Table 4. Multiple regression analyses predicting situational trust or situational distrust.
Separately for factors concerning user, system quality, information quality, context, and persons involved (step 1) and commonly for significant predictors of step 1 (step 2).
| Trust | Distrust | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predictor | Radj2 | B | β | Radj2 | B | β |
| Step 1 | ||||||
| User | .04 | −.00 | ||||
| Technology competence | .19 | .16 | .09 | .07 | ||
| Trust in technology | .13 | .15 | −.02 | −.02 | ||
| Regular frequency of use | .09 | .10 | −.17 | −.20 | ||
| System quality | .51*** | .13* | ||||
| Reliability | .60*** | .66*** | −.42** | −.37** | ||
| Controls | .08 | .07 | −.04 | −.03 | ||
| Ease of use | .01 | .01 | −.11 | −.11 | ||
| Response time | .03 | .05 | .03 | −.03 | ||
| Information quality | .40*** | .20** | ||||
| Amount | .04 | .05 | −.35* | −.35* | ||
| Relevance | .08 | .05 | −.31 | −.23 | ||
| Security | .07 | .07 | .13 | .12 | ||
| Informativeness | .07 | .06 | .16 | .13 | ||
| Credibility | .57*** | .52*** | −.44* | −.35* | ||
| Clarity | .09 | .10 | .31* | .26* | ||
| Service quality | .08** | −.01 | ||||
| Support | .29** | .31** | −.10 | −.10 | ||
| Context | .22*** | −.04 | ||||
| Participation | .26** | .35** | −.23 | −.21 | ||
| Transparency | .05 | .08 | .02 | .02 | ||
| Error communication | .13 | .09 | .01 | .01 | ||
| Perceived organizational support | .14 | .16 | .05 | .05 | ||
| Obligation to use | .04 | .04 | −.02 | −.02 | ||
| Persons involved | .15*** | .09* | ||||
| Ability | .30** | .36** | −.13 | .−13 | ||
| Attitude | .08 | .09 | −.29 | .−29 | ||
| Accountability | .15 | .09 | .11 | .08 | ||
| Step 2 | .60*** | .25*** | ||||
| Reliability | .45*** | .50*** | −.30* | −.26 | ||
| Credibility | .37*** | .34*** | −.35* | −.28 | ||
| Support | .02 | .02 | – | – | ||
| Participation | .04 | .06 | – | – | ||
| Ability | .04 | .04 | – | – | ||
| Amount | – | – | −.24 | −.24 | ||
| Clarity | – | – | .29* | −.24* | ||
Notes.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.