The Impact of Technological Trust and Self-Determined Motivation on Intentions to use Wearable Fitness Technology

Abstract

Exercise has many health benefits, however, not enough Americans engage in physical activity which may be due to a lack of motivation and knowledge of how to do so. Wearable technologies, such as fitness trackers, can ameliorate this pervasive problem. The aim of this study was to examine trust and motivation as predictors of fitness tracker usage across several devices. Moreover, we developed trust and motivation scales specific to wearable fitness devices to determine the extent to which these factors may relate to individuals’ desire for continued use. A Confirmatory factor analysis and Structural equation model analysis was conducted on the data. Our results indicated that: 1) both technological trust and self-determined motivation are significantly related to each other and 2) both users’ perceived trust and motivation of the device are predictive of individuals' desire for continued use of wearable fitness devices. Therefore, considerations of how the technology can be transparent to the user and provide motivational support are important design considerations.

References

Centers for Disease Control - National Center for Health Statistics (2013). Health, United States, 2013 with Special Feature on Perception Drugs. Hyattsville, MD. 2014 Library of Congress Catalog Number 76641496.

Chen

J. Y.

Procci

Boyce

Wright

Garcia

Barnes

(2014). Situation Awareness-Based Agent Transparency (No. ARL-TR-6905).Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: US. Army Research Labor-atory.

Culmer

(2012). I.T. changes: An exploration of the relationship between motivation, trust, and resistance to change in information technology (PhD Thesis). University of Iowa, United States.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. Handbook of self-determination research, 3-33.

Fitbit Official Site for Activity Trackers & More. (n.d.). Retrieved November 10, 2015, from https://www.fitbit.com/

Frederick

C. M.

Ryan

R. M.

(1993). Differences in motivation for sport and exercise and their relations with participation and mental health. Journal of sport behavior, 16(3), 124-146.

Hancock

P. A.

Billings

D. R.

Schaefer

K. E.

Chen

J. Y.

De Visser

E. J.

Parasuraman

(2011). A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 53(5), 517-527.

Agu

Strong

Tulu

Pedersen

(2013, September). Characterizing the Performance and Behaviors of Runners Using Twitter. In Healthcare Informatics (ICHI), 2013 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 406-414). IEEE.

10.

Hoff

K. A.

Bashir

(2015). Trust in automation integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57(3), 407-434.

11.

Hollis

J. F.

Gullion

C. M.

Stevens

V. J.

Brantley

P. J.

Appel

L. J.

Ard

J. D.

... Svetkey

L. P.

(2008). Weight loss during the intensive intervention phase of the weight-loss maintenance trial. American journal of preventive medicine, 35(2), 118-126.

12.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.

13.

Jian

J. Y.

Bisantz

A. M.

Drury

C. G.

(2000). Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(1), 53-71.

14.

Ledger

McCaffrey

(2014). Inside Wearables. How the Science of Human Behavior Change Offers the Secret to Long-term Engagement. Retrieved March 25, 2015, from http://endeavourpartners.net/assets/Endeavour-Partners-Wearables-and-the-Science-of-Human-Behavior-Change-Part-1-January-20141.pdf

15.

Lee

Hwang

(2015). Relating motivation to information and communication technology acceptance: Self-determination theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 418-428.

16.

Lee

J. D.

See

K. A.

(2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 46(1), 50-80.

17.

Losier

G. F.

Bourque

P. E.

Vallerand

R. J.

(1993). A motivational model of leisure participation in the elderly. The Journal of psychology,127(2), 153-170.

18.

Mackinlay

M. Z.

(2013). Phases of Accuracy Diagnosis: (In) visibility of System Status in the Fitbit. Intersect: The Stanford Journal of Science, Technology and Society, 6(2).

19.

Madsen

Gregor

(2000, December). Measuring human-computer trust. In 11th Australasian conference on information systems (Vol. 53, pp. 6-8).

20.

Mcknight

D. H.

Carter

Thatcher

J. B.

Clay

P. F.

(2011). Trust in a specific technology: An investigation of its components and measures. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS), 2(2), 12.

21.

Mekky

(2014, April). Wearable Computing and the Hype of Tracking Personal Activity. Paper Presented at the Royal Institute of Technology’s Student Interaction Design Research conference (SIDeR) Stockholm, Sweden (1-4).

22.

Merritt

S. M.

(2011). Affective Processes in Human–Automation Interactions. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 53(4), 356-370.

23.

Meyer

Fortmann

Wasmann

Heuten

(2015, January). Making lifelogging usable: Design guidelines for activity trackers. In Multimedia Modeling (pp. 323-334). Springer International Publishing.

24.

Michaelis

J.R.

Rupp

M.A.

Kozachuk

Zapata-Ocampo

McConnell

D.S.

Smither

J.A.

(2016, September). Describing the User Experience of Wearable Fitness Technology through Online Product Reviews. In Proceedings of the 2016 annual meeting of the International Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Washington, D.C.

25.

Microsoft Band. (n.d.). Retrieved November 7, 2015, from https://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-band/en-us

26.

Morgan-Thomas

Veloutsou

(2013). Beyond technology acceptance: Brand relationships and online brand experience. Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 21-27.

27.

National Center for Health Statistics (2014). Health, United States, 2013: With special feature on prescription drugs (DHHS Publication No. 2014-1232). Hyattsville, MD.

28.

Oreg

(2006). Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(1), 73-101.

29.

Parasuraman

Riley

(1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 39(2), 230-253.

30.

Przybylski

A. K.

Deci

E. L.

Rigby

C. S.

Ryan

R. M.

(2014). Competence impeding electronic games and players’ aggressive feelings, thoughts, and behaviors. Journal of personality and social psychology, 106 (3), 441.

31.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 54-67.

32.

Sherwood

N. E.

Jeffery

R. W.

(2000). The behavioral determinants of exercise: implications for physical activity interventions. Annual review of nutrition, 20(1), 21-44.

33.

Spain

R. D.

Bustamante

E. A.

Bliss

J. P.

(2008, September). Towards an empirically developed scale for system trust: Take two. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 52, No. 19, pp. 1335-1339). SAGE Publications.

34.

Strath

S. J.

Swartz

A. M.

Parker

S. J.

Miller

N. E.

Grimm

E. K.

Cashin

S. E.

(2011). A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Motivationally Matched Pedometer Feedback to Increase Physical Activity Behavior in Older Adults. Journal of Physical Activity & Health, 8, 267-S274.

35.

Selkowitz

A.R.

Larios

C.A.

Lakhmani

S.G.

Chen

J.Y.C.

(2016, July). Displaying information to support transparency for autonomous platforms. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, Orlando, FL.

36.

Szalma

J. L.

(2014). On the Application of Motivation Theory to Human Factors/Ergonomics Motivational Design Principles for Human–Technology Interaction. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 56(8), 1453-1471.

37.

Venkatesh

Davis

F. D.

(2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management science, 46(2), 186-204.

38.

Vicente

K. J.

Rasmussen

(1990). The ecology of human-machine systems II: Mediating' direct perception' in complex work domains. Ecological psychology, 2(3), 207-249.

39.

Wilson

P. M.

Mack

D. E.

Grattan

K. P.

(2008). Understanding motivation for exercise: a self-determination theory perspective. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49(3), 250.

40.

Ziefle

Röcker

Holzinger

(2011, July). Medical technology in smart homes: exploring the user's perspective on privacy, intimacy and trust. In Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops (COMPSACW), 2011 IEEE 35th Annual (pp. 410-415). IEEE.