5.5.1. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)
First, the study will test whether the observed variables are reliable or not, have a close relationship with each other, and can show the characteristics of the scale well.
The test is carried out through Cronbach's Alpha reliability coefficient. (Hoang Trong
& Chu Nguyen Mong Ngoc, 2008).
Convergent validity was assessed through the factor loadings of the indicators and average variance extracted (AVE). Individual item reliability for all factor loadings was confirmed as they were all above 0.5 and the average variance extracted values were exceeded 0.5 (Table 3).
The benchmark value for Cronbach's alpha that analysts typically use is 0.7. The items are sufficiently consistent at this level and above to demonstrate the measure is reliable. The summary table of Cronbach’s alpha analysis results (Table 3) shows that internal consistency reliability was confirmed as Cronbach's alpha is greater than 0.7.
Specifically, Cronbach's alpha of Enjoyment (EY) is 0.806; Attitude toward advertisement (AT) is 0.841; Achievement (AV) is 0.777, Social Interaction (SI) is 898;
Game Visual (GV) is 0.851; Expectation (ET) is 0.855; Perceived Performance (PP)
0.838; Confirmation (CF) is 0.786; Value Co-creation Intention (VC) is 0.844.
Therefore, the observed variables of the scales are kept for confirmatory factor analysis.
Table 3. The results of Exploratory’ factor analysis (EFA) and Cron bach's Alpha
Variables
Factor loadings
(>0.5)
Crobach’s Alpha
(>0.7)
AVE (>0.5)
Enjoyment (EY) 0.806 0.632
EY1: 1 feel relaxed when playing this game
app 0.772
EY2: Playing this game makes me feel good 0.841 EY3: Playing this game gives me pleasure 0.846 EY4: Playing this game takes me away from
the real world 0.713
Attitude toward advertisement (AT) 0.841 0.676
ATI: I like to look at most game,
advertisements that I am exposed to 0.831 AT2: I often use advertising to help me decide
which games to play 0.860
AT3: Advertising tells me what people with
interests similar to mine are playing the game 0.838 AT4: Advertising tells me which games have
the features I am looking for 0.756
Achievement (AV) 0.777 0.597
AV 1: When playing games, I think
achievement is important 0.751
AV2: A game that requires effort to earn
achievements makes me like to do very much 0.791 AV3: Achievement is something I like 0.812 AV4: When playing games, I admire persons
who have earned a very high position on the leaderboard very much
0.733
Social Interaction (SI) 0.898 0.766
Sil: I found it enjoyable to be with the
other(s) 0.857
SI2: My actions depended on the other's
actions 0.869
SI3:1 felt connected to the other(s) 0.895 SI4: I find the game supports social
interaction (e.g chat...) between players 0.878
Game Visual (GV) 0.851 0.688
GV1: I’m interested in games with good
graphics 0.879
GV2:1 think game graphics can express its
style and gamer’s style 0.813
GV3:1 think the game is visually appealing 0.860 GV4: Ĩ think game graphics are also an art 0.762
Expectation (ET) 0.855 0.697
ET1:1 expect to enjoy playing the game 0.790 ET2:1 expect to have a strategy for winning
the game 0.834
ET3:1 expect to put a lot of time and effort
into playing the game 0.877
ET4: Playing the game will be a ‘valuable
experience’ 0.837
Perceived Performance (PP) 0.838 0.675
PPI: I have fun with playing these games 0.878 PP2: I find playing these games to be
interesting 0.863
PP3: These games are easy to play 0.781 PP4: Playing game can improve my thinking
ability 0.758
Confirmation (CF) 0.786 0.609
CF1: I had a better experience using the game
site than I expected 0.788
CF1: My expectations for the level of service
provided by the game app have been exceeded 0.801 CF2: Generally speaking, most of my
expectations about the game app have been confirmed
0.753
CF3: The service level provided by the Game
app is belter than what I expected 0.778
Satisfaction (SF) 0.818 0.648
SF1: lam satisfied with the game now 0.791 SF2: The game makes me excited so I am
always motivated to work hard in every game 0.796 SF3: I am happy to recommend the game to
my friends, relatives, and colleagues 0.777 SF4: I give good reviews about the game 0.854
Value Co-creation Intention (VC) 0.844 0.663
VC1: I intend to give the feedback to the
game maker 0.857
VC2:1 intend to invest in this game. 0.828 VC3: I want to be the developer of this game 0.848 VC4: It's easy to improve this game 0.715
5.5.2. Correlation analysis
Based on the results of running SPSS, the correlation coefficients of the sum of the observed variables in each scale are diverse (ranging from 0.075 - 1,000), showing a positive relationship (Table 4).
Table 4. Pair correlation matrix
EY AT AV SI GV ET pp CF SF VC
EY 1.000
AT 0.298 1.000
AV 0.336 0.363 1.000
SI 0.436 0.260 0.371 1.000
GV 0.346 0.172 0.281 0.410 1.000
ET 0.389 0.509 0.485 0.457 0.308 1.000
pp 0.570 0.307 0.438 0.505 0.375 0.499 1.000
CF 0.470 0.439 0.335 0.408 0.237 0.510 0.565 1.000
SF 0.516 0.415 0.391 0.542 0.334 0.569 0.596 0.656 1.000
VC 0.168 0.444 0.315 0.198 0.075 0.388 0.296 0.363 0.334 1.000 Notes: EY: Enjoyment; AT: Attitude toward advertisement; AV: Achievement; SI:
Social Interaction; GV: Game Visual; ET Expectation; PP: Perceived Performance; CF:
Confirmation; SF: Satisfaction; VC: Value Co-creation Intention.
5.5.3. Discriminant validity
To examine the discriminant validity of the constructs, we verified that the square roots of the AVEs of each construct were greater than the inter-construct correlations (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) (Table 6.4), and we also confirmed that all HTMT values were below the threshold of 0.9 (Henseler et al.,2015) (Table 5). Thus, it can be concluded that the observed variables ensure the discriminant quality.
Table 5. ForneU-Larcker Criterion
ET pp SF EY SI AV AT CF VC GV
ET 0.835
pp 0.499 0.821
SF 0.569 0.596 0.805
EY 0.389 0.570 0.516 0.795
SI 0.457 0.505 0.542 0.436 0.875
AV 0.485 0.438 0.391 0.336 0.371 0.772
AT 0.509 0.370 0.415 0.298 0.260 0.363 0.822
CF 0.510 0.565 0.656 0.470 0.408 0.335 0.439 0.780
VC 0.388 0.296 0.384 0.168 0.198 0.315 0.444 0.363 0.814
GV 0.308 0.375 0.334 0.346 0.410 0.281 0.172 0.237 0.075 0.830 Notes: EY: Enjoyment; AT: Attitude toward advertisement; AV: Achievement; SI:
Social Interaction; GV: Game Visual; ET Expectation; PP: Perceived Performance; CF:
Confirmation; SF: Satisfaction; VC: Value Co-creation Intention.
Table 6. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT)
ET pp SF EY SI AV AT CF VC GV
ET
pp 0.587
SF 0.683 0.718
EY 0.462 0.682 0.621
SI 0.520 0.572 0.634 0.510
AV 0.581 0.527 0.480 0.420 0.435
AT 0.588 0.437 0.500 0.358 0.299 0.440
CF 0.611 0.687 0.814 0.579 0.481 0.410 0.536
VC 0.433 0.337 0.402 0.193 0.202 0.390 0.519 0.426
GV 0.355 0.427 0.391 0.405 0.465 0.345 0.195 0.270 0.143
Notes: EY: Enjoyment; AT: Altitude toward advertisement; AV: Achievement; SI:
Social Interaction; GV: Game Visual; ET Expectation; PP: Perceived Performance; CF:
Confirmation; SF: Satisfaction; VC: Value Co-creation Intention.
5.5.4. VIF assessment
In addition, we assessed multicollinearity through the variance inflation factors (VIF). The value above 3.3 suggests potential multicollinearity problems (Cenfetelli &
Basscllicr, 2009; Diamantopoulos & Siguaw, 2006). According to Tabic 6.6, all inner
VIF values ranged from 1.000 to 1.331, which demonstrated that the model has no multicollinearity problems.
Table 7. Inner VIF Values
ET pp SF EY SI AV AT CF VC GV
ET 1.331
pp 1.331
SF 1.000
EY 1.098
SI 1.314
AV 1.187
AT 1.098
CF 1.000
VC
GV 1.230
Notes: EY: Enjoyment; AT: Attitude toward advertisement; AV: Achievement; SI:
Social Interaction; GV: Game Visual; ET Expectation; PP: Perceived Performance; CF:
Confirmation; SF: Satisfaction; VC: Value Co-creation Intention.
5.5.5. Analysis of the structural model
After obtaining satisfactory results of reliability and validity of the measurement model; next, to explore the relationships among all variables, the structural model was assessed by using SEM (examining the path coefficients, t-value, and effect sizes). The statistical analysis software packages used to perform these analyses was SmartPLS 4.
Table 8 presents the results of hypothesis testing.
The results indicated that enjoyment (p = 0.261; p <0,01, t-value = 5.715) and attitude toward advertisement (P = 0.431; p <0,01, t-value = 8.912) positively affect users' expectation of the game. Thus, Hl, H2 are approved. Similarly, the results showed that the achievement achievement (P = 0.267; p <0,01, t-value = 4.160), social interaction (P = 0.340; p <0,01, t-valuc = 5.565), game visual (P = 0.160; p <0,01, t-
value = 2.700) while playing game also positively impact on perceived performance.
Hence, H3, H4 and H5 are approved. In addition, the relationships between expectation (P = 0.304; p <0,01, t-value = 5.528) and perceived performance (p = 0.413; p <0,01, t- value = 6.828) for confirmation is positively associated, approving H6a and H6b.
Moreover the influence of confirmation (p = 0.656; p <0,01, t-value = 16.126) on satisfaction is shown to be considerably positive, approving H7. Finally, the results demonstrated that satisfaction (p = 0.384; p <0,01, t-value = 10.031) when playing games promotes the value co-creation intention of users. Therefore, H8 is approved.
In conclusion, the variables in the research model are proven to have an impact on each other, the results accept all the hypothetical relationships (Hl - H8) as explained
in the journal (Fig. 6.).
Table 8. Hypotheses results
Ho Relationships Path
Coefficient std t-values p Values Results
Hl EY -> ET 0.261 0.046 5.715 0.000 Approved
H2 AT^ ET 0.431 0.048 8.912 0.000 Approved
H3 AV4PP 0.267 0.064 4.160 0.000 Approved
H4 SI 4 pp 0.340 0.061 5.565 0.000 Approved
H5 GV-ằ pp 0.160 0.059 2.700 0.007 Approved
H6a ET^ CF 0.304 0.055 5.528 0.000 Approved
H6b pp -> CF 0.413 0.061 6.828 0.000 Approved
H7 CF^SF 0.656 0.041 16.126 0.000 Approved
H8 SF-> VC 0.384 0.038 10.031 0.000 Approved
Notes: EY: Enjoyment; AT: Attitude toward advertisement; AV: Achievement; SI:
Social Interaction; GV: Game Visual; ET Expectation; PP: Perceived Performance; CF:
Confirmation; SF: Satisfaction; VC: Value Co-creation Intention.
Figure 6. Research model results
* : p-value < 0.01