nach oben

Electronic Commerce Research

16.05.2024

A study on the factors influencing the consumption of virtual gifts on a live streaming platform based on virtual badges and user interaction

verfasst von: Fudong Wang, Yuying Chu, Zhiwei Yan

Erschienen in: Electronic Commerce Research

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Multiplayer online games are currently the most popular type of game, with virtual gifts providing the main income support for online live-streaming gaming platforms. However, there is little understanding regarding what consistently drives gifting behavior in the live gaming environment. Thus, clarifying the factors influencing the provision of virtual gifts in the game live-streaming environment is critical. We develop a research model based on Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to investigate the role of virtual badges and social interaction as external motivators to incentivize users' gift-giving behaviors, with monetary value used for quantification and evaluation. Specifically, according to Social Interaction Theory we analyze the effects of social interaction in terms of the presence of others, social competition, and Danmaku emotions. The model was validated through an empirical study including 71,680 observations of real-time viewer data collected from the Douyu live streaming platform. The results empirically demonstrate that the pursuit of virtual badges and user interactions in a negative live environment positively affect users' motivation for gifting behavior. Specifically, the higher the virtual badge level is, the stronger the incentive effect, and the incentive effect of virtual badges exhibits a positive spillover from high-grade virtual badges to low-grade virtual badges. Surprisingly, we observe that the presence of others and social competition under negative Danmaku sentiment motivate users' gift-giving behavior, while the motivational effect of positive Danmaku sentiment is not significant. We demonstrate the robustness of the model through robustness tests. Our study expands the applicability of SDT in the online game live-streaming context, contributes to the literature on the economic development of live-streaming platforms, and provides recommendations for how game live-streaming platforms facilitate viewer gifting behavior.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

China Internet Network Information Center [CNNIC]. (2022). The 49th Statistical Report on the Development Status of the Internet in China. (In Chinese). URL: https://cnnic.cn/NMediaFile/2023/0322/MAIN16794576367190GBA2HA1KQ.pdf

Haimson, O. L., & Tang, J. C. (2017). What makes live events engaging on Facebook live, periscope, and Snapchat. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025642.

Malinen, S. (2015). Understanding user participation in online communities: A systematic literature review of empirical studies. Computers in Human Behavior, 46, 228–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.004CrossRef

Hilvert-Bruce, Z., Neill, J. D., Sjöblom, M., & Hamari, J. (2018). Social motivations of live-streaming viewer engagement on Twitch. Computers in Human Behavior, 84, 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.013CrossRef

Bateman, P. J., Gray, P. H., & Butler, B. S. (2011). The impact of community commitment on participation in online communities. Information Systems Research, 22(4), 841–854. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1090.0265CrossRef

Wasko & Faraj (2005). Why should i share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 29(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148667

Zhou, S., Li, T., Yang, S., & Chen, Y. (2022). What drives consumers’ purchase intention of online paid knowledge? A stimulus-organism-response perspective. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 52, 101126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2022.101126CrossRef

Su, W., Li, Y., Zhang, H., & Wang, T. (2021). How the attributes of content distributors influence the intentions of users to pay for content shared on social media. Electronic Commerce Research, 23(1), 407–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-021-09482-zCrossRef

Zhao, Y., Zhou, R., & Yang, B. (2020). A 2020 perspective on “How knowledge contributor characteristics and reputation affect user payment decisions in paid Q&A? An empirical analysis from the perspective of trust theory.” Electronic Commerce Research and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2020.100942CrossRef

10.

Liu, L., Fang, J., Yang, L., Han, L., Hossin, M. A., & Wen, C. (2023). The power of talk: Exploring the effects of streamers’ linguistic styles on sales performance in B2B livestreaming commerce. Information Processing and Management, 60(3), 103259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2022.103259CrossRef

11.

Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social Facilitation. Science, 149(3681), 269–274. https://www.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3681.269.

12.

Carter, M., & Egliston, B. (2021). The work of watching Twitch: Audience labour in livestreaming and esports. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds, 13(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1386/jgvw_00025_1CrossRef

13.

Roychowdhury, P. (2017). Visible inequality, status competition, and conspicuous consumption: Evidence from rural India. Oxford Economic Papers-new Series, 69(1), 36–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpw056CrossRef

14.

Zhang, Y., & Epley, N. (2012). Exaggerated, mispredicted, and misplaced: When “it’s the thought that counts” in gift exchanges. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 141(4), 667–681. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029223CrossRef

15.

Baskin, E., Wakslak, C. J., Trope, Y., & Novemsky, N. (2014). Why feasibility matters more to gift receivers than to givers: A construal-level approach to gift giving. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(1), 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1086/675737CrossRef

16.

Zhao, M. (2016). Analysis of the current situation of webcasting in China and its characteristics. Journal of Western, 08, 29–32. (In Chinese). http://dx.chinadoi.cn/https://doi.org/10.16721/j.cnki.issn2095-6916.2016.08.011.

17.

Holt, J., Steirer, G., & Petruska, K. (2016). Introduction. Convergence, 22(4), 341–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856516642927CrossRef

18.

Ran, Y., & Wan, E. W. (2022). Enjoyment or autonomy? The interactive effect of brand ritual and brand personality on consumer purchase. Psychology and Marketing, 40(1), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21731CrossRef

19.

Chen Y., Gao, X. & Wen, Y. (2021). Research on Mutual Trust between Buyers and Sellers in Online Live Shopping Mode. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 29(02), 228–236. (In Chinese). http://dx.chinadoi.cn/https://doi.org/10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2018.0576.

20.

Lu, B., & Chen, Z. (2021). Live-streaming commerce and consumers’ purchase intention: An uncertainty reduction perspective. Information and Management, 58(7), 103509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2021.103509CrossRef

21.

Wei, H., Gao, J, & Duan, F. (2021). The impact of information interaction on user engagement behavior in a live e-commerce model. Information Science, 39(04), 148–156. (In Chinese). http://dx.chinadoi.cn/https://doi.org/10.13833/j.issn.1007-7634.2021.04.020.

22.

Witkowski, E., Recktenwald, D., Manning, J., & Ge, Z. (2016). Livestreaming in theory and practice: Four provocations on labour, liveness and participatory culture in games livestreaming. In Proceedings of the 22nd international symposium on electronic art (pp. 429–431). https://sure.sunderland.ac.uk/id/eprint/13317/3/ISEA2016_Proceedings.pdf#page=448

23.

Kim, H., Kankanhalli, A., & Lee, S. Y. (2018). Examining gifting through social network services: A social exchange theory perspective. Information Systems Research, 29(4), 805–828. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2017.0737CrossRef

24.

Lee, S. Y., Choi, S. R., & Kim, H. (2019). What makes people send gifts via social network services? A mixed methods approach. Internet Research, 30(1), 315–334. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-12-2018-0551CrossRef

25.

Goode, S., Shailer, G., Wilson, M., & Jankowski, J. (2014). Gifting and status in virtual worlds. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31(2), 171–210. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222310207CrossRef

26.

Li, R., Lu, Y., Ma, J., & Wang, W. (2021). Examining gifting behavior on live-streaming platforms: An identity-based motivation model. Information & Management, 58(6), 103406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2020.103406CrossRef

27.

Zhou, J., Zhou, J., Ding, Y., & Wang, H. (2019). The magic of danmaku: A social interaction perspective of gift sending on live-streaming platforms. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 34, 100815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2018.11.002CrossRef

28.

Su, Q., Zhou, F., & Wu, Y. J. (2020). Using virtual gifts on live-streaming platforms as a sustainable strategy to stimulate consumers’ green purchase intention. Sustainability, 12(9), 3783. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093783CrossRef

29.

Kim, H. S., & Kim, M. (2020). Viewing sports online together? Psychological consequences on social live streaming service usage. Sport Management Review, 23(5), 869–882.

30.

Kim, H., Gupta, S., & Koh, J. (2011). Investigating the intention to purchase digital items in social networking communities: A customer value perspective. Information & Management, 48(6), 228–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2011.05.004CrossRef

31.

Meng, L., Liu, F., Duan, K., & Zhao, Y. (2021). Influence of network celebrity live broadcast on consumers' virtual gift consumption from the perspective of lnformation source characteristics. Management Review, 33(05), 319–330. (In Chinese). http://dx.chinadoi.cn/https://doi.org/10.14120/j.cnki.cn11-5057/f.2021.05.018.

32.

Sjöblom, M., & Hamari, J. (2017). Why do people watch others play video games? An empirical study on the motivations of Twitch users. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 985–996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.019CrossRef

33.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68CrossRef

34.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. In Springer eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7CrossRef

35.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020CrossRef

36.

Chen, K., & Jang, S. (2010). Motivation in online learning: Testing a model of self-determination theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 741–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.011CrossRef

37.

Khan, I. U., Hameed, Z., Yu, Y., Islam, T., Sheikh, Z., & Khan, S. H. (2017). Predicting the acceptance of MOOCs in a developing country: Application of task-technology fit model, social motivation, and self-determination theory. Telematics and Informatics, 35(4), 964–978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.09.009CrossRef

38.

Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Gagné, M., Leone, D. R., Usunov, J., & Kornazheva, B. P. (2001). Need satisfaction, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former eastern bloc country: A cross-cultural study of self-determination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(8), 930–942. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201278002CrossRef

39.

Jia, J., Jiao, Y., & Yan, J. (2020). Study on the influence mechanism of ethical leadership on subordinates’ proactive behavior. Chinese Journal of Management, (09), 1327–1335. (In Chinese). http://dx.chinadoi.cn/doi:https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-884x.2020.09.007.

40.

Qin, M., & Li, R. (2020). Understanding online user community user contribution behavior formation through online social support and self-determination theory. Management Review 32(09),168–181. (In Chinese). http://dx.chinadoi.cn/https://doi.org/10.14120/j.cnki.cn11-5057/f.2020.09.014.

41.

Cavusoglu, H., Li, Z., & Kim, S. U. (2021). How do virtual badges incentivize voluntary contributions to online communities? Information and Management, 58(5), 103483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2021.103483CrossRef

42.

Yu, L., & Jin, H. (2021). Research on the Factors Affecting Online Community Users’ Participating Behavior in Public Health Emergency: Based on SDT and TPB Integration Model. New Century Library, (09), 20–28. (In Chinese). http://dx.chinadoi.cn/https://doi.org/10.16810/j.cnki.1672-514X.2021.09.003.

43.

Goffman, E. (1983). The interaction order: american sociological association, 1982 presidential address. American Sociological Review, 48(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095141CrossRef

44.

Wohn, D. Y., Freeman, G., & McLaughlin, C. (2018). Explaining viewers’ emotional. Instrumental, and Financial Support Provision for Live Streamers. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174048CrossRef

45.

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. S. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49(3), 252–276. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.0043CrossRef

46.

Ren, Y., Kraut, R. E., & Kiesler, S. (2007). Applying common identity and bond theory to design of online communities. Organization Studies, 28(3), 377–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607076007CrossRef

47.

Shavitt, S., Jiang, D., & Cho, H. (2016). Stratification and segmentation: Social class in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(4), 583–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2016.08.005CrossRef

48.

Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.322CrossRef

49.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “What” and “Why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01CrossRef

50.

Dellarocas, C. (2010). Online reputation systems: How to design one that does what you need. MIT Sloan management review, 51(3), 33.

51.

Donath, J. (2002b). Identity and deception in the virtual community. In Routledge eBooks (pp. 37–68). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203194959-11

52.

Argo, J., Dahl, D. W., & Manchanda, R. V. (2005). The influence of a mere social presence in a retail context. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(2), 207–212. https://doi.org/10.1086/432230CrossRef

53.

Zajonc, R. B. (1965b). Social facilitation. Science, 149(3681), 269–274. https://www.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3681.269.

54.

Jin, X., Zhao, T., & Li, Y. (2017). How does marketing information affect purchase intention of pro-environmental products—Based on the moderating effect of social presence. Management Review, 29(01), 166–174. (In Chinese). http://dx.chinadoi.cn/https://doi.org/10.14120/j.cnki.cn11-5057/f.2017.01.017.

55.

Adam, M. T. P., Krämer, J., & Müller, M. N. (2015). Auction fever! how time pressure and social competition affect bidders’ arousal and bids in retail auctions. Journal of Retailing, 91(3), 468–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2015.01.003CrossRef

56.

Sun, K., Liu, L., & Liu, C. (2022). Consumers' impulsive purchase intention from the perspective of affection in livestreaming e-commerce. China Business and Market, 36(01), 33–42. http://dx.chinadoi.cn/https://doi.org/10.14089/j.cnki.cn11-3664/f.2022.01.004.

57.

Wohn, D. Y., & Freeman, G. (2019). Live streaming, playing, and money spending behaviors in eSports. Games and Culture, 15(1), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412019859184CrossRef

58.

Chen, C.-P. (2021). Digital gifting in personal brand communities of live-streaming: Fostering viewer–streamer–viewer parasocial relationships. Journal of Marketing Communications, 27(8), 865–880. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2021.1910327CrossRef

59.

Liu, F., Li, Y., Song, X., Cai, Z., Lim, E. T., & Tan, C.-W. (2022). Effects of age on live streaming viewer engagement: A dual coding perspective. Journal of Management Analytics, pp. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/23270012.2022.2156303

60.

Hsieh, J., Kunz, W. H., & Wu, A. (2022). Virtual gifting behavior on new social media: The perspectives of the community gift-giving model and face-negotiation theory. Internet Research, 33(4), 1597–1632. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-09-2021-0691CrossRef

61.

Fu, X., Chen, X., Shi, Y., Bose, I., & Cai, S. (2017). User segmentation for retention management in online social games. Decision Support Systems, 101, 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2017.05.015CrossRef

62.

Rezaei, S., & Ghodsi, S. S. (2014). Does value matters in playing online game? An empirical study among massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs). Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 252–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.002CrossRef

63.

Jin, W., Sun, Y., Wang, N., & Zhang, X. (2017). Why users purchase virtual products in MMORPG? An integrative perspective of social presence and user engagement. Internet Research, 27(2), 408–427. https://doi.org/10.1108/intr-04-2016-0091CrossRef

64.

Wu, S., & Hsu, C. (2018). Role of authenticity in massively multiplayer online role playing games (MMORPGs): Determinants of virtual item purchase intention. Journal of Business Research, 92, 242–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.07.035CrossRef

65.

Liu, H., Tan, K. H., & Pawar, K. S. (2022). Predicting viewer gifting behavior in sports live streaming platforms: The impact of viewer perception and satisfaction. Journal of Business Research, 144, 599–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.02.045CrossRef

66.

Zhang, H., Yang, Y., & Zhao, J. (2023). Does game-irrelevant chatting stimulate high-value gifting in live streaming? A session-level perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 138, 107467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107467CrossRef

67.

Phang, C. W., Kankanhalli, A., & Huang, L. (2014). Drivers of quantity and quality of participation in online policy deliberation forums. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31(3), 172–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2014.995549CrossRef

68.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal at-tachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497CrossRef

69.

Rogers, E. M. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. Simon and Schuster.

70.

Ryan, B., Gross, N.C., 1943. The diffusion of hybrid seed corn in two Iowa communities.Rural Sociol. 8, 15–24. https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10010565652

71.

Castilla, E. J. (2005). Social networks and employee performance in a call center. American Journal of Sociology, 110(5), 1243–1283. https://doi.org/10.1086/427319CrossRef

72.

Nitzan, I., & Libai, B. (2011). Social effects on customer retention. Journal of Marketing, 75(6), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.10.0209CrossRef

73.

Shriver, S. K., Nair, H. S., & Hofstetter, R. (2013). Social ties and user-generated content: Evidence from an online social network. Management Science, 59(6), 1425–1443. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1648CrossRef

74.

McAlexander, J. H., Schouten, J. W., & Koenig, H. F. (2002). Building brand community. Journal of Marketing, 66(1), 38–54. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.66.1.38.18451CrossRef

75.

Fedorikhin, A., & Patrick, V. M. (2010). Positive mood and resistance to temptation: The interfering influence of elevated arousal. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(4), 698–711. https://doi.org/10.1086/655665CrossRef

76.

Ku, G., Malhotra, D., & Murnighan, J. K. (2005). Towards a competitive arousal model of decision-making: A study of auction fever in live and Internet auctions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96(2), 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.10.001CrossRef

77.

Sjöblom, M., Törhönen, M., Hamari, J., et al. (2017). Content structure is king: An empirical study on gratifications, game genres and content type on Twitch[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 161–171.CrossRef

Titel: A study on the factors influencing the consumption of virtual gifts on a live streaming platform based on virtual badges and user interaction
verfasst von: Fudong Wang
Yuying Chu
Zhiwei Yan
Publikationsdatum: 16.05.2024
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Electronic Commerce Research
Print ISSN: 1389-5753
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-9362
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-024-09858-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"