The effect of Facebook users’ satisfaction and trust on stickiness: The role of perceived values
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to explore the impact of satisfaction and trust on stickiness to Facebook. Also, it proposed that hedonic value, emotional value, and social value act as critical antecedents to Facebook stickiness. A quantitative methodology is used to examine the research questions. The research model was tested with data from 511 university students and five academic professors using an online survey. The proposed hypotheses were tested using regression analysis. Furthermore, Data were collected from targeted participants with Facebook experience, among the 511 participants, 353 were females (69.1%), and 158 were males (30.9%). The SEM analysis showed that satisfaction positively and significantly did affect stickiness, where trust did not. Also, results showed while hedonic value affected satisfaction, it did not impact trust. Hence, the results confirmed that hedonic value served as important value concerns for Facebook users. Nevertheless, the study found that both emotional value and social value impacted satisfaction and trust. The current research has enriched the existing study in the fields of customers’ satisfaction and trust on stickiness to Facebook. Moreover, this research is one of the earliest studies that proved that customer value creation serves as an important driving factor for customer satisfaction to generate stickiness to SNS. This study’s results help policymakers and designers of SNS to understand what value factors affect users’ stickiness to Facebook. Their marketing plans and decisions can be accordingly adjusted. This study suggests that marketers need to pay full attention to social value by adding more interactive features such as comments, likes, and shares in order to build social image and increase one’s social influence.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".