IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jftint/v12y2020i11p191-d439311.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Internet of Things (IoT) Acceptance Model. Assessing Consumer’s Behavior toward IoT Products and Applications

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Tsourela

    (Department of Business Administration, International Hellenic University, 62100 Serres, Greece)

  • Dafni-Maria Nerantzaki

    (Department of Business Administration, International Hellenic University, 62100 Serres, Greece)

Abstract

A common managerial and theoretical concern is to know how individuals perceive Internet of Things (IoT) products and applications and how to accelerate adoption of them. The purpose of the current study is to answer, “What are the factors that define behavioral intention to adopt IoT products and applications among individuals?” An IoT adoption model was developed and tested, incorporating pull factors from two different information impact sources: technical and psychological. This study employs statistical structural equation modeling (SEM) in order to examine the conceptual IoT acceptance model. It is demonstrated that facilitated appropriation, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, as mediators, significantly influence consumers’ attitude and behavioral intention towards IoT products and applications. User character, cyber resilience, cognitive instrumentals, social influence and trust, all with different significance rates, exhibited an indirect effect, through the three mediators. The IoT acceptance model (IoTAM) upgrades current knowledge on consumers’ behavioral intention and equips practitioners with the knowledge needed to create successful integrated marketing tactics and communication strategies. It provides a solid base for examining multirooted models for the acceptance of newly formed technologies, as it bridges the discontinuity in migrating from information and communication technologies (ICTs) to IoT adoption studies, causing distortions to societies’ abilities to make informed decisions about IoT adoption and use.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Tsourela & Dafni-Maria Nerantzaki, 2020. "An Internet of Things (IoT) Acceptance Model. Assessing Consumer’s Behavior toward IoT Products and Applications," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-23, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:12:y:2020:i:11:p:191-:d:439311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/12/11/191/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/12/11/191/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rouibah, Kamel & Abbas, Hasan & Rouibah, Samia, 2011. "Factors affecting camera mobile phone adoption before e-shopping in the Arab world," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 271-283.
    2. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    3. Joanna Goode, 2010. "Mind the Gap: The Digital Dimension of College Access," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 81(5), pages 583-618, September.
    4. Ha, Sejin & Stoel, Leslie, 2009. "Consumer e-shopping acceptance: Antecedents in a technology acceptance model," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(5), pages 565-571, May.
    5. Barbara H. Wixom & Peter A. Todd, 2005. "A Theoretical Integration of User Satisfaction and Technology Acceptance," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 85-102, March.
    6. Porter, Constance Elise & Donthu, Naveen, 2006. "Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine Internet usage: The role of perceived access barriers and demographics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(9), pages 999-1007, September.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:5:p:411-419 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Revels, Janeaya & Tojib, Dewi & Tsarenko, Yelena, 2010. "Understanding consumer intention to use mobile services," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 74-80.
    9. Bernadette Szajna, 1996. "Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 85-92, January.
    10. Alalwan, Ali Abdallah & Baabdullah, Abdullah M. & Rana, Nripendra P. & Tamilmani, Kuttimani & Dwivedi, Yogesh K., 2018. "Examining adoption of mobile internet in Saudi Arabia: Extending TAM with perceived enjoyment, innovativeness and trust," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 100-110.
    11. Rajagopal, 2014. "The Human Factors," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Architecting Enterprise, chapter 9, pages 225-249, Palgrave Macmillan.
    12. Ostlund, Lyman E, 1974. "Perceived Innovation Attributes as Predictors of Innovativeness," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 1(2), pages 23-29, Se.
    13. Muslim Amin & Sajad Rezaei & Maryam Abolghasemi, 2014. "User satisfaction with mobile websites: the impact of perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU) and trust," Nankai Business Review International, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(3), pages 258-274, July.
    14. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    15. Laukkanen, Tommi, 2016. "Consumer adoption versus rejection decisions in seemingly similar service innovations: The case of the Internet and mobile banking," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2432-2439.
    16. Heidenreich, Sven & Kraemer, Tobias & Handrich, Matthias, 2016. "Satisfied and unwilling: Exploring cognitive and situational resistance to innovations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2440-2447.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nerea Alejandra Ramírez-Castillo & Jéssica Müller-Pérez & Ángel Acevedo-Duque & Sheyla Müller-Pérez & Romel Ramón González-Díaz & Jorge Suarez Campos & Luiz Vicente Ovalles-Toledo, 2021. "Sustainable Moviegoer Intention to Attend Cinemas Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Muhammad Ilyas & Arif ud din & Muhammad Haleem & Irshad Ahmad, 2023. "Digital entrepreneurial acceptance: an examination of technology acceptance model and do-it-yourself behavior," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Sudesh Sheoran & Sanket Vij, 2023. "A Consumer-Centric Paradigm Shift in Business Environment with the Evolution of the Internet of Things: A Literature Review," Vision, , vol. 27(4), pages 431-442, August.
    4. Jessica Müller-Pérez & Viridiana Sarahí Garza-Muñiz & Ángel Acevedo-Duque & Elizabeth Emperatriz García-Salirrosas & Jorge Alberto Esponda-Pérez & Rina Álvarez-Becerra, 2022. "The Future of Tamaulipas MSMEs after COVID-19: Intention to Adopt Inbound Marketing Tools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, October.
    5. Baudier, Patricia & Ammi, Chantal & Hikkerova, Lubica, 2022. "Impact of advertising on users’ perceptions regarding the Internet of things," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 355-366.
    6. Renata Walczak & Krzysztof Koszewski & Robert Olszewski & Krzysztof Ejsmont & Anikó Kálmán, 2023. "Acceptance of IoT Edge-Computing-Based Sensors in Smart Cities for Universal Design Purposes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-22, January.

    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. Fosso Wamba, Samuel & Bhattacharya, Mithu & Trinchera, Laura & Ngai, Eric W.T., 2017. "Role of intrinsic and extrinsic factors in user social media acceptance within workspace: Assessing unobserved heterogeneity," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 1-13.
    2. Rese, Alexandra & Baier, Daniel & Geyer-Schulz, Andreas & Schreiber, Stefanie, 2017. "How augmented reality apps are accepted by consumers: A comparative analysis using scales and opinions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 306-319.
    3. Johannes Putzke & Detlef Schoder & Kai Fischbach, 2010. "Adoption of Mass-Customized Newspapers: An Augmented Technology Acceptance Perspective," Journal of Media Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 143-164.
    4. Julian M. Müller, 2019. "Comparing Technology Acceptance for Autonomous Vehicles, Battery Electric Vehicles, and Car Sharing—A Study across Europe, China, and North America," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-17, August.
    5. Türker, Cansu & Altay, Burak Can & Okumuş, Abdullah, 2022. "Understanding user acceptance of QR code mobile payment systems in Turkey: An extended TAM," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    6. Mital, Monika & Chang, Victor & Choudhary, Praveen & Papa, Armando & Pani, Ashis K., 2018. "Adoption of Internet of Things in India: A test of competing models using a structured equation modeling approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 339-346.
    7. Kerstin Pezoldt & Jana Schliewe, 2012. "Akzeptanz von Self-Service-Technologien: State of the Art," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 205-253, March.
    8. Hsiao, Chun Hua & Yang, Chyan, 2011. "The intellectual development of the technology acceptance model: A co-citation analysis," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 128-136.
    9. Pantano, Eleonora & Rese, Alexandra & Baier, Daniel, 2017. "Enhancing the online decision-making process by using augmented reality: A two country comparison of youth markets," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 81-95.
    10. Nan Zhang & Xunhua Guo & Guoqing Chen, 2011. "Why adoption and use behavior of IT/IS cannot last?—two studies in China," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 381-395, July.
    11. Mohammad Hasan Galib & Khalid Ait Hammou & Jennifer Steiger, 2018. "Predicting Consumer Behavior: An Extension of Technology Acceptance Model," International Journal of Marketing Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(3), pages 1-73, August.
    12. Nedra, Bahri-Ammari & Hadhri, Walid & Mezrani, Mariem, 2019. "Determinants of customers' intentions to use hedonic networks: The case of Instagram," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 21-32.
    13. Yu Wang & Shanyong Wang & Jing Wang & Jiuchang Wei & Chenglin Wang, 2020. "An empirical study of consumers’ intention to use ride-sharing services: using an extended technology acceptance model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 397-415, February.
    14. Ashraf Sharif & Saira Hanif Soroya & Shakil Ahmad & Khalid Mahmood, 2021. "Antecedents of Self-Disclosure on Social Networking Sites (SNSs): A Study of Facebook Users," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-21, January.
    15. Morgan-Thomas, Anna & Veloutsou, Cleopatra, 2013. "Beyond technology acceptance: Brand relationships and online brand experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 21-27.
    16. Al-Qeisi, Kholoud & Dennis, Charles & Alamanos, Eleftherios & Jayawardhena, Chanaka, 2014. "Website design quality and usage behavior: Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 2282-2290.
    17. Oghuma, Apollos Patricks & Chang, Younghoon & Libaque-Saenz, Christian Fernando & Park, Myeong-Cheol & Rho, Jae Jeung, 2015. "Benefit-confirmation model for post-adoption behavior of mobile instant messaging applications: A comparative analysis of KakaoTalk and Joyn in Korea," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 658-677.
    18. Yang, Byunghwa & Kim, Youngchan & Yoo, Changjo, 2013. "The integrated mobile advertising model: The effects of technology- and emotion-based evaluations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1345-1352.
    19. Attié, Elodie & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2022. "The acceptance and usage of smart connected objects according to adoption stages: an enhanced technology acceptance model integrating the diffusion of innovation, uses and gratification and privacy ca," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    20. Garaus, Marion & Wolfsteiner, Elisabeth & Wagner, Udo, 2016. "Shoppers' acceptance and perceptions of electronic shelf labels," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 3687-3692.

    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:gam:jftint:v:12:y:2020:i:11:p:191-:d:439311. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.