Thesis Susanti Louis - M10521805

國立臺灣科技大學
管理學院MBA 碩士班
碩士學位論文
學號：M10521805
Factor Influencing In-App Item Purchase

Decision of Asian Mobile Gamer: Comparison of
Indonesian and Taiwan Market
研究生: Susanti Louis
指導教授 : 葉穎蓉
中華民國 107 年六月
i
ABSTRACT
Mobile phone has become an important part of our daily activities and is used
for business, personal life, and entertainment. Mobile games taking 51% of online game
market. In-app items are one of the primary sources of revenue for online game. Thus,
it is important to analyze mobile gamer as customer-related factors that influenced
mobile gamer on purchase intention and actual purchase of In-App game item.
Despite the increasing sales and trend in mobile game, there are limited studies
examined factors influencing mobile gamers to purchase In-App game items.
Therefore, this study aims to examine mobile gamer’s decision-making process
for In-App Item based on Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) involving antecedent
factors: playing habit, income, and gender. Data from 326 Asian respondents being
used and analyzed using SPSS25 and SmartPLS 3. This study applies SEM technique
with confirmatory factor analysis to test relationships. This study compares behavior of
Indonesian and Taiwanese respondent, also female and male respondent.
This study finds that attitude and perceived behavioral control have a significant
influence on purchase intention towards game In-App item. Social influence
significantly influences attitude in all group, but only influences purchase intention in
Asian, Taiwanese, and female group. Only Asian, Taiwanese, and Male actual purchase
influenced directly by perceived behavioral control. Purchase intention is a strong
determinant of actual purchase in all group.
These insights may provide a basis for further research and for game developer
to develop effective strategies to increase purchase In-App game items.
Keywords: Mobile game, Free-to-play game, In-app item, TPB, PLS
i
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Special Thanks to:
My God, who gives his blessing for me to finish writing my thesis.
My Family, who always supports and understand me.
NTUST, that gives me scholarship and providing me facility to broaden my
knowledge. I really grateful that NTUST gives me the opportunity to
come to Taiwan.
Professor Kuo and Yeh, who teaches and guides me to do the research and report.
My 504 roommates, Fall 105, Temple explorer, and all my friends who always
remind, encourage, believe and motivate me to finish my thesis.
I want to apologize for any mistakes that I might make. Hope this thesis will be
useful for any readers and future research writers.
賜子千金不如教子一藝
-Learning a new skill will pay dividends in the future-
ii
TABLE OF CONTENT
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................. i
ACKNOWLEDGMENT................................................................................................ii
TABLE OF CONTENT ............................................................................................... iii
LIST OF FIGURES .....................................................................................................vii
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... viii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background .............................................................................................. 1
1.2 Research Purpose ..................................................................................... 3
1.3 Research Questions .................................................................................. 4
1.4 Research Contents .................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................... 6
2.1 Mobile Games .......................................................................................... 6
2.1.1 Type of Mobile Game ......................................................................... 7
2.1.2 In-App / Virtual Items ......................................................................... 7
2.2 Mobile Gamer .......................................................................................... 9
2.2.1 Definition and Classification .............................................................. 9
2.2.2 Mobile Gamer Profile ....................................................................... 10
2.2.3 Culture and Behavior of Online Game Player .................................. 11
2.3 The Theory of Planned Behavior ........................................................... 12
2.3.1 Attitude ............................................................................................. 13
iii
2.3.2 Subjective Norm ............................................................................... 14
2.3.3 Perceived Behavioral Control ........................................................... 14
2.3.4 Purchase Intention............................................................................. 14
2.3.5 Actual Purchase ................................................................................ 15
2.4 Demographic .......................................................................................... 15
2.4.1 Habit.................................................................................................. 16
2.4.2 Income............................................................................................... 16
2.4.3 Gender ............................................................................................... 16
2.5 Previous Research and Research Gap .................................................... 17
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ....................................................... 19
3.1 Hypothesis Development ....................................................................... 19
3.1.1 Influence of Attitude to In-App Item Purchase Intention ................. 19
3.1.2 Influence of Social Influence to In-App Item Attitude and Purchase
Intention ............................................................................................ 19
3.1.3 Influence of Perceived Behavioral Control to In-App Item Purchase
Intention and Actual Purchase .......................................................... 20
3.1.4 Influence of Purchase Intention to In-App Item Actual Purchase .... 20
3.1.5 Moderating effect of Playing Habit between In-App Item Purchase
3.1.6 Influence of Income to In-App Item Perceived Behavioral Control. 21
iv
3.1.7 Difference Influence of Attitude, Social Influence, and Perceived
Behavioral Control Toward In-App Purchase Intention between
Gender ............................................................................................... 21
3.2 Proposed Conceptual Framework .......................................................... 21
3.3 Survey Development .............................................................................. 22
3.4 Data Collection and Sample ................................................................... 25
3.5 Data Analysis Method ............................................................................ 26
3.5.1 Validity and Reliability Test ............................................................. 26
3.5.2 Partial Least Square- Structural Equation Modeling ........................ 27
CHAPTER IV: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS ........................................ 29
4.1 Survey Data Collection .......................................................................... 29
4.2 Validity and Reliability Test Result ....................................................... 34
4.3 Hypothesis Testing Result...................................................................... 43
4.3.1 Influence of Attitude to In-App Item Purchase Intention ................. 45
4.3.2 Influence of Social Influence to In-App Item Attitude and Purchase
Intention ............................................................................................ 45
4.3.3 Influence of Perceived Behavioral Control to In-App Item Purchase
4.3.4 Influence of Purchase Intention to In-App Item Actual Purchase .... 46
4.3.5 Moderating effect of Playing Habit between In-App Item Purchase
4.3.6 Influence of Income to In-App Item Perceived Behavioral Control. 47
v
4.3.7 Difference Influence of Attitude, Social Influence, and Perceived
Behavioral Control Toward In-App Purchase Intention between
Gender ............................................................................................... 47
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION .................................. 50
5.1 Conclusion.............................................................................................. 50
5.2 Research Limitation ............................................................................... 51
5.3 Recommendation.................................................................................... 51
5.3.1 Future Study ...................................................................................... 51
5.3.2 Insight for Game Developer.............................................................. 51
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 53
APPENDIX 1: QUESTIONNAIRE ENGLISH VERSION ........................................ 59
APPENDIX 2: QUESTIONNAIRE INDONESIAN VERSION ................................ 63
APPENDIX 3: QUESTIONNAIRE CHINESE VERSION ........................................ 68
APPENDIX 4: PLS-SEM AND BOOTSTRAPPING RESULT GENERATED BY
SMARTPLS3 ....................................................................................... 72
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. 2017 Global Games Market................................................................ 1
Figure 2. Theory of Planned Behavior ............................................................. 13
Figure 3. Conceptual Model ............................................................................ 21
Figure 4. PLS-SEM Result for Asian Respondent........................................... 44
Figure 5. PLS-SEM Result for Indonesian Respondent .................................. 44
Figure 6. PLS-SEM Result for Taiwanese Respondent ................................... 45
Figure 7. PLS-SEM Result for Female Respondent ........................................ 48
Figure 8. PLS-SEM Result for Male Respondent ............................................ 48
Figure 9. SmartPLS SEM Result for Asian Respondent ................................. 72
Figure 10. SmartPLS SEM Result for Indonesian Respondent ....................... 73
Figure 11. SmartPLS SEM Result for Taiwanese Respondent........................ 74
Figure 12. SmartPLS SEM Result for Female Respondent ............................. 75
Figure 13. SmartPLS SEM Result for Male Respondent ................................ 76
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Characteristic of Hardcore and Casual Gamer .................................... 9
Table 2. Summary of Previous Research ......................................................... 18
Table 3. Model Construct, Survey Measurement, and Question ..................... 23
Table 4. Demographic Characteristics of Respondents ................................... 32
Table 5. Removed Items due to Insufficient Correlation Value ...................... 34
Table 6. Removed Items due to Insufficient Loading Factor .......................... 35
Table 7. Asian Model Validity and Reliability Result ..................................... 36
Table 8. Correlation of Asian Respondent Model ........................................... 36
Table 9. Indonesian Model Validity and Reliability Result ............................ 37
Table 10. Correlation of Indonesian Respondent Model ................................. 37
Table 11. Correlation of Taiwanese Respondent Model ................................ 38
Table 12. Taiwanese Model Validity and Reliability Result ........................... 38
Table 13. Correlation of Taiwanese Respondent Model (New) ...................... 39
Table 14. Correlation of Female Respondent Model ....................................... 39
Table 15. Female Model Validity and Reliability Result ................................ 40
Table 16. Correlation of Female Respondent Model (New)............................ 40
Table 17. Male Model Validity and Reliability Result .................................... 41
Table 18. Correlation of Male Respondent Model .......................................... 41
Table 19. Measurement Model ........................................................................ 42
Table 20. Summary of Hypothesis Result ....................................................... 50
Table 21. SmartPLS Bootstrapping for Asian Respondent ............................. 72
Table 22. SmartPLS Bootstrapping for Indonesian Respondent ..................... 73
Table 23. SmartPLS Bootstrapping for Taiwanese Respondent ...................... 74
viii
Table 24. SmartPLS Bootstrapping for Female Respondent ........................... 75
Table 25. SmartPLS Bootstrapping for Male Respondent............................... 76
ix
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Smartphone or mobile phone has become an important part of our daily
activities and is used for business, personal life, and entertainment. Owing to this trend,
mobile games industry has expanded dramatically in recent years in terms of both
market size and number of games. Mobile games played on smartphone have become
very popular, shifting the ways in which video games designed and played, shifting the
stereotype of gaming away from hardcore to activities that fit into everyday life
(Willson & Leaver, 2016).
Figure 1. 2017 Global Games Market

Based on Wijman (2018) in Newzoo market research, mobile games revenue
grows rapidly compare to others online games. It’s said that in Q1 2018 Global Games
Market Report, it shows that 2.3 billion gamers across the globe are expected to
generate $137.9 billion in game revenues in 2018 with mobile games taking more than
half of the market (51%). Mobile is the most lucrative segment, with smartphone and
1
tablet gaming growing 25.5% year on year to $70.3 billion (Figure 1). This growth is
fueled by an increase in the number of players and an increase spending per players
(McDonald, 2017). Average revenue per user in mobile games is $31.20 in 2018
(Statista, 2018).
There are two kinds of business model represent the online game market:
subscription-based model and free-to-play models. In subscription-based model,
gamers pay a monthly fee to game company for access to the game. While in free-to-
play model, gamers are free of charge to play the game but require to purchase various
game item (Park & Lee, 2011). In-app items are revenue model for free-to-play games.
Despite the increasing sales and trend in mobile game, there are limited studies
investigate factors influencing mobile gamers to purchase In-App game items. Without
an in-depth understanding of consumer behavior, it is hard to develop effective
strategies for game developer to keep this sustainable growth. Therefore, there is a need
to provide insight and observe online gamer as customer-related factors that influenced
mobile gamer on purchase intention and actual purchase of In-App game item.
Asian region is the largest mobile game market as many Asians adopt new
smartphones and download mobile games into their smartphone (D.Y. Jin, 2016).
APAC (Asia-Pacific) territories account for 52% of total global game revenues
(Wijman, 2018). Taiwan and Indonesia ranked 15 and 16 respectively on Global Game
Revenue estimate for 2017 based on Newzoo (2017) market research. Taiwan
population is 24M, internet population 21M and total revenues $1,030 million. While
Indonesia population is 264M, internet population 72M and total revenues $882 million.
Our majority respondents are Indonesian, fourth largest population in the world
(WorldBank, 2017) and Taiwanese as representative of Han Chinese, world’s largest
ethnic group (Zhang et al., 2010), Chinese ethnic group representing 22% of the
2
planet’s population (Parker, Gladstone, & Chee, 2001). Indonesia and Taiwan have a
different background, culture, and ethnic. Majority Indonesian population are Muslims,
Indonesia have the largest number of Muslims in the world (Athyal, 2015). Indonesia’s
majority population is native Indonesian (Levinson & Christensen, 2002). While
Taiwan as an immigrant population, the majority (>95%) of Taiwanese are of Han
Chinese (C.-H. Chen et al., 2016). Taiwan majority of religions are Buddhist (35%) and
Taoist (33%) (U.S.Department, 2007). Cultural differences have a significant part that
affects consumers’ attitudes and intentions (Halimia, Chavoshb, Soheiliradc, Esferjanid,
& Ghajarzadehe, 2011). Therefore, Indonesian and Han Chinese similarities and
dissimilarities in attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control and antecedent
factors that influencing purchase intention and actual purchase of mobile gamer toward
In-App Item is still unclear. Thus, this study aims to investigate different behavior in
Indonesia and Taiwan mobile gamer so that game developer can more understand
mobile gamer in both countries.
1.2 Research Purpose
Although Asian mobile game market grows rapidly, there is lack of previous
research on customer purchasing behavior on factors influencing mobile gamers to
purchase In-App game items. Without complete information what factor influencing
mobile gamer to purchase In-App game items, it is hard for game developer to set the
best strategies to increase gamer purchase on In-App game items.
Some studies have identified attributes that drive In-App / virtual item purchase
intention and decisions in online games. Only several studies identified factor
influencing In-App items purchase intention in mobile games. To address the study gap
regarding In-App items in mobile games, current study will investigate Asian mobile
3
gamers decision-making process for In-App items based on Theory of Planned
Behavior (TPB). This study intends to understand what factors influence the attitude,
subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control of Asian mobile gamers on In-App
items. Then, current study attempt to observe the relationship of attitude, subjective
norm, and perceived behavioral control to Asian mobile gamers purchase intention and
actual purchase of In-App items. This study result intends to give game developer
insights to provide a basis for further research and for them to develop effective
strategies that meet customer, Asian mobile gamer, value to increase their purchase In-
App game items.
1.3 Research Questions
There are two research questions regarding the main objectives, those are:
1. What are the antecedent factors that influence the attitude, subjective norm,
perceived behavioral control, and purchase intention of Asian mobile gamer on
In-App item?
2. What are the relationship between antecedent factors, attitude, subjective norm,
and perceived behavioral control to in-App item purchase intention and actual
purchase of Asian mobile gamer?
1.4 Research Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter gives you overview research background, the objective of research,
questions of research, and research organization. This chapter aims to provide
4
information to readers about the main topic to be discussed. This chapter intends to
provide readers information about the main topic to be discussed
Chapter 2: Literature Review
This chapter focus on the literature and theory that discussed as main object and
guidance to conduct this research. This chapter also discussed previous research and
their gap.
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
This chapter contains hypothesis development and methods to conduct this
research. This chapter will also explain research and survey design, data collection and
analysis method.
Chapter 4: Data Collection and Analysis
This chapter discussed data collection and analysis from our collected data. This
chapter will use literature reviews and the data that has been gathered to analyze the
result. The researcher will discuss primary data result and analyze it using SPSS version
25 and SmartPLS version 3. PLS-SEM is used to analyze the data. Result and
explanation of the hypotheses will be explained in this chapter. Researcher will also
compare result between Indonesia and Taiwan (representative Han-Chinese), also
between female and male.
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendation
This chapter is the final part of this research which consists of conclusion and
limitation of the current study. There will be some recommendations for game
developer insight and future research.
5
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Mobile Games
Mobile games are games played on any portable device, including mobile phone,
smartphone, PDA, or tablets (Richardson, 2012). In the other hand, Taniar (2008)
emphasize in portability and networkability elements and define mobile game or mobile
network game as games conducted in handheld devices with network functionality.
Later, Dal Yong Jin, Chee, and Kim (2015) refers mobile game to games and gaming
culture on specifically related to the use of cell phone platform, particularly smartphone,
excluding other portable devices. Major advantages of mobile games, for example,
compared to PC games is its accessibility (C. Chen & Leung, 2016; Wei & Lu, 2014).
H.-M. Kim (2013) also mention that common feature in mobile game is a sufficient
degree of simplicity.
D.Y. Jin (2016) mention that smartphone and tablet dramatic improvement has
fundamentally changed people daily activity especially influence the nature of mobile
games. Mobile games played on smartphone shifting the way video games are designed
and played. Mobile game shifted the stereotype gaming from of hardcore dedicated play
to activity that fit into everyday life (Willson & Leaver, 2016). Gamers and developers
usually consider mobile game as a casual game (D.Y. Jin, 2016), so mobile game also
typically defined in term of non-immersive shallow gameplay that was interruptible
non-narrative and played for minutes at s time (Richardson & Hjorth, 2014).
Richardson and Hjorth (2014) also mention that with the increasing app-based
ecologies and trends toward gamification, use fame and playful apps to boost
consumption product and service, mobile games now are an intrinsic part of the twenty-
first century popular game.
6
2.1.1 Type of Mobile Game
There are four kinds of mobile game based on most common business model
(Feijoo, Gómez-Barroso, Aguado, & Ramos, 2012; Laakso & Nyman, 2014). First,
premium model that player purchases the game before playing. Second, freemium
model that basic content is free but additional features unlocked through in-app
purchases. Third, subscription model that player pays a regular fee in order to play the
game. Last, advergaming that combines advertising and game. While Park and Lee
(2011) only divide into 2 group, they are a subscription-based model and free-to-play
models. In the subscription-based model, gamers pay a monthly fee to game company
for access to the game. While in the free-to-play model, gamers are free of charge to
play the game but require to purchase various game item.
There are three types of games based on player. They are a single-player game,
double-player, and player-against-computer which enrich the interaction, truth, and
richness of online games (Chia-Husn, 2007). Game can be defined by difficulties and
easy exploration into four types: casual game, experience game, challenge game, and
hardcore game (Tung & Lan, 2017). Chang (2002) categorized game into nine types,
they are role-playing, strategy, real-time tactic, action, puzzle, simulation, competitive
racing, foresting, and adventure.
2.1.2 In-App / Virtual Items
In-App / Virtual items are one of the primary sources of revenue for online game
(H. Lin & Sun, 2007). Virtual items as a revenue model - trading real money for virtual
items – was established back in the early 2000’s (Hamari & Lehdonvirta, 2010). In-
App / Virtual items are non-physical goods that can only be created and used in virtual
world environments to improve gamer entertainment experience (Guo & Barnes, 2012).
7
Predominantly these virtual items have either a competency value or a visual authority,
in some cases, they might fit both values. One popular mechanics, especially in casual
games, is the reduction of waiting time. This can be seen as a functional attribute that
allows the user to skip time for a desirable “next step” in the game (Hanner & Zarnekow,
2015).
Demand for virtual items can be triggered through marketing activities.
Especially in mobile games, it is common to send push messages to the user’s mobile
device reminding him of the game and potentially interesting offers in the in-game
stores. But, recent research shows that an inflationary spread of virtual items decreases
their value. So, game developer cannot simply “spam” the users with offers for virtual
items, since this would subvert the whole revenue model of free to play games. In most
free to play games the process of purchasing a virtual item is separated into two parts.
Mostly the user cannot buy a virtual item directly with real money. It can only be
obtained through an in-game currency (virtual currency). There are two types of
currencies in a game. One that can be earned within the game (e.g. resources like stones,
iron etc.). The second type of currency “premium-currency” (e.g. diamonds) can
sometimes be earned in the game but in most cases, it has to be purchased with real
money. After the purchase, the player can use this currency to buy the wanted virtual
items (Hanner & Zarnekow, 2015).
H. Lin and Sun (2007) mention that there is two type of virtual items, functional
props, and decorative props. Functional props can enhance game user competency and
decorative props can change in-game appearance of game user. While, LiveGamer
(2008), a global provider of commerce solutions for online publishers, grouped virtual
items into three types: vanity, functional, and social. Vanity items are used to alter
8
appearance. Functional items are game items that are used to augment power or ability.
Social items are given to other users as gifts.
2.2 Mobile Gamer
Mobile gamer defined as casual, they play for short bursts, prefer having fun,
and generally require relatively low dimensionality of control over the game, and think
of games as time-consuming entertainment (Christensen & Prax, 2012; Coulton, Čopič
Pucihar, & Bamford, 2008).
2.2.1 Definition and Classification
There is two broad classifications of gamer are casual and hardcore gamer.
Though mobile gamers have different demographic compared to other game, for
example, console or PC game, mobile gamer still often divide into those two categories
(Bamford, Coulton, & Edwards, 2006). Table 1 compares different characteristics
between hardcore and casual gamers.
Table 1. Characteristic of Hardcore and Casual Gamer
Hardcore gamers Casual gamers

Buy fewer games, buy or play
Purchase and play many games
popular or recommended games
Enjoy longer play session and Enjoy shorter play sessions (short
regularly play for a long time bursts)
Excited by the challenge in the Prefer having fun or immersing in
game atmospheric experience
Tolerate high level of functionality
Generally, require simple user
in the user interface and enjoy
interface
mastering complexity
Play games as lifestyle preference Playing game as time-passing
or priority entertainment
EEDAR (2017), game market research provider, classified mobile game player
into two categories based on spending and consumption time every week. Based on
9
annual spending, divide into three groups, which are non-payer ($0/year), payer ($0.99-
100/year), and (>$100/year). EEDAR also classify mobile gamer based on consumption
time into three groups, which are light player (<1 hour/week), moderate player (1-5
hours/week), and heavy player (>5 hours/week).
2.2.2 Mobile Gamer Profile
Based on Newzoo market research (Wijman, 2018), 80% of mobile gamer
comes from smartphone and the remaining 20% from tablets. According to Verto
Analytics, average mobile game playing is 24 minutes per day (Hwong, 2016).
Zatkin (2017) founder of EEDAR in Game Developers Conference 2017 said
that 27% of mobile gamer age is under 18 years, 29% are 18-35 years, 18% are 36-49
years, and 26% are older than 50. In 2016, mobile gamers dominated by female (55%),
while male 45%. More than 35% of active mobile gamers older than 18 years are heavy
payers (spend more than $100), the average yearly spending is $310.56. More than half
of mobile game revenue comes from heavy payers. Average heavy payers are 35.4 years
and dominated by men (71%). Top motivation for playing mobile game is to pass time
and free (or cheap) entertainment. Key factor mobile gamer to consider spending money
is to progress more quickly.
Eight out of ten teens and adults view mobile games as an easy way to pass time,
45% of adults play mobile games because they require less time and attention than other
activities, 42% teens and 28% of adults choose to play video games with their friends,
80% teens and 73% adults enjoy mobile game ability to play on-the-go, 70% adults like
the convenience of mobile game, and 45% enjoy its low engagement threshold.
(EEDAR, 2017).
10
2.2.3 Culture and Behavior of Online Game Player
Online game satisfies user requirement of social relationship (H.-P. Lu & Wang,
2008). Yee (2006) mentioned that there are three major motivations of online game
player, which are achievement, sociality, and immersion. While playing the game,
players gain power to push desire to accumulate higher position in the game. Thus,
there are other three factors that influence user intention, which are operation attitude,
objective norm, and awareness control. Other factors that influence user intention to
play game are software design, system quality, service quality, peer influence, outside
influence, self-control, and self-benefit (T. Lu & Boutilier, 2011). Factors that draw
gamer’s attention and meet their expectation are content, music effectiveness game
control, long-term, social communication, network stability, unique interface, and
tempo. These factors influenced their preference game attribute(C. L. Lin, 2003). Yang,
Wu, and Wang (2009) mention three factors that influence gamer satisfaction and
loyalty. There are experiential value, transaction cost, and service quality.
Leveling system or social stratification in online game motivated gamer to
increase their competency for gaining high social status, gamers need to devote
considerable time or money to achieve high social status. Thus, switching costs are very
large if players give up their current social status, so gamer with high social status have
higher intention to continually pursue and purchase advanced virtual items for
maintaining their present social status (Guo & Barnes, 2012). Hanner and Zarnekow
(2015) mention that retention rate and the average value per purchase will be increased
with repeated purchase of virtual item.
H.-M. Kim (2013) mention that gamers are willing to pay for extended versions
of free games. Though only small number of gamer who actually spend money on
11
mobile game, those group of people generate over half of the revenue of the games
(Hsiao & Chen, 2016).
2.3 The Theory of Planned Behavior
The Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991) is an influential theory in the
field of marketing communication and consumer behavior that links the beliefs that
individuals have, to their behavior. The TPB is often considered as an augmentation of
the theory of reasoned action (TRA), which establish to address various TRA
limitations (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). TPB has been shown to provide an excellent
framework to identify predictors of intention to purchase a particular product more
accurately than its predecessor TRA (Ajzen, 1991; Han, Hsu, & Sheu, 2010); therefore,
the TPB is used in this study.
According to the theory of planned behavior, prediction of intention depends
upon three different processes: 1) attitude, 2) subjective norm and 3) perceived behavior
control. Attitude reflects how people think and believe which relates to expectations of
the behavior. Subjective norm relates to the support provided or not provided by an
individual’s family, friends or significant other who significantly influences that
individual’s behavior. Perceived behavioral control refers to an individual’s feelings
about the ability to execute the designed behavior. Overall, the theory of planned
behavior explains that when a person perceives an activity as enjoyable and providing
good benefits, the person receives support and encouragement from others who are
already engaged in that behavior, and the person makes assumptions concerning his or
her own ability to accomplish the task. Then, there is stronger intention to perform that
task, which leads to actual execution of that specific task (Alzahrani, Mahmud,
12
Ramayah, Alfarraj, & Alalwan, 2017). The overall construct of the TPB model is shown
in Figure 2.
TPB have been used in various studies from different type of goods related
purchase intentions, for example for: household appliances (Tan, Ooi, & Goh, 2017),
skincare (Chia-Lin Hsu, Chang, & Yansritakul, 2017), online fashion (Escobar-
Rodríguez & Bonsón-Fernández, 2017), online auction (McLaughlin, Bradley, Prentice,
Verner, & Loane, 2017), and virtual items (Guo & Barnes, 2007).
Figure 2. Theory of Planned Behavior

2.3.1 Attitude
Ajzen (1991), describe Attitude as “the degree to which a person has a favorable
or unfavorable evaluation or appraisal of the behavior”. The more favorable the attitude
towards the behavior, the stronger the intention to perform it. Attitudes develop
reasonably from the beliefs people hold about the attitude by associating it with other
objects, characteristics, or events. Persuasive message that attack beliefs can produce
changes in previous attitudes.
13
2.3.2 Subjective Norm
Subjective norm refers to “the perceived social pressure to perform or not to
perform the behavior” (Ajzen, 1991). Subjective norm in TPB is an injunctive norm
where it is concerned about perceived social pressure to perform the behavior, whether
it is engaged or not engaged with social reward or punishment (Cialdini, Kallgren, &
Reno, 1991). Deutsch and Gerard (1955) divide social influence into normative and
informational social influence. Normative social influence defined as an influence to
conform with the expectation, while informational social influence defined as an
influence to accept information obtain from others as evidence about reality. Social
influence such as judgment of others, for example, family, friends, and community,
were considered when people make their own judgment. Thus, social influence can
change people attitude towards something (Wood, 2000). In this study, social influence
is derived from the concept as subjective norm in the TPB.
2.3.3 Perceived Behavioral Control
Perceived behavioral control described as perceived ease or difficulty to
perform the behavior. The greater the perceived behavioral control, the stronger should
be an individual’s intention to perform behavior. The more resources, like time and
money, and opportunities they have, fewer obstacles, the greater their perceived control
over behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Three factors determine perceived behavioral control are
ability, resource, and opportunity (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Ajzen (1991) also mention
that perceived behavioral control together with intention, can be used directly to predict
the behavior, which in this study is actual purchase behavior.
2.3.4 Purchase Intention
Ajzen (1991), describe intention as motivational factors that influence behavior,
indicate how hard people willing to try and how much effort they planning to exert in
14
order to perform the behavior. The stronger intention, the more likely they perform the
behavior. Bagozzi, Yi, and Baumgartner (1990) found that intention is a function of
level effort needed to perform the behavior (for example purchase a product or service)
in attitude-behavior relation. When the level of effort was high, intention is fully
mediate the effect of attitude on behavior, thus attitude had no direct effects on behavior.
In the other hand, in behavior only need little effort, attitude had direct effects on
behavior.
2.3.5 Actual Purchase
Brown (1996) mention that purchasing behavior is the decision processes and
acts when people involved in buying and using products. Costumer decision process
affected by 3 factor which is personal, psychological and social Personal factors are a
unique factor to a particular person according to their demographics such as gender,
race, age, income, habit, etc. Psychological factors include motives, perception, attitude,
personality, lifestyles, ability, and knowledge. Social factors are influenced by opinion
of leaders, family, reference group, social class, and culture.
2.4 Demographic
Demographic characteristics such as gender, race, age, income, habit commonly
studied to understand product adoption process (Akhter, 2003). Chatman, Polzer,
Barsade, and Neale (1998) mention in their study that people usually use demographic
characteristics to categorize others and predict their likely behaviors. Demographic
characteristics also tend to be used as a basis for social categorization because
demographically similar people likely share similar backgrounds and experiences.
15
2.4.1 Habit
Habit is a stable and persistent type of behavior (Verplanken & Melkevik, 2008).
Habit can be measured by the frequency of the occurrence of certain behavior.
Increments of habit strength are accomplished by repetitions of reinforcements
(Triandis, 1979). Habit strength may moderate the relationship between reason such as
attitudes and intention with behavior (Ronis, Yates, & Kirscht, 1989).
Limayem, Hirt, and Cheung (2007) mention that habit plays a moderating role
in the relationship between intention and behavior in continued IS usage. Related to
mobile game purchase intention, player who spend more time on mobile games will
have more intention to spend money (Hsiao & Chen, 2016).
2.4.2 Income
Past research has found that resources such as education and personal income
influence strategy of usage (C. Kim & Lee, 1996; Spiro, 1983). Individual spending
pattern is a consequence of increases in income resulting from assimilation of
individuals’ consumption pattern habits of their new income class (Bronfenbrenner,
2017).
Income is closely related to the opportunity cost of time. Along with income
increases, the perception of value of time changes. High-income consumers will exhibit
a high valuation of time (Goldman & Johansson, 1978; Stigler, 1961).
2.4.3 Gender
Gender differences in attitudes and behavior have been extensively researched
in general psychology and the business literature (Akhter, 2003). Studies show that men
engage in taking more risky behavior than women (Bajtelsmit & VanDerhei, 1997;
Hinz, McCarthy, & Turner, 1997) and more rely on themselves for making decisions
(Lewellen, Lease, & Schlarbaum, 1977).
16
Liu (2016) mention that gender plays a major role in the perceptions and
acceptance of online games. Female tends to be more sensitive towards other opinions,
thus social influence is a stronger determinant of the intention to play online games.
2.5 Previous Research and Research Gap
Previous studies mainly focus primary on online game in general, discussing
game preference (Tung & Lan, 2017), gamer motivation (Alzahrani et al., 2017; Chin-
Lung Hsu & Lu, 2007; Lee, 2009; Lee & Tsai, 2010; Lim & Seng, 2011), addiction
(H.-P. Lu & Wang, 2008), gender (Liu, 2016) and their purchase behavior (Bleize &
Antheunis, 2017; Guo & Barnes, 2007, 2009, 2011; Guo & Barnes, 2012; Hamari, 2015;
Ho & Wu, 2012; Lehdonvirta, 2009; Mäntymäki & Salo, 2013; Park & Lee, 2011;
Wohn, 2014). In recent years, there are some studies about mobile game discussing
gamer behavior (de Kervenoael, Schwob, Palmer, & Simmons, 2017) and mobile game
environment (Feijoo et al., 2012; D.Y. Jin, 2016). There are also previous studies about
customer purchase behavior, for example, Penttinen, Rossi, and Tuunainen (2010),
Hanner and Zarnekow (2015), Sifa et al. (2015), and Hsiao and Chen (2016). Table 1
shows a summary of some previous research
Prior research on mobile game item (In-App) consumer purchasing behavior in
Asian population is still lacking. Previous studies use perceived value, Keeney’s value
based, and Customer Lifetime Value. However, there are still no studies on mobile
game In-App purchase using TPB as a framework.
17
Table 2. Summary of Previous Research
Research Alzahrani et al. Park and Lee (2011) Ho and Wu (2012) Guo and Barnes Hsiao and Chen
(2017) (2012) (2016)
Methodology Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative
Data Collection method Questionnaire Questionnaire Online survey Online survey Online survey
distributed in distributed in school distributed to World distributed via
Malaysia public and colleges class of Warcraft (WoW) popular virtual
universities player communities of
Tower of Saviors
(ToS)
Theory Flow theory and TPB TCV TCV UTAUT, TAM, and Perceived value
TPB
Subject 1584 students 384 students 523 virtual game users 253 WoW player 3309 ToS player
Analysis PLS PLS Multiple regression SEM-PLS SEM
analysis
Result Flow experience and Character competency, Game type moderate’s Perceived User loyalty and
perceived enjoyment enjoyment visual relationship between enjoyment, specific value
positively increase authority, monetary game variables perceived value, positively affect
attitude and online value and character (character competency, social status, effort in-app purchase
game playing. identification price utility, and social expectancy, general intention. Gender
Attitude, subjective positively affect relationship support) achievement, and and income play
norm, and perceived intention to purchase and purchase intention status significantly an influential
behavior control have game items. While of virtual goods. Price related to purchase role in affecting
a significant satisfaction does not utility, aesthetics and intention. Purchase purchase
relationship with significantly affect social relationship intention positively intention.
actual game playing. game items purchase significantly increase influences actual
intention. purchase intention. purchase behavior.
18
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Hypothesis Development
3.1.1 Influence of Attitude to In-App Item Purchase Intention
Hamari (2015) found that attitude positively associated with purchase intentions
for virtual items. Hence, we propose that:
H1. Attitude (AT) positively influences gamer In-App Item Purchase Intention
(PI).
3.1.2 Influence of Social Influence to In-App Item Attitude and Purchase Intention
Social influence can change people attitude towards something (Wood, 2000).
Wohn (2014) indicates in her study that social factor was strongly associated with
individual spent real money or not. Having more friends in game will increase the like
hood of spending money within the game. Hamari (2015) also mention that social
influence is positively associated with purchase intention for virtual items. Thus, we
propose that:
H2a. Social Influence (SI) positively influences gamers Attitude (AT) toward
In-App Item.
H2b. Social Influence (SI) positively influences gamer In-App Item Purchase
Intention (PI).
19
3.1.3 Influence of Perceived Behavioral Control to In-App Item Purchase Intention
and Actual Purchase
Perceived control has a significant effect on purchase intention in a virtual world
(Domina, Lee, & MacGillivray, 2012). Ajzen (1991) mention that perceived behavioral
control can also be used directly to predict the behavior. So, we propose that:
H3a. Perceived behavioral control (PB) positively influences gamer In-App
Item Purchase Intention (PI).
H3b. Perceived behavioral control (PB) positively influences gamer In-App
Item Actual Purchase (AP).
3.1.4 Influence of Purchase Intention to In-App Item Actual Purchase
(Guo & Barnes, 2012) research result support relationship between purchase
intention and actual purchase behavior of virtual items in WoW. Therefore, we propose
that:
H4. Purchase Intention (PI) positively influences gamer In-App Item Actual
Purchase (AP).
3.1.5 Moderating effect of Playing Habit between In-App Item Purchase Intention
and Actual Purchase
Habit may moderate the relationship between intention and behavior (Ronis et
al., 1989). Hsiao and Chen (2016) mention that player who spends more time on mobile
games will have more intention to spend money. Thus, we propose that:
H5. Playing habit positively moderate gamer Purchase Intention (PI) toward In-
App Item Actual Purchase (AP).
20
3.1.6 Influence of Income to In-App Item Perceived Behavioral Control
The more resources, like time and money, and opportunities they have, the
greater their perceived control over behavior (Ajzen, 1991), so we propose that:
H6. Income positively influences gamer Perceived behavioral control (PB)
toward In-App Item.
3.1.7 Difference Influence of Attitude, Social Influence, and Perceived Behavioral
Control Toward In-App Purchase Intention between Gender
Gender plays a major role in the perceptions and acceptance of online games
(Liu, 2016). Thus, we propose that the effect of attitude, social influence, and perceived
behavioral control influence different between female and male.
3.2 Proposed Conceptual Framework
Based on our literature review, this study derived five factors, including ten
measurements item, to explore answers to our research question. The factors and their
effects are shown in the conceptual model (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Conceptual Model

21
3.3 Survey Development
This study questionnaire is divided into two parts. The first part is about
respondent background (demographic) information. The second part is the study
research questions. Background information questions are designed as multiple choice
questions. While for study research questions, we used five-point Likert scale.
The design of the question is adapted and modified from Ajzen (2002) guideline
with appropriate modifications for mobile game In-App item. We asked respondents to
indicate the extent to which they agreed with the condition described in each item on a
5-point Likert scale, ranging from “1=strongly disagree” to “5= strongly agree”.
There are 5 factors construct which are Attitude (AT), Social Influence (SI),
Perceived Behavioral Control (PB), Purchase Intention (PI), and Actual Purchase (AP)
Factors construct followed by 10 measurement items and 43 question items. Each
measurement item is designed with two or more questions item. Summary of
questionnaire design shown in Table 3.
22
Table 3. Model Construct, Survey Measurement, and Question
No Factor No Measurement Label No Question

Construct Items
1 Attitude 1 Play Mobile PG1 1 Playing mobile game is very enjoyable
(AT) Game PG2 2 Playing mobile game every day is beneficial
PG3 3 I am happy when I play mobile game
2 Buy Item BI1 4 Item from mobile game is worth to buy
BI2 5 Buying mobile game item is a good thing
BI3 6 When I buy mobile game item, I feel happy
2 Social 3 Family FM1 7 My family (or relatives) thinks I should buy mobile game item
Influence FM2 8 My family (or relatives) support me to buy mobile game item
(SI) FM3 9 My family (or relatives) recommend me to buy mobile game item
FM4 10 I feel guilty towards my family if I buy mobile game item
FM5 11 It is important to me buy mobile game item that my family approved
FM6 12 I often consult my family before I buy mobile game item
4 Friends FR1 13 My friends think I should buy mobile game item
FR2 14 My friends support me to buy mobile game item
FR3 15 My friends recommend me to buy mobile game item
FR4 16 I feel guilty towards my friends if I buy mobile game item
FR5 17 It is important to me buy mobile game item that my friends approved
FR6 18 I often consult my friends before I buy mobile game item
5 Gamer GC1 19 My gamer community thinks I should buy mobile game item
Community GC2 20 My gamer community support me to buy mobile game item
GC3 21 My gamer community recommend me to buy mobile game item
23
No Factor No Measurement Label No Question
Construct Items
GC4 22 I feel guilty towards my gamer community if I buy mobile game item
GC5 23 It is important to me buy mobile game item that my gamer community
approved
GC6 24 I often consult my gamer community before I buy mobile game item
3 Perceived 6 Price PR1 25 Mobile game item is affordable
Behavioral PR2 26 Mobile game limited item is still affordable
Control PR3 27 I feel no objection to buying mobile game item even though it a little
(PB) bit expensive
PR4 28 I have enough money to buy mobile game item
7 Availability AV1 29 Mobile game item is easy to buy
AV2 30 Mobile game item is convenience to buy
AV3 31 There always interesting mobile game item to buy
AV4 32 There always interesting promotion to buy mobile game item
4 Purchase 8 Preference PC1 33 I intend to buy mobile game item this month
Intention PC2 34 I plan to buy mobile game item this month
(PI) PC3 35 I will buy mobile game item this month
9 Willingness WS1 36 I am willing to save to buy mobile game item
to Sacrifice WS2 37 I do not mind to wait for special promotion to buy mobile game item
WS3 38 I willing to allocate my other expenses to buy mobile game item
5 Actual Purchase AP1 39 I bought mobile game item before
(AP) AP2 40 I bought mobile game item regularly
AP3 41 I bought mobile game item for my friends before
AP4 42 I bought mobile game item for my game community before
AP5 43 I bought mobile game limited item before
24
3.4 Data Collection and Sample
The questionnaire distributes through online media (Google Form) to mobile or
smartphone user. We choose online survey because the method is less expensive,
environment-friendly, and efficiently compare to traditional paper-based survey.
Online survey also can reach more people compare to paper survey. Besides, our target
respondents are mobile gamer, so respondents should be familiar to smartphone.
The questionnaires distributed in three languages for the same questions. All the
questionnaire questions have the same questionnaire design translated into English
Chinese, and Indonesian, in order to reach target respondents. Each questionnaire
version is shown in Appendix 1-3.
Prior questionnaire distribution, readability test done towards several
respondents to ensure that the questionnaire can be understood by respondents and does
not contain any bias meaning. Each language version of the questionnaires has been
proofreading by respondents who are native to the language.
The most common minimum sample rule for PLS is "10 times" rule, which
states that the sample size should be at least 10 times the number of incoming paths to
the construct with the most incoming paths (Barclay, Higgins, & Thompson, 1995; Chin,
Marcolin, & Newsted, 2003). Joe F Hair, Sarstedt, Ringle, and Mena (2012) mention
that the use of PLS is appropriate, and with respect to sample size they repeated the "10
times" rule. In this study, the most incoming paths are 3 to Purchase Intention construct,
thus minimum sample is 30.
25
3.5 Data Analysis Method
PLS-SEM (Partial Least Square-Structural Equation Modeling) is used to
analyze data. Analysis is conducted using SPSS version 25 and SmartPLS version 3.
All data collected through questionnaires entered into SPSS to check overall data
validity and reliability before analyzing with SmartPLS.
3.5.1 Validity and Reliability Test
Validity test shows the degree to which the test or scale actually measures the
real quantifier which all the inference made based on the result will be meaningful
(Cronbach, 1971). Validity test is a requirement to test reliability (Wainer & Braun,
2013). Convergent validity indicates to the extent to which a set of indicators converges
in measuring the concept of concern (J.F. Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2013).
While Discriminant validity is to which extent a construct is truly distinct from other
constructs. This means that the variance shared among a set of items measuring a
construct and their own construct is higher than the variance shared with other
constructs in the model (J.F. Hair et al., 2013).
Convergent validity assessed according to F. Hair Jr, Sarstedt, Hopkins, and G.
Kuppelwieser (2014) suggestion by examining the loadings, average variance extracted
(AVE) and composite reliability (CR). CR should > 0.7 and AVE should > 0.5. While
factor loadings should be 0.5 or greater to be considered as practical significant (J.F.
Hair et al., 2013). Discriminant validity assessed based on Fornell and Larcker
(1981)suggestion, who compare the AVE with squared correlations or alternatively
compare the square root of the AVE with the correlations. AVE square root of each
construct should be greater than the correlation of each construct.
26
Reliability test represents the stability and consistency degree of a test or a scale
in measuring intended measurement (Moskal & Leydens, 2000). The higher the
reliability, the more dependable of analysis result. To test reliability, Cronbach alpha
coefficient is used. Cronbach's alpha coefficient >0.7 indicates an acceptable reliability
for capturing the dimensions. AVE from each construct should exceed the 0.5
thresholds. In addition, the composite reliability suggested exceeding the appropriate
level >0.7 (J.F. Hair et al., 2013).
3.5.2 Partial Least Square- Structural Equation Modeling
Vinzi, Chin, Henseler, and Wang (2010), in his book mention that partial least
squares path modeling (PLS, PLS-PM, PLS-SEM) is a statistical approach for modeling
complex multivariable relationships among observed and latent variables. PLS
performs a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). In a CFA, the pattern of loading of
the measurement items on the latent constructs is specified explicitly in the model
(Gefen & Straub, 2005). Structural Equation Models (SEM) allowing the estimation of
a causal theoretical network of relationships linking latent complex concepts, each
measured by means of a number of observable indicators. From the standpoint of SEM,
PLS is a component-based approach where the concept of causality is formulated in
terms of linear conditional expectation. While from the standpoint of data analysis, PLS
viewed as a very flexible approach to multi-block (few sets of variables are available
for the same set of samples) analysis (Vinzi et al., 2010).
The advantage using PLS-SEM is it can be used in small sample size and non-
normal data. PLS-SEM also can handle more complex model with fewer restrictions
compared to CB-SEM. Thus, PLS is a powerful method to analyze complex model
using smaller sample and provide precise estimates in extremely non-normal data
(Ringle, Sarstedt, & Straub, 2012).
27
To test the hypothesis with PLS-SEM method, this study utilizes SmartPLS
version 3. Following F. Hair Jr et al. (2014) suggestion, to assess the loadings and path
coefficients’ significance, bootstrapping method (5000 resamples) was utilized.
28
CHAPTER IV: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Survey Data Collection
Data collected from 21 March until 07 May 2018. From total 337 respondents,
there are 326 respondents with a valid questionnaire which consist of Asian respondents
who are 16 years old and older.
The most common minimum sample rule for PLS is "10 times" rule, which
states that the sample size should be at least 10 times the number of incoming paths to
the construct with the most incoming paths (Barclay et al., 1995; Chin et al., 2003). Joe
F Hair et al. (2012) mention that the use of PLS is appropriate, and with respect to
sample size they repeated the "10 times" rule. In this study, the most incoming paths
are 3 to Purchase Intention construct, thus minimum sample is 30. Following this, the
final sample included 326 valid responses are adequately meeting PLS minimum
sample size. Detailed sample demographic characteristics are described in Table 4.
Respondents consist of 161 Indonesian (49.39%), 158 Taiwanese (48.47), and
the remaining 7 (2.14%) are from another Asian country such as Macau, Hong Kong,
Vietnam, Malaysia, and Japan. From 326 respondents, 180 persons (55.21%) are female
and 146 (44.79%) are male. Indonesian respondents consist of 45.96% female and
54.04% male, while Taiwanese respondents consist of 63.29% female and 36.71 are
male.
Age of children is a significant factor in their power to influence or be
influenced by parents (Tilston, Gregson, Neale, & Douglas, 1991), younger children
have stronger parenteral influence, while adolescence had more freedom to choose
(Hamilton, McIlveen, & Strugnell, 2000). Thus, children younger than 16 years old
purchase decisions are too dependent on their parents. Therefore, we assume our
29
respondents who are16 years old and older already can make their own purchase
decision and have purchase power. Therefore, respondents are 16 years old and older.
There are 15.95% respondents between age 16 to 20 years old, 42.02% between 21 to
25 years old, 30.37% between 26 to 30 years old, and 11.66% older than 30 years old.
More than half of Indonesian respondents (73.91%) are between 21 to 30 years old,
while almost half of Taiwanese respondents (48.73%) are between 21 to 25 years old.
Most of our respondents have graduated from university (89.88%), 48.16% of
respondents had a bachelor degree and 41.72% had a postgraduate degree. Indonesian
respondents consist of 83.27% had a bachelor degree and above, while Taiwanese
respondents consist of 96.20% with a bachelor degree and above. Based on this profile,
it indicates that most of the respondents were highly educated.
In point of current status, the majority of our respondents are a student (60.12%),
followed by office worker (29.75%). Indonesian respondents consist of 42.86% student
and 39.13% office worker, while Taiwanese respondents dominated by students
(77.85%).
Related mobile game playing habit (H), researcher ask about playing time spent/
week (H1), playing frequency/ week (H2), and playing time spent/ day (H3). More than
half of our respondents (53.07) spent less than one hour to play mobile game. There are
54.04% of Indonesian respondents spend more than one hour to play mobile game, in
contrast, 60.13% of Taiwanese respondents only spent less than one hour to play mobile
game. Almost half of the respondents (45.09%) play mobile game every day, with
Indonesian respondents (41.61%) and Taiwanese respondents (48.73%). Based on
EEDAR (2017) classification, our respondents consist of 32.52% light player and 67.48%
30
heavy player. Indonesian respondents consist of 70.19% heavy player, while Taiwanese
respondents consist of 65.19% heavy player.
Respondents who join game community (including group within the game or
group of friends who play the same game) are 44.17%. Most of Indonesian respondents
(61.49) did not join game community, while half of Taiwanese respondents (50%) join
game community.
Regarding average monthly income, the vast majority (63.50%) has less than
500 USD (equal to 15000 NTD, with currency 1TWD = USD 0.033). Indonesian
respondents (56.52%) and Taiwanese respondents (70.25%) have average monthly
income less than 500 USD. Low monthly income probably because of most of our
respondents are still a student.
Majority of our respondents (63.18%) never purchase In-App game item, with
Indonesian respondents 59.63% and Taiwanese respondents 65.82%. There are 24.23%
respondents who purchase In-App game item for ≤ 10 USD (300NTD). Indonesian
respondents who purchase In-App game item for ≤ 10 USD are 25.47% and Taiwanese
respondents are 23.42%.
31
Table 4. Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
Asian (326) Indonesian (161) Taiwanese (158)

Frequency Percentage (%) Frequency Percentage (%) Frequency Percentage (%)
Gender Female 180 55.21 74 45.96 100 63.29
Male 146 44.79 87 54.04 58 36.71
Age 16 - 20 years 52 15.95 19 11.80 33 20.89
21 - 25 years 137 42.02 57 35.40 77 48.73
26 - 30 years 99 30.37 62 38.51 35 22.15
> 30 years 38 11.66 23 14.29 13 8.23
Education Background High School 33 10.12 27 16.77 6 3.80
Bachelor 157 48.16 85 52.80 70 44.30
Master 128 39.26 44 27.33 79 50.00
PhD 8 2.45 5 3.11 3 1.90
Status Student 196 60.12 69 42.86 123 77.85
Employee 97 29.75 63 39.13 32 20.25
Entrepreneur 21 6.44 19 11.80 2 1.27
Housewife 12 3.68 10 6.21 1 0.63
Time Spent/ Week < 1 hour 106 32.52 48 29.81 55 34.81
1 - 5 hours 94 28.83 39 24.22 54 34.18
6 - 10 hours 50 15.34 25 15.53 23 14.56
11 - 15 hours 26 7.98 14 8.70 11 6.96
16 - 20 hours 11 3.37 5 3.11 6 3.80
> 20 hours 39 11.96 30 18.63 9 5.70
32
Asian (326) Indonesian (161) Taiwanese (158)
Frequency Percentage (%) Frequency Percentage (%) Frequency Percentage (%)
Frequency/ Week ≦ 1/week 95 29.14 47 29.19 45 28.48
2-3/week 41 12.58 22 13.66 18 11.39
Several times 43 13.19 25 15.53 18 11.39
Everyday 147 45.09 67 41.61 77 48.73
Time Spent/ Day < 1 hour 173 53.07 74 45.96 95 60.13
1 - 2 hours 88 26.99 44 27.33 41 25.95
3 - 4 hours 39 11.96 26 16.15 13 8.23
5 - 8 hours 21 6.44 14 8.70 7 4.43
> 8 hours 5 1.53 3 1.86 2 1.27
Gamer Community Yes 144 44.17 62 38.51 79 50.00
No 182 55.83 99 61.49 79 50.00
Monthly Income ≦ 500 USD 207 63.50 91 56.52 111 70.25
(USD) 501 - 1000 USD 70 21.47 38 23.60 32 20.25
1001 - 1500 27 8.28 16 9.94 11 6.96
USD
> 1500 USD 22 6.75 16 9.94 4 2.53
Have ever purchase Yes 120 36.81 65 40.37 54 34.18
In-App Game Item No 206 63.19 96 59.63 104 65.82
In-App Game Never spent any 206 63.19 96 59.63 104 65.82
Purchase/ Month money
≦ 10 USD 79 24.23 41 25.47 37 23.42
11 - 25 USD 21 6.44 15 9.32 6 3.80
26 - 50 USD 10 3.07 2 1.24 8 5.06
> 50 USD 10 3.07 7 4.35 3 1.90
33
4.2 Validity and Reliability Test Result
All data collected through questionnaires entered into SPSS to check whether
the data is valid and reliable. Validity test using bivariate Pearson correlation coefficient
with two-tailed significance (0.05). Item-to-total correlation value should >0.3 to
indicates appropriate level (Field, 2017). Due to correlation insufficient correlation
value, FM6 and FR4 removed from Asian, Indonesian, and Male data. FM5, FM6, and
FR4 are removed from Taiwanese data, then FM5 and FR4 removed from Female data
because of correlation value less than 0.3. Table 5 shows a summary of removed item
due insufficient correlation value.
Cronbach's alpha coefficient > 0.7 indicates an acceptable reliability (J.F. Hair
et al., 2013). Cronbach’s Alpha from reliability test of Asian, Indonesian, Taiwanese,
Female and Male are respectively 0.934, 0.936, 0.932, 0932, 0.922 with no data
excluded. Thus, all the data is reliable.
Table 5. Removed Items due to Insufficient Correlation Value
Removed
Item
Asia Indonesian Taiwanese Female Male
FM5 √ √
FM6 √ √ √ √
FR4 √ √ √ √ √
Factor loadings should be 0.5 or greater to be considered as practical significant
(J.F. Hair et al., 2013). Therefore, factor loadings that less than 0.5 should be removed
before further analysis. Based on factor loading criteria, researcher removing some
items, mention in Table 6.
34
Table 6. Removed Items due to Insufficient Loading Factor
Removed Factor Loading

Item Asia Indonesian Taiwanese Female Male
FM1 0.453
FM4 0.174 0.167 0.209 0.168 0.189
FM5 0.231 0.343 0.362
FM6 0.289
FR5 0.458 0.458 0.414 0.382
GC4 -0.410 -0.433 -0.400 -0.364 -0.471
GC6 0.466
AV1 0.466
AV2 0.464 0.492
Model validity and reliability test result generated from Smart PLS. Cronbach's
alpha coefficient should > 0.7 indicates (J.F. Hair et al., 2013), CR > 0.7 and AVE >
0.5 (F. Hair Jr et al., 2014). Discriminant validity analyzes by comparing the AVE with
squared correlations or alternatively compare the square root of the AVE with the
correlations. AVE square root of each construct should be greater than the correlation
of each construct (Fornell & Larcker, 1981)
Asian Respondent model validity and reliability test result shown in Table 7.
Cronbach's alpha coefficient of all construct range from 0.831-1 and CR range from
0.883-1. For AVE, except for PB (0.446) and SI (0.500), all construct has a value
greater than 0.5. If AVE is less than 0.5, but composite reliability is higher than 0.6, the
convergent validity of the construct is still adequate (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Table
8 shows that AVE square root of each construct in Asian Respondent model (diagonal
elements in bold) are greater than the correlation of each construct. Thus, Asian
Respondent model still valid and reliable.
35
Table 7. Asian Model Validity and Reliability Result
Cronbach's Alpha CR AVE

AP 0.837 0.883 0.602
AT 0.861 0.893 0.584
Habit 0.839 0.904 0.758
Income 1 1 1
Moderating Effect H (PI-AP) 0.942 0.947 0.507
PB 0.831 0.865 0.446
PI 0.890 0.918 0.654
SI 0.905 0.921 0.500
Table 8. Correlation of Asian Respondent Model
Moderating
Effect H
AP AT Habit Income (PI-AP) PB PI SI
AP 0.776
AT 0.547 0.764
Habit 0.378 0.412 0.870
Income 0.049 -0.039 -0.008 1
Moderating
Effect H
(PI-AP) 0.259 0.174 0.082 0.057 0.712
PB 0.489 0.649 0.253 0.094 0.092 0.668
PI 0.730 0.613 0.36 0.044 0.374 0.534 0.809
SI 0.489 0.634 0.225 -0.065 0.065 0.522 0.524 0.707
Indonesian Respondent model validity and reliability test result shown in Table
9. Cronbach's alpha coefficient of all construct range from 0.832-1 and CR range from
0.867-1. AVE from all construct has a value greater than 0.5, except PB (0.450).
According to (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), convergent validity of the construct is still
adequate if composite reliability is higher than 0.6 though AVE is less than 0.5. In Table
10, AVE square root of each construct in Indonesian Respondent model (diagonal
elements in bold) are greater than the correlation of each construct. Therefore, Asian
Respondent model still valid and reliable.
36
Table 9. Indonesian Model Validity and Reliability Result

AP 0.845 0.888 0.616
AT 0.86 0.894 0.586
Habit 0.869 0.919 0.792
Income 1 1 1
PB 0.832 0.867 0.450
PI 0.908 0.93 0.692
SI 0.922 0.937 0.584
Table 10. Correlation of Indonesian Respondent Model
Moderating
Effect H
AP 0.785
AT 0.510 0.765
Habit 0.405 0.526 0.890
Income 0.073 -0.065 0.060 1
Moderating
Effect H
(PI-AP) 0.227 0.159 0.081 0.053 0.751
PB 0.480 0.568 0.301 0.087 0.029 0.671
PI 0.761 0.590 0.351 0.115 0.368 0.516 0.832
SI 0.442 0.600 0.272 -0.088 0.028 0.479 0.465 0.764
AVE square root of PB and SI of Taiwanese Respondent model lower than
correlation with AT (Table 11). It means that the variables correlate more highly with
variables outside their parent factor than with the variables within their parent factor.
To increase the value of AVE, indicator with lower outer loading from PB and SI are
removed. Thus, researcher removed FM3(0.623), FR6(0.651) and GC5 (0.464) from SI
construct, then PR2(0.732) and PR4 (0.656) from PB construct.
37
Table 11. Correlation of Taiwanese Respondent Model
Moderating
Effect H
AP 0.777
AT 0.610 0.765
Habit 0.353 0.315 0.852
Income -0.020 0.037 -0.154 1
Moderating
Effect H
(PI-AP) 0.292 0.197 0.063 0.032 0.649
PB 0.553 0.767 0.235 0.137 0.220 0.728
PI 0.695 0.662 0.392 -0.067 0.356 0.628 0.786
SI 0.581 0.705 0.211 -0.002 0.181 0.650 0.646 0.676
After removing some item, AVE square root of each construct of Taiwanese
Respondent model (diagonal elements in bold) is greater than the correlation of each
construct (Table13). Table 12 shows, Cronbach's alpha coefficient of all construct range
from 0.777-1 and CR range from 0.855-1. AVE from all construct has a value greater
than 0.5, except moderating effect of H (0.421). Convergent validity of the construct is
still adequate if composite reliability is higher than 0.6 though AVE is less than 0.5
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
Table 12. Taiwanese Model Validity and Reliability Result

AP 0.838 0.884 0.604
AT 0.863 0.894 0.586
Habit 0.812 0.888 0.726
Income 1 1 1
PB 0.777 0.855 0.597
PI 0.869 0.904 0.618
SI 0.875 0.901 0.536
38
Table 13. Correlation of Taiwanese Respondent Model (New)
Moderating
Effect H
AP 0.777
AT 0.608 0.766
Habit 0.353 0.317 0.852
Income -0.021 0.036 -0.154 1
Moderating
Effect H
(PI-AP) 0.291 0.196 0.063 0.032 0.649
PB 0.522 0.744 0.236 0.129 0.179 0.773
PI 0.695 0.661 0.392 -0.067 0.356 0.600 0.786
SI 0.572 0.703 0.22 0.009 0.199 0.616 0.633 0.732
Table 14 shows that AVE square root of PB of Female Respondent model lower
than correlation with AT. Indicator with lower outer loading from PB removed to
increase the value of AVE. Therefore, researcher removed AV1(0.491) and PR4 (0.618)
from PB construct.
Table 14. Correlation of Female Respondent Model
Moderating
Effect H
AP 0.786
AT 0.547 0.759
Habit 0.323 0.319 0.880
Income -0.109 -0.079 -0.018 1
Moderating
Effect H
(PI-AP) 0.225 0.263 0.103 -0.024 0.703
PB 0.483 0.709 0.248 -0.068 0.176 0.680
PI 0.621 0.657 0.283 -0.089 0.373 0.592 0.822
SI 0.551 0.630 0.115 -0.114 0.042 0.577 0.553 0.695
After removing some item, AVE square root of each construct from Female
Respondent model (diagonal elements in bold) are greater than the correlation of each
39
construct (Table16). In table 15, Cronbach's alpha coefficient of all construct range
from 0.786-1 and CR range from 0.852-1. AVE from all construct has a value greater
than 0.5, except moderating effect of H (0.495) and SI (0.484). If AVE is less than 0.5,
but composite reliability is higher than 0.6, convergent validity of the construct is still
adequate (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
Table 15. Female Model Validity and Reliability Result

AP 0.849 0.890 0.618
AT 0.856 0.890 0.577
Habit 0.855 0.912 0.775
Income 1 1 1
PB 0.786 0.852 0.536
PI 0.902 0.926 0.676
SI 0.908 0.922 0.484
Table 16. Correlation of Female Respondent Model (New)
Moderating
Effect H
AP 0.786
AT 0.547 0.759
Habit 0.323 0.319 0.880
Income -0.109 -0.079 -0.018 1
Moderating
Effect H
(PI-AP) 0.225 0.263 0.103 -0.024 0.703
PB 0.492 0.717 0.231 -0.080 0.204 0.732
PI 0.62 0.656 0.283 -0.089 0.373 0.621 0.822
SI 0.551 0.63 0.115 -0.114 0.042 0.592 0.553 0.695
Male Respondent model validity and reliability test result shown in Table 17.
Cronbach's alpha coefficient of all construct range from 0.812-1 and CR range from
0.851-1. For AVE, except for moderating effect H (0.472), PB (0.419) and SI (0.472),
40
all construct has a value greater than 0.5. Fornell and Larcker (1981) mention that if
AVE is less than 0.5, but composite reliability is higher than 0.6, the convergent validity
of the construct is still adequate. AVE square root of each construct in Male Respondent
model (diagonal elements in bold) are greater than the correlation of each construct
(Table 18). Thus, Asian Respondent model still valid and reliable.
Table 17. Male Model Validity and Reliability Result
Cronbach's
Alpha CR AVE
AP 0.812 0.869 0.571
AT 0.851 0.884 0.563
Habit 0.800 0.882 0.714
Income 1 1 1
PB 0.813 0.851 0.419
PI 0.863 0.901 0.612
SI 0.892 0.912 0.472
Table 18. Correlation of Male Respondent Model
Moderating
Effect H
AP 0.756
AT 0.491 0.750
Habit 0.315 0.381 0.845
Income 0.140 -0.035 -0.054 1
Moderating
Effect H
(PI-AP) 0.168 0.087 -0.041 0.056 0.687
PB 0.456 0.539 0.108 0.229 0.082 0.647
PI 0.772 0.535 0.300 0.111 0.266 0.460 0.782
SI 0.360 0.592 0.168 -0.069 0.007 0.407 0.431 0.687
All above results show that the measurement model has confirmed adequate
validity, reliability, and discriminant validity. Summary of measurement model
including its loading factor shows in Table 19.
41
Table 19. Measurement Model
Factor Label Loadings

Construct Asian Indonesian Taiwanese Female Male
Attitude PG1 √ 0.654 √ 0.666 √ 0.651 √ 0.629 √ 0.634
(AT) PG2 √ 0.688 √ 0.681 √ 0.708 √ 0.682 √ 0.657
PG3 √ 0.701 √ 0.719 √ 0.678 √ 0.711 √ 0.668
BI1 √ 0.838 √ 0.846 √ 0.842 √ 0.846 √ 0.821
BI2 √ 0.830 √ 0.819 √ 0.836 √ 0.818 √ 0.841
BI3 √ 0.847 √ 0.839 √ 0.850 √ 0.842 √ 0.845
Social FM1 √ 0.523 - - √ 0.590 √ 0.557 √ 0.481
Influence FM2 √ 0.567 √ 0.451 √ 0.632 √ 0.612 √ 0.515
(SI) FM3 √ 0.557 √ 0.473 - - √ 0.591 √ 0.516
FR1 √ 0.797 √ 0.830 √ 0.827 √ 0.784 √ 0.771
FR2 √ 0.800 √ 0.840 √ 0.822 √ 0.785 √ 0.775
FR3 √ 0.812 √ 0.862 √ 0.825 √ 0.773 √ 0.806
FR5 - - - - - - √ 0.53 - -
FR6 √ 0.634 √ 0.689 - - √ 0.634 √ 0.611
GC1 √ 0.798 √ 0.891 √ 0.661 √ 0.774 √ 0.805
GC2 √ 0.819 √ 0.886 √ 0.744 √ 0.822 √ 0.809
GC3 √ 0.838 √ 0.907 √ 0.714 √ 0.836 √ 0.821
GC5 √ 0.589 √ 0.645 - - √ 0.645 √ 0.535
GC6 √ 0.633 √ 0.751 - - √ 0.595 √ 0.650
Perceived PR1 √ 0.679 √ 0.647 √ 0.698 √ 0.758 √ 0.642
Behavioral PR2 √ 0.660 √ 0.629 - - √ 0.752 √ 0.640
Control PR3 √ 0.684 √ 0.675 √ 0.771 √ 0.709 √ 0.677
(PB)
PR4 √ 0.667 √ 0.653 - - - - √ 0.661
AV1 √ 0.564 √ 0.639 - - - - √ 0.536
AV2 √ 0.577 √ 0.656 - - - - √ 0.606
AV3 √ 0.737 √ 0.711 √ 0.809 √ 0.735 √ 0.673
AV4 √ 0.752 √ 0.749 √ 0.807 √ 0.704 √ 0.724
Purchase PC1 √ 0.879 √ 0.887 √ 0.884 √ 0.86 √ 0.890
Intention PC2 √ 0.899 √ 0.919 √ 0.872 √ 0.885 √ 0.907
(PI) PC3 √ 0.880 √ 0.897 √ 0.863 √ 0.874 √ 0.881
WS1 √ 0.772 √ 0.782 √ 0.761 √ 0.828 √ 0.695
WS2 √ 0.610 √ 0.691 √ 0.518 √ 0.662 √ 0.517
WS3 √ 0.778 √ 0.793 √ 0.759 √ 0.805 √ 0.728
Actual AP1 √ 0.781 √ 0.759 √ 0.803 √ 0.800 √ 0.721
Purchase AP2 √ 0.841 √ 0.873 √ 0.795 √ 0.813 √ 0.850
(AP) AP3 √ 0.743 √ 0.755 √ 0.771 √ 0.787 √ 0.732
AP4 √ 0.676 √ 0.691 √ 0.678 √ 0.684 √ 0.672
AP5 √ 0.828 √ 0.833 √ 0.832 √ 0.837 √ 0.789
42
4.3 Hypothesis Testing Result
PLS-SEM (Partial Least Square-Structural Equation Modeling) using
SmartPLS3 was conducted to test the hypothesis conceptual model of this study. Figure
4, 5, and 5 respectively show the result of PLS-SEM analysis for Asian, Indonesian,
and Taiwanese Respondent. Complete PLS-SEM and bootstrapping result generated
from SmartPLS3 shown in Appendix 4.
R2 represents the amount of variance explained by the model. The values should
be sufficiently high for the model to have a minimum level of explanatory power. Rule
of thumb for acceptable R2 with 0.75, 0.50, and 0.25 are described as substantial,
moderate and weak respectively (Henseler, Ringle, & Sinkovics, 2009).
In Asian respondent model, the R2 for attitude was 0.402, perceived behavioral
control was 0.009, purchase intention was 0.428, and actual purchase game In-App item
was 0.560 (Figure 4). According to Henseler et al. (2009), all R2 except R2 of perceived
behavioral control was acceptable.
R2 for Indonesian respondent were attitude 0.359, perceived behavioral control
0.008, purchase intention 0.405, and actual purchase game In-App item 0.609 (Figure
5). R2 for attitude, purchase intention, and actual purchase was acceptable, while
perceived behavioral control was not acceptable (Henseler et al., 2009).
R2 respondent for attitude 0.495, perceived behavioral control 0.017, purchase
intention 0.507, and actual purchase game In-App item 0.511 in Taiwanese respondent
(Figure 6). Based on Henseler et al. (2009), R2 for attitude, purchase intention, and
actual purchase was acceptable, while perceived behavioral control was not acceptable.
43
Figure 4. PLS-SEM Result for Asian Respondent
Figure 5. PLS-SEM Result for Indonesian Respondent
44
Figure 6. PLS-SEM Result for Taiwanese Respondent
4.3.1 Influence of Attitude to In-App Item Purchase Intention
The result influence of attitude on purchase intention (Asian respondent
β=0.363, p<0.01; Indonesian respondent β=0.379, p<0.01; and Taiwanese respondent
β=0.315, p<0.01), supporting H1. The result indicating that attitude significant
positively influence purchase intention of game In-App item.
4.3.2 Influence of Social Influence to In-App Item Attitude and Purchase Intention
Influence of social influence positively on attitude in all group, Asian (β=0.634,
p<0.01), Indonesian (β=0.600, p<0.01), and Taiwanese (β=0.703, p<0.01). Thus, H2a
was supported.
Social influence positively influenced purchase intention in Asian (β=0.190,
p<0.01) and Taiwanese respondent (β=0.301, p<0.01), but was not give significant
influence in Indonesian respondent (β=0.121, p>0.1).
45
Therefore, we suggest that social influence has little effect on forming Asian
mobile gamers’ purchase intention. Social influence gives more influenced towards
Taiwanese mobile gamers’ purchase intention than to Indonesian gamers. Social
influence can help to build good attitude towards purchasing game In-App item to
increase gamer purchase intention.
4.3.3 Influence of Perceived Behavioral Control to In-App Item Purchase Intention
and Actual Purchase
Perceived behavioral control positively influenced purchase intention of game
In-App item in Asian (β=0.199, p<0.05), Indonesian (β=0.242, p<0.01), and Taiwanese
respondent (β=0.180, p<0.05). Hence, H3a was supported.
H3b was partially supported because perceived behavioral control positively
influenced the actual purchase of game In-App item in Asian (β=0.129, p<0.01) and
Taiwanese respondent (β=0.168, p<0.05), while in Indonesian respondent perceived
behavioral control was not give significant influence on actual purchase.
From this research, we suggest that Indonesian gamer who perceived
purchasing game In-App item is easy to perform will likely have higher purchase
intention but it was not mean that they will directly have higher actual purchase.
Perceived behavioral control increase gamer purchase intention that will indirectly
increase actual purchase of game In-App item.
4.3.4 Influence of Purchase Intention to In-App Item Actual Purchase
Purchase intention is a strong determinant of actual purchase game In-App item
in every group. The result for Asian, Indonesian, and Taiwanese respectively are
β=0.624, p<0.01; β=0.680, p<0.01; and β=0.531, p<0.01. Thus, H4 was strongly
supported.
46
4.3.5 Moderating effect of Playing Habit between In-App Item Purchase Intention
and Actual Purchase
Based on the research result, habit do not significantly moderate purchase
intention to actual purchase of game In-App items in every group (Asian respondent
β=0.007, p>0.1; Indonesian respondent β=-0.034, p>0.1; and Taiwanese respondent
β=0.101, p>0.1). So, H5 is not supported.
4.3.6 Influence of Income to In-App Item Perceived Behavioral Control
The result influence of income on perceived behavioral control (Asian
respondent β=0.094, p>0.1; Indonesian respondent β=0.087, p>0.1; and Taiwanese
respondent β=0.129, p>0.1), do not support H6. It means that gamer with higher income
does not necessarily perceive purchasing game In-App item is easy to perform.
4.3.7 Difference Influence of Attitude, Social Influence, and Perceived Behavioral
Control Toward In-App Purchase Intention between Gender
In Female respondent model, the R2 for attitude was 0.397, perceived behavioral
control was -0.080, purchase intention was 0.494, and actual purchase game In-App
item was 0.424 (Figure 7). According to Henseler et al. (2009), all R2 except R2 of
perceived behavioral control was acceptable.
Attitude (β=0.362, p<0.01), social influence (β=0.171, p<0.05), and perceived
behavioral control (β=0.260, p<0.01) positively influence purchase intention of game
In-App item in female respondent. Female attitude towards purchasing game In-App
item influenced by social influence (β=0.630, p<0.01). Female actual purchase
influenced by purchase intention (β=0.480, p<0.01), but not significantly influenced by
perceived behavioral control (β=0.159, p>0.1). Female perceived behavioral control did
47
not influence by income (β=-0.080, p>0.1). Playing habit do not moderate female
purchase intention to actual purchase (β=-0.002, p>0.1). (Figure 7)
Figure 7. PLS-SEM Result for Female Respondent
Figure 8. PLS-SEM Result for Male Respondent
48
R2 respondent for attitude 0.351, perceived behavioral control 0.052, purchase
intention 0.341, and actual purchase game In-App item 0.618 in Taiwanese respondent
(Figure 8). Based on Henseler et al. (2009), R2 for attitude, purchase intention, and
actual purchase was acceptable, while perceived behavioral control was not acceptable.
Male purchase intention influenced by attitude (β=0.328, p<0.01) and perceived
behavioral control (β=0.225, p<0.01), but not influenced by social influence (β=0.145,
p>0.1). Although social influenced positively influenced male attitude towards
purchasing game In-App item (β=0.592, p<0.01). Purchase intention (β=0.690, p<0.01)
and perceived behavioral control (β=0.130, p<0.05) positively influenced the actual
purchase of game In-App item, while playing habit (β=-0.021, p>0.1) do not
significantly influenced actual purchase. Male perceived behavioral control influenced
by income (β=0.229, p<0.01). (Figure 8)
Based on above results, both Asian female and male purchase intention
influenced by attitude and perceived behavioral control, while male more influenced by
social influence than female. Social influence positively influenced attitude in female
and male respondent. Purchase intention positively influenced both male and female
actual purchase of game In-App item, this relationship did not moderate by gamer
playing habit. Income did not influence female perceived behavioral control, while it
has significant influence in male group. Moreover, female perceived behavioral control
did not influence their actual purchase, while it has significant influence in male group.
49
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Conclusion
This study finds that attitude and perceived behavioral control have a significant
influence on purchase intention towards game In-App item. Social influence
significantly influences attitude in all group, but only influences purchase intention in
Asian, Taiwanese, and female group. Only Asian, Taiwanese, and Male actual purchase
influenced directly by perceived behavioral control. Income do not significantly
influence perceived behavioral control, except in male respondent. It means that gamer
with higher income does not necessarily perceive purchasing game In-App item is easy
to perform. Purchase intention is a strong determinant of actual purchase in all group.
Playing habit do not moderate purchase intention to actual purchase.
Table 20. Summary of Hypothesis Result
Hypothesis Relationship Asian Indonesian Taiwanese Female Male

H1 AT → PI √ √ √ √ √
H2a SI → AT √ √ √ √ √
H2b SI → PI √ x √ √ x
H3a PB → PI √ √ √ √ √
H3b PB → AP √ x √ x √
H4 PI → AP √ √ √ √ √
Moderating Effect
H5 H (PI→AP) x x x x x
H6 Income → PB x x x x √
Note: √ is supported and x is not supported
There are some differences between Indonesian and Taiwanese gamer,
Taiwanese gamer purchase intention more influenced by social influence than
Indonesian, moreover their actual purchase also more influenced by purchase
behavioral control than Indonesian.
50
Female and male gamer also have some differences. Female gamer purchase
intention more influenced by social influence than male. In the other hand, male income
increases their perceived behavioral control that influenced their actual purchase.
5.2 Research Limitation
Because of geographic barrier, the demographics of the sample showed that a
majority of respondents were Indonesian and Taiwanese, adult, with high educational
background. Therefore, the conclusions of the study might more suitable for adult and
educated people. Thus, the generalizability of this study outcome should be cautioned.
5.3 Recommendation
5.3.1 Future Study
For more generalized result, future studies should include more diversified
sample geographically and demographically. It would be better that future study also
has more sample. Future study could also examine other antecedent, for example value,
media and advertisement influence.
5.3.2 Insight for Game Developer
Game developer should utilize social influence to form a good attitude towards
their game and purchasing In-App item. By increasing attitude and perceived
behavioral control (perceived easiness to perform), it will indirectly increase actual
purchase.
Since female more influenced by social influence, developer can use referral
method to increase female attitude and intention. Because male more influenced by
51
perceived behavioral control, developer could increase item affordability and
availability to increase male intention and actual purchase.
52
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-
5978(91)90020-T
Ajzen, I. (2002). Constructing a TPB questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological
considerations.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social
behaviour.
Akhter, S. H. (2003). Digital divide and purchase intention: Why demographic
psychology matters. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24(3), 321-327.
Alzahrani, A. I., Mahmud, I., Ramayah, T., Alfarraj, O., & Alalwan, N. (2017).
Extending the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to explain online game playing
among Malaysian undergraduate students. Telematics and Informatics, 34(4),
239-251.
Athyal, J. M. (2015). Religion in Southeast Asia: An Encyclopedia of Faiths and
Cultures: An Encyclopedia of Faiths and Cultures: ABC-CLIO.
Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Baumgartner, J. (1990). The level of effort required for
behaviour as a moderator of the attitude–behaviour relation. European Journal
of Social Psychology, 20(1), 45-59.
Bajtelsmit, V. L., & VanDerhei, J. L. (1997). Risk aversion and pension investment
choices. Positioning pensions for the twenty-first century, 45, 66.
Bamford, W., Coulton, P., & Edwards, R. (2006). A surrealist inspired mobile
multiplayer game: Fact or fish? Paper presented at the 1st World Conference
for Fun'n Games.
Barclay, D., Higgins, C., & Thompson, R. (1995). The Partial Least Squares (pls)
Approach to Casual Modeling: Personal Computer Adoption Ans Use as an
Illustration.
Bleize, D. N., & Antheunis, M. L. (2017). Factors influencing purchase intent in virtual
worlds: a review of the literature. Journal of Marketing Communications, 1-18.
Bronfenbrenner, M. (2017). Income Distribution Theory: Taylor & Francis.
Brown, A. (1996). Chapter 6 Class Notes. University of Delaware. Retrieved from
http://www.udel.edu/alex/chapt6.html
Chang, W. C. (2002). Online game software design factor and user satisfaction.
(Master), Tamkang University.
Chatman, J. A., Polzer, J. T., Barsade, S. G., & Neale, M. A. (1998). Being different
yet feeling similar: The influence of demographic composition and
organizational culture on work processes and outcomes. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 749-780.
Chen, C.-H., Yang, J.-H., Chiang, C. W. K., Hsiung, C.-N., Wu, P.-E., Chang, L.-C., . . .
Shen, C.-Y. (2016). Population structure of Han Chinese in the modern
Taiwanese population based on 10,000 participants in the Taiwan Biobank
project. Human Molecular Genetics, 25(24), 5321-5331.
doi:10.1093/hmg/ddw346
Chen, C., & Leung, L. (2016). Are you addicted to Candy Crush Saga? An exploratory
study linking psychological factors to mobile social game addiction. Telematics
and Informatics, 33(4), 1155-1166.
53
Chia-Husn, F. (2007). Consumer behavior of online game player 2007. (Master), Shih
Hsin University.
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent
variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a
Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study.
Information systems research, 14(2), 189-217.
Christensen, C., & Prax, P. (2012). Assemblage, adaptation and apps: Smartphones and
mobile gaming. Continuum, 26(5), 731-739.
Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative
conduct: A theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in
human behavior Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 201-
234): Elsevier.
Coulton, P., Čopič Pucihar, K., & Bamford, W. (2008). Mobile social gaming. Paper
presented at the Workshop on Social Interaction and Mundane Technologies
2008.
Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.). Educational
Measurement (2nd ed.). Washington, D. C.: American Council on Education.
de Kervenoael, R., Schwob, A., Palmer, M., & Simmons, G. (2017). Smartphone
chronic gaming consumption and positive coping practice. Information
Technology & People, 30(2), 503-519.
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social
influences upon individual judgment. The journal of abnormal and social
psychology, 51(3), 629.
Domina, T., Lee, S.-E., & MacGillivray, M. (2012). Understanding factors affecting
consumer intention to shop in a virtual world. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 19(6), 613-620.
EEDAR. (2017). Deconstructing Mobile & Tablet Gaming 2017. Retrieved from
Escobar-Rodríguez, T., & Bonsón-Fernández, R. (2017). Analysing online purchase
intention in Spain: fashion e-commerce. Information Systems and e-Business
Management, 15(3), 599-622.
F. Hair Jr, J., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & G. Kuppelwieser, V. (2014). Partial least
squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) An emerging tool in business
research. European Business Review, 26(2), 106-121.
Feijoo, C., Gómez-Barroso, J.-L., Aguado, J.-M., & Ramos, S. (2012). Mobile gaming:
Industry challenges and policy implications. Telecommunications Policy, 36(3),
212-221.
Field, A. (2017). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics: SAGE Publications.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An
introduction to theory and research.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with
unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research,
39-50.
Gefen, D., & Straub, D. (2005). A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-Graph:
Tutorial and annotated example. Communications of the Association for
Information systems, 16(1), 5.
Goldman, A., & Johansson, J. K. (1978). Determinants of search for lower prices: An
empirical assessment of the economics of information theory. Journal of
Consumer Research, 5(3), 176-186.
Guo, Y., & Barnes, S. (2007). Why people buy virtual items in virtual worlds with real
money. SIGMIS Database, 38(4), 69-76. doi:10.1145/1314234.1314247
54
Guo, Y., & Barnes, S. (2009). Virtual item purchase behavior in virtual worlds: an
exploratory investigation. Electronic Commerce Research, 9(1-2), 77-96.
Guo, Y., & Barnes, S. (2011). Purchase behavior in virtual worlds: An empirical
investigation in Second Life. Information & Management, 48(7), 303-312.
Guo, Y., & Barnes, S. J. (2012). Explaining purchasing behavior within World of
Warcraft. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 52(3), 18-30.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2013). Multivariate Data
Analysis: Pearson Education Limited.
Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use
of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research.
Journal of the academy of marketing science, 40(3), 414-433.
Halimia, A. B., Chavoshb, A., Soheiliradc, S., Esferjanid, P. S., & Ghajarzadehe, A.
(2011). THE IMPACT OF CULTURE ON YOUNG CONSUMER’S
INTENTION TOWARDS ONLINE SHOPPINGH IN MALAYSIA. Business
and Economics Research, 1, 120-123.
Hamari, J. (2015). Why do people buy virtual goods? Attitude toward virtual good
purchases versus game enjoyment. International Journal of Information
Management, 35(3), 299-308.
Hamari, J., & Lehdonvirta, V. (2010). Game design as marketing: How game
mechanics create demand for virtual goods.
Hamilton, J., McIlveen, H., & Strugnell, C. (2000). Educating young consumers–a food
choice model. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 24(2), 113-123.
Han, H., Hsu, L.-T., & Sheu, C. (2010). Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior
to green hotel choice: Testing the effect of environmental friendly activities.
Tourism Management, 31(3), 325-334.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.03.013
Hanner, N., & Zarnekow, R. (2015). Purchasing behavior in free to play games:
Concepts and empirical validation. Paper presented at the System Sciences
(HICSS), 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares
path modeling in international marketing New challenges to international
marketing (pp. 277-319): Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Hinz, R. P., McCarthy, D. D., & Turner, J. A. (1997). Are women conservative
investors? Gender differences in participant-directed pension investments.
Positioning pensions for the twenty-first century, 91, 103.
Ho, C.-H., & Wu, T.-Y. (2012). Factors affecting intent to purchase virtual goods in
online games. International Journal of Electronic Business Management, 10(3),
204.
Hsiao, K.-L., & Chen, C.-C. (2016). What drives in-app purchase intention for mobile
games? An examination of perceived values and loyalty. Electronic commerce
research and applications, 16, 18-29.
Hsu, C.-L., Chang, C.-Y., & Yansritakul, C. (2017). Exploring purchase intention of
green skincare products using the theory of planned behavior: Testing the
moderating effects of country of origin and price sensitivity. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 145-152.
Hsu, C.-L., & Lu, H.-P. (2007). Consumer behavior in online game communities: A
motivational factor perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1642-
1659.
Hwong, C. (2016). The Average Mobile Game Day. Retrieved from
https://www.vertoanalytics.com/average-mobile-game-day/
55
Jin, D. Y. (2016). Mobile Gaming in Asia: Politics, Culture and Emerging Technologies:
Springer Netherlands.
Jin, D. Y., Chee, F., & Kim, S. (2015). Transformative mobile game culture: A
sociocultural analysis of Korean mobile gaming in the era of smartphones.
International Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(4), 413-429.
Kim, C., & Lee, H. (1996). A taxonomy of couples based on influence strategies: The
case of home purchase. Journal of Business Research, 36(2), 157-168.
Kim, H.-M. (2013). Mobile media technology and popular mobile games in
contemporary society. International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 8(2).
Laakso, M., & Nyman, L. (2014). Innovation opportunities: An overview of standards
and platforms in the video game industry. Technology Innovation Management
Review, 4(7), 15.
Lee, M.-C. (2009). Understanding the behavioural intention to play online games: An
extension of the theory of planned behaviour. Online information review, 33(5),
849-872.
Lee, M.-C., & Tsai, T.-R. (2010). What drives people to continue to play online games?
An extension of technology model and theory of planned behavior. Intl. journal
of human–computer interaction, 26(6), 601-620.
Lehdonvirta, V. (2009). Virtual item sales as a revenue model: identifying attributes
that drive purchase decisions. Electronic Commerce Research, 9(1-2), 97-113.
Levinson, D., & Christensen, K. (2002). Encyclopedia of Modern Asia: Gale.
Lewellen, W. G., Lease, R. C., & Schlarbaum, G. G. (1977). Patterns of investment
strategy and behavior among individual investors. The Journal of Business,
50(3), 296-333.
Lim, R., & Seng, E. Y. (2011). Virtual Goods in Social Games: An Exploratory Study
of Factors that Drive Purchase of In-Game Items.
Limayem, M., Hirt, S. G., & Cheung, C. M. (2007). How habit limits the predictive
power of intention: The case of information systems continuance. MIS quarterly,
705-737.
Lin, C. L. (2003). Player attributes of Multi-player on online role-playing game.
(Master), Providence University.
Lin, H., & Sun, C.-T. (2007). Cash Trade Within the Magic Circle: Free-to-Play Game
Challenges and Massively Multiplayer Online Game Player Responses. Paper
presented at the DiGRA Conference.
Liu, C.-C. (2016). Understanding player behavior in online games: The role of gender.
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 111, 265-274.
LiveGamer. (2008). Virtual item monetization: A powerful revenue opportunity for
online game publishers and virtual world operators. Retrieved from
http://www.livegamer.com/strategy/white-
papers/Live_Gamer_Opportunity_Whitepaper_NA.PDF
Lu, H.-P., & Wang, S.-m. (2008). The role of Internet addiction in online game loyalty:
an exploratory study. Internet Research, 18(5), 499-519.
Lu, T., & Boutilier, C. (2011). Budgeted social choice: From consensus to personalized
decision making. Paper presented at the IJCAI.
Mäntymäki, M., & Salo, J. (2013). Purchasing behavior in social virtual worlds: An
examination of Habbo Hotel. International Journal of Information Management,
33(2), 282-290.
McDonald, E. (2017). Newzoo’s 2017 Report: Insights into the $108.9 Billion Global
Games Market. Retrieved from https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/newzoo-
2017-report-insights-into-the-108-9-billion-global-games-market/
56
McLaughlin, C., Bradley, L., Prentice, G., Verner, E.-J., & Loane, S. (2017). Consumer
to Consumer (C2C) Online Auction Transaction Intentions: an Application of
the Theory of Planned Behaviour. DBS Business Review, 1.
Moskal, B. M., & Leydens, J. A. (2000). Scoring rubric development: Validity and
reliability. Practical assessment, research & evaluation, 7(10), 71-81.
Newzoo. (2017). Top 100 Countries by Game Revenues. Retrieved from
https://newzoo.com/insights/rankings/top-100-countries-by-game-revenues/
Park, B.-W., & Lee, K. C. (2011). Exploring the value of purchasing online game items.
Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2178-2185.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.06.013
Parker, G., Gladstone, G., & Chee, K. T. (2001). Depression in the Planet’s Largest
Ethnic Group: The Chinese. American Journal of Psychiatry, 158(6), 857-864.
doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.158.6.857
Penttinen, E., Rossi, M., & Tuunainen, V. K. (2010). Mobile games: Analyzing the
needs and values of the consumers. Journal of Information Technology Theory
and Application (JITTA), 11(1), 2.
Richardson, I. (2012). Touching the screen: A phenomenology of mobile gaming and
the iPhone: Routledge as part of the Taylor and Francis Group.
Richardson, I., & Hjorth, L. (2014). Mobile games: From tetris to foursquare.
Ringle, C., Sarstedt, M., & Straub, D. (2012). A critical look at the use of PLS-SEM in
MIS quarterly. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q, 36.
Ronis, D. L., Yates, J. F., & Kirscht, J. P. (1989). Attitudes, decisions, and habits as
determinants of repeated behavior. Attitude structure and function, 213-239.
Sifa, R., Hadiji, F., Runge, J., Drachen, A., Kersting, K., & Bauckhage, C. (2015).
Predicting purchase decisions in mobile free-to-play games. Proc. of AAAI
AIIDE.
Spiro, R. L. (1983). Persuasion in family decision-making. Journal of Consumer
Research, 9(4), 393-402.
Statista. (2018). Digital Media Report 2018. Retrieved from
https://www.statista.com/outlook/211/100/mobile-games/worldwide#
Stigler, G. J. (1961). The economics of information. Journal of political economy, 69(3),
213-225.
Tan, C.-S., Ooi, H.-Y., & Goh, Y.-N. (2017). A moral extension of the theory of
planned behavior to predict consumers’ purchase intention for energy-efficient
household appliances in Malaysia. Energy Policy, 107, 459-471.
Taniar, D. (2008). Mobile Computing: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and
Applications: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications: IGI Global.
Tilston, C., Gregson, K., Neale, R., & Douglas, C. (1991). Dietary awareness of primary
school children. British Food Journal, 93(6), 25-29.
Triandis, H. C. (1979). Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior. Paper presented
at the Nebraska symposium on motivation.
Tung, W.-F., & Lan, Y.-J. (2017). Analyzing social choice and group ranking of online
games for product mix innovation. Information Systems Frontiers, 19(6), 1301-
1309. doi:10.1007/s10796-017-9769-8
U.S.Department. (2007). International Religious Freedom Report 2007. Retrieved
from https://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2007/90134.htm
Verplanken, B., & Melkevik, O. (2008). Predicting habit: The case of physical exercise.
Psychology of sport and exercise, 9(1), 15-26.
Vinzi, V. E., Chin, W. W., Henseler, J., & Wang, H. (2010). Handbook of Partial Least
Squares: Concepts, Methods and Applications: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
57
Wainer, H., & Braun, H. I. (2013). Test validity: Routledge.
Wei, P.-S., & Lu, H.-P. (2014). Why do people play mobile social games? An
examination of network externalities and of uses and gratifications. Internet
Research, 24(3), 313-331.
Wijman, T. (2018). Mobile Revenues Account for More Than 50% of the Global
Games Market as It Reaches $137.9 Billion in 2018. Retrieved from
https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/global-games-market-reaches-137-9-
billion-in-2018-mobile-games-take-half/
Willson, M., & Leaver, T. (2016). Social, Casual and Mobile Games: The Changing
Gaming Landscape: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Wohn, D. Y. (2014). Spending real money: purchasing patterns of virtual goods in an
online social game. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
Wood, W. (2000). Attitude change: Persuasion and social influence. Annual review of
psychology, 51(1), 539-570.
WorldBank. (2017). World Development Indicators database (15 December 2017 ed.).
Yang, H.-E., Wu, C.-C., & Wang, K.-C. (2009). An empirical analysis of online game
service satisfaction and loyalty. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 1816-
1825.
Yee, N. (2006). Motivations for play in online games. CyberPsychology & behavior,
9(6), 772-775.
Zatkin, G. (2017). Awesome Video Game Data 2017. Paper presented at the Game
Developers Conference, San Francisco.
Zhang, H.-G., Chen, Y.-F., Ding, M., Jin, L., Case, D. T., Jiao, Y.-P., . . . Chen, R.-B.
(2010). Dermatoglyphics from All Chinese Ethnic Groups Reveal Geographic
Patterning. PLOS ONE, 5(1), e8783. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0008783
58
APPENDIX 1: QUESTIONNAIRE ENGLISH VERSION
Mobile Game In-App Purchase
Hello, my name is Susanti. I am MBA student in NTUST, Taiwan.

This questionnaire is designed to look for factors that influence mobile gamer to
purchase in-app item. There are two part to be filled, first part is about your background
information and last part is the survey questions.
Likert scale from 1 to 5 is used for the survey question in the last part. Please choose 1
for strongly disagree and 5 for strongly agree. Your answer is strictly confidential and
the result will be solely used for survey purpose and research study.
Best Regards,
Susanti
Background Information
Gender:
1. Female
2. Male
Age:
1. ≦ 10 years
2. 11 - 15 years
3. 16 - 20 years
4. 21 - 25 years
5. 26 - 30 years
6. > 30 years
Nationality:
1. Indonesia
2. Taiwan
3. Other:
Education Background:
1. Elementary School
2. Junior High School
59
3. Senior High School
4. Bachelor
5. Master
6. PhD
7. Other:
Status:
1. Student
2. Employee
3. Entrepreneur
4. Housewife
5. Other:
Time Spent per Week for playing mobile game:

1. < 1 hour
2. 1 - 5 hours
3. 6 - 10 hours
4. 11 - 15 hours
5. 16 - 20 hours
6. > 20 hours
Frequency to Play Mobile Game per Week:

1. Approximately once per week
2. 2-3 times per week
3. Several times per week
4. Everyday
Total time Spent per Day for Playing Mobile Game:

1. < 1 hour
2. 1 - 2 hours
3. 3 - 4 hours
4. 5 - 8 hours
5. > 8 hours
Do you have gamer community? (Included group within the game and friends who
playing the same game)
1. No
2. Yes
60
Monthly Income: (1TWD approximately equal to IDR 450 and USD 0.033)
1. ≦ 500 USD
2. 501 - 1000 USD
3. 1001 - 1500 USD
4. 1501 - 2000 USD
5. 2001 - 2500 USD
6. 2501 - 3000 USD
7. 3001 - 3500 USD
8. > 3500 USD
Have you ever purchase In-App Game Item?

1. No (please choose never spent any money on the next question)
2. Yes
Mobile Game In-App Purchase per month: (1TWD approximately equal to IDR 450
and USD 0.033)
1. Never spent any money
2. ≦ 10 USD
3. 11 - 25 USD
4. 26 - 50 USD
5. 51 - 100 USD
6. 101 - 200 USD
7. > 200 USD
Survey Questions
(5-point likert scale, 1 for strongly disagree and 5 for strongly agree)
1. Playing mobile game is very enjoyable
2. Playing mobile game every day is beneficial
3. I am happy when I play mobile game
4. Item from mobile game is worth to buy
5. Buying mobile game item is a good thing
6. When I buy mobile game item, I feel happy
7. My family (or relatives) thinks I should buy mobile game item
8. My family (or relatives) support me to buy mobile game item
9. My family (or relatives) recommend me to buy mobile game item
10. I feel guilty towards my family if I buy mobile game item
11. It is important to me buy mobile game item that my family approved
12. I often consult my family before I buy mobile game item
13. My friends think I should buy mobile game item
14. My friends support me to buy mobile game item
61
15. My friends recommend me to buy mobile game item
16. I feel guilty towards my friends if I buy mobile game item
17. It is important to me buy mobile game item that my friends approved
18. I often consult my friends before I buy mobile game item
19. My gamer community thinks I should buy mobile game item
20. My gamer community support me to buy mobile game item
21. My gamer community recommend me to buy mobile game item
22. I feel guilty towards my gamer community if I buy mobile game item
23. It is important to me buy mobile game item that my gamer community
approved
24. I often consult my gamer community before I buy mobile game item
25. Mobile game item is affordable
26. Mobile game limited item is still affordable
27. I feel no objection to buy mobile game item even though it a little bit
expensive
28. I have enough money to buy mobile game item
29. Mobile game item is easy to buy
30. Mobile game item is convenience to buy
31. There always interesting mobile game item to buy
32. There always interesting promotion to buy mobile game item
33. I intend to buy mobile game item this month
34. I plan to buy mobile game item this month
35. I will buy mobile game item this month
36. I am willing to save to buy mobile game item
37. I do not mind to wait for special promotion to buy mobile game item
38. I willing to allocate my other expenses to buy mobile game item
39. I bought mobile game item before
40. I bought mobile game item regularly
41. I bought mobile game item for my friends before
42. I bought mobile game item for my game community before
43. I bought mobile game limited item before
Thank You for your participation.
62
APPENDIX 2: QUESTIONNAIRE INDONESIAN VERSION
Pembelian barang di dalam game HP
Halo, perkenalkan nama saya Susanti. Saya mahasiswi MBA di NTUST, Taiwan.
Survei ini didisain untuk mengetahui faktor yang mempegaruhi pemain game HP untuk
membeli barang di dalam game. Survei ini dibagi menjadi 2 bagian, bagian pertama
menanyakan informasi pribadi dan bagian terakhir adalah pertanyaan terkait dengan
survei.
Untuk setiap di bagian terakhir akan menggunakan skala likert mulai dari 1 sampai
dengan 5. Silakan memilih 1 untuk sangat tidak setuju dan 5 untuk sangat setuju.
Seluruh jawaban Anda akan dirahasiakan dan digunakan semata–mata hanya untuk
survei dan keperluan penelitian saja.
Salam,
Susanti
Informasi Pribadi
Jenis Kelamin:
1. Wanita
2. Pria
Usia:
1. ≦ 10 tahun
2. 11 - 15 tahun
3. 16 - 20 tahun
4. 21 - 25 tahun
5. 26 - 30 tahun
6. > 30 tahun
Kewarganegaraan:
4. Indonesia
5. Taiwan
6. Other:
63
Pendidikan Terakhir:
1. SD
2. SMP
3. SMA
4. S1
5. S2
6. S3
7. Lainnya:
Status:
1. Pelajar/Mahasiswa
2. Karyawan/Karyawati
3. Wirausaha
4. Ibu Rumah Tangga
5. Lainnya:
Total durasi bermain game HP dalam satu minggu:

1. < 1 jam
2. 1 - 5 jam
3. 6 - 10 jam
4. 11 - 15 jam
5. 16 - 20 jam
6. > 20 jam
Frekuensi main game HP dalam satu minggu:

1. Hampir 1 hari per minggu
2. 2-3 kali per minggu
3. Beberapa hari per minggu
4. Setiap hari
Durasi bermain game HP dalam satu hari:

1. < 1 jam
2. 1 - 2 jam
3. 3 - 4 jam
4. 5 - 8 jam
5. > 8 jam
64
Apakah kamu punya komunitas gamer (bermain game)? (Termasuk grup di dalam
game dan teman yang bermain game yang sama)
1. Tidak
2. Ya
Penghasilan per bulan: (1TWD kurang lebih setara dengan Rp 450 dan USD 0.033)
1. ≦ Rp 6.750.000
2. Rp 6.750.001 - Rp 13.500.000
3. Rp 13.500.001 - Rp 20.250.000
4. Rp 20.250.001 - Rp 27.000.000
5. Rp 27.000.001 - Rp 33.750.000
6. Rp 33.750.001 - Rp 40.500.000
7. Rp 40.500.001 - Rp 47.250.000
8. > Rp 47.250.000
Apakah anda pernah membeli barang di dalam game HP?

1. Tidak pernah (Pilih "Tidak pernah membeli" pada pertanyaan selanjutnya)
2. Pernah
Uang yang digunakan untuk membeli barang di dalam game HP setiap bulannya:
(1TWD kurang lebih setara dengan Rp 450 dan USD 0.033)
1. Tidak pernah membeli
2. ≦ Rp 135.000
3. Rp 135.001 - Rp 337.500
4. Rp 337.501- Rp 675.000
5. Rp 675.000 - Rp 1.350.000
6. Rp 1.350.001 - Rp 2.700.000
7. > Rp 2.700.000
Survey Questions
(5 poin skala likert, memilih 1 untuk sangat tidak setuju dan 5 untuk sangat setuju)
1. Bermain game HP sangat menyenangkan
2. Bermain game HP setiap hari sangat bermanfaat
3. Saya sangat bahagia saat bermain game HP
4. Barang yang dibeli didalam game HP layak untuk dibeli
5. Membeli barang di dalam game HP adalah hal yang baik
6. Saat saya membeli barang di dalam game HP, saya merasa bahagia
7. Keluarga (atau kerabat) saya berpikir bahwa saya sebaiknya membeli barang
di dalam game HP
65
8. Keluarga (atau kerabat) saya mendukung saya untuk membeli barang di dalam
game HP
9. Keluarga (atau kerabat) saya merekomendasikan saya untuk membeli barang
di dalam game HP
10. Saya merasa bersalah kepada keluarga saya bila saya membeli barang di
dalam game HP
11. Penting bagi saya untuk membeli barang di dalam game HP yang disetujui
keluarga saya
12. Saya sering menanyakan pendapat keluarga saya sebelum membeli barang di
dalam game HP
13. Teman saya berpikir bahwa saya sebaiknya membeli barang di dalam game
HP
14. Teman saya mendukung saya untuk membeli barang di dalam game HP
15. Teman saya merekomendasikan saya untuk membeli barang di dalam game
HP
16. Saya merasa bersalah kepada teman saya bila saya membeli barang di dalam
game HP
teman saya
18. Saya sering menanyakan pendapat teman saya sebelum membeli barang di
dalam game HP
19. Komunitas gamer (bermain game) saya berpikir bahwa saya sebaiknya
membeli barang di dalam game HP
20. Komunitas gamer (bermain game) saya mendukung saya untuk membeli
barang di dalam game HP
21. Komunitas gamer (bermain game) saya merekomendasikan saya untuk
22. Saya merasa bersalah kepada komunitas gamer (bermain game) saya bila saya
komunitas gamer (bermain game) saya
24. Saya sering menanyakan pendapat komunitas gamer (bermain game) saya
sebelum membeli barang di dalam game HP
25. Barang di dalam game HP harganya terjangkau
26. Barang terbatas (spesial) di dalam game HP harganya masih terjangkau
27. Saya tidak merasa keberatan untuk membeli barang di dalam game HP walau
sedikit mahal
28. Saya punya cukup uang untuk membeli barang di dalam game HP
29. Barang di dalam game HP mudah untuk dibeli
30. Barang di dalam game HP leluasa untuk dibeli
31. Selalu ada barang yang menarik untuk dibeli di dalam game HP
32. Selalu ada promosi barang yang menarik dibeli di dalam game HP
33. Bulan ini saya berniat membeli barang di dalam game HP
34. Bulan ini saya berencana membeli barang di dalam game HP
35. Bulan ini saya akan membeli barang di dalam game HP
36. Saya bersedia berhemat untuk membeli barang di dalam game HP
66
37. Saya tidak keberatan menunggu promo khusus untuk membeli barang di
dalam game HP
38. Saya bersedia mengalokasikan pengeluaran saya yang lain untuk membeli
barang di dalam game HP
39. Saya pernah membeli barang di dalam game HP
40. Saya rutin membeli barang di dalam game HP
41. Saya pernah membelikan barang di dalam game HP untuk teman saya
42. Saya pernah membelikan barang di dalam game HP untuk komunitas gamer
(bermain game) saya
43. Saya pernah membeli barang terbatas (spesial) di dalam game HP
Terima kasih atas partisipasinya.
67
APPENDIX 3: QUESTIONNAIRE CHINESE VERSION
手機遊戲內建購買
您好，我是 Susanti。我是台灣科技大學的 MBA 學生。
感謝您百忙之中填寫此問卷，此問卷是關於設計影響手機玩家購買應用內商品
的因素。問卷分為兩部分:第一部分為背景資料，第二部分為調查問題
針對每一個調查問題，本問卷採用李克特量表 1 到 5 為範圍，請選擇 1(非常不

同意)到 5(非常同意)中適當的數值。您的答案是保密的，資料結果僅供測量目
的及學術研究使用。
致上最誠摯的問候,
Susanti
背景資料
性別:
1. 女
2. 男
年紀:
1. ≦ 10 歲
2. 11 - 15 歲
3. 16 - 20 歲
4. 21 - 25 歲
5. 26 - 30 歲
6. > 30 歲
國籍:
1. 印度尼西亞
2. 台灣
3. 其他:
68
教育背景:
1. 小學
2. 初中
3. 高中
4. 學士
5. 碩士
6. 博士
7. 其他:
身分:
1. 學生
2. 上班族
3. 創業者
4. 家庭主婦
5. 其他:
每週玩手機遊戲花費的時間:
1. < 1 小時
2. 1 - 5 小時
3. 6 - 10 小時
4. 11 - 15 小時
5. 16 - 20 小時
6. > 20 小時
每周玩手機遊戲的次數:
1. 大約每週一次
2. 每週 2-3 次
3. 每週幾次
4. 每天
每天玩遊戲的總時間:
1. < 1 小時
2. 1 - 2 小時
3. 3 - 4 小時
4. 5 - 8 小時
5. > 8 小時
69
你有玩家社群網友嗎? (包括在手機遊戲中的小組或玩同一樣遊戲的朋友)
1. 沒有
2. 有
每月可支配所得: (1 台幣約等於 450 印尼幣和 0.033 美幣）
1. ≦ 15,000 台幣
2. 15,001 - 30,000 台幣
3. 30,001 - 45,000 台幣
4. 45,001 - 60,000 台幣
5. 60,001 - 75,000 台幣
6. 75,001 - 90,000 台幣
7. 90,001 - 105,000 台幣
8. > 105,000 台幣
請問您有沒有買過手機遊戲內建的商品？
1. 沒有 (選擇從未花過任何錢者請繼續回答下列問題)
2. 有
每月花在手機遊戲內建買費用 (1 台幣約等於 450 印尼幣和 0.033 美幣)
1. 從未花過任何錢
2. ≦ 300 台幣
3. 301 - 750 台幣
4. 751- 1500 台幣
5. 1501 - 3000 台幣
6. 3001 - 6000 台幣
7. > 6000 台幣
調查問題
(李克特量表 1 到 5 為範圍 1(非常不同意)到 5(非常同意))
1. 玩手機遊戲是非常愉快的
2. 每天玩手機遊戲是有益的
3. 當我玩手機遊戲時很高興
4. 手機遊戲中的商品值得買
5. 買手機遊戲商品是好事
6. 當我買手機遊戲商品時，我感覺高興
7. 我的家人（或親戚）認為我應該買手機遊戲商品
8. 我的家人（或親戚）支持我買手機遊戲商品
70
9. 我的家人（或親戚）推薦我買手機遊戲商品
10. 如果我買手機遊戲商品，我對家人感覺內疚
11. 買手機遊戲商品得到家人的贊許是非常重要
12. 在買手機遊戲商品之前，我經常詢問家人的意見
13. 我的朋友認為我應該買手機遊戲商品
14. 我的朋友支持我買手機遊戲商品
15. 我的朋友推薦我買手機遊戲商品
16. 如果我買手機遊戲商品，我對朋友感覺內疚
17. 買手機遊戲商品得到朋友的贊許是非常重要
18. 在買手機遊戲商品之前，我經常詢問朋友的意見
19. 我的玩家社群網友認為我應該買手機遊戲商品
20. 我的玩家社群網友支持我買手機遊戲商品
21. 我的玩家社網友群推薦我買手機遊戲商品
22. 如果我買手機遊戲商品，我對玩家社群網友感覺內疚
23. 買手機遊戲商品得到玩家社群網友的贊許是非常重要
24. 在買手機遊戲商品之前，我經常詢問家社群網友的意見
25. 手機遊戲商品價格實惠
26. 手機遊戲限量商品仍然實惠
27. 儘管價格有點貴，但我並不反對買手機遊戲商品
28. 我有足夠的錢買手機遊戲商品
29. 手機遊戲商品很容易買到
30. 手機遊戲商品買方便
31. 總是有些趣味性手機遊戲的內建可買
32. 總是有些趣味性促銷手機遊戲的內建可買
33. 我想在本月買手機遊戲商品
34. 我打算在本月買手機遊戲商品
35. 我將在本月買手機遊戲商品
36. 我願意存錢買手機遊戲商品
37. 我不介意等待价的時候再買手機遊戲商品
38. 我願意挪用其他費用來買手機遊戲商品
39. 我之前買過手機遊戲商品
40. 我定期買手機遊戲商品
41. 我以前買過手機遊戲商品買送給朋友
42. 我以前買過手機遊戲商品買送給家社群朋友
43. 我以前買過手機遊戲限量商品
感謝您的參與.
71
APPENDIX 4: PLS-SEM AND BOOTSTRAPPING RESULT
GENERATED BY SMARTPLS3
Figure 9. SmartPLS SEM Result for Asian Respondent
Table 21. SmartPLS Bootstrapping for Asian Respondent
Mean SD T Statistics P Values

AT -> PI 0.359 0.073 4.985 0.000
Income -> PB 0.094 0.054 1.727 0.084
Moderating Effect H (PI-AP) -> AP 0.017 0.042 0.157 0.875
PB -> AP 0.129 0.046 2.777 0.006
PB -> PI 0.204 0.059 3.361 0.001
PI -> AP 0.611 0.064 9.637 0.000
SI -> AT 0.637 0.033 19.426 0.000
SI -> PI 0.191 0.060 3.155 0.002
72
Figure 10. SmartPLS SEM Result for Indonesian Respondent
Table 22. SmartPLS Bootstrapping for Indonesian Respondent

AT -> PI 0.376 0.096 3.947 0.000
Income -> PB 0.088 0.078 1.127 0.260
Moderating Effect H (PI-AP) -> AP -0.017 0.069 0.498 0.618
PB -> AP 0.089 0.056 1.564 0.118
PB -> PI 0.253 0.073 3.311 0.001
PI -> AP 0.677 0.094 7.255 0.000
SI -> AT 0.606 0.047 12.656 0.000
SI -> PI 0.120 0.079 1.539 0.124
73
Figure 11. SmartPLS SEM Result for Taiwanese Respondent
Table 23. SmartPLS Bootstrapping for Taiwanese Respondent

AT -> PI 0.319 0.091 3.448 0.001
Income -> PB 0.130 0.084 1.535 0.125
PB -> AP 0.162 0.074 2.279 0.023
PB -> PI 0.183 0.074 2.439 0.015
PI -> AP 0.528 0.093 5.687 0.000
SI -> AT 0.710 0.036 19.484 0.000
SI -> PI 0.298 0.090 3.330 0.001
74
Figure 12. SmartPLS SEM Result for Female Respondent
Table 24. SmartPLS Bootstrapping for Female Respondent

AT -> PI 0.360 0.094 3.838 0.000
Income -> PB -0.081 0.075 1.070 0.284
PB -> AP 0.153 0.099 1.603 0.109
PB -> PI 0.256 0.073 3.575 0.000
PI -> AP 0.480 0.132 3.645 0.000
SI -> AT 0.639 0.041 15.475 0.000
SI -> PI 0.181 0.080 2.146 0.032
75
Figure 13. SmartPLS SEM Result for Male Respondent
Table 25. SmartPLS Bootstrapping for Male Respondent

AT -> PI 0.328 0.101 3.230 0.001
Income -> PB 0.235 0.073 3.157 0.002
PB -> AP 0.130 0.057 2.294 0.022
PB -> PI 0.239 0.086 2.623 0.009
PI -> AP 0.682 0.062 11.181 0.000
SI -> AT 0.601 0.051 11.691 0.000
SI -> PI 0.141 0.086 1.683 0.092
76

Thesis Susanti Louis - M10521805

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thesis Susanti Louis - M10521805

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

國立臺灣科技大學

Factor Influencing In-App Item Purchase

中華民國 107 年六月

it is important to analyze mobile gamer as customer-related factors that influenced

examined factors influencing mobile gamers to purchase In-App game items.

Therefore, this study aims to examine mobile gamer’s decision-making process

Indonesian and Taiwanese respondent, also female and male respondent.

influence on purchase intention towards game In-App item. Social influence

influenced directly by perceived behavioral control. Purchase intention is a strong

determinant of actual purchase in all group.

to develop effective strategies to increase purchase In-App game items.

Keywords: Mobile game, Free-to-play game, In-app item, TPB, PLS

Special Thanks to:

My God, who gives his blessing for me to finish writing my thesis.

My Family, who always supports and understand me.

NTUST, that gives me scholarship and providing me facility to broaden my

knowledge. I really grateful that NTUST gives me the opportunity to

remind, encourage, believe and motivate me to finish my thesis.

useful for any readers and future research writers.

-Learning a new skill will pay dividends in the future-

TABLE OF CONTENT ............................................................................................... iii

LIST OF FIGURES .....................................................................................................vii

LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... viii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background .............................................................................................. 1

1.2 Research Purpose ..................................................................................... 3

1.3 Research Questions .................................................................................. 4

1.4 Research Contents .................................................................................... 4

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................... 6

2.1 Mobile Games .......................................................................................... 6

2.1.1 Type of Mobile Game ......................................................................... 7

2.1.2 In-App / Virtual Items ......................................................................... 7

2.2 Mobile Gamer .......................................................................................... 9

2.2.1 Definition and Classification .............................................................. 9

2.2.2 Mobile Gamer Profile ....................................................................... 10

2.2.3 Culture and Behavior of Online Game Player .................................. 11

2.3 The Theory of Planned Behavior ........................................................... 12

2.3.1 Attitude ............................................................................................. 13

2.3.3 Perceived Behavioral Control ........................................................... 14

2.3.4 Purchase Intention............................................................................. 14

2.3.5 Actual Purchase ................................................................................ 15

2.4 Demographic .......................................................................................... 15

2.4.3 Gender ............................................................................................... 16

2.5 Previous Research and Research Gap .................................................... 17

CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ....................................................... 19

3.1 Hypothesis Development ....................................................................... 19

3.1.1 Influence of Attitude to In-App Item Purchase Intention ................. 19

3.1.2 Influence of Social Influence to In-App Item Attitude and Purchase

3.1.3 Influence of Perceived Behavioral Control to In-App Item Purchase

Intention and Actual Purchase .......................................................... 20

3.1.4 Influence of Purchase Intention to In-App Item Actual Purchase .... 20

3.1.5 Moderating effect of Playing Habit between In-App Item Purchase

Intention and Actual Purchase .......................................................... 20

3.1.6 Influence of Income to In-App Item Perceived Behavioral Control. 21

Behavioral Control Toward In-App Purchase Intention between

3.2 Proposed Conceptual Framework .......................................................... 21

3.3 Survey Development .............................................................................. 22

3.4 Data Collection and Sample ................................................................... 25

3.5 Data Analysis Method ............................................................................ 26

3.5.1 Validity and Reliability Test ............................................................. 26

3.5.2 Partial Least Square- Structural Equation Modeling ........................ 27

CHAPTER IV: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS ........................................ 29

4.1 Survey Data Collection .......................................................................... 29

4.2 Validity and Reliability Test Result ....................................................... 34