Examining the Determinants of Facebook Continuance Intention and Addiction: The Moderating Role of Satisfaction and Trust
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- (1)
- Inspect the influence of users’ perceived values on the continuance intention;
- (2)
- Examine the correlation between the continuance intention and addiction; and finally
- (3)
- Investigate the moderating role of satisfaction and trust on the relationship between continuous intention and Facebook users’ addiction.
2. Literature Review and Hypotheses Development
- The first stream of research focuses on the antecedents to the continuous intention of SNS. These studies identify factors such as habits, message richness, message synchronicity [26], personality, self-esteem, loneliness, relationship building, social activities [24], service, relationship quality [27], social norms and attitudes [28], flow experience [27], and perceived values [1,25,29,30,31].
- In terms of addiction, different factors were identified, such as security [6], psychological traits [32], self-esteem factors [9], loneliness [24], age [33], and relationship building [24]. In terms of addiction consequences, the literature examined the effect of addiction on academic performance [2,34], anxiety, insomnia, turnover, performance [7], and internet addiction [12].
2.1. Perceived Values and Continuance Intention
2.2. Continuance Intention and Facebook Addiction
2.3. The Moderating Role of Satisfaction and Trust
3. Research Model and Hypotheses Testing
3.1. Measurement Development
3.2. Survey Description
3.3. Respondents’ Demographic Information
4. Analysis Results
4.1. Reliability and Validity
Item | Cronbach’s Alpha | Composite Reliability | AVE |
---|---|---|---|
Social value (SV) | 0.712 | 0.723 | 0.400 * |
Hedonic value (HV) | 0.698 | 0.709 | 0.451 * |
Information value (IF) | 0.766 | 0.774 | 0.534 |
Emotional value (EV) | 0.70 | 0.710 | 0.454 * |
Facebook addiction (FA) | 0.761 | 0.763 | 0.449 * |
Continuous intention (CI) | 0.831 | 0.835 | 0.560 |
Trust (TR) | 0.771 | 0.773 | 0.460 * |
Satisfaction (ST) | 0.835 | 0.843 | 0.645 |
4.2. Hypotheses Testing
5. Discussion
6. Implications
6.1. Theoretical Implications
6.2. Practical Implications
7. Research Limitations and Future Research
8. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Construct | Item # | Measure |
---|---|---|
Emotional Value [25,31] | EV1 | I receive adequate emotional concern from people using Facebook. |
EV2 | I feel relieved by getting sympathy from online people using Facebook. | |
EV3 | I have been encouraged by friends on Facebook. | |
Information Value [25,31] | IV1 | I accumulate numerous knowledge through shared information from Facebook users. |
IV2 | I acquire a variety of information from online people using Facebook. | |
IV3 | I obtain lots of useful information from online people using Facebook. | |
IV4 | Over the last month, I consulted online people using Facebook for practical issues and matters. | |
Social Value [25,31] | SV1 | Facebook use helps me feel acceptable. |
SV2 | Facebook use improves the way I am perceived. | |
SV3 | The fact that I use Facebook makes a good impression on other people. | |
SV4 | Facebook use gives me social approval. | |
Hedonic Value [25,31] | HV1 | Compared to other things I could have done, the time spent online at the Facebook site was truly enjoyable. |
HV2 | I enjoyed being immersed in exciting new information on Facebook sites. | |
HV3 | During the navigating Facebook processes, I felt the excitement of the hunt. | |
Continuance Intention [25,31] | CI1 | If could, I will continue using Facebook. |
CI2 | I will recommend my friends and family members to use Facebook. | |
CI3 | I will continue using Facebook in the future. | |
CI4 | My intentions are to continue using Facebook service rather than any alternative. | |
Facebook Addiction [7] | FA1 | Using my Facebook site sometimes interfered with other activities. |
FA2 | I have made unsuccessful attempts to reduce the time I interact with my Facebook site. | |
FA3 | Arguments have sometimes arisen at home because of the time I spend on my Facebook site. | |
FA4 | I think that I am addicted to the Facebook site. | |
Satisfaction [60,70] | SA1 | I was very content with Facebook. |
SA2 | I was very pleased with Facebook. | |
SA3 | I felt delighted with Facebook. | |
SA4 | Overall, I was satisfied with Facebook. | |
Trust [1,70] | TR1 | People on Facebook are trustworthy. |
TR2 | I trust Facebook information to be true. | |
TR3 | I usually trust Facebook unless it gives me a reason not to trust it. | |
TR4 | Overall, Facebook users are trustworthy. | |
TR5 | Facebook respects and would not abuse my private information and browsing log history. | |
TR6 | The security guard and mechanism of Facebook are trustworthy. |
References
- Yang, H.-L.; Lin, C.-L. Why do people stick to Facebook web site? A value theory-based view. Inf. Technol. People 2014, 27, 21–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrigan, P.; Miles, M.P.; Fang, Y.; Roy, S.K. The role of social media in the engagement and information processes of social CRM. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 2020, 54, 102151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ainin, S.; Naqshbandi, M.M.M.; Moghavvemi, S.; Jaafar, N.I.I. Facebook usage, socialization and academic performance. Comput. Educ. 2015, 83, 64–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kanat-maymon, Y.; Almog, L.; Cohen, R.; Amichai-hamburger, Y. Computers in Human Behavior Contingent self-worth and Facebook addiction. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 88, 227–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Facebook Inc. Facebook Reports First Quarter 2021 Results. 2021. Available online: https://investor.fb.com/investor-news/press-release-details/2021/Facebook-Reports-First-Quarter-2021-Results/default.aspx (accessed on 17 July 2021).
- Vishwanath, A.H. Facebook use and its impact on getting deceived on social media. J. Comput. Commun. 2015, 20, 83–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moqbel, M.; Kock, N. Unveiling the dark side of social networking sites: Personal and work-related consequences of social networking site addiction. Inf. Manag. 2018, 55, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Charlton, J.P.; Danforth, I.D. Validating the distinction between computer addiction and engagement: Online game playing and personality. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2010, 29, 601–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coopersmith, S. Self-Esteem Inventories; Consulting Psychologist Press: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
- Pianta, R.C. Professional Manual; Psychological Assessment Resources: Odessa, TX, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Karaiskos, D.; Tzavellas, E.; Balta, G.; Paparrigopoulos, T. Social network addiction: A new clinical disorder? Eur. Psychiatry 2010, 25, 855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.; Nath, R.; Tang, Z. Understanding the determinants of digital distraction: An automatic thinking behavior perspective. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020, 104, 106195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, H.-L.; Lai, C.-Y. Effects of Perceived Values on Continuance Usage of Facebook. In Advanced Research on Electronic Commerce, Web Application, and Communication; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 254–260. [Google Scholar]
- Van Schaik, P.; Jansen, J.; Onibokun, J.; Camp, J.; Kusev, P. Security and privacy in online social networking: Risk perceptions and precautionary behaviour. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 78, 283–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lakshminarasimha, A.; Vijayan, A. Value Chain Analysis: Social Networking Communities. J. Mark. 2008, VII, 34–42. [Google Scholar]
- Park, J.H. The effects of personalization on user continuance in social networking sites. Inf. Process. Manag. 2014, 50, 462–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shin, D.H.; Shin, Y.J. Why do people play social network games? Comput. Hum. Behav. 2011, 27, 852–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, H.; Jiang, J.; Oh, L.; Bin Li, H.; Liao, X.; Chen, Z. A Maslow’s hierarchy of needs analysis of social networking services continuance. J. Serv. Manag. 2013, 24, 170–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuan-Yu, L.; Hsi-Peng, L. Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2011, 27, 1152–1161. [Google Scholar]
- Lo, J. Exploring the buffer effect of receiving social support on lonely and emotionally unstable social networking users. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019, 90, 103–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grabner-Kräuter, S.; Bitter, S. Trust in online social networks: A multifaceted perspective. Forum Soc. Econ. 2014, 44, 48–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fang, L.; Liu, Q. Mobile SNS addiction and user continuance: An empirical investigation of wechat. Teh. Vjesn. 2019, 26, 1104–1111. [Google Scholar]
- Bölen, M.C. Exploring the determinants of users’ continuance intention in smartwatches. Technol. Soc. 2020, 60, 101209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wan, C. Gratifications & Loneliness as Predictors of Campus-Sns. Master’s Thesis, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, C.B.; Li, Y.N.; Wu, B.; Li, D.J. How WeChat can retain users: Roles of network externalities, social interaction ties, and perceived values in building continuance intention. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 69, 284–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, H.; Tan, B. Why do I Keep Checking Facebook: Effects of Message Characteristic on the Formation of Social Network Services Addiction. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, ICIS 2012, Orlando, FL, USA, 16–19 December 2012; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, S.; Kim, B.G.; Lee, S. The impact of qualities of social network service on the continuance usage intention. Manag. Decis. 2017, 55, 701–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiang, H.S. Continuous usage of social networking sites: The effect of innovation and gratification attributes. Online Inf. Rev. 2013, 37, 851–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chun, J.W.; Lee, M.J. Increasing individuals’ involvement and WOM intention on Social Networking Sites: Content matters! Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 60, 223–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, J.C.; Lin, P.H.; Hsieh, P.C. The effect of consumer innovativeness on perceived value and continuance intention to use smartwatch. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 67, 264–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, S.; Jiang, H.; Yao, J.; Chen, Y.; Wei, J. Perceived values on mobile GMS continuance: A perspective from perceived integration and interactivity. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 89, 16–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Cock, R.; Vangeel, J.; Klein, A.; Minotte, P.; Rosas, O.; Meerkerk, G.-J. Compulsive Use of Social Networking Sites in Belgium: Prevalence, Profile, and the Role of Attitude Toward Work and School. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2014, 17, 166–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Echeburua, E.; de Corral, P. Addictions to new technologies and to online social networking in young people: A new challenge. Adicciones 2010, 22, 91–96. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Y.; Mark, G. The context of college students’ facebook use and academic performance. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal, QC, Canada, 21–26 April 2018; pp. 1–11. Available online: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=3173574.3173992 (accessed on 17 July 2021).
- Kimberly, S. Young Internet Addiction: The Emergence of a New Clinical Disorder. CyberPsychology Behav. 1996, 1, 237–244. [Google Scholar]
- Sigerson, L.; Li, A.Y.L.; Cheung, M.W.L.; Cheng, C. Examining common information technology addictions and their relationships with non-technology-related addictions. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 75, 520–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lemmens, J.S.; Valkenburg, P.M.; Peter, J. Psychosocial causes and consequences of pathological gaming. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2011, 27, 144–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anderson, M. Technology Device Ownership. PewInternet. 2015. Available online: www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/29/technology-device-ownership-2015/ (accessed on 17 July 2021).
- Statista. Social Media Usage. Secretintelligenceservice.Org. 2019. Available online: www.secretintelligenceservice.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/PI_2015-10-08_Social-Networking-Usage-2005-2015_FINAL.pdf (accessed on 17 July 2021).
- Marengo, D.; Poletti, I.; Settanni, M. The interplay between neuroticism, extraversion, and social media addiction in young adult Facebook users: Testing the mediating role of online activity using objective data. Addict. Behav. 2020, 102, 106150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Teo, T.S.H.; Liu, L. Perceived value and continuance intention in mobile government service in China. Telemat. Inform. 2020, 48, 101348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeithaml, V.A. Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence. J. Mark. 1988, 52, 2–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliver, R.L.; Mano, H. Assessing the Dimensionality and Structure of the Consumption Experience: Evaluation, Feeling, and Satisfaction. J. Consum. Res. 1993, 20, 451–466. [Google Scholar]
- Park, M.; Park, J. Exploring the influences of perceived interactivity on consumers’ e-shopping effectiveness. J. Cust. Behav. 2009, 8, 361–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, T.; Lu, Y. Examining mobile instant messaging user loyalty from the perspectives of network externalities and flow experience. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2011, 27, 883–889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheth, J.N.; Newman, B.I.; Gross, B.L. Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. J. Bus. Res. 1991, 22, 159–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Debei, M.M.; Al-Lozi, E.; Papazafeiropoulou, A. Why people keep coming back to Facebook: Explaining and predicting continuance participation from an extended theory of planned behaviour perspective. Decis. Support Syst. 2013, 55, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raacke, J.; Bonds-Raacke, J. MySpace and Facebook: Applying the Uses and Gratifications Theory to Exploring Friend-Networking Sites. CyberPsychology Behav. 2008, 11, 169–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Balakrishnan, V.; Azra, S. Malaysian Facebookers: Motives and addictive behaviours unraveled. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2013, 29, 1342–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kupfer, A.; Ableitner, L.; Schöb, S.; Tiefenbeck, V. Technology Adoption vs. Continuous Usage Intention: Do Decision Criteria Change when Using a Technology? In Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2016), San Diego, CA, USA, 11–14 August 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Leong, L.Y.; Hew, T.S.; Ooi, K.B.; Lee, V.H.; Hew, J.J. A hybrid SEM-neural network analysis of social media addiction. Expert Syst. Appl. 2019, 133, 296–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zong, W.; Yang, J.; Bao, Z. Social network fatigue affecting continuance intention of social networking services: The case of WeChat users in China’s universities. Data Technol. Appl. 2019, 53, 123–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, X. Social influence or personal attitudes? Understanding users’ social network sites continuance intention. Kybernetes 2019, 48, 424–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pelling, E.L.; White, K.M. The theory of planned behavior applied to young people’s use of social networking Web sites. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 2009, 12, 755–759. Available online: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19788377 (accessed on 17 July 2021). [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Turel, O.; Serenko, A.; Bontis, N. User acceptance of hedonic digital artifacts: A theory of consumption values perspective. Inf. Manag. 2010, 47, 53–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Obeidat, Z.M.I.; Xiao, S.H.; Iyer, G.R.; Nicholson, M. Consumer revenge using the internet and social media: An examination of the role of service failure types and cognitive appraisal processes. Psychol. Mark. 2017, 34, 496–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ronis, D.L.; Yates, J.F.; Kirscht, J.P. Attitudes, Decisions, and Habits as Determinants of Repeated Behavior; Lawrence Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1989; pp. 213–239. Available online: https://books.google.com/books?hl=es&lr=&id=fiOvSm50Z7kC&pgis=1 (accessed on 17 July 2021).
- Miyazaki, A.D.; Fernandez, A. Consumer perceptions of privacy and security risks for online shopping. J. Consum. Aff. 2001, 35, 27–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maqableh, M.; Obeidat, A.; Obeidat, Z. Exploring the determinants of Internet continuance intention and the negative impact of Internet addiction on students’ academic performance. Int. J. Data Netw. Sci. 2021, 5, 183–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Błachnio, A.; Przepiorka, A.; Benvenuti, M.; Mazzoni, E.; Seidman, G. Relations between facebook intrusion, Internet addiction, life satisfaction, and self-esteem: A study in Italy and the USA. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 2019, 17, 793–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yang, S.; Liu, Y.; Wei, J. Social capital on mobile SNS addiction: A perspective from online and offline channel integrations. Internet Res. 2016, 26, 982–1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nepomuceno, M.V.; Laroche, M.; Richard, M.O. How to reduce perceived risk when buying online: The interactions between intangibility, product knowledge, brand familiarity, privacy and security concerns. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2014, 21, 619–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliver, R.L. Satisfaction: A behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, 2nd ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, K.H.; Kim, K.J.; Lee, D.H.; Kim, M.G. Identification of critical quality dimensions for continuance intention in mHealth services: Case study of onecare service. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 2019, 46, 187–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalinić, Z.; Marinković, V.; Djordjevic, A.; Liebana-Cabanillas, F. What drives customer satisfaction and word of mouth in mobile commerce services? A UTAUT2-based analytical approach. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2019, 33, 71–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, X.; Liu, Z.; Zheng, X.; Wu, T. Why are experienced users of WeChat likely to continue using the app? Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2018, 30, 1013–1039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Ansi, A.; Olya, H.G.T.; Han, H. Effect of general risk on trust, satisfaction, and recommendation intention for halal food. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 83, 210–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.J.; Huang, Y.Y.; Yang, M.M. How satisfaction modifies the strength of the influence of perceived service quality on behavioral intentions. Leadersh. Health Serv. 2011, 24, 91–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zopiatis, A.; Theocharous, A.L.; Constanti, P.; Tjiapouras, L. Quality, Satisfaction and Customers’ Future Intention: The Case of Hotels’ Fitness Centers in Cyprus. J. Qual. Assur. Hosp. Tour. 2017, 18, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fong, L.H.N.; He, H.; Chao, M.M.; Leandro, G.; King, D. Cultural essentialism and tailored hotel service for Chinese: The moderating role of satisfaction. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 31, 3610–3626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alsaad, A.; Mohamad, R.; Ismail, N.A. The moderating role of trust in business to business electronic commerce (B2B EC) adoption. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 68, 157–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sultan, P.; Tarafder, T.; Pearson, D.; Henryks, J. Intention-behaviour gap and perceived behavioural control-behaviour gap in theory of planned behaviour: Moderating roles of communication, satisfaction and trust in organic food consumption. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020, 81, 103838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Susanto, A.; Chang, Y.; Ha, Y. Determinants of continuance intention to use the smartphone banking services: An extension to the expectation-confirmation model. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2016, 116, 508–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Rourke, N.; Hatcher, L. A Step-by-Step Approach to Using SAS for Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling; SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.; Black, W.; Babin, B.; Anderson, R. Multivariate Data Analysis. 2014. Available online: http://hym-2017.corpuscodea.es/pdf/ (accessed on 17 July 2021).
- Hair, J.F., Jr.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis; Pearson: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Krejcie, R.V.; Morgan, D.W. Determining sample size for research activities. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1970, 30, 607–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ford, J.K.; MacCallum, R.C.; Tait, M. The application of exploratory factor analysis in applied psychology: A critical review and analysis. Pers. Psychol. 1986, 39, 291–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaiser, H.F. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 1974, 39, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hogarty, K.Y.; Hines, C.V.; Kromrey, J.D.; Perron, J.M.; Mumford, A.K.R. The quality of factor solutions in exploratory factor analysis: The influence of sample size, communality, and overdetermination. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 2005, 65, 202–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoyle, R.H. Handbook of Structural Equation Modeling, 1st ed.; Guilford: New York, NY, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Larcker, D.F.; Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 456–464. [Google Scholar]
- Harrington, D. Confirmatory Factor Analysis; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2009; Available online: https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195339888.001.0001/acprof-9780195339888 (accessed on 17 July 2021).
- Hair, J.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2011, 19, 139–151. [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]
- Garson, G.D. Testing Statistical Assumptions: Blue Book Series. 2012. Available online: www.researchgate.net/profile/Jurandy_Penitente-Filho/post/What_is_the_best_statistical_method_to_correlate_immunohistochemestry_and_rt-pcr/attachment/59d61d9879197b807797853c/AS:271755204071424@1441802897825/download/assumptions.pdf (accessed on 17 July 2021).
- Schreiber, J.B.; Stage, F.K.; King, J.; Nora, A.; Barlow, E.A. Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. J. Educ. Res. 2006, 99, 323–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pihlström, M.; Brush, G.J. Comparing the perceived value of information and entertainment mobile services. Psychol. Mark. 2008, 25, 732–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, C.C.; Hung, S.W.; Cheng, M.J.; Wu, C.Y. Exploring the intention to continue using social networking sites: The case of Facebook. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2015, 95, 48–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mouakket, S. Factors influencing continuance intention to use social network sites: The Facebook case. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 53, 102–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kowalewski, S.; Ziefle, M.; Ziegeldorf, H.; Wehrle, K. Like us on Facebook!–Analyzing User Preferences Regarding Privacy Settings in Germany. Procedia Manuf. 2015, 3, 815–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Literature | Variables | Moderators |
---|---|---|
[1] | Epistemic value, social value, hedonic value, stickiness | Trust |
[25] | Network externalities, social interaction ties, social value, information value, emotional value, hedonic value, continuance intention | - |
[30] | Innovativeness, hedonic value, utilitarian value, continuance intention | - |
[31] | Perceived integration, perceived interactivity, perceived values, continuance intention | - |
[7] | SNS addiction, tasks, position emotions, employee performance | - |
[20] | Discontinuous usage intention, SNS satisfaction, SNS exhaustion, social overload, receiving social support | - |
[40] | Neuroticism, extraversion, social media addiction | - |
[41] | Relative advantage, perceived value, continuance intention | Compatibility |
Our Proposed Model | Social value, information value, emotional value, hedonic value, continuance intention | Trust and Satisfaction |
Constructs | Definitions | Sources |
---|---|---|
Emotional Value (EV) | It refers to the emotional satisfaction and comfort attained from Facebook social support and communications. | [25,31] |
Information Value (IV) | It refers to the advantages of obtaining useful information from Facebook expert information providers or friends. | [25,31] |
Social Value (SV) | It refers to the perceived usefulness of users in constructing and preserving interpersonal relationships effectively, representing themselves, seeking companionship, and pursuing Facebook social approval. | [1,25,31] |
Hedonic Value (HV) | It refers to the ability of Facebook to provide innovation, elicit curiosity, and/or satisfy aspirations to seek knowledge. | [1,25,31] |
Continuance Intention (CI) | It refers to the initial decision by Facebook users to reuse the website. | [25,31] |
Facebook Addiction (FA) | It refers to Facebook excessive use and psychological dependence that obstructs other important actions and has negative impacts. | [7] |
Trust (TR) | It refers to the tendency to believe in others and their posted articles on the Facebook website. | [1] |
Satisfaction (ST) | It refers to a user’s judgments about how well that service provides a level of fulfilment from Facebook. | [63] |
Category | Category | Frequency | Percentage% |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 178 | 31.1 |
Female | 394 | 68.9 | |
Age | 17–19 | 97 | 17.0 |
20–23 | 431 | 75.3 | |
23 and above | 44 | 7.7 | |
Academic Level (Year) | First | 20 | 3.5 |
Second | 165 | 28.9 | |
Third | 180 | 31.5 | |
Fourth | 169 | 29.5 | |
Fifth and above | 38 | 6.6 | |
Students Time Spent on Social Networking Activities Daily (Hour) | Less than 1 | 69 | 12.1 |
1–3 | 238 | 41.6 | |
4–6 | 187 | 32.7 | |
More than 6 | 78 | 13.6 | |
Number of Times Using Facebook Sites (Weekly) | Less than ten times | 70 | 12.3 |
10–29 times | 193 | 33.7 | |
30–50 times | 153 | 26.7 | |
More than 50 times | 156 | 27.3 |
Latent Variable | KMO | % of Variance Explained | Number of Indicators |
---|---|---|---|
Emotional Value | 0.846 | 49.8% | 3 |
Social Value | 4 | ||
Hedonic Value | 3 | ||
Information Value | 3 | ||
Continuous Intention | 0.797 | 56.06% | 4 |
Addiction | 0.751 | 44.867% | 4 |
Satisfaction | 0.808 | 60.706% | 4 |
Trust | 0.726 | 51.437% | 6 |
Item | Unstandardised Loading | Standardised Loading | Standard Error | Composite Reliability | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
SV4 | A4 | 1.000 | 0.776 | ||
SV3 | A3 | 0.724 | 0.547 | 0.064 | 11.310 |
SV2 | A2 | 0.701 | 0.551 | 0.062 | 11.380 |
SV1 | A1 | 0.893 | 0.628 | 0.070 | 12.762 |
HV3 | A7 | 1.182 | 0.685 | 0.105 | 11.274 |
HV2 | A6 | 1.199 | 0.740 | 0.103 | 11.635 |
HV1 | A5 | 1.000 | 0.580 | ||
IV3 | A16 | 1.049 | 0.715 | 0.076 | 13.829 |
IV2 | A15 | 1.114 | 0.797 | 0.076 | 14.604 |
IV1 | A14 | 1.000 | 0.676 | ||
EV3 | A20 | 0.807 | 0.554 | 0.073 | 11.044 |
EV2 | A19 | 1.127 | 0.748 | 0.083 | 13.589 |
EV1 | A18 | 1.000 | 0.703 | ||
FA1 | A21 | 1.000 | 0.562 | ||
FA2 | A22 | 1.222 | 0.684 | 0.111 | 11.024 |
FA3 | A23 | 1.362 | 0.713 | 0.121 | 11.239 |
FA4 | A24 | 1.352 | 0.709 | 0.121 | 11.211 |
CI1 | A29 | 1.000 | 0.826 | ||
CI2 | A30 | 0.883 | 0.713 | 0.050 | 17.774 |
CI3 | A31 | 0.932 | 0.792 | 0.046 | 20.105 |
CI4 | A32 | 0.782 | 0.651 | 0.049 | 15.931 |
TR1 | A8 | 1.000 | 0.617 | ||
TR2 | A9 | 1.181 | 0.715 | 0.095 | 12.404 |
TR3 | A10 | 1.245 | 0.706 | 0.101 | 12.325 |
TR4 | A11 | 1.091 | 0.671 | 0.091 | 11.959 |
ST1 | A25 | 1.000 | 0.673 | ||
ST2 | A26 | 1.262 | 0.867 | 0.073 | 17.353 |
ST3 | A27 | 1.237 | 0.854 | 0.072 | 17.221 |
Construct | Trust | Social | Hedonic | Information | Emotional | Addiction | Continuous | Satisfaction |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Trust | 0.678 | |||||||
Social | 0.461 | 0.632 | ||||||
Hedonic | 0.265 | 0.504 | 0.672 | |||||
Information | 0.262 | 0.473 | 0.636 | 0.731 | ||||
Emotional | 0.575 | 0.599 | 0.364 | 0.48 | 0.673 | |||
Addiction | 0.141 | 0.325 | 0.388 | 0.286 | 0.381 | 0.67 | ||
Continuous | 0.283 | 0.416 | 0.576 | 0.569 | 0.461 | 0.338 | 0.749 | |
Satisfaction | 0.31 | 0.43 | 0.573 | 0.484 | 0.453 | 0.384 | 0.727 | 0.803 |
Mean | 1.76 | 3.21 | 2.76 | 2.95 | 2.67 | 2.15 | 3.47 | 2.58 |
SD | 0.533 | 0.741 | 0.578 | 0.587 | 0.654 | 0.637 | 0.816 | 0.634 |
Skewness | 0.188 | −0.457 | −0.653 | −1.08 | −0.146 | −0.094 | −0.53 | −0.412 |
Kurtosis | −0.232 | 0.038 | 0.497 | 1.75 | −0.341 | −0.667 | 0.31 | 0.237 |
Dependent Variables | Independent Variables | Standardised | Estimate | S.E. | CR. | p | Result | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Continuous intention | <--- | Emotional value | 0.238 | 0.273 | 0.079 | 3.471 | *** | H1 Significant |
Continuous intention | <--- | Information value | 0.242 | 0.318 | 0.094 | 3.395 | *** | H2 Significant |
Continuous intention | <--- | Social value | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.070 | 0.066 | 0.94 | H3 Insignificant |
Continuous intention | <--- | Hedonic value | 0.338 | 0.463 | 0.102 | 4.526 | *** | H4 Significant |
Facebook addiction | <--- | Continuous intention | 0.369 | 0.311 | 0.047 | 6.565 | *** | H5 Significant |
Hypothesis 6 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hypotheses | Standardised Coefficient β | t (p) | Bootstrapped SE | Bootstrapped 95% CI | Result | Collinearity Statistics | |
Tolerance | VIF | ||||||
Constant | 0.0477 | 1.1054 (0.2695) | 0.0435 | −0.0423 to 0.1318 | |||
Continuance intention (CI) | 0.0991 | 1.566 (0.1179) | 0.0684 | −0.0329 to 0.2354 | 0.345 | 2.902 | |
Satisfaction (SA) | 0.350 | 5.568 (0.000) | 0.0671 | 0.2157 to 0.4787 | 0.349 | 2.863 | |
CI *SA | −0.0593 | −2.1703 (0.0304) | 0.0274 | −0.1110 to −0.0038 | Significant | 0.913 | 1.096 |
R | 0.4648 | ||||||
R2 | 0.2160 | ||||||
F (p) | 52.172 (0.0000) | ||||||
The individual effects at low, medium, and high levels of satisfaction. | |||||||
Satisfaction level | Effect | t(p) | SE | 95% CI | Result | ||
(−1 SD) | 0.1584 | 2.415 (0.0160) | 0.0656 | 0.0296 to 0.2872 | significant | ||
0 | 0.0991 | 1.566 (0.1179) | 0.0633 | −0.0252 to 0.2234 | |||
(+1 SD) | 0.0398 | 0.5523 (0.5809) | 0.0721 | −0.1018 to 0.1815 |
Hypothesis 7 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hypotheses | Coefficient B | t (p) | Bootstrapped SE | Bootstrapped 95% CI | Support | Collinearity Statistics | |
Tolerance | VIF | ||||||
Constant | 0.0223 | 0.5569 (0.5778) | 0.0392 | −0.0555 to 0.1003 | |||
Continuance intention (CI) | 0.3775 | 9.2212 (0.0000) | 0.0439 | 0.2904 to 0.4605 | 0.870 | 1.150 | |
Trust (TR) | 0.0536 | 1.3207 (0.1871) | 0.0413 | −0.0260 to 0.1363 | 0.855 | 1.130 | |
CI *TR | −0.0659 | −1.8449 (0.0656) | 0.0356 | −0.1316 to 0.0067 | Insignificant | 0.980 | 1.020 |
R | 0.4148 | ||||||
R2 | 0.1721 | ||||||
F (p) | 39.357 (0.0000) |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 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
Maqableh, M.; Obeidat, Z.; Obeidat, A.; Jaradat, M.; Shah, M.H.; Masa’deh, R. Examining the Determinants of Facebook Continuance Intention and Addiction: The Moderating Role of Satisfaction and Trust. Informatics 2021, 8, 62. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics8030062
Maqableh M, Obeidat Z, Obeidat A, Jaradat M, Shah MH, Masa’deh R. Examining the Determinants of Facebook Continuance Intention and Addiction: The Moderating Role of Satisfaction and Trust. Informatics. 2021; 8(3):62. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics8030062
Chicago/Turabian StyleMaqableh, Mahmoud, Zaid Obeidat, Ahmad Obeidat, Mais Jaradat, Mahmood Hussain Shah, and Ra’ed Masa’deh. 2021. "Examining the Determinants of Facebook Continuance Intention and Addiction: The Moderating Role of Satisfaction and Trust" Informatics 8, no. 3: 62. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics8030062
APA StyleMaqableh, M., Obeidat, Z., Obeidat, A., Jaradat, M., Shah, M. H., & Masa’deh, R. (2021). Examining the Determinants of Facebook Continuance Intention and Addiction: The Moderating Role of Satisfaction and Trust. Informatics, 8(3), 62. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics8030062