Brand satisfaction and repurchase intent in the cell phone product market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.033 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".