1. Trang chủ
  2. » Luận Văn - Báo Cáo

Journal of retailing and consumer services volume 19 issue 1 2012 modeling the effect of self efficacy on game usage and purchase behavior

11 418 0

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

Tài liệu hạn chế xem trước, để xem đầy đủ mời bạn chọn Tải xuống

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 11
Dung lượng 203,22 KB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

We deployed confirmatory factors analysis CFA and structural equation modeling SEM across 4 game types; original model all games and alternative models, Sports/Simulation/Driving, Role Pl

Trang 1

Modeling the effect of self-efficacy on game usage and purchase behavior

Robert Davisa,n

, Bodo Langb,1

a

Faculty of Creative Industries and Business, Unitec Institute of Technology, Department of Management and Marketing, Private Bag 92025, Auckland, New Zealand

b

Marketing Department, The University of Auckland Business School, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand

a r t i c l e i n f o

Available online 16 December 2011

Keywords:

Self-efficacy

Usage

Purchase

Computer games

Confirmatory factors analysis

Structural equation modeling

a b s t r a c t

This research models the relationship between self-efficacy, game purchase and usage Four-hundred and ninety three consumers responded to a questionnaire We deployed confirmatory factors analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) across 4 game types; original model (all games) and alternative models, Sports/Simulation/Driving, Role Playing Game/Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game/Strategy and Action/Adventure/Fighting The impact of self-efficacy on usage and purchase was modeled both individually and simultaneously For individual effects; models had adequate fit with Sports/Simulation/Driving showing an impact between self-efficacy on game usage and purchase Our results showed no simultaneous relationship We conclude that self-efficacy does impact usage or purchase but game type affects this relationship Research implications are discussed

&2011 Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved

1 Introduction

Recent advances in games on PC, MAC, Console, Mobile, iPhone

or iPad have increased the consumers purchase and use of these

entertainment related products and services (Prugsamatz et al.,

2010) According to the Entertainment Software Association in

the U.S.: (1) computer and video game software sales generated

$10.5 billion in 2009, (2) sixty-seven percent of American

house-holds play computer or video games, (3) the average game player

is 34 years old and has been playing games for 12 years Overall,

sales of game hardware, software and accessories have eclipsed

those of the US box-office, cementing gaming as a dominant force

of technological consumption (Khan, 2002;Guth, 2003) Europe

has also become a significant industry and market The UK is the

third largest market globally with total sales in 2004 of

entertain-ment and leisure software of £1.34b (Boyle and Hibberd, 2005)

The interactive entertainment industry in the UK is set to grow by

7.5% between 2009 and 2012 (UKIE, 2011)

There are many factors that have fueled this change in the

consumers consumption behavior but it is argued in this research

that the growth in the importance of games in a consumers

enter-tainment experience has been largely attributable to increased

technology related self-efficacy (Allan, 2010) Usage and purchase

has grown because the consumer perceives that they have the

capability to be interactive with a game and therefore, other stimuli

within the game (e.g., Advergames)

As a consequence, marketing practioners and researchers have become more interested in the potential of this medium for market-ing A key focus of this interest is related to three questions, that is, self-efficacy and the fit between the consumer and: (1) the game, (2) the marketing stimulus (e.g., advertisement) and (3) the co-creation of experience with the game and stimulus All these questions place emphasis on the consumers belief in their capability

to not only play the game as well as interact with the marketing stimulus to accomplish specific objectives but also to be an active player in the co-creation of experience (Bandura, 1982)

A review of the existing research shows that much of the work

to date has focused on the effect of advertising within a game on the consumer (Molesworth, 2006) For example,Prugsamatz et al

showing the effects on purchase intentions Also,Cauberghe and

on brand recall and attitude They also take in to account the mediating effects of product involvement, although, we acknowl-edge that the games medium is predominately service oriented This work is consistent withNicovich (2005)who have measured the relationship between consumer involvement on the advertis-ing effect LikeCauberghe and De Pelsmacker (2010), many others have examined the advertising communication effect of product

or brand placement in computer games on the consumer (e.g.,

replicated traditional models, they have ignored two important factors First, the mediating effect of the service experience and, second the difference between a product vs an entertainment orientation

Contents lists available atSciVerse ScienceDirect

journal homepage:www.elsevier.com/locate/jretconser

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services

0969-6989/$ - see front matter & 2011 Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved.

n

Corresponding author Tel.: þ649 815 4321.

E-mail addresses: rdavis@unitec.ac.nz (R Davis),

b.lang@auckland.ac.nz (B Lang).

1 Tel.: þ64 9 923 7162.

Trang 2

Recently, other researchers in an attempt to extend our

under-standing of the consumer response to marketing in the game

environment have started to explore avatar-based advertising (Jin

avatar-based interactive advertising on product involvement and attitude

were tested It was found that consumers ‘‘perceive human-like

spokes-avatars as more attractive, and players who interact with a

human-like spokes-avatar perceive the iPhone advertisement as

more informative than those who interact with a non-human

spokes-avatar (Jin and Bolebruch, 2009, p57).’’

Despite these developments, most of the existing research has

focused on the consumer- advertisement response Many with

the exception of Prugsamatz et al (2010) have not compared

different game genres Little attention has been given to

under-standing the fit between consumer, game and marketing stimulus

from a self-efficacy perspective and the effect of this on use and

purchase This is concerning because if a consumer does not have

the belief in their capability to be interactive with the game and/

or marketing stimulus concurrently, it is less likely that they will

value the experience Self-efficacy plays a key mediating role in

the interactivity between consumer, game and marketing

stimu-lus If consumers do not have a high level of self-efficacy then this

may reduce use and purchase Also, as some researchers have

argued, there may be negative impacts on the gamers self-and

other aspects of cognition (Boyle and Hibberd, 2005; Anderson

While these perspectives are valuable for our understanding, a

fundamental research question has not been addressed, such as

those concerning the consumers’ self-efficacy and its relationship

to game purchase and game usage (Kaltcheva et al., 2011) We

model these relationships across 4 game types, grouped according

to the conceptualization ofMyers (1990), namely: (1) all games

representing our original model and then the alternative

compet-ing models, (2) Sports/Simulation/Drivcompet-ing, which places emphasis

on hand/eye co-ordination/reflexes in real world environments,

(3) Role Playing Game (RPG)/Massively Multiplayer Online

Role-Playing Game (MMORPG)/Strategy, which places emphasis on

characters that gain experience and power through encounters and

(4) Action/Adventure/Fighting, which places emphasis on

simula-tions of futuristic and historical warfare and/or violent activity

This approach is consistent with Apperly (2006, p 20) and

others (Prugsamatz et al., 2010) who argue that ‘‘strategy and

role-playing genres have their roots in pre-computer forms of play,

whereas the simulation genre can be compared to

non-entertain-ment computer simulations The action genre is implicitly connected

to cinema through its deployment of the terminology of that

medium to mark key generic distinctions.’’

Usage and purchase are employed as dependent variables and

relate to the frequency of this behavior Usage and purchase have

often been used in this capacity in marketing research For

example,Shimp and Kavas (1984)relate the theory of reasoned

action to usage Usage has also been deployed in an experimental

context.Folkes et al (1993)relate product supply to usage.Desai

different usage Purchase behavior has also played a key role in

marketing research as a dependent variable (Sriram et al., 2010;

explain the purchasing behavior between coupon-prone and

non-coupon-prone households Also,Sismeiro and Bucklin (2004)use

binary probit models of navigational behavior to predict actual

purchase online

Our work has implications for current research focusing on the

fit between consumer, game and marketing stimulus from a

self-efficacy perspective and the effect of this on use and purchase

Through this understanding it provides an important direction for

the advertising of games and for game designers Through a better understanding of what consumers’ value and whether it drives usage and purchase, advertising within games may well become more effective in terms of reaching communication goals such as brand recall and awareness Product and game involvement may also increase

This paper is organized as follows First, we present the conceptual model which begins with a definition of the concept of the game leading to our hypotheses The paper follows with the methodology and results The paper concludes with the discussion, managerial and research implications

2 Conceptual model

A wide variety of concepts have been applied to conceptualize the consumers interaction with games such as; narratives and interactive texts (Juul, 2001,Ryan, 2001), cultural artifacts (Prensky,

2001) and technological drivers (Woods, 2003; Bushnell, 1996;

conceptual model that defines the game from the consumers’ experience (Newman, 2002a, 2004; Manninen, 2003; Aarseth,

2003) of the consumption or play of the game (Chen, 2008;

instanta-neous feedback in visual, auditory and kinesthetic forms This feed-back helps to create interactivity and shape the consumers experience in cognition and within the medium, create rich virtual worlds that blur the boundaries between imagination and reality

The process of consumption is not singular, but rather an experience that varies with the consumer and their level of interaction, both within the game and with other game players

A game has an explicit structure that defines how it is to be played (Choi and Kim, 2004), yet it is open to interpretation and experimentation It is also a representation of the functional and recreational desires of the immediate consumer (Newman,

the game may be driven by a hedonic need This enforces the concept brought forward by Mortensen (2002) and Fromme

interpretation and desire of the consumers and by their self-concept (Walther, 2003;Gottschalk, 1995)

We propose that when a consumer plays a game they experience interactivity The effect of this feedback is to transform their perceptions of self-efficacy; the belief they hold in their capability

to accomplish a task, which, in this respect refers to their ability to play the game (Agarwal et al., 2000;Bandura, 1982) In essence it changes their fundamental belief that they are capable through game play to achieve the desired goals and outcomes

This argument is supported by Allan (2010), Bandura (1977,

mastery experiences (performance accomplishments), vicarious learning and experience, social persuasion and affective states (emotional arousal).Allan (2010, p 36) posits; ‘‘video games can produce both positive and negative emotional arousal in those who play them Watching another person play a video game provides the observer with vicarious experience to make efficacy comparisons Verbal persuasion influences video game self-efficacy when a player receives feedback from others Finally, video games are generally performance accomplishment tasks They provide a player with a constant stream of input This input supplies the player with ongoing mastery experience to build video game self-efficacy.’’ These findings are consistent with Newman’s (2002a,b, 2004)

continuum of engagement andVorderer (2003) andEber (2001), who define a game as a ‘form of mastery’ (i.e the acquisition and perfection of a skill) Consequently, self-efficacy has primarily been

Trang 3

operationalized in the form of prior experience to represent both

mastery and vicarious learning experiences (Igbaria and Iivari, 1995)

and is considered to be dynamic in nature since the consumer is

expected to become more capable in performing a task as their

exposure to the task increases

We argue that through the games consumption and

experi-ence of interactivity; consumers will have positive self-efficacy

Thus, the belief in their capability to be interactive with the game

will drive the value of the experience, positively impacting usage

Hu1–4 Self-efficacy has an individual effect on game purchase

mea-sured across four game model types; (1) original model, (2) Sports,

Simulation and Driving; (3) RPG, MMORPG and Strategy and (4) Action,

Adventure and Fighting

Hp1–4 Self-efficacy has an individual effect on game usage measured

across four game model types; (1) original model, (2) Sports, Simulation

and Driving; (3) RPG, MMORPG and Strategy and (4) Action, Adventure

and Fighting

H5–8 Self-efficacy has a simultaneous effect on game usage and

purchase measured across four game model types; (1) original model,

(2) Sports, Simulation and Driving; (3) RPG, MMORPG and Strategy

and (4) Action, Adventure and Fighting

As we have noted in our hypotheses; these hypotheses are

extended over the 4 game types so the analysis of the path

coefficients and SEM model fit will proceed to test 8 hypothesized

relationships between self-efficacy and; (1) game purchase and

(2) game usage Therefore, 8 models are also compared

3 Method

Data was gathered through face-to-face interviews with 493

consumers in Auckland, New Zealand All consumers who walked

past the interviewers were considered to be potential

respon-dents The interviewers were rotated around four locations in

Auckland; east, west, south and north Every potential respondent

was asked to participate so they had an equal chance to complete

the survey Those that agreed to participate were asked to respond

to a structured questionnaire Respondents were screened with two

questions: (1) In the last week, did you play games on your

computer (PC or MAC), or on a games console (perhaps through

the Internet), such as an Xbox, Playstation or Wii that you

pur-chased?’’ If the answer was ‘‘Yes’’, they were asked (2) What game

did you play most often in the last week?

Question 1 established that the respondent was a regular game

player of games they had actually purchased and, Question

2 checked that the game was not a game preloaded on a computer

such as Solitaire Four-hundred and ninety three respondents

provided usable data Eighty-two percent of the respondents were

male and 18% were female (Table 1) The majority of the

respon-dents (77%) were 25 years and under About 66% of the responrespon-dents

had not received a degree and 77% were single Thirty-nine percent

of respondents were Asians and 48% of the respondents were

students Forty-eight percent of the respondents had an annual

income of less than $10,000 The samples demographics are

gen-erally consistent with the recent research byINZ (2010) on the

New Zealand gaming consumer (N¼1958)

The questionnaire (see Table 2) was designed to measure

multi-item constructs Throughout the whole questionnaire a

seven point scale was used to measure the constructs of interest

(1¼‘‘strongly disagree’’, 7¼‘‘strongly agree’’) To operationalize

self-efficacy we use Smith (2002a,b) with an adapted form of

scale based upon Bandura’s (1977, 1982) guidelines on

self-efficacy and social cognitive theory Purchase behavior is based

on an adaption of the scale of Bristol and Mangleburg (2005) Usage behavior is based on the Technology Acceptance Model

are derived fromMyers (1990)and the retail categories commonly used in consumer purchases (http://store.steampowered.com/)

4 Analysis The analysis tested the proposed conceptual model with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation mod-eling (SEM) The commonly used approach was employed as we wanted to use an analysis method that not only supported model refinement but could rigorously assess model fit across four gaming types It also helped us measure the individual and simultaneous effects in the relationship between self-efficacy, usage and purchase

5 Confirmatory factor analysis This study adopted a two-stage process (Kline, 1998) The first stage of the process was to construct separate measurement models for each latent variable The structural model is constructed as the second stage of the process Initial data screening was done for missing values, outliers and the normality of the dataset was tested

We examined all scale items and reverse-coded when applicable to reflect the hypothesized directions

Table 1 Sample characteristics (n¼ 493).

Variable Categories Percent of sample

Pacific Islander 6.5

Marital status Single 77.3

Living with partner 13.8

Divorced/separated 1.4

Self-employed 4.9

Student/part-time 10.8 Annual Income o10,000 47.5

10,000–20,000 16.6 20,001–30,000 7.5 30,001–40,000 11.4 40,001–50,000 9.5 50,001–60,000 3.2 60,001–80,000 2.4

Trang 4

Table 2

Questionnaire items.

Screen question: in the last week, did you play

games on your computer (PC or MAC), or on a

games console (perhaps through the Internet),

such as an Xbox, Playstation or Wii that you

purchased? (check the game was purchased)

SCREEN question: if yes—what game did you

play most often in the last week? [(check the

game is not a game preloaded on a computer

such as solitaire, etc.)

Name of game

This questionnaire is about games you can play

on your computer (PC or MAC) or on a games

console, such as an Xbox, Playstation or Wii.

We will call these console games, simply

‘‘games’’ in this questionnaire

Purchase behavior: thinking about the types of

games you buy please answer the following

questions by providing a number between

1 and 7 where 1 means ‘very rarely’ and

7 means ‘very often’.

2 How often do you buy the following game types?

Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game (MMORPG)

Play usage behavior: thinking about the types of

games you play please answer the following

questions by providing a number between

1 and 7 where 1 means ‘very rarely’ and

7 means ‘very often’.

4 How often do you play games on each of the following platforms?

Trang 5

6 How long have you been playing games? PU7

16–20 years More than 20 years

7 How often do you play the following game types?

Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game (MMORPG)

8 If not clear from Q7, ask and circle: which one of these game types do you play most?

PU19

9 Which one game do you play most from that group (Q8)? Write down the name

PU20 Skill level 10 When thinking about insert name of game from Q9 how would you rate your skill level? Beginner 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Expert SK1 Thinking about game from Q9, please answer the following questions by providing a number between 1 and 7 where 1 means ‘strongly disagree’ and

7 means ‘strongly agree’.

Strongly disagree Strongly agree CODE

15 I know more about the game than most other people who play this game 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SE5

16 I can play this game if

Trang 6

Subsequently, the data was subjected to multivariate

normal-ity testing Results show that the Mardia coefficient was greater

than 15, very much higher than the 3.0 cutoff advised byWothke

Bollen–Stine (B–S) p value is less than 0.05, the model should be

rejected

Convergent and discriminant validity of the constructs were

tested using the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) that combined

all constructs concurrently Maximum likelihood estimation (MLE)

was used to fit the models MLE is a procedure that improves

parameter estimates in a way that minimizes the differences

between the observed and estimated covariance matrices (Pampel,

2000) Construct refinement was enabled by an analysis of

covar-iance residuals and modification indices and exclusion of items until

the goodness-of-fit was achieved Following Baumgartner and

model fit: goodness-of-fit indices, chi-squared (X2), the comparative

fit index (CFI) and normalized fit index (NFI) For CFI and NFI values

close to 1 are indicative of good model fit (Bentler, 1990) The root

mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was calculated for the

overall model and according toBentler (1990), values below 0.05

indicate close fit and values up to 0.08 are reasonable Finally, the

standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR) as described byHu

correlations to within an average error.Bentler (1990)argues that a

model is regarded as having an acceptable fit if the SRMR is less than

0.10, while a SRMR of 0 indicates a perfect fit (Browne and Cudeck,

The final measurement models show a reasonably good fit and

most of the fit indices are above or close to the required minimum

threshold level The ratio of minimum discrepancy to degree of

freedom (chi-square/DF ratio) should be less than 5 or preferably

less than 2 (Bentler, 1990) The GFI index is above the threshold of

0.90 (Hair et al., 2009), and CFI is close to 1 (Bentler, 1990) for

every construct

Composite reliability is an indicator of the shared variance

among the set of observed variables used as indicators of a latent

construct (Bacon et al., 1995; Kandemir et al., 2006) The three

items included in self-efficacy are: (1) respondents have a manual

for reference; (2) respondents have the built-in help assistance

and (3) respondents have never played this game before The

con-struct reliability for these self-efficacy items was 0.83, above the

recommended value of 0.70 or higher In addition, the coefficient

alpha value was 0.83, above the threshold value of 0.70 that

(AVE) value was 0.63 It reflects the average communality for each

latent factor and is used to establish convergent validity The AVE

value is above the threshold value of 0.50 (Chin, 1998;H ¨ock and

6 Structural equation modeling The structural equation modeling process had two competing steps The first step assessed the conceptual model measuring the individual effects of self-efficacy on purchase and usage sepa-rately The second step measured the simultaneous effect of self-efficacy on purchase and usage together

6.1 Individual effects

In the first step SEM, the same conventional measures were used to assess the model fit as in the CFA, that is, the

goodness-of-fit indices (GFI), the chi-squared (X2)/degrees of freedom (DF) ratio, the comparative fit index (CFI), the normalized fit index (NFI), the root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA), the standardized RMR (SRMR) and the Bollen–Stine (B–S) p value The SEM focused on the analysis of the hypotheses of the four competing forms of this model; (1) the original model includes all the game types while the alternative models focus on each game genre, namely (2) Sports, Simulation and Driving; (3) RPG, MMORPG and Strategy and (4) Action, Adventure and Fighting The results of the SEM analysis for both models are displayed inTables 3 and 4 The final model met suggestions from the literature regarding the minimum number of items attached to a construct (Hair et al.,

For the original model: the game usage results indicate inade-quate model fit (GFI¼0.88, CFI¼ 0.75, TLI ¼0.69, RMSEA¼ 0.12, SRMR¼0.09, X2/DF¼7.58 and B–S p¼ 0.00) Similarly, the self-efficacy results for game purchase were inadequate (GFI¼ 0.86, CFI¼0.81, TLI ¼0.76, RMSEA ¼0.12, SRMR¼0.08, X2/DF¼8.31 and B–S p¼0.00) With poor fit indices results and unacceptable B–S p values, the models should be rejected The standardized factor loadings for self-efficacy (game usage) ranged from 0.69 to 0.87 and were highly significant (po0.001) The standard factor loading for self-efficacy (game purchase) were similar and highly significant (po0.001) The average variance extracted (AVE) value was 0.63 For the Sports, Simulation and Driving Model: The game usage results suggest adequate model fit (GFI¼0.99, CFI¼0.99, TLI¼0.98, RMSEA¼0.04, SRMR¼0.03, X2/DF¼1.83 and B–S p¼0.45) Similarly the self-efficacy results for game purchase were adequate (GFI¼ 0.99, CFI¼0.99, TLI¼0.99, RMSEA¼0.03, SRMR¼ 0.02, X2/DF¼1.36 and B–S p¼0.79) The standardized factor loadings for self-efficacy (game usage) ranged from 0.69 to 0.87 and were highly significant (po0.001) The standard factor loading for self-efficacy (game purchase) were similar and highly significant (po0.001) The average variance extracted (AVE) value was 0.63 With these results, both models (game usage and game purchase) in the Sports, Simulation and Driving genre are accepted The results for Sports, Simulation and Driving game classification reveal that a significant positive relationship for the path between self-efficacy and game

Table 3

SEM model fit (step 1): individual effect.

Game, usage Sports, Simulation, Driving 194.67 (8) 1.83 0.07 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.04 0.03 0.45 Game, purchase Sports, Simulation, Driving 10.90 (8) 1.36 0.21 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.03 0.02 0.79

Game, purchase Action, Adventure, Fighting 27.97 (8) 3.50 0.00 0.98 0.96 0.98 0.07 0.04 0.02

X 2 —chi-square; CFI—comparative fit index; TLI—Tucker Lewis index; GFI—goodness-of-fit-index; RMSEA—root-mean-square error of approximation;

Trang 7

SRMR—standar-usage Likewise a significant positive relationship exists for the path between self-efficacy and game purchase

For the RPG, MMORPG and Strategy Model: The game usage results

in an adequate model fit (GFI¼0.97, CFI¼0.95, TLI¼0.91, RMSEA¼0.09, SRMR¼0.06, X2/DF¼5.44 and B–S p¼0.00) Similarly the self-efficacy results for game purchase were adequate (GFI¼0.99, CFI¼0.98, TLI¼0.97, RMSEA¼0.06, SRMR¼0.04, X2/DF¼2.73 and B–S p¼0.09) The standardized factor loadings for self-efficacy (game usage) ranged from 0.69 to 0.87 and were highly significant (po0.001) The standard factor loading for self-efficacy (game purchase) were similar and highly significant (po0.001) The average variance extracted (AVE) value was 0.63 Considering the Bollen– Stine (B–S) p values of these models, the game usage and purchase models are rejected We note that there is a significant relationship between self-efficacy and game purchase

For the Action, Adventure and Fighting Model: The game usage results an adequate model fit (GFI¼0.99, CFI¼0.98, TLI¼0.97, RMSEA¼0.06, SRMR¼0.04, X2/DF¼2.89 and B–S p¼0.06) Similarly the self-efficacy results for game purchase were adequate (GFI¼ 0.98, CFI¼0.98, TLI¼0.96, RMSEA¼0.07, SRMR¼0.04, X2/DF¼3.50 and B–S p¼0.02) The standardized factor loadings for self-efficacy (game usage) ranged from 0.69 to 0.87 and were highly significant (po0.001) The standard factor loading for self-efficacy (game purchase) were similar and highly significant (po0.001) The average variance extracted (AVE) value was 0.63 Considering the Bollen Stine (B–S) p values of both models, they are rejected 6.2 Simultaneous effect

We have also investigated the impact of self-efficacy on game usage and purchase behavior simultaneously across the game types and the original model Given the Bollen–Stine (B–S) p values are less than 0.5 all models should be rejected (seeTables 5 and 6)

7 Discussion

We investigated the impact of self-efficacy on game usage and purchase behavior, both individually and simultaneously It was concluded in the individual effects analysis that self-efficacy impacts game usage and purchase for only the Sports/Simula-tion/Driving genre Our results showed no simultaneous relation-ship across all games types Overall, we conclude that consumers self-efficacy does impact usage and/or purchase behavior but game type has a significant impact on this relationship The game types that showed no relationship between self-efficacy and usage or purchase were:

1 All game genres combined

2 Action/Adventure/Fighting

3 Role Playing Game/Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game/Strategy

The positive relationship between self-efficacy and consumer value evaluations and usage intentions is supported by Van

‘‘self-efficacy may not be the only determinant of one’s motivation to play a video game, but it appears to be an important one.’’ It was also argued that; (1) males had higher video game self-efficacy and (2) usage frequency was related to video game self-efficacy

In our study, Eighty-two percent of the respondents were male so

we suggest a similar effect toAllan’s (2010)gender correlations Given the game type, that is, Sports/Simulation/Driving showed a significant model fit, we further contend subjectively that our results may be influenced by gender Also, it is not surprising that

Standardized loading

Un-standardized loading

H1u

H1p

H2u

H2p

H3u

H3p

H4u

H4p

Trang 8

Table 6

SEM path coefficients (step 2): simultaneous effect.

loading

Un-standardized loading

S.E t-Value p Hypothesis Conclusion

Sports Simulation Driving Game usage (GU) ’ Self-Efficacy GU 0.24 0.25 0.07 3.70 0.00 H 5u Model rejected, B–S po0.5

RPG MMORPG Strategy Game usage (GU) Self-Efficacy GP 0.24 0.24 0.05 4.79 0.00 H 6u Model rejected, B–S po0.5

Action Adventure Fighting Game usage (GU) Self-Efficacy GP 0.003 0.003 0.06 0.05 0.96 H 7u Model rejected, B–S po0.5

Original model Game usage (GU) Self-Efficacy GP 0.15 0.16 0.06 2.69 0.01 H 8u Model rejected, B–S po0.5

SE—standard error; the above models are rejected with, B–S po0.5.

Table 5

SEM model fit (step 2): simultaneous effect.

Dependent variables Game group X 2

Game, purchase

Game, purchase

Game, Purchase

Game, purchase

X 2

—chi-square; CFI—Comparative fit index; TLI—Tucker Lewis index; GFI-goodness-of-fit-index; RMSEA—root-mean-square error of approximation; SRMR—standardized root-mean-squared residual; B—S p—Bollen–Stine bootstrap p; DF—degrees of freedom; the above models are rejected with, B–S po0.5.

Trang 9

self-efficacy has an impact because this game type places

empha-sis on hand/eye co-ordination/reflexes in real world environments

accomplish tasks, play the game and achieve defined objectives

high level of interactivity between consumer and game during the

consumption process

What is interesting to explore is why the consumer’s process

of self-efficacy with Action/Adventure/Fighting games, which

place emphasis on simulations of futuristic and historical warfare

and/or violent activity did not affect purchase or usage It would

appear that there is no match between the actual self and the

ideal self when they experience these games This finding may

also indicate that players of this genre differ from players of other

genres For example, gamers in the Action, Adventure and

Fight-ing genre may engage in gamFight-ing to a greater extent and thus,

have a smaller gap between their actual and ideal self in the

game That is, they are highly proficient already and self-efficacy

is not a key driver of purchase It may also suggest that such

games do not impact self-concept and their maybe a low level of

interactivity This finding may conflict with the view that, for

example, violent computer games create violent consumers This

view maybe tempered by other findings For exampleAllan (2010,

argues that ‘‘violent video games have been shown to increase

aggression and physiological arousal of those who play themy

attributed to the desensitization effect.’’

A similar non-significant result was found for Role Playing

Game/Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game/Strategy

games, where self-efficacy was not related to usage or purchase

As with Action/Adventure/Fighting games, this may be related to

the effect of multiple self’s It is proposed that with the consumer

there may be some confusion about which character is supposed

to have game self-efficacy Is it the consumer or the game player

(character within the game)? These types of games do not have

well defined goals A lot more emphasis is placed on exploration

and experimentation It may be more difficult for a consumer to

assess self-efficacy with this level of ambiguity

One of the key managerial findings of the study relates to

marketing stimuli within a game Our findings suggest that

market-ers and gamer developmarket-ers must first consider the mediating effect of

self-efficacy on the effectiveness of their advertisement or product/

service placement within the gaming environment Simply put, if the

consumer does not perceive they have the capabilities to play the

game, their purchase and usage behavior will be affected Practioners

also should consider the impact of game type While our findings are

only related to self-efficacy, we suggest that different game types

will reveal different results when measuring the consumers’

cogni-tive response to game consumption and experience

8 Limitations

Future research may wish to ascertain the applicability of the

results to other geographical areas Also, it could be argued that

grouping the games together in terms of genre types is a limitation

of the data analysis We believe that grouping the games is

appropriate as they exhibit similar characteristics and thus

repre-sent similar acts of consumption Our study also differentiated game

types but did not examine the differences of online vs offline

gaming Would we expect a difference in the results? Further

studies may uncover differences but we are yet to uncover any

convincing evidence We note that the sample is biased towards

males We could have controlled for this during data collection, but

this would have manipulated the randomly generated sample

It could be argued that having a male biased sample may be more

representative of the market population for computer games US market statistics from the Entertainment Software Association showed that in 2008 sixty percent of all game players are men

We acknowledge that a balance will evolve between the numbers of male and female gamers over time as more games are developed with a specific gender orientation Future research should also take account of this change

9 Future research Future studies should now introduce specific marketing stimuli within different types of games and measure the mediating effect of self-efficacy on involvement, brand recall and awareness There is also the need to clarify the relationship between self-efficacy and multiple self-concepts Given that the act of playing a game is a learning experience that is often concerned with the mastery of a skill,Prensky’s (2001)research on consumer learning styles may be integrated to classify gamers using alternative criteria The focus could be on defining the consumer’s personality and learning style

to support the self-concept as key antecedents of game selection and gaming behavior Another extension to the research model would be

to focus on the three dimensions of the game (play, game-structure and game-world) Such research would require these dimensions to be expanded further to identify the key elements that constitute each of these dimensions For example, game-world could be expanded into elements such as the use of 3D graphics, based on real-life/fantasy, exploratory world/restrictive world and game-play could be expanded using elements of interactivity, competition and teamwork Given this conceptual model is new within this research context it may be argued that there is a lack of qualitative data to support its development and use This would consist of a phenomenological design utilizing grounded theory as the primary research methodology of both new and experienced players Future research should extend the model into other samples, different from the New Zealand context

Acknowledgments Manukau Institute of Technology, Chi Main Ong and Josephino San Diego

References

Aarseth, E., 2003 Playing Research: Methodological Approaches to Game Analysis In: Proceedings of Conference of Digital Arts and Cultures (DAC) Melbourne, VIC.

Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V., Stair, R.M., 2000 Research report: the evolving relationship between general and specific computer self-efficacy—an empiri-cal assessment Information Systems Research 11 (4), 418–430.

Allan, J.D., 2010 An Introduction to Video Game Self-Efficacy Masters Thesis Faculty of California State University, Chico.

Anderson, C., Berkowitz, L., Donnerstein, E., Huesmann, L., Johnson, J., Linz, D., Wartella, E., 2003 The influence of media violence on youth Psychological Science in the Public Interest 4 (3), 81–110.

Anderson, C.A., Bushman, B.J., 2002 The effects of media violence on society Science 295, 2377–2379.

Apperley, T.H., 2006 Genre and game studies: toward a critical approach to video game genres Simulation and Gaming 37 (1), 6–23.

Bacon, D.R., Sauer, P.L., Young, M., 1995 Composite reliability in structural equation modeling Educational and Psychological Measurement 55, 394–406 Bandura, A., 1977 Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioural change Psychological Review 84, 191–215.

Bandura, A., 1982 Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency American Psychol-ogist 37 (2), 122–147.

Baumgartner, H., Homburg, C., 1996 Applications of structural equation modeling

in marketing and consumer research: a review International Journal of Research in Marketing 13, 139–161.

Bawa, K., Shoemaker, R.W., 1987 The coupon-prone consumer: some findings based on purchase behavior across product classes Journal of Marketing 51

Trang 10

Bentler, P.M., 1990 Comparative fit indexes in structural models Psychological

Bulletin 107, 238–246.

Bollen, Kevin A., Stine, Robert A., 1992 Bootstrapping goodness-of-fit measures

in structural equation models Sociological Methods and Research 21,

205–229.

Boyle, Raymond, Hibberd, Mathew, 2005 Review of research on the impact of

violent computer games on young people Her Majesty’s Department of Trade

and Industry/Department of Culture, Media and Sport, London.

Browne, M.W., Cudeck, R., 1993 Alternative ways of assessing model fit In: Bollen,

K.A., Long, J.S (Eds.), Testing structural Equation Models, SAGE, Newbury Park,

CA, pp 136–162.

Bristol, Terry, Mangleburg, Tamara F., 2005 Not telling the whole story: teen

deception in purchasing Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 33 (1),

79–95.

Bushnell, N., 1996 Relationships between fun and the computer business.

Communications of the ACM 39 (8), 31–37.

Carnagey, N., Anderson, C., Bushman, B., 2007 The effect of video game violence on

physiological desensitization to real-life violence Journal of Experimental

Social Psychology 43 (3), 489–496.

Cauberghe, V., De Pelsmacker, P., 2010 Advergames: the impact of brand

prominence and game repetition on brand responses Journal of Advertising

31 (1), 5–18.

Chaney, I.M., Lin, K., Chaney, J., 2004 The effect of billboards within the gaming

environment The Journal of Interactive Advertising 5 (1), 37–45.

Chen, M.K., 2008 Rationalization and Cognitive Dissonance: Do Choices Affect or

Reflect Preferences? Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper No 1669 Yale

University, New Haven, CT.

Chin, W.W., 1998 The partial least squares approach for structural equation

modeling In: Macoulides, G.A (Ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research,

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 295–336.

Choi, D., Kim, J., 2004 Why people continue to play online games: in search of

critical design factors to increase customer loyalty to online contents.

Cyberpsychology and Behaviour 7 (1), 11–24.

Cunningham, E., 2008 A Practical Guide to Structural Equation Modeling Using

AmosStatsline, Melbourne, VIC.

Dash, S., Saji, K.B., 2007 The role of consumer self-efficacy and website

social-presence in customers’ adoption of B2C online shopping: an empirical study in

the Indian context Journal of International Consumer Marketing 20 (2), 33–48.

Desai, K.K., Hoyer, W.D., 2000 Descriptive characteristics of memory-based

consideration sets: influence of usage occasion frequency and usage location

familiarity Journal of Consumer Research 27 (3), 309–323.

Dill, Karen E., Dill, Jody C., 1998 Video game violence: a review of the empirical

literature Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal 3, 407–428.

Eber, D.E., 2001 Towards computer game aesthetics—editorial Digital Creativity

12 (3), 129–132.

Folkes, V.S., Martin, I.M., Gupta, K., 1993 When to say when: effects of supply on

usage Journal of Consumer Research 20 (3), 467–477.

Fornell, C., Larcker, D., 1981 Structural equation models with unobservable variables

and measurement error Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1), 39–50.

Fromme, J., 2003 Computer games as a part of children’s culture International

Journal of Computer Game Research 3 (1) (available at: accessed May 2010)

/http://www.gamestudies.org/0301/Fromme/S.

Gottschalk, S., 1995 Videology: video-games as postmodern sites/sights of

ideological reproduction Symbolic Interaction 18 (1), 1–18.

Guth, R.A., 2003 Choosing sides: game giant links with Sony, snubbing

Microsoft—electronic arts show its clout and wariness of allowing Xbox

to dominate market—John Madden on play-by-play Wall Street Journal

(New York, 12 May).

Hair, Joseph F., Black, William, Babin, Barry, Anderson, Rolph E., 2009 Multivariate

Data Analysis, seventh edition Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

H ¨ock, Michael, Ringle, Christian M., 2006 Strategic Networks in the Software

Industry: An Empirical Analysis of the Value Continuum Paper Presented at

the IFSAM Viiith World Congress 2006, Berlin Available at: /http://www.

Ibl-Unihh.De/IFSAM06.PdfS (accessed 11.06.10.).

Holbrook, M.B., Hirschman, E.C., 1982 The experiential aspects of consumption:

consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun Journal of Consumer Research 9 (2),

132–140.

Hu, L.-T., Bentler, P.M., 1995 Evaluating model fit In: Hoyle, R.H (Ed.), Structural

Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues and Applications, SAGE, Thousand Oaks,

CA, pp 76–99.

Hui, S.K., Bradlow, E.T., Fader, P.S., 2009 Testing behavioral hypotheses using an

integrated model of grocery store shopping path and purchase behavior.

Journal of Consumer Research 36 (3), 478–493.

INZ, 2010 National Research Prepared by Bond University for the Interactive

Games and Entertainment Association.

Igbaria, M., Iivari, J., 1995 The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage Omega.

International Journal of Management Science 23 (6), 587–605.

Jessen, Carsten, 1999 Computer Games and Play Culture—An Outline of an

Interpretative Framework Available at: /http://www.carsten-jessen.dk/comp

games.htmlS.

Jin, S.A., Bolebruch, J., 2009 Avatar-based advertising in second life: the role of

presence and attractiveness of virtual spokespersons The Journal of

Inter-active Advertising 10 (1), 51–60.

Juul, J., 2001 Games Telling stories?—a brief note on games and narratives.

International Journal of Computer Game Research Available at /http://www.

Kaltcheva, Velitchka D., Patino, Anthony D., Chebat, Jean-Charles, 2011 The impact

of retail environment extraordinariness on customer self-concept Journal of Business Research 64 (6), 551–557.

Kandemir, Destan, Attila, Yaprak, Tamer Cavusgil, S., 2006 Alliance orientation: conceptualization, measurement, and impact on market performance Journal

of the Academy of Marketing Science 34 (3), 324–341.

Khan, T.L.Tran, 2002 U.S game industry posts record sales Wall Street Journal 7 (February).

Kline, R.B., 1998 Principles and Practice of Structural Equation ModelingGuildford Press, New York.

Liu, Y., 2007 The long-term impact of loyalty programs on consumer purchase behavior and loyalty Journal of Marketing 71 (4), 19–35.

Mackay, T., Ewing, M., Newton, F., Windisch, L., 2009 The effect of product placement in computer games on brand attitude and recall International Journal of Advertising 28 (3), 423–438.

Manninen, T., 2003 Conceptual, communicative and pragmatic aspects of inter-action forms—rich interinter-action model for collaborative virtual environments In: Proceedings of Computer Animation and Social Agents (CASA) Conference IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 168–174.

Mau, G., Silberer, G., Constien, C., 2008 Communicating brands playfully: effects of in-game advertising for familiar and unfamiliar brands International Journal

of Advertising 27 (5), 827–851.

Molesworth, Mike, 2006 Real brands inimaginary worlds: investigating players’ experiences of brand placement indigital games Journal of Consumer Beha-viour 5 (4), 355–366.

Mortensen, T., 2002 Playing with players Potential methodologies for muds International Journal of Computer Game Research 2 (1) (available at: accessed July 2010)/http://www.gamestudies.org/0102/Mortensen/S.

Myers, D., 1990 Computer game genres Play and Culture 3, 286–301.

Nelson, M.R., Keum, H., Yaros, R.A., 2004 Advertainment or adcreep? Game players’ attitudes toward advertising and product placements in computer games Journal of Interactive Advertising 5 (1), 3–21.

Newman, J., 2002a In search of the game player—the lives of Mario New Media and Society 4 (3), 405–422.

Newman, J., 2002b The myth of the ergodic Game International Journal of Computer Game Research 2 (1) (available at: accessed July 2010)/http:// www.gamestudies.org/0102/Newman/S.

Newman, J., 2004 GamesTaylor Francis Group, Routledge.

Nicovich, S.G., 2005 The effect of involvement on ad judgment in a video game environment—the mediating role of presence Journal of Interactive Advertis-ing 6 (1), 29–39.

Nunnally, J.C., 1978 Psychometric Theory, second ed McGraw-Hill, New York Pampel, Fred C., 2000 Logistic Regression: A Primer Sage Quantitative Applica-tions in the Social Sciences Series #132Sage PublicaApplica-tions, Thousand Oaks, CA Prensky, M., 2001 Fun, Play and Games: What Makes Games Engaging Digital Game-Based LearningMcgraw-Hill, NY.

Prugsamatz, S., Lowe, B., Alpert, F., 2010 Modelling consumer entertainment software choice: an exploratory examination of key attributes, and differences

by gamer segment Journal of Consumer Behaviour 9 (5), 381–392 Ryan, M., 2001 Beyond myth and metaphor*—the case of narrative in digital media International Journal of Computer Game Research 1 (1) (available at: accessed July 2010)/http://www.gamestudies.org/0101/Ryan/S.

Schneider, L.P., Cornwell, T.B., 2005 Cashing in on crashes via brand place-ment in computer games International Journal of Advertising 24 (3), 321–343.

Shimp, T.A., Kavas, A., 1984 The theory of reasoned action applied to coupon usage Journal of Consumer Research 11 (3), 795–809.

Sismeiro, C., Bucklin, R.E., 2004 Modeling purchase behavior at an E-commerce web site: a task-completion approach Journal of Marketing Research 41 (3), 306–323.

Smith, S.M., 2002a The role of social cognitive career theory in information technology based academic performance Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal 20 (2), 1–10.

Smith, S.M., 2002b Using the social cognitive model to explain vocational interest

in information technology Information Technology, Learning, and Perfor-mance Journal 20 (1), 1–9.

Sriram, S., Chintagunta, P.K., Agarwal, M.K., 2010 Investigating consumer purchase behavior in related technology product categories Marketing Science 29 (2), 291–314.

Torkzadeh, G., Koufteros, X., 1994 Factorial validation of a computer self-efficacy scale and the impact of computer training Education and Psychological Measurement 54 (3), 813–821.

UKIE, 2011 The Association for UK Interactive Entertainment, hhttp://www.ukie infoi.

Van Beuningen, J., de Ruyter, K., Wetzelfs, M., Streukens., S., 2009 Customer self-efficacy in technology- based self-service Journal of Service Research, 407–428.

Venkatesh, Viswanath, Morris, Michael G., Davis, Gordon B., Davis, Fred D., 2003 User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view MIS Quarterly 27 (3), 425–478.

Vorderer, P., 2003 Explaining the enjoyment of playing video games: the role of competition In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Entertainment Computing (May).

Walther, B.K., 2003 Playing and gaming Reflections and classifications Interna-tional Journal of Computer Game Research 3 (1) (available at: accessed May

Ngày đăng: 23/06/2014, 15:22

TỪ KHÓA LIÊN QUAN

🧩 Sản phẩm bạn có thể quan tâm