Despite the growing use of wearable technologies in tourism, academic research on their adoption remains scarce, particularly regarding cashless wristbands. This study addresses this gap by analyzing how perceived technology use, socio-symbolic drivers, and perceived security influence the intention to use wearable wristbands in tourism. While wearable computers have advanced across various economic sectors, including tourism and hospitality, research has yet to fully explore how symbolic and experiential factors shape user adoption in leisure contexts. Many service providers and destinations have introduced cashless wristbands to enhance convenience and data collection for planning. By identifying this theoretical gap and applying the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) along with extensions such as trust and security, this study offers a novel perspective on consumer adoption in tourism. A survey with 428 tourists was conducted to examine the relationships among the proposed variables. Structural equation modeling techniques were used to test the conceptual model. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of how extended TAM variables operate in tourism scenarios involving wearable devices and offer managerial insights for the design and implementation of such technologies.
Aldás‐ManzanoJ.Lassala‐NavarréC.Ruiz‐MaféC.Sanz‐BlasS. (2009). Key drivers of internet banking services use. Online Information Review, 33(4), 672–695. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520910985675
2.
AldhabanF. (2012). Exploring the adoption of Smartphone technology: Literature review. In 2012 proceedings of PICMET’12: Technology management for emerging technologies, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 29 July–02 August, 2012 (pp. 2758–2770). IEEE.
3.
AmeenN.TarhiniA.ShahM. H.MadichieN.PaulJ.ChoudrieJ. (2021). Keeping customers’ data secure: A cross-cultural study of cybersecurity compliance among the gen-mobile workforce. Computers in Human Behavior, 114(6), 106531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106531
4.
AyehJ. K.AuN.LawR. (2013). Predicting the intention to use consumer-generated media for travel planning. Tourism Management, 35(1), 132–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.06.010
5.
BanduraA. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action (2nd ed., pp. 23–28). NJ.
BorkowskiS.SandrickC.WagilaK.GollerC.YeC.ZhaoL. (2016). Magicbands in the magic kingdom: Customer-centric information technology implementation at Disney. Journal of the International Academy for Case Studies, 22(3), 143–151.
8.
BosangitC.HibbertS.McCabeS. (2015). “If I was going to die I should at least be having fun”: Travel blogs, meaning and tourist experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 55(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2015.08.001
9.
BuenaflorC.KimH. (2013). Six human factors to acceptability of wearable computers. International Journal of Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering, 8(3), 103–114.
10.
CamargoK. J. D. S.PereiraT.LimbergerP. F. (2024). Generational perspectives on smart tourism: A focus on baby boomers. Journal of Smart Tourism, 4(1), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.52255/smarttourism.2024.4.1.5
11.
CavalheiroM. B.JoiaL. A.CavalheiroG. M. D. C. (2020). Towards a smart tourism destination development model: Promoting environmental, economic, socio-cultural and political values. Tourism Planning & Development, 17(3), 237–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568316.2019.1597763
12.
ChiO. H.JiaS.LiY.GursoyD. (2021). Developing a formative scale to measure consumers’ trust toward interaction with Artificially Intelligent (AI) social robots in service delivery. Computers in Human Behavior, 118(7), 106700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106700
13.
ChoiJ.KimS. (2016). Is the smartwatch an IT product or a fashion product? A study on factors affecting the intention to use smartwatches. Computers in Human Behavior, 63(1), 777–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.007
14.
ChuahS. H. W.RauschnabelP. A.KreyN.NguyenB.RamayahT.LadeS. (2016). Wearable technologies: The role of usefulness and visibility in smartwatch adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 65(1), 276–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.047
15.
DavisF. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
16.
DavisF. D.BagozziR. P.WarshawP. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x
17.
Dehghani (2018). Exploring the motivational factors on continuous usage intention of smartwatches among actual users. Behaviour & Information Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1424246
18.
FerreiraJ. J.FernandesC. I.RammalH. G.VeigaP. M. (2021). Wearable technology and consumer interaction: A systematic review and research agenda. Computers in Human Behavior, 118(3), 106710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106710
19.
GaoT.RohmA. J.SultanF.HuangS. (2012). Antecedents of consumer attitudes toward mobile marketing: A comparative study of youth markets in the United States and China. Thunderbird International Business Review, 54(2), 211–224. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.21452
20.
GefenD.KarahannaE.StraubD. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519
HairJ, et al. (2016). Identifying and treating unobserved heterogeneity with FIMIX-PLS: part I–method. European business review. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-09-2015-0094
23.
HerzM.RauschnabelP. A. (2019). Understanding the diffusion of virtual reality glasses: The role of media, fashion and technology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 138(6), 228–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.09.008
24.
HuL.BentlerP. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
25.
IslamS. R.KwakD.KabirM. H.HossainM.KwakK. S. (2015). The internet of things for health care: A comprehensive survey. IEEE Access, 3(1), 678–708. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2015.2437951
26.
JauwA. L. J.PurwantoE. (2017). Moderation effects of cultural dimensions on the relationship between E-service quality and satisfaction with online purchase. Calitatea, 18(157), 55.
27.
JungY.KimS.ChoiB. (2016). Consumer valuation of the wearables: The case of smartwatches. Computers in Human Behavior, 63(1), 899–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.040
28.
KimD. J.FerrinD. L.RaoH. R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decision Support Systems, 44(2), 544–564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2007.07.001
29.
KockN.MayfieldM. (2015). PLS-based SEM algorithms: The good neighbor assumption, collinearity, and nonlinearity. Information Management and Business Review.
30.
KonietznyJ.CaruanaA.CassarM. L. (2018). Fun and fair, and I don’t care: The role of enjoyment, fairness and subjective norms on online gambling intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 44(3), 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.06.010
31.
KoseG.Marmolejo-SaucedoL.Rodriguez-AguilarM.KoseU. (2024). Wearables for health tourism: Perspectives and model suggestion. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Pervasive Health and Technology, 10(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4108/eetpht.10.4310
32.
KumarA.AdlakahaA.MukherjeeK. (2018). The effect of perceived security and grievance redressal on continuance intention to use M-wallets in a developing country. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 36(7), 1170–1189. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijbm-04-2017-0077
33.
LaraO. D.LabradorM. A. (2012). A survey on human activity recognition using wearable sensors. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 15(3), 1192–1209. https://doi.org/10.1109/surv.2012.110112.00192
34.
LarocheM.HabibiM. R.RichardM. O. (2013). To be or not to be in social media: How brand loyalty is affected by social media?International Journal of Information Management, 33(1), 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.07.003
35.
LawR.ChenS. (2025). Developments and implications of tourism information technology: A horizon 2050 paper. Tourism Review, 80(1), 299–312. https://doi.org/10.1108/tr-12-2023-0846
36.
Lollapalooza. (2019). A tecnologia Cashless em festivais está tomando conta do mercado e fomos um dos primeiros no Brasil a aderir esse serviço. Lollapalooza BR. https://www.lollapaloozabr.com/lollacashless-by-bradesco/ (Access: 01 nov. 2019).
37.
MatsudaY.FedotovD.TakahashiY.ArakawaY.YasumotoK.MinkerW. (2018). EmoTour: Estimating emotion and satisfaction of users based on behavioral cues and audiovisual data. Sensors, 18(11), 3978. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18113978
38.
McKnightD. H.CummingsL. L.ChervanyN. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.2307/259290
39.
MerhiM.HoneK.TarhiniA. (2019). A cross-cultural study of the intention to use mobile banking between Lebanese and British consumers: Extending UTAUT2 with security, privacy and trust. Technology in Society, 59(1), 101151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101151
40.
MouJ.ShinD. H.CohenJ. F. (2017). Trust and risk in consumer acceptance of e-services. Electronic Commerce Research, 17(2), 255–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-015-9205-4
41.
NierodaM. E.MradM.SolomonM. R. (2018). How do consumers think about hybrid products? Computer wearables have an identity problem. Journal of Business Research, 89(1), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.04.024
42.
NunesM.MayerV. F. (2014). Mobile technology, games and nature areas: The tourist perspective. Tourism & Management Studies, 10(1), 53–58.
43.
NunnallyJ. C. (1967). Psychometric theory.
44.
OgbanufeO.GerhartN. (2022). Exploring smart wearables through the lens of reactance theory: Linking values, social influence, and status quo. Computers in Human Behavior, 127(2), 107044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107044
45.
O’NascimentoR. (2020). Roupas inteligentes: Combinando moda e tecnologia. Editora Senac São Paulo.
46.
PavlouP. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 101–134.
47.
PavlouP. A.GefenD. (2004). Building effective online marketplaces with institution-based trust. Information Systems Research, 15(1), 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1040.0015
48.
PereiraT.LimbergerP. F.ArdigóC. M. (2021). The moderating effect of the need for interaction with a service employee on purchase intention in chatbots. Telematics and Informatics Reports, 1(3), 100003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teler.2022.100003
49.
PereiraT.LimbergerP. F.MinasiS. M.BuhalisD. (2024). New insights into consumers’ intention to continue using chatbots in the tourism context. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 25(4), 754–780. https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008x.2022.2136817
50.
PersaudA.AzharI. (2012). Innovative mobile marketing via smartphones: Are consumers ready?Marketing Intelligence & Planning.
51.
PopescuL. (2024). Deep learning-based gesture recognition and in-sensor motion perception systems. Wearable artificial intelligence and aesthetic self-monitoring devices. And beauty filter and visual sentiment algorithms for problematic body image. Journal of Research in Gender Studies, 14(2), 99–114.
52.
RauschnabelP. A.HeinD. W.HeJ.RoY. K.RawashdehS.KrulikowskiB. (2016). Fashion or technology? A fashnology perspective on the perception and adoption of augmented reality smart glasses. i-com, 15(2), 179–194. https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2016-0021
RousseauD. M.SitkinS. B.BurtR. S.CamererC. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.926617
55.
SaeedN.YangY.SinnappanS. (2009). Emerging web technologies in higher education: A case of incorporating blogs, podcasts and social bookmarks in a web programming course based on students’ learning styles and technology preferences. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 98–109.
56.
SanchezI.WilliamsA. M.García AndreuH. (2020). Customer resistance to tourism innovations: Entrepreneurs’ understanding and management strategies. Journal of Travel Research, 59(3), 450–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287519843188
57.
SarstedtM., et al. (2011). Multigroup analysis in partial least squares (PLS) path modeling: Alternative methods and empirical results.Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
ShinD. H. (2010). The effects of trust, security and privacy in social networking: A security-based approach to understand the pattern of adoption. Interacting with Computers, 22(5), 428–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2010.05.001
StewartH.JürjensJ. (2018). Data security and consumer trust in FinTech innovation in Germany. Information & Computer Security.
64.
ThakerM. A. B. M. T.AminM. F. B.ThakerH. B. M. T.PitchayA. B. A. (2018). What keeps Islamic mobile banking customers loyal?Journal of Islamic Marketing, 10(2), 525–542. https://doi.org/10.1108/jima-08-2017-0090
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. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
WangT.SunY.LiaoS. (2022). Physical self matters: How the dual nature of body image influences smart watch purchase intention. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(1), 846491. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.846491
68.
WangZ.FangD.LiuX.ZhangL.DuanH.WangC.GuoK. (2023). Consumer acceptance of sports wearables: The role of products attributes. Sage Open, 13(3), 21582440231182653. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231182653
69.
WojciechowskiR.CellaryW. (2013). Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Computers & Education, 68(1), 570–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.014
70.
WrightR.KeithL. (2014). Wearable technology: If the tech fits, wear it. Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 11(4), 204–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/15424065.2014.969051
71.
WuK.ZhaoY.ZhuQ.TanX.ZhengH. (2011). A meta-analysis of the impact of trust on technology acceptance model: Investigation of moderating influence of subject and context type. International Journal of Information Management, 31(6), 572–581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2011.03.004
72.
WuL.ChenJ. L. (2005). An extension of trust and TAM model with TPB in the initial adoption of on-line tax: An empirical study. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 62(6), 784–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.03.003
