IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v187y2023ics0040162522007715.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How do care service managers and workers perceive care robot adoption in elderly care facilities?

Author

Listed:
  • Na, Eunkyung
  • Jung, Yoonhyuk
  • Kim, Seongcheol

Abstract

Amid growing social interest and investment in the implementation of robots throughout the elderly care system, the benefits and challenges faced by care facility personnel have also gathered attention. This study investigates the social representations of care robots held by two groups – care service managers and care workers – who play critical roles in organizational adoption within care facilities. The social representation model assumed in this paper is particularly well-suited to help understand the perceptions and attitudes of different stakeholders toward care robots. We conducted 25 face-to-face interviews with 12 care service managers and 13 care workers in Korean care facilities, and identified 18 topics as elements of social representation. Core-periphery analysis revealed an apparent contrast between the two groups in their fundamental elements and structures: namely, the dominant social representation of care service managers was negative; that of care workers was positive. The difference in roles and responsibilities between the two groups yielded contrasting perceptions and attitudes toward care robots. The potential implications for the government and the industry are presented alongside an interpretation of the results.

Suggested Citation

  • Na, Eunkyung & Jung, Yoonhyuk & Kim, Seongcheol, 2023. "How do care service managers and workers perceive care robot adoption in elderly care facilities?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:187:y:2023:i:c:s0040162522007715
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122250
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162522007715
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122250?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lolich, Luciana & Riccò, Isabella & Deusdad, Blanca & Timonen, Virpi, 2019. "Embracing technology? Health and Social Care professionals' attitudes to the deployment of e-Health initiatives in elder care services in Catalonia and Ireland," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 63-71.
    2. Lucy Kok & Caroline Berden & Klarita Sadiraj, 2015. "Costs and benefits of home care for the elderly versus residential care: a comparison using propensity scores," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(2), pages 119-131, March.
    3. Talukder, Md. Shamim & Sorwar, Golam & Bao, Yukun & Ahmed, Jashim Uddin & Palash, Md. Abu Saeed, 2020. "Predicting antecedents of wearable healthcare technology acceptance by elderly: A combined SEM-Neural Network approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    4. Kose, Toshihiro & Sakata, Ichiro, 2019. "Identifying technology convergence in the field of robotics research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 751-766.
    5. Gremler, Dwayne D. & Gwinner, Kevin P., 2008. "Rapport-Building Behaviors Used by Retail Employees," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 308-324.
    6. Francisco Leiva & Francisco Ríos & Teodoro Martínez, 2006. "Assessment of Interjudge Reliability in the Open-Ended Questions Coding Process," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 519-537, August.
    7. Ronald T. Cenfetelli & Andrew Schwarz, 2011. "Identifying and Testing the Inhibitors of Technology Usage Intentions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 808-823, December.
    8. Si Ying Tan & Araz Taeihagh, 2021. "Governing the adoption of robotics and autonomous systems in long-term care in Singapore [Scoping review on the use of socially assistive robot technology in elderly care]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(2), pages 211-231.
    9. Maïté Brunel & Céline Launay & Valérie Le Floch & Jacques Py & Nadine Cascino & Méliné Zorapapillan & Gregory Lo Monaco, 2018. "Is the social representation of nanotechnology anchored in that of GMOs?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(10), pages 1248-1263, October.
    10. Goeldner, Moritz & Herstatt, Cornelius & Tietze, Frank, 2015. "The emergence of care robotics — A patent and publication analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 115-131.
    11. Anol Bhattacherjee & Neset Hikmet, 2007. "Physicians' resistance toward healthcare information technology: a theoretical model and empirical test," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(6), pages 725-737, December.
    12. Suzanne D Pawlowski & Evgeny A Kaganer & John J Cater, 2007. "Focusing the research agenda on burnout in IT: social representations of burnout in the profession," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(5), pages 612-627, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fink, Matthias & Maresch, Daniela & Gartner, Johannes, 2023. "Programmed to do good: The categorical imperative as a key to moral behavior of social robots," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    2. Yao, Qi & Hu, Chao & Zhou, Wenkai, 2024. "The impact of customer privacy concerns on service robot adoption intentions: A credence/experience service typology perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    3. Lim, Chulmin & Rowsell, Joe & Kim, Seongcheol, 2024. "Exploring killer domains to create new value: A comparative case study of Canadian and Korean telcos," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4).
    4. Dang, Ngoc Bich & Bertrandias, Laurent, 2023. "Social robots as healing aids: How and why powerlessness influences the intention to adopt social robots," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    5. Jeong-Bae Ko & Yong-Ku Kong & Kyeong-Hee Choi & Chang-Ki Lee & Hyun-Ji Keum & Jae-Soo Hong & Byeong-Hee Won, 2023. "Comparison of the Physical Care Burden on Formal Caregivers between Manual Human Care Using a Paper Diaper and Robot-Aided Care in Excretion Care," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-17, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frishammar, Johan & Essén, Anna & Bergström, Frida & Ekman, Tilda, 2023. "Digital health platforms for the elderly? Key adoption and usage barriers and ways to address them," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    2. Bakx, Pieter & Wouterse, Bram & van Doorslaer, Eddy & Wong, Albert, 2020. "Better off at home? Effects of nursing home eligibility on costs, hospitalizations and survival," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Arfi, Wissal Ben & Nasr, Imed Ben & Kondrateva, Galina & Hikkerova, Lubica, 2021. "The role of trust in intention to use the IoT in eHealth: Application of the modified UTAUT in a consumer context," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    4. Turel, Ofir & Connelly, Catherine E., 2013. "Too busy to help: Antecedents and outcomes of interactional justice in web-based service encounters," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 674-683.
    5. Sami S. Binyamin & Md. Rakibul Hoque, 2020. "Understanding the Drivers of Wearable Health Monitoring Technology: An Extension of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-20, November.
    6. Hajiheydari, Nastaran & Delgosha, Mohammad Soltani & Olya, Hossein, 2021. "Scepticism and resistance to IoMT in healthcare: Application of behavioural reasoning theory with configurational perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    7. Yi Sun & Shihui Li & Lingling Yu, 2022. "The dark sides of AI personal assistant: effects of service failure on user continuance intention," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 17-39, March.
    8. Lee, Chien-Chiang & Qin, Shuai & Li, Yaya, 2022. "Does industrial robot application promote green technology innovation in the manufacturing industry?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    9. Dant, Rajiv P. & Brown, James R., 2008. "Bridging the B2C and B2B Research Divide: The Domain of Retailing Literature," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 84(4), pages 371-397.
    10. Chiang, Ai-Hsuan & Trimi, Silvana & Lo, Yu-Ju, 2022. "Emotion and service quality of anthropomorphic robots," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    11. Islam, A.K.M. Najmul & Laato, Samuli & Talukder, Shamim & Sutinen, Erkki, 2020. "Misinformation sharing and social media fatigue during COVID-19: An affordance and cognitive load perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    12. Maaike Diepstraten & Rudy Douven & Bram Wouterse, 2019. "Can your house keep you out of a nursing home?," CPB Discussion Paper 397, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    13. Karen Bell & Eldin Fahmy & David Gordon, 2016. "Quantitative conversations: the importance of developing rapport in standardised interviewing," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 193-212, January.
    14. Panigrahi, Ritanjali & Srivastava, Praveen Ranjan & Sharma, Dheeraj, 2018. "Online learning: Adoption, continuance, and learning outcome—A review of literature," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 1-14.
    15. Maaike Diepstraten & Rudy Douven & Bram Wouterse, 2019. "Can your house keep you out of a nursing home?," CPB Discussion Paper 397.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    16. Lee, Na Young & Noble, Stephanie M. & Zablah, Alex R., 2020. "So distant, yet useful: The impact of distal stories on customers’ service expectations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 230-242.
    17. Christian Maier & Sven Laumer & Jason Bennett Thatcher & Jakob Wirth & Tim Weitzel, 2022. "Trial-Period Technostress: A Conceptual Definition and Mixed-Methods Investigation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 489-514, June.
    18. Ding, Bin & Li, Yameng & Miah, Shah & Liu, Wei, 2024. "Customer acceptance of frontline social robots—Human-robot interaction as boundary condition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    19. Judith Bom & Pieter Bakx & Sara Rellstab, 2022. "Well‐being right before and after a permanent nursing home admission," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(12), pages 2558-2574, December.
    20. Park, Mingyu & Geum, Youngjung, 2022. "Two-stage technology opportunity discovery for firm-level decision making: GCN-based link-prediction approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:187:y:2023:i:c:s0040162522007715. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.