Background Designing technologies that users will be interested in, start using, and keep using has long been a challenge. In the health domain, the question of technology acceptance is even more important, as the possible intrusiveness of technologies could lead to patients refusing to even try them. Developers and researchers must address this question not only in the design and evaluation of new health care technologies but also across the different stages of the user’s journey. Although a range of definitions for these stages exists, many researchers conflate related terms, and the field would benefit from a coherent set of definitions and associated measurement approaches. Objective This review aims to explore how technology acceptance is interpreted and measured in mobile health (mHealth) literature. We seek to compare the treatment of acceptance in mHealth research with existing definitions and models, identify potential gaps, and contribute to the clarification of the process of technology acceptance. Methods We searched the PubMed database for publications indexed under the Medical Subject Headings terms “Patient Acceptance of Health Care” and “Mobile Applications.” We included publications that (1) contained at least one of the terms “acceptability,” “acceptance,” “adoption,” “accept,” or “adopt”; and (2) defined the term. The final corpus included 68 relevant studies. Results Several interpretations are associated with technology acceptance, few consistent with existing definitions. Although the literature has influenced the interpretation of the concept, usage is not homogeneous, and models are not adapted to populations with particular needs. The prevalence of measurement by custom surveys suggests a lack of standardized measurement tools. Conclusions Definitions from the literature were published separately, which may contribute to inconsistent usage. A definition framework would bring coherence to the reporting of results, facilitating the replication and comparison of studies. We propose the Technology Acceptance Lifecycle, consolidating existing definitions, articulating the different stages of technology acceptance, and providing an explicit terminology. Our findings illustrate the need for a common definition and measurement framework and the importance of viewing technology acceptance as a staged process, with adapted measurement methods for each stage.

In recent decades, emotion regulation (ER) has been one of the most widely studied constructs within the psychological field. Nevertheless, laboratory experiments and retrospective assessments have been the two most common strands of ER research, thus leaving open several crucial questions about ER antecedents and consequences in daily life. Beyond traditional methods, ecological momentary assessment (EMA) has the potential to capture ER dynamics during the flow of daily experiences, in real-life settings and through repeated measurements. Here, we discuss what we currently know about ER antecedents and consequences. We will compare findings from previous literature to findings from EMA studies, pointing out both similarities and differences, as well as questions that can be answered better with the EMA approach.

Publication informationPresence-Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 12 (5): 523-537 Publisher MIT PressItem record/more information

No abstract

The Psychology of Human WayfindingWe travel through the environment to reach places that satisfy our needs and wants. Successful travel requires that we know where to go and how to get there; it also requires that we can move along the intended route in the intended direction without having accidents or getting unnecessarily delayed. Taken together, these are requirements of navigation: coordinated and goal-directed movement through the environment. Navigation occurs over a wide spectrum of spatio-temporal scales. We navigate to the other side of the room, to the post office, to visit our relatives in another town, or to vacation half way around the world. In order to navigate effectively, we apply our psychological skills of perception, cognition, and motor behavior, within the contexts of physical and social environments, and with the assistance of technologies of information and transportation. There are consequently a host of human factors issues relevant to navigation. Attention to these issues can result in improvements to the design of technologies, environments, and training procedures that increase the ease, accuracy, efficiency, comfort, and safety of navigation.