Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design (대한건축학회논문집:계획계)

Architectural Institute of Korea (대한건축학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Users' Preference and Acceptance of Smart Home Technologies

사용자의 스마트 주거 기술 선호와 수용에 관한 연구

  • Received : 2018.08.27
  • Accepted : 2018.11.11
  • Published : 2018.11.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study analyzed users' acceptance and intention to use in addition to needs and preferences of smart home technologies, and identified the differences in technology preference and acceptance by different factors. The subjects were residents in the 40s and 60s residing in the Seoul or suburbs of Seoul, and questionnaires were conducted in the 40s while interviews with questionnaires were conducted in the 60s. A total of 105 questionnaires were used as data, and frequency, mean, crossover, independent sample t test, one-way ANOVA and multiple regression analysis were performaed using SPSS23. The results of this study are as follows. First, hypertension, hyperlipidemia and hypercholesterolemia were the most common diseases among respondents and if there was no discomfort, they would like to continue living in the homes of the current residence. Therefore, the direction of smart home development should support the daily living and health care so that residents can live a healthy life for a long time in their living space. Second, the technologies that residents most need were a control technology of residential environments and a monitoring technology of residents' health and physiological changes. The most preferred sensor types are motion sensors and speech recognition while video cameras have a very low preference. Third, technology anxiety was the most significant factor influencing intention to accept smart home technology. The greater the technology anxiety is, the weaker the acceptance of technology. Fourth, when applying smart residential technology in homes, various resident characteristics should be considered. Age and technology intimacy were the most influential variables, and accordingly there were differences in technology preference and acceptance. Therefore, a user-friendly smart home plan should be done in the consideration of the results.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국연구재단

References

  1. Bensink, M., Hailey, D., & Wootton, R. (2006). A systematic review of successes and failures in home telehealth: preliminary results. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 12(7), 8-16. https://doi.org/10.1258/135763306779380174
  2. Cimperman, M., Brencic, M. M., & Trkman, P. (2016). Analyzing older users' home telehealth services acceptance behavior-applying an extended UTAUT medel, International Journal of Medical Informatics, 90, 22-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.03.002
  3. Cook, D., & Das, S.K. (2005). Smart Environments, John Wiley Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jerse.
  4. Courtney, K.L. (2008). Privacy and senior willingness to adopt smart home information technology in residential care facilities, Methods of Information in Medicine, 47(1), 76-81. https://doi.org/10.3414/ME9104
  5. Davis, L.D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1002. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
  6. Harper, R. (2003). Inside the Smart Home, Springer.
  7. Holden, R.J., & Karsh, B.-T. (2010). Methodological review: the technology acceptancemodel: its past and its future in health care, Journal of the Biomedical Information, 43(1), 159-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2009.07.002
  8. Hudson, D.L., & Cohen, M.E. (2003). The role of information technology in disease management, 4th Annual IEEE Conference on Information Technology Applications in Biomedicine, 169-172.
  9. Hudson, D.L., Brent Hamar, G., Orr, P.M., Johnson, J.H., Neftzger, A., Chung, R.S., Williams, M.L., Gandy, W.M., Crawford, A., Clarke, J.L., & Goldfarb, N.I. (2005). Remote physiological monitoring: clinical, financial, and behavioral outcomes in a heart failure population, Disease Management, 8(6), 372-381. https://doi.org/10.1089/dis.2005.8.372
  10. Jung, J., Huh, J., Park, H., & Shin, B. (2018). Acceptance Factors and Market Segmentation of Smart Devices: Focusing on UTAUT and Personal Innovation, Korean Journal of Business Administration, 31(1), 27-47. https://doi.org/10.18032/kaaba.2018.31.1.27
  11. Koch, S. (2006). Meeting the challenges-the role of medical informatics in an ageing society, Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 124, 25-31.
  12. Kim, D., Shin, H., & Ryu, H. (2012). The preference of healthcare smart home system. Journal of the Korean Architectural Institute, 28(5), 25-52.
  13. Mann, W. C., Marchant, T., Tomita, M., Fraas, L., & Stanton, K. (2002). Elder acceptance of health monitoring devices in the home, Care Management Journals, 3(2), 91-98. https://doi.org/10.1891/1521-0987.3.2.91
  14. Mihailidis, A., Cockburn, A., Longley, C., & Boger, J. (2008). The Acceptability of Home Monitoring Technology Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults and Baby Boomers, Journal of Assistive Technology, 20(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2008.10131927
  15. Moeckli, J., Cram, P., Cunningham, C., & Reisinger, H. S. (2013). Staff acceptance of a telemedicine intensive care unit program: A qualitative study, Journal of Critical Care, 28(6), 890-901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2013.05.008
  16. Orr, P.M., McGinnis, M.A., Hudson, L.R., Coberley, S.S., Crawford, A., Clarke, J.L. & Goldfarb N.I. (2006). A focused telephonic nursing intervention delivers improved adherence to A1 testing, Disease Management, 9(5), 277-283. https://doi.org/10.1089/dis.2006.9.277
  17. Ricqueboug, V., Menga, D., Durand, D., Marhic, B, Delahoche, L., & Loge, C. (2006). The Smart Home Concept : Our Immediate Future, 1st IEEE International Conference on E-Learning in Industrial Electronics, 23-28.
  18. Peek, S.T.M., Woutersa, E.J.M., Hoofc, J.V., Luijkxb, K.G., Boeijed, H.R., & Vrijhoefb, H.J.M (2014). Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: A systematice review, International Journal of Medical Informatics, 83, 235-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.004
  19. Pew, R.W., & Van Hemel, S.B. (2004). Technology for adaptive aging, Steering Committee for the Workshop on Technology for Adaptive Aging, National Research Council.
  20. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  21. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y.L., Chan, F.K.Y., Hu, P.J.-H., & Brown, S.A. (2011). Extending thetwo-stage information systems continuance model: incorporating UTAUT predictors and the role of context, Information System Journal, 21(6), 527-555. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2011.00373.x