Wearable sensing devices acceptance behavior in construction safety and health: Assessing existing models and developing a hybrid conceptual model

Okpala, I; Nnaji, C and Awolusi, I (2022) Wearable sensing devices acceptance behavior in construction safety and health: Assessing existing models and developing a hybrid conceptual model. Construction Innovation, 22(1), pp. 57-75. ISSN 1471-4175

Abstract

This study aims to examine relationships between several key technology acceptance variables that predict workers' wearable sensing devices (WSDs) acceptance in the construction industry by using technology acceptance model, theory of planned behavior and unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model. The study proposes a hybrid conceptual model to measure construction field workers' intentions to use WSDs and their usage behaviors. The study introduces variables that are instrumental in understanding and improving WSD acceptance in construction. The study was carried out using a structured literature review, online survey and structural equation modeling. A total of 195 field workers across the USA, with experience in using WSDs, participated in the study. Results indicate that all three theories predict WSD acceptance with variables explaining at least 89% of the variance in actual use, with the UTAUT outperforming other models (91%). However, the differences between the predictive power of these models were not statistically significant. A hybrid conceptual model is proposed using findings from the present study. Practical implications: The study contributes to knowledge and practice by highlighting key variables that influence WSD acceptance. Findings from this study should provide stakeholders with critical insights needed to successfully drive WSD acceptance in the construction industry. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first study that evaluates the predictive strength of multiple technology acceptance theories and models within the construction worker safety technology domain. Additionally, the study proposes a hybrid conceptual model which could provide practitioners and researchers with information pertinent to enhancing WSD acceptance.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction safety monitoring; construction technology; innovation management; predictive modeling; safety management; technology acceptance; technology adoption; wearable sensing devices
Index terms: construction safety monitoring, construction safety and health, construction industry, construction worker, planned behaviour, construction technology, technology adoption, technology acceptance model, variance, practitioner, safety management, innovation management, technology acceptance, predictive modelling, wearable sensing device, structural equation modelling, literature review, survey
Subjects: occupational health and safety management, measurement and scaling, industry analysis, statistical analysis, behavioral psychology, environmental health, computer vision, acoustic properties, data analysis and analytics, innovation and technology management, prediction and forecasting, data collection methods, digital engineering, practitioner, innovation studies
Topics: Digital Applications, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Sustainability
Descriptive scope: 5 PCTEA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here