TÜKETİCİLERİN AKILLI EV TEKNOLOJİLERİNE YÖNELİK TUTUMLARI: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ

Abstract

Çalışmanın amacı, bireylerin akıllı ev teknolojilerine (AET) yönelik tutumlarını ve bu teknolojileri kullanma niyetlerini, gelişmekte olan bir ülke perspektifiyle Türkiye örneği üzerinden açıklamaktır. Teknoloji Kabul Modeli’ni temel alarak yapılan araştırmada algılanan kolay kullanım, çevresel fayda, ekonomik avantaj, güvenlik ve maliyet unsurlarının hem tutum hem de davranışsal niyet üzerindeki etkileri analiz edilmiştir. Veriler yüz yüze ve çevrimiçi anketler yoluyla Haziran 2024 ve Şubat 2025 tarihleri arasında toplanmıştır. Bulgular, algılanan kolay kullanımın tutum üzerinde en güçlü etkiye sahip olduğunu, algılanan çevresel faydanın tutumu, algılanan ekonomik avantajın ise kullanım niyetini daha yüksek düzeyde etkilediğini göstermektedir. Ayrıca tutum, kimi değişkenler ile niyet arasındaki ilişkide kısmi aracılık rolü oynamaktadır. Çalışma, hem Teknoloji Kabul Modeli’nin genişletilmesine katkı sağlamakta hem de gelişmekte olan ülkeler bağlamında akıllı ev teknolojilerinin yaygınlaşması için uygulanabilir öneriler sunmaktadır.

Keywords

• Akıllı ev
• Teknoloji Kabul Modeli
• Türkiye
• Tutum
• Kullanım Niyeti

CONSUMER ATTITUDES TOWARDS SMART HOME TECHNOLOGIES: THE CASE OF TURKIYE

Abstract

This study aims to explain individuals' attitudes toward smart home Technologies (SHT) and their intentions to use these technologies from the perspective of a developing country, Turkiye, as an example. Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the study analyzed the effects of perceived ease of use, environmental benefits, economic advantages, security, and cost factors on both attitudes and behavioral intentions. Data was collected through face-to-face and online surveys between June 2024 and February 2025. The findings reveal that perceived ease of use has the most significant effect on attitudes, while perceived environmental benefits influence attitudes and perceived economic advantages influence usage intentions to a greater extent. The study contributes to the extension of TAM and provides practical recommendations for the widespread adoption of smart home technologies in the context of developing countries.

Keywords

• Smart home
• Technology Acceptance Model
• Turkiye
• Attitude
• Usage Intention

References

1. Ayan, O., & Türkay, B. (October, 2021). Factors affecting the adoption of smart home systems: An evaluation in the context of the Technology Acceptance Model. 2021 Conference on Intelligent Systems and Applications (ASYU), 1- 7. IEEE. https://polen.itu.edu.tr/entities/publication/85ecb1a0-9ab4-4ecf-a7fe-63dc74758f08
2. Balta-Ozkan, N., Boteler, B., & Amerighi, O. (2014). Development of the UK smart homes market: Public views on technical and economic aspects across the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy. Energy Research & Social Science, 3, 65–77.
3. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
4. Başarır-Özel, B., Türker, H. B., & Nasir, V. A. (2022). Identifying key drivers and barriers in smart home technology adoption: A thematic analysis from the business perspective. Sustainability, 14(15), 9053. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159053
5. Borenstein, J., & Howard, A. (2021). Emerging challenges in AI and the need for AI ethics education. AI and Ethics, 1(1), 61-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-020-00002-7
6. Büyük, M., Avşar, E., & İnci, M. (2022). Evaluation of smart home concepts with energy management systems, numerical research, and future perspective. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, 47(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2021.2024924
7. Calahorra-Candao, G., & Hoyos, M. J. M. (2024). From writing to speaking: Uncovering the role of AI in integrating voice assistants in online shopping. Information, 15(4), 202. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15040202
8. Cannizzaro, S., Procter, R., Ma, S., & Maple, C. (2020). Trust in smart home devices: Findings from a national survey in the UK. PLOS ONE, 15(5), e0231615. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231615

9. Chin, C., Wong, W. P. M., Cham, T., Thong, J. Z., & Ling, J. P. (2023). Exploring the usage intention of ai-powered devices in smart homes among millennials and zillennials: the moderating role of trust. Young Consumers, 25(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1108/yc-05-2023-1752
10. Coşkun, A., Kaner, G., & Bostan, İ. (2018). Is smart home a necessity or a fantasy? A study on user expectations from mainstream users. International Journal of Design, 12(1), 7–20.
11. Cui, T., Tang, S., & Hassan, S. H. (2024). Do family factors influence smart home usage intention? An empirical study from China using PLS-SEM. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 36(8), 1837–1853. https://doi.org/10.1108/apjml-09-2023-0922
12. Daş, R., Tuna, G., & Tuna, A. (2015). Designing and implementing a smart home system for elderly and disabled people. Environment, 1(3).
13. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
14. Demir, B., & Ventura, K. (2021). Exploring the internet of things within the new generation smart home systems: A qualitative study. In New challenges for future sustainability and wellbeing (pp. 363–376). Emerald Publishing Limited.
15. Dermody, G., Fritz, R., Glass, C., Dunham, M., & Whitehead, L. (2021). Factors influencing community‐dwelling older adults’ readiness to adopt smart home technology: a qualitative exploratory study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(12), 4847-4861. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14996
16. Ding, F., Song, A., Tong, E., & Li, J. (2016). A smart gateway architecture for improving efficiency of home network applications. Journal of Sensors, 2016, 1- 10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2197237
17. Dunlap, W.P., Xin, X. & Myers, L. (2004). Computing aspects of power for multiple regression. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers. 36, 695–701. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206551
18. Eroğlu, Ş. (2018). Dijital yaşamda mahremiyet (gizlilik) kavramı ve kişisel veriler: hacettepe üniversitesi bilgi ve belge yönetimi bölümü öğrencilerinin mahremiyet ve kişisel veri algılarının analizi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 35(2), 130- 153. https://doi.org/10.32600/huefd.439007
19. Gebsombut, N., Naruetharadhol, P., Chaiwong, P., & Hengboriboon, L. (2025). Smart home security: factors affecting consumer intention to put smart home security in place. SAGE Open, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251358967
20. George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update (10a ed.). Boston: Pearson.
21. Gonçalves, A. R., Pinto, D. C., Rita, P., & Pires, T. C. (2023). Artificial intelligence and its ethical implications for marketing. Emerging Science Journal, 7(2), 313–327. https://doi.org/10.28991/esj-2023-07-02-01
22. Gravetter, F., & Wallnau, L. (2014). Essentials of statistics for the behavioral sciences (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
23. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate Data Analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
24. Hubert, M., Carugati, A., Brock, C., & Obel, B. (2020). Take it personally – The role of consumers’ perceived value of personalization on cross-category use in a smart home ecosystem. Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2020.144
25. Jain, V., Wadhwani, K., & Eastman, J. K. (2023). Artificial intelligence consumer behavior: A hybrid review and research agenda. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 23(2), 676–697. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2233
26. Jin, F., & Zhang, X. (2025). Artificial intelligence or human: When and why consumers prefer AI recommendations. Information Technology & People, 38(1), 279–303.
27. Kang, H., Han, J., & Kwon, G. H. (2022). The acceptance behavior of smart home health care services in South Korea: An integrated model of UTAUT and TTF. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(20), 13279. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192013279
28. Kilcullen, S., Heffernan, E., Hussey, P., Lee, H., Moran, K., Murphy, C., … & Hopper, L. (2022). A theoretical domains framework (tdf) approach to the qualitative analysis of older adults’ intentions to adopt assistive smart home technology. Gerontechnology, 21(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.4017/gt.2022.21.1.591.12
29. Kolar, N., Milfelner, B., & Pisnik, A. (2024). Factors for customers’ AI use readiness in physical retail stores: The interplay of consumer attitudes and gender differences. Information, 15(6), 346. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15060346
30. Коrneeva, Е., Olinder, N., & Striełkowski, W. (2021). Consumer attitudes to the smart home technologies and the Internet of Things (IoT). Energies, 14(23), 7913. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14237913
31. Larionova, Y., Sharma, D., Nijhawan, G., Kumari, N., & Devi, S. (2024). The economic viability of smart home investments: a cost-benefit analysis. BIO Web of Conferences, 86, 01086. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20248601086
32. Lau, J. S., Lau, J. L., & Harun, Z. (2022). Factors influencing the intention to adopt smart home technology among households in Johor Bahru, Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(12). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v12-i12/16016
33. Li, W., Yiğitcanlar, T., Liu, A., & Erol, I. (2022). Mapping two decades of smart home research: A systematic scientometric analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 179, 121676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121676
34. Ma, K. (2024). Development of an extended TAM model for enabling online social experience with smart home displays for older adults (Doctoral dissertation, Routledge).
35. Marikyan, D., Papagiannidis, S., & Alamanos, E. (2019). A systematic review of the smart home literature: A user perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 138, 139-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.08.015
36. Marikyan, D., Papagiannidis, S., & Alamanos, E. (2020). Cognitive dissonance in technology adoption: A study of smart home users. Information Systems Frontiers, 25(3), 1101–1123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-020-10042-3
37. Marikyan, D., Papagiannidis, S., & Alamanos, E. (2023). Cognitive dissonance in technology adoption: A study of smart home users. Information Systems Frontiers, 25(3), 1101-1123.
38. Miljko, L. (2025) Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)- How to interpret KMO and Bartlett´s test. Retrieved from https://www.StatistischeDatenAnalyse.de/images/Exploratory_Factor_Analysis-EFAHow_to_interpret_KMO_and_Bartletts_test.pdf
39. Nikou, S. (2019). Factors driving the adoption of smart home technology: An empirical assessment. Telematics and Informatics, 45, 101283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.101283
40. Pal, D., Funilkul, S., Vanijja, V., & Papasratorn, B. (2018). Analyzing the elderly users’ adoption of smart-home services. IEEE Access, 6, 51238–51252.
41. Parag, Y., & Butbul, G. (2018). Flexiwatts and seamless technology: Public perceptions of demand flexibility through smart home technology. Energy Research & Social Science, 39, 177–191.
42. Park, E., Kim, S., Kim, Y., & Kwon, S. J. (2018). Smart home services as the next mainstream of the ICT industry: Determinants of the adoption of smart home services. Universal Access in the Information Society, 17(1), 175–190.
43. Park, H. J., & Lin, L. M. (2020). Exploring attitude–behavior gap in sustainable consumption: Comparison of recycled and upcycled fashion products. Journal of Business Research, 117, 623-628.
44. Pires, C., Rosa, P. J., Vigário, M., & Cavaco, A. (2019). Validation of a new tool for evaluating subjects’ satisfaction with medicine package leaflets: a cross-sectional descriptive study. Sao Paulo Medical Journal, 137(5), 454-462. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-3180.2019.0123160919
45. Pliatsikas, P., & Economides, A. A. (2022). Factors influencing intention of Greek consumers to use smart home technology. Applied System Innovation, 5(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi5010026
46. Puntoni, S., Walker Reczek, R., Giesler, M., & Botti, S. (2021). Consumers and artificial intelligence: An experiential perspective. Journal of Marketing, 85(1), 131- 151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920953847.
47. Sanguinetti, A., Karlin, B., & Ford, R. (2018). Understanding the path to smart home adoption: Segmenting and describing consumers across the innovation-decision process. Energy Research & Social Science, 46, 274–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.08.002
48. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290–312. https://doi.org/10.2307/270723
49. Sovacool, B. K., & Del Río, D. F. (2020). Smart home technologies in Europe: A critical review of concepts, benefits, risks and policies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 120, 109663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109663
50. Statista. (n.d.). Smart home – Turkey. Statista. Retrieved July 21, 2025, from https://www.statista.com/outlook/cmo/smart-home/turkey
51. Strzelecki, A., Kolny, B., & Kucia, M. (2024). Smart homes as catalysts for sustainable consumption: a digital economy perspective. Sustainability, 16(11), 4676. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114676
52. Tural, E., Lu, D., & Cole, D. A. (2021). Safely and actively aging in place: older adults’ attitudes and intentions toward smart home technologies. Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, 7, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/23337214211017340
53. Türkyılmaz, S., & Altindag, E. (2022). Analysis of smart home systems in the context of the Internet of Things in terms of consumer experience. International Review of Management and Marketing, 12(1), 19.
54. Usta, E. (2023). Lifelong learning motivation scale (LLMS): Validity and Reliability study. Journal of Teacher Education and Lifelong Learning, 5(1), 429-438. https://doi.org/10.51535/tell.1309487
55. Wright, D. and Shank, D. B. (2019). Smart Home Technology Diffusion in a Living Laboratory. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 50(1), 56-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281619847205
56. Youn, K., & Cho, M. (2023). Business types matter: New insights into the effects of anthropomorphic cues in AI chatbots. Journal of Services Marketing, 37(8), 1032–1045. https://doi.org/10.1108/jsm-04-2022-0126
57. Zhang, W., & Liu, L. (2022). How consumers’ adopting intentions towards eco-friendly smart home services are shaped? An extended technology acceptance model. The Annals of Regional Science, 68(2), 307–330.
58. Zhou, C., Qian, Y., & Kaner, J. (2024). A study on smart home use intention of elderly consumers based on technology acceptance models. PLOS ONE, 19(3), e0300574.