Abstract: Mobile Technology Adoption and Use in Africa: Assessing How Kenyans Accept and Use Mobile Technology in Healthcare Delivery

◆ Ebenezer Aidoo, University of Iowa
◆ Kate Magsamen-Conrad, University of Iowa

We know quite a lot about health-related technology adoption in western, educated, industrialized, and privileged populations in Europe and North America (i.e., “WEIRD”). However, we know less about how information communication technology (ICT) is adopted and used in African countries. For example, Kenya has successful ICT connectivity rate, high mobile phone penetration, and a high mobile financing system. However, we do not know much about how they are using and adopting to technology for health care. This study is the first step in a multi-phase project investigating MTIBA adoption among English-speaking, smartphone using Kenyans. Once we understand the adoption process the team will create data-driven MTIBA-adoption interventions. Design: We began by conducting cognitive interviews (CI) on existing survey measures that had been primarily utilized in WEIRD samples to ensure that survey questions are understood in the way they are intended. The CI process helped us understand participants' thought processes while completing the survey. We identified problems with the question wording or responses and enacted the necessary changes for the final survey. Participants: We recruited 15 participants using a social network + snowball sampling strategy. Participants were Kenyan or Kenyan residents aged 24-31 (M=27) who completed a survey and interview in English. The majority of participants completed a “college degree” (n=14) and one completed “high school diploma”. Seven participants were married, seven were single, and one responded with “other" (with no explanation). Procedure: After IRB approval, the first author conducted 15 semi-structured CIs virtually. Participants completed the survey online while on Zoom. Interviews ranged from 45-60 minutes. While participants were filling out the survey, we interviewed them simultaneously and made them think aloud and talk aloud, and further probed to elicit their comprehension of the survey. Completing the survey took approximately 15-20 mins, talking about the questions during the survey (the interview) took about an extra 30-40 mins. We did not generate new information after the fifteenth interview and reached saturation. Participants received $20 via worldRemit after the interview. Measures: We adopted Venkatesh et al.’s (2003) Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology” (UTAUT) scales to measure performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, and behavioral intentions, and privacy (Metzger, 2004) using Authors (redacted) published scales with modifications (e.g., “MTIBA” instead of “handheld device.”). These existing measures needed to be tested and edited before we conduct the study. Results: Overall, participants reading aloud and thinking aloud proved useful in identifying issues with translation and comprehension. For example, about 95% of participants interpreted the meaning of a word like “novel” as “narrative” instead of the intended meaning “original” as used in the survey. Conclusion: We have completed CIs and are currently editing the online survey. During January 2022, we will collect data from ~500 Kenyans using research expert, DataDiggers Market Research. In April we would present the detailed CI analysis, dissemination strategy, and preliminary descriptive and psychometric statistics for all scales, and best practices for research within international (Africa) populations.