Gym users: an enabler in creating an acceptance of sports and fitness wearable devices in India

Abstract

PurposeThere are two-fold objectives to this research. First is to analyse the importance of technology readiness (TR) for the users in using sports and fitness wearable devices in India. And second is to explore if gymnasium (gym) users are much more technologically ready as compared to non-gym users to use sports and fitness wearable devices.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses technology readiness and acceptance model (TRAM) to examine the users' intention to use sports and fitness wearable devices. Data from a survey of 907 respondents from India were collected and partial least squares (PLS)-structural equation modelling (SEM) technique was used to empirically examine it.FindingsThe outcomes reveal that innovativeness and optimism have a positive influence on perceived ease of use (PEOU) and perceived usefulness (PU), and insecurity and discomfort have a negative influence on PEOU and PU. Both PEOU and PU act as important determinants in the user's intention to use sports and fitness wearable devices. The multi-group analysis (MGA) suggests that gym users tend to exhibit more positive intention towards using sports and fitness wearable devices and show higher probability of using the wearable devices relative to non-gym users.Originality/valueThere are hardly any studies on intention to use sports and fitness wearable devices in India. The current research tries to understand the intention behind the gym users and non-gym users to use sports and fitness wearable devices. The outcomes of the research will help the marketers to align their promotional campaign based on the new segmentation variable “gym-user/non-gym user”. The research also highlights the importance of TR in the use of sports and fitness wearable devices in India.

An acceptance model for sports technologies: the effects of sports motivation, sports type and context-aware characteristics

“…’s (2016) study, which the authors attribute to ease of use being mainly a firm-level acceptance construct. By contrast, Raman and Aashish (2021), Aksoy et al. (2020), Reyes-Mercado (2018) and Kim and Shin (2016) found that effort expectancy and ease of use had direct positive effects on intention to use.…”

“…, 2003). Raman and Aashish (2021), Aksoy et al. (2020) and Reyes-Mercado (2018) also found that performance expectancy (similar to perceived usefulness) significantly explains behavioral intention to use fitness wearables.…”

“…Ease of use (synonymous with effort expectancy) was not a significant predictor of intention to use in Wu et al's (2016) study, which the authors attribute to ease of use being mainly a firm-level acceptance construct. By contrast, Raman and Aashish (2021), Aksoy et al (2020), Reyes-Mercado (2018 and Kim and Shin (2016) found that effort expectancy and ease of use had direct positive effects on intention to use. Consistently with the latter set of findings, our results reveal that effort expectancy is the main construct explaining intention to use a sports technology.…”

“…Perceived innovation characteristics and behavioral intention to use Performance expectancy and relative advantage constructs provide the explanatory power in most acceptance models (Davis, 1989;Venkatesh et al, 2003). Raman andAashish (2021), Aksoy et al (2020) and Reyes-Mercado (2018) also found that performance expectancy (similar to perceived usefulness) significantly explains behavioral intention to use fitness wearables. However, Wu et al (2016) reported that relative advantage significantly affects attitudes toward using smartwatches but not behavioral intention to use.…”

“…Behavioral factors are important when it comes to wearable usage. Raman and Aashish (2021) reported perceptional differences in sports wearables between gym and nongym members. This study reveals group differences in motivation to use sports technologies.…”