Modeling the Adoption of Electric Cars

Several theoretical approaches have been created in behavioral science to assess the
issues influencing users' propensity to accept new technologies. Models like the Theory of
Reasoned Action (TRA), the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Theory of Planned
Behavior, and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Application of Technology (UTAUT) have
all seen extensive use over the past several decades. These models claim that the structure of
intent to use can predict how technological advancement may be used in the future.
Beliefs and perceived subjective standards are proposed to affect conduct in the notion of
reasoned action. The TAM and TPB models, which investigate acceptance and human behavior,
are extensions of the TRA model. The Technology Adoption Model (TAM) illustrates the
connections between how people see the usefulness, accessibility, and likelihood of using
emerging technologies. The TPB model describes the relationships between a person's
perspective on a behavior, the subjective standard, their sense of agency over their actions, and
their purpose for engaging in those actions. The UTAUT model, an extension of TAM, was
developed to provide insight into the discrepancy between users' planned and actual IS
engagement. The model proposes that performance expectation (PE), effort expectancy (EE),
social influence (SI), and enabling conditions are key factors that determine behavioral intention
(BI) and usage behavior. According to the UTAUT, BI is forecasted by PE, EE, and SI, which,
together with usage behavior, define actual consumption patterns.
Findings of the UTAUT model suggest that it can be applied to people's adoption of new
technology transport modes like EVs. Therefore, this paper will use the model to assess the
issues that influence Emiratis' acceptance of EVs.
The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Usage of Technology (UTAUT)
The UTAUT model encompasses primary constructs which model users' acceptance of
electric vehicles. Jewer (2018) states the four constructs of the model as; performance
expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions. Integration of these
constructs results in behavioral intention, which leads to user behavior in accepting a new mode
of transport. These constructs are determined by age, experience, gender, and voluntaries of use,
as displayed in the figure below.
 Performance
Expectancy

Effort Expectancy

Behavioral Use
Intention Behavior

Social Influence

Facilitating
Conditions

Age Gender Experience Voluntariness

Figure: The UTAUT Model

The components of the model are discussed in the sections below.
Performance Expectancy
Performance expectancy is the level to which a person regards EV to aid in successful
completion of trips. EVs need less maintenance, use clean energy, and consume less fuel than
conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles (Jain et al., 2021). These factors alone
translate to a high EV performance expectancy. Performance expectancy is substantively
affiliated with adoption intention in various contexts, such as autonomous delivery systems,
advanced driver assistance systems, mobile payment uptake, and smartphone adoption (Kapser
& Abdelrahman, 2020; Rahman et al., 2017; Patil et al., 2020; Baishya & Samalia, 2020). The
scope of these contexts makes performance expectancy the most significant predictor of EV
adoption. It can be predicted that performance expectancy positively impacts consumers’
intentions to use EVs.
Effort Expectancy
EVs uptake directly depends on the effort required to operate them. Osswald et al. (2012)
define effort expectancy in the context of EVs as the measure of ease linked with customers’ EV
use. Most of the currently available EVs, like Tesla, feature user-friendly designs. Furthermore,
the vehicles are easy to operate. These user-friendly attributes, coupled with the perceived ease
of use, further contribute to the adoption process. Researchers have already proven a strong and
positive relationship in various contexts. De Luna et al. (2019) demonstrated the contributions of
effort expectancy in mobile payment systems. Furthermore, Leicht et al. (2018) illustrated a
strong association between usage intent of EVs and effort expectancy. Therefore, effort
expectancy can also positively impact the intention to adopt EVs.
Social Influence
 People are naturally predisposed to seeking investments that increase their social status.
In the context of EVs, social influence alludes to the position acquired by owning an EV
(Osswald et al., 2012). Social impact gauges the level to which consumers believe others'
opinions are crucial for using EVs. According to Patil et al. (2020) and Kapser and Abdelrahman
(2020), this perspective significantly impacts adoption intention. EVs are the latest
commercialized vehicular technology, especially in the UAE. They provide a social status and
identity, with buyers perceive as affluent and technologically savvy.
Facilitating Conditions
Enabling conditions allude to the extent to which users regard the availability of support
and resources for implementing a specific behavior. In the context of EVs, access to charging
infrastructure is the most crucial external facilitating condition (Anderson et al., 2018).
Conversely, the critical internal facilitating conditions include Bluetooth connectivity to
smartphones, the simplicity and usability of navigation technology, and effective seat
adjustment. Despite Kapser and Abdelrahman (2020) presenting a solid relationship between
facilitating conditions and drivers' adoption intentions, the impact may not be as strong as in the
preceding factors.
Performance Risk
Performance risk is the uncertainty about EVs' optimal functionality. Consumers in the
UAE face various EV-related challenges, such as short traveling range and long charging time.
These issues make the customers reluctant to purchase the said vehicles. Weldon et al. (2018)
define performance risks as negatively contributing to the intent to buy or use EVs. Li et al.
(2017) claim that the perceived risks could emanate from time, financial, physical, and
performance factors linked to EV use. The physical aspects are the uncertainties concerning EV
reliability, technology, and safety issues that can cause damage. The financial risk mainly
comprises the resource and monetary losses associated with the costliness of EVs and their
batteries. Time risk alludes to the extensive time required to recharge EV batteries, including
variables like the station queueing time and the process of locating charging stations. Thus,
unlike the previous factors, the perceived risk negatively impacts the intention to use EVs.
Behavioral Intention and Usage Behavior
Behavioral intention is the extent to which one has developed conscious plans concerning
whether or not to implement a specific future behavior. Contrarily, usage behavior is the measure
of use intensity. In the context of EVs, these metrics are products of the four constructs of the
UTAUT model (Abbasi et al., 2021; Venkatesh et al., 2003). Thus, similar to the stated factors,
behavioral intention positively impacts the purpose of buying EVs.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Developing the Conceptual Model
Several factors, such as age, gender, and experience, affect EV adoption. The UTAUT
model strongly focuses on human behavior and forms the framework to measure EV acceptance
in the UAE. The research will focus on three main variables: PE, EE, and SI.
Performance expectancy
PE is the extent consumers trust using an innovation will enhance their performance. This
element is primarily derived from perceived usefulness in Technology Acceptance Model
(TAM). According to Abbasi et al. (2021) and Onaolapo and Oyewole (2018), PE is a crucial
determinant of consumer intentions regarding technology acceptance. Similarly, Performance
expectancy can be defined as the degree to which individuals in the UAE perceive the possibility
of EV use improving their performance in daily lives. Thus, if a person supposedly regards that
using an electric vehicle will significantly improve their performance, they will be inclined to
adopt it. Gender and age moderate the PE towards adopting and using EVs. The following
hypothesis will be tested under this construct:
Hypothesis 1: Performance expectancy of users positively influences intentions to adopt EVs.
Effort Expectancy
Effort Expectancy (EE) plays a crucial role in predicting technology acceptance. It is the
perceived ease and comfort of using the new technology (Onaolapo & Oyewole, 2018). Abbasi
et al. (2021) reveal that EE positively influences consumer acceptance of upcoming transport
systems in Europe. Thus, EE determines consumer adoption of technology. In this case, effort
expectancy is the user's perception of comfort and ease in using electric vehicles since they
assume that by using the innovation, the cars will have fewer complications and will be easy to
use compared to conventional vehicles. Thus, if the consumers envisage that EVs will be easy
and less complicated to use, they will likely adopt them. It is hypothesized that:
Hypothesis 2: The effort expectancy of users will positively determine purchasing
intention of EVs.
Social Influence
SI is the extent to which users view the importance of other perceptions relating to the
innovation. Literature shows that other community members like family and friends are likely to
influence one's decision to acquire EVs (Khazaei & Khazaei, 2016). Abbasi et al. (2021)
reported that SI is a vital factor affecting Malaysians' adoption of EVs. Social media is an
effective tool for creating a long-lasting relationship between brands and clients, increasing
loyalty to a specific product. It is predicted that:
Hypothesis 3: Social influence positively influences consumer intentions to accept Electric Cars.
Behavioral Intention and Usage Behavior
While the behavioral intention is the extent to which one has developed conscious plans
to implement a specific future behavior, usage behavior measures use intensity. In the context of
EVs, behavioral intention and usage behavior constitute the four UTAUT constructs (Abbasi et
al., 2021). Therefore, similar to the stated factors, behavioral intention significantly impacts the
purpose of buying EVs. These constructs result in the proceeding hypotheses:
Hypothesis 4: Behavioral intention determines the intention to uptake EVs.
Hypothesis 5: Usage behavior positively influences the intention to buy EVs.
Facilitating Conditions
Facilitating conditions allude to the extent to which users regard the availability of
support and resources for implementing a specific behavior. In the context of EVs, access to
charging infrastructure is the most crucial external facilitating condition (Anderson et al., 2018).
Other notable factors include Bluetooth connectivity to smartphones, the simplicity and usability
of navigation technology, and effective seat adjustment. However, these facilitating conditions
may negatively impact intentions to buy EVs. Therefore, it is hypothesized that:
Hypothesis 6: Facilitating conditions positively impact the intention to purchase EVs.
Performance Risk
Performance risk is the uncertainty about EVs' optimal functionality. Consumers in the
UAE face various EV-related challenges, such as short traveling range and long charging time
(Jain et al., 2022). These issues make the customers reluctant to purchase the vehicles. These
factors generally reduce the inclination to buy EVs. It is predicted that:
Hypothesis 7: Performance risk negatively affects the intention to use EVs.
Environmental Concerns
Environmental concerns comprise people’s awareness and value orientation towards the
environment (Schuitema et al., 2013). According to Richardson (2013), these apprehensions alter
the conventional behavior of individuals towards pro-environmental mannerisms. Consumers
with relatively more concern for the environment would prefer to buy EVs. Due to this, it is
predicted that:
Hypothesis 8: Environmental issues significantly affect one's intentions to buy EVs. The figure
below illustrates the UTAUT tentative model corresponding to the presented hypotheses.

Figure 1: The project's UTAUT tentative model

Measurement of Constructs
The research employed quantitative methods to test the developed hypotheses. A survey
was used to evaluate the effects of the factors that affects the espousal of EVs. Data was amassed
by distributing questionnaires online. The study comprised two dependent, six independent, and
one moderator variable.
Dependent Variables
Behavioral Intention/ Usage Behavior
Based on Fishman, Lushin, and Mandell's (2020) findings, three items can be used to
determine behavioral intention, as illustrated in table 1. The statements were measured using a
five-point Likert scale, ranging from highly agree (5) to highly disagree (1).
Table 1: Measures of behavioral intention and usage behavior

Item Source

I intend to purchase an EV Fishman et al., 2020

Venkatesh et al.,
I will buy an EV
2003
I am likely to buy an EV

Purchase/ Use Intention

As Khazaei and Khazaei (2016) illustrated, purchase/ use intention is a derivative of the
four measures captured in table 2. The statements were quantified using a five-point Likert scale
ranging from highly agree (5) to highly disagree (1).
Table 2: Measures of purchase/ use intention

Item Source

My next car will probably be an EV Khazaei & Khazaei,

2016
I would recommend others to buy EVs

If I buy a car in the next five years, it will be an EV

If I owned an EV, I would prefer to drive it.

Independent Variables
Performance Expectancy
The performance expectancy comprises three measures derived from Onaolapo and
Oyewole (2018), as illustrated in table 3. A five-point Likert scale, ranging from highly agree (5)
to highly disagree (1), was used to measure this construct.
Table 3: Measures of performance expectancy

Item Source

An EV can adequately meet my travel needs Onaolapo &

Oyewole, 2018
I can commute efficiently using an EV
 Using an EV offers an advantage over regular cars.

Effort Expectancy
The effort expectancy was also adapted from the work of Onaolapo and Oyewole (2018),
and it comprises the three measures captured in table 4. The statements were measured using a
five-point Likert scale, ranging from highly agree (5) to highly disagree (1).
Table 4: Measure of effort expectancy

Item Source

EV use is not characterized by stress Onaolapo &

Oyewole, 2018
I do not need much technical expertise to drive an EV

EVs reduce the typical driving effort.

Social Influence
The social influence" variable was adopted from Khazaei and Khazaei (2016). It
comprised six measures, as demonstrated below. A five-point Likert scale, ranging from highly
agree (6) to highly disagree (1), was used to measure social influence.
Table 5: Measures of social influence

Item Source

An EV would give me a status symbol Khazaei & Khazaei,

2016
An EV would express my personality

I desire to drive cars that attract attention.

Individuals whose opinions matter to me find EVs good and reliable

People positively respond when they see an EV being driven.

EVs possess a generally positive outlook in society.

Facilitating Conditions
The facilitating conditions were quantified using four measures from Khazaei and
Khazaei (2016). A five-point Likert scale, ranging from highly agree (5) to highly disagree (1),
was used to measure this variable.
Table 6: Measures of facilitating conditions

Item Source

I can quickly get help from others when I experience difficulties using Khazaei & Khazaei,
 an EV 2016

EVs are compatible with the technologies I currently use

I have the requisite knowledge to operate an EV

All necessary resources for EV use are available and accessible.

Performance Risk
The performance risk construct was sourced from Jain et al. (2022). It comprises three
primary measures, as illustrated below. A five-point Likert scale, ranging from highly agree (5)
to highly disagree (1), was used to gauge the performance risk.
Table 7: Measures of performance risk

Item Source

I am uncertain about the functionality of EVs Jain et al., 2022

The traveling range of EVs is a significant concern for me.

I am worried about the long charging time of EVs.

Moderator Variable
Environmental Concerns
The environmental concerns construct moderates the influence of performance risk on
purchase/ use intention. As demonstrated below, ecological problems were assessed using five
items adapted from Khazaei and Khazaei (2016). A five-point Likert scale, ranging from highly
agree (5) to highly disagree (1), was used to measure the environmental concerns.
Table 8: Measures of environmental concerns

Item Source

EVs cause relatively less pollution Khazaei & Khazaei,

2016
EVs help save resources and the environment for future generations.

I want to purchase an EV to help combat the air pollution crisis.

I want to help preserve the environment by using an EV

I love seeing the green environment.

Sample Design and Data Collection

An online-delivered questionnaire, provided in appendix 1, was used for data collection.
The questionnaire was distributed to the respondents, along with an explanation of the research.
Emails were the main communication route. The respective measures for each construct outlined
above were also captured in the questionnaire. A five-point Likert scale was used to quantify the
individual efforts: highly disagree (1), disagree (2), not sure (3), agree (4), and highly agree (5).
Assuming a confidence interval of ± 10%, a 0.5 standard deviation, and a 95% confidence level,
a sample of 96 respondents was considered adequate for the study. About 250 respondents were
contacted, out of which 150 provided the required feedback.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Behavioral Intention/ Usage Behavior
Table 9: Measurement of behavioral intention and usage behavior

Item Average Score

I intend to purchase an EV 3

I will purchase an EV 2

I am likely to buy an EV 2

Average 2.33

The results above demonstrate the poor behavioral intentions and usage behavior towards
EVs in the UAE. Most residents have no choice but to transition to EVs, owing to the interplay
of the investigated independent variables. If the behavioral intentions and usage behavior were
high, the purchasing intention of EVs would also be increased. These findings support
hypotheses 4 and 5.
Purchase/ Use Intention
Table 10: Measurement of purchase/ use intention

Item Average Score

My next car will probably be an EV 2

I would recommend others to buy EVs 3

If I buy a car in the next five years, it will be an EV 4

If I owned an EV, I would prefer to drive it 3

Average 3

Data on purchase and use intentions confirm the speculations that UAE residents are
unwilling to adopt EVs. The statistics illustrate reliance on alternative cars, such as conventional
ICE vehicles.
Performance Expectancy
Table 11: Measurement of performance expectancy

Item Average Score

An EV can adequately meet my travel needs 3

I can commute efficiently using an EV 3

Using an EV offers an advantage over regular cars 2

Average 2.66

The data above exhibits the poor performance expectancy in the UAE. Most respondents
do not perceive any significant superiority of EVs, contradicting the existing body of knowledge.
This situation alludes to low awareness of EV benefits. Altogether, these findings validate
hypothesis 1: performance expectancy of users positively influences intentions to adopt and
purchase Electric cars.
Effort Expectancy
Table 12: Measurement of effort expectancy

Item Average Score

EV use is not characterized by stress 3

I do not need much technical expertise to drive an EV 3

EVs reduce the typical driving effort 4

Average 3.33

As illustrated above, UAE residents generally expect minimal comfort benefits and ease
when using EVs. This situation proves hypothesis 2, exhibiting the stereotypic preference for
conventional vehicles.
Social Influence
Table 13: Measurement of social influence

Item Average Score

An EV would give me a status symbol 2

An EV would express my personality 3

I desire to drive cars that attract attention 5

Individuals whose opinions matter to me find EVs good 3

 and reliable

People positively respond when they see an EV being 3

driven

EVs possess a generally positive outlook in society 4

Average 3.33

The data above suggests that although UAE residents agree that EVs attract attention,
they do not perceive the cars to have a strong social influence. This finding confirms hypothesis
3. Specifically, the poor perceived social impact contributes to low intentions to adopt EVs.
Facilitating Conditions
Table 14: Measurement of facilitating conditions

Item Average Score

I can quickly get help from others when I experience 2

difficulties using an EV

EVs are compatible with the technologies I currently use 5

I have the requisite knowledge to operate an EV 5

All necessary resources for EV use are available and 4

accessible

Average 4

Besides the accessibility of help, other facilitating conditions for using EVs are generally
considered available. However, as reported before, the behavioral intent to use EVs in the UAE
is still poor. These findings confirm hypothesis 6: FCs have a minor positive impact on the intent
to purchase EVs.
Performance Risk
Table 15: Measurement of performance risk

Item Average Score

I am uncertain about the functionality of EVs 6

The traveling range of EVs is a significant concern for me 6

I am worried about the long charging time of EVs 6

Average 6
 As illustrated above, most respondents reported very high-performance risks with EVs.
This negative perception may explain the unwillingness to transition to EVs. These findings
confirm hypothesis 7, demonstrating that performance risk negatively affects the intention to use
EVs.
Environmental Concerns
Table 16: Measurement of ecological concerns

Item Average Score

EVs cause relatively less pollution 6

EVs help save resources and the environment for future 6

generations

I want to purchase an EV to help combat the air pollution 4

crisis

I want to help preserve the environment by using an EV 4

I love seeing the green environment 5

Average 5

Based on the data above, UAE residents report no environmental concerns with EVs. The
vehicles are generally thought to help promote sustainability. These sentiments moderate the
perception of the severity of performance risks, prompting some individuals to buy EVs.
Specifically, the respondents generally reported the willingness to combat pollution and protect
the environment, possibly through EV use. These findings confirm hypothesis 8: environmental
apprehensions moderate the link between intentions to buy EVs and the perceived risks.