What makes Jordanian residents buy smart home devices?

Purpose Smart homes are recent Internet of Things applications that aim to improve residents’ quality of life. Despite its potential, the adoption of smart homes, in general, and its devices and appliances, in specific, is not reaching a mass market yet. This study aims to investigate the factors that influence residents’ intention to buy smart homes devices in Jordan. Design/methodology/approach This paper proposes a novel model to study users’ intention to buy smart homes devices by following a quantitative method. Responses were collected and statistically analyzed from 375 households using structural equation modeling. Findings Results show that user awareness, perceived cost, perceived enjoyment, personalization, user trust and social influences significantly influence the intention to buy smart home devices. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first study attempts to predict intention to buy smart home devices in Jordan. The findings provide meaningful implications for smart home devices providers.

[1]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[2]  Antonio Iera,et al.  The Internet of Things: A survey , 2010, Comput. Networks.

[3]  Dong-Hee Shin,et al.  An acceptance model for smart watches: Implications for the adoption of future wearable technology , 2015, Internet Res..

[4]  Jiyun Kang,et al.  A model of sustainable household technology acceptance , 2016 .

[5]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Do I Trust You Online, and If So, Will I Buy? An Empirical Study of Two Trust-Building Strategies , 2006, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[6]  Dharma P. Agrawal,et al.  Choices for interaction with things on Internet and underlying issues , 2015, Ad Hoc Networks.

[7]  Marshall Scott Poole,et al.  What Is Personalization? Perspectives on the Design and Implementation of Personalization in Information Systems , 2006, J. Organ. Comput. Electron. Commer..

[8]  Dale Goodhue,et al.  Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance , 1995, MIS Q..

[9]  Li-Chen Fu,et al.  Service-Oriented Smart-Home Architecture Based on OSGi and Mobile-Agent Technology , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

[10]  Dong Hee Shin,et al.  User acceptance of mobile Internet: Implication for convergence technologies , 2007, Interact. Comput..

[11]  W. Neuman,et al.  Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches , 2002 .

[12]  John A. Campbell,et al.  Communicative Practices in Online Communication: A Case of Agreeing to Disagree , 2006, J. Organ. Comput. Electron. Commer..

[13]  Debbie A. Niemeier,et al.  Advantages and disadvantages : longitudinal vs. repeated cross-section surveys , 1996 .

[14]  Peter Mayer,et al.  User Acceptance of 'Smart Products': An Empirical Investigation , 2011, Wirtschaftsinformatik.

[15]  L. Whitmarsh,et al.  Social barriers to the adoption of smart homes , 2013 .

[16]  Jinyoung Han,et al.  Comprehensive Approaches to User Acceptance of Internet of Things in a Smart Home Environment , 2017, IEEE Internet of Things Journal.

[17]  Tainyi (Ted) Luor,et al.  Exploring the critical quality attributes and models of smart homes. , 2015, Maturitas.

[18]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[19]  Bushra Alolayan,et al.  Do I Really Have to Accept Smart Fridges? An empirical study , 2014, ACHI 2014.

[20]  A. Twycross.  Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches Creswell John W Sage 320 £29 0761924426 0761924426 [Formula: see text]. , 2004, Nurse researcher.

[21]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  A Practical Guide To Factorial Validity Using PLS-Graph: Tutorial And Annotated Example , 2005, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[22]  Charlie Wilson,et al.  Smart homes and their users: a systematic analysis and key challenges , 2014, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[23]  Glyn Lawson,et al.  Exploring Acceptance and Consequences of the Internet of Things in the Home , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Green Computing and Communications.

[24]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Effects of Personalizaion and Familiarity on Trust and Adoption of Recommendation Agents , 2006, MIS Q..

[25]  Seong-Taek Park,et al.  A Study on Factors Affecting the Adoption of LTE Mobile Communication Service: The Case of South Korea , 2016, Wirel. Pers. Commun..

[26]  Pere Ponsa,et al.  A human–computer interaction approach for healthcare , 2016, Universal Access in the Information Society.

[27]  Hangjung Zo,et al.  User acceptance of smart home services: an extension of the theory of planned behavior , 2017, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

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

[29]  Lingling Gao,et al.  A unified perspective on the factors influencing consumer acceptance of internet of things technology , 2014 .

[30]  Dong-Hee Shin,et al.  What makes consumers use VoIP over mobile phones? Free riding or consumerization of new service , 2012 .

[31]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[32]  Nazmiye Balta-Ozkan,et al.  A comparison of consumer perceptions towards smart homes in the UK, Germany and Italy: reflections for policy and future research , 2014, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[33]  Mohsen Guizani,et al.  Internet of Things: A Survey on Enabling Technologies, Protocols, and Applications , 2015, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials.