Journal of Modelling in Management

Modelling repurchase intention among smartphones users in Nigeria

Simon Ayo Adekunle, Jones O. Ejechi,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Simon Ayo Adekunle, Jones O. Ejechi, (2018) "Modelling repurchase intention among smartphones
users in Nigeria", Journal of Modelling in Management, https://doi.org/10.1108/JM2-12-2017-0138
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/JM2-12-2017-0138
Downloaded on: 02 November 2018, At: 17:21 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 83 other documents.
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:178665 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1746-5664.htm

Repurchase
Modelling repurchase intention intention
among smartphones users
in Nigeria
Simon Ayo Adekunle and Jones O. Ejechi
Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Management Sciences,
University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria Received 18 December 2017
Revised 30 March 2018
15 June 2018
Accepted 10 August 2018

Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to model repurchase intention among smartphones users by using structural
equation modelling. The model was used to determine the impact of service quality measured by convenience,
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

functionality and perceived usefulness on users’ satisfaction and repurchase intention. The study also
examined the mediating role of users’ satisfaction on repurchase intention.
Design/methodology/approach – A survey research design was adopted to gather data used for this
study through questionnaire administration. In total, 500 copies of the questionnaire were administered to
smartphones users in Nigeria, and 486 copies of the questionnaire were found usable for data analyses. The
data obtained were analysed using different statistical tools such as mean, standard deviation, correlation,
confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling through the use of Analysis of Moment
Structures software.
Findings – The study revealed that users’ satisfaction is significantly influenced by convenience,
functionality and perceived usefulness. Similarly, repurchase intention is significantly impacted by perceived
usefulness. The results further showed that there is a positive and statistically significant relationship
between users’ satisfaction and repurchase intention. However, convenience and functionality were found to
have positive but statistically insignificant relationship with repurchase intention.
Originality/value – This study contributes to the emerging discourse on the perception of smartphone
users with respect to convenience, functionality, perceived usefulness, satisfaction and repurchase intention in
the Nigerian context. It presents a latest attempt and useful insights on the service quality–users’
satisfaction–repurchase intention nexus among smartphone users in Nigeria.
Keywords Functionality, Modelling, Repurchase intention, Satisfaction, Smartphones
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The ways we create, distribute and consume information have changed significantly in the past
decades due to technological advancements (Arif et al., 2016). The invention and continuous
improvement in mobile phones is one of the evidence of the rapid change in technological
advancements. Mobile phones have become an inseparable part of everyday life, and majority of
people carry them all the time (Smura et al., 2009). Suki and Suki (2007) asserted that “heavy
mobile phone users possess a higher level of knowledge, have more social participation, maintain
extensive interpersonal networks, and have contact with people in different parts of the world.”
A smartphone is a mobile phone with more advanced computing capacity and
connectivity than basic feature phones (Falayi and Adedokun, 2014). According to Norazah
(2013, p. 236):
Journal of Modelling in
[. . .]smartphones are a combination of personal device assistants and mobile phones that use Management
advanced operating systems and permit users to install new applications, be constantly © Emerald Publishing Limited
1746-5664
connected, and provide multifarious functionalities. DOI 10.1108/JM2-12-2017-0138
 JM2 Falayi and Adedokun (2014) stated that:
[. . .]early smartphones typically combined the features of a mobile phone with those of another
popular consumer device, such as a personal digital assistant (PDA), a media player, digital
camera, or a GPS navigation unit. Modern smartphones have all of these features plus the features
of a touchscreen computer, including web browsing, wi-fi, and third party applications such as
hotspot.
Norazah (2013) further opined that consumers do not only view smartphones just as devices
for calling and sending text messages but also as multi-use devices for gaming, socializing
and downloading applications which results in a radical shift in behaviour patterns,
lifestyles and status. Smartphones are increasingly entwined in people’s everyday activities
as it gives users easier access to the internet 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and 365
days a year (Norazah, 2013).
Smartphones are no longer perceived as luxury but necessity in people’s daily life (Walsh
and White, 2006). There has therefore been an increase in the diffusion and adoption of
smartphones among individuals in different works of life. This is because the platform
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

provides affordable and convenient access to generating new information.

The proliferation of smartphones in an emerging economy like Nigeria signals a need for
empirical studies with respect to users’ repurchase intention. To the best of our knowledge,
there are limited empirical investigations in the Nigerian context on smartphones. Attempts
were made by Falayi and Adedokun (2014) and Adetola and Ifeanyichukwu (2016) to
examine the factors influencing the demand for smartphones among students and young
adults. However, there is need to measure users’ perception of the quality of services of
smartphone devices, the level of satisfaction among users and the influence they exert on
users’ repurchase intention. Empirically establishing the service quality–users’ satisfaction–
repurchase intention nexus among smartphones users is the gap that this study seeks to fill
which would guide manufacturers of the devices in identifying any areas in need of
improvement.
This study therefore presents useful insights on the impact of service quality and users’
satisfaction on repurchase intention among smartphone users in Nigeria using structural
equation modelling (SEM). The specific objectives of this study include to determine the
impact of service quality (proxied by convenience, functionality and perceived usefulness)
on users’ satisfaction with smartphones; ascertain the impact of service quality (proxied by
convenience, functionality and perceived usefulness) on users’ repurchase intention of
smartphones; and examine the mediating role of users’ satisfaction on service quality and
repurchase intention of smartphones among users in Nigeria.

2. Literature review
This section contains a review of extant literature on repurchase intention, users’
satisfaction and service quality. The links among the three variables were carefully
reviewed.

2.1 Repurchase intention

Hellier et al. (2003) defined repurchase intention as the process of an individual purchasing
goods and services from the same firms. Rajaobelina and Bergeron (2009) opined that
“repurchase intention is the degree of perceptual conviction of a customer to repurchase a
particular product (or service) or to repurchase any product (or service) at a particular
organisation.” Harris and Goode (2010) described repurchase intention as using a particular
brand when a need for its service arises in the future. Repurchase intention is a deeply held
 commitment to re-patronize the offering of a particular product or service provider (Xu and Repurchase
Liu, 2010). Goh et al. (2016) described repurchase intention as when consumers initiated the intention
effort to purchase the same brand, products or services again. From the above definitions,
repurchase intention among smartphone users can be described as the deposition to re-buy a
smartphone offer of a particular brand in the future.
Zeithaml et al. (1996) asserted that enterprises can spend less on promotional activities by
retaining old customers compared with attracting new ones by building relationship with
customers that would lead to increased repurchases. Goyal et al. (2013) stated that
repurchase intentions are reflections of the service provider’s ability to get its customers to
remain loyal to them, pay price premiums, communicate concerns to other customers and
communicate concerns to the company. Supporting this, Kaur and Quareshi (2015) opined
that repurchase intentions can be evaluated through customers’ belief that they consider a
particular brand or manufacturer as their first choice to buy similar products in the future,
with the likelihood to continue using the products and the will to come back to buy similar
products in the future. They also opined that customers with high repurchase intentions are
likely to make recommendations to other consumers and engage in positive word-of-mouth
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

advert about a particular product after the initial experience.

The reason for repurchase is primarily based on past purchase experiences (Kuo et al.,
2009). Understanding the repurchase intention of customers is beneficial because satisfied
customers are more likely to continue their relationship with a particular firm than
dissatisfied ones (Ibzan et al., 2016). Similarly, firms that want to create and maintain
competitive advantage against rivals would offer superior services to their customers to
retain them.

2.2 Users’ satisfaction

Kim et al. (2007) defined satisfaction as the extent to which a user feels that the quality or
performance of a product or service has met or exceeded his or her expectations. Satisfaction
refers to the level of cognitive or affective evaluation in purchasing and using a product or
service (Kim et al., 2016). When the expectations of users are met, they feel satisfied. This
can result in repeat purchase and usage of the same product or service. Also, when a user
feels satisfied, it could be the results of emotional response based on his/her experience of
the purchase and use of the product/service or the cognitive evaluation between the level of
expectation and the actual experience (Oliver, 1997).
Chang et al. (2011) defined customer satisfaction as a post consumption reaction and
judgement concerning a specific product or service. Oliver (1999) argued that user
satisfaction is a cognitive process and that satisfaction is the difference between a
consumer’s expectations of a product (that is, prior to consumption) and the actual efficacy
of the product (that is, after consumption). Users’ satisfaction with smartphones can greatly
be influenced by the level of satisfaction they have with the attributes of the devices and
other evaluation while using the devices (Kim et al., 2016; Ha and Park, 2013). Andrews et al.
(2012) identified functionality, design, usability, applications and price as important
attributes of a smartphone that can influence users’ level of satisfaction. Kim et al. (2016)
opined that the higher the values users perceive from each of these attributes, the more
satisfied they are towards the particular smartphone manufacturer.

2.3 Service quality

Inegbenebor (2006) defined service as an intangible benefit provided to individuals,
businesses, government establishments and other organizations through the performance of
a variety of activities or the provision of physical facilities, product or activity for another’s
 JM2 use. Parasuraman et al. (1985, p. 22) defined service quality as the discrepancy between
consumers’ perceptions of services offered by a particular firm and their expectations about
firms offering such services. Service quality can be defined as the overall assessment of a
service by the customer (Eshghi et al., 2008). From the above definitions, it can be asserted
that service quality is the extent to which the needs or expectations of customers are met by
service providers. The quality of service is seen to be low if what is perceived is below
expectation and vice versa (Bello and Adekunle, 2015).
Zhou (2013) examined service quality regarding smartphones and found that service
quality positively affects customers’ experience and that unstable and slow internet
connections reduce customers’ pleasure. Poor service quality can reduce users’ perceived
satisfaction with smartphones (Lin et al., 2017; Tam and Oliveira, 2017). Kuo et al.’s (2009)
study on the relationships among service quality, perceived value, customer satisfaction and
post-purchase intention in mobile value-added services found that service quality had no
significantly positive influence on repurchase intention.
Lin et al. (2017), in their study on why do people switch mobile platforms, conceptualized
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

service quality in terms of reliability, responsiveness, assurance and personalization. In this

study, service quality measures smartphones in terms of convenience, functionality and
perceived usefulness. Previous studies by Arif et al. (2016), Hew et al. (2017) and Chong
(2013) considered these measures to be fundamental in measuring service quality of
smartphones.
2.3.1 Convenience. This refers to a situation where work is simplified, made easy or can
be done with less effort, without discomfort or difficulty (Arif et al., 2016). Convenience in
smartphone may imply the ability to use the smartphone at anytime and anywhere without
having to put the smartphone in a fixed workstation (Falayi and Adedokun, 2014; Ding
et al., 2011). Ting et al. (2011) opined that consumers have a high need for convenience so as
to use their smartphones at any time and in any place without having to park the
smartphone in a fixed workstation. Smartphones provide quick access to multiple products
on multiple channels with greater levels of quality, efficiency and personalization, and they
can do almost everything that a laptop can (Persaud and Azhar, 2012; Basaglia et al., 2009).
Stephens and Davis (2009) asserted that the fusion of normal mobile phone and laptop
functionalities in smartphones was accomplished merely for consumers’ convenience.
2.3.2 Functionality. Functionality of smartphones as defined by Lee et al. (2011) is the
capacity of the device to provide a time-efficient and effective delivery mechanism for the
users. The introduction of smartphones and applications for mobile devices has provided
enhanced functionality, which has changed the way people communicate and search for
information (Nathalie and Henk, 2013). Smartphone users who have enjoyed the efficient
functioning of the device will be more likely to exhibit stronger repurchase intentions (Chiu
et al., 2009). With smartphones, users can make calls and send text messages, chat with
friends, check emails and Facebook, view photo, listen to music and news, take pictures,
read e-books, navigate weather, plan activities and manage time using timetable and alarm
as well shop online (Wang et al., 2014).
2.3.3 Perceived usefulness. This is defined as the extent to which a consumer believes
that a product will enhance his or her transaction performance (Chiu et al., 2009). Lau et al.
(2016) described perceived usefulness as users’ belief that a smartphone could help
individuals enhance their performance in terms of communication, personal management of
activities, personal agenda and entertainment. Chiu et al. (2009) stated that an individual is
more likely to undertake continued usage when such usage is perceived to be useful. Prior
research shows that perceived usefulness has a significant effect on customer repurchase
intention (Chiu et al., 2009). The dual-use nature of smartphones has increased their usage
 (Hahn, 2010). Moreover, with the availability of high-speed 3G/4G and Wi-Fi networks, Repurchase
especially on university campuses and major cities, surfing the internet through intention
smartphones has become more useful for users who are bound by severe time constraints
(Lu and Su, 2009). Empirical results by Sinda and Joel (2014) found that perceived usefulness
is one of the determinants of repurchase intention among smartphones users.

2.4 Service quality, satisfaction and repurchase intention

Empirical evidences abound on the relationships among service quality, satisfaction and
repurchase intention. Parasuraman et al. (1991) revealed that judgement of high and low
service quality depended on how customers perceived the actual service performance in the
context of what they expected. Parasuraman et al. (1991) reported a positive relationship
between customers’ perceptions of service quality and their willingness to recommend the
company. The relationship between service quality and individual behavioural intentions
dimensions has been examined by Boulding et al. (1993) and Cronin and Taylor (1992).
Cronin and Taylor (1992) focussed solely on repurchase intentions, whereas Boulding et al.
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

(1993) focussed on both repurchase intentions and willingness to recommend. In the study
by Cronin and Taylor (1992), service quality does not have a significant (positive) effect on
intentions to purchase again, while Boulding et al. (1993) found a positive relationship
between service quality and repurchase intentions.
Balaji and Sarkar (2013) showed that the severity of failure influences the relationship
between recovery efforts and customer response behaviour such as loyalty and negative
word-of-mouth. Caruana (2002) found that customer satisfaction does play a mediating role
in the effect of service quality on service loyalty. Gonzalez et al. (2007) demonstrated
the influence of service quality and customer satisfaction on behavioural intentions in the
tourism industry. The results revealed a significantly positive influence of service quality
and customer satisfaction on behavioural intentions in the tourism industry.
The studies of Tung (2004) and Kuo et al. (2009) on mobile services in South Korea and
Canada, respectively, found that service quality positively influence customer satisfaction.
Empirical studies have established a positive relationship between customer satisfaction
and repurchase intention (Brady et al., 2001; Cronin et al., 2000). This is in line with Kuo’s
et al. (2009) finding that consumers with a higher level of satisfaction tend to have a stronger
intention to repurchase and recommend the purchased product. This means that repurchase
can be more frequent when customers are satisfied. The studies of Tung (2004) and Gerpott
et al. (2001) on the telecommunication industry in Germany concluded that customer
satisfaction is positively related to repurchase intention.
Finally, previous studies have established a positive and significant relationship between
service quality and repurchase intention (Wang et al., 2004; Alexandris et al., 2002; Cronin
and Taylor, 1992). This implies that high quality service can induce positive repurchase
intention among customers. Ahamed and Skallerud (2015) found that satisfaction leads to
relationship continuity. Fang et al. (2011) found that trust and satisfaction had a direct
positive effect on repurchase intention, but the effect of satisfaction was stronger than that
of trust. Loureiro et al. (2014) found that satisfaction was directly related to repurchase
intention. Similarly, Oliver (1999) opined that satisfaction leads to repurchase or reuse of
products and services.
Scholars such as Anderson et al. (1994) and Annamdevula and Bellamkonda (2016)
asserted that the relationship between service quality and satisfaction is still ambiguous.
Athiyaman (1997) found a strong relationship between service quality and satisfaction while
Annamdevula and Bellamkonda (2016) emphasized stronger empirical evidence to
strengthen the common understanding on the relationship between service quality and
 JM2 satisfaction. Taylor and Baker (1994) strongly supported the view that service quality and
satisfactions are separate and distinct constructs. This study aligned with Taylor and
Baker’s (1994) view by measuring service quality (convenience, functionality and perceived
usefulness) and satisfactions separately.

2.5 Research model and hypotheses formulation

Based on the review of extant literature, we proposed a model as depicted in Figure 1. The
focus of the model is to determine the impact of service quality on users’ satisfaction and
repurchase intention. Specifically, we are interested in determining if service quality
measured by convenience, functionality and perceived usefulness impacts on users’
satisfaction and repurchase intention. The model also examines the mediating impact of
users’ satisfaction on repurchase intention. The schematic representation of the
relationships is shown in Figure 1.
The following null hypotheses were formulated to guide the study:
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

H1. There is no significant relationship between users’ satisfaction and convenience (H1a),
functionality (H1b) and perceived usefulness of smartphones among users (H1c).

H2. There is no significant relationship between repurchase intention and convenience

(H2a), functionality (H2b) and perceived usefulness of smartphones among users (H2c).

H3. Users’ satisfaction does not significantly mediate the relationship between
repurchase intention and service quality.

3. Method
3.1 Research design
A survey research design was adopted for this study. It involves the design of a well-
structured questionnaire, which was administered to a sample of selected smartphones users.

Service Quality

Users’
H1a
Convenience Satisfaction

H2a

H1c
H1b
H3
Functionality
H2b

Perceived Repurchase
Usefulness H2c Intention

Figure 1.
Research model
Source: Researchers’ conceptualization (2017)
 3.2 Population of the study Repurchase
The population of the study comprised users of smartphones in Nigeria. Statista, one of the intention
leading statistics companies on the internet, estimated that the number of smartphone users
in Nigeria as at October 2017 is 18 million (Statista, 2017). Hence, the population of the study
is 18 million users of smartphones.

3.3 Sample selection process

The sample size of the study was determined using Yamane’s (1967) equation, which is the
application of normal approximation with 95 per cent confidence level and 5 per cent error
tolerance. The assumption behind the use of Yamane’s (1967) equation is that the population
of smartphones users in Nigeria is finite. The population was estimated to be 18 million
smartphones users in Nigeria as at October 2017 (Statista, 2017). It was on this basis that the
Yamane’s (1967) equation was used. The equation is given as:

N
n¼
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

1 þ Nðe2 Þ

Here,n = sample size; N = population = 18,000,000; e = level of precision = 0.05.

Next, 5 per cent level of precision was selected in this study in line with Singh and
Masuku’s (2014, p.9) suggestion of 400 as a sample for population, that is greater than
100,000.

N 18; 000; 000

n¼ ¼ ¼ 399:9911 ffi 400
1 þ Nðe Þ
2
1 þ 18; 000; 000ð0:052 Þ

The equation shows that the sample size is 400. However, 500 copies of questionnaire were
administered to smartphone users to compensate for anticipated invalids or improper
completion by respondents. Out of the 500, 486 copies of the questionnaire were found
usable for data analyses. The remaining 14 copies of the questionnaire that were not used
for data analyses were not properly filled by the respondents. The representativeness of the
sample of 486 is justified on the basis of the demographic attributes of the respondents. The
questionnaires were filled by men and women proportionally. Also, the questionnaires were
filled by respondents across different age categories with diverse educational qualification
and usage experience.

3.4 Data collection instrument and schedule

In carrying out this study, data were collected through the use of primary source.
Questionnaire was used for data collection. The items were divided into two sections. The
first section contains questions on respondents’ gender, age, educational qualification and
experience in the usage of smartphones. The second part of the questionnaire contains items
on the constructs used for the study. The 25-item scale used in this study was adapted and
modified from previous research. Five indicators/items each were used to capture the
selected constructs, which include convenience, functionality, perceived usefulness, users’
satisfaction and repurchase intention. However, an item under users’ satisfaction was
deleted for lack of internal consistency as revealed by Cronbach alpha reliability test. The
Cronbach’s alpha scores of the adapted scale for the constructs are 0.792, 0.889, 0.910, 0.883
and 0.906 for convenience, functionality, perceived usefulness, users’ satisfaction and
repurchase intention, respectively. All the scale items were in a five-point Likert format
 JM2 with 5 representing strongly agree, 4 representing agree, 3 representing not sure, 2
representing disagree and 1 representing strongly disagree (see details of the
questionnaire in Appendix 1).
The questionnaires were administered with the help of trained Business Administration
students, University of Benin, Nigeria, in their final year. This is similar to Kautish and
Dash’s (2017) approach of using management students in administering questionnaire on
environmentally concerned consumer behaviour in Rajasthan. A cover letter was added to
the questionnaire to explain the essence of the study and solicit for the voluntary and
anonymous participation of the respondents which cut across different works of life
(students, civil servants, employees of privately owned enterprises, self-employed
individuals, among others).

3.5 Data analyses method

Data collected through questionnaire administration were analysed using descriptive
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

statistics such as frequency distribution, mean and standard deviation. The research model
was estimated using SEM.
Smith and Langfield-Smith (2004) described SEM as a way of specifying a series of
structural equations and is useful when dependent variable in one equation becomes an
independent variable in another equation. A structural model is used to study dependence
relationship. SEM was used for data analysis because it is a powerful multivariate technique
for analyzing causal models with an estimation of the measurement and structural
components (Lin et al., 2017).
The measurement component was examined using confirmatory factor analyses.
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) specifies the pattern by which each measure loads on a
particular factor (Hair et al., 2010). It concentrates on validating the model and does not
explain the relationships between constructs. It represents how the measured variables
come together to represent constructs and is used for validation and reliability checks. In
other words, CFA is a way of testing how well the measured variables represent a particular
construct.
The adequacy of the results of CFA and the structural equation model were evaluated
using absolute indices, incremental indices and parsimony fit indices. The measures of
absolute indices used include relative/normed chi-square, root mean square error of
approximation (RMSEA), goodness of fit index (GFI) and adjusted goodness of fit index
(AGFI). Incremental or comparative indices were measured by normed fit index (NFI),
Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) and comparative fit index (CFI) while parsimony fit indices were
evaluated using parsimony goodness of fit index (PGFI) and parsimonious normed fit index
(PNFI). Details of the acceptable values of the indices are shown in Table III. This study
used analysis of moment structures (AMOS 24) software. AMOS was used because it is user-
friendly, has an easy-to-use graphical communication interface and offers users the ability to
estimate structural equation models without any need to write syntax or programming
statements (Lin et al., 2017).

4. Empirical analyses and results

This section contains the description of respondents’ bio-data, description of research
variables, correlation analyses, tests for measurement and structural models and test of
research hypotheses.
 4.1 Description of respondents’ bio-data Repurchase
In total, 55.8 per cent of the respondents were male while 44.2 per cent were female. The age intention
distribution showed that majority of the respondents (230, 47.3 per cent) were 21-40 years
old. Next, 135 (27.8 per cent) of the respondents were 20 years old and below. Only 8.2 per
cent and 16.7 per cent of the respondents were 41-50 years and above 50 years, respectively.
In addition, 32.7 per cent of the respondents have SSCE/GCE qualification; 68 (14 per cent) of
the respondents have NCE/Diploma/OND; and 207 (42.6 per cent) of the respondents have
first degree (HND/BSc Degree). Only 10.7 per cent of the respondents have postgraduate
qualifications. The respondents’ experience of the use of smartphones shows that majority
of them (255, 52.4 per cent) have used smartphones for four years and above, while 231
accounting for 47.6 per cent have used smartphones for less than four years. It can be
asserted that respondents who filled the research instruments are knowledgeable in the use
of smartphone based on how long they have been using the devices (see Appendix 2 for
details).
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

4.2 Description of research variables

The mean and standard deviation for the different variables as shown in Appendix 3
revealed that majority of the respondents agreed with the items used in measuring the
different variables as the scores are greater than the mid-point of 3. The mean scores and
standard deviation for the variables are: convenience (X ¼ 4.20, SD = 0.628), functionality
(X ¼ 3.82, SD = 0.733), perceived usefulness (X ¼ 3.85, SD = 0.727), users’ satisfaction (X ¼
3.61, SD = 0.897) and repurchase intention (X ¼ 3.52, SD = 1.018).

4.3 Correlation analyses

Pearson correlation coefficients were conducted on the data for all the variables in the study.
The results are shown in Table I.
Pearson correlation coefficients (r) as posited by Bryman and Cramer (1997) should not
exceed 0.80; otherwise, the independent variables that show a relationship in excess of 0.80
may be suspected of having multi-collinearity. However, we observed from Table I that none
of the correlation coefficients is up to 0.80, thus ruling out any form of multi-collinearity in
the model.

4.4 Tests for measurement model

The measurement model was assessed via the evaluations of the validity and reliability of
the constructs, as well as through CFA.

Perceived Users’ Repurchase

Variables Convenience Functionality usefulness satisfaction intention

Convenience 1
Functionality 0.505** 1
Perceived
usefulness 0.540** 0.612** 1
Users' satisfaction 0.330** 0.583** 0.560** 1
Repurchase Table I.
intention 0.396** 0.595** 0.464** 0.645** 1 Pearson correlation
Note: **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) coefficients among
Source: Researchers’ field work (2017) research variables
 JM2 4.4.1 Validity and reliability of instrument. Validity of questionnaire was conducted using
construct validity. This was done using both convergent and discriminant validity. Lowry
and Gaskin (2014) asserted that these two methods of assessing construct validity apply to
constructs with multiple indicators or items. As all the constructs have multiple indicators,
they were all tested for construct validity.
In determining convergent validity, Fornell and Larcker (1981) cited in Izogo (2016)
stated that average variance extracted (AVE) must be at least 0.50. The AVE of the
constructs: convenience, functionality, perceived usefulness, users’ satisfaction and
repurchase intention are 0.594, 0.647, 0.660, 0.569 and 0.607, respectively, which are all
above 0.50. Fornell and Larcker (1981) cited in Izogo (2016) also stated that discriminant
validity is established when a construct shares more variance with its indicators than with
any other construct. The discriminant validity for the constructs ranged from 0.814 to 0.906,
which are all above the correlation coefficients in Table I. It can therefore be concluded that
the criteria for establishing convergent and discriminant validity were fulfilled, which
shows that the measurement model demonstrates construct validity. Details of the validity
values are in Table II.
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

Two parameters were used in this study to measure the reliability of the questionnaire.
These parameters are Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability. According to Hair et al.
(2010), the minimum threshold for establishing reliability with Cronbach’s alpha is 0.6 and
0.7 for composite reliability. Table II shows that the Cronbach’s alpha of the constructs
ranged from 0.755 to 0.812, while composite reliability ranged from 0.802 to 0.913. It can
therefore be concluded that the different indicators measuring each construct are internally
consistent.
4.4.2 Confirmatory factor analysis. The collected data were tested for measures of fit
through CFA. In line with Hair et al. (2010) submission that most model fits indices should
reach acceptable standards before a model can be judged to have fitness, nine common
model fit measures were evaluated. The measures are: x 2/df = 2.365, RMSEA = 0.053, GFI
0.909, AGFI = 0.886, NFI = 0.862, TLI = 0.902, CFI = 0.915, PGFI = 0.730 and PNFI = 0.753.
All the indices exhibited acceptable values which indicated a good fit (see Table III for
details).

4.5 Tests for structural model

The benchmark and results of the estimated SEM for this study are presented in Tabled III
and IV.
Results in Table III showed that the model fit indices for the structural model provided
evidence of an acceptable fit: x 2/df = 2.323, RMSEA = 0.052, GFI = 0.911, AGFI = 0.889,
NFI = 0.865, TLI = 0.905, CFI = 0.917, PGFI = 0.732 and PNFI = 0.755). All the indices
exhibited acceptable values, which indicated a good fit.

4.6 Test of research hypotheses

The results in Table IV and Figure 2 revealed that users’ satisfaction is significantly
influenced by convenience ( b = 0.681, t = 3.219); functionality ( b = 0.941, t = 2.829) and
perceived usefulness ( b = 0.790, t = 2.417); thus, H1a-H1c are rejected. Similarly,
repurchase intention is significantly impacted by perceived usefulness ( b = 1.307, t =
1.971); thus, H2c is rejected. However, the results showed positive but statistically
insignificant relationship between convenience and repurchase intention ( b = 0.665, t =
1.496); as well as functionality and repurchase intention ( b = 1.046, t = 1.930); thus, H2a and
H2b are not rejected. Finally, the results showed that there is a positive and statistically
significant relationship between users’ satisfaction and repurchase intention ( b = 1.031, t =
 Validity Reliability
Repurchase
Variable Indicator Factor loading AVE Discriminant Cronbach alpha Composite intention
Convenience CON1 0.736 0.594 0.879 0.771 0.805
CON2 0.824
CON3 0.825
CON4 0.699
CON5 0.762
Functionality FUN1 0.756 0.647 0.902 0.805 0.802
FUN2 0.796
FUN3 0.818
FUN4 0.849
FUN5 0.801
Perceived Usefulness PUS1 0.764 0.660 0.906 0.812 0.833
PUS2 0.759
PUS3 0.866
PUS4 0.839
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

PUS5 0.827
Users' Satisfaction SAT1 0.734 0.569 0.814 0.755 0.913
SAT2 –
SAT3 0.784
SAT4 0.751
SAT5 0.748
Repurchase Intention RIN1 0.755 0.607 0.904 0.779 0.820
RIN2 0.735
RIN3 0.829
RIN4 0.774
RIN5 0.800

Notes: Item SAT2 under users’ satisfaction was deleted for lack of internal consistency as revealed by Table II.
Cronbach’s alpha reliability test; Hence, the item was not used for data analyses Validity and
Source: Researchers’ fieldwork (2017) reliability scores

Recommended
Indices Measure benchmark Source CFA SEM

Absolute fit indices Relative/normed #3.00 Hayduck (1987) 2.365 2.323

chi-square ( x 2/df)
RMSEA #0.08 Bagozzi and Yi (1988) 0.053 0.052
GFI 0.80 Scott (1995) 0.909 0.911
AGFI 0.80 Scott (1995) 0.886 0.889
Incremental NFI 0.80 Hair et al. (2010) 0.862 0.865
(comparative) fit indices TLI 0.90 Davcik (2014) 0.902 0.905 Table III.
CFI 0.90 Bagozzi and Yi (1988) 0.915 0.917 Fit indices
Parsimony fit indices PGFI 0.50 Bagozzi and Yi (1988) 0.730 0.732
PNFI 0.50 Bagozzi and Yi (1988) 0.753 0.755
benchmark, source
and measurement/
Note: CFA and SEM connote confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling, respectively structural model’s
Source: Researchers’ fieldwork (2017) values
 JM2 Path Coefficient SE t-Statistics Decision

H1a: Convenience ! Users’_Satisfaction 0.681 0.212 3.219** Reject H0

H1b: Functionality ! Users’_Satisfaction 0.941 0.333 2.829** Reject H0
H1c: Perceived_Usefulness ! Users’_Satisfaction 0.790 0.327 2.417* Reject H0
H2a: Convenience ! Repurchase_Intention 0.665 0.445 1.496 Accept H0
H2b: Functionality ! Repurchase_Intention 1.046 0.542 1.930 Accept H0
H2c: Perceived_Usefulness ! Repurchase_Intention 1.307 0.663 1.971* Reject H0
H3: Users’_Satisfaction !Repurchase_Intention 1.207 0.331 3.640** Reject H0
2
Table IV. Coefficient of determination (R ) for users’ satisfaction 0.761
Coefficient of determination (R2) for repurchase intention 0.747
Estimated results of Number of Observations 486
the structural model
and hypotheses test Notes: ** and * connote p < 1% and p < 5%, respectively; SE – Standard Error
outputs Source: Researchers’ fieldwork (2017)
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

β =–0.681 Users’ Satisfaction

Convenience t =–3.219**
R2 = 0.761
β = 0.941
β = 0.665
t = 1.496 t = 2.829**

β = 1.207
Functionality t = 3.640**

β = 1.046
t = 1.930
β = 0.790
t = 2.417*
Perceived β = –1.307 Repurchase Intention
Usefulness t = –1.971*
R2 = 0.747

Figure 2.
Path coefficients, Not Significant Significant
t-values and
coefficient of Notes: ** and * connote p < 1% and p < 5%, respectively
determination (R2)
Source: Researchers’ computation (2017)

4.730); thus, H3 is rejected. The coefficient of determination (R2) of the two dependent
variables: users’ satisfaction and repurchase intention are 76.1 per cent and 74.7 per cent,
respectively.

5. Discussion of findings
The empirical analyses revealed a number of findings. The study found that service quality
(convenience, functionality and perceived usefulness) significantly influenced users’
satisfaction. This finding supports Arif et al. (2016) assertion that student dependence on
 smartphones helps them to work easily or with less effort without discomfort or difficulty. Repurchase
The ability to use smartphones at anytime and anywhere provided there is network facilities intention
make the use of the device convenient for the users. Convenience in the use of smartphones
is also enhanced by quick access to multiple products with greater level of quality, efficiency
and personalization (Persaud and Azhar, 2012). The outcome is also in line with Nathalie
and Henk’s (2013) finding that the introduction of smartphones and applications for mobile
devices has provided enhanced functionality, which has changed the way people
communicate and search for information. Users’ satisfaction with smartphone usage is
possibly influenced positively by the usefulness of the devices such as chatting with friends,
checking emails and Facebook, viewing photo, listening to music and news, taking pictures,
reading e-books, navigating weather, planning activities and managing time using timetable
and alarm, among others (Wang et al., 2014).
The study also revealed a significant relationship between perceived usefulness and
repurchase intention. Users of smartphones who find the device to be useful are more likely
to undertake continued usage (Chiu et al., 2009). This finding is supported by the outcome of
Chiu et al. (2009) that perceived usefulness has a significant effect on customer repurchase
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

intention. The significant relationship between service quality (perceived usefulness) and
repurchase intention is also supported by the findings of Wang et al. (2004), Alexandris et al.
(2002) and Boulding et al. (1993) that relationships exist between service quality and
repurchase intentions. Smartphone users who have enjoyed the efficient functioning of the
device will be more likely to exhibit stronger repurchase intentions. However, the study of
Cronin and Taylor (1992) did not support the significant relationship between service
quality and users’ intentions to purchase again.
Finally, this study found a positive and significant relationship between users’
satisfaction and repurchase intention. The study of Choudhury (2013) that found a strong
support for the predictive power of satisfaction on customers’ purchase intentions does
support the outcome of this study.

6. Conclusion and recommendations

This study examined the determinants of repurchase intention among smartphone users in
Nigeria using SEM approach. Variables of interest were basically categorized into three
namely: service quality, users’ satisfaction and repurchase intention. Service quality
measures smartphones services in terms of convenience, functionality and perceived
usefulness. The outcomes of the study showed that service quality (convenience,
functionality and perceived usefulness) significantly impact on users’ satisfaction of
smartphones. Similarly, perceived usefulness significantly impact on repurchase intention
of smartphones users. However, convenience and functionality were found to positively
influence repurchase intention but the relationships were statistically insignificant.
This study contributes to knowledge in different ways. It contributes to the intellectual
discourse on the factors determining repurchase intention among smartphone users. This
study has been able to empirically establish the determining factors considered to be
significant by smartphone users in making repurchase decision. In terms of research
context, this study has contributed to emerging discourse on the perception of smartphone
users with respect to convenience, functionality, perceived usefulness, satisfaction and
repurchase intention in the Nigerian context. This study presents a latest attempt and useful
insights on the service quality–users’ satisfaction–repurchase intention nexus among
smartphone users in Nigeria. Another contribution to knowledge made by this study is in
the use of SEM. SEM provides robust results showing possible structural relationships
among the research variables.
 JM2 6.1 Managerial implications
First, this study recommends that manufacturers of smartphones should continuously
improve on their products to enhance users’ satisfaction that could guarantee repeat
purchase in the future. Second, good functions and usability are fundamental necessities of a
smartphone. Therefore, it is recommended that manufacturers identify what users want in
the use of smartphones and concentrate more on the functions that satisfy users’ needs. In
ensuring that smartphones are of optimal use to the target audience, manufacturers should
develop smartphones that are neither complicated in the menu configuration nor difficult to
learn even by less-technologically literate individuals.

6.2 Research limitations and implication for future study

The sample size used for this study is relatively small compared to the number of
smartphones users in Nigeria. Therefore, a study of this nature requires a larger sample size
to enhance the generalizations of the research findings. Hence, it is suggested that sample
size of future studies on the subject matter should be increased. This can be done by taking
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

samples from different major cities in the country. This would give room for comparative
analyses of repurchase intention among smartphone users on the basis of location. Second,
future studies can focus on comparative analysis of repurchase intention of available brands
of smartphones in Nigeria to guide manufacturers and sellers of such brands on designing
marketing strategies that would increase their market shares. Finally, future research works
on the subject matter can increase the number of variables to include peer influence,
perceived ease of use, perceived value, social influence, brand trust, customer support, price,
and so on to possibly improve the coefficient of determination.

References
Adetola, A.A. and Ifeanyichukwu, C. (2016), “Factors influencing smartphone purchase behaviour
among young adults in Nigeria”, International Journal of Recent Scientific Research, Vol. 7 No. 9,
pp. 13248-13254.
Ahamed, A.F. and Skallerud, K. (2015), “The link between export relationship quality, performance and
expectation of continuing the relationship: a South Asia exporters’ perspective”, International
Journal of Emerging Markets, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 16-31.
Alexandris, K., Dimitriadis, N. and Markata, D. (2002), “Can perceptions of service quality predict
behavioral intentions? An exploratory study in the hotel sector in Greece”, Managing Service
Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 224-231.
Anderson, E.W., Fornell, C. and Lehmann, D.R. (1994), “Customer satisfaction, market share, and
profitability: findings from Sweden”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 53-66.
Andrews, L., Drennan, J. and Russell-Bennett, R. (2012), “Linking perceived value of mobile marketing
with the experiential consumption of mobile phones”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46
Nos 3/4, pp.357-386.
Annamdevula, S. and Bellamkonda, R.S. (2016), “The effects of service quality on student loyalty: the
mediating role of student satisfaction”, Journal of Modelling in Management, Vol. 11 No. 2,
pp.446-462.
Arif, I., Aslam, W. and Ali, M. (2016), “Students’ dependence on smartphones and its effect on
purchasing behaviour”, South Asian Journal of Global Business Research, Vol. 5 No. 2,
pp.285-302.
Athiyaman, A. (1997), “Linking student satisfaction and service quality perceptions: the case of
university education”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 528-540.
 Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Journal of the Repurchase
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 74-94.
intention
Balaji, M.S. and Sarkar, A. (2013), “Does successful recovery mitigate failure severity? A study of the
behavioral outcomes in Indian context”, International Journal of Emerging Markets, Vol. 8 No. 1,
pp. 65-81.
Basaglia, S., Caporarello, L., Magni, M. and Pennarola, F. (2009), “Individual adoption of convergent
mobile phone in Italy”, Review of Managerial Science, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 1-18.
Bello, D.V. and Adekunle, S.A. (2015), “Customer perception of the quality of service in fast food
enterprises”, Nigeria Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 13 Nos 1/2, pp. 28-37.
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Richard, S. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1993), “A dynamic process model of service
quality: from expectations to behavioral intentions”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30
No. 1, pp. 7-27.
Brady, M.K., Robertson, C.J. and Cronin, J.J. (2001), “Managing behavioral intentions in diverse cultural
environments: an investigation of service quality, service value, and satisfaction for American
and ecuadorian fast-food customers”, Journal of International Management, Vol. 7 No. 2,
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

pp. 129-149.
Bryman, A. and Cramer, D. (1997), Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS for Windows: A Guide for
Social Scientists, Routledge, London.
Caruana, A. (2002), “Service loyalty: the effects of service quality and the mediating role of customer
satisfaction”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36 Nos 7/8, pp. 811-828.
Chang, Y., Kim, M., Kim, Y. and Park, M. (2011), Determinants of User Satisfaction and Continuance
Intention of Smartphone: Focus on Interactivity Perspective, Information Technology Research
Centre, Korea.
Chiu, C.M., Chang, C.C., Cheng, H.L. and Fang, Y.H. (2009), “Determinants of customer repurchase
intention in online shopping”, Online Information Review, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 761-784.
Chong, A.Y.I. (2013), “Understanding mobile commerce continuance intentions: an empirical analysis of
Chinese consumers”, Journal of Computer and Information System, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 22-30.
Choudhury, K. (2013), “Service quality and customers’ purchase intentions: an empirical study of the
Indian banking sector”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 529-543.
Cronin, J.J. and Taylor, S.A. (1992), “SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: reconciling performance-based
and perceptions-minus-expectations measurement of service quality”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 125-131.
Cronin, J.J., Brady, M.K. and Hult, G.T.M. (2000), “Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer
satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 76 No. 2, pp. 193-218.
Davcik, N. (2014), “The use and misuse of structural equation modelling in management research: a
review and critique”, Journal of Advances in Management Research, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 47-81.
Ding, H.T., Suet, F.L., Tanusina, S.P., Ca, G.L. and Gay, C.K. (2011), “Dependency on smartphone and
the impact on purchase behaviour among young consumers”, Insight and Ideas for Responsible
Marketers, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 193-203.
Eshghi, A., Roy, S.K. and Ganguli, S. (2008), “Service quality and customer satisfaction: an empirical
investigation in Indian mobile telecommunications services”, Marketing Management Journal,
Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 119-144.
Falayi, O.R. and Adedokun, A.J. (2014), “The demand for smartphones among students in university of
Ibadan”, Economics, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 30-34.
Fang, Y.H., Chiu, C.M. and Wang, E.T.G. (2011), “Understanding customers' satisfaction and
repurchase intentions: an integration of IS success model, trust, and justice”, Internet Research,
Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 479-503.
 JM2 Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Gerpott, T.J., Rams, W. and Schindler, A. (2001), “Customer retention, loyalty, and satisfaction in the
german mobile cellular telecommunications market”, Telecommunications Policy, Vol. 25 No. 4,
pp. 249-269.
Goh, S.K., Jiang, N., Hak, M.F.A. and Tee, P.L. (2016), “Determinants of smartphone repeat purchase
intention among malaysians: a moderation role of social influence and a mediating effect of
consumer satisfaction”, International Review of Management and Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 4,
pp. 993-1004.
Gonzalez, M., Comesana, L. and Brea, J. (2007), “Assessing tourist behavioral intentions through
perceived service quality and customer satisfaction”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 60 No. 2,
pp. 153-160.
Goyal, A., Maity, M., Thamizhvanan, A. and Xavier, M.J. (2013), “Determinants of customers’ online
purchase intention: an empirical study in India”, Journal of Indian Business Research, Vol. 5
No. 1, pp. 17-32.
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

Ha, Y.W. and Park, M.C. (2013), “Antecedents of customer satisfaction and customer loyalty for
emerging devices in the initial market of Korea: an equity framework”, Psychology and
Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 8, pp. 676-689.
Hahn, J. (2010), “Information seeking with wikipedia on iPod touch”, Reference Services Review, Vol. 38
No. 2, pp. 284-298.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (2010), “Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.,
Prentice-hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Harris, L.C. and Goode, M.M.H. (2010), “Online servicescape, trust, and purchase intentions”, Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 230-243.
Hayduck, L.A. (1987), Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, Johns Hopkins University Press,
Baltimore, MD.
Hellier, P.K., Geursen, G.M., Carr, R.A. and Rickard, J.A. (2003), “Customer repurchase intention: a
general structural equation model”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37 Nos 11/12,
pp. 1762-1800.
Hew, J., Badaruddin, M.N. and Moorthy, M.K. (2017), “Crafting a smartphone repurchase decision
making process: do brand attachment and gender matter?”, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 34
No. 4, pp. 34-56.
Ibzan, E., Balarabe, F. and Jakada, B. (2016), “Consumer satisfaction and repurchase intentions”,
Developing Country Studies, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 96-100.
Inegbenebor, A.U. (2006), “Elements of service operations”, in Inegbenebor, A.U. (Ed.), The
Fundamentals of Entrepreneurship, Malthouse Press, Benin City.
Izogo, E.E. (2016), “Structural equation test of relationship quality: repurchase intention –willingness to
recommend framework in retail banking”, International Journal of Emerging Markets, Vol. 11
No. 3, pp. 374-394, available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-07-2015-0130
Kaur, G. and Quareshi, K. (2015), “Factors obstructing intentions to trust and purchase products
online”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 758-783.
Kautish, P. and Dash, G. (2017), “Environmentally concerned consumer behavior: evidence from
consumers in Rajasthan”, Journal of Modelling in Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 712-738.
Kim, H.W., Chan, H.C. and Gupta, S. (2007), “Value-based adoption of mobile internet: an empirical
investigation”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 111-126.
Kim, M., Wong, S.F., Chang, Y. and Park, J. (2016), “Determinants of consumer loyalty in the korean
smartphone market: moderating effects of usage characteristics”, Telematics and Informatics,
Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 936-949.
 Kuo, Y.F., Wu, C.M. and Deng, W.J. (2009), “The relationships among service quality, perceived value, Repurchase
customer satisfaction, and post-purchase intention in mobile value-added services”, Computers
in Human Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 887-896.
intention
Lau, M.M., Lam, A.Y.C. and Cheung, R. (2016), “Examining the factors influencing purchase intention
of smartphones in Hong Kong”, Contemporary Management Research, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 213-224.
Lee, C.H., Eze, U.C. and Ndubisi, N.O. (2011), “Analyzing key determinants of online repurchase
intentions”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 200-221.
Lin, K.Y., Wang, Y.T. and Hsu, H.S. (2017), “Why do people switch mobile platforms? The moderating
role of habit”, Internet Research, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 1170-1189, available at: https://doi.org/
10.1108/IntR-04-2016-0087
Loureiro, S.M.C., Kaufmann, H.R. and Rabino, S. (2014), “Intention to use and recommend to others: an
empirical study of online banking practices in Portugal and Austria”, Online Information
Review, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 186-208.
Lowry, P.B. and Gaskin, J. (2014), “Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modelling (SEM) for
building and testing behavioural causal theory: when to choose it and how to use it”, IEEE
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

Transactions on Professional Communication, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 123-146.

Lu, H. and Su, P.Y. (2009), “Factors affecting purchase intention on mobile shopping web sites”, Internet
Research, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 442-458.
Nathalie, S. and Henk, F. (2013), Using Smartphones in Survey Research: A Multifunctional Tool, The
Netherlands Institute for Social Research, The Hague.
Norazah, M.S. (2013), “Students’ demand for smartphones: structural relationships of product features,
brand name, product price and social influence”, Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 30
No. 4, pp. 236-248.
Oliver, R.L. (1997), Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston.
Oliver, R.L. (1999), “Whence consumer loyalty?” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63 No. 4, pp. 33-44.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1985), “A conceptual model of service quality and its
implications for future research”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 41-50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1991), “SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for
measuring consumer perceptions of service quality”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64 No. 1,
pp. 12-40.
Persaud, A. and Azhar, I. (2012), “Innovative mobile marketing via smartphones: are consumers
ready?”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 418-443.
Rajaobelina, L. and Bergeron, J. (2009), “Antecedents and consequences of buyer-seller relationship
quality in the financial services industry international”, International Journal of Bank
Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 359-380.
Scott, J.E. (1995), “The measurement of information systems effectiveness: evaluating a measuring
instrument”, ACM SIGMIS Database, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 43-61.
Sinda, A. and Joel, J. (2014), “Explain the intention to use smartphones for mobile shopping”, Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 22, pp. 16-23.
Singh, A.S. and Masuku, M.B. (2014), “Sampling techniques and determination of sample size in applied
statistics research: an overview”, International Journal of Economics, Commerce and
Management, Vol. 2 No. 11, pp. 1-22.
Smith, D. and Langfield-Smith, K. (2004), “Structural equation modelling in management
accounting research: critical analysis and opportunities”, Journal of Accounting Literature,
Vol. 23, pp. 49-86.
Smura, T., Kivi, A. and Toyli, J. (2009), “A framework for analysing the usage of mobile services”,
Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications, Information and Media,
Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 53-67.
 JM2 Statista (2017), “Number of smartphone users in Nigeria”, available at: www.statista.com/statistics/
467187/forecast-of-smartphone-users-in-nigeria/
Stephens, K.K. and Davis, J. (2009), “The social influences on electronic multitasking in organizational
meetings”, Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 63-83.
Suki, N. and Suki, M.N. (2007), “Mobile phone usage for m-learning: comparing heavy and light mobile
phone users”, Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 355-365.
Tam, C. and Oliveira, T. (2017), “Understanding mobile banking individual performance: the DeLone
and McLean model and the moderating effects of individual culture”, Internet Research, Vol. 27
No. 3, pp. 65-73.
Taylor, S.A. and Baker, T.L. (1994), “An assessment of the relationship between service quality and
customer satisfaction”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 70 No. 2, pp. 163-178.
Ting, D.H., Lim, S.F., Patanmacia, T.S., Low, C.G. and Ker, G.C. (2011), “Dependency on smartphone
and the impact on purchase behaviour”, Young Consumers, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 193-203.
Tung, L.L. (2004), “Service quality and perceived value’s impact on satisfaction, intention and usage of
short message service (SMS)”, Information Systems Frontiers, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 353-368.
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

Walsh, S. and White, K. (2006), “Ring, ring, why did I make that call? Mobile phone beliefs and behavior
among australian university students”, Youth Studies Australia, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 49-57.
Wang, D., Xiang, Z. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (2014), “Adapting to the mobile world: a model of smartphone
use”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 48, pp. 11-26.
Wang, Y., Lo, H.P. and Yang, Y. (2004), “An integrated framework for service quality, customer value,
satisfaction: evidence from China’s telecommunication industry”, Information Systems
Frontiers, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 325-340.
Xu, J. and Liu, Z. (2010), “Study of online stickiness: its antecedents and effect on repurchase intention”,
2010 International Conference on e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e Learning (IEEE
Computer Society), California.
Yamane, T. (1967), Elementary Sampling Theory, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, NJ.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996), “The behavioral consequences of service
quality”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 31-46.
Zhou, T. (2013), “An empirical examination of continuance intention of mobile payment services”,
Decision Support Systems, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 1085-1091.

Further reading
Karatepe, O.M. (2011), “Service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty: the moderating role of
gender”, Journal of Business Economics and Management, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 278-300.
Lin, W.S. (2012), “Perceived fit and satisfaction on web learning performance: IS continuance intention
and task-technology fit perspectives”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 70
No. 7, pp. 498-507.
Szymanski, D.M. and Hise, R.T. (2000), “E-satisfaction: an initial examination”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 309-322.
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

Appendix 1. Questionnaire
Repurchase
intention
 JM2 Appendix 2

S/N Variable Category Frequency % Cumulative %

1 Gender Male 271 55.8 55.8

Female 215 44.2 100
Total 486 100.0
2 Age 20 years and below 135 27.8 27.8
21-30 years 121 24.9 52.7
31-40 years 109 22.4 75.1
41-50 years 40 8.2 83.3
Above 50 years 81 16.7 100
Total 486 100.0
3 Education SSCE/GCE 159 32.7 32.7
NCE/Diploma/OND 68 14.0 46.7
HND/BSc 207 42.6 89.3
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

Postgraduate 52 10.7 100

Total 486 100.0
4 Experience Less than 6 months 36 7.4 7.4
Table AI.
6-11 months 62 12.8 20.2
Frequency 1-3 years 133 27.4 47.5
distribution for 4-6 years 133 27.4 74.9
demographic Above 6 years 122 25.1 100
attributes Total 486 100.0
 Appendix 3 Repurchase
intention
Strongly Strongly
Item code agree Agree Not sure Disagree disagree Mean Std. deviation

CON1 235 (48.4%) 121 (24.9%) 18 (3.8%) 57 (11.8%) 55 (11.4%) 3.87 1.413
CON2 244 (50.3%) 184 (37.9%) 36 (7.5%) 15 (3.1%) 7 (1.5%) 4.32 0.852
CON3 229 (47.2%) 165 (34%) 59 (12.2%) 25 (5.2%) 8 (1.7%) 4.20 0.954
CON4 270 (55.6%) 159 (32.8%) 30 (6.2%) 18 (3.8%) 9 (1.9%) 4.36 0.895
CON5 231 (47.6%) 179 (36.9%) 42 (8.7%) 22 (4.6%) 12 (2.5%) 4.22 0.957
Overall mean and standard deviation for convenience 4.20 0.628
FUN1 159 (32.8%) 195 (40.2%) 71 (14.7%) 44 (9.1%) 17 (3.5%) 3.90 1.068
FUN2 143 (29.5%) 197 (40.6%) 67 (13.8%) 62 (12.8%) 17 (3.5%) 3.80 1.104
FUN3 200 (41.2%) 172 (35.4%) 61 (12.6%) 36 (7.5%) 17 (3.5%) 4.03 1.072
FUN4 146 (30.1%) 176 (36.3%) 96 (19.8%) 49 (10.1%) 19 (4%) 3.78 1.099
FUN5 113 (23.3%) 186 (38.3%) 89 (18.4%) 75 (15.5%) 23 (4.8%) 3.60 1.140
Overall mean and standard deviation for functionality 3.82 0.733
PUS1 169 (34.8%) 204 (42%) 49 (10.1%) 52 (10.7%) 12 (2.5%) 3.96 1.048
Downloaded by INSEAD At 17:21 02 November 2018 (PT)

PUS2 160 (33%) 184 (37.9%) 66 (13.6%) 65 (13.4%) 11 (2.3%) 3.86 1.089
PUS3 139 (28.7%) 210 (43.3%) 61 (12.6%) 52 (10.7%) 24 (5%) 3.80 1.116
PUS4 159 (32.8%) 190 (39.1%) 55 (11.4%) 61 (12.6%) 21 (4.4%) 3.83 1.143
PUS5 143 (29.5%) 205 (42.2%) 65 (13.4%) 50 (10.3%) 23 (4.8%) 3.81 1.110
Overall mean and standard deviation for perceived usefulness 3.85 0.727
SAT1 119 (24.5%) 192 (39.6%) 67 (13.8%) 67 (13.8%) 41 (8.5%) 3.58 1.232
SAT3 116 (23.9%) 218 (44.9%) 56 (11.6%) 66 (13.6%) 30 (6.2%) 3.67 1.159
SAT4 113 (23.3%) 195 (40.2%) 81 (16.7%) 77 (15.9%) 20 (4.2%) 3.63 1.125
SAT5 96 (19.8%) 209 (43.1%) 86 (17.7%) 68 (14%) 27 (5.6%) 3.57 1.120
Overall mean and standard deviation for users' satisfaction 3.61 0.897
RIN1 127 (26.2%) 152 (31.3%) 105 (21.7%) 58 (12%) 44 (9.1%) 3.53 1.248
RIN2 143 (29.5%) 151 (31.1%) 96 (19.8%) 53 (11%) 43 (8.9%) 3.61 1.256
RIN3 121 (24.9%) 162 (33.4%) 112 (23.1%) 54 (11.2%) 37 (7.7%) 3.57 1.194
RIN4 109 (22.5%) 143 (29.5%) 125 (25.8%) 64 (13.2%) 45 (9.3%) 3.43 1.231
RIN5 124 (25.6%) 145 (29.9%) 99 (20.4%) 66 (13.6%) 52 (10.7%) 3.46 1.294
Overall mean and standard deviation for repurchase intention 3.52 1.018
Table A2.
Frequency
Note: CON, FUN, PUS, SAT and RIN connote convenience, functionality, perceived usefulness, users’ distribution for
satisfaction and repurchase intention respectively research items

About the authors

Dr Simon Ayo Adekunle is a First Class Honours graduate of Business Administration in the
Department of Business Administration, University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria. He is a Lecturer.
Adekunle has published in a number of respected local and international journals. His research
interest and areas of specialization are operations management, quantitative analysis, marketing and
business research. He is a certified data analyst in Microsoft Excel, Statistical Packages for Social
Sciences (SPSS), Econometric Views (EViews), among others. Simon Ayo Adekunle is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: adeksim@yahoo.com
Dr Jones O. Ejechi is a Senior Lecturer and current Ag. Head of Department, Department of
Business Administration, University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria. His areas of interest are
operations management, business statistics and computer application.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com