| Literature DB >> 35270734 |
Wenyu Zang1, Yuhao Qian1, Hemin Song1.
Abstract
The 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics has created unprecedented opportunities for China's commercial ice rinks, where improving consumers' repurchase intention is essential for their high-quality development. This paper explores the mediation effect of community interactions between perceived value and commercial ice rink consumers' repurchase intention based on the theory of perceived value. Through a questionnaire survey, we collected 347 valid questionnaire from consumers of commercial ice rinks. Based on a structural equation model, the results show that consumers' perceived risk value significantly impacts community interactions and consumers' repurchase intention. Perceived functional, social, and emotional values positively affect community interactions but have an insignificant impact on the consumers' repurchase intention. Community interactions play a full mediation role between perceived emotional and social values and consumers' repurchase intention; they play partially mediating role between consumers' perceived risk value and repurchase intention and do not have mediating role between perceived functional value and consumers' repurchase intention. Therefore, we provide some practical suggestions: extending commercial ice rink product lines, creating unique intellectual property systems, improving consumer sports career planning, and enhancing risk management.Entities:
Keywords: commercial ice rinks; community interactions; mediation effect; perceived value; repurchase intention
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35270734 PMCID: PMC8910724 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19053043
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Structural equation model.
Demographic information of the survey sample.
| Category | Percentage (%) | Category | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | − | Income level | − |
| Male | 56.06% | Below 2000 | 3.03% |
| Female | 43.94% | 2001~4000 | 6.31% |
| Age | − | 4001~6000 | 16.42% |
| Under 18 years old | 1.77% | 6000~8000 | 16.92% |
| 18~25 | 22.22% | 8000~10,000 | 16.16% |
| 26~30 | 30.30% | 10,000~20,000 | 24.24% |
| 31~40 | 39.14% | 20,000~50,000 | 15.91% |
| 41~50 | 5.56% | 50,000 or more | 1.01% |
| Above 50 | 1.01% | Commercial ice rink consumption frequency | − |
| Education level | − | Less than once a week | 20.20% |
| High school and below | 9.34% | 1–3 times a week | 43.94% |
| Junior college | 13.89% | 4–6 times per week | 35.10% |
| Bachelor | 43.69% | 7 times a week and above | 0.76% |
| Master and above | 33.08% | − | − |
The items of latent variables.
| Variables | Items | References |
|---|---|---|
| Perceived functional value | 1. I can improve my sports skills at the ice rink | Du and Deng [ |
| 2. I think I can make the best use of my fragmented time at the ice rink | ||
| 3. The service of the ice rink is professional and comprehensive | ||
| 4. I am satisfied with the overall service quality of the ice rink | ||
| Perceived social value | 1. My peers around me be willing to spend money at the ice rink | Perez et al.[ |
| 2. I think I should go to the ice rink because everyone seems to go there | ||
| 3. People around me who are influential or important to me recommend that I go to the ice rink | ||
| 4. It has become a trend to go to the ice rink | ||
| Perceived emotional value | 1. I don’t think my time at the rink is wasted | Kim et al. [ |
| 2. I feel relaxed when I exercise in the ice rink | ||
| 3. The ice rink adds joy to my life | ||
| 4. I enjoy the process of sport at the ice rink | ||
| Perceived risk value | 1. I am worried about the safety risks of sport at the ice rink | Bauer [ |
| 2. I am worried that my privacy will be compromised by the ice rink operator | ||
| 3. I am worried that there will be bundled purchases after spending money at the ice rink | ||
| 4. I am worried that the pricing of the ice rink operator’s program is not transparent, resulting in unclear economic losses | ||
| Community interactions | 1. I often discuss information and knowledge about ice sports with other customers at the ice rink | Yang [ |
| 2. I have common opinions with some customers of the ice rink and we can talk together | ||
| 3. I can cooperate with other customers at the ice rink to diagnose and solve product/sport problems | ||
| 4. Communication with other customers at the ice rink is pleasant | ||
| 5. The usage behavior of others does not influence my willingness to spend money at the ice rink | ||
| Repurchase intention | 1. I would like to continue to consume at the ice rink if I can | Chiu [ |
| 2. I have the intention to maintain continuous consumption at the ice rink | ||
| 3. I may participate in more projects at the ice rink in the future | ||
| 4. I will not spend money at the ice rink in the future | ||
| Consumer innovation | 1. I like to pursue new technologies and things | Cha [ |
| 2. I usually buy new products earlier than others | ||
| 3. I believe that the progress of technology will result in a better life | ||
| 4. I am willing to accept all kinds of novelties in my life |
Analysis of reliability and convergent validity.
| Variables | α | CR | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived functional value | 0.847 | 0.848 | 0.583 |
| Perceived social value | 0.899 | 0.904 | 0.702 |
| Perceived emotional value | 0.893 | 0.893 | 0.676 |
| Perceived risk value | 0.907 | 0.910 | 0.717 |
| Community interactions | 0.956 | 0.957 | 0.847 |
| Repurchase intention | 0.974 | 0.975 | 0.928 |
| Label variable | 0.893 | 0.893 | 0.677 |
Analysis of discriminant validity.
| Construct Face | Perceived Functional Value | Perceived Social Value | Perceived Emotional Value | Perceived Risk Value | Community Interactions | Repurchase Intention | Labeling Variables |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived functional value | 0.763 | − | − | − | − | − | − |
| Perceived social value | 0.706 | 0.838 | − | − | − | − | − |
| Perceived emotional value | 0.751 | 0.780 | 0.822 | − | − | − | − |
| Perceived risk value | −0.57 | −0.714 | −0.644 | 0.847 | − | − | − |
| Community interactions | 0.671 | 0.764 | 0.739 | −0.765 | 0.920 | − | − |
| Repurchase intention | 0.613 | 0.7 | 0.666 | −0.779 | 0.824 | 0.963 | − |
| Label variable | −0.112 | −0.104 | −0.099 | −0.131 | −0.073 | 0.044 | 0.823 |
Fitting results and comparison of each model.
| Number | Model | χ2/df | RMSEA | CFI | IFI | TLI | NFI | SRMR | GFI | Compare | ∆χ2 | ∆df |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CFA | CFA model | 1.946 | 0.052 | 0.967 | 0.967 | 0.962 | 0.934 | 0.338 | 0.888 | − | − | − |
| B | Baseline B model | 1.914 | 0.051 | 0.967 | 0.967 | 0.963 | 0.934 | 0.048 | 0.887 | B vs U | 18.888 | 23.000 |
| U | U model | 2.001 | 0.054 | 0.966 | 0.967 | 0.959 | 0.936 | 0.033 | 0.890 | − | − | − |
The results of descriptive statistics.
| Variable Name | Mean | Standard Deviation | Perceived Functional Value | Perceived Social Value | Perceived Emotional Value | Perceived Risk Value | Community Interactions | Repurchase Intention |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived functional value | 6.180 | 0.868 | − | − | − | − | − | − |
| Perceived social value | 4.825 | 0.806 | 0.605 ** | − | − | − | − | − |
| Perceived emotional value | 4.456 | 0.863 | 0.651 ** | 0.704 ** | − | − | − | − |
| Perceived risk value | 1.873 | 0.874 | −0.510 ** | −0.662 ** | −0.590 ** | − | − | − |
| Community interactions | 6.203 | 1.092 | 0.605 ** | 0.712 ** | 0.684 ** | −0.731 ** | − | − |
| Repurchase intention | 5.733 | 1.518 | 0.558 ** | 0.663 ** | 0.618 ** | −0.747 ** | 0.795 ** | − |
Note: ** p < 0.01.
The results of empirical analysis.
| Hypothesis | Unstandardized Coefficients | S.E. | C.R. |
| Results | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | Perceived functional value → | 0.095 | 0.108 | 0.879 | 0.379 | Not supported |
| H2 | Perceived social value → | 0.062 | 0.154 | 0.399 | 0.690 | Not supported |
| H3 | Perceived emotional value → | 0.045 | 0.120 | 0.375 | 0.708 | Not supported |
| H4 | Perceived risk value → | −0.564 | 0.095 | −5.94 | *** | Supported |
| H5 | Perceived functional value → | 0.167 | 0.084 | 1.986 | 0.047 * | Supported |
| H6 | Perceived social value → | 0.376 | 0.119 | 3.15 | 0.002 ** | Supported |
| H7 | Perceived emotional value → | 0.272 | 0.093 | 2.936 | 0.003 ** | Supported |
| H8 | Perceived risk value → | −0.483 | 0.066 | −7.314 | *** | Supported |
| H9 | Community interactions → | 0.673 | 0.088 | 7.679 | *** | Supported |
Note: Goodness-of-fit indicators χ2/df < 3, GFI > 0.9, comparative fitness indicators (NFI, IFI, TLI, CFI) > 0.9, SRMR < 0.05, and RMSEA < 0.08; *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05.
Figure 2The results of the SEM analysis. *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05.
The analytical results of mediating effects.
| Path | Point Estimate | Coefficient Product | Bootstrapping | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bias-Corrected Percentile 95% CI | Percentile 95% CI | |||||||
| SE | Z | Lower | Upper | Lower | Upper | |||
| Total effect | PRV → RI | −0.889 | 0.145 | −6.131 | −1.177 | −0.613 | −1.171 | −0.609 |
| PEV → RI | 0.228 | 0.165 | 1.382 | −0.076 | 0.553 | −0.096 | 0.537 | |
| PSV → RI | 0.315 | 0.235 | 1.340 | −0.141 | 0.783 | −0.114 | 0.835 | |
| PFV → RI | 0.207 | 0.180 | 1.150 | −0.159 | 0.550 | −0.148 | 0.553 | |
| Direct effects | PRV → RI | −0.564 | 0.158 | −3.570 | −0.946 | −0.306 | −0.915 | −0.298 |
| PEV → RI | 0.045 | 0.123 | 0.366 | − | − | − | − | |
| PSV → RI | 0.062 | 0.225 | 0.276 | − | − | − | − | |
| PFV → RI | 0.095 | 0.194 | 0.490 | − | − | − | − | |
| Indirect effects | PRV → RI | −0.325 | 0.078 | −4.167 | −0.497 | −0.188 | −0.472 | −0.163 |
| PEV → RI | 0.183 | 0.090 | 2.033 | 0.042 | 0.395 | 0.035 | 0.382 | |
| PSV → RI | 0.253 | 0.142 | 1.782 | 0.046 | 0.596 | 0.040 | 0.574 | |
| PFV → RI | 0.112 | 0.084 | 1.333 | −0.035 | 0.315 | −0.064 | 0.278 | |
Note: PRV = perceived risk value; PEV = perceived emotional value; PSV = perceived social value; PFV = perceived functional value; RI = repurchase intention.