Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38486624›Full record

ArticleWearable technologies2021

Exoskeleton acceptance and its relationship to self-efficacy enhancement, perceived usefulness, and physical relief: A field study among logistics workers.

Sandra M Siedl, Martina Mara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Wearable technologies, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sandra M SiedlLIT Robopsychology Lab, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Linz, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6670-9288
Martina MaraLIT Robopsychology Lab, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Linz, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3447-0556

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This field study aimed to explore the effects of exoskeleton use on task-specific self-efficacy beliefs of logistics workers and to relate these effects to usefulness perceptions and technology acceptance. Background: A growing number of industrial companies have shown interest in having employees wearing exoskeletons to support their physical health. However, psychological consequences of exoskeleton use and mechanisms associated with workers' acceptance or rejection of exoskeletons are not yet sufficiently understood. Methods: A total of 31 logistics workers of a vehicle manufacturing company reported on their work-related self-efficacy, that is, how capable they felt of performing tasks related to their job well, before partaking in half-hour trials of a passive lift-assistive exoskeleton (Laevo V2.5) during their normal work. Afterward, they completed a questionnaire on their exoskeleton-supported self-efficacy and indicated how useful they found the exoskeleton, how much physical relief they felt from wearing it, and how willing they were to continue with its use. Results: Overall, wearing the exoskeleton did not lead to increased work-specific self-efficacy. However, indications of interaction effects were found between baseline self-efficacy, perceived physical relief, and perceived usefulness in such a way that workers who experienced the exoskeleton as more strain-relieving or more useful were also more likely to report a post-trial growth in their self-efficacy beliefs. A positive change in self-efficacy, in turn, was associated with a greater willingness to further use the exoskeleton at the workplace.

Indexed as

ExoskeletonField ExperimentPsychological Well-being

Identifiers

PMID38486624
PMCPMC10936393

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.