OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)
Feb 14, 2025;15 (2):

Cross-Analysis of mHealth Social Acceptance Among Youth: A Comparative Study Between Japan and China.

Olugbenga Akiogbe, Hanlin Feng, Karin Kurata, Makoto Niwa, Jianfei Cao, Shuo Zhang, Itsuki Kageyama, Yoshiyuki Kobayashi, Yeongjoo Lim, Kota Kodama
Author Information
  1. Olugbenga Akiogbe: Graduate School of Design and Architecture, Nagoya City University, Nagoya 464-0083, Japan. ORCID
  2. Hanlin Feng: Graduate School of Technology Management, Ritsumeikan University, Ibaraki 567-8570, Japan. ORCID
  3. Karin Kurata: Graduate School of Design and Architecture, Nagoya City University, Nagoya 464-0083, Japan.
  4. Makoto Niwa: Research Organization of Open Innovation and Collaboration, Ritsumeikan University, Osaka 567-8570, Japan. ORCID
  5. Jianfei Cao: Graduate School of Technology Management, Ritsumeikan University, Ibaraki 567-8570, Japan. ORCID
  6. Shuo Zhang: Institute at School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, China.
  7. Itsuki Kageyama: Merge System Co., Ltd., Fukuoka 810-0041, Japan.
  8. Yoshiyuki Kobayashi: Medical Data Science Lab., Hoshi University, Tokyo 142-0063, Japan.
  9. Yeongjoo Lim: Graduate School of Corporate Business, Ritsumeikan University, Ibaraki 567-8570, Japan. ORCID
  10. Kota Kodama: Research Organization of Open Innovation and Collaboration, Ritsumeikan University, Osaka 567-8570, Japan.
PMID: 40001844 DOI: 10.3390/bs15020213

Abstract

Although mobile health (mHealth) technologies have emerged as a revolutionary approach to enhance healthcare delivery, few studies have examined how it is perceived and accepted in different cultures. This study investigated mHealth's social acceptance among young people in Japan and China, with a focus on cultural influences on technology adoption. A comparative analysis approach was adopted, employing an extended unified theory of acceptance and use of the technology model. University students from both countries, recruited using harmonized sampling methods, completed questionnaires. We employed descriptive statistics to summarize the sample characteristics, confirmatory factor analysis to validate the constructs, multigroup analysis to test for measurement invariance and ensure the applicability of the model in both cultural contexts, and comparative path analysis to explore differences in the various factors influencing mHealth acceptance in each cultural setting. The findings revealed distinct cultural effects on mHealth acceptance. Japanese young people showed cautious acceptance influenced by societal norms and infrastructure, whereas Chinese young people demonstrated strong engagement driven by government support and the growing digital health industry. The study emphasizes the importance of considering cultural and systemic dynamics when integrating mHealth into youth healthcare models and suggests tailored strategies for successful implementation.

Keywords

China Japan comparative path analysis mHealth social acceptance youth

References

  1. Front Artif Intell. 2022 Apr 28;5:768831 [PMID: 35573898]
  2. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2023 Sep 28;23(1):213 [PMID: 37759183]
  3. Acta Neurol Scand Suppl. 2012;(195):31-5 [PMID: 23278654]
  4. Psychol Methods. 2023 Feb;28(1):207-221 [PMID: 34672644]
  5. Gen Psychiatr. 2022 Sep 13;35(4):e100764 [PMID: 36189182]
  6. Appl Psychol Meas. 2021 Oct;45(7-8):477-493 [PMID: 34866708]
  7. Australas Psychiatry. 2022 Oct;30(5):608-611 [PMID: 35603549]
  8. Nutrients. 2021 Nov 26;13(12): [PMID: 34959810]
  9. J Am Coll Health. 2025 Feb;73(2):602-610 [PMID: 37399569]
  10. Front Digit Health. 2023 Mar 08;5:1008564 [PMID: 36969957]
  11. Heliyon. 2024 Jan 26;10(3):e25131 [PMID: 39668858]
  12. Behav Res Methods. 2024 Apr;56(4):2901-2922 [PMID: 37950114]
  13. GetMobile. 2018 Jun;22(2):11-14 [PMID: 30680312]
  14. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Nov 17;19(22): [PMID: 36429875]
  15. Gen Psychiatr. 2019 Aug 8;32(4):e100069 [PMID: 31552383]
  16. Cureus. 2022 Jul 26;14(7):e27299 [PMID: 35903483]
  17. Healthcare (Basel). 2019 Dec 02;7(4): [PMID: 31810293]
  18. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Jun 4;8(6):e16723 [PMID: 32496202]
  19. JBI Evid Implement. 2024 May 01;22(2):236-238 [PMID: 38390893]
  20. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021 Sep 8;9(9):e31097 [PMID: 34494968]
  21. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2023 Jun 23;11:e45162 [PMID: 37351947]
  22. Digit Health. 2022 May 24;8:20552076221102773 [PMID: 35646382]
  23. Psychol Methods. 2022 Jun;27(3):281-306 [PMID: 33271027]
  24. Int J Med Inform. 2018 Jul;115:92-105 [PMID: 29779724]
  25. J Soc Psychol. 2024 Nov;164(6):1178-1194 [PMID: 37964607]
  26. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Feb 06;20(4): [PMID: 36833559]
  27. Sci Rep. 2024 Jan 3;14(1):339 [PMID: 38172184]
  28. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2020 May;24(2):103-120 [PMID: 31253070]
  29. J Pers Oriented Res. 2023 Jun 17;9(1):17-28 [PMID: 37389031]
  30. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2023 Jun 22;304:81-85 [PMID: 37347575]
  31. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2017 Nov/Dec;32(6):E1-E7 [PMID: 28248747]
  32. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Apr 24;7(4):e13204 [PMID: 31017586]
  33. Adicciones. 2021 Nov 05;33(4):369-372 [PMID: 33338249]
  34. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Nov 30;6(11):e194 [PMID: 30251704]
  35. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Dec 07;19(24): [PMID: 36554307]
  36. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Aug 29;6(8):e172 [PMID: 30158101]
  37. Front Digit Health. 2022 Sep 27;4:916809 [PMID: 36238198]
  38. BMC Public Health. 2018 Jun 19;18(1):764 [PMID: 29921258]
  39. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Mar 14;7(3):e11163 [PMID: 30869649]
  40. J Evid Based Med. 2023 Dec;16(4):534-546 [PMID: 37772921]
  41. Assessment. 2024 Apr;31(3):574-587 [PMID: 37138520]
  42. Mhealth. 2021 Apr 20;7:35 [PMID: 33898604]
  43. Health Commun. 2023 Jul;38(8):1550-1562 [PMID: 34978235]
  44. Balkan Med J. 2022 Nov 7;39(6):384-385 [PMID: 36373703]
  45. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2022 Jul 24;22(1):191 [PMID: 35871682]
  46. PLoS One. 2015 Nov 13;10(11):e0142385 [PMID: 26565410]
  47. Sci Rep. 2023 May 31;13(1):8846 [PMID: 37258793]
  48. Soc Sci Med. 2023 Jun;326:115899 [PMID: 37087974]
  49. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Apr 23;17(8): [PMID: 32340355]
  50. Behav Sci (Basel). 2024 Jun 14;14(6): [PMID: 38920829]
  51. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Jun 5;20(1):144 [PMID: 32503435]
  52. Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Jun 02;11(11): [PMID: 37297768]

Grants

  1. 21H00739/Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  2. 20H01546/Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  3. 20K20769/Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  4. SECOM Science and Technology Foundation/SECOM Science and Technology Foundation
Journal Article

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0mHealthacceptanceculturalanalysisyoungpeopleJapanChinacomparativehealthapproachhealthcarestudysocialtechnologymodelpathyouthAlthoughmobiletechnologiesemergedrevolutionaryenhancedeliverystudiesexaminedperceivedaccepteddifferentculturesinvestigatedmHealth'samongfocusinfluencesadoptionadoptedemployingextendedunifiedtheoryuseUniversitystudentscountriesrecruitedusingharmonizedsamplingmethodscompletedquestionnairesemployeddescriptivestatisticssummarizesamplecharacteristicsconfirmatoryfactorvalidateconstructsmultigrouptestmeasurementinvarianceensureapplicabilitycontextsexploredifferencesvariousfactorsinfluencingsettingfindingsrevealeddistincteffectsJapaneseshowedcautiousinfluencedsocietalnormsinfrastructurewhereasChinesedemonstratedstrongengagementdrivengovernmentsupportgrowingdigitalindustryemphasizesimportanceconsideringsystemicdynamicsintegratingmodelssuggeststailoredstrategiessuccessfulimplementationCross-AnalysisSocialAcceptanceAmongYouth:ComparativeStudy

Similar Articles

Cited By