MASTER THESIS
BEHAVIORAL LOYALTY
TOWARDS BRANDED APPS
An investigation towards the drivers of behavioral loyalty towards branded apps
and the conditional effects of the nature of the app
Annabel de Neeling
6019579Supervisor Drs. M. Vock
5 MAART 2014
FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS
MSC BUSINESS STUDIES SPECIALIZATION MARKETING
1
“
T
HIS YEAR BRANDS SHOULD FOCUS ON THE USER EXPERIENCE.
T
HEIR MOBILE MARKETING SHOULD BE SEAMLESS AND NON-
DISRUPTIVE AND MOREOVER OFFER ADDITIONAL VALUE.
B
RANDS THAT WON’
T DO THIS RUN THE RISK TO GET COMPLETELY IGNORED.
”
2
A
BSTRACTThe market for mobile phone applications has been increasing rapidly the last few years. Organizations try to engage in mobile marketing by providing branded apps as extended services for the customers. The main challenge organizations face at the moment is that only a few branded apps are used intensively, while the remaining apps get deleted within a few weeks. This study sheds light on the important drivers are for consumers to engage in using branded apps. The effects of four user interface design elements– Convenience, Perceived interactivity, Customization, and Design aesthetics – are examined, in order to develop a guideline for creating effective branded apps. The Technology Acceptance Model(TAM) is used to determine consumers’ attitude towards branding app. In addition, this study takes the conditional effects of nature of the app(hedonic vs. utilitarian) into account, thereby building on prior literature. A total input of 145 participants was used for analyzing.Results demonstrate that the perceived convenience of the app is the most important driver of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use of the app, and design aesthetics are the most important driver of perceived enjoyment. Noteworthy is the finding that perceived interactivity did not show any significant relations with TAM-model. In turn, perceived enjoyment turned out to be the strongest predictor of attitude towards the app. The hedonic nature of the app intensifies this effect. Perceived usefulness also has a positive impact on the attitude towards branded apps. This effect is moderated by the utilitarian nature of the app. Perceived ease of use does not lead to a positive attitude towards branded apps. This study extends available knowledge about mobile applications, as it highlights the drivers in terms of user interface design elements and the conditional effects of the nature of the app, thereby proving both the scientific and managerial relevance.
3
L
IST OF TABLESTable 1 Literature overview user interface elements
Table 2 Overview general findings branded apps
Table 3 Summary of measurements
Table 4 Nature of the app
Table 5 Correlation matrix
Table 6 Overview results H2
Table 7 Overview results H3
Table 8 Overview results H3
Table 9 Overview results H3
Table 10 Overview results H1 and H6
Table 11 Overview results H7
Table 12 Hypotheses validation
L
IST OF FIGURESFigure 1 Conceptual model
Figure 2 Overview Results hypotheses
21 34 36 38 38 42 43 44 44 45 46 48 26 51
4
T
ABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract List of tables List of figures Table of contents 2 3 3 4 1. Introduction 1.1. Problem statement 1.2. Theoretical contribution 1.3. Research question 6 8 8 2. Theoretical Framework2.1. How does m-commerce differ from e-commerce? 2.2. What is a branded app?
2.3. Which factors that drive consumers’ attitude towards branded apps? 2.4. What are the most prominent elements of the user interface design 2.4.1. Convenience
2.4.2. Perceived interactivity 2.4.3. Customization
2.4.4. Design aesthetics
2.5. What is the impact of the nature of the app – utilitarian vs. hedonic–? 2.6. When are consumers loyal towards branded apps?
2.7. Conceptual model 3. Methodology
3.1. Research design 3.2. Pretest
3.3. Sample, Procedures and Respondents 3.4. Survey Design 3.5. Measurements 3.5.1. Independent variables 3.5.2. TAM-model 3.5.3. Moderating variables 3.5.4. Dependent variables 3.6. Method of analysis 4. Results 4.1. General findings 4.2. Summary measurements
4.2.1. Nature of the app – utilitarian versus hedonic – 4.2.2. Correlation analysis
4.2.3. Validation of the constructs 4.3. Hypotheses testing
4.3.1. Effect of convenience
4.3.2. Effect of perceived interactivity
10 12 13 14 16 16 17 18 20 22 24 26 27 27 27 28 28 29 30 30 30 31 31 32 32 32 35 36 37 39 40 41 42
5 4.3.3. Effect of customization
4.3.4. Effect of design aesthetics 5. Discussion
5.1. Findings
5.2. Managerial implications 5.3. Limitations and future research 6. Conclusion References Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F 43 46 46 51 52 53 56 61 61 64 69 71 73 76
6
1. I
NTRODUCTIONIt is almost impossible to imagine your daily life without smartphones. Since Steve Jobs introduced the first iPhone in 2007, the popularity of the smartphone has been increasing rapidly. In 2012, for example, 58% of the Dutch population was in possession of a smartphone, which is an increase of 16% compared to 2011 (“Stats dashboard: Mobile marketing”, 2012). In 2013 this number increased to 8,7 million smartphones (67%), which made the smartphone already more popular than the PC (65%). The possession of tablets has also been increasing rapidly, as more than half of the Dutch population currently has access to a tablet. Even more interesting is the intensive usage of the smartphones. Half of the users indicate that they check their smartphone more than ten times an hour for new updates (GFK, 2013). In contrast to the regular cell phone, a smartphone provides additional features, such as improved internet accessibility, improved message capabilities and the possibility to download various types of software. All these features improve the user experience. For marketers the smartphone, compared to mass marketing, also offers improved marketing opportunities. Mobile marketing allows marketers to target customers more precisely at a specific location and point of time, to better track and measure their consumer responses. As a result, the communication costs associated with the target audience will decrease(Shankar & Balasubraminian, 2009). Marketing within the smartphone and tablet market is therefore distinctive from marketing through PCs or traditional mass media. Martin(2011) describes the unique attributes of a smartphone, which offer marketers better ways to interact with consumers. The smartphone is more personal and customer centric than PC or other media. Due to the multi-faceted communications capability, users are able to constantly share information to others in various ways. Location-based technology allows marketers to determine time and location in addition to demand and supply. In general, the technological advances make smartphones much easier to use than the regular cell phone or the PC. Especially the speed of loading, the ease of navigation and the relevance and quality of content exceed in a more interactive mobile experience (Martin, 2011).
The possibility to download new software in terms of mobile applications is probably the most innovative aspect of the smartphone. Mobile phone applications can be defined as a special type of software, which can be downloaded on mobile devices (smartphones and tablets) and are also
7
known as apps (Bellman, Potter, Treleaven-Hassard, Robinson & Varan, 2011). It is important to understand to what extent these numbers have an impact on consumer behavior. A recent study about the usage of mobile phone applications shows that apps play a dominant role in the daily life of consumers (Flurry Five-Year Report, 2013). On average consumers tend to spend 158 minutes per day on apps. These results support the suggestion that people feel more and more personally connected to their smart phones (Shankar & Balasubraminian, 2009). Since mobile internet already took over the desktop internet usage, one could expect that mobile applications will play an even more important role in the future of consumers’ life (GFK, 2014).
The fact that consumers tend to spend more time on their smartphone and in particular on the smartphone applications, make apps an interesting area for business initiatives and should therefore not be ignored by marketers. A mobile application provides the opportunity to stay in direct contact with the customer and is therefore of high interest for marketers. Interactivity is one of the key properties of the mobile app and facilitates active communication and transactions in the online environment (Yoon, Choi & Sohn, 2008). This results in a more interactive way of communicating between the customer and the organization. According to the interactivity theory, these higher levels of perceived interactivity will lead to increased communication effectiveness (Rafaeli, 1989). Organizations should therefore try to engage in mobile marketing by providing mobile apps as a service extension to their customers. When apps prominently display the brand identity, brand name and brand logo of the organization they are known as ‘branded apps ’(Bellman et al., 2011). The “H&M” app, provided by the Swedish fashion chain Hennis and Mauritz, is a good example of a branded app. By the use of this app, consumers are able to search through an online catalogue for products, manage their shopping lists, and find general information about stores. The app also includes a transaction function, which enables consumers to engage in mobile shopping (Google Play, 2013). From an organizations’ perspective, apps provide opportunities to send user-specific information to their customers, such as communicating special offers tailored to the specific needs of customers. In conclusion, these unique attributes as mentioned in the case of H&M-app contribute to a more convenient shopping experience (Clarke III, 2008).
8
1.1. PROBLEM STATEMENT
The main challenge organizations are facing at the moment is the selective usage of apps by consumers. A recent study reveals that consumers tend to use just three to five apps intensively. Most apps already got deleted within a period of two weeks (Purcell, 2011). For branded apps it seems to be even more difficult to capture a prominent place on consumers’ smartphone or tablet. Dutch market research reveals that 85 % of the branded apps is hardly ever used, while the remaining(15%) is used a several times a week. Apps provided by banks appear to be increasingly popular among consumers, especially because those apps serve consumers’ functional needs (TNS NIPO, 2013). In order to close the gap, effective apps in terms of loyalty should be created. Developers of applications should therefore concentrate on the design elements, which will contribute to long- term use of their branded application. It is important to include specific features to satisfy consumers’ main needs. Apps are used to serve the time-critical and arrangement needs, the spontaneous and decisions needs, mobility related needs, time-efficiency needs and ambitions and entertainment needs(Anckar & D’Incau, 2002). This study aims to get a better understanding about the usage of branded apps in order to overcome the current problem of the selective usage of branded apps. The purpose of this study is therefore to determine the factors that drive behavioral loyalty towards branded apps.
1.2. THEORETICAL CONTRIBUTION
Even though mobile applications are an area of emerging interest for marketers, there is a lack of empirical research on mobile applications. In the light of branded apps, Bellman et al.(2011) conducted the first study. The authors showed the impact of branded apps on consumer perceptions, and more concrete the impact of branded apps on advertising effectiveness in terms of attitude and purchase intention (Bellmen et al., 2011). Results indicate that branded apps are able to enhance consumers’ attitude and purchase intention towards the brand. Since the use of branded apps leads to favorable benefits for the brand itself, it is important to understand why and under what conditions consumers engage in using branded apps. This study aims to improve the scarce knowledge about branded apps by adopting relevant literature from the e-commerce and m-commerce area. Building on the work of Bellman et al.(2011), this study connects the distinction between experiential and informational apps to theory about hedonic and utilitarian
9
consumer motivations (Childers et al., 2001). From an application development perspective, it is important to determine which elements of the user interface design(e.g. interactivity, design aesthetics) lead to repeated usage of branded apps. The user interface design refers to the design of systems, which is focused on users experience and interaction with the system. The user interface of systems should be designed to make it as simple as possible for users to fulfill their needs(Lee & Lochovsky, 1985). Because the user interface design elements are in control of developers of mobile applications, it is interesting to investigate their impact on the intention to use branded apps. Because mobile phone applications are a relatively young phenomena and a scarcely tested subject, it is worthwhile to understand which factors influence consumers’ decision process to engage in using branded apps. The technology acceptance model (TAM) explains the factors that play a role in how and when users accept new technology and engage into using this technology (Davis, 1982). This study therefore examines the relation between the user interface design elements and the factors(TAM)that explain whether consumers engage in repeated usage of branded apps. Where prior studies confined their focus on one element of a (mobile)website in combination with the TAM-model, this study examines the effect of four elements on the attitude towards branded apps. As a result, this study aims to shed light on the key drivers of behavioral loyalty towards branded apps. Moreover, this study takes into consideration that the nature of the app plays a role in determining the drivers of consumers’ behavioral loyalty towards the app. According to Bellman et al.(2011) branded apps can be divided into informational and experiential apps. Informational apps aim to satisfy consumers’ functional needs and experiential apps are related to consumers’ need for enjoyment. Bellman et al.(2011) did not find a difference between the two types, in determining the impact on brand attitude. The current study does expect that the nature of the app plays an role in determining behavioral loyalty towards the app. As mentioned by the Dutch market research, financial applications provided by banks turn out to be used most often. This could be because those apps provide services, which facilitate consumers’ functional needs (TNS NIPO,2013). Financial apps are considered to be more functional of nature. Apps where the focus lies on enjoyment, are considered to be hedonic of nature. Game apps are a good example of purely hedonic apps(Bellman et al, 2011). The impact of the nature of the app (utilitarian/functional vs.
10
hedonic/enjoyment) on consumers attitude towards branded apps will be explored as well. In conclusion, this study contributes to existing literature in several ways. Firstly, by broadening the scarcely available knowledge about the branded of apps in general. Secondly, by investigating the drivers of attitude towards branded apps, and ultimately loyalty towards branding apps. By taking into account the impact of the nature of the app(hedonic vs. utilitarian), this study goes further than prior research did.
1.3. RESEARCH QUESTION
The purpose of this study is to solve the current problem regarding the selective usage of branded apps. This research sheds light on different elements of the user interface design, and their impact on behavioral loyalty while controlling the nature(utilitarian vs. hedonic) of the app. By highlighting the most effective drivers of behavioral loyalty of the branded app in terms of user interface design elements, this study provides insight into the development of applications. In a way that developers of branded applications will be able to learn how to design effective branded apps in terms of behavioral loyalty. This study will be of interest of marketers, since it helps them to understand how to implement branded apps as an effective marketing instrument. Therefore, the main question of this research will be: Which factors drive behavioral loyalty towards a branded app, and what is the impact of the nature of the branded app? This central question can be translated into the following research questions:
RQ1: Which elements of the user interface design of branded apps are the most important drivers of behavioral loyalty the app?
RQ2: To what extend does the nature of the app(utilitarian vs. hedonic) plays a role in enhancing behavioral loyalty?
The following sub-questions are proposed in order to find answers for the research question. The questions will also serve as a guideline through the literature review.
Q1: How does e-commerce differ from m-commerce? Q2: What is a branded app?
11
Q4: What are the most prominent features of the user interface design? Q5: What is the role of the nature of the app(utilitarian vs. hedonic) Q6: When are consumers loyal towards branded apps?
This thesis is structured as followed. The literature review starts with providing general information about the emergence of mobile applications, by highlighting the shift from e-commerce to m-e-commerce. To be able to develop hypotheses, literature about the TAM-model will be reviewed in order to understand the acceptance of mobile applications. Thereafter, the constructs of interest will be discussed starting with the user interface design elements. Subsequently, the moderating role of the nature of the app will be discussed. The final part of the literature review is dedicated to describe the effect of attitude on behavioral loyalty towards branded apps. In this direction, the method and measurements will be presented, followed by the results of the survey. In the discussion part the results will be discussed in terms of managerial relevance and theoretical contribution. In addition, limitations and implications for further research are provided. The final chapter is dedicated to describe the conclusions, which can be drawn from this study.
2. T
HEORETICALF
RAMEWORKIn this section the existing literature will be reviewed to develop a comprehensive image about the various drivers that will lead to the acceptance of branded apps. The shift from e-commerce and m-commerce will be described, as well as the emergence of mobile phone applications. Hereafter, the focus lies on the different user interface elements of a branded app and their relation to the TAM-model, each element will be discussed in a separate paragraph. To predict the acceptance and usage of branded apps the technology acceptance model(TAM) will be discussed in the fourth paragraph. Theory about utilitarian and hedonic values will be reviewed in order to understand differences in the nature of the branded app. The last paragraph is dedicated to a description of the attitude and behavioral loyalty towards the app. This chapter will end with the visualization of the proposed hypotheses into a conceptual model.
12
2.1. HOW DOES M
-COMMERCE DIFFER FROM E-COMMERCE?
In this section the differences between e-commerce and m-commerce will be discussed, in order to highlight the marketing opportunities that apps provide for brands. Electronic commerce, commonly known as e-commerce, is described as all the business and transactions that take place in the online arena. Internet has played a huge role in the way e-commerce has manifested itself into the daily business practices. Web-technologies enriched the communication between organizations and customers. Therefore, almost all firms adopted e-commerce into their business plans. Transactions on mobile devices, such as smartphones and tablets, making use of the wireless telecommunication network(Wi-Fi) and wireless e-commerce technologies are known as mobile marketing or m-commerce (Clarke III, 2008). Advances in the wireless technology(Wi-Fi) are considered to be the main drivers of the emergence of m-commerce, because Wi-Fi creates opportunities for consumers to be connected to the web whenever they want and wherever they are.
Ubiquity, personalization and localization are assumed to be the unique characteristics that distinguish m-commerce from e-commerce (Clarke III, 2008). Ubiquity is described as the ability to perform transactions and receive information at any location at every moment. From a consumer perspective ubiquity improves the flexibility and time-convenience in performing tasks. Localization means that users are able through GPS technology, which is available on their mobile device, to localize where they are. For m-commerce providers this means that they can better send and receive information that is relative to a specific location(Shankar & Balasubramanian, 2009). Personalization in the m-commerce environment implies that mobile devices are designed for individual use. This gives providers of m-services opportunities for individual-based target marketing through personalized services and customer-tailored information for the individual. Because the mobile device is regarded as a personal accessory it provides opportunities to serve as a gateway towards a personal relationship between consumers and brands (Shankar et al., 2010). Personalization can therefore be fruitful for creating a stronger and more personal relationship between the customer and the m-service provider. M-commerce also shapes new possibilities in the retail area. Due to the time-sensitivity and location-specificity features of mobile device, m-commerce enables change in the paradigm of retailing (Shankar &
13
Balasubramanian, 2009). In the traditional model of retailing the physical location is the primary source of competitive advantage, because it is about consumers shopping in the physical retail environment. M-commerce changes this paradigm radically, via wireless network retailers are now able to stay connected to the consumer anywhere and everywhere (Shankar & Balasubramanian, 2009). Since consumers are no longer constrained by time or location, m-commerce creates a kind of convenience which improves the quality of life (Clarke III, 2008). This convenience can be seen as one of the most important advantages viewed from out a consumers’ perspective, because it helps them save time and costs. Mobile devices serve consumers’ functional needs through this mechanism. Moreover, the mobile device can also help consumers through dead spots during the day, in this way the mobile device facilitates consumers need for enjoyment (Smutkupt, Krairit & Esichaiku, 2010).
The distinctive features as described above, provide organizations advantageous opportunities. M-commerce creates a great market potential for organizations, higher levels of productivity and high profitability. Nevertheless, it seems to be a big challenge for marketers to integrate the advantages of m-commerce into their marketing activities in a profitable manner(Shankar & Balasubramanian, 2009). This study therefore aims to enlarge the available knowledge about m-commerce by focusing on mobile applications. The next paragraph will elaborate on the emergence of mobile applications.
2.2
WHAT IS A BRANDED APP?
The mobile phone application, commonly known as an app, can be seen as the most successful development of a m-service. An app is described as special software, which is downloadable on mobile devices, including smartphones and tablets (Bellman et al. 2011). Apps can be distinguished into two types: namely the native app and the web app. A native app needs to get downloaded and installed on a mobile device. In contrast, the web app requires no installation because it is accessible through the mobile web. The web app is therefore also known as a mobile website (Charlan & Leroux, 2011). In this study only the native app will be researched, as it is designed with the goal to serve customers’ needs and reaches this goal in another way than a website does. Additionally, it also requires consumers’ time and effort to actually download the
14
native app. Today apps play an important role in the rapid growth of the m-commerce area. Apps provide benefits for consumers in many ways. The most obvious advantages of using apps are considered to be convenience, personalization, time-efficiency and interactivity (Anckar & D’Incau, 2002). These perceived consumer benefits and the fact that most apps are free to download on mobile devices, contributed to the extremely rapid acceptation of apps in daily life.
Since the app influences the way consumers behave, this particular m-service gains a lot of interest from marketers. Apps exist in many sizes and types. Apps provided by an organization that create extra value in terms of an additional service are known as branded apps. In this study only the branded apps will be examined. According to Bellman et al. (2011) branded apps get defined as software, which can be downloaded to a mobile device displaying prominently the identity of a brand, through the name of the app and the appearance of the brand logo or icon. In their research Bellman et al. (2011) examined the effects of two types of branded apps, namely apps focused on the informational/utilitarian experience and apps focused on the experiential/enjoyment experience. The results show that apps in general enhance the attitude towards the brand and the purchase intention, however significant differences between the effects of informational and experiential apps were not found (Bellman et al., 2011). Since the use of branded apps lead to favorable benefits for the brand itself, it is of importance to understand why and under which conditions consumers engage in using branded apps. The following paragraph will therefore emphasize the factors that drive consumers’ attitude towards branded apps.
2.3.
WHICH FACTORS DRIVE CONSUMERS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS BRANDED APPS
The technology acceptance model(TAM), developed by Davis(1982), is probably the most cited model to explain the consumption of technological products. The model is developed in order to predict the consumer’s intention to use specific technological products and derives from the Theory of Reasoned Action(TRA) developed by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975). In both theories, intention is considered to be a determinant of behavior. Where in the TRA a persons’ attitude towards specific behavior is the main driver of intention, perceived usefulness(PU) and perceived ease of use(PEOU) are the key drivers of intention in the TAM-model. Davis (1982) defines PU as “the total value a user perceives from using a new technology” and PEOU as “the degree to which
15
a person believes that using the technology requires little effort”. The TAM-framework is the most widely accepted model to explain consumers’ behavior towards technological products (Yousafzai, Foxall & Pallister, 2007). Due to the technological innovations of the last decade, the model has been tested in multiple situations. For instance, the intention to use the internet for shopping has been a subject of scrutiny (Childers et al. 2001; Morgan-Thomas & Veloutsou, 2013; Rose, Clark, Samouel & Hair, 2012; Verhagen & van Dolen, 2011). The TAM-model is also examined in the m-commerce area by investigating the role of the TAM-constructs in predicting the use of mobile devices. Mobile applications have not yet been examined in relation to the TAM-model (Cyr et al. 2006; Kim, Chan & Gupta, 2007; Liu & Li, 2011; Wu & Wang, 2005). In the original TAM-model the PU and the PEOU construct refer to the fulfillment of consumers’ functional needs. The possibility that a consumer may also use technological products to fulfill emotional needs is not included in the original model (Childers et al., 2001). As a result, Davis (1992) made an extension to the original TAM-model by adding with the enjoyment construct. The perceived enjoyment (PE) of using technology can be seen as the extent to which using a specific technology is perceived to be enjoyable, apart from any performance consequences that result from the usage of technology (Davis, 1992). Where PU and PEOU are more related to consumers’ extrinsic motivations, PE refers to consumers’ intrinsic motivations to use products and results in more affective responses. The construct of PE has been examined in both e-commerce and m-e-commerce settings. In the e-e-commerce area Childers et al. (2001) showed a direct effect of enjoyment on consumers’ attitude towards online shopping. Van der Heijden (2003) confirmed this relation and found an additional effect of PE on consumers’ intention to use websites for online shopping. In the m-commerce area Cyr et al. (2006) also found a positive relation between the three constructs of the TAM-model and loyalty towards the m-service. Liu and Li (2011) confirmed this relation in the context of mobile gaming. In addition, they found that PE positively influences PU. According to existing literature, PE is considered to be an important extension of the TAM-model.
The TAM-model has been proven to serve as a valid model to predict the acceptance of new technologies. The TAM-model is useful for predicting loyalty towards technological services(Cyr
16
et al., 2006). In this study, the TAM-model will be used to predict the attitude towards branded apps. Following existing literature on the TAM-model, a relation between the three discussed TAM-constructs and attitude towards branded apps is expected (Childers et al, 2001). This line of reasoning leads to the formalization of the following hypotheses:
H1a: Perceived usefulness will positively affect consumer’s attitude towards the branded app. H1b: Perceived ease of use will positively affect consumer’s attitude towards branded app. H1c: Perceived enjoyment will positively affect consumer’s attitude towards the branded app.
2.4.
WHAT ARE THE MOST PROMINENT ELEMENTS OF THE USER INTERFACE DESIGN?
In this paragraph the different elements of the user interface design of branded apps will be discussed. The user interface design of an application can be seen as the contact interface between the user and the system. The user interface design determines how the user experiences the system (Lee & Lochovsky, 1985). The user interface design is a multi-dimensional concept, existing out of several elements. Since it is hardly possible to capture all elements of user interface experience, this study will only investigate the four most prominent dimensions of user interface design; convenience, interactivity, customization, and design aesthetics (Chang & Chen, 2008; Chang & Chen, 2009; Srinivasan et al., 2002). Table 1 provides an overview of prior research on user interface elements in combination with research on the TAM-model.
2.4.1. CONVENIENCE
In the e-commerce environment convenience refers to the degree in which a customer perceives a website as user-friendly, easy to use and intuitive. The accessibility of information and simplicity of the transaction process are herein considered to be main drivers of a website’s convenience (Srinivasan et al., 2002). In the light of m-commerce, a study by Okazaki and Mendez(2013) found simultaneity, speed and search ability as the primary drivers of convenience. Simultaneity refers to the customers’ ability to use the m-service next to other activities. An app that scores high on convenience, helps users to save time and effort in completing their tasks. This will increase the probability that the app will be continued to use. When an app is convenient to use, it eliminates frustration and makes the online shopping experience more enjoyable (Childers et al., 2001). Several studies investigated the effect of convenience on loyalty. Where Srinivasan et al. (2002) did not find a direct effect, Chang and Chen(2008) did find a direct effect of convenience on
17
loyalty. Kim, Kim and Kandampully (2009) also found a positive relation between the perceived convenience of a website and e-loyalty, as derived from e-satisfaction. A study by Childers et al.(2001) demonstrates that convenience is positively related to each of the constructs of the TAM-model, which in turn lead to a positive attitude towards online shopping. Regarding branded apps the extent to which an app is perceived as convenient is expected to have a positive influence on the perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and the perceived enjoyment of the app. In other words when consumers have a convenient experience when using the app, this will translate into enhanced cognitive beliefs in the app. Where Childers et al.(2001) investigated the effect of convenience in context of online shopping, this study expects similar relations in context of branded apps:
H2a: Perceived convenience of the branded app is positively related to PU of the branded app. H2b: Perceived convenience of the branded app is positively related towards the PEOU of the branded app. H2c: Perceived convenience of the branded app is positively related towards the PE of the branded app.
2.4.2. PERCEIVED INTERACTIVITY
Recent technological advancements played a major role in the increasing interactivity between medium and users in the environment of e-commerce. According to Liu and Shrum (2002), interactivity refers to the extent to which two or more parties are able to communicate with each other or the medium. Interactivity also refers to the extent to which two or more parties are able to respond to communicated messages and the degree to which this process is synchronized. Interactivity is a multidimensional concept, consisting out of active control, two-way-communication, and synchronicity. Active control refers to the voluntary abilities users have in order to satisfy their needs and wants. Two-way communication implies the degree to which reciprocal communication is possible between the user and the medium. The degree in which the communication process between the user and service occurs simultaneously is described as synchronicity. Recent research shows that the sub dimensions synchronicity and two-way communication serve as determinants of relationship quality and behavioral loyalty (Yoon et al., 2008).
Other research examined the relationship between interactivity and customer loyalty in the e-commerce area (Srinivasan et al., 2002; Chang & Chen, 2008; Cyr, Head & Ivanov, 2009). Results
18
show that perceived interactivity is an important driver of customer loyalty. Contact interactivity refers to a.two-way communication style, and the availability and effectiveness of supportive tools. Supportive tools refer to active control of the user, because these tools increase the freedom of choice and the experienced control(Srinivasan et al., 2002; Chang & Chen, 2008; Chang & Chen, 2009). Cyr et al.(2009) investigated the effect of perceived interactivity on e-loyalty, resulting from efficiency, effect, enjoyment and trust. Whereas efficiency refers to PU, effect to PEOU, and enjoyment to PE of the TAM-model(Davis, 1986). Research demonstrates a positive relation between interactivity and each construct of the TAM-model (Cyr et al., 2009). Kim, Lee and Taylor (2013) investigated perceived interactivity in context of mobile advergames, and found a positive link with attitude towards the brand. Another research in the field of m-commerce confirmed the positive significant relation between interactivity and intention to use, as a result of the three constructs of the TAM-model (Coursaris & Sung, 2012). While, perceived interactivity has been a subject of scrutiny in the both the e-commerce and m-commerce area, this study will investigate which role perceived interactivity plays in the context of branded apps. In line with previous studies, it is hypothesized that the perceived interactivity of branded apps is positively linked to PU, PEOU and PE:
H3a: Perceived interactivity of the branded app is positively related to PU of the branded app.
H3b: Perceived interactivity of the branded app is positively related towards the PEOU of the branded app.
H3c: Perceived interactivity of the branded app is positively related towards the PE of the branded app.
2.4.3. CUSTOMIZATION
Through technological advancements organizations are able to monitor customer data more effectively than before. This creates opportunities to provide customers personalized information based on previous purchases. The ability of organizations to tailor products, personalize services and the transactional environment to individual customers is known as customization (Srinivasan et al., 2002; Lee & Bensabet, 2002). In context of branded apps customization, operationally is defined as the ability to tailor the choice of products, services and transaction details in order to satisfy the customer.
19
Customization is considered to positively affect loyalty towards the brand by concentrating on customers actual needs and wants. It does this by providing organizations the opportunity to tailor their products and services precisely to the narrow choices of their customers. This may improve the match between the customer and the organization. Furthermore, customization will make consumers’ decision and transaction process easier. Because it provides product recommendations tailored to the specific needs of customers and it reminds customer details of previous transactions (Srinivasan et al., 2002). In case of branded apps, customization can be seen as the extent to which consumers are able to keep personal data, receive customer-specific information or offers, and the extent to which they feel that they are treated like a unique customer. Prior research found a positive relation between customization and loyalty towards websites (Chang & Chen, 2008, Chang & Chen, 2009; Srinivasan et al., 2002). The relation between customization and loyalty within the m-commerce area did receive scholarly attention (Choi et al.,2008; Wang & Li, 2013). Both studies show a positive direct relation between customization and loyalty towards the m-service, only here customization is named personalization but has the same meaning. A recent study by Rose et al. (2012) shows that customization, as a result from perceived control, improves the affective experiential state of consumers. Regarding the TAM-model this indicates that customization would be linked to perceived enjoyment. However, the relation between customization and the TAM-model has not been investigated yet. This study therefore aims to examine whether the TAM-model is an appropriate model to investigate customization as driver of behavioral loyalty towards branded apps. In relation to the current study, apps provide opportunities to create higher levels of customization. The unique characteristics of m-commerce enable apps to localize the customer and provide location-specific information to the customer. Furthermore, customization implies that consumers’ have the opportunity to save personal data, and for instance to keep a shopping cart. These features enable consumers to use a device much more effectively and efficiently. The H&M-app for example enables users to create a user profile in which personal data can be saved, this is required for making online transaction. In addition the app provides a tool to keep a shopping cart, in which consumers can save the products they consider to buy. If consumers return to the app on a later moment they are able to view the products they saved and engage in direct buying those
20
products. These functions enable consumers to directly make online transactions without going through the collection again or filling in personal details again. Customization is therefore expected to contribute to a much more effective and efficient way of using services. The feeling that a user of an app is treated like an unique customer is expected to have a positive link with the PE of the app. The features that enable consumers to save personal details and create a shopping cart are expected to be positively related to the PU and PEOU of the branded app. This study hypothesizes the following:
H4a: Customization of the branded app is positively related to PU of the branded app.
H4b: Customization of the branded app is positively related towards the PEOU of the branded app. H4c: Customization of the branded app is positively related towards the PE of the branded app.
2.3.4.
DESIGN AESTHETICS
The way in which customers perceive the presentation of a website has an influence on the attitude customers will have about a website. Nowadays, creative web design play a more prominent role in attracting customers to their websites and it positively affects. Through graphic design websites can personalize itself in a way customers can identify the website from other websites. The overall image or personality that an organization wants to project to consumers by using different design elements is known as character (Srinivasan et al., 2002) or design aesthetics (Cyr et al., 2006). Both character and design aesthetics include all the design elements that contribute to the aesthetic appearance of a website such as style, color, graphics, text, logos, slogans and themes on a website. These elements can serve as stimuli to enhance site recognition and recall or evoke positive emotions. Prior studies proved the influencing role of visual design on the satisfaction and loyalty towards the website (Chang & Chen, 2008; Srinivasan et al., 2002 ). Cyr et al. (2006) investigated the effect of design aesthetics mediated by the PEOU, PU and PE constructs of the TAM-model on m-loyalty. Design aesthetics turned out to predict all three of the mentioned constructs, with the clearly bigger impact on perceived enjoyment. This effect is due to the fact that design aesthetics are not designed to serve instrumental needs but to evoke positive emotions such as joy. Wang, Minor and Wei (2011) confirm this by showing website aesthetics positively influence consumers affective responses. Chosen here is to adopt the term design aesthetics from Cyr et al.(2006) and not character (Srinivasan, et al. 2002; Chang & Chen,
21
2008) because the former gives a more comprehensive definition of the visual design. In line with prior research this study expects a positive relations between design aesthetics and each construct of the TAM-model, resulting in the following assumptions:
H4a: Design aesthetics of the branded app is positively related to PU of the branded app.
H4b: Design aesthetics of the branded app is positively related towards the PEOU of the branded app. H4c: Design aesthetics of the branded app is positively related towards the PE of the branded app. Table 1: Overview literature user interface elements
Authors Stimulus Organism Response
Chang & Chen (2009)
Convenience, interactivity, character and customization (Interface quality) + Perceived security
Customer satisfaction, perceived switching costs
Customer loyalty
Chang & Chen (2008)
Customization, interactivity convenience and character
Customer satisfaction, Switching costs
E-loyalty
Childers et al.(2001)
Navigation, Convenience, Sub experience
PE, PEOU and PU Attitude
Coursaris & Sung (2012)
Website interactivity PEOU, PU and PE Intention to use
Cyr (2008) Navigation design, Visual design, information design
Trust, satisfaction E-loyalty
Cyr et al. (2006) Design aesthetics, Ease of Use, usefulness, Enjoyment
M-loyalty
Cyr et al. (2009) Perceived interactivity Efficiency, effectiveness, enjoyment and trust
E-loyalty
Li & Yeh (2010) Design aesthetics Ease of use, Usefulness, Customization
M-trust
Rose et al. (2012) (Interactive speed, telepresence, challenge, Skill)(ease of use, customization, perceived benefits, aesthetics, connectedness) Cognitive experiential state, affective experiential state, satisfaction, trust
Online purchase intention
Srinivasan et al. (2002)
Customization, contact interactivity, cultivation, care, community, choice, convenience and character
E-loyalty Word-of-mouth, Willingness to pay
Van der Heijden (2003)
22
Van Noort, Voorveld & van Reijmersdal (2012)
Interactivity Flow Cognitive(number thoughts, type thoughts
website/brand), Affective(attitude brand/website), Behavioral
responses(purchase intention/ revisit/ referral intention)
Voorveld, Duijn & van Noort (2013)
Website interactivity Brand relationship quality, Brand attitude
Wang & Li (2012) personalization, identification, and perceived enjoyment
brand loyalty, perceived quality, brand awareness, and brand associations Wang et al.
(2011)
Perceived web aesthetics Arousal, satisfaction, online service quality
Revisit, purchase, consultation, search other websites
Wu & Wang(2005)
Cost, PEOU, PU, Compatibility, Risk
Behavioral intention to use
Actual use
2.5. WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF THE NATURE OF THE APP?
Regarding the current challenge of capturing a prominent place on consumers’ smartphones and tablets, it is important to determine the conditions under which consumers tend to be more loyal to use a specific app. Since branded app exist in different types many sizes, it is important to take the nature of the app into account. Bellman et al.(2011) focused on branded apps that where created to fulfill utilitarian/informational gathering needs on the one side, and the more intrinsic enjoyment/entertainment experiences on the other side. This resulted in informational and experiential branded apps, where the creative execution style of the app determines the nature of the app. By using an experiment as method, Bellman et al.(2001) investigated whether the nature of the app causes different outcomes. The authors only found a small difference regarding purchase intention. Informational apps turned out to have a slightly bigger impact on purchase intention, than experiential apps (Bellman et al., 2011). An example of an app that serves mainly consumers’ functional needs would be a financial app. Through financial apps, banks provide their customers services to conduct financial affairs, such as checking their bank account or transferring money. An app that is more hedonic of nature would be a branded game app since the main purpose is here to satisfy users’ enjoyment needs. Since utilitarian and hedonic apps are developed to satisfy different needs it is plausible that the nature of the app influences the attitude towards the app. This study makes a distinction between utilitarian and hedonic apps. According to Hirschman and Holbrook(1982), utilitarian and hedonic motivations are the two key
23
motivations of consumers to use or consume products. When consumers are driven by utilitarian/ goal-directed motivations, products are consumed to fulfill functional needs. In this case consumers can be seen as “problem solvers”. When consumers are driven by hedonic motivations, they aim to fulfill enjoyment/emotional needs. Hedonic consumers are hence seeking for enjoyment, fun, sensory stimulation as outcomes of consumption(Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982). All though different consumption motivations exist as well, the utilitarian and hedonic motivations are considered to be the fundamental motivations to understand consumer behavior (Babin, Darden & Griffin, 1994). Regarding the TAM-model, PU and PEOU are considered to correspond with users’ instrumental motivations because these constructs serve consumers’ functional needs. PE on the other hand is more related to the hedonic motivations of consumers, because this construct serves consumers’ need for fun (Childers et al. 2001). Regarding the current study the nature of the branded app (utilitarian vs. hedonic) is considered to have an impact on the relationship between the TAM-model and the attitude towards the branded app. Since PU and PEOU refer to consumers functional needs, the utilitarian value of an app will be of more importance than the hedonic value. In turn, the hedonic nature of the app will influence the relation between PE and attitude towards the branded app. For branded apps this implies that utilitarian apps serve consumers functional/informational needs and hedonic serve consumers’ experiential/enjoyment needs (Bellman et al., 2011). The nature of the app is in this study thus expected to serve as a moderator in determining the relationship between the constructs of the TAM-model and the attitude towards the branded app. This means that the relation between each of the TAM-constructs and the attitude towards the app changes under specific conditions. In line with literature, this study predicts that an utilitarian nature of the app will positively intensify the relation between both the PU as the PEOU and attitude towards the ap. The hedonic nature of the app is expected to positively intensify the relation between the perceived enjoyment of the app and the attitude towards the app. This research therefore hypothesizes:
H6a: The relation between PU and attitude towards the branded app is positively moderated by the perceived utilitarian nature of the app.
H6b: The relation between PEOU and attitude towards the branded app is positively moderated by the perceived utilitarian nature of the app.
24
H6a: The relation between PE and attitude towards the branded app is positively moderated by the perceived hedonic nature of the app.
2.6. WHEN ARE CONSUMERS LOYAL TOWARDS BRANDED APPS?
Customer loyalty is one of the main goals organizations try to achieve, because it is likely to result into financial benefits for the organization (Reichfeld & Schefter, 2000). According to Oliver (1999, p. 34) customer loyalty can be labeled as “a deeply held commitment to re-buy or re-patronize a preferred product or service consistently in the future, despite situational influences and marketing efforts having the potential to cause switching behavior”. Dick and Basu(1994) describe customer loyalty as the strength of the relation between consumers’ relative attitude and repeat patronage. Whereas attitude can be seen as the affective responses of consumers and repeat patronage as behavioral responses. Customer loyalty in the online environment is better known as e-loyalty and can be achieved by using web technologies accurately (Reichfeld & Schefter, 2000). E-loyalty refers to a “consumer’s intention to buy” from a website and “consumers’ willingness not to switch to another website” (Flavián, Guinaliú & Gurrea, 2006). n the m-commerce context loyalty towards a mobile service also depends on a consumers’ intention to use the service again (Cyr, 2008). Where e-loyalty already has been a subject of scrutiny, m-loyalty has received less attention among scholars (Cyr, 2008). Oliver (1997) describes the different phases consumers need to go through before they become “truly loyal” . When consumers prefer a brand above other brands based on just their brand belief, the consumer is cognitive loyal towards the brand. When liking the brand or having a positive attitude towards the brand are the main reasons to purchase this specific brand one can speak of affective loyalty. In this phase the consumer generates affective feelings towards the brand, which will in turn translate into developing behavioral intentions. The phase wherein behavioral intentions towards the brand are developed is known as the conative phase and derives from repeated episodes of positive affect towards the brand. Action loyalty is the ultimate form of loyalty that consumers can reach and implies that consumers are actually committed to rebuy the brand (Oliver, 1999). In context of branded apps this indicates that before apps will actually result into financial benefit for organizations (rebuying the brand), consumers need to reach the last phase of loyalty. Because this study aims to investigate the drivers of repeated usage of the branded apps, the stages of affective loyalty and the conative loyalty are of interest. Since attitude towards the brand is
25
considered to be an affective component of loyalty, expected is that the positive affect resulting from using branded apps will positively affect the behavioral loyalty towards the brand as well (Oliver, 1999). When a consumer has a positive experience while using the app, it is likely that this will positively impact their attitude towards the app. Which implies that the consumer will generate more affective feelings towards the app (Fournier, 1994). Once consumers have a positive attitude towards a branded app they will probably reach the next phase in which behavioral loyalty arises (Oliver, 1999). In a logical sequence consumers will firstly generate cognitive responses which is how they perceive the TAM-constructs. In the next phase affective responses are created in the form of attitude towards the app which will in turn lead to behavioral responses in terms of behavioral loyalty (Al-Ghatani & King, 1999). Regarding branded apps, organizations purpose is to attain and maintain a prominent place on consumers’ smartphone with their branded app. In line with theory, this study expects that consumers need to go through the affective phase before they become behavioral loyal towards the app. This study therefore hypothesizes:
26
2.7. CONCEPTUAL MODEL
In the conceptual model, the reviewed literature has been linked to each other and included into one model. As displayed below, the user interface design is expected to be linked to the TAM-model, which in turn is connected to attitude towards the app. The conditional effect of the nature of the app(Utilitarian vs. hedonic) is expected to influence this relation. Ultimately, attitude will lead to loyalty towards the app.
27
3. M
ETHODOLOGYIn this chapter, the used method and procedures are described in order to empirically test the conceptual model. The first paragraph will describe the research design, followed by a paragraph dedicated to the pretest. The third paragraph discusses the sample and procedures, which were taken to collect the data. The fourth paragraph is dedicated to describe the measurements, followed by a description of the method of analysis.
3.1.RESEARCH DESIGN
A survey is chosen, to determine the factors and conditions that result into behavioral loyalty towards branded apps. Another option could have been an experiment, since this method is most often used to examine conditional effects. By using a survey, more branded apps will be included which has a positive effect on the generalizability of the outcomes.
3.2.PRETEST
In order to get a better view of the branded apps that are popular among consumers, a pretest is conducted (See appendix A). Students are chosen because these are considered to be the most active users of apps (Flurry Five-Year Report, 2013 ). In the pretest a definition of the branded apps is introduced in order to find out to what extent this definition is clear and complete for the respondents. The respondents(n=20) were asked to compile a top-3 of branded apps. Thereafter the participants were asked to rate the selected applications on their utilitarian and hedonic value on a 7-point scale(To , Liao & Lin, 2007). In general, results of the pretest show that the respondents found it hard to compile with a top-3 of branded apps. A total of 11 different branded apps can be derived from the pretest. Moreover, apps that score high on utilitarian value turned out to be most popular on the lists. Regarding the actual survey, the pretest provides useful information about the branded apps that are popular among students, and how these apps are perceived as hedonic and utilitarian of nature. The results of the pretest point out that the same app is perceived different by each participant (See Appendix A for details).
28
Through a personalized e-mail the respondents will be approached to voluntarily participate in a research about branded apps. The e-mail attaches a link, which directs participants to the online questionnaire. The survey was conducted by the online software thesisqualtrics.com. Because e-mailing did not lead to an adequate number of respondents, the survey was also posted on several social media sites of the researcher. In general, a higher the amount of respondents increases the generalizability of results, and is therefore more likely to yield accurate results (Fan &Yan, 2010). While 187 participants started with the online questionnaire, only 153 of them managed to complete the whole questionnaire. This number can be due to the length of the survey. In addition, the requirement of having a smartphone or tablet with branded apps may have played a role as well. Furthermore, 8 respondents were dropped from the survey due to inaccurate answers, which has led to a total sample size of 145 respondents (n=145). The use of snowball-sampling is a limitation of this study, because this technique in most cases does not lead to a representative sample. Through snowball-sampling most respondents will derive from immediate social contacts of the researcher. The sample size will therefore for the larger part consist out of students, which in turn does not have to be detrimental since the smartphone penetration among 25 -34 years old people is according to a recent research the highest (81%) followed by 79 percent of the 18- 24 years old age group (Stats dashboard: Mobile marketing 2013).
3.4. SURVEY DESIGN
The online survey was conducted by using the online survey tool Qualtrics. The total questionnaire consisted out of 53 questions (Appendix B). The first section contains general questions about the usage of app. In this section the same definition of apps is used as in the pretest. A list was composed, containing the most downloaded for free branded apps(Google Play, 2013; iTunes Apple Store, 2013). All branded apps that where mentioned by the participants of the pretest were included. A list was provided, to give respondents a clear view about which branded apps exist. Hereafter, the respondents were asked to fill in the questions about the branded app they had used the last time. However, the likelihood that the questions would be filled in for an app that is frequently used it is more adequate than if the respondent just picked an app from the presented list. Because the likelihood that the respondents will pick a branded
29
app because it is provided by a favorable brand or because they got positive feelings about the app will be high. This in turn may result in highly positive ratings of the app. In the second part of the questionnaire respondents were asked to fill in questions about the user interface elements, the TAM-constructs, the nature of the app(hedonic vs. utilitarian), and about the attitude and loyalty towards the app. All questions contained statements which could be answered on a 7-point Likert scale (from strongly disagree to strongly agree). Some of the questions were stated in a reversed way, in order to check whether respondents do not give the same answers to each question. The last part of the survey was designed to collect demographic data.
3.5. MEASUREMENTS
The different elements of the User Interface Design convenience, perceived interactivity, customization and design aesthetics are the independent variables in this research and will be examined by making use of existing questionnaires adopted from prior research. These elements will be tested in relation to each of the constructs of the extended TAM-model, namely Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Enjoyment. The nature of the app(utilitarian vs. hedonic) is expected to serve as a moderating variable. Behavioral loyalty towards the app is the dependent variable in the model and is expected to result from attitude towards the app.
3.5.1. INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
The level of perceived convenience of a branded app will be measured by using a adopted scale from the research by Chang and Chen(2009). In this study three items are constructed to measure the perceived convenience of online shopping. Examples of items are “This app is very convenient to use” and “A first-time user can use this app without much help”. The items are measured on a 7-point Likert scale (from strongly disagree to strongly agree). Perceived interactivity of the branded app can be measured by using the scale from Liu (2003). Interactivity is considered to be a multidimensional construct, consisting of two-way communication, synchronicity and user control. Each dimension is measured by using several items on a 7-point Likert scale (from strongly disagree to strongly agree). For instance, items to measure the synchronicity of an app include statements like “The app processes my input very fast”. To measure the level of customization of
30
a branded app perceived by customers a scale of Srinivasan et al. (2002) is adopted. This scale has also been successfully tested by (Chang & Chen, 2008; Chang & Chen, 2009). The construct consists out of five items measured on a 7-point Likert scale (from strongly disagree to strongly agree). “This app provides information that match my needs” and “This app makes me feel that I am a unique customer” are examples of items used to explain the level of customization. The level of perceived design aesthetics is measured by using a scale from a study conducted by Cyr et al. (2006). The study shows significant positive relations between design aesthetics and the different constructs of the TAM-model . The scale consists out of four elements, which are all constructed as agree – disagree statements on a 7-point Likert scale. “The overall look and feel of the app is visually appealing” and “This app looks professionally designed” are examples of items used.
3.5.2.THE TAM-MODEL
The different dimensions of the extended TAM-model will be measured as mediating variables. PU, PEOU and PE will measured by making use of the same scale used in the study of Cyr(2008). Results of that study show that the dimensions of the TAM-model mediate the relation between design aesthetics and loyalty towards the m-service. PEOU of the app will be measured by four items, including statements that measured the extent to which the app was perceived as useful. “The app made the task I wanted to accomplish easier to get done”, is an example of an item to explain PU. The PEOU derives from three items which measure the extent to which one perceives the branded app as easy to use. One of the items is the following “ Learning to use the app is easy for me”. To investigate the PE of an app five items from Cyr (2008) are adopted. These items include statements as “I had fun using this app.” All the items are measured on a 7-point Likert scale (from strongly disagree to strongly agree).
3.5.3. MODERATING VARIABLES
The perceived hedonic value and the perceived utilitarian value of the branded app will be tested in this model as moderators, which implies that the perceived utilitarian or hedonic value of an
31
app influences the relationship between the independent or dependent variables. Moderators can either intensify or diminish this relationship. To measure the utilitarian and hedonic value of the app scales of To et al. (2007) were adopted. The utilitarian value is measured by questions like “ to what extend do you perceive the app as not functional/functional”. The hedonic value is also measured by five statements where respondents need to indicate to what extent they perceive the app as fun/boring.
3.5.4. DEPENDENT VARIABLES
The dependent variables in this research include the attitude towards the app and the behavioral loyalty towards the app. Questions regarding the attitude towards the app(ATTapp) are selected from a existing scale developed by Chen and Wells (1999). Originally this scale was designed to measure the attitude towards a website, therefore the questions are adapted to apps. In order to measure behavioral loyalty towards the app, the m-loyalty scale derived from Cyr et al. (2009) will be adopted. In this study the authors show that three items give a reliable explanation of customers intention to keep on using the app in the future. These three items, consist out of agree-disagree statements measured on a 7-point Likert scale. One of these items is for example “I would consider purchasing from this app in the future”.
3.6. METHOD OF ANALYSIS
The method of analysis is structured as followed. Firstly, a correlation analysis will be performed to investigate to which extend and in which direction(negative/positive) the constructs are correlated with each other. Hereafter, a factor analysis is performed, including the TAM-constructs and the utilitarian and hedonic nature of the app. Subsequently, the hypotheses will be tested by making use of the PROCESS tool developed by Hayes (2012). This is a relatively new analytical tool which allows to test simple regression, mediation and moderation effects within one model by performing bootstraps. In order to test the conditional effects of the nature of the app this tool is will be helpful. All data is analyzed by using SPSS version 22.
32
4. R
ESULTSThis chapter provides an overview of the results derived from the quantitative study. The first paragraph is dedicated to describe the general findings about the usage of branded apps and the demographics of the respondents. In the second paragraph, a description of the preparation of the data for the analysis is given. Hereafter, the validity and reliability of the constructs will be discussed. The third paragraph describes the statistical techniques, which are applied in order to test the hypotheses. Hereafter, a brief overview of additional findings is provided. The results section will end by providing a summary of the results of the tested hypotheses.
4.1. GENERAL FINDINGS
In total the data derived from 145 respondents(n=145) is used for analyses. The sample group consists for 59,3 % out of females(n=86) and 40,7% (n=59) out of men. All respondents were either in possession of a smartphone(73,8%), a tablet (2,1%), or both (24,1%). Respondents were asked to fill in the questionnaire about the last branded application they used. Table 2 provides an overview of the branded apps which are included in this survey. Remarkable is that the branded apps that are most in common among the respondents are the Appie, provided by the Dutch leading supermarket Albert Heijn, followed by the “ING mobile banking”, provided by the Dutch national bank, and the H&M app from the Swedish fashion chain Hennis and Mauritz. When emphasizing on the categories the apps belong to, the general findings can be viewed from out a different perspective. The list for instance consists out of three apps provided by different banks, respectively ING (n=27), ABN Amro (n=12), and Rabobank (n=10). Because these banks provide similar financial services to their customers via this app, such as the opportunity to check their balance, to manage their accounts and to transfer money, these belong to the same category which is financial apps. Financial apps are most common among the participants (n= 49). Table 2 provides an overview of the top 10 used apps, including the name of the app, the brand name, the category to which the app belongs, a description of the functions the app provides and the frequency of the apps among the respondents. Information about the category and the functions of the app is derived from Google Play(2014) and iTunes App store(2014). The respondents indicate to use the app multiple times a day(26,2%), once a day(22,1%), a couple of times a
