A Study on Immersion and Intention to Pay in AR Broadcasting: Validating and Expanding the Hedonic Motivation System Adoption Mode
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Background
1.2. Research Purpose and Significance
2. Relevant Research
2.1. Online Entertainment Live Broadcasting
2.2. Hedonic Motivation System Acceptance Model (HMSAM)
2.3. Immersion
2.4. Intention to Pay
2.5. Aesthetics
2.6. Perceived Ease of Use
2.7. Perceived Usefulness
2.8. Perceived Behavior Control
2.9. Curiosity
2.10. Joy
3. Research Methods and Hypothesis
3.1. Hypothesis and Model Construction
3.1.1. The Influence of Aesthetics on Perceived Ease of Use, Perceived Usefulness, Curiosity, Perceived Behavioral Control and Joy
3.1.2. The Influence of Perceived Usefulness on Curiosity, Perceived Behavioral Control and Joy
3.1.3. The Influence of Perceived Ease of Use on Perceived Usefulness, Joy, Perceived Behavioral Control and Curiosity
3.1.4. The Influence of Curiosity on Immersion and Intention to Pay
3.1.5. The Influence of Perceived Behavioral Control on Immersion
3.1.6. The Influence of Joy on Immersion and Intention to Pay
3.2. Design of Questionnaire
3.3. Data Collection
4. Research Data Analysis and Results
4.1. Reliability Analysis
4.2. Exploratory Factor Analysis
4.3. Confirmatory Factor Analysis
4.4. Results of the Structural Equation Model
5. Discussions
5.1. The Value Enhancement Role of AR Technology in Network Entertainment Live Streaming
5.2. The Influencing Factors of Immersion and Intention to Pay
5.3. The Value of Aesthetics in the Application of AR Technology
5.4. Aesthetic Variables Expand the Theory of HMSAM
6. Conclusions and Suggestions
6.1. Theoretical Implications
6.2. Practical Implications
6.3. Limitations and Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Chen, Y.; Huang, X.; Zhao, S. The Moderating Effect of Appearance on the Impact of Performance Rankings in the Live Streaming Market. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 1011787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pavelle, S.; Wilkinson, C. Into the digital wild: Utilizing Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and Facebook for effective science and environmental communication. Front. Commun. 2020, 5, 575122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, M.; Wang, Q.; Cao, Y. Understanding user online impulse buying in live streaming e-commerce: A stimulus-organism-response framework. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 4378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rein, K.; Venturini, T. Ploughing digital landscapes: How Facebook influences the evolution of live video streaming. New Media Soc. 2018, 20, 3359–3380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- China Internet Network Information Center. Di 52 Ci Zhong Guo Hu Lian Wang Luo Fa Zhan Zhuang Kuang Tong Ji Bao Gao [The 52nd Statistical Report on Internet Development in China]. Available online: https://www.cnnic.net.cn/NMediaFile/2023/0908/MAIN1694151810549M3LV0UWOAV.pdf (accessed on 8 December 2023).
- The 10th of China Internet Audio & Video Convention. Wang Luo Shi Ting Rang Zhong Guo Chuan Tong Wen Hua“ Huo ” qi Lai [Revitalizing Chinese Traditional Culture through Online Audio-Visual Media]. Press Center. 26 April 2023. Available online: https://www.ciavc.com/home/news/ndetails/id/481.html (accessed on 8 December 2023).
- Hu, M.; Chaudhry, S.S. Enhancing consumer engagement in e-commerce live streaming via relational bonds. Internet Res. 2020, 30, 1019–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, S.; Younghwan, P. Mind over matter: Examining the role of cognitive dissonance and self-efficacy in discontinuous usage intentions on pan-entertainment mobile live broadcast platforms. Behav. Sci. 2023, 13, 254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lu, S.; Yao, D.; Chen, X.; Grewal, R. Do larger audiences generate greater revenues under pay what you want? Evidence from a live streaming platform. Mark. Sci. 2021, 40, 964–984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ye, D.; Liu, F.; Cho, D.; Jia, Z. Investigating switching intention of e-commerce live streaming users. Heliyon 2022, 8, e11145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C. Hardcore Viewer Engagement and Social Exchange with Streamers and Their Digital Live Streaming Communities. Qual. Mark. Res. Int. J. 2022, 26, 37–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Silva, B.L. Tangible VR: Traversing space in XR to grow a virtual butterfly. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Spatial User Interaction, Sydney, Australia, 13–15 October 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Jajić, I.; Khawaja, S.; Qureshi, F.H.; Bach, M.P. Augmented reality in business and economics: Bibliometric and topics analysis. Interdiscip. Descr. Complex Syst. 2022, 20, 723–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeong, B.; Yoon, J. Competitive intelligence analysis of augmented reality technology using patent information. Sustainability 2017, 9, 497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pavlič, J.; Tomažič, T. The (in)effectiveness of attention guidance methods for enhancing brand memory in 360° video. Sensors 2022, 22, 8809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gu, E.; Zhang, Y.; Yao, L. A Study of the Impact of Online Live Shopping Information Display on Users’ Purchase Behaviour. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Application and Information Security (ICCAIS 2021), Wuhan, China, 18–19 December 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, F.; Fan, Z.; Qi, Y. Analysis of user product preference and news media based on data mining technology. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 1007846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Krasonikolakis, I.; Vrechopoulos, A.P.; Pouloudi, A.; Dimitriadis, S. Store layout effects on user behavior in 3D online stores. Eur. J. Mark. 2018, 52, 1223–1256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.; Forsythe, S. Adoption of virtual try-on technology for online apparel shopping. J. Interact. Mark. 2008, 22, 45–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Renaldi, D.; Aziz, E.S. Design of basic computer networking simulation learning using multimedia development life cycle method based on augmented reality at SMKN 1 Tangerang. Tech-E 2021, 4, 30–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmalstieg, D.; Höllerer, T. Augmented reality: Principles and practice. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), Los Angeles, CA, USA, 18–22 March 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, Y.; Wang, C. Study on virtual experience marketing model based on augmented reality: Museum marketing (example). Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2022, 2022, 2485460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rao, M.S.; Dawarwadikar, M. Immersive visualizations using augmented reality and virtual reality. Encycl. Comput. Graph. Games 2020, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Hilken, T.; Ruyter, K.D.; Chylinski, M.; Mahr, D.; Keeling, D.I. Augmenting the eye of the beholder: Exploring the strategic potential of augmented reality to enhance online service experiences. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2017, 45, 884–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Javornik, A. Augmented reality: Research agenda for studying the impact of its media characteristics on consumer behaviour. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2016, 30, 252–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barta, S.; Gurrea, R.; Flavián, C. How augmented reality increases engagement through its impact on risk and the decision process. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw. 2023, 26, 177–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romano, B.; Sands, S.; Pallant, J. Virtual shopping: Segmenting consumer attitudes towards augmented reality as a shopping tool. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2022, 50, 1221–1237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, C.; Lin, Y.; Peng, K.; Liu, C. Augmented reality marketing to enhance museum visit intentions. J. Hosp. Tour. Technol. 2023, 14, 658–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roumba, E.; Nicolaidou, I. Augmented reality books: Motivation, attitudes, and behaviors of young readers. Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol. 2022, 16, 59–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, Z.; Wu, L.; Li, X. When art meets tech: The role of augmented reality in enhancing museum experiences and purchase intentions. Tourism Manag. 2018, 68, 127–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oriti, D.; Manuri, F.; Pace, F.D.; Sanna, A. Harmonize: A shared environment for extended immersive entertainment. Virtual Real. 2021, 27, 3259–3272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gasong, B.I.; Rufi’i, R.; Hartono, H. Development of augmented reality code application on 3d animation in learning procedure at school. Edcomtech J. Kajian Teknol. Pendidik. 2021, 6, 79–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, H.; Gupta, P.; Chauhan, S. Meta-analysis of augmented reality marketing. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2022, 4, 110–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, S.; Huang, W. Analysis on the influencing factors of users’ willingness to use of third-party mobile payment across the straits. Open J. Bus. Manag. 2022, 10, 2276–2303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, L.; Chiang, C.H.; Chen, S.H. Patent trend analysis: Extended reality (xr) and future virtual adventure. Adv. Manag. Appl. Econ. 2023, 13, 27–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Axcell, S.; Ellis, D.J. Exploring the attitudes and behaviour of gen z students towards branded mobile apps in an emerging market: UTAUT2 model extension. Young Consum. 2023, 24, 184–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riar, M.; Xi, N.; Korbel, J.J.; Zarnekow, R.; Hamari, J. Using augmented reality for shopping: A framework for ar induced consumer behavior, literature review and future agenda. Internet Res. 2022, 33, 242–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McLean, G.; Wilson, A. Shopping in the digital world: Examining customer engagement through augmented reality mobile applications. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019, 101, 210–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christ-Brendemühl, S.; Schaarschmidt, M. Customer fairness perceptions in augmented reality-based online services. J. Serv. Manag. 2021, 33, 9–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vaidyanathan, N.; Henningsson, S. Designing augmented reality services for enhanced customer experiences in retail. J. Serv. Manag. 2022, 34, 78–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pantano, E.; Rese, A.; Baier, D. Enhancing the online decision-making process by using augmented reality: A two country comparison of youth markets. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 38, 81–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parekh, P.; Patel, S.; Patel, N.; Shah, M. Systematic review and meta-analysis of augmented reality in medicine, retail, and games. Vis. Comput. Ind. Biomed. Art 2020, 3, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ibáñez-Sánchez, S.; Orús, C.; Flavián, C. Augmented reality filters on social media. Analyzing the drivers of playability based on uses and gratifications theory. Psychol. Mark. 2022, 39, 559–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abels, E.A.; Toet, A.; Stokking, H.; Klunder, T.; MC van Berlo, Z.; Smeets, B.; Niamut, O. Augmented reality-based remote family visits in nursing homes. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Media Experiences, Virtual Event, 21–23 June 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Putra, A.P.; Priyanto, P. Developing education media of health protocol utilizing live coloring using augmented reality technology. Elinvo (Electron. Inform. Vocat. Educ.) 2021, 6, 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schweiger, M.; Wimmer, J.; Nagler, G.; Schlagowski, R. Augmenting the city: The photo-realistic animation of a historic building and its influence on spatial perception and meaning. Int. J. Film Media Arts 2021, 6, 107–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lowry, P.B.; Gaskin, J.E.; Twyman, N.W.; Hammer, B.; Roberts, T.L. Taking “fun and games” seriously: Proposing the hedonic-motivation system adoption model (HMSAM). J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2013, 14, 617–671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shang, Q.; Ma, H.; Wang, C.; Gao, L. Effects of Background Fitting of E-commerce Live Streaming on Consumers’ Purchase Intentions: A Cognitive-Affective Perspective. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 2023, 16, 149–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cui, Y.; Liu, Y.; Gu, M. Investigating the Key Drivers of Impulsive Buying Behavior in Live Streaming. J. Glob. Inf. Manag. 2022, 30, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Z. Analysis of the Impact of Webcast on Users’ Purchase Decision. E3S Web Conf. 2021, 235, 01053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, L.; Chan, Y.Y. Business or Friendship? Exploring Online Live Streaming Host-Viewer Relationship in China. Chin. J. Commun. 2017, 12, 1–17. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, M.; Cheung, C.M.; Lee, M.K.; Chen, H. Understanding live streaming shopping. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2020, 24, 290–328. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, J.; Lin, Z. Understanding the Effect of Social Media Marketing Activities on Relationship Quality between Live Streaming Host and Viewer. Inf. Dev. 2018, 36, 436–448. [Google Scholar]
- Hilvert-Bruce, Z.; Neill, J.T.; Sjöblom, M.; Hamari, J. Social motivations of live-streaming viewer engagement on Twitch. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 84, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, S.; Cheng, L.; Liu, Y. What attracts people onto live streaming platforms? An affordance-constraint framework and evidence from China. Inf. Manag. 2019, 57, 103265. [Google Scholar]
- Javornik, A.; Wansink, B.; Shuayto, M.A.E.; Lindner, A.M. Augmented reality advertising: A literature review and agenda for future research. J. Advert. 2022, 51, 38–54. [Google Scholar]
- Szalavetz, A. Digital Transformation—Enabling Factory Economy Actors’ Entrepreneurial Integration in Global Value Chains? Post-Communist Econ. 2020, 32, 771–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruppert, E.; Law, J.; Savage, M. Reassembling Social Science Methods: The Challenge of Digital Devices. Theory Cult. Soc. 2013, 30, 22–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duus, R.; Cooray, M.; Lilley, S. “Now You See Me, Now You Don’t”: How Digital Consumers Manage Their Online Visibility in Game-Like Conditions. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 795264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, J.M.; Lam, C.F.; Fan, D.X. The development of a measurement scale for entertainment tourism experience: A case study in Macau. Curr. Issues Tour. 2018, 23, 852–866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, Y.; Hsu, P.; Chen, J.; Shiau, W.; Xu, N. Utilitarian and/or Hedonic Shopping—User Motivation to Purchase in Smart Stores. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2023, 123, 821–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seng, W.Q.; Hee, O.C. Factors Influencing the Intention to Use E-Wallet: An Extended Hedonic-Motivation System Adoption Model. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2021, 11, 2265–2278. [Google Scholar]
- Breil, B.; Salewski, C.; Apolinário-Hagen, J. omparing the acceptance of mobile hypertension apps for disease management among patients versus clinical use among physicians: Cross-sectional survey. JMIR Cardio 2022, 6, e31617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Florensia, J.; Suryadibrata, A. 7-day math: A mobile visual novel game for mathematics education. Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol. 2023, 17, 197–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosmansyah, Y.; Achiruzaman, M.; Hardi, A.B. A 3D multiuser virtual learning environment for online training of agriculture surveyors. J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res. 2019, 18, 481–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Thong, J.Y.; Hong, S.J.; Tam, K.Y. The effects of post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-confirmation model for information technology continuance. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2006, 64, 799–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.; Li, P.; Rao, S. Why they enjoy virtual game worlds? An empirical investigation. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 2008, 9, 219–230. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, C.; Ryan, S.; Prybutok, V.; Wen, C. It is not for fun: An examination of social network site usage. Inf. Manag. 2012, 49, 210–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, M.; Zhang, M.; Wang, Y. Why do audiences choose to keep watching on live video streaming platforms? An explanation of dual identification framework. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 75, 594–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeng, H.; Zhou, S.; Hong, G.; Li, Q.; Xu, S. Evaluation of Interactive Game-Based Learning in Physics Domain. J. Balt. Sci. Educ. 2020, 19, 484–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holopainen, J.; Lähtevänoja, A.; Mattila, O.; Södervik, I.; Pöyry, E.; Parvinen, P. Exploring the Learning Outcomes with Various Technologies—Proposing Design Principles for Virtual Reality Learning Environments. In Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2020, Maui, HI, USA, 7–10 January 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Georgiou, Y.; Ioannou, A.; Ioannou, M. Investigating Children’s Immersion in a High-Embodied Versus Low-Embodied Digital Learning Game in an Authentic Educational Setting; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Georgiou, Y.; Ioannou, A.; Ioannou, M. Investigating immersion and learning in a low-embodied versus high-embodied digital educational game: Lessons learned from an implementation in an authentic school classroom. Multimodal Technol. Interact. 2019, 3, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aiken, M.P.; Berry, M.J. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: Possibilities for Olfaction and Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy. Virtual Real. 2015, 19, 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Résibois, M.; Rotgé, J.; Delaveau, P.; Kuppens, P.; Mechelen, I.V.; Fossati, P.; Verduyn, P. The impact of self-distancing on emotion explosiveness and accumulation: An fMRI study. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0206889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diemer, J.; Alpers, G.W.; Peperkorn, H.M.; Shiban, Y.; Mühlberger, A. The Impact of Perception and Presence on Emotional Reactions: A Review of Research in Virtual Reality. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ernstsen, J.; Mallam, S.; Nazir, S. Incidental Memory Recall in Virtual Reality: An Empirical Investigation. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2019, 63, 2277–2281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tcha-Tokey, K.; Christmann, O.; Loup-Escande, É.; Loup, G.; Richir, S. Towards a model of user experience in immersive virtual environments. Adv. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2018, 2018, 7827286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Ou-Yang, C.; Sun, C. Immersion during Digital Media Multitasking. In Proceedings of the International Conferences Interfaces and Human Computer Interaction 2019, Game and Entertainment Technologies 2019, and Compute, Porto, Portugal, 16–18 July 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Cypress, B.S.; Caboral-Stevens, M. “Sense of Presence” in Immersive Virtual Reality Environment. Dimens. Crit. Care Nurs. 2022, 41, 235–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bell, A.; Ensslin, A.; Bom, I.; Smith, J. Immersion in Digital Fiction. Int. J. Lit. Linguist. 2018, 7, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yun-xuan, W. Application of Artificial Intelligence within Virtual Reality for Production of Digital Media Art. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2022, 2022, 3781750. [Google Scholar]
- Bruckner, F.; Baumann, C.; Husinsky, M.; Jakl, A.; Püringer, J.; Suess, R.; Wintersberger, M. Interactive Storytelling for Immersive Media, Augmented Manufacturing, and Digital Healthcare. Interact. Film. Media J. 2022, 2, 66–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Argyriou, L.; Economou, D.; Bouki, V. Design methodology for 360° immersive video applications: The case study of a cultural heritage virtual tour. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 2020, 24, 843–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pavlou, P.A. User acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. Int. J. Electron. Commerce 2003, 7, 101–134. [Google Scholar]
- Hamari, J.; Alha, K.; Järvelä, S.; Kivikangas, J.M.; Koivisto, J.; Paavilainen, J. Why do players buy in-game content? An empirical study on concrete purchase motivations. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 68, 538–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tatavarthy, A.D.; Mukherjee, K. Payment methods and their effect on durable goods replacement. J. Consum. Mark. 2019, 36, 484–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Linge, A.A.; Chaudhari, T.; Kakde, B.; Singh, M. Analysis of factors affecting use behavior towards mobile payment apps: A SEM approach. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 2023, 2023, 3327994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sutrisno, T. The effect of TAM factor on repurchase intention (Go-Pay digital wallet case study). JMBI UNSRAT (J. Ilm. Manaj. Bisnis Dan Inov. Univ. Sam Ratulangi) 2023, 10, 181–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kafley, G.S.; Chandrasekaran, M. A study on users’ adoption of electronic payment system in India. Turk. J. Comput. Math. Educ. 2021, 12, 2642–2649. [Google Scholar]
- Syafira, F.N.; Ratnasari, R.T.; Ismail, S. The effect of religiosity and trust on intention to pay in Ziswaf collection through digital payments. J. Ekon. Dan Bisnis Islam (J. Islam. Econ. Bus.) 2020, 6, 98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pratiwi, İ.E. Factors influencing Muslims’ compliance behavior in paying zakah of income: A case study in Jayapura (a non-Muslim region in Indonesia). QIJIS (Qudus Int. J. Islam. Stud.) 2018, 6, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ligon, E.; Malick, B.; Sheth, K.; Trachtman, C. What explains low adoption of digital payment technologies? Evidence from small-scale merchants in Jaipur, India. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0219450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mansour, H. How successful countries are in promoting digital transactions during COVID-19. J. Econ. Stud. 2021, 49, 435–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karjaluoto, H.; Shaikh, A.A.; Leppäniemi, M.; Luomala, R. Examining users’ usage intention of contactless payment systems. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2019, 38, 332–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, W. Research progress on virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) in tourism and hospitality. J. Hosp. Tour. Technol. 2019, 10, 539–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jung, T.; Lee, H.; Chung, N.; Dieck, M.C.t. Cross-cultural differences in adopting mobile augmented reality at cultural heritage tourism sites. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 30, 1621–1645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gharaibeh, M.K.; Gharaibeh, N.K.; Khan, M.A.; Abu-ain, W.A.K.; Alqudah, M.K. Intention to use mobile augmented reality in the tourism sector. Comput. Syst. Sci. Eng. 2021, 37, 187–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sonderegger, A.; Ribes, D.; Henchoz, N.; Groves, E. Food talks: Visual and interaction principles for representing environmental and nutritional food information in augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality Adjunct (ISMAR-Adjunct), Beijing, China, 10–18 October 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Buonincontri, P.; Marasco, A. Enhancing cultural heritage experiences with smart technologies: An integrated experiential framework. Eur. J. Tour. Res. 2017, 17, 83–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heemsbergen, L.; Bowtell, G.; Vincent, J.B. Conceptualising augmented reality: From virtual divides to mediated dynamics. Converg. Int. J. Res. Into New Media Technol. 2021, 27, 830–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, Z.; Shi, Z.; Cheng, Q. Examining the antecedents and consequences of Mobile Travel app engagement. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0248460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, B.; Hauer, R.J.; Xu, C. Effects of design proportion and distribution of color in urban and suburban green space planning to visual aesthetics quality. Forests 2020, 11, 278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, S.; Chen, D.; Shang, X.; Han, L.; Shi, L. Resident satisfaction of urban green spaces through the lens of landsenses ecology. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 15242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y. Neurological Effect of the Aesthetics of Product Design on the Decision-Making Process of Users. NeuroQuantology 2018, 16, 501–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Ha, T. Changes in perceived usability and aesthetics with repetitive use in the first use session. Hum. Factors Ergon. Manuf. Serv. Ind. 2019, 29, 517–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bakar, Z.A.; Salim, F.S.; Noor, N.M.M.; Mohemad, R. An Initial Study of Measuring Aesthetic Web Interfaces Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) Approach. Int. J. Eng. Trends Technol. 2020, 26–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, H.; Liu, Y.; Lu, W.F. Establishing product appearance specifications with the identification of user aesthetic needs in product conceptual design. In Advances in Product Design Engineering; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 199–217. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, F.D. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Q. 1989, 13, 319–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nasta, M.; Amin, F.H.; Hasriani, G. Instagram for writing practice: Students’ perceived usefulness and ease of use. J. Engl. Lit. Educ. Teach. Learn. Engl. A Foreign Lang. 2022, 9, 13–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Effendy, F.; Hurriyati, R.; Hendrayati, H. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and social influence: Intention to use E-Wallet. In Proceedings of the 5th Global Conference on Business, Management and Entrepreneurship (GCBME 2020), Bandung, Indonesia, 2 September 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, Y.; Kozar, K.A.; Larsen, K.R. The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2003, 12, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pokhrel, L. Intention of social media adoption among undergraduate students of business schools in Kathmandu Valley. J. Bus. Manag. Res. 2022, 4, 34–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suariedewi, I.G.A.A.M.; Adyatma, I.W.C.; Wulandari, I. The impact of social media marketing for MSMEs sustainability in the COVID-19 period. J. Bus. Manag. Rev. 2022, 3, 641–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeh, Y.S.; Teng, C.I. Extended conceptualization of perceived usefulness: Empirical test in the context of information system use continuance. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2012, 31, 525–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, P.; Liu, Z.; Li, X.; Jiang, X.; Zhu, M.X. The influences of livestreaming on online purchase intention: Examining platform characteristics and user psychology. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2022, 123, 862–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Halizah, S.N.; Retnowati, E.; Darmawan, D.; Khayru, R.K.; Issalillah, F. Determinants of customer trust: A study on safety, ease-of-use, and perceived usefulness of herbal products of kuku bima ener-g. J. Trends Econ. Account. Res. 2022, 2, 86–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arghashi, V.; Yüksel, C. Interactivity, Inspiration, and Perceived Usefulness! How Retailers’ AR-Apps Improve User Engagement Through Flow. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022, 64, 102756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, K.; Oh, S. The users’ intention to participate in a VR/AR sports experience by applying the extended technology acceptance model (ETAM). Healthcare 2022, 10, 1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castillo, S.M.J.; Bigné, E. A model of adoption of AR-based self-service technologies: A two-country comparison. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2021, 49, 875–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alam, S.S.; Susmit, S.; Lin, C.; Masukujjaman, M.; Ho, Y. Factors affecting augmented reality adoption in the retail industry. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. Perceived Behavioral Control, Self-Efficacy, Locus of Control, and the Theory of Planned Behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2002, 32, 665–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. Attitudes, Personality and Behaviour; Open University Press: Milton Keynes, UK, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Conner, M.; Armitage, C.J. Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Review and Avenues for Further Research. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1998, 28, 1429–1464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shin, D.H.; Shin, Y.J. Users’ trust in virtual mall shopping: The self-efficacy and social influence perspective. J. Interact. Mark. 2011, 25, 255–266. [Google Scholar]
- Otchengco, A.M.; Akiate, Y.W.D. Entrepreneurial intentions on perceived behavioral control and personal attitude: Moderated by structural support. Asia Pac. J. Innov. Entrep. 2021, 15, 14–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tolentino, D.A.; Costa, D.K.; Jiang, Y. Determinants of American adults’ use of digital health and willingness to share health data with providers, family, and social media. CIN Comput. Inform. Nurs. 2023, 41, 892–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paulus, F.W.; Joas, J.; Gerstner, I.; Kühn, A.; Wenning, M.; Gehrke, T.; Burckhart, H.; Richter, U.; Nonnenmacher, A.; Zemlin, M.; et al. Problematic internet use among adolescents 18 months after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Children 2022, 9, 1724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jirout, J.; Klahr, D. Children’s scientific curiosity: In search of an operational definition of an elusive concept. Dev. Rev. 2012, 32, 125–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harvey, D. Anti-capitalist politics in the time of COVID-19. Jacobin Mag. 2020, 20, 179–189. [Google Scholar]
- Sylaiou, S.; Mania, K.; Karoulis, A.; White, M. Exploring the relationship between presence and enjoyment in a virtual museum. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2010, 68, 243–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tiwari, C.; Bhaskar, P.; Pal, A. Prospects of augmented reality and virtual reality for online education: A scientometric view. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 2023, 37, 1042–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gómez-Rios, M.D.; Velasco, M.P.; Hernandez-Beleno, R.; Fuentes-Pinargote, J.A. Analysis of emotions in the use of augmented reality technologies in education: A systematic review. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2022, 31, 216–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nofal, E.; Elhanafi, A.M.; Hameeuw, H.; Moere, A.V. Architectural contextualization of heritage museum artifacts using augmented reality. Stud. Digit. Herit. 2018, 2, 42–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Basiroen, V.J.; Permatasakti, D.; Paath, R.E. Interactive AR book as media for educating children about colorism in Jakarta. Ultim. J. Komun. Vis. 2022, 15, 173–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jawaid, M.; Siddiqui, Z.A.; Siddiqui, A.S.; Karim, M.U. Augmented reality: A new learning experience among health care professionals. BioMedica 2021, 37, 185–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cyr, D.; Head, M.; Larios, H.; Pan, B. Exploring Human Images in Website Design: A Multi-Method Approach. MIS Q. 2009, 33, 539–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trevino, L.K.; Webster, J. Flow in computer-mediated communication: Electronic mail and voice mail evaluation and impacts. Commun. Res. 1992, 19, 539–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harley, J.M.; Lajoie, S.P.; Tressel, T.; Jarrell, A. Fostering positive emotions and history knowledge with location-based augmented reality and tour-guide prompts. Learn. Instr. 2020, 70, 101163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lampropoulos, G.; Keramopoulos, E.; Diamantaras, K.; Evangelidis, G. Augmented reality and virtual reality in education: Public perspectives, sentiments, attitudes, and discourses. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jajić, I.; Spremić, M.; Miloloža, I. Behavioural intention determinants of augmented reality technology adoption in supermarkets/hypermarkets. Int. J. E-Serv. Mob. Appl. 2021, 14, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mosbeh, R.; Soliman, K.S. An exploratory analysis of factors affecting users’ adoption of corporate intranet. Manag. Res. News 2008, 31, 375–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pallavicini, F.; Pepe, A.; Mantovani, F. Commercial off-the-shelf video games for reducing stress and anxiety: Systematic review. JMIR Ment. Health 2021, 8, e28150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schott, G.D. Symmetry and artistic elongation of the human form: Exploring the attainment of aesthetic appeal. Perception 2021, 50, 976–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alharoon, D.; Gillan, D.J. The relation of the perceptions of aesthetics and usability. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2020, 64, 1876–1880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reinecke, K.; Yeh, T.; Miratrix, L.; Mardiko, R.; Zhao, Y.; Liu, J.; Gajos, K.Z. Predicting Users’ First Impressions of Website Aesthetics with a Quantification of Perceived Visual Complexity and Colorfulness. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, Canada, 26 April–1 May 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Sonderegger, A.; Zbinden, G.; Uebelbacher, A.; Sauer, J. The influence of product aesthetics and usability over the course of time: A longitudinal field experiment. Ergonomics 2012, 55, 713–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tractinsky, N.; Katz, A.; Ikar, D. What is beautiful is usable. Interact. Comput. 2000, 13, 127–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thorlacius, L. The role of aesthetics in web design. Nordicom Rev. 2007, 28, 63–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamborg, K.; Hülsmann, J.; Kaspar, K. The interplay between usability and aesthetics: More evidence for the “what is usable is beautiful” notion. Adv. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2014, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nia, M.R.; Shokouhyar, S. Analyzing the effects of visual aesthetic of web pages on users’ responses in online retailing using the visawi method. J. Res. Interact. Mark. 2020, 14, 357–389. [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, H.; Liu, J.; Cui, X. Research on influencing factors of adoption behavior of mobile readers based on meta-analysis. Math. Probl. Eng. 2021, 2021, 5082594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyên, N.T.; Rudawska, E. Integrated cultural theories on mobile marketing acceptance: Literature review. Cent. Eur. Manag. J. 2022, 30, 112–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seo, K.K.; Lee, S.; Chung, B.D.; Park, C. Users’ emotional valence, arousal, and engagement based on perceived usability and aesthetics for web sites. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2014, 31, 72–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sonderegger, A.; Sauer, J. The influence of design aesthetics in usability testing: Effects on user performance and perceived usability. Appl. Ergon. 2010, 41, 403–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thüring, M.; Mahlke, S. Usability, aesthetics and emotions in human–technology interaction. Int. J. Psychol. 2007, 42, 253–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Koubek, R.J. Understanding user preferences based on usability and aesthetics before and after actual use. Interact. Comput. 2010, 22, 530–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schrepp, M.; Held, T.; Laugwitz, B. The influence of hedonic quality on the attractiveness of user interfaces of business management software. Interact. Comput. 2006, 18, 1055–1069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sevilla, J.; Meyer, R.J. Leaving something for the imagination: The effect of visual concealment on preferences. J. Mark. 2020, 84, 109–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reppa, I.; McDougall, S. Aesthetic appeal influences visual search performance. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 2022, 84, 2483–2506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belfi, A.M.; Vessel, E.A.; Starr, G.G. Individual ratings of vividness predict aesthetic appeal in poetry. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 2018, 12, 341–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hitsuwari, J.; Nomura, M. How individual states and traits predict aesthetic appreciation of haiku poetry. Empir. Stud. Arts 2021, 40, 81–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belfi, A.M. Emotional valence and vividness of imagery predict aesthetic appeal in music. Psychomusicology 2019, 29, 128–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oyibo, K.; Vassileva, J. The interplay of aesthetics, usability and credibility in mobile website design and the effect of gender. J. Interact. Syst. 2017, 8, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chung, N.; Lee, H.; Kim, J.; Koo, C. The role of augmented reality for experience-influenced environments: The case of cultural heritage tourism in Korea. J. Travel Res. 2017, 57, 627–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.; Wang, T.; Zhou, F.; Wang, H. Research on elderly users’ intentions to accept wearable devices based on the improved UTAUT model. Front. Public Health 2023, 10, 1035398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tanković, A.Č.; Benazić, D. The perception of e-servicescape and its influence on perceived e-shopping value and customer loyalty. Online Inf. Rev. 2018, 42, 1124–1145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thielsch, M.T.; Blotenberg, I.; Jaron, R. User evaluation of websites: From first impression to recommendation. Interact. Comput. 2013, 26, 89–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Hsu, Y. Does sustainable perceived value play a key role in the purchase intention driven by product aesthetics? Taking smartwatch as an example. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schindler, I.; Hosoya, G.; Menninghaus, W.; Beermann, U.; Wagner, V.; Eid, M.; Scherer, K.R. Measuring aesthetic emotions: A review of the literature and a new assessment tool. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0178899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Reppa, I.; McDougall, S.; Sonderegger, A.; Schmidt, W.C. Mood moderates the effect of aesthetic appeal on performance. Cogn. Emot. 2020, 35, 15–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Diessner, R.; Genthôs, R.; Arthur, K.; Adkins, B.; Pohling, R. Olfactory and gustatory beauty: Aesthetic emotions and trait appreciation of beauty. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 2021, 15, 38–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ertz, M.; Jo, M.; Kong, Y.; Sarigöllü, E. Predicting M-shopping in the Two Largest M-commerce Markets: The United States and China. Int. J. Mark. Res. 2021, 64, 249–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dubey, R.; Griffiths, T.L.; Lombrozo, T. If It’s Important, Then I’m Curious: Increasing Perceived Usefulness Stimulates Curiosity. Cognition 2022, 226, 105193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, X.; Yu, Z. An Extended Hedonic Motivation Adoption Model of TikTok in Higher Education. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2023, 28, 13595–13617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, Y.; Lee, B.; Lu, Y. Fitnesser’s Intrinsic Motivations of Green Eating: An Integration of Theory of Planned Behavior and Hedonic-Motivation System Adoption Model. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 670243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, Y.; Zhou, H.; Qin, J. Research on the Effect of Uncertain Rewards on Impulsive Purchase Intention of Blind Box Products. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 2022, 16, 946337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Israel, K.; Zerres, C.; Tscheulin, D.K. Presenting Hotels in Virtual Reality: Does It Influence the Booking Intention? J. Hosp. Tour. Technol. 2019, 10, 443–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ha, Y.W.; Im, H. The Role of an Interactive Visual Learning Tool and Its Personalizability in Online Learning: Flow Experience. Online Learn. 2020, 24, 205–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sinambela, G.D.P.; Rahayu, S.; Megawati, V. The Effect of Subjective Norms, Attitude, Perceived Risk, and Perceived Behavioral Control of Behavioral Intention Mt. Bromo Tourists in East Java Province. Ekspektra J. Bisnis Dan Manajemen 2022, 6, 136–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Zhang, J.; Luximon, Y.; Qin, M.; Geng, P.; Tao, D. The Determinants of User Acceptance of Mobile Medical Platforms: An Investigation Integrating the TPB, TAM, and Patient-centered Factors. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 10758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, Z.; Hong, Z.; Ren, C.; Wei, Z.; Xiang, F. What Predicts Patients’ Adoption Intention Toward mHealth Services in China: Empirical Study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2018, 6, e172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Godin, G.; Kok, G. The Theory of Planned Behavior: A Review of Its Applications to Health-Related Behaviors. Am. J. Health Promot. 1996, 11, 87–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V.; Davis, F. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Manag. Sci. 2000, 46, 186–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boonkaewwan, A.; Punthmatharith, B.; Wiroonpanich, W.; Williams, K.A. Effects of a Nurse’s Support for the Adolescent-led HIV/AIDS Sexual Transmission Prevention Program Using Social Media. Walailak J. Sci. Technol. (WJST) 2021, 18, 10010–10014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, C. Using PLS-SEM Model to Explore the Influencing Factors of Learning Satisfaction in Blended Learning. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asmarina, N.L.P.G.M.; Yasa, N.N.K.; Ekawati, N.W. Role of Satisfaction in Mediating the Effect of Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness on Purchase Intention. Int. Res. J. Manag. IT Soc. Sci. 2022, 9, 690–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, J.M.; Saridakis, G.; Benson, V. Risk, Trust, and the Interaction of Perceived Ease of Use and Behavioral Control in Predicting Consumers’ Use of Social Media for Transactions. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 80, 197–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chittoo, H.B.; Dhotah, R. Electronic Tax Filing in Mauritius: Insights into Factors Leading to Technology Adoption. IOSR J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2016, 21, 34–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agarwal, R.; Karahanna, E. Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Q. 2000, 24, 665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zou, Y.; Luh, D.; Shi-zhu, L. Public Perceptions of Digital Fashion: An Analysis of Sentiment and Latent Dirichlet Allocation Topic Modeling. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 986838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, T.K. Investigating User Acceptance of a Screenshot-Based Interaction System in the Context of Advanced Computer Software Learning. In Proceedings of the 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI, USA, 6–9 January 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Heimbuch, S.; Bodemer, D. Controversy Awareness on Evidence-Led Discussions as Guidance for Students in Wiki-Based Learning. Internet High. Educ. 2017, 33, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Acharya, S.; Mekker, M. Public Acceptance of Connected Vehicles: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2022, 88, 54–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, K.; Lee, S.W.Y.; Hsu, Y. The roles of epistemic curiosity and situational interest in students’ attitudinal learning in immersive virtual reality environments. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2022, 61, 494–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Visinescu, L.L.; Sidorova, A.; Jones, M.C.; Prybutok, V.R. The influence of website dimensionality on customer experiences, perceptions and behavioral intentions: An exploration of 2D vs. 3D web design. Inf. Manag. 2015, 52, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, E.Y.; Kennedy, K.M.; Zhang, L.; Qian, D.; Forbes, T.; Zuniga-Hernandez, M.; Caruso, T.J. Predicting pediatric healthcare provider use of virtual reality using a technology acceptance model. JAMIA Open 2023, 6, ooad076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, H.; Bai, X.; Ma, Z. Consumer reactions to AI design: Exploring consumer willingness to pay for AI-designed products. Psychol. Market. 2022, 39, 2171–2183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pottle, J. Virtual reality and the transformation of medical education. Future Healthc. J. 2019, 6, 181–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 2020, 2, 314–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeng, M.; Yeh, T.; Pai, F. The continuous intention of older adults in virtual reality leisure activities: Combining sports commitment model and theory of planned behavior. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sampoerna, J.; Istiono, W.; Suryadibrata, A. Virtual reality game for introducing pencak silat. Int. J. Interact. Mobile Technol. (iJIM) 2021, 15, 199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Preuß, A.K. The impact of personality and motivation on immersion in simulation games. Res. Anthol. Game Des. Dev. Usage Soc. Impact 2022, 10, 1558–1580. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, T.; Hong, Y.; Liao, Z.; Meekajit, P.; Wang, Y. The prosocial and cathartic potential of immersive media on eudaimonic entertainment experiences. Psychol. Popular Media 2023, 12, 414–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, Y.; Ma, C.; Zhu, Y. The impact of emotional labor on user stickiness in the context of livestreaming service—Evidence from China. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 698510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salimon, M.G.; Aliyu, O.A.; Yusr, M.M.; Perumal, S. Smartphone banking usage in Nigeria: Gamification, technology acceptance and cultural factors empirical perspectives. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries. 2021, 87, e12174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, M.-C.; Tsai, T.-R. What drives people to continue to play online games? an extension of technology model and theory of planned behavior. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2010, 26, 601–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ong, A.K.; Prasetyo, Y.T.; Lagura, F.C.; Ramos, R.N.; Sigua, K.M.; Villas, J.A.; Young, M.N.; Diaz, J.F.; Persada, S.F.; Redi, A.A. Factors affecting intention to prepare for mitigation of “The big one” earthquake in the Philippines: Integrating protection motivation theory and extended theory of planned behavior. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2021, 63, 102467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perez, W.D.; Prasetyo, Y.T.; Cahigas, M.M.; Persada, S.F.; Young, M.N.; Nadlifatin, R. Factors influencing non-fungible tokens (NFT) game engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic: The theory of planned behavior (TPB) and hedonic motivation system adoption model (HMSAM) approach. Heliyon 2023, 9, e19847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oluwajana, D.; Nat, M.; Idowu, A.; Vanduhe, V.; Fadiya, S. The adoption of students’ hedonic motivation system model to gamified learning environment. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2019, 14, 156–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Finke, E.H.; Hickerson, B.; McLaughlin, E. Parental Intention to Support Video Game Play by Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Lang. Speech Hear. Serv. Sch. 2015, 46, 154–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mulaji, S.M.; Roodt, S. Factors affecting organisations’ adoption behaviour toward blockchain-based distributed identity management: The sustainability of self-sovereign identity in organisations. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, Q.; Sun, J.; Yang, C.; Gu, C. The Impact of Perceived Interactivity and Intrinsic Value on Users’ Continuance Intention in Using Mobile Augmented Reality Virtual Shoe-Try-On Function. Systems 2021, 10, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mathwick, C.; Malhotra, N.; Rigdon, E. Experiential value: Conceptualization, measurement and application in the catalog and internet shopping environment. J. Retail. 2001, 77, 39–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jackson, D.L. Revisiting sample size and number of parameter estimates: Some support for the N: Q hypothesis. Struct. Equ. Model. 2003, 10, 128–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hofhuis, J.; Hautvast, J.L.; Schrijvers, A.J.; Bakker, J. Quality of life on admission to the intensive care: Can we query the relatives? Intensive Care Med. 2003, 29, 974–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Morgan, P.J.; Cleave-Hogg, D.; DeSousa, S.; Tarshis, J. High-fidelity patient simulation: Validation of performance checklists. Br. J. Anaesth. 2004, 92, 388–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sakip, S.R.M.; Akhir, N.M.; Omar, S.S. Determinant factors of successful public parks in Malaysia. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 170, 422–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Norusis, M.J. SPSS for Windows: Base System User’s Guide, Release 5.0; SPSS Incorporated: Chicago, IL, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Kaiser, H.F. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 1974, 39, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harman, H. Modern Factor Analysis; Univ. Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1960. [Google Scholar]
- Kohli, A.K.; Shervani, T.A.; Challagalla, G. Learning and performance orientation of salespeople: The role of supervisors. J. Mark. Res. 1998, 35, 263–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdullah, M.; Dias, C.; Muley, D.; Shahin, M. Exploring the Impacts of COVID-19 on Travel Behavior and Mode Preferences. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2020, 8, 100255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Podsakoff, P.M.; Organ, D.W. Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. J. Manag. 1986, 12, 531–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, A.R.; Lim, W.M. Exploring the online buying behavior of specialty food shoppers. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2011, 30, 855–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Risher, J.J.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2019, 31, 2–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Owusu, E.K.; Chan, A.P.; Hosseini, M.R. Impacts of anti-corruption barriers on the efficacy of anti-corruption measures in infrastructure projects: Implications for sustainable development. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 246, 119078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mekni, M.; Lemieux, A. Augmented reality: Applications, challenges and future trends. Appl. Comput. Sci. 2014, 20, 205–214. [Google Scholar]
- Mopoзoв, M.D.; Рoманoв, В.В.; Romanov, V.V. Role of aesthetics in web design. Vestn. Astrakhan State Tech. Univ. 2019, 2, 77–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ilhan, A.E.; Toğay, A. Use of eye-tracking technology for appreciation-based information in design decisions related to product details: Furniture example. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2023, 83, 8013–8042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, S.; Tseng, H.; Shirazi, F.; Hajli, N.; Tsai, P. Exploring Factors Influencing Impulse Buying in Live Streaming Shopping: A Stimulus-Organism-Response (SOR) Perspective. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logistics 2022, 35, 1383–1403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, L.; Jin, F.; Wu, B.; Wang, X.; Wang, V.L.; Chen, Z. Understanding the Role of Influencers on Live Streaming Platforms: When Tipping Makes the Difference. Eur. J. Mark. 2022, 56, 2677–2697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, J.; Forbes, H.; Schaefer, D. An Exploration of How Creativity, Functionality, and Aesthetics Are Related in Design. Res. Eng. Des. 2021, 32, 289–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodríguez-López, P.; Rueda-Robles, A.; Sánchez-Rodríguez, L.; Blanca-Herrera, R.M.; Quirantes-Piné, R.M.; Borrás-Linares, I.; Lozano-Sánchez, J. Analysis and Screening of Commercialized Protein Supplements for Sports Practice. Foods 2022, 11, 3500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kroker-Lobos, M.F.; Mazariegos, M.; Guamuch, M.; Ramírez-Zea, M. Ultraprocessed Products as Food Fortification Alternatives: A Critical Appraisal from Latin America. Nutrients 2022, 14, 1413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Treffers, T.; Putora, P.M. Emotions as Social Information in Shared Decision-Making in Oncology. Oncology 2020, 98, 430–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Isbell, L.M.; Tager, J.; Beals, K.; Liu, G. Emotionally evocative patients in the emergency department: A mixed methods investigation of providers’ reported emotions and implications for patient safety. BMJ Qual. Saf. 2020, 29, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arifah, I.D.C.; Juniarti, R.P. Interface aesthetic, perceived value, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefulness on purchase intention of smartwatch consumers. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Business and Engineering Management (ICONBEM 2021), Bandung, Indonesia, 25 May 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Hsee, C.K.; Ruan, B. The Pandora effect: The power and peril of curiosity. Psychol. Sci. 2016, 27, 659–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Litman, J.A. Curiosity and the pleasures of learning: Wanting and liking new information. Cognit. Emot. 2005, 19, 793–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, T.; Liang, S.; Sun, Y. So curious that I want to buy it: The positive effect of queue wait on users’ purchase intentions. J. Consum. Behav. 2023, 22, 848–866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kenang, I.H.; Alesandro, J.; Putra, A.M.S. Elaboration of sor paradigm using information transparency and curiosity variables approach to purchase intention. Primanomics J. Ekon. Bisnis 2021, 19, 108–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khalida, L.R.; Fadli, U.M.D.; Savitri, C.; Faddila, S.P. The effect of promotions and user preferences on purchase decision. In Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Management; Atlantis Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 982–986. [Google Scholar]
- Santos, M.D.; Díaz, M.W.S. When love matters. Experience and brand love as antecedents of loyalty and willingness to pay a premium price in streaming services. Span. J. Mark.-ESIC 2021, 25, 374–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, Y.Y.; Gan, C.L.; Liew, T.W. The impacts of mobile wallet app characteristics on online impulse buying: A moderated mediation model. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 2022, 2022, 2767735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haynes, P.; Alemna, D. A systematic literature review of the impact of complexity theory on applied economics. Economies 2022, 10, 192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Velasco, M.P.; Velázquez-Iturbide, J.Á.; Gómez-Rios, M.D. Augmented reality with algorithm animation and their effect on students’ emotions. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2022, 82, 11819–11845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Si, P.; Zhao, J.; Han, H.; Lam, K.-Y.; Liu, Y. Resource allocation and resolution control in the metaverse with mobile augmented reality. In Proceedings of the GLOBECOM 2022—2022 IEEE Global Communications Conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 4–8 December 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Syed-Abdul, S.; Upadhyay, U.; Salcedo, D.; Lin, C. Virtual reality enhancing medical education and practice: Brief communication. Digit. Health 2022, 8, 205520762211439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nguyen, H.T.H.; Pham, H.V.; Vu, N.H.; Hoang, H.T. Factors influencing students’ intention to use e-learning system: A case study conducted in vietnam. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. (iJET) 2020, 15, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, G.E.; Zubir, N.S.; Zakaria, N.H.; Ahmad, J.A. Handheld Augmented Reality Application for 3D Fruits Learning. Int. J. Innov. Comput. 2022, 12, 69–75. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, H.; Lee, S.; Son, D.; Yeo, H. Objective Quantification of the Impact of Blepharoplasty on the Superior Visual Field. Arch. Plast. Surg. 2022, 49, 19–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Álvarez-Marín, A.; Velázquez-Iturbide, J.Á.; Castillo-Vergara, M.; Acuña-Opazo, C. The Moderating Role of Aesthetics and Information Quality for Acceptance of Augmented Reality. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 2023, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ko, E.; Wang, H. Augmented Reality (AR) App Use in the Beauty Product Industry and Consumer Purchase Intention. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logistics 2021, 34, 110–131. [Google Scholar]
- Alturise, F.; Alshmrany, S.; Alkhalifah, T.; Alkhalaf, S. Factors Influencing the Acceptance of Mobile Learning in K-12 Education in Saudi Arabia: Towards a Shift in the Saudi Education System Vis-À-Vis Saudi 2030 Vision. Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol. 2022, 16, 52–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Construct | Code | Items | Reference |
---|---|---|---|
Perceived Usefulness | PU1 | 1. The anchor utilizes VR technology to create an engaging and interactive virtual experience. | [206] |
PU2 | 2. The anchor’s VR content enhances my online entertainment experience. | ||
PU3 | 3. The interactive nature of the anchor’s VR content adds to the overall entertainment experience. | ||
PU4 | 4. The anchor’s use of VR effects meets my desire for innovative entertainment. | ||
Perceived Ease of Use | PEOU1 | 1. Navigating the anchor’s content using VR is user-friendly. | [206] |
PEOU2 | 2. Using VR to explore the anchor’s content does not require advanced technical skills. | ||
PEOU3 | 3. Browsing the anchor’s content with VR is straightforward. | ||
PEOU4 | 4. The VR interface for the anchor’s content is intuitive and easy to use. | ||
Perceived Behavioral Control | PBC1 | 1. I have access to various VR devices to explore the anchor’s dynamic content. | [207,208,209] |
PBC2 | 2. I have the freedom to choose how I want to engage with the anchor’s VR content. | ||
PBC3 | 3. Browsing the anchor’s VR content is effortless for me. | ||
PBC4 | 4. I possess the knowledge and resources to utilize the anchor’s VR content. | ||
Behavioral Intention to Pay | BI1 | 1. If the platform’s AR features meet my needs, I am willing to pay for the experience. | [209,210] |
BI2 | 2. I am open to subscribing to the AR content of my favorite anchor. | ||
BI3 | 3. I am more inclined to support high-quality and professional AR content through paid subscriptions. | ||
BI4 | 4. If the live broadcast platform incorporates innovative AR technology, I would prioritize paying for it. | ||
Immersion | IM1 | 1. I am fully immersed in the anchor’s VR content. | [210,211,212] |
IM2 | 2. The anchor’s VR content provides a shield from external distractions. | ||
IM3 | 3. Engaging with the anchor’s VR content fully captivates my attention. | ||
IM4 | 4. The anchor’s VR content completely captures my interest. | ||
Aesthetics | AE1 | 1. The anchor’s VR content has piqued my curiosity. | [213,214] |
AE2 | 2. I am eager to explore the virtual world presented in the anchor’s VR content. | ||
AE3 | 3. The anchor’s VR content has sparked my imagination. | ||
Curiosity | CUR1 | 1. The anchor’s VR content has piqued my curiosity. | [47,209] |
CUR2 | 2. I am eager to explore the virtual world presented in the anchor’s VR content. | ||
CUR3 | 3. The anchor’s VR content has sparked my imagination. | ||
Joy | JOY1 | 1. Interacting with the anchor using VR is enjoyable. | [47,209] |
JOY2 | 2. The anchor’s VR content provides an immersive and enjoyable experience. | ||
JOY3 | 3. I find the dynamic content of the anchor’s VR to be consistently engaging. | ||
JOY4 | 4. Engaging with the anchor’s VR content brings me great joy. |
Sample | Category | Number | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 228 | 50.67 |
Female | 222 | 49.33 | |
Age | ≤20 | 65 | 14.44 |
21–40 | 249 | 55.33 | |
41–65 | 115 | 25.56 | |
≥65 | 21 | 4.67 | |
Education | High school diploma or below | 81 | 18.00 |
Associate degree | 137 | 30.44 | |
Bachelor’s degree | 191 | 42.44 | |
Master’s degree | 25 | 5.56 | |
Doctoral degree | 16 | 3.56 | |
Marriage Status | Married | 309 | 68.67 |
Unmarried | 141 | 31.33 | |
Time to use live streaming | ≤1 y | 101 | 22.44 |
2 y | 144 | 32.00 | |
3 y | 161 | 35.78 | |
≥4 y | 44 | 9.78 | |
Platform | 45 | 10.00 | |
TikTok | 115 | 25.56 | |
Douyu | 91 | 20.22 | |
Kuaishou | 87 | 19.33 | |
Huya | 101 | 22.44 | |
The others | 11 | 2.44 |
Item | Mean | Std. Deviation | CITC | Cronbach’s α If Item Deleted | Cronbach’s α |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
PU1 | 4.358 | 1.632 | 0.740 | 0.855 | 0.885 |
PU2 | 4.316 | 1.669 | 0.757 | 0.849 | |
PU3 | 4.380 | 1.661 | 0.738 | 0.856 | |
PU4 | 4.356 | 1.669 | 0.759 | 0.848 | |
PEOU1 | 4.384 | 1.672 | 0.710 | 0.845 | 0.873 |
PEOU2 | 4.389 | 1.642 | 0.729 | 0.837 | |
PEOU3 | 4.409 | 1.676 | 0.739 | 0.833 | |
PEOU4 | 4.478 | 1.599 | 0.735 | 0.835 | |
AE1 | 4.362 | 1.638 | 0.692 | 0.749 | 0.826 |
AE2 | 4.438 | 1.551 | 0.666 | 0.776 | |
AE3 | 4.413 | 1.626 | 0.689 | 0.752 | |
CUR1 | 4.513 | 1.598 | 0.674 | 0.739 | 0.815 |
CUR2 | 4.431 | 1.585 | 0.656 | 0.757 | |
CUR3 | 4.513 | 1.639 | 0.670 | 0.743 | |
JOY1 | 4.260 | 1.689 | 0.722 | 0.850 | 0.878 |
JOY2 | 4.304 | 1.575 | 0.748 | 0.840 | |
JOY3 | 4.291 | 1.693 | 0.724 | 0.849 | |
JOY4 | 4.384 | 1.654 | 0.755 | 0.836 | |
PBC1 | 4.369 | 1.669 | 0.734 | 0.830 | 0.870 |
PBC2 | 4.256 | 1.666 | 0.732 | 0.831 | |
PBC3 | 4.424 | 1.635 | 0.710 | 0.839 | |
PBC4 | 4.369 | 1.631 | 0.717 | 0.837 | |
BI1 | 4.427 | 1.613 | 0.733 | 0.855 | 0.883 |
BI2 | 4.509 | 1.682 | 0.740 | 0.852 | |
BI3 | 4.491 | 1.628 | 0.771 | 0.840 | |
BI4 | 4.433 | 1.630 | 0.739 | 0.852 | |
IM1 | 4.513 | 1.588 | 0.715 | 0.830 | 0.866 |
IM2 | 4.509 | 1.545 | 0.693 | 0.838 | |
IM3 | 4.424 | 1.652 | 0.718 | 0.829 | |
IM4 | 4.376 | 1.634 | 0.739 | 0.820 |
Common Indices | x2 | df | x2/df | GFI | AGFI | CFI | NFI | RMSEA | SRMR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Judgement criteria | - | - | <3 | >0.9 | >0.9 | >0.9 | >0.9 | <0.08 | <0.08 |
CFA value | 417.111 | 377 | 1.106 | 0.943 | 0.93 | 0.943 | 0.946 | 0.015 | 0.028 |
Item | Coef. | Std. Error | Z (CR) | Sig. | Factor Loading | AVE | CR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PU1 | 1 | - | - | - | 0.801 | 0.658 | 0.885 |
PU2 | 1.049 | 0.057 | 18.51 | 0.001 | 0.821 | ||
PU3 | 1.014 | 0.057 | 17.923 | 0.001 | 0.798 | ||
PU4 | 1.052 | 0.057 | 18.578 | 0.001 | 0.824 | ||
PEOU1 | 1.000 | - | - | - | 0.772 | 0.633 | 0.873 |
PEOU2 | 1.011 | 0.060 | 16.776 | 0.001 | 0.794 | ||
PEOU3 | 1.055 | 0.062 | 17.145 | 0.001 | 0.812 | ||
PEOU4 | 0.997 | 0.059 | 16.989 | 0.001 | 0.804 | ||
AE1 | 1 | - | - | - | 0.799 | 0.613 | 0.826 |
AE2 | 0.897 | 0.061 | 14.671 | 0 | 0.756 | ||
AE3 | 0.986 | 0.066 | 14.919 | 0 | 0.793 | ||
CUR1 | 1 | - | - | - | 0.783 | 0.596 | 0.815 |
CUR2 | 0.956 | 0.068 | 14.008 | 0.001 | 0.755 | ||
CUR3 | 1.018 | 0.072 | 14.122 | 0.001 | 0.777 | ||
JOY1 | 1 | - | - | - | 0.783 | 0.644 | 0.879 |
JOY2 | 0.97 | 0.055 | 17.698 | 0.001 | 0.815 | ||
JOY3 | 1.007 | 0.059 | 17.042 | 0.001 | 0.787 | ||
JOY4 | 1.031 | 0.058 | 17.909 | 0.001 | 0.825 | ||
PBC1 | 1 | - | - | - | 0.805 | 0.627 | 0.87 |
PBC2 | 0.994 | 0.056 | 17.607 | 0.001 | 0.802 | ||
PBC3 | 0.944 | 0.056 | 16.986 | 0.001 | 0.776 | ||
PBC4 | 0.952 | 0.055 | 17.187 | 0.001 | 0.784 | ||
BI1 | 1 | - | - | - | 0.79 | 0.655 | 0.883 |
BI2 | 1.058 | 0.06 | 17.697 | 0.001 | 0.801 | ||
BI3 | 1.076 | 0.058 | 18.647 | 0.001 | 0.841 | ||
BI4 | 1.029 | 0.058 | 17.77 | 0.001 | 0.804 | ||
IM1 | 1 | - | - | - | 0.783 | 0.619 | 0.867 |
IM2 | 0.943 | 0.059 | 16.049 | 0.001 | 0.758 | ||
IM3 | 1.05 | 0.063 | 16.746 | 0.001 | 0.79 | ||
IM4 | 1.071 | 0.062 | 17.233 | 0.001 | 0.814 |
PU | PEOU | AE | CUR | JOY | PBC | BI | IM | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PU | - | |||||||
PEOU | 0.42 | - | ||||||
AE | 0.431 | 0.493 | - | |||||
CUR | 0.427 | 0.445 | 0.413 | - | ||||
JOY | 0.409 | 0.441 | 0.403 | 0.381 | - | |||
PBC | 0.445 | 0.424 | 0.421 | 0.395 | 0.451 | - | ||
BI | 0.479 | 0.459 | 0.472 | 0.395 | 0.393 | 0.498 | - | |
IM | 0.448 | 0.443 | 0.422 | 0.431 | 0.4 | 0.429 | 0.399 | - |
Common Indices | x2 | df | x2/df | GFI | AGFI | CFI | NFI | RMSEA | SRMR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Judgement criteria | - | - | <3 | >0.9 | >0.9 | >0.9 | >0.9 | <0.08 | <0.08 |
Value | 552.546 | 389 | 1.392 | 0.927 | 0.913 | 0.979 | 0.929 | 0.030 | 0.071 |
Relationship | Estimate | S.E. | C.R. | p | Hypotheses | Support |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AE ⇒ OY | 0.192 | 0.063 | 3.059 | 0.002 | H5 | Yes |
AE” ⇒ CUR | 0.21 | 0.063 | 3.36 | 0.001 | H3 | Yes |
AE” ⇒ PBC | 0.219 | 0.063 | 3.451 | 0.001 | H4 | Yes |
AE” ⇒ PEOU | 0.488 | 0.057 | 8.624 | 0.001 | H1 | Yes |
AE” ⇒ PU | 0.295 | 0.062 | 4.741 | 0.001 | H2 | Yes |
CUR ⇒ IM | 0.31 | 0.059 | 5.291 | 0.001 | H13 | Yes |
CUR ⇒ ITP | 0.336 | 0.056 | 6.024 | 0.001 | H14 | Yes |
JOY ⇒ IM | 0.2 | 0.053 | 3.815 | 0.001 | H16 | Yes |
JOY ⇒ ITP | 0.284 | 0.051 | 5.53 | 0.001 | H17 | Yes |
PBC ⇒ IM | 0.237 | 0.053 | 4.474 | 0.001 | H15 | Yes |
PEOU ⇒ CUR | 0.27 | 0.062 | 4.368 | 0.001 | H12 | Yes |
PEOU ⇒ JOY | 0.278 | 0.062 | 4.466 | 0.001 | H10 | Yes |
PEOU ⇒ PBC | 0.233 | 0.062 | 3.756 | 0.001 | H7 | Yes |
PEOU ⇒ PU | 0.28 | 0.061 | 4.559 | 0.001 | H9 | Yes |
PU ⇒ CUR | 0.25 | 0.057 | 4.401 | 0.001 | H6 | Yes |
PU ⇒ JOY | 0.242 | 0.057 | 4.236 | 0.001 | H8 | Yes |
PU ⇒ PBC | 0.279 | 0.058 | 4.818 | 0.001 | H11 | Yes |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Tu, J.-C.; Jia, X.-H. A Study on Immersion and Intention to Pay in AR Broadcasting: Validating and Expanding the Hedonic Motivation System Adoption Mode. Sustainability 2024, 16, 2040. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16052040
Tu J-C, Jia X-H. A Study on Immersion and Intention to Pay in AR Broadcasting: Validating and Expanding the Hedonic Motivation System Adoption Mode. Sustainability. 2024; 16(5):2040. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16052040
Chicago/Turabian StyleTu, Jui-Che, and Xi-Hui Jia. 2024. "A Study on Immersion and Intention to Pay in AR Broadcasting: Validating and Expanding the Hedonic Motivation System Adoption Mode" Sustainability 16, no. 5: 2040. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16052040
APA StyleTu, J.-C., & Jia, X.-H. (2024). A Study on Immersion and Intention to Pay in AR Broadcasting: Validating and Expanding the Hedonic Motivation System Adoption Mode. Sustainability, 16(5), 2040. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16052040