MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403869004 · doi:10.1504/ijmc.2025.10067555

The impact of gamification features on customer brand engagement: A study in entertainment mobile apps

2024· article· en· W4403869004 on OpenAlexaff
Milad Mohebali Malmiri, Mohammadreza Barootkoob, Mohammad Nematpour, Mohammad Ghaffari, Amir Reza Konjkav Monfared, Leila Malekpur

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mobile Communications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsUniversity Canada West
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCustomer engagementEntertainmentBusinessAdvertisingMobile telephonyMarketingComputer scienceTelecommunicationsMobile radioSocial mediaWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to develop a conceptual model to investigate the influence of the main features of gamification (entertainment, interactivity, innovation, and sociability) on customers' brand engagement in terms of emotional, cognitive, and behavioural dimensions on SnappQ as the online social and entertaining application. A survey employing researcher-developed-questionnaire was conducted by collecting data from 233 customers using SnappQ in Iran. The structural equation modelling method was employed to investigate research hypotheses. The findings of this study revealed that gamification features have a significant relationship with customer brand engagement. Following the findings, employing gamified services and gamification features in online social and entertaining platforms help managers to satisfy customers' psychological needs, and this leads them to have to learn the manner of managing their customers to engage them profitably. The findings help marketing managers/practitioners to understand how to enhance customers' motivation to engage with the desired brand by designing different gamification features.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.377 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Mobile CommunicationsSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207