| Literature DB >> 33092090 |
Anna Vinnikova1, Liangdong Lu1, Jiuchang Wei1, Guangbao Fang2, Jing Yan1.
Abstract
With the popularity of the health and wellness trend in recent years, smartphone fitness applications have become more and more popular. Thus, this study explored factors affecting the behavioral intention to use and the actual usage behavior of smartphone fitness apps from technical, health, and social perspectives by integrating the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). We examined whether perceived usefulness, perceived ease-of-use, social influence, self-efficacy, goal-setting, and self-monitoring predict usage behavior. Based on the survey responses of 1066 smartphone fitness apps users, we revealed that all of the variables, except for self-monitoring, significantly influence usage behavior, while behavioral intention acts as a total mediator between perceived usefulness, perceived ease-of-use and usage behavior. Drawing on the research findings, we suggest that influencing behavioral intention to use a fitness app can be an effective method to increase its adoption. Therefore, app developers need to pay attention to interventions that seek to enhance the usefulness of the app, provide professional counseling, as well as an opportunity for effortless goal setting features.Entities:
Keywords: SCT; UTAUT; behavioral intention; fitness app; usage behavior
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33092090 PMCID: PMC7588923 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17207639
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Conceptual framework of understanding and predicting adoption of smartphone fitness apps.
Demographic statistics of the respondents (n = 1066).
| Variable | Number | Percentage (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 524 | 49.1 |
| Female | 542 | 50.9 | |
| Age | Less than 18 | 24 | 2.3 |
| 18–30 | 558 | 52.3 | |
| 31–40 | 358 | 33.6 | |
| 41–50 | 110 | 10.3 | |
| 51–60 | 16 | 1.5 | |
| Education | Elementary or junior high school | 154 | 14.4 |
| Undergraduate | 751 | 70.5 | |
| Graduate school and above | 161 | 15.1 | |
| Annual income | Less than ¥30,000 | 241 | 22.6 |
| ¥30,000–¥60,000 | 165 | 15.5 | |
| ¥60,001–¥100,000 | 289 | 27.1 | |
| More than ¥100,000 | 371 | 34.8 | |
Constructs and items included in the questionnaire.
| Construct | Item | Measurement | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived Usefulness (PU) | PU1 | I find the fitness app useful in managing my health. | [ |
| PU2 | Using the fitness app would enhance my effectiveness in managing my health. | ||
| PU3 | Using the fitness app would help me accomplish my health management goals. | ||
| PU4 | Using the fitness app would improve my performance in my health management. | ||
| Perceived Ease-of-Use (PEOU) | PEOU1 | Learning how to use the fitness app is easy for me. | [ |
| PEOU2 | I find this fitness app easy to use. | ||
| PEOU3 | It is easy for me to become skillful at using the fitness app. | ||
| Social Influence (SI) | SI1 | People who are important to me would think that I should use this fitness app. | [ |
| SI2 | People who influence me would think that I should use this fitness app. | ||
| SI3 | People whose opinions are valued to me would prefer that I should use this fitness app. | ||
| Self-efficacy (SE) | SE1 | It is easy for me to use this fitness app. | [ |
| SE2 | I have the capability to use this fitness app. | ||
| SE3 | I am able to use this fitness app without much effort. | ||
| Behavioral Intention (BI) | BI1 | I intend to use this fitness app in the future. | [ |
| BI2 | I intend to use this fitness app at every opportunity in the future. | ||
| BI3 | I plan to increase my use of this fitness app in the future. | ||
| Goal-setting (GS) | GS1 | I set short term goals for how often I am active. | [ |
| GS2 | I set PA goals that focus on my health. | ||
| Self-monitoring (SM) | SM1 | I watch for signs of progress as I stay physically active. | [ |
| SM2 | I monitor myself to see if I am meeting my goals for physical activity. | ||
| Usage Behavior (UB) | Frequency | How many times a week do you use fitness apps? | [ |
| Usage duration | How long have you been using fitness apps? | ||
| Number of apps | How many fitness apps have you used? |
Confirmatory factor analysis results for measurement model.
| Construct | Items | Loadings | Cronbach’s α | Composite Reliability | Average Variance Extracted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived | PU1 | 0.865 | 0.911 | 0.933 | 0.779 |
| PU2 | 0.908 | ||||
| PU3 | 0.923 | ||||
| PU4 | 0.833 | ||||
| Perceived Ease-of-Use | PEOU1 | 0.914 | 0.842 | 0.889 | 0.729 |
| PEOU2 | 0.835 | ||||
| PEOU3 | 0.810 | ||||
| Social Influence | SI1 | 0.901 | 0.909 | 0.933 | 0.844 |
| SI2 | 0.923 | ||||
| SI3 | 0.899 | ||||
| Self-efficacy | SE1 | 0.892 | 0.868 | 0.936 | 0.830 |
| SE2 | 0.921 | ||||
| SE3 | 0.920 | ||||
| Behavioral Intention | BI1 | 0.877 | 0.853 | 0.912 | 0.776 |
| BI2 | 0.853 | ||||
| BI3 | 0.912 | ||||
| Goal-setting | GS1 | 0.931 | 0.821 | 0.919 | 0.850 |
| GS2 | 0.913 | ||||
| Self-monitoring | SM1 | 0.867 | 0.722 | 0.875 | 0.777 |
| SM2 | 0.896 | ||||
| Usage Behavior | UB1 | 0.701 | 0.805 | 0.801 | 0.575 |
| UB2 | 0.803 | ||||
| UB3 | 0.767 |
Means, standard deviation, and correlations.
| Item | Mean | SD | UB | PU | PEOU | SI | SE | BI | GS | SM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UB | 2.01 | 0.75 | 0.575 | |||||||
| PU | 3.97 | 0.69 | 0.24 ** | 0.779 | ||||||
| PEOU | 4.26 | 0.75 | 0.16 ** | 0.47 ** | 0.729 | |||||
| SI | 3.67 | 0.88 | 0.23 ** | 0.48 ** | 0.17 ** | 0.844 | ||||
| SE | 4.33 | 0.69 | 0.22 ** | 0.48 ** | 0.69 ** | 0.21 ** | 0.830 | |||
| BI | 3.99 | 0.73 | 0.21 ** | 0.61 ** | 0.42 ** | 0.49 ** | 0.44 ** | 0.776 | ||
| GS | 3.81 | 0.84 | 0.15 ** | 0.51 ** | 0.32 ** | 0.33 ** | 0.36 ** | 0.44 ** | 0.850 | |
| SM | 4.04 | 0.78 | 0.19 ** | 0.50 ** | 0.42 ** | 0.27 ** | 0.42 ** | 0.46 ** | 0.50 ** | 0.777 |
Note: Correlations appear below the diagonal; the square roots of AVE values appear on the diagonal and present in bold type. ** p < 0.001.
Figure 2Result of the testing of the model (*** p < 0.001; * p < 0.05).
Total effect, direct effect, and indirect effect.
| Total Effects | Direct Effects | Indirect Effects | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient Values | Bootstrap S.E. | Coefficient Values | Bootstrap S.E. | Coefficient Values | Bootstrap S.E. | |
| PEOU to UB | 0.13 | 0.141 | −0.044 | 0.051 | 0.174 * | 0.09 |
| PU to UB | 0.012 | 0.1 | 0.128 | 0.089 | −0.116 | 0.069 |
| SE to UB | 0.397 * | 0.144 | 0.226 * | 0.087 | 0.171 ** | 0.107 |
| SI to UB | 0.337 ** | 0.069 | 0.196 * | 0.047 | 0.141 * | 0.068 |
| GS to UB | 0.604 ** | 0.087 | 0.485 ** | 0.035 | 0.119 * | 0.061 |
| BI to UB | 0.422 * | 0.223 | 0.422 ** | 0.223 | ||
| SM to UB | −0.024 | 0.092 | −0.024 | 0.092 | ||
| PEOU to BI | 0.083 * | 0.037 | 0.083 * | 0.037 | ||
| PU to BI | 0.429 *** | 0.051 | 0.429 *** | 0.051 | ||
| SE to BI | 0.379 ** | 0.103 | 0.149 * | 0.573 | 0.230 ** | 0.042 |
| SI to BI | 0.251 *** | 0.027 | 0.251 *** | 0.027 | ||
| GS to BI | 0.140 *** | 0.050 | 0.140 *** | 0.050 | ||
| SE to GS | 0.675 *** | 0.061 | 0.675 *** | 0.061 | ||
*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05.