SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 41 - Sayı: 1

HOW TO SATISFY MOBILE APPLICATION USERS AND INCREASE THEIR BRAND EQUITY PERCEPTION?

Hüseyin EKİZLER
Pages
126–144
Publication Date
2019-07-12
DOI
—
🏛️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)

As a result, there were significant relationships between all concepts except the aesthetic dimension and privacy risk of the application.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Nowadays, with the development of technology people’s lives have adapted to new situation and individuals have started to carry all the communication, socialization, banking, navigating and many other things they need through applications on their smart phones.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Out of 731 respondents, that were usable, 368 were selected for EFA and the remaining 363 were selected for CFA and path analysis, where dataset division was randomly performed with Bernoulli distribution.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, there were significant relationships between all concepts except the aesthetic dimension and privacy risk of the application.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Mobile Applications · Customer Satisfaction · Brand Equity

Özet

Nowadays, with the development of technology people’s lives have adapted to new situation and individuals have started to carry all the communication, socialization, banking, navigating and many other things they need through applications on their smart phones. The main purpose of this study is to examine the features of the mobile phone applications and the effects of these features on the brand value through users’ satisfaction. In this study, the utilitarian benefits, consist of application quality and application utility, hedonic benefits, consist of enjoyment and aesthetics, privacy risk, technicality, and perceived price were determined as the factors assume to have an impact on satisfaction directly, and brand equity correspondingly. All of the concepts used in this study were firstly analyzed with Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and their reliability were measured. Afterwards, the model fit was tested with Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and path analysis. Out of 731 respondents, that were usable, 368 were selected for EFA and the remaining 363 were selected for CFA and path analysis, where dataset division was randomly performed with Bernoulli distribution. As a result, there were significant relationships between all concepts except the aesthetic dimension and privacy risk of the application.

🔖

Cite This Article

EKİZLER, H. (2019). HOW TO SATISFY MOBILE APPLICATION USERS AND INCREASE THEIR BRAND EQUITY PERCEPTION?. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 41 - Sayı: 1, 126–144. https://ajindex.com/articles/6341

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Aaker, D.A., & Keller, K.L. (1990). Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. Journal of marketing, 54(1), 27-41.
  2. Ahmad, N. (2012). Utilitarian and Hedonic Values of Mobile Services: A Preliminary Analysis from the Users’ Perspective. Business & accounting review, (9), 69-83.
  3. Anderson, E.W. & Sullivan, M.W. (1993). The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms, Marketing Science, 12 (2), 125–143.
  4. Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation – confirmation model, MIS Quarterly, 25 (3), 351–370.
  5. Chen L., Meservy, T.O. & Gillenson M. (2012). Understanding information systems continuance for information-oriented mobile applications, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 30, 127–146.
  6. Chen, Z. & Dubinsky, A.J. (2003). A conceptual model of perceived customer value in ecommerce: a preliminary investigation, Psychology and Marketing, 20 (4), 323–347.
  7. Cho, D.Y., Kwon, H.J., & Lee, H.Y. (2007). Analysis of trust in internet and mobile commerce adoption. In Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii international conference on system science (HICSS), Waikoloa (pp. 1–10). Churchill Jr. G.A. & Surprenant, C. (1982). An investigation into the determinants of customer satisfaction, Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 491–504.
  8. Cyr, D. Head, M., Larios, H., & Pan, B. (2009). Exploring human images in website design: a multi-method approach, MIS Quarterly, 33 (3), 539-566.
  9. Cyr, D., Head, M. & Ivanov, A. (2006). Design aesthetics leading to m-loyalty in mobile commerce, Information & Management, 43 (8), 950–963.
  10. Davis F. D., Bagozzi R.P., & Warshaw P.R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22 (14), 1111–1132.
  11. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly, 13 (3), 319–340. Deloitte, (2011). So many apps so little to download. USA. Dennis, C., Papagiannidis, S., Alamanos, E., & Bourlakis, M. (2016). The role of brand attachment strength in higher education. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3049-3057.
  12. Dholakia, U.M., Bagozzi, R.P., & Pearo, L.K. (2004). A social influence model of consumer participation in network-and small-group-based virtual communities. International journal of research in marketing, 21(3), 241-263.
  13. Dinev, T. & Hart, P., (2006). An extended privacy calculus model for E-commerce transactions, Information Systems Research, 17 (1