The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology (문화기술의 융합)

The International Promotion Agency of Culture Technology (국제문화기술진흥원)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Differing effects of perceived psychological benefits of wearables adoption by consumer age, need for cognition, and involvement

소비자의 웨어러블즈 스포츠웨어 기술수용 과정에서 연령, 인지욕구, 패션관여의 조절효과 연구

  • 이은정 (국민대학교 조형대학 의상디자인학과)
  • Received : 2019.12.31
  • Accepted : 2020.01.25
  • Published : 2020.02.29
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The wearables market has fast grown, demanding a more consumer-centric academic attention. The current research explores the moderations of consumer individual characteristics (i.e., age, need for cognition, involvement) in the dynamics of perceived psychological benefits of wearables adoption (i.e., perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use) towards perceived product quality. the results indicate a strong positive influence of both the perceived usefulness and ease of use on perceived quality. however, the predicted moderations of age, need for congitiion, and involvement were partially supported.

본 연구는 기존의 기술수용모델의 핵심인 지각된 사용 용이성과 지각된 편의성이 소비자의 제품 품질 지각에 미치는 영향에서, 연령, 인지욕구, 그리고 패션관여가 미치는 조절효과를 조사했다. 분석 결과, 가정되었던 지각된 유용성과 사용용이성의 지각된 품질에의 긍정적 영향력은 통계적으로 유의한 것으로 확인되었다. 이러한 결과는 웨어러블즈의 수용에서 기술수용모델을 적용하여 설명했던 선행연구들의 결과와 일관되었다. 반면 가정되었던 연령, 인지욕구, 패션관여의 조절효과는 부분적으로 지지되었다. 가령 응답자 연령은 웨어러블즈에 대한 지각된 유용성이 지각된 품질에 미치는 영향에 유의한 부적 조절효과를 보인 반면, 지각된 사용용이성이 지각된 품질에 미치는 영향에 유의한 조절효과를 나타내지 못했다.

Keywords

References

  1. Adapa, A., Nah, F.F.-H., Hall, R.H., Siau, K., & Smith, S.N. (2018). Factors Influencing the Adoption of Smart Wearable Devices. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 34(5), 399-409. DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2017.1357902
  2. Chuah, S., Rauschnabel, P.A., Krey, N., Nguyen, B., Ramayah, T., & Lade, S. (2016). Wearable technologies: The role of usefulness and visibility in smartwatch adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 276-284. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.047
  3. Perry, A. (2018). Exploring from creators' perspectives issues and solutions about involvement, difficulties, and disposal in making smart clothing designs. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 11(1), 129-137. DOI: 10.1080/17543266.2017.1332246
  4. Llamas, R., Ubrani, J., & Shirer, M. (2019, December 16). Worldwide Wearables Market to Top 300 Million Units in 2019 and Nearly 500 Million Units in 2023, Says IDC. Business Wire. Retrieved from https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191216005029/en/Worldwide-Wearables-Market-Top-300-Million-Units
  5. Kwon, H. (2019. April 10). Suggestions for domestic SMEs through the analysis of next-generation wearable device trends. Information and Communications Planning and Evaluation Institute. Retrieved from https://www.itfind.or.kr/WZIN/jugidong/1891/file6976432723740444286-189101.pdf
  6. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly. 13, 319. DOI: 10.2307/249008
  7. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y.L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178. DOI: 10.2307/41410412
  8. Lee, Y. (2019). The effects of SNS use and the individual differences on the social connectedness. The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology (JCCT), 5(3), 215-227. DOI: 0.17703/JCCT.2019.5.3.215 https://doi.org/10.17703/JCCT.2019.5.3.215
  9. Hwang, C., Chung, T.-L., & Sanders, E.A. (2016). Attitudes and WTPs for Smart Clothing: Examining U.S. Consumers' Functional, Expressive, and Aesthetic Needs for Solar-Powered Clothing. Clothing & Textiles Research Journal, 34(3), 207-222. DOI: 10.1177/0887302X16646447
  10. IDC, 2018., https://www.idc.com/promo/wearablevendo
  11. Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  12. Chun, J. (2019). The Effect of Mobile Foodservice Platform Service Characteristics on Ease of Use, Usefulness and Reuse Intention. The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology (JCCT), 5(2), 31-37. DOI: 10.17703/JCCT.2019.5.2.31
  13. Choo, H. (2016). A Study on the Factors Affecting Usability and Usefulness Recognition of Wrist Wearables of Elementary School Students. Unpublished Master's Thesis of Graduate School of Information, Yonsei University.
  14. Park, S. (2016). A Study on the Effect of Consumer Innovativeness, Trust, Playfulness and TAM on Recommendation Intention of TV Cooking Show. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Graduate School of Gyeongsang National University.
  15. Crespo, A. H., Bosque, I.R., & Sanchez, M. (2009). The influence of perceived risk on Internet shopping behavior: a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Risk Research, 12(2), 259-277. DOI: 10.1080/13669870802497744
  16. Park, I. (2012).Utilization and circulation of smart phone mobile application of travel agencies through expansion of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Graduate School of Tourism, Kyung Hee University.
  17. Im, D. (2018). The impact of Service Quality on Mobile Aviation Application on Purchase Intention: Using TAM and MOBISQUAL Model. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Graduate School of Tourism, Kyung Hee University.
  18. Lee, J., Park,S., & Rha, J. (2018). The Effects of Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Enjoyment on Smartwatch Adoption and the Moderating Role of Consumer Inertia. Consumer Culture Studies, 21(2), 43-65. DOI : 10.17053/jcc.2018.21.2.003
  19. Lee, S. (2014). Impact of Consumer Innovation on Sports Wearable Computers on New Product Availability. Unpublished Master's Thesis of Graduate School, Kyung Hee University.
  20. Sharma, P., Chen, I.S., & Luk, S.T. (2012). Gender and age as moderators in the service evaluation process. Journal of Services Marketing, 26(2), 102-114. DOI: 10.1108/08876041211215266
  21. Christia, J., & Ard, A. (2016). The Influence of Demographic Characteristics on Service Quality Perceptions. Journal of Marketing Management, 4(2), 57-62. DOI: 10.15640/jmm.v4n2a5
  22. Ganesan-Lim, C., Russell-Bennett, R., & Danaher, T.S. (2008). The Impact of Service Contact Type and Demographic Characteristics on Service Quality Perceptions. Journal of Services Marketing, 22(7), 43-57. DOI: 10.1108/08876040810909677
  23. Lian, J. (2014). Online shopping drivers and barriers for older adults: Age and gender differences. Computers in Human Behavior, 37(2), 133-143. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.028
  24. Javalgi, R., Martin, C., & Todd, P. (2004). The export of e-services in the age of technology transformation: challenges and implications for international service providers. Journal of Services Marketing, 18(7), 560-573. DOI: 10.1108/08876040410561884
  25. Cacioppo, J., & Petty, R. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116
  26. Haugtvedt, C.P., & Petty, R.E. (1992) Personality and Persuasion: Need for Cognition Moderates the Persistence and Resistance of Attitude Changes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 308-319. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.63.2.308
  27. Sicilia, M., Ruiz, S. and Munuera, J.L. (2005) Effects of Interactivity in a Web Site: The Moderating Effect of Need for Cognition. Journal of Advertising, 34, 31-44. DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2005.10639202
  28. Olson, K., Camp, C., & Fuller, D. (1984). Curiosity and Need for Cognition. Psychological Reports, 54(1), 71-74. DOI: 10.2466/pr0.1984.54.1.71
  29. Fairhurst, A., Good, L.K., & Gentry, J.W. (1989), Fashion Involvement: An Instrument Validation Procedure. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 7(3),10-14. DOI: 10.1177/0887302X8900700302
  30. Tigert, D. J., Ring, L. J., & King, C. W. (1976). Fashion involvement and buying behavior: A methodological study. Advances in Consumer Research, 3(1), 46-52.
  31. Assael, H. (1998). Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action. South-Western College Pub.
  32. Tyebjee, T.T. (1979). Response Time, Conflict, and Involvement in Brand Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 6(3), 295-304. DOI: 10.1086/208770
  33. Bei, L., & Widdows, R. (2005). Product Knowledge and Product Involvement as Moderators of the Effects of Information on Purchase Decisions: A Case Study Using the Perfect Information Frontier Approach. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 33(1), 165-186. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6606.1999.tb00765.x
  34. Michaelidou, N., & Dibb, S. (2008). Consumer involvement: a new perspective. Marketing Review, 8(1), 83-99. DOI: 10.1362/146934708X290403
  35. Damkuviene, M., & Petukiene, E. (2018). Co-Creation of Public Services; Levels of Customers' Participation. Advanced Journal of Social Science, 2(1), 41-47. DOI: 10.21467/ajss.2.1.40-47
  36. Bloch, P.H. and Richins, M.L. (1983) Shopping without Purchase: An Investigation of Consumer Browsing Behavior. Advances in Consumer Research, 10, 389-393.
  37. Petty, R.E. and Cacioppo, J.T. (1986) The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion. In: Communication and Persuasion, Springer, New York, 1-24.
  38. Goldsmith, R.E., & Hofacker, C.F. (1991). Measuring consumer innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19(1), 209-221. DOI: 10.1007/BF02726497
  39. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  40. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equations with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. DOI: 10.1177/002224378101800104
  41. Wu, L.H., Wu, L.-C., & Chan, S.-C. (2016). Exploring consumers' intention to accept smartwatch. Computers in Human Behavior, 64(1), 383-392. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.005