A quantitative study on the intention to use internet of things services

Year 2023, Volume: 6 Issue: 1, 28 - 43, 25.03.2023

Bülent Yıldız Dilber Nilay Kütahyalı

https://doi.org/10.58308/bemarej.1221072

Abstract

The Internet of Things (IoT) has become an integral part of our lives. It provides great convenience to consumers in their work and home lives and in the services they receive, such as health and tourism. However, as with other technological innovations, consumers have privacy and security concerns about IoT services. This study investigated how perceived usefulness and privacy risk affected consumers’ attitudes toward IoT services. The study also examined how their attitudes toward IoT services affected their intention to use them. The research hypotheses were tested with the structural equation model. The results showed that perceived usefulness positively affected consumers’ attitudes, affecting their intention to use IoT services. On the other hand, perceived privacy risk did not significantly affect their attitudes toward IoT services.

Keywords

internet of things, perceived usefulness, intention to use

Nesnelerin interneti hizmetlerini kullanım niyeti üzerine nicel bir araştırma

Abstract

Nesnelerin interneti (IoT) hizmetleri günlük hayatta da hayatımıza girmeye başlamıştır. IoT, tüketicilere gerek iş hayatlarında, gerek ev yaşantılarında gerekse sağlık ve turizm gibi almış oldukları hizmetlerde önemli kolaylıklar sağlamaktadır. Ancak diğer teknolojik yeniliklerde olduğu gibi IoT hizmetlerinde de gizlilik ve güvenlik ile ilgili endişeler olabilmektedir. Bu amaçla bu çalışmada tüketicilerin IoT hizmetlerine yönelik kullanışlılık ve gizlilik riski ile ilgili algılarının tutumları üzerindeki etkisi araştırılmıştır. Ayrıca tutumlarının IoT hizmetleri kullanım niyetleri üzerindeki etkisi araştırılmıştır. Araştırma hipotezleri yapısal eşitlik modeli ile test edilmiştir. Yapılan yapısal eşitlik modeli analizi neticesinde algılanan kullanışlılığın tutumu ve tutumun da kullanım niyetini pozitif yönde anlamlı olarak etkilediği bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır. Algılanan gizlilik riskinin ise tutumu anlamlı olarak etkilemediği tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

nesnelerin interneti, algılanan kullanışlılık, kullanım niyeti

References

• AlHogail, A. (2018). Improving IoT technology adoption through ımproving consumer trust. Technologies, 6(64), 1-17. doi: 10.3390/technologies6030064.
• Al-rawashdeh, M., Keikhosrokiani, P., Belaton, B., Alawida, M., & Zwiri, A. (2022). IoT adoption and application for smart healthcare: A systematic review. Sensors, 22(14), 5377. doi: 10.3390/s22145377
• Alraja, M. N., Farooque, M. M. J., & Khashab, B. (2019). The effect of security, privacy, familiarity, and trust on users’ attitudes toward the use of the IoT-based healthcare: the mediation role of risk perception. IEEE Access, 7, 111341-111354.
• Arfi, W. B., Nasr, I. B., Khvatova, T., & Zaied, Y. B. (2021). Understanding acceptance of e healthcare by IoT natives and IoT immigrants: An integrated model of UTAUT, perceived risk, and financial cost. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 163, 120437.
• Atzori, L., Iera, A., & Morabito, G. (2010). The internet of things: A survey. Computer Networks, 54(15), 2787-2805.
• Bertin, E., Crespi, N., & Magedanz, T. (Eds.). (2013). Evolution of telecommunication services: the convergence of telecom and internet: technologies and ecosystems (Vol. 7768). Springer.
• Boateng, G. O, Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018) Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. front. Public Health, 6, 149.
• Brous, P., Janssen, M., & Herder, P. (2020). The dual effects of the Internet of Things (IoT): A systematic review of the benefits and risks of IoT adoption by organizations. International Journal of Information Management, 51, 101952.
• Chang, C. C., Yan, C. F., & Tseng, J. S. (2012). Perceived convenience in an extended technology acceptance model: Mobile technology and English learning for college students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(5), 809-826.
• Chuang, J. H., Wang, J. H., & Liang, C. (2020). Implementation of Internet of Things depends on intention: Young farmers’ willingness to accept innovative technology. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 23(1030-2020-1046), 253-265.
• Çelik, Z., & Aydın, İ. (2021). Perakendecilikte drone ile ürün teslimatının tüketicilerin davranışsal niyetlerine etkisi. BMİJ, 9(4), 1422-1436.
• Dlamini, N. N., & Johnston, K. (2016, November). The use, benefits and challenges of using the Internet of Things (IoT) in retail businesses: A literature review. In 2016 İnternational Conference On Advances İn Computing And Communication Engineering (ICACCE) (pp. 430-436). IEEE.
• Dong, X., Chang, Y., Wang, Y., & Yan, J. (2017). Understanding usage of Internet of Things (IOT) systems in China: Cognitive experience and affect experience as moderator. Information Technology & People, 30(1), 117-138.
• Field, A. (2017). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. 5th edition; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, ISBN 978-1-5264-1952-1 978-1-5264-1951-4.
• Gao, L., & Bai, X. (2014). A unified perspective on the factors influencing consumer acceptance of internet of things technology. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 26(2), 211-231.
• Govindraj, V., Sathiyanarayanan, M., & Abubakar, B. (2017, August). Customary homes to smart homes using Internet of Things (IoT) and mobile application. In 2017 International Conference On Smart Technologies For Smart Nation (SmartTechCon) (pp. 1059-1063). IEEE.
• Guo, D., Li, M., Lyu, Z., Kang, K., Wu, W., Zhong, R. Y., & Huang, G. Q. (2021). Synchroperation in industry 4.0 manufacturing. International Journal Of Production Economics, 238, 108171, 1-13.
• Guo, H., Goodchild, M. F., & Annoni, A. (2020). Manual of digital Earth (p. 852). Springer Nature.
• Gupta, R., & Gupta, R. (2016, March). ABC of Internet of Things: Advancements, benefits, challenges, enablers and facilities of IoT. In 2016 Symposium on Colossal Data Analysis and Networking (CDAN) (pp. 1-5). IEEE.
• Haddud, A., DeSouza, A., Khare, A., & Lee, H. (2017). Examining potential benefits and challenges associated with the Internet of Things integration in supply chains. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 28(8), 1055-1085.
• Hsu, C. L., & Lin, J. C. C. (2016). An empirical examination of consumer adoption of Internet of Things services: Network externalities and concern for information privacy perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 516-527.
• Hsu, C. L., & Lin, J. C. C. (2018). Exploring factors affecting the adoption of internet of things services. Journal of Computer information systems, 58(1), 49-57.
• Infante-Moro, A., Infante-Moro, J. C., & Gallardo-Pérez, J. (2021). Key factors in the implementation of the Internet of Things in the hotel sector. Appl. Sci., 11, 2924, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11072924.
• Jayashankar, P., Nilakanta, S., Johnston, W. J., Gill, P., & Burres, R. (2018). IoT adoption in agriculture: The role of trust, perceived value and risk. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 33(6), 804-821.
• Karahoca, A., Karahoca, D., & Aksöz, M. (2017). Examining intention to adopt to internet of things in healthcare technology products. Kybernetes, 47(4), 742-770.
• Kassab, M., DeFranco, J., & Laplante, P. (2020). A systematic literature review on Internet of things in education: Benefits and challenges. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(2), 115-127.
• Kaur, S., & Singh, I. (2016). A survey report on internet of things applications. International Journal of Computer Science Trends and Technology, 4(2), 330-335.
• Kautish, P., & Sharma, R. (2019). Value orientation, green attitude and green behavioral intentions: an empirical investigation among young consumers. Young Consumers, 20(4) 338-358.
• Kim, H. Y., Lee, J. Y., Mun, J. M., & Johnson, K. K. (2017). Consumer adoption of smart in-store technology: assessing the predictive value of attitude versus beliefs in the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 10(1), 26-36.
• Korneeva, E., Olinder, N., & Strielkowski, W. (2021). Consumer attitudes to the smart home technologies and the Internet of Things (IoT). Energies, 14, 7913, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14237913.
• Lins, T., Oliveira, R. A. R., Correia, L. H., & Silva, J. S. (2018, November). Industry 4.0 retrofitting. In 2018 VIII Brazilian Symposium on Computing Systems Engineering (SBESC) (pp. 8-15). IEEE.
• Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, I., Yıldız, B., Çiğdem, S., & Cincikaite, R. (2021). Do people prefer cars that people don’t drive? A survey study on autonomous vehicles. Energies, 14(16), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14164795.
• Miranda, J., Mäkitalo, N., Garcia-Alonso, J., Berrocal, J., Mikkonen, T., Canal, C., & Murillo, J. M. (2015). From the internet of things to the internet of people. IEEE Internet Computing, 19(2), 40-47.
• Mital, M., Chang, V., Choudhary, P., Papa, A., & Pani, A. 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, 136, 339-346.
• Narakorn, P., & Seesupan, T., (2019). The role of attitude towards Internet of Things (IOT) in relation to technology acceptance model in Thailand. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 5(2), 77-92.
• Nizetic, S., Solic, P., Gonzalez de Artaza, D. L. I., & Patrono, L. (2020). Internet of things (IoT): opportunities, issues and challenges towards a smart and sustainable future. Journal of Cleaner Production, 274, 1-32.
• Osisanwo, F., Kuyoro, S., & Awodele, O. (2015, March). Internet refrigerator–A typical internet of things (IoT). In 3rd International Conference on Advances in Engineering Sciences & Applied Mathematics (ICAESAM’2015), London (UK). http://iieng. org/images/proceedings_pdf/2602E0315051.pdf.
• Öztürk, İ. D., & Zeybek, B. (2021). Dijitalleşme ve etik sorunlar: Nesnelerin interneti teknolojisini gözetim, gizlilik, güvenlik kapsamında değerlendirme. İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi, 55, 1-15.
• Park, E., Cho, Y., Han, J., & Kwon, S. J. (2017). Comprehensive approaches to user acceptance of Internet of Things in a smart home environment. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 4(6), 2342-2350.
• Pelet, J.-É., Lick, E., & Taieb, B. (2021). The internet of things in upscale hotels: its impact on guests’ sensory experiences and behavior. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 33(11) 4035-4056.
• Princi, E., & Krämer, N. C. (2020). Out of control–privacy calculus and the effect of perceived control and moral considerations on the usage of IoT healthcare devices. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 1-15.
• Rajesh, S., Abd Algani, Y. M., Al Ansari, M. S., Balachander, B., Raj, R., Muda, I., Bala, B. K., & Balaji, S. (2022). Detection of features from the internet of things customer attitudes in the hotel industry using a deep neural network model. Measurement: Sensors, 22, 1-11.
• Romero-Rodríguez, J. M., Alonso-García, S., Marín-Marín, J. A., & Gómez-García, G. (2020). Considerations on the implications of the internet of things in spanish universities: The usefulness perceived by professors. Future Internet, 12(8), 1-13.
• Sayana, L. S., & Joshi, B. K. (2016). Security issues in internet of things. Uttarakhand: ICFAI. UGC Sponsored National Conference on Global Challenges – Role of Sciences & Technology in Imparting their Solutions (GCRSTS 2016), 23-24 April 2016, TIT&S Bhiwani, Haryana, India. ISBN: 978-81-909307-3-4.
• Serror, M., Hack, S., Henze, M., Schuba, M., & Wehrle, K. (2020). Challenges and opportunities in securing the industrial internet of things. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 17(5), 2985-2996.
• Shehabat, I. M., & Al-Hussein, N. (2018). Deploying internet of things in healthcare: Benefits, requirements, challenges and applications. J. Commun 13(10), 574-580.
• Teo, T., Lee, C. B., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Understanding pre‐service teachers' computer attitudes: applying and extending the technology acceptance model. Journal Of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 128-143.
• Tiryaki, İ., & Önder, G. L. (2022). Tüketicilerin akıllı giyilebilir nesnelerin kullanımına yönelik davranış niyetlerinin genişletilmiş teknoloji kabul modeli aracılığıyla incelenmesi. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(1), 182-202.
• Tsourela, T., & Nerantzaki, D. M. (2020). An Internet of Things (IoT) acceptance model: Assessing consumer’s behavior toward IoT products and applications. Future Internet, 12, 191, 1-23; doi:10.3390/fi12110191.
• Vaidya, S., Ambad, P., & Bhosle, S. (2018). Industry 4.0–a glimpse. Procedia Manufacturing, 20, 233-238.
• Want, R., Schilit, B. N., & Jenson, S. (2015). Enabling the internet of things. Computer, 48(1), 28-35.
• Xia, F., Yang, L. T., Wang, L., & Vinel, A. (2012). Internet of things. International Journal Of Communication Systems, 25(9), 1101.
• Xiao, J., & Goulias, K. G. (2022). Perceived usefulness and intentions to adopt autonomous vehicles. Transportation Research Part A, 161, 170-185.
• Xu, L. D., Xu, E. L., & Li, L. (2018). Industry 4.0: state of the art and future trends. International Journal Of Production Research, 56(8), 2941-2962.
• Yoon, H. Y. (2016). User acceptance of mobile library applications in academic libraries: An application of the technology acceptance model. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(6), 687-693.
• Zhu, D. S., Lin, T. C. T., & Hsu, Y. C. (2012). Using the technology acceptance model to evaluate user attitude and intention of use for online games. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 23(7-8), 965-980.