The progression in the technology field has resulted in a lack of physical activity and poor diets, leading to health problems. Many individuals are turning to mobile health applications (mHAs) to manage their health and well-being. Despite significant investment in developing mHA, research indicates that the adoption rate of mHAs remains low, with inadequate user acceptability being a primary reason. Therefore, this study aims to propose a framework that provides a deeper understanding of the factors that influence users’ decision-making towards mHA.
Design/methodology/approach:
The study used a single cross-sectional design to collect 353 responses from both users and non-users, using a purposive sampling technique. The collected data were analysed using structural equation modelling (SEM) using Smart PLS 4.0 software. Additionally, the study validates a more vigorous behavioural model, providing a comprehensive understanding of the adoption of mHA.
Findings:
The findings of the study accentuate the significant influence of PU, PV, PEOU, and attitude on the intention to adopt mHA. Additionally, the study investigated the mediation role of attitude and PU. Furthermore, the study examined the moderating role of FOMO on the underlying relationships.
Practical Implications:
The study will provide a holistic model grounded on three theories, namely, TAM, self-determination theory, and protection motivation theory, to determine consumers’ intention to adopt mHA. Also, the study advances the existing literature by investigating the interactive role of FOMO on the technology acceptance model (TAM) and health beliefs. Furthermore, this study aims to develop a deeper understanding of user acceptance by analysing the behavioural pattern to create a more user-centric mobile health solution and provide developers and marketers with insights to enhance user acceptability and improve the overall adoption rates of mHAs.
Originality/Value:
Previous literature on mHAs has mainly focused on the utilitarian factors; however, the technology acceptance behaviour of a consumer is influenced by the utilitarian and symbolic dimensions. The relevance of symbolic elements, particularly FOMO, has, somehow, eluded the attention of scholars towards mHAs. Further, there is a limited understanding of how symbolic beliefs interplay with the TAM and health beliefs. Therefore, this study introduces TAM, PMT, and SDT in the context of mHAs to provide a holistic view of the influence of utilitarian, symbolic, and health dimensions on users’ intention to use mHAs.
AhadzadehA. S., Pahlevan SharifS., & Sim OngF. (2018). Online health information seeking among women: The moderating role of health consciousness. Online Information Review, 42(1), 58–72.
2.
AjzenI. (2018). Consumer attitudes and behavior. In Handbook of consumer psychology (pp. 529–552). Routledge.
3.
AlfaddaH. A., & MahdiH. S. (2021). Measuring students’ use of zoom application in language course based on the technology acceptance model (TAM). Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 50(4), 883–900.
4.
Al-FuraihS. A., & Al-AwidiH. M. (2021). Fear of missing out (FoMO) among undergraduate students in relation to attention distraction and learning disengagement in lectures. Education and Information Technologies, 26(2), 2355–2373.
5.
AnazaN. A., UpadhyayaB., BennettD., & RuvalcabaC. (2024). Is it FOMO or is it ME? The influence of personality traits on cryptocurrency consumption. Psychology & Marketing, 41(1), 184–202.
6.
BagratuniM., SilbererJ., PlaningP., & MüllerP. (2025). Media immersion and acceptance of technologies: Exploring the influence of virtual reality, video, and photo-based presentations using the case of air taxis. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 29, 101317.
7.
BakerZ. G., KriegerH., & LeRoyA. S. (2016). Fear of missing out: Relationships with depression, mindfulness, and physical symptoms. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 2(3), 275.
8.
BaliS., ChenT. C., & LiuM. C. (2025). Behavioral intentions of low-achieving students to use mobile English learning: Integrating self-determination theory, theory of planned behavior, and technology acceptance model approaches. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 41(9), 5522–5532.
9.
CampbellS., GreenwoodM., PriorS., ShearerT., WalkemK., YoungS., BywaterD., & WalkerK. (2020). Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652–661.
10.
CengizH., & ŞenelM. (2023). The effect of perceived scarcity on impulse-buying tendencies in a fast fashion context: A mediating and multigroup analysis. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 28(3).
11.
ChengT. E., LamD. Y., & YeungA. C. (2006). Adoption of internet banking: An empirical study in Hong Kong. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1558–1572.
12.
ChinW. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), 295–336.
13.
CohenJ. (1988). The effect size. In Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (pp. 77–83). Routledge.
14.
CoumansJ. M., BolmanC. A., OenemaA., & LechnerL. (2022). The effects of a web-based computer-tailored diet and physical activity intervention based on self-determination theory and motivational interviewing: A randomized controlled trial. Internet Interventions, 28, 100537.
15.
DavisF. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
16.
DavisF. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
17.
DeciE. L., & RyanR. M. (1985). Motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Publishing Co.
18.
DoshiP., NigamP., & RishiB. (2025). Customer values and patronage intention in social media networks: Mediating role of perceived usefulness. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 55(2), 404–420.
19.
FishbeinM., & AjzenI. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research (Vol. 27). Addison-Wesley.
20.
FornellC., & LarckerD. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
21.
GeddamS. M., NethravathiN., & HussianA. A. (2024). Understanding AI adoption: The mediating role of attitude in user acceptance. Journal of Informatics Education and Research, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.52783/jier.v4i2.975
22.
GhimireA., ImranM. A. U., BiswasB., TiwariA., & SahaS. (2024). Behavioral intention to adopt artificial intelligence in educational institutions: A hybrid modelling approach. Journal of Computer Science and Technology Studies, 6(3), 56–64.
23.
GoodeM. R., DahlD. W., & MoreauC. P. (2010). The effect of experiential analogies on consumer perceptions and attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(2), 274–286.
24.
HairJ. F., AstrachanC. B., MoisescuO. I., RadomirL., SarstedtM., VaithilingamS., & RingleC. M. (2021). Executing and interpreting applications of PLS‐SEM: Updates for family business researchers. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 12(3), 100392.
25.
HairJ. F., RingleC. M., & SarstedtM. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152.
26.
HasaniT., RezaniaD., LevalletN., O’ReillyN., & MohammadiM. (2023). Privacy enhancing technology adoption and its impact on SMEs’ performance. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 15, 18479790231172874.
27.
HenselerJ., RingleC. M., & SinkovicsR. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In New challenges to international marketing (Vol. 20, pp. 277)–319). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
28.
HoqueR., & SorwarG. (2017). Understanding factors influencing the adoption of mHealth by the elderly: An extension of the UTAUT model. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 101, 75–84.
29.
HurstC., GibbonH. F., & NurseA. (2016). Social inequality: Forms, causes, and consequences. Routledge.
30.
HusseinR. S., MohamedH., & KaisA. (2022). Antecedents of level of social media use: Exploring the mediating effect of usefulness, attitude and satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Communications, 28(7), 703–724.
31.
IshengomaF. (2024). Revisiting the TAM: Adapting the model to advanced technologies and evolving user behaviours. The Electronic Library, 42(6), 1055–1073.
32.
JainS., & AgrawalS. (2021). Perceived vulnerability of cyberbullying on social networking sites: Effects of security measures, addiction and self-disclosure. Indian Growth and Development Review, 14(2), 149–171.
33.
KimJ., BaekY., & ChoiY. H. (2012). The structural effects of metaphor-elicited cognitive and affective elaboration levels on attitude toward the ad. Journal of Advertising, 41(2), 77–96.
34.
KockN. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJEC), 11(4), 1–10.
35.
LegassH. A., & DurmuşM. E. (2024). Factors determining the adoption of mobile banking in Ethiopian Islamic banks: Extension of technology acceptance model (TAM). Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIABR-02-2024-0051
36.
LiK. (2023). Determinants of college students’ actual use of AI-based systems: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Sustainability, 15(6), 5221.
37.
LiQ. (2020). Healthcare at your fingertips: The acceptance and adoption of mobile medical treatment services among Chinese users. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 6895.
38.
LuoY., WangG., LiY., & YeQ. (2021). Examining protection motivation and network externality perspective regarding the continued intention to use m-health apps. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(11), 5684.
39.
MishraP., & SinghG. (2023). Internet of medical things healthcare for sustainable smart cities: Current status and future prospects. Applied Sciences, 13(15), 8869.
40.
OberstU., WegmannE., StodtB., BrandM., & ChamarroA. (2017). Negative consequences from heavy social networking in adolescents: The mediating role of fear of missing out. Journal of Adolescence, 55, 51–60.
41.
OngA. K. S., PrasetyoY. T., KusonwattanaP., YuduangN., PersadaS. F., NadlifatinR., CahigasM. M. L., ChuenyindeeT., & ThanaK. (2023). Factors affecting the intention to prepare for tsunami in Thailand. Ocean & Coastal Management, 233, 106464.
42.
PantanoE., & PriporasC. V. (2016). The effect of mobile retailing on consumers’ purchasing experiences: A dynamic perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 548–555.
43.
ParkH. J. (2022). Impact of Facebook usage intensity on fear of missing out and depression: Moderated mediating effect of Facebook usage behaviour. Telematics and Informatics, 74, 101878.
44.
PodsakoffP. M., MacKenzieS. B., LeeJ. Y., & PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
45.
Prentice-DunnS., & RogersR. W. (1986). Protection motivation theory and preventive health: Beyond the health belief model. Health Education Research, 1(3), 153–161.
46.
PrzybylskiA. K., MurayamaK., DeHaanC. R., & GladwellV. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1841–1848.
47.
QuS., ZhouM., KongN., & CampyK. S. (2023). Factors influencing user acceptance of weight management apps among Chinese obese individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health Policy and Technology, 12(2), 100758.
48.
RahiS., KhanM. M., & AlghizzawiM. (2021). Factors influencing the adoption of telemedicine health services during COVID-19 pandemic crisis: An integrative research model. Enterprise Information Systems, 15(6), 769–793.
49.
RamosM. D. (2023). Exploring the relationship between planned behavior and self-determination theory on health-seeking behaviour among older adults with hearing impairment. Geriatric Nursing, 52, 1–7.
50.
RenuN. (2021). Technological advancement in the era of COVID-19. SAGE Open Medicine, 9, 20503121211000912.
51.
RogersR. W. (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change1. The Journal of Psychology, 91(1), 93–114.
52.
RohaniN., & YusofM. M. (2023). Unintended consequences of pharmacy information systems: A case study. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 170, 104958.
53.
RyanR. M., & DeciE. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68.
54.
ShahsavarY., & ChoudhuryA. (2023). User intentions to use ChatGPT for self-diagnosis and health-related purposes: Cross-sectional survey study. JMIR Human Factors, 10(1), e47564.
55.
ShinE., & YangH. (2025). Effect of Chinese consumer characteristics on the attitude of AI-curated fashion service and the purchase intention of fashion products. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 29(1), 20–37.
56.
ShihY. Y., & FangK. (2004). The use of a decomposed theory of planned behavior to study Internet banking in Taiwan. Internet Research, 14(3), 213–223.
57.
SinghS., & KumarA. (2025). Investing in the future: An integrated model for analysing user attitudes towards Robo-advisory services with AI integration. Vilakshan-XIMB Journal of Management, 22(1), 158–175.
58.
SubramaniamT. M. R., Vafaei-ZadehA., HanifahH., & NikbinD. (2025). To adopt or not to adopt mobile health applications? A study among Generation X mobile phone users in a developing country. Journal of Health Organization and Management.
59.
TannerE. C., VannR. J., & KizilovaE. (2020). Consumer-level perceived access to health services and its effects on vulnerability and health outcomes. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 39(2), 240–255.
60.
TomasF., & ImmerzeelJ. (2025). Chatbots in eyewitness interviews: Perceived usefulness and ease of use drive intent to use conversational agent. Journal of Criminal Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCP-11-2024-0110
61.
TsaiT.-H., LinW.-Y., ChangY.-S., ChangP.-C., & LeeM.-Y. (2020). Technology anxiety and resistance to change behavioral study of a wearable cardiac warming system using an extended TAM for older adults. PloS One, 15(1), e0227270.
62.
UramP., & SkalskiS. (2022). Still logged in? The link between Facebook addiction, FoMO, self-esteem, life satisfaction and loneliness in social media users. Psychological Reports, 125(1), 218–231.
63.
VenkateshV., & DavisF. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.
64.
VenkateshV., MorrisM. G., DavisG. B., & DavisF. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.
65.
VenkateshV., ThongJ. Y., & XuX. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.
66.
YeeT. S., SeongL. C., & ChinW. S. (2019). Patient’s intention to use mobile health app. Journal of Management Research, 11(3), 18.
67.
YooJ. W., ParkJ. S., & ParkH. J. (2023). Understanding VR-based construction safety training effectiveness: The role of telepresence, risk perception, and training satisfaction. Applied Sciences, 13(2), 1135.
68.
ZahidH., AliS., DanishM., & SulaimanM. A. B. A. (2024). Factors affecting consumers intentions to purchase dairy products in Pakistan: A cognitive affective-attitude approach. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 36(3), 347–372.
69.
ZhangX., LiuS., WangL., ZhangY., & WangJ. (2020). Mobile health service adoption in China: integration of theory of planned behavior, protection motivation theory and personal health differences. Online Information Review, 44(1), 1–23.
70.
ZhaoY., NiQ., & ZhouR. (2018). What factors influence the mobile health service adoption? A meta-analysis and the moderating role of age. International Journal of Information Management, 43, 342–350.
