Wearable Activity Trackers: A Structural Investigation into Acceptance and Goal Achievements of Generation Z

References

• Business Wire. Global wearable display market forecasts to 2024 - increasing adoption of OLED displays in smart watches drives growth. October 14, 2019. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191024005900/en/Global-Wearable-Display-Market-Forecasts-2024--. Accessed June 15, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Research and Markets. Global wearable display market projected to reach $5.44 Billion by 2024- comprehensive growth insights & opportunity analysis. September 24, 2019. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/global-wearable-display-market-projected-to-reach-5-44-billion-by-2024---comprehensive-growth-insights--opportunity-analysis-300924345.html. Accessed June 15, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Press Trust of India. India becomes third largest wearables market in the world, 3mn devices sold. https://yourstory.com/2021/03/india-wearables-market-grows-144pc-2020-third-largest-globally/amp. Published March 4, 2021. Accessed June 15, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Stein S Wearable tech at CES 2014: many, many small steps. https://www.cnet.com/news/wearable-tech-at-ces-2014-many-many-small-steps/. Published January 9, 2014. Accessed June 15, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Sawh M. The best smartglasses and AR specs 2021: snap, Amazon and more. Wareable. https://www.wareable.com/ar/the-best-smartglasses-google-glass-and-the-rest. Published 2021. Accessed June 15, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Kaewkannate K, Kim S. A comparison of wearable fitness devices. BMC Public Health. 2016;16(1):433. doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3059-0.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kerner C, Goodyear VA. The motivational impact of wearable healthy lifestyle technologies: a self-determination perspective on Fitbits with adolescents. Am J Health Educ. 2017;48(5):287–297. doi:10.1080/19325037.2017.1343161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ng K, Kokko S, Tammelin T, et al. Clusters of adolescent physical activity tracker patterns and their associations with physical activity behaviors in Finland and Ireland: cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(9):e18509. doi:10.2196/18509.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berkowsky RW, Sharit J, Czaja SJ. Factors predicting decisions about technology adoption among older adults. Innov Aging. 2017;2(1):igy002. doi:10.1093/geroni/igy002.
   Google Scholar
• Priporas C-V, Stylos N, Fotiadis AK. Generation Z consumers’ expectations of interactions in smart retailing: a future agenda. Comput Human Behav. 2017;77:374–381. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.058.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berkup SB. Working with generations X and Y in generation Z period: management of different generations in business life. Mediterr J Soc Sci. 2014;5(19):218. doi:10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n19p218.
   Google Scholar
• Desai SP, Lele V. Correlating internet, social networks and workplace-a case of generation Z students. J Commer Manag Thought. 2017;8(4):802. doi:10.5958/0976-478X.2017.00050.7.
   Google Scholar
• Kiráľová A, Hamarneh I. Marketing Challenges of Sports Tourism Development in Destinations with Focus on Generation Y and Z. International Conference on Strategic Innovative Marketing. Pafos, Cyprus: Springer; 2017:77–82.
   Google Scholar
• Goodyear VA, Kerner C, Quennerstedt M. Young people’s uses of wearable healthy lifestyle technologies; surveillance, self-surveillance and resistance. Sport Educ Soc. 2019;24(3):212–225. doi:10.1080/13573322.2017.1375907.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bencsik A, Molnar P, Juhasz T, Machova R. Relationship Between knowledge sharing willingness and life goals of generation Z. Proceedings of the European Conference on Knowledge Management. Vol 1; 2018:84–94.
   Google Scholar
• Alderson A. Sports tech: fitness trackers. Eng Technol. 2015;10(4):84–85.
   Google Scholar
• Ledger D, McCaffrey D, Endeaver Partners. Inside wearables: how the science of human behavior change offers the secret to long-term engagement. https://medium.com/@endeavourprtnrs/inside-wearable-how-the-science-of-human-behavior-change-offers-the-secret-to-long-term-engagement-a15b3c7d4cf3. Published January 2014. Accessed June 15, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Angulo G, Brogan D, Martini A, Wang J, Clevenger LA. Health features of activity trackers: motivation, goal achievement, and usability. The Conference Proceeding of the Michael L. Gargano 14th Annual Research Day (6 May 2016); 2016:A5–1.
   Google Scholar
• Rupp MA, Michaelis JR, McConnell DS, Smither JA. The role of individual differences on perceptions of wearable fitness device trust, usability, and motivational impact. Appl Ergon. 2018;70:77–87. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2018.02.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsiao K-L, Chen -C-C. What drives smartwatch purchase intention? Perspectives from hardware, software, design, and value. Telemat Inf. 2018;35(1):103–113. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.10.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson J. Apple watch becomes a study on attention. The Seattle Times. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/apple-watch-becomes-a-study-on-attention/. Published March 27, 2015. Accessed June 15, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Shin G, Jarrahi MH, Fei Y, et al. Wearable activity trackers, accuracy, adoption, acceptance and health impact: a systematic literature review. J Biomed Inform. 2019;93:103153. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinney DA, Nabors LA, Merianos AL, Vidourek RA. College students’ use and perceptions of wearable fitness trackers. Am J Heal Educ. 2019;50(5):298–307. doi:10.1080/19325037.2019.1642265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinney D. College students use and perceptions of wearable fitness trackers and mobile health apps. [Dissertation]. University of Cincinati; 2017. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=ucin1504798862580571&disposition=inline. Accessed June 15, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Feng Y, Agosto DE. From health to performance: amateur runners’ personal health information management with activity tracking technology. Aslib J Inf Manag. 2019;71(2):217–240. doi:10.1108/AJIM-07-2018-0170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brzeziński J, Gwiaździński E. Wearable Devices in digital society: recognition, use of and readiness for use by young consumers. Zesz Nauk Małopolskiej Wyższej Szk Ekon w Tarnowie. 2020;48(4):13–25.
   Google Scholar
• Cheung ML, Leung KSW, Chan HS. Driving healthcare wearable technology adoption for Generation Z consumers in Hong Kong. Young Consum. 2020:ahead-of-print(ahead–of–print). [published online]. doi:10.1108/YC-04-2020-1123.
   Google Scholar
• Pitta D, Eastman JK, Liu J. The impact of generational cohorts on status consumption: an exploratory look at generational cohort and demographics on status consumption. J Consum Mark. 2012;29(2):93–102. doi:10.1108/07363761211206348.
   Google Scholar
• Parment A. Generation Y vs. Baby boomers: shopping behavior, buyer involvement and implications for retailing. J Retail Consum Serv. 2013;20(2):189–199. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2012.12.001.
   Google Scholar
• Van den Bergh J, Behrer M. How Cool Brands Stay Hot: Branding to Generations Y and Z. London, UK: Kogan Page Publishers; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Schlossberg M. Teen Generation Z is being called ‘Millennials on Steroids,’and that could be terrifying for retailers. Business Insider. http://www.businessinsider.co.id/millennials-vs-gen-z-2016-8. Published August 5, 2016. Accessed June 15, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Ng SI, Ho JA, Lim XJ, Chong KL, Latiff K. Mirror, mirror on the wall, are we ready for Gen-Z in marketplace? A study of smart retailing technology in Malaysia. Young Consum. 2019:ahead-of-print(ahead–of–print). [published online]. doi:10.1108/YC-06-2019-1006.
   Google Scholar
• Perez-Escoda A, Castro-Zubizarreta A, Fandos-Igado M. Digital skills in the Z Generation: key questions for a curricular introduction in primary school. Comun Media Educ Res J. 2016;24(2):71–79. doi:10.3916/C49-2016-07.
   Google Scholar
• Seemiller C, Grace M. Generation Z: A Century in the Making. Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Talukder MS, Chiong R, Bao Y, Malik BH. Acceptance and use predictors of fitness wearable technology and intention to recommend. Ind Manag Data Syst. 2019;119(1):170–188. doi:10.1108/IMDS-01-2018-0009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989;13(3):319–340. doi:10.2307/249008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci. 1989;35(8):982–1003. doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Morris MG. Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Q. 2000;24(1):115–139. doi:10.2307/3250981.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing; 1977.
   Google Scholar
• Doll WJ, Hendrickson A, Deng X. Using Davis’s perceived usefulness and ease‐of‐use instruments for decision making: a confirmatory and multigroup invariance analysis. Decis Sci. 1998;29(4):839–869. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1998.tb00879.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dabholkar PA, Bagozzi RP. An attitudinal model of technology-based self-service: moderating effects of consumer traits and situational factors. J Acad Mark Sci. 2002;30(3):184–201. doi:10.1177/0092070302303001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marangunić N, Granić A. Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Univers Access Inf Soc. 2015;14(1):81–95. doi:10.1007/s10209-014-0348-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman P, Smith L. The theory of planned behaviour and exercise: an investigation into the role of prior behaviour, behavioural intentions and attitude variability. Eur J Soc Psychol. 1995;25(4):403–415. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420250405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunney A, Cunningham NR, Eastin MS. Wearable fitness technology: a structural investigation into acceptance and perceived fitness outcomes. Comput Human Behav. 2016;65:114–120. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta N, Fischer ARH, Frewer LJ. Socio-psychological determinants of public acceptance of technologies: a review. Public Underst Sci. 2012;21(7):782–795. doi:10.1177/0963662510392485.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ames C. Classrooms: goals, structures, and student motivation. J Educ Psychol. 1992;84(3):261–271. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicholls JG. The Competitive Ethos and Democratic Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Standage M, Duda JL, Ntoumanis N. A model of contextual motivation in physical education: using constructs from self-determination and achievement goal theories to predict physical activity intentions. J Educ Psychol. 2003;95(1):97–110. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts GC, Treasure DC, Conroy DE. Understanding the dynamics of motivation in sport and physical activity: an achievement goal interpretation. In: Tenenbaum G, Eklund RC, eds.. Handbook of Sport Psychology. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2007:1–30.
   Google Scholar
• Meece JL, Anderman EM, Anderman LH. Classroom goal structure, student motivation, and academic achievement. Annu Rev Psychol. 2006;57:487–503. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maehr ML, Zusho A. Achievement goal theory: the past, present, and future. In: Wenzel KR, Wigfield A, eds.. Handbook of Motivation at School. Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge; 2009:77–104.
   Google Scholar
• Rockmann R, Gewald H. Individual fitness app use: the role of goal orientations and motivational affordances. Poster presented at: Americas Conference on Information Systems; August 15–17, 2019; Cancun, MX.
   Google Scholar
• Wang J, Coleman DC, Kanter J, Ummer B, Siminerio L. Connecting smartphone and wearable fitness tracker data with a nationally used electronic health record system for diabetes education to facilitate behavioral goal monitoring in diabetes care: protocol for a pragmatic multi-site randomized trial. JMIR Res Protoc. 2018;7(4):e10009. doi:10.2196/10009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rieder A, Lehrer C, Jung R. Understanding the habitual use of wearable activity trackers. Poster presented at: 14th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik; February 24–27, 2019; Siegen, DE.
   Google Scholar
• Arigo D. Promoting physical activity among women using wearable technology and online social connectivity: a feasibility study. Heal Psychol Behav Med. 2015;3(1):391–409. doi:10.1080/21642850.2015.1118350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb TL, Sheeran P. Integrating concepts from goal theories to understand the achievement of personal goals. Eur J Soc Psychol. 2005;35(1):69–96. doi:10.1002/ejsp.233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant H, Dweck CS. Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;85(3):541–553. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harackiewicz JM, Barron KE, Tauer JM, Carter SM, Elliot AJ. Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals: predicting interest and performance over time. J Educ Psychol. 2000;92(2):316–330. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poortvliet PM, Darnon C. Toward a more social understanding of achievement goals: the interpersonal effects of mastery and performance goals. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2010;19(5):324–328. doi:10.1177/0963721410383246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lintunen T, Valkonen A, Leskinen E, Biddle SJH. Predicting physical activity intentions using a goal perspectives approach: a study of Finnish youth. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 1999;9(6):344–352. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.1999.tb00255.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li W, Shen B, Rukavina PB, Sun H. Effect of perceived sport competence on intentions to exercise among adolescents: mediating or moderating? J Sport Behav. 2011;34:160–174.
   Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci. 2000;46(2):186–204. doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In: Kuhl J, Beckmann J, eds.. Action Control. Berlin, GA: Springer; 1985:11–39.
   Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003;27(3):425–478. doi:10.2307/30036540.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aydin G, Burnaz S. Adoption of mobile payment systems: a study on mobile wallets. J Bus Econ Financ. 2016;5(1):73–92.
   Google Scholar
• Zhu Y, Dailey SL, Kreitzberg D, Bernhardt J. “Social networkout”: connecting social features of wearable fitness trackers with physical exercise. J Health Commun. 2017;22(12):974–980. doi:10.1080/10810730.2017.1382617.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muller C. Generation Y students’ attitude towards and intention to use activity-tracking devices [dissertation]. Vanderbijlpark Campus, South Africa: North-West University, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Webster J, Trevino LK. Rational and social theories as complementary explanations of communication media choices: two policy-capturing studies. Acad Manag J. 1995;38(6):1544–1572.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schepers J, Wetzels M. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Inf Manag. 2007;44(1):90–103. doi:10.1016/j.im.2006.10.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeong J-Y, Roh T-W. The intention of using wearable devices: based on modified technology acceptance model. J Digit Converg. 2017;15(4):205–212. doi:10.14400/JDC.2017.15.4.205.
   Google Scholar
• Gefen D, Karahanna E, Straub DW. Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. MIS Q. 2003;27(1):51–90. doi:10.2307/30036519.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Legris P, Ingham J, Collerette P. Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Inf Manag. 2003;40(3):191–204. doi:10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00143-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rockmann R, Maier C. On the fit in fitness Apps: studying the interaction of motivational affordances and users’ goal orientations in affecting the benefits gained. Poster presented at: 14th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik; February 24–27, 2019; Siegen, DE.
   Google Scholar
• Murayama K, Elliot AJ. The joint influence of personal achievement goals and classroom goal structures on achievement-relevant outcomes. J Educ Psychol. 2009;101(2):432–447. doi:10.1037/a0014221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rockmann R, Gewald H. Activity tracking affordances: identification and instrument development. Poster presented at: The 22nd Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems Conference; June 26–30, 2018; Yokohama, Japan.
   Google Scholar
• Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. Int J Man Mach Stud. 1993;38(3):475–487. doi:10.1006/imms.1993.1022.
   Google Scholar
• Conroy DE, Elliot AJ, Hofer SM. A 2× 2 achievement goals questionnaire for sport: evidence for factorial invariance, temporal stability, and external validity. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2003;25(4):456–476. doi:10.1123/jsep.25.4.456.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elliot AJ, McGregor HA. A 2× 2 achievement goal framework. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001;80(3):501–519. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.3.501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bentler PM. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull. 1990;107(2):238–246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bentler PM, Bonett DG. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull. 1980;88(3):588–606. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hair JF Jr., Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis. 8th ed. Andover, UK: Cengage Learning; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Aiken LS, West SG, Reno RR. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Shin DH. User acceptance of mobile Internet: implication for convergence technologies. Interact Comput. 2007;19(4):472–483. doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2007.04.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim KJ, Shin D-H. An acceptance model for smart watches: implications for the adoption of future wearable technology. Internet Res. 2015;25(4):527–541. doi:10.1108/IntR-05-2014-0126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilhan A, Henkel M. 10,000 steps a day for health? User-based evaluation of wearable activity trackers. Poster presentated at: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences; January 2–6, 2018; Big Island, Hawaii.
   Google Scholar