Smart Home Technologies: Insights into Generation-Specific Acceptance Motives

In this research we examine the generation specific acceptance motives of eHealth technologies in order to assess the likelihood of success for these new technologies. 280 participants (14 - 92 years of age) volunteered to participate in a survey, in which using motives and barriers toward smart home technologies were explored. The scenario envisaged was the use of a medical stent implemented into the body, which monitors automatically the health status and which is able to remotely communicate with the doctor. Participants were asked to evaluate the pros and cons of the usage of this technology, their acceptance motives and potential utilization barriers. In order to understand the complex nature of acceptance, personal variables (age, technical expertise, health status), individual's cognitive concepts toward ageing as well as perceived usefulness were related. Outcomes show that trust, believe in the reliability of technology, privacy and security as well as intimacy facets are essential for acceptance and should be considered in order to proactively design a successful rollout of smart home technologies.

[1]  Adelina Comas-Herrera,et al.  Future demand for long-term care in the UK. A summary of projections of long-term care finance for older people to 2051 , 2004 .

[2]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  Transgenerational Designs in Mobile Technology , 2008 .

[3]  Hans-Werner Wahl,et al.  Aging independently : living arrangements and mobility , 2003 .

[4]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[5]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test† , 1996 .

[6]  Jean Claude Marquié,et al.  Do older adults underestimate their actual computer knowledge? , 2002, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[7]  Christopher B. Mayhorn,et al.  A Survey of World Wide Web Use in Middle-Aged and Older Adults , 2000, Hum. Factors.

[8]  Steffen Leonhardt,et al.  Personal Healthcare Devices , 2006 .

[9]  W. Rogers,et al.  The Use of Communication Technologies by Older Adults: Exploring the Benefits from the User's Perspective , 2001 .

[10]  Arthur D. Fisk,et al.  Aware technologies for aging in place: understanding user needs and attitudes , 2004, IEEE Pervasive Computing.

[11]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  How younger and older adults master the usage of hyperlinks in small screen devices , 2007, CHI.

[12]  Adelina Comas-Herrera,et al.  Future demand for long-term care, 2002 to 2041: Projections of demand for older people in England , 2006 .

[13]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  How older adults meet complexity: Aging effects on the usability of different mobile phones , 2005, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[14]  Steve J. Westerman,et al.  Individual Differences in the Use of Command Line and Menu Computer Interfaces , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[15]  A. D. Fisk,et al.  Human factors considerations in implementing telemedicine systems to accommodate older adults , 2007, Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare.

[16]  M. Skubic,et al.  Senior residents’ perceived need of and preferences for “smart home” sensor technologies , 2008, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[17]  Michael Weiner,et al.  Using Information Technology To Improve the Health Care of Older Adults , 2003, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[18]  C. Stephanidis,et al.  Universal Access in Ambient Intelligence Environments , 2008 .

[19]  R C Williges,et al.  Assaying and Isolating Individual Differences in Searching a Hierarchical File System , 1987, Human factors.

[20]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies , 2000, Management Science.

[21]  A. Lymberis,et al.  Smart wearable systems for personalised health management: current R&D and future challenges , 2003, Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37439).

[22]  Linda Little,et al.  E-health , 2008, BCS HCI.

[23]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  Different Perspectives on Technology Acceptance: The Role of Technology Type and Age , 2009, USAB.

[24]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[25]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  How to Overcome Disorientation in Mobile Phone Menus: A Comparison of Two Different Types of Navigation Aids , 2006, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[26]  N. Chappell,et al.  Receptivity to new technology among older adults. , 1999, Disability and rehabilitation.

[27]  Joseph Tan.  Healthcare Information Systems and Informatics: Research and Practices , 2008 .

[28]  D. Bouwhuis,et al.  Older adults' motivated choice for technological innovation: evidence for benefit-driven selectivity. , 2006, Psychology and aging.

[29]  S Meyer,et al.  HOME TECHNOLOGY, SMART HOMES, AND THE AGING USER. IN: AGING INDEPENDENTLY. LIVING ARRANGEMENTS AND MOBILITY , 2003 .

[30]  P Starr,et al.  Smart technology, stunted policy: developing health information networks. , 1997, Health affairs.

[31]  R. L. Craft,et al.  Designing smart health care technology into the home of the future , 1999, Proceedings of the First Joint BMES/EMBS Conference. 1999 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 21st Annual Conference and the 1999 Annual Fall Meeting of the Biomedical Engineering Society (Cat. N.

[32]  H. Mollenkopf,et al.  Alter und Technik , 2001 .

[33]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  Barriers of Information Access in Small Screen Device Applications: The Relevance of User Characteristics for a Transgenerational Design , 2006, Universal Access in Ambient Intelligence Environments.

[34]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  Understanding age differences in PDA acceptance and performance , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..