Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Articles
DOI: 10.14254/1795-6889.2025.21-1.2
Submitted: 2023-12-30
Published: 2025-05-28

Social perception of mobile network development in Poland: The role of trust, benefits and risks

Bialystok University of Technology
The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin
Mykolas Romeris University
5G wireless technology social acceptance trust in technology TAM model

Abstract

This paper aims to explore the intricate relationships between general trust in technology, perceived benefits, perceived threats, and future intentions to use wireless technology. The study employs Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) to analyse data collected from a representative sample of 1010 Polish respondents. The methodology is rooted in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), incorporating modifications to accommodate the specifics of wireless technology acceptance. The results affirm significant positive relationships between general trust in technology and perceived benefits, as well as a negative association between general trust and perceived threats. Interestingly, while perceived threats were expected to negatively impact future usage intentions, this study finds that the positive perceptions of benefits substantially outweigh the concerns related to threats, leading to a strong intention to use future technologies. This study extends the TAM by incorporating trust and perceived threats into the model, providing a more comprehensive understanding of the factors that drive technology acceptance, particularly in the context of next-generation wireless networks. This highlights the pivotal role of trust in moderating the perceived risks associated with new technologies. Demonstrating the importance of enhancing public trust and accurately communicating the benefits of new technologies, this research suggests strategies that could mitigate public apprehension and enhance the adoption rates of new technological systems.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. Aderibigbe, O.-O., & Gumbo , T. (2023). Geospatial analysis of telecommunication and travel behaviour of households: Lessons from a developing city in Nigeria. Journal of Sustainable Development of Transport and Logistics, 8(2), 71–85. https://doi.org/10.14254/jsdtl.2023.8-2.5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/jsdtl.2023.8-2.5
  2. Ajmone Marsan, M., Blefari Melazzi, N., & Buzzi, S. (2018). 5G Italy White Book: from Research to Market. Retrieved December 15, 2024, from https://www.5gitaly.eu/2018/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/5G-Italy-White-eBook.pdf
  3. Altay, B. C., & Okumus, A. (2022). User adoption of integrated mobility technologies: The case of multimodal trip-planning apps in Turkey. Research in Transportation Business and Management, 43, 100706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100706 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100706
  4. Asif, S.Z. (2018). 5G Mobile Communications: Concepts and Technologies (1st edition). CRC Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429466342-1
  5. Attaran, M. (2023). The impact of 5G on the evolution of intelligent automation and industry digitization. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 14(5), 5977–5993. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-020-02521-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-020-02521-x
  6. Cai, L., Yuen, K. F., & Wang, X. (2023). Explore public acceptance of autonomous buses: An integrated model of UTAUT, TTF and trust. Travel Behaviour And Society, 31, 120–130. doi: 10.1016/j.tbs.2022.11.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2022.11.010
  7. Čaušević, S., & Medić, A. (2021). 4G to 5G Network Evolution: Advantages and Differences. SAR Journal, 4(4), 153. https://doi.org/10.18421/SAR44-01 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18421/SAR44-01
  8. Chen, S., Li, S.-H., & Li, C.-Y. (2012). Recent related research in technology acceptance model: a literature review. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(9), 124–127. https://doi.org/10.52283/NSWRCA.AJBMR.20110109A14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.52283/NSWRCA.AJBMR.20110109A14
  9. Cumiskey, K. M., & Humphreys, L. (2023). Social, seamless, just, and open: Advancing mobile communication research. New Media & Society, 25(4), 833–848. doi: 10.1177/14614448231158642 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231158642
  10. D’Alessandro, S., & Winzar, H. (2014). From i-phone 3G to i-phone 4G: A two-stage complex systems model of the two stage diffusion process. Australasian Marketing Journal, 22(1,SI), 69–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2013.12.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2013.12.011
  11. David, K., & Berndt, H. (2018). 6G Vision and Requirements: Is There Any Need for Beyond 5G? IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, 13(3), 72–80. https://doi.org/10.1109/MVT.2018.2848498 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/MVT.2018.2848498
  12. Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology Acceptance model for empirically testing new and-user information systems: theory and results. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Retrieved October 15, 2024, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/35465050_A_Technology_Acceptance_Model_for_Empirically_Testing_New_End-User_Information_Systems
  13. de Blanes Sebastian, M. G., Sarmiento Guede, J. R., Azuara Grande, A., & Juarez-Varon, D. (2023). Analysis of factors influencing attitude and intention to use electric vehicles for a sustainable future. Journal pf Technology Transfer, 49, 1347–1368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-023-10046-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-023-10046-6
  14. Destiny, T. (2020). Conspiracy theories about 5G networks have skyrocketed since COVID-19. The Conversation. Retrieved December 1, 2024, from https://wp.wifibusiness.fastcloud.it/outcome?logout-url=https://hnaas.wifibusiness.fastcloud.it:19008/thirdauth/logout/c37c64b94938d28e863ea8480c25acce589083fea195649f
  15. DigitalPoland (2020). Technologia w służbie społeczeństwu. Czy Polacy zostaną społeczeństwem 5.0? (Technology in the service of society. Will Poles become a 5.0 society?). Fundacja DigitalPoland. https://digitalpoland.org/assets/publications/technologia-w-sluzbie-spoleczenstwu-czy-polacy-zostana-spoleczenstwem-50-edycja-2020/society-50-tech4society-edycja-2020-digitalpoland.pdf
  16. Eliassen, I., & Pena, P. (2020, June 12). Real 5G issues overshadowed by Covid-19 conspiracy theories. https://Www.Investigate-Europe.Eu/En/2020/5g-Covid-Conspiracy/.
  17. European Commission. (2018). E-Communications and the digital single market – Report. European Commission. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/57889a55-8fb6-11e8-8bc1-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
  18. Eurostat (2020). Digital economy and society statistics - households and individuals. Eurostat. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Digital_economy_and_society_statistics_-_households_and_individuals
  19. Eurostat (2023). Digital economy and society statistics - households and individuals. (2023). Eurostat. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Digital_economy_and_society_statistics_-_households_and_individuals
  20. Fettweis, G., & Alamouti, S. (2014). 5G: Personal Mobile Internet beyond What Cellular Did to Telephony. IEEE Communications Magazine, 52(2), 140–145. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2014.6736754 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2014.6736754
  21. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Inexperience and experience with online stores: The importance of TAM and trust. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(3), 307–321. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2003.817277 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2003.817277
  22. Gupta, S., & Mathur, N. (2023). Virtual communication adoption by educational leaders: moderating role of perceived risk and benefits. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 40(3), 242–258. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-03-2022-0044 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-03-2022-0044
  23. Haque, Md. A., Ahmad, S., Abboud, A. J., Hossain, Md. A., Kumar, K., Haque, S., Sonal, D., Rahman, M., & Marisennayya, S. (2024). 6G Wireless Communication Networks: Challenges and Potential Solution. Int. J. Bus. Data Commun. Netw., 19, 1–27. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:268285056 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/IJBDCN.339889
  24. Iacobucci, D. (2010). Structural equations modeling: Fit Indices, sample size, and advanced topics. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(1), 90–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.09.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.09.003
  25. ITU (2020). Security in telecommunications and information technology (7th edition). An overview of issues and the deployment of existing ITU-T Recommendations for secure telecommunications. International Telecommunication Union. https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/opb/tut/T-TUT-ICTSS-2020-4-PDF-E.pdf
  26. ITU. (2015). ITU-R Recommendation M.2083-0. IMT Vision. Framework and overall objectives of the future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond. International Telecommunication Union. https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/m/R-REC-M.2083-0-201509-I!!PDF-E.pdf
  27. Jurek-Matusiak, O., Brożek-Mądry, E., Jastrzębska, H., & Krzeski, A. (2021). Orbital decompression for thyroid eye disease: surgical treatment outcomes in endocrinological assessment. Endokrynologia Polska, 72(6), 609–617. https://doi.org/10.5603/ep.a2021.0078 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5603/EP.a2021.0078
  28. Karunarathna, W. K. S., Jayaratne, W., Dasanayaka, S. W. S. B., Ibrahim, S., & Samara, F. (2023). Factors affecting household’s use of energy-saving appliances in Sri Lanka: an empirical study using a conceptualized technology acceptance model. Energy Efficiency, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-023-10096-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-023-10096-7
  29. Kim, Y., & Peterson, R. A. (2017). A Meta-analysis of Online Trust Relationships in E-commerce. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 38, 44–54. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2017.01.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2017.01.001
  30. Kuen, L., Schuermann, F., Westmattelmann, D., Hartwig, S., Tzafrir, S., & Schewe, G. (2023). Trust transfer effects and associated risks in telemedicine adoption. Electronic Markets, 33(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-023-00657-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-023-00657-0
  31. Kuen, L., Westmattelmann, D., Bruckes, M., & Schewe, G. (2023). Who earns trust in online environments? A meta-analysis of trust in technology and trust in provider for technology acceptance. Electronic Markets, 33(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-023-00672-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-023-00672-1
  32. Kunst, J. R., Gundersen, A. B., Krysińska, I., Piasecki, J., Wójtowicz, T., Rygula, R., van der Linden, S., & Morzy, M. (2024). Leveraging artificial intelligence to identify the psychological factors associated with conspiracy theory beliefs online. Nature Communications, 15(1), 7497. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-51740-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-51740-9
  33. Kuzhda, T. (2016). Diagnosing resistance to change in the change management process. Economics, Management and Sustainability, 1(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.14254/jems.2016.1-1.5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/jems.2017.1-1.5
  34. La, L. (2020). 5G myths, debunked: 5G won’t replace 4G, doesn’t cause COVID-19 and is still rolling out. CNET. https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/5g-myths-debunked-5g-wont-replace-4g-doesnt-cause-covid-19-and-is-still-rolling-out-during-the-pandemic/
  35. Lee, J.-H., & Song, C.-H. (2013). Effects of trust and perceived risk on user acceptance of a new technology service. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 41, 587+. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A334041446/AONE?u=anon~a1de272f&sid=googleScholar&xid=5d1892b8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.4.587
  36. Lewicki, R. J., Tomlinson, E. C., & Gillespie, N. (2006). Models of Interpersonal Trust Development: Theoretical Approaches, Empirical Evidence, and Future Directions. Journal of Management, 32(6), 991–1022. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306294405 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306294405
  37. Lopez-Carreiro, I., Monzon, A., & Lopez, E. (2024). Assessing the intention to uptake MaaS: the case of Randstad. European Transport Research Review, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-023-00625-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-023-00625-x
  38. Lu, J., Yao, J. E., & Yu, C. S. (2005). Personal innovativeness, social influences and adoption of wireless Internet services via mobile technology. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14(3), 245–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2005.07.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2005.07.003
  39. Lu, U., Yu, C. S., Liu, C., & Yao, J. E. (2003). Technology acceptance model for wireless Internet. Internet Research, 13(3), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240310478222 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240310478222
  40. Luyao, L., Al Mamun, A., Hayat, N., Yang, Q., Hoque, M. E., & Zainol, N. R. (2022). Predicting the intention to adopt wearable payment devices in China: The use of hybrid SEM-Neural network approach. Plos One, 17(8), e0273849-. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273849 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273849
  41. Lyeonov, S., Brychko, M., Korpysa, J., & Bács, Z. (2024). Cognitive mapping of the economy of trust. Economics and Sociology, 17(3), 237-266. doi:10.14254/2071-789X.2024/17-3/13 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2024/17-3/13
  42. Melberg, K., & Gressgard, L. J. (2023). Digitalization and changes to work organization and management in the Norwegian petroleum industry. Cognition Technology & Work, 25(4), 447–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-023-00739-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-023-00739-1
  43. Mukong, A. K., & Nanziri, L. E. (2021). Social networks and technology adoption: Evidence from mobile money in Uganda. Cogent Economics & Finance, 9(1), 1913857. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1913857 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.1913857
  44. Mustafa, S., Zhang, W., Anwar, S., Jamil, K., & Rana, S. (2022). An integrated model of UTAUT2 to understand consumers’ 5G technology acceptance using SEM-ANN approach. Scientific Reports, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24532-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24532-8
  45. Nuntasunti, S., & Bernold, L. E. (2006). Experimental assessment of wireless construction technologies. Journal Of Construction Engineering And Management-ASCE, 132(9), 1009–1018. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:9(1009) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:9(1009)
  46. Oughton, E., Frias, Z., Russell, T., & Sicker Douglas and Cleevely, D. D. (2018). Towards 5G: Scenario-based assessment of the future supply and demand for mobile telecommunications infrastructure. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 133, 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.03.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.03.016
  47. Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology Readiness Index (Tri): A Multiple-Item Scale to Measure Readiness to Embrace New Technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/109467050024001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109467050024001
  48. PIIT (2024). Postawy Polaków wobec nowych technologii znajomość tematyki pola elektromagnetycznego - analiza i porównanie na tle innych krajów [Attitudes of Poles towards new technologies and knowledge about electromagnetic fields – analysis and comparison with other countries]. https://www.telepolis.pl/images/2024/12/Podstawy-wobec-nowych-technologii_grudzien-2024-skompresowany.pdf
  49. Plohl, N., & Čuš Babič, N. (2024). Using the UTAUT2 components and trust to predict consumer acceptance of smart home technology: A systematic review. Human Technology, 20(1), 93–113. https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2024.20-1.5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2024.20-1.5
  50. Qualcomm (2020). Global update on spectrum for 4G & 5G. https://www.qualcomm.com/content/dam/qcomm-martech/dm-assets/documents/spectrum-for-4g-and-5g.pdf
  51. Rao, B., Harrison, A. J., & Mulloth, B. (2020). Defense Technological Innovation: Issues and Challenges in an Era of Converging Technologies. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789902105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789902105
  52. Razavi, N., & Sierpinski, G. (2024). An attempt to determine the impact of the implementation of autonomous vehicles on a larger scale on the planning of city transport systems. Journal of Sustainable Development of Transport and Logistics, 9(1), 96-120. https://doi.org/10.14254/jsdtl.2024.9-1.8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/jsdtl.2024.9-1.8
  53. Rosa, L., Silva, F., & Analide, C. (2021). Mobile Networks and Internet of Things Infrastructures to Characterize Smart Human Mobility. Smart Cities, 4(2), 894–918. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities4020046 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities4020046
  54. Segal, A. (2019). Year in review 2019: The U.S.-China tech cold war deepens and expands. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/blog/year-review-2019-us-china-tech-cold-war-deepens-and-expands
  55. Setterstrom, A. J., Pearson, J. M., & Orwig, R. A. (2013). Web-enabled wireless technology: an exploratory study of adoption and continued use intentions. Behaviour & Information Technology, 32(11), 1139–1154. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2012.708785 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2012.708785
  56. Shah, S. K., Tang, Z., & Sharif Sayed Muhammad Fawad and Tanveer, A. (2021). An empirical study of Chinese students’ behavioral intentions to adopt 5G for smart-learning in Covid-19. Smart Learning Environments, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-021-00172-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-021-00172-9
  57. Shah, S. K., Zhongjun, T., Sattar, A., & XinHao, Z. (2021). Consumer’s intention to purchase 5G: Do environmental awareness, environmental knowledge and health consciousness attitude matter? Technology in Society, 65, 101563. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101563 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101563
  58. Shahzad, M. F., Xu, S., Khan, K. I., & Hasnain, M. F. (2023). Effect of social influence, environmental awareness, and safety affordance on actual use of 5G technologies among Chinese students. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 22442. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-50078-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-50078-4
  59. Shetu, S. N., Islam, Md. M., & Promi, S. I. (2022). An Empirical Investigation of the Continued Usage Intention of Digital Wallets: The Moderating Role of Perceived Technological Innovativeness. Future Business Journal, 8(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-022-00158-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-022-00158-0
  60. Shin, H.-S. (2010). Moderating Effects of Personal Innovativeness on the Relationship between Perceived Usefulness, Subjective Norm and Intention to Use Mobile Internet. Journal of Information Systems, 19, 209–236. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:201895544 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5859/KAIS.2010.19.3.209
  61. Soler, U. (2021). Political and Economic Contexts of Implementing 5G in Poland and in Selected European Countries. Journal of Telecommunications and Information Technology, 2, 38–48. https://doi.org/10.26636/jtit.2021.149720 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26636/jtit.2021.149720
  62. Soler, U. (2022). Social perception of 5G technology. Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:256881740 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36874/RIESW.2022.1.6
  63. Sousa, S., & Beltrão, G. (2021). Factors Influencing Trust Assessment in Technology. Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2021: 18th IFIP TC 13 International Conference, Bari, Italy, August 30 – September 3, 2021, Proceedings, Part V, 416–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85607-6_49 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85607-6_49
  64. Steć, Z., Burska, Z., Brożek-Mądry, E., Straburzyński, M., Waliszewska-Prosół, M., & Krzeski, A. (2022). Clinical characteristics of acute rhinosinusitisin COVID-19 a post-hoc analysis of a longitudinalstudy. Otolaryngologia Polska, 77(1), 12–18. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0016.1076 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0016.1076
  65. Tilson, D., & Lyytinen, K. (2006). The 3G transition: Changes in the US wireless industry. Telecommunications Policy, 30(10), 569–586. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2006.09.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2006.09.002
  66. Wald, R., Piotrowski, J. T., Araujo, T., & van Oosten, J. M. F. (2023). Virtual assistants in the family home. Understanding parents’ motivations to use virtual assistants with their Child(dren). Computers in Human Behavior, 139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107526 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107526
  67. Walter, J. R., Xu, S., & Rogers, J. A. (2024). From lab to life: how wearable devices can improve health equity. Nature Communications, 15(1), 123. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-44634-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-44634-9
  68. Weerakkody, V., & Dhillon, G. S. (2008). Moving from E-Government to T-Government: A Study of Process Reengineering Challenges in a UK Local Authority Context. Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res., 4, 1–16. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:532965 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/jegr.2008100101
  69. WVS (2028). World Values Survey Wave 6. https://Www.Worldvaluessurvey.Org/WVSOnline.Jsp.
  70. Yang, M., Jiang, J., Kiang, M., & Yuan, F. (2022). Re-Examining the Impact of Multidimensional Trust on Patients’ Online Medical Consultation Service Continuance Decision. Information Systems Frontiers, 24(3, SI), 983–1007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-021-10117-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-021-10117-9
  71. Zhao, Y., Sun, Y., Zhou, Q., Cui, C., & Liu, Y. (2023). How A/E/C professionals accept BIM technologies in China: a technology acceptance model perspective. Engineering Construction And Architectural Management, 30(10), 4569–4589. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-04-2022-0308 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-04-2022-0308
  72. Zhu, J. (2018). Wireless Sensor Network Technology Based on Security Trust Evaluation Model. International Journal Of Online Engineering, 14(4), 211–226. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v14i04.8590 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v14i04.8590
  73. Żurek, J. (2018). The electromagnetic field and people. On physics, biology, medicine, standards, and the 5G network. National Institute of Telecommunications. https://www.euractiv.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/07/The-electromagnetic-field.-On-physics-biology-medicine-standards-and-the-5G-network.pdf

How to Cite

Ejdys, J., Soler, U., & Ginevičius, R. (2025). Social perception of mobile network development in Poland: The role of trust, benefits and risks. Human Technology, 21(1), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2025.21-1.2