The Effects of Application Discoverability on User Benefits in Mobile Application Stores

  • Jaeki Song
  • Junghwan Kim
  • Donald R. Jones
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 108)


This document is in the required format. Mobile applications and mobile application stores are becoming people’s commodities in everyday life, offering unprecedented mobile services. In mobile application stores with numerous applications finding the right applications is painstaking for users. Therefore, this study aims to explicate the effect of application discoverability on user benefits in mobile application stores by identifying the relationships of need specificity, application discoverability, and application quantity. Using a survey methodology, we found that app users’ need specificity has an impact on application discoverability and quantity-sufficiency of applications, but not quantity-overload of applications. Our findings also show that application discoverability plays a substantial role in enriching users’ utilitarian and hedonic benefits in mobile application stores.


Partial Little Square Mobile Service Partial Little Square Path Android Phone User Benefit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Nysveen, H., Pedersen, P., Thorbjørnsen, H.: Intentions to use mobile services: antecedents and cross-service comparisons. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 33, 330–346 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ling, R.: New tech, new ties: How mobile communication is reshaping social cohesion. The MIT Press (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zittrain, J.: The Future of the Internet, Allen Lane, London (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    MobiThinking, Global mobile statistics 2011: all quality mobile marketing research, mobile Web stats, subscribers, ad revenue, usage, trends.., in (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    IDC, IDC Forecasts Worldwide Mobile Applications Revenues to Experience More Than 60% Compound Annual Growth Through 2014, in (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, B.X.: For the iPhone’s App Store, Quantity Really Does Matter. Wired (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shapiro, A.: The Great App Bubble. (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Konana, P., Balasubramanian, S.: The social–economic–psychological model of technology adoption and usage: an application to online investing. Decision Support Systems 39, 505–524 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim, J., Song, J., Jones, D.R., Lin, Z.: The influences of hedonic and utilitarian benefits in mobile app stores. In: Big XII+ MIS Research Symposium, Manhattan, KS (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Locke, E.A., Latham, G.P.: Goal setting theory. In: O’Neil Jr., H.F., Drillings, M. (eds.) Motivation: Theory and Research, pp. 13–29. Lawrence Erlbaum Hillsdale, NJ (1994)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cyr, D.: Modeling Web site design across cultures: Relationships to trust, satisfaction, and e-loyalty. Journal of Management Information Systems 24, 47–72 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Palmer, J.: Web site usability, design, and performance metrics. Information Systems Research 13, 151–167 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Song, J., Zahedi, F.: A theoretical approach to web design in e-commerce: a belief reinforcement model. Management Science 51, 1219–1235 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kang, Y.S., Kim, Y.J.: Do visitors’ interest level and perceived quantity of web page content matter in shaping the attitude toward a web site? Decision Support Systems 42, 1187–1202 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    O’Reilly, C.A.: Individuals and information overload in organizations: Is more necessarily better? Academy of Management Journal 23, 684–696 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grisé, M.L., Gallupe, R.B.: Information overload: addressing the productivity paradox in face-to-face electronic meetings. Journal of Management Information Systems 16, 157–185 (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gu, B., Konana, P., Rajagopalan, B., Chen, H.: Competition among virtual communities and user valuation: The case of investing-related communities. Information Systems Research 18, 68–85 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gibson, J.J.: The ecological approach to perception. Haughton Mifflin, Boston (1979)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R.: Cognition and environment, Praeger (1982)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gravitytank, Apps get real: Perspective on the phenomenon, Chicago, IL (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Batra, R., Ahtola, O.: Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes. Marketing Letters 2, 159–170 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., Mahajan, V.: Form versus function: How the intensities of specific emotions evoked in functional versus hedonic trade-offs mediate product preferences. Journal of Marketing Research 44, 702–714 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., Mahajan, V.: Delight by design: The role of hedonic versus utilitarian benefits. Journal of Marketing 72, 48–63 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dhar, R., Wertenbroch, K.: Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research 37, 60–71 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bridges, E., Florsheim, R.: Hedonic and utilitarian shopping goals: The online experience. Journal of Business Research 61, 309–314 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pinder, C.C.: Work motivation: Theory, issues, and applications, Scott, Glenville, IL (1984)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Winters, D., Latham, G.P.: The effect of learning versus outcome goals on a simple versus a complex task. Group & Organization Management 21, 236–250 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Koufaris, M., Kambil, A., LaBarbera, P.A.: Consumer behavior in web-based commerce: an empirical study. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 6, 115–138 (2001)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chen, B.X.: Mac App Store Provokes Developer Interest, Concern. Wired (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Butler, B.S.: Membership size, communication activity, and sustainability: A resource-based model of online social structures. Information Systems Research 12, 346–362 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Moreland, R.L., Argote, L., Krishnan, R.: Socially shared cognition at work: Transactive memory and group performance. In: Nye, J.L., Brower, A.M. (eds.) What’s Social about Social Cognition? Research on Socially Shared Cognition in Small Groups, pp. 57–84. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1996)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hoffman, D., Novak, T.: Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments: conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing 60, 50–68 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lin, C.: Standpoint: Looking back: The contribution of Blumler and Katz’s uses of mass communication to communication research. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 40, 574–581 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dabholkar, P., Bagozzi, R.: An attitudinal model of technology-based self-service: moderating effects of consumer traits and situational factors. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 30, 184–201 (2002)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Johnson, M., Zinkhan, G., Ayala, G.: The impact of outcome, competency and affect on service referral. Journal of Services Marketing 12, 397–415 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hoque, A.Y., Lohse, G.L.: An information search cost perspective for designing interfaces for electronic commerce. Journal of Marketing Research 36, 387–394 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chin, W.W.: The partial least squares approach to structural modeling. In: Marcoulides, G.A. (ed.) Modern Methods for Business Research, pp. 295–336. Erlbau Associates, London (1998)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Barclay, D., Higgins, C., Thompson, R.: The Partial Least Squares (PLS) approach to causal modeling: Personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technology Studies 2, 285–309 (1995)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Werts, C.E., Linn, R.L., Jöreskog, K.G.: Intraclass reliability estimates: Testing structural assumptions. Educational and Psychological Measurement 34, 25 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Nunally, J.: Pshycometric theory, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (1978)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F.: Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 18, 39–50 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    TheNielsonCompany, Mobile Youth Around the World, The Nielson Company (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jaeki Song
    • 1
  • Junghwan Kim
    • 1
  • Donald R. Jones
    • 1
  1. 1.ISQS Area, Rawls College of Business AdministrationTexas Tech UniversityLubbockUSA

Personalised recommendations