ARTIRILMIŞ GERÇEKLİK UYGULAMALARININ KULLANICI DENEYİMİ TATMİN VE SATIN ALMA NİYETİ ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ

Öz

Artırılmış gerçeklik, belirgin bir gerçeklik sunan sanal dünya bilgisini, gerçek dünya ile bütünleştiren teknolojik bir uygulamadır. Perakendecilik kapsamında artırılmış gerçekliğin amacı, sürükleyici alışveriş deneyimleri, etkileşimli pazarlama kampanyaları ve tüketiciler için yenilikçi ürün deneyimleri yaratmaktır. Artırılmış gerçeklik uygulamaları, tüketicilerin alışveriş deneyimlerini zenginleştirerek perakendecilere yenilikçi rekabet avantajları yaratmaktadır. Bu açıdan artırılmış gerçeklik uygulamalarının tüketici deneyimleri üzerindeki etkilerini belirlemek, olumlu davranışsal sonuçlar sağlayabilmek açısından oldukça önemlidir. Bu kapsamda çalışmanın amacı, elektronik perakendecilerin artırılmış gerçeklik uygulamalarının; kullanıcı deneyimi, kullanıcı memnuniyeti ve kullanıcının satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkilerini tespit ederek, elektronik perakendecilik alan yazınına katkı sağlamaktır. Araştırma sürecinde, 400 üniversite öğrencisinden yüz yüze anket yöntemiyle elde edilen veriler, Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli analiz yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Analiz sonucuna göre kullanıcı deneyimi; kullanıma yönelik kalite, estetik kalite, uyarılmayla hedonik kalite ve kendini ifade etmeyle hedonik kalite olmak üzere dört boyuttan oluşmaktadır. Ayrıca artırılmış gerçeklik uygulamasının etkileşim düzeyi, kullanıcı deneyimini pozitif yönde etkilemektedir. Kullanıcı deneyimi ise kullanıcı tatmin düzeyini ve satın alma niyetini pozitif yönde etkilemektedir. Çalışmanın bulguları, araştırmacılara ve uygulayıcılara yol gösterebilecektir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Artırılmış gerçeklik,kullanıcı deneyimi,memnuniyet,satın alma niyeti,elektronik perakendecilik

DETERMINING THE EFFECT OF AUGMENTED REALITY APPLICATIONS ON USER EXPERIENCE SATISFACTION AND BUYING INTENTION

Öz

Augmented reality AR is a technological application that integrates knowledge of the virtual world with the real world, which presents a distinct reality. The overall goals of the augmented reality within retailing are to generate immersive shopping experiences, interactive marketing campaigns and innovative product experiences for consumers. Augmented reality apps produce innovative competitive advantages for retailers by enriching consumers’ shopping experiences. Thus, reviewing the subject in terms of online consumers, determining the effects of apps on shopping experiences are important to develop enriched consumer experiences and to get positive behavioral responses. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine the effect of augmented reality apps on user experience, user satisfaction, and purchase intention. In the research process, the data were obtained by face-to-face survey method from 400 university students and the data were analyzed by Structural Equation Model analysis. According to the analysis result, user experience dimension consists of four latent factors as pragmatic quality, aesthetic quality, hedonic quality by stimulation and hedonic quality by identification. The results reveal that the interaction level of augmented reality app affects user experience positively. Also, analysis result indicates that augmented reality user experience level positively affects user satisfaction and buying intention. Implications of this study may lead to a new strategic avenue for practitioners and researchers

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Augmented reality,user experience,satisfaction,buying intention,electronic retailing

Kaynakça

1. Ariely, D. (2000). Controlling the Information Flow: Effects on Consumers’ Decision Making and Preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2): 233-248.
2. Beck, M. ve Crié, D. (2016). I Virtually Try It… I Want It Virtual Fitting Room: A Tool to Increase On-line and Off-line Exploratory Behavior, Patronage and Purchase Intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Advance Online Publication.
3. Bilici, F. (2015). Pazarlamada Artırılmış Gerçeklik ve Karekod Teknolojileri: Tüketicilerin Artırılmış Gerçeklik Teknoloji Algılamaları Üzerine Bir Alan Araştırması. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Uludağ Üniversitesi/ Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Bursa.
4. Bonetti, F., Warnaby, G. ve Quinn, L. (2018). Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality in Physical and Online Retailing: A Review, Synthesis and Research Agenda. Timothy Jung, Mandy Tom Dieck (Ed.): In Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality. Cham, Springer: 119-132.
5. Bulearca, M. ve Tamarjan, D. (2010). Augmented Reality: A Sustainable Marketing Tool. Global Business and Management Research: An International Journal, 2(2): 237-252.
6. Butler, K. A. (1996). Usability Engineering Turns 10. Interactions, 3(1): 58-75.
7. Candan, B. ve Kuruluş, K. (2003). İnternet Kullanıcılarının Gıda, Temizlik ve Kişisel Bakım Ürünlerinde Sanal Alış-Veriş Yapma Nedenlerini Belirlemeye Yönelik Pilot Bir Araştırma. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 17(1-2): 307-321.
8. Caruana, A. (2002). Service Loyalty the Effects of Service Quality and the Mediating Role of Customer Satisfaction. European Journal of Marketing, 36 (7/8): 811-828.

9. Cheng, L. K., Chieng, M. H. ve Chieng, W. H. (2014). Measuring Virtual Experience in a Three-Dimensional Virtual Reality Interactive Simulator Environment: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Virtual Reality, 18(3): 173-188.
10. Desmet, P. ve Hekkert, P. (2007). Framework of Product Experience. International Journal of Design, 1(1), 1-10.
11. Dodds, W. B. ve Monroe, K. B., Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of Price, Brand, and Store Information on Buyers’ Product Evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3): 307-319.
12. Dzida, W., Herda, S., ve Itzfeldt, W. D. (1978). User-Perceived Quality of Interactive Systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 4(4): 270-276.
13. Fornell, C. ve Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with UnobservableVariables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18: 39- 50.
14. Forsythe, S., Liu, C., Shannon, D. ve Gardner, L. C. (2006). Development of a Scale to Measure the Perceived Benefits and Risks of Online Shopping. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 20(2): 55-75.
15. Gervautz, M. ve Schmalstieg, D. (2012). Anywhere Interfaces Handheld Augmented Reality. IEEE Computer, 45(7): 26-31.
16. Grewal, D., Monroe, K. B. ve Krishnan, R. (1998). The Effects of Price-Comparison Advertising on Buyers’ Perceptions of Acquisition Value, Transaction Value, and Behavioral Intentions. The Journal of Marketing, 62(2): 46-59.
17. Hair, J. F., Tomas, G., Hult, M., Ringle, C.ve Sarstedt, M. (2014). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
18. Hassenzahl, M. (2001). The Effect of Perceived Hedonic Quality on Product Appealingness. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 13(4): 481-499.
19. Hassenzahl, M. (2003). The Thing and I: Understanding the Relationship Between User and Product. M. Blythe, A. F. Monk, C. Overbeeke, P.C. Wright (Ed.): In Funology: From Usability to Enjoyment, Netherlands: Springer: 31-42.
20. Hassenzahl, M., Diefenbach, S. ve Göritz, A. (2010). Needs, Affect, and Interactive Products – Facets of User Experience. Interacting with Computers, 22(5), 353-362.
21. Hassenzahl, M. ve Tractinsky, N. (2006). User Experience - A Research Agenda. Behaviour & Information Technology, 25(2): 91-97.
22. Hassenzahl, M. ve Ullrich, D. (2007). To Do or Not to Do: Differences in User Experience and Retrospective Judgments Depending on the Presence or Absence of Instrumental Goals. Interacting with Computers, 19(4): 429-437.
23. Henseler, J., Hubona, G. ve Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS Path Modeling in New Technology Research: Updated Guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(1): 2-20.
24. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M. ve Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The Use of Partial Least Squares Path Modeling in International Marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20: 277-320.
25. Hilken, T., de Ruyter, K., Chylinski, M., Mahr, D. ve Keeling, D. I. (2017). Augmenting the Eye of the Beholder: Exploring the Strategic Potential of Augmented Reality to Enhance Online Service Experiences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(6), 884-905.
26. Huang, T. L., ve Liao, S. L. (2017). Creating E-Shopping Multisensory Flow Experience Through Augmented-Reality Interactive Technology. Internet Research, 27 (2): 449-475.
27. Huang, T. L. ve Liao, S. (2015). A Model of Acceptance of Augmented-Reality Interactive Technology: The Moderating Role of Cognitive Innovativeness. Electronic Commerce Research, 15 (2): 269-295.
28. Huang, T. L. ve Liu, F. H. (2014). Formation of Augmented-Reality Interactive Technology’s Persuasive Effects from the Perspective of Experiential Value. Internet Research, 24(1): 82-109.
29. Javornik, A. (2016). ‘It’s An Illusion, but It Looks Real ’ Consumer Affective, Cognitive and Behavioural Responses to Augmented Reality Applications. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(9-10): 987-1011.
30. Jeon, H., Jang, J. ve Barrett, E. B. (2017). Linking Website Interactivity to Consumer Behavioral Intention in an Online Travel Community: The Mediating Role of Utilitarian Value and Online Trust. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 18(2): 125-148.
31. Jin, E. (2018). The Persuasive Effectiveness of Website Interactivity in an Anti- smoking Website: the Moderating Effect of Self-efficacy of Avoiding Second-hand Smoke Exposure, Doktora Tezi, The University of Texas.
32. Kırcova, İ. (2012). İnternette Pazarlama. İstanbul: Beta.
33. Kim, J. ve Forsythe, S. (2008). Adoption of Virtual Try-on Technology for Online Apparel Shopping. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 22(2): 45-59.
34. Kock, N. (2017). WarpPLS User Manual: Version 6.0. Laredo, TX: ScriptWarp Systems.
35. Küçüksaraç, B. ve Sayımer, İ. (2016). Deneyimsel pazarlama Aracı olarak Artırılmış Gerçeklik: Türkiye’deki Marka Deneyimlerinin Etkileri Üzerine Bir Araştırma. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, 51: 73-95.
36. Lee, H. H., Fiore, A. M. ve Kim, J. (2006). The Role of the Technology Acceptance Model in Explaining Effects of Image Interactivity Technology on Consumer Responses. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 34(8): 621-644.
37. Li, H., Daugherty, T. ve Biocca, F. (2002). Impact of 3-D Advertising on Product Knowledge, Brand Attitude, and Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Presence. Journal of Advertising, 31(3): 43-57.
38. Li, Y. W., Yang, S. M. ve Liang, T. P. (2015). Website Interactivity and Promotional Framing on Consumer Attitudes toward Online Advertising: Functional Versus Symbolic Brands. Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(2): 41-58.
39. Liu, Y. (2003). Developing a Scale to Measure the Interactivity of Websites. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(2), 207-216.
40. Mathwick, C., Malhotra, N. ve Rigdon, E. (2001). Experiential Value: Conceptualization, Measurement and Application in the Catalog and Internet Shopping Environment. Journal of Retailing, 77(1): 39-56.
41. Merle, A., Senecal, S. ve St-Onge, A. (2012). Whether and How Virtual Try- on Influences Consumer Responses to An Apparel Web Site. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 16(3): 41-64.
42. Miyazaki, A. D. ve Fernandez, A. (2001). Consumer Perceptions of Privacy and Security Risks for Online Shopping. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1): 27-44.
43. Moorhouse, N., Dieck, M.C. ve Jung, T. (2018). Technological Innovations Transforming the Consumer Retail Experience: A Review of Literature. Springer International Publishing AG 2018: 133-143.
44. Noort, G. V., Voorveld, H. A. ve Reijmersdal, E. A. (2012). Interactivity in Brand Web Sites: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Responses Explained by Consumers’ Online Flow Experience. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4): 223-234.
45. Olsson, T., Lagerstam, E., Kärkkäinen, T. ve Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K. (2013). Expected User Experience of Mobile Augmented Reality Services: A User Study in the Context of Shopping Centres. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17(2): 287-304.
46. Pantano, E., Rese, A. ve Baier, D. (2017). Enhancing the Online Decision-Making Process by Using Augmented Reality: A Two Country Comparison of Youth Markets. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 38: 81-95.
47. Pantano, E. ve Timmermans, H. (2014). What is smart for retailing?. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 22: 101-107.
48. Peter, J. P. ve Olson, J. C. (2010). Consumer Behavior & Marketing Strategy. New York: The McGraw-Hill.
49. Poushneh, A. (2018). Augmented Reality in Retail: A Trade-Off Between User’s Control of Access to Personal Information and Augmentation Quality. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 41: 169-176.
50. Poushneh, A. ve Vasquez-Parraga, A. Z. (2017). Discernible Impact of Augmented Reality on Retail Customer’s Experience, Satisfaction and Willingness to Buy. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34: 229-234.
51. Raska, K. ve Richter, T. (2017). Influence of Augmented Reality on Purchase Intention: The IKEA Case. Jönköping University / International Business School, Jönköping.
52. Rauwers, F., Voorveld, H. A. ve Neijens, P. C. (2018). Investigating the Persuasive Impact and Underlying Processes of Interactive Magazine Ads in a Real- life Setting. International Journal of Advertising, 35(5): 806-827.
53. Rese, A., Baier, D., Geyer-Schulz, A., Schreiber, S. (2017). How Augmented Reality Apps are Accepted by Consumers: A Comparative Analysis Using Scales and Opinions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 124: 306-319.
54. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S. ve Becker, J. M. (2015). SmartPLS 3 (Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH).
55. Siu, N. Y. M. ve Cheng, M. M. S. (2001). A Study of the Expected Adoption of Online Shopping-The Case of Hong Kong. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 13(3): 87-106.
56. Steuer, J. (1992). Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4): 73-93.
57. Swinyard, W. R. ve Smith, S. M. (2003). Why People (Don’t) Shop Online: A Lifestyle Study of the Internet Consumer. Psychology & Marketing, 20(7): 567-597.
58. Taylor, S. A. ve Baker, T. L. (1994). An Assessment of The relationship Between Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction in the Formation of Consumers’ Purchase Intentions. Journal of Retailing, 70(2): 163-178.
59. Tenenhaus, M. (2008). Component-Based Structural Equation Modeling. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 19: 871-886.
60. Varadarajan, P. R. ve Yadav, M. S. (2002). Marketing Strategy and the Internet: an Organizing Framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4): 296-312.
61. Wang, W.C., Chen, Y.H. ve Kao, C.Y. (2012). The Digital Design Applied to Consumer Garment-try-on Experience Integrated with Augmented Reality. Lect. Notes Electr. Eng., 124(1): 115-122.
62. Yang, S. ve Lee, Y. J. (2017). The Dimensions of M-Interactivity and Their Impacts in the Mobile Commerce Context. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 21(4): 548-571.
63. Yang, F. ve Shen, F. (2018). Effects of Web Interactivity: A Meta-Analysis. Communication Research, 45(5): 635-658.
64. Yim, M. Y. C., Chu, S. C. ve Sauer, P. L. (2017). Is Augmented Reality Technology an Effective Tool for E-commerce? An Interactivity and Vividness Perspective. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 39: 89-103.
65. Yoo, W. S., Lee, Y. ve Park, J. (2010). The role of Interactivity in E-Tailing: Creating Value and Increasing Satisfaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 17(2): 89-96.
66. Yüksel, C.A., Candan, B. ve Yerebakan, O. (2011). Tüketici Elektroniği Perakendeciliğinde Mağaza Konumlamalarının Belirlenmesine Yönelik İstanbul İlinde Yapılan Bir Pilot Araştırma. Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 8: 51-70.
67. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence. The Journal of Marketing, 52(3): 2-22.
68. Zulu, V. M. (2016). Perceived Mobile Interactivity Influence on Usability and Mobile Marketing Acceptance in the Informal Hair-care Business, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, University of the Witwatersrand.