An empirical study of an enjoyment‐based response hierarchy model of watching MDTV on the move
Abstract
Purpose This paper adopts a response hierarchy model to examine drivers' intrinsic and extrinsic motivations for using mobile digital television (MDTV) while on the move. Design/methodology/approach The study used a regional quota sampling method to examine the viewing habits of drivers who have a mobile digital television installed in their vehicles and was carried out in two steps. The first stage had interviews with eight car stereo distributors, and the second stage used a questionnaire to ascertain the viewing habits and content selection of drivers watching TV in their vehicles. Findings SEM analysis of a survey of 480 MDTV‐using drivers in Taiwan revealed an enjoyment‐based model of MDTV use since enjoyment has the most significant effect on drivers' affect, intention to use, and use behavior. Perceived ease of use and subjective norms had a lesser effect. The non‐significant effect of concentration and perceived risk imply that while drivers enjoy watching MDTV, they do not believe they switch their primary attention from driving to programs. Since drivers do not think they concentrate on watching MDTV, program content has little chance to induce curiosity and increase viewing time, the real communicative effect of watching TV while driving must be sharply discounted. Research limitations/implications The paper focuses exclusively on use of front‐seat MDTV equipment by drivers, and does not attempt to examine MDTV use by other passengers in the same vehicle. Originality/value This is the first study that has been undertaken of mobile digital television viewers, and the paper will be useful as a reference for those who are developing the mobile digital television market as they work to understand the needs and viewing habits of their audience.
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 CAB model holds that the decision-making process starts with cognitions, followed by affect, which in turn leads to behaviors.
“The CAB model holds that the decision-making process starts with cognitions, such as consumer's beliefs, perceptions, attitudes, and followed by affect or the emotions or feelings of a consumer to a product or service, which in turn leads to behaviors, which may include intention or concrete action of a consumer (Babin & Harris, 2010; Hu & Tsai, 2009; Solomon, 2011).”
From Effects of Environmental Sustainability Awareness and Altruism on Green Purchase Intention and Brand Evangelism (2022) · cites this paper as Hu & Tsai, 2009
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 60 · Cited by 15
- Authors
- Wan‐Ling Hu, A., & Ming‐Hone Tsai, W.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Marketing
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2009-03-20
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 66-77
- ISSN
- 0736-3761 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2018313799
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 60
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Consumer Marketing (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Multimedia Communication and Technology
- Keywords
- mobile TV, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, intention to use, perceived ease of use, subjective norms, risk perception, attention allocation, viewing time, car audio
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