No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This paper compares the relative advantages of two models (a) a two‐factor (i.e. source and channel) choice model; and (b) a theory of planned behaviour (TPB)–based acceptance model, developed to explain electronic government (e‐government) service adoption. The models were empirically validated in the government‐to‐citizen (G2C) anti/counter‐terrorism (ACT) service domain by a telephone survey administered to a sample of 500 US residents systematically drawn from the mainland USA. The structured telephone survey questionnaire measured respondents' intentions to use Web‐based ACT services and their beliefs and attitudes towards various ACT service providers (e.g. the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Homeland Security, local police, non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) and news companies) and media (e.g. Web, email, telephone, TV, newspapers, postal mail). The results of multiple‐regression analysis of the 500 interview responses show that the source–channel choice model can explain the service usage intentions as well as, or better than, the TPB‐based acceptance model. Both service source and channel exerted consistent and substantive effects on citizens' intention to use ACT services, explaining, on average, more than 43% of variance in the dependent variable. In contrast, subjective norms in the TPB‐based model seemed to have a marginal effect. Privacy protection and integrity of the service source appeared to be key antecedents of source preference, while the influence of channel attributes on channel preference varied widely depending on the type of services. This study provides an empirical basis for the validity and applicability of the source–channel choice model and offers insightful and prescriptive knowledge for e‐government initiatives and service providers.