Please wait a minute...
Advanced Search
数据分析与知识发现  2023, Vol. 7 Issue (8): 149-162     https://doi.org/10.11925/infotech.2096-3467.2022.0754
  研究论文 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
基于元分析的健康穿戴设备用户采纳行为研究：标准比较视角*
卢新元,王雪霖,陈泽茵,卢泉()
华中师范大学信息管理学院 武汉 430079
湖北省电子商务研究中心 武汉 430079
Adoption Behavior of Wearable Health Device Users Based on Meta-analysis
Lu Xinyuan,Wang Xuelin,Chen Zeyin,Lu Quan()
School of Information Management, Central China Normal University,Wuhan 430079, China
Hubei E-commerce Research Center, Wuhan 430079, China
全文: PDF (1063 KB)   HTML ( 6 ) 
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 

【目的】聚合同一主题的多种研究结果，对当前健康穿戴设备用户采纳的实证研究进行元分析，以探究各个因素与健康穿戴设备用户采纳的真实关系。【方法】基于标准比较范式，将用户采纳的前因分为三阶段五维度（标准建立-体验感知-比较与结果），并采用元分析对56个独立研究进行再分析。【结果】标准建立过程中的各个变量均正向影响用户采纳，其中社会认同的作用更强；体验感知阶段，易用性对于医疗用途的健康穿戴设备用户采纳呈强正相关关系；比较与结果阶段，信任在多个前因变量中，对健康穿戴设备用户采纳的影响最大。【局限】 样本量尚未特别充分，因此部分变量的调节效应未得到一致性的结果，有待进一步的研究验证。【结论】除消费者创新与感知损失外，验证了其他用户采纳影响因素间的真实效应值，为今后构建新的理论模型奠定了基础。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
卢新元
王雪霖
陈泽茵
卢泉
关键词 ： 健康穿戴设备,  用户采纳,  标准比较范式,  元分析    
Abstract：

[Objective] This paper conducts a meta-analysis of current empirical research on the adoption of health device users, aiming to explore the relationship between various factors and the users’ adoption. [Methods] Based on the Comparison Standards Paradigm (CSP), we divided the antecedents of users’ adoption into three stages and five dimensions (standard establishment-experience perception-comparison and results). We also utilized meta-analysis to re-analyze 56 independent studies. [Results] We found that all variables in the process of the standard establishment had positive impacts on user adoption, of which social influence has a more substantial effect. In the perception stage, the ease of use had a strong positive correlation with user adoption of wearable devices for medical purposes. In the comparison and results stage, trust had the most substantial influence on the adoption of users among multiple antecedent variables. [Limitations] The sample size of this study needs to be expanded, which might generate consistent moderating effects of some variables. [Conclusions] In addition to consumer innovation and perceived loss, the study verifies the actual effect size of other user adoption factors, laying a foundation for new theoretical models in the future.
Key words： Health Wearable Devices    User Adoption    Comparision Standards Paradigm    Meta-analysis
收稿日期: 2022-07-20      出版日期: 2023-03-22
ZTFLH:  TP393  
  G250  
基金资助:* 国家社会科学基金项目(19BGL267)
通讯作者: 卢泉，ORCID：0000-0003-2502-5696，E-mail： luquan@mails.ccnu.edu.cn。   
引用本文:   
卢新元, 王雪霖, 陈泽茵, 卢泉. 基于元分析的健康穿戴设备用户采纳行为研究：标准比较视角*[J]. 数据分析与知识发现, 2023, 7(8): 149-162.
Lu Xinyuan, Wang Xuelin, Chen Zeyin, Lu Quan. Adoption Behavior of Wearable Health Device Users Based on Meta-analysis. Data Analysis and Knowledge Discovery, 2023, 7(8): 149-162.
链接本文:  
https://manu44.magtech.com.cn/Jwk_infotech_wk3/CN/10.11925/infotech.2096-3467.2022.0754      或      https://manu44.magtech.com.cn/Jwk_infotech_wk3/CN/Y2023/V7/I8/149
Fig.1  健康穿戴用户采纳行为过程模型
变量范畴 变量名称 变量定义 来源
消费者特质 消费者创新 指消费者比其他人更频繁、更早地购买或使用特定产品的倾向 文献[17，21]
健康意识 个人对自身健康状况的了解程度，以及健康问题融入其日常活动的程度 文献[9-11]
社会影响 社会认同 指使用健康穿戴设备以增强他人对自己的社会身份和角色的积极认同，符合他人期望 文献[10，12-13]
个体独特性 为了使自身与大多数人区分开，在主流文化中使用健康穿戴设备展现个人特征 文献[8，47]
感知价值 预期效果 采用健康可穿戴设备将在多大程度上为用户的带来益处，包括监测日常身体状况、制定个
人保健计划以及减少健康方面的威胁等		 文献[14，21，48]
感知享乐 采用健康可穿戴设备所带来的快乐与享受，享受健康设备提供的功能、与同伴共享数据与
达到健康目标后的成就感等		 文献[9，15]
感知损失 健康可穿戴设备所造成的损失，主要指设备的不安全所造成的隐私泄露等 文献[21，49]
产品特性 功能性 健康可穿戴设备是否适合满足功能性和产品相关基本需求，价格合理性、舒适性、兼容性和
质量		 文献[11，11，50]
易用性 用户使用健康穿戴设备的难易程度 文献[15，21-22]
态度 信任 用户对健康穿戴设产生的积极态度，相信该设备 文献[13，51，51]
因变量 用户采纳 用户对健康穿戴设备的接受程度，包括持续使用意愿等 文献[15，22，49]
Table 1  健康穿戴设备用户采纳行为构念
自变量 k N ρ 95%CI acc/% Q I 2 Fail-safe N
消费者创新 20 5 869 0.239 6 [-0.320 9，0.800 1] 2 110 8.285 9 *** 98.29 1 213
健康意识 15 5 512 0.162 9 [0.087 8，0.288 3] 9 189.007 7 *** 92.59 647
社会认同 28 7 680 0.552 4 [0.365 0，0.550 9] 4 737.177 3 *** 96.34 4 779
个体独特性 11 2 929 0.480 8 [0.347 6，0.494 0] 18 56.701 1 *** 82.36 1 621
预期效果 53 18 017 0.470 6 [0.427 6，0.559 2] 3 1 789.144 0 *** 97.09 61 366
感知享乐 23 7 691 0.544 0 [0.395 4，0.577 9] 5 609.304 4 *** 96.39 2 335
感知损失 19 4 957 -0.242 2 [-0.376 6，0.038 7] 2 1 070.172 0 *** 98.32 1 048
功能性 35 11 734 0.453 5 [0.289 8，0.498 6] 3 1 555.168 0 *** 97.81 9 241
易用性 39 11 714 0.449 0 [0.342 3，0.480 1] 5 765.620 7 *** 95.04 61 439
信任 18 4 325 0.602 7 [0.355 2，0.610 4] 3 529.661 7 *** 96.79 6 399
Table 2  主效应分析与异质性检验
自变量 类别 k N r+ SDr ρ SDρ 95%CI Q
消费者创新 健身 15 4 342 0.350 0 0.068 4 0.443 6 0.217 8 [0.227 3，0.431 8] 529.874 9 ***
医疗 5 1 527 -0.309 4 0.198 0 -0.309 4 0.400 4 [-0.609 5，0.069 0]
健康意识 健身 12 4 630 0.208 3 0.061 3 0.003 0 0.006 4 [0.091 0，0.319 8] 2.544 0
医疗 3 882 0.240 0 0.003 2 0.261 1 0.083 0 [0.132 7，0.341 8]
社会认同 健身 21 5 631 0.455 3 0.071 1 0.548 2 0.274 9 [0.338 2，0.558 5] 2.200 3
医疗 7 2 049 0.485 1 0.124 9 0.564 3 0.258 8 [0.277 5，0.649 4]
预期效果 健身 43 14 882 0.486 7 0.049 3 0.438 1 0.275 4 [0.409 6，0.556 8] 11.617 0 ***
医疗 10 3 135 0.536 1 0.097 0 0.612 2 0.240 9 [0.387 2，0.657 7]
感知享乐 健身 19 6 243 0.486 6 0.068 5 0.525 1 0.209 9 [0.377 7，0.582 2] 1.892 1
医疗 4 1 448 0.516 6 0.167 2 0.662 2 0.282 4 [0.239 2，0.716 1]
感知损失 健身 14 3 334 -0.168 4 0.132 5 -0.207 8 0.478 8 [-0.405 1，0.089 4] 1.161 5
医疗 5 1 623 -0.199 8 0.222 1 -0.323 9 0.475 1 [-0.563 4，0.228 6]
功能性 健身 27 9 033 0.421 5 0.069 1 0.455 1 0.277 6 [0.304 1，0.526 3] 27.813 4 ***
医疗 8 2 701 0.321 9 0.162 3 0.420 5 0.415 5 [0.015 7，0.572 9]
易用性 健身 35 10 452 0.393 5 0.042 0 0.415 1 0.233 5 [0.321 8，0.460 8] 59.500 2 ***
医疗 4 1 262 0.569 0 0.160 8 0.668 1 0.195 0 [0.319 3，0.744 8]
Table 3  用途（健身vs. 医疗）调节效应
自变量 群体类别 k N r+ SDr ρ SDρ 95%CI Q
消费者创新 一般群体 17 5 025 0.291 7 0.088 1 0.356 2 0.347 7 [0.127 0，0.440 7] 373.593 3 ***
老年群体 3 844 -0.396 0 0.231 3 -0.389 5 0.329 1 [-0.702 9，0.033 7]
健康意识 一般群体 12 4 714 0.208 3 0.061 3 0.161 1 0.174 0 [0.091 1，0.319 9] 6.600 6 *
老年群体 3 798 0.112 9 0.136 6 0.174 1 0.195 7 [-0.153 1，0.363 7]
社会认同 一般群体 24 6 666 0.463 5 0.066 5 0.546 1 0.270 1 [0.355 2，0.559 5] 0.024 6
老年群体 4 1 014 0.459 3 0.165 8 0.597 0 0.271 9 [0.169 9，0.675 8]
预期效果 一般群体 48 16 861 0.482 8 0.048 0 0.465 6 0.285 2 [0.407 0，0.552 0] 3.452 4
老年群体 5 1 156 0.508 9 0.113 3 0.546 0 0.190 6 [0.326 8，0.654 6]
功能性 一般群体 30 10 406 0.433 4 0.066 7 0.478 2 0.292 3 [0.321 6，0.533 3] 97.573 3 ***
老年群体 5 1 328 0.174 8 0.176 7 0.208 1 0.354 8 [-0.168 1，0.475 0]
易用性 一般群体 34 10 440 0.423 1 0.044 6 0.441 8 0.226 4 [0.348 8，0.492 0] 9.629 3 **
老年群体 5 1 274 0.344 6 0.154 0 0.451 7 0.331 1 [0.057 3，0.579 1]
Table 4  年龄调节（一般群体vs. 老年群体）效应
作用关系 类别 k N r+ SDr ρ SDρ 95%CI Q
消费者创新 国内 16 4 398 0.177 4 0.108 0 0.225 4 0.415 2 [-0.032 42，0.372 2] 4.412 5
国外 4 1 471 0.237 0 0.289 3 0.278 1 0.492 0 [-0.313 7，0.669 3]
健康意识 国内 10 2 571 0.215 2 0.072 8 0.272 6 0.212 0 [0.075 7，0.346 4] 9.155 9 ***
国外 5 2 941 0.139 1 0.059 9 0.085 0 0.084 4 [0.022 5，0.251 9]
社会认同 国内 19 5 195 0.443 4 0.080 8 0.518 8 0.288 9 [0.307 8，0.561 3] 10.990 5 **
国外 9 2 485 0.506 0 0.079 6 0.617 3 0.218 0 [0.381 0，0.312 9]
个体独特性 国内 4 886 0.434 5 0.039 5 0.520 0 0.030 7 [0.369 5，0.495 1] 0.630 6
国外 7 2 043 0.409 9 0.067 9 0.466 9 0.136 8 [0.293 6，0.514 3]
预期效果 国内 29 8 211 0.502 9 0.052 2 0.535 8 0.206 4 [0.426 7，0.572 3] 1.772 2
国外 24 9 806 0.488 0 0.073 5 0.404 0 0.305 5 [0.370 9，0.589 9]
感知享乐 国内 12 3 519 0.471 4 0.074 8 0.547 9 0.218 1 [0.349 8，0.577 3] 6.021 8 **
国外 11 4 172 0.513 8 0.199 3 0.540 8 0.232 9 [0.349 8，0.647 2]
感知损失 国内 12 3 156 -0.155 7 0.110 8 -0.207 5 0.380 8 [-0.237 3，-0.170 0] 3.986
国外 7 1 801 -0.212 7 0.250 9 -0.306 1 0.619 5 [-0.609 3，0.269 0]
功能性 国内 18 4 793 0.328 5 0.088 1 0.361 1 0.339 1 [0.166 9，0.472 8] 82.148 4 ***
国外 17 6 941 0.469 5 0.089 3 0.501 3 0.280 7 [0.322 5，0.594 4]
易用性 国内 22 6 252 0.417 3 0.055 2 0.479 0 0.244 0 [0.324 0，0.502 5] 0.318 0
国外 17 5 462 0.408 0 0.068 0 0.402 5 0.224 3 [0.291 6，0.513 5]
信任 国内 8 1 876 0.502 2 0.118 0 0.590 0 0.253 0 [0.309 5，0.655 3] 0.531 7
国外 10 2 449 0.485 3 0.127 6 0.611 3 0.328 0 [0.272 7，0.652 7]
Table 5  样本来源（国内vs.国外）调节效应
作用关系 年份类别 k N r+ SDr ρ SDρ 95%CI Q
消费者创新 2017年及之前 12 3 177 0.227 0 0.080 4 0.323 3 0.264 7 [0.073 5，0.370 4] 13.353 6 **
2017年之后 8 2 692 0.134 0 0.216 0 0.146 0 0.557 0 [-0.280 6，0.507 8]
健康意识 2017年及之前 5 1 236 0.219 3 0.038 0 0.258 0 0.058 5 [0.145 9，0.290 3] 1.908 4
2017年之后 10 4 276 0.176 0 0.075 6 0.140 0 0.188 0 [0.030 5，0.315 7]
社会认同 2017年及之前 12 2 911 0.393 8 0.075 7 0.446 0 0.227 1 [0.261 6，0.511 4] 39.773 7 ***
2017年之后 16 4 769 0.511 1 0.083 1 0.618 0 0.274 9 [0.381 2，0.621 3]
个体独特性 2017年及之前 8 2 367 0.448 0 0.043 3 0.514 0 0.070 5 [0.377 5，0.513 2] 5.680 3
2017年之后 3 562 0.355 0 0.124 4 0.340 3 0.175 0 [0.126 7，0.547 7]
预期效果 2017年及之前 23 6 131 0.484 8 0.052 0 0.538 1 0.168 0 [0.403 2，0.558 8] 2.824 8
2017年之后 30 11 886 0.504 6 0.065 9 0.423 0 0.307 7 [0.402 3，0.594 5]
感知享乐 2017年及之前 9 2 667 0.484 9 0.104 4 0.565 0 0.193 2 [0.313 8，0.625 6] 0.401 4
2017年之后 14 5 024 0.496 4 0.079 1 0.531 0 0.243 7 [0.370 9，0.604 2]
感知损失 2017年及之前 9 2 154 -0.181 8 0.124 4 -0.241 0 0.365 0 [-0.403 3，0.059 8] 0.120 0
2017年之后 10 2 803 -0.172 2 0.182 0 -0.243 0 0.557 3 [-0.486 0，0.181 0]
功能性 2017年及之前 16 4 600 0.358 3 0.106 0 0.424 1 0.324 3 [0.162 7，0.525 2] 22.189 3 ***
2017年之后 19 7 134 0.433 0 0.080 6 0.462 3 0.303 0 [0.296 4，0.552 3]
易用性 2017年及之前 18 4 795 0.400 3 0.042 0 0.435 0 0.161 0 [0.328 0，0.468 0] 2.059 7
2017年之后 21 6 919 0.422 7 0.069 1 0.445 7 0.277 1 [0.305 5，0.527 3]
信任 2017年及之前 10 2 441 0.489 7 0.247 0 0.588 0 0.259 0 [0.292 3.0.647 0] 0.110 5
2017年之后 8 1 884 0.497 4 0.119 0 0.623 7 0.348 0 [0.274 2，0.669 8]
Table 6  发表年份（2017年及之前vs. 2017年之后）调节效应
作用关系 自变量 调节变量
用途 年龄 样本来源 发表年份
健身 医疗 一般群体 老年群体 国内 国外 2017年及之前 2017年之后
消费者特质-用户采纳 消费者创新 0.443 6 -0.309 4 0.356 2 -0.389 5 0.323 3 0.146 0
健康意识 0.161 1 0.174 2 0.272 6 0.085 0
社会影响-用户采纳 社会认同 0.518 8 0.617 3 0.446 0 0.618 0
个体独特性
感知价值-用户采纳 预期效果 0.438 1 0.612 2
感知享乐 0.547 9 0.540 8
感知损失
产品特性-用户采纳 功能性 0.455 1 0.420 5 0.478 2 0.208 1 0.361 1 0.501 3 0.424 1 0.462 3
易用性 0.415 1 0.668 1 0.441 8 0.451 7
信任-用户采纳 信任
Table 7  调节效应总结
Fig.2  出版偏倚漏斗图 （部分）
[1] 余玉刚, 王耀刚, 江志斌, 等. 智慧健康医疗管理研究热点分析[J]. 管理科学学报, 2021, 24(8) : 58-66.
[1] (Yu Yugang, Wang Yaogang, Jiang Zhibin, et al. Analysis of Research Hotspots of Intelligent Health Care Management[J]. Journal of Management Sciences of China, 2021, 24(8) : 58-66.)
[2] Rauschnabel P A, Hein D W E, He J, et al. Fashion or Technology? A Fashnology Perspective on the Perception and Adoption of Augmented Reality Smart Glasses[J]. i-com, 2016, 15(2): 179-194.
doi: 10.1515/icom-2016-0021
[3] Piwek L, Ellis D A, Andrews S, et al. The Rise of Consumer Health Wearables: Promises and Barriers[J]. PLoS Medicine, 2016, 13(2): e1001953.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001953
[4] 林伟振, 刘洪伟, 陈燕君, 等. 基于在线评论的顾客满意度研究——以健康监测穿戴产品为例[J]. 数据分析与知识发现, 2023, 7(5): 145-154.
[4] (Lin Weizhen, Liu Hongwei, Chen Yanjun, et al. Customer Satisfaction Modelling for Healthcare Wearable Devices Through Online Reviews[J]. Data Analysis and Knowledge Discovery, 2023, 7(5): 145-154.)
[5] Attig C, Franke T. Abandonment of Personal Quantification: A Review and Empirical Study Investigating Reasons for Wearable Activity Tracking Attrition[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2020, 102: 223-237.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.025
[6] PwC P. The Wearable Life 2.0: Connected Living in a Wearable World[R]. London, 2017.
[7] Talukder M S, Chiong R, Bao Y K, et al. Acceptance and Use Predictors of Fitness Wearable Technology and Intention to Recommend: An Empirical Study[J]. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 2019, 119(1): 170-188.
[8] Choi J, Kim S. Is the Smartwatch an IT Product or a Fashion Product? A Study on Factors Affecting the Intention to Use Smartwatches[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2016, 63: 777-786.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.007
[9] Meier D Y, Barthelmess P, Sun W, et al. Wearable Technology Acceptance in Health Care Based on National Culture Differences: Cross-Country Analysis Between Chinese and Swiss Consumers[J]. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2020, 22(10): e18801.
doi: 10.2196/18801
[10] Li J D, Ma Q, Chan A H S, et al. Health Monitoring Through Wearable Technologies for Older Adults: Smart Wearables Acceptance Model[J]. Applied Ergonomics, 2019, 75: 162-169.
doi: S0003-6870(18)30516-7 pmid: 30509522
[11] Sergueeva K, Shaw N, Lee S H. Understanding the Barriers and Factors Associated with Consumer Adoption of Wearable Technology Devices in Managing Personal Health[J]. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 2020, 37(1): 45-60.
doi: 10.1002/cjas.v37.1
[12] Kim T B, Ho C-T B. Validating the Moderating Role of Age in Multi-Perspective Acceptance Model of Wearable Healthcare Technology[J]. Telematics and Informatics, 2021, 61: 101603.
doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2021.101603
[13] Lunney A, Cunningham N R, Eastin M S. Wearable Fitness Technology: A Structural Investigation into Acceptance and Perceived Fitness Outcomes[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2016, 65: 114-120.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.007
[14] Guillén-Gámez F D, Mayorga-Fernández M J. Empirical Study Based on the Perceptions of Patients and Relatives about the Acceptance of Wearable Devices to Improve Their Health and Prevent Possible Diseases[J]. Mobile Information Systems, 2019, 2019: 4731048.
[15] Niknejad N, Hussin A R C, Ghani I, et al. A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Behavioral Intention to Use Smart Wellness Wearables in Malaysia[J]. Universal Access in the Information Society, 2020, 19(3): 633-653.
doi: 10.1007/s10209-019-00663-0
[16] Farivar S, Abouzahra M, Ghasemaghaei M. Wearable Device Adoption among Older Adults: A Mixed-Methods Study[J]. International Journal of Information Management, 2020, 55: 102209.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102209
[17] Hong J C, Lin P H, Hsieh P C. The Effect of Consumer Innovativeness on Perceived Value and Continuance Intention to Use Smartwatch[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2017, 67: 264-272.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.001
[18] Fournier S, Mick D G. Rediscovering Satisfaction[J]. Journal of Marketing, 1999, 63(4): 5-23.
doi: 10.1177/002224299906300403
[19] Zhang M, Luo M F, Nie R, et al. Technical Attributes, Health Attribute, Consumer Attributes and Their Roles in Adoption Intention of Healthcare Wearable Technology[J]. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2017, 108: 97-109.
doi: S1386-5056(17)30356-8 pmid: 29132639
[20] Davis F D. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology[J]. MIS Quarterly, 1989, 13(3): 319-340.
doi: 10.2307/249008
[21] Kim T, Chiu W. Consumer Acceptance of Sports Wearable Technology: The Role of Technology Readiness[J]. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 2019, 20(1): 109-126.
doi: 10.1108/IJSMS-06-2017-0050
[22] Park E. User Acceptance of Smart Wearable Devices: An Expectation-Confirmation Model Approach[J]. Telematics and Informatics, 2020, 47: 101318.
doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2019.101318
[23] Ernst C P H, Ernst A W. The Influence of Privacy Risk on Smartwatch Usage[C]// Proceedings of the 32nd Americas Conference on Information Systems. 2016.
[24] Gao Y Q, Li H, Luo Y. An Empirical Study of Wearable Technology Acceptance in Healthcare[J]. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 2015, 115(9): 1704-1723.
[25] Rubin A, Ophoff J. Investigating Adoption Factors of Wearable Technology in Health and Fitness[C]// Proceedings of 2018 Open Innovations Conference. 2018: 176-186.
[26] White S S, Schneider B. Climbing the Commitment Ladder: The Role of Expectations Disconfirmation on Customers’ Behavioral Intentions[J]. Journal of Service Research, 2000, 2(3): 240-253.
doi: 10.1177/109467050023002
[27] Oliver R L. A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1980, 17(4): 460-469.
doi: 10.1177/002224378001700405
[28] 张德鹏, 刘思, 温韵柔, 等. 持续抑或终止?——创新社区用户介入程度对持续知识分享的影响效应[J]. 管理评论, 2020, 32(8) : 106-115.
[28] (Zhang Depeng, Liu Si, Wen Yunrou, et al. Deep Involvement Leads to the Termination of Sharing? Study on the Curvilinear Relations Between User Involvement and Continuous Knowledge Sharing in Innovation Community[J]. Management Review, 2020, 32(8): 106-115.)
[29] 杨晶, 袁曦. 基于期望确认理论的移动视觉搜索用户情感体验形成机制研究[J]. 情报资料工作, 2022, 43(1): 92-101.
[29] (Yang Jing, Yuan Xi. Research on the Formation Mechanism of Mobile Visual Search User Emotional Experience Based on Expectation Confirmation Theory[J]. Information and Documentation Services, 2022, 43(1): 92-101.)
[30] 赵雪芹, 王少春. 微信小程序用户持续使用意愿的影响因素探究[J]. 现代情报, 2019, 39(6) : 70-80, 90.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-0821.2019.06.008
[30] (Zhao Xueqin, Wang Shaochun. Research of Customers’ Continuance Intention on WeChat Mini Program[J]. Modern Information, 2019, 39(6): 70-80, 90.)
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-0821.2019.06.008
[31] 曹高辉, 虞松涛, 张煜轩, 等. 消费者持续参与在线评论意愿实证研究[J]. 管理评论, 2017, 29(11): 148-158.
[31] (Cao Gaohui, Yu Songtao, Zhang Yuxuan, et al. An Empirical Research on Consumers’ Passion for Online Review[J]. Management Review, 2017, 29(11): 148-158.)
[32] Bhattacherjee A. Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2001, 25(3): 351-370.
doi: 10.2307/3250921
[33] 孟祥莉, 袁勤俭. 期望确认理论在IS领域的应用与展望[J]. 现代情报, 2018, 38(9): 169-177.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-0821.2018.09.026
[33] (Meng Xiangli, Yuan Qinjian. The Application and Prospects of Expectation Confirmation Theory in the Field of Information Science[J]. Modern Information, 2018, 38(9): 169-177.)
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-0821.2018.09.026
[34] Venkatesh V, Thong J Y L, Chan F K Y, et al. Extending the Two-Stage Information Systems Continuance Model: Incorporating UTAUT Predictors and the Role of Context[J]. Information Systems Journal, 2011, 21(6): 527-555.
doi: 10.1111/isj.2011.21.issue-6
[35] 冯钰茹, 邓小昭. 弹幕视频网站用户弹幕评论行为的影响因素研究——以Bilibili弹幕视频网站为例[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(17) : 110-116.
doi: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.17.011
[35] (Feng Yuru, Deng Xiaozhao. Research on the Influencing Factors of User Commenting Behavior on Danmaku—Taking Bilibili Danmaku Video Website as an Example[J]. Library and Information Service, 2021, 65(17): 110-116.)
doi: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.17.011
[36] Zeithaml V A, Berry L L, Parasuraman A. The Nature and Determinants of Customer Expectations of Service[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1993, 21: 1-12.
doi: 10.1177/0092070393211001
[37] Shirani A, Aiken M, Reithel B. A Model of User Information Satisfaction[J]. ACM SIGMIS Database: The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems, 1994, 25(4): 17-23.
doi: 10.1145/192561.192570
[38] Midgley D F, Dowling G R. Innovativeness: The Concept and its Measurement[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 1978, 4(4): 229-242.
doi: 10.1086/jcr.1978.4.issue-4
[39] Hsu C L, Lin J C C. Exploring Factors Affecting the Adoption of Internet of Things Services[J]. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 2018, 58(1): 49-57.
doi: 10.1080/08874417.2016.1186524
[40] Yang H, Yu J, Zo H, et al. User Acceptance of Wearable Devices: An Extended Perspective of Perceived Value[J]. Telematics and Informatics, 2016, 33(2): 256-269.
doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2015.08.007
[41] 吴江, 曾敏讷, 刘福珍, 等. 基于元分析方法的可穿戴设备用户采纳行为研究[J]. 信息资源管理学报, 2017, 7(2): 5-13.
[41] (Wu Jiang, Zeng Minne, Liu Fuzhen, et al. A Meta-Analysis on Users’ Adoption of Wearable Device[J]. Journal of Information Resources Management, 2017, 7(2): 5-13.)
[42] 池毛毛, 刘姝君, 蔡志慧, 等. IT匹配在IT治理和企业绩效间的中介作用和边界条件研究: 基于元分析技术的探索[J]. 南开管理评论, 2021, 24(3): 115-127.
[42] (Chi Maomao, Liu Shujun, Cai Zhihui, et al. A Meta-Analysis of the Mediating Effect and Boundary Conditions of IT Alignment on the Relationship Between IT Governance and Firm Performance[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2021, 24(3): 115-127.)
[43] 卢新元, 方文琪, 卢泉, 等. 基于元分析的社交媒体用户倦怠行为影响因素研究[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2020, 43(9): 87-92, 99.
doi: 10.16353/j.cnki.1000-7490.2020.09.013
[43] (Lu Xinyuan, Fang Wenqi, Lu Quan, et al. Research on Influencing Factors of Users’ Fatigue Behavior in Social Media Based on Meta-Analysis[J]. Information Studies:Theory & Application, 2020, 43(9): 87-92, 99.)
doi: 10.16353/j.cnki.1000-7490.2020.09.013
[44] Cooper H M. Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis: A Step-by-Step Approach[M]. The 4th Edition. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2010.
[45] 崔小雨, 陈春花, 苏涛. 高管团队异质性与组织绩效的关系研究: 一项Meta分析的检验[J]. 管理评论, 2018, 30(9): 152-163.
[45] (Cui Xiaoyu, Chen Chunhua, Su Tao. A Study on Haw TMT Heterogeneity Affects Organizational Performance: A Meta-Analytic Examination[J]. Management Review, 2018, 30(9): 152-163.)
[46] Lipsey M W, Wilson D B. Practical Meta-Analysis[M]. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2000.
[47] Rupp M A, Michaelis J R, McConnell D S, et al. The Role of Individual Differences on Perceptions of Wearable Fitness Device Trust, Usability, and Motivational Impact[J]. Applied Ergonomics, 2018, 70: 77-87.
doi: S0003-6870(18)30029-2 pmid: 29866329
[48] Kim B, Hong S, Kim S. Introducing an Integrated Model of Adults’ Wearable Activity Tracker Use and Obesity Information-Seeking Behaviors from a National Quota Sample Survey[J]. JMIR Formative Research, 2021, 5(9): e23237.
doi: 10.2196/23237
[49] Wang H L, Tao D, Yu N, et al. Understanding Consumer Acceptance of Healthcare Wearable Devices: An Integrated Model of UTAUT and TTF[J]. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2020, 139: 104156.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104156
[50] Papa A, Mital M, Pisano P, et al. E-Health and Wellbeing Monitoring Using Smart Healthcare Devices: An Empirical Investigation[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2020, 153: 119226.
doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.02.018
[51] Adebesin F, Mwalugha R. The Mediating Role of Organizational Reputation and Trust in the Intention to Use Wearable Health Devices: Cross-Country Study[J]. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2020, 8(6): e16721.
doi: 10.2196/16721
[52] 卫旭华. 组织与管理研究中的元分析方法[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2021.
[52] (Wei Xuhua. Meta-Analytical Methods in Organization and Management Research[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2021.)
[53] Rothstein H, Sutton A J, Borenstein M. Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis: Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments[M]. Wiley & Sons, 2005.
[54] 孟欣然, 邓朝华, 吴泰来. 中老年用户智能可穿戴设备使用意愿的影响因素研究[J]. 卫生软科学, 2020, 34(8) : 41-46.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2800.2020.08.009
[54] (Meng Xinran, Deng Chaohua, Wu Tailai. Study on Influence Factors of the Willingness of Using Smart Wearable Devices in Middle-Aged and Elderly[J]. Soft Science of Health, 2020, 34(8): 41-46.)
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2800.2020.08.009
[55] 刘新. 基于“智慧芽”的全球可穿戴医疗智能设备专利分析[J]. 中华医学图书情报杂志, 2020, 29(8): 37-42.
[55] (Liu Xin. “Patsnap”-Based Analysis of Worldwide Wearable Intelligent Medical Device Patents[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Library and Information Science, 2020, 29(8) : 37-42.)
[56] Shin D H, Park Y J. Understanding the Internet of Things Ecosystem: Multi-Level Analysis of Users, Society, and Ecology[J]. Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance, 2017, 19(1): 77-100.
doi: 10.1108/DPRG-07-2016-0035
[1] 李雪丽, 黄令贺, 陈佳星. 基于元分析的社交媒体用户隐私披露意愿影响因素研究*[J]. 数据分析与知识发现, 2022, 6(4): 97-107.
[2] 李晓, 曲建升. 元分析在社会科学领域的应用与进展述评*[J]. 数据分析与知识发现, 2021, 5(11): 1-12.
[3] 吴胜男, 蒲虹君, 田若楠, 梁雯琪, 于琦. 网络结构对链路预测算法的影响研究*——基于元分析视角[J]. 数据分析与知识发现, 2021, 5(11): 102-113.
[4] 王健海 曾桢. 多维度战略数据的Chernoff脸谱图表示方法与实证研究[J]. 现代图书情报技术, 2010, 26(7/8): 15-21.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 2015 《数据分析与知识发现》编辑部
地址：北京市海淀区中关村北四环西路33号 邮编：100190
电话/传真：(010)82626611-6626，82624938
E-mail:jishu@mail.las.ac.cn