Introducing an Integrated Model of Adults’ Wearable Activity Tracker Use and Obesity Information–Seeking Behaviors From a National Quota Sample Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research from multiple perspectives to investigate adults' use of wearable activity-tracking devices is limited. We offer a multiperspective model and provide empirical evidence of what leads to frequent usage of wearable health technologies from a large, nationally representative survey sample. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore factors affecting the use of wearable activity-tracking devices among health consumers from the perspectives of individual health beliefs (perceived severity, perceived susceptibility, perceived benefits, and self-efficacy) and information-seeking behaviors. METHODS: Our Integrated Model of Wearable Activity Tracker (IMWAT) use and proposed hypotheses were validated and tested with data collected from a telephone survey with a national quota sample. The data were analyzed using a variety of statistical techniques, including structural equation analysis. RESULTS: The sample comprised 2006 participants. Our results showed that the perceived benefits of physical activity, perceived susceptibility, and self-efficacy toward obesity were significant predictors of information-seeking behaviors, which, in turn, mediated their effects on the use of wearable activity trackers. Perceptions of obesity severity directly promoted wearable device usage. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided a new and powerful theoretical model that combined the health beliefs and information-seeking behaviors behind the use of wearable activity trackers in the adult population. The findings provide meaningful implications for developers and designers of wearable health technology products and will assist health informatics practitioners and obesity prevention communicators.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".