Title: A study on gamification as a technique of customer engagement

Abstract: Time and again, gamification techniques have been used to provide customers with
discounts and several other offers. Whether it is in a shopping mall or in newspapers and
magazines or now even through mobile apps, these techniques tend to engage the customer
and give them a sense of accomplishment once they are able to complete the game. Several
other factors come into play while the customer is engrossed in the game. The research
intends to test two such factors through an experiment and try to determine the effect of such
techniques on customers willingness to buy the product and on the repurchase intention. The
research further tries to dig into the benefits one derives out of a game. These benefits may be
classified into three; utilitarian (regarding the use or utility of the game), hedonic (regarding
the enjoyment and excitement) and social (regarding the social recognition and influence).
The research, through Structure Equation Modelling (SEM), intends to find which of these
benefits contribute to increase or decrease in the customers willingness to buy the product.
The results show that gamification affects neither the customers willingness to buy not
his/her repurchase intention significantly. However, the results of SEM suggests that only the
social benefits (and not utilitarian or hedonic benefits) derived out of the game have a
significant positive effect on customers willingness to buy which in turn positively affect the
customers repurchase intention.

Analysis and Results

Analysis:
The following are the details of the data that was collected:
Total no. of responses
Demographics:
Male
Female
Average Age
No. of responses after
cleaning the data
Responses for gamification

90
66 (73.3%)
24 (26.7%)
23.53 years (Min: 21, Max:
30)
79 (39 played the game)
27

The following are the average value of responses recorded for the questions (1-least
likely/strongly disagree, 7-most likely/strongly agree)
Common Questions:
How likely are you going to buy this product?
Value for money of the product is an important factor in my decision.
Brand of the product is an important factor in my decision.
Aesthetics of the product is an important factor in my decision.
The frequent need of the product is an important factor in my
decision.
Features of the product is an important factor in my decision.
Discount provided on the product affects my willingness to buy.
Given the same scenario, how likely are you going to buy the product
again for self/someone else in future?
I am likely to buy this product in future based on the performance.
Specific Question (only for those who played the game):
I am likely to play the game because
It provides me with discount
Of the ease of use of the game
It does not require a lot of mental effort
It is clear and understandable
Enjoyment I get out of playing the game
Excitement I get out of playing the game
Of the playfulness of the game
It seems to be interesting
I feel good when I achieve something
My friends are also playing the game
I like competing with others

Comparison of Means: Independent Samples t-Test

3.76
5.76
5.54
4.95
5.74
5.84
5.39
4.48
5.25
3.85
3.87
3.46
3.92
4.18
4.28
4.31
4.38
4.05
3.87
3.97

Independent Samples t-Test was done to study whether the likeliness to buy and repurchase
intention differed significantly between those who played the game and those who did not.
Following are the results that were obtained.

Levenes Test (Sig. < 0.05) tells us whether the variances of both the groups can be assumed
to be equal or not. Here, as Levenes Test was not found to be significant, this implied that we
may assume the variances of both the groups to be equal.
Next, the t-test (Sig. < 0.01) checks the equality of means. Here we can see that the t-test
results are not significant implying that the means of the group are not significantly different.
This analysis shows that we were unable to reject the following hypothesis:
H01: Gamification does not affect willingness to buy
H02: Gamification does not affect the repurchase intention of the consumer
Next step was to conduct the Structural Equation Model analysis to find out the relation
between the constructs.

Structure Equation Model

Following is the representation of the relationships that we intended to test:

Provides Discount

Value for Money

Ease of Use
Low Mental Effort

Brand
Utilitarian Benefits
Willingness to Buy

Understandable

Aesthetics
Features

Enjoyment
Excitement

Discount
Hedonic Benefits

Playfulness
Frequent Need
Interesting
Repurchase Intention
Product Performance

Achievement
Friends Playing

Social Benefits

Competing Others

After doing the analysis using AMOS software, we got the following values:

As value of CMIN/DF is approximately 2, this is acceptable.

All the values observed here were less than acceptable limits (CFI, GFI, AGFI > 0.9 and
PGFI, PCFI > 0.7) so the model is not a good fit.

RMSEA value should be less than 0.1 to be acceptable, which is not the case, hence, the
model is not a good fit.

Except for Willingness to purchase and Repurchase Intention all other construct were
convergent valid. Discriminant validity between Willingness to purchase and Repurchase
Intention could not be established.

All construct, except Repurchase Intention were found to be relevant.

Following are the measurement and path models as per AMOS software:

Figure 1: Measurement Model

Figure 2: Path Model

The following are the results obtained from the path model:

This analysis shows that we were unable to establish following relationships:

H03: Utilitarian Benefits + Willingness to buy
H04: Hedonic Benefits + Willingness to buy
But we were able to establish the following relationships:
H05: Social Benefits + Willingness to buy (with 94% confidence)
H06: Willingness to buy + Repurchase intention (with 95% confidence)