SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 17 Sayı: 50

Factors Influencing Motivation to Use Mobile Applications: A Qualitative Study

Mobil Uygulamaları Kullanma Motivasyonunu Etkileyen Faktörler: Nitel Bir Araştırma

Furkan İlik(KARAMANOĞLU MEHMETBEY ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0005-6226-9288
Nezahat Ekici Özcan(KARAMANOĞLU MEHMETBEY ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1697-3483
Fuat Erol(KARAMANOĞLU MEHMETBEY ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-0923-380X
Pages
680–703
Publication Date
2026-05-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that perceived usefulness and ease of use are crucial for individuals in the neuroticism theme; perceived usefulness is significant for those in the conscientiousness theme; perceived usefulness and entertainment are key factors for individuals in the extraversion theme; ease of use and cost are critical for those in the agreeableness theme; and ease of use and security are important factors for individuals in the openness to experience theme.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In today's world, where digital transformation is accelerating, mobile applications have become fundamental tools that meet a wide range of individual needs, ranging from communication to entertainment and from shopping to information acquisition.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research is conducted based on data obtained from 16 participants living in different cities of Türkiye using the in-depth interview technique.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that perceived usefulness and ease of use are crucial for individuals in the neuroticism theme; perceived usefulness is significant for those in the conscientiousness theme; perceived usefulness and entertainment are key factors for individuals in the extraversion theme; ease of use and cost are critical for those in the agreeableness theme; and ease of use and security are important factors for individuals in the openness to experience theme.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Mobil Uygulamalar · Beş Faktörlü Kişilik Özellikleri · Kişilik

Abstract

In today's world, where digital transformation is accelerating, mobile applications have become fundamental tools that meet a wide range of individual needs, ranging from communication to entertainment and from shopping to information acquisition. The abundance of existing applications enables users to customize mobile applications according to their personalities and interests. In this context, the main objective of the study is to reveal, through an exploratory approach based on participant narratives, which types of mobile applications participants use according to their self-perceived personalities, the motivations influencing this usage, and how the perceived personality traits of mobile applications are evaluated by users. The research is conducted based on data obtained from 16 participants living in different cities of Türkiye using the in-depth interview technique. The qualitative data analysis software MAXQDA 24 is utilized for data analysis. The findings indicate that perceived usefulness and ease of use are crucial for individuals in the neuroticism theme; perceived usefulness is significant for those in the conscientiousness theme; perceived usefulness and entertainment are key factors for individuals in the extraversion theme; ease of use and cost are critical for those in the agreeableness theme; and ease of use and security are important factors for individuals in the openness to experience theme.

Özet

Dijital dönüşümün hız kazandığı günümüzde mobil uygulamalar, bireylerin iletişimden eğlenceye, alışverişten bilgi edinmeye kadar birçok ihtiyacını karşılayan temel araçlar haline gelmiştir. Mevcut uygulamaların çokluğu kullanıcıların mobil uygulamaları kişiliklerine ve ilgi alanlarına göre özelleştirmelerine olanak tanımaktadır. Bu bağlamda, çalışmanın temel amacı katılımcı anlatılarından hareket eden keşifsel bir yaklaşımla, katılımcıların kendi kişiliklerine ilişkin algılarına göre hangi tür mobil uygulamaları kullandıklarını, bu uygulamaları kullanmalarında etkili olan motivasyonları ve mobil uygulamaların algılanan kişilik özelliklerinin kullanıcılar tarafından nasıl değerlendirildiğini ortaya koymaktır. Araştırma derinlemesine görüşme tekniğiyle, Türkiye’nin farklı şehirlerinde yaşayan 16 katılımcıdan elde edilen verilere dayalı olarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Verilerin analizinde MAXQDA 24 nitel veri analiz programından faydalanılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre, nevrotizm temasında yer alan bireyler için algılanan fayda ve kullanım kolaylığı; öz disiplin temasında yer alan bireyler için algılanan fayda; dışa dönüklük temasında yer alan bireyler için algılanan fayda ve eğlence; uyumluluk temasında yer alan bireyler için kullanım kolaylığı ve maliyet; deneyime açıklık temasında yer alan bireyler için ise kullanım kolaylığı ve güvenlik faktörlerinin önemli olduğu ortaya konulmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

İlik, F., Özcan, N. E., Erol, F. (2026). Factors Influencing Motivation to Use Mobile Applications: A Qualitative Study. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 50, 680–703. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.1660301

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (82)

  1. Agarwal, R. ve Prasad, J. (1998). A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Information Systems Research, 9(2), 204-215. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.9.2.204
  2. Agyei, J., Sun, S., Abrokwah, E., Penney, E. K. ve Ofori-Boafo, R. (2020). Mobile banking adoption: Examining the role of personality traits. Sage Open, 10(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020932918
  3. Akbolat, M., Yıldırım, Y. ve Amarat, M. (2019). Hastane mobil uygulamalarında kullanıcı yorumlarının incelenmesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 10(25), 511-522. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.567454
  4. Al-Dwairi, S. A., Harb, Y. ve Abu-Shanab, E. (2019). The impact of personality traits on mobile banking adoption in Jordan. International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 20(4), 489-510. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBIR.2019.103321
  5. Atkinson R.L., Atkinson R.C. ve Hilgard E.R. (1995). Psikolojiye Giriş II. (Kemal Atakay, Mustafa Atakay, Aysun Yavuz, Çev.), Sosyal Yayınlar. (Orijinal eserin basım tarihi 1993).
  6. Baltar, F., ve Brunet, I. (2012). Social research 2.0: virtual snowball sampling method using Facebook. Internet research, 22(1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662241211199960
  7. Baymur B. F. (2017). Genel Psikoloji (26. Baskı). İnkılâp Kitabevi.
  8. Błachnio, A., Przepiórka, A., Senol-Durak, E., Durak, M. ve Sherstyuk, L. (2016). The role of self-esteem in internet addiction: A comparison between Turkish, Polish and Ukrainian samples. The European Journal of Psychiatry, 30(2), 149-155.
  9. Burger, J. M. (2006). Kişilik (1. Baskı). (İnan Deniz Erguvan Sarıoğlu, Çev.), Kaknüs Yayınları. (Orijinal eserin basım tarihi 2004).
  10. Butt, S. ve Phillips, J. G. (2008). Personality and self reported mobile phone use. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 346–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.019
  11. Büyüközkan, G. (2009). Determining the mobile commerce user requirements using an analytic approach. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 31(1), 144-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2007.11.006
  12. Chong, A. Y. L., Chan, F. T. ve Ooi, K. B. (2012). Predicting consumer decisions to adopt mobile commerce: cross country empirical examination between China and Malaysia. Decision Support Systems, 53(1), 34-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2011.12.001
  13. Chong, A. Y.-L. (2013). Mobile commerce usage activities: The roles of demographic and motivation variables. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(7), 1350–1359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.12.011
  14. Clarke III, I. (2001). Emerging value propositions for m-commerce. Journal of Business Strategies, 18(2), s.133-148.
  15. Cloninger, S. C. (2004). Theories of personality: Understanding persons (4th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
  16. Correa, T., Hinsley, A. W. ve de Zúñiga, H. G. (2010). Who interacts on the web?: The intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 247–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.09.003
  17. Costa, P. T. ve McCrae, R. R. (1976). Age differences in personality structure: A cluster analytic approach. Journal of Gerontology, 31(5), 564–570. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/31.5.564
  18. Costa, P. T. ve McCrae, R. R. (1992). Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: The neo personality inventory. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.5
  19. Costa, P. T., Fozard, J. L., McCrae, R. R. ve Bosse R. (1976). Relations of age and personality dimensions to cognitive ability factors. Journal of Gerontology, 31(6), 663–669. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/31.6.663
  20. Creswell, J. W. (2015). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (Mesut Bütün ve Selçuk Beşir Demir, Çev.), Siyasal Kitabevi. (Orijinal eserin basım tarihi 2013).
  21. Cüceloğlu D. (1998). İnsan ve davranışı (8. Baskı). Remzi Kitabevi.
  22. Cyr, D., Head, M. ve Ivanov, A. (2006). Design aesthetics leading to m-loyalty in mobile commerce. Information & Management, 43(8), 950–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.08.009
  23. Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41(1), 417–440. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221
  24. Dworkin, S.L. (2012). Sample size policy for qualitative studies using in-depth interviews. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(6), 1319–1320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-0016-6
  25. Eren E. (2015). Örgütsel davranış ve yönetim psikolojisi (15. Baskı). Beta Yayıncılık.
  26. Feist, J. ve Feist G.J. (2008). Theories of personality (7th ed.). McGraw- Hill Primis.
  27. Fichter, J. (2001). Sosyoloji nedir? (5. Baskı). (Nilgün Çelebi, Çev.), Atilla Kitabevi. (Orijinal eserin basım tarihi 1971).
  28. Friedman, H. S. ve Schustack, M. W. (2014). Personality: Classic theories and modern research (5th ed.). Pearson Education Limited.
  29. Gençtanırım Kurt, D. ve Çetinkaya Yıldız, E. (2017). Kişilik kuramları gerçek yaşamdan kişilik analizi örnekleri. Pegem Akademi.
  30. Guest, G., Bunce, A., ve Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
  31. Hong, S., Thong, J. Y. L. ve Tam, K. Y. (2006). Understanding continued information technology usage behavior: A comparison of three models in the context of mobile internet. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1819–1834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2006.03.009
  32. Hsiao, K. L. (2017). Compulsive mobile application usage and technostress: The role of personality traits. Online Information Review, 41(2), 272-295. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-03-2016-0091
  33. Huang, Y. C., Chang, L. L., Yu, C. P. ve Chen, J. (2019). Examining an extended technology acceptance model with experience construct on hotel consumers’ adoption of mobile applications. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 28(8), 957-980. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2019.1580172
  34. Hubert, M., Blut, M., Brock, C., Backhaus, C. ve Eberhardt, T. (2017). Acceptance of smartphone‐based mobile shopping: Mobile benefits, customer characteristics, perceived risks, and the impact of application Context. Psychology & Marketing, 34(2), 175-194. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20982
  35. Hughes, D. J., Rowe, M., Batey, M. ve Lee, A. (2012). A tale of two sites: Twitter vs. facebook and the personality predictors of social media usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 561-569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.001
  36. Huseynov, F. (2020). Understanding usage behavior of different mobile application categories based on personality traits. Interacting with Computers, 32(1), 66-80. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwaa005
  37. John, O. P. ve Srivastava, S. (1999). The big-five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. L. A. Pervin ve O. P. John (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (s. 102-138). Guilford Press.
  38. Kalinic, Z. ve Marinkovic, V. (2016). Determinants of users’ intention to adopt m-commerce: An empirical analysis. Information Systems and EBusiness Management, 14(2), 367–387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-015-0287-2
  39. Kervankıran, İ., Kurnaz, Z., ve Başçı, E. (2021). Bir yer olarak Göbekli Tepe’nin ötekileş (tiril) en son sakinleri. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 24(3), 29-63. https://doi.org/10.18490/sosars.1014205
  40. Kuckartz, U., ve Rädiker, S. (2019). Analyzing qualitative data with MAXQDA. Springer.
  41. Landers, R. N. ve Lounsbury, J. W. (2006). An investigation of big five and narrow personality traits in relation to internet usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 283–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.06.001
  42. Lee, S.-G., Park, B., Kim, S.-H. ve Lee, H.-H. (2012). Innovation and imitation effects in the mobile telecommunication service market. Service Business, 6(3), 265–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-012-0135-0
  43. Li, Y. M. ve Yeh, Y. S. (2010). Increasing trust in mobile commerce through design aesthetics. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 673-684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.004
  44. Luthans, F. (2011). Organizational behavior. An evidence-based approach (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill Irwin.
  45. Marshall, B., Cardon, P., Poddar, A., ve Fontenot, R. (2013). Does sample size matter in qualitative research? A review of qualitative interviews in is research. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 54(1), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2013.11645667
  46. McCrae, R. R. ve Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81-90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81
  47. McCrae, R. R. ve Costa, P. T. (2006). Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspctive (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
  48. Mehra, A., Paul, J. ve Kaurav, R. P. S. (2020). Determinants of mobile apps adoption among young adults: Theoretical extension and analysis. Journal of Marketing Communications, 00(00), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2020.1725780
  49. Nunes, A., Limpo, T. ve Castro, S. L. (2019). Individual factors that influence the acceptance of mobile health apps: The role of age, gender, and personality traits. Information and Communication Technologies for Ageing Well and e-Health: 4th International Conference (s. 167-179). Heraklion, Greece.
  50. Park, E., Baek, S., Ohm, J. ve Chang, H. J. (2014). Determinants of player acceptance of mobile social network games: An application of extended technology acceptance model. Telematics and Informatics, 31(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2013.07.001
  51. Patro, A., Rayanchu, S., Griepentrog, M., Ma, Y. ve Banerjee, S. (2013). Capturing mobile experience in the wild: A tale of two apps. Proceedings of the ninth ACM conference on Emerging networking experiments and Technologies (s. 199-210). California, USA.
  52. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage publications.
  53. Rafique, H., Almagrabi, A. O., Shamim, A., Anwar, F. ve Bashir, A. K. (2020). Investigating the acceptance of mobile library applications with an extended technology acceptance model (TAM). Computers & Education, 145, 103732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103732
  54. Revels, J., Tojib, D. ve Tsarenko, Y. (2010). Understanding consumer intention to use mobile services. Australasian Marketing Journal, 18(2), 74-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2010.02.002
  55. Robbins S.P. ve Judge T.A. (2017). Örgütsel Davranış (14. Baskı). (İnci Erdem, Çev.), Nobel Akademik. (Orijinal eserin basım tarihi 2011).
  56. Ryan, T. ve Xenos, S. (2011). Who uses facebook? An investigation into the relationship between the big five, shyness, narcissism, loneliness, and facebook usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1658-1664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.004
  57. Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
  58. Scornavacca Jr, E. ve Barnes, S. J. (2006). Barcode enabled m-commerce: Strategic implications and business models. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 4(2), 163-177. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMC.2006.008607
  59. Seneviratne, S., Seneviratne, A., Mohapatra, P. ve Mahanti, A. (2014). Predicting user traits from a snapshot of apps installed on a smartphone. ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 18(2), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1145/2636242.2636244
  60. Sığrı, Ü. ve Gürbüz, S. (2011). Akademik başarı ve kişilik ilişkisi: Üniversite öğrencileri üzerinde bir araştırma. Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(1), 30-48. https://izlik.org/JA46RT92EN
  61. Siau, K., Lim, E. P. ve Shen, Z. (2001). Mobile commerce: Promises, challenges and research agenda. Journal of Database Management (JDM), 12(3), 4-13. DOI: 10.4018/jdm.2001070101
  62. Smura, T., Kivi, A. ve Töyli, J. (2009). A framework for analysing the usage of mobile services. Info, 11(4), 53-67. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636690910970973
  63. Somer, O., Korkmaz, M. ve Tatar, A. (2002). Beş faktör kişilik envanteri’nin geliştirilmesi: Ölçek ve alt ölçeklerin oluşturulması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 17(49), 21-33.
  64. Sönmez, U. (2019). Online alışverişe yönelik satın alma tarzlarının kişilik tipleri açısından incelenmesi: Sakarya ili örneği [Yüksek Lisans Tezi]. Sakarya Üniversitesi.
  65. Söylemez, C. ve Taşkın, E. (2020). Tüketicilerin mobil bankacılık uygulamalarını kullanma niyetini etkileyen faktörler: Uluslararası bir karşılaştırma. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 15(2), 411-436. https://doi.org/10.17153/oguiibf.549422
  66. Statista (2024). Number of apps available in leading app stores as of August 2024. https://www.statista.com/statistics/276623/number-of-apps-available-in-leading-app-stores/ adresinden 20 Kasım 2024 tarihinde alınmıştır.
  67. Syed, N., Saeed, A. ve Farrukh, M. (2015). Organization commitment and five factor model of personality: Theory recapitulation. Journal of Asian Business Strategy, 5(8), 183-190.
  68. Tan, W. K. ve Yang, C. Y. (2014). Internet applications use and personality. Telematics and Informatics, 31(1), 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2013.02.006
  69. Taylor, D. G., Voelker, T. A. ve Pentina, I. (2011). Mobile Application Adoption by Young Adults: A Social Network Perspective. WCOB Faculty Publications. https://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/wcob_fac/1
  70. Tekin, Ö. A., Turan, S. N., Özmen, M., Turhan, A. A. ve Kökçü, A. (2012). Beş faktör kişilik özellikleri ve örgütsel çatışma yönetimi arasındaki ilişkiler: Ankara’daki beş yıldızlı otel işletmeleri üzerine bir uygulama. Journal of Yasar University, 27(7), 4611-4641.
  71. Thakur, R. ve Srivastava, M. (2013). Customer usage intention of mobile commerce in India: An empirical study. Journal of Indian Business Research, 5(1), 52–72. https://doi.org/10.1108/17554191311303385
  72. Toraman, Y. ve Yüksel, C. (2022). Covid-19 salgını sürecinde tüketicilerin yeni teknolojileri benimsemelerinin teknoloji kabul modeli (TKM) çerçevesinde temassız teslimat özelinde incelenmesi: Mobil uygulamalar üzerine bir araştırma. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 23(Covid-19 özel sayısı), 17-34. https://doi.org/10.31671/doujournal.928518
  73. Uyar, A. (2019). Tüketicilerin mobil uygulamalara ilişkin algılarının teknoloji kabul modeli ile değerlendirilmesi. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 11(1), 687-705.
  74. Wac, K., Ickin, S., Hong, J. H., Janowski, L., Fiedler, M. ve Dey, A. K. (2011). Studying the experience of mobile applications used in different contexts of daily life. Proceedings of the first ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Measurements up the stack (s. 7-12). Toronto, Canada.
  75. Wayne, J. H., Musisca, N. ve Fleeson, W. (2004). Considering the role of personality in the work–family experience: Relationships of the big five to work–family conflict and facilitation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64(1), 108–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00035-6
  76. Xu, R., Frey, R. M., Fleisch, E. ve Ilic, A. (2016). Understanding the impact of personality traits on mobile app adoption–insights from a large-scale field study. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 244-256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.011
  77. Yan, Z., Liu, C., Niemi, V. ve Yu, G. (2013). Exploring the impact of trust information visualization on mobile application usage. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17, 1295-1313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-013-0636-4
  78. Yayla, E. N. ve Çizmeci, B. (2022). T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı’nın mobil sağlık uygulamalarının bilinirliğine yönelik bir araştırma. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 13(33), 254-270. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.897754
  79. Yıldırır, S. C. ve Kaplan, B. (2019). Mobil uygulama kullanımının benimsenmesi: Teknoloji kabul modeli ile bir çalışma. Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(19), 22-51.
  80. Yiğit Açıkgöz, F. ve Kayakuş, M. (2025). Süpermarket zincirlerinin mobil uygulamalarının kurumsal itibarına etkisi: Duygu analizi ve metin madenciliği yöntemleriyle değerlendirme. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 16(45), 177-193. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.1505641
  81. Yu, Y. ve Buahom, K. (2013). Exploring factors influencing consumer adoption on mobile commerce services. The Business Review, Cambridge, 21(1), 258-265.
  82. Zel, U. (2006). Kişilik ve liderlik. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.