4.5 Article

Factors related to the intention to buy an e-bike: A survey study from Norway

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2018.11.008

关键词

Intention to buy an e-bike; Perceived benefits, perceived barriers; Social norms; Familiarity with e-bikes; Norway

资金

  1. Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The electric bicycle (e-bike) is a newly emerging transport option that brings several environmental and individual benefits. In order to promote e-bike use, it is important to understand which factors influence the intention to buy an e-bike among the non-users. The main aim of the present study is to examine the role of perceived benefits, barriers, social norms, familiarity with e-bikes and demographic variables for predicting the intention to buy an e-bike in a Norwegian sample. In addition, the study also aims to compare perceived benefits and barriers of e-bike use between e-bike users and non-users. A commercial panel (response rate 42.04%) and a Facebook post were used to collect data from 910 respondents (252 e-bike users, 658 non-users) via an online survey. A hierarchical multiple regression analysis was conducted to investigate the predictors of intentions to buy an e-bike. Results showed that increasing age, higher perceived benefits, both subjective and descriptive norm in favor of e-bikes, and familiarity with e-bikes were positively, whereas perceived barriers related to usability and safety were negatively related with the intention to buy an e-bike. In addition, compared to e-bike users, non-users had lower scores on the benefits related to mobility, symbolic and health aspects of e-bikes and higher scores on the barriers related to usability and safety of e-bikes. Environmental factors, such as poor weather and road conditions, appeared as the strongest barrier against e-bike use for both e-bike users and non-users. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据