E-government users evolve through time. The maturity of information technologies used by the public sector allows new opportunities and perils for citizens worldwide. It also leads to more efficient use of government resources applied to the knowledge and profile of potential users. Despite the importance of e-government, the diffusion of this technology is an exception for many governments. There are very few studies on this topic to understand how user profiles support public policies for technology. This research aims to contribute to the profile of e-government using the diffusion of innovation theory as a framework. We collect information from Mexico's and Spain's users from governmental databases and analyze them through logistic regression, which helps define e-government users’ profiles in these two countries.
AjzenI (1985) From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In: KuhlJBeckmanJ (eds) Action-control: From Cognition to Behavior. Heidelberg: Springer, 11–39.
2.
AjzenIFishbeinM (1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3.
AkmanIYaziciAMishraA, et al. (2005) E-Government: A global view and an empirical evaluation of some attributes of citizens. Government Information Quarterly22(2): 239–257.
4.
Al-SobhiFWeerakkodyV (2011) The roles of intermediaries in e-government diffusion and adoption: A case study of Madinah city in Saudi Arabia. In: Stakeholder Adoption of E-Government Services: Driving and Resisting Factors. IGI Global, 103–115[11].
5.
Al AwadhiSMorrisA (2008) The use of the UTAUT model in the adoption of e-government services in Kuwait. Proceedings of the 41st Annual, IEEE, Hawaii, January.
6.
AyachiRBoukhrisIMellouliS, et al. (2016) Proactive and reactive e-government services recommendation. Universal Access in the Information Society15(4): 681–697.
7.
BarqueraSHernández-BarreraLTrejo-ValdiviaB, et al. (2020) Obesidad en México, prevalencia y tendencias en adultos. Salud Pública de México62(6): 682–692.
8.
Barrera-BarreraRRey-MorenoMMedina-MolinaC (2019) Factores explicativos de la preferencia y uso de la administración electrónica en España. Revista de Administração Pública53: 349–374.
9.
BélangerFCarterL (2009) The impact of the digital divide on e-government use. Communications of the ACM52(4): 132–135.
10.
BovairdTRyzinGGVLoefflerE, et al. (2015) Activating citizens to participate in collective co-production of public services. Journal of Social Policy44(1): 1–23.
11.
CamilleriMA (2019, February) Exploring the behavioral intention to use e-government services: validating the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. In: KommersP (eds) 9th International Conference on Internet Technologies & Society. Lingnan University, Hong Kong. IADIS.
12.
CarterLBélangerF (2005) The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal15(1): 5–25.
13.
ChangICLiYCHungWF, et al. (2005) An empirical study on the impact of quality antecedents on tax payers’ acceptance of internet tax-filing systems. Government Information Quarterly22(3): 389–410.
14.
ChoJS (2017) Evolution of e-government: Transparency, competency, and service-oriented government with Korean government 3.0. Journal of business and retail management research12(1.
15.
ColescaSEDobricaL (2008) Adoption and use of e-government services: The case of Romania. Journal of Applied Research and Technology6: 204–217.
16.
CompeauDRHigginsCA (1995) Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills. Information Systems Research6(2): 118–143.
17.
DavisFD (1986) A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. PhD. diss., MIT Sloan School of Management[13].
18.
DavisFDBagozziRPWarshawPR (1992) Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology22(14): 1111–1132.
19.
DimitrovaDVChenYC (2006) Profiling the adopters of E-government information and services: The influence of psychological characteristics, civic mindedness, and information channels. Social Science Computer Review24(2): 172–188.
20.
DwivediYKWeerakkodyVJanssenM (2012) Moving towards maturity: Challenges to successful e-government implementation and diffusion. ACM SIGMIS Database: The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems42(4): 11–22.
21.
DwivediYKWilliamsMD (2008) Demographic influence on UK citizens’e-government adoption. Electronic Government, an International Journal5(3): 261–274.
22.
FaisalMAl-QouzHHusainF (2016) A direct method for measuring user experience in E-government portals (May 2016). 2016 15th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), 1-4.
23.
Fath-AllahACheikhiLAl-QutaishRE, et al. (2016) Toward a Measurement Based E-Government Portals’ Benchmarking Framework. In Proceedings of the Mediterranean Conference on Information & Communication Technologies 2015: MedCT 2015 Volume 2 (pp. 161-169). Springer International Publishing.
24.
Gomez-ReynosoJMSandoval-AlmazánR (2013) The adoption of e-government services in Mexico: A citizens’ perception analysis. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management3(06): 12.
25.
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.
26.
HomburgVMDijkshoornA (2013) Diffusion of personalized e-government services among Dutch municipalities: An empirical investigation and explanation. In: E-Government Services Design, Adoption, and Evaluation. IGI Global, 221–237.
27.
HosmerDWLemeshowSSturdivantRX (2013) Applied Logistic regression. In Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics Wiley series in probability and statistics, 3rd ed.
28.
HungSYTangKZChangCM, et al. (2009) User acceptance of intergovernmental services: An example of electronic document management system. Government Information Quarterly26(2): 387–397.
29.
KhanGFMoonJHRheeC, et al. (2010) E-government skills identification and development: Toward a staged-based user-centric approach for developing countries. Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems20(1): 1–31.
30.
LayneKLeeJ (2001) Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly18(2): 122–136.
31.
LeeJBPorumbescuGA (2019) Engendering inclusive e-government use through citizen IT training programs. Government Information Quarterly36(1): 69–76.
32.
MaLZhengY (2018) Does e-government performance actually boost citizen use? Evidence from European countries. Public Management Review20(10): 1513–1532.
33.
ManoharanAPIngramsAKangD, et al. (2021) Globalization and worldwide best practices in E-government. International Journal of Public Administration44(6): 465–476.
34.
MensahIKMiJ (2018) Exploring the impact of demographic factors on e-government services adoption. Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ)31(3): 1–16.
35.
MillerJB (2012) Toward a new psychology of women. Beacon Press.
36.
MooreGCBenbasatI (1991) Development of an instrumento measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research2(3): 192–222.
37.
MorrisMGVenkateshV (2000) Age differences in technology adoption decisions: Implications for a changing work force. Personnel Psychology53(2): 375–403.
38.
NamTSayogoDS (2011) Who uses e-government?: Examining the digital divide in e-government use. 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV 2011): 27–36.
39.
NgafeesonMNMerhiMI (2013) E-Government diffusion: Evidence from the last decade. International Journal of Electronic Government Research9(2): 1–18.
40.
PietersonWEbbersWvan DijkJ (2005) The opportunities and barriers of user profiling in the public sector. In Electronic Government: 4th International Conference, EGOV 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 22-26, 2005. Proceedings 4 (pp. 269-280). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
41.
Rabaa’AAiNA (2017) The use of UTAUT to investigate the adoption of e-government in Jordan: A cultural perspective. International Journal of Business Information Systems24(3): 285.
42.
Rodríguez-RamírezSGaona-PinedaEBMartínez-TapiaB, et al. (2021) Inseguridad alimentaria y percepción de cambios en la alimentación en hogares mexicanos durante el confinamiento por la pandemia de COVID-19. Salud Pública de México63(6): 763–772.
43.
RodriguesGSarabdeenJBalasubramanianS (2016) Factors that influence consumer adoption of E-government services in the UAE: A UTAUT model perspective. Journal of Internet Commerce15(1): 18–39.
44.
RogersEM (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition. Simon and Schuster.
45.
RosenP (2005) Acceptance and rejection: Two sides of the same coin, or two different coins? DIGIT 2005 Proceedings.
46.
Sandoval-AlmazanRValle-CruzDKavanaughAL (2018) The diffusion of social media among state governments in Mexico. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age (IJPADA)5(1): 63–81.
47.
SchmidthuberLStützSHilgersD (2019) Outcomes of open government: Does an online platform improve citizens’ perception of local government?International Journal of Public Sector Management32(5): 489–507.
48.
SharmaSK (2015) Adoption of e-government services: The role of service quality dimensions and demographic variables. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy9(2): 207–222.
49.
SusantoTDGoodwinR (2013) User acceptance of SMS-based e-government services: Differences between adopters and non-adopters. Government Information Quarterly30(4): 486–497.
50.
TaipaleS (2013) The use of e-government services and the internet: The role of socio-demographic, economic and geographical predictors. Telecommunications Policy37(4): 413–422.
51.
TaylorSToddPA (1995) Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research6(2): 144–176.
52.
ThomasJCStreibG (2003) The new face of government: Citizen-initiated contacts in the era of E-government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory13(1): 83–102.
53.
ThompsonRLHigginsCAHowellJM (1991) Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly15(1): 124–143.
54.
Tremblay-CantinCAMellouliSCheikh-AmmarM, et al. (2023) E-government service adoption by citizens: A literature review and a high-level model of influential factors. Digital Government: Research and Practice4(1): 1–24.
55.
Valle-CruzDSandoval-AlmazanR (2020) Diffusion of innovations among Mexico: The technology adoption of state governments. In: Digital Government and Achieving E-Public Participation: Emerging Research and Opportunities. IGI Global, 39–62.
56.
Van den BergACGiestSNGroeneveldSM, et al. (2020) Inclusivity in online platforms: Recruitment strategies for improving participation of diverse sociodemographic groups. Public Administration Review80(6): 989–1000.
57.
van DijkJPietersonWvan DeurenA, et al. (2007) Services for citizens: The Dutch usage case. In: WimmerMASchollHJGrönlundA (eds) International Conference on Electronic Government. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 155–166.
58.
VenkateshVBalaH (2008) Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences39(2): 273–315.
59.
VenkateshVDavidFD (2000) Theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science46: 186–204.
60.
VenkateshVMorrisMG (2000) Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly24: 115–139.
61.
VenkateshVMorrisMGSykesTA, et al. (2004) Individual reactions to new technologies in the workplace: The role of gender as a psychological construct. Journal of Applied Social Psychology34(3): 445–467.
62.
VenkateshVSykesTAVenkatramanS (2014) Understanding e-government portal use in rural India: Role of demographic and personality characteristics. Information Systems Journal24(3): 249–269.
63.
VerdegemPVerleyeG (2009) User-centered E-government in practice: A comprehensive model for measuring user satisfaction. Government Information Quarterly26(3): 487–497.
64.
WelchEWHinnantCCMoonMJ (2005) Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory15(3): 371–391.
65.
WestDM (2004) E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Administration Review64(1): 15–27.
66.
WijnhovenFEhrenhardMKuhnJ (2015) Open government objectives and participation motivations. Government Information Quarterly32(1): 30–42.
67.
ZeebareeM.AgoyiM.AqelM. (2022). Sustainable adoption of E-government from the UTAUT perspective. Sustainability, 14(9), 5370.
