional members emphasize on the
usefulness of a technology rather than its ease of use.
Another TAM research conducted by Davis [23] on new
information system usage showed that the perceived
usefulness was 50% more influential than ease of use in
determining the usage of new systems. Masrom [24]
study showed that perceived usefulness is more
significant in determining intention to use compared to
attitude towards using the e-learning system. Her result
also showed a significant effect of perceived usefulness
and perceived ease of use towards using the technology.
Hence, the researcher has made an assumption that the
usefulness of IFR contents perceived by a user may
increase the intention to use IFR as a decision making
instrument. Based on this discussion, the hypothesis
that will be tested in this research is shown below:
H1: The perceived usefulness has a significant effect on
intention to use IFR.
Perceived Quality: Previous study found that Jordanian
citizens who perceived high level of information quality
will use the e-government system to gather data and
conduct transaction [25]. Another study also discovered
that the consumers who perceived the quality of sports
shoes to be high have a bigger intention to buy them
again in the future [26]. In a research regarding Internet
shopping site quality measurement, the higher the
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (8): 1357-1364, 2014
perceived quality of site, the better the attitude and
behavior in the purchase intention and site revisit
intention [27]. Hence, the researcher has made an
assumption that the quality of IFR contents perceived by
a user may increase the intention to use IFR as a decision
making instrument.
H2: The perceived quality has a significant effect on
intention to use IFR.
In TAM, technology acceptance or usage is
determined by behavioural intention. Davis [28] believes
that the usage of technology is indirectly influenced by
external variable (such as individual abilities or situational
constraints) through its impact on the perception of
usefulness and ease-of-use. Besides, perceived ease-of-
use also has a causal effect on perceived usefulness [23].
In this study, we pre-assume that the respondents have
Internet access and received a particular level of
knowledge necessary to use IFR. In this study, the
researcher will apply TAM and only focused on the
perceived quality and perceived usefulness of IFR
towards the intention to use from a user’s perspective.
The usefulness of firms’ IFR depends on how easy
it is to locate the data [29]. Their research which was
conducted among the Thailand public listed companies
showed that majority of companies had easy access to
the financial information in just a single click. They also
found that Thai companies use IFR as a complement to
traditional paper-based annual reports. On the other hand,
Ezat and El-Masry [30] found that the usefulness of IFR
information depends on the accuracy and the timeliness
for different stakeholders and it is believed that the
accuracy will decline as time lag increases.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Sample Selection: In this study, the respondents are
selected from users of IFR in public investor groups and
who also are Internet users. Hedlin [31] revealed that the
firms use Internet as a tool to communicate to public
investor. Marston [32] also noted that the purpose of
investor relations information is to reach the financial
community and public investors such that they are able
to evaluate the company. However, Hamid [33] concluded
that Malaysian still yet fully utilize the potential of the
internet by reaching out to foreign and public
investor.The researcher believes that public investor
group may provide valuable feedback such as the user
group chosen by previous studies. Questionnaires will
1359
be published on the online forum e.g. investlah.com,
lowyat.net, cari.com.my, carigold.com sahamas.net klse.
i3investor.com, investalks.com and jbtalks.cc. Zhang [34]
argued that Internet is appropriate to conduct surveys
and more efficiently and effectively than traditional
means. Besides that, the sampling method will be based
on non-probability sampling techniques due to the
insufficient resources required to define the population
[35]. Purposive sampling will also be used when
conducting the survey. Purposive sampling enables the
researcher to use his/her own judgments to select cases
that will enable the researcher to answer the research
question and meet the objectives [36]. According to the
rule of thumb proposed by Roscoe [37] for determining
sample size, sample size which is greater than 30 and less
than 500 is considered appropriate for most researches
[38].
Data Collection Method: The main purpose of this study
is to examine the perceived usefulness and perceived
quality of IFR information from a user’s perspective, as
well as determining the intention to use IFR in Malaysia.
In this research, primary data will be collected through
questionnaires. In this study, the questionnaire will be
designed according to the self-administered type using
Internet-mediated questionnaires and hard copy printed
questionnaires which are delivered to each respondent
and collected later.
Questionnaire Design: The questionnaire consists of
questions regarding the level of perceived usefulness
and perceived quality towards the intention to use IFR
from a user’s perspective. Items is answered in the form of
5 points Likert scales (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree,
3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree).
The perceived usefulness from previous studies
has also been summarized and applied in this research.
The perceived usefulness is generally developed in the
context of speed, performance, productivity, confidence,
efficiency and usefulness. Table 1 shows the items
developed from previous studies.
An extensive literature review was conducted to
develop every single item to justify the qualitative
characteristics of a useful IFR. The main attributes to
describe a useful financial reporting are relevance,
understandable, reliable and comparable [39]. Timeliness
is one of the restrictions to provide relevant and reliable
information [39]. Table 2 shows an overview of
perceived quality used to describe useful financial
reporting.
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (8): 1357-1364, 2014

Table 1: An overview to measure perceived usefulness

No. Perceived Usefulness Literature
1. Using IFR allows me to make investment decision quickly. (Speed) Davis (1989); Davis (1993); Agarwal and Prasad (1999);
Al-Htaybat (2011)
2. Using IFR would improve the accuracy of decision making. Davis (1989); Davis (1993); Agarwal and Prasad (1999); Chau and
(Performance) Hu (2001); Masrom (2007); Al-Htaybat (2011)
3. Using IFR allows me to gather more related information for Davis (1989); Davis (1993); Agarwal and Prasad (1999); Masrom (2007);
decision making. (Productivity) Al-Htaybat (2011)
4. I am confident in using IFR information for my
decision. (Confidence) Davis (1989); Agarwal and Prasad (1999); Al-Htaybat (2011);
5. Using IFR facilities anytime and anywhere enable me to be more Davis (1989); Davis (1993); Agarwal and Prasad (1999); Chau and
efficient. (Efficiency) Hu (2001); Masrom (2007); Al-Htaybat (2011)
6. Overall, IFR is a useful source of information for decision Davis (1989);Davis (1993); Agarwal and Prasad (1999); Chau and Hu
making. (Usefulness) (2001); Masrom (2007); Al-Htaybat (2011)

Table 2: An overview of perceived quality used to describe useful financial reporting

No. Perceived Quality Literature
Relevance
1 IFR discloses forward-looking information. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
2 IFR discloses information in terms of business
opportunities and risks. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
3 IFR provides more related information for decision making. Davis (1989); Davis (1993); Agarwal and Prasad (1999); Masrom (2007);
Al-Htaybat (2011)
4 IFR provides feedback information on how various market
events and significant transactions affected the company. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
5 IFR helps user to evaluate past, present, or future events or
confirming or correcting their past evaluations. Lewis and Pendrill (1996); ASB (1999); Van Beest et al. (2009)
Reliability
6 IFR provides valid and sufficient substantiation assumptions
and estimates. ASB (1999); Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
7 IFR firmly follows the accounting principles. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
8 IFR provides financial highlight as well as negative events. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
9 The information is free from material error and bias and not
misleading. ASB (1999)
10 IFR tells only the truth. Lewis and Pendrill (1996); ASB (1999)
Understandability
11 The IFR presentation is well organized. ASB (1999); Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
12 IFR content is clear and not confusing. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
13 IFR provides graphs and tables to clarify the information presented. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
14 The use of language and technical jargon is easy to understand
in IFR. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
15 IFR provides a comprehensive glossary for technical terms and
terminology. Van Beest et al. (2009)
Comparability
16 IFR provides the notes to change in accounting policies and
explain the implications of change. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
17 IFR provides financial index numbers and ratio for comparison. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
18 IFR provides different period's financial information for comparison. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
19 IFR allows comparisons over time and among entities. ASB (1999); Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
20 IFR provides instrument of analysis and downloadable data. Van Beest et al. (2009); Tasios and Bekiaris (2012)
Timeliness
21 IFR is up to date without delay. Abdelsalam and El-Masry (2008); Ezat and El-Masry (2008)
22 IFR is updated from time to time. Lee et al. (2002)
23 IFR provides the latest information and announcement. Lymer and Tallberg (1997)

1360
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (8): 1357-1364, 2014

Table 3: An overview regarding statements of intention to use

No. Statements of Intention to Use Literature
1 I intend to use Internet financial reporting more frequently as my Chau and Hu (2001); Wang et al. (2003); Masrom (2007); Pinho and
decision making instrument Soares (2011)
2 I intend to increase the usage of IFR as my decision making
instrument in the future Agarwal and Prasad (1999); Wang et al. (2003); Pinho and Soares (2011)
3I intend to switch from hard copy financial report to IFR. Agarwal and Prasad (1999); Pinho and Soares (2011)

The statements which indicate the intention to use
IFR as their decision making instruments are studied.
The items were built by referring to the previous
researches conducted on TAM. Table 3 shows the
statements of intention to use and their references.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Descriptive Results: Based on the 90 sets of usable data
collected, 78.9% of the respondents are male respondents
and only 21.1% are female respondents. About 16.7% of
the respondents’ age is below 25 years old and 70% of
the respondents are between 25-40 years old. About 8.9%
of the respondents are aged from 41-55 years old and
4.4% of the respondents are more than 56 years old. 11.1%
of the respondents have a secondary school level of
education, 17.8% have a diploma certificate and about
61.1% of the respondents are degree or professional
certificate holders. 6.7% of the respondents have a
master degree and 3.3% have a doctorate degree.
Furthermore, 87.8% of the respondents are working
in a private sector, followed by 6.7% who are working in
other organizations, such as non-profit organization and
5.5% who are working in the public sector, such as
government. About 63.3% of the respondent are using
IFR information as their primary decision making
instrument and 24.5% are still using the traditional hard
copy annual report. The remaining 12.2% of respondents
are using another source of information such as research
report, news, forum, investment information website
and newspaper. Table 4 show the profile of the
respondent taken part in the study.
Table 5 shows the result of multiple regressions
between independent variables and dependent variable
for the second model. It shows that the F statistic for the
final model is 36.87 with a P-value of 0.00, which indicates
a significant model at F (2,87) = 36.87, p<0.001, R 2 = 0.459.
The significant model indicates that there are effects
between the independent variables; i) perceived
usefulness and ii) perceived quality with R = 0.677.
These two independent variables explain 45.9% of the
variance in dependent variable (R2 = 0.459) and 44.6% of
the variance of dependent variable in a real population
(Adjusted R2 = 0.446). In other words, it means that 45.9
percent of the variation in the dependent variable can be
explained using independent variables. The remaining
54.1 percent can be attributed to unknown or inherent
variability.

Table 4: Profile of Respondent

Demographic Item Frequency Percentage (%)
Gender Male 71 78.9
Female 19 21.1
Age Below 25 years old 15 16.7
25-40 years old 63 70
41-55 years old 8 8.9
56 years old and above 4 4.4
Education Level Secondary school 10 11.1
Diploma 16 17.8
Degree/ Professional 55 61.1
Master 6 6.7
PhD 3 3.3
Organization Public sector (e.g. government) 5 5.5
Private sector (e.g. most businesses and individuals) 79 87.8
Other 6 6.7
Source of Information Hard copy annual report 22 24.5
Corporate website / IFR information 57 63.3
Other 11 12.2

1361
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (8): 1357-1364, 2014
Table 5: Multiple regression for research model
Variable Standardized Coefficients
Beta
(Constant) Perceived
Usefulness Perceived 0.375
Quality 0.339
R2 = 0.459; Adjusted R2 = 0.446; F value = 36.87; Sig = 0.000
a. Predictors: (Constant), Perceived Quality, Perceived Usefulness
b. Dependent Variable: Intention to Use
* sig = p < 0.05, ** sig = p < 0.01
Moreover, it can be observed that both the
independent variables have a positive significant
relationship with the intention to use IFR at p<0.05.
Perceived usefulness seems to be the main predictor of
the intention to use IFR with = 0.375 while perceived
quality is the second predictor of intention to use IFR
with = 0.339. This finding also means that the higher
the rate of perceived usefulness and perceived quality,
the higher the ratio of their intention to use IFR as a
decision making instrument.
Summary, Conclusion and Future Research: Perceived
usefulness is the degree to which a person believes that
using a particular system would enhance his or her job
performance [28]. The multiple regression result for the
research model is significant at = 0.375 and p = 0.005.
The result is consistent with the theory of TAM, in which
perceived usefulness has a significant influence on the
behavioural intention to use a system. Previous study
also proved that the perceived usefulness is significant in
determining intention to use the e-learning system [24].
Furthermore, Davis [23] had argued that perceived
usefulness has a greater influence in determining the
usage of new systems. Another study in China also
shows that the perceived usefulness has a positive
relationship to the continual usage intention of a system
[40].
Based on the multiple regression result for the
research model, there is evidence that the result shows
that there is a positive relationship between the perceived
quality and intention to use IFR at p<0.05. The result tells
us that perceived quality has a significant effect on the
intention to use IFR at = 0.339 and p = 0.012. This means
that when the perceived quality is higher, the intention
to use IFR will also be higher. It is consistent with the
findings of previous researches, in which perceived
quality has a significant positive relationship with the
intention to use e-government system [25]. Previous
study also showed that consumers who perceived higher
quality of product, has a higher intention to buy the
t Sig. Collinearity Statistics
Tolerance VIF
1.727 0.088
2.850 0.005** 0.360 2.779
2.579 0.012* 0.360 2.779
product again in the future [26]. Another study also
shows that when the perceived quality of a site is high,
the purchase and site revisit intention is also high [27].
The result of this study gives a constructive output
for the preparer to produce a better IFR presentation.
The study has discovered that perceived usefulness and
perceived quality has a significant effect to the intention
to use IFR before making an investment decision. It is
noteworthy to mention that Davis [28] introduced and
developed TAM for predicting information system
usage and acceptance behaviours. TAM mentioned that
perceived usefulness is one of the specific variables
which influence behavioural intentions. In this study, the
empirical evidence reaffirmed the suggestion of this
hypothesis, in which there is a relationship between
perceived usefulness and intention to use IFR before
making investment decisions. Interestingly, this study
also deduced that perceived quality shows a positive
significant effect on intention to use IFR.
As with any study, there are limitations to this
research. First of all, the research is carried in the context
of users, specifically to stock investors in Malaysia only.
Stock investors are the respondents in this study, the
result of this study may not be applicable to other
stakeholders of IFR. Therefore, future research can focus
on the extensions of the current study. For example, it is
interesting to perform a comparative study between
countries, for example, users of Malaysia and users of
other country.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express our heartfelt appreciation
to Prof. Dr. Noor Azizi Ismail (UUM) for their valuable
and constructive suggestions during the planning and
development of this research as part of their advisory.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution
of Norhayati Salleh for completing this manuscript.
Our special thanks are extended to Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia (UTM) for providing the grant for the research
1362
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (8): 1357-1364, 2014
work. The financial support for the authors’ research
from Ministry of Education, Malaysia and Research
Management Center (RMC), UTM Johor Bahru, Johor,
Malaysia vote number. Q.J130000.2529.09H11 by Research
University Grant (RUG) Tier 1 also appreciated.
REFERENCES
1. Lymer, A., 1999. Internet and the future of reporting
in Europe. European Accounting Review,
8(2): 289-301.
2. Lymer, A., Debreceny, R., Gray, G.L. and Rahman, A.
1999. Business reporting on the Internet. United
Kingdom: International Accounting Standards
Commitee.
3. Xiao, Z., M.J. Jones and A. Lymer, 2002. Immediate
Trends in Internet Reporting. European Accounting
Review, 11(2): 245-275.
4. Hassan, S., N. Jaffar, S.K. Johl and M.N.M. Zain,
1999. Financial reporting on the internet by
Malaysian companies: Perceptions and practices.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting, 6(2): 299-319.
5. Khadaroo, I., 2005. Corporate Reporting on the
Internet: Some Implications for the Auditing
Profession. Managerial Auditing Journal,
20(6): 578-591.
6. Al Arussi, A.S., M.H. Selamat and M.M. Hanefah,
2009. Determinants of financial and environmental
disclosures through the internet by Malaysian
companies. Asian Review of Accounting,
17(1): 59-76.
7. Beattie, V. and K. Pratt, 2003. Issues concerning
web-based business reporting: an analysis of the
views of interested parties. The British Accounting
Review, 35(2): 155-187.
8. Craven, B.M. and C.L. Marston, 1999. Financial
reporting on the Internet by leading UK companies.
European Accounting Review, 8(2): 321-333.
9. Al-Moghaiwli, M.H., 2009. A survey of Internet
Financial Reporting in Qatar. Journal of Economic
and Administrative Sciences, 25(1): 1-20.
10. Alanezi, F.S., 2009. Factors Influencing Kuwait
Companies' Internet Financial Reporting. Journal of
Economic and Administrative Sciences, 25(2): 1-23.
11. Nurunnabi, M. and M.A. Hossain, 2012.
The Voluntary Disclosure of Internet Financial
Reporting in an Emerging Economy: A Case of
Digital Bangladesh. Journal of Asia Business
Studies, 6(1): 17-42.
1363
12. Hanifa, M.H. and H.M. Ab. Rashid, 2006.
The Determinants of Voluntary Disclosures in
Malaysia: The Case of Internet Financial Reporting.
UniTAR e-Journal, 2(1): 22-42.
13. Ali Khan, M.N.A., 2010. Pelaporan Kewangan
menerusi Internet: Indeks, Tahap Pelaporan dan
Faktor penentu. Unpublished PhD Dissertation:
Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Kedah.
14. Ali Khan, M.N.A. and N.A. Ismail, 2014.
Determinants of Web Based Financial Reporting
in Malaysia. GIABR Journal of Business,
1(1): 28-57.
15. Gowthorpe, C., 2000. Corporate reporting on the
Internet: Developing opportunities for research.
Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 5(3): 3-28.
16. Gowthorpe, C., 2004. Asymmetrical dialogue?
Corporate financial reporting via the Internet.
Corporate Communications: An International
Journal, 9(4): 283-293.
17. Sortur, S., 2006. Financial reporting on internet.
Chartered Accountant-New Delhi, 54(7): 996-1006.
18. Ashbaugh, H., K.M. Johnstone and T.D. Warfield,
1999. Corporate Reporting on the Internet.
Accounting Horizons, 13(3): 241-257.
19. Ali Khan, M.N.A. and N.A. Ismail, 2010. Kajian awal
terhadap kepentingan item pelaporan kewangan
menerusi internet. International Journal of
Management Studies, 17(2): 225-252.
20. Ali Khan, M.N.A. and N.A. Ismail, 2012. A review of
e-financial reporting research. Journal of Internet
and e-business Studies, 2012(2012): 1-16.
21. Al-Htaybat, K., L.V. Alberti-Alhtaybat and
K.A. Hutaibat, 2008. Users' Perceptions on Internet
Financial Reporting Practices in Emerging Markets:
Evidence from Jordan. International Journal of
Business and Management, 6(9): 170-182.
22. Chau, P.Y.K. and P.J.H. Hu, 2001. Information
Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals:
A Model Comparison Approach. Decision Sciences,
32(4): 699-719.
23. Davis, F.D., 1993. User acceptance of information
technology: system characteristics, user perceptions
and behavioral impacts. International Journal of
Man-Machine Studies, 38: 475-487.
24. Masrom, M., 2007. Technology Acceptance Model
and E-learning. Paper presented at the 12th
International Conference on Education, Sultan
Hassanal Bolkiah Insitute of Education, Universiti
Brunei Darrussalam.
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (8): 1357-1364, 2014
25. Almahamid, S., A.C. Mcadams, Al T. Kalaldeh and
M. Al-Sa'eed, 2010. The relationship between
perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use,
perceived information quality and intention to use
e-government. Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Information Technology, pp: 30-44.
26. Tsiotsou, R., 2005. Perceived Quality Levels and
Their Relation to Involvement, Satisfaction and
Purchase Intentions. Marketing Bulletin, 16(4): 1-10.
27. Yoo, B. and N. Donthu, 2001. Developing a Scale to
Measure the Perceived Quality of an Internet
Shopping Site (SITEQUAL). Quarterly Journal of
Electronic Commerce, 2(1): 31-45.
28. Davis, F.D., 1989. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived
Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information
Technology. Management Information Systems
Quarterly, 13(3): 319-340.
29. Davey, H. and K. Homkajohn, 2004. Corporate
Internet Reporting: An Asian Example. Problems
and Perspectives in Management, 2(2004): 211-228.
30. Ezat, A. and A. El-Masry, 2008. The impact of
corporate governance on the timeliness of corporate
internet reporting by Egyptian listed companies.
Managerial Finance, 34(12): 848-867.
31. Hedlin, P., 1999. The Interent as a vehicle for
investor relations: the Swedish case. The European
Accounting Review, 8(2): 373-381.
32. Marston, C., 1996. The Organization of the Investor
Relations Function by Large UK Quoted Companies.
Omega, 24(4): 477-488.
33. Hamid, F.Z.A., 2005. Malaysian companies’ use of
the internet for investor relations. Corporate
Governance, 5(1): 5-14.
34. Zhang, Y., 2000. Using the Internet for Survey
Research: A Case Study. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science, 51(1): 57-68.
35. Chin, A.L.L., 2012. The Relationship between
Psychological Biases and the Decision Making of
Investor in Malaysian Share Market. Paper presented
at the International Conference on Management,
Economics and Finance (ICMEF 2012), Sarawak,
Malaysia.
1364
36. Saunders, M., P. Lewis and A. Thornhill, 2007.
Research Methods for Business Students:
Financial Times/Prentice Hall.
37. Roscoe, J.T., 1975. Fundamental Research Statistics
for the Behavioural Sciences. New York: Holt
Rinehart and Winston.
38. Sekaran, U., 2003. Research Methods for Business:
A Skill Building Approach: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
39. Accounting Standards Board (ASB), 1999.
Statements of Principles for Financial Reporting:
The Accounting Standards Board Limited.
40. Zhao, Z. and Cao, 2012. An empirical study on
continual usage intention of microblogging: the case
of Sina. Nankai Business Review International,
3(4): 413-429.
41. Agarwal, R. and J. Prasad, 1999. Are Individual
Differences Germane to the Acceptance of New
Information Technologies? Decision Sciences,
30(2): 361-391.
42. Al-Htaybat, K., 2011. Corporate online reporting in
2010: a case study in Jordan. Journal of Financial
Reporting and Accounting, 9(1): 5-26.
43. Lymer, A. and A. Tallberg, 1997. Corporate Reporting
and the Internet – a Survey and Commentary on the
Use of the WWW in Corporate Reporting in the UK
and Finland. Paper presented at the 20th Annual
Congress of the European Accounting Association,
Graz, Austria, pp: 23-25.
44. Tasios, S. and M. Bekiaris, 2012. Auditor’s
perceptions of financial reporting quality: the case of
Greece. International Journal of Accounting and
Financial Reporting, 2(1): 57-74.
45. Van Beest, F., G. Braam and S. Boelens, 2009.
Quality of Financial Reporting: measuring
qualitative characteristics. Radboud University
Nijmegen. Nijmegen Center for Economics, NiCE.