The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Having fun while receiving rewards?: Exploration of gamification in loyalty programs for consumer loyalty
Abstract
Abstract This study investigates whether and how gamification in loyalty programs (i.e., gamified loyalty programs) impacts consumer loyalty toward loyalty programs and behavioral intentions, along with the role of the type of rewards (self-oriented vs. altruistic rewards). The data were collected from U.S. consumers responding to LPs offered in the mobile environment. The results confirmed that gamified loyalty programs (vs. conventional ones) increased consumer loyalty toward loyalty programs which in turn enhanced consumers' participation intention and app download intention. Playfulness and attitude toward the program served as mediating mechanisms underlying the impact of gamification. The indirect relationships were stronger under conditions of self-oriented rewards. Also, reward types moderated the indirect pathway of playfulness, but not attitude. These findings support the essential role of gamification in customer relationship management, an understanding which offers important practical implications for how firms might implement gamified loyalty programs to promote consumer responses.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 54,599
(2013) · Cited by 44,563
(1980) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 25,810
User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · Cited by 25,709
Exchange and Power in Social Life
Blau, P. M. (2017) · doi:10.4324/9780203792643 · Cited by 15,923
Exchange and Power in Social Life.
Bierstedt, R., & Blau, P. M. (1965) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2091154 · Cited by 13,624
(1998) · Cited by 12,725
Flow: the psychology of optimal experience
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-0597 · Cited by 12,637
Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience
Buchanan, R., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991) · Design Issues · doi:10.2307/1511458 · Cited by 9,394
Cited by
Enhancing user engagement: The role of gamification in mobile apps
Bitrián, P., Buil, I., & Catalán, S. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.028 · Cited by 442
Driving Mobile App User Engagement Through Gamification
Paschmann, J. W., Bruno, H. A., van Heerde, H. J., Völckner, F., & Klein, K. (2025) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/00222437241275927 · Cited by 34
Bravo, R., Catalán, S., & Pina, J. M. (2023) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology · doi:10.1108/jhtt-02-2022-0033 · Cited by 27
Lin, C.-W., Chien, C.-Y., Ou Yang, C.-P., & Mao, T.-Y. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15010589 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Hwang, J., & Choi, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Business Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-01
- Volume
- 106
- Pages
- 365-376
- ISSN
- 0148-2963 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2912175146
- Cited by
- 363
- References
- 77
- FWCI
- 56.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Having fun while receiving rewards?: Exploration of gamification in loyalty programs for consumer loyalty. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.031
- The paper
- Hwang, J., & Choi, L. (2020). Having fun while receiving rewards?: Exploration of gamification in loyalty programs for consumer loyalty. Journal of Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.031
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
