IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-023-02575-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How deep is your trust? A comparative user requirements’ analysis of automation in medical and mobility technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Sophia Hick

    (RWTH Aachen University)

  • Hannah Biermann

    (RWTH Aachen University)

  • Martina Ziefle

    (RWTH Aachen University)

Abstract

In a changing world full of innovative technologies, trust and trust requirements are increasingly important for designing user-centred systems and ensuring their long-term implementation. In this study, we explored and compared the requirements of future users to build trust in the two contexts of medical and mobility technology by considering Ambient Assisted Living technologies (AAL) and Shared Autonomous Vehicles (SAV). We conducted an online survey study with N = 143 participants. The results show significant differences in the evaluation of individual trust requirements in the two contexts about data sharing, data privacy and security as well as customization. Using a cluster analysis, we identified distinct user groups and trust personalities in both contexts (medicine and mobility). The clusters differ in terms of innovation openness and risk readiness, initial trust, and presence of chronic illness. Correlation analyses revealed significant relationships between people’s initial perceived trust in technology in the two contexts and their assessment of trust requirements, as well as their behavioural intentions to use SAV or AAL systems. Our findings indicate that trust requirements are context-specific and influenced by individual characteristics. This knowledge can be used to inform developers and distributors of technologies to design, build, and manage systems that meet the needs of future users.

Suggested Citation

  • Sophia Hick & Hannah Biermann & Martina Ziefle, 2024. "How deep is your trust? A comparative user requirements’ analysis of automation in medical and mobility technologies," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-02575-0
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-023-02575-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-023-02575-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-023-02575-0?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. William Clayton & Daniela Paddeu & Graham Parkhurst & John Parkin, 2020. "Autonomous vehicles: who will use them, and will they share?," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 343-364, May.
    2. Georgina Santos, 2018. "Sustainability and Shared Mobility Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Calin Iclodean & Nicolae Cordos & Bogdan Ovidiu Varga, 2020. "Autonomous Shuttle Bus for Public Transportation: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-45, June.
    4. Tom Storme & Corneel Casier & Hossein Azadi & Frank Witlox, 2021. "Impact Assessments of New Mobility Services: A Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Weck, Marina & Afanassieva, Marianne, 2023. "Toward the adoption of digital assistive technology: Factors affecting older people's initial trust formation," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2).
    6. Matija Kovačić & Maja Mutavdžija & Krešimir Buntak, 2022. "New Paradigm of Sustainable Urban Mobility: Electric and Autonomous Vehicles—A Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-23, August.
    7. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    8. Sigma Dolins & Helena Strömberg & Yale Z. Wong & MariAnne Karlsson, 2021. "Sharing Anxiety Is in the Driver’s Seat: Analyzing User Acceptance of Dynamic Ridepooling and Its Implications for Shared Autonomous Mobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Saeideh Sharifi fard & Ezhar Tamam & Md Salleh Hj Hassan & Moniza Waheed & Zeinab Zaremohzzabieh, 2016. "Factors affecting Malaysian university students’ purchase intention in social networking sites," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1182612-118, December.
    2. Chou, Jui-Sheng & Gusti Ayu Novi Yutami, I, 2014. "Smart meter adoption and deployment strategy for residential buildings in Indonesia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 336-349.
    3. Philippe Cohard, 2020. "Information Systems Values: A Study of the Intranet in Three French Higher Education Institutions," Post-Print hal-02987225, HAL.
    4. Melih Engin & Fatih Gürses, 2019. "Adoption of Hospital Information Systems in Public Hospitals in Turkey: An Analysis with the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(06), pages 1-19, October.
    5. Morosan, Cristian, 2016. "An empirical examination of U.S. travelers’ intentions to use biometric e-gates in airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 120-128.
    6. Tsung Teng Chen, 2012. "The development and empirical study of a literature review aiding system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(1), pages 105-116, July.
    7. Abdesamad Zouine & Pierre Fenies, 2014. "The Critical Success Factors Of The ERP System Project: A Meta-Analysis Methodology," Post-Print hal-01419785, HAL.
    8. Debora Bettiga & Lucio Lamberti & Emanuele Lettieri, 2020. "Individuals’ adoption of smart technologies for preventive health care: a structural equation modeling approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 203-214, June.
    9. Kertcher, Zack & Venkatraman, Rohan & Coslor, Erica, 2020. "Pleasingly parallel: Early cross-disciplinary work for innovation diffusion across boundaries in grid computing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 581-594.
    10. 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).
    11. Fang Li & Sheng Zhang & Yuhuan Jin, 2018. "Sustainability of University Technology Transfer: Mediating Effect of Inventor’s Technology Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    12. Waqar Younas & K. Ramanathan Kalimuthu, 2021. "Telecom microfinance banking versus commercial banking: a battle in the financial services sector," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(2), pages 67-80, June.
    13. Sarv Devaraj & Robert F. Easley & J. Michael Crant, 2008. "Research Note ---How Does Personality Matter? Relating the Five-Factor Model to Technology Acceptance and Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 93-105, March.
    14. Claudio Vitari & Elisabetta Raguseo, 2016. "Big data value and financial performance: an empirical investigation [Digital data, dynamic capability and financial performance: an empirical investigation in the era of Big Data]," Post-Print halshs-01923271, HAL.
    15. Tammaru, Tiit & Sevtsuk, Andres & Witlox, Frank, 2023. "Towards an equity-centred model of sustainable mobility: Integrating inequality and segregation challenges in the green mobility transition," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    16. Yu Wang & Shanyong Wang & Jing Wang & Jiuchang Wei & Chenglin Wang, 2020. "An empirical study of consumers’ intention to use ride-sharing services: using an extended technology acceptance model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 397-415, February.
    17. Proserpio, Luigi & Magni, Massimo, 2012. "Teaching without the teacher? Building a learning environment through computer simulations," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 99-105.
    18. Sharma, Mahak & Antony, Rose & Sehrawat, Rajat & Cruz, Angel Contreras & Daim, Tugrul U., 2022. "Exploring post-adoption behaviors of e-service users: Evidence from the hospitality sector /online travel services," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    19. Chen-Yuan Chen & Bih-Yaw Shih & Shih-Hsien Yu, 2012. "Disaster prevention and reduction for exploring teachers’ technology acceptance using a virtual reality system and partial least squares techniques," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 62(3), pages 1217-1231, July.
    20. Paul Juinn Bing Tan, 2013. "Applying the UTAUT to Understand Factors Affecting the Use of English E-Learning Websites in Taiwan," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(4), pages 21582440135, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-02575-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    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.