Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Kualitas Informasi Sebagai Determinan Kepuasan Pengguna Website Lembaga Legislatif: Perspektif Webqual 4.0 Pada DPRD Toraja Utara Gidion A.N. Pongdatu; Ferayanti B. Gallaran; Intan S.D. Welem
Journal of Innovation Research and Knowledge Vol. 6 No. 3 (2026): Agustus 2026
Publisher : Bajang Institute

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Regional legislative websites serve as a key channel for information transparency and public participation, yet their usefulness largely depends on perceived content quality. This study seeks to identify which dimension most strongly determines user satisfaction with the North Toraja DPRD website by applying the WebQual 4.0 framework. The influence of three constructs on user satisfaction was examined: information quality, usability, and service interaction quality. Respondents comprised 58 individuals who had visited the website, recruited purposively and measured through a 1–5 Likert-scale questionnaire. Data were analyzed using multiple linear regression after the instrument was established as valid (all items r > 0.2586) and reliable (Cronbach's alpha between 0.801 and 0.885). The regression model accounted for 85.3% of the variance in user satisfaction (R² = 0.8525; F(3,54) = 104.03; p < 0.001). All predictors were significant, with information quality emerging as the strongest driver (β = 0.577; p < 0.001), followed by service interaction quality (β = 0.273; p = 0.021) and usability (β = 0.268; p = 0.035). A comparison of standardized coefficients showed that the contribution of information quality (0.535) exceeded more than double that of service interaction quality (0.237) and usability (0.207). Content is therefore the central axis of user satisfaction, suggesting that management should prioritize information timeliness and accuracy while improving access stability and navigation. The moderately high inter-predictor correlation (0.79–0.83) is reported transparently so that results are interpreted with caution. This research adds to the limited application of WebQual 4.0 to regional legislative websites.
Evaluasi Persepsi Kapabilitas Tata Kelola Keamanan Data Pada Badan XYZ: Kajian Cobit 2019 (APO12, APO13, Dan DSS05) Ferayanti B. Gallaran; Gidion A.N. Pongdatu; E.D. Bangnga
Journal of Innovation Research and Knowledge Vol. 6 No. 3 (2026): Agustus 2026
Publisher : Bajang Institute

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Statistical data is a strategic asset for national development; its security and integrity are prerequisites for public trust. This study evaluates perceived capability of data security governance at a regional statistical agency using the COBIT 2019 framework across APO12 (Manage Risk), APO13 (Manage Security), and DSS05 (Manage Security Services). A census survey of 17 employees involved in information system management was conducted using a 45-item, 5-point Likert questionnaire (15 items per domain). The final measurement model retained 32 valid items (APO12 15, APO13 6, DSS05 11). All constructs showed high reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.912–0.961; composite reliability 0.938–0.967) and adequate convergent validity (AVE 0.665–0.728). However, discriminant validity was not fully established: the HTMT value between APO12 and APO13 (0.908) exceeded the 0.90 threshold, and the Fornell-Larcker criterion was also violated for that pair. Response distribution was highly homogeneous (69.7% of all responses were scored 4 "Agree"; no score-1 responses; average per-respondent standard deviation of only 0.29), indicating a tendency toward acquiescence response style. All measured capability levels were rated Largely Achieved with achievement scores between 75.7% and 82.4%, yielding capability level L5 for APO12 and DSS05 and L3 for APO13, with no gap against the target level 3 (Defined). Owing to the perception-based instrument and small sample size, these results cannot be interpreted as actual maturity. The study recommends evidence-based capability assessment (documents, interviews, and observation), a more discriminative instrument, and further testing with a larger sample