Gender differences in perception and usage of public transit technologies: : Implications for digital government
Abstract
Technological solutions available to public agencies in delivering public services have increased, including the information and communication technologies (ICTs) used in public transit. For many women who depend on public transit services to access employment, childcare, education, health, and political processes (Hamilton & Jenkins, 2000), transit technologies may offer increased convenience and benefits and eventually improve their living conditions. While women tend to use public transit services more intensively than men (Racca & Ratledge, 2004), prior studies have shown that their perceptions and attitudes towards ICTs and patterns of technology use tend to differ from men. On the other hand, these differences are not well explored in the context of public transit services. Accordingly, using systematic literature review methodology, this paper intends to outline what we know and do not know about gender differences in technology adoption in the public transportation context to develop a research agenda for future studies. It aims to inform theory and policy development for digital government by identifying the gaps in this area.
References
[1]
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitude and predicting social behavior. Prentice-Hall Inc.: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
[2]
Ameen, N., & Willis, R. (2019). Towards closing the gender gap in Iraq: understanding gender differences in smartphone adoption and use. Information Technology for Development, 25(4), 660-685.
[3]
Boneva, B., Kraut, R., & Frohlich, D. (2001). Using e-mail for personal relationships: the difference gender makes. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 530-549.
[4]
Booz Allen Hamilton (2002). International e-economy benchmarking: The world’s most effective policies for the e-economy. London: Booz Allen Hamilton.
[5]
Brown, M.M., & Brudney, J.L. (2001, October). Achieving advanced electronic government services: An examination of obstacles and implications from an international perspective. In National Public Management Research Conference, Bloomington, IN, Vol. 2, pp. 143-49.
[6]
Chen, S.Y., & Macredie, R. (2010). Web-based interaction: a review of three important human factors. International Journal of Information Management, 30(5), 379-387.
[7]
Choe, P., Liao, C., & Sun, W. (2012). Providing customisation guidelines of mobile phones for manufacturers. Behaviour and Information Technology, 31(10), 983-994.
[8]
Chorus, C.G. (2007). Traveler Response to Information, T2007/2, TRAIL Thesis Series, The Netherlands.
[9]
Chorus, C.G., Molin, E.J., & Van Wee, B. (2006). Use and effects of Advanced Traveller Information Services (ATIS): a review of the literature. Transport Reviews, 26(2), 127-149.
[10]
Chung, K.C. (2014). Gender, culture and determinants of behavioral intents to adopt mobile commerce among the Y generation in transition economies: evidence from Kazakhstan. Behaviour and Information Technology, 33(7), 743-756.
[11]
Clarinval, A., Simonofski, A., Vanderose, B., & Dumas, B. (2020). Public displays and citizen participation: a systematic literature review and research agenda. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, In press.
[12]
Cozens, P., Neale, R., Hillier, D., & Whitaker, J. (2004). Tackling crime and fear of crime while waiting at Britain’s railway stations. Journal of Public Transportation, 7, 23-41.
[13]
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
[14]
Dickhäuser, O., & Stiensmeier-Pelster, J. (2002). Gender differences in computer work: evidence for the model of achievement-related choices. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(3), 486-496.
[15]
DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Celeste, C., & Shafer, S. (2004). Social inequality. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
[16]
Emmerink, R.H., Nijkamp, P., Rietveld, P., & Van Ommeren, J.N. (1996). Variable message signs and radio traffic information: an integrated empirical analysis of drivers’ route choice behaviour. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 30(2), 135-153.
[17]
Ferris, B., Watkins, K., & Borning, A. (2010, April). OneBusAway: results from providing real-time arrival information for public transit. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1807-1816.
[18]
Guo, J., Susilo, Y., Antoniou, C., & Pernestål Brenden, A. (2020). Influence of individual perceptions on the decision to adopt automated bus services. Sustainability, 12(16), 6484.
[19]
Hamilton, K., & Jenkins, L. (2000). A gender audit for public transport: a new policy tool in the tackling of social exclusion. Urban Studies, 37, 1793-1800.
[20]
Hargittai, E., & Shafer, S. (2006). Differences in actual and perceived online skills: the role of gender. Social Science Quarterly, 87(2), 432-448.
[21]
Howard, P., Rainie, L., & Jones, S. (2001). Days and nights on the internet: the impact of a diffusing technology. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 383-404.
[22]
Hulse, L.M., Xie, H., & Galea, E.R. (2018). Perceptions of autonomous vehicles: relationships with road users, risk, gender and age. Safety Science, 102, 1-13.
[23]
Islam, M.F., Fonzone, A., MacIver, A., & Dickinson, K. (2019). Use of ubiquitous real-time bus passenger information. IET Intelligent Transport Systems, 14(3), 139-147.
[24]
Jabbour, C.J.C., Fiorini, P.D.C., Ndubisi, N.O., de Queiroz, M.M., & Piato, É.L. (2020). Digitally-enabled sustainable supply chains in the 21st century: a review and a research agenda. Science of the Total Environment, 138-177.
[25]
Jaeger, P.T., & Thompson, K.M. (2003). E-government around the world: lessons, challenges, and new directions. Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 389-394.
[26]
Kamga, C., Yazıcı, M.A., & Singhal, A. (2013). Implementation of interactive transit information kiosks at New York City transit facilities: analysis of user utilization and lessons learned. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 35, 218-231.
[27]
Katz, J.E., & Rice. R.E. (2002). Social Consequences of Internet Use: Access, Involvement and Interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[28]
Kennedy, T., Wellman, B., & Klement, K. (2003), Gendering the digital divide. IT and Society, 1(5), 72-96.
[29]
Kose, T. (2019). Gender and use of e-government services in Turkey: E-government in Turkey. In Gender Gaps and the Social Inclusion Movement in ICT, pp. 130-146. IGI Global.
[30]
Larsen, E., & Rainie, L. (2002). The rise of the e-citizen: How people use government agencies’ Web sites. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
[31]
Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2014). Fear and safety in transit environments from the women’s perspective. Security Journal, 27(2), 242-256.
[32]
Loukaitou-Sideris, A., & Fink, C. (2009). Addressing women’s fear of victimization in transportation settings: a survey of US transit agencies. Urban Affairs Review, 44(4), 554-587.
[33]
Madden, T.J., Ellen, P.S., & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 3-9.
[34]
Martin, F., & Goggin, G. (2016). Digital transformation? Gendering the end-user in digital government policy. Journal of Information Policy, 6, 436-459.
[35]
Michie, S., & Nelson, D.L. (2006). Barriers women face in information technology careers: self-efficacy, passion and gender biases. Women in Management Review, 21(1), 10-27.
[36]
Mossberger, K., & Tolbert, C.J. (2009). Digital excellence in Chicago: A citywide view of technology use. Study Commissioned by: City of Chicago Department of Innovation and Technology. Report available online at: http://www.cityofchicago.org/dam/city/depts/doit/supp_info/DEI/Digital_Excellence_Study_2009.pdf.
[37]
Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C.J., & Gilbert, M. (2006). Race, place and information technology. Urban Affairs Review, 41, 583-620.
[38]
Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C., & Stansbury, M. (2003). Virtual Inequality: Beyond the digital divide. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
[39]
Polydoropoulou, A., & Ben-Akiva, M. (1998). “Effect of Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS) on Travelers’ Behavior.” Presented at the 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, January 1998.
[40]
Peirce, S., & Lappin, J. (2004). Why don’t more people use advanced traveler information? Evidence from the Seattle area. Paper presented at the 83rd meeting of the Transportation.
[41]
Petrella, M., & Lappin, J. (2004). Comparative analysis of customer response to online traffic information in two cities: Los Angeles, California, and Seattle, Washington. Transportation Research Record, 1886(1), 10-17.
[42]
Racca, D., & Ratledge, E. (2004). Factors that Affect and/or Can Alter Mode Choice, Delaware Transportation Institute. Newark, USA.
[43]
Reed, T.B., Wallace, R.R., & Rodriguez, D.A. (2000). Transit passenger perceptions of transit-related crime reduction measures. Transportation Research Record, 1731(1), 130-141.
[44]
Rivadeneyra, A.T., Dodero, A.L., Mehndiratta, S.R., Alves, B.B., & Deakin, E. (2015). Reducing Gender-Based Violence in Public Transportation: Strategy Design for Mexico City, Mexico. Transportation Research Record, 2531(1), 187-194.
[45]
Rodríguez-Ardura, I., & Meseguer-Artola, A. (2016). Presence in personalised e-learning – the impact of cognitive and emotional factors and the moderating role of gender. Behaviour and Information Technology, 35(11), 1008-1018.
[46]
Sarker, R.I., Kaplan, S., Anderson, M.K., Haustein, S., Mailer, M., & Timmermans, H.J. (2019). Obtaining transit information from users of a collaborative transit app: platform-based and individual-related motivators. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 102, 173-188.
[47]
Shirgaokar, M. (2020). Expanding seniors’ mobility through phone apps: potential responses from the private and public sectors. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 40(4), 405-415.
[48]
Stowers, G.N.L. (2002). The state of federal Web sites: The pursuit of excellence. Accessed January 12, 2008. Available at: http://www.endowment.pwcglobal.com/pdfs/StowersReport0802.pdf.
[49]
Tolbert, C., Mossberger, K., King, B., & Miller, G.L. (2007). Are all American women making progress online? African – Americans and Latinas. Information Technologies & International Development, 4(2), 61.
[50]
Velazquez, G., Kaplan, S., & Monzon, A. (2018). Ex-ante and ex-post evaluation of a new transit information app: modeling use intentions and actual use. Transportation Research Record, 2672(50), 56-65.
[51]
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F.D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
[52]
Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
[53]
Wasserman, I.M., & Richmond-Abbott, M. (2005). Gender and the internet: causes of variation in access, level, and scope of use. Social Science Quarterly, 86(1), 252-270.
[54]
Weiser, E.B. (2000). Gender differences in internet use patterns and internet application preferences: a two-sample comparison. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3(2), 167-178.
[55]
West, D.M. (2005). Digital government: Technology and public sector performance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
[56]
Yavuz, N. (2010). Understanding Citizens’ Adoption of New Technologies Used in Delivery of Public Service and Information. University of Illinois at Chicago. Social Sciences Institute. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Chicago, Illinois, USA.
[57]
Yavuz, N., & Welch, E.W. (2010). Addressing fear of crime in public space: gender differences in reaction to safety measures in train transit. Urban Studies, 47(12), 2491-2515.
[58]
Yim, Y., Khattak, A.J., & Raw, J. (2002). Traveler response to new dynamic information sources: analyzing corridor and area-wide behavioral surveys. Transportation Research Record, 1803(1), 66-75.
[59]
Zhou, Z., Jin, X.L., Vogel, D.R., Fang, Y., & Chen, X. (2011). Individual motivations and demographic differences in social virtual world uses: an exploratory investigation in second life. International Journal of Information Management, 31(3), 261-271.
Index Terms
- Gender differences in perception and usage of public transit technologies: Implications for digital government
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Digital Government Initiatives in Balochistan: a case study
ICTD '17: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and DevelopmentThis research study 1 aims to analyse the digital government initiatives in Balochistan. The study finds that there is a lack of e-readiness even if public sector officials are willing to use Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) to enhance ...
E-government and citizen's engagement with local affairs through e-websites
Highlights Spanish municipalities have embarked upon a wave of e-government initiatives that make use of ICT. With ICT being introduced in organisations, managers could build on an existing culture of awareness of and sensitivity to information and ...
Gender Differences in ICT Use Among Small Business Owners in Ghana
In the last two decades, microfinance institutions across regions have helped to financially build small businesses in areas of disadvantaged populations. The efforts in providing entrepreneurs with small non-collateralized loans or micro-loans along ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
© 2022 – IOS Press. All rights reserved.
Publisher
IOS Press
Netherlands
Publication History
Published: 01 January 2022
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 27 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
View options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in