Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Open Journal of Business and Management, 2016, 4, 51-59
Published Online January 2016 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojbm
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2016.41006
How to cite this paper: Goswami, A. and Dutta, S. (2016) Gender Differences in Technology Usage—A Literature Review.
Open Journal of Business and Management, 4, 51-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2016.41006
Gender Differences in Technology
Usage—A Literature Review
Ananya Goswami, Sraboni Dutta
Department of Management, Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Kolkata Extension Center, Kolkata, India
Received 16 November 2015; accepted 11 January 2016; published 14 January 2016
Copyright © 2016 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Abstract
The usage of Information Technology has expanded dramatically in today’s homes, business or-
ganizations and Government departments Technology has become an inevitable part of human life.
Researchers have come up with various models and theories to investigate factors that influence
the extent to which humans use computers and its applications. Unified Theory of Adoption and
Use of Technology (UTAUT) is the latest model which has been conceived to understand the nature
of technology usage and has been applied in various domains like education, banking, health care
etc. Gender has been attributed as a significant variable in explaining the technology acceptance
behaviour of humans. The objective of this study is to review the existing literature on the tech-
nology usage and intention to use technology from the gender perspective. It has been observed
from the review that in few contexts, gender plays a significant role in determining the intention
of accepting new technology and there are cases where gender differences cannot be discerned.
Keywords
Unified Theory of Adoption and Use of Technology (UTAUT), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM),
Gender, Technology, Usage, Intention
1. Introduction
The usage of Information Technology has expanded dramatically in today’s homes, business organizations and
Government departments. Card, S. K. et al. (1983) stated that the interaction between humans and computer had
remarkably increased for the purpose of completing any task [1]. Westland and Clark has observed that since
1980s, organizations have invested about 50 percent of new capital in Information Technology [2]. Researchers
have propounded various models and theories that investigate factors influencing humans to use computers and
its applications.
In spite of institutional efforts to reduce gender inequalities, women in many countries in comparison to their
A. Goswami, S. Dutta
52
male counterparts, encounter a significant disadvantage in areas such as education, politics and workplace dis-
crimination. Mayoux pointed out that women faced more challenges in terms of socio-cultural, educational and
technological issues than men when managing their business ventures [3]. Orji found that the differences be-
tween the men and women have been studied in various areas such as electronic mail, information retrieval,
e-learning, communication technologies and online purchasing behaviour and majorly, the studies revealed more
favorably towards men as compared to women [4]. The author has suggested that understanding the reasons be-
hind gender inequalities on the acceptance of new technologies would help in overall development of technolo-
gies.
Various theoretical models have been established to study the behavioral intentions to adopt technologies.
Such models are the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) [5], the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) [6], the
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) [7], the Combined-TAM-TPB model (C-TAM-TPB) [8], the Motiva-
tional Model (MM) [9], the Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) [10], Model of PC Utilization (MPCU) [11], So-
cial Cognitive Theory (SCT) [12]. Venkatesh et al. (2003) combined these 8 models to form Unified Theory of
Adoption and Use of Technology (UTAUT) to study the behavioural intention to use technology [13]. It has
been observed that Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Unified Theory of Adoption and Use of Tech-
nology (UTAUT) are being widely used by the researchers to study the behavioral aspect in using technology.
The objective of this study is to review the existing literature on the technology usage and intention to use
technology from the gender perspective.
In this study, we discussed the framework of the two prominent technology adoption models, namely, Tech-
nology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) in Sec-
tion 2. Thereafter in Section 3, we have surveyed literature spanning from 2000 till 2015 to discuss how the
adoption and usage of various ICT applications such as Information Technology, e learning, e banking, e com-
merce, stock trading and social media differ on the basis of gender. In the last section, we present the conclu-
sions.
2. Models of Technology Adoption
2.1. Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
In the initial TAM Model, Davis states that the success of a system is determined by the user acceptance of the
system which is measured by three factors: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and attitudes towards
usage of the system. Davis (1989) defined Perceived Usefulness as “the degree to which a person believes that
using a particular system would enhance his or her performance” and Perceived Ease of Use as “the degree to
which a person believes that using a particular system would be free of effort” [7]. Perceived Usefulness and
Perceived Ease of Use are influenced by external variables such as design, features of the IT system and organi-
zational training. Davis also defined Attitude towards usage as “the degree to which an individual evaluates and
associates the target system with his or her job” [7]. A behavioral intention to use the system of the user is in-
fluenced by his/her attitude and perceived usefulness of the system.
Later, Davis and Venkatesh (1996) modified the model and eliminated attitude variable as they found through
a study that attitude played a minor role in system usage behavior [14]. It was also analyzed that the external va-
riables possibly could be system characteristics, user training, user participation in design and nature of the im-
plementation process (Figure 1).
2.2. Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT)
UTAUT model consists of four core determinants of intention and usage: Performance Expectancy, Effort Ex-
pectancy, Social Influence and Facilitating Conditions and also of four moderators of key relationships: Gender,
Age, Experience and Voluntariness. The core determinants are the key factors which influence directly the us-
er’s behavioral intention to use new technologies. Moderators are factors, which control the influence of the key
factors (Figure 2). The definitions of the constructs are given in Table 1.
3. Gender Differences with Respect to Usage of ICT Applications
3.1. Information Technology
Using the Unified Theory of Adoption and Use of Technology (UTAUT) Model, Nysveen et al. (2005) studied
A. Goswami, S. Dutta
53
Figure 1. Technology acceptance model (TAM).
Figure 2. The UTAUT model.
Table 1. Definition of the constructs.
Variable Type Definition
Performance
Expectancy (PE) Independent The degree to which an individual believes that using the system would help
him/her to attain gains in job performance
Effort Expectancy (EE) Independent The degree of ease associated with the usage of the system
Social Influence (SI) Independent The degree to which an individual perceives that other important persons
believe that he/she should use the system
Facilitating
Condition (FC) Independent The degree to which an individual believes that an organizational and
technical infrastructure exists to support use of the system.
Behavioral Intention (BI) Dependent An indication of an individual’s readiness to perform a given behavior
684 mobile chat service users in Norway were being studied and found that perceived usefulness in using mobile
chat services is stronger for men than women [15]. Venkatesh and Morris (2000) used Technology Acceptance
Model (TAM) amongst 342 employees in a workplace and found that females tend to use the technology that
requires less effort and thus, effort expectancy is stronger for women than men. They have also said that women
were having lower perceived ease of use because they were having higher levels of computer anxiety as com-
pared to their male counterparts [16]. Constantiou and Manhke (2010) studied 232 people in Austria comprising
of mainly young adults working in the private sector and students, on the consumption pattern of Mobile TV
services, it has been concluded that men are more interested in sports and women in daily soaps, lifestyle news
and weather status [17]. Venkatesh et al. (2003) found that females are more sensitive to the suggestions of the
A. Goswami, S. Dutta
54
peers and hence the effect of social influence will be stronger when forming the intention to use Information
Technology [13]. Venkatesh et al. (2003) also revealed that females are more anxious than men when it comes
to IT utilization and this nature of the females reduced their self effectiveness which in turn led to increased
perceptions of the effort required to use IT [13].
Amongst 630 Anglo American undergraduates, Jackson et al. (2001) found that emails are used more by
women than men whereas men use Web more than women [18]. By surveying 220 Chinese and 245 British stu-
dents’, Li & Kirkup (2007) concluded that men in both the countries tend to use emails and “chat” rooms more
than women do; men play more games on computer; men are more confident on their computer skills than
women. However, the gender inequality is stronger in the British group than in the Chinese one [19]. Jackson et
al. (2001) found that females are more prone to computer nervousness, are less effective in terms of handling
computers and have unfavourable attitudes towards using computers [18]. Utilizing the UTAUT Model, Nys-
veen et al. (2005) indicated that social influence has a greater impact on females in using mobile chat services
[15]. Similarly, in Portugal, Afonso et al. (2012) studied 2175 users of Electronic Document Management Sys-
tem (EDMS) and found that gender only moderates Performance Expectancy (PE) towards Behavioural Inten-
tion (BI) as males are more result oriented than females [20].
Calvert et al. (2005) had interviewed 1065 parents to know about the media habits of children aged 6 months
to 6 years, in the U.S and found that at younger ages there was no difference between boys and girls in using
computer but however the interest level of the girls diminished at later stages [21]. In a cross country compara-
tive study in USA and Japan on gender differences, Ono and Zavodny (2005) revealed that during 1990s there
were radical gender gap in both the countries in Information Technology usage but situation had reversed by
2001 in the US, while in Japan the situation remained unchanged [22]. In the context of adopting technological
innovation, Mazman et al. (2009) indicated that females are more induced to adopt technological innovation
through social influence rather than by a personal decision whereas in case of males the personal decision to
adopt innovation is much stronger than social influence [23].
3.2. e-Learning
Gender differences have been studied in diverse range of disciplines. By implementing extended Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM), Okazaki and Santos (2012) studied 446 faculty members in Brazil with respect to
adoption of e learning tools. They used Structural Modelling Analysis and found that statistically significant
differences exists between male and female with respect to three relations i.e. between ease of use and perceived
usefulness, between perceived usefulness and attitude and between intention of use and actual behavior [24].
The authors have also revealed that gender influence the causal relationship i.e., the path from perceived useful-
ness to attitude is much much stronger for males as compared to females and the result is same for the path from
ease of use to perceived usefulness [24]. Ong and Lai (2006) surveyed 67 female and 89 male employees from
six different international companies in Taiwan and found that females being more challenged by computer illi-
teracy attach more importance to the ease of use of e-learning tools as compared to men while males give more
emphasis on perceived usefulness in determining behavioural intention towards e learning adoption [25]. Islam
et al. (2011) have noticed gender differences in Malaysia by studying 80 students from higher learning institu-
tions and revealed that females face technical barriers in understanding e learning system [26]. Liaw and Huang
(2011) studied 424 university students in Singapore and concluded that male students are more positively in-
clined towards e-learning than female students [27]. Milis et al. (2008) surveyed 200 undergraduate students to
understand the acceptability of Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) and observed that females found the new
system to be complicated and learning of the new technology widely relied on perceived usability [28].
Raman et al. (2014) investigated 65 postgraduate students in Malaysia with respect to the use of Moodle and
found that the gender does not influence Performance Expectancy (PE), Effort Expectancy (EE) and Social In-
fluence (SI) towards Behavioural Intention (BI) [29]. Similar kind of conclusion was drawn by Egbo et al. (2011)
by analyzing 415 undergraduate students in Nigeria, who posited that female students intend to use ICT more
than their male counterparts [30]. In India, Suri and Sharm (2013) surveyed 477 students and concluded that no
gender difference exists in attitudes towards e learning [31].
3.3. e-Banking Services
With the growth of Internet and intensive penetration of mobile phones, banks have been extensively promoting
A. Goswami, S. Dutta
55
the mobile and Internet banking systems. Studies have shown that gender is a significant factor in influencing
adoption of mobile banking. Laukkanen and Pasanen (2008) studied 2675 customers of Scandinavian Bank in
Finland and by applying backward stepwise method of logistic regression analysis, it has been revealed that men
are more likely to use mobile banking services than women [32]. Cruz et al. (2010) found that men are more
goal oriented but men are also more concerned on the cost of Internet access and other related fees when using
mobile banking services [33]. Similarly, in Brazil, Puschel et al. (2010) surveyed 666 respondents, it has been
concluded that men are using mobile banking services much higher than the women do [34]. In India, Joshua
and Koshy (2011) examined 553 consumers who are accessing computers and Internet and concluded similar
result [35].
On the contrary, Foon and Fah (2011) surveyed 200 respondents in Malaysia, it has been found that gender
difference is not significant in Internet banking adoption [36]. This finding is also similar to Ainin et al. (2005)
which claimed that gender does not influence the adoption of Internet banking [37].
Yu (2012) utilized the UTAUT Model to study the factors in adopting mobile banking. Through empirical
evidence, he revealed that effort expectancy and social influence were not significantly moderated by gender
while performance expectancy is the only construct that was controlled by gender [38]. Shergill and Li (2005)
studied the Internet banking consumers and found that women are more concerned on privacy issues than men
[39].
3.4. e-Commerce
With respect to electronic commerce, Bae and Lee (2011) noticed that women attached more risk to online
shopping and are more concerned with privacy issues [40]. In domain of Mobile Commerce, Jaradat and Raba-
baa (2013) used the Modified UTAUT Model amongst the 447 undergraduate university students in Jordan to
study acceptance and use of m-commerce services. They found that performance expectancy and effort expec-
tancy is not controlled by gender [41]. Likewise, in Saudi Arabia, Alkhunaizan and Love (2013) conducted as-
tudy amongst 574 participants which had yield similar result [42]. By studying 2104 Spanish Internet users,
Bigne, Ruiz and Sanz (2005) highlighted that gender does not exhibit significant difference when it comes to
mobile shopping but rather age, societal status and knowledge of Internet shopping are the main determinants of
using M-Commerce [43].
Jones et al. (2009) claimed that males are more frequent Internet users and consequently, their usage of e
commerce sites is also very high [44]. Bae and Lee (2011) stated that females while making online purchase de-
cisions are more affected by online consumer reviews than males [40]. They have also found that in comparison
to males, females are more affected by the negative consumer reviews given online. Garbarino and Strahilevitz
(2004) discovered that positive feedback on a product from friends play a stronger effect on females than males
and this reduces their observed risk of using e commerce sites for purchasing [45].
3.5. Stock Trading
Based on a modified UTAUT Model, Tai and Ku (2013) surveyed 329 stock investors in Taiwan and concluded
that the effect of social influence on behavioural intention was significant for males, but non-significant for fe-
males. This may be due to the relatively advanced and complex technologies involved in stock trading, thus, re-
ducing the chance of being influenced by the peer groups. They also concluded that people who are having high
performance expectancy reveal a strong intention to use mobile stock trading [46]. Teo et al. (2004) examined
the attitude of both adopter and non adopters of online stock trading and surveyed 208 adopter and 222 non
adopters in Singapore and concluded that males are dominantly found to be early adopters in Internet Stock
Trading [47]. Similarly, Hou (2015) studied 200 online stock traders and 1479 non traders in U.S. and found that
males tend to use online stock trading more than females [48].
In the contrary, Li et al. (2002) used sample size of 3759 households in US to study the intention to take up e
trading and found that gender inequalities do not exist but young investors are willing to take risk in e-trading
[49]. Tai and Ku (2013) also revealed that the influence of effort expectancy on behavioural intention to adopt
mobile stock trading technologies is not controlled by gender [46].
3.6. Social Media
Nowadays, social media is a very popular ICT application and also plays an active role among youngsters. After
A. Goswami, S. Dutta
56
studying 450 Indian young adults in an urban area, it has been revealed that 6.67% of the females spent more
than three hours in social network sites as compared to 6.04% males. Also, with respect to time spent on social
network sites for more than two hours, percentage for females was 7.44 as compared to 3.85 for males [50]. Us-
ing UTAUT2 Model, a survey was conducted amongst 419 college students in the Bandung city of Indonesia to
understand the usage of social media application called LINE and has been found that the behavioural intention
towards usage is stronger amongst women as compared to men [51]. Mazman & Usluel (2011) conducted an on-
line survey amongst 870 Facebook users and concluded that females use Facebook more for “maintaining exist-
ing relationship”, “academic usage” and “following particular agenda” than their male counterpart while males
use it more for “making new relationship” [52]. This finding was supported by Tufekci (2008) where he ex-
amined 301 college social network site users and concluded that women use social network sites mainly to
maintain personal relationships and men use it to find new friends [53].
After studying 22,670 profiles of social media application called MySpace in the U.S, it has been found that
this social network site was mainly used by teenagers; with females being keen on making friendship and males
being interested in dating [54]. In the US, 935 teens were being surveyed and found that females are more con-
cerned on disclosing their personal information in the social network sites than males are [55]. Likewise, Nara-
simhamurthy (2014) studied 450 young Indian adults and disclosed that women use social media as a productive
tool but male use it as a means of entertainment [50]. By examining 41 students of XI th standard in a high
school in the United States, it has been revealed that female students have more accounts in social network sites
and they spend more time in those sites than males [56].
4. Conclusions
From the literature review, it can be observed that there are mixed results with respect to the influence of gender
on technology adoption. While in few contexts, gender plays a significant role in determining the intention of
accepting new technology, there are cases where gender differences cannot be discerned. In the context of usage
of Information Technology which includes computers, email services, electronic data management systems etc.,
gender acts as an influencing factor in technology adoption as men are found to be more technologically adept
compared to women. In terms of mobile or Internet banking, there has been a mixed observation from the au-
thors regarding the impact of gender. Similarly, gender difference is not being observed with respect to interac-
tion via social media but the males and females do have different agenda in using social network sites. Females
mainly use the social network for “maintaining existing relationships” whereas males use it for “making new
friends”. In the fields of mobile/electronic commerce, males and females are found to be equally using online
shopping but women are more influenced towards consumer reviews than men. Majority of the literature on ac-
ceptance of e-learning applications highlighted that gender was a significant factor, which was also the case in
online stock trading, where many of the researchers had concluded that females faced technical challenges and
risk in using technology.
This review can help the future researchers to identify techniques by which the gender gap in technology ac-
ceptance in the above discussed domains can be addressed. Institutions both private and public, can design pro-
grammes aimed at enhancing the skills of the females who are more apprehensive about using emerging ICT
applications.
References
[1] Card, S.K., Moran, T.P. and Newell, A. (1983) The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
[2] Westland, C. and Clark, T. (2000) Global Electronic Commerce: Theory & Case Studies. Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, London.
[3] Mayoux, L. (2001) Jobs, Gender and Small Enterprises: Getting the Policy Environment Right. SEED Working Paper
No. 15, Series on Women’s Entrepreneurship Development and Gender in Enterprises (WEDGE).
[4] Orji, R. (2010) Impact of Gender and Nationality on Acceptance of a Digital Library: An Empirical Validation of Na-
tionality Based UTAUT Using SEM. Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 1, 68-79.
[5] Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behaviour: An Introduction to Theory and Research.
Addison-Wesley, Reading.
[6] Ajzen, I. (1991) The Theory of Planned Behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50,
179-211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
A. Goswami, S. Dutta
57
[7] Davis, F.D. (1989) Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS
Quarterly, 13, 319-340. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249008
[8] Taylor, S. and Todd, P.A. (1995) Assessing IT Usage: The Role of Prior Experience. MIS Quarterly, 19, 561-570.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249633
[9] Davis, F., Bagozzi, R. and Warshaw, P. (1992) Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1111-1132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x
[10] Rogers, E.M. (1995) Diffusion of Innovation. Free Press, New York.
[11] Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A. and Howell, J.M. (1991) Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utiliza-
tion. MIS Quarterly, 15, 124-143. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249443
[12] Bandura, A. (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs.
[13] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D. (2003) User Acceptance of Information Technology: To-
wards a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425-478.
[14] Davis, F. and Venkatesh, V. (1996) A Critical Assessment of Potential Measurement Biases in the Technology Accep-
tance Model: Three Experiments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, 19-45.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1996.0040
[15] Nysveen, H., Pedersen, P.E. and Thorbjernsen, H. (2005) Explaining Intention to Use Mobile Chat Services: Moderat-
ing Effects of Gender. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22, 247-256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363760510611671
[16] Venkatesh, V. and Morris, M. (2000) Why Don’t Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? MIS Quarterly, 24, 115-139.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3250981
[17] Constantiou, I.D. and Manhke, V. (2010) Consumer Behaviour and Mobile TV Services: Do Men Differ from Women
in Their Adoption Intentions. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 11, 127-139.
[18] Jackson, L.A., Ervin, K.S., Gardner, P.D. and Schmitt, N. (2001) Gender and the Internet: Women Communicating and
Men Searching. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 44, 363-379. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1010937901821
[19] Li, N. and Kirkup, G. (2007) Gender and Cultural Differences in Internet Use: A Study of China and the UK. Comput-
ers and Education, 48, 301-317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.01.007
[20] Afonso, C.M., Roldán, J.L., Sánchez-Franco, M. and de la Gonzalez, M.O. (2012) The Moderator Role of Gender in
the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): A Study on Users of Electronic Document Man-
agement Systems. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Partial Least Squares and Related Methods,
Houston, 19-22 May 2012.
[21] Calvert, S., Rideout, V., Woolard, J., Barr, R. and Strouse, G. (2005) Age, Ethnicity, and Socioeconomic Patterns in
Early Computer Use: A National Survey. American Behavioural Scientist, 48, 590-607.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764204271508
[22] Ono, H. and Zavodyn, M. (2005) Gender Differences in Information Technology Usage: A US-Japan Comparison. So-
ciological Perspectives, 48, 105-133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/sop.2005.48.1.105
[23] Mazman, S.G., Usluel, Y.K. and Çevik, V. (2009) Social Influence in the Adoption Process and Usage of Innovation:
Gender Differences. International Journal of Behavioral, Cognitive, Educational and Psychological Sciences, 1, 229-
232.
[24] Okazaki, S. and Santos, L.M.R. (2012) Understanding E-Learning Adoption in Brazil: Major Determinants and Gender
Effects. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13, 91-106.
[25] Ong, C.S. and Lai, J.Y. (2006) Gender Differences in Perceptions and Relationships among Dominants of E-Learning
Acceptance. Computers in Human Behaviour, 22, 816-826. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.006
[26] Islam, M.A., Rahim, N.A.A., Liang, T.C. and Montaz, H. (2011) Effect of Demographic Factors on E-Learning Effec-
tiveness in a Higher Learning Institution in Malaysia. International Education Studies, 4, 112-122.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v4n1p112
[27] Liaw, S.S. and Huang, H.M. (2011) A Study of Investigating Learners’ Attitudes toward E-Learning. Proceedings of
the 5th International Conference on Distance Learning and Education, 12, 28-32.
[28] Milis, K., Wessa, P., Poelmans, S., Doom, C. and Bloemen, E. (2008) The Impact of Gender on the Acceptance of
Virtual Learning Environments. KU Leuven Association, Belgian.
[29] Raman, A., Don, Y., Khalid, R. and Rizuan, M. (2014) Usage of Learning Management System (Moodle) among Post-
graduate Students: UTAUT Model. Asian Social Science, 10, 186-195. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n14p186
[30] Egbo, O.P., Okoyeuzu, C.R., Ifeanacho, I.C. and Onwumere, J.U. (2011) Gender Perception and Attitude towards E-
Learning: A Case of Business Students, University of Nigeria. International Journal of Computer Application, 1, 135-
A. Goswami, S. Dutta
58
148.
[31] Suri, G. and Sharma, S. (2013) The Impact of Gender on Attitude towards Computer Technology and E-Learning: An
Exploratory Study of Punjab University, India. International Journal of Engineering Research, 2, 132-136.
[32] Laukkanen, T. and Pasanen, M. (2008) Mobile Banking Innovators and Early Adopters: How They Differ from Other
Online Users? Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 13, 86-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.fsm.4760077
[33] Cruz, P., Neto, L.B.F., Munoz-Gallego, P. and Laukkanen, T. (2010) Mobile Banking Rollout in Emerging Markets:
Evidence from Brazil. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28, 342-371.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02652321011064881
[34] Puschel, J., Mazzon, J.A. and Hernandez, J.M.C. (2010) Mobile Banking: Proposition of Integrated Adoption Intention
Framework. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28, 389-409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02652321011064908
[35] Joshua, A.J. and Koshy, M.P. (2011) Usage Patterns of Electronic Banking Services by Urban Educated Customers:
Glimpses from India. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 16, 1-12.
[36] Foon, Y.S. and Fah, B.C.Y. (2011) Internet Banking Adoption in Kuala Lumpur: An Application of UTAUT Model.
International Journal of Business and Management, 6, 161-167.
[37] Ainin, S., Lim, C.H. and Wee, A. (2005) Prospects and Challenges of E-Banking in Malaysia. The Electronic Journal
on Information Systems in Developing Countries, 22, 1-11.
[38] Yu, C.S. (2012) Factors Affecting Individuals to Adopt Mobile Banking: Empirical Evidence from the UTAUT Model.
Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 13, 104-121.
[39] Shergill, G.S. and Li, B. (2004) Internet Banking—An Empirical Investigation of Customers’ Behaviour for Online
Banking in New Zealand. Working Paper Series, Department of Commerce, College of Business, Massey University.
[40] Bae, S. and Lee, T. (2011) Gender Differences in Consumers’ Perception of Online Consumer Views. Electronic Com-
merce Research, 11, 201-214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10660-010-9072-y
[41] Jaradat, M.R.M. and Rababaa, M.S.A. (2013) Assessing Key Factor that Influence on the Acceptance of Mobile Com-
merce Based on Modified UTAUT. International Journal of Business and Management, 8, 102-112.
[42] Alkhunaizan, A. and Love, S. (2013) Effect of Demography on Mobile Commerce Frequency of Actual Use in Saudi
Arabia. Advances in Information Systems and Technologies, 206, 125-131.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36981-0_12
[43] Bigne, E., Ruiz, C. and Sanz, S. (2005) The Impact of Internet User Shopping Patterns and Demographics on Consum-
er Mobile Buying Behaviour. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 6, 193-209.
[44] Jones, S., Johnson-Yale, C., Millermaier, S. and Pérez, F.S. (2009) US College Students’ Internet Use: Race, Gender
and Digital Divides. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 244-264.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01439.x
[45] Garbarino, E. and Strahilevitz, M. (2004) Gender Differences in the Perceived Risk of Buying Online and the Effects
of Receiving a Site Recommendation. Journal of Business Research, 57, 768-775.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00363-6
[46] Tai, Y. and Ku, Y. (2013) Will Stock Investors Use Mobile Stock Trading? A Benefit-Risk Assessment Based on a
Modified UTAUT Model. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 14, 67-84.
[47] Teo, T.S.H., Tan, M. and Peck, S.N. (2004) Adopters and Non Adopters of Internet Stock Trading in Singapore. Beha-
viour & Information Technology, 23, 211-223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01449290410001685402
[48] Hou, J. (2015) Online Stock Trading: Do Demographics, Internet Usage and Attitudes Matter? International Journal of
Business and Social Science, 6, 8-15.
[49] Li, Y.M., Lee, J. and Cude, B.J. (2002) Intention to Adopt Online Trading: Identifying the Future Online Traders. Fi-
nancial Counseling and Planning, 13, 49-66.
[50] Narasimhamurthy, N. (2014) Cultural Impact and Gender on Indian Young Adults in Using Social Networking Sites.
International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 1, 113-125.
[51] Harsano, I.L.D. and Suryana, L.A. (2014) Factors Affecting the Use Bahviour of Social Media Using UTAUT2 Model.
Proceedings of the First Asia-Pacific Conference on Global Business, Economics, Finance, and Social Sciences, Sin-
gapore, 1-3 August 2014.
[52] Mazman, S.G. and Usluel, Y.K. (2011) Gender Differences in Using Social Networks. The Turkish Online Journal of
Educational Technology, 10, 133-139.
[53] Tüfekci, Z. (2008) Gender, Social Capital and Social Network(ing) Sites: Women Bonding, Men Searching. Proceed-
ings of the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, Boston, 4 August 2008.
[54] Thelwall, M. (2008) Social Networks, Gender and Friending: An Analysis of MySpace Member Profiles. Journal of
A. Goswami, S. Dutta
59
the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59, 1321-1330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.20835
[55] Lenhart, M. and Madden, M. (2007) Teens, Privacy and Online Social Networks. How Teens Manage Their Online
Identities and Personal Information in the Age of MySpace. Pew Internet & American Life Project Report, 1-45.
[56] Flad, K. (2010) The Influence of Social Networking Participation on Student Academic Performance across Gender
Line. Counselor Education Master’s Theses, Paper 31, The College at Brockport: State University of New York,
Brockport.
