The profile of future consumer with microchip implant: Habits and characteristics

Abstract

Passive radio frequency identification microchip implants (MIs) have been the subject of public debate for nearly two decades, due to differing views on issues of privacy and impact on the human body, as well as actual successful applications in healthcare. Nonetheless, advances in technology imply that consumers may use MIs for identification, shopping, and other activities in the future. The purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics and habits of individuals who are more likely to use a MI in the near future. A cross‐sectional study was conducted in five countries: Poland, Croatia, Slovenia, Ukraine, and the Russian Federation. Convenience sampling and an online questionnaire were used to collect data from 2037 respondents. Multiple regression analysis was used to test the research questions, and the results showed the predictors of willingness to use MIs. The potential MI user is male, has multiple social media profiles, and has a history of losing keys, wallets, or ID cards. He tends to use credit cards, contactless payments, and payment services when shopping. His willingness to use a MI decreases with age. Based on these findings, retailers and other service providers can adapt their processes to successfully support the future consumer with MI.

Gradual stimulation of respondents' reflexivity: A research design for studying unreflexive consumers

“…Many studies still view consumers and technology as discrete entities with inherent characteristics or at most as mutually dependent ensembles interacting with each other whose primary mechanisms are impact, moderation, mediation and interaction (e.g., Dhir et al, 2021; Hentzen et al, 2022; Kamboj & Sharma, 2022). Researchers still view consumers as users of mobile technology that is seen as an object (e.g., Ahn et al, 2016; Cavalinhos et al, 2021; Ju et al, 2022; Morozova & Gurova, 2021; Nikou, 2015; Sohn et al, 2022; Žnidaršič et al, 2022) with which they might have a relationship (e.g., Parent & Shapka, 2020), neglecting the fundamental phenomenological fusion of (young) people with their smartphones in studies of consumer behaviour (e.g., Barrera & Ponce, 2021; Mandal & Tripathi, 2022) and in systematic reviews delineating research gaps (e.g., Sağkaya Güngör & Ozansoy Çadırcı, 2022).…”