自從自電動汽車（EV）進入全球汽車市場以來，最主要的挑戰之一就是說服現有汽車用戶採用這些最先進的電動汽車，基於電動汽車的產品獨特性與先前傳統燃油汽車有本質上的差別，因此目前製造廠商及政府機構推廣電動汽車進入消費市場並說服消費者採用時有著一定程度上的困難。電動汽車代表了一種革命性的創新，意味著駕駛行為的顯著變化。然而，近年來，全球的採用率增長緩慢，先前的研究主要聚焦在用戶對於電動車的採用意圖的態度取向。用戶對電動汽車的態度顯著影響他們購買電池電動汽車的意願，特別是從工具屬性的角度來看，如電動汽車的感知功能方面。本文將先前預測模型中的一些行為特徵作為購買電動汽車的合理驅動因素：技術接受模型（TAM。先前的研究表明，用戶在選擇駕駛電池電動汽車（BEV）的採用意圖有積極正面的影響。
本研究通過整合TAM和技術準備指數（TRI）來調查用戶選擇電動汽車（EV）的意願。TAM確定了“感知有用性”和“感知易用性”是影響用戶對新技術的態度和行為意圖的關鍵因素。然而，TAM並未考慮可能影響技術產品採用的個人因素。為了解決這一問題，Parasuraman（2000）提出了TRI，檢查個人技術準備度與選擇技術產品意圖之間的關係並利用問卷調查法，研究通過多重描述統計、信度和效度測試、驗證性因子分析（CFA）和路徑分析來分析受訪者數據。研究結果揭示了幾個關鍵見解：感知易用性與感知有用性負相關，而感知有用性和感知易用性均正向影響用戶態度，用戶態度與使用意圖正相關，樂觀和創新性均與感知易用性正相關。這些結果強調了在推廣電動汽車時考慮個人準備度的重要性，重點是改善用戶對易用性和有用性的看法，藉由增強易用性和有用性可以顯著影響用戶的使用態度和對電動汽車的使用意圖，並且透過使電動汽車更具易用性的特性，可以有效展示其有用性的特殊優勢，同時積極影響潛在用戶的採用意願，將電動汽車融入日常生活中的各種使用情景，以加強電動汽車的在消費市場上被廣泛接受並採用。

Since electric vehicles (EVs) entered the global car market, the most significant challenge has been identified is that how to persuade user to adopt these most advanced cars. Due to the Due to the unique nature of this product, convincing consumers to adopt it has become a highly complex task for both the industry and government authorities today. It represents a revolutionary innovation, implying significant changes in driving behavior. However, adoption rates globally are growing slowly recent years, meanwhile previous research has primarily revealed the mechanisms through which users convey User attitudes towards EVs significantly influence their willingness to purchase battery electric vehicles, particularly from the perspective of tool attributes, such as the perceived functional aspects of electric vehicles. This paper takes some behavioral characteristics of previous predictive models as rational driving factors for purchasing electric vehicles: Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Previous studies have shown that the user choice to drive battery electric vehicles (BEVs) has a significantly positive effect on the willingness to adopt the Technology Acceptance Model.
This study investigates the willingness on user to choose electric vehicles (EVs) by integrating the TAM and the Technology Readiness Index (TRI). TAM identifies “perceived usefulness” and “perceived ease of use as” crucial factors affects users' attitudes and behavioral intentions toward new technology. However, TAM does not account for personal factors that may impact the adoption of technological products. To address this, Parasuraman (2000) developed the TRI, which inspect the relationship between individual technology readiness and the intention to choose technological products.
Utilizing a questionnaire survey method, the research analyzes respondent data through multi-descriptive statistics, reliability and validity tests, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and path analysis. The findings reveal several key insights: perceived ease of use negatively correlates with perceived usefulness, while both perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use positively influence user attitudes. Furthermore, user attitudes are positively correlated with usage intentions, and both optimism and innovativeness positively correlate with perceived ease of use. These results underscore the importance of considering personal readiness, when promoting the adoption of electric vehicles (EVs), it is essential to focus on improving user perceptions of ease of use and usefulness. Enhancing these perceptions can significantly influence their attitudes and intentions toward EVs. By making EVs more user-friendly and demonstrating their practical benefits, it is possible to positively impact potential users' willingness to adopt and integrate EVs into their daily lives. This approach underscores the importance of addressing user concerns and providing clear, tangible advantages to encourage the widespread acceptance of electric vehicles.

Ajzen, I., & Cote, N. G. (2008). Attitudes and the prediction of behavior. Attitudes and attitude change, 13, 289-305.
Choi, J. K., & Ji, Y. G. (2015). Investigating the importance of trust on adopting an autonomous vehicle. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(10), 692-702.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management science, 35(8), 982-1003.
Egbue, O., & Long, S. (2012). Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: An analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy policy, 48, 717-729.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research.
Ghorab, K. E. (1997). The impact of technology acceptance considerations on system usage, and adopted level of technological sophistication: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Information Management, 17(4), 249-259.
Greeno, J. G. (1994). Gibson's affordances.
Hair, E., Halle, T., Terry-Humen, E., Lavelle, B., & Calkins, J. (2006). Children's school readiness in the ECLS-K: Predictions to academic, health, and social outcomes in first grade. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21(4), 431-454.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach.
Hulin, C. (2001). Can a reliability coefficient be too high? J Consum Psychol, 10(1–2), 55.
Igbaria, M., Guimaraes, T., & Davis, G. B. (1995). Testing the determinants of microcomputer usage via a structural equation model. Journal of management information systems, 11(4), 87-114.
King, W. R., & He, J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & management, 43(6), 740-755.
Liljander, V., Gillberg, F., Gummerus, J., & Van Riel, A. (2006). Technology readiness and the evaluation and adoption of self-service technologies. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13(3), 177-191.
Norman Donald, A. (2013). The design of everyday things: MIT Press.
Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology Readiness Index (TRI) a multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of service research, 2(4), 307-320.
Salari, N. (2022). Electric vehicles adoption behaviour: Synthesising the technology readiness index with environmentalism values and instrumental attributes. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 164, 60-81.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management science, 46(2), 186-204.
Wang, S., Wang, J., Li, J., Wang, J., & Liang, L. (2018). Policy implications for promoting the adoption of electric vehicles: do consumer’s knowledge, perceived risk and financial incentive policy matter? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 117, 58-69.
Wu, J., Liao, H., Wang, J.-W., & Chen, T. (2019). The role of environmental concern in the public acceptance of autonomous electric vehicles: A survey from China. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 60, 37-46.
Industrial Development Administration, MOEA (2010) The Electric Vehicle Development Strategy and Action Plan, Source from: https://www.lev.org.tw/index?aspxerrorpath=/iev/caseLink.aspx.
經濟部工業局 (2010)，《智慧電動車發展策略與行動方案》，工業局，取自: https://www.lev.org.tw/index?aspxerrorpath=/iev/caseLink.aspx。
U-Car (2024), 2023 Taiwan Automobile Market Sales Report 2023: Top 10 Electric Vehicles, Source from: https://news.u-car.com.tw/news/article/77258.
U-Car (2024) ，2023年度臺灣汽車市場銷售報告：電動車Top 10，取自: https://news.u-car.com.tw/news/article/77258。