Understanding How Hedonic and Utilitarian Values Impact Continuance Intention to Play Online Games

Journal of Internet Commerce
ISSN: 1533-2861 (Print) 1533-287X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wico20
Understanding Continuance Intention to Play

Online Games: The Roles of Hedonic Value,
Utilitarian Value and Perceived Risk
Tripti Ghosh Sharma, Preeti Tak & Ankit Kesharwani
To cite this article: Tripti Ghosh Sharma, Preeti Tak & Ankit Kesharwani (2020): Understanding
Continuance Intention to Play Online Games: The Roles of Hedonic Value, Utilitarian Value and
Perceived Risk, Journal of Internet Commerce
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2020.1756189
Published online: 29 Apr 2020.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wico20
JOURNAL OF INTERNET COMMERCE
https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2020.1756189
Understanding Continuance Intention to Play Online

Games: The Roles of Hedonic Value, Utilitarian Value
and Perceived Risk
Tripti Ghosh Sharmaa, Preeti Takb , and Ankit Kesharwanib
a
Institute of Management Technology, Ghaziabad, India; bIndian Institute of Foreign Trade, New
Delhi, India
ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
The current study examines how the perception of negative Continuance intention;
consequences or risks interacts with hedonic and utilitarian Hedonic values; means-end-
values in predicting gamers’ continuance intention to play chain theory; online
gaming; perceived risk;
online games. We examine the proposed model by conduct- utilitarian values
ing an empirical study of the responses of two hundred and
one (201) online gamers using structural equation modeling.
From our results, hedonic value positively impacts the con-
tinuance intention to play online games, whereas utilitarian
value does not significantly impact online gaming behavior.
Furthermore, at higher perceived risk levels, hedonic value
enhances the online game continuance intention whereas
utilitarian value has insignificant effect. At low perceived risk
levels, both hedonic and utilitarian values have significant
effect on continuance intentions to play online games. The
study discusses the theoretical contributions as well as prac-
tical implications of our findings.
Introduction
Thanks to the increasing popularity of online, mobile, and social media
gaming, the global gaming business has grown exponentially in the past
decade. According to the Newzoo Global Games Market Report (2019),
consumer spending on games could touch $200 billion by 2022 at the com-
pounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 9.0% from 2018 to 2022.
Emerging markets such as South-East Asia and India are growing the fast-
est, with both western and eastern game publishers vying for the players’
time and money. Companies are witnessing competitive pressure to sustain
their market advantage and are increasingly realizing the need for innova-
tions in order to enhance their players’ continuance intention.
Thus, practitioners need to understand how players behave in online
gaming if they want to attract players to their online gaming websites more
often or develop player loyalty (Wu and Liu 2007; Lu and Wang 2008;
CONTACT Preeti Tak dr.preetitak@gmail.com Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, New Delhi, India.
ß 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 T. G. SHARMA ET AL.
Huang and Hsieh 2011). Consumer behavior is generally goal oriented

(Pieters, Baumgartner, and Allen 1995). Two major online gaming study
goals are to investigate (a) the effects of online gaming benefits on players’
continuance intention, that is, the benefits–intention linkage (e.g. Lee and
Tsai 2010; Lafreniere et al. 2009), and (b) the gaming goal values (e.g. utili-
tarian and hedonic values) and effects on players’ continuance intention,
that is, the value–intention linkage (e.g. Chang, Liu, and Chen 2014;
Harnadi 2019). This study introduces the means-end-chain (MEC) theory
to the domain of online gaming. The MEC theory posits that motives are
hierarchically structured, with the benefits acting as sub-goals of values.
The benefits–intention linkage explains the importance of more concrete
goals (benefits) in determining behavioral intention but defies the goal
hierarchy of the MEC theory. Drawing direct conclusions on the continu-
ance intention of players from benefits (utilitarian and hedonic) without
distinguishing them from the underlying values could be problematic
(Botschen, Thelen, and Pieters 1999). Furthermore, clarity in the links
between benefits, values, and intentions can provide deeper insights into
consumer behavior (Zanoli and Naspetti 2002). The current study explores
the links between benefits, values, and intentions, to provide deeper
insights into gaming behavior.
Extensive studies show that consumers use consoles or wireless devices
to play computer games on the internet and experience hedonic as well as
utilitarian consumption values (Roy and Ng 2012). This study examines
various aspects of these hedonic and utilitarian values. To investigate their
relative importance in influencing the continuance intention to play online
games, both hedonic and utilitarian value constructs have been studied as
reflective second-order constructs. The dimensions of hedonic value are
perceived enjoyment, self-concept, self-congruity, and self-efficacy; and
dimensions of utilitarian values are ease of use, perceived complexity, and
perceived control values (Davis, Lang, and Gautam 2013).
This paper also examines the impact of perceived risk on a player’s con-
tinuance intention to play online games. Previous studies indicate several
negative consequences (risk) of online gaming (Chen 2010; Domahidi et al.
2018). Furthermore, the literature depicts risk as an important variable
changing the simple causal relationships between consumer perceptions/
evaluations and behavioral intentions into more meaningful conditional
relationships (Featherman and Fuller 2003). Since perceived risk interacts
with value to predict behavior, it also moderates the effects of hedonic and
utilitarian value on the continuance intention to play online games.
The proposed model offers insights to determine the gamers’ continu-
ance intention to play online in the future and adds to the knowledge of
the role of risk in online gaming. It also provides a competitive advantage
JOURNAL OF INTERNET COMMERCE 3
to game service practitioners by helping them decide on the correct com-

bination of value and risk and thereby ensure the gamers’ continuance in
playing online.
Theoretical background
MEC theory
Consumer behavior can be described as a consumer’s movement through
a goal hierarchy (Gutman 1997); and MEC provides one such hierarchy
of goals in which deeper levels of motivation are represented by higher—
level goals. The MEC theory posits three levels of abstraction: attributes,
consequences, and values (Gutman 1982, 1984). Attributes are the prod-
uct and service characteristics consumers directly perceive. Consequences
are the functional and psychosocial experiences of consumers when they
purchase or use goods/services. Values are at the highest abstract level
and represent the enduring beliefs that influence action across different
contexts (Lai 1995). The MEC model suggests that consumers choose
actions that produce desired outcomes. Consumers examine the outcomes
they desire and those they wish to avoid and having understood what
action produces the desired consequences (benefits) and values, guide
their choice behaviors accordingly (Gutman 1982). Values can thus be
considered the final goals that drive a player’s intention to continue play-
ing online games. Therefore, we can conclude that players play games
primarily because of their benefits and values, and not attributes. Thus,
the current study adopts the value—behavior linkage to develop a model
that investigates the continuance intention to play online games. Studies
in the literature have used the MEC theory to examine the value–repeat-
purchase intention linkage in the context of tourism (Jiang, Scott, and
Ding 2015), online shopping (Chiu et al. 2014; Fang et al. 2016), online
learning (Lin, Lin, and Hung 2015; Sun, Cheng, and Finger 2009), and
so on. This study extends this model further to the online gam-
ing context.
Perceived value
Perceived value is defined as the tradeoff between benefits and costs in
terms of primarily a consumer’s overall assessment of what is received and
what is given (Zeithaml 1988). Studies have indicated that value has a sig-
nificant influence on behavioral intentions (Chen and Tsai 2007; Lin, Lin,
and Hung 2015). Since utilitarian and hedonic values are present across the
various consumption types, they are deemed essential to evaluate the con-
sumers’ overall consumption experience (Babin, Darden, and Griffin 1994).
Liu et al. (2020) recently differentiated between customers’ utilitarian and

hedonic online shopping expectations, highlighting how expectations can
be best served through various performances. This two-dimensional
approach is also useful to study gaming behavior (Storgards, Tuunainen,
and Oorni 2009; Storgårds 2011). Extant studies suggest that consumer
motivations toward both experiential (hedonic) and goal-oriented (utilitar-
ian) behaviors drive the continuance intention to play online games (Li
et al. 2015; Hamari and Keronen 2017). In the utilitarian context, gamers
may have motivations such as ease of use and control over a game, which
can subsequently lead to the utilitarian goals to enhance the gamer’s inten-
tion to continue playing.
In the hedonic context, gamers may have enjoyment-oriented motiva-
tions such as playfulness and fun, influencing the sources that contribute to
continued playing (Koo 2009). Furthermore, extant studies suggest that
perceived values should be conceptualized at a more abstract level to suit
their conceptual definitions (Zeithaml 1988). Thus, this study models both
the utilitarian and hedonic values as second-order constructs, reflecting the
underlying benefits driving them.
Dimensions of utilitarian value

Deci and Ryan (1985) differentiate the human motivations of an action
into two general categories—extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation.
Extrinsic motivation relates to the performance of an activity to attain
some separable outcome, and, according to the MEC theory, it is analogous
to a utilitarian benefit leading to utilitarian value. The benefits most com-
monly reinforcing online gaming with utilitarian value are perceived ease
of use (Batra and Ahtola 1991), perceived complexity (Jessen 1999), and
perceived control (Lu and Wang 2008). First, perceived ease of use is the
extent to which consumers play a game without investing much effort.
Ease of use is defined as the degree to which a person believes that using
the system would be effortless (Davis 1989). Studies have shown that if a
particular technology is easy to use, it would be perceived less complicated
(Venkatesh et al. 2003). Perceived control is described as the consumers’
ability to control an experience (Huang and Hsieh 2011). When consumers
perceive that a game can be controlled by them, they would believe that
the game is easy to use and not too complex. Finally, perceived complexity
refers to the perception of both internal and external constraints on behav-
ior (Venkatesh et al. 2003). D’Astous and Guevremont (2008) state that
competent gamers consider complexity as an important factor in their
online game usage. Li et al. (2015) show that consumer’s feel rewarded
when they solve a complex challenge. Thus, we propose that expectations

that are primarily utilitarian contribute to continued gaming.
Dimensions of hedonic value

Most human behaviors are intrinsically pleasure seeking in nature
(Holbrook and Hirschman 1982). Studies have examined the hedonic ten-
dencies of consumers in online environment (Kim and Eastin 2011).
Online gamers typically desire a feeling of pleasure from the gaming
experience (Hamari and Keronen 2017). In line with extant studies suggest-
ing that perceived values should be modeled as a reflective second-order
construct based on the underlying benefits driving these values (Lin, Lin,
and Hung 2015), we adopt the hedonic value dimensions suggested by
Davis, Lang, and Gautam (2013): the gamers’ self-concept, congruity
between the game and self-concept, users’ self-efficacy with regard to a
game, and perceived enjoyment from the game.
Aaker (1999) defines self-concept as how individuals perceive and value
themselves. Extant studies indicate a consistent or compensatory relation-
ship between the virtual self in online gaming and the real self (Lemmens,
Valkenburg, and Peter 2011); furthermore, the virtual self in online gaming
can extend the real self and also serve the compensatory function of satisfy-
ing unfulfilled real-life roles. Johar and Sirgy (1991) suggest that one’s
desire to interpret and experiment arises from the need to transform self-
concept into an ideal/social/gaming state. Self-congruity defines the sym-
bolic value one obtains from an object (Aguirre-Rodriguez, Bosnjak, and
Sirgy 2012; Quester, Karunaratna, and Kee Goh 2000). Koo (2009) suggests
that intrinsic motives such as self-congruity can motivate consumers to
play online games, more so by influencing the player’s imagination and
experience. Setterstrom, Pearson, and Guggenheim (2018) posit that indi-
viduals desire to be associated with their peer groups and hence adjust their
attitudes toward online games in order to be congruent with the peer
group members. Furthermore, self-efficacy refers to one’s self-confidence in
mobilizing one’s own motivation, cognitive resources, and requisite courses
of action to meet a particular demand (Wood and Bandura 1989). This
explicitly refers to internal domain-specific competency perceptions.
Consumers play games that enhance their gaming skills, and the self-effi-
cacy that they gain is likely to enhance their confidence in the long run
when facing high-level challenges in an online game. Finally, perceived
enjoyment is defined as the extent to which the use of computer technol-
ogy is perceived enjoyable, besides any anticipated performance consequen-
ces (Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw 1992). Mathwick and Rigdon (2004)
suggest that enjoyment is a reward for self that is associated with escapism
as well as a key hedonic determinant (Bridges and Florsheim 2008). Hsu

and Lu (2007) also find the gamers seeking pleasurable experiences highly
likely to become repeat users. Chen, Lu, and Wang (2016) and Hamari and
Keronen (2017) indicate that perceived enjoyment significantly influences
the playing intention, to further significantly influence gaming behavior.
Thus, these expectations that are primarily hedonic-oriented contribute to
continued playing.
Perceived risk
Studies in the literature broadly agree on the importance of the role of per-
ceived risk in consumer behavior, besides establishing the centrality of con-
sumers’ risk perception in their evaluation, purchase (Dowling and Staelin
1994; Wu and Ke 2015), and continuance intentions (Belanche, Casal o, and
Guinalıu 2012). Thus, pressing its inclusion in the current study. Perceived
risk represents a type of mental effort and can be seen as an anxiety/fear
from a consumer’s perspective (Wang and Wang 2010). Bauer (1960)
defines perceived risk as a concept involving uncertainty and negative con-
sequences. Uncertainty is the lack of knowledge about what might happen
and the negative consequences of loss associated with a purchase or usage.
In the virtual environment context, perceived risk is defined as the internet
users’ fear of loss due to an electronic transaction (Forsythe and Shi 2003).
The role of perceived risk in the online gaming context has not been
explored adequately so far (Chen, Lee, and Wang 2012, Wang, Fan, and
Bae 2019), although a few studies have explored the characteristic of uncer-
tainty and its role (Liu 2017). Once gamers realize the possible negative
consequences of gaming, they might discontinue playing online games.
According to Featherman and Pavlou (2003), perceived risk has six dimen-
sions: performance, financial, time, psychological, social, and physical risks.
These dimensions were adopted by Chen, Lee, and Wang (2012) in the
online gaming context. However, since financial risk, physical risk, and per-
formance risk were found to be insignificant in the previous studies, thus,
the current study does not consider these dimensions. Moreover, technolo-
gies are becoming increasingly personal and ubiquitous, with privacy con-
cerns growing in importance (Ackerman 2004). Studies suggest that
focusing on technology without considering the privacy implications, and
vice versa, in highly personalized technological settings could be fruitless
(Junglas, Johnson, and Spitzm€ uller 2008). Studies have also conceptualized
privacy concerns as a risk factor reflecting users’ inherent worries about
the possible loss of personal information from technology use (Malhotra,
Kim, and Agarwal 2004). Malik et al. (2019) highlight the privacy aspects
of online games. Thus, we chose four risk dimensions relevant to online
gaming: (a) psychological, (b) social, (c) time, and (d) privacy. The items
for measuring perceived risk were adapted from Curras-Perez, Ruiz-Mafe,
and Sanz-Blas (2013), focusing on negative outcomes in situations charac-
terized by uncertainty, loss of self-concept, time wastage, and loss of per-
sonal information respectively.
The risk gamers perceive in playing games may negatively influence their
perceived utilitarian and hedonic values. From the study of Featherman
and Fuller (2003), which posits that risk is an important moderating vari-
able that changes simple, causal relationships of consumer perceptions,
evaluations, and behavioral intentions into more insightful conditional rela-
tionships, we propose that perceived risk interacts with utilitarian and
hedonic values in predicting the continuance intention to play
online games.
Determinants of continuance intention

Studies in gaming explore different consumer behavioral intention dimen-
sions, such as purchase (Huang 2012) and continuance (Chang, Liu, and
Chen 2014) intention. The literature highlights that the long-term success
of a technology-based product depends on its continued use (Basak and
Calisir 2015). From this, we can posit that continuance intention is an
important behavioral consequence for determining the sustainable success
of online games as well (Gao and Bai 2014; Chang, Liu, and Chen 2014;
Ghazali, Mutum, and Woon 2019). Fang et al. (2016) and Chiu et al.
(2014) show that perceived value (utilitarian and hedonic) significantly
influenced consumers’ continued shopping. In the information system (IS)
continuance use literature, several lines of evidence reveal that utilitarian
value (e.g. perceived usefulness), as extrinsic motivation, is strongly related
to the effective and efficient use of information technology (Jasperson,
Carter, and Zmud 2005; Kim, Chan, and Gupta 2007). Hedonic value (e.g.
perceived playfulness and enjoyability) as intrinsic motivation can also
determine the users’ continuance intention (Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw
1992; Lin, Sher, and Shih 2005). Studies on online gaming also indicate the
importance of utilitarian and hedonic value in driving the continuance
intention to play (Chen, Lu, and Wang 2016; Li et al. 2015; Chang, Liu,
and Chen 2014). Therefore, this study proposes that consumers’ utilitarian
and hedonic value positively influence their continuance intention to play
online games. We adapt the MEC framework to understand the continu-
ance intention to play games by exploring the links between benefits, val-
ues, and intentions to provide deeper insights into gaming behavior.
Utilitarian benefits (ease of use, perceived complexity, and perceived con-
trol) and hedonic benefits (the gamers’ self-concept, congruity between
Utilitarian Value H2
Continuance
Intention to play
H1
H3
Hedonic Value H4
Perceived Risk
Figure 1. Research model.
games and self-concept, users’ self-efficacy with respect to games, and per-
ceived enjoyment from games) can be seen as subgoals leading to
higher goals (i.e. utilitarian and hedonic values) that motivate consumers
to continue playing games (Gutman 1997). For consumers, obtaining
value is a fundamental goal pivotal to all successful transactions
(Holbrook 1994) and thus the main driver of repeat intention (Kim and
Gupta 2009).
Furthermore, since online gaming does evoke risk perceptions—with the
relationship between value and continuance intention contingent on the
risk in an online gaming context—this study examines the value–continu-
ance intention linkage in conjunction with the moderating role of perceived
risk.
Model framework and hypothesis development

The research model based on the MEC theory is depicted in Figure 1. The
MEC theory is used to build a higher-order structure for both dimensions
of perceived value by depicting the benefits reflected from both hedonic
and utilitarian values. Perceived risk is adopted to explore the moderating
role it might have in the relationship between these values and a player’s
continuance intention to play online games.
Utilitarian and hedonic values

From the MEC theory, which posits that higher-level goals represent deeper
motivation levels, values can be considered the final goals that drive a play-
er’s continuance intention to play online games. Additionally, both hedonic
and utilitarian values influence consumer decisions. Thus, for players to
continue playing games, they should have both value types in greater meas-
ure. Therefore, for continuance intention to play online games, we
hypothesize as follows:
H1: Hedonic value has a positive impact on gamers’ continuance intention to

play online.
H2: Utilitarian value has a positive impact on gamers’ continuance intention to

play online.
Perceived risk
This study proposes that perceived risk interacts with value to predict
behavior and thus moderates the effects of hedonic values and utilitarian
values on the continuance intention to play games. We also propose that
perceived risk has a negative role in the relationship between the values
and the continuance intention to play games. In case of high risk, gamers
may not want to overcome the complexities of the game and take control
of it. Thus, they may focus less on utilitarian value, given the concern for
uncertainty, loss of self-concept, time wastage, and loss of personal infor-
mation. Similarly, in case of high risk, gamers may not be able to make the
most of their experiences because they would be driven less by the need to
experience adventure and novel sensations in view of the risk.
Consequently, the role of hedonic and utilitarian values in the continuance
intention to play games decreases. Thus, we propose that the impact of utilitar-
ian and hedonic value on the continuance intention to play online games
would decrease as a function of perceived risk, and thus hypothesize as follows:
H3: Perceived risk moderates the relationship between utilitarian value and the
continuance intention to play games.
H4: Perceived risk moderates the relationship between hedonic value and the
continuance intention to play games.
Research methodology
Measurement instrument
To operationalize the utilitarian and hedonic consumption values in the
context of online gaming, we adopt the components proposed by Davis,
Lang, and Gautam (2013): three components of utilitarian value—perceived
ease of use, perceived control, and perceived complexity—and four compo-
nents of hedonic value—perceived enjoyment, self-concept, self-congruity,
and self-efficacy. The adoption of Davis, Lang, and Gautam (2013) scales
provided us several advantages; for example, the scale items were validated
in the context of online gaming itself, and, similar to the Davis, Lang, and
Gautam (2013) study, we collected data from all game genres.1
The measurement scale for perceived risk was adapted from

Curras-Perez, Ruiz-Mafe, and Sanz-Blas (2013). Since each perceived risk
sub-dimension is a concrete concept in itself, the aggregated impact of the
sub-dimensions represents perceived risk (Chen and He 2003). Moreover,
re-presenting each sub-dimension with one item is acceptable since this is
more easily and uniformly imaginable by the respondents (Rossiter 2002;
Chiu et al. 2014). The current study also adopted an overall multiple-item
measure for the perceived risk construct. Furthermore, the items for con-
tinuance intention were adopted from Agarwal and Karahanna (2000). All
the questionnaire scale items were measured using a five-point Likert scale,
from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
Since the measurement instruments were adapted from different studies
and contexts, we conducted a pretest with two purposes: (i) we interviewed
10 online game players to examine the content validity of the measures,
and (ii) we surveyed 50 online gamers in a pilot study to check the reliabil-
ity and validity of the measures. The final questionnaire had questions in
three sections: (i) information on playing experience and type of online
games played, (ii) data on perceptions of online-game benefits, perceived
risks, and intention to play online games, and (iii) demographic details
such as age, gender, and educational level. The constructs and their meas-
urement items are presented in Appendix A.
Data collection
We tested the research model using online gaming users’ data obtained
through an online survey conducted by posting a survey link on various
social network pages and forums of popular online games. We received a
total of 247 questionnaires from online gamers in India, and then assessed
the data for missing values, outliers, and normality to maintain consistency
with the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation model-
ing (SEM) assumptions (Hair et al. 2006). For assessing the outliers, we
used the Mahalanobis distance statistic, deleting the observations in which
both p1 and p2 were significant. For testing normality, we examined the
skewness and kurtosis measures. The items whose kurtosis and skewness
exceeded the recommended value of 2.0 were deleted (Curran, West, and
Finch 1996). After eliminating responses at the preliminary analyses, we
had 201 valid questionnaires remaining for consideration and use for sub-
sequent analysis. We show the final sample’s demographic distribution in
Table 1 below:
Of the respondents, 54% were male and 46% were female. While
about 80% of the respondents were below 40 years of age, 50% were
under 30 years. As regards the genre of games played, the majority
Table 1. Descriptive statistics of respondents.

Descriptive statistics No. of respondents % of Respondents
Gender
Female 93 46
Male 108 54
Age
Below 20 38 19
20–30 78 39
30–40 59 29
40–50 19 9
Above 50 7 3
Education
Sr. secondary 23 11
Graduation 72 36
Post-graduation 94 47
Others 12 6
Playing online game experience (year)
<1 9 4
1–2 27 13
2–3 104 52
3–4 32 16
4–5 18 9
>5 11 5
Type of playing online games
Action 22 11
Adventure 34 17
Role-playing online games 12 6
Simulation 9 4
Sports 42 21
Strategy 35 17
Classic puzzle 22 11
War games 21 10
Others 4 2
played sports (Mini football, Tennis star), strategy (Abandoned,

Mountain hop), and adventure games (Bullet hell adventure, Epic mage).
Almost 80% of respondents reported that they have played online games
for over 2 years.
Data analysis and results

Our analysis followed a two-stage process of model development and test-
ing (Bagozzi and Yi 2012). First, we developed a measurement model using
CFA (Kline 1998), and then tested the hypotheses using SEM.
Measurement model
We tested the multiple-item scales of construct shown in Figure 1 through
CFA using a maximum likelihood estimation method to determine whether
the manifest variables reflected the hypothesized latent variables, assessing
the adequacy of the individual items through convergent validity, compos-
ite reliability, and discriminant validity.
Table 2. Reliability analysis and loadings of each variable.

Constructs Items Loading Cronbach’s alpha CR AVE
Self-concept (SCNPT) 3 0.896 0.856 0.860 0.673
0.838
0.717
Self-congruity (SCNGR) 3 0.770 0.745 0.751 0.503
0.607
0.741
Self-efficacy (SEFFI) 3 0.843 0.873 0.874 0.698
0.823
0.841
Perceived enjoyment (PENJ) 4 0.761 0.845 0.846 0.578
0.724
0.798
0.757
Ease of use (PEOU) 3 0.860 0.871 0.873 0.697
0.750
0.889
Perceived control (CONT) 3 0.894 0.856 0.861 0.676
0.860
0.700
Perceived complexity (CMPX) 4 0.748 .869 0.877 0.642
0.889
0.818
0.740
Continuance intention to play (CINT) 3 0.864 0.894 0.896 0.741
0.885
0.833
Perceived risk (PR) 4 0.787 0.886 0.887 0.664
0.841
0.864
0.763
Notes: CR: composite reliability; AVE: average variance explained
Reliability and validity

As Table 2 shows, all the factor loadings exceeded 0.70 (Hair et al. 2006),
with significance at the level of 0.05. Each construct showed an acceptable
internal consistency level, with the Cronbach’s alpha estimates ranging
from 0.745 to 0.894 (Hair et al. 2006). All the composite reliabilities of the
constructs were in the range of 0.751–0.896, ensuring adequate internal
consistency of multiple items for each construct (Hair et al. 2006). The
average variance extracted (AVE) of all constructs exceeded the minimum
criterion of 0.50, explaining a large portion of the variance (Hair et al.
2006). Also, the square root of each construct’s AVE was larger than the
construct’s correlation with other constructs, further indicating good con-
vergent and discriminant validity (Sanchez-Franco and Roldan 2005)
(Table 3). The fit indices were appropriate, with CMIN ¼ 251.840,
df ¼ 211, v2/df ¼ 1.194, CFI ¼ 0. 982, IFI ¼ 0.982 and RMSEA ¼ 0. 031.
Structural model (H1 and H2)

We tested H1 and H2 using SEM. The fit indices were appropriate, with
CMIN ¼ 364.212, df ¼ 291, v2/df ¼ 1.252, CFI ¼ 0.972, and RMSEA ¼
0.035. The results of hypotheses testing are presented in Table 4.
Table 3. Correlation matrix.
Perceived Perceived Continuance
Self-concept Self-congruity Self-efficacy enjoyment Ease of use Perceived control complexity intention to play Perceived risk
Self-concept 0.820
Self-congruity 0.162 0.710
Self-efficacy 0.153 0.206 0.836
Perceived 0.510 0.109 0.221 0.760
enjoyment
Ease of use 0.214 0.299 0.174 0.345 0.835
Perceived control 0.245 0.191 0.092 0.335 0.585 0.822
Perceived 0.198 0.201 0.199 0.200 0.342 0.333 0.801
complexity
Continuance 0.265 0.243 0.288 0.412 0.324 0.155 0.298 0.861
intention
to play
Perceived risk 0.031 0.171 0.016 0.117 0.230 0.200 0.068 0.234 0.815
Note: Diagonals represent the square root of the average variance extracted, while the other matrix entries represent the correlations.
JOURNAL OF INTERNET COMMERCE
13
Table 4. Results of hypothesis testing.

S. No. Hypothesized relationship Path estimate (p-value)
H1 Hedonic value ➜ Continuance intention to play 0.523 (0.001)
H2 Utilitarian value ➜ Continuance intention to play 0.053 (0.686)
From the results, the continuance intention to play online games is sig-
nificantly influenced by hedonic value (H1: b ¼0.523, p ¼ 0.001), with utili-
tarian value (H2: b ¼ 0.053, p ¼ 0.686) having insignificant effect. The
values suggested that hedonic value drives the continuance usage behavior
better than utilitarian value in the context of online games.
Multi-group analysis (H3 and H4)

The study also examined how perceived risk moderates (i.e. high risk vs.
low risk) the relationship between the hedonic and utilitarian aspects of
online gaming and the continuance intention to play games. Multi-group
invariance implies three key features: (1) the research model is invariant
(i.e. similar) across the separate sample groups—that is, high risk and low
risk groups (configural invariance); (2) the measurement instruments are
invariant across the two sample groups (metric invariance); and (3) the
individual hypothesized relationships are also invariant across the sample
groups (structural invariance) (Vandenberg and Lance 2000).
To analyze the invariance of multiple groups, we tested the research
model for the overall sample (i.e. for both high risk and low risk) and cre-
ated a baseline model. The research model for the overall sample is referred
to as the configural model. To establish whether the configural model fits
the data well, as suggested by Hu and Bentler (1999), we used several
model-fit statistics. Establishing configural model invariance is critical
because it serves as a baseline model for subsequent invariance testing. The
results show a v2/df value of 1.138 (CMIN ¼ 662.586, df ¼ 582), CFI value
of 0.970, and RMSEA value of 0.026; this indicates the establishment of
configural invariance, supporting the notion of identical fixed and non-
fixed parameter patterns in the research model for both the high- and low-
risk samples. Additionally, the testing of each group separately showed no
difference in number and pattern of fixed and non-fixed parameter values
across the groups.
The establishment of metric invariance implies similar measurement
instrument behaviors across the two sample groups (high risk vs. low risk).
This behavior can be achieved when the path coefficients of the measure-
ment instrument variables on their respective constructs show similar
results across the two groups, that is, the path coefficients across groups
are not significantly different. The failure to establish metric invariance
may lead to different meanings for factors, despite having the same factor
Table 5. Fit indices for invariance tests.

Model Test v2 (df) v2 / df p-Value CFI RMSEA
1. Pooled sample model 364.212 (291) 1.252 0.002 0.972 0.035
2. High risk only 305.026 (291) 1.048 0.274 0.988 0.023
3. Low risk only 357.533 (291) 1.229 0.005 0.956 0.045
4. Configural invariance 662.586 (582) 1.138 0.011 0.970 0.026
5. Metric invariance 679.134 (598) 1.136 0.012 0.969 0.026
6. Structural invariance 698.742 (605) 1.155 0.005 0.965 0.028
Table 6. Results of v2 difference tests.

Model comparison D v2 D df p-Value D CFI D RMSEA Decision
Test of full metric invariance (Model 5 versus Model 4) 16.548 16 0.415 0.001 0.000 Supported
Test of full structural invariance (Model 6 versus 36.155 23 0.040 0.005 0.002 Not Supported
Model 4)
label (Byrne 2010). Once metric invariance is satisfied, the comparison of

different scores on items across groups would be meaningful, with the
observance of item differences correctly indicating differences across groups
in underlying latent constructs (Steenkamp and Baumgartner 2000).
To test for metric invariance, we fix the path coefficients across groups,
increasing the v2 value from 662.586 to 679.134 (Table 5). Since the metric
invariance model (Model 2) is nested within the baseline model (Model 1), we
perform a v2 difference test. Given that the v2 difference of 16.548 with 16
degrees of freedom is not statistically significant at p-value ¼ 0.415, we can
conclude that metric invariance is supported (Table 5).
While the v2 difference test is the most accepted approach for model
comparison, the CFI and RMSEA have been recommended for assessing
the model fit (Hair et al. 2010). As shown in Table 6, the v2 difference test
results are insignificant and the DCFI and DRMSEA values are not greater
than the cutoff value of 0.001 (Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 2000; Byrne,
Shavelson, and Muthen 1989; Byrne 2010). Therefore, both the sample
groups—that is, the high-risk and low-risk groups—behave similarly in
terms of metric invariance (Table 6).
After ascertaining the metric invariance, with the measurement instru-
ments functioning similarly for all groups, we tested for structural invari-
ance. In structural invariance, the coefficients of all paths between the
constructs (i.e. hypothesized relationships) are constrained to be equal
across the groups. This constraint is more stringent than metric invariance.
The metric invariance model (Model 5) constrained the path estimates of
seven more variables as fixed across both the high-risk and low-risk sample
groups and tested for structural invariance. As with metric invariance, a v2
difference test compared the structural invariance (Model 6). Since the v2
difference was statistically significant, at p ¼ 0.040 (Dv2¼36.155, with 23
degrees of freedom), and the DCFI and DRMSEA values exceeded the cut-
off of 0.001, structural invariance was not established (Table 6). Thus,
Table 7. Summarized results.

Overall High risk Low risk
Hypothesis
H3: UV ➜ CINT 0.053 (0.686) 0.223 (0.520) 0.228 (0.096)
H4: HV ➜ CINT 0.523 (0.001) 0.930 (0.051) 0.252 (0.088)
Other Findings
HV ➜ SCNPT 0.589 (<0.001) 0.435 (0.003) 0.721 (<0.001)
HV ➜ SCNGR 0.306 (0.005) 0.225 (0.142) 0.368 (0.010)
HV ➜ SEFFI 0.348 (<0.001) 0.292 (0.037) 0.375 (0.004)
HV ➜ PENJ 0.751 (<0.001) 0.701 (0.003) 0.782 (<0.001)
UV ➜ PEOU 0.803 (<0.001) 0.687 (<0.001) 0.966 (0.001)
UV ➜ CONT 0.714 (<0.001) 0.930 (<0.001) 0.519 (<0.001)
UV ➜ CMPX 0.466 (<0.001) 0.484 (<0.001) 0.449 ((<0.001)
Note: p-values are in parenthesis.
structural relationships did not have similar impacts across groups

(Table 7).
A model comparison showed that risk significantly moderated the rela-
tion between value dimensions and the continuance intention to play
games. For gamers who perceived a higher risk in online gaming, the utili-
tarian value had a smaller effect (b ¼ 0.223) on continuance intention to
play online games as compared to gamers who perceived a lower risk (b ¼
0.228), which supports H3 at the significance level of 10%). Furthermore,
the impact of hedonic value on continuance intention to play games has
reduced under low risk (b ¼ 0.252) and increased under high risk
(b ¼ 0.930), thus supporting H4 as well.
Discussion
The present study attempts to understand the forces that strengthen/
weaken the intention of online gaming users to continue playing games.
We find that the intent to continue playing online games is affected signifi-
cantly by hedonic value (driven by hedonic benefits such as perceived
enjoyment, self-concept, self-congruity, and self-efficacy); however, utilitar-
ian value (driven by utilitarian benefits such as perceived ease of use, con-
trol, and complexity) is not a significant factor. This can be explained by
appreciating the emerging market context of the study where the gamers
are probably driven by hedonic benefits and values.
The study also confirms that hedonic value remains the primary driver
of the continuance intention to play online games, irrespective of the risk
level perceived by gamers. This indicates that most of the players are driven
by experience. As regards hedonic value, this study shows that perceived
enjoyment, self-concept, self-efficacy, and self-congruity are all significant
components. Thus, perceived enjoyment stands out as the most important
benefit generating hedonic value, in line with existing studies (Wu and
Liu 2007). Note also the role of perceived self-concept in generating
hedonic value. Thus, gamers are motivated by the thought of similarity

between themselves and other gamers as well as the idea of developing
esteem—that is, being seen or perceived as a particular type of gamer.
Under high risk, the dimension of self-congruity has an insignificant
impact on hedonic value. Thus, online gamers may not be able to relate
themselves to other gamers, eventually making them vulnerable to switch
to other less uncertain games.
For utilitarian value, perceived ease of use emerges as the most important
contributor. Thus, the easy-to-use game technology enhances the gamer’s
ability to interact with the game, reducing the perceived and actual barriers
to interaction (Yang 2010). Furthermore, perceived control is the second
major benefit contributing to utilitarian value. This can be explained in
terms of players wanting to have the necessary knowledge and resources to
play a game and to know from where they can get help.
Our findings also highlight the moderating role of perceived risk in the
relationship between the values and continuance intentions (Chen 2010).
This can be explained in terms of the underlying fear of users while playing
online games relating to loss of privacy, loss of time, anxiety, and fear of
worsening the social image they have created for themselves.
The moderating results show high-risk situations unexpectedly increasing
the impact of hedonic value on the gamers’ continuance intention to play
online games. This does not support the assumption that online gamers
cannot make the most of their experiences due to high risk concerns. A
possible reason for this could be drawn from existing studies suggesting
that gamers tend to immerse themselves in their experience, because gam-
ing evokes excitement and high emotion levels, with the environment pro-
viding an experiential amplification of the internal self (Childers et al.
2001; Scarpi 2012).
A similar finding was obtained in Chiu et al. (2014) with regard to
online shopping. This indicates the overarching influence of perceived risk
on the relationship between hedonic value and continuance intentions/
behavior irrespective of the nature of service, because online shopping is
predominantly a utilitarian service (Overby and Lee 2006) and online gam-
ing is predominantly a hedonic service. This further indicates the experi-
mental facet of consumers in the online environment. The authors believe
that this is an important finding meriting future research.
Further, the impact of utilitarian value on continuance intention remains
insignificant in high-risk situations but becomes significant in low-risk sit-
uations (at 10% level of significance). Thus, it guides marketers maintain
low-risk perceptions to capitalize on, both, hedonic and utilitarian values.
Gamers seem to be in a flow state in high-risk situations, driven more
by the need to experience adventure and showcase their control over the
game, beyond any concerns. Drawing from the extant studies (Ben-Ur,
Mai, and Yang 2015), we re-iterate that game developers should design the
games’ difficulty levels with much care to make the games challenging,
while also giving players a sense of control. However, in low-risk situations,
gamers seem to appreciate more the effort level required to play a game or
overcome the game’s complexities and take control of it.
Our research model investigates the continuance intention of players in
the context of online gaming from a different angle compared to most
existing studies. First, we bring the MEC theory to the online gaming
domain by proposing links between benefits, values, and intentions. Our
model is based on the value–intention linkage under the MEC tenet that
values are the final goals influencing behavior. Moreover, the inclusion of
hedonic and utilitarian value dimensions allows us to simultaneously see
how each of them is related to the continuance intention to play games.
From our findings, players will continue to play online games only if they
realize positive hedonic and utilitarian values. Second, the study integrates
perceived risk with the dimensions of the two values and examines their
combined effect on the player’s continued gaming intention. This integra-
tion provides a much more holistic explanation of the continuance inten-
tion to play online games.
Implications
Implications for theory
A major contribution of this study is that it reveals the moderating role of
perceived risk. The impact of hedonic value on the continuance intention
increases in case of high risk irrespective of the nature of service, indicating
the overarching effect of perceived risk in the online environment. The rea-
son could be that online environment propels the experimental facet of
consumers as they tradeoff between value and risk (Chen 2010; Moon and
Lee 2015).
Thus, we need to understand the interactions between perceived risk and
hedonic and utilitarian values to gain in-depth insight into the relationship
between perceived values and the continuance intention to play online
games. These results show the opposite impact of perceived risk on the
effect of hedonic and utilitarian values on continuance intention to play
online games, indicating that the reason for consumers to seek or avoid
risk varied across the values under evaluation, and that it is therefore
imperative for one to consider the differential influence of the nature of
gaming goals. Furthermore, to ensure that players realize the combined
effect of hedonic and utilitarian values, risk perceptions need to be man-
aged at an acceptable level.
While studies in the literature have examined the influence of both

hedonic and utilitarian values on the purchase and usage of online games
(Harnadi 2019; Chen, Lu, and Wang 2016; Li et al. 2015; Davis, Lang, and
Gautam 2013), this study sheds light on the online gamers’ intentions. This
study contributes to the online gaming literature by appreciating the bene-
fits–value–continuance intention linkage and bringing out the individual
effects of values as well as their combined effects along with perceived risk
on the continuance intention to play online games. The study brings the
MEC theory to the online gaming domain by proposing links between ben-
efits, values, and intentions. Lower-level goals (benefits) in the tested model
serve as means to attain higher-level values that ultimately drive the con-
tinuance intention to play online games.
Studies in the literature extensively discuss the various underlying utili-
tarian and hedonic online gaming dimensions and examine their individual
effects on gaming behavior, instead of their integrative effects, leading to
confounding results with respect to the influence of hedonic and utilitarian
values on constructs such as the continuance intention. Empirical analysis
can avoid this situation by conducting studies at the value rather than com-
ponent level (Lin, Sher, and Shih 2005). This study models hedonic and
utilitarian values as second-order constructs to obtain higher-level abstrac-
tions while simultaneously building a model to examine the overarching
effects of the first-order variables on the respective values.
Implications for practice

As various social network sites and e-commerce players are foraying into
the online gaming industry2, gaming is set to witness a huge jump in mar-
ket share, with online games taking the center stage as an interactive com-
munication platform influencing consumer behavior.3 Given the vital
importance of online gaming, the current study has several implications for
both marketers and game designers. As the lack of adequate value creations
and risk perceptions may adversely affect this growth trajectory, marketers
should carefully monitor gamers’ behavior. The dominant role of hedonic
values suggests that online game marketers should ensure to provide
requisite hedonic values on a priority basis. Gamers who have experienced
a desired value from certain games are more likely to continue playing
those games. This study suggests that of all the individual benefits underly-
ing hedonic value, perceived enjoyment is the primary target, followed by
self-concept and self-congruity. Thus, marketers should provide an immer-
sive experience to gamers on a priority basis. For this, game developers
should come up with innovative ideas and infuse excitement and interest
into their games. Moreover, they must take into account the different types
of gamers they are targeting and build components that distinct gamers
would easily identify.
Furthermore, since the impact of utilitarian value is significant on con-
tinuance intentions only in low-risk situations, managers should ensure
low-risk perceptions and capitalize on both hedonic and utilitarian values.
Marketers should ensure that the system interface is easy to use. Guidelines
on how to play a game would contribute to players feeling more in control,
leading to their continuance intention to play.
To sum up, since the online environment propels the experimental facet
of consumers as they tradeoff between value and risk (Chen 2010; Moon
and Lee 2015) and since the tradeoff varies between consumers, managers
may benefit from segmenting them by identifying their correct value-risk
combination and personalizing the game features accordingly.
Limitations and future scope of research

Since the data used in this study are cross-sectional, much of the statistic-
ally supported relationships should be considered tentative. The generaliz-
ability of the model and findings in other multiple-player and cultural
contexts may be explored in future. The cross-sectional data could be
replaced by a longitudinal study to evaluate the argument, wherein the
research model could be investigated in different time periods to facilitate
comparison—thus providing more insight into the continuance intention to
play online games.
Future studies could explore the applicability of our results to other geo-
graphical areas. Given the importance of customer satisfaction, future
research could explore the mediating influence of satisfaction through the
hedonic/utilitarian value–continuance intention link to play online games.
Moreover, to fully appreciate the gamers’ role in the consumption process,
future research could examine the influence of co-creation on gam-
ing experience.
Notes
1. Although there are other significant works by Ramırez-Correa et al. (2019, 2020), those
studies primarily focus on the initial adoption behavior only, and not on
continuance intention.
2. Facebook horizon, Google play game pass, Apple gaming arcade, Amazon Games, etc.
3. https://brandequity.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/digital/facebook-gaming-grows-
210-twitch-still-leads/73184490
ORCID
Preeti Tak http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3953-4443
References
Aaker, J. L. 1999. The malleable self: The role of self-expression in persuasion. Journal of
Marketing Research 36 (1), 45–57. doi: 10.1177/002224379903600104.
Ackerman, M. 2004. Privacy in pervasive environments: Next generation labeling protocols.
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 8 (6):430–434. doi: 10.1007/s00779-004-0305-8.
Agarwal, R., and E. Karahanna. 2000. Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorp-
tion and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly 24 (4):665–694. doi:
10.2307/3250951.
Aguirre-Rodriguez, A., M. Bosnjak, and M. J. Sirgy. 2012. Moderators of the self-congruity
effect on consumer decision-making: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business Research 65
(8):1179–1188. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.031.
Babin, B. J., W. R. Darden, and M. Griffin. 1994. Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic
and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research 20 (4):644–656. doi: 10.
1086/209376.
Bagozzi, R. P., and Y. Yi. 2012. Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural
equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 40 (1):8–34. doi: 10.1007/
s11747-011-0278-x.
Basak, E., and F. Calisir. 2015. An empirical study on factors affecting continuance inten-
tion of using Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior 48:181–189. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.
2015.01.055.
Batra, R., and O. T. Ahtola. 1991. Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of con-
sumer attitudes. Marketing Letters 2 (2):159–170. doi: 10.1007/BF00436035.
Bauer, R. A. 1960. Consumer behavior as risk taking. In Dynamic marketing for a changing
world, ed. by R. S. Hancock, 389–398. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Belanche, D., L. V. Casalo, and M. Guinalıu. 2012. Website usability, consumer satisfaction
and the intention to use a website: The moderating effect of perceived risk. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (1):124–132. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2011.11.001.
Ben-Ur, J., E. Mai, and J. Yang. 2015. Hedonic consumption in virtual reality. Journal of
Internet Commerce 14 (3):406–423. doi: 10.1080/15332861.2015.1081792.
Botschen, G., E. M. Thelen, and R. Pieters. 1999. Using means-end structures for benefit
segmentation: An application to services. European Journal of Marketing 33 (1/2):38–58.
doi: 10.1108/EUM0000000004491.
Bridges, E., and R. Florsheim. 2008. Hedonic and utilitarian shopping goals: The
online experience. Journal of Business Research 61 (4):309–314. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.
2007.06.017.
Byrne, B. M. 2010. Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications,
and programming (multivariate applications series). New York: Taylor & Francis Group,
396, 7384.
Byrne, B. M., R. J. Shavelson, and B. Muthen. 1989. Testing for the equivalence of factor
covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance.
Psychological Bulletin 105 (3):456–466. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456.
Chang, I. C., C. C. Liu, and K. Chen. 2014. The effects of hedonic/utilitarian expectations
and social influence on continuance intention to play online games. Internet Research 24
(1):21–45. doi: 10.1108/IntR-02-2012-0025.
Chen, A., Y. Lu, and B. Wang. 2016. Enhancing perceived enjoyment in social games
through social and gaming factors. Information Technology and People 29 (1):99–119.
doi: 10.1108/ITP-07-2014-0156.
Chen, C. F., and D. Tsai. 2007. How destination image and evaluative factors affect behav-
ioral intentions? Tourism Management 28 (4):1115–1122. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2006.07.
007.
Chen, L. S. L. 2010. The impact of perceived risk, intangibility and consumer characteristics
on online game playing. Computers in Human Behavior 26 (6):1607–1613. doi: 10.1016/j.
chb.2010.06.008.
Chen, L. S. L., Y. H. Lee, and S. T. Wang. 2012. Impact of intangibility on perceived risk
associated with online games. Behaviour and Information Technology 31 (10):1021–1032.
doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2011.624640.
Chen, R., and F. He. 2003. Examination of brand knowledge, perceived risk and consumers’
intention to adopt an online retailer. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence
14 (6):677–693. doi: 10.1080/1478336032000053825.
Childers, T. L., C. L. Carr, J. Peck, and S. Carson. 2001. Hedonic and utilitarian motiva-
tions for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing 77 (4):511–535. doi: 10.
1016/S0022-4359(01)00056-2.
Chiu, C. M., E. T. Wang, Y. H. Fang, and H. Y. Huang. 2014. Understanding customers’
repeat purchase intentions in B2C e-commerce: The roles of utilitarian value, hedonic
value and perceived risk. Information Systems Journal 24 (1):85–114. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-
2575.2012.00407.x.
Curran, P. J., S. G. West, and J. F. Finch. 1996. The robustness of test statistics to nonnor-
mality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods 1
(1):16–29. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.16.
Curras-Perez, R., C. Ruiz-Mafe, and S. Sanz-Blas. 2013. Social network loyalty: Evaluating
the role of attitude, perceived risk and satisfaction. Online Information Review 37 (1):
61–82.
D’Astous, A., and A. Guevremont. 2008. Effects of retailer post-purchase guarantee policies
on consumer perceptions with the moderating influence of financial risk and product
complexity. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 15 (4):306–314. doi: 10.1016/j.
jretconser.2007.06.005.
Davis, F. D. 1989. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of
Information Technology. MIS Quarterly 13 (3):319–340. doi: 10.2307/249008.
Davis, F. D., R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw. 1992. Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to
use computers in the workplace1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 22 (14):
1111–1132. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x.
Davis, R., B. Lang, and N. Gautam. 2013. Modeling utilitarian-hedonic dual mediation
(UHDM) in the purchase and use of games. Internet Research 23 (2):229–256. doi: 10.
1108/10662241311313330.
Deci, E. L., and R. M. Ryan. 1985. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum.
Domahidi, E., J. Breuer, R. Kowert, R. Festl, and T. Quandt. 2018. A longitudinal
analysis of gaming-and non-gaming-related friendships and social support among social
online game players. Media Psychology 21 (2):288–307. doi: 10.1080/15213269.2016.
1257393.
Dowling, G. R., and R. Staelin. 1994. A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling
activity. Journal of Consumer Research 21 (1):119–134. doi: 10.1086/209386.
Fang, J., C. Wen, B. George, and V. R. Prybutok. 2016. Consumer heterogeneity, perceived
value, and repurchase decision-making in online shopping: The role of gender, age, and
shopping motives. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research 17 (2):116.
Featherman, M., and M. Fuller. 2003. Applying TAM to e-services adoption: The moderat-
ing role of perceived risk. In 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences, 2003 (p. 11), IEEE. doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2003.1174433.
Featherman, M. S., and P. A. Pavlou. 2003. Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk
facets perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59 (4):451–474. doi:
10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00111-3.
Forsythe, S. M., and B. Shi. 2003. Consumer patronage and risk perceptions in Internet
shopping. Journal of Business Research 56 (11):867–875. doi: 10.1016/S0148-
2963(01)00273-9.
Gao, L., and X. Bai. 2014. A unified perspective on the factors influencing consumer
acceptance of internet of things technology. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and
Logistics 26 (2):211–231. doi: 10.1108/APJML-06-2013-0061.
Ghazali, E., D. S. Mutum, and M. Y. Woon. 2019. Exploring player behavior and motiva-
tions to continue playing Pokemon GO. Information Technology and People 32 (3):
646–667. doi: 10.1108/ITP-07-2017-0216.
Gutman, J. 1982. A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes.
Journal of Marketing 46 (2):60–72. doi: 10.1177/002224298204600207.
Gutman, J. 1984. Analyzing consumer orientations toward beverages through means–end
chain analysis. Psychology and Marketing 1 (3–4):23–43. doi: 10.1002/mar.4220010305.
Gutman, J. 1997. Means–end chains as goal hierarchies. Psychology and Marketing 14 (6):
545–560. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199709)14:6<545::AID-MAR2>3.0.CO;2-7.
Hair, J. F., R. E. Anderson, B. J. Babin, and W. C. Black. 2010. Multivariate data analysis:
A global perspective (vol. 7): Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
Hair, J. F., Jr. W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, R. E. Anderson, and R. L. Tatham. 2006.
Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.
Hamari, J., and L. Keronen. 2017. Why do people play games? A meta-analysis.
International Journal of Information Management 37 (3):125–141. doi: 10.1016/j.ijin-
fomgt.2017.01.006.
Harnadi, B. 2019. An investigation of the adoption of online game technologies in
Indonesia. In Gender and diversity: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications,
307–335. IGI Global. USA: Information Resources Management Association. doi: 10.
4018/978-1-5225-6912-1.ch016.
Holbrook, M. B. 1994. The nature of customer value: An axiology of services in the con-
sumption experience. Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice 21 (1):
21–71.
Holbrook, M. B., and E. C. Hirschman. 1982. The experiential aspects of consumption:
Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research 9 (2):132–140. doi:
10.1086/208906.
Hsu, C. L., and H. P. Lu. 2007. Consumer behavior in online game communities: A motiv-
ational factor perspective. Computers in Human Behavior 23 (3):1642–1659. doi: 10.1016/
j.chb.2005.09.001.
Hu, L. T., and P. M. Bentler. 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure
analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal 6 (1):1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.
Huang, E. 2012. Online experiences and virtual goods purchase intention. Internet Research
22 (3):252–274. doi: 10.1108/10662241211235644.
Huang, L. Y., and Y. J. Hsieh. 2011. Predicting online game loyalty based on need gratifica-
tion and experiential motives. Internet Research 21 (5):581–598. doi: 10.1108/
10662241111176380.
Jasperson, J. S., P. E. Carter, and R. W. Zmud. 2005. A comprehensive conceptualization of

post-adoptive behaviors associated with information technology enabled work systems.
MIS Quarterly 29 (3):525–557. doi: 10.2307/25148694.
Jessen, C. 1999. Computer games and play culture–an outline of an interpretative frame-
work. In Children, young people and media: Nordic Research Perspectives, ed. Christa
Lykke Christensen, 277–290. Gothenburg: Nordicom.
Jiang, S., N. Scott, and P. Ding. 2015. Using means-end chain theory to explore travel
motivation: An examination of Chinese outbound tourists. Journal of Vacation
Marketing 21 (1):87–100. doi: 10.1177/1356766714535599.
Johar, J. S., and M. J. Sirgy. 1991. Value-expressive versus utilitarian advertising appeals:
When and why to use which appeal. Journal of Advertising 20 (3):23–33. doi: 10.1080/
00913367.1991.10673345.
Junglas, I. A., N. A. Johnson, and C. Spitzm€ uller. 2008. Personality traits and concern for
privacy: An empirical study in the context of location-based services. European Journal
of Information Systems 17 (4):387–402. doi: 10.1057/ejis.2008.29.
Kim, H. W., H. C. Chan, and S. Gupta. 2007. Value-based adoption of mobile internet: An
empirical investigation. Decision Support Systems 43 (1):111–26. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2005.
05.009.
Kim, H. W., and S. Gupta. 2009. A comparison of purchase decision calculus between
potential and repeat customers of an online store. Decision Support Systems 47 (4):
477–487. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2009.04.014.
Kim, S., and M. S. Eastin. 2011. Hedonic tendencies and the online consumer: An investi-
gation of the online shopping process. Journal of Internet Commerce 10 (1):68–90. doi:
10.1080/15332861.2011.558458.
Kline, R. B. 1998. Software review: Software programs for structural equation modeling:
Amos, EQS, and LISREL. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 16 (4):343–364. doi:
10.1177/073428299801600407.
Koo, D. M. 2009. The moderating role of locus of control on the links between experiential
motives and intention to play online games. Computers in Human Behavior 25 (2):
466–474. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2008.10.010.
Lafreniere, M. A. K., R. J. Vallerand, E. G. Donahue, and G. L. Lavigne. 2009. On the costs
and benefits of gaming: The role of passion. CyberPsychology & Behavior 12 (3):285–290.
doi: 10.1089/cpb.2008.0234.
Lai, A. W. 1995. Consumer values, product benefits and customer value: A consumption
behavior approach. Advances in Consumer Research 22 (1):381–388.
Lee, M. C., and T. R. Tsai. 2010. What drives people to continue to play online games? An
extension of technology model and theory of planned behavior. International Journal of
Human-Computer Interaction 26 (6):601–620. doi: 10.1080/10447311003781318.
Lemmens, J. S., P. M. Valkenburg, and J. Peter. 2011. Psychosocial causes and consequen-
ces of pathological gaming. Computers in Human Behavior 27 (1):144–152. doi: 10.1016/
j.chb.2010.07.015.
Li, H., Y. Liu, X. Xu, J. Heikkil€a, and H. Van Der Heijden. 2015. Modeling hedonic is con-
tinuance through the uses and gratifications theory: An empirical study in online games.
Computers in Human Behavior 48:261–272. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.053.
Lin, C. H., P. J. Sher, and H. Y. Shih. 2005. Past progress and future directions in concep-
tualizing customer perceived value. International Journal of Service Industry Management
16 (4):318–336. doi: 10.1108/09564230510613988.
Lin, Y. L., H. W. Lin, and T. T. Hung. 2015. Value hierarchy for massive open online
courses. Computers in Human Behavior 53:408–418. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.006.
Liu, C. C. 2017. A model for exploring players flow experience in online games.
Information Technology and People 30 (1):139–162. doi: 10.1108/ITP-06-2015-0139.
Liu, F., E. T. Lim, H. Li, C. W. Tan, and D. Cyr. 2020. Disentangling utilitarian and
hedonic consumption behavior in online shopping: An expectation disconfirmation per-
spective. Information and Management 57 (3):103199. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2019.103199.
Lu, H. P., and S. M. Wang. 2008. The role of Internet addiction in online game loyalty: An
exploratory study. Internet Research 18 (5):499–519. doi: 10.1108/10662240810912756.
Malhotra, N. K., S. S. Kim, and J. Agarwal. 2004. Internet users’ information privacy con-
cerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems
Research 15 (4):336–355. doi: 10.1287/isre.1040.0032.
Malik, A., K. Hiekkanen, Z. Hussain, J. Hamari, and A. Johri. 2019. How players across
gender and age experience Pokemon Go? Universal Access in the Information Society.
doi: 10.1007/s10209-019-00694-7.
Mathwick, C., and E. Rigdon. 2004. Play, flow, and the online search experience. Journal of
Consumer Research 31 (2):324–332. doi: 10.1086/422111.
Moon, H., and H. H. Lee. 2015. The effect of intangibility on the perceived risk of online
mass customization: Utilitarian and hedonic perspectives. Social Behavior and
Personality: An International Journal 43 (3):457–466. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2015.43.3.457.
Newzoo. 2019. Global Games Market Report. Retrieved February 25, 2020, from
https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/700740/Reports/Newzoo2018Global_Games_Market_Report_
Light.pdf
Overby, J. W., and E. J. Lee. 2006. The effects of utilitarian and hedonic online shopping
value on consumer preference and intentions. Journal of Business Research 59 (10–11):
1160–1166. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.03.008.
Pieters, R., H. Baumgartner, and D. Allen. 1995. A means-end chain approach to consumer
goal structures. International Journal of Research in Marketing 12 (3):227–244. doi: 10.
1016/0167-8116(95)00023-U.
Quester, P. G., A. Karunaratna, and L. Kee Goh. 2000. Self-congruity and product evalu-
ation: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Consumer Marketing 17 (6):525–535. doi: 10.
1108/07363760010349939.
Ramırez-Correa, P., E. E. Grand
on, M. Ramırez-Santana, and L. Belmar Ordenes. 2019.
Explaining the use of social network sites as seen by older adults: The enjoyment compo-
nent of a hedonic information system. International Journal of Environmental Research
and Public Health 16 (10):1673. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16101673.
Ramırez-Correa, P. E., F. J. Rondan-Catalu~
na, and J. Arenas-Gaitan. 2020. A posteriori seg-
mentation of personal profiles of online video games’ players. Games and Culture 15 (3):
227–247. doi: 10.1177/1555412018766786.
Rossiter, J. R. 2002. The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing.
International Journal of Research in Marketing 19 (4):305–330. doi: 10.1016/S0167-
8116(02)00097-6.
Roy, R., and S. Ng. 2012. Regulatory focus and preference reversal between hedonic
and utilitarian consumption. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 11 (1):81–88. doi: 10.1002/
cb.371.
Sanchez-Franco, M. J., and J. L. Roldan. 2005. Web acceptance and usage model: A com-
parison between goal-directed and experiential web users. Internet Research 15 (1):21–48.
doi: 10.1108/10662240510577059.
Scarpi, D. 2012. Work and fun on the internet: The effects of utilitarianism and
hedonism online. Journal of Interactive Marketing 26 (1):53–67. doi: 10.1016/j.intmar.
2011.08.001.
Setterstrom, A. J., J. M. Pearson, and D. Guggenheim. 2018. The impact of social environ-
ment on willingness to pay for online content. Journal of Internet Commerce 17 (3):
283–309. doi: 10.1080/15332861.2018.1463800.
Steenkamp, J. B. E., and H. Baumgartner. 2000. On the use of structural equation models
for marketing modeling. International Journal of Research in Marketing 17 (2–3):
195–202. doi: 10.1016/S0167-8116(00)00016-1.
Storgårds, J. H. 2011. The influence of the hedonic and utilitarian value of digital games on
product recommendation. In AMCIS 2011 Proceedings - All Submissions, 245. Retrieved
from http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2011_submissions/245
Storgards, J. H., V. K. Tuunainen, and A. Oorni. 2009. The hedonic and utilitarian value of
digital games at product category level. In ECIS 2009 Proceedings, 406. Retrieved from
https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2009/406
Sun, P. C., H. K. Cheng, and G. Finger. 2009. Critical functionalities of a successful e-learn-
ing system—An analysis from instructors’ cognitive structure toward system usage.
Decision Support Systems 48 (1):293–302. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2009.08.007.
Vandenberg, R. J., and C. E. Lance. 2000. A review and synthesis of the measurement
invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational
research. Organizational Research Methods 3 (1):4–70. doi: 10.1177/109442810031002.
Venkatesh, V., M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis. 2003. User acceptance of infor-
mation technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27 (3):425–478. doi: 10.2307/
30036540.
Wang, H. Y., and S. H. Wang. 2010. Predicting mobile hotel reservation adoption: Insight
from a perceived value standpoint. International Journal of Hospitality Management 29
(4):598–608. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.11.001.
Wang, L., L. Fan, and S. Bae. 2019. How to persuade an online gamer to give up cheating?
Uniting elaboration likelihood model and signaling theory. Computers in Human
Behavior 96:149–162. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.024.
Wood, R., and A. Bandura. 1989. Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mech-
anisms and complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 56
(3):407–415. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.56.3.407.
Wu, J., and D. Liu. 2007. The effects of trust and enjoyment on intention to play online
games. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research 8 (2):128.
Wu, W. Y., and C. C. Ke. 2015. An online shopping behavior model integrating personality
traits, perceived risk, and technology acceptance. Social Behavior and Personality: An
International Journal 43 (1):85–97. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2015.43.1.85.
Yang, K. 2010. Determinants of US consumer mobile shopping services adoption:
Implications for designing mobile shopping services. Journal of Consumer Marketing 27
(3):262–270. doi: 10.1108/07363761011038338.
Zanoli, R., and S. Naspetti. 2002. Consumer motivations in the purchase of organic food: A
means-end approach. British Food Journal 104 (8):643–653. doi: 10.1108/
00070700210425930.
Zeithaml, V. A. 1988. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end
model and synthesis of evidence. The Journal of Marketing 52 (3):2–22. doi: 10.1177/
002224298805200302.
Appendix A. Questionnaire items
Self-concept (SCNPT) (adapted from Davis, Lang, and Gautam 2013)

SCNPT1 People similar to me play this game.
SCNPT2 This game reflects the type of gamer I am.
SCNPT3 This game reflects the type of gamer I want to be perceived as.
Self-congruity (SCNGR) (adapted from Davis, Lang, and Gautam 2013)
SCNGR1 Other players of this game appear similar to how I would like to see myself.
SCNGR2 I am quite similar to the typical player of this game.
SCNGR3 The image of the typical player of this game is similar to how I see myself.
Self-efficacy (SEFFI) (adapted from Davis, Lang, and Gautam 2013)
SEFFI1 I would play this game if I could see someone else playing it before I played.
SEFFI2 I would play this game if someone else helped me to get started.
SEFFI3 I would play this game if someone showed me how to play it first.
Perceived enjoyment (PENJ) (adapted from Davis, Lang, and Gautam 2013)
PENJ1 When I play this game, it gives me a feeling of amusement.
PENJ2 When I play this game, the experience is enjoyable.
PENJ3 When I play this game, the experience is interesting.
PENJ4 When I play this game, the experience is exciting.
Ease of use (PEOU) (adapted from Davis, Lang, and Gautam 2013)
PEOU1 I find it easy to operate the control of this game.
PEOU2 I find the system interface easy to use.
PEOU3 I find this game easy to use.
Perceived control (CONT) (adapted from Davis, Lang, and Gautam 2013)
CONT1 I feel like I have control over how I play this game.
CONT2 I have the knowledge necessary to play this game.
CONT3 I have the resources necessary to play this game.
Perceived complexity (CMPX) (adapted from Davis, Lang, and Gautam 2013)
CMPX1 Playing this game is complicated, and I find it difficult to understand what is going on.
CMPX2 When I play this game, I find it hard to understand.
CMPX3 Learning how to play this game takes too long to make it worth the effort.
Continuance intention to play (CIP) (adapted from Agarwal and Karahanna (2000)
CINT1 I would play online games in the future.
CINT2 I would continue to play online games in the future.
CINT3 I expect to continue playing online games in the future.
Perceived risk (PR) (adapted from Curras-Perez, Ruiz-Mafe, and Sanz-Blas (2013)
PR1 I feel worried when sharing my personal details on online games.
PR2 I am concerned about wasting too much time in playing online games.
PR3 Participating in online games worsens the image that other people have about me.
PR4 I sometimes feel anxious when participating in online games.

Understanding How Hedonic and Utilitarian Values Impact Continuance Intention to Play Online Games

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Understanding How Hedonic and Utilitarian Values Impact Continuance Intention to Play Online Games

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Internet Commerce

ISSN: 1533-2861 (Print) 1533-287X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wico20

Understanding Continuance Intention to Play

Tripti Ghosh Sharma, Preeti Tak & Ankit Kesharwani

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2020.1756189

Published online: 29 Apr 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Understanding Continuance Intention to Play Online

Huang and Hsieh 2011). Consumer behavior is generally goal oriented

to game service practitioners by helping them decide on the correct com-

Liu et al. (2020) recently differentiated between customers’ utilitarian and

Dimensions of utilitarian value

when they solve a complex challenge. Thus, we propose that expectations

Dimensions of hedonic value

as well as a key hedonic determinant (Bridges and Florsheim 2008). Hsu

Determinants of continuance intention

Figure 1. Research model.

Model framework and hypothesis development

Utilitarian and hedonic values

H1: Hedonic value has a positive impact on gamers’ continuance intention to

H2: Utilitarian value has a positive impact on gamers’ continuance intention to

The measurement scale for perceived risk was adapted from

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of respondents.

played sports (Mini football, Tennis star), strategy (Abandoned,

Data analysis and results

Table 2. Reliability analysis and loadings of each variable.

Reliability and validity

Structural model (H1 and H2)

Table 4. Results of hypothesis testing.

Multi-group analysis (H3 and H4)

Table 5. Fit indices for invariance tests.

Table 6. Results of v2 difference tests.

label (Byrne 2010). Once metric invariance is satisfied, the comparison of

Table 7. Summarized results.

structural relationships did not have similar impacts across groups

hedonic value. Thus, gamers are motivated by the thought of similarity

While studies in the literature have examined the influence of both

Implications for practice

Limitations and future scope of research

Jasperson, J. S., P. E. Carter, and R. W. Zmud. 2005. A comprehensive conceptualization of

Appendix A. Questionnaire items

Self-concept (SCNPT) (adapted from Davis, Lang, and Gautam 2013)

You might also like