Brand satisfaction and repurchase intent in the cell phone product market
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION The cell phone is a ubiquitous communication device. The data provided by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (2014a) indicate that the cellular subscriptions per 100 inhabitants was globally 96.2 in 2013. Finland has been one of the pioneers in the adoption of mobile technology, and market penetration is currently over 1.72 mobile subscriptions per person in 2012. Cell phone penetration in the other countries of this study was 1.50 in the United Arab Emirates, 1.10 in New Zealand, 0.80 in Canada and 0.81 in China in 2012 (ITU 2014b). Adolescents and young adults, the target audience of this study, as a group have been called the sweet spot of the communications industry (Charny 2002; Goldenberg et al. 2003; McVicker 2001) indicating that they are early adopters of new technology, and users of new technology applications. A review and synthesis of the literature on cell phone usage suggests that adolescents and young adults use the cell phone in different ways to their parents and other older users (Lee 2007), and therefore the study of younger users is important in the context of the cell phone product-market. The relationship between customer satisfaction and repurchase intent has received relatively little attention in academic research in the cell phone product-market context. Economides and Grousopoulou (2009), Glasscock and Wogalter (2006), Isiklar and Buyukozkan (2007), and Van Biljon (2008) studied students' perceptions of the importance, costs of their mobile devices' features and services, and motivational factors in the cell phone product-market context. However, the perspective in these studies was not in terms of customer satisfaction or repurchase intentions. Han et al. (2004) investigated the relationship between user satisfaction and design (aesthetics) features, but the scope of the research did not extend to the relationship between customer satisfaction and repurchase intent. Zhou and Nakamoto (2007) studied the impact of enhanced and unique features on product preferences and the moderating role of product familiarity, but here again the relationship between customer satisfaction and repurchase intent was not investigated. Finally Goode et al. (2005) studied the relationship between customer satisfaction and key input factors like experience of product quality, level of service charges, level of call charges, and level of satisfaction with the service provider in the cell phone product market. Haverila (2011b) studied the relationship between customer satisfaction and repurchase intent among young Finnish males, but the role of various brands in this regard was not considered. It seems, therefore, that while various studies have investigated cell phone usage, there are few that deal with customer satisfaction and repurchase intent particularly with regard to the brand perspective. Several studies have compared customer satisfaction between genders, and have found that gender might influence customer satisfaction, particularly the drivers of customer satisfaction (Bryant and Cha 1996; Danaher 1998; Mittal and Kamakura 2001; Sanchez-Hernandez et al. 2010; Soderlund 2002). The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between customer satisfaction and repurchase intent in Finland, United Arab Emirates, China, Canada, and New Zealand with particular attention given to brand variations in the examined relationship. The research objectives are as follows: The first research objective is to investigate the overall significance of the customer satisfaction and repurchase intent relationship in this study. The second research objective is to examine how the customer satisfaction and repurchase intent relationship varies according to brand. The third research objective is to investigate the nature of the overall relationship between customer satisfaction and repurchase intent by brand. These research questions are important given the growing importance and changing role of cell phones in contemporary culture globally. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,033 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».