The influence of ethical judgements on acceptance and non-acceptance of wearables and insideables: Fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis

Jorge de Andrés-Sánchez, Mario Arias-Oliva, Jorge Pelegrín-Borondo and Mohammad Almahameed, Ala’ Ali

Technology in Society, 2021, vol. 67, issue C

Abstract: The rise of intelligent technological devices (ITDs)—wearables and insideables—provides the possibility of enhancing human capabilities and skills. This study contributes to the literature on the impact of ethical judgements on the acceptance of ITDs by using a multidimensional ethical scale (MES) proposed by Shwayer and Sennetti. The novelty of this study resides in using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) instead of correlational methods to explain human behaviour (in this case, attitudes towards ITDs) from an ethical perspective. fsQCA evaluates the influence of ethical variables on the intention to use ITDs (and the non-use of these technologies). Positive ethical evaluations of technology do not always ensure ITD acceptance—unfavourable ethical perceptions may lead to its rejection. We find that for wearables: (1) positive perceptions from a utilitarian perspective are key in explaining their acceptance. Likewise, we identify configurations leading to acceptance where positive judgements on moral equity, egoism and contractualism are needed. Surprisingly, only the relativism dimension participates in configurations that cause acceptance when it is negated; (2) We found that a single unfavourable perception from a contractualism or relativism perspective causes non-use. Likewise, we found that coupling of negative judgements on moral equity, utilitarianism and egoism dimensions also produce resistance to wearables. For insideables, we notice that: (1) an MES has weak explanatory power for the intention to use ITDs but is effective in understanding resistance to use; (2) A negative perception of any ethical dimension leads to resistance towards insideables.

Keywords: Ethical judgements; Multidimensional ethical scale; Intelligent technological devices; Intention to use; Intention to non-use; Qualitative comparative analysis; Fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X21001640
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:teinso:v:67:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x21001640

DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101689

Access Statistics for this article

Technology in Society is currently edited by Charla Griffy-Brown

More articles in Technology in Society from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().