Responsible technology acceptance: Model development and application to consumer acceptance of Smart Grid technology

Applied Energy

Volumn 134, Issue , 2014, Pages 392-400

  Broman Toft, Madeleine ^a   Schuitema, Geertje ^a   Thøgersen, John ^a  

^a AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Personal norms; Smart Grid; Technology acceptance

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL ACTIVATION; CLIMATE CHANGE; SMART POWER GRIDS; ELECTRIC POWER TRANSMISSION NETWORKS;

CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE; ELECTRICITY GRIDS; INDEPENDENT VARIABLES; PERSONAL NORM; SMART GRID; SMART GRID TECHNOLOGIES; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL;

ELECTRIC POWER TRANSMISSION NETWORKS; SMART POWER GRIDS;

CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; ELECTRICITY GENERATION; NUMERICAL MODEL; PARAMETERIZATION; TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION; ELECTRICAL POWER; RENEWABLE RESOURCE;

NETHERLANDS; NORWAY; SWITZERLAND; DENMARK;

EID: 84906836369     PISSN: 03062619     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.08.048     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Lund H. Renewable energy strategies for sustainable development. Energy 2007, 32:912-919.
2. Biegel B., Hansen L.H., Stoustrup J., Andersen P., Harbo S. Value of flexible consumption in the electricity markets. Energy 2014, 66:354-362.
3. Broeer T., Fuller J., Tuffner F., Chassin D., Djilali N. Modeling framework and validation of a Smart Grid and demand response system for wind power integration. Appl Energy 2014, 113:199-207.
4. Moura P.S., de Almeida A.T. The role of demand-side management in the grid integration of wind power. Appl Energy 2010, 87:2581-2588.
5. IEA. Smart Grid - smart customer policy needs. International Energy Agency; 2011.
6. Smart Grids - European technology platform. European technology platform for the electricity networks of the future - FAQs about ETP Smart Grids; 2013.
7. Clastres C. Smart Grids: another step towards competition, energy security and climate change objectives. Energy Policy 2011, 39:5399-5408.
8. Wissner M. The Smart Grid - a saucerful of secrets?. Appl Energy 2011, 88:2509-2518.
9. European Commission's Joint Research Centre. Smart Grid projects in Europe: lessons learned and current developments. In: Giordano V, Gangale F, Fulli G, Jiménez M, editors. Luxembourg: Publications office of the European Union; 2011.
10. Gangale F., Mengolini A., Onyeji I. Consumer engagement: an insight from Smart Grid projects in Europe. Energy Policy 2013, 60:621-628.
11. European Commission's Joint Research Centre. Energy efficiency status report - electricity consumption and efficiency trends in the EU-27. In: Bertoldi P, Hirl B, Labanca N, editors. JCR scientific and policy reports: European Commission; 2012.
12. The Smart Grids task force. European task force for the implementation of Smart Grids into the European internal market - mission and work programme. European Commission; 2010.
13. Energy Dong Demand response - the eFlex project 2012, Virum, Denmark.
14. Accenture. Understanding consumers preferences in energy efficiency. Accenture; 2010.
15. Krishnamurti T., Schwartz D., Davis A., Fischhoff B., de Bruin W.B., Lave L., et al. Preparing for Smart Grid technologies: a behavioral decision research approach to understanding consumer expectations about smart meters. Energy Policy 2012, 41:790-797.
16. Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance. MIS Quart 1989, 13:319-340.
17. Schwartz SH. Normative influences on altruism. In: Leonard B, editor. Advances in experimental social psychology. Academic Press; 1977. p. 221-79.
18. Electricity consumption in houses (Elforbrug i huse). Dong Energy. http://www.DongEnergy.dk.
19. EurActiv. Doubts cast over consumer benefits of smart meters. EurActiv. EurActiv; 2012. http://www.euractiv.com.
20. Economics Frontier Economic potential of smart electricity meters in Germany 2011, Frontier Economics Ltd., London.
21. Hamilton BA. Understanding the benefits of the Smart Grid - Smart Grid implementation strategy. In: Hamilton BA, Miller J, Renz B, editors. United States: United States Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory; 2010.
22. Krupka E., Weber R.A. The focusing and informational effects of norms on pro-social behavior. J Econ Psychol 2009, 30:307-320.
23. McCalley L.T., Midden C.J.H. Energy conservation through product-integrated feedback: the role of goal-setting and social orientation. J Econ Psychol 2002, 23:589-603.
24. Jansson J., Marell A., Nordlund A. Exploring consumer adoption of a high involvement eco-innovation using value-belief-norm theory. J Consum Behav 2011, 10:51-60.
25. Huijts N.M.A., Molin E.J.E., van Wee B. Hydrogen fuel station acceptance: a structural equation model based on the technology acceptance framework. J Environ Psychol 2014, 38:153-166.
26. de Groot J.I.M., Steg L. Morality and nuclear energy: perceptions of risks and benefits, personal norms, and willingness to take action related to nuclear energy. Risk Anal 2010, 30:1363-1373.
27. Ajzen I., Fishbein M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior 1980, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 1st ed.
28. Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. Action control 1985, 11-39. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg. J. Kuhl, J. Beckmann (Eds.).
29. Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P., Warshaw P.R. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci 1989, 35:982-1003.
30. Chang S, Chou C, Yang J. The literature review of Technology Acceptance Model: a study of the bibliometric distributions. Pacific Asia conference on information systems, PACIS 2010 Taipei, Taiwan; 2010.
31. Huijts N.M.A., Molin E.J.E., Steg L. Psychological factors influencing sustainable energy technology acceptance: a review-based comprehensive framework. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012, 16:525-531.
32. Waarts E., van Everdingen Y.M., van Hillegersberg J. The dynamics of factors affecting the adoption of innovations. J Prod Innov Manage 2002, 19:412-423.
33. Schwartz S.H., Howard J.A. A normative decision-making model of altruism. Altruism and helping behaviour: social, personality, and developmental perspectives 1981, 189-211. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. J.P. Rushton, R.M. Sorrentine (Eds.).
34. Thøgersen J. Recycling and morality: a critical review of the literature. Environ Behav 1996, 28:536-558.
35. Bamberg S., Möser G. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J Environ Psychol 2007, 27:14-25.
36. Biel A., Thøgersen J. Activation of social norms in social dilemmas: a review of the evidence and reflections on the implications for environmental behaviour. J Econ Psychol 2007, 28:93-112.
37. Huijts N.M.A., De Groot J.I.M., Molin E.J.E., van Wee B. Intention to act towards a local hydrogen refueling facility: moral considerations versus self-interest. Transport Res Part A: Policy Pract 2013, 48:63-74.
38. Abrahamse W., Steg L., Gifford R., Vlek C. Factors influencing car use and the intention to reduce it: a question of morality?. Transport Res Part F: Traffic Psychol Behav 2009, 12:317-324.
39. Schwartz S.H., Howard J.A. Internalized values as moderators of altruism. Development and maintenance of prosocial behavior: international perspectives on positive morality 1984, 229-255. Plenum Press, New York. E. Staub, B.-T. Karylowski, J. Reykowski (Eds.).
40. Gardner G.T., Stern P.C. Environmental problems and human behavior 1996, Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA, US.
41. Steg L., de Groot J.I.M. Explaining prosocial intentions: testing causal relationships in the norm activation model. Br J Soc Psychol 2010, 49:725-743.
42. Schepers J., Wetzels M. A meta-analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model: investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Inform Manage 2007, 44:90-103.
43. Sun H., Zhang P. The role of moderating factors in user technology acceptance. Int J Hum Comput Stud 2006, 64:53-78.
44. Geelen D., Reinders A., Keyson D. Empowering the end-user in Smart Grids: recommendations for the design of products and services. Energy Policy 2013, 61:151-161.
45. Hauttekeete L, Stragier J, Haerick W, De Marez L. Smart, smarter, smartest the consumer meets the smart electrical grid. In: 9th Conference on Telecommunications Internet and Media Techno Economics (CTTE); 2010. p. 1-6.
46. Stragier J, Hauttekeete L, De Marez L. Introducing Smart Grids in residential contexts: consumers' perception of smart household appliances. IEEE Conference on Innovative Technologies for an Efficient and Reliable Electricity Supply (CITRES); 2010. p. 135-42.
47. EcoPinion. Consumer cents for Smart Grid, survey report. Ecoalign; 2011. p. 1-23.
48. Fishbein M., Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research 1975, Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Reading, Mass.
49. Schwartz S.H., Tessler R.C. A test of a model for reducing measured attitude-behavior discrepancies. J Pers Soc Psychol 1972, 24:225-236.
50. Bamberg S., Schmidt P. Incentives, morality, or habit? Predicting students' car use for university routes with the models of Ajzen, Schwartz, and Triandis. Environ Behav 2003, 35:264-285.
51. Bamberg S., Hunecke M., Blöbaum A. Social context, personal norms and the use of public transportation: two field studies. J Environ Psychol 2007, 27:190-203.
52. Klöckner C.A., Blöbaum A. A comprehensive action determination model: toward a broader understanding of ecological behaviour using the example of travel mode choice. J Environ Psychol 2010, 30:574-586.
53. Matthies E., Selge S., Klöckner C.A. The role of parental behaviour for the development of behaviour specific environmental norms - the example of recycling and re-use behaviour. J Environ Psychol 2012, 32:277-284.
54. Harland P., Staats H., Wilke H.A.M. Situational and personality factors as direct or personal norm mediated predictors of pro-environmental behavior: questions derived from norm-activation theory. Basic Appl Soc Psychol 2007, 29:323-334.
55. Black J.S., Stern P.C., Elworth J.T. Personal and contextual influences on household energy adaptations. J Appl Psychol 1985, 70:3-21.
56. Matthies E. One to bind them all: how the modified moral decision making model can be used for the integration of measures to promote pro-environmental travel mode choices. Crossing boundaries - the value of interdisciplinary research Aberdeen 2003, 103-109. Robert Gordon University, Scotland. T. Craig (Ed.).
57. Den store danske - Gyldendals åbne encyklopædi (eng. The great Danish - Gyldendals open encyclopedia). In: Winge V, editor. Denmark: Gyldendal A/S; 2013. http://www.denstoredanske.dk.
58. Steg L., Dreijerink L., Abrahamse W. Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies: a test of VBN theory. J Environ Psychol 2005, 25:415-425.
59. Read W., Robertson N., McQuilken L. A novel romance: the Technology Acceptance Model with emotional attachment. Aust Market J (AMJ) 2011, 19:223-229.
60. van de Schoot R., Lugtig P., Hox J. A checklist for testing measurement invariance. Eur J Dev Psychol 2012, 9:1-7.
61. Steenkamp J.B.E.M., Baumgartner H. Assessing measurement invariance in cross national consumer research. J Consum Res 1998, 25:78-107.
62. Hu L., Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 1999, 6:1-55.
63. Yu C-Y, Muthén B. Evaluation of model fit indices for latent variable models with categorical and continuous outcomes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA; 2002.
64. Belanche D., Casaló L.V., Flavián C. Integrating trust and personal values into the Technology Acceptance Model: the case of e-government services adoption. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa 2012, 15:192-204.
65. Henderson R., Divett M.J. Perceived usefulness, ease of use and electronic supermarket use. Int J Hum Comput Stud 2003, 59:383-395.
66. Holden R.J., Karsh B.-T. The Technology Acceptance Model: Its past and its future in health care. J Biomed Inform 2010, 43:159-172.
67. Bolderdijk J.W., Steg L., Geller E.S., Lehman P.K., Postmes T. Comparing the effectiveness of monetary versus moral motives in environmental campaigning. Nat Clim Change 2013, 3:413-416.
68. Throne-Holst H., Strandbakken P., Stø E. Identification of households' barriers to energy saving solutions. Manage Environ Qual: An Int J 2008, 19:55-66.
69. Broman Toft M., Schuitema G., Thøgersen J. The importance of framing for consumer acceptance of the Smart Grid: A comparative study of Denmark, Norway and Switzerland. Energ Res Soc Sci 2014, 3:113-123.