CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 17COVID-19 Digital Contact TracingTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Behavioural intention to use a contact tracing application: the case of StopCovid in France

Open access
Shahidi, Niousha, Tossan, Vesselina, Bourliataux-Lajoinie, Stéphane, Cacho-Elizondo, Silvia·2022·Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services
DOI 10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102998
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102998

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The results from Study 1 suggest that the decision to install an app (and grant data access permissions as required) results from a trade-off between the app's functionality importance and the user's privacy concerns.

    “The results from Study 1 suggest that the decision to install an app (and grant data access permissions as required) results from a trade-off between the app's functionality importance and the user's privacy concerns (e.g., Dinev and Hart, 2006;Liu et al., 2015;Shahidi et al., 2022).”

    From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Shahidi et al., 2022

    Section 5.2 (page unavailable) reports that perceived usefulness increased intention to use StopCovid, while privacy concerns decreased it; perceived permission sensitivity also increased privacy concerns. This supports the suggested benefit–privacy trade-off, but the study measured intention to use a specific contact-tracing app, not actual installation or granting of data-access permissions. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The results of Studies 1 and 2 confirm the hypothesis that app perceived importance has a positive effect on app installation intention (H4), replicating previous studies.

    “Therefore, the results of Studies 1 and 2 confirm the hypothesis that app perceived importance has a positive effect on app installation intention (H 4 ), replicating previous studies (e.g., Egelman et al., 2013;Shahidi et al., 2022).”

    From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Shahidi et al., 2022

    In §5.2 (page unavailable), the cited paper reports that perceived usefulness positively influenced intention to use StopCovid. Section 3.2 defines that adoption intention to include downloading the app, so the finding is relevant to installation intention. The paper tests perceived usefulness, however, not the citing study’s distinct construct of app perceived importance. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Liu et al. (2015), Gu et al. (2022), and Shahidi et al. (2022) produced evidence in favor of the privacy calculus theory by demonstrating that whether a user chooses to use an app is a result of the trade-off between the app's functionality or usefulness and the user's privacy concerns.

    “Liu et al. (2015), Gu et al. (2022), and Shahidi et al. (2022), for example, produced evidence in favor of the privacy calculus theory by demonstrating that whether a user chooses to use an app is a result of the trade-off between the app's functionality (or usefulness) and the user's privacy concerns.”

    From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Shahidi et al. (2022)

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 76

  1. Altmann, S., Milsom, L., Zillessen, H., Blasone, R., Gerdon, F., Bach, R., . . . Abeler, J. (2020). Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth, 8(8). doi: 10.2196/19857 · DOI
  2. Ambrose, P., & Basu, C. (2012). Interpreting the impact of perceived privacy and security concerns in patients' use of online health information systems. Journal of Information Security and Privacy, 8(1), 38-50.
  3. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-step Approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Andrews, L., Gajanayake, R., & Sahama, T. (2014). The Australian general public's perceptions of having a personally controlled electronic health record (PCEHR) . Int J Med Inform, 83(12), 889-900.
  5. Arunkumar, S., Srivatsa, M., & Rajarajan, M. (2015). A review paper on preserving privacy in mobile environments. Journal Of Network & Computer Applications, 53, 74-90.
  6. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1991). Multitrait-Multimethod Matrices in Consumer Research. Journal of Marketing Research, 17, 426-439. doi:10.1086/208568 · DOI
  7. Bagozzi, R. P., Belanche, D., Casaló, L. V., & Flavián, C. (2016). The Role of Anticipated Emotions in Purchase Intentions. Psychology & Marketing, 33(8), 629-645. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20905 · DOI
  8. Bagozzi, R., Baumgartner, H., & Pieters, R. (1998). Goal-directed Emotions. Cognition & Emotion, 12(1), 1-26. doi:10.1080/026999398379754 · DOI
  9. Baker, E. W., Al-Gahtani, S. S., & Hubona, G. S. (2010). Cultural Impacts on Acceptance and Adoption of Information Technology in a Developing Country. Journal of Global Information Management, 18(3), 35-58. doi:10.4018/jgim.2010070102 · DOI
  10. Bassi, A., Arfin, S., John, O., & Jha, V. (2020). An overview of mobile applications (apps) to support the coronavirus disease 2019 response in India. Indian J Med Res, 151(5), 468-473. doi:10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_1200_20 · DOI
  11. Beldad, A., & Kusumadewi, M. C. (2015). Here's my location, for your information: The impact of trust, benefits, and social influence on location sharing application use among Indonesian university students. 49, 102-110. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.047. · DOI
  12. Buchanan, T., Paine, C., Joinson, A. N., & Reips, U.-D. (2007). Development of measures of online privacy concern and protection for use on the Internet. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(2), 157-165.
  13. Campbell, A. J. (1997). Relationship marketing in consumer markets: A comparison of managerial and consumer attitudes about information privacy. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 11, 44- 57. doi:doi.org/dbbfp7
  14. Culnan, M. J., & Williams, C. C. (2009). How Ethics Can Enhance Organizational Privacy: Lessons from the Choicepoint and TJX Data Breaches. MIS Quarterly, 33(4), 673-687. doi:10.2307/20650322 · DOI
  15. Danquah, L. O., Hasham, N., Macfarlane, M., Conteh, F. E., Momoh, F., Tedesco, A. A., . . . Weiss, H. A. (2019). Use of a mobile application for Ebola contact tracing and monitoring in northern Sierra Leone: A proof-of-concept study. BMC Infectious Diseases, 19(1). doi:10.1186/s12879-019-4354-z · DOI · Paper page
  16. Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Doctoral dissertation, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  17. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. doi:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Degirmenci, K. (2020). Mobile users' information privacy concerns and the role of app permission requests. International Journal of Information Management, 50, 261-272.
  19. Erjavec, J., & Manfreda, A. (2021). Online shopping adoption during COVID-19 and social isolation: Extending the UTAUT model with herd behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102867 · DOI
  20. Esmaeilzadeh, P. (2018). The effects of public concern for information privacy on the adoption of health information exchanges (HIEs) by healthcare entities. Health communication., 34(10), 1202-1211. doi:10.1080/10410236.2018.1471336 · DOI
  21. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
  22. Fox, G., Clohessy, T., van der Werff, L., Rosati, P., & Lynn, T. (2021). Exploring the competing influences of privacy concerns and positive beliefs on citizen acceptance of contact tracing mobile applications. Computers in Human Behavior. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2021.106806. · DOI
  23. Garavand, A., Samadbeik, M., Nadri, H., Rahimi, B., & Asadi, H. (2019). Effective Factors in Adoption of Mobile Health Applications between Medical Sciences Students Using the UTAUT Model. Methods of information in medicine, 58(4-05), 131-139. doi:10.1055/s-0040- 1701607 · DOI
  24. Graeff, T. R., & Harmon, S. (2002). Collecting and using personal data: Consumers' awareness and concerns. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 19, 302-318.
  25. Hamilton, M., Salim, F., Cheng, E., & Choy, S. L. (2011). Transafe: A crowdsourced mobile platform for crime and safety perception management. In 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS). (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
  26. Hofmann, D. A., & Morgeson, F. P. (1999). Safety-related behavior as a social exchange: The role of perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange. Journal of applied psychology, 84(2), 286-296.
  27. Holbrook, M. B. (2006). Consumption experience, customer value, and subjective personal introspection: an illustrative photographic essay. Journal of Business Research, 59(6), 714- 725.
  28. Hong, S., & Tam, K. (2006). Understanding the Adoption of Multipurpose Information Appliances: The case of Mobile Data Services. Information Systems Research, 17(2), 162-179. doi:10.1287/isre.1060.0088 · DOI
  29. Im, H., & Young, H. (2012). Who are the users of mobile coupons? A profile of US consumers. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 6(3), 215-232. doi:10.1108/17505931211274688 · DOI
  30. Kala Kamdjoug, J. R., Wamba-Taguimdje, S.-L., Wamba, S. F., & Kake, I. B. (2021). Determining factors and impacts of the intention to adopt mobile banking app in Cameroon: Case of SARA by afriland First Bank. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 61.
  31. Kalgotra, P., Gupta, A., & Shardab, R. (2021). Pandemic information support lifecycle: Evidence from the evolution of mobile apps during COVID-19. Journal of Business Research, 134, 540-559.
  32. Keith, M. J., Thompson, S. C., Hale, J., & Lowry, P. B. (2013 ). Information disclosure on mobile devices: R-examining privacy calculus with actual user behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies , 71, 1163-1173. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2013.08.016 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Mac Callum, K. M., & Jeffrey, L. (2013). The influence of students'ICT skills and their adoption of mobile learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(3). doi:10.14742/ajet.298 · DOI
  34. Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users' information privacy concerns (IUIPC): Tthe construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information systems research, 15(4), 336-355.
  35. Marriott, H., & Williams, M. (2018). Exploring consumers perceived risk and trust for mobile shopping: A theoretical framework and empirical study. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 42, 133-146. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.01.017 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 173-191.
  37. Mathwick, C., Malhotra, N. K., & Rigdon, E. (2001). Experiential value: conceptualization, measurement and application in the catalog and internet shopping environment. Journal of Retailing, 77(1), 39-56.
  38. Meng, B., & Choi, K. (2019). Tourists' intention to use location-based services (LBS): Converging the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and the elaboration likelihood model (ELM). International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(8), 3097-3115. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-09-2018-0734 · DOI
  39. Mishra, S., & Singh, I. P. (2008). mHealth: A developing country perspective. Making the eHealth Connection: Global Partnerships, Local Solutions Conference, (pp. 1-19).
  40. Mortensona, M. J., & Vidgen, R. (2016). A computational literature review of the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Information Management, 36, 1248-1259.
  41. Nemeslaki, A., Aranyossy, M., & Sasvári, P. (2016). Could on-line voting boost desire to vote? - Technology acceptance perceptions of young Hungarian citizens. Government Information Quarterly, 33(4), 705-714.
  42. Norberg, P. A., & Horne, D. R. (2007). Privacy attitudes and privacy-related behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 24(10), 829-847. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20186 · DOI
  43. Parker, D., Manstead, A. S., & Stradling, S. G. (1995). Extending the theory of planned behaviour: The role of personal norm. British Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 127-137. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1995.tb01053.x · DOI
  44. Pentina, I., Zhang, L., Bata, H., & Chen, Y. (2016). Exploring privacy paradox in information- sensitive mobile app adoption: A cross-cultural comparison. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 409-419. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.005 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Perugini, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2001). The role of desires and anticipated emotions in goal-directed behaviors: Broadening and deepening the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(1), 79-98.
  46. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Richard, J., & Meuli, P. (2013). Exploring and modelling digital natives' intention to use permission- based location-aware mobile advertising. Journal of Marketing Management, 29(5-6), 698- 719. doi:10.1080/0267257X.2013.770051 · DOI
  48. Robin, R., & Dandis, A. O. (2022). Business as usual through contact tracing app: what influences intention to download? . Journal of Marketing Management, 1-30.
  49. Rowe, F. (2020). Contact tracing apps and values dilemmas: A privacy paradox in a neo-liberal world. International Journal of Information Management, 55, 102178. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102178 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Rowe, F., Ngwenyama, O., & Richet, J. -L. (2020). Contact-tracing apps and alienation in the age of COVID-19. European Journal of Information Systems, 29(5), 545-562. doi:10.1080/0960085X.2020.1803155 · DOI
  51. Sacks, J. A., Zehe, E., Redick, C., Bah, A., Cowger, K., Camara, M., . . . Liu, A. (2015). Introduction of mobile health tools to support ebola surveillance and contact tracing in Guinea. Global Health: Science and Practice, 3(4), 646-659. doi:10.9745/GHSP-D-15-00207 · DOI
  52. Sebetci, O. (2015). A TAM-based Model for e-Gouvernment: A case for Turkey. Int. J. Electronic Gouvernance, 7(2), 113-135.
  53. Shahidi, N., Tossan, V., & Cacho-Elizondo, S. (2018). Assessment of A Mobile Educational Coaching App: Exploring Adoption Patterns and Barriers in France. International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction, 14(1). doi:10.4018/IJTHI.2018010102 · DOI
  54. Sharma, S., Singh, G., Sharma, R., Jones, P., Kraus, S., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2020). Digital health innovation: Exploring adoption of COVID-19 digital contact tracing apps. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, In press, , 1-17. doi:10.1109/ TEM.2020. · DOI
  55. Sherman, S. J. (1980). On the Self-Erasing Nature of Errors of Prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 211-221.
  56. Steininger, K., & Barbara, S. (2015). EHR acceptance among Austrian resident doctors. Health Policy Tech. 4(2), 121-130.
  57. Sutanto, J., Palme, E., Tan, C.-H., & Phang, C. W. (2013). Addressing the Personalization-Privacy Paradox: An Empirical Assessment from a Field Experiment on Smartphone Users. Mis Quarterly, 37(4), 1141-1164.
  58. Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: the development of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203-220.
  59. Tang, T., Hou, J., Fay, D. L., & Annis, C. (2021). Revisit the drivers and barriers to e-governance in the mobile age: A case study on the adoption of city management mobile apps for smart urban governance. Journal of Urban Affairs, 43(4), 563-585.
  60. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decision about health, Wealth and Happiness. Yale University Press.
  61. Trang, S., Trenz, M., Weiger, W. H., Tarafdar, M., & Cheung, C. M. (2020). One app to trace them all? Examining app specifications for mass acceptance of contact-tracing apps. European Journal of Information Systems, 29(4), 415-428.
  62. Velicia-Martin, F., Cabrera-Sanchez, J., Gil-Cordero, E., & Palos-Sanchez, P. (2021). Researching COVID-19 tracing app acceptance: Incorporating theory from the technological acceptance model. PeerJ Computer Science. doi:10.7717/peerj-cs · DOI
  63. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 · DOI · Paper page
  64. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of Information Technology, Towards a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540 · DOI · Paper page
  65. Walton, D. (2013). Scare tactics: Arguments that appeal to fear and threats. Springer Science & Business Media.
  66. Wang, T., Duong, T. D., & Chen, C. C. (2016). Intention to disclose personal information via mobile applications: A privacy calculus perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 36(4), 531-542. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.03 · DOI
  67. Weichbroth, P. (2020). Usability of mobile applications: a systematic literature study. IEEE Access, 8, 55563-55577.
  68. Westin, A. F. (1967). Privacy and Freedom. NY: Atheneum Press.
  69. White, C. J., & Thomas, H. (2016). Up in smoke: demarketing and consumer smoking cessation. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 40(1), 75-82. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12216 · DOI
  70. Wottrich, V. M., van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Smit, E. G. (2018). The privacy trade-off for mobile app downloads: The roles of app value, intrusiveness, and privacy concerns. Decision Support Systems, 106, 44-52. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2017.12.003 · DOI
  71. Wu, J.-H., & Wang, S.-C. (2005). What drives mobile commerce? An empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Information & management, 42(5), 719-729.
  72. Xu, H., Gupta, S., Rosson, M. B., & Carroll, J. M. (2012). Measuring mobile users' concerns for information privacy. the International Conference on Information Systems.
  73. Yang, H. C. (2013). Bon Appétit for apps: young American consumers' acceptance of mobile applications. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 53(3), 85-96.
  74. Yousaf, A., Mishra, A., & Gupta, A. (2021). "From technology adoption to consumption": Effect of pre-adoption expectations from fitness applications on usage satisfaction, continual usage, and health satisfaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 62, 102655. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102655 · DOI
  75. Zhang, D., Adipat, B., & Mowafi, Y. (2009). User-centered context-aware mobile applications-The next generation of personal mobile computing. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 24(3), 27-46. doi:https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais. 02403 · DOI
  76. Zhang, X., Guo, X., Guo, F., & Lai, K. H. (2014). Nonlinearities in personalization-privacy paradox in mHealth adoption: the mediating role of perceived usefulness and attitude. Technology and health care, 22(4), 515-529. doi:10.3233/THC-140811 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shahidi, N., Tossan, V., Bourliataux-Lajoinie, S., & Cacho-Elizondo, S.
Affiliations
EDC Paris Business School (FR)
Corresponding author
Shahidi, Niousha
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-09
Volume
68
Pages
102998
ISSN
0969-6989 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102998
OpenAlex
W4226331908
Cited by
17
References
4
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3
FWCI
4.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services (acceptedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
contact tracing apps, COVID-19 pandemic, technology acceptance, goal-directed behavior, privacy concerns, perceived usefulness, anticipated emotions, subjective norms, intention to use, app adoption

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review