Factors Influencing The Intention To Use Electric Cars in Brazil 2022

Transportation Research Part A 155 (2022) 418–433
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Transportation Research Part A

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tra
Factors influencing the intention to use electric cars in Brazil

Marina Buranelli de Oliveira a, *, Hermes Moretti Ribeiro da Silva a, Daniel Jugend a,
Paula De Camargo Fiorini b, Carlos Eduardo Paro c
a
São Paulo State University (UNESP), Production Engineering Department, Bauru, SP, Brazil
b
Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar), Department of Administration, Sorocaba, SP, Brazil
c
University of São Paulo (USP), Department of Administration, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Electric cars have been gaining ground on the world market in recent years. In Brazil, the pres
Electric Cars ence of this new technology is still nascent and few studies on the subject are found in the
Electromobility in Brazil literature, especially in terms of consumer perspectives. This research aimed to identify the
Intention to Use
determining factors for the Intention to Use electric cars in Brazil, adopting a research model
Theory of Planned Behavior
Structural Equation Modeling
based on the Decomposed Theory of Planned Behavior and the influence of consumer emotions.
Adoption of New Technologies Data was collected from an online survey of 488 Brazilian respondents and analyzed using the
Structural Equation Modeling technique. The results reveal that a perceived relative advantage
and a perceived compatibility associated with the use of the electric car have a positive effect on
the attitudes of the respondents, and that positive attitudes towards the electric car have, in turn,
a positive effect on the Intention to Use the same. Attitudes towards the electric car and the in
fluence of emotions were identified as the biggest predictors of Intention to Use. The results also
indicate that, despite the positive inclination of respondents in relation to using and even buying
an electric car, there is still much concern about the charging infrastructure, charging time and
vehicle autonomy, in addition to other barriers, such as the purchase price. These findings are in
line with the results of several studies of the same scope, carried out in other countries. The
results of the present study may shed light on the discussion of the topic in Brazil, in addition to
providing stakeholders in electromobility in the country with information that benefits the
development of policies and guidelines for the spread of electric car use in Brazil.
1. Introduction
If, on the one hand, urban mobility represents one of the main challenges to sustainable development (Lozano et al., 2020; Köhler
et al., 2009), on the other hand, the automotive industry stands out for being one of those that most invests in the research and
development of technologies as alternatives to the use of fossil fuels (Faria et al., 2012).
Emerging countries greatly contribute to growing levels of consumption and environmental impacts (Ritter et al., 2015), since their
economic growth reflects an increased demand for energy and, consequently, an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. In Brazil,
increasing urbanization and greater consumer access to cars, starting in the late 1990 s, has worsened CO2 emission levels (Costa et al.,
2018; Costa and Seixas, 2014). The eighth largest car producer in the world, with 2,014,055 units produced in 2019 (OICA, 2019) and
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: maburanelli@gmail.com (M. Buranelli de Oliveira), hermes.silva@unesp.br (H. Moretti Ribeiro da Silva), daniel.jugend@
unesp.br (D. Jugend), paula.fiorini@ufscar.br (P. De Camargo Fiorini), carlos.paro@usp.br (C.E. Paro).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2021.11.018
Received 14 May 2020; Received in revised form 6 November 2021; Accepted 18 November 2021
Available online 12 December 2021
0965-8564/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Buranelli de Oliveira et al. Transportation Research Part A 155 (2022) 418–433
26 manufacturers in the country (National Association of Automotive Vehicle Manufacturers - ANFAVEA, 2020), Brazil relies heavily
on road transport, not only for freight but also for passenger transport. The transport sector accounts for 33% of the total energy
consumption in the country, with road transport accounting for over 93% of this amount. In addition, the sector accounts for 81.6% of
diesel oil consumption in the country (EPE, 2020).
Despite the high expressiveness at national and global levels of the automotive sector, in terms of production, consumption, and
energy expenditure, with regard to electric vehicles, Brazil does not follow the trend of other countries that appear at the top of the
energy and mobility agendas such as China, USA and India (Vargas et al., 2020). China is currently the largest market for electric cars
in the world, followed by Europe and the United States. Several countries have already established the phasing out of fossil fuel ve
hicles and most have determined an end to the sale of combustion vehicles by 2030. Brazil is not part of any major agreement to
discontinue combustion engine vehicles and promote electromobility (Burch and Gilchrist, 2018; IEA, 2021).
Among EVs, the most extensive market in Brazil is for Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV) (Costa et al., 2020). Although they are an
alternative to combustion engine vehicles, HEVs are still heavily dependent on fossil fuels. Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV), on the other
hand, which do not have combustion engines and operate purely from their batteries, being rechargeable through the electric grid,
present the lowest environmental impact, require the greatest disruption in consumer mentality and are currently the least widespread
in the Brazilian market (Li et al., 2017; Orecchini and Santiangeli, 2010; Yong et al., 2015). From here on, the term EV, as well as
electric cars, will be considered to refer to BEVs.
According to the International Energy Agency (2021), the current global electric car fleet exceeds 7.2 million units and is estimated
to reach the 23 million mark by 2030. In Brazil, the electric car market is still in its initial phase, totaling only 42,401 units by the end of
2020, a number that represents<0.6% of the world fleet (ANFAVEA, 2021).
In contrast, Brazil invests in ethanol as a clean fuel, being the world leader in production from sugarcane. However, this leads to
other environmental problems such as deforestation, soil, water and air contamination. There are also economic considerations, since
ethanol production competes with food production and export (Filoso et al., 2015; Gauder et al., 2011; Martinelli et al., 2011). These
factors show that Brazil will not be able to stay in this comfortable position for long and will need to take measures regarding other
alternatives to fossil fuels in the transport sector, including the need to accelerate the dissemination of electromobility (Baran and
Legey, 2013).
In addition to the competition with biofuel, the lack of incentives and an absence of government action for the mitigation of GHG
emissions, a high tax burden and the high cost of EV acquisition, are among other technological factors that have deeply discouraged
the adoption of electric vehicles in the country (Choma and Ugaya, 2017; Marx and Mello, 2014; Silva et al., 2018; Vargas et al., 2020;
Wittmann et al., 2013). But beyond these technological and political barriers, it is necessary to understand consumer positioning
regarding the dissemination of this new technology and draw conclusions from a socio-technical perspective (Rezvani et al., 2015;
Sovacool and Hirsh, 2009).
The expansion to emerging markets, such as Brazil, represents a significant opportunity for companies wishing to bring their
products to a wide range of new consumers (Kumar and Srivastava, 2020). However, it is important to know that the characteristics of
these emerging markets tend to be influenced by aspects such as price sensitive consumers, competition between local and global
brands and greater difficulties in product distribution and supply chains (Arunachalam et al., 2019; Giannetti and Rubera, 2020;
Kumar and Srivastava, 2020).
According to Vargas et al. (2020), any attempt to change transport paradigms in Brazil will face a mature market with unique
characteristics. Habich-Sobiegalla et al. (2018) state that EV purchase intention among Chinese citizens is higher than among Brazilian
and Russian citizens. The experience with the Brazilian automotive industry reveals a tendency to only accept the entry of new
technologies once it has already been consolidated internationally (Costa et al., 2020). Furthermore, culture and socioeconomic status
play a significant role in environmental impacts and influence the consumption of green products (Ritter et al., 2015). In any case,
there is a lack of studies that assess, from the perspective of the Brazilian consumer, what the motivations and perceived barriers to
adopting a VE are.
Recently, several studies have surveyed the motivations and barriers for the dissemination of electromobility in the world (Adnan
et al., 2018; Biresselioglu et al., 2018; Curtale et al., 2021; Haustein and Jensen, 2018; Simsekoglu and Nayum, 2019; Sovacool et al.,
2019). Among the most commonly encountered limiting factors are: (i) the very high purchase price compared to combustion engine
vehicles (Biresselioglu et al., 2018; Degirmenci and Breitner, 2017); (ii) the maximum mileage travelled on a single charge is
considered insufficient (Biresselioglu et al., 2018; Degirmenci and Breitner, 2017); (iii) battery and vehicle maintenance concerns; (iv)
the poor provision of public charging stations (Haustein and Jensen, 2018; She et al., 2017); (v) lack of trust and concerns about
technical and operational constraints (Biresselioglu et al., 2018; Graham-Rowe et al., 2012). In addition, there is (vi) little interest in
electric vehicles among many consumers due to a lack of information (Egbue and Long, 2012; Krause et al., 2013). Among the
motivating factors, the following stand out: (i) environmental benefits (Adnan et al., 2018; Degirmenci and Breitner, 2017; Schuitema
et al., 2013); (ii) economic benefits, such as a low cost per kilometre (Biresselioglu et al., 2018; Lebeau et al., 2013) and (iii) the
political support for the promotion of these vehicles, e.g., in the form of tax subsidies and reductions (Cansino et al., 2018; Sovacool
et al., 2019). Furthermore, consumer education as a public policy strategy is cited for improving knowledge and facilitating EV
purchasing decisions (Larson et al. 2014).
Despite the importance of a better understanding of emerging markets, the innovation management literature has still paid little
attention to large and emerging countries, such as Russia and Brazil (Giannetti and Rubera, 2020). Within this context, this study aims
to identify and measure which factors determine the Intention to Use electric cars in Brazil. By presenting and discussing results on
consumer behavior regarding the intention to use electric cars, our findings also contribute to this contemporary debate.
To achieve the proposed objective, we applied a survey with Brazilian respondents, developed from a research model based on the
419
Theory of Planned Behavior Decomposed (DTPB) (Taylor and Todd, 1995), and associated with the Consumer Emotions factor that was
subsequently analyzed through the method of Structural Equation Modeling. Thus, the precedents of the Intention to Use this tech
nology were identified, as well as the examination of the relationships between them. The contributions of this study are threefold.
First, our paper complements the extant literature on the behavioral intention to adopt electric vehicles by developing a research
model that addresses the theory of planned behavior in its decomposed form, the aforementioned DTPB. Second, our findings advance
the discussion on electromobility in Brazil by contributing to the dissemination of EV use in emerging economies and providing policy
implications for other countries with similar contexts. Third, our study can collaborate with the development of public, industrial, and
marketing strategies that aim to boost the market for EV and attract investment, thereby supporting the expansion of the EV infra
structure network and promoting more sustainable mobility alternatives.
2. Theoretical framework and hypotheses
The literature study by Rezvani et al. (2015) reviews several papers that investigated consumer behavior with respect to EV
adoption around the world and identified the main theoretical lenses through which this behavior can be studied, the Theory of
Planned Behavior (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) being one of the most adopted models. Taylor and Todd (1995) detail the factors behind TPB
constructs, developing a model called the Decomposed Theory of Planned Behavior (DTPB).
Furthermore, studies identified that consumer responses are not entirely cognitive and rational. Consumers are often emotional and
invoke various types of feelings (Kotler and Keller, 2012). Several studies recognize the power of emotions in the decision-making
process of consumers in terms of the adoption of new technologies (So et al., 2015; Ruiz-Mafe et al., 2018) and some even ascer
tain their determining role regarding electromobility (Graham-Rowe et al., 2012; Egbue and Long, 2012; Schuitema et al., 2013). One
of the objectives of this work is to understand how consumer emotions, together with the constructs of DRCT, are able to contribute to
the intention to use electric cars in Brazil.
Moons and Pelsmacker (2012) investigated the Intention to Use electric cars in Belgium from the BPDCT, associated with Consumer
Emotions and their habits. This work was a great inspiration for the present study because (i) it is cited numerous times in the literature
as a study reference on the intention to use electric cars; (ii) it employs an original research model, which is based on the DTPB plus the
emotions factor; (iii) while the traditional TPB model is well disseminated in this theme, the work of Moons and Pelsmacker is one of
few to use the DTPB, which has greater power to explain behavioral intentions related to new technologies (Davis, 1986); (iv) it aims
not only to investigate the predictors in its sample, but also to develop, test and empirically validate an original and complex research
model validation that was confirmed by the authors in their results, and finally (v) the present work did not aim to test or develop new
methodological models for consumer behavior analysis, but to adopt a preexisting validated model, which was appropriate to the study
Fig. 1. DTPB and Emotions in the Intention to Use Electric Cars Source: adapted from Moons and Pelsmacker (2015).
420
objectives and employment in the context of electric cars in Brazil. Thus, substantially modifying the framework and questionnaire of
Moons and Pelsmacker (2015) would lead to a significant loss of methodological validity already established by these authors.
Fig. 1 summarizes the research model adopted in this study. We emphasize that there is no specific meaning for the colors of the
arrows. A color was assigned to each construct purely for visual and ease of reading purposes.
TPB assumes that “behavioral intention”, the proximate cause of behavior, is determined by three main factors: “attitude”,
“subjective norm” and “perceived behavioral control”. Bühler et al. (2014) in their study with German consumers conclude that those
who perceive EVs positively and show positive attitudes toward EVs possess moderate purchase intentions.
Attitude acts as an evaluation of intended behavior, based on individual beliefs and evaluations. Attitudes towards behavior reflect
the degree to which this behavior is evaluated favorably or unfavorably (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Moons and Pelsmacker, 2015). An
individual who, for example, has positive attitudes towards innovation is likely to adopt new technologies (Rogers, 1995). As such, the
first hypothesis of this study is:
H1 Positive Attitudes towards the electric car will lead to a positive Intention to Use electric cars.
A subjective norm is the perceived social pressure to engage in behavior (Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). That is, the more
an individual perceives certain behavior as being important to his friends, family or society, the greater the likelihood of forming
intentions to engage in the behavior. In this sense, Simsekoglu and Nayum (2019) found that the subjective norm is positively related
to the intention to buy BEV in Norway. From this, the second hypothesis of the present study is given:
H2 Positive Subjective Norm will lead to a positive Intention to Use electric cars.
Regarding TRA, TPB adds the “perceived behavioral control” factor, which can be defined as an individual’s perception of his or her
ease or difficulty in performing a certain behavior (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). The perceived behavioral control is affected by the
perception of one’s own abilities, but also by any constraints or facilitators in the context of the decision (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975).
From this definition, the third hypothesis arises:
H3 Positive Perceived Behavioral Control will lead to a positive Intention to Use electric cars.
It is important to emphasize that we assumed in the constructions of the hypotheses exclusively the positive effects of the factors
that influence the intention to use. To achieve this goal, all statements of the questionnaire, presented in section 3, Table 4, were
structured in the same positive sense to the intention to use.
In order to better understand the determinants of the adoption of a new technology, Taylor and Todd (1995) decomposed the
traditional model of TPB, and described specific factors behind attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control, redefining
TPB as the Decomposed Theory of Planned Behavior (DTPB).
Regarding attitude, Taylor and Todd (1995) report three factors that are powerful construct predecessors of attitude beliefs,
namely: complexity, relative advantage and compatibility. Complexity refers to the degree to which an innovation is perceived as
difficult to understand and use (Taylor and Todd, 1995). Therefore, it is understood that the perception of ease of use of EVs can
positively influence the attitude of consumers in relation to the intention to purchase these vehicles. Thus, the fourth hypothesis of this
work is:
H4 Absence of Complexity will lead to a positive effect on Attitude.
Relative Advantage, in turn, refers to the degree to which a given innovation provides benefits that outperform those of its pre
cursor (Taylor and Todd, 1995; Moons and Pelsmacker, 2015). That is, it indicates that an innovation such as EVs when perceived by
the consumer as better than the existing product – internal combustion engine vehicles - can positively affect attitudes towards
purchasing. Thus, it appears that:
H5 Perceived Relative Advantage will lead to a positive effect on Attitude.
The last predecessor of attitude beliefs is compatibility. Compatibility refers to the degree to which an innovation is perceived as
compatible with existing values, former experiences and the needs of potential adopters (Taylor and Todd, 1995). Thus, it is suggested
that the greater the compatibility of electric cars with the values and needs of consumers, the more positive will be their attitude
towards them. Therefore, we have the following hypothesis:
H6 Compatibility will lead to a positive effect on Attitude.
By normative beliefs, it is understood that an individual performs an action when important people in his/her life, people of
reference or influence, judge such behavior as something positive (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). Thus, the subjective norm is decomposed
according to the reference group. In this work, mass media and peers are used as reference groups for the Intention to Use electric cars
(Moons and Pelsmacker, 2015). Mass media encompasses the mass communication channels. Peers, in turn, refer to friends, colleagues
and people from one’s social life. Thus, it is expected that the reference groups mentioned will positively affect consumer engagement
421
M. Buranelli de Oliveira et al.
Table 1
DTPB constructs and definitions.
Construct Number of Definition References
items
ATT – Attitude 4 Degree to which the adoption of a behavior is evaluated in a favorable or unfavorable Moons and Pelsmacker (2015)
way.
CPLX – Complexity 3 Degree to which an innovation is perceived as difficult to understand and use. Moons and Pelsmacker (2015)
ADV – Relative 3 Degree to which an innovation is perceived as providing benefits that outperform those of Moons and Pelsmacker (2015)
Advantage its precursor.
CPAT – 3 Degree to which an innovation is perceived as compatible with existing values, former Moons and Pelsmacker (2015)
Compatibility experiences and the needs of potential adopters.
SNM – Mass Media 3 The degree to which mass communication transmission channels influence an Moons and Pelsmacker (2015)
individual’s assessment of a certain behavior.
422
SNP – Peers 3 Degree to which friends, peers and people from social life influence an individual’s Moons and Pelsmacker (2015)
assessment of a certain behavior.
SEFI – Self-efficacy 3 Individual capacity, perceived by the potential consumers themselves, to use a new Moons and Pelsmacker (2015)
technology.
FAC – Facilitators 4 External conditions defined in terms of resources (time or money) or technological Adnan et al. (2018); Biresselioglu et al. (2018); Degirmenci and Breitner, (2017); Haustein
conditions that manifest themselves as motivations for the performance of certain and Jensen, (2018); Lebeau et al. (2013); Schuitema et al. (2013); Sovacool et al. (2019)
behavior.
CON - Constraints 4 External conditions defined in terms of resources (time or money) or technological Biresselioglu et al. (2018); Degirmenci and Breitner, (2017); Egbue and Long, (2012);
conditions that manifest themselves as barriers to the performance of certain behavior. Graham-Rowe et al., 2012; Larson et al. (2014); She et al. (2017)
EMO – Emotions 3 The degree to which consumer emotions influence a behavioral intention and how other Moons and Pelsmacker (2015)
behavioral antecedents influence those emotions.
Transportation Research Part A 155 (2022) 418–433

INT – Intention to 3 Degree of intention to perform certain behavior. Moons and Pelsmacker (2015)
Use
Source: Adapted from Taylor and Todd (1995) and Moons and Pelsmacker (2015).
in the adoption behavior of electric cars. Therefore, it is inferred that:
H7 Positive influence of Mass Media will lead to a positive effect on Subjective Norm.
H8 Positive influence of Peers will lead to a positive effect on Subjective Norm.
Regarding perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, facilitators and constraints are considered as predecessors (Taylor and Todd,
1995; Moons and Pelsmacker, 2015). Self-efficacy refers to how potential consumers perceive their own individual capacity to use a
new technology (Taylor and Todd, 1995). Facilitators are external conditions defined in terms of resources (time or money) or
technological conditions that are perceived as motivators for the performance of certain behavior (Taylor and Todd, 1995; Moons and
Pelsmacker, 2015). Finally, constraints are external conditions defined in terms of resources (time or money) or technological con
ditions that are perceived as barriers to the performance of a certain behavior (Taylor and Todd, 1995; Moons and Pelsmacker, 2015).
Thus, it is expected that a perceived ability to use EVs, the existence of facilitating conditions, as well as the absence of constraints,
can have a positive effect on consumer perception of the ease of adopting electric cars. Therefore, it is indicated that:
H9 Positive Perceived Self-efficacy will lead to a positive effect on Perceived Behavioral Control.
H10 Facilitating conditions will lead to a positive effect on Perceived Behavioral Control.
H11 Absence of Constraints will lead to a positive effect on Perceived Behavioral Control.
Several studies recognize the influence of emotions in the decision-making process of consumers when it comes to the adoption of
new technologies (So et al., 2015; Watson and Spence, 2007; Ruiz-Mafe et al., 2018). Some authors also advocate the integration of
affective responses to cognitive decision models, such as the Technology Acceptance Model (Bagozzi, 2007), the Common Model of
Cognition (Larue et al., 2018) and TPB (Moons and De Pelsmacker, 2012; Parker et al., 1995). Other studies have investigated the role
of affective responses as a determining factor for consumer behavior in relation to the spread of electromobility (Graham-Rowe et al.,
2012; Egbue and Long, 2012; Schuitema et al., 2013).
Moons and Pelsmacker (2015) discuss how emotional reactions should be modeled with DTPB and question whether they mediate
the effect of cognitive considerations regarding Intention to Use or whether they should be modeled as an independent determinant of
intention, in the same way that traditional TPB variables are modeled. Finally, they state that “cognitive responses and beliefs can
affect the Intention to Use an electric car, by itself. However, they can also generate negative or positive emotions that, in turn, inhibit
or stimulate intention to use”. Therefore, it is inferred that:
H12 Positive Emotions towards the electric car are positive correlated to the Intention to Use it.
H13 Perceived Complexity, Compatibility, Relative Advantage, Subjective Norm (Peers and Mass Media) and Perceived Behavioral
Control (Self-efficacy, Facilitators and Constraints) will lead to a positive effect on Emotions.
3. Research method
3.1. Questionnaire, data collection and sample
Table 1 compiles the DTPB constructs analyzed in this research (as presented in section 2.1) including, the number of items for each
construct in the questionnaire, the references used for the elaboration of the questions referring to each construct and the abbreviations
that will be adopted during the data presentation and results analysis.
The questions relating to the constructs of attitude, complexity, relative advantage, compatibility, peers, mass media, self-efficacy,
emotions and intention to use, were translated and adapted from the scales used in the work of Moons and Pelsmacker (2015). The
questions referring to the facilitators and constraints constructs were partially based on the scales of Moons and Pelsmacker (2015),
since the original scales were based on the work applied in Belgium, where the scenario of the dissemination of electric cars is much
better structured than in Brazil. Some items were replaced by the authors, based on the various studies found in the literature and their
results regarding the motivations and barriers to EV adoption worldwide (e.g., Adnan et al., 2018; Degirmenci and Breitner, 2017;
Egbue and Long, 2012; She et al., 2017; Sovacool et al., 2019). In addition, there were questions to profile respondents’ demographics
and their level of involvement with ordinary and electric cars (baseline questions).
The questionnaire contained scales referring to the construct and hypothesis analysis indicated in section 2.1, to which the re
spondents attributed a score from 1 to 5, according to the Likert scale, whereby 1 = I totally disagree, 2 = I partially disagree, 3 =
Neither agree nor disagree, 4 = I partially agree and 5 = I totally agree. The complete questionnaire is presented in Table 5 in the
Results Chapter, Section 3.1.
Data were collected through an online survey that was made available through the ‘Google Forms’ electronic platform and applied
to Brazilian individuals holding the National Driver’s License for cars. Data collection occurred in the months of April and May 2019.
The respondents were reached by sharing the questionnaire on social media, Facebook and WhatsApp, through publication in groups
with several themes (common vehicles, electric vehicles, university, furniture and electronics sales, travel, and groups exclusively for
women, among others). The questionnaire was also sent by e-mail to university professors in the North and Northeast regions of the
country, asking them to respond to the questionnaire and share it within their social circles. The intention was to reach the public of
these regions.
In all, 488 individuals completed the form and had their answers accounted for. Hair et al. (2010) suggests a general rule to
423
determine the number of samples. The sample size should have at least five times as many observations as the number of variables to be
analyzed, and the most acceptable sample size would have a 10:1 ratio. In this research, 36 indicators are analyzed resulting in a ratio
bigger than 13:1. We also calculated the sample size using the G*power 3.1 software. Our results indicate that the minimum number of
samples for our study is 129 respondents, where the effect size = 0.15, power = 0.95 and the significance value = 0.05. We can,
therefore, consider the sample size adequate for the purposes of the study.
During data collection, the socio-demographic distribution of respondents was monitored, with the aim of keeping the sample as
close as possible to the data indicated by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (known as IBGE, its Portuguese acronym).
In demographic terms, we can affirm that the sample is in a certain sense faithful to the real distribution of data. Therefore, we believe
the final sample is representative of the Brazilian population. There is a balance in terms of gender, although the educational level
parameter presents a slight over-representation of middle and high-income, highly educated respondents. We would argue, in this
respect, that since respondents were reached through electronic means and social media groups, it is probable that those already
interested in electric cars were more likely to reply to the research, including the early adopters. Finally, despite the attempts of the
authors to ensure a balanced distribution across the five Brazilian regions, there was a concentration of respondents from the
Southeast. Nevertheless, the overall distribution is aligned with the geographic presence of electric vehicles in Brazil. Data from the
Brazilian Association of Electric Vehicles (known as ABVE, its Portuguese acronym) indicate that 70% of electric vehicles registered in
2020 (ABVE, 2021a), and 88% of the electric stations distributed throughout the national territory (ABVE, 2021b), were in the
Southeast and South regions.
3.2. Methods to analyze data
The data obtained were submitted to Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), using the Partial Least Squares (PLS-SEM) technique
(Hair et al., 2014a, 2014b). SEM is a multivariate data analysis technique and is divided into two main stages: Measurement Model
Analysis, in which its validity and reliability are verified from the relationship between the constructs and their items. This is done in
order to refine the model for the second stage, called Structural Model Analysis, in which the objective is to estimate the dependency
relationships between the constructs, demonstrating how one variable influences the others and verifying the validity of the model
proposed to evaluate these relationships (Hair et al., 2010, 2017; Malhotra et al., 2010). Table 2 presents the techniques applied during
the two stages. The analyses were performed using the IBM SPSS Statistics Version 21 software and SmartPLS 3.0 software.
PLS-SEM is a non-parametric statistical method, which does not require data to be normally distributed and is appropriate for the
given sample (Hair et al., 2017).
4. Results
4.1. Descriptive data analysis
Table 3 summarizes the characteristics of the sample and Table 4 shows the region distribution.
Among the participants, 84% stated that they currently owned or had previously owned a car, and 16% had not. In addition, about
81.5% had never had experiences with electric cars, and 18.5% had. Among the respondents who had experience, only 6 declared that
they currently owned or had owned an electric car, equivalent to 1.2% of the sample. Respondents were asked if they would buy an
electric car. About 10.9% stated that they wouldn’t, and 89.1% that they would. This may indicate an optimistic value, because,
although most have never had an experience of this type of vehicle, at the end of the questionnaire 435 individuals demonstrated a
favorable positioning.
The respondents were also asked to indicate how much they would pay for an electric car. After the withdrawal of outliers, the
range varied between R$ 20,000.00 and R$ 200,000.00. The price most often indicated as the maximum amount was R$ 50,000.00 (91
responses). The highest concentration of responses was contained in the range between R$ 30,000.00 and R$ 70,000.00. It is important
to note that at the date of the survey, there were no electric cars within this price range being sold in Brazil. The models available on the
Table 2
Procedures adopted for SEM.
Measurement Model Analysis
Techniques Objective Indicators
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) Check if all the factorial loads of the indicators are adequate > 0.5
Composite Reliability (CR) Check the internal consistency of the constructs > 0.6
Average Variance Extracted (AVE) Check the convergent validity of the constructs > 0.5
Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio of Correlations (HTMT) Check the discriminant validity of the constructs <0.9
Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) Ensure the absence of multicollinearity <5.0
Structural Model Analysis
Techniques Objective Indicators
Path Coefficient Check the relationships between the constructs > 0.1
Significance Analysis Check the significance of path coefficients t –value > 1.96p -value < 0.05
Coefficient of Determination (R2) Check how much the model can explain the values obtained > 0.20
424
Table 3
Sample characteristics.
Variable Frequency %
Age
19–29 268 54,9%
30–39 95 19,5%
40–49 42 8,6%
50–59 66 13,5%
60–69 17 3,4%
Gender
Female 243 49,8%
Male 241 49,4%
Non-binary 4 0,8%
Income
Lower Class 22 4,5%
Lower Middle Class 110 22,5%
Middle Class 175 35,9%
Upper Middle Class 125 25,6%
Upper Class 56 11,5%
Education
Elementary School 2 0,4%
High School 20 4,1%
Undergraduate Studies 106 21,7%
Bachelor’s Degree 176 36,1%
Postgraduate Studies 52 10,7%
Post-Graduation Degree 132 27,0%
Sample Size 488 100%
Table 4
Region distribution.
Region Frequency %
North (Acre, Amapá, Amazonas, Pará, Rondônia, Roraima and Tocantins) 39 8,0%
Northeast (Maranhão, Piauí, Ceará, Rio Grande do Norte, Paraíba, Pernambuco, Alagoas, Sergipe and Bahia) 56 11,5%
Central-West (Goiás, Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul; along with Distrito Federal) 32 6,5%
Southeast (Espírito Santo, Minas Gerais, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo) 310 63,5%
South (Paraná, Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul) 51 10,5%
Sample Size 488 100
market, in general, are sold at prices starting at R$ 100,000.00 (iCarros, 2018, 2019a, 2019b; Revista Quatro Rodas, 2019).
To complete the descriptive analysis, the averages and standard deviation values were extracted from the responses for each of the
indicators. The values are shown in Table 5.The lowest averages related to some items of the construct constraints, suggesting that
consumers identify with the cost of buying an electric car (CON1), the battery charging infrastructure (CON3) and the waiting time for
charging (CON4) as barriers. The items of the subjective norms scales also revealed lower averages. Regarding standard deviations, the
average diverged. This was mainly found in items from the antecedents of the subjective norm, which assess the influence of mass
media (SNM2, SNM1) and Peers (SNP3) on the perception and individual interest of consumers regarding electric cars.
4.2. Measurement model analysis
After the construction of a Path Diagram, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed. Hair et al. (2010) points out that
factorial loads between 0.50 and 0.70 are satisfactory. The CFA revealed that the SNP3 (0.290) and SNM3 (0.419), CON1 (0.411) and
FAC4 (0.407) indicators presented values well below that recommended for their maintenance in the model, and they were therefore
promptly removed.
To check if the Measurement Model has reliability and convergent validity, Composite Reliability (CR) and Average Variance
Extracted (AVE) analyses were performed (Malhotra et al., 2010). For CR, values above 0.6 are considered satisfactory; for AVE, they
must be>0.5 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988; Malhotra et al., 2010). The values obtained are shown below in Table 6.All values extracted for CR,
with the exception of the SNM indicator (0.511) are satisfactory. For the AVE, the constructs SNP (0.431), SNM (0.344), FAC (0.435)
and CON (0.486) showed values below expectations.
Regarding the SNM, both the CR and AVE values were below the lower acceptable limit. In addition, the factorial loads of its SNM1
(0.542) and SNM2 (0.628) indicators, despite being satisfactory, are close to the lower limit. Observing the SNP, it is clear that its AVE
is below expectations and its CR is literally on the lower limit boundary. If the SNM1 and SNM2 indicators were removed, both SNM
and SNP would have only one indicator and, with that, the SEM application would no longer be appropriate, since, in a research model
that uses a combination of constructs to predict a behavior, a construct is not expected to be directly measured by a question, but rather
from a set of variables (Hair et al., 2010). In this way, the SNP and SNM constructs were completely removed from the model. This
425
Table 5
Mean and Standard Deviation of Indicators.
Indicators Mean Standard
Deviation
ATT1 - In my opinion, using an electric car is a good attitude. 4.576 0.729

ATT2 - In my opinion, using an electric car is a wise attitude. 4.422 0.896
ATT3 - In my opinion, using an electric car is a favorable attitude. 4.439 0.883
ATT4 - In my opinion, using an electric car is a positive attitude. 4.561 0.758
CPLX1 - I believe it is easy to drive an electric car. 4.580 0.809
CPLX2 - I believe it would be easy to make the electric car comply with my commands. 4.475 0.859
CPLX3 - I believe that I would be able to deal with the differences between an electric car and a conventional car. 4.475 0.835
ADV1 - An electric car offers more advantages to our society than a conventional car. 4.373 0.897
ADV2 - Driving an electric car will be better for meeting environmental standards than driving a conventional car. 4.535 0.825
ADV3 - An electric car will be less harmful to our planet than a conventional car. 4.486 0.879
CPAT1 - I believe that driving an electric car would fit my lifestyle. 4.301 0.971
CPAT2 - I believe that driving an electric car would fit what I need. 4.217 1.010
CPAT3 - I believe that driving an electric car would fit into my routine. 4.270 0.991
SNP1 – People who are important to me would support me if I drove an electric car. 4.498 0.828
SNP2 - People who are important to me would try to convince me to drive an electric car. 3.502 1.218
SNP3 - I would take into account the opinion of the people important to me before deciding to use an electric car. 3.205 1.472
SNM1 - The media gives me positive stimuli about using an electric car. 3.100 1.341
SNM2 - The media could influence me to start using an electric car. 3.525 1.355
SNM3 - I would take media information into account before deciding to use an electric car. 3.215 1.307
SEFI1 - I believe I have enough knowledge to drive an electric car. 3.840 1.315
SEFI2 - I believe I am capable of driving an electric car. 4.523 0.830
SEFI3 - I think it would be easy for me to control the aspects that differentiate an electric car from a conventional car. 4.236 0.940
FAC1 - I believe that, in the near future, electric cars will be used more than conventional cars because of the environment. 3.963 1.131
FAC2 - A tax reduction for electric cars (e.g., reduction in IPVA) would make electric cars more attractive to me. 4.543 0.789
FAC3 - A reduction in monthly fuel costs would make electric cars more attractive to me. 4.658 0.675
FAC4 - Having electric car maintenance costs similar to regular car maintenance costs would make electric cars more attractive to 4.115 1.141
me.
CON1 - My budget is enough to buy an electric car. 2.018 1.133
CON2 - Driving an electric car would not make me unsure about the maximum mileage it is capable of traveling with a single 3.273 1.328
charge.
CON3 - It would be easy to recharge the electric car while away from home. 2.633 1.212
CON4 - I could wait for the electric car batteries to be charged even if the charging time were long. 2.723 1.249
EMO1 - I would enjoy driving an electric car. 4.451 0.789
EMO2 - I am looking forward to driving an electric car. 4.000 1.253
EMO3 - I don’t believe that driving an electric car would frustrate me. 3.961 1.097
INT1 - I intend to drive an electric car in the near future. 4.064 1.149
INT2 - I would recommend using the electric car to other people. 4.053 1.052
INT3 - I would like to drive an electric car in the near future. 4.402 0.914
Table 6
Composite Reliability (CR) and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) of the
indicators.
Construct CR AVE
ATT 0.923 0.750

CPLX 0.752 0.505
ADV 0.879 0.708
CPAT 0.932 0.820
SNP 0.601 0.431
SNM 0.511 0.344
SEFI 0.852 0.658
FAC 0.671 0.435
CON 0.651 0.486
EMO 0.780 0.547
INT 0.856 0.666
directly impacts the formation of the second-order NS construct, composed of the SNM and SNP antecedents based on the DTPB. If SNM
and SNP cease to be part of the model, NS also ceases to exist. Another direct impact is in the validation of the hypothesis that involves
observing the impact of SNP and SNM on NS, and then NS on Intention to Use, which are no longer applicable.
The AVE of the CON construct presented a value slightly below the ideal (0.486). However, as it presented a CR value above the
limit (0.651), it was maintained in the model, being deemed partially satisfactory according to the AVE criterion. The same occurred
with the FAC construct, which showed satisfactory CR (0.671) and AVE just below the limit (0.435) and was therefore also retained. In
addition, these constructs have a solid theoretical background, and it is assumed that their removal from the model would result in
unacceptable loss with respect to the final objective of the research. By retaining them, the magnitude of their relationships can be
426
checked in the Structural Model Analysis stage.

Following this, the discriminant validity was checked, which shows how different one construction is from the others, thereby
representing a unique contribution. This was done through Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix (MTMM) analysis. If the value of the MTMM
index is below 0.90, the discriminant validity is established among the evaluated constructs (Henseler et al., 2015). The extracted
values are shown in Table 7.
The results obtained from the HTMT index were satisfactory for all constructs. The highest value is between INT and EMO (0.899).
This was expected, since EMO is formed not only from its indicators, but also from the other constructs of DTPB, being influenced by
attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavior control and their respective antecedents. After checking the CR, AVE and HTMT, it
can be stated that the model has convergent validity, reliability, and discriminant validity.
Finally, a collinearity analysis was carried out to ensure the absence of multicollinearity, using the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF),
which considers values less than 5.0 to be satisfactory (Hair et al., 2010). The results can be seen in Table 8.
The indicators of the SEFI, FAC and CON constructs, which form the second-order perceived behavioral control (PBC) construct,
were calculated twice during the VIF, due to the approach of the repeated indicators for modeling in the SmartPLS software, as
suggested by Hair et al. (2014a, 2014b). All indicators showed a satisfactory value, below the upper limit.
After the operationalization of all the steps of the Measurement Model Analysis, satisfactory results were obtained, based on the
literature. It is concluded, therefore, that the Measurement Model is valid, thus allowing the Structural Model Analysis stage to be
conducted.
4.3. Structural model analysis
The main criteria for evaluating the Structural Model using PLS-SEM are the significance of Path Coefficients and the value of the
Coefficient of Determination. Since PLS-SEM is a non-parametric technique, bootstrapping is performed to obtain standard errors for
hypothesis testing (Hair et al., 2010).
It is suggested that if the Path Coefficient is greater than 0.1, the value of t > 1.96 and the values of p < 0.05, then the statistical
significance of the hypothesis is accepted (Hair et al., 2017). Table 9 presents the values obtained.
The CPLX construct did not have a significant load to affirm that it influences ATT. That is, an absence of perceived complexity in
relation to the use of an electric car does not lead to a positive attitude about it. This also occurred in the relationship between CPLX
and EMO, indicating that there is no relevant impact. Regarding the second order PBC construct, it was observed that it does not have a
significant load to affirm that it influences the Intention to Use. Also, evaluating the relationships of the DTPB antecedents and its
influence on emotions, the CPLX, ADV and FAC constructs did not indicate satisfactory values. The other relationships between the
constructs showed satisfactory Path Coefficients, p-value less than 0.05 and t-value above the critical value.
The strongest relationship found in the analysis is between the SEFI and PBC constructs (0.729), with PBC being a second order
construct formed by SEFI. The strong relationship indicated between emotions and intention (0.713) proves the impact of emotions on
the Intention to Use electric cars, validating its integration with the DTPB model. There was also a strong relationship between the ADV
and ATT constructs (0.650), indicating that a perceived advantage in the use of electric cars contributes to positive attitudes towards
the vehicle and, finally, the relationship between FAC and PBC also draws attention due to its high coefficient (0.506) suggesting the
relevance of this construct to the model. In addition, the CON construct also returned a considerable value (0.364) regarding its
relationship with the PBC. It is important to recall that both FAC and CON form, together with SEFI, the second-order PBC construct.
On the other hand, as mentioned above, PBC has no indicated significance in its relationship with Intention to Use.
The relationships that presented lower coefficients, but still above that deemed satisfactory, were the CPAT and ATT constructs
(0.207), which means that the perceived compatibility of the electric car with consumer lifestyle indicated a positive relationship, but
not one of great relevance. The relationship between CON and Emotions also had a significant value, however slight (0.211). It is
important to remember that all the statements in the questionnaire were built in the same positive direction in relation to the Intention
to Use; this means that a positive relationship between CON and another construct indicates that an absence of constraints leads to a
positive perspective of the consumer in relation to the electric car. The relationship between ATT and Intention to Use was also one of
the lightest (0.214) which indicates that, even considering electric cars as something positive, good, wise and/or favorable, this has a
positive, but mild relationship with the Intention to Use.
With regard to the Coefficient of Determination (R2), which is the most common way to evaluate the Structural Model (Hair et al.,
Table 7
Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix (MTMM).
SEFI ATT CPAT CPLX EMO FAC INT CON ADV
SEFI
ATT 0.321
CPAT 0.454 0.615
CPLX 0.727 0.446 0.579
EMO 0.626 0.674 0.706 0.615
FAC 0.365 0.570 0.583 0.427 0.645
INT 0.502 0.715 0.666 0.543 0.899 0.659
CON 0.279 0.398 0.491 0.352 0.576 0.483 0.566
ADV 0.289 0.795 0.551 0.374 0.550 0.688 0.585 0.364
427
Table 8
Variance Inflation Factor (VIF).
Indicator VIF Indicator VIF Indicator VIF
SEFI1 1.990 CPAT3 4.388 FAC3 1.489

SEFI1 2.045 CPLX1 1.628 CON2 1.228
SEFI2 2.068 CPLX2 1.761 CON2 1.288
SEFI2 2.172 CPLX3 1.364 CON3 1.266
SEFI3 2.189 EMO1 1.920 CON3 1.313
SEFI3 2.291 EMO2 1.680 CON4 1.365
ATT1 2.329 EMO3 1.438 CON4 1.419
ATT2 3.458 FAC1 1.219 INT1 2.378
ATT3 3.382 FAC1 1.157 INT2 1.874
ATT4 4.303 FAC2 1.566 INT3 2.383
CPAT1 3.626 FAC2 1.518 ADV1 2.112
CPAT2 3.674 FAC3 1.533 ADV2 2.795
Table 9
Path coefficients and significance.
Related Constructs Path Coefficient t -value p -value
CPLX -> ATT 0.082 1.448 0.148

ADV -> ATT 0.650 11.687 0.000
CPAT -> ATT 0.207 3.492 0.000
SEFI -> PBC 0.729 14.607 0.000
FAC -> PBC 0.506 13.671 0.000
CON -> PBC 0.364 7.846 0.000
CPLX -> EMO 0.040 0.392 0.695
ADV -> EMO 0.081 0.875 0.382
CPAT -> EMO 0.285 3.672 0.000
SEFI -> EMO 0.310 3.532 0.000
FAC -> EMO 0.188 1.757 0.079
CON -> EMO 0.211 3.640 0.000
ATT -> INT 0.214 2.692 0.007
PBC -> INT 0.045 0.366 0.714
EMO -> INT 0.713 4.863 0.000
2017), the Intention to Use (INT) is the endogenous latent variable to be explained by the other exogenous constructs linked to it. The
R2 value ranges from 0 to 1, and the greater it is, the higher the model’s predictive accuracy (Hair et al., 2017). The value extracted was
0.824, suggesting the high predictive power of the research model.
Through performing the Structural Model Analysis from the Path Coefficients and the Coefficient of Determination, hypothesis
analysis becomes possible, as presented in Table 10.
5. Discussions
The present study investigated the determinants for the Intention to Use electric cars in Brazil, through a survey applied to Brazilian
respondents. The data collected were analyzed, first in a descriptive manner, with the aim of summarizing and exploring the behavior
of the sample, and then used for Structural Equation Modeling. Our results contribute by presenting fresh findings on the theme in an
Table 10
Hypothesis analysis.
Hypothesis Description Result
H1 Positive Attitudes towards the electric car will lead to a positive Intention to Use electric cars. Supported
H2 Positive Subjective Norm will lead to a positive Intention to Use electric cars. Not Evaluated
H3 Positive Perceived Behavioral Control will lead to a positive Intention to Use electric cars. Not Supported
H4 Absence of Complexity will lead to a positive effect on Attitude. Not Supported
H5 Perceived Relative Advantage will lead to a positive effect on Attitude. Supported
H6 Compatibility will lead to a positive effect on Attitude. Supported
H7 Positive influence of Mass Media will lead to a positive effect on Subjective Norm. Not Evaluated
H8 Positive influence of Peers will lead to a positive effect on Subjective Norm. Not Evaluated
H9 Positive Perceived Self-efficacy will lead to a positive effect on Perceived Behavioral Control. Supported
H10 Facilitating conditions will lead to a positive effect on Perceived Behavioral Control. Supported
H11 Absence of Constraints will lead to a positive effect on Perceived Behavioral Control. Supported
H12 Positive Emotions towards the electric car are positive correlated to the Intention to Use it. Supported
H13 Perceived Complexity, Compatibility, Relative Advantage, Subjective Norm (Peers and Mass Media) and Perceived Behavioral Partially
Control (Self-efficacy, Facilitators and Constraints) will lead to a positive effect on Emotions. Supported
428
emerging market, Brazil, in addition to suggesting some important practical implications that may support marketing strategies, in
dustry and policy makers involved with the spread of electromobility in the country.
From the descriptive analysis, we can say that the respondents saw using an electric car as a good, wise, favorable, and positive
attitude. Positive attitudes towards the electric car, according to the SEM results, had a positive effect on the intention to use. This
finding is in line with the results obtained by Moons and Pelsmacker (2015) in Belgium and Curtale et al. (2021) in the Netherlands. On
the other hand, the positive effect found is of lesser impact when compared to the results found in the work of Haustein and Jensen
(2018), carried out in Denmark and Sweden, in which symbolic attitudes that attribute positive symbolic meanings to electric cars and
their owners, was the construct that represented the greatest influence on the Intention to Use. In the present study, Emotions was the
construct with the strongest relationship to the Intention to Use, while Attitudes came in second place.
Still regarding attitudes, our SEM results indicate that a perceived relative advantage of using an electric car, and a perceived
compatibility with one’s lifestyle, needs and routine, have a positive effect on attitudes towards the electric car. On the other hand, the
absence of complexity did not demonstrate a relationship, through SEM, with attitudes. This finding is different from Belgian con
sumers (Moons and Pelsmacker, 2015), for whom a significant positive effect of the antecedents of compatibility, relative advantage
and complexity on attitude was identified.
In the descriptive analysis, it was noticed that the respondents indicated that they did not have concerns about potential complexity
in the use of the electric car or compatibility problems, with the majority opinion being that the vehicle would be easy to drive, the
differences between an electric car and a conventional car would be easy to deal with, and that it would fit into people’s lifestyle and
routine. The simplicity with which new technology is perceived, regarding its use and its compatibility with what one is used to, could
be part of an information campaign, as also suggested by Moons and Pelsmacker (2015).
Several respondents pointed to the use of electric cars as an alternative means of complying with environmental regulations and
associated the use of this type of vehicle with positive environmental factors, in addition to believing that these vehicles will be used
more than conventional cars in the near future because of their reduced impact on the environment. This result is in line with other
studies that have also identified, through research based on TPB, a positive relationship between the Intention to Use or adopt electric
cars and the environmental benefits expected by consumers in Germany, Malaysia and Norway (Degirmenci and Breitner, 2017; Adnan
et al., 2018; Simsekoglu and Nayum, 2019).
Disseminating information related to the environmental role of electric cars, such as their contribution to reducing dependence on
fossil fuels, would be important in raising awareness of the benefits of adopting EVs and, consequently, potential drivers concerned
with the environment could consider an electric car as their next purchase. According to Biresselioglu et al. (2018), such dissemination
of information is the responsibility of policy makers.
The subjective norm construct and its antecedents could not be analyzed through SEM, since in the Measurement Model validation
they did not present sufficient factor loads during the application of CFA. In the descriptive analysis, the peers and mass media in
fluence groups, antecedents of subjective norm, also did not seem to exert strong social pressure on respondent perception regarding
the use of the electric car. In the study from Moons and Pelsmacker (2015), the effect of peers is slightly positive in relation to the
intention to use, while the influence of the mass media has greater significance. Simsekoglu and Nayum (2019) also identified a
positive relationship between subjective norm and Intention to Use among Norwegian respondents.
The Perceived Behavioral Control construct is a second-order construct formed by self-efficacy, facilitators and constraints. The
three antecedents showed a strong relationship with the formation of the PBC construct. However, it did not indicate significance in its
relationship with Intention to Use, contrary to what is commonly verified in Norway and Belgium, for example (Simsekoglu and
Nayum, 2019; Moons and Pelsmacker, 2015).
Considering the descriptive analysis, when respondents were directly asked about facilitators and constraints, the results were
similar to those found in several studies about the motivators and barriers for adopting electric vehicles around the world. It was noted
that economic factors have a strong influence on the perception of Brazilian consumers, and the possible adoption of the electric car.
These are: (i) tax incentives in the form of tax reductions, as also identified by Sovacool et al. (2019) and Cansino et al. (2018) in their
studies in China and in Europe respectively; (ii) the reduction in fuel costs, and (iii) a maintenance price similar to that of conventional
cars, results which are also in line with those of European consumers (Biresselioglu et al., 2018).
On the other hand, the high acquisition price is seen as a negative factor, as it is in the European and North American markets (e.g.,
Biresselioglu et al., 2018; Degirmenci and Breitner, 2017; Larson et al., 2014). The role of information can once again be a driver for
the adoption of electric cars, once consumers are aware that, despite the high purchase price of an electric car compared to a con
ventional car, it has lower operating costs. In addition, this type of vehicle should, in the long run, offer an economic benefit when
compared to the use of a conventional vehicle, in contrast to the study from de Silva et al. (2018), conducted in Brazil, which verified
the payback time for electric vehicles in the current scenario.
Furthermore, in terms of the economic factors, based on the results, it is expected that the adoption of special tax schemes for EVs
will positively affect the success of the dissemination of electromobility in Brazil. These incentives could proceed in the following ways:
(i) reduction of the purchase tax; (ii) reduction of the annual tax on ownership of a vehicle (IPVA) (Biresselioglu et al., 2018); (iii)
reduction in the price of electricity for EV owners (Silva et al., 2018) (iii) concessions on the circulation of electric vehicles; (iv)
concessions on corporate car taxes (Biresselioglu et al., 2018), or (v) in the form of government subsidies, incorporating leasing and
buyback schemes for electric cars (Graham-Rowe et al., 2012), as it has been made in Europe, USA, China and another markets.
Some operational factors were identified as negative from a consumer perspective. Limited autonomy, the poor availability of
charging stations and the long recharge time are all negative factors, which are reinforced in studies conducted in Germany, Belgium,
and China (e.g., Degirmenci and Breitner, 2017; Lebeau et al., 2013; She et al., 2017). In this case, the performance of automotive
manufacturers is extremely important. Ensuring continuous improvement in the technical performance of these vehicles can increase
429
the chances of making electric cars feasible in the daily lives of consumers (Biresselioglu et al., 2018).
With regard to charging infrastructure, it is essential that national and local policy makers, together with automotive manufac
turers and car dealerships, provide subsidies for the installation of public charging stations in community environments such as
shopping malls, gas stations and parking lots, and even offer incentives for consumers to install charging points in households and
condominiums, as also suggested by Krause et al (2013). In addition to financial incentives to purchase, investments in charging
infrastructure and R&D projects are important political instruments to promote the use of electric vehicles (Cansino et al., 2018).
As previously stated, the relationship between emotions and Intention to Use was the one greatest significance extracted by SEM. In
addition, the antecedents of DTBP behaved in such a way as to exert partial influence on these emotions. Respondents expressed, for
example, “being anxious to drive” or “believing that they will enjoy driving” an electric car. The result is compatible with that observed
by other studies, such as the study from Graham-Rowe et al. (2012) with UK drivers, who partly expressed positive feelings when
driving BEVs and PHEVs for an experimental period, feeling “useful to the environment” and “less guilty”.
In general, there was a positive attitude from respondents in relation to electric cars. Indeed, at the end of the survey, 89.2% of
those individuals answered that they would buy an electric car. In the Brazilian scenario, in which the adoption of electric cars is not
yet popular and considering that only 18.8% of the sample stated that they have some experience with this technology, the result can
be seen as encouraging. However, it is important to note that the value indicated by respondents as the maximum they would pay for an
electric car (between R$ 30,000.00 and R$ 70,000.00) is still well below the minimum selling price of these cars in the country
(iCarros, 2018, 2019a, 2019b; Quatro Rodas Magazine, 2019), reinforcing the acquisition cost factor as a possible barrier to the
adoption of electric vehicles.
Other studies that use TPB in the context of electric cars, presented different responses regarding the indicators of greatest influence
on the Intention to Use. While Egbue and Long (2012) identified that respondents in the United States believed environmental benefits
were still less important than cost and performance, in Germany, Degirmenci and Breitner (2017) found that EV environmental
performance is a stronger predictor of Intention to Use than price and autonomy.
In Brazil, there is a significant need for measures to strengthen motivators and ease barriers to the spread of electromobility.
Certainly, there is a requirement to implement appropriate policies at both state and federal level, in addition to seeking alignment
between the following stakeholders, as cited by Sovacool et al. (2019) in the context of EVs: (i) car dealerships and sales franchises; (ii)
automotive manufacturers; (iii) national and local policy makers, and even (iv) users and adopters, the latter who, in the social context,
can spread the benefits and allay fears regarding the adoption of electric cars. These measures range from consumer education that
provides sufficient knowledge about this new technology, facilitating and boosting purchasing decisions regarding electric cars, to the
implementation of subsidies, the promotion of tax incentives and the installation of more charging stations, such measures offer a truly
realistic scenario, favorable in the economic, environmental, and functional sense to the adoption of electric cars in Brazil.
6. Conclusions
This research aimed to identify the factors that determine the Intention to Use electric cars in Brazil. The results, as presented and
discussed, bring meaningful theoretical and management-oriented contributions in relation to the spread of electric cars in the country.
From a theoretical perspective, the research advances the discussion on electromobility in Brazil, bringing contributions to the
study of its dissemination from the perspective of the consumer, mapping and verifying empirically the determining factors for the
Intention to Use electric cars in Brazil. The study fills a gap found in the literature. Few studies in the literature address TPB in its
decomposed form, DTPB. This approach, which considers the antecedents of the behavior planned to measure an intention to buy,
adopt or use, may have distinct advantages and disadvantages. As an advantage, we mention the mapping of several behavioral
variables through DTPB, variables that in TPB are not so specifically described and addressed. On the other hand, a disadvantage found
was the necessary number of indicators on the scales, avoiding, for example, what happened with the subjective norm construct in the
present work, which, due to an inadequate number of indicators with satisfactory factor loads and measurement indices, had to be
removed, directly impacting the research proposal.
Regarding managerial contributions, the results have relevant implications for stakeholders, reflecting on the development of
strategies for the spread of electromobility in Brazil in the coming years. It is hoped that the results may collaborate with the
development of public, industrial, and marketing strategies in order to enhance consumer attitudes towards the adoption of this
product, aiming to boost the production and growth of the market, attracting investments, supporting the expansion of the EV
infrastructure network and broadly developing electric mobility in the country.
This study is subject to the following limitations, which present useful opportunities for further research. Although the sample size
is appropriate for the model analyzed in this study, we recognise that there are some sample-related limitations. One of these concerns
the use of a non-probabilistic sample because, in this type of method, the probability of each element of the population being contained
in it is unknown and not all elements of the population studied have the same chance of being selected. The use of a non-probabilistic
sample associated with the use of PLS-SEM during Structural Modeling, which is a less rigorous method in comparison, as for example,
with CB-SEM, based on covariance, requires caution in the interpretation and generalization of the results obtained in this research. For
future studies, Structural Modeling using the CB-SEM method is suggested as a form of data analysis. This type of structural equation
uses maximum likelihood as an estimation method and is used to confirm already established theories. Another limitation, as pre
viously mentioned, is the impossibility of evaluating the influence of the subjective norm on the research model in our sample, only a
descriptive analysis being carried out from these data. In addition, the influence that an individual’s experience with electric cars or a
respondent’s level of knowledge about this technology has not been evaluated on their perceptions and neither, therefore, on their
responses.
430
Throughout data collection, a daily monitor of the sociodemographic distribution of respondents was kept, guaranteeing a sample
as close as possible to that indicated by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (2019). Even so, it is not possible to state that
the results generated from our study are representative of the entire Brazilian population, considering its vast territorial extension,
cultural roots that vary from region to region, and diverse social context. We are also aware that since the questionnaire was shared
through social media, it is likely that those already interested in electric cars were more disposed to respond to the survey, a factor that
may have distorted the results in some way, reducing the representativeness of the survey. Besides that, some of our findings may
reflect only initial concerns around electric cars, as a result, which may change based on acquired knowledge or on initial consumer
experiences. Some caution is advised to policymakers, retailers, and other stakeholder in interpreting our findings. For further studies,
we suggest exploring the relationship between knowledge of this technology and the impact on its level of acceptance.
Future studies may also deal with predetermined groups, seeking to identify the behaviors of specific target audiences or to
establish partnerships with companies and media that can disseminate the research to extremely wide audiences with varied profiles,
giving even greater reliability to the results obtained. As the theme of electric cars with a focus on consumer perspective significantly
lacked studies in the literature, several studies could be carried out with cluster analysis; using research models based on simpler but
equally effective theoretical models, or even more deeply assessing specific aspects of consumer perception of electric cars, using the
barriers identified in this study as a basis.
Finally, it is expected that the work will encourage the development of research in this field and that the results may contribute to
the evolution of public policies, pricing and marketing strategies. Automobile manufacturers should also be involved in long-term
energy planning, to promote the adoption of electric cars among consumers, thereby enabling an increasingly favorable scenario
for electromobility in Brazil.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
References
Adnan, N., Nordin, S.M., Amini, M.H., Langove, N., 2018. What make consumer sign up to PHEVs? Predicting Malaysian consumer behavior in adoption of PHEVs.
Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Practice 113, 259–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.04.007.
Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Org. Behav. Human Decision Process. 50 (2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
Arunachalam, S., Bahadir, S.C., Bharadwaj, S.G., Guesalaga, R., 2019. New product introductions for low-income consumers in emerging markets. J. Acad. Marketing
Sci. 48 (5), 914–940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00648-8.
Bagozzi, R., 2007. The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. J. Assoc. Inform. Syst. 8 (4), 244–254. https://doi.org/
10.17705/1jais.00122.
Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y., 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 16 (1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327.
Baran, R., Legey, L.F.L., 2013. The introduction of electric vehicles in Brazil: impacts on oil and electricity consumption. Technol. Forecasting Social Change 80 (5),
907–917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.10.024.
Biresselioglu, M.E., Kaplan, M.D., Yilmaz, B.K., 2018. Electric mobility in Europe: A comprehensive review of motivators and barriers in decision making processes.
Brazilian Association of Electric Vehicle - ABVE (2021a, September). São Paulo tem um terço do mercado de eletrificados. September 6th, 2021. Retrieved from http://
www.abve.org.br/sao-paulo-tem-um-terco-do-mercado-de-eletrificados/, Last accessed on: September 9th, 2021.
Brazilian Association of Electric Vehicle – ABVE, 2021b, September. Rede de recarga aumenta 50% em quatro meses. September 7th, 2021. Retrieved from http://
www.abve.org.br/eletropostos-no-brasil-crescem-50-em-quatro-meses/, Last accessed on: September 12th, 2021.
Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics - IBGE. Projeção da População do Brasil e das Unidades da Federação. Retrieved from https://www.ibge.gov.br/apps/
populacao/projecao/, Last accessed on: April 26th, 2019.
Bühler, F., Cocron, P., Neumann, I., Franke, T., Krems, J.F., 2014. Is EV experience related to EV acceptance? Results from a German field study. Transp. Res. Part F:
Traffic Psychol. Behav. 25 (A), 85–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.05.002.
Burch, I., Gilchrist, J., 2018. Survey of global activity to phase out internal combustion engine vehicles. Center of Climate Protection, Santa Rosa, CA, USA.
Cansino, J.M., Sánchez-Braza, A., Sanz-Díaz, T., 2018. Policy instruments to promote electro-mobility in the EU28: A comprehensive review. Sustainability 10 (7),
2507. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072507.
Choma, E.F., Ugaya, C.M.L., 2017. Environmental impact assessment of increasing electric vehicles in the Brazilian fleet. J. Clean. Prod. 152, 497–507. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.091.
Costa, E., Seixas, J., 2014. Contribution of electric cars to the mitigation of CO2 emissions in the city of Sao Paulo [Paper presentation]. In: 2014 IEEE Vehicle Power
and Propulsion Conference, VPPC 2014. Coimbra: IEEE Xplore, https://doi.org/10.1109/VPPC.2014.7007035.
Costa, E., Seixas, J., Baptista, P., Costa, G., Turrentine, T., 2018. CO2 emissions and mitigation policies for urban road transportation: Sao Paulo versus Shanghai.
Urbe, Urbe. Revista Brasileira de Gestão Urbana 10 (1), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-3369.010.supl1.ao15.
Costa, E., Horta, A., Correia, A., Seixas, J., Costa, G., Sperling, D., 2020. Diffusion of electric vehicles in Brazil from the stakeholders’ perspective. Int. J. Sustain.
Transp. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2020.1827317.
Curtale, R., Liao, F., van der Waerden, P., 2021. User acceptance of electric car-sharing services: The case of the Netherlands. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Practice 149,
266–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2021.05.006.
Degirmenci, K., Breitner, M.H., 2017. Consumer purchase intentions for electric vehicles: Is green more important than price and range? Transp. Res. Part D: Transp.
Environ. 51, 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.01.001.
Egbue, O., Long, S., 2012. Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: An analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy Policy 48, 717–729. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.009.
Empresa de Pesquisa Energética (EPE), 2020. Brazilian Energy Balance. Retrieved from: https://www.epe.gov.br/sites-pt/publicacoes-dados-abertos/publicacoes/
PublicacoesArquivos/publicacao-479/topico-528/BEN2020_sp.pdf, Last accessed on: April 02th, 2021.
Faria, R., Moura, P., Delgado, J., de Almeida, A.T., 2012. A sustainability assessment of electric vehicles as a personal mobility system. Energy Convers. Manage. 61,
19–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2012.02.023.
Filoso, S., Carmo, J.B., Mardegan, S.F., Lins, S.R.M., Gomes, T.F., Martinelli, L.A., 2015. Reassessing the environmental impacts of sugarcane ethanol production in
Brazil to help meet sustainability goals. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 52, 1847–1856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.08.012.
Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I., 1975. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co, Reading, Mass.
431
Gauder, M., Graeff-Hönninger, S., Claupein, W., 2011. The impact of a growing bioethanol industry on food production in Brazil. Appl. Energy 88 (3), 672–679.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.08.020.
Giannetti, V., Rubera, G., 2020. Innovation for and from emerging countries: a closer look at the antecedents of trickle-down and reverse innovation. J. Acad.
Marketing Sci. 48 (5), 987–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00669-3.
Graham-Rowe, E., Gardner, B., Abraham, C., Skippon, S., Dittmar, H., Hutchins, R., Stannard, J., 2012. Mainstream consumers driving plug-in battery-electric and
plug-in hybrid electric cars: A qualitative analysis of responses and evaluations. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Practice 46 (1), 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tra.2011.09.008.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th Edition. Prentice Hall, NJ.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., 2014a. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage, Thousand Oaks.
Hair, J.F., Gabriel, M., Patel, V., 2014b. AMOS covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM): Guidelines on its application as a marketing research tool.
Braz. J. Market. 13 (2), 44–55. https://doi.org/10.5585/remark.v13i2.2718.
Habich-Sobiegalla, S., Kostka, G., Anzinger, N., 2018. Electric vehicle purchase intentions of Chinese, Russian and Brazilian citizens: An international comparative
study. J. Cleaner Prod. 205, 188–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.318.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., 2017. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 2nd. SAGE Publications.
Haustein, S., Jensen, A.F., 2018. Factors of electric vehicle adoption: A comparison of conventional and electric car users based on an extended theory of planned
behavior. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 12 (7), 484–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2017.1398790.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., 2015. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Marketing
Sci. 43 (1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
iCarros, 2019a. JAC will have the cheapest electric car in Brazil. iCarros, January 28th, 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.icarros.com.br/noticias/lancamentos/jac-
tera-o-carro-eletrico-mais-barato-do-brasil/25937.html, Last accessed on: April 8th, 2020.
iCarros, 2019b. ZOE, Leaf or Bold: ZOE, Leaf or Bold: which is the best electric car by price? iCarros, November 9th, 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.icarros.com.
br/noticias/saloes/zoe,-leaf-ou-bolt:-qual-o-melhor-carro-eletrico-pelo-preco-/25595.html, Last accessed on: April 8th, 2020.
International Energy Agency (IEA), 2021. Global EV Outlook 2020: Entering the decade of electric drive?, IEA, OECD/IEA. Retrieved from: https://www.iea.org/
reports/global-ev-outlook-2020, Last accessed on: March 2nd, 2021.
Köhler, J., Whitmarsh, L., Nykvist, B., Schilperoord, M., Bergman, N., Haxeltine, A., 2009. A transitions model for sustainable mobility. Ecol. Econ. 68 (12),
2985–2995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.06.027.
Kotler, P., Keller, K.L., 2012. Marketing Management, 15th. Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Krause, R.M., Carley, S.R., Lane, B.W., Graham, J.D., 2013. Perception and reality: public knowledge of plug-in electric vehicles in 21 US cities. Energy Policy 63,
433–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.09.018.
Kumar, V., Srivastava, R., 2020. New perspectives on business model innovations in emerging markets. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 48 (5), 815–825. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11747-019-00713-2.
Larson, P.D., Viáfara, J., Parsons, R.V., Elias, A., 2014. Consumer attitudes about electric cars: Pricing analysis and policy implications. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy
Practice 69, 299–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2014.09.002.
Larue, O., West, R., Rosenbloom, P.S., Dancy, C.L., Samsonovich, A.V., Petters, D., Juvina, I., 2018. Emotion in the Common Model of Cognition. Proc. Computer Sci.
145, 740–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.11.045.
Lebeau, K., Van Mierlo, J., Lebeau, P., Mairesse, O., Macharis, C., 2013. Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey. Int. J. Electric
Hybrid Vehicles 5 (1), 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEHV.2013.053466.
Li, W., Long, R., Chen, H., Geng, J., 2017. A review of factors influencing consumer intentions to adopt battery electric vehicles. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 78,
318–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.076.
Lozano, Angélica, Cantillo, Víctor, Holguín-Veras, José, 2020. Special issue on “Urban transportation sustainability: Experiences and innovative approaches”. Transp.
Res. Part A: Policy Practice 137, 325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.05.023.
Malhotra, N.K., Birks, D.K., Wills, P., 2010. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, 6th European ed. Pearson Education Limited, England.
Martinelli, L., Garrett, R., Ferraz, S., Naylor, R., 2011. Sugar and ethanol production as a rural development strategy in Brazil: Evidence from the state of Sao Paulo.
Agric. Syst. 104 (5), 419–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2011.01.006.
Marx, R., Mello, A.M., 2014. New initiatives, trends and dilemmas for the Brazilian automotive industry: the case of Inovar Auto and its impacts on electromobility in
Brazil. Int. J. Automotive Technol. Manage. 14 (2), 138–157. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJATM.2014.060751.
Moons, I., Pelsmacker, P., 2012. Emotions as determinants of electric car usage intention. J. Marketing Manage. 28 (34), 195–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/
0267257X.2012.659007.
Moons, I., Pelsmacker, P., 2015. An extended decomposed theory of planned behaviour to predict the usage intention of the electric car: a multi-group comparison.
Sustainability 7 (5), 6212–6245. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7056212.
National Association of Automotive Vehicle Manufacturers (ANFAVEA), 2020. Brazilian Automotive Industry Annual Report 2020. ANFAVEA, Brasília, Distrito
Federal, Brazil. Retrieved from: http://www.anfavea.com.br/anuario2020/anuario.pdf, Last accessed on: March 23th, 2021.
National Association of Automotive Vehicle Manufacturers (ANFAVEA), 2021. Brazilian Automotive Industry Annual Report 2019. ANFAVEA, Brasília, Distrito
Federal, Brazil. Retrieved from: https://anfavea.com.br/anuario2021/anuario.pdf, Last accessed on: March 22th, 2021.
Orecchini, F., Santiangeli, A., 2010. Chapter twenty two - Automakers’ powertrain options for hybrid and electric vehicles. Electric Hybrid Vehicles 579–636. https://
doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53565-8.00022-1.
Organisation Internationale des Constructeurs d’Automobiles (OICA), 2019. World Motor Vehicle Production by Country/Region and Type. Retrieved from: https://
www.oica.net/wp-content/uploads/By-country-region-2020.pdf, Last accessed on: April 07th, 2021.
Parker, D., Manstead, A.S.R., Stradling, S.G., 1995. Extending the theory of planned behaviour: The role of personal norm. British J. Social Psychol. 34 (2), 127–138.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1995.tb01053.x.
Revista Quatro Rodas, 2019. Guide: learn about all the hybrid and electric cars on sale today in Brazil. Revista Quatro Rodas, January 29th, 2019. Retrieved from:
https://quatrorodas.abril.com.br/especial/guia-conheca-os-carros-hibridos-e-eletricos-que-voce-ja-pode-comprar/, Last accessed on: April 5th, 2020.
Rezvani, Z., Jansson, J., Bodin, J., 2015. Advances in consumer electric vehicle adoption research: A review and research agenda. Transp. Res. Part D: Transp.
Environ. 34, 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2014.10.010.
Ritter, Á.M., Borchardt, M., Vaccaro, G.L., Pereira, G.M., Almeida, F., 2015. Motivations for promoting the consumption of green products in an emerging country:
exploring attitudes of Brazilian consumers. J. Clean. Prod. 106, 507–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.066.
Rogers, E.M., 1995. Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press, New York, NY, USA.
Ruiz-Mafe, C., Chatzipanagiotou, K., Curras-Perez, R., 2018. The role of emotions and conflicting online reviews on consumers’ purchase intentions. J. Bus. Res. 89,
336–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.027.
Schuitema, G., Anable, J., Skippon, S., Kinnear, N., 2013. The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attributes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles. Transp.
Res. Part A: Policy Practice 48, 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2012.10.004.
She, Z.Y., Sun, Q., Ma, J.J., Xie, B.C., 2017. What are the barriers to widespread adoption of battery electric vehicles? A survey of public perception in Tianjin, China.
Transp. Policy 56, 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.03.001.
Silva, R.E., Sobrinho, P.M., Souza, T.M., 2018. How can energy prices and subsidies accelerate the integration of electric vehicles in Brazil? An economic analysis.
Electricity J. 31 (3), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tej.2018.03.007.
Simsekoglu, Ö., Nayum, A., 2019. Predictors of intention to buy a battery electric vehicle among conventional car drivers. Transp. Res. Part F: Traffic Psychol. Behav.
60, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.10.001.
So, J., Achar, C., Han, D., Agrawal, N., Duhachek, A., Maheswaran, D., 2015. The psychology of appraisal: Specific emotions and decision-making. J. Consumer
Psychol. 25 (3), 359–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.04.003.
432
Sovacool, B.K., Abrahamse, W., Zhang, L., Ren, J., 2019. Pleasure or profit? Surveying the purchasing intentions of potential electric vehicle adopters in China.
Sovacool, B.K., Hirsh, R.F., 2009. Beyond batteries: An examination of the benefits and barriers toplug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and a vehicle-to-grid (V2G)
transition. Energy Policy 37, 1095–1103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.10.005Get.
Taylor, S., Todd, P.A., 1995. Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Inform. Syst. Res. 6 (2), 144–176. https://doi.org/10.1287/
isre.6.2.144.
Vargas, J.E.V., Seabra, J.E., Cavaliero, C.K., Walter, A., Souza, S.P., Falco, D.G., 2020. The New Neighbor across the Street: An Outlook for Battery Electric Vehicles
Adoption in Brazil. World Electric Vehicle J. 11 (3), 60. https://doi.org/10.3390/wevj11030060.
Watson, L., Spence, M.T., 2007. Causes and consequences of emotions on consumer behaviour. Eur. J. Marketing 4 (5–6), 487–511. https://doi.org/10.1108/
03090560710737570.
Wittmann, D., Bermann, C., Wittmann, T.F., 2013. Critical Analysis of Large Scale Integration for Electric Vehicles in Brazil. In: 4th International Workshop Advances
in Cleaner Production: Integrating Cleaner Production Into Sustainability Strategies, São Paulo, Brazil.
Yong, J.Y., Ramachandaramurthy, V.K., Tan, K.M., Mithulananthan, N., 2015. A review on the state-of-the-art technologies of electric vehicle, its impacts and
prospects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 49, 365–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.130.
433

Factors Influencing The Intention To Use Electric Cars in Brazil 2022

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Factors Influencing The Intention To Use Electric Cars in Brazil 2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transportation Research Part A 155 (2022) 418–433

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Transportation Research Part A

Factors influencing the intention to use electric cars in Brazil

2. Theoretical framework and hypotheses

H4 Absence of Complexity will lead to a positive effect on Attitude.

H5 Perceived Relative Advantage will lead to a positive effect on Attitude.

H6 Compatibility will lead to a positive effect on Attitude.

Transportation Research Part A 155 (2022) 418–433

in the adoption behavior of electric cars. Therefore, it is inferred that:

3.1. Questionnaire, data collection and sample

3.2. Methods to analyze data

4.1. Descriptive data analysis

Techniques Objective Indicators

4.2. Measurement model analysis

ATT1 - In my opinion, using an electric car is a good attitude. 4.576 0.729

ATT 0.923 0.750

checked in the Structural Model Analysis stage.

4.3. Structural model analysis

SEFI1 1.990 CPAT3 4.388 FAC3 1.489

CPLX -> ATT 0.082 1.448 0.148

Declaration of Competing Interest

You might also like