IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuhtim/106.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Belief elicitation study: Identifying salient beliefs of patients towards the use of mHealth

Author

Listed:
  • Hennings, Christine
  • Herstatt, Cornelius

Abstract

Mobile health (mHealth) with its unique attributes (e.g. instant connectivity, convenience, personalization) is largely considered as a new healthcare paradigm transforming health services around the world. mHealth has also gained popularity in research, especially in the field of technology adoption. According to the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), a widely used and well established theory to explain behavior, salient beliefs are considered to be the dominant determinants of a person's intentions and actions. In the context of technology adoption identifiying salient beliefs is essential when thinking of effective intervention strategies and marketing strategies by e.g. public health policers and app producers. This study is from qualitative nature and contains a German sample, aiming to answer the following research question: What are the salient beliefs patients with chronic conditions have towards the use of medical apps (mHealth)? The results show behavioral, normative and control beliefs of patients. Study participants in particular value the high comfort, a good, mainly administrative, support in daily disease handling and a feeling of increased control over the disease caused by using medical apps. The most frequent negative beliefs were insecurity about data privacy issues, a feeling of becoming dependent on the app and the fear of data loss in case of a lost or broken smartphone. In regard to normative beliefs patients see the physician as an important individual to approve or disapprove their use of medical apps. Noteably in this case is, that physicians were the most frequent mentioned group for positive normative beliefs as well as for negative normative beliefs. In regard to control beliefs respondents perceived that among the most frequent facilitators that would allow the use of mHealth apps were individual requests for a specific app feature, a high usability/ease of use of the app and device compatibility of the app with other medical devices. Salient beliefs about barriers that would allow the use of mHealth apps were a low quality of an app, the absence of a suitable smartphone and a high complexity of the app. The results are potentially beneficial for app producers to gain insights for their marketing initiatives but also for public health policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Hennings, Christine & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2019. "Belief elicitation study: Identifying salient beliefs of patients towards the use of mHealth," Working Papers 107, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/192994/1/1049071956.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oecd, 2013. "Electronic and Mobile Commerce," OECD Digital Economy Papers 228, OECD Publishing.
    2. Mary J. Culnan & Pamela K. Armstrong, 1999. "Information Privacy Concerns, Procedural Fairness, and Impersonal Trust: An Empirical Investigation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 104-115, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cheng, Junjun & Chen, Bo & Huang, Zihang, 2023. "Collective-based ad transparency in targeted hotel advertising: Consumers’ regulatory focus underlying the crowd safety effect," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    2. Saeideh Sharifi fard & Ezhar Tamam & Md Salleh Hj Hassan & Moniza Waheed & Zeinab Zaremohzzabieh, 2016. "Factors affecting Malaysian university students’ purchase intention in social networking sites," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1182612-118, December.
    3. Corey Angst, 2009. "Protect My Privacy or Support the Common-Good? Ethical Questions About Electronic Health Information Exchanges," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(2), pages 169-178, November.
    4. Huarng, Kun-Huang & Yu, Tiffany Hui-Kuang & Lee, Cheng fang, 2022. "Adoption model of healthcare wearable devices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    5. Sembada, Agung Y. & Koay, Kian Yeik, 2021. "How perceived behavioral control affects trust to purchase in social media stores," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 574-582.
    6. Leong, Lai-Ying & Hew, Teck-Soon & Ooi, Keng-Boon & Chong, Alain Yee-Loong, 2020. "Predicting the antecedents of trust in social commerce – A hybrid structural equation modeling with neural network approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 24-40.
    7. Alin ZAMFIROIU & Mihai Liviu DESPA, 2013. "Reasons, Circumstances and Innovative Trends in Mobile Environments," Informatica Economica, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 17(2), pages 109-118.
    8. Yujuico, Emmanuel, 2015. "Considerations in the diffusion of a public traffic app for Metro Manila," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 48-56.
    9. Yuan Sun & Shuyue Fang & Yujong Hwang, 2019. "Investigating Privacy and Information Disclosure Behavior in Social Electronic Commerce," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-27, June.
    10. Jabbar, Abdul & Geebren, Ahmed & Hussain, Zahid & Dani, Samir & Ul-Durar, Shajara, 2023. "Investigating individual privacy within CBDC: A privacy calculus perspective," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    11. Pope, Leah G. & Warnock, Amanda & Perry, Tyler H. & Langlois, Stephanie & Anderson, Simone & Boswell, Tehya & Appelbaum, Paul & Dixon, Lisa & Watson, Amy & Compton, Michael T., 2022. "Information sharing across mental health service providers and criminal legal system stakeholders: Perspectives of people with serious mental illnesses and their family members," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    12. Gur, K. & Chatzikyriakou, D. & Baschet, C. & Salomon, M., 2018. "The reuse of electrified vehicle batteries as a means of integrating renewable energy into the European electricity grid: A policy and market analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 535-545.
    13. Jeeyeon Jeong & Yaeri Kim & Taewoo Roh, 2021. "Do Consumers Care About Aesthetics and Compatibility? The Intention to Use Wearable Devices in Health Care," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, August.
    14. Carlo Pugnetti & Johannes Becker & Cristian Zani, 2022. "Do Customers Want to Communicate with Insurers on Social Media? An Investigation of the Swiss Market," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, December.
    15. Muhammad Irfan & Mohammad Farid Shamsudin & Noor Hadi, 2016. "How Important Is Customer Satisfaction? Quantitative Evidence from Mobile Telecommunication Market," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(6), pages 1-57, May.
    16. Grace Fox & Lisa van der Werff & Pierangelo Rosati & Patricia Takako Endo & Theo Lynn, 2022. "Examining the determinants of acceptance and use of mobile contact tracing applications in Brazil: An extended privacy calculus perspective," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(7), pages 944-967, July.
    17. Jong Uk Kim & Rajiv Kishore, 2019. "Do we Fully Understand Information Systems Failure? An Exploratory Study of the Cognitive Schema of IS Professionals," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1385-1419, December.
    18. Mohammadbashir Sedighi & Hamideh Parsaeiyan & Yashar Araghi, 2021. "An Empirical Study of Intention to Continue Using of Digital Ride-hailing Platforms," The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 489-515, November.
    19. Gretchen Larsen & Rob Lawson, 2013. "Consumer Rights: An Assessment of Justice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 112(3), pages 515-528, February.
    20. Ludwig Bstieler & Martin Hemmert, 2010. "Trust formation in Korean new product alliances: How important are pre-existing social ties?," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 299-319, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    mHealth; Theory Planned Behavior; Belief Elicitation Study;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ittuhde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.