“ A STUDY ON ATTITUDE TOWARD

INTERNET BANKING USER AMONG

SCHOOL TEACHERS IN
KOTA BHARU”

PREPARED BY:
Noor zahian binti mohd zain
2006236188
 Contents

INTRODUCTION

LITERATURE REVIEW

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

FINDING AND ANALYSIS

CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATION

 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Internet banking provides a fast and convenience ways of

performing common banking transactions in the internet. It
also will be able to do banking from the comfort of home,
office or virtually anywhere else in the world. It gives many
benefits to the customer but…

Why there are still many peoples are not using internet
banking
 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The study on internet banking focuses on consumer attitudes
among teachers in Kota Bharu. The objectives of this study
are:

To identify whether the factors such as trust, relative

advantage, trialibility and convenience being the factors of
the influencing attitude toward internet banking user in Kota
Bharu.

To examine whether there have relationship between trust,

relative advantage, trialibility and convenience with the
attitude toward internet banking user in Kota Bharu.
 Theoretical framework

Trust

Relative
advantage Attitude
toward the internet
banking usage
Trialability

Convenience
DATA COLLECTION AND DATA
SOURCES
PRIMARY DATA: QUESTIONNAIRES

SAMPLING

SCHOOL TEACHERS IN
POPULATION KOTA BHARU

SAMPLE 100 RESPONDENTS

SIZE
 LITERATURE REVIEW

 ATTITUDE

According to Fishbein and Ajzen(1975) attitude is defined as

an individual's positive and negative feelings (evaluative
affect) about performing the target behavior. Attitude toward
behavior refers to the degree to which a person has a favorable
or unfavorable evaluation or appraisal of the behavior in
question.
 TRUST
Trust is a willingness to be vulnerable to the actions of another
person or people (Mayer et al., 1995). This is based on
expectations that the other person will behave in a responsible
manner (Pavlou, 2003) and will not take advantage of a
dependence upon him or her (Gefen et al., 2003).
 RELATIVE ADVANTAGES

According to Rogers, relative advantage requires

the adopter to analyze the costs and benefits of
using an innovation, which can be expressed
economically, socially, or in other ways.

 TRIALIBILITY

Trialability is the extent to which users would like

an opportunity to experiment with an innovation
prior to committing to its usage (Roger, 1983;
Agarwal & Prasad, 1997).
 CONVENIENCE

Chung and Paynter (2002) found that many people

who did not use internet banking believed they did
not need high levels of convenience.

Convenience was mostly described in terms of

lifestyle, workplace use, housebound use, not
having to travel, personal safety, not having to wait
and also, as found in the (Pew, 2003) study, ‘saved
time’ and 24/7 access.
 RESEARCH METHODODLOGY

INDEPENDENT SAMPLES
ONE WAY ANOVA
T TEST

BIVARIATE
LINEAR REGRESSION
CORRELATION
 FINDING AND ANALYSIS
INDEPENDENT SAMPLES
T TEST
DEMOGRAPHIC- GENDER
Sig (2-tailed) 95% confidence Interval Of The
t Different

Lower Upper
Relative Equal variance -.625 .543 -1.9984649796 -.1148683538
Advantage assumed -.601 .552 -2.0085137841 -.1048195492
Equal variances
not assumed

Only relative advantage is significant with

the gender.
In demographic, age, marital status, income and education,
only age and income significance with trialibility. The others
is not significant.

Table : Significant comparison ( Age)

ANOVA

Trialibility
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 18.253 3 6.084 2.756 .047
Within Groups 211.969 96 2.208
Total 230.222 99

Table : Significant comparison ( Income)

ANOVA

Trialibility
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 30.835 2 15.417 7.500 .001
Within Groups 199.388 97 2.056
Total 230.222 99
 PEARSON CORRELATION
Table : Correlation for variable
Correlations

Attitude Trust RelAdv Trialibility Convenience

Attitude Pearson Correlation 1 .770** .919** .472** .890**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100
Trust Pearson Correlation .770** 1 .772** .570** .756**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100
RelAdv Pearson Correlation .919** .772** 1 .516** .909**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100
Trialibility Pearson Correlation .472** .570** .516** 1 .537**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100
Convenience Pearson Correlation .890** .756** .909** .537** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

There is very strong relationship between trust,

relative advantage, and convenience with the
dependent variable (attitude). While trialibilty is
moderate relationship because the r value is between
0.30-0.49.
Hypothesis 1: LINEAR REGRESSION
Ho: Trust has no significant effects toward internet banking user among
school teachers.
H1: Trust has a significant effects toward internet banking user among school
teachers.

Hypothesis 2:
Ho: Relative advantage has no significant effects toward internet banking user
among school teachers.
H1: Relative advantage has a significant effects toward internet banking user
among school teachers.

Hypothesis 3:

Ho: Trialability has no significant effects toward internet banking user among
school teachers.
H1: Trialability has a significant effects toward internet banking user among
school teachers.

Hypothesis 4:
Ho: Convenience has no significant effects toward internet banking user
among school teachers.
H1: Convenience has a significant effect toward internet banking user among
school teachers.
 Table: The regression output
Coefficientsa

Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .031 .376 .081 .935
Trust .216 .099 .136 2.181 .032
RelAdv .583 .094 .581 6.189 .000
Trialibility -.086 .064 -.062 -1.352 .180
Convenience .273 .086 .292 3.179 .002
a. Dependent Variable: Attitude

Regression model

Y = β1x1+β2x2+β3x3+β4x4
= 0.031 +0.216x1+0.583 x2-0.086 x30.273 x4

There is a positive relationship between trust, relative

advantage and convenience with attitude.
 Trialibility have negative relationship with attitude (Y).
 Table: Test Of Correlation

Model Summary

Adjusted Std. Error of

Model R R Square R Square the Estimate
1 .932a .869 .864 .777
a. Predictors: (Constant), Convenience, Trialibility, Trust,
RelAdv

COEFFICIENT OF CORRELATION (R)

 Correlation table shows that there is a strong

position linear between the independent
variable (trust, relative advantage, trialibility
and convenience) with the dependent
variable (attitude). R is 93.2% .
 COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION (R2)

 R2 value is 0.869, which means that 86.9% of the

variation in the dependent variable (attitude) can be
explained by the independent variable (trust, relative
advantage, trialibility and convenience).
 F-STATISTIC
Table: ANOVA

ANOVAb

Sum of
Model Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 381.189 4 95.297 157.938 .000a
Residual 57.321 95 .603
Total 438.510 99
a. Predictors: (Constant), Convenience, Trialibility, Trust, RelAdv
b. Dependent Variable: Attitude

 Significant value is 0.000 less than 0.05. , thus we fail

to accept Ho, or in other words, there is a relationship
between dependent variable (attitude) and independent
variables (trust, relative advantage, trialibility, and
convenience).
 CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the result shows that all the independent

variables have a positive relationship with the attitude
toward internet banking usage, except trialibility. This
means that the higher the results the better their
attitude toward internet banking.
 RECOMMENDATION
 Banks need to develop strategies that could improve
the customer’s trust in the underlying technology.
 The finding suggests that a positive attitude towards
Internet banking could be formed if customers feel
Internet banking is useful.
 To encourage the acceptance, banks should allow
potential customers to try Internet banking by
providing step-by-step demonstration on how to use
Internet banking on their website.

It is also recommended that a further study on this

topic would be taken. It is because the study has several
limitations that affect the reliability and validity of the findings.
The survey is not representative of the whole
Kota Bharu. The sample was collected only from school
teachers in Kota Bharu.