In the process of making decisions about purchasing specific food products, consumers pay attention to various factors characterizing the food itself, as well as the terms of sale, labelling, price (Kumar & Kapoor, 2017), taste, brand, product appearance or food quality (Gelici-Zeko et al., 2013; Eldesouky & Mesías, 2014). In developed countries, the influence of advertising campaigns on the choice of food products is also noted (Prowse et al., 2020). Research shows that consumers indicate food packaging as one of the primary sources of information about food (Gutkowska & Ozimek, 2005; Alibabić et al., 2011), and this information function of packaging is now becoming more and more critical for consumers.

The labelling of products placed on the market, including food, must include mandatory information, the presence of which on the packaging results from applicable legal provisions. In the EU countries, Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 generally regulates issues related to the labelling, advertising and presentation of food. As emphasized in this legal act, the advertising and presentation of food and feed products, taking into account their appearance, shape, and packaging, as well as the arrangement and place of display and the information provided about them, may not provide consumers with incorrect information. In this respect, detailed rules for food labelling are set out in Regulation (EU) No. 1169/2011, which defines food information as “information about a food made available to the final consumer using a label, other accompanying materials or other means, including modern technological tools or oral communication’ (p. 3). Food labelling, in turn, includes “any inscriptions, particulars, trademarks, brand names, illustrations or symbols relating to a food and affixed to any packaging, document, leaflet, label, band or ring accompanying such food or relating to it’ (Regulation…, 2011, p. 4). Also important are the requirements regarding hygienic conditions related to the sale of products, which are regulated in particular by EU regulations such as: Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs; and Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin.

A product’s price should also be clearly displayed at the point of sale. This issue is regulated in Poland by the Act of May 9, 2014 on information on prices of goods and services (Act…, 2014), which implements Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of February 16, 1998, on consumer protection by displaying the prices of products offered to consumers, together with the implementing act, i.e. the Regulation of the Minister of Development and Technology of December 19, 2022, on the visibility of prices of goods and services (Regulation…, 2022).

The modern consumer is becoming more and more open to trying different product categories at regional, national, European, and global levels (Angowski & Jarosz-Angowska, 2020). Research shows that food shopping habits are influenced, among other factors, by age, gender, place of residence, and education level (Aday & Yener, 2014; Grande Covián et al., 2014; de Lourdes Samaniego-Vaesken et al., 2018; Bassola et al., 2020; Lima et al., 2021). Moreover, the young generation, representing the future of society, seems to have a completely different approach and different ideas than the older generation (Kanchanapibul et al., 2014).

In this study, we resolved to concentrate on young buyers, who constitute an essential group for the development of Poland’s economy – given that people between 18 and 34 years of age constitute over 18% of the population (Statistics Poland, 2021). However, the definitions of ‘young consumers’ used in previous research vary. For example, Solomon (2017) identifies young consumers as individuals up to 24 years old, whereas other publications define them as individuals up to 35 years old, such as Bakewell & Mitchell (2003), Olejniczuk-Merta (2008), Nyrhinen et al. (2024). In his research, Arnett (2000) focused on young consumers aged 18–25. He emphasized that this period of life, which he termed ‘emerging adulthood,’ is neither adolescence nor early adulthood and differs both theoretically and empirically. This stage is characterized by intense identity exploration and experimentation with various social roles, translating into specific consumer behaviors. Following Arnett’s (2000) research, we focused on the 18–25 age group of young consumers.

The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of selected factors on the purchase of food by young consumers, using the CAWI method (computer-assisted Internet interview technique). The survey was created in Google Forms, an online survey collection tool.

2. Materials and method

The survey was conducted in October-November 2020, using purposive sampling. Participants were specifically selected based on two criteria: age (18–25 years) and their status as students. It was administered online via a publicly accessible Google Forms questionnaire, which included both the research questions and additional questions regarding the respondents’ demographic and socio-economic characteristics.

The study used a 5-point Likert scale to gauge the extent to which a given respondent pays attention to particular selected factors when purchasing food (a score of 1 indicating no attention to this factor at all, a score of 5 indicating high attention to this factor). We treat the ordinal scales as quasi-quantitative scales for analytical purposes, calculating means and standard deviations (SD) via descriptive analysis. The reliability of the scales was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, which was 0.829 – indicating satisfactory reliability (as indicated by values above 0.7)

To investigate the complexity of factors determining consumers’ food choices, we examined the validity of selected 17 elements related to food product characteristics and conditions of food sales. The following factors were analysed: the food storage method at the store, the storage conditions, appropriate hygienic conditions at the point of sale, food price, the appearance, taste and smell of the product, the condition of the product packaging, and general information appearing on the food product packaging – country of origin, energy/nutritional value of the food product, product weight/volume, product composition, nutrient content (e.g. proteins, carbohydrates), shelf life/date of minimum durability, the ecological origin of the product, manufacturer, and brand.

A 5-point scale was likewise used in subsequent questions in the questionnaire: a score of 1 meant that the respondent “completely disagrees’ with a given statement, 2 – “generally disagrees’; 3 – “neither agrees nor disagrees’, 4 – “generally agrees’, and a score of 5 – “completely agrees’.

Factor and cluster analyses, common in consumer research, were applied to analyse the resulting data. First, factor analysis was used to identify the relationship between the factors, applying the varimax rotation method. The number of factors was determined based on the following criteria: a scree plot test, components with an eigenvalue of 1, and the interpretability of the factors. Factors with loadings above 0.40 were considered. Data factorability was confirmed with the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) (with a cut-off value of 0.60) measure of sampling adequacy and Bartlett’s test of sphericity (p ≤ 0.05).

In the second step of analysis, non-hierarchical clustering was performed to obtain segments of respondents, using the k-means clustering method. Clusters are formed by evaluating dissimilarities and similarities of intrinsic characteristics between different cases. We calculated the correlation ratio (CR) for each variable applied in our cluster analysis and conducted cross-tabulation with Chi2-statistics to profile the clusters. SPSS for Windows statistical software (9.0 version) was used for statistical analysis.

The questionnaire also included questions about the respondents’ demographic characteristics, such as gender, labour market status, number of people in the household, self-assessment of the household’s financial status, and place of residence. These detailed characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table 1.

The study involved 702 student participants, all between 18 and 25 years old, 63.4% women and 36.6% men. Most often, respondents lived in households of 4 or 3 people (31.5% and 21.5%, respectively). The respondents were least likely to declare that they lived in single-person households and those with 6 or more people (7.7% and 8.4%, respectively). Two-fifths of respondents (42.9%) were gainfully employed, 57.1% were not employed. At the same time, almost half of the respondents (48.1%) described the financial situation of their household as good, while one-third (34.9%) described it as average. The respondents represented places of residence of various sizes, most often declaring that they lived in a city with a population of over 100,000 inhabitants (36.9%) and rural areas (35.5%).

3. Results

The most respondents declared that when shopping for food, they pay attention primarily to the price (mean score 4.43) and the use-by date / date of minimum durability (mean 4.42). Factors such as the ‘taste and aroma’ of a food product (mean 4.37), ‘condition of packaging’ (mean 4.35), ‘appearance’ (4.34), and ‘hygienic conditions’ (4.24) also achieved an average above four (Table 2).

The factor ‘information on the packaging’ obtained a mean score of 3.86. The respondents least often indicated such factors as ‘organic origin’ (2.86) and ‘country of origin’ (2.76) (Table 2).

3.1. Factors influencing food choice

Exploratory factor analysis was performed to examine the relationship between the observed variables. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin value was 0.808. The result indicated that the choice of analysis and the number of factors were correct. The result of Bartlett’s test of sphericity x2 = 3985.855, p ≤ 0.01, indicated that correlations between items were high enough to perform the analysis.

EFA was conducted using maximum likelihood extraction with varimax rotation (Table 3), extracting four factors. It was assumed that the components of the coefficient are those variables that, after rounding, obtain absolute values equal to 0.4 or greater. All factors were identified with an eigenvalue higher than the Kaiser criterion 1. The first factor’s eigenvalue is 4.665, which explains 27.44% of the variance. The second factor’s eigenvalue equals 2.343, which explains 13.78% of the variance. The third factor’s eigenvalue equals 1.630, which explains 9.59% of the variance. The fourth factor`s eigenvalue equals 1.214, which explains 7.14% of the variance. All four factors taken together explained 57.95% of the total variance.

The first factor, summarizing five variables, was positively correlated with the tendency of respondents to read food labels and pay attention to product composition, hence it was named ‘Information’. The second factor, summarizing four variables, was positively related to variables expressing interest in the conditions associated with storing food at the point of sale and paying attention to the use-by date/date of minimum durability on the food product packaging. For this reason, this factor was labelled ‘Hygiene and food safety’. The third factor explains four variables and was named ‘Product appearance and price’. Lastly, the fourth factor summarizes four variables, relating to respondents’ interest in the purchased food brand, its origin, and information about organic production, hence it was named ‘Origin’ (Table 3).

3.2. The influence of food choice factors on the respondents’ profile

For the whole surveyed population, 5 clusters were identified, each representing from 5.98% to 30.77% of the surveyed population (Table 4). Cluster 2 represents 27.92% of all respondents. In Cluster 2, the highest average value was obtained for 15 of the 17 variables. Only in the case of three factors, ‘price’, ‘appearance’, and ‘energy value’, were higher average values recorded in other clusters (‘price’ in Cluster 5; ‘appearance’ in Cluster 3; ‘energy value’ in Cluster 4). Cluster 1 had the lowest mean values for 14 factors out of 17. The reported averages range from 1.33 ‘storage conditions’ to 2.25 ‘nutrient content’. The largest spreads in average values were recorded for Cluster 5, representing 13.82% of all respondents. They ranged from 1.56 for the variable ‘energy value’ to 4.55 for the value ‘price’. Cluster 3 represents 30.77% of the surveyed population, and Cluster 4 represents 21.52%. In Cluster 3, the highest average value (4.54) was recorded for the factor ‘use-by date/date of minimum durability’. In turn, the lowest average value (2.29) was exhibited by the factor ‘nutrient content’. In Cluster 4, the lowest average was recorded for the factors ‘manufacturer’ and ‘organic origin’ (2.23) (Table 4).

Analysis of the socio-demographic characteristics showed that Cluster 1 consists most predominantly of females and unemployed people. Of all the clusters, the percentage of unemployed people was the highest in this cluster (Table 5).

None of the respondents in Cluster 1 described their financial situation as ‘very good’, and 16.7% stated that their financial situation was ‘bad’. The highest percentages of men and employed individuals are found in Cluster 4; the percentage of respondents living in the largest cities was also the highest in this cluster. The respondents in Cluster 3 most often declared that they lived in rural areas and had a very good financial situation. Cluster 2 includes mainly respondents living in households of 5 or more people. Compared to other clusters, we note the highest percentage of respondents declaring a very bad financial situation in this cluster. Cluster 5 consists predominantly of women, respondents with good financial situations and those living in four-person households (Table 5).

4. Discussion

Food selection is a complex process affecting food production systems and consumer nutrient intake, as it determines what foods consumers buy and eat (Furst et al., 1996). As such, understanding what motivates basic food choices is essential from the perspective of food development and marketing efforts. In our study, factors such as packaging information, hygiene, and food safety emerged as significant determinants of food purchasing decisions among young Polish consumers, giving some insight into what drives their food choices.

Su et al.’s (2019) study of Gen Z consumers in the United States found them to be much more knowledgeable about sustainable lifestyles than previous generations, typically prioritising their health when making food choices. Our findings similarly suggest that young Polish consumers are increasingly attentive to health-related aspects like hygiene and the nutritional content displayed on packaging, indicating a shift towards health consciousness in their purchasing behaviour. This moreover parallels Kumar & Kapoor’s (2017) findings that young consumers in India place considerable importance on food labels, mirroring the behaviour observed in our study where information on packaging plays a crucial role.

On the other hand, Allman-Farinelli et al. (2016) found that young people prefer and overconsume unhealthy foods because they are tastier than their healthier alternatives. The present study, on the contrary, suggests a more balanced consideration involving both health and sensory attributes like taste and appearance. This could indicate a cultural variation or an evolving trend among younger demographics who are seeking to balance taste with health considerations.

Moreover, such differences in the findings reported by studies on food choice priorities may reflect gender-related differences or broader regional consumer behaviour trends. Alibabić et al. (2011), for instance, found that product packaging, manufacturer, and product quality were the main determinants for Bosnian male consumers when deciding whether to buy food. Studies such as those by Lawlor et al. (2001) and Wardle & Griffith (2001) suggest that men may prioritize taste and convenience – a trend not strongly evidenced in our study’s young Polish demographic, which displayed a more balanced set of priorities encompassing price, hygiene, and information.

The place where consumers live also has an impact on their food choices. This factor may also be linked to economic status and affect food availability (Samaniego-Vaesken et al., 2018; Grande Covián et al., 2014). On the other hand, other studies show that a globalised market, which includes the distribution of a wide range of staple foods, regardless of their origin, reduces the gap in food purchases and consumption between urban and rural areas (Martín et al., 2014; Naska et al., 2006).

In our study, the origin of products was found to be the least important factor in food choices for young Polish consumers. This contrasts with findings from Turčínková and Kalábová (2011), who concluded that the origin of food plays a vital role in Czech consumers’ purchasing decisions. They found a moderately strong relationship between the age and education of respondents and their tendency to choose local food. Similarly, Brown (2003) noted that the attitude towards local food depends on the origin of the respondents. Additionally, Bimbo et al. (2021) showed that age, education, and professional status positively correlate with high frequency of local food purchases. These differences, again, may reflect varying cultural values or economic conditions that influence consumer priorities in different regions.

5. Conclusions

This study successfully identified several critical determinants influencing food choices among young Polish consumers, achieving the article’s aims as demonstrated by the results. The analyses revealed that consumer choices are influenced by a blend of economic, informational, and aesthetic factors including information on the packaging of food products, hygiene and food safety, the appearance of the product, and its price. Notably, the lessened importance of food origin and the high priority given to product appearance and hygiene suggest a unique profile of young Polish consumers that may differ from global trends. Significant differences were also observed based on gender and place of residence among the clusters identified in the study, emphasizing the complexity of decision-making processes in food purchases.

The selection of a sample consisting only of people aged 18–25 carries limitations regarding representativeness and generalization of research results to a broader population. People aged 18–25 are at a stage of life often related to higher education, the beginning of their professional career, greater mobility, and life changes. They usually have limited professional and financial experience, which may influence their economic decisions and attitudes. People of this age are also often heavy social media and technology users, which may also influence their behaviour. To obtain more universal conclusions, future studies should consider a broader demographic range, including different age groups, to better reflect society’s diversity.

Additionally, food marketers and producers should consider these preferences when designing and marketing their products to the young Polish market, potentially adjusting marketing strategies to emphasize the factors of highest consumer sensitivity, such as packaging information and hygienic conditions.

References

Act of May 9, 2014, on information on prices of goods and services. Single text OJ of 2023, item 168..

Aday, M. S., & Yener, U. (2014). Understanding the buying behaviour of young consumers regarding packaging attributes and labels. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(4), 385–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12105

Alibabić, V., Jokić, S., Mujić, I., Rudić, D., Bajramović, M., & Jukić, H. (2011). Attitudes, behaviors, and perception of consumers’ from northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina toward food products on the market. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2932–2937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.217

Allman-Farinelli, M., Partridge, S. R., & Roy, R. (2016). Weight-Related dietary behaviors in young adults. Current Obesity Reports, 5(1), 23–29. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s13679-016-0189-8

Angowski, M., & Jarosz-Angowska, A. (2020). Importance of regional and traditional EU quality schemes in young consumer food purchasing decisions. European Research Studies Journal, XXIII(Special Issue 2), 916–927. https://doi.org/ 10.35808/ersj/1906

Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/0003-066x.55.5.469

Bakewell, C., & Mitchell, V. (2003). Generation Y female consumer decision-making styles. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 31(2), 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550310461994

Bassola, B., Tommasi, V., Bonetti, L., Bauer, S., & Lusignani, M. (2020). Nurses’ knowledge about malnutrition in older people: A multicenter cross-sectional study. Nutrition, 78, 110947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2020.110947

Bimbo, F., Russo, C., Di Fonzo, A., & Nardone, G. (2020). Consumers’ environmental responsibility and their purchase of local food: Evidence from a large-scale survey. British Food Journal, 123(5), 1853–1874. https://doi.org/10.1108/bfj-05-2020-0398

Brown, C. (2003). Consumers’ preferences for locally produced food: A study in southeast Missouri. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 18(4), 213–224. https://doi.org/10.1079/ajaa200353

Eldesouky, A., & Mesias, F. (2014). An insight into the influence of packaging and presentation format on consumer purchasing attitudes towards cheese: A qualitative study. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 12(2), 305. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2014122-5520

Furst, T., Connors, M., Bisogni, C. A., Sobal, J., & Falk, L. W. (1996). Food choice: A conceptual model of the process. Appetite, 26(3), 247–266. https://doi.org/ 10.1006/appe.1996.0019

Gelici-Zeko, M. M., Lutters, D., ten Klooster, R., & Weijzen, P. L. G. (2012). Studying the influence of packaging design on consumer perceptions (of dairy products) using categorizing and perceptual mapping. Packaging Technology and Science, 26(4), 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1002/pts.1977

Grande Covián, F., Rof Carballo, J., & Jiménez García, F. (2014). Alimentación y desarrollo infantil II; el desarrollo físico comparativo de dos grupos de niños en edad escolar y distinto nivel económico (Rev Clin Esp 1944;12:155-164) [Nutrition and child development II; a comparison of physical development in two school children groups with different income level]. Nutricion Hospitalaria, 30(3), 708–718. https://doi.org/10.3305/nh.2014.30.3.7709

Gutkowska, K., & Ozimek, I. (2005). Wybrane aspekty zachowań konsumentów na rynku żywności – kryteria zróżnicowania [Selected aspects of consumer behavior in the food market – differentiation criteria]. Warszawa, Poland. Wydawnictwo SGGW.

Kanchanapibul, M., Lacka, E., Wang, X., & Chan, H. K. (2014). An empirical investigation of green purchase behaviour among the young generation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 66, 528–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.10.062

Kumar, N., & Kapoor, S. (2017). Do labels influence purchase decisions of food products? Study of young consumers of an emerging market. British Food Journal, 119(2), 218–229. https://doi.org/10.1108/bfj-06-2016-0249

Lawlor, D. A., Ebrahim, S., & Davey Smith, G. (2001). Sex matters: Secular and geographical trends in sex differences in coronary heart disease mortality. BMJ, 323(7312), 541–545. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7312.541

Lima, J. P. M., Costa, S. A., Brandão, T. R. S., & Rocha, A. (2021). Food consumption determinants and barriers for healthy eating at the workplace—a university setting. Foods, 10(4), 695. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10040695

Martín, A., Cervero, M., González Rodríguez, A., Molinero, A., Magro, M., & Partearroyo, T. (2014). Quidad y desigualdad nutricional en dos centros escolares de la ciudad de Madrid (España) [Equity and nutritional inequalityin two school centers in Madrid (Spain)]. Nutricion Hospitalaria, 29(1), 128–135. https://doi.org/10.3305/nh.2014.29.1.6778

Naska, A., Fouskakis, D., Oikonomou, E., Almeida, M. D. V., Berg, M. A., Gedrich, K., Moreiras, O., Nelson, M., Trygg, K., Turrini, A., Remaut, A. M., Volatier, J. L., & Trichopoulou, A. (2005). Dietary patterns and their socio-demographic determinants in 10 European countries: Data from the DAFNE databank. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 60(2), 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602284

Nyrhinen, J., Sirola, A., Koskelainen, T., Munnukka, J., & Wilska, T.-A. (2023). Online antecedents for young consumers’ impulse buying behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 108129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.108129

Olejniczuk-Merta, A. (2008). Uwarunkowania rozwoju społeczno-zawodowej aktywności ludzi młodych.[Circumstances for the development of social and professional activity among young people]. Instytut Badań Rynku, Konsumpcji i Koniunktur.

Prowse, R. J. L., Naylor, P.-J., Olstad, D. L., Storey, K., Carson, V., Mâsse, L. C., Kirk, S. F. L., & Raine, K. D. (2020). Impact of a capacity-building intervention on food marketing features in recreation facilities. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 52(10), 935–943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2020.03.009

Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87/250/EEC, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and the Council, Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004. (EU No 1169/2011). (2011).

Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority, and laying down procedures in matters of food safety. (EC No 178/2002). (2002).

Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin. (EC No 853/2004). (2004).

Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs. (EC No 852/2004). (2004).

Regulation of the Minister of Development and Technology of December 19, 2022, on the visibility of prices of goods and services. OJ of 2022, item 2776.

Samaniego-Vaesken, M., Partearroyo, T., Ruiz, E., Aranceta-Bartrina, J., Gil, Á., González-Gross, M., Ortega, R., Serra-Majem, L., & Varela-Moreiras, G. (2018). The influence of place of residence, gender and age influence on food group choices in the spanish population: Findings from the ANIBES study. Nutrients, 10(4), 392. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10040392

Solomon, M. R. (2017). Consumer behaviour: Buying, having, and being. Pearson.

Statistic Poland. (2021). Population. Size and structure and vital statistics in Poland by territorial division. As of December 31, 2020. https://stat.gov.pl/en/topics/ population/population/population-size-and-structure-and-vital-statistics-in-poland-by-territorial-division-as-of-december-31-2020,3,29.html

Su, Tsai, Chen, & Lv. (2019). U.S. sustainable food market generation Z consumer segments. Sustainability, 11(13), 3607. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133607

Turčínková, J., & Kalábová, J. (2011). Preferences of Moravian consumers when buying food. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 59(2), 371–376. https://doi.org/10.11118/actaun201159020371

Wardle, J. (2001). Socioeconomic status and weight control practices in British adults. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 55(3), 185–190. https://doi.org/ 10.1136/jech.55.3.185

A smart home is also referred to as an interactive or networked home. Many 'define it as a home that includes digital sensing and communication devices’ (Baudier, Ammi, & Deboeuf-Rouchon, 2020). It increases the quality of life of its inhabitants, allows them to better care for their security and safety, and reduces utility expenses. It offers greater convenience than its regular counterpart, in which the various devices are separately or individually operated and controlled by their users (Yang et al., 2017). In a smart home, less is done by its owners, and less needs to be remembered because the installed devices communicate with each other by performing the necessary activities. Smart homes create an economically optimised and effective space for people living in them owing to the appropriate structure, power supply and control systems for electric energy, systems ensuring comfort and safety, and the mutual relations between them. The appliances of a smart home include, among others, smart devices, smart lighting, smoke and gas detectors and intrusion detection systems. These devices can be connected wirelessly to the internet and controlled remotely. Smart devices include television sets, audio-video equipment, vacuum cleaners, refrigerators, ovens, washing machines, dishwashers, light bulbs, air conditioners, doorbells, locks, devices classifiable under heating systems, and systems using security cameras and sensors for intrusion detection and alert. What distinguishes a smart home from an ordinary home is that in the case of the former, its smart devices communicate with each other and synchronise their activities.

Smart home technologies are gaining popularity. In Poland, according to a study conducted by Oferteo.pl, 23% of respondents decided to implement smart home solutions in their newly built home in 2018, while every third respondent chose them in 2019. People who did not choose to use these solutions in their new homes indicated high prices to be the reason, as well as the absence of a need to know about or have them (Majchrzyk, 2020). The latter reasons are confirmed in research findings available from the same author and forming part of the published literature (Kolny, 2021a), in which it is demonstrated that 75.8% of respondents consider facilitating the performance of everyday activities as an advantage, and 58.9% that everyday life becomes more satisfying and comfortable. However, the consumers constituting the respondents in the earlier study (and their households) who did not buy smart devices indicated the following factors to be the reason: high prices (79.5%), no need to have them (59%), or lack of knowledge about them (55.6%).

According to the Digital Market Outlook, the number of smart homes in the world in 2025 is expected to reach 478.2 million (Statista, 2021a), and the market penetration rate will reach 21.1% (Statista, 2021b). In 2020, the total number of smart home devices worldwide was 349 million. This number is predicted to increase significantly in the next few years, reaching 1.77 billion in 2025 (Statista, 2022).

As smart home systems are gaining more and more popularity from year to year, and since it is expected that their number will increase, despite the mentioned factors discouraging their implementation, an attempt was made to answer the question of what the attitude of consumers towards,  them is. Therefore, the article aims at assessing the attitude of young consumers towards a smart home and its devices. The study exclusively focuses on young consumers aged 18-34 years, who are more likely than others to adapt to all technological innovations and potentially become smart home users in the future. The research results can indicate what the level of acceptance of the smart home technology will be, and what is and will be the willingness of consumers to use these solutions. The focus was on issues from three research areas. The first area concerned the general attitude towards the concept of smart homes; the second, the possibility of using smart devices and smart homes in the future; and the third area covered issues related to the sense of security and safety as well as the possibilities offered to consumers using smart home solutions. It is assumed that young consumers intend to use a smart home in the future and have a positive attitude towards it, especially towards those solutions that are related to ensuring a sense of security and safety for its inhabitants.

The article provides information on smart homes and their devices. It describes the research methodology and the research sample, as well as presents the results of the author’s research and conclusions with recommendations for further research.

Resources and Method

The article is based on primary and secondary sources of information. Issues discussed pertaining to smart homes come from secondary information, which was supplemented with primary information collected by the author during direct research using the internet questionnaire technique from Mar. 1, 2021 to May 18, 2021. The questionnaire was made available on the SurveyMonkey platform, and the link to the research was sent by e-mail to potential respondents. The research sample, which consisted of 588 individuals, exclusively focussed on young consumers aged 18-34 years, out of whom 50% were women and 50% men. Among the respondents, 20.7% lived in rural areas, 27.6% lived in cities with up to 99,000 residents, 24.0% lived in cities from 100,000 to 199,000 residents and 27.7% of the respondents lived in cities with more than 200,000 residents. Most respondents assessed the financial situation of their household as good (63.8%) and answered that they could afford some luxury goods. Among the respondents, 26.0% declared the financial situation of their households as sufficient, meaning that they have to plan all major expenses. A very good financial situation was declared by 9.7% of the surveyed households and only 0.5% assessed their financial situation as bad. When analysing the respondents’ competencies to use objects and tools necessary to operate devices adopted in a smart home, it was found that very high skills related to the use of a smartphone were declared by 70.1% of respondents, a tablet by 49.8% and various internet applications by 61.9%. When declarations of high and very high skills were compared, the percentage of respondents in almost all cases increased to well over 90% (except for the tablet, where 75.8% of respondents declared skills at these levels). Moreover, 67.2% of the respondents declared that they were interested in technological innovations, which undoubtedly include all devices used in a smart home, whereas 32.8% declared that they were not interested in them.

Smart Home Features

The concept of a smart home is not something new, as the automation of household duties has been known for nearly 100 years. It emerged with the spread of electricity and electrical household appliances. The first devices using technology in home automation, based on the existing electrical installation to transmit signals controlling lights and home appliances, were introduced to the market by the Scottish company Pico Electronics in 1978, and the concept of the 'smart home’ was created in 1984 (Miller, 2016). When reflecting on the meaning of the word smart concerning things, it seems that the point is that many people will find that calling an object smart is determined by the ability to manage it remotely, and turn it on and off. 'Smart home can be de?ned as a residence equipped with a communication network, high-tech household devices, appliances, and sensors that can be remotely accessed, monitored, and controlled and that provide services responding to the residents’ needs’ (Yang et al., 2017). Thus, the modern smart home is a place equipped with various devices, lighting, heating, air conditioning, RTV equipment, household appliances and security systems that can communicate with each other and are controlled by using an application on a smartphone or tablet to by remotely turning on or off a given hardware contraption (Domb, 2019). The operation of a smart home is based on the use of a wireless home network (WiFi, Bluetooth, RFID) that allows many devices to be connected with an appropriate application developed and made available by manufacturers of smart devices. The Internet of Things is the most broadly utilised in the areas related to smart home furnishing (Gunge & Yalagi, 2016). The Internet of Things is viewed as a body of smart things that can react to the environment, process and remember digital information, and transfer it to other objects (and users) via internet protocols. The Internet of Things not only enables people to communicate with smart objects but also allows the interface between such smart devices.

This ensures the capability for communication anytime and anywhere, using any information carrier (Kwiatkowska, 2014). The Internet of Things consists of four basic elements: devices that allow for the active collection and transmission of measurement data that indicate their functioning; the communication network that connects the devices (i.e. the internet); information systems capable of collecting incoming data; and analytical solutions that process data and allow for inference and obtaining additional business value (Rozmus, 2019).

The main elements of a smart home, in which the integrated Building Management System (BMS) manages household appliances, include RTV equipment, alarm system and all controllable activities, such as lighting or heating, including central unit, power supply subsystems and control of electric energy, subsystems ensuring comfort and security and control devices (Malinowska, 2021). The central unit is defined as the 'heart’ of the BMS, to which all devices in the smart home are connected. There is also the need for electricity supply and control subsystems, i.e. various types of power supply installations, wiring, smart plug sockets, security, lighting and emergency power supply. Among the subsystems that ensure comfort, the following stand out, among others: heating, ventilation, air conditioning, lighting control, audio-video devices, sound system, entrance gate, garage door and sprinklers. On the other hand, the subsystems ensuring security and safety include alarms, smoke monitoring system and gas, motion and temperature detectors. For all of this to work smoothly, a control device is needed, i.e. a tablet, smartphone or other device dedicated to a given system, using which the functionalities of the home can be managed.

Objects that can be connected to a smartphone or tablet are perceived as having enhanced functionalities. Mobile devices act as a control centre for consumer electronics and household appliances connected to the home network. It should be easy for an average user, in particular one having the ability to use a smartphone, to install a control application and add another device to the home IoT ecosystem (Mącik, 2018).

All the smart devices in the home are designed to automate the performance of household chores. When various smart devices, communicating with each other, are gathered under one roof, this results in a smart home. Even a house equipped with basic automation has some smart functions (Miller, 2016). Apart from simply controlling and automating individual devices, home automation ensures that smart devices in a smart home communicate with other devices such that their operation is synchronised. A smart home can be seen as a fully autonomous system that works on behalf of its residents. It is the next step in the operation of the Connected Home, where devices can be controlled from anywhere using an application. Smart home systems can be easily adapted to the changing needs of smart home inhabitants. A smart home learns the behaviour and preferences of people living in it. It adapts to these behaviours, anticipates needs and reacts appropriately. It uses data collected not only from devices and sensors in the home but also wearable devices and even connected cars (Ekholm, 2018). A well-set-up smart home system means, e.g. that when a person locks the door with a key, the alarm system is automatically turned on, the blinds in the windows are automatically lowered, the temperature in particular rooms is automatically reduced and the lamps, home electronics and household appliances are automatically turned off. When the person comes back, the system automatically adjusts to their preferences (turning on, e.g. appropriate lighting, music or heating). The system incorporates the advantage that the user can continually check what is happening at home, and when it senses something dangerous, the automated system activates the alarm and sends information to the security company office or the fire brigade. The house, and the smart devices inside it, do most things for people, both inside and outside.

Apart from the advantages, such as the undoubted likelihood of energy savings and improved security and safety, there are also threats to privacy and security data that are downloaded by smart devices (Wilson, Hargreaves, & Hauxwell-Baldwin, 2017; Kolny, 2021b). These concerns are also related to the operation of smart devices and homes. A report on a survey of 10,002 respondents commissioned by Dynatrace in eight countries around the world (Great Britain, USA, France, Germany, Australia, Brazil, Singapore and China) showed that 73% of respondents fear that they may be locked inside or outside a smart home. The inability to control the temperature in a smart home was indicated by 68% of respondents, and light by 64% (Dynatrace, 2018). Furthermore, the results of a qualitative study among smart homeowners conducted by Hargreaves, Wilson and Hauxwell-Baldwin (2017) pointed out that smart home technologies are both technically and socially disruptive, it is not easy for all household members to adapt to the functionality of a smart home and learning to use this technology is a demanding and time-consuming task.

Research Results

At the beginning of the study, respondents were asked what smart devices their households are equipped with and which ones they are planning to buy in the future. It was found that most households were furnished with RTV equipment such as a smart TV (68.7%) and a multimedia player (49.5%). Among household equipment, the most popular type of appliance used by respondents’ households was a vacuum cleaner (41.7%), followed by a washing machine (39.5%) and a refrigerator (39.4%). The lowest share of surveyed households had an oven (37.3%) and a dishwasher (27.8%). The last two mentioned appliances are also not planned purchases in the future, because as much as 62.5% of respondents replied that they did not plan to buy a dishwasher, and 56.8% that they did not plan to buy an oven (Table 1).

RTV equipment and household appliances are only part of the furnishings of the connected house. Smartphones and tablets, via the internet, can control, for example, lighting, temperature, roller shutters and alarm systems. Therefore, the respondents were asked what home furnishings, classified as home automation devices, their households had. It was found that most of them had smart lighting (44.5%), followed by heating (38.3%), sockets (37.7%) and door locks (34.1%). About 15% of the surveyed households had other analysed appliances. These were air quality monitoring devices, weather stations and alarm systems. Among the respondents, 13.4% had smart homes that were equipped with monitoring cameras, 12.0% with video intercoms and the least number of them with window and door sensors (6.4%). The respondents’ declarations showed that most of them did not plan to purchase these devices (Table 2).

Source: Own study.

The attitude of young consumers to the concept of having a smart home installed and equipping it with smart devices was studied in three areas, each with corresponding statements. The first research area concerned the general attitude towards smart homes, the second area referred to the use of smart devices and a smart home in the future, and the third area concerned the sense of security and safety and the additional possibilities offered by the use of smart home solutions. Attitudes were tested on a scale from 1 to 7, where 1 meant that the respondents strongly disagreed with a given statement and 7 that they strongly agreed with it. It is worth noting that among all the scores, the respondents most often awarded 7, i.e. the highest score confirming that they definitely agreed with the particular statement.

Source: Own study.

The calculated average scores indicate that in terms of the issues from the first research area, the respondents agreed with the statements regarding smart homes, giving each of them an average score of more than 5. Moreover, their answers were dominated by scores of 7, and the median was mostly 6. The respondents gave high scores mostly towards indicating their agreement with the statements that smart home appliances are fun and that smart home appliances are enjoyable, giving each of these an average score of 5.45. The respondents also agreed with the statements that smart home devices are easy to use (average score 5.41) and that they are useful in everyday life (average score 5.38). A similar average score was also obtained for statements indicating that the use of smart home devices helps complete chores faster (average score 5.35) and that the interaction with smart home devices is clear and meaningful (average score 5.31). The lowest mean (3.45), as well as the median (3) and the mode (4), were obtained for the statement that smart devices have a reasonable price. Analysing the largest differences in respondents’ answers by gender, it was noted that women more often than men agreed with the statement that using smart home devices helps complete chores faster (average score of 5.56 compared to 5.13), while men agreed more often than women with the statement that they know how to use smart home devices (average score of 5.28 compared to 4.85). Considering the respondents’ declarations of interest in technological innovations, it was found that in all cases, higher average scores were awarded by people declaring themselves interested in technological advances (Table 3). When analysing the respondents’ answers in terms of their place of residence, it was noted that in most cases, residents of smaller cities (up to 99,000) agreed with these statements more than others, as evident from the results presented in Table 4. If we consider the percentage of respondents giving the highest scores, it can be concluded that most respondents (34.6%) agreed with the opinion that using smart home devices is fun, giving a score of 7. Then, 33.5% confirmed that smart home devices are useful in life. Slightly less, 32% confirmed that smart home devices are enjoyable, and 28.4% thought that smart devices are easy to use. The obtained results show that the general attitude of young consumers towards smart homes and devices is positive due to the pleasure derived from their use and their usefulness in everyday life.

INT, respondents interested in new technologies; M, men; Me, median; Mo, mode; NINT, respondents not interested in new technologies; T, total sample; W, women. *The scoring was based on a scale from 1 to 7, where 1 meant strongly disagree and 7 strongly agree. Source: Own study.

The respondents’ attitude towards smart home solutions may be related to the possibility of using them in the future and the acceptance of this technology. Therefore, when analysing the respondents’ declarations on their predicted use of smart devices and smart homes in the future, as part of the scope of the second research area, it was noted that they agreed with the statement indicating that they could use smart home devices (average score 5.58), and further, that the use of smart devices could become a habit for them (average score 5.45). It can therefore be assumed that the use of a smart home would not be a major problem for the respondents. They also agreed with the statement that they might use smart home services in the future (average 5.35), and even explicitly indicated that they intend to use smart home services in the future (average 5.23). Despite the declaration of willingness to use smart home solutions, it should be noted that they are not indispensable for the respondents because they did not agree

unequivocally with the statement that they could get addicted to using a smart home device (mean 3.96, median and mode 5). Among those interested in technological innovations, female more often than male respondents agreed with all the statements on the possibility of using smart devices and a smart home solution. The biggest difference in declarations was noted concerning the statement, 'I intend to use smart home services in the future’ (the average score given by women was 5.37 compared to 5.10 by men, and the average score given by respondents interested in technological innovations was 5.44 compared to 4.81 by those not interested), as can be seen from the results presented in Table 5. Considering the place of respondents’ residence, it was also found that for the statements on the use of smart home solutions in the future and statements reflecting attitudes towards smart homes, the residents of smaller cities (up to 99,000) agreed with them more often than other urban

INT, respondents interested in new technologies; M, men; Me, median; Mo, mode; NINT, respondents not interested in new technologies; T, total sample; W, women. *The scoring was based on a scale from 1 to 7, where 1 meant strongly disagree and 7 strongly agree. Source: Own study.

and rural dwellers. Only the residents of rural areas agreed more often than city dwellers with the statement 'I could get addicted to using smart home devices’ (Table 6). The highest score (7) was given by 37.4% of respondents who stated that they could use smart home devices, while 35.4% definitely admitted that the use of smart devices may become a habit for them. Over every third respondent (34.8%) definitely confirmed that they would use smart home services in the future, and not much less, almost every third (32.3%) gave a score of 7 stating that they intend to use smart home services in the future. Only 21.3% strongly confirmed that using smart home devices could become a habit for them and only 14.6% strongly admitted that they could become addicted to using smart home devices. The obtained results show a positive attitude in young consumers towards the possibility of using a smart home, although it should be emphasised that the declarations related to the use of a smart home in the future are contradictory to the described declarations regarding the intention to purchase (Tables 1 and 2). This can only be explained by the

*The scoring was based on a scale from 1 to 7, where 1 meant strongly disagree and 7 strongly agree. Source: Own study.

fact that an intelligent house is perceived as a comprehensive facility with devices and services, and individual smart things about the intention to buy that were asked may be the equipment of every regular house and flat.

Living in a smart home is undoubtedly associated with benefits for its user in terms of ensuring security and safety, reducing utility costs and facilitating everyday activities. Therefore, during the study, the attitude of young consumers towards the sense of security and safety associated with the use of a smart home solution, as well as the additional possibilities offered by the use of a smart home, was assessed. These issues were surveyed in the third research area. The mode score in all cases is 7, and the highest average score-indicating that the respondents agreed with the given statement-was that using a smart device at home can increase security and safety by detecting gas and smoke emissions (average 6.13), and by notifying in the event of unauthorised home intrusion (average 5.95). Also important are the abilities to provide automatic temperature control in the house (average score of 5.71), to control any electrical apparatus through simple operation (average 5.52), and to control whether the doors and windows in the house are closed (average 5.45), as well as active help without the need for human intervention (average 5.23) and the possibility of reducing costs (5.18). As far as the issues of the third research area are concerned, which are related to the sense of security and safety obtained from implementation of a smart home system as well as the additional possibilities created by the use of a smart home, among respondents interested in technological innovations, women agreed with them more often than men. The biggest difference in the declarations of women and men was noted concerning the statements that a smart home allows for the 'possibility of reducing utility costs’ (the average assessment given by women was 5.33 compared to 5.02 by men) and that it provides active help to residents without human intervention (5.37 average score awarded by respondents interested in technological innovations compared to 4.94 by those not interested), as can be seen from the data presented in Table 7. The study also showed that those city dwellers living in towns having a population of up to 99,000 agreed more often than other respondents with the statements presented to them from the third research area concerning the sense of security and safety obtained from implementation of a smart home system as well as the additional possibilities created by the use of a smart home (Table 8). These respondents also more often agreed with the statements from the first and second research areas (Tables 4 and 6). When analysing the scores in detail, it was noted that the largest proportion of respondents agreed with and assigned the highest score to the statements that using a smart device at home may increase their security and safety by detecting gas and smoke emissions (60.7%), and by informing in the event of an unauthorised home intrusion (52.9%). In these two cases, both the mode and the median were also 7 (Table 7).

The obtained research results indicate that households most often had smart electronic devices such as TV sets and multimedia players. Less than half of the surveyed households declared having smart home automation devices such as lighting (light bulbs) and heating (thermostats). When

INT, respondents interested in new technologies; M, men; Me, median; Mo, mode; NINT, respondents not interested in new technologies; T, total sample; W, women. *The scoring was based on a scale from 1 to 7, where 1 meant strongly disagree and 7 strongly agree. Source: Own study.

examining the attitudes of young consumers towards the smart home and its equipment, it was found that the respondents most often agreed with the statements indicating the sense of security and safety obtained from implementation of a smart home system as well as the additional possibilities created by the use of a smart home, especially those specifying the capability of the smart home system to increase safety by detecting gas and smoke emissions. Young consumers also agreed with the statement that they could use smart home devices and that the use of smart home devices is fun, and even declared their intention to use smart home

*The scoring was made on a scale of 1 to 7, where 1 meant strongly disagree and 7 strongly agree. Source: Own study.

solutions in the future. It should be noted that a full conviction concerning the sense of security and safety deriving from implementation of a smart home system has not yet been reflected in the current equipment of the respondents’ households, because their houses and flats were least often equipped with window and door sensors (6.4%), surveillance cameras (13.4%) and alarm systems (13.4%).

Conclusions

The constant development of technology has come to mean that the modern consumer has to live in an extremely interesting world, offering a countless range of possibilities for consumers to communicate with each other, for communication between consumers and objects and for that between the objects themselves without a consumer’s interference to facilitate and improve everyday life activities. Smart home systems are becoming more common day by day and forecasts indicate that the number of smart homes will increase. Therefore, the undertaken research was aimed at answering the question of what the attitude of young consumers is towards smart homes and furnishings in a smart home. Can the opinions expressed by young consumers give hope that these solutions will be used in the future? The survey shows that young consumers most often agreed with the statements indicating the sense of sense of security and safety obtained from implementation of a smart home system as well as the additional possibilities created by the use of a smart home, especially those specifying the capability of the smart home system to increase safety by detecting gas and smoke emissions. Importantly, the respondents agreed with the statement that they could use smart home devices, even agreeing with the statements that they intend to use smart home services in the future and that using smart home devices is fun. The obtained responses confirm the assumption that young consumers intend to use smart home solutions in the future and have a positive attitude towards them, especially those related to ensuring a sense of safety. In the responses of the respondents, one can see great optimism towards the use of smart homes, and this is related to both the sense of security derived from their use and the pleasure and ease of using them. However, it is difficult to predict whether these opinions would be confirmed during use, and when they will actually use it. Therefore, finally, attention should also be paid to the limitations of the results of the present research. No question was asked about who among the respondents already lives in a fully autonomous smart home and will continue to live in it. The questions referred only to individual smart devices, which do not always have to be synchronised with other smart devices used by households but are controlled separately by mobile devices. Therefore, it would be important to ascertain the opinions of people who have already decided to live in a smart home and repeat the research in the future.

References

1. Baudier, P., Ammi, Ch., & Deboeuf-Rouchon, M., (2020). Smart home: Highly-educated students’ acceptance. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 153, 119355. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.043

2. Domb, M. (2019). Smart home systems based on internet of things. In Y. Ismail (Ed.), Internet of Things (IoT) for automated and smart applications (pp. 25–37). London, UK: IntechOpen.

3. Dynatrace. (2018). IoT consumer confidence report: Challenges for enterprise cloud monitoring on the horizon. Retrieved from https://assets.dynatrace.com/en/docs/report/ 2824-iot-consumer-confidence-report-dynatrace.pdf.

4. Ekholm, J. (2018, May 31). Good bye connected home — Hello intelligent home, Gartner. Retrieved from https://blogs.gartner.com/jessica-ekholm/2018/05/31/good-byeconnectedhome-hello-intelligent-home/?

5. Gunge, V. S., & Yalagi, P. S. (2016). Smart home automation: A literature review. International Journal of Computer Applications (0975–8887). National Seminar on Recent Trends in Data Mining (RTDM), Retrieved from https://research.ijcaonline. org/rtdm2016/number1/rtdm2568.pdf.

6. Hargreaves, T., Wilson, Ch., & Hauxwell-Baldwin, R. (2018). Learning to live in a smart home. Building Research & Information, 46(1), 127–139.

7. Kwiatkowska, E. M. (2014). Rozwój Internetu rzeczy — szanse i zagrożenia, Internetowy Kwartalnik Antymonopolowy i Regulacyjny, 8(3), 60–70, Retrieved from www.ikar.wz.uw.edu.pl.

8. Kolny, B. (2021a). Equipping households with durable goods in the age of the internet of things. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Oeconomia, 20(3), 23-32.

9. Kolny, B. (2021b). Attitudes of young consumers on the security of their data collected by smart devices in the age of the Internet of Things. Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, 41(3), 21–38.

10. Malinowska, K. (2021). Co to jest inteligentny dom? Co się w nim znajduje? Retrieved from www.compero.pl.

11. Majchrzyk, Ł. (2020). Już co 3. nowy dom w Polsce jest inteligentny. Retrieed from https://mobirank.pl/2020/02/16/juz-co-3-nowy-dom-w-polsce-jest-inteligentny/

12. Mącik, R. (2018). Konsument w świecie internetu rzeczy (IoT) — uwarunkowania akceptacji technologii IoT, Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, nr 526, Wrocław: UE Wrocław, 48–59.

13. Miller, M. (2016). Internet rzeczy. Jak inteligentne telewizory, samochody, domy i miasta zmieniają świat. Warszawa, Poland: PWN.

14. Rozmus, S. (2019). Gospodarstwo domowe w dobie Internetu Rzeczy. Rocznik Kolegium Analiz Ekonomicznych, SGH, nr 54. Warszawa, Poland, 61–73.

15. Statista. (2021a). Number of smart homes forecast in the world until 2025. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/forecasts/887613/number-of-smart-homes-in-the-smarthomemarket-in-the-world

16. Statista. (2021b). Smart Homes penetration rate forecast in the World until 2025. https://www.statista.com/forecasts/887636/penetration-rate-of-smart-homes-in-theworld

17. Statista. (2022). Smart home device shipments worldwide 2020–2025. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/1223274/smart-home-device-shipments-worldwide/

18. Wilson, C., Hargreaves, T., & Hauxwell-Baldwin, R. (2017). Benefits and risks of smart home technologies. Energy Police, 103, 72–83.

19. Yang, H., Lee, H., & Zo, H. (2017). User acceptance of smart home services: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117(1), 68–89.