Prior research has highlighted the pivotal role of trust in the adoption of e-voting. However, trust as a construct has generally been studied without clear specifications of its underlying dimensions. As part of building a more comprehensive understanding of trust in e-voting, we propose and validate the underlying dimensions of trust in technology to be security, usability, privacy and validity. In an application to e-voting, we propose that greater trust in its technology could mitigate its perceived risks, and lead to higher intentions to use e-voting. To test our model, we collected data from 426 voters in East Java province, Indonesia. The findings confirmed the validity of all proposed dimensions of trust of technology. Trust of technology is a significant determinant of intention to use e-voting. Trust of technology also indirectly influences intentions to use e-voting through perceived risks.
AndersonJCGerbingDW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin103(3): 411–423.
2.
AljarrahEElrehailHAababnehB (2016) E-voting in Jordan: assessing readiness and developing a system. Computers in Human Behavior63: 860–867.
3.
ArmstrongE (2005) Integrity, Transparency and Accountability in Public Administration: Recent Trends, Regional and International Developments and Emerging Issues. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs: 1–10.
4.
ArmstrongJSOvertonTS (1977) Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research (14): 396–402.
5.
AvgerouC (2013) Explaining trust in IT-mediated elections: a case study of e-voting in Brazil. Journal of the Association for Information Systems14(8): 420–451.
6.
AkkayaCObermeierMWolfPKrcmarH (2011) Components of Trust Influencing eGovernment Adoption in Germany. In: 10th IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference (EGOV 2011), Delft, Netherlands, 28 August-2 September2011, London: Springer.
7.
BasuS (2004) E-government and developing countries: an overview. international review of law. computers, and technology18(1), 109–132.
8.
becerra ma and gupta k (1999) perceived trustworthiness within the organization: the moderating impact of communication frequency on trustor and trustee effects. Organization Science14(1): 32–44.
9.
BelangerFCarterL (2008) Trust and risk in e-government adoption. Journal of Strategic Information Systems17: 165–176.
10.
BelangerFHillerJSSmithWJ (2002) Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: the role of privacy, security, and site attributes. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems11(3): 245–270.
11.
BallC (2009) What is transparency?. Public Integrity11(4): 293–308.
12.
BenoitK (2004) Experience of electronic voting overseas. First Report of the Commission on Electronic Voting, pp. 311–326. The Policy Institute, Trinity College Dublin.
13.
BertotJCJaegerPTGrimesJM (2010) Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly (27): 264–271.
14.
BannisterFConnollyR (2011) Trust and transformational government: A proposed framework for research. Government Information Quarterly28(2): 137–147.
15.
BishopM.WagnerD (2007) Risks of e-voting. Communications of the ACM50(11): 20–20.
16.
BuchsbaumTM (2005) E-voting: lessons learnt from recent pilots. In International Conference on Electronic Voting and Electronic Democracy: Present and the Future, 1–22.
17.
BhattacherjeeA (2002) Individual trust in online firms: Scale development and initial test. Journal of management information systems19(1): 211–241.
18.
ButlerJKCantrellRS. (1984) A behavioral decision theory approach to modeling dyadic trust in superiors and subordinates. Psychological Reports (55): 19–28.
19.
ButlerJK (1991) Toward understanding and measuring conditions of trust: Evolution of a condition of trust inventory. Journal of Management17: 643–663.
20.
BeckerGS (1976) The Economic Approach to Human Behaviour. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
BertotJCJaegerPTGrimesJM (2010) Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly27(3): 264–271.
22.
BlindPK (2007) Building trust in government in the twenty-first century: Review of literature and emerging issues. In: 7th Global Forum on Reinventing Government Building Trust in Government, pp. 26–29,Vienna, Austria: UNDESA.
23.
BelangerFHillerJS (2006) A framework for e-government: privacy implications. Business Process Management Journal12 (1): 48–60.
24.
BourasCKatrisNTriantafillouV (2003) An electronic voting service to support decision-making in local government. Telematics and Informatics20(3): 255–274.
25.
BrughaC (2013) Project Management Decision Structures and Why Public Sector Management is Failing. In Operations Management at the Heart of the Recovery, European Operations Management Association (EurOMA), 20th International Conference: Dublin, 9–12June2013.
26.
BrughaCM (2015) Foundation of nomology. European Journal of Operational Research240(3): 734–747.
27.
CarterLBelangerF (2012) Internet voting and political participation: An empirical comparison of technological and political factors. The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 43(3). doi: 10.1145/2351848.2351851.
28.
CarterLBélangerF (2005) The utilization of e-government services: citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal15(1): 5–25.
29.
CenfetelliRTBassellierG (2009) Interpretation of formative measurement in information systems research. MIS Quarterly33(4): 689–707.
30.
ChenYHBarnesS (2007) Initial trust and online buyer behaviour. Industrial Management and Data Systems107(1): 21–36.
31.
ChinWGopalA (1995) Adoption intention in GSS: relative importance of beliefs. ACM Sig MIS Database26(2-3): 42–64.
32.
ChinWW (1998) Commentary: Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. MIS Quarterly, 22(1): vii–xvi.
33.
ChiuCWangE (2008) Understanding web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task value. Information and Management, 45(3): 194–201.
34.
ChenYNChenHMHuangW.ChingRKH. (2006) E-government strategies in developed and developing countries: an implementation framework and case study. Journal of Global Information Management1(14): 23–46.
35.
ChoiSOKimBC (2012) Voter intention to use e-voting technologies: security, technology acceptance, election type, and political ideology. Journal of Information Technology and Politics9(4): 433–452.
36.
CitrinJGreenDP (1986) Presidential leadership and the resurgence of trust in government. British Journal of Political Science16(4): 431–453.
37.
CordobaJR (2014) Systemic patterns of practice to improve e-government evaluation. In: Measuring E-Government Efficiency. Springer New York, pp. 9–27.
38.
CookJWallT (1980) New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment, and personal need nonfulfillment. Journal of Occupational Psychology53: 39–52.
39.
CourseyDKillingsworthJ (2000). Managing government web services in Florida: issues and lessons. In: Handbook of Public Information System. New York: Marcel Dekker, pp.331–44.
40.
CranorLFCrytonLK (1997) Sensus: A security-conscious electronic polling system for the Intemet. In: Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on system sciences, Vol. 3, pp. 561–570. IEEE.
41.
CreswellJW (2014) A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research. SAGE.
42.
ErmischJGambettaDLaurieHSiedlerTNoah UhrigSC (2009) Measuring people’s trust. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A172(4): 749–769.
43.
EvansDYenD (2006) E-government: Evolving relationship of citizens and government, domestic, and international development. Government Information Quarterly23: 207–235.
44.
FitraniFHofmanBKaitseraK (2005) Unity in diversity? The creation of new local governments in a decentralizing Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies41(1): 57–79.
45.
FungRKKLeeMKO (1999). EC-trust (trust in electronic commerce): exploring the antecedent factors. In: HasemanWDNazarethDL (eds) Proceedings of the Fifth Americas Conference on Information Systems, 13–15 August, pp. 517–519.
46.
FoggBJTsengH (1999) The element of computer credibility. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM: 80–87.
47.
FornellCLarckerJF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39–50.
48.
FuruholtBWahidF (2008) E-government Challenges and the Role of Political Leadership in Indonesia: the Case of Sragen. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Proceedings of the 41st Annual, pp. 411–411. IEEE.
49.
FloriniA (2010) The national context for transparency-based global environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics10(3): 20–131.
50.
GanesanSHessR (1997) Dimensions and levels of trust: Implications for commitment to a relationship. Marketing Letters8(4): 439–448.
51.
GarciaJRMoyanoMJ (2005) Exploring e-government evolution: The influence of systems of rules on organizational action. National Center for Digital Government.
52.
GoodhueDLWyboMDKirschLJ (1992) The impact of data integration on the costs and benefits of information systems. MIS Quarterly16(3): 293–311.
53.
GefenDKarahannaEStraubD (2003) Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated modelMIS Quarterly (27): 51–90.
54.
GeorgeDMalleryM (2010) SPSS for windows: step by step, 10a edition. Boston: Pearson.
55.
GrimmelikhuijsenS (2009) Do transparent government agencies strengthen trust?Information Polity14(3): 173–186.
56.
GoldsmithBRuthrauffH (2013) Implementing and overseeing electronic voting and counting technologies. International Foundation for Electoral Systems and National Democratic Institute for International.
57.
GrazioliSJavernpaaSL (2000) Perils of Internet fraud: An empirical investigation of deception and trust with experienced internet consumers. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics30(4): 395–410.
58.
GritzalisDA (2002) Principles and requirements for a secure e-voting system. Jounal of Computer and Security21(6): 539–556.
59.
GrönlundK (2004) Cyber Citizens: Mapping Internet Access and Digital Divides in Western Europe. In Electronic Voting and Democracy, pp. 20-38, London, Palgrave Macmillan.
60.
GefenDRoseGMWarkentinMPavlouPA (2005) Cultural diversity and trust in IT adoption: A comparison of potential e-voters in the USA and South Africa. Journal of Global Information Management. 13(1): 54–79.
61.
GuptaBDasguptaSGuptaA (2008) Adoption of ICT in a government organization in a developing country: An empirical study. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems17(2): 140–154.
HapsaraM (2014) E-voting Indonesia: A safety-critical-systems model towards standard and framework for Indonesia’s presidential election. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences8(4): 301–308.
64.
HeijdenVVerhagenTCreemersM (2003) Understanding online purchase intentions: contributions from technology and trust perspectives. European Journal of Information Systems12(1): 41–48.
65.
HoffmanLJJenkinsKBlumJ (2006) Trust beyond security: An expanded trust model. Communication of the ACM (49): 94–101.
66.
HetheringtonMJ (1998) The political relevance of political trust. The American Political Science Review92(4): 791–808.
67.
HealdD (2007) Varieties of Transparency In: HoodCHealdD (eds) Transparency: The Key to Better Governance?Oxford University Press. London, UK.
68.
HinnantC.WelchE (2003) Internet Use, Transparency, and Interactivity, Effects on Trust in Government. In: Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, USA, 6-9 January 2003.
69.
JaegerPTThompsonKM (2003) E-government around the world: Lessons, challenges, and future directions. Government Information Quarterly20(4): 389–394.
70.
JamesG (2000) Empowering bureaucrats. MC Technology Marketing Intelligence20 (12): 62–68.
71.
JansenJPBoschFJVolberdaHW (2005) Managing potential and realized absorptive capacity: How do organizational antecedents matter?. Academy of Management48(6): 999–1015.
72.
JarvenpaaSL (2002) Exploring the implications of m-commerce for markets and marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (30): 348–361.
73.
JarvenpaaSL andStaplesDS. (2000) The use of collaborative electronic media for information sharing: An exploratory study of determinants. Journal of Strategic Information Systems9(2): 129–154.
74.
KerstingNBaldersheimB (2004) Electronic voting and democratic issues: An introduction. In: Electronic Voting and Democracy, Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 3–19.
75.
KoppellJ (2005) Pathologies of accountability and the challenge of multiple accountabilities disorder. Public Administration Review65(1): 94–108.
76.
KimSLeeJ (2012) E-participation, transparency, and trust in local government. Public Administration Review72(6): 819–828.
77.
KoufarisM.Hampton-SosaW (2004) The development of initial trust in an online company by new customers. Information and Management41: 377–397.
78.
KuoHKHwangSL.WangEMY (2004) Evaluation research of information and supporting interface in electronic commerce web sites. Industrial Management and Data Systems104(9): 712–721.
79.
KurfalıMArifoğluATokdemirGPaçinY (2017) Adoption of e-government services in Turkey. Computers in Human Behavior66: 168–178.
80.
LauerTW (2004) The risk of e-voting. Electronic Journal of E-government2(3): 177–186.
81.
LeeMTurbanE (2001) A trust model for consumer Internet shopping. International Journal of Electronic Commerce6(1): 75–91.
82.
LaiIKTongVWLaiDC (2011) Trust factors influencing the adoption of internet-based interorganizational systems. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications10(1): 85–93.
83.
LoeberLCouncilDE (2008) E-voting in the Netherlands; from general acceptance to general doubt in two years. Electronic Voting131: 21–30.
84.
LefebvreLALefebvreEHarveyJ (1996) Intangible assets as determinants of advanced manufacturing technology adoption in SME’s: toward an evolutionary model. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management43(3): 307–322.
85.
LippertSK (2007) Investigating postadoption utilization: An examination into the role of interorganizational and technology trust. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management54(3): 468–483.
86.
LeeRMRenzettiCM (1990) The problems of researching sensitive topics: An overview and introduction. American Behavioral Scientist33(5): 530–538.
87.
LiebermanJK (1981) The litigious society. New York: Basic Books.
88.
LippertSKOjumuEB (2008) Thinking outside of the ballot box: Examining public trust in e-voting technology. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing20(3): 57–80.
89.
MartinsMR (1995) Size of municipalities, efficiency, and citizen participation: A cross-European perspective. Government and Policy13: 441-458.
90.
MayerRCDavisJHSchoormanFD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. The Academy of Management Review20(3): 709–734.
91.
McKnightDHChoudhuryVKacmarC (2002) Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information System Research13(3): 334–359.
92.
MitrouLGritzalisDKatsikasSQuirchmayrG (2002) Electronic voting: Constitutional and legal requirements, and their technical implications. Advances in Information Security7: 43–60.
93.
NdouV (2004) E-government for developing countries: opportunities and challenges. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries18(1): 1–24.
94.
NemeslakiAAranyossyMSasváriP (2016) Could on-line voting boost desire to vote?–Technology acceptance perceptions of young Hungarian citizens. Government Information Quarterly33(4): 705–714.
95.
NunnallyJ (1978) Psychometric Methods. 2nd, McGraw-Hill, New York.
96.
OostveenABesselaarP (2004) Internet voting technologies and civic participation: the users’ perspective. Journal of the European Institute for Communication and Culture11(1): 61–78.
97.
PavlouPA (2003) Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce7(3): 101–134.
98.
PowellAWilliamsCKBockDBDoellmanTAllenJ (2012) E-voting intent: A comparison of young and elderly voters. Government Information Quarterly29(3): 361–372.
99.
RichardPCovelloGVincentTMcCallumDB (1997) The determinants of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: an empirical study. Risk Analysis17(1): 43–54.
100.
SalamAFRaoHRPegelsCC (2003) Consumer-perceived risk in e-commerce transactions. Communications of the ACM46(12): 325–331.
101.
SchauppLCCarterL (2005) E-voting: From apathy to adoption. Journal of Enterprise Information Management18(5): 586–601.
102.
ScottJ (2000) Rational Choice Theory. In: BrowningGHalcliHWebsterF (eds) Understanding Contemporary Society: Theories of the Present. SAGE, London.
103.
ShapiroSP (1987) The social control of impersonal trust. American Journal of Sociology93(3): 623–658.
104.
SitkinSBPabloAL (1992) Re-conceptualizing the determinants of risk behavior. Academy of Management17(1): 9-38.
105.
SitkinSBRothNL (1993) Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic remedies for trust/distrust. Organization Science4: 367–392.
106.
SmithRG (2001) The risks and benefits of electronic voting. 15th Australian Forum—Melbourne. 3 March 2001
107.
SobelME (1986) Some new results on indirect effects and their standard errors in covariance structure. Sociological Methodology16: 159–186.
108.
TanYHTheonW (2001) Toward a generic model of trust for electronic commerce. International Journal of Electronic Commerce5(2): 61–74.
TezciE (2009) Teachers’ effect on ICT use in education: The Turkey sample. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences1: 1285–1294.
111.
TolbertCJMossbergerK (2006) The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review66(3): 354–369.
112.
Van der HeijdenHVerhagenTCreemersM (2003) Understanding online purchase intentions: contributions from technology and trust perspectives. European journal of information systems12(1): 41–48.
113.
WarkentinMGefenDPavlouPARoseGM (2002) Encouraging citizen adoption of e-government by building trust. Electronic Markets12(3): 157–162.
114.
XenakisAMacintoshA (2005) Trust analysis of the UK e-voting pilots. Social Science Computer Review23(3): 312–325.
115.
YaoYMurphyL (2007) Remote electronic voting systems: an exploration of voters’ perceptions and intention to use. European Journal of Information Systems16(2): 106–120.
