LITERATURE REVIEW

The scholar will present relevant theories and concepts extracted from prior research
papers, laying the groundwork for the formulation of hypotheses. Subsequently, a
conceptual framework will be constructed based on the foundational literature.

2.1 Theoretical Background:

2.1.1 Customer Satisfaction

Customer satisfaction, a measure of contentment or disappointment, arises

when we compare the outcomes of a product or service with our expectations (Kotler,
2000). According to Kotler, satisfaction can be understood in three levels:
dissatisfaction if the product or service falls short of expectations, satisfaction if it
meets expectations, and heightened satisfaction if it exceeds expectations. Fornell
(1995) contributes by describing post-purchase feelings as reactions to the difference
between expectations and our realistic view of the product after using it.

The process of customer satisfaction is a dynamic journey characterized by

three pivotal stages. Initially, customers engage in thoughtful consideration,
delineating their expectations from a service before making the decision to utilize it.
Subsequently, as customers actively engage with the product or service, they
instinctively draw comparisons between their initial expectations and the actual
experiences encountered. This ongoing evaluation process serves as a critical juncture
in determining the effectiveness of the service in meeting customer needs. The
ultimate outcome of this comparative analysis directly influences the overall
satisfaction and perception of the service.

Previous studies highlight the impact of e-satisfaction on e-loyalty on the

internet (Anderson and Srinivasan, 2003; Pee et al., 2018). Satisfied customers are
more likely to buy food in the future. Conversely, dissatisfaction with Online Food
Delivery (OFD) services reduces the likelihood of future purchases or

1
recommendations, underlining the role of customer satisfaction in the OFO service
industry. This connection between e-service quality, food, and customer loyalty is
supported by studies in both online and offline business (Andreassen & Lindestad,
1998; Gronholdt, Martensen & Kristensen, 2000; Gummerus et al., 2004; Luarn &
Lin, 2003).

A widely accepted theory in customer satisfaction is the expectancy

disconfirmation theory, proposed by Oliver (1980). According to this theory,
satisfaction levels depend on the gap between what customers expect and what they
actually experience. Various factors contribute to satisfaction, including customer
needs, emotions, and service/product features. Important experiences, such as
product/service quality, food application design, and app transaction reliability, are
crucial for determining customer satisfaction. Therefore, the service performance of
the ShopeeFood food delivery app is crucial in the online food delivery sector,
ensuring the provision of excellent experiences and fostering customer satisfaction.

H1: Customer Satisfaction has a positive effect on Customer Loyalty.

2.1.2 Customer Loyalty

Loyalty, according to Oliver (1999), means a strong commitment to

consistently stick with a preferred product or service, despite external factors or
marketing efforts. Gursoy (2014) adds that loyalty involves not just repeat purchases
but also the willingness to recommend to others. Customer loyalty is often seen in
positive reviews, word-of-mouth recommendations, and repeated visits. Recognizing
the importance of loyal customers, companies like ShopeeFood benefit from their
ongoing support, leading to increased profits and potential cost savings (Reichheld et
al., 2000). Despite concerns about declining customer commitment (Swinscoe, A.,
2014), this study focuses on factors influencing loyalty, particularly within the
context of ShopeeFood.

Loyalty includes both behaviors, like choosing one company over others, and

2
attitudes, like being willing to recommend. Behavioral loyalty may not always
indicate loyalty if there are limited alternatives or the company is conveniently
located. So, loyalty needs to be measured with other indicators, like customers being
willing to recommend the service to others. Ordering from the ShopeeFood app
multiple times shows loyalty and triggers positive word-of-mouth, where customers
share their positive experiences unknowingly. Loyal customers talk positively about
the app or delivery service, becoming effective advocates. Griffin (2002) notes that
businesses benefit from customer loyalty as it serves as a free and powerful
advertising channel. Recommendations from satisfied customers carry more weight
than company-generated ads. Dithan (2009) emphasizes that loyalty's value goes
beyond just revenue, affecting how customers influence others in their social circles.
Therefore, positive word-of-mouth becomes a crucial indicator of customer loyalty
alongside visit and repurchase behaviors (Silvana, 2014).

2.2 E-SERVICE Quality Dimension

The exploration of customer perceptions in the realm of e-service quality has

been a focal point in recent empirical studies, shedding light on the transformative
impact of the internet on consumer behavior, particularly in countries like Indonesia.
Arilaha, Fahri, and Buamonabot (2021) delve into the Indonesian context,
emphasizing the evolving landscape of online shopping, where the success of
businesses is intricately linked to the quality of services provided. Uniquely, the study
dissects individual aspects of customer perception, such as website design, reliability,
trust, and personalization, setting it apart from previous research that often treated
these factors collectively. Conducted with users of popular platforms Shopee and
Tokopedia across diverse regions, the research contributes to a nuanced
understanding of the dynamics at play in the Indonesian online shopping scene.

In a parallel case, Lee and Lin's (2005) research navigates the expanding
domain of electronic commerce, recognizing that success in e-commerce surpasses
mere mobile app presence and competitive pricing. The study underscores the elusive

3
nature of measuring electronic service quality (e-service quality) and argues for
modifications to existing models to better suit the context of online shopping.
Focusing on the influence of e-services on customer responses, the research explores
dimensions such as perceived service quality, customer satisfaction, and purchase
intentions. It addresses the pivotal role of service quality in enhancing the
effectiveness of e-commerce, offering valuable insights for online store managers and
researchers involved in internet marketing.

Further expanding the exploration of e-service quality, Sasono et al. (2021)

concentrate on the domain of internet banking, recognizing the transformative role of
technology in modern banking activities. The study investigates dimensions like
website design, reliability, trust, and personalization, emphasizing their significant
impact on consumer perceptions in online banking. The research recognizes the
interconnectedness of e-service quality, customer satisfaction, and e-loyalty,
highlighting the importance of a seamless online experience in fostering customer
loyalty in the realm of internet banking. Together, these studies provide a
comprehensive background for ongoing research, offering insights into the intricate
relationships between e-service quality, customer perceptions, and business success in
the digital landscape.

Service quality dimensions encapsulate features that delineate customers'

encounters with a service, offering insights to managers and researchers on enhancing
service offerings. In the context of this research, the focus is on e-service quality. The
advent of e-service practices since 2000, driven by the internet's proliferation in
business, has prompted various definitions of e-service quality. Zeithaml et al. (2000)
characterize it as the degree to which a e-service platform facilitates efficient
shopping, purchasing, and service delivery, while Parasuraman et al. (2005) extend
the definition to encompass all customer interactions with a website.

In the online shopping sphere, Santos (2003) defines service quality as overall
customer evaluations and judgments concerning online service delivery, a sentiment

4
echoed by Zeithaml et al. (2002). The impact of service quality on consumer
decisions in e-commerce has been explored in research over the last two decades
(Wolfinbarger & Gilly, 2003; Zhilin Yang & Jun, 2008). However, empirical research
is crucial to elucidate the specific determinants of e-service quality and their influence
on customer perceptions of online shopping (Santos, 2003; Zhilin Yang & Jun, 2008).
This study proposes that dimensions of e-service quality encompass website design,
reliability, responsiveness, trust, and personalization, aiming to develop a research
framework that comprehensively elucidates the perspectives of discerning customers
in the realm of online shopping.

2.2.1 Mobile App Design

Mobile apps, defined as end-user software designed for mobile operating

systems, have evolved beyond their original scope of general productivity to
encompass various categories like games, ebooks, utilities, and social networking
platforms (Yang, 2013; Dube & Helkkula, 2015; Kim & Ah Yu, 2016). They enhance
a phone's capabilities, enabling users to perform specific tasks on devices such as
smartphones, tablets, laptops, and desktop computers (Rieger, 2013; Peng et al.,
2014). Grotnes (2009) highlights the appeal of mobile apps lying in their comfortable
features and simple structures, facilitating easy use and seamless transactions for
consumers. Lee (2011) emphasizes the importance of usability and functionality in
online app design, with users spending an average of half a minute transitioning
between products (Brohan, 1999).

Moreover, the design process for mobile applications relies extensively on customer
perceptions, presenting an efficient methodology within certain constraints (Katz et
al., 1991; Weinberg, 2000). The surge in mobile technology has elevated the
significance of application-based systems, serving as pivotal tools for connecting
service providers or products with customers (Taherdoost, 2019). Customer
perceptions of mobile applications can undergo changes if the desired information is

5
inaccessible, leading them to explore alternative applications (Gao, 2005). Effectual
mobile shopping hinges on visually appealing applications with user-friendly
interfaces, ensuring a swift and uncomplicated transaction process (Parasuraman et
al., 1988; Kim & Lee, 2002). Applications meeting these criteria naturally capture
consumer attention (Ganguly et al., 2010). Consistent updates and enhanced
interactive experiences contribute to heightened satisfaction levels (Kim et al., 2009).

H2: Mobile App Design has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction.

2.2.2 Reliability:

Reliability pertains to the capability of delivering promised services with

accuracy, dependability, and punctuality (Parasuraman et al., 1988). It encompasses
the proficiency in problem-solving and ensuring secure transactions, thus avoiding
flawed transactions (Lee & Lin, 2005; Chang et al., 2016). The reliability factor
significantly influences consumer purchasing motivation, with the assurance of
product reliability online acting as a catalyst for online transactions (Rishi, 2010).
Consequently, it is imperative for every online retailer to operate consistently, exhibit
a genuine commitment to resolving consumer issues, and prevent errors, whether
deliberate or unintentional (Parasuraman et al., 1988; Kim & Lee, 2002). Such
practices have a direct impact on fostering a sense of comfort for consumers during
the shopping experience. Thus, one fundamental aspect of the Internet as a shopping
platform is the reliability system, which warrants thorough examination regarding its
convenience (Jun et al., 2004; Kim & Park, 2012; Udo et al., 2010; Yang & Fang,
2004). The capacity of an online shopping platform to function reliably during
specified times and address consumer concerns authentically contributes significantly
to shaping positive consumer perceptions and enhancing the overall shopping
experience.

H3: Reliability has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction.

2.2.3 Responsiveness:

6
 Responsiveness in mobile shopping pertains to how promptly and effectively
a retailer addresses customer queries or concerns within the mobile app (Bauer et al.,
2006; Ladhari, 2010). Bauer et al. (2006) also emphasize the importance of having
alternative communication channels available, particularly if the mobile shopping app
encounters issues. The courteousness of customer service, a quality carried over from
traditional service settings to online platforms, is an integral aspect (Parasuraman et
al., 1985, 2005). Some scholars, like Bauer et al. (2006), Holloway and Beatty
(2008), and Parasuraman et al. (2005), include considerations of return and exchange
policies within the responsiveness dimension. However, for the Mobile App Service
Quality (MASQ) scale, these policies are deemed too broad for mobile app
assessment. Customer service, in this context, specifically addresses concerns related
to the mobile shopping app, excluding broader logistical issues such as incorrect or
damaged deliveries. Customer service is relevant across all stages of e-commerce,
impacting how customers perceive overall service quality (Holloway and Beatty,
2008, p. 350).

While customer service and responsiveness significantly influence the overall

perceived service quality, their universal necessity for predicting service quality in all
mobile purchases is debated (Lee and Lin, 2005; Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003).
Within the Mobile App Service Quality (MASQ) scale, the responsiveness dimension
is defined as the retailer's capacity to swiftly and courteously resolve customer issues
tied to the mobile app. A high MASQ score indicates that the perceived
responsiveness aligns with or exceeds customer expectations. This dimension
encompasses elements like customer service availability, problem-solving capability,
employee politeness, and guidance within the app.

H4: Responsiveness has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction.

2.2.4 Trust

Trust holds a significant role in shaping consumers' choices in online

purchases, as emphasized by Fortes et al. (2017). Wu et al. (2018) define trust as a

7
blend of belief, confidence, sentiment, and expectations tied to buyer intentions and
behaviors. The absence of trust, as noted by Chang et al. (2013), stands as a notable
hurdle in the widespread adoption of e-commerce. Examining customer trust
dimensions, Oliveira et al. (2017) find that higher overall trust aligns with a greater
inclination toward e-commerce. Several studies affirm the positive link between e-
service quality and trust (Chiou and Droge, 2006; Cho and Hu, 2009; Rasheed and
Abadi, 2014; Wu et al., 2010, 2018). In the healthcare sector, Alrubaiee and Alkaa'ida
(2011) note a direct positive impact of service quality on customer trust, with
customer satisfaction indirectly contributing to trust, but a whole reverse of trust
complimenting customer satisfaction. Trust is pivotal in online transactions, not just
between the merchant and customer but also between the customer and the computer
system facilitating the transaction (Lee and Turban, 2001). Wu et al. (2018) argue
that trust helps mitigate uncertainty, particularly when the customer's familiarity with
the transaction security mechanism is lacking.

H5: Trust has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction.

2.2.5 Personalization:

Personalization in e-services involves the degree to which a website or

application can be tailored to meet individual consumer preferences easily (Swaid &
Wigand, 2009). Kotler defines satisfaction as the emotional response arising from
comparing a product's perceived performance with expectations (Kotler & Keller,
2012).

The significance of personalization has grown with the rise in business-to-

customer transactions, with customization being a crucial aspect of website quality
(Kim and Lee, 2006). Customization is described as the ability of websites to present
information tailored to individual needs or to provide customized information for
specific customer groups (Greer and Murtaza, 2003; Chen and Hitt, 2002).
Recognizing the diverse audience visiting websites, Kim and Lee (2006) emphasize
that customization is a critical element influencing website performance. Therefore,

8
website/application designers should carefully consider the varied needs of users not
only during the design phase but also throughout its maintenance to ensure it meets
the expectations of virtual visitors (Pallas and Economide, 2008).

H6: Personalization has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction.

2.4 Conceptual Framework & Hypotheses

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

(Adapted from the previous researches of Arilaha & Fahri & Buamonabot, 2021;
Lee & Lin, 2005; Sasono et al, 2021)

Hypotheses:

H1: Customer Satisfaction has a positive effect on Customer Loyalty.

H2: Mobile App Design has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction.

H3: Reliability has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction.

H4: Responsibility has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction.

H5: Trust has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction.

9
H6: Personalization has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction.

10
3.4.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Following the completion of Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) on the

observed variables, the subsequent stage entails the execution of Confirmatory Factor
Analysis (CFA) using AMOS. The objective of this analysis is to scrutinize the
theoretical connections among variables and validate the theoretical model by
employing observed data. This involves assessing whether the model serves as a
fundamental framework for the observed variables, as outlined by Schreiber et al.
(2006). The criteria for evaluating the adequacy of the CFA align with the guidelines
established by Hu and Bentler (1999), specifically focusing on the criteria indicative of
a well-fitting model.

3.4.5 Structural Equation Modeling

In conclusion, the investigator will employ Structural Equation Modeling

(SEM) to examine the connections between variables and the model. SEM adopts a
covariance-based approach, allowing the simultaneous testing of multiple correlations,
thereby revealing relationships among the components (Taris, 2002). Once the
hypothesis is either accepted or rejected, the researcher can draw a conclusion.
Acceptance of the hypothesis occurs when the p-level is below 0.05. Additionally, by
scrutinizing estimated values, the researcher can gauge the strength of the association.

11
 CHAPTER IV

4.2 Reliability measurement analysis (Cronbach’s Alpha analysis)

To assess the reliability of the observed variables in the model, the author
conducted an evaluation using Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient combined with
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). Observations with higher Cronbach’s Alpha
coefficients are deemed more reliable. According to Nunally (1978), Hair et al
(2009), observations with a Cronbach’s Alpha reliability of 0.7 or higher are
considered good. However, for preliminary research, a Cronbach’s Alpha threshold of
0.6 is still acceptable. In such cases, variables with Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients
below 0.6 and variables with Corrected Item-Total Correlations below 0.3 are
excluded. The author performed checks using the SPSS software, and the summary of
the reliability analysis results is presented in the table below:

Table 1: Cronbach’s Alpha Result

Corrected Cronbach's
Item Total Scale Mean if Scale Variance
Item-Total Alpha if Item
Statistics Item Deleted if Item Deleted
Correlation Deleted

1. Mobile App Design (MAD) Cronbach's Alpha’s = 0,762

MAD1 11,72 5,104 0,454 0,764

12
MAD2 11,84 4,541 0,632 0,666

MAD3 11,56 4,563 0,62 0,673

MAD4 11,41 5,187 0,548 0,714

2. Reliability (RE) Cronbach's Alpha’s = 0,898

RE1 11,23 7,848 0,757 0,874

RE2 10,89 7,591 0,804 0,857

RE3 10,68 7,053 0,798 0,861

RE4 10,83 8,184 0,743 0,88

3. Responsibility (RES) Cronbach's Alpha’s = 0,861

RES1 10,59 6,422 0,664 0,844

RES2 10,57 6,417 0,778 0,793

RES3 10,67 6,774 0,743 0,81

RES4 10,54 6,871 0,657 0,843

4.Trust (TR) Cronbach's Alpha’s = 0,927

13
TR1 14,44 11,831 0,747 0,923

TR2 14,4 11,663 0,783 0,916

TR3 14,34 11,689 0,826 0,908

TR4 14,34 11,401 0,864 0,9

TR5 14,3 11,556 0,831 0,907

5. Personalization (PE) Cronbach's Alpha’s = 0,866

PE1 7,33 3,216 0,727 0,828

PE2 7,48 2,94 0,769 0,789

PE3 7,28 3,132 0,74 0,816

6. Customer Satisfaction (CS) Cronbach's Alpha’s = 0,912

CS1 10,98 7,532 0,833 0,875

CS2 10,92 8,432 0,772 0,897

CS3 10,94 8,022 0,813 0,882

CS4 11,19 7,466 0,794 0,89

14
 7. Customer Loyalty (CL) Cronbach's Alpha’s = 0,866

CL1 10,11 7,571 0,655 0,852

CL2 10,39 6,749 0,829 0,783

CL3 10,45 7,177 0,729 0,824

CL4 10,58 6,764 0,667 0,854

(Source: SPSS analysis result)

The reliability analysis, as presented in the table using Cronbach’s Alpha,

examines observations related to Customer Loyalty (CL) and five other variables:
Mobile App Design (MAD), Reliability (RE), Responsibility (RES), Trust (TR), and
Personalization (PE). An additional variable in the analysis is Customer Satisfaction
(CS).

When evaluating the reliability of the Customer Loyalty (CL) variable, the
calculated Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient is 0.866, exceeding the typical benchmark of
0.7 suggested by researchers like Hair (2009). This high value indicates that the
measure of Customer Loyalty (CL) is quite dependable. Even upon removing
individual observations such as CL1, CL2, CL3, and CL4, the resulting Cronbach’s
Alpha coefficients (0.852, 0.783, 0.824, and 0.854, respectively) are all lower than
the overall Cronbach’s Alpha. This suggests that all these observations within the
Customer Loyalty (CL) group are not only highly reliable but also significantly useful
for further analysis. Understanding the reliability of these observations contributes to
a sense of confidence in their value for comprehending and interpreting the research
findings.

15
 The Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient for the combined total of the five
independent variables and the intermediary variable, Customer Satisfaction (CS),
observed from item 1 to item 6 in the result table, are respectively as follows:

- Mobile App Design (MAD): 0,762

- Reliability (RE): 0,898
- Responsibility (RES) : 0,861
- Trust (TR) : 0,927
- Personalization (PE) : 0,866
- Customer Satisfaction (CS): 0,912

The results indicate that all six indices are > 0.7, hence the observations are
assessed to have good reliability. The reliability analysis results also demonstrate that
the correlation coefficients with the total variable are all greater than 0.3. Evaluating
the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients for each variable, excluding observations in each
variable results in values lower than the current overall Cronbach’s Alpha.

In summary, following the reliability assessment using Cronbach’s Alpha in

IBM SPSS for 28 observations across independent, intermediary, and dependent
variables, all observations exhibit high reliability, meeting the standards for
subsequent analyses.

4.3 Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)

4.3.1 Pattern Matrix Analysis for the First Time

After evaluating the reliability, the entire set of 28 observed variables, once
meeting the conditions of the Cronbach’s Alpha reliability test, will be
simultaneously subjected to Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). The analysis results
indicate that the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure is 0.890, surpassing the
threshold of 0.5. This signifies that conducting EFA with the collected data is
appropriate. Simultaneously, the Bartlett's test indicates that the observed variables
are interrelated and statistically significant at a 5% significance level (with a

16
significance coefficient of sig. = 0.000 < 0.05).

Table 2: KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling ,890

Adequacy.

Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 4375,696

Sphericity
df 378

Sig. ,000

(Source: SPSS analysis result)

The Eigenvalues of all 7 factors are > 1, meeting the specified criterion.
Therefore, all 7 variables can be retained in the model.

The total variance explained is 66.690%, exceeding the 50% threshold

mentioned. This leads to the conclusion that the factors derived from the independent
variables account for 66.690% of the data variation.

17
 Table 3: First-try Pattern Matrix Analysis

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

RE4 0,737

CS3 0,883

CS1 0,864

CS4 0,846

CS2 0,780

CL3 0,796

CL4 0,729

CL1 0,630

18
RES3 0,866

RES2 0,825

RES1 0,720

RES4 0,687

PE2 0,929

PE3 0,821

PE1 0,717

MAD3 0,901

MAD2 0,680

MAD4 0,611

MAD1

(Source: SPSS analysis result)

From the results table, it is evident that the 28 observations subjected to

analysis have converged into 7 factor groups. There are no instances where an
observed variable violates by loading onto both factors simultaneously with closely
proximate loading coefficients. However, since the variable MAD1 does not exhibit a
loading coefficient; hence, the author opted to exclude MAD1 from the model.
Subsequently, a second round of EFA was conducted for the remaining observed
variables.

19
4.3.2 Pattern Matrix Analysis for the Second Time

The KMO analysis result indicates a coefficient of 0.889, surpassing the

threshold of 0.5, meeting the requirement. The Bartlett test has also affirmed
statistically significant relationships among the observed variables (Sig value = 0.000
< 0.05), signifying significance at the 5% level.

Table 4: KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 0,889

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 1575,666

df 253

Sig. 0,000

(Source: SPSS analysis result)

The Eigenvalues of all 7 factors are > 1, meeting the specified criterion. Therefore, all
7 variables can be retained in the model.

The total variance explained is 68.067%, surpassing the 50% threshold mentioned.
This leads to the conclusion that the factors derived from the independent variables
account for 68.067% of the data variation.

20
 Table 5: Second-try Pattern Matrix Analysis

Factor

TR4 0,966

TR5 0,824

TR1 0,689

RE3 0,892

RE2 0,870

CS4 0,849

CS2 0,786

21
RES3 0,865

PE2 0,922

PE1 0,712

MAD3 0,911

MAD2 0,630

MAD4 0,597

(Source: SPSS analysis result)

The results table shows that the 27 observations included in the analysis have
converged into 7 factor groups. There is no instance where a variable violates by
loading onto both factors simultaneously with closely proximate loading coefficients.
All observed variables have factor loading coefficients ≥ 0.5. Therefore, it can be
concluded that all factors ensure high convergence values.

Consequently, after factor analysis using the factor matrix, the author
excluded the variable MAD1 and retained all observed variables of the remaining
factors. These variables are deemed suitable for subsequent analytical steps.

4.4 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)

After conducting Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) on the 27 observed

variables, the next step involves Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) using AMOS.

22
 The purpose of this analysis is to examine the theoretical relationships among
variables, as well as validate the theoretical model by utilizing observed data and
assessing whether the model serves as a foundation for the observed variables
(Schreiber et al., 2006). The criteria for CFA align with the recommendations of Hu
and Bentler (1999), specifically, the criteria for a well-fitting model are as follows:

- CMIN/df ≤ 3 (accepted at CMIN/df ≤ 5)

- CFI ≥ 0,9 (accepted at CFI ≥ 0,8)
- GFI ≥ 0,9
- RMSEA ≤ 0,06 (accepted at RMSEA ≤ 0,08)
- TLI ≥ 0,9 (accepted at TLI ≥ 0,8)
- NFI ≥ 0,9 (accepted at NFI ≥ 0,8)

Table 8 illustrates the indices aligning with a model that meets all the criteria;
the indices, including df, CMIN/df, CFI, GFI, RMSEA, and PCLOSE, all achieve a
“good fit” level.

Table 6: Model Fit Assessment

Measurement Current Good-fit Acceptable level

Indices
Level

Degree of Freedom df 303 ≥0 ≥0

Chi-square/Degree of
Freedom
CMIN/df 1,651 ≤3 ≤5

Comparative fit index CFI 0,952 ≥ 0,9 ≥ 0,8

23
Goodness-of-fit index GFI 0,867 ≥ 0,9

Root mean squared error

approximation
RMSEA 0,053 ≤ 0,06 ≤ 0,08

P-value of close fit PCLOSE 0,294 ≥ 0,05 ≥ 0,01

(Source: Author’s Amos 20.0 analysis)

24
Figure 2: CFA Structural Equation Model

(Source: Author’s Amos 20.0 analysis)

25
 Table 7: Discriminant Validity, Composite reliability, Convergent Validity Result

CR AVE MSV MaxR(H) TR RE CS CL RES PE MAD

TR 0,929 0,723 0,365 0,936 0,851

RE 0,9 0,692 0,2 0,902 0,318 0,832

CS 0,914 0,726 0,365 0,917 0,604 0,428 0,852

CL 0,874 0,636 0,246 0,901 0,496 0,278 0,456 0,798

RES 0,864 0,616 0,224 0,884 0,474 0,447 0,416 0,428 0,785

PE 0,867 0,685 0,187 0,868 0,367 0,433 0,352 0,415 0,270 0,827

MAD 0,763 0,519 0,19 0,774 0,408 0,360 0,436 0,352 0,322 0,422 0,721

(Source: Author’s Amos 20.0 analysis)

Evaluation of Discriminant Validity: All variables meet the criteria when the MSV >
AVE index is considered.

Assessment of Composite Reliability: All variables meet the criterion with CR ≥ 0.7.

Examination of Convergent Validity through the Average Variance Extracted (AVE)

index, with the requirement set at AVE ≥ 0.5, demonstrates that all variables satisfy
the criteria.

Therefore, following the Confirmatory Factor Analysis, all remaining observations

26
meet the requirements and are suitable for subsequent quantitative analyses.

4.5 Structural Equation Modelling Analysis – SEM

4.5.1 Regression Weight

The hypothetical model comprises 7 variables, encompassing 1 dependent

variable, Customer Loyalty (CL), and 5 independent variables: Mobile App Design
(MAD), Reliability (RE), Responsibility (RES), Trust (TR), Personalization (PE),
with an intermediary variable, Customer Satisfaction (CS). Following the Structural
Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis, the obtained results are presented in the table
below:

Table 8: Standardized Regression Weights

Standardized Result
Regression Std p- value
Weights

CS <--- RES 0,085 0,081 0,292 No impact

CS <--- TR 0,435 0,07 0,000 Positive impact

CS <--- RE 0,165 0,062 0,008 Positive impact

CS <--- MAD 0,194 0,093 0,038 Positive impact

CS <--- PE 0,034 0,07 0,625 No impact

27
CL <--- CS 0,516 0,073 0,000 Positive impact

(Source: Author’s Amos 20.0 analysis)

The table above elucidates the direct relationships among independent,

intermediate, and dependent variables. Regarding Customer Satisfaction (CS), the
analysis results, as indicated by the P-value, demonstrate that Trust (TR), Reliability
(RE), and Mobile App Design (MAD) all exert a statistically significant impact on
Customer Satisfaction, with P-values less than 0.05 (95% significance level).

Concerning Customer Loyalty (CL), the analysis reveals that Customer

Satisfaction (CS) holds statistical significance in predicting variations in Customer
Loyalty (CL), evidenced by a P-value less than 0.05 (95% significance level).
Furthermore, examining the sign of the Estimate column in the regression analysis
table indicates that all these relationships are positive, implying favorable or positive
effects.

In essence, these findings suggest that Trust, Reliability, and Mobile App
Design significantly influence Customer Satisfaction, which, in turn, plays a pivotal
role in predicting changes in Customer Loyalty. The positive signs underscore the
affirmative nature of these associations, signifying positive impacts on the observed
variables.

28
 4.6. Discussions on the findings

Tên biến Giả thuyết Kết quả

Customer Customer Satisfaction has a positive effect on
Satisfaction Customer Loyalty. Supported
Mobile App Mobile App Design has a positive effect on
Design Customer Satisfaction. Supported
Reliability has a positive effect on Customer
Reliability Satisfaction. Supported
Responsiveness has a positive effect on Customer
Responsibility Satisfaction No Supported
Trust Trust has a positive effect on Customer Satisfaction. Supported
Personalization has a positive effect on Customer
Personalization Satisfaction. No Supported

29
 CHAPTER V

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

This section summarizes the practical implications drawn from the earlier chapters'
findings and offers recommendations for marketing purposes as well as the future
researches.

5.1 Conclusion

In this investigation, the focus was on pinpointing the crucial elements

contributing to customer loyalty within the realm of online food ordering, specifically
within the ShopeeFood platform. The results underscore the pivotal role of enhancing
reliability, delivery precision, and overall service quality for ShopeeFood. A apparent
correlation appears, indicating that an improvement in these aspects is likely to rise
customer satisfaction. Consequently, this heightened satisfaction is there to leverage a
strengthened sense of loyalty among ShopeeFood's customer base. Conversely, the
study reveals that factors such as Mobile App Design (MAD), Responsibility (RES),
and Personalization (PE) lack statistically significant impact on both customer
satisfaction and loyalty, as the mentioned analytical outcomes. This implies that
aesthetically pleasing app design and personalized user experiences haven't
significantly altered the landscape for ShopeeFood. Instead, the study recommends a
strategic focus on reinforcing reliability and deepening user trust, identifying these
elements as pivotal in shaping a robust and loyal customer foundation for
ShopeeFood.

The primary objective of this research was to identify the factors influencing
consumers' intention to purchase food online, specifically in the context of

30
ShopeeFood. The study accomplished three main goals, delineating the factors of e-
service quality in the online purchase scenario, evaluating the impact of e-service
quality and sales promotion on customer purchase intention, and providing
recommendations to enhance customer purchase intention. The conceptual framework,
comprising seven dimensions (Web design, Reliability, Responsiveness, Trust,
Personalization, Customer satisfaction, Customer Loyalty) and eight hypotheses, laid
the foundation for the investigation. Using these dimensions, a questionnaire was
developed through a comprehensive review of prior research papers, with 236
respondents in HCMC participating in the study.

Various structured statistical techniques were applied, utilizing SPSS and

AMOS software, encompassing "statistics descriptive, reliability testing, exploratory
factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), structural equation
(SEM)." The gathered data underwent thorough evaluation, validating all hypotheses
and affirming that the obtained data aligns with the conceptual structure.

The study's outcomes illuminate a significant indirect effect of e-service

quality on purchase intention through consumer satisfaction. Furthermore, the positive
direct outcomes of customer satisfaction and purchase decisions resulting from sales
promotion find support within this investigation. As a result, the study not only
provides insights into the specific factors influencing customer loyalty in the online
food ordering domain but also establishes a framework for understanding the interplay
between e-service quality, customer satisfaction, and purchase intention within the
context of ShopeeFood.

31
5.2 Limitation

While our exploration of online shopping has uncovered valuable

implications, it's crucial to address certain issues for future studies. One notable
challenge is the concentration of survey participants in Ho Chi Minh City, where the
researcher attends university. This raises concerns about how well we can apply the
findings to other groups of people.

Furthermore, the research expresses a limitation in the study's methodology.

The research focuses on one specific mobile delivery app, ShopeeFood, and primarily
surveyed students and office workers. Moreover, the convenience sampling method is
applied as a sampling method in this research. These factors could make it
challenging to generalize the findings to a broader audience as well as another
market. Additionally, the exclusive focus on online food ordering raises questions
about the applicability of the findings to other types of online shopping. Cultural
differences in purchasing behavior in Ho Chi Minh City might also limit how broadly
we can apply the study's results.

In conclusion, there is a need to address issues such as the diversity of survey

participants, understand the dynamic nature of people's feelings and behaviors, and
improve research methods for a more comprehensive understanding of online
shopping. Future studies should aim for inclusivity, flexibility, and a broader
understanding of the ever-evolving landscape of online commerce.

5.2 Recommendation for future research and practical implication

In our detailed examination of user perceptions and engagement with the

ShopeeFood app in Vietnam, several ways of improving the customer loyalty could
be drawn out. Taking these factors into account could help contributingcontribute to
the sustained success of the application.

32
 Foremost, the key point of customer satisfaction lies in reliability, particularly
concerning the punctuality of deliveries and the overall solidity of service provision.
Our findings underscore that a seamless customer experience, from order placement
to delivery, is instrumental in fostering satisfaction. Therefore, we recommend that
ShopeeFood intensify its efforts to ensure operational smoothness, with a specific
emphasis on timely and dependable delivery services. This not only enhances user
satisfaction but also lays the groundwork for customer loyalty.

Equally crucial is the establishment and reinforcement of trust, a major point

in customer loyalty. Users who perceive ShopeeFood as a reliable entity, delivering
on their expectations, are predisposed to prolonged engagement. To cultivate this
sense of trust, ShopeeFood must actively invest in building robust and trustworthy
relationships with its user base. Confidence in the brand and service offering is
pivotal in engendering customer loyalty, making it imperative for ShopeeFood to
prioritize initiatives that enhance user confidence.

Conversely, while factors such as Mobile App Design (MAD), Responsibility

(RES), and Personalization (PE) are integral, our study indicates that these elements
may not carry as much weight in influencing customer satisfaction and loyalty.
Rather than allocating disproportionate resources to the aesthetics or hyper-
personalization of the app, ShopeeFood would be careful in concentrating its efforts
on reliability and trust-building efforts. By doing so, the app can effectively align its
investments with aspects that have a bigger impact on user satisfaction and loyalty.

Moreover, the responsiveness of ShopeeFood to customer inquiries emerges

as a critical factor. Swift and helpful responses contribute significantly to user
satisfaction. While it is imperative for ShopeeFood to promptly address customer
questions and concerns, a delicate balance must be maintained to prevent
overwhelming users with excessive communication. Striking this equilibrium is
crucial for fostering a positive user experience.

Lastly, the integration of special deals and promotions is identified as a

33
valuable strategy to maintain customer satisfaction. Tailoring promotions based on an
understanding of user behavior—how frequently users return to the app—can be a
powerful tool. ShopeeFood can use this data to craft targeted promotions that resonate
with users, encouraging repeated app usage.

In summary, our comprehensive analysis offers ShopeeFood some specific

implication into refining its approach for enhanced user satisfaction and loyalty in the
competitive landscape of food ordering apps in Vietnam. The strategic focus should
center on reinforcing reliability, fortifying trust, ensuring prompt responsiveness to
users, and incorporating enticing promotions. By strategically aligning efforts with
these key facets, ShopeeFood can position itself as a preferred choice, fostering
lasting relationships with its user base.

34
 LIST OF REFERENCES

Jeong, S. W. (2016). “Food delivery gets its apps”. Retrieved from

https://koreana.or.kr/home/homeIndex.do.

Aaker, D. A., Kumar, V, & Day, G. s. (2008), Marketing research, John Wiley &
Sons.

Alrubaiee, L., Alkaa’ida, F., 2011. “The mediating effect of patient satisfaction in the
patients’ perceptions of health quality-patient trust relationship. Int. J. Mark. Stud.
3(1), 103–127.

Andreassen, T. W., & Lindestad, B. (1998). Customer loyalty and complex services.
International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(1), 7–23.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09564239810199923

Asia Plus Inc. (n.d.). Vietnam Market Research Report - Food delivery trend in
Vietnam 2022 | Q&Me. https://qandme.net/en/report/food-delivery-trend-in-vietnam-
2022.html

Bauer, H.H., Falk, T., & Hammerschmidt, M. (2006). eTransQual: A Transaction

Process-Based Approach for Capturing Service Quality in Online Shopping. Journal
of Business Research, 59, 866-875.

Brohan, M. (1999). Gotta Have It. Internet Retailer, Available At:

www.Internetretailer.com

Bryman, A., and Bell, E. (2011). Business Research Methods. 3 rd Edition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

Chang CY, et al. (2016) Modulating the Structure and Function of an Aminoacyl-
tRNA Synthetase Cofactor by Biotinylation. J Biol Chem 291(33):17102-11.

Chang, M.K., Cheung, W., Tang, M., 2013. Building trust online: interactions among

35
trust building mechanisms. Inf. Manag. 50 (7), 439–445.

Chen, P.-Y. & Hitt, L. M. (2002). “Measuring Switching Costs and the Determinants
of Customer Retention in Internet-Enabled Businesses: A Study of the Online
Brokerage Industry,” Information Systems Research, 13(3): 255-274.

Chiou, J.-S., Droge, C., 2006. Service quality, trust, specific asset investment, and
expertise: direct and indirect effects in satisfaction-loyalty framework. J. Acad. Mark.
Sci. 34 (4), 613–627.

Cho, J.E., Hu, H., 2009. The effect of service quality on trust and commitment
varying across generations. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 33 (4), 468–476.

Comrey, A.L., & Lee, H.B. (1992). A First Course in Factor Analysis (2nd ed.).
Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315827506

Dothan, M., & Thompson, F. (2009). A better budget rule. Journal of Policy Analysis
and. Management, 28, 463-478

Feri Wicaksono, L.A., Ms, M., & Roslina, R. (2023). The Influence of BCA E-
Banking Service Quality on Customer E-Satisfaction and E- Loyalty. JOURNAL OF
ECONOMICS, FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT STUDIES.

Fisher, W. P. Jr. (2007). Research Scale Instrument Quality Criteria. Rasch

Measurement Transactions, 21(1), 1095.

Flavian C., Guinaliu M., Torres E. (2006) Industrial Journal of Bank Marketing,
24(6), 406-423.

Fornell, C., (1992). A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish

Experience. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 6-21

Fortes, N., Rita, P., Pagani, M., 2017. The effects of privacy concerns, perceived risk
and trust on online purchasing behaviour. Int. J. Internet Mark. Advert. 11 (4).

36
Ganguly, B., Dash, S. B., Cyr, D., & Head, M. (2010). The effects of website design
on purchase intention in online shopping : the mediating role of trust and the
moderating role of culture. Int. J. Electronic Business, 8(4–5), 302–330.
https://doi.org/10.1504/ IJEB.2010.035289

Gao, Y. (2005). Web systems design and online consumer behavior. Idea Group
Publishing Global.

Greer, T. H. & Murtaza, M. B. (2003) 'Web Personalization: The Impact of Perceived

Innovation Characteristics on the Intention to Use Personalization,' Journal of
Computer Information Systems, 50-53.

Griffin, J. M. (2002). Are the Fama and French Factors Global or Country Specific?
The Review of Financial Studies, 15(3), 783–803.
https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/15.3.783

Grønholdt, L., Martensen, A., & Kristensen, K. (2000). The relationship between
customer satisfaction and loyalty: Cross-industry differences. Total Quality
Management, 11(4–6), 509–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544120050007823

Grotnes, E., 2009. Standardization as open innovation: two cases from the mobile
industry. Information, Technology and People, 22(4).

Gürsoy, D., Chen, J., & Christina, G. (2014). Theoretical examination of destination
loyalty formation. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
26(5), 809–827. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-12-2013-0539

Holloway, B.B., & Beatty, S.E. (2008). Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers in the Online
Environment. Journal of Service Research, 10, 347 - 364.

Holton, E. H., & Burnett, M. B. (1997). Qualitative research methods. In R. A.

Swanson, & E. F. Holton (Eds.), Human resource development research handbook:
Linking research and practice. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

37
Iarossi, G. (2006). The power of survey design.

Jabid, A.W., Buamonabot, I., Fahri, J., & Arilaha, M.A. (2021). Organizational
Politics and Job Satisfaction: Mediation and Moderation of Political Skills. Binus
Business Review.

Kim, B. C., & Park, Y. W. (2012). Security versus convenience? An experimental

study of user misperceptions of wireless internet service quality. Decision Support
Systems, 53(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2011.08.006

Kim, J., & Lee, J. (2002). Critical design factors for successful e-commerce systems.
Behaviour and Information Technology, 21(3), 185–199.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929021000009054

Kim, S. & Lee, Y. (2006). “Global Online Marketplace: A Cross-Cultural

Comparison of Website Quality,” International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(6):
533–543.

Kotler, P. (2000). Marketing management: The millennium edition. Marketing

Management, 23(6), 188-193.

Ladhari, R. (2010). Developing e-service quality scales: A literature review. Journal

of Retailing and Consumer Services, 17, 464-477.

Lee, G., & Lin, H. (2005). Customer perceptions of e ‐service quality in online
shopping. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 33, 161-176.

Lee, M.K.O., Turban, E., 2001. A trust model for consumer internet shopping. Int. J.
Electron. Commer. 6 (1), 75–91.

Leo, G., Hurriyati, R., & Hendrayati, H. (2022). Online Food Delivery Service: The
Role of e-Service Quality and Food Quality on Customer Loyalty. Proceedings of the
6th Global Conference on Business, Management, and Entrepreneurship (GCBME
2021).

38
Liao, Z., & Cheung, M. T. (2002). Internet-based e-banking and consumer attitudes:
an empirical study. Information & Management, 39(4), 283-295.

Louisa, L., & Simbolon, F.P. (2023). Determinants of Customer Loyalty: Empirical
Study from Online Food Delivery Services. Binus Business Review.

Luarn, P., & Lin, H. (2003). A customer loyalty model for E-Service context.
ResearchGate.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220437600_A_Customer_Loyalty_Model_f
or_E-Service_Context

Molloy, P.M. (1985). Engineering the New South: Georgia Tech, 1885–1985 by
Robert C. McMath, Jr., et al (review). Technology and Culture, 29, 155 - 155.

Mukherjee, A., & Nath, P. (2007). Role of electronic trust in online retailing: A re-
examination of the commitmenttrust theory. European Journal of Marketing,
41(9/10),1173-1202.

Novak, T. P., Hofftnan, D. L. & Yung, Y.-F. (2000). “Measuring the Customer
Experience in Online Environments: A Structural Modeling Approach,” Marketing
Science, 19(1): 22-42.

Oliveira, T., Alhinho, M., Rita, P., Dhillon, G., 2017. Modelling and testing consumer
trust dimensions in e-commerce. Comput. Hum. Behav. 71, 153–164.

Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of

satisfaction decisions. Journal of marketing research, 460-469.

Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63(4_suppl1),

33–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429990634s105

Pallas, J. & Economides, A. A. (2008). “Evaluation of Art Museums’ Web Sites

Worldwide,” Information Services and Use, 28: 45–57.

39
Palmer, J. W. (2002). “Website Usability, Design, and Performance Metrics,”
Information Systems Research, 13(2): 151-167.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Malhotra, A. (2005). E-S-QUAL: A Multiple-

Item Scale for Assessing Electronic Service Quality. Journal of Service Research,
7(3), 213-233. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670504271156

Poon, W. C. (2007). Users’ adoption of e-banking services: the Malaysian

perspective. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 23(1), 59-69.

Quy, N. (2020, May 17). Food delivery a mainstay for Vietnamese urbanites amid
Covid-19 crisis. VnExpress International – Latest News, Business, Travel and
Analysis From Vietnam. https://e.vnexpress.net/news/business/data-speaks/food-
delivery-a-mainstay-for-vietnamese-urbanites-amid-covid-19-crisis-4099471.html

Rasheed, F.A., Abadi, M.F., 2014. Impact of service quality, trust and perceived
value on customer loyalty in Malaysia services industries. Procedia – Soc. Behav.
Sci. 164, 298–304.

Ray, A., Dhir, A., Bala, P. K., & Kaur, P. (2019). Why do people use food delivery
apps (FDA)? A uses and gratification theory perspective. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 51, 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.05.025

Reichheld, F. F. & Schefter, P. (2000) E-loyalty: your secret weapon on the web,
Harvard Business Review, 78(4), pp. 105–113.

Rita, P., Oliveira, T., & Farisa, A. (2019). The impact of e-service quality and
customer satisfaction on customer behavior in online shopping. Heliyon, 5.

Sadoff, S., & Samek, A. (2019). Can interventions affect commitment demand? A
field experiment on food choice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,
158, 90–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2018.11.016

Sasono, I., Jubaedi, A., Novitasari, D., Wiyono, N., Riyanto, R., Oktabrianto, O.,

40
Jainuri, J., & Waruwu, H. (2021). The Impact of E-Service Quality and Satisfaction
on Customer Loyalty: Empirical Evidence from Internet Banking Users in Indonesia.
Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8, 465-473.

Sathye, M. (1999). Adoption of Internet banking by Australian consumers: an

empirical investigation. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 17(7), 324-334.

Statista. (2023a, November 8). Leading food delivery services based on market share
Vietnam 2022. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1246489/vietnam-leading-food-
delivery-services-by-market-share/

Statista. (2023b, November 9). Most used platforms for online orders among food and
beverage businesses Vietnam 2022.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1361170/vietnam-platforms-for-online-orders-
among-food-and-beverage-businesses/

Suhartanto, D., Helmi Ali, M., Tan, K.H., Sjahroeddin, F., & Kusdibyo, L. (2018).
Loyalty toward online food delivery service: the role of e-service quality and food
quality. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 22, 81 - 97.

Swaid, S.I., & Wigand, R.T. (2009). Measuring the Quality of E-Service: Scale
Development and Initial Validation. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 10,
13.

Swinscoe, A. (2014, February 14). The little things that destroy your customer
experience. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/adrianswinscoe/2014/02/14/the-
little-things-that-destroy-your-customer-experience/?sh=21e9ffb27c56

Taherdoost, H. (2019). Electronic service quality measurement: development of a

survey instrument to measure the quality of e-service. International Journal of
Intelligent Engineering Informatics, 7(6), 491–526.
https://doi.org/10.1504/ijiei.2019.104559

41
Taherdoost, H. (2019). Electronic service quality measurement: development of a
survey instrument to measure the quality of e-service. International Journal of
Intelligent Engineering Informatics, 7(6), 491–526.
https://doi.org/10.1504/ijiei.2019.104559

Udo, G. J., Bagchi, K. K., & Kirs, P. J. 2010. An assessment of customers’ e-service
quality perception, satisfaction and intention. International Journal of Information
Management, 30(6): 481–492.

Wolfinbarger, M. and M. Gilly., “eTailQ: Dimensionalising, Measuring and

Predicting eTail Quality”, Journal of Retailing, 79, 2003, pp. 183-198.

Wu, J.J., Hwang, J.N., Sharkhuu, O., Tsogt-Ochir, B., 2018. Shopping online and off-
line? complementary service quality and image congruence. Asia Pac. Manag. Rev.
23 (1),30–36.

Wulfert, T. (2019). Mobile App Service Quality Dimensions and Requirements for
Mobile Shopping Companion Apps.

Yang, Z., & Fang, X. (2004). Online service quality dimensions and their
relationships with satisfaction: A content analysis of customer reviews of securities
brokerage services. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 15(3),
302–326.https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230410540953

Yang, Z., & Jun, M. (1970). Consumer perception of E-Service Quality: From
Internet Purchaser and Non-Purchaser Perspectives. Journal of Business Strategies,
25(2), 59–84. https://doi.org/10.54155/jbs.25.2.59-84

Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Malhotra, A. (2002). Service quality delivery
through web sites: A critical review of extant knowledge. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 30(4), 362–375.

42
 APPENDIX A

BẢNG CÂU HỎI KHẢO SÁT (TIẾNG VIỆT)

MỐI QUAN HỆ GIỮA SỰ HÀI LÒNG VÀ TRUNG THÀNH CỦA KHÁCH

HÀNG ĐỐI VỚI ỨNG DỤNG ĐẶT MÓN ĂN TẠI VIỆT NAM, NGHIÊN CỨU
THỰC NGHIỆM TRÊN ỨNG DỤNG SHOPEEFOOD

Xin chào mọi người,

Mình là Trương Bảo Châu, một sinh viên năm cuối chuyên ngành Quản trị Kinh
doanh tại Trường Đại học Quốc tế - Đại học Quốc gia Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh. Bảng
khảo sát này là một phần quan trọng của luận văn tốt nghiệp của mình, tập trung vào
các chủ đề liên quan đến Ứng dụng Đặt món Ăn, Sự Hài lòng của Khách hàng và Sự
Trung thành của Khách hàng.

Bảng khảo sát này chỉ cần 3-5 phút để hoàn thành. Ý kiến và đánh giá của các bạn rất
quan trọng đối với nghiên cứu của mình. Mình xin cam đoan rằng thông tin thu thập
sẽ chỉ được sử dụng cho mục đích nghiên cứu và sẽ được bảo mật tuyệt đối. Bảng
khảo sát sẽ được tiến hành mà không tiết lộ danh tính để bảo vệ quyền riêng tư của
các bạn và đảm bảo sự công bằng của kết quả.

Cảm ơn mọi người nhiều! Chúc các bạn có một ngày tuyệt vời!

43
Phần I: Thông tin chung:

1. Giới tính của bạn:

▢ Nam ▢ Nữ ▢ Khác

2. Độ tuổi của bạn:

▢ Dưới 18 tuổi ▢ 18 tuổi hoặc trên 18 tuổi

3. Công việc hiện tại của bạn

▢ Học sinh/Sinh viên ▢ Nhân viên văn phòng ▢ Khác

4. Bạn đã từng sử dụng ứng dụng ShopeeFood để đặt đồ ăn/nước uống chưa?

▢ Đã từng ▢ Chưa từng

5. Lần gần đây nhất bạn sử dụng ShopeeFood hoặc các ứng dụng giao thức ăn
khác là khi nào?

▢ 1-6 tháng ▢ 7-12 tháng ▢ Trên 12 tháng

6. Mức độ thường xuyên đặt đồ ăn/nước uống của bạn qua ứng dụng
ShopeeFood như thế nào?

▢ Mỗi ngày

▢ 1-2 lần/tuần

▢ 1-2 lần/tháng

▢ Hiếm khi

44
45
 Phần II: Đo Lường Trải Nghiệm Khách Hàng:

Vui lòng chọn mức đồng ý của bạn với các phát biểu trong bảng bên dưới với các
mức độ:

1-Hoàn toàn không đồng ý, 2-Không đồng ý, 3-Trung lập, 4-Đồng ý, 5-Hoàn toàn
đồng ý

Bạn có những trải nghiệm như thế nào với Ứng dụng Dịch vụ Thực phẩm
ShopeeFood?

Thang đo

Tuyên Bố

1 2 3 4 5

Thiết Kế Ứng Dụng A1: Ứng dụng ShopeeFood thường xuyên được
cập nhật
(A)

A2: Giao diện người dùng của Ứng dụng

ShopeeFood được thiết kế tốt và mang tính hiệu
quả

A3: Ứng dụng ShopeeFood có tính năng tương

tác

46
 A4: Ứng dụng ShopeeFood có giao diện tiện lợi
và thân thiện với người dùng

E1: Ứng dụng ShopeeFood cung cấp dịch vụ

đúng như mô tả

E2: Ứng dụng ShopeeFood liên tục cung cấp

các dịch vụ chính xác trong khoảng thời gian
Sự Tinh Cậy hứa hẹn

(E)
E3: Người dùng Ứng dụng ShopeeFood có thể
xem tất cả chi tiết giao dịch

E4: Thông tin cung cấp qua Ứng dụng

ShopeeFood chính xác và đáng tin cậy

Sự Phản Hồi R1: Ứng dụng giao thức ăn ShopeeFood cung

cấp dịch vụ xử lí nhanh và phản ứng tích cực
(R)
nếu có bất kỳ vấn đề nào

47
 R2: Tôi tin rằng đội ngũ quản lí ứng dụng giao
thức ăn ShopeeFood có khả năng giải quyết vấn
đề hiệu quả

R3: Tôi nghĩ rằng Dịch vụ Khách hàng của ứng

dụng giao thức ăn ShopeeFood rất hữu ích, lịch
sự và chu đáo

R4: Ứng dụng dịch vụ giao thức ăn ShopeeFood

có sự hướng dẫn và hỗ trợ cụ thể cho người
dùng

Niềm Tin T1: Tôi tin rằng đội ngũ quản lí ứng dụng giao
thức ăn ShopeeFood chân thành quan tâm đến
(T)
khách hàng của mình

T2: Nếu gặp vấn đề, tôi nghĩ rằng đội ngũ quản
lí ứng dụng ShopeeFood đối xử với khách hàng
một cách công bằng

T3: Tôi hài lòng với cách mà đội ngũ quản lí

ứng dụng ShopeeFood hoạt động, khi cân nhắc
đến các yếu tố như hiệu suất và chất lượng dịch

48
 vụ tổng thể

T4: Tôi tin rằng đội ngũ quản lí ứng dụng

ShopeeFood hoạt động tỉ mỉ và tận tâm đến
từng chi tiết

T5: Tôi tin rằng ứng dụng ShopeeFood đáng tin

cậy và truyền đạt thông tin rất cụ thể

P1: Ứng dụng giao thức ăn ShopeeFood cung

cấp các tương tác cá nhân và thường xuyên cập
nhật thông báo dựa theo thói quen người dùng

Sự Cá Nhân Hoá P2: Những tính năng tương tác trên ứng dụng
giao thức ăn ShopeeFood giúp cho quá trình đặt
(P) đơn hàng trở nên thuận tiện hơn

P3: Tôi có thể dễ dàng tương tác với ứng dụng

để truy cập thông tin phù hợp với nhu cầu đặc
biệt của tôi

49
 Phần III: Đo Lường Độ Hài Lòng và Trung Thành của Khách Hàng

Thang đo

Tuyên Bố

1 2 3 4 5

S1: Tôi hài lòng với tổng thể giao diện người dùng và thiết kế của
ứng dụng ShopeeFood

S2: Tôi hài lòng với quy trình giao hàng thực phẩm của ứng dụng
Độ Hài Lòng
ShopeeFood
của Khách
Hàng
S3: Tôi hài lòng với khả năng truy cập đầy đủ thông tin cần thiết về
(S)
thức ăn/đồ uống mà tôi muốn đặt hàng trên ứng dụng ShopeeFood

S4: Tôi hài lòng với việc ứng dụng ShopeeFood đáp ứng hoặc vượt
qua kỳ vọng của tôi

Độ Trung L1: Tôi muốn tiếp tục sử dụng ứng dụng ShopeeFood để đặt món
Thành của ăn

50
 L2: Tôi khuyên người khác nên sử dụng ứng dụng ShopeeFood

Khách Hàng
L3: Tôi sẽ giới thiệu ứng dụng ShopeeFood cho bạn bè

(L)
L4: Tôi sẽ tiếp tục đặt hàng của mình thông qua ứng dụng
ShopeeFood mặc dù có thể có sự tăng giá

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

KẾT THÚC

Cảm ơn bạn đã hoàn thành bảng khảo sát! Chúc bạn một ngày tốt lành!

51
 APPENDIX B

1. EFA

52
53
54