Table 6.
This table shows the estimated ratios of the indirect effect to the total effect, which can be interpreted loosely as the percentage of the total effect of an independent variable on installation intention that are achieved through the four mediator variables. The cells that contain a ratio and its 95% confidence interval indicate that the independent variable (e.g., “Location uploaded”) affects the app installation intentions through the mediator variable (e.g., “Self benefits”) and the indirect effect is significant. A positive number means the indirect effect is in the same direction as the total effect and a negative number means the indirect effect is in the opposite direction of the total effect which counteracts other indirect effects. We leave the cell blank (“–”) if the indirect effect is not significant.
| Independent var. | S&P risks | Self benefits | Societal benefits | Perceived adoption |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Location uploaded | – | 0.21 [0.08, 0.56] | 0.18 [0.08, 0.48] | – |
| Secondary use risk | 0.17 [-0.05, 0.89] | – | – | 0.26 [-0.06, 1.26] |
| Prosocialness | 0.08 [0.04, 0.13] | 0.22 [0.15, 0.32] | 0.15 [0.09, 0.23] | 0.28 [0.20, 0.39] |
| COVID-19 risk perception | 0.04 [0.02, 0.07] | 0.24 [0.17, 0.31] | 0.18 [0.10, 0.25] | 0.09 [0.05, 0.13] |
| General privacy concern | 0.77 [0.36, 3.55] | – | – | – |
| Technology readiness | 0.15 [0.10, 0.22] | 0.22 [0.15, 0.30] | 0.13 [0.08, 0.20] | 0.13 [0.08, 0.19] |
| Age | -0.15 [-0.35, -0.05] | 0.21 [0.11, 0.37] | – | 0.27 [0.15, 0.48] |
| Female | – | 0.15 [0.06, 0.28] | 0.18 [0.09, 0.32] | 0.19 [0.09, 0.35] |
| Hispanic | – | – | – | – |
| Income | – | – | 0.10 [0.04, 0.20] | 0.22 [0.12, 0.38] |
| Essential worker | – | – | 0.19 [0.04, 0.89] | – |
| Transit use | -0.13 [-0.33, -0.04] | 0.19 [0.09, 0.34] | – | 0.39 [0.25, 0.70] |
| Urban area percentage | 0.11 [0.01, 0.29] | 0.13 [-0.00, 0.35] | 0.21 [0.10, 0.57] | 0.46 [0.25, 1.17] |