Advertisement

An Exploratory Analysis of Travel-Related WeChat Mini Program Usage: Affordance Theory Perspective

  • Ao Cheng
  • Gang Ren
  • Taeho Hong
  • Kichan Nam
  • Chulmo KooEmail author
Conference paper

Abstract

A WeChat mini program is an application that users can use without downloading and installing. After it was officially released in 2017, many travel enterprises have launched their own mini programs. This study applies affordance theory to investigate the role of WeChat mini programs in tourism activities through social network analysis using Rstudio. The authors searched for the topic “how do you perceive travel related WeChat mini program”, 200 comments were crawled and 180 comments were analysed after data cleaning. Results show that travel-related WeChat mini programs play a very important role in Chinese social network tourism activities. Moreover, the results suggest how the affordance theory has to be applied to the usage of WeChat mini programs.

Keywords

WeChat mini program Affordance theory Social network analysis Rstudio 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016S1A3A2925146).

References

  1. 1.
    Newark-French C (2011) Mobile app inventory hungry enough to eat internet display ad spend. http://blog.flurry.com/bid/71285/Mobile-App-Inventory-Hungry-Enough-to-EatInternet-Display-Ad-Spend
  2. 2.
    Kennedy-Eden H, Gretzel U (2012) A taxonomy of mobile applications in tourismGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mickaiel I (2011) Mobile the new black for travel. ZDNet. http://www.zdnet.com.au/mobile-the-new-black-for-travel-339321469.htm
  4. 4.
    TripBarometer (2016) https://www.tripadvisor.com
  5. 5.
    Michelle Saettler (2018) TripAdvisor boosts non-transactional mobile travel with offline app features. https://www.mobilemarketer.com/ex/mobilemarketer/cms/news/strategy/18161.html
  6. 6.
    Hwang K-H, Chan-Olmsted SM, Nam S-H, Chang B-H (2016) Factors affecting mobile application usage: exploring the roles of gender, age, and application types from behaviour log data. Int J Mobile Commun 14(3):256–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Qiao Y, Zhao X, Yang J, Liu J (2016) Mobile big-data-driven rating framework: measuring the relationship between human mobility and app usage behavior. IEEE Netw 30(3):14–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baltrunas L, Church K, Karatzoglou A, Oliver N (2015) Frappe: understanding the usage and perception of mobile app recommendations in-the-wild. arXiv:1505.03014
  9. 9.
    Santo K, Kirkendall S, Chalmers J, Chow C, Redfern J (2017) Mobile phone usage patterns in an acute coronary syndrome cohort. Heart Lung Circ 26:S87–S88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li H, Lu X (2017) Mining device-specific apps usage patterns from large-scale android users. arXiv:1707.09252
  11. 11.
    Quanzhong G (2017) Mini program and its future. News Writ 3:28–30Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Qi Y, Liping Z (2017) Viewing the development of WeChat mini program from the internet ecology. News Trib 2:22–24Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gibson J (1977) The theory of affordances. Perceiving, acting, and knowing: toward an ecological psychology, pp 67–82Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maier JR, Fadel GM (2009) Affordance based design: a relational theory for design. Res Eng Design 20(1):13–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Beynon-Davies P, Lederman R (2017) Making sense of visual management through affordance theory. Prod Plan Control 28(2):142–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lintern G (2000) An affordance-based perspective on human-machine interface design. Ecol Psychol 12(1):65–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Treem JW, Leonardi PM (2013) Social media use in organizations: exploring the affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association. Ann Int Commun Assoc 36(1):143–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Majchrzak A, Faraj S, Kane GC, Azad B (2013) The contradictory influence of social media affordances on online communal knowledge sharing. J Comput-Mediat Commun 19(1):38–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cabiddu F, De Carlo M, Piccoli G (2014) Social media affordances: enabling customer engagement. Ann Tour Res 48:175–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Guoming Yu, Siqi Cheng (2018) From “connection” to “scene”: an important step in the development of the Internet: examining the value logic and market territory of WeChat applet. Journal Bimon 1:121–127Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    2016–2017 China tourism consumer market development report (2017) http://www.ctaweb.org/html/2017-1/2017-1-10-11-15-58731.html
  22. 22.
    Simon-Calder (2017) Why smartphone APPs are changing the future of travel. https://www.independent.co.uk
  23. 23.
    Tencent Big Data (2016) http://data.qq.com/reports
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
    Sadler E, Given LM (2007) Affordance theory: a framework for graduate students’ information behavior. J Doc 63(1):115–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pozzi G, Pigni F, Vitari C (2014) Affordance theory in the IS discipline: a review and synthesis of the literatureGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hutchby I (2001) Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology 35(2):441–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Leonardi PM (2011) When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Q 147–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Majchrzak A, Markus ML (2012) Technology affordances and constraints in management information systems (MIS)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Faraj S, Azad B (2012) The materiality of technology: an affordance perspective. In: Materiality and organizing: social interaction in a technological world, vol 237, p 258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Norman DA (1988) The psychology of everyday things. The design of everyday things. Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Eddington SM (2018) The communicative constitution of hate organizations online: a semantic network analysis of “Make America Great Again”. Soc Media Soc 4(3).  https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118790763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
  34. 34.
    Pons P, Latapy M (2006) Computing communities in large networks using random walks. J Graph Algorithms Appl 10(2):191–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
  36. 36.
  37. 37.
    Wu JH, Wang SC (2005) What drives mobile commerce? an empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Inf Manag 42(5):719–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Vijayasarathy LR (2004) Predicting consumer intentions to use on-line shopping: the case for an augmented technology acceptance model. Inf Manag 41(6):747–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pavlou PA (2003) Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. Int J Electron Commer 7(3):101–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zhou T, Lu Y, Wang B (2010) Integrating TTF and UTAUT to explain mobile banking user adoption. Comput Hum Behav 26(4):760–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Im I, Hong S, Kang MS (2011) An international comparison of technology adoption: testing the UTAUT model. Inf Manag 48(1):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Carlsson C, Carlsson J, Hyvonen K, Puhakainen J, Walden P (2006) Adoption of mobile devices/services—searching for answers with the UTAUT. In: Proceedings of the 39th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 2006. HICSS 2006, vol 6. IEEE, p 132Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ao Cheng
    • 1
  • Gang Ren
    • 2
  • Taeho Hong
    • 2
  • Kichan Nam
    • 3
  • Chulmo Koo
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.College of Hotel and Tourism ManagementKyung Hee UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.College of Business AdministrationPusan National UniversityBusanSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of Marketing and Information Systems, School of Business AdministrationAmerican University of SharjahSharjahUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations