Transportation

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9893-4

An empirical study of consumers’ intention to use

ride‑sharing services: using an extended technology
acceptance model

Yu Wang1 · Shanyong Wang1 · Jing Wang1 · Jiuchang Wei1 · Chenglin Wang1

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract  Ride-sharing has received great attention recently and is considered to be a

sustainable transportation mode. Understanding the determinants of the consumers’ inten-
tion to use ride-sharing services is critical to promote such services. In this research, an
extended technology acceptance model is used as a theoretical research framework. This
extension was implemented by incorporating three new constructs: personal innovative-
ness, environmental awareness, and perceived risk. The model was empirically tested using
questionnaire survey data collected from 426 participants. The results indicate that per-
sonal innovativeness, environmental awareness, and perceived usefulness are positively
associated with consumers’ intention to use ride-sharing services, while perceived risk is
negatively associated with the intention and perceived usefulness. The analysis shows that,
contrary to our expectations, the perceived ease of use has no significant effect on inten-
tion to use ride-sharing services. In addition, personal innovativeness is positively related
to perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use but negatively related to perceived risk.
Based on these results, implications for practice and suggestions for further research are
discussed.

Keywords  Technology acceptance model · Personal innovativeness · Environmental

awareness · Perceived risk · Ride-sharing services

Introduction

A new economic phenomenon, the sharing economy or so-called “collaborative consump-

tion economy”, has emerged because of the popularity of mobile intelligent devices and the
improvement of information and communication technologies (Hamari et  al. 2016). The
sharing economy is a new economic model in which individuals or organizations distribute,

* Shanyong Wang
wsy1988@ustc.edu.cn
1
School of Management, University of Science and Technology of China, 96 Jinzhai Rd.,
Hefei 230026, Anhui Province, People’s Republic of China

13
 Transportation

share, and reuse redundant products or services through online platforms (Parsons 2014;
Hamari et al. 2016; Grybaitė and Stankevičienė 2016). The concept and practice of “shar-
ing economy” indicate that it can foster a more environmentally sustainable and collabo-
rative society by making full use of market intelligence (Heinrichs 2013). Currently, the
sharing economy is increasingly accepted by more and more individuals and organizations
because abundant benefits can be obtained by them as well as the whole society (Schor
2016). To some extent, it can be said that the sharing economy era is coming.
Ride-sharing, as a significant part of the sharing economy in the transportation sector,
has become an increasingly popular model of travel (Wosskow 2014). Ride-sharing refers
to transportation in which individual travelers who have analogous itineraries and identical
time schedules ride the same car to go to work or school, a long distance trip, travel, etc.,
and share transportation expenses such as fuel bills, parking fees, parking, and toll fees
with each other (Agatz et al. 2012; Furuhata et al. 2013). It is noteworthy that ride-sharing
is fundamentally different from traditional or internet-based ride-hailing (Meelen and Fren-
ken 2015). Compared with traveling by private car, ride-hailing creates new capacity issues
because taxis not only have to drive from A to B but also have to drive to and from the
start/end of the trip. In contrast, ride-sharing reduces capacity through effective utilization
of free seats by passengers since that the driver was already planning to drive from A to B
(Frenken and Schor 2017). Ride-sharing can bring many advantages. To be specific, for the
drivers and passengers, it can reduce travel costs and increase trip convenience (Agatz et al.
2012; Stiglic et al. 2015; Liu et al. 2017); for the environment, it can improve the utilization
of obtainable seat capacity and reduce the number of vehicles used for personal trips and
thus mitigate traffic congestion and reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emis-
sions (Agatz et al. 2012; Teubner and Flath 2015); for the society, it provides a platform for
passengers to meet people with various occupations and backgrounds, improve people’s
knowledge or skills, and increase trust between them (Kelley 2007; Morency 2007; Chan
and Shaheen 2012; Furuhata et al. 2013).
In fact, ride-sharing is a sustainable transportation mode which has often been con-
sidered as an effective method to reduce carbon emissions and city congestion (Fellows
and Pitfield 2000; Caulfield 2009). In the last few decades, many developed countries
such as the United States, Britain, Canada, and Germany have actively proclaimed a
wide portfolio of policies through local and regional governments to encourage ride-
sharing (e.g. provision of ride-share lanes, reduction of fuel tax) which aims to miti-
gate traffic congestion and let people develop the environmentally friendly travel habits
(Collura 1994; Huang et al. 2000; Caulfield 2009). In China, however, ride-sharing was
once subject to controversy because of the inconvenience and lack of safety of the tra-
ditional ride-sharing model, along with the strict control of taxi operation qualifications
of the Chinese government (Wang 2011; Zhu et al. 2017a, b). The governments and taxi
companies queried the legality of ride-sharing, and they declared that the drivers of the
car booked via the Internet are always not licensed, which will result in insecurity and
illegality of ride-sharing (Feeney 2015). However, with the deterioration of the envi-
ronment, the improvement of people’s awareness of environmental protection and the
opening of taxi operation certification, the Chinese government has also begun to pay
close attention to ride-sharing and emphasize the environmental effect of it as a vital
“green travel” mode (Wang 2011). Furthermore, the emergences of the internet-based
P2P (peer-to-peer) ride-sharing platforms or mobile ride-sharing applications (e.g.,
Didi Hitch, BlaBlaCar) have also contributed greatly to the development of ride-shar-
ing (Agatz et  al. 2012). A ride-sharing platform provided by a transportation network
company enables people to share information effectively, offers easy access to shared

13
Transportation

vehicles in a more convenient way, and realizes real-time ride-sharing through mobile
geolocation technology (Agatz et al. 2012; Teubner and Flath 2015).
The popularity of ride-sharing requires government support and promotion as well as
the technical assistance of mobile ride-sharing applications, but it is even more impor-
tant to explore the determinants of the consumers’ ride-sharing willingness. To promote
the sustainable transportation mode of ride-sharing in China, it is necessary to deeply
investigate Chinese consumers’ perception of ride-sharing and the influential factors
that affect consumers’ intention to use ride-sharing services. Considering the innovative
characteristics of ride-sharing, in the current research, we adopt the technology accept-
ance model (TAM) (Davis 1989) as the basic theoretical model to understand the ante-
cedents of consumers’ intention to use ride-sharing services. TAM is often considered
as a common and robust model to address consumer acceptance of an innovative tech-
nology (Davis 1989; Ha and Stoel 2009; Cheung and Vogel 2013; Prieto et  al. 2014;
Briz-Ponce and García-Peñalvo 2015; Hubert et al. 2017). In fact, several prior studies
have adopted TAM to explore consumers’ intention to use these shared services and
validated its usefulness and feasibility. For example, Chen and Lu (2016) used the green
technology acceptance model to explore consumers’ intention to use public bike-sharing
services from the perspective of environmental protection and revealed that the green
TAM is appropriate to explain the influential factors of consumer acceptance of sus-
tainable transportation. Fleischer and Wahlin (2016) developed an integrated research
model with the theory of planned behavior (TPB) which was first proposed by Ajzens
(1991) and TAM to investigate the influencing factors of the intention of Swedish gen-
eration Y consumers to use the ride-sharing services of Uber.
Though TAM has received strong support in explaining innovative technology accept-
ance, it has also received several criticisms. Critics have noted that TAM is not compre-
hensive enough, accounting only for the consumers’ positive perceptions of a new technol-
ogy or support factors of technology acceptance and neglecting their negative perceptions
or boycott factors (Cheng and Huang 2013; Park et al. 2014; Girod et al. 2017). As ride-
sharing is a new emerging technology, the risks associated with its use are often problems
that worry consumers (Lee 2009), and so perceived risk is regarded as a vital factor when
exploring the consumers’ ride-sharing intention. Moreover, given that mobile ride-sharing
services are innovative, the acceptance of ride-sharing may be affected by the consumers’
personal characteristics like individual innovativeness (Koivisto et  al. 2016; Girod et  al.
2017). Another personal characteristic is significant because using ride-sharing services
is beneficial to mitigate traffic congestion and reduce carbon emissions, so the acceptance
of ride-sharing may also be affected by consumers’ environmental awareness (Caulfield
2009).
Based on these arguments, the present research tries to add perceived risk, individual
innovativeness, and environmental awareness into the framework model to better under-
stand consumers’ intention to use ride-sharing services. Compared with the previous rel-
evant literature on ride-sharing services, this research is meaningful due to more in-depth
consideration of additional factors influencing the use of ride-sharing services. This inte-
grated theoretical model may contribute to the study of the sharing economy from the per-
spective of consumers’ technology acceptance.
The remainder of this research is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the theoreti-
cal background, discusses the research theoretical framework, and proposes the research
hypotheses. Section 3 focuses on the data acquisition and the research method. Data analy-
sis and results are presented in Sect. 4. In Sect. 5, we conclude the research and point out
implications and limitations.

13
 Transportation

Theoretical background, research model and hypotheses

Technology acceptance model

Technology acceptance model (TAM) is a commonly used framework to understand an

individual’s acceptance of a particular innovative technology and it was first proposed by
Davis in 1981 (Legris et al. 2003; Wang et al. 2006; Cheung and Vogel 2013; Hubert et al.
2017). TAM proposed that perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness are two fun-
damental determinant factors of consumers’ usage attitude and usage intention toward a
new technology (Davis 1989). Perceived ease of use is seen as the extent to which use of
the technology is thought to be easy and effortless (Venkatesh and Davis 2000). Perceived
usefulness is seen as the extent to which use of the technology is thought to be useful and
helpful. (Venkatesh and Davis 2000; Legris et al. 2003).
According to TAM, perceived ease of use positively affects perceived usefulness,
whereas both perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness positively affect consumers’
attitude towards using the technology. Attitude and perceived usefulness jointly influence
consumers’ intention to use a technology. And finally, consumers’ usage intention deter-
mines the actual use behavior. The TAM framework proposed by Davis (1989) is depicted
in Fig. 1.
In the later studies, some researchers simplified TAM by removing the attitude towards
using an innovative technology (Venkatesh and Davis 2000; Wu et  al. 2011; Cheng and
Huang 2013; Park et  al. 2014). The reason is that on one hand, the measurement of the
attitude construct is hard (Venkatesh et al. 2003; Chen 2008) and on the other hand, the
mediation effect of the attitude construct as a mediator between consumers’ belief con-
structs (perceived usefulness and ease of use) and behavioral intention is weak (Yen et al.
2010; Lee and Lehto 2013). Moreover, Venkatesh (2000) suggested that in the study of
consumer behavior, the simplified TAM may be more predictive than the original TAM.
Mallat et al. (2009) also revealed that perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness have
direct positive influences on behavioral intention. For these reasons, in this research, we
adopt the simplified TAM as the basic theoretical model.
In the context of ride-sharing, perceived ease of use refers to the extent to which a con-
sumer thinks that using a ride-sharing service is not too difficult. Perceived usefulness
refers to the extent to which a consumer thinks that using a ride-sharing service is useful to
obtain goals such as to lower the expenditure on commuting, increase ride experience and

Perceived
ease of use

Attitude towards Behavioral

Actual behavior
using intention

Perceived
usefulness

Fig. 1  TAM proposed by Davis (1989)

13
Transportation

trip convenience, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption, and mitigate
traffic congestion. When consumers are deciding whether to use an innovative technology,
they are more willing to experience it if it is easy to use and beneficial to an aim (Park
et al. 2014). A series of previous publications have indicated that in many different situa-
tions, perceived ease of use is positively associated with perceived usefulness and behav-
ioral intention; and perceived usefulness is positively associated with behavioral intention
(Cheng and Huang 2013; Park et  al. 2014; Tan et  al. 2014). Hence, based on the same
logic, in the context of using ride-sharing services, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H1  Perceived ease of use is positively associated with perceived usefulness.

H2  Perceived ease of use is positively associated with consumers’ intention to use ride-
sharing services.

H3  Perceived usefulness is positively associated with consumers’ intention to use ride-
sharing services.

Perceived risk

TAM only considers the gains or advantage factors of using an innovative technology from
the perspective of consumers, ignoring the losses or resistance factors (Cheng and Huang
2013; Park et al. 2014). Some studies have identified perceived risk as a critical obstacle
for consumers to accept a new technology or use a novel service (Kim et  al. 2008; Luo
et al. 2010; Cheng and Huang 2013), so it is necessary to incorporate consumers’ perceived
risk of using ride-sharing services into TAM and explore its effects. Therefore, the two
critical constructs of TAM, namely perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness, are
the consumers’ positive perceptions of an innovative technology and constitute the favora-
ble factors of consumers’ intention to use the technology. In contrast, perceived risk is the
consumers’ negative perception of an innovative technology and constitutes the resistance
factor of use intention.
Perceived risk refers to financial, product performance, social, psychological, physical,
or time risks in the pursuit of a desired outcome of using products or services (Feather-
man and Pavlou 2003). Consumers have many concerns when using mobile technological
innovations like ride-sharing services (Hong 2017; Schor 2016). Lee et  al. (2017) noted
that consumers are worried about the security risk, privacy risk, and surcharge justification
risk when they decide to use ride-sharing services. Cheng (2016) and Zhu et al. (2017a, b)
indicated that mobile ride-sharing service is an emerging type of O2O (online to offline)
business model which may be perceived to be associated with risks involving financial,
privacy, physical, and legal risks.
Perceived risk can lower consumers’ positive perceptions of many different types of
goods and services (Liu and Wei 2003; Martins et al. 2014). If consumers pay great atten-
tion to the perceived risk, they are less likely to adopt the goods and services and think
they are useless (Martins et  al. 2014). In the e-commerce research field, several studies
have demonstrated that perceived risk negatively influences perceived usefulness towards
online shopping and online transaction (Jarvenpaa et al. 2000; Van der Heijden et al. 2003;
Featherman and Pavlou 2003). Prior research also noted that perceived risk is important
to consumer acceptance of innovative technology and suggested that perceived risk has
a significant negative impact on consumer adoption intention (Laforet and Li 2005; Wu

13
 Transportation

and Wang 2005). For example, Kim et  al. (2008) indicated that perceived risk is a key
impediment for consumers in a network environment and it is negatively associated with
the behavioral intention. Based on these arguments, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H4  Perceived risk is negatively associated with perceived usefulness.

H5  Perceived risk is negatively associated with consumers’ intention to use ride-sharing
services.

Personal characteristics

In addition, knowledge of personal characteristics is useful to increase the predictive power

of TAM (Cheng and Huang 2013). The classical TAM only considers the consumers’ sub-
jective beliefs about technology characteristics without considering the characteristics of
the consumers themselves. Incorporating personal characteristics into TAM would make
up for the deficiencies of research on novel green technology acceptance that viewed only
the technology-focused perspective (Girod et al. 2017). Girod et al. (2017) also proposed
that personal innovativeness and environmental awareness are the two foremost personal
characteristics which affect consumer acceptance of an innovative environmental technol-
ogy. Hence, the present research incorporates personal innovativeness and environmental
awareness into TAM to develop a more comprehensive framework to explore consumers’
intention to use ride-sharing services.
Personal innovativeness refers to the degree to which a person tends to adopt new things
such as new technologies, products, or services, earlier than others (Rogers 1995). Personal
innovativeness is an important factor in predicting consumers’ intention to accept new
technologies (Cheng and Huang 2013). Lewis et al. (2003) believed that an individual is
deemed to be more confident about new technologies with a greater level of personal inno-
vativeness. Lu et al. (2005) found that an individual who has a higher degree of personal
innovativeness will have better perceptions of innovative technology and intend to adopt it.
Serenko (2008) argued that personal innovativeness actually affects the individual’s subjec-
tive perception of the new technology: the perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness.
Previous studies with regard to mobile commerce have also demonstrated that personal
innovativeness has a strong positive effect on perceived ease of use and perceived useful-
ness, which in turn influences consumer adoption intention (Bhatti 2007; Tan et al. 2014).
Besides these factors, Cheng and Huang (2013) noted that an individual who has a
higher degree of personal innovativeness tends to consider more the advantages of an inno-
vative technology instead of dwelling on the risk factors. In addition, the innovation diffu-
sion theory also suggests that people with high innovativeness are more inclined to adopt
new technologies and services, have more capacity to deal with uncertainty, and underes-
timate the effects of risks (Agag and El-Masry 2016). Aldás-Manzano et al. (2009) noted
that personal innovativeness has a significant effect on risk-taking and behavioral intention.
Based on the same logic, in this research, it is hypothesized that:

H6  Personal innovativeness is positively associated with perceived ease of use.

H7  Personal innovativeness is positively associated with perceived usefulness.

H8  Personal innovativeness is negatively associated with perceived risk.

13
Transportation

H9  Personal innovativeness is positively associated with consumers’ intention to use

ride-sharing services.

Environmental awareness refers to the knowledge of and concern about the impact of
human behavior on the climate and environment (Schuitema et al. 2013). Drawing on the
viewpoint of Hopwood et al. (2005), environmental awareness is a comprehensive concept
and it encompasses cognitions, perceptions, concerns, and sensibilities about environmen-
tal problems, along with thoughts and attitudes towards solutions to the problems and how
to maintain and manage the relationship between humans and the environment to improve
the quality of the environment. Environmental awareness is a person’s general understand-
ing and awareness of environmental problems and it is an important determinant for mak-
ing individuals change from their current behavior to more environmental-friendly behav-
ior (Schuitema et al. 2013; Daziano and Bolduc 2013; Wang et al. 2016).
Several studies have stressed that individuals who have a higher environmental aware-
ness would rather take actions that are more environmentally friendly (Kahn 2007; Bansal
2011; Chen and Hung 2016). Fishman et  al. (2013) indicated that the greater the envi-
ronmental awareness consumers have, the more likely it is that they will try to use bike-
sharing systems. Wang et al. (2017) noted that environmentalist are more easily motivated
to use energy-sustainable transport innovations such as electric vehicles and regard them as
an emission reduction tool to respond to their concerns about climate change. Considering
the environmental benefits of the sustainable transportation mode of ride-sharing, it can be
predicted that consumers with high environmental awareness are more inclined to use ride-
sharing services. Hence, it is hypothesized that:

H10  Environmental awareness is positively associated with consumers’ intention to use

ride-sharing services.

Based on above analysis, the research framework is depicted in Fig. 2.

Research methodology

Data collection

A questionnaire survey method was employed to collect data to test the research hypoth-
eses. The questionnaire was divided into three sections: demographic information, a brief
introduction of ride-sharing, and a set of measurement items designed to capture the con-
structs of our research model. Before conducting the formal survey, we conducted a pilot
survey. The initial questionnaire was filled in by 50 respondents to obtain important feed-
back. Then we discussed the feedback information and modified the questionnaire. It is
noteworthy that based on the pilot study, the time required to complete the questionnaire
was generally around 5 min. After the pilot survey, the formal survey was conducted online
through Survey Monkey, a professional online questionnaire website, from mid-April to
mid-June of 2017. In total, 915 respondents participated in the survey. These respondents
were divided into two groups. The respondents in the first group were college students
(approximately 600) from six universities in China and they were required to complete
this online survey during their courses. The respondents in the second group were ran-
dom selected respondents and they filled out the questionnaire voluntarily. Since the early

13
 Transportation

H9

Perceived
ease of use

H6 H1 H2

Personal Perceived Behavioral

H7 H3
innovativeness usefulness intention

H8 H4 H5 H10

Perceived Environmental
risk awareness

Fig. 2  The research framework of using ride-sharing services

users of Internet-based ride-sharing services are young people who are familiar with smart
phones (Zhu et  al. 2017a, b), it is appropriate to treat these students as the main targets
of our survey. In addition, in order to encourage participation in the survey, all respond-
ents who filled out the questionnaire were given a certain reward (various online applica-
tion coupons). 356 of the 915 responses were considered unreliable and deleted as they
were completed in less than 2 min. After this, 57 of the remaining responses were deleted
because of the presence of missing values, and 76 of the remaining were deleted due to
having the same answers to all different questions or lack of consistency. Finally, a total of
426 usable responses were selected after discarding 489 invalid questionnaires.
The demographic information of these respondents is shown in Table 1. It indicates that
nearly half of the respondents were female (52.40%) and more than 80% of them were aged
between 20 and 40 years old. The respondents were well-educated and 58.50% of them had
final education experience of an associate degree or bachelor’s degree. In terms of income
level, about 33.10% had a monthly income between RMB 4000 and RMB 8000 (USD 644
and USD 1288). With regard to use experience, 196 respondents have used ride-sharing
services before (46%), while 230 have never used ride-sharing services (54%).

Measures

The measurement items were developed through a concrete review of the existing literature
on TAM, perceived risk, personal innovativeness, and environmental concern. Some of the
wordings of the items were slightly modified for the ride-sharing context. All items were
measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”.
The constructs and items are shown in “Appendix 1”.
The measurement items of perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and intention to
use ride-sharing services were adapted from Gefen et al. (2003), Gefen and Straub (2004),
Yu et al. (2005), and Kim et al. (2017). For personal innovativeness, the items were adapted

13
Transportation

Table 1  Demographic profile of Group Frequency Percentage

respondents (n = 426)
Gender
 0. Male 203 47.60
 1. Female 223 52.40
Age
 1. Under 20 26 6.10
 2. 20–30 273 64.10
 3. 31–40 82 19.30
 4. 41–50 36 8.40
 5. 51 and over 9 2.10
Educational level
 1. Senior high school or below 49 11.50
 2. Associate degree or bachelor’s degree 249 58.50
 3. Master’s degree or Ph.D. 128 30.00
Monthly income (net monthly)
 1. Less than 4000 (USD 644) 92 21.60
 2. 4000–8000 (USD 644- USD 1288) 141 33.10
 3. 8001–12000 (USD 1288- USD 1932) 106 24.90
 4. More than 12000 (USD 1932) 87 20.40
The ride-sharing experience
 0. No 230 54.00
 1. Yes 196 46.00
Total 426 100

from Venkatesh and Davis (2000), Rogers et al. (2003), Kuo and Yen (2009), and Cheng
and Huang (2013). Environmental awareness was measured by items from the studies of
Fransson and Gärling (1999) and Ahn et al. (2016). The items used to measure the con-
struct of perceived risk were largely adapted from Kim et al. (2017) and Zhu et al. (2017a,
b).

Empirical results

Structural equation modeling analysis was employed to test whether the survey data fit
the conceptual model well and to examine the research hypotheses. The SPSS 19.0 and
AMOSS 21.0 software packages were used to conduct the data analysis. The SEM analysis
consisted of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and path analysis (PA).

Confirmatory factor analysis

Reliability, validity, and goodness of fit of the model were analyzed. According to Hair
et al. (1998), the standardized factor loadings of all items should be higher than the sug-
gested benchmark of 0.70. As shown in Table 2, the results of the research model meet the
benchmark except for one item of perceived usefulness (PU2), thus we deleted this item.

13
 Transportation

Table 2  Reliability and convergent validity of the research model

Construct Item Reliability Convergent validity
Cronbach’s Composite Standardized AVE
alpha value reliability factor loading

Personal innovativeness PI1 0.80 0.88 0.83 0.71

PI2 0.82
PI3 0.88
Perceived ease of use PEU1 0.91 0.94 0.91 0.85
PEU2 0.94
PEU3 0.91
Perceived usefulness PU1 0.84 0.90 0.86 0.68
PU2 (deleted) 0.55
PU3 0.72
PU4 0.86
PU5 0.85
Perceived risk PR1 0.84 0.89 0.83 0.68
PR2 0.82
PR3 0.83
PR4 0.81
Environmental awareness EA1 0.84 0.89 0.78 0.67
EA2 0.83
EA3 0.86
EA4 0.80
Behavioral intention BI1 0.86 0.91 0.90 0.78
BI2 0.87
BI3 0.87

Construct reliability was estimated by the Cronbach’s alpha values and the composite
reliability values (Fornell and Larcker 1981). As Table 2 shows, Cronbach’s alpha values
of the constructs ranged from 0.80 to 0.91, so all were greater than the recommended level
of 0.70, and the values of composite reliability ranged from 0.88 to 0.94 which exceeds the
recommended level of 0.70. These results indicate a quite good reliability.
Based on Fornell and Larcker (1981), convergent validity and discriminant validity were
adopted to assess the validity of the constructs. The convergent validity was tested by aver-
age variance extracted (AVE) (Chiu and Wang 2008). In this study, the values of AVE
ranged from 0.67 to 0.84 and achieved the requirement of the recommended level of 0.50
(Hair et  al. 2006). Discriminant validity was evaluated by comparing the square root of
AVE values and the correlations between constructs (Chiu and Wang 2008). In Table 3, the
diagonal elements in the correlation matrix are replaced by the square root of AVE values,
and these values are all larger than the correlations among constructs. Consequently, the
convergent validity and discriminant validity of this study are verified (Fornell and Larcker
1981).
The studies of Lu et al. (2007) indicated that the sample size or the number of observa-
ble variables can influence the statistical test. It is much more appropriate to measure the fit
indexes of the model. According to previous studies, the absolute fitness can be measured

13
Transportation

Table 3  Discriminant validity of Construct PI PEU PU PR EA BI

the research model
PI 0.84
PEU 0.51 0.92
PU 0.68 0.64 0.83
PR − 0.45 − 0.36 − 0.53 0.84
EA 0.49 0.47 0.55 − 0.29 0.82
BI 0.69 0.61 0.81 − 0.64 0.56 0.88

PI personal innovativeness, PEU perceived ease of use, PU perceived

usefulness, PR perceived risk, EA environmental awareness, BI behav-
ioral intention
The diagonal (bold) elements are the square roots of AVE values and
the off-diagonal elements are the correlations among the constructs

by the ratio of χ2 to degree of freedom, GFI (goodness-of-fit index), AGFI (adjusted good-
ness-of-fit index), RMR (root means square residual), and RMSEA (root mean square error
of approximation) (Hair et al. 2006; Kim et al. 2010). As illustrated in Table 4, all of these
goodness-of-fit indices meet the requirement of the recommended level. Moreover, the
incremental fit indices (NFI, CFI) and parsimony fit indices (PGFI, PNFI) of the research
model also satisfy the conditions of exceeding 0.9 and 0.5, respectively (NFI = 0.93,
CFI = 0.96: PGFI = 0.71, PNFI = 0.79). Therefore, the analysis can be summed up as prov-
ing a good model fit.

Path analysis

Path analysis was conducted to test the proposed hypotheses after the model fitness had
been confirmed. The results of path analysis are shown in Fig.  3 and Table  5. All the
hypotheses are consistent with the expected direction. To be specific, personal inno-
vativeness is positively associated with perceived ease of use (β = 0.41, t value = 6.80,
p < 0.001), perceived usefulness (β = 0.29, t value = 5.27, p < 0.001), and intention to use
ride-sharing services (β = 0.17, t value = 2.45, p < 0.05), which means that H6, H7, and

Table 4  Goodness-of-fit indices Fitness index Index value Ideal value

of confirmatory factor analysis
Absolute fit measure
 χ2/df 2.08 < 3.00
 RMSEA 0.05 < 0.08
 GFI 0.93 > 0.90
 AGFI 0.91 > 0.90
 RMR 0.04 < 0.05
Incremental fit measure
 NFI 0.93 > 0.90
 CFI 0.96 > 0.90
Parsimony fit measure
 PGFI 0.71 > 0.50
 PNFI 0.79 > 0.50

13
 Transportation

R2=0.26

Perceived
ease of use

***
***

R2=0.62 R2=0.76

Personal Perceived Behavioral

innovativeness *** usefulness *** intention

** *** *
***

Perceived Environmental
risk awareness

R2=0.21

Fig. 3  Results of path analysis. Notes: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; Dotted line represents insignifi-
cant path

Table 5  Results of hypothesis testing

Path Estimate t Value Result

H1: Perceived ease of use → perceived usefulness 0.32*** 4.09 Accepted

H2: Perceived ease of use → behavioral intention 0.13 1.42 Rejected
H3: Perceived usefulness → behavioral intention 0.52*** 3.48 Accepted
H4: Perceived risk → perceived usefulness − 0.21** − 3.09 Accepted
H5: Perceived risk → behavioral intention − 0.31*** − 4.11 Accepted
H6: Personal innovativeness → perceived ease of use 0.41*** 6.80 Accepted
H7: Personal innovativeness → perceived usefulness 0.29*** 5.27 Accepted
H8: Personal innovativeness → perceived risk − 0.35*** − 6.84 Accepted
H9: Personal innovativeness → behavioral intention 0.17* 2.45 Accepted
H10: Environmental awareness → behavioral intention 0.16* 2.19 Accepted

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001

H9 are supported. The results indicate that consumers who have a higher level of inno-
vativeness are more likely to believe that ride-sharing is easy to use and more willing to
use ride-sharing services. At the same time, innovative individuals tend to consider more
advantages of using ride-sharing services. These results are consistent with previous stud-
ies (Kuo and Yen 2009; Kim et  al. 2010; Cheng and Huang 2013). Personal innovative-
ness has a negative influence on perceived risk (β = − 0.35, t value = − 6.84, p < 0.001),
thus H8 is also verified. Similarly, perceived ease of use has a positive effect on per-
ceived usefulness as expected (β = 0.32, t value = 4.09, p < 0.001), leading to the establish-
ment of H1. However, the effect of perceived ease of use on intention to use ride-sharing

13
Transportation

service is not significant (β = 0.13, t value = 1.42, p > 0.05), which implies the rejection
of H2. Perceived usefulness significantly affects intention to use ride-sharing services
(β = 0.52, t value = 3.48, p < 0.001), which indicates the acceptance of H3. Both H4 and
H5 are accepted because of the negative influences of perceived risk on perceived use-
fulness (β = − 0.21, t value = − 3.09, p < 0.01) and intention to use ride-sharing services
(β = − 0.31, t value = − 4.11, p < 0.001). In other words, perceived risk not only directly
affects the intention to use ride-sharing services but also affects the intention indirectly
through perceived usefulness. Environmental awareness has a positive and direct influence
on ride-sharing services usage intention (β = 0.16, t value = 2.19, p < 0.05), which means
that H10 is supported. The result indicates that consumers who have a higher level of envi-
ronmental awareness are more willing to use the sustainable transportation of ride-sharing
services. In addition, the results also suggest that the effects of personal innovativeness and
environmental awareness on intention are relatively small.

Conclusions and implications

Conclusions

Ride-sharing has been regarded as an effective way to reduce carbon emissions and allevi-
ate urban transportation congestion. Based on the technology acceptance model, the pre-
sent research develops a conceptual framework with the aim of investigating consumer
motives for or against using ride-sharing services and discusses the relationships between
personal innovativeness, environmental awareness, perceived risk, perceived ease of use,
perceived usefulness, and intention to use ride-sharing services. In this study, the influenc-
ing factors of using ride-sharing services not only include the consumers’ positive percep-
tions about using ride-sharing services (e.g., perceived usefulness) but also contain nega-
tive perceptions of consumers about using ride-sharing services (e.g., perceived risk). At
the same time, the conceptual framework also investigates the effects of personal character-
istics on using ride-sharing services.
The results reveal that the consumers’ personal innovativeness positively influences
their intention to use ride-sharing services. Ride-sharing is novel and attractive to consum-
ers with high levels of personal innovativeness. However, the positive effect of personal
innovativeness on intention to use ride-sharing services is relatively small (β = 0.17). The
reason can be attributed to the fact that consumers make decisions to use ride-sharing ser-
vices based mainly on the convenience and usefulness of ride-sharing rather than their own
curiosity or desire for novelty. Furthermore, the results show that environmental awareness
is positively associated with consumers’ intention to use ride-sharing services. Similar to
the role of personal innovativeness, the effect of environmental awareness on intention to
use ride-sharing services is relatively small (β = 0.16). This may be due to the fact that for
most consumers in China, the environmental protection role of ride-sharing is not so popu-
lar that they would certainly think of its environmental friendliness before using it. Most
users or potential users make a ride-sharing decision for the usefulness of it, for instance,
it makes a trip more economical, convenient, and/or comfortable, instead of viewing it as
improving the environmental conditions.
Perceived usefulness is positively related to intention to use ride-sharing services and it
has the largest effect among all the influencing factors. It can be concluded that the main
drivers of using ride-sharing services relate to the perceived usefulness, such as the value

13
 Transportation

and convenience ride-sharing provides. However, contrary to our expectations, the effect of
the consumers’ perceived ease of use on intention to use ride-sharing services is insignifi-
cant, which is consistent with the results of previous research by Cheng and Huang (2013)
and Wu and Wang (2005) on mobile commerce. Perceived ease of use has a significant
indirect impact on consumers’ ride-sharing intention through the mediator of perceived
usefulness. Maybe the reason can be explained as follows. In China, mobile travel appli-
cations have become very popular in recent years (Zhu et al. 2017a, b). Most consumers
of ride-sharing services and potential consumers of ride-sharing services who have expe-
rienced an analogous mobile trip mode tend to believe that using ride-sharing services is
easy for them, but they will not choose to ride-share merely for the simplicity and ease of
use of ride-sharing services. In fact, only under the premise of consumers’ perception that
the ride-sharing brings great benefits to them does the consumers’ perception of ease of
use of ride-sharing have an impact on their ride-sharing behavior.
In addition, perceived risk has a significantly negative effect on intention to use ride-
sharing. This is because compared with the traditional travel mode such as taxi, ride-shar-
ing needs to rely on a mobile platform which involves a large amount of personal infor-
mation and privacy, meaning that it is accompanied by more security risks due to the
imperfections of the system (Hong 2017). Moreover, ride-sharing is also considered as one
of the new O2O (online to offline) business models. Consumers are nervous and worried
when using ride-sharing services, emotions which are mainly derived from concerns about
information safety and property safety in the online process of transactions through plat-
forms, and physical security in the offline process of taking a ride such as encountering a
car accident (Zhu et al. 2017a, b).

Implications

The present research not only contributes to the literature on the sharing economy in the
transportation sector but also is beneficial to business operators and policymakers desiring
to promote the sustainable transportation of ride-sharing. The findings display that per-
ceived usefulness and perceived risk are the two critical determinants of consumers’ inten-
tion to use ride-sharing services.
Some measures can be taken to increase consumers’ perceived usefulness. In addition
to the benefits of ride-sharing itself such as reducing travel cost, other benefits can also be
provided by ride-sharing platforms to consumers to increase their perception of the useful-
ness of ride-sharing. For example, free ride-sharing for the first time and appropriate sub-
sidies in the form of issuing coupons or a discount for a first month of ride-sharing can be
provided to create an opportunity for a consumer to become familiar with the ride-sharing
platforms, which should increase the consumers’ perceptions of the usefulness of ride-
sharing services. Moreover, relevant government departments and service providers should
step up publicity on the benefits of ride-sharing for society and environmental protection to
increase the public’s positive perception of this mode of transportation.
To reduce the perceived risk, some measures should be taken. Firstly, studies have
shown that perceived risk will be reduced when consumers have more experience with a
technology (Cheng and Huang 2013). Therefore, promotional policies designed to increase
the experience rate of using ride-sharing are an effective method. Secondly, platform
operators should perfect security mechanisms which are aimed at the overall safeguard-
ing of the consumer’s privacy as well as financial and personal security. Typically, ride-
sharing platforms should improve the real-name authentication system through rigorous

13
Transportation

certification of driver information and vehicle information so as to further ensure the per-
sonal and property safety of passengers. They should also purchase insurance for consum-
ers to improve the security system, which should reduce the consumers’ perceptions of
the risk of using ride-sharing services. Ultimately, raising the standards for the protection
of individual information is also important. The criteria concerning the use of user infor-
mation and authority to access data should be truly and transparently communicated to
consumers.

Limitations and further studies

Although this research offers some interesting findings and makes significant theoretical
and practical implications, it has several limitations which must be acknowledged and pos-
sibly overcome in future research. Firstly, the respondents of this research were relatively
young and well-educated, and most of them were Chinese college students. Follow-up
studies should collect data from more diverse groups. Secondly, in our questionnaire, the
answers of only 426 out of the 915 people returning a questionnaire could be used, so
the rate of valid responses is relatively low. In future research, several measures should be
taken to improve the rate of valid responses. Thirdly, this study just discusses the influence
of personal innovativeness and environmental awareness on the intention to use ride-shar-
ing. Other personal characteristics such as preference and experience are not considered. In
future research, we should attempt to consider other characteristics such as these. Finally,
this research only focuses on intention to use ride-sharing services rather than actual use
behavior. In fact, there is a gap between intention and actual behavior. To enrich the con-
clusions, in the following studies it is necessary to further investigate the survey respond-
ents’ actual use behavior.

Acknowledgements  This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(Grant No. 71601174) and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (WK2040150015).
The authors would like to express their gratitude to the usable answers of survey respondents and valuable
comments of the anonymous reviewers.

Compliance with ethical standards 

Conflict of interest  On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there are no conflicts of
interest.

Appendix 1

Constructs and measurement items.

Construct Code Measurement item

Personal innovativeness PI1 If I heard about a new thing/technology, I would look for ways to
experiment with it
PI2 Among my peers, I am usually the first one to try the new thing/technol-
ogy
PI3 I like to experience a new thing/technology

13
 Transportation

Construct Code Measurement item

Perceived ease of use PEU1 If I wanted to use ride-sharing services, it would be easy to me
PEU2 If I wanted to use ride-sharing services, it would be simple to me
PEU3 If I wanted to use ride-sharing services, I would have no problems
Perceived usefulness PU1 Using ride-sharing services would enable me to get to my destination
more quickly
PU2 Using ride-sharing services would improve my commute performance
PU3 Using ride-sharing services would make my tasks easier
PU4 Using ride-sharing services can mitigate traffic congestion
PU5 Using ride-sharing services can reduce greenhouse gas emission and
energy consumption
Perceived risk PR1 I’m concerned that my personal information will be shared or sold to
others when enter the ride-sharing services platform
PR2 I’m concerned that ride-sharing services platform collects too much
personal information about me
PR3 I’m concerned that use ride-sharing with strangers through a same ride-
sharing platform is not safe
PR4 I’m concerned that share a car with strangers by using ride-sharing
services can’t ensure my personal and property safety
Behavioral intention BI1 I plan to use ride-sharing services
BI2 I intend to use ride-sharing services
BI3 I predict that I will use ride-sharing services as long as I have access to
it
Environmental awareness EA1 I consider the potential environmental impact of my actions when mak-
ing many of my decisions
EA2 I am concerned about wasting the resources of our planet
EA3 I would like to describe myself as environmentally responsible
EA4 I am willing to be inconvenienced in order to take actions that are more
environmentally friendly

References
Agag, G., El-Masry, A.A.: Understanding consumer intention to participate in online travel community and
effects on consumer intention to purchase travel online and WOM: an integration of innovation diffu-
sion theory and TAM with trust. Comput. Hum. Behav. 60, 97–111 (2016)
Agatz, N., Erera, A., Savelsbergh, M., Wang, X.: Optimization for dynamic ride-sharing: a review. Eur. J.
Oper. Res. 223(2), 295–303 (2012)
Ahn, M., Kang, J., Hustvedt, G.: A model of sustainable household technology acceptance. Int. J. Consum.
Stud. 40(1), 83–91 (2016)
Ajzen, I.: The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50(2), 179–211 (1991)
Aldás-Manzano, J., Lassala-Navarré, C., Ruiz-Mafé, C., Sanz-Blas, S.: The role of consumer innovativeness
and perceived risk in online banking usage. Int. J. Bank Mark. 27(1), 53–75 (2009)
Bansal, G.: E-book usage: role of environmental consciousness, personality and past usage. J. Comput. Inf.
Syst. 52(2), 93–104 (2011)
Bhatti, T.: Exploring factors influencing the adoption of mobile commerce. J. Internet Bank. Commer. 12,
1–13 (2007)
Briz-Ponce, L., García-Peñalvo, F.J.: An empirical assessment of a technology acceptance model for apps in
medical education. J. Med. Syst. 39(11), 176 (2015)
Caulfield, B.: Estimating the environmental benefits of ride-sharing: a case study of Dublin. Transp. Res.
Part D Transp. Environ. 14(7), 527–531 (2009)

13
Transportation

Chan, N.D., Shaheen, S.A.: Ridesharing in North America: past, present, and future. Transp. Rev. 32(1),
93–112 (2012)
Chen, L.D.: A model of consumer acceptance of mobile payment. Int. J. Mobile Commun. 6(1), 32–52
(2008)
Chen, S.C., Hung, C.W.: Elucidating the factors influencing the acceptance of green products: an extension
of theory of planned behavior. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 112, 155–163 (2016)
Chen, S.Y., Lu, C.C.: A model of green acceptance and intentions to use bike-sharing: YouBike users in
Taiwan. Netw. Spat. Econ. 16(4), 1103–1124 (2016)
Cheng, M.: Sharing economy: a review and agenda for future research. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 57, 60–70
(2016)
Cheng, Y.H., Huang, T.Y.: High speed rail passengers’ mobile ticketing adoption. Transp. Res. Part C
Emerg. Technol. 30, 143–160 (2013)
Cheung, R., Vogel, D.: Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: an extension of the tech-
nology acceptance model for e-learning. Comput. Educ. 63, 160–175 (2013)
Chiu, C.M., Wang, E.T.G.: Understanding web-based learning continuance intention: the role of subjective
task value. Inf. Manag. 45, 194–201 (2008)
Collura, J.: Evaluating ride-sharing programs: massachusetts’ experience. J. Urb. Plan. Dev. 120(1), 28–47
(1994)
Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology.
MIS Q. 13, 319–340 (1989)
Daziano, R.A., Bolduc, D.: Incorporating pro-environmental preferences towards green automobile tech-
nologies through a Bayesian hybrid choice model. Transp. A 9(1), 74–106 (2013)
Featherman, M.S., Pavlou, P.A.: Predicting e-services adoption: a perceived risk facets perspective. Int. J.
Hum. Comput. Stud. 59(4), 451–474 (2003)
Feeney, M.: Is ridesharing safe? Policy Anal. 767, 2–7 (2015)
Fellows, N.T., Pitfield, D.E.: An economic and operational evaluation of urban car-sharing. Transp. Res.
Part D Transp. Environ. 5(1), 1–10 (2000)
Fleischer, A., Wahlin, C.: Want to take a ride with me? The intention of Generation Y to use Uber. Transp.
Rev. 18(2), 138–162 (2016)
Fishman, E., Washington, S., Haworth, N.: Bike share: a synthesis of the literature. Transp. Rev. 33(2),
148–165 (2013)
Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F.: Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measure-
ment error. J. Mark. Res. 18, 39–50 (1981)
Fransson, N., Gärling, T.: Environmental concern: conceptual definitions, measurement methods, and
research findings. J. Environ. Psychol. 19(4), 369–382 (1999)
Frenken, K., Schor, J.: Putting the sharing economy into perspective. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 23, 3–10
(2017)
Furuhata, M., Dessouky, M., Ordóñez, F., Brunet, M.E., Wang, X., Koenig, S.: Ridesharing: the state-of-
the-art and future directions. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 57, 28–46 (2013)
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W.: Inexperience and experience with online stores: the importance of
TAM and trust. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 50(3), 307–321 (2003)
Gefen, D., Straub, D.W.: Consumer trust in B2C e-Commerce and the importance of social presence: exper-
iments in e-Products and e-Services. Omega 32(6), 407–424 (2004)
Girod, B., Mayer, S., Nägele, F.: Economic versus belief-based models: shedding light on the adoption of
novel green technologies. Energy Policy 101, 415–426 (2017)
Grybaitė, V., Stankevičienė, J.: Motives for participation in the sharing economy–evidence from Lithuania.
Ekonomia i Zarzadzanie 8(4), 7–17 (2016)
Ha, S., Stoel, L.: Consumer e-shopping acceptance: antecedents in a technology acceptance model. J. Bus.
Res. 62(5), 565–571 (2009)
Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., Ukkonen, A.: The sharing economy: why people participate in collaborative con-
sumption. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 67(9), 2047–2059 (2016)
Hair, J.F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L.: Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th edn. Pearson,
New Jersey (2006)
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L.: Multivariate data analysis, vol. 5(3), pp.
207–219. Prentice hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ (1998)
Heinrichs, H.: Sharing economy: a potential new pathway to sustainability. Gaia 22(4), 228 (2013)
Hong, S.J.: Assessing economic value of reducing perceived risk in the sharing economy: the case of ride-
sharing services. J. Public Transp. 13(4), 61–72 (2017)
Hopwood, B., Mellor, M., O’Brien, G.: Sustainable development: mapping different approaches. Sustain.
Dev. 13(1), 38–52 (2005)

13
 Transportation

Hubert, M., Blut, M., Brock, C., Backhaus, C., Eberhardt, T.: Acceptance of smartphone-based mobile
shopping: mobile benefits, customer characteristics, perceived risks, and the impact of application con-
text. Psychol. Mark. 34(2), 175–194 (2017)
Huang, H.J., Yang, H., Bell, M.G.: The models and economics of carpools. Ann. Reg. Sci. 34(1), 55–68
(2000)
Jarvenpaa, S., Tractinsky, N., Vitale, M.: Consumer trust in an internet store. Inf. Technol. Manag. 1(1/2),
45–71 (2000)
Kahn, M.E.: Do greens drive Hummers or hybrids? Environmental ideology as a determinant of consumer
choice. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 54(2), 129–145 (2007)
Kelly, K.L.: Casual carpooling-enhanced. J. Pub. Transp. 10(4), 6 (2007)
Kim, C., Mirusmonov, M., Lee, I.: An empirical examination of factors influencing the intention to use
mobile payment. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26(3), 310–322 (2010)
Kim, D.J., Ferrin, D.L., Rao, H.R.: A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce:
the role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decis. Support Syst. 44(2), 544–564 (2008)
Kim, H., Choi, K.H., Kim, K.J., Park, E.: From owning to sharing: understanding the emergence of social
sharing services. Program 51(2), 102–115 (2017)
Koivisto, K., Makkonen, M., Frank, L., Riekkinen, J.: Extending the technology acceptance model with
personal innovativeness and technology readiness: a comparison of three models. In: BLED 2016: Pro-
ceedings of the 29th Bled eConference “Digital Economy”, ISBN 978-961-232-287-8 (2016)
Kuo, Y.F., Yen, S.N.: Towards an understanding of the behavioral intention to use 3G mobile value-added
services. Comput. Hum. Behav. 25(1), 103–110 (2009)
Laforet, S., Li, X.: Consumers’ attitudes towards online and mobile banking in China. Int. J. Bank Mark.
23(5), 362–380 (2005)
Lee, C., Rahafrooz, M., Lee, O.K.D.: What are the concerns of using a Ride-Sharing service? An investiga-
tion of Uber. Sustain. Dev. 21(5), 28–42 (2017)
Lee, D.Y., Lehto, M.R.: User acceptance of YouTube for procedural learning: an extension of the technol-
ogy acceptance model. Comput. Educ. 61, 193–208 (2013)
Lee, M.C.: Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking: an integration of TAM and TPB with per-
ceived risk and perceived benefit. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 8(3), 130–141 (2009)
Legris, P., Ingham, J., Collerette, P.: Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the
technology acceptance model. Inf. Manag. 40(3), 191–204 (2003)
Lewis, W., Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V.: Sources of influence on beliefs about information technology
use: an empirical study of knowledge workers. MIS Q. 1, 657–678 (2003)
Liu, J., Kockelman, K.M., Boesch, P.M., Ciari, F.: Tracking a system of shared autonomous vehicles across
the Austin Texas network using agent-based simulation. Transportation 44, 1–18 (2017)
Liu, X., Wei, K.K.: An empirical study of product differences in consumers’ E-commerce adoption behav-
ior. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2(3), 229–239 (2003)
Lu, C.S., Lai, K.H., Cheng, T.C.E.: Application of structural equation modeling to evaluate the adoption of
Internet services in liner shipping. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 180(2), 845–867 (2007)
Lu, J., Yao, J.E., Yu, C.S.: Personal innovativeness, social influences and adoption of wireless Internet ser-
vices via mobile technology. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 14(3), 245–268 (2005)
Luo, X., Li, H., Zhang, J., Shim, J.P.: Examining multi-dimensional trust and multi-faceted risk in initial
acceptance of emerging technologies: an empirical study of mobile banking services. Decis. Support
Syst. 49(2), 222–234 (2010)
Mallat, N., Rossi, M., Tuunainen, V.K., Öörni, A.: The impact of use context on mobile services acceptance:
the case of mobile ticketing. Inf. Manag. 46(3), 190–195 (2009)
Martins, C., Oliveira, T., Popovič, A.: Understanding the Internet banking adoption: a unified theory of
acceptance and use of technology and perceived risk application. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 34(1), 1–13 (2014)
Meelen, T., Frenken, K.: Stop saying Uber is part of the sharing economy. Fast Co. 14, 15–23 (2015)
Morency, C.: The ambivalence of ridesharing. Transportation 34(2), 239–253 (2007)
Park, C.K., Kim, H.J., Kim, Y.S.: A study of factors enhancing smart grid consumer engagement. Energy
Policy 72, 211–218 (2014)
Parsons, A.: The sharing economy: a short introduction to its political evolution. Ecol. Econ. 12, 149–159
(2014)
Prieto, J.C.S., Migueláñez, S.O., García-Peñalvo, F.J.: ICTs integration in education: mobile learning and
the technology acceptance model (TAM). In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on
Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, pp. 683–687. ACM (2014)
Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of innovations, vol. 12. Greenwood Press, New York (1995)
Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of innovations, vol. 551. Free Press, New York (2003)
Schor, J.: Debating the sharing economy. J. Self-Gov. Manag. Econ. 4(3), 7–22 (2016)

13
Transportation

Schuitema, G., Anable, J., Skippon, S., Kinnear, N.: The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attrib-
utes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 48, 39–49 (2013)
Serenko, A.: A model of user adoption of interface agents for email notification. Interact. Comput. 20(4–5),
461–472 (2008)
Stiglic, M., Agatz, N., Savelsbergh, M., Gradisar, M.: The benefits of meeting points in ride-sharing sys-
tems. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 82, 36–53 (2015)
Tan, G.W.H., Ooi, K.B., Leong, L.Y., Lin, B.: Predicting the drivers of behavioral intention to use mobile
learning: a hybrid SEM-Neural Networks approach. Comput. Hum. Behav. 36, 198–213 (2014)
Teubner, T., Flath, C.M.: The economics of multi-hop ride sharing. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 57(5), 311–324
(2015)
Van der Heijden, H., Verhagen, T., Creemers, M.: Understanding online purchase intentions: contributions
from technology and trust perspectives. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 12(1), 41–48 (2003)
Venkatesh, V.: Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion
into the technology acceptance model. Inf. Syst. Res. 11(4), 342–365 (2000)
Venkatesh, V., Davis, F.D.: A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal
field studies. Manag. Sci. 46(2), 186–204 (2000)
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D.: User acceptance of information technology: toward a
unified view. MIS Q. 27, 425–478 (2003)
Wang, R.: Shaping carpool policies under rapid motorization: the case of Chinese cities. Transp. Policy
18(4), 631–635 (2011)
Wang, S., Fan, J., Zhao, D., Yang, S., Fu, Y.: Predicting consumers’ intention to adopt hybrid electric vehi-
cles: using an extended version of the theory of planned behavior model. Transportation 43(1), 123–
143 (2016)
Wang, S., Li, J., Zhao, D.: The impact of policy measures on consumer intention to adopt electric vehicles:
evidence from China. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 105, 14–26 (2017)
Wang, Y.S., Lin, H.H., Luarn, P.: Predicting consumer intention to use mobile service. Inf. Syst. J. 16(2),
157–179 (2006)
Wosskow, D.: Unlocking the sharing economy: an independent review. Econ. Aff. 11(3), 31–45 (2014)
Wu, C.S., Cheng, F.F., Yen, D.C., Huang, Y.W.: User acceptance of wireless technology in organizations: a
comparison of alternative models. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 33(1), 50–58 (2011)
Wu, J.H., Wang, S.C.: What drives mobile commerce?: an empirical evaluation of the revised technology
acceptance model. Inf. Manag. 42(5), 719–729 (2005)
Yen, D.C., Wu, C.S., Cheng, F.F., Huang, Y.W.: Determinants of users’ intention to adopt wireless technol-
ogy: an empirical study by integrating TTF with TAM. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26(5), 906–915 (2010)
Yu, J., Ha, I., Choi, M., Rho, J.: Extending the TAM for a t-commerce. Inf. Manag. 42(7), 965–976 (2005)
Zhu, G., Li, H., Zhou, L.: Enhancing the development of sharing economy to mitigate the carbon emission:
a case study of online ride-hailing development in China. Nat. Hazards 8, 1–23 (2017a)
Zhu, G., So, K.K.F., Hudson, S.: Inside the sharing economy: understanding consumer motivations behind
the adoption of mobile applications. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 29(9), 2218–2239 (2017b)

Yu Wang  is a PhD student in the School of Management at the University of Science and Technology of
China. Her current research interests include sharing economy, green travel and sustainable business.

Shanyong Wang  is an Associate Professor in the School of Management at the University of Science and
Technology of China. His primary research interests include energy policy, low-carbon transport system and
environmental management.

Jing Wang  is a PhD student in the School of Management at the University of Science and Technol-
ogy of China. Her current research interests focus on green travel, sustainable development and service
management.

Jiuchang Wei  is a Professor in the School of Management at the University of Science and Technology of
China. His current research interests include risk resilience and crisis management, sustainable business and
environmental technology innovation.

Chenglin Wang  is a Member of Executive Development Programs in the University of Science and Tech-
nology of China. His research interests include sustainable business and green management.

13