The Effect of Social Influence on Actual Usage of E-
Government Among Employees Within Public Sector
Organizations in the UAE.
Massila Kamalrudin
Institute of Technology Management and Enterpreneurship
Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka\
massila@utem.edu.my
Abstract—The new technologies are enabling organizations to
be flatter, networked, and more flexible. The United Arab
Emirates (UAE) vice-president and prime minister focus on the
long-term vision and strategy which is to be number one in
worldwide rank related to efficiency and effectiveness for UAE
governments. In order to achieve this target, there is a gap has
been identified between the indicator related to the essential of
ICT towards government vision as UAE in first rank compare to
139 countries. This study addresses the link between knowledge
management and smart government effectiveness considered the
role of institutional challenges as a moderator variable within the
public sector in UAE. This study implemented three acceptance
model which are technology acceptance model (TAM), unified
theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) and
DeLone and McLean model of information systems success
(D&M IS Success Model) as guided for the proposed model. This
study also employs quantitative data, which are collected
following the rules of statistical surveys. SPSS and Smarts
software have been used for analyzed the data. The result from
SEM output shows the strongest correlation is found between
social influence and actual use = 0.624. The empirical results
reveal that the actual use of e-government is predicted by the
change in social influence and the association between these two
variables is statistically significant. Hence, the conclusion is the
increase in social influence will lead to increase in actual use to e-
government in RTA.
Index Terms—Social Influence, UAE, Actual usage, E-
Government.
I. INTRODUCTION
The Internet has become an essential platform for
knowledge management systems in which improve knowledge
acquisition, task efficiency, communication quality and
Decision Quality (Cheung, Chang, & Lai, 2000; Parveen &
Sulaiman, 2008; Curran, Fenton, & Freedman, 2016). As
Stanford study show the diversity of activities of the internet
(business, Shopping, stock trading, banking, product
information, email, reading, job search, and entertainment) by
asking 4000 respondents to select among a list of 17 common
Internet activities and tell them which they did or did not do
(Nie & Erbring, 2002).
Abdullah Alzarouni
Faculty of Technology Management & Technopreneurship
Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka
Melaka, Malaysia
Maxima02@hotmail.com
The Government of United Arab Emirates emphasized that
the vision and long-term strategy of the UAE government is to
be number one among world countries in term of efficiency
and effectiveness. There is a gap between the indicator
regarding the importance of information and communications
technology (ICTs) to government vision of the future which
UAE ranked as number 1 in the world among 139 country and
the indicator of the impact of ICTs on organizational which
UAE ranked as number 10. In order to fill this gap, this study
addresses the link between knowledge management and smart
government effectiveness considering the role of institutional
challenges as a moderator variable within the public sector in
UAE.
Several theories and models have been developed to
investigate and understand the characteristics affecting the
technology usage and information system success which have
reduced the ambiguity that related to technology usage and the
related issues. The well-known theories and models that have
been using to answer the questions that related to technology
usage issues are; technology acceptance model (TAM) (Davis,
1989), unified theory of acceptance and use of technology
(UTAUT) (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, Davis, & Sam, 2003),
and DeLone and McLean model of information systems
success (D&M IS Success Model) (Delone & McLean, 2003)
D&M IS Success Model is considered one of the
widespread acceptance of the models in technology usage and
information system success (Petter & McLean, 2009), which
proposed the three antecedence constructs in the updated
model (system quality, information quality, and service
quality).
However, D&M IS Success Model ignore other important
constructs such as social characteristics (Cheng et al., 2013;
Lian, 2015) which considered as an important constructs to
determine the technology usage. This study is going to fill the
gap which is between the indicator regarding the importance of
ICT to government vision of the future and the indicator of the
impact of ICTs on organizational which UAE ranked as
number 10 through the extension of D&M IS Success Model
by implemented the social influence construct which this
construct been adapted from UTAUT Model as an independent
variable. This paper tends to examine the effect of social
influence on actual usage of E-government among employees
within public sector organizations in the UAE.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
There are two constructs has been approached from D&M
IS Success Model in this paper which are Social Influence and
Actual Usage as explained in detail below.
A. Social Influence (SI)
Social Influence defined as the degree to which the e-
government users perceive that important other (family,
friends, and colleagues) believe he or she should use the e-
government (Cheng et al., 2013; Seppo Pahnila, 2011;
Venkatesh et al., 2012). A few studies have conducted on the
influence of social influnce construct on actual usage. For
instance, Ogara et al. (2014) in a survey study among 239
students in the context of mobile instant messaging found that
social presence and social influence predict user satisfaction. In
addition, Cheung et al. (2000) in the context of Internet and
world wide web which used questionnaire method found that
there is a relationship between social factor and usage.
Moreover, a quantitative study through questionnaire method
among 327 Facebook user indicate that social characteristics
influence task-technology fit (Lu & Yang, 2014).
Although Venkatesh et al. (2011) found in the context
of information systems that social quality (social influence)
positively affect user satisfaction, Revels et al. (2010) found
the opposite in the context of mobile services which there is no
relationship between social quality (image) and user
satisfaction. In addition, another study in the context of IT
usage among 143 computer users found that social pressure
does not influence user satisfaction but influence Usage
(Anandarajan, Igbaria, & Anakwe, 2002).
B. Actual Usage (USE)
Actual Usage has been defined as the frequency of e-
government usage and the duration of use (Shih & Fang,
2004). Actual Usage is defined as the Usage frequency of the
technology and Usage times (Kim et al., 2007). And according
to McFarland and Hamilton (2006) Two self-reported system
usage items: frequency of use and duration of use. In addition,
Fan & Fang (2006) defined it as the measure of the frequency
of using systems. Several studies have conducted to investigate
the influence of actual usage construct on performance impact
or the factors that influence actual usage. For instance,
Norzaidi and Salwani (2009) in a quantitative study that used
questionnaire method to collect the main data among 354
undergraduate students found that usage influenced by task-
technology fit and user satisfaction, and influence user
satisfaction and performance. Moreover, Lee et al. (2005) in
the context of mobile commerce task characteristics,
technology characteristics, individual characteristics and task-
technology fit predict usage (utilization), and Usage positively
influence performance impact.
III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The methodology adopted for this paper is the mixed
method which involves the collection, analysis and
interpretation of data using both quantitative and qualitative
methods to try to address a research question. The quantitative
analysis is used by translating the collected data into accessible
statistics to measure or quantify the research question.
Qualitative analysis is typically an exploratory method, used to
acquire experts 'overall understanding, explanations and views
(specialized people who are knowledgeable of the study's
objective).
A. Data Collection
There are several methods for data collection for instance
observation, self-administered paper questionnaire, self-
administered electronic questionnaire, interview, physical
experiment, and multi-methods (Sekaran & Bougie, 2013). An
adequate data collection method for any study is inherently
dependent upon the problem of the study (Tull & Hawkins,
1984). It is recognized that the most acceptable method of
generating primary data is through surveys (Zikmund, Babin,
Carr, & Griffin, 2010).
This study employs quantitative data, which are collected
following the rules of statistical surveys. Surveys can be
applied either by using non-Internet survey methods or Internet
survey forms. There are several techniques for Non-Internet
survey such as personal interviews, telephone interviews, self-
administered questionnaire, and structured observations. On
the other hand internet survey involves generating a Web-
based or mail panel and administering it online. Structured
interviews with university students’ scale could have been a
choice but the restrictions of time and budget make self-
administered questionnaire more reliable
Population refers to the entire group of people, events, or
things of interest that the researcher wishes to investigate
(Sekaran & Bougie, 2013). The population of this study is the
e-government services users among employees within Road
and Transport Authority in Dubai.
The Rating Scale for this study is Likert rating scale that is
designed to examine how strongly subject agree or disagree
with statement on a 5-point Likert scale: (1) Strongly disagree,
(2) Slightly disagree, (3) Neutral, (4) Slightly agree, (5)
Strongly agree. The instrument to measure the main variables
in this study as follow:
A.1) Social Influence (SI)
The instrument to measure social influence is adapted as
table 1 shows, with 5-point Likert scale and the scales of
measure is interval scale.
Table 1: Instrument for social influence
Scales
ite Rating of
Measure Source
m Scale Measur
e
 SI1 My supervisor 5-point program assists in the coding and entering the data that
thinks that I Likert collected from survey questionnaires. Then the missing data
should use e- scale: extent will be examined and apply missing value replacement
government from Interval procedures. After that, this study is going to apply the
services. (1) Scale standardized value (Z-Score) to determine the outliers and
Strongl (Cheng, Mahalanobis distance score to check of multivariate outliers.
SI2 My colleagues
y 2011) Finally, determine the unengaged responses or straight lining
think that I should
disagre (Brown, responses to delete them.
use e-government
e Dennis, &
services.
to Venkatesh
SI3 My close friends
, 2010) B.2) Descriptive Analysis
think that I should (5)
Strongl (Brown et Descriptive statistics uses the data to provide descriptions
use e-government
y agree al., 2010) of the population and the constructs of the study. Regarding the
services.
SI4 My family thinks descriptive analysis, SPSS software Version 22.0 is used. Mean
that I should use and standard deviation measure used to assess the central
e-government tendency & dispersion. Frequency tables to assess the
services. respondent’s characteristics. Then this study is going to apply
skewness and kurtosis measure to assess the Normality of data.

B.3) Inferential Analysis

A.2) Actual Usage (USE)
Regarding the inferential statistics which makes inferences
The instrument to measure actual usage adapted as table 2
and predictions about a population based on a sample of data
shows, which contains 3 items; regularly use e-government
taken from the population in question. The technique with the
services, prefer online communication and promote e-
SmartPLS software (Version 21) is going to be used to test and
government services, with 5-point Likert scale and the scales of
analyze the hypothesis and causal relationships between
measure is interval scale.
variables in the model. This technique is considered suitable
for the type of investigation carried out by this study since it
Table 2: Instrument for actual usage
allows for answering questions that involve multiple regression
Scales analysis of constructs among a single measured dependent
Rating of variable and a group of measured independent variable
item Measure Source
Scale Measur (Ullman, 2006).For the quantitative data, the questionnaire is
e planned to distribute to a total of 350 respondents and
USE I regularly use the 5-point expecting at least 300 responses. The questionnaires are
1 e-government Likert administered to workers who work at public sectors and are
services. scale: send through social media applications, web link, messages
USE I prefer the from Interval and emails. The data is collected in the Statistical Package for
2 communication (1) Scale (Nistor Social Sciences (SPSS) application software for conducting
through the e- Strongl et al., various statistical and analytical tests such as cross tabulation,
government y 2014) factor analysis and multiple regression analysis.
services. disagre (Lin,
USE I promote the use e 2007) B.4) Linear regression
3 of the e- to This study uses a simple linear regression to test direct
government (5) relationships between independent variables (system quality,
services to my Strongl information quality, service quality, social impact, actual use)
colleagues. y agree and dependent variables (performance impact).
Basically, a hypothesis test is that the probability test
targets (ρ) are equal to or less than the significance level (α =
B. Data Analysis 0.05). It is also called the test size or the size of the critical
This research incorporates a number of statistical methods area. In the hypothesis test, the researcher assumes that the null
to assess the gathered data and respond to the hypotheses. hypothesis (H0) is true and checks how often the observed
More detailed explanation will be provided in the next chapter outcome would occur if that assumption is true (in other words,
which demonstrates how the findings are derived from the data the study determines the probability value).
collected for the current study. A statistical hypothesis test is a method for statistical
inference. In general, two sets of statistical data are compared
B.1) Data Preparation for Analysis or a set of sample data is compared to a set of synthetic data
For the purpose of data preparation for analysis, SPSS from an idealized model (Stuart, 1999). An assumption is
software Version 22.0 will be used. The use of SPSS computer suggested for the statistical relationship between the two
datasets. This hypothesis is compared as an alternative to an
idealized null hypothesis that does not provide a relationship
between two datasets. The comparison is considered
statistically significant if the relationship between the records
represents an unlikely achievement of the null hypothesis
according to a threshold probability, the level of significance.
Decides whether the null hypothesis is rejected in favor of the
alternative or not. The decision rule is to reject the null
hypothesis H0 when the observed value t is in the critical
range, and to accept or "reject" the opposite hypothesis.
In this section, hypothesis tests are used to determine which
results would lead to a rejection of the null hypothesis for a
predefined level of significance. Differentiating between the
null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis is facilitated by,
for example, identifying two types of conceptual errors (Type 1
and Type 2) and specifying parametric boundaries. Which type
1 error is allowed? A simple linear regression is used to test the
study hypothesis. Multiple linear regression is used to measure
the correlations between interdependent constructs of the
conceptual framework. The main idea of the hypothesis test is
to reject the null hypothesis when the value ρ is equal to or less
than the significance level (α) of (0.05). In other words (value ρ
≤ 0.05).
In addition to testing the hypothesis, in this section the
internal relationships between each independent variable
(system quality, information quality, service quality, social
impact) with the mediator (actual use) and the dependent
variable (performance impact) are examined using linear
regression, This study describes the relationship between two
variables in terms of direction (positive or negative), shape
(general, linear, nonlinear or monotone), and strength (Dodge,
2003).
The hypothesis tests will be conducted according to the
following three steps:
Step 1: Simple Linear Regression Analysis Model
The regression analysis describes how, to what extent and
under which conditions independent and dependent variables
are related. And can be used to draw causal conclusions.
Simple linear regression is used to test the correlation between
variables and contracts of a theoretical model. In statistics,
simple linear regression is the least squares method of a linear
regression model with an explanatory variable. A simple
adjective refers to the fact that a result variable is associated
with a predictor (a dependent variable). The use of linear
regression is very useful for predicting changes in the
dependent variable when the independent variable changes.
In mathematical modeling and statistical modeling, there
are dependent and independent variables. The models examine
how the former depend on the latter. Dependent variables
represent the result whose variation is being investigated. The
independent variables represent the input data or the causes, ie
the possible causes for changes. Models test or explain the
effect of independent variables on dependent variables.
Sometimes independent variables can be included for other
reasons, for example because of their possible interference
effect, without directly checking their influence (Carlson,
2006).
The purpose of this analysis is to find the following linear
regression equation between the dependent (Y) and
independent (Xn) variables.
Y (dependent variable) = α + β X (independent variable) / α
(intersection y) and β (slope).
Simple linear regression yields the "best" match for data
points. The "best" is understood here to be a least squares
method: a line that minimizes the sum of the squares of the
residuals of the linear regression model
In the statistical literature, the test of statistical hypotheses
plays a fundamental role. The usual argument is the following
(Lehmann and Joseph, 2005):
• There is a first research hypothesis whose truth is
unknown.
• The first step is to formulate null and suitable
alternatives. This is important because a misrepresentation of
assumptions will disrupt the whole process.
• The second step is to examine the statistical
assumptions made during the test on the sample. For example,
assumptions about statistical independence or the form of
distribution of observations.
Step 2: ANOVA Output
ANOVA indicates whether the regression model explains
the statistically significant part of the variance between
independent and dependent variables. In particular, the
relationship is used to compare how well the linear regression
model predicts the result, with a simple use of the mean of the
outcome data as an estimate. According to the degree of
correlation R between the independent variable and the
dependent variable, it can be determined that the regression
model is statistically significant (p; <.05), where the value of ρ
as a hypothesis test shows that the null hypothesis is the
probability that you choose to abandon the zero hypothesis The
following statement is based on the results of the output tables
in the regression analysis. The smaller the value of p, the
stronger the test of the alternative hypothesis will be.
Step 3: Residual Plots for Regression Analysis
The final step is to test the regression model by examining
the residual graph to ensure that (a) they are normally
distributed and (b) they do not systematically change with the
predicted values. The waste should not be systematically high
or low. This graph is useful to test the assumption of
homosexuality: the residue should not be systematically
changed at any predicted value, and the distribution of the
residue must be the same for all predictions. Residual diagrams
allow researchers to assess whether the observed error
corresponds to an unpredictable (random) error.
Waste must be reset within the set values. In other words,
the model is the correct average for all calculated values. It is
assumed that accidental errors lead to errors that are normally
distributed.
Residual = Observed Data: Estimates that represent an error
in the estimation of estimates for actual (observed) data.
In the following analysis, the study shows the result of
testing the hypothesis of the study:
 IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

A. Descriptive Analysis
Descriptive statistics are used to describe the basic features
of the data in a study. They provide simple summaries about
the sample and the measures. Together with simple graphics
analysis, they form the basis of virtually every quantitative
analysis of data. Univariate analysis involves the examination
across cases of one variable at a time.
The central tendency of a distribution is an estimate of the
"center" of a distribution of values. There are three major types
of estimates of central tendency as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Standard deviation of normal distribution data.
A.1) Descriptive of Social Influence
The descriptive analysis (mean, standard deviations)
associated with the items of Social influence is shown below:
B. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
In this section, the factor analysis shows the correlations
between the observed variables (items of the questionnaire) of
each latent variable and identify the most significant variables
(items) that affect the related factor and have the most
significant impact on them.
There are two types variables defined in this study. In
statistics, latent variables opposed to observable variables, they
are variables that are not directly observed but are rather
inferred (indirect) through a mathematical model from other
variables that are observed (i.e. directly measured like
questionnaire items). The study predefined 6 latent variables
(system quality, social influence, Information quality, and
Performance impact). The aim of factor analysis is to reduce
the number of observed variables (items) associated with each
latent variable in order to reduce the interpretation strength of
observed variables.
The reason for conducting factor analysis in this study is
summarized below:
• Define multiple observed variables having similar
patterns of responses because they are all associated with one
latent variable.
• Grouping correlated items of each latent variable into
factors (dimensions) according to their loading on the factor.
• Remove observed variables (items) with low
interpretation level.
• Reducing multicollinearity between the observed
variables of each latent variable
• Improving data for SEM analysis.

B.1) EFA Of Social Influence

The following sections shows EFA analysis of Social
influence, the analysis include communalities, KMO and
1.1.1 Descriptives Of Actual Use Bartlett’s test, total variance explained, scree plot.
The descriptive analysis (mean, standard deviations) Communalities
associated with the items of Actual use is shown below: Reading the values in table 4.32 show the communalities of
social influence items which reveal a very good degree since
all above ≥ 0.3. In addition to that, it is found that all items
scored a communality value ≥ 0.5 and this indicates a good fit
of data for EFA, CFA and SEM analysis, except item (5) which
A.2) Descriptive of Actual Use scored below 0.03, therefore this item will not be omitted from
The descriptive analysis (mean, standard deviations) factor analysis. Initial Extraction
associated with the items of Actual use is shown below:
Social Influence 1 1.000 .945
Table 3: Communality of social influence
Social Influence 2 1.000 .926
Social Influence 3 1.000 .913
Social Influence 4 1.000 .901
Social Influence 5 1.000 .016
Social Influence 6 1.000 .506
Social Influence 7 1.000 .556
Social Influence 8 1.000 .777
Social Influence 9 1.000 .632
Social Influence 10 1.000 .555
 Figure 2: Scree Plot of social influence factors
B.1.1 KMO and Bartlett’s Test
After conducting the rotation of factors, the result is two
As shown in Table 4.33, reading the values in KMO and main factors retained for CFA and SEM. Reading factor
Bartlett's Test output indicates that KMO = 0.846 which is a loadings of all items associated with service quality shows this
very good level of data fit to be proposed for factor analysis. variable consists of three factors. Only items scored factor
Thus, the data of social influence is considered highly fit for loading ≥ 0.4 are retained for further analysis. It is found that
EFA, CFa, and SEM analysis. item 5 has weak factor loading, thus this item will be omitted
from CFA and SEM analysis as shown in Table 4.35.
Table 4: KMO and Bartlett's Test
Table 6: Matrix of Social influence Rotated Component
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .846
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 2967.221

df 45

Sig. .000

B.1.2 Total Variance Explained

Reading the data in output table 4.34 of total variance
explained of social influence shows that the total number of
extracted components (factors) with an eigenvalue ≥ 1.00 equal
to two factors. The cumulative variance of explanation by these
two factors = 67.276 which is a good degree of interpretation
to the latent variable. Therefore, the 10 items associated with
social influence explain only (67.276%) of its total variance.
This value is considered an acceptable degree of interpretation
of variance in social influence. The remaining percentage of
interpretation (32.72%) is due to random error or other factors
which are not defined in this study

Table 5: Total variance explained of social influence

The first factor scored the highest eigenvalue = 4.427 and
explains (44.268%) of the overall variance in social influence.
The variables (items) loaded on the first factor represent the
most explanatory items to the variance in social influence.
Thus, factors (1-2) are retained because their eigenvalue ≥1
and locating at the slop of curve in the scree plot (see figure 2
below).
B.2 EFA Of Actual Use
In this section EFA analysis of Social influence is conducted,
the analyses include communalities, KMO and Bartlett’s test,
total variance explained, scree plot, and finally rotated
component matrix. The output should of EFA is necessary
before conducting CFA and SEM analysis:
Communalities
Table 4.36 reveals the communalities of actual use. It is evident
that all items having a good degree of communalities ≥ 0.3
(the threshold for CFA). The majority of items scored a
communality value ≥ 0.5 except item (4) which represents a
good degree of data fit. Thus, the researcher shall not omit any
item associated with actual use after conducting CFA and SEM
analysis.
 Table 7: Communality of Actual use
Initial Extraction

Actual use 1 1.000 .671

Actual use 2 1.000 .696
Actual use 3 1.000 .649
Actual use 4 1.000 .377
Actual use 5 1.000 .507
KMO and Bartlett’s Test
Actual use 6 1.000 .609 Figure 3: Scree plot of actual use factors
B.2.1Actual
KMOuseand
7 Bartlett’s Test 1.000 .630 The first factor scored the highest eigenvalue = 4.48 and
Actual use 8 1.000 .602
explains (44.82%) of the overall variance in actual use. The
KMO and Bartlett's Test table 8 shows that KMO = variables (items) loaded on the first factor represent the most
Actual use 9 1.000 .594
0.834. Moreover, also reading the value of Bartlett’s Test of explanatory items to the variance in actual use. Thus, factors
Actual use 10
Sphericity shows it is significant1.000 .567
(ρ = 0.000, ρ ≤0.05). Thus, (1-2) are retained for CFA and SEM analysis because their
the data of actual use is considered fit for further analysis in eigenvalue ≥ 1 and locating at the slop of curve in the scree
CFA and SEM later in this chapter. plot (see figure below) which and explains more variance in
actual use comparing to other factors.
Table 8: KMO and Bartlett's Test
B.2.3 Rotated Component Matrix
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .834 It is evident that three factors identified for actual use. But the
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 901.088
third factor has only two items loaded which is not acceptable
in CFA and SEM. Thus, factor (3) will be omitted and consider
df 45 only factor (1) and factor (2) for constructing the measurement
Sig. .000 model of actual use. Moreover, the result of component
rotation shows that two factors are retained and all items
associated with actual use scored factor loading ≥ 0.40 and
B.2.2 Total Variance Explained preserved for CFA and SEM analysis.

The output table of total variance explained shows

that the total number of extracted components with an Table 10: Rotated component matrix of actual use
eigenvalue ≥ 1.00 equal to two factors. The cumulative
variance of explanation by these two factors = 58.70 which is a
good degree of interpretation. Therefore, the 10 items
associated with actual use explain only (58.70%) of its total
variance. This value is considered an acceptable degree of
interpretation of variance in a latent variable. The remaining
percentage of interpretation (41.30%) is due to random error or
other factors which are not defined in this study.

Table 9: Total variance explained of actual use

C. Simple Linear Regression

C.1 The Relationship Between Social Influence and Actual Use
In this section, the simple linear regression test between
social influence and actual use was conducted using three
analyses namely: regression model summary, ANOVA output,
and last one is residual plots for regression analysis. All these
three tests are used to examine the following hypothesis:
H4: Social influence affects actual use in a statistical
relationship.
H0 (Null Hypothesis): Social influence does not affect
actual use and no statistical relationship does exist between
them.
To test the relationship model as shown in Figure 4.20, the
following regression analysis, the researcher evaluates the
output of a simple linear regression model between social
influence and actual use. The result of this test is expected to
show the significance of a statistical and casual relationship
between these two variables. Thus, the alternative hypothesis
(H1) maybe true or not true.
Figure 4: Regression model between Social influence and
Actual use
C.2 Model Summary of Simple Linear Regression
The summary of regression model shows information about
correlation coefficient of determination (R2) which tell the
degree of interpretation and correlation coefficient (R) as
shown in Table 11.
Table 11: Model summary of simple linear regression output
between social influence and actual use.
Table 11 tells the values of and R2 and shows how well the
regression model predicts the variability between social
influence and actual use. First evaluating the correlation
coefficient R = 0.506 designates a moderate degree of
correlation between social influence and actual use.
The result of model summary indicates that the "R Square"
reveals how much of the total discrepancy in the dependent
variable (actual use) can be explained by Social influence.
While the magnitude of R2 = 0.256 suggests that (25.60%) of
the change in the value of actual use can be interpreted by the
variance in social influence. The residual variance in actual use
= 74.40% is supposed to be due to unrelated random variability
to social influence.
Moreover, evaluating the magnitude of adjusted R2 tells that
SPSS fits 25.40% of the variance between social influence and
actual use which specifies a very small difference (0.002≈0)
between the adjusted R2 and the actual R2 found in the
regression output. Thus, it is concluded that a good degree of
regression model fit has been obtained between social
influence and actual use. This is another indicator that H4 is
true
C.3 The ANOVA Output
Next is evaluating ANOVA output by examining the
degree of significance based on ρ-value in regression model
between social influence and actual use. This is an important
test to verify if the data fit with regression equation. If the Sig.
≤ 0.05, then the alternative hypothesis (H4) is true and null-
hypothesis (H0) is rejected as shown in Table 12.
Table 12: ANOVA Output of social influence
It is evident that the magnitude of Sig. ≤ 0.05. Thus, the
regression model predicts the dependent variable significantly
well (i.e., a good fit for the data is obtained). Furthermore, the
F-ratio used to test the validity of hypothesis where the effects
between the two variables (social influence and actual use) is
due to significant statistical relationship. Also, the magnitude
of F ratio = 130.178, where F ≥ 1.0. The larger F value, the
likelihood is greater that social influence affects actual use and
both variables has strong correlation which is not due to
random cause, which is the same result of ANOVA output
associated with hypothesis (H4).
C.4 Regression Coefficients
In the table 13 that indicate regression coefficients to assess
the degree of correlation between social influence and actual
use. It is found that the strength of influence by social influence
on actual use is strong. Moreover, the magnitude of standard
and unstandardized regression coefficients B & Beta tell
whether the relationship between social influence and actual
use are statistically significant (Sig ≤ 0.05). If Sig. magnitude
is greater than 0.which is less than 0.05 in this case and thus
there is a significant relationship between social influence and
actual use. Table 4.21 indicates the output of regression
coefficients.
Table 13: Coefficients of regression between social influence
and actual use

It is obvious from the data in the table 4.51 of coefficients
that B (unstandardized regression coefficient) is statistically
significant (B= 0.465 ρ ≤ 0.000). Therefore, if social influence
increase by a magnitude of (1) unit, actual use rise by 0.465.
Hence, actual use is found to be predicted by the change in
social influence and the association between them is significant
because the magnitude of Sig. ≤ 0.000. Thus, hypothesis (H1)
is true.
Finally, it is found that the values of residual are not
systematically distributed. Thus, the centered distribution of
residuals values indicates a good degree of association between
social influence affects actual use as shown in Figure 4.21
below. As shown in this figure the most of residuals of
regression equation are centered on zero, and throughout the
whole range of fitted residual, which apply for fit of data in the
regression model only.
Figure 4: The scatterplot of residuals
IV) CONCLUSION
The outcome of this study is helpful for the users of e-
government as well as system developers especially in the field
of information technology. The findings of this study are
important to ensure high degree of performance impact on
users and increasing the intention to actual use of e-
government.. Hence, the f hypothesis in this study is true which
indicates a statistical relationship between social influence and
actual use of e-government.
The practical implementation is based on reconstructing the
variables of Delon and McLean success model for e-
government usage by developing a conceptual model that
correlates system quality, information quality, service quality,
and social influence with the mediator actual use. The
conclusions and recommendations of this study will help RTA
or other public and government organizations to run efficient e-
government which will be reflected on the intention and
increases level of usage.
It is expected that future studies on other e-government
version may lead to more findings that could be differ or
similar to this study. ther words, the increase in actual use of e-
government will lead to increase in performance impact of staff
in RTA
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors are grateful to those who have assisted directly
or indirectly to complete this study at Universiti Teknikal
Malaysia Melaka.
.
REFERENCES
[1] Anandarajan, M., Igbaria, M., & Anakwe, U. P. (2002). IT
acceptance in a less-developed country: A motivational factor
perspective. International Journal of Information Management,
22, 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-4012(01)00040-8
[2] Anisur, M., Qi, X., & Islam, T. (2016). Banking access for the
poor : Adoption and strategies in rural areas of Bangladesh.
Journal of Economic & Financial Studies, 04(03), 1–10.
[3] Annunziata, M. (2013). Welcome to the age of the industrial
internet.
[4] Benedetto, C. A. Di, Calantone, R. J., & Zhang, C. (2003).
International technology transfer: Model and exploratory study
in the People’s Republic of China. International Marketing
Review, 20(4), 446–462.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02651330310485171
[5] Brown, S. a., Dennis, A. R., & Venkatesh, V. (2010). Predicting
Collaboration Technology Use: Integrating Technology
Adoption and Collaboration Research. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 27(2), 9–54.
https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222270201
[6] Cheng, D., Liu, G., Qian, C., & Song, Y.-F. (2013). Customer
Acceptance of Internet Banking: Integrating Trust and Quality
with UTAUT Model. IEEE, 383–388.
[7] Cheng, Y. M. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of e-
learning acceptance. Information Systems Journal, 21(1), 269–
299. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2010.00356.x
[8] Cheung, W., Chang, M. K., & Lai, V. S. (2000). Prediction of
Internet and World Wide Web usage at work: A test of an
extended Triandis model. Decision Support Systems, 30(1), 83–
100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(00)00125-1
[9] Chien, S.-W., & Tsaur, S.-M. (2007). Investigating the success
of ERP systems: Case studies in three Taiwanese high-tech
industries. Computers in Industry, 58(8–9), 783–793.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2007.02.001
[10] Chiu, C. M., Chiu, C. S., & Chang, H. C. (2007). Examining the
integrated influence of fairness and quality on learners’
satisfaction and Web-based learning continuance intention.
Information Systems Journal, 17(3), 271–287.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00238.x
[11] Chong, H., Cates, D., & Rauniar, R. (2010). Validity of Delone
and Mclean’s E-Commerce Model in B2C Student Loan
Industry. Journal of International Technology and Information
Management, 19(1), 75–III.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEB.2009.023611
[12] Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2013). Business Research
Methods (12th Editi). McGraw-Hill Education.
[13] Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. book, Sage
publications.
[14] Curran, J., Fenton, N., & Freedman, D. (2016).
Misunderstanding the Internet (2nd ed.). Routledge.
[15] D’Ambra, J., & Wilson, C. S. (2011). Explaining perceived
performance of the World Wide Web : uncertainty and the task-
technology fit model. Internet Research, 14(4), 294–310.
https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240410555315
[16] D’Ambra, J., Wilson, C. S., & Akter, S. (2013). Application of
the Task-Technology Fit Model to Structure and Evaluate the
Adoption of E-Books by Academics. Journal of The American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(1), 48–64.
https://doi.org/10.1002/asi
[17] Datta, P. (2011). A preliminary study of ecommerce adoption in
developing countries. Information Systems Journal, 21(1), 3–32.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2009.00344.x
[18] Davis, F. D. (1989). perceived Usefulness, Perceived ease of
use, and User Acceptence of inforamtion technology. MIS
Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
[19] DeLone, W. H. (1988). Determinants of Success for Computer
Usage in Small Business. MIS Q., 12(1), 51–61.
https://doi.org/10.2307/248803
[20] Delone, W. H., & Mclean, E. R. (1992). Information Systems
Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable. Information
Systems Research, 3(1), 60–95.
[21] Delone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and
McLean Model of Information Systems Success : A Ten-Year
Update. Journal of Management Information System, 19, 9–31.
[22] DeLone, W. H., & Mclean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and
McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year
Update. Journal of Management Information Systems / Spring,
19(4), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0914199107
[23] Fan, J. C., & Fang, K. (2006). ERP implementation and
information systems success: A test of DeLone and McLean’s
model. Portland International Conference on Management of
Engineering and Technology, 3(c), 1272–1278.
https://doi.org/10.1109/PICMET.2006.296695
[24] Gbenga, F., Victor, A., Godspower, E., Solomon, A., & Janet,
K. (2013). Adoption of mobile learning among 3g-enabled
handheld users using extended technology acceptance model.
World Journal on Educational Technology, 5(3), 420–430.
[25] Gelo, O., Braakmann, D., & Benetka, G. (2008). Quantitative
and qualitative research: Beyond the debate. Integrative
Psychological and Behavioral Science, 42((3)), 266–290.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-008-9078-3
[26] Global Information Technology Report. (2016). Importance of
ICTs to government vision of the future and Impact of ICTs on
organizational in UAE, World Economic Forum.
[27] Gorla, N., Somers, T. M., & Wong, B. (2010). Organizational
impact of system quality, information quality, and service
quality. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 19(3), 207–
228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2010.05.001
[28] Greengard, S. (2015). The Internet of Things. (T. M. Press, Ed.).
[29] Hassanzadeh, A., Kanaani, F., & Elahi, S. (2012). A model for
measuring e-learning systems success in universities. Expert
Systems with Applications, 39(12), 10959–10966.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.03.028
[30] Hou, C.-K. (2012). Examining the effect of user satisfaction on
system usage and individual performance with business
intelligence systems: An empirical study of Taiwan’s electronics
industry. International Journal of Information Management,
32(6), 560–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.03.001
[31] Hussein, R., Karim, N. S. A., & Selamat, M. H. (2007). The
impact of technological factors on information systems success
in the electronic-government context. Business Process
Management Journal, 13(5), 613–627.
https://doi.org/10.1108/14637150710823110
[32] Internet World Stats. (2015). Internet Users in the World
Distribution by World Regions.
[33] Isaac, O., Abdullah, Z., Ramayah, T., Mutahar, A. M., &
Alrajawy, I. (2016). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of
Use, Perceived Compatibility, and Net Benefits: an empirical
study of internet usage among employees in Yemen. In 7th
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE on POSTGRADUATE
EDUCATION (pp. 899–919). Shah Alam, Malaysia.
[34] ITU. (2017). ICT development index. Retrieved August 16,
2018, from
http://www.itu.int/net4/ITU-D/idi/2017/#idi2017economycard-
tab&ARE
[35] Jennex, M., Olfman, L., Panthawi, P., & Park, Y.-T. (1998).
Organizational Memory Information Systems Success Model:
An Extension of DeLone and McLean’s IS Success Model. In
Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
(pp. 157–165).
[36] Jung, T., Chung, N., & Leue, M. C. (2015). The determinants of
recommendations to use augmented reality technologies: The
case of a Korean theme park. Tourism Management, 49(1), 75–
86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.02.013
[37] Khayun, V., & Ractham, P. (2011). Measuring e-excise tax
success factors: Applying the DeLone & McLean information
systems success model. In In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10).
Honolulu.
[38] Kim, B. G., Park, S. C., & Lee, K. J. (2007). A structural
equation modeling of the Internet acceptance in Korea.
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 6(4), 425–
432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2006.08.005
[39] 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
[40] Kripanont, N. (2007). Examining a Technology Acceptance
Model of Internet Usage by Academics within Thai Business
Schools. School of Information Systems, Faculty of Business
and Law, Victoria University.
[41] Kristensen, S. M. (2016). Understanding factors influencing
Danish consumers ’ intention to use mobile payment at point-of-
sale, (June).
[42] Lancaster, G. (2005). Research methods in management: a
concise introduction to research in management and business
consultancy. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
[43] Lederer, A. L., Maupin, D. J., Sena, M. P., & Zhuang, Y.
(2000). The technology acceptance model and the World Wide
Web. Decision Support Systems, 29(3), 269–282.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(00)00076-2
[44] Lee, K., Lee, S., & Kim, J. (2005). Analysis of Mobile
Commerce Performance by using the Task-Technology Fit.
Mobile Information Systems, 158(1), 135–153.
[45] Lee, S., & Kim, B. G. (2009). Factors affecting the usage of
intranet: A confirmatory study. Computers in Human Behavior,
25(1), 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.08.007
[46] Lee, S., Park, D. H., & Han, I. (2014). New members’ online
socialization in online communities: The effects of content
quality and feedback on new members’ content-sharing
intentions. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 344–354.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.09.015
[47] Lian, J.-W. (2015). Critical factors for cloud based e-invoice
service adoption in Taiwan: An empirical study. International
Journal of Information Management, 35(1), 98–109.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.10.005
[48] Lin, F., Fofanah, S. S., & Liang, D. (2011). Assessing citizen
adoption of e-Government initiatives in Gambia: A validation of
the technology acceptance model in information systems
success. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), 271–279.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.09.004
[49] Lin, H. F. (2007). Predicting consumer intentions to shop online:
An empirical test of competing theories. Electronic Commerce
Research and Applications, 6, 433–442.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2007.02.002
[50] Lin, W.-S., & Wang, C.-H. (2012). Antecedences to continued
intentions of adopting e-learning system in blended learning
instruction: A contingency framework based on models of
information system success and task-technology fit. Computers
& Education, 58(1), 88–99.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.008
[51] Lin, W. S., & Wang, C. H. (2012). Antecedences to continued
intentions of adopting e-learning system in blended learning
instruction: A contingency framework based on models of
information system success and task-technology fit. Computers
and Education, 58(1), 88–99.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.008
[52] Liu, Y., Li, H., & Carlsson, C. (2010). Factors driving the
adoption of m-learning: An empirical study. Computers and
Education, 55(3), 1211–1219.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.018
[53] Lu, H.-P., & Yang, Y.-W. (2014). Toward an understanding of
the behavioral intention to use a social networking site: An
extension of task-technology fit to social-technology fit.
Computers in Human Behavior, 34(1), 323–332.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.020
[54] Lwoga, E. (2013). Measuring the success of library 2.0
technologies in the African context: The suitability of the
DeLone and McLean model. Campus-Wide Information
Systems, 30(4), 288–307. https://doi.org/10.1108/CWIS-02-
2013-0011
[55] Makokha, M. W., & Ochieng, D. O. (2014). Assessing the
Success of ICT ’ s from a User Perspective : Case Study of
Coffee Research Foundation in Kenya. Journal of Management
and Strategy, 5(4), 46–54. https://doi.org/10.5430/jms.v5n4p46
[56] Malhotra, N. K., Agarwal, J., & Peterson, M. (1996).
Methodological issues in cross-cultural marketing research: A
state-of-the-art review. International Marketing Review, 13(5),
7–43. article.
[57] McFarland, D. J., & Hamilton, D. (2006). Adding contextual
specificity to the technology acceptance model. Computers in
Human Behavior, 22(3), 427–447.
[58] McNamee, R. (2011). 6 ways to save the internet. TED Global
Conference. United States: TED Global Conference. Retrieved
from
https://www.ted.com/talks/roger_mcnamee_six_ways_to_save_t
he_internet
[59] Mohammadi, H. (2015). Investigating users ’ perspectives on e-
learning : An integration of TAM and IS success model.
Computers in Human Behavior, 45(1), 359–374.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.044
[60] Montrieux, H., Vangestel, S., Raes, A., Matthys, P., &
Schellens, T. (2015). Blending face-to-face higher education
with web-based lectures: Comparing different didactical
application scenarios. Educational Technology and Society,
18(1), 170–182.
[61] Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social Research Methods: Qualitative
and Quantitative Approaches. Relevance of social research
(Seventh Ed, Vol. 8). Pearson Education.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3211488
[62] Ngai, E. W. T., Poon, J. K. L., & Chan, Y. H. C. (2007).
Empirical examination of the adoption of WebCT using TAM.
Computers & Education, 48(1), 250–267.
[63] Nie, N. H., & Erbring, L. (2002). Internet and society : A
Preliminary Report. IT&SOCIETY, 1(1), 275–283.
[64] Nistor, N., Lerche, T., Weinberger, A., Ceobanu, C., &
Heymann, O. (2014). Towards the integration of culture into the
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. British
Journal of Educational Technology, 45(1), 36–55.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01383.x
[65] Norzaidi, M., Chong, S. C., Murali, R., & Salwani, M. I. (2007).
Intranet usage and managers’ performance in the port industry.
Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(8), 1227–1250.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570710822831
[66] Norzaidi, M. D., & Salwani, M. I. (2009). Evaluating
technology resistance and technology satisfaction on students’
performance. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 26(4), 298–
312. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650740910984637
[67] Ogara, S. O., Koh, C. E., & Prybutok, V. R. (2014).
Investigating factors affecting social presence and user
satisfaction with Mobile Instant Messaging. Computers in
Human Behavior, 36, 453–459.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.064
[68] Pahnila, S., Siponen, M., & Zheng, X. (2011). Integrating Habit
into UTAUT: The Chinese eBay Case. Pacific Asia Journal of
the Association for Information Systems, 3(2), 1–30.
[69] Parveen, F., & Sulaiman, A. (2008). Technology Complexity ,
Personal Innovativeness And Intention To Use Wireless Internet
Using Mobile Devices In Malaysia, 4(5), 1–10.
[70] Pedhazur, E. J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral
research (3rd ed.). Wadsworth Publishing.
[71] Petter, S., & McLean, E. R. (2009). A meta-analytic assessment
of the DeLone and McLean IS success model: An examination
of IS success at the individual level. Information and
Management, 46(3), 159–166.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2008.12.006
[72] Pituch, K. A., & Lee, Y. (2006). The influence of system
characteristics on e-learning use. Computers & Education,
47(1), 222–244
[73]