International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12

line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 12, Issue 6 (June 2025), Pages: 66-76

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Exploring the factors influencing the adoption of smart innovations: An integrated model of consumer behavior and purchase intention

 Author(s): 

 Yasser Baeshen *

 Affiliation(s):

 Department of Marketing, Faculty of Economics and Administration, King Abdul Aziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

 Full text

    Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

   Corresponding author's ORCID profile:  https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5149-3157

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2025.06.007

 Abstract

The use of smart technology has become an important topic in research on the Internet of Things (IoT), where consumer acceptance plays a key role in market success. This study explores the factors that affect the adoption of smart technologies and how these factors influence consumers’ intentions to purchase. The research is based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT), and Consumer Perceived Innovativeness (CPI), and it develops and tests an integrated framework. A quantitative survey was carried out with 101 participants, and the data were analyzed using structural equation modeling. The results show that perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEoU), compatibility, and consumer-perceived innovativeness increase the intention to purchase smart technologies, while perceived cost reduces this intention. Observability and trialability also have important indirect effects through PU and PEoU. This study adds to the existing research by presenting a comprehensive model for understanding consumer behavior in adopting smart technologies and offers practical recommendations for businesses to improve consumer engagement and adoption.

 © 2025 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

 Smart technology, Consumer acceptance, Purchase intention, Innovation adoption, Technology acceptance

 Article history

 Received 27 November 2024, Received in revised form 26 April 2025, Accepted 25 May 2025

 Acknowledgment

No Acknowledgment. 

  Compliance with ethical standards

 Ethical considerations

This study was conducted in accordance with ethical standards. Participation in the survey was voluntary and anonymous. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection..

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Baeshen Y (2025). Exploring the factors influencing the adoption of smart innovations: An integrated model of consumer behavior and purchase intention. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 12(6): 66-76

  Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

  Fig. 1  

 Tables

  Table 1   Table 2  Table 3  Table 4  Table 5  Table 6  Table 7 

----------------------------------------------   

 References (32)

  1. Alam M, Nadeem R, and Jilani MI (2012). Pb(II) removal from wastewater using pomegranate waste biomass. International Journal of Chemical and Biochemical Sciences, 1: 24-29.    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aldás‐Manzano J, Lassala‐Navarré C, Ruiz‐Mafé C, and Sanz‐Blas S (2009). The role of consumer innovativeness and perceived risk in online banking usage. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 27(1): 53-75.  https://doi.org/10.1108/02652320910928245    [Google Scholar]
  3. Assink M (2006). Inhibitors of disruptive innovation capability: A conceptual model. European Journal of Innovation Management, 9(2): 215-233.  https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060610663587    [Google Scholar]
  4. Balta-Ozkan N, Davidson R, Bicket M, and Whitmarsh L (2013). Social barriers to the adoption of smart homes. Energy Policy, 63: 363-374.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.043    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bhutto MY, Liu X, Soomro YA, Ertz M, and Baeshen Y (2021). Adoption of energy-efficient home appliances: Extending the theory of planned behavior. Sustainability, 13(1): 250.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010250    [Google Scholar]
  6. Coskun A, Kaner G, and Bostan I (2018). Is smart home a necessity or a fantasy for the mainstream user? A study on users’ expectations of smart household appliances. International Journal of Design, 12(1): 7-20.  https://doi.org/10.21742/ijsh.2018.12.3.02    [Google Scholar]
  7. Davis FD (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3): 319-340.  https://doi.org/10.2307/249008    [Google Scholar]
  8. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, and Warshaw PR (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8): 982-1003.  https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982    [Google Scholar]
  9. de Boer PS, van Deursen AJ, and van Rompay TJ (2019). Accepting the Internet-of-Things in our homes: The role of user skills. Telematics and Informatics, 36: 147-156.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.12.004    [Google Scholar]
  10. Doe J, Smith J, Johnson E, Brown M, Lee D, Martinez S, Chen A, Kim R, White D, and Garcia J (2023). Enhancing security measures through ID card. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 27: 2672-2680.    [Google Scholar]
  11. Featherman MS and Pavlou PA (2003). Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(4): 451-474.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00111-3    [Google Scholar]
  12. Garcia MB (2017). E-learning technology adoption in the Philippines: An investigation of factors affecting Filipino college students' acceptance of learning management systems. The International Journal of E-Learning and Educational Technologies in the Digital Media (IJEETDM), 3(3): 118-130.  https://doi.org/10.17781/P002374    [Google Scholar]
  13. Guhr N, Werth O, Blacha PPH, and Breitner MH (2020). Privacy concerns in the smart home context. SN Applied Sciences, 2: 1-12.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-2025-8    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hirunyawipada T and Paswan AK (2006). Consumer innovativeness and perceived risk: Implications for high technology product adoption. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(4): 182-198.  https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760610674310    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hojjati SN and Khodakarami M (2016). Evaluation of factors affecting the adoption of smart buildings using the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Advanced Networking and Applications, 7(6): 2936-2943.    [Google Scholar]
  16. Joshi K (2005). Understanding user resistance and acceptance during the implementation of an order management system: A case study using the equity implementation model. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 7(1): 6-20.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15228053.2005.10856057    [Google Scholar]
  17. Kim KJ and Shin DH (2015). An acceptance model for smart watches: Implications for the adoption of future wearable technology. Internet Research, 25(4): 527-541.  https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-05-2014-0126    [Google Scholar]
  18. Kwon WS, Woo H, Sadachar A, and Huang X (2021). External pressure or internal culture? An innovation diffusion theory account of small retail businesses’ social media use. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 62: 102616.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102616    [Google Scholar]
  19. Lee H and Johnson R (2023). Privacy-preserving data mining techniques for sensitive data analysis. International Journal on Advanced Electrical and Computer Engineering, 12(1): 25-31.    [Google Scholar]
  20. Liu L, Stroulia E, Nikolaidis I, Miguel-Cruz A, and Rincon AR (2016). Smart homes and home health monitoring technologies for older adults: A systematic review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 91: 44-59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.04.007    [Google Scholar] PMid:27185508
  21. Lowe B and Alpert F (2015). Forecasting consumer perception of innovativeness. Technovation, 45: 1-14.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.02.001    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lu J, Yao JE, and Yu CS (2005). Personal innovativeness, social influences and adoption of wireless Internet services via mobile technology. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14(3): 245-268.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2005.07.003    [Google Scholar]
  23. Marikyan D, Papagiannidis S, and Alamanos E (2019). A systematic review of the smart home literature: A user perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 138: 139-154.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.08.015    [Google Scholar]
  24. Nikou S (2019). Factors driving the adoption of smart home technology: An empirical assessment. Telematics and Informatics, 45: 101283.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.101283    [Google Scholar]
  25. Peine A (2008). Technological paradigms and complex technical systems—The case of smart homes. Research Policy, 37(3): 508-529.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.11.009    [Google Scholar]
  26. Ram S (1987). A model of innovation resistance. Advances in Consumer Research, 14(1): 208-212.    [Google Scholar]
  27. Rana J and Paul J (2017). Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food: A review and research agenda. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 38: 157-165.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.06.004    [Google Scholar]
  28. Rogers EM (2003). Diffusion of innovations. 5th Edition, Free Press, New York, USA.    [Google Scholar]
  29. Thakur R and Srivastava M (2014). Adoption readiness, personal innovativeness, perceived risk and usage intention across customer groups for mobile payment services in India. Internet Research, 24(3): 369-392.  https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2012-0244    [Google Scholar]
  30. Tidd J (2001). Innovation management in context: Environment, organization and performance. International Journal of Management Reviews, 3(3): 169-183.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00062    [Google Scholar]
  31. Wang J, Yu Y, and Lu C (2024). Switching intention of potential smart home users: The co-action of innovation diffusion theory and switching costs. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 41(5): 3509–3526.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2338658    [Google Scholar]
  32. Yang Y, Wu L, Yin G, Li L, and Zhao H (2017). A survey on security and privacy issues in Internet-of-Things. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 4(5): 1250-1258.  https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2017.2694844    [Google Scholar]