Post-adoption switching behavior for online service substitutes: A perspective of the push–pull–mooring framework
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The findings support the push-pull-mooring framework as applied to health-related information seeking via GenAI.
“These findings also support the push-pull-moor -ing (PPM) framework, widely used in migration and information systems research to explain why individuals switch from one technology or system to another (Hsieh et al., 2012).”
From Perceived Search Overload, Generative AI Credibility, and Comparative Usefulness: A Channel Complementarity Approach to Health Information Seeking (2025) · cites this paper as Hsieh et al., 2012
Existing research has seldom examined user switch of information seeking, especially user switching from traditional search engines to emerging generative AI.
“Existing research focuses on user switching behavior in the contexts of digital reading (Chiang and Chen, 2014), social media (Hsieh et al., 2012), and knowledge payment (Zhou and Mi, 2023), and has seldom examined user switch of information seeking, especially user switching from traditional search engines to emerging generative AI.”
From Understanding user switch of information seeking: From search engines to generative AI (2026) · cites this paper as Hsieh et al., 2012
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 68 · Cited by 291
- Authors
- Hsieh, J.-K., Hsieh, Y.-C., Chiu, H.-C., & Feng, Y.-C.
- Affiliations
- National Central University (TW)
- National Tsing Hua University (TW)
- Corresponding author
- Hsieh, Jung-Kuei
- ORCID
- Hsieh, Jung-Kuei
- Venue
- Computers in Human Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-09
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1912-1920
- ISSN
- 0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2014964224
- Cited by
- 291
- References
- 68
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 9
- FWCI
- 22.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
- Keywords
- push-pull-mooring framework, social network sites, bloggers, switching intention, weak ties, writing anxiety, perceived usefulness, switching costs, prior experience, online service providers
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
