| Literature DB >> 34305759 |
Yunxia Shi1, Chunhao Ma1, Yuxin Zhu2.
Abstract
Improving the user stickiness becomes increasingly valued, due to the severe user churn of livestreaming services. Previous studies pay much attention to the influencing factors of technology on user stickiness, ignoring the emotional factors. This study examined the impact of the emotional labor of network anchors (deep acting vs. surface acting) on user stickiness in the context of livestreaming service. We extended prior findings in three ways. The results of Study 1 (i.e., questionnaire method, 305 livestreaming users, and 56.4% females) demonstrated that the emotional labor of network anchor positively influenced user stickiness, and immersion experience plays a mediating role. The results of Study 2 (i.e., situational simulation method, 203 volunteers, and 54.09% females) demonstrated that the deep acting strategies of emotional labor had a stronger effect when compared with surface acting strategies. The results of Study 3 (i.e., situational simulation method, 235 volunteers, and 51.9% females) demonstrated that the effect of emotional labor on user stickiness was stronger for the users with prevention focus compared with promotion focus. Based on the perspective of emotional labor, this study extends the previous research on user stickiness and is valuable for guiding the practice of livestreaming services.Entities:
Keywords: emotional labor; immersion theory; livestreaming service; regulatory focus theory; user stickiness
Year: 2021 PMID: 34305759 PMCID: PMC8295726 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.698510
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1Conceptual framework.
Descriptive statistical analysis of variables.
| 1. Perceived emotional labor | 3.11 | 1.13 | 0.58 | 0.84 | (0.76) | ||
| 2. Immersion experience | 2.86 | 1.11 | 0.60 | 0.86 | 0.39 | (0.77) | |
| 3. User stickiness | 3.32 | 1.12 | 0.69 | 0.87 | 0.40 | 0.39 | (0.83) |
p < 0.01; The value on the diagonal is the square root of the AVE value.
Test of structural validity.
| Three-factor model | PEL; IE; US | 4.97 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.91 | 0.05 |
| Two-factor model | PEL+IE; US | 13.94 | 0.74 | 0.75 | 0.73 | 0.16 |
| Two-factor model | PEL; IE+US | 17.31 | 0.68 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.23 |
| One-factor model | PEL+IE+US | 25.24 | 0.51 | 0.52 | 0.51 | 0.28 |
Bootstrap effect analysis.
| Direct effect Perceived emotional labor → User stickiness | 0.30 | 0.06 | 0.1878 | 0.4158 |
| Mediating effect Perceived emotional labor → Immersion experience → User stickiness | 0.11 | 0.03 | 0.0612 | 0.1759 |
Figure 2Comparison of differences in user stickiness under differently perceived emotional labor.
Figure 3Comparison of user stickiness with different regulatory focus.
Figure 4Comparison of immersive experience with different regulatory focus.