TABLE 4.
CI | CON | PU | SAT | TASK | TECH | TTF | |
CI1 | 0.927 | 0.643 | 0.541 | 0.635 | 0.480 | 0.463 | 0.445 |
CI2 | 0.939 | 0.656 | 0.545 | 0.616 | 0.495 | 0.425 | 0.477 |
CI3 | 0.849 | 0.693 | 0.430 | 0.686 | 0.507 | 0.540 | 0.496 |
CON1 | 0.627 | 0.892 | 0.606 | 0.695 | 0.511 | 0.524 | 0.478 |
CON2 | 0.643 | 0.905 | 0.598 | 0.710 | 0.514 | 0.512 | 0.531 |
CON3 | 0.620 | 0.892 | 0.628 | 0.807 | 0.544 | 0.491 | 0.489 |
CON4 | 0.738 | 0.898 | 0.606 | 0.777 | 0.583 | 0.536 | 0.585 |
PU1 | 0.482 | 0.529 | 0.839 | 0.445 | 0.515 | 0.385 | 0.544 |
PU2 | 0.429 | 0.551 | 0.885 | 0.482 | 0.560 | 0.383 | 0.597 |
PU3 | 0.475 | 0.622 | 0.921 | 0.543 | 0.565 | 0.445 | 0.572 |
PU4 | 0.563 | 0.671 | 0.865 | 0.612 | 0.553 | 0.446 | 0.468 |
SAT1 | 0.639 | 0.734 | 0.525 | 0.921 | 0.571 | 0.519 | 0.482 |
SAT2 | 0.680 | 0.794 | 0.579 | 0.963 | 0.615 | 0.593 | 0.545 |
SAT3 | 0.695 | 0.826 | 0.581 | 0.938 | 0.619 | 0.605 | 0.542 |
TASK1 | 0.509 | 0.520 | 0.584 | 0.569 | 0.879 | 0.570 | 0.614 |
TASK2 | 0.480 | 0.573 | 0.563 | 0.592 | 0.887 | 0.586 | 0.526 |
TASK3 | 0.440 | 0.488 | 0.490 | 0.520 | 0.856 | 0.592 | 0.581 |
TECH1 | 0.479 | 0.473 | 0.424 | 0.486 | 0.560 | 0.806 | 0.526 |
TECH2 | 0.320 | 0.348 | 0.316 | 0.404 | 0.473 | 0.827 | 0.336 |
TECH3 | 0.457 | 0.514 | 0.378 | 0.523 | 0.538 | 0.894 | 0.417 |
TECH4 | 0.463 | 0.550 | 0.435 | 0.595 | 0.624 | 0.814 | 0.467 |
TTF1 | 0.458 | 0.525 | 0.541 | 0.497 | 0.630 | 0.488 | 0.893 |
TTF2 | 0.469 | 0.507 | 0.555 | 0.491 | 0.537 | 0.464 | 0.880 |
CI, continuance intention; CON, confirmation; PU, perceived usefulness; SAT, satisfaction; TASK, task characteristics; TECH, technology characteristics; TTF, task technology fit. The bold values means standardized factor loadings.