IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i2p602-d477859.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability Calculus in Adopting Smart Speakers—Personalized Services and Privacy Risks

Author

Listed:
  • Hoon S. Cha

    (Department of Information and Decision Sciences, Perdue School of Business, Salisbury University, Salisbury, MD 21804, USA)

  • Jong Hyun Wi

    (College of Business and Economics, Chung-Ang University, Dongjak-gu, Seoul 06974, Korea)

  • Chanhi Park

    (College of Business and Economics, Chung-Ang University, Dongjak-gu, Seoul 06974, Korea)

  • Taeha Kim

    (College of Business and Economics, Chung-Ang University, Dongjak-gu, Seoul 06974, Korea)

Abstract

Despite the benefits of using smart speakers, serious privacy concerns have been raised, particularly due to their constantly listening microphones. Given the mixture of the advantages and risks deciding whether to use them is not an easy matter, casting a doubt about sustainable growth and development of smart speakers. Using a sample of 559 users in South Korea and the U.S., we empirically investigated the dilemma of users seeking to adopt smart speakers. The results revealed users’ perceived usefulness and enjoyment positively influenced the intention to adopt smart speakers. No direct effect of perceived ease of use was found but this effect was completely mediated by perceived usefulness and enjoyment. Perceived enjoyment was found to be twice as strong as perceived usefulness in determining the usage intention, confirming the hedonic aspect of smart speakers. Conversely, perceived privacy risks were shown to be a significant negative factor. This negative impact was significantly stronger in the U.S. than in South Korea. We could infer that the more mature the stage of acceptance of smart speakers, the greater the sensitivity of users to privacy risks. Lastly, in the South Korean sample, we found that the perceived usefulness could reduce the negative impact of perceived risks on the intention. to adopt smart speakers.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoon S. Cha & Jong Hyun Wi & Chanhi Park & Taeha Kim, 2021. "Sustainability Calculus in Adopting Smart Speakers—Personalized Services and Privacy Risks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:602-:d:477859
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/602/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/602/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    3. Marios Koufaris, 2002. "Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and Flow Theory to Online Consumer Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 205-223, June.
    4. Hanna Krasnova & Natasha Veltri & Oliver Günther, 2012. "Self-disclosure and Privacy Calculus on Social Networking Sites: The Role of Culture," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 4(3), pages 127-135, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Tamara Dinev & Paul Hart, 2006. "An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 61-80, March.
    7. 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.
    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. Eunji Lee & Jin-young Kim & Junchul Kim & Chulmo Koo, 2023. "Information Privacy Behaviors during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Focusing on the Restaurant Context," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 1829-1845, October.
    2. Karim Darban & Smail Kabbaj & Mostafa El Jay, 2023. "The Transformative Potential of AI in Green Marketing Strategies," Post-Print hal-04523586, HAL.

    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. Jaspers, Esther D.T. & Pearson, Erika, 2022. "Consumers’ acceptance of domestic Internet-of-Things: The role of trust and privacy concerns," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 255-265.
    2. Kathrin Dudenhöffer, 2013. "Why electric vehicles failed," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 95-124, July.
    3. 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.
    4. Brusch, Ines & Rappel, Nina, 2020. "Exploring the acceptance of instant shopping – An empirical analysis of the determinants of user intention," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    5. John A. Aloysius & Hartmut Hoehle & Soheil Goodarzi & Viswanath Venkatesh, 2018. "Big data initiatives in retail environments: Linking service process perceptions to shopping outcomes," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 270(1), pages 25-51, November.
    6. Wen-Lung Shiau & Yogesh K. Dwivedi, 2013. "Citation and co-citation analysis to identify core and emerging knowledge in electronic commerce research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1317-1337, March.
    7. Ofir Turel & Catherine E. Connelly, 2012. "Team Spirit: The Influence of Psychological Collectivism on the Usage of E-Collaboration Tools," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 703-725, September.
    8. Sara Moussawi & Marios Koufaris & Raquel Benbunan-Fich, 2021. "How perceptions of intelligence and anthropomorphism affect adoption of personal intelligent agents," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(2), pages 343-364, June.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Shafiqul Islam & Mohammad Fakhrul Islam & Noor-E- Zannat, 2023. "Behavioral Intention to Use Online for Shopping in Bangladesh: A Technology Acceptance Model Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    12. Yanghee Kim & Leishuo Wang & Jinho Noh & Taewoo Roh, 2025. "Exploring the role of innovation diffusion and trust transfer on technology acceptance: intention to use drone delivery service in China," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 24(3), pages 357-384, July.
    13. Donglin Han & Huiying (Cynthia) Hou & Hao Wu & Joseph H. K. Lai, 2021. "Modelling Tourists’ Acceptance of Hotel Experience-Enhancement Smart Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    14. Tamara Dinev & Paul Hart, 2006. "An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 61-80, March.
    15. Arif Hasan & S. K. Gupta, 2020. "Exploring Tourists’ Behavioural Intentions Towards Use of Select Mobile Wallets for Digital Payments," Paradigm, , vol. 24(2), pages 177-194, December.
    16. Wang, Tien & Duong, Trong Danh & Chen, Charlie C., 2016. "Intention to disclose personal information via mobile applications: A privacy calculus perspective," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 531-542.
    17. Alraja, Mansour, 2022. "Frontline healthcare providers’ behavioural intention to Internet of Things (IoT)-enabled healthcare applications: A gender-based, cross-generational study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    18. Rolfsen Christian Nordahl & Lassen Ann Karina, 2020. "On-site inspections: the shift from forms to digital capture," Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 2064-2071, January.
    19. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & Ashutosh Patil, 2006. "Common Method Variance in IS Research: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1865-1883, December.
    20. Taylor, David G. & Strutton, David, 2010. "Has e-marketing come of age? Modeling historical influences on post-adoption era Internet consumer behaviors," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(9-10), pages 950-956, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:602-:d:477859. 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.