Consumer acceptance, perceived value and trust in the internet of things: The case of new generation smartwatch

Yıl 2024, , 700 - 728, 25.06.2024

Hakan Kaya , Suzan Coban

https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1426838

Cited By: 1

Öz

The main purpose of the study is to determine the effect of consumer acceptance and acceptance dimensions on perceived value and trust in new generation smart watches (NGSW), an example of Internet of Things, and to examine the mediating role of trust in the effect of smart watch consumer acceptance on perceived total value. The questionnaire developed for this purpose was applied via Google form. Explanatory and confirmatory factor analyses, normality and reliability analyses, multiple and linear regression analyses were performed on the data obtained in line with the objectives of the research. As a result of the analyses, it was found that technological functionality and aesthetic appeal among the new generation smartwatch dimensions had a significant effect on perceived total value, whereas hedonic motivation, social impact and privacy risk among the new generation smartwatch acceptance dimensions did not have a significant effect on perceived total value. The mediating role of perceived trust in the effect of NGSW acceptance dimensions on the total perceived value was examined and it was determined that there was a partial mediation effect since the total value of the NGSW acceptance dimensions decreased due to the effect of perceived trust but did not completely disappear.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Internet of Things, Perceived Value, Trust

Nesnelerin internetinde tüketici kabulü, algılanan değer ve güven etkileşimi: Yeni nesil akıllı saat örneği

Öz

Çalışmanın temel amacı, bir Nesnelerin İnterneti örneği olan yeni nesil akıllı saatlerde (YNAS) tüketici kabulü ve kabul boyutlarının algılanan değer ve güvene etkisini belirlemek ve akıllı saat tüketici kabulünün algılanan toplam değere etkisinde güvenin aracı rolünü incelemektir. Bu maksatla geliştirilen anket Google form aracılığıyla uygulanmıştır. Elde edilen verilere, araştırmanın amaçları doğrultusunda açıklayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri, normallik ve güvenilirlik analizleri, çoklu ve doğrusal regresyon analizleri yapılmıştır. Analiz sonucunda yeni nesil akıllı saat boyutlarından teknolojik işlevselliğin ve estetik cazibenin algılanan toplam değer üzerinde anlamlı bir etkiye sahip olduğu, buna karşın yeni nesil akıllı saat kabul boyutlarından hedonik motivasyon, sosyal etki ve gizlilik riskinin algılanan toplam değer üzerinde anlamlı bir etkiye sahip olmadığı saptanmıştır. YNAS kabul boyutlarının toplam algılanan değer üzerindeki etkisinde algılanan güvenin aracılık rolü incelenmiş ve algılanan güvenin etkisiyle YNAS kabul boyutlarının toplam değerinin azaldığı ancak tamamen ortadan kalkmadığı için kısmi aracılık etkisi olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Nesnelerin İnterneti, Algılanan Değer, Güven

Kaynakça

• Abashidze I., & Dąbrowski, M. (2016). Internet of Things in marketing: opportunities and security issues. Management Systems in Production Engineering, 24(4), 217-221.
• Akince, B. (2021). Nesnelerin İnterneti, Güvenlik ve Gizlilik, İnsan Hakları Bağlamında Bir Değerlendirme. International Journal of Social Inquiry, 14(1), 53-80.
• Alalwan, A. A., Baabdullah, A. M., Rana, N. P., Tamilmani, K., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2018.) Examining adoption of mobile internet in Saudi Arabia: Extending TAM with perceived enjoyment, innovativeness and trust. Technology in Society, 55, 100-110.
• Aldossari, M. Q., & Sidorova, A. (2020). Consumer acceptance of Internet of Things (IoT): Smart home context. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 60(6), 507-517.
• Alpaslan, B. A., & Delibalta, E. (2018). Akıllı Nesnelerin Kişiselleştirilmiş Gerçek Zamanlı Pazarlamaya Yansımaları. Global Media Journal TR Edition, 9, 17. 1-15.
• Al-Qeisi, K., Dennis, C., Alamanos, E., & Jayawardhena, C. (2014). Website design quality and usage behavior: Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Journal of Business Research, 67(11), 2282-2290.
• Anderson, R. E., & Srinivasan, S. S. (2003). E‐satisfaction and e‐loyalty: A contingency framework. Psychology & marketing, 20(2), 123-138.
• Arifah, I. D. C., & Juniarti, R. P. (2021). Interface Aesthetic, Perceived Value, Perceived Ease of Use, and Perceived Usefulness on Purchase Intention of Smartwatch Consumers. In International Conference on Business and Engineering Management (ICONBEM 2021) (pp. 25-33). Atlantis Press.
• Atıgan, F. (2020). Sosyal Medya Pazarlaması ve Tüketici Satın Alma Değişkenleri İlişkisi. Sosyal Kimlik ve Algılanan Değerin Aracılık Rolü Üzerine Bir Araştırma, BMIJ, 8(2), 1892-1921.
• Atzori, L., Iera, A., & Morabito, G. (2010). The internet of things: A survey. Computer networks. 54(15), 2787-2805.
• Balaji, M. S., & Roy, S. K. (2017). Value co-creation with Internet of things technology in the retail industry. Journal of Marketing Management, 33(1-2), 7-31.
• Barcena, M. B., Wueest, C., & Lau, H. (2014). How safe is your quantified self. Symantech: Mountain View, CA, USA, 16.
• 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.
• Bayuk, M. N., & Öz, A. (2017). Nesnelerin İnterneti ve İşletmelerin Pazarlama Faaliyetlerine Etkileri. Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(43), 41-58.
• Belge, S., & Mutlu, H. M. (2020). Tüketicilerin giyilebilir teknolojileri benimsenmesine yönelik davranışsal niyet ve kullanımları üzerine bir araştırma. Uygulamalı Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4(1), 14-35.
• Bölen, M. C. (2020). Exploring the determinants of users’ continuance intention in smartwatches. Technology in Society, 60, 101209.
• Brown, S. A., & Venkatesh, V. (2005). Model of adoption of technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS quarterly, 399-426.
• Bumin Doyduk, H. B., & Bayarçelik, E. B. (2019). Consumers’ Acceptance of Internet of Things Technology. İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 6(2), 351–371.
• Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (2002). Quantitative data analysis with SPSS release 10 for Windows: A guide for social scientists. Routledge.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2011). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analiz Kitabı. Ondördüncü Baskı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık Eğitim ve Danışma Hizmeti Ticaret Ltd Şti.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2011). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
• Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. routledge.
• Castañeda, J. A. (2011). Relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty on the internet. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(3), 371-383.
• Chang, Y., Dong, X., & Sun, W. (2014). Influence of characteristics of the Internet of Things on consumer purchase intention. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 42(2), 321-330.
• Chaudhuri, A., & Holbrook, M. B. (2001). The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty. Journal of marketing, 65(2), 81-93.
• Chen, R. (2013). Member use of social networking sites-an empirical examination. Decision Support Systems, 54(3), 1219-1227.
• Chen, H. (2012). The Influence of Perceived Value and Trust on Online Buying Intention. J. Comput., 7(7), 1655-1662.
• Childers, T. L., Carr, C. L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of retailing, 77(4), 511-535.
• Cho, W. C., Lee, K. Y., & Yang, S. B. (2019). What makes you feel attached to smartwatches? The stimulus–organism–response (S–O–R) perspectives. Information Technology & People, 32(2), 319-343.
• Choi, J., & Kim, S. (2016). Is the smartwatch an IT product or a fashion product? A study on factors affecting the intention to use smartwatches. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 777-786.
• Choi, J., Lee, H. J., & Kim, Y. C. (2011). The influence of social presence on customer intention to reuse online recommender systems: The roles of personalization and product type. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 16(1), 129-154.
• Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (2013). A first course in factor analysis. Psychology press.
• Corcoran, P. (2015). The internet of things: why now, and what's next?. IEEE consumer electronics magazine, 5(1), 63-68.
• Creusen, M. E., Veryzer, R. W., & Schoormans, J. P. (2010). Product value importance and consumer preference for visual complexity and symmetry. European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 49 No. 9/10.
• Cyr, D., Hassanein, K., Head, M., & Ivanov, A. (2007). The role of social presence in establishing loyalty in e-service environments. Interacting with computers, 19(1), 43-56.
• Çoban, U., & Tektaş, Ö. Ö. (2019). Nesnelerin İnternetinin Algılanan Değer Üzerindeki Etkisinin İncelenmesi: Bireysel Yenilikçiliğin Düzenleyici Rolü. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(2), 233-258.
• Dağ, K. (2022). Restoran Sektöründe İlişki Kalitesinin Ağızdan Ağıza İletişim Üzerindeki Etkileri. Alanya Akademik Bakış, 6(3), Sayfa No.3349-3369.
• Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management science, 35(8), 982-1003.
• Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 22(14), 1111-1132.
• Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340.
• de Boer, P. S., van Deursen, A. J., & Van Rompay, T. J. (2019). Accepting the Internet-of-Things in our homes: The role of user skills. Telematics and informatics, 36, 147-156.
• Dehghani, M. (2018). Exploring the motivational factors on continuous usage intention of smartwatches among actual users. Behaviour & Information Technology, 37(2), 145-158.
• Dehghani, M., & Kim, K. J. (2019). The effects of design, size, and uniqueness of smartwatches: perspectives from current versus potential users. Behaviour & Information Technology, 38(11), 1143-1153.
• Doyduk, H. B. B., & Bayarçelik, E. B. (2019). Consumers’ acceptance of Internet of Things technology. İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 6(2), 351-371.
• Doyduk, H. B. B., & Tiftik, C. (2017). Nesnelerin interneti: kapsamı, gelecek yönelimi ve iş fırsatları. Third Sector Social Economic Review, 52(3), 127-147.
• Dutot, V., Bhatiasevi, V., & Bellallahom, N. (2019). Applying the technology acceptance model in a three-countries study of smartwatch adoption. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 30(1), 1-14.
• Ernst, C. P. H., & Ernst, A. W. (2016). The Influence of Privacy Risk on Smartwatch Usage. In AMCIS, 1-10. Faiz, E., & Uludağ, G. (2019). Güdülenmiş tüketici yenilikçiliğinin değiştirme maliyeti ve algılanan değer üzerindeki etkisine yönelik bir model önerisi: akıllı telefon pazarı örneği. Business and Economics Research Journal, 10(4), 991-1004.
• Featherman, M. S., & Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Predicting e-services adoption: a perceived risk facets perspective. International journal of human-computer studies, 59(4), 451-474.
• 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. Vol. 26 Iss 2 pp. 211 – 231.
• Gao, Y., Li, H., & Luo, Y. (2015). An empirical study of wearable technology acceptance in healthcare. Industrial Management & Data Systems.
• Gefen, D. (2000). E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust. Omega, 28(6), 725-737.
• Gefen, D., & Straub, D. (2003) Managing user trust in B2C e-services. e-service Journal, 2(2), 7–24.
• Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS quarterly, 51-90.
• Ghazali, E. M., Mutum, D. S., Pua, M. H. J., & Ramayah, T. (2020). Status-quo satisfaction and smartwatch adoption: A multi-group analysis. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 120(12), 2319-2347.
• Goodwin, N. C. (1987). Functionality and usability. Communications of the ACM, 30(3), 229-233.
• Grabner-Kraeuter, S. (2002). The role of consumers' trust in online-shopping. Journal of business ethics, 39, 43-50.
• Greengard, S. (2021). The internet of things. MIT press.
• Gujarati, D. N. (2004). Basic econometrics: Student solutions manual for use with Basic econometrics.-4th. McGraw-Hill.
• Gujarati, D. (2016). Örneklerle ekonometri. N. Bolatoğlu. Çev. Ankara: BB101 Yayınları.
• Gundlach, G. T., & Murphy, P. E. (1993). Ethical and legal foundations of relational marketing exchanges. Journal of marketing, 57(4), 35-46.
• Gupta, S., & Kim, H. W. (2010). Value‐driven Internet shopping: The mental accounting theory perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 27(1), 13-35.
• Ha, S., & Stoel, L. (2009). Consumer e-shopping acceptance: Antecedents in a technology acceptance model. Journal of business research, 62(5), 565-571.
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2013). Multivariate data analysis: Pearson new international edition PDF eBook. Pearson Higher Ed.
• Hajiha, A., Shahriari, M., & Vakilian, N. (2014). The role of perceived value on customer E-shopping intention using technology acceptance model, (TAM). In 2014 IEEE international conference on industrial engineering and engineering management (pp. 1136-1140). IEEE.
• Harris, L. C., & Goode, M. M. (2004). The four levels of loyalty and the pivotal role of trust: a study of online service dynamics. Journal of retailing, 80(2), 139-158.
• Harris, L. C., & Goode, M. M. (2010). Online servicescapes, trust, and purchase intentions. Journal of Services Marketing. Volume 24, Number 3, 230–243.
• Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. (2015). Emergent experience and the connected consumer in the smart home assemblage and the internet of things. Available at SSRN 2648786, 1-153.
• Hong, J. C., Lin, P. H., & Hsieh, P. C. (2017). The effect of consumer innovativeness on perceived value and continuance intention to use smartwatch. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 264-272.
• Hong, I. B., & Cha, H. S. (2013). The mediating role of consumer trust in an online merchant in predicting purchase intention. International Journal of Information Management, 33(6), 927-939.
• Hsiao, K. L. (2017). What drives smartwatch adoption intention? Comparing Apple and non-Apple watches. Library Hi Tech. Vol. 35 Issue: 1, pp.186-206.
• Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.
• Hui, G. (2014). How the Internet of Things Changes Business Models. URL:http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/07/how-the-internet-of-things-changes-business-models.
• 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.
• Hsu, C. L., Lu, H. P. (2004). Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experience. Information & management, 41(7), 853-868.
• Huang, T., & Liao, S. (2015). A model of acceptance of augmented-reality interactive technology: the moderating role of cognitive innovativeness. Electronic Commerce Research, 15(2), 269-295.
• IERC, (2016). Value Co-creation Mechanisms-UNIFY-IoT 2016. http://www.internet-of-things-research.eu/pdf/D01_01_WP01_H2020_UNIFY-IoT_Final.pdf.
• Iqbal, S., & Jokela, P. (2022). Exploring Smart Watch Ecosystem Value Co-creation Experience: A Qualitative Case Study. In SPWID 2022: The Eighth International Conference on Smart Portable, Wearable, Implantable and Disability-oriented Devices and Systems (pp. 1-7).
• Izuagbe, R., & Popoola, S. O. (2017). Social influence and cognitive instrumental factors as facilitators of perceived usefulness of electronic resources among library personnel in private universities in South-west, Nigeria. Library Review. Vol. 66 No. 8/9, pp. 679-694.
• Jeong, M., Park, K., & Kim, K. (2020). A survey of what customers want in smartwatch brand applications. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 18(5), 540-558.
• Jung, Y., Kim S., & Choi, B. (2016). Consumer valuation of the wearables: The case of smartwatches. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 899-905.
• Kağnıcıoğlu, C. H., & Çolak, H. (2019). Tüketicinin Nesnelerin İnterneti Teknolojilerini Benimsemesi ve Bir Uygulama. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19(4), 241-268.
• Karaca, Ş. (2022). Teknoloji Kabul Modeli Bağlamında Giyilebilir Teknolojilere Yönelik Tutumun Satın Alma Niyetine Etkisi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(1), 81-101.
• Karagöz, Y. (2021). SPSS ve AMOS META uygulamalı nitel-nicel-karma bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri ve yayın etiği. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık, 402.
• Karakaya, M., Bostan, A., & Gökçay, E. (2016). How Secure is Your Smart Watch?. International Journal of Information Security Science, 5(4), 90-95.
• Kaya, H. (2023). Nesnelerin İnterneti Tüketici Kabulü, Algılanan Değer ve Güven Etkileşimi: Yeni Nesil Akıllı Saat Örneği [Doktora tezi, Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi]. Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
• Khalilzadeh, J., Ozturk, A. B., & Bilgihan, A. (2017). Security-related factors in extended UTAUT model for NFC based mobile payment in the restaurant industry. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 460-474.
• Khasawneh, M. H. A., & Haddad, N. (2020). Analysis of the effects of ease of use, enjoyment, perceived risk on perceived value and subsequent satisfaction created in the context of C2C online exchanges. International Journal of Electronic Marketing and Retailing, 11(3), 217-238.
• Kim, K. J. (2016). Round or square? How screen shape affects utilitarian and hedonic motivations for smartwatch adoption. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(12), 733-739.
• Kim, H. W., Chan, H. C., & Gupta, S. (2007). Value-based adoption of mobile internet: an empirical investigation. Decision support systems, 43(1), 111-126.
• Kim, C., Zhao, W., & Yang, K. H. (2008). An empirical study on the integrated framework of e-CRM in online shopping: evaluating the relationships among perceived value, satisfaction, and trust based on customers' perspectives. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), 6(3), 1-19.
• Kleinbaum, D. G., Kupper, L. L., Nizam, A., & Rosenberg, E. S. (2013). Applied regression analysis and other multivariable methods. Cengage Learning. 5d ed., Boston, USA.
• Kotler, P., & Rath, G. A. (1984). Design: A powerful but neglected strategic tool. Journal of business strategy, 5(2), 16-21.
• Kranthi, A. K., & Ahmed, K. A. (2018). Determinants of smartwatch adoption among IT professionals-an extended UTAUT2 model for smartwatch enterprise. International Journal of Enterprise Network Management, 9(3-4), 294-316.
• Lee, H., Chung, N., & Jung, T. (2015). Examining the cultural differences in acceptance of mobile augmented reality: Comparison of South Korea and Ireland. In Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2015: Proceedings of the International Conference in Lugano, Switzerland, February 3-6, 2015 (pp. 477-491). Springer International Publishing.
• Lee, H. G., Chung, S., & Lee, W. H. (2013). Presence in virtual golf simulators: The effects of presence on perceived enjoyment, perceived value, and behavioral intention. New media & society, 15(6), 930-946.
• Li, M. L., & Green, R. (2011). A mediating influence on customer loyalty: The role of perceived value. Journal of Management and Marketing Research, 7, 1-12.
• Liu, Y. (2003). Engineering aesthetics and aesthetic ergonomics: theoretical foundations and a dual-process research methodology. Ergonomics, 46(13-14), 1273-1292.
• Liu, F., Zhao, X., Chau, P. Y., & Tang, Q. (2015). Roles of perceived value and individual differences in the acceptance of mobile coupon applications. Internet Research. 25(3), 471-495.
• Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. Chichester, UK: Wiley, [translation from German].
• Manyika, J., & Chui, M. (2015). By 2025, Internet of things applications could have $11 trillion impact. http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/mgi/in_the_news/by_2025_Internet_of_things_applications_ could_have_11_ trillion_impact.
• Marangoz, M., & Aydın, A. E. (2017). Tüketicilerin Giyilebilir Teknoloji Ürünlerini Benimsemesinde Etkili Olan Faktörler: Akıllı Saatler Üzerine Bir Araştırma". Pazarlama Teorisi ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, Cilt 4. Sayı 1, 1-20.
• Meydanoğlu, E. S. B., & Klein, M. (2016). Nesnelerin İnterneti ve Pazarlama. Akıllı teknoloji & akıllı yönetim, 12-19.
• Moon, H., Park, J., & Kim, S. (2015). The importance of an innovative product design on customer behaviour: Development and validation of a scale. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(2), 224–232.
• Mustafa, S., Zhang, W., Anwar, S., Jamil, K., & Rana, S. (2022). An integrated model of UTAUT2 to understand consumers' 5G technology acceptance using SEM-ANN approach. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 20056.
• Nakip, M., & Yaraş, E. (2016). SPSS uygulamalı pazarlama araştırmalarına giriş. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Nascimento, B., Oliveira, T., & Tam, C. (2018). Wearable technology: What explains continuance intention in smartwatches?. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 43, 157-169.
• Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2015). Smart technologies for personalized experiences: a case study in the hospitality domain. Electronic Markets, 25(3), 243-254.
• Nunnally, J. C., & Berstein, I. R. (1994). “Psychometric Theory”, 3st ed., New York: McGraw-Hill.
• O’Brien, H., & Cairns, P. (2015). An empirical evaluation of the User Engagement Scale (UES) in online news environments. Information Processing & Management, 51(4), 413-427.
• Ogonowski, A., Montandon, A., Botha, E., & Reyneke, M. (2014). Should new online stores invest in social presence elements? The effect of social presence on initial trust formation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(4), 482–491.
• Ogbanufe, O., & Gerhart, N. (2018). Watch it! Factors driving continued feature use of the smartwatch. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 34(11), 999-1014.
• Orel, F. D., & Kara, A. (2014). Supermarket self-checkout service quality, customer satisfaction, and loyalty: Empirical evidence from an emerging market. Journal of Retailing and Consumer services, 21(2), 118-129.
• Öztürk, İ., & Zeybek, B. (2021). Dijitalleşme ve Etik Sorunlar: Nesnelerin İnterneti Teknolojisini Gözetim, Gizlilik, Güvenlik Kapsamında Değerlendirme. İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi, 2021(55), 1-15.
• Pal, D., Funilkul, S., & Vanijja, V. (2020). The future of smartwatches: assessing the end-users’ continuous usage using an extended expectation-confirmation model. Universal Access in the Information Society, 19(2), 261-281.
• Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J., & MacInnis, D. J. (1986). Strategic brand concept-image management. Journal of marketing, 50(4), 135-145.
• Park, N., Roman, R., Lee, S., Chung, J. E. (2009). User acceptance of a digital library system in developing countries: An application of the Technology Acceptance Model. International journal of information management, 29(3), 196-209.
• Park, E. (2020). User acceptance of smart wearable devices: An expectation-confirmation model approach. Telematics and Informatics, 47, 101318.
• Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International journal of electronic commerce, 7(3), 101-134.
• Peter, J. P., & Ryan, M. J. (1976). An investigation of perceived risk at the brand level. Journal of marketing research, 13(2), 184-188.
• Prayoga, T., & Abraham, J. (2020). Technopsychology of IoT optimization in the business world. In Securing the Internet of Things: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 21-45). IGI Global.
• Rajabi, N., & Hakim, A. (2015). An intelligent interactive marketing system based-on Internet of Things (IoT). In 2015 2nd International Conference on Knowledge-Based Engineering and Innovation (KBEI). (pp. 243-247). IEEE.
• Ramkumar, B., & Liang, Y. (2020). How do smartwatch price and brand awareness drive consumer perceptions and purchase intention? A perceived value approach. International Journal of Technology Marketing, 14(2), 154-180.
• Ramesh, B. (2016) Building Competitive Advantage in Retail Industry using Internet of Things (IoT). Technical Report. 1-23.
• Reichheld, F. F., Markey, Jr R. G., & Hopton, C. (2000). The loyalty effect-the relationship between loyalty and profits. European business journal, 12(3), 134.
• Ro, Y. K., Brem, A., & Rauschnabel, P. A. (2018). Augmented reality smart glasses: Definition, concepts and impact on firm value creation. In Augmented reality and virtual reality (pp. 169-181). Springer, Cham.
• Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of innovations (1983). The Free Press A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. 866 Third Avenue, New York.
• Rouibah, K., Al-Qirim, N., Hwang, Y., & Pouri, S. G. (2021). The determinants of eWoM in social commerce: The role of perceived value, perceived enjoyment, trust, risks, and satisfaction. Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), 29(3), 75-102.
• Roy, S. K., Balaji, M. S., Quazi, A., & Quaddus, M. (2018). Predictors of customer acceptance of and resistance to smart technologies in the retail sector. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 42, 147-160.
• Sabbir, M., Akter, S., Khan, T., & Das, A. (2020). Exploring factors affecting consumers’ intention to use smartwatch in Bangladesh: An empirical study. Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems, 30(3), 636-663.
• Sağtaş, S., & Aslan, M. (2022). Giyilebilir teknoloji ürünlerin benimsenmesinde etkili olan faktörler: Akıllı saatler üzerine bir uygulama. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 10(1), 325-339.
• Sauer, J., & Sonderegger, A. (2011). The influence of product aesthetics and user state in usability testing. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30(6), 787–796.
• Seva, R. R., & Helander, M. G. (2009). The influence of cellular phone attributes on users’ affective experiences: A cultural comparison. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 39: 341–46.
• Sheng, M. L., & Teo, T. S. (2012). Product attributes and brand equity in the mobile domain: The mediating role of customer experience. International Journal of Information Management, 32(2), 139–146.
• Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of business research, 22(2), 159-170.
• Sicari, S., Rizzardi, A., Grieco, L. A., & Coen-Porisini, A. (2015). Security, privacy and trust in Internet of Things: The road ahead. Computer networks, 76, 146-164.
• Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of psychological research online, 8(2), 23-74.
• Singh, J., & Sirdeshmukh, D. (2000). Agency and trust mechanisms in consumer satisfaction and loyalty judgments. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 28(1), 150-167.
• Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J., & Sabol, B. (2002). Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges. Journal of marketing, 66(1), 15-37.
• Sitkin, S. B., & Pablo, A. L. (1992). Reconceptualizing the determinants of risk behavior. Academy of management review, 17(1), 9-38.
• Smart Watch Global Market Report, (2023). Market Size, Trends, And Global Forecast 2023-2032. https://www.thebusinessresearchcompany.com/report/smart-watch-global-market-report.
• Staples, D. S., Wong, I., & Seddon, P. B. (2002). Having expectations of information systems benefits that match received benefits: does it really matter?. Information & Management, 40(2), 115-131.
• Stavroulakis, P. (2003). Reliability, survivability and quality of large scale telecommunication systems: case study: olympic games. John Wiley & Sons.
• Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Ullman, J. B. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: pearson.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics. seventh edition. Boston, MA: pearson.
• Tang, A., Biocca, F., & Lim, L. (2004). Comparing differences in presence during social interaction in augmented reality versus virtual reality environments: An exploratory study. Proceedings of PRESENCE, 204-208.
• Thiruvattal, E. (2017). Impact of value co-creation on logistics customers’ loyalty. Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 10(3), 334-361.
• Thong, J. Y., Hong, S.J., & Tam, K. Y. (2006). The effects of post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-confirmation model for information technology continuance. International Journal of human-computer studies, 64(9), 799-810.
• Tiryaki, İ., & Önder, L. G. (2022). Tüketicilerin Akıllı Giyilebilir Nesnelerin Kullanımına Yönelik Davranış Niyetlerinin Genişletilmiş Teknoloji Kabul Modeli Aracılığıyla İncelenmesi. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(1), 182-202.
• Tsourela, M., & Nerantzaki, D. M. (2020). An internet of things (IoT) acceptance model. Assessing consumer’s behavior toward IoT products and applications. Future Internet, 12(11), 191.
• Truong, Y., Klink, R. R., Fort-Rioche, L., & Athaide, G. A. (2014). Consumer response to product form in technology-based industries. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(4), 867–876.
• Udoh, E. S., & Alkharashi, A. (2016). Privacy risk awareness and the behavior of smartwatch users: A case study of Indiana University students. In 2016 Future Technologies Conference (FTC) (pp. 926-931). IEEE.
• Van der Heijden, H. (2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS quarterly, 695-704.
• Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management science, 46(2), 186-204.
• Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 425-478.
• Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision sciences, 39(2), 273-315.
• Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS quarterly, 157-178.
• Weber, R. H., & Weber, R. (2010). Internet of things (Vol. 12). Heidelberg: Springer.
• Westin, A. F. (1967). “Privacy and Freedom,” New York, NY: Atheneum.
• Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J. (1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence, 7(3), 225-240.
• Whitmore, A., Agarwal, A., & Da Xu, L. (2015). The Internet of Things-A survey of topics and trends. Information systems frontiers, 17(2), 261-274.
• Wu, L. H., Wu, L. C., & Chang, S. C. (2016). Exploring consumers’ intention to accept smartwatch. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 383-392.
• Wünderlich, N. V., Wangenheim, F. V., & Bitner, M. J. (2013). High tech and high touch: a framework for understanding user attitudes and behaviors related to smart interactive services. Journal of Service Research, 16(1), 3-20.
• Wünderlich, N. V., Heinonen, K., Ostrom, A. L., Patricio, L., Sousa, R., Voss, C., & Lemmink, J. G. (2015). “Futurizing” smart service: implications for service researchers and managers. Journal of Services Marketing, 29(6/7), 442-447.
• Yang, H., Yu, J., Zo, H., & Choi, M. (2016). User acceptance of wearable devices: An extended perspective of perceived value. Telematics and Informatics, 33(2), 256-269.
• Yang, Z., & Peterson, R. T. (2004). Customer perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty: The role of switching costs. Psychology & marketing, 21(10), 799-822.
• Yaşlıoğlu, M. M. (2017). Sosyal bilimlerde faktör analizi ve geçerlilik: Keşfedici ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizlerinin kullanılması. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 46, 74-85.
• Yıldız, B., & Kütahyalı, D. N. (2021). Tüketici Yenilikçiliğinin Akıllı Saat Kullanmaya Devam Etme Niyeti Üzerindeki Etkisinde Hedonik ve Faydacı Değerin Aracı Rolü. Alanya Akademik Bakış, 5(2), 705-726.
• Zitkiene, R., Markeviciute, G., & Mickeviciene, M. (2017). The Determinants of Consumer Behaviour Influencing the Smart Technology Recognition and Acceptance. In International Conference at Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Business and Management.