Vietnamese Generation Z’s behavioral intention to use active noise cancelling headphones: integration of technology acceptance model and protection motivation theory
Van Khoi Ma et al.
What the paper says
Purpose This study aims to investigate the adoption of active noise cancelling (ANC) headphones among Generation Z consumers in Vietnam. Given the increasing risk of hearing loss caused by prolonged exposure to high-volume audio, ANC headphones emerge as a health-supportive consumer technology. By integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and protection motivation theory (PMT), this research tests both functional and psychological determinants of ANC headphone adoption in a health-care-relevant context. Design/methodology/approach A structured questionnaire was distributed using purposive sampling, yielding 311 valid responses. Structural equation modeling was conducted using covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) to test and confirm the hypothesized relationships. Findings Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and self-efficacy significantly influenced behavioral intention across both models. Unexpectedly, perceived severity negatively impacted behavioral intention while perceived vulnerability showed no effect, suggesting that Generation Z may be resistant to fear-based health appeals. Response efficacy and response costs were not significant, indicating that the perceived effectiveness of protective actions does not strongly shape behavioral intentions in this context. Originality/value This study extends the application of TAM and PMT to the context of wearable health-related technology among an emerging market demographic. It reveals generational resistance to traditional health fear appeals and highlights the importance of self-efficacy and perceived usefulness in shaping health-tech adoption.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.