The risks and benefits of Internet of Things (IoT) and their influence on smartwatch use

  1. Tahereh Saheb 1
  2. Francisco J. Liébana Cabanillas 2
  3. Elena Higueras 2
  1. 1 Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
  2. 2 Universidad de Granada
    info

    Universidad de Granada

    Granada, España

    ROR https://ror.org/04njjy449

Zeitschrift:
Spanish journal of marketing-ESIC

ISSN: 2444-9695,  2444-9709

Datum der Publikation: 2022

Titel der Ausgabe: Machine intelligence in marketing

Ausgabe: 26

Nummer: 3

Art: Artikel

DOI: 10.1108/SJME-07-2021-0129 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen Access editor

Andere Publikationen in: Spanish journal of marketing-ESIC

Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung

Zusammenfassung

Purpose This study aims to determine how Internet of Things (IoT) risks and benefits affect both the intention to use and actual use of a smartwatch. Methodology The stimulus–organism–behavior–consequence (SOBC) hypothesis is used to explain the mechanisms underpinning the discontinuity between intention and technology usage. A total of 394 questionnaires distributed to smartwatch users were analyzed, using convergent analysis, discriminant analysis and structural modeling. Findings The IoT’s technical features, such as continuous connectivity and real-time value, serve as effective stimuli for smartwatches, positively influencing individuals’ responses and behavioral consequences associated with smartwatch usage. While IoT risks such as data, performance and financial have no negative relationship with the usefulness of smartwatches, data and financial risks have a negative influence on their ease of use. Additionally, as ease of use and usefulness have a positive impact on intention to use, users’ behavior is positively influenced by their intentions to use a smartwatch. Value The study applies technology acceptance theory and the SOBC paradigm to smartwatches to determine if users’ intentions to use them impact their behavior. Furthermore, the research analyzed the technical elements of smartwatches in terms of IoT advantages and risks.

Bibliographische Referenzen

  • Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
  • Baudier, P., Ammi, C. and Wamba, S.F. (2020), “Differing perceptions of the smartwatch by users within developed countries”, Journal of Global Information Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 1-20.
  • Bauer, H.H., Reichardt, T., Barnes, S.J. and Neumann, M.M. (2005), “Driving consumer acceptance of mobile marketing: a theoretical framework and empirical study”, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 6 No. 3, p. 181.
  • Birch, D. and Memery, J. (2020), “Tourists, local food and the intention-behaviour gap”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 43, pp. 53-61.
  • Blazquez, M., Alexander, B. and Fung, K. (2020), “Exploring millennial’s perceptions towards luxury fashion wearable technology”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 343-359.
  • Carmines, E. and Zeller, R. (1979), Reliability and Validity Assessment, 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks CA 91320 United States of America: SAGE Publications.
  • Chai, P.R., Wu, R.Y., Ranney, M.L., Porter, P.S., Babu, K.M. and Boyer, E.W. (2014), “The virtual toxicology service: wearable head-mounted devices for medical toxicology”, Journal of Medical Toxicology, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 382-387.
  • Chuah, S.H.-W., Rauschnabel, P.A., Krey, N., Nguyen, B., Ramayah, T. and Lade, S. (2016), “Wearable technologies: the role of usefulness and visibility in smartwatch adoption”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 65, pp. 276-284.
  • Chung, N. and Lee, K.C. (2011), ‘Effect of Connectivity and Context-Awareness on Users’ Adoption of Ubiquitous Decision Support System’, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 502-511.
  • Davis, F.D. (1993), “User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts”, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 475-487.
  • Davis, T.R.V. and Luthans, F. (1980), “A social learning approach to organizational behavior”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 281-290.
  • Dehghani, M. (2018), “Exploring the motivational factors on continuous usage intention of smartwatches among actual users”, Behaviour and Information Technology, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 145-158, doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2018.1424246.
  • Featherman, M.S. and Pavlou, P.A. (2003), “Predicting e-services adoption: a perceived risk facets perspective”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 59 No. 4, pp. 451-474.
  • Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
  • Gao, Y., Li, H. and Luo, Y. (2015), “An empirical study of wearable technology acceptance in healthcare”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 115 No. 9, pp. 1704-1723.
  • Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2014), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135.
  • Herweijer, C., Combes, B., Johnson, L., McCargow, R., Bhardwaj, S., Jackson, B. and Ramchandani, P. (2018), “Enabling a sustainable fourth industrial revolution: how G20 countries can create the conditions for emerging technologies to benefit people and the planet”, Economics Discussion Papers, No. 2018-32.
  • Hong, J.C., Lin, P.H. and Hsieh, P.C. (2017), “The effect of consumer innovativeness on perceived value and continuance intention to use smartwatch”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 67, pp. 264-272.
  • Hubert, M., Blut, M., Brock, C., Backhaus, C. and Eberhardt, T. (2017), “Acceptance of smartphone-based mobile shopping: mobile benefits, customer characteristics, perceived risks, and the impact of application context”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 175-194.
  • Hwang, C., Chung, T.-L. and Sanders, E.A. (2016), “Attitudes and purchase intentions for smart clothing”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 207-222.
  • Kamal, S.A., Shafiq, M. and Kakria, P. (2020), “Investigating acceptance of telemedicine services through an extended technology acceptance model (TAM)”, Technology in Society, Vol. 60, p. 101212.
  • Kang, H. and Jung, E.H. (2020), “The smart wearables-privacy paradox: a cluster analysis of smartwatch users”, Behaviour and Information Technology, Vol. 40 No. 16, pp. 1755-1768.
  • Kim, K.J. and Shin, D.-H. (2015), “An acceptance model for smart watches”, Internet Research, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 527-541.
  • Lee, T. and Jun, J. (2007), “Contextual perceived value?”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 798-814. Edited by R. Schierholz.
  • Li, H., Wu, J., Gao, Y. and Shi, Y. (2016), “Examining individuals’ adoption of healthcare wearable devices: an empirical study from privacy calculus perspective”, International Journal of Medical Informatics, Vol. 88, pp. 8-17.
  • Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Sánchez-Fernández, J. and Muñoz-Leiva, F. (2014), “The moderating effect of experience in the adoption of mobile payment tools in virtual social networks: the m-Payment acceptance model in virtual social networks (MPAM-VSN)”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 151-166.
  • Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.A. (1974), “An approach to environmental psychology”, the MIT Press.
  • Nasir, S. and Yurder, Y. (2015), “Consumers’ and physicians’ perceptions about high tech wearable health products”, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 195, pp. 1261-1267.
  • Saheb, T. (2018), “Big data analytics in the context of internet of things and the emergence of real-time systems: a systematic literature review1”, International Journal of High Performance Systems Architecture, Vol. 8 Nos 1/2, p. 34.
  • Saheb, T. (2020), “An empirical investigation of the adoption of mobile health applications: integrating big data and social media services”, Health and Technology, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 1063-1077.
  • Saheb, T. and Izadi, L. (2019), “Paradigm of IoT big data analytics in the healthcare industry: a review of scientific literature and mapping of research trends”, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 41, pp. 70-85, doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2019.03.005.
  • Saheb, T. and Saheb, T. (2021), “Predicting the adoption of health wearables with an emphasis on the perceived ethics of biometric data”, Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 121-140.
  • Saheb, T., Saheb, T. and Carpenter, D.O. (2021), “Mapping research strands of ethics of artificial intelligence in healthcare: a bibliometric and content analysis”, Computers in Biology and Medicine, Vol. 135, p. 104660.
  • Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M. and Hair, J.F. (2017), “Partial least squares structural equation modeling”, Handbook of Market Research, pp. 1-40.
  • Talwar, S., Jabeen, F., Tandon, A., Sakashita, M. and Dhir, A. (2021), “What drives willingness to purchase and stated buying behavior toward organic food? A stimulus–organism–behavior–consequence (SOBC) perspective”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 293, p. 125882.
  • Venkatesh, V. (2000), “Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 342-365.
  • Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. (2000), “A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies”, Management Science, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 186-204.
  • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D. (2003), “User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 425-478.
  • Whelan, E., Islam, A.K.M.N. and Brooks, S. (2020), “Applying the SOBC paradigm to explain how social media overload affects academic performance”, Computers and Education, Vol. 143, p. 103692.
  • Wu, L.-H., Wu, L.-C. and Chang, S.-C. (2016), “Exploring consumers’ intention to accept smartwatch”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 64, pp. 383-392.
  • Yang, H., Yu, J., Zo, H. and Choi, M. (2016), “User acceptance of wearable devices: an extended perspective of perceived value”, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 256-269.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet