![Sample our Engineering & Technology journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5933/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Engineering-Tech.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Previous studies in an e-commerce context suggest that there are biological differences (i.e. whether one is a man or a woman) with respect to perceptions of websites. In other research, there is evidence that psychological gender (i.e. values such as masculinity or femininity) likewise influences website perceptions. It is the aim of the current investigation to explore the possibility that both biological sex and psychological gender influence user perceptions, and to examine the predictive power of each on our model. To test these assumptions, we use an augmented technology acceptance model (TAM). To maximise variance in our sample, participants are selected from two countries that are significantly different in masculinity–femininity. As expected, psychological gender better predicted trust and TAM than biological sex. Moreover, this study validates that the masculinity–femininity dimension as originally developed by Hofstede [1980. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage] can be separated into two scales – one each for masculinity and femininity. The results suggest the need for additional research into the differentiation between psychological gender and sex.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1 The test itself is based on a standard independent two sample t test of means. The t-statistic is calculated as:
2 Adding a control of the treatment group to which the subject belongs increases the R2 of PSP to .33. (β = .49, t = 12.70, p < .001). The addition of this path did not change the significance of the other paths. This control does not significantly affect any other construct.