Predicting User Acceptance of Solar-Powered Vending Machines Based on Quality Dimensions
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
Article Details
อนุญาตภายใต้เงื่อนไข Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
เอกสารอ้างอิง
Almasri, R. A.; Abu-Hamdeh, N. H.; Al-Tamimi, N. A state-of-the-art review of energy-efficient and renewable energy systems in higher education facilities. Front. Energy Res. 2024, 11, 1344216. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2023.1344216
Anjana, M. S.; Devidas, A. R.; Ramesh, M. V. Empowering sustainability: The crucial role of IoT-enabled distributed learning systems in reducing carbon footprints. IEEE Access 2025. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3539333
Granić, A.; Marangunić, N. Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2019, 50 (5), 2572–2593. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12864
Jabeen, G.; Wang, D.; Ahmad, M.; Işık, C.; Pinzón, S. P.; Rehman, A.; Ongan, S. Transitioning to sustainable energy: Multidimensional factors guiding solar power technology adoption. Energy 2024, 305, 133468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2024.133468
Haque, M. S. S.; Sultana, K. A.; Morshed, M. S. IoT-integrated cashless sanitary pad vending machine for sustainable menstrual hygiene management in Bangladesh. In 2024 25th Int. Arab Conf. Inf. Technol. (ACIT); IEEE: 2024; pp 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACIT62805.2024.10877057
Jun, Y.; Rehman, M. U.; Zelin, T.; Hussain, T.; Hussain, S. The intention to adopt photovoltaic systems: Integrating behavioral theories with mediation-moderation analysis. Acta Psychol. 2025, 256, 105027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105027
Giroux, M.; Kim, J.; Lee, J. C.; Park, J. Artificial intelligence and declined guilt: Retailing morality comparison between human and AI. J. Bus. Ethics 2022, 178(4), 1027–1041. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05056-7
Latif, I.; Saputro, R. E.; Barkah, A. S. Technology acceptance model (TAM) using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). J. Inf. Syst. Inform. 2025, 7(2), 1104. https://doi.org/10.51519/journalisi.v7i2.1104
Zhou, L.; Hao, L.; Xiong, Y.; Qin, H.; Bao, A.; Chen, Z. Research progress of robotic technologies and applications in smart pig farms. Agriculture 2026, 16(3), 334. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture16030334
Kabbara, N.; Nait Belaid, M. O.; Gibescu, M.; Camargo, L. R.; Cantenot, J.; Coste, T.; et al. Towards software-defined protection, automation, and control in power systems: Concepts, state of the art, and future challenges. Energies 2022, 15 (24), 9362. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15249362
Agozie, D. Q.; Afful-Dadzie, A.; Gyamfi, B. A.; Bekun, F. V. Does psychological empowerment improve renewable energy technology acceptance and recommendation? Evidence from 17 rural communities. Renewable Energy 2023, 219, 119449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.119449
Rosli, M. S.; Saleh, N. S.; Ali, A. J.; Bakar, S. N. A.; Tahir, L. M. A systematic review of the technology acceptance model for the sustainability of higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic and identified research gaps. Sustainability 2022, 14(18), 11389. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811389
Kamkankaew, P. Navigating the digital landscape with a comprehensive review: Challenges and limitations of the technology acceptance model. J. Interdiscip. Soc. Dev. 2026, 4(1), 851–907.
Limna, P.; Kraiwanit, T.; Chumwatana, T. Assessing the integration of ChatGPT in business environments: An application of the technology acceptance model. J. Dhamma Life 2024, 30(1), 221–231.
Sagnier, C.; Loup-Escande, E.; Lourdeaux, D.; Thouvenin, I.; Valléry, G. User acceptance of virtual reality: An extended technology acceptance model. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2020, 36(11), 993–1007. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2019.1708612
Bochmann, N.; Moryson, H. Evaluating user adoption of citizen development platform: A case study using the technology acceptance model. Int. Bus. Res. 2025, 18(4), 12. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v18n4p12
Fearnley, M. R.; Amora, J. T. Learning management system adoption in higher education using the extended technology acceptance model. IAFOR J. Educ. 2020, 8(2), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.8.2.05
Song, Y.; Qiu, X.; Liu, J. The impact of artificial intelligence adoption on organizational decision-making: An empirical study based on the technology acceptance model in business management. Systems 2025, 13 (8), 683. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems13080683
Syah, D.; Dongoran, F.; Nugrahadi, E. W.; Aditia, R. Understanding the technology acceptance model in QRIS usage: Evidence from SMEs in Indonesia. Int. J. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2022, 11(6), 337–346. https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v11i6.1917
Adnan, A.; Irvine, R.; Williams, A.; Harris, M.; Antonacci, G. Improving acceptability of mHealth apps: The use of the technology acceptance model to assess the acceptability of mHealth apps: Systematic review. J. Med. Internet Res. 2025, 27, e66432. https://doi.org/10.2196/66432
Harst, L.; Lantzsch, H.; Scheibe, M. Theories predicting end-user acceptance of telemedicine use: A systematic review. J. Med. Internet Res. 2019, 21(5), e13117. https://doi.org/10.2196/13117
Lee, C.-C. Acceptance of sales automation in supply chain operations: A perspective from the technology acceptance model framework. Supply Chain Sustainability Res. 2025, 4(2), 8–18.
Fadilah, N.; Andriani, N. Consumer preferences and decision-making in digital payments: A systematic review using the technology acceptance model (TAM). Asian J. Manag. Analytics 2025, 4(2), 14295. https://doi.org/10.55927/ajma.v4i2.14295
Kelly, S.; Kaye, S. A.; Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. What factors contribute to the acceptance of artificial intelligence? A systematic review. Telematics Inform. 2022, 77, 101925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2022.101925
Kraus, J.; Miller, L.; Klumpp, M.; Babel, F.; Scholz, D.; Merger, J.; Baumann, M. On the role of beliefs and trust for the intention to use service robots: An integrated trustworthiness beliefs model for robot acceptance. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 2023, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-022-00952-4
D'Souza, C.; Wong, W. Y.; Haber, N.; Brouwer, A.; Niininen, O. Online impulse purchases versus planned purchases and the role of visual attributes. J. Global Fashion Mark. 2024, 15(4), 504–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2024.2361884
Aakko, M.; Niinimäki, K. Quality matters: Reviewing the connections between perceived quality and clothing use time. J. Fashion Mark. Manage. 2022, 26(3), 475–492. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-09-2020-0192
Kapoor, K. K.; Dwivedi, Y. K. Sustainable consumption from the consumer's perspective: Antecedents of solar innovation adoption. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 152, 104501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104501
Li, Z.; Li, B.; Lyu, R.; Xu, H. Competing with brands: The impact of product reliability and compensation mechanisms on non-brand suppliers in smart technology. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-10-2024-1492
Rosillo-Díaz, E.; Muñoz-Rosas, J.; Blanco-Encomienda, F. J. Impact of heuristic-systematic cues on electronic commerce consumers' purchase intention through the perception of product quality. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2024, 79, 103980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103980
Madhavedi, S.; Y, R.; Hoo, W. C.; Suhud, U.; Mamoon, A. Assessing the role of perceived quality and brand elements in shaping Indian consumers' purchase intentions for cosmetic skincare products. Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Stud. 2025, 8 (1), 5037. https://doi.org/10.53894/ijirss.v8i1.5037
Wang, J.; Tao, J.; Chu, M. Behind the label: Chinese consumers' trust in food certification and the effect of perceived quality on purchase intention. Food Control 2020, 108, 106825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.106825
Religia, Y.; Ramawati, Y.; Syahwildan, M. S. Analysis of the effect of perceived product quality on retail purchase intention: The mediating role of consumer trust and the moderating effect of price sensitivity. Appl. Inf. Syst. Manage. 2024, 7(1), 33914. https://doi.org/10.15408/aism.v7i1.33914
Haedar, S.; Marsasi, E. G. How perceived usefulness, ease of use, and quality affect e-wallet intention in Gen Y and Z: A TAM perspective. Sentralisasi 2025, 14(2), 4233. https://doi.org/10.33506/sl.v14i2.4233
Mlekus, L.; Bentler, D.; Paruzel, A.; Kato-Beiderwieden, A. L.; Maier, G. W. How to raise technology acceptance: User experience characteristics as technology-inherent determinants. Gruppe Interaktion Organisation 2020, 51, 273–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11612-020-00529-7
Yook, H. J. Structural relationship between perceived quality, technology acceptance, and consumption behavioral intention of service robots in the food service industry. Culin. Sci. Hosp. Res. 2023, 29(4), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.20878/cshr.2023.29.4.011
Sun, W.; Yuan, M.; Zhang, Z. Promoting consumer adoption of electric vehicles from a standard-information-behavior perspective. Information 2022, 13(6), 291. https://doi.org/10.3390/info13060291
Li, M.; Bai, X.; Xing, S.; Wang, X. How smart product attributes influence consumer adoption intention. Front. Psychol. 2023, 14, 1090200. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1090200
Vatanapitukpong, V. Determinants of outsourced ERP implementation success: Effects of the task-technology fit theory and partnership quality perspective. AJMI 2020, 7(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.14456/ajmi.2020.3
Liu, C.; Jiang, J. The impact of AI-embedded education systems on teachers' work performance: An extension of the D&M information system success model. J. Interdiscip. Soc. Dev. 2025, 3(4), 738–776.
Ran, L.; Li, Z. An empirical study on takeout app customers' continuous use intention in China. AJMI 2020, 7(1), 90–107. https://doi.org/10.14456/ajmi.2020.7
Pattanayak, S. Investigating the impact of product quality on consumer satisfaction. Int. Sci. J. Eng. Manage. 2025, 4, 57. https://doi.org/10.55041/isjem04057
Fait, A. H. The mental image of a product and its influence on purchase and repeat purchase decisions by Saudi consumers. Edelweiss Appl. Sci. Technol. 2025, 9(2), 4750. https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4750
Fürst, A.; Pecornik, N.; Hoyer, W. D. How product complexity affects consumer adoption of new products: The role of feature heterogeneity and interrelatedness. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2023, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-023-00933-7
Dona, M. R.; Fernando, Y.; Ikhsan, R. B.; Wahyuni-Td, I. S.; Fernando, E.; Prabowo, H. Features, conformance and perceived product quality: A social security mobile app. In 2023 Int. Conf. Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol.; 2023; pp 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICOSNIKOM60230.2023.10364539
Baghirov, F.; Zhang, Y. Assessment of the association between aesthetic products and perceived product quality: An analysis of customer attitudes. J. Consum. Mark. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-01-2024-6521
Shi, A.; Huo, F.; Hou, G. Effects of design aesthetics on the perceived value of a product. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 670800. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.670800
Peng, C.; Eisend, M.; Chen, Z. EXPRESS: A meta-analysis of product visual aesthetics. J. Mark. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429251356484
Nagel, C.; Schumann, J. H. Post-adoption buffering effects of innovative product aesthetics. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2020, 29 (4), 653–669. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12363
Vaghari, H.; Hosseinzadeh Aghdam, M.; Emami, H. Group attention for collaborative filtering with sequential feedback and context-aware attributes. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15(1), 10050. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-94256-y
Hassan, M. U.; Iqbal, M. W.; Habibah, U. Self-service technology service quality: Building loyalty and intention through technology trust in the Pakistani service sector. SAGE Open 2020, 10(2), 2158244020924412. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020924412
Song, C. G.; Sohn, Y. W. The influence of dependability in cloud computing adoption. J. Supercomput. 2022, 78(9), 12159–12201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-022-04346-1
Cordella, M.; Alfieri, F.; Clemm, C.; Berwald, A. Durability of smartphones: A technical analysis of reliability and repairability aspects. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 286, 125388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125388
Jetti, R.; Dhar, D. Product durability: A systematic literature review. Arch. Des. Res. 2024, 37(5), 93–119. https://doi.org/10.15187/adr.2024.11.37.5.93
Mesa, J. A.; González-Quiroga, A.; Aguiar, M. D. S.; Jugend, D. Linking product design and durability: A review and research agenda. Heliyon 2022, 8(9), e10734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10734
Suvittawat, A. Investigating farmers' perceptions of drone technology in Thailand: Exploring expectations, product quality, perceived value, and adoption in agriculture. Agriculture 2024, 14(12), 2183. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14122183
Okokpujie, I. P.; Tartibu, L. K.; Omietimi, B. H. Improving the maintainability and reliability in Nigerian Industry 4.0: Its challenges and the way forward from the manufacturing sector. Int. J. Sustainable Dev. Plann. 2023, 18(8). https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.180820
Tanveer, A.; Zeng, S.; Irfan, M.; Peng, R. Do perceived risk, perception of self-efficacy, and openness to technology matter for solar PV adoption? An application of the extended theory of planned behavior. Energies 2021, 14(16), 5008. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14165008
Ali, S.; Poulova, P.; Akbar, A.; Javed, H. M. U.; Danish, M. Determining the influencing factors in the adoption of solar photovoltaic technology in Pakistan: A decomposed technology acceptance model approach. Economies 2020, 8(4), 108. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies8040108
Asif, M.; Tan, Z.; Ahmad, B.; Irfan, M.; Razzaq, A.; Ameer, W. Influencing factors of consumers' buying intention of solar energy: A structural equation modeling approach. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30(11), 30017–30032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-24286-w
Maalouf, N.; Sayegh, E.; Inati, D.; Sarkis, N. Consumer motivations for solar energy adoption in economically challenged regions. Sustainability 2024, 16(20), 8777. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16208777
Shakeel, S. R.; Yousaf, H. M. A. U.; Irfan, M.; Rajala, A. Solar PV adoption at the household level: Insights based on a systematic literature review. Energy Strategy Rev. 2023, 49, 101178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2023.101178
Alkawsi, G.; Ibrahim, N.; Al-Sharafi, M. A.; Mustafa, A.; Radzi, H. M.; Capretz, L. F. Determinants of uptake of the residential solar photovoltaic system and its impact on environmental sustainability: Evidence from PLS-SEM and fuzzy sets (fsQCA). Eng. Sci. Technol. Int. J. 2024, 57, 101795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2024.101795
Pan, T. L.; Kumar, R.; Foropon, C. Examining barriers to solar energy adoption: A PESTEL and IVHF-DEMATEL analysis for advancing Sustainable Development Goal 7. J. Environ. Manage. 2025, 389, 125918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.125918
Vu, T. H.; Nguyen, H. T. T.; Nguyen, T. T. M. Extending the theory of planned behavior to explain rooftop solar energy adoption in emerging markets: The moderating mechanism of personal innovativeness. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2023, 9(3), 100078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2023.100078
Alsulami, A.; Fairbrass, J.; Botelho, T.; Assadinia, S. Renewable energy and innovation in Saudi Arabia: An exploration of factors affecting consumers' intention to adopt solar PV. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2024, 205, 123430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123430
Bhardwaj, C.; Singh, P.; Kaur, R. Residential solar energy adoption: An empirical study on consumer awareness, perception, and influencing factors. Int. J. Multidiscip. Res. 2025, 7(3), 47110. https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2025.v07i03.47110
Khan, A. W.; Nazir, N. Motives for and barriers to consumers' behavior toward the adoptability of solar energy: A case study of District Peshawar. Pak. J. Soc. Res. 2022, 4(4), 832. https://doi.org/10.52567/pjsr.v4i04.832
Yusof, M. Y. M.; Fauzi, N. S. M.; Jamaludin, A.; Seman, S. N. A. A.; Salleh, M. A. M.; Tasrip, N. A. Technological advancements in vending machines: Transforming consumer behavior, market trends, and the future of automated retail. J. Posthumanism 2025, 5(6), 1968. https://doi.org/10.63332/joph.v5i6.1968
Wang, P. C.; Chen, W. C. SWOT analysis to explore the development of smart retail vending machines in the countryside. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Public Adm. 2024, 4(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.62051/ijsspa.v4n1.46
Pillai, R.; Sivathanu, B.; Dwivedi, Y. K. Shopping intention at AI-powered automated retail stores (AIPARS). J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 57, 102207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102207
Rabbani, A.; Musa, S. N. The relationship of trust, product attractiveness, and technology features toward the technology acceptance model in the case of vending machines. In Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Bus. Manage. Technol. (IConBMT); 2020; pp 218–225. https://doi.org/10.2991/aebmr.k.201222.032
Lin, C. Y. Understanding consumer perceptions and attitudes toward smart retail services. J. Serv. Mark. 2022, 36(6), 761–778. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-09-2020-0407
Baranovski, I.; Stankovski, S.; Ostojić, G.; Horvat, S.; Trifković, S. Augmented reality support for self-service automated systems. J. Graph. Eng. Des. 2020, 11(1), 63–68. https://doi.org/10.24867/JGED-2020-1-063
Bouaguel, W.; Alsulimani, T. Understanding the factors influencing consumers' intention toward shifting to solar energy technology for residential use in Saudi Arabia using the technology acceptance model. Sustainability 2022, 14(18), 11356. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811356
Park, I.; Kim, D.; Moon, J.; Kim, S.; Kang, Y.; Bae, S. Searching for a new technology acceptance model under the social context: Analyzing the determinants of acceptance of intelligent information technology in digital transformation and implications for the requisites of digital sustainability. Sustainability 2022, 14(1), 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010579
Venkatesh, V.; Bala, H. Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decis. Sci. 2008, 39(2), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
Yang, L.; Bashiru Danwana, S.; Yassaanah, I. F.-L. An empirical study of renewable energy technology acceptance in Ghana using an extended technology acceptance model. Sustainability 2021, 13(19), 10791. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910791
Solin, A.; Curry, A. Perceived quality: In search of a definition. TQM J. 2023, 35(6), 1433–1447. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-09-2021-0280
Recuenco, A. G.; Reyes, W. S. Perceived quality: The best accepted good in the language of marketing. SCIÉNDO 2020, 23(2), 24. https://doi.org/10.17268/sciendo.2020.024
Kolawole, M. I.; Ayodele, B. L. Smart electronics in solar-powered grid systems for enhanced renewable energy efficiency and reliability. Int. J. Sci. Res. Arch. 2024, 13(2), 2910–2930. https://doi.org/10.30574/ijsra.2024.13.2.2512
Rituraj, G.; Mouli, G. R. C.; Bauer, P. A comprehensive review on off-grid and hybrid charging systems for electric vehicles. IEEE Open J. Ind. Electron. Soc. 2022, 3, 203–222. https://doi.org/10.1109/OJIES.2022.3167948
Sah, R.; Chowdhury, A. K. The influence of aesthetics and apparent usability on jewelry design preference. ASR Chiang Mai Univ. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2024, 11(2), 9. https://doi.org/10.12982/cmujasr.2024.009
Helmy, H. A.; El-Rifaie, A. M.; Youssef, A. A.; Haggag, A.; Hamad, H.; Eltokhy, M. Improving solar energy-harvesting wireless sensor networks (SEH-WSNs) with hybrid Li-Fi/Wi-Fi, integrating Markov models, sleep scheduling, and smart switching algorithms. Technologies 2025, 13(10), 437. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies13100437
Kim, E.; Nicolau, J. L.; Tang, L. R. The impact of restaurant innovativeness on consumer loyalty: The mediating role of perceived quality. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2021, 45(8), 1464–1488. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348020985586
Risdayanti, R.; Titing, A.; Ismanto, I. The influence of brand image and perceived product quality on consumers' purchase intention for Axioo laptops. J. Manaj. Bisnis Kewirausahaan 2025, 5(1), 5469. https://doi.org/10.55606/jumbiku.v5i1.5469
Zheng, J.; Zeng, B. Unleashing the influencing factors of solar energy adoption to combat climate change: A roadmap toward sustainable energy technologies. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2023, 59, 103303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2023.103303
Nekmahmud, M.; Fekete-Farkas, M. Why not green marketing? Determinants of consumers' intention to green purchase decisions in a newly developing nation. Sustainability 2020, 12(19), 7880. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12197880
Al-Ateeq, B.; Sawan, N.; Al-Hajaya, K.; Altarawneh, M.; Al-Makhadmeh, A. Big data analytics in auditing and the consequences for audit quality: A study using the technology acceptance model (TAM). Corp. Gov. Organ. Behav. Rev. 2022, 6(1), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.22495/cgobrv6i1p5
Su, D. N.; Nguyen, N. T.; Nguyen, L. H.; Luu, T. T.; Nguyen-Phuoc, D. Q. Modeling consumers' trust in mobile food delivery apps: Perspectives of the technology acceptance model, mobile service quality, and personalization-privacy theory. J. Hosp. Mark. Manage. 2022, 31(5), 535–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2022.2020199
Ge, Y.; Yuan, Q.; Wang, Y.; Park, K. S. The structural relationship among perceived service quality, perceived value, and customer satisfaction: Focused on Starbucks Reserve coffee shops in Shanghai, China. Sustainability 2021, 13(15), 8633. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158633
