Trust, Technology Acceptance, and Social Support in Older Adults’ Adoption of Smart Home Elderly-Care Services

Sun Qi; Perema Kumari A/P S. Ponnapalam; Yining Yu; Liu Shan; He Qingrong

doi:10.55220/2576-683x.v10.1439

Authors

Sun Qi Hulunbuir University, China, and SEGi University, No. 9 Jalan Teknologi, Taman Sains Selangor, Kota Damansara PJU 5, 47810 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
Perema Kumari A/P S. Ponnapalam SEGi University, No. 9 Jalan Teknologi, Taman Sains Selangor, Kota Damansara PJU 5, 47810 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
Yining Yu Pujiang Institute, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing, China.
Liu Shan SEGi University, No. 9 Jalan Teknologi, Taman Sains Selangor, Kota Damansara PJU 5, 47810 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia, and School of Literature and Law, Yunnan Technology and Business University, Kunming, Yunnan, China.
He Qingrong SEGi University, No. 9 Jalan Teknologi, Taman Sains Selangor, Kota Damansara PJU 5, 47810 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55220/2576-683x.v10.1439

Keywords:

Behavioral intention, Older adults, Smart home elderly care, Technology acceptance, Trust, Social support.

Abstract

Smart home elderly-care services can support ageing in place, yet favorable evaluations of a technology do not automatically become adoption intentions. This study integrates technology acceptance, multidimensional trust, and social support and tests the framework with complete questionnaire data from 512 Chinese adults aged 60–86 years. Twelve three-item scales were assessed on five-point response formats. Composite-score ordinary least squares models controlled for age, gender, education, income, and location; indirect effects were estimated with 5,000 bootstrap resamples. Perceived ease of use positively predicted trust (β = .147, p = .001), whereas perceived usefulness did not after adjustment (β = .080, p = .098). Perceived risk reduced trust (β = −.213, p < .001), while intergenerational, community, and institutional support increased it. Behavioral intention was positively associated with usefulness (β = .302), price value (β = .202), trust (β = .144), and intergenerational support (β = .083), and negatively associated with risk (β = −.095). Trust carried significant indirect effects from ease of use and all three support dimensions, but not from usefulness. Neither the support interactions nor a proposed quadratic intergenerational-support effect was significant. The results identify trust as a selective, rather than universal, conversion mechanism and suggest that support primarily establishes baseline confidence instead of amplifying already favorable evaluations. The cross-sectional design supports association, not causation.