Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Smart energy applications can be powerful tools for two-way communication between energy providers and end-users. These apps offer real-time usage insights and present consumption data through intuitive and visually appealing interfaces. In parallel, these platforms allow users to provide ratings, reviews, and comments directly within or via app provision platforms, thereby helping energy providers improve their overall services. Long-term engagement with such energy apps could benefit sustainable energy consumption practices, as such digital platforms can empower users to make informed energy-efficient choices. Nonetheless, there is a lack of a systematic approach to analysing users’ engagement towards such smart energy apps and users’ opinions about their practical functionalities and features. This study examines how users interact with smart energy apps, assess their functionalities, and share their opinions through ratings, reviews, and comments. It offers unique insights into end-user perspectives through advanced text-mining techniques incorporating word analysis, sentiment analysis, topic modelling, and exploratory qualitative analysis. By analysing over 3,000 publicly available user-generated reviews, the research identifies patterns such as monitoring energy consumption, managing appliances, and integrating smart home features like EV charging. The findings highlight diverse motivations for app engagement, extending beyond cost savings to include empowerment, convenience, and alignment with sustainability goals. While users express predominantly positive sentiments about the app’s intuitive design, real-time feedback, and gamification features, reviews also reveal areas for improvement, emphasizing the importance of user-centred design in enhancing app usability and functionality. The findings provide actionable insights for improving app design, advancing smart energy solutions, and informing energy efficiency and conservation initiatives.
Paneru et al. (Mon,) studied this question.