Another but also across brands and within a brand.

However, firms are more interested in

strategies for retaining their existing customers and attracting potential customers to switch from
other competitors (Filieri et al., 2017). Liu et al. (2016) suggested that in the e-service context,
consumer satisfaction with a brand’s e-service can effectively prevent them from switching. In
addition, it has been shown that negative WOM communication will also lead to consumer
switching (Chang et al., 2015). Zolfagharian et al. (2017) pointed out that the quality of interaction
with the service staff has an inderect effect on the branch and brand switching via service quality
and satisfaction. Accordingly, when consumers feel unsatisfied with their existing samrtphones,
they well be more likely to change to a new model when it is launched or when the
telecommunication service contract expires. Thus, in this study, smartphone brand switching
behavior is defined as the degree to which consumers switch brands based on their perceptions of
the smartphones and sevice providers.

2.4 Switching cost

Switching cost is consumers’ estimation of he loss or sacrifice in terms of time, effort and money
related to shifting from one service provider to another (Lee and Huang, 2014). El-Manstrly
(2016) suggested that switching cost is related to specific costs, including transaction costs, learing
cost, search cost customer discount, habit, emotional cost, cognitive effort, and financial, Wu et al.
(2017) measured them formatively using search and evaluation cost, set up cost and continuity
cost; Ghazali et al. (2016) used a relective concept and measured costs according to the costs
related to learning, artificiality, uncertainty, search and evaluation, and brand relationship loss;
Chang et al. (2017) covered procedural and relational costs, and Lee and Huang (2016), and Sun et
al. (2017) adopted a first-order scale to measure switching costs with direct indicators.
In this study, the costs that accour due to smartphone brand switching behavior are considered
as a holistic concept used to evaluate any losses that may incur in the switching process. For
instance, consumers may need to put in some effort to learn about the new smartphone features
and interfaces, such as creating a new login account and getting used to it. They may also have to
give up the familiar feelings of visiting the existing brand retail store. This is one-time cost
concept, such as sunk cost (Kim and Lee, 2017). Therefore, a direct measurement scale may be
more suitable for study. Accordingly, this study followed the concept of Lee and Huang (2014) and
Sun et al. (2017), where switching costs are defined as the one-time socts that customers encounter
in the process of switching from one provider to another, including search cost, learning cost and
loss of special treatment benefits.

3. Development of hypotheses
3.1 The product consumption values and brand commitment (H1)
A smartphone’s functional value is determined by factors such as user-friendliness, reliability,
durability and price (Suki, 2016). Cater and Cater (2010) suggested that when consumers perceive
a product as having superior functional quality, it can be reasonably assumed that this perception
will induce a higher degree of commitment to the brand and implies that when a smartphone is
viewed as functional, consumers will be more likely to purchase the same brand when they need to
ritire the existing brand product. Eid ans satisfaction and facilitates repurchase (i.e. behavioral
commitment). When a product perfoms well and is a good value for the money , the re-
patrionization rate will be increased. Accordingly, it is posited here that functional value is
positively associated with customer brand commitment. That is perceived functional value of a
brand’s smartphone, such as quality, price, and appearance, may have effects on consumer
commitment to the smartphone brand. Therefore, it is proposed that:

H1a. Functional value has a positive effect on brand commitment.

The sense of pleasure and enjoyment is often used for measuring emotional value. Kim et al.
(2011) suggested that emotional values (such as having fun) related to the consumption of goods
and services lead to consumer repurchase intention. Repeated purchase intention can be predicted
by brand commitment (Shukla et al., 2016). Chaudhuri and Holbrook (2002) found that a close
consumer-brand relationship depends on the positive effects generated by the brand. Strong
effective responses are related to a high level of brand commitment. Thus, when consumers have
positive feelings toward an existing smartphone brand, such as pleasure and enjoyment, they tend
to have a greater commitment towards the brand. These positive feelings, such as satisfaction, can
also be aroused by the habitual use of a smartphone. In other words, because they are used to the
phone, they enjoy using it and are willing to continue using it (i.e. choose the same brand) (Ottar
Olsen et al., 2013). Khan and Mohsin (2017) concluded that when brand commitment is high,
emotional value has a significant positive relation with consumer choice behavior. Thus, it is
inferred in the current study that when a smartphone brand is perceived as having a high emotional
value, this will lead to a strong brand commitment and buying behavior toward the brand’s
products. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H1b. Emotional value has a positive effect on brand commitment.

Consumers who choose to purchase a particular brand’s smartphone not only expect to receive
social recognition but also to emulate their friends’ or relatives’ behavior. Thus, peer opinions are a
key factor in the decision-making process (Biswas and Roy, 2015). When consumers perceive the
social value (e.g. increase of social image) of a smartphone brand, they will have a positive
impression toward the brand and the product, which will influence their behavior (Gonçalves et
al., 2016). Píhlström and Brush (2008) pointed out that social >.‘ value has a positive effect on
brand commitment in the mobile phone industry. Branded smartphones, such as iPhones, have
been associated with wealth and luxury; therefore, they present a high social image to consumers
(Shaw et al., 2016). Consumers are keen to purchase the latest model even though the priœ is high,
which may be the result of their brand commitment Based on these observations, it is predicted
here that when customers can enhance their social image, obtain social support and gain higher
appraisals from members of their social group by owning a particular brand of smartphone, they
will be more likely to commit to that brand. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H1c. Social value has a positive effect on brand commitment.

Suki (2016) indicated that familiarity with a product brand, attention to new products and
enthusiasm for learning about new products and brands do influence consumer behavior.
Especially, when a new model of a branded smartphone is released, consumers are apt to learn the
product-related information concerning the new features, functions and user experiences with the
new model. This behavior is intended to satisfy a desire for knowledge regarding the product
attributes compatibility with needs and novelty (Biswas and Roy, 2015). It is, thus, inferred that
when consumers are continuously seeking new product-related information or new experiences
with a new smartphone model, they are more likely to be committed to a brand in order to find out
more about the brand’s new product features. For instance, iPhone users are more likely to
continue to purchase new models to experience the new phones’ thinner designs. Seeking novelty
also stems from a desire to know more. It generates epistemic values and has a positive
relationship with sustainable consumption behavior (Khan & Mohsin, 2017). Thus, since the
epistemic value has an effect on the purchase decision, it is possible to infer that epistemic value is
also related to brand commitment. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H1d. Epistemic value has a positive effect on brand commitment.

3.2 The retail services’ relational benefits and brand commitment (H2)
Relationship benefits allow firms to develop a long-term relationship with their customers (Chang
et aL, 2016; Cheng et al., 2013). Functional benefits play an important role in providing
convenience to customers, which can save them time and effort in searching for new product
information or in getting help with technical problems. Dimitriadis and Koritos (2014) indicated
that a retailer’s functional benefits have a direct impact on customer satisfaction with the
salesperson. Moreover, Hur et al. (2010) found that functional benefits have a positive effect on
customer commitment. When customers visit a smartphone brand retail store, they experience
interaction with and services from the staff. When the customers perceive that the staff can provide
them with useful advice and solutions for problem solving, and the store location is convenient,
they will be more likely to have a positive functional benefit evaluation of the brand. Therefore, it
is inferred that high convenience and efficiency of services lead to increased positive consumer
impressions of a brand retail store, which strengthens customer commitment toward the brand. In
addition, positive impressions will also result in recommending the brand to others. Thus, the
following hypothesis is posited:

H2a. Functional benefits have a positive effect on brand commitment.

Social benefits often involve the development of a mutual understanding between customers and
staff members. These benefits motivate the customers to maintain a relationship with a brand and
to remain committed to service providers (Yang et aL, 2017). According to Dimitriadis and Koritos
(2014), customer-employee rapport (i.e. social benefits) leads to customer commitment to service
providers. Dagger and O’Brien (2010) noted that social benefits can influenœ customer
satisfaction, trust, and commitment in service industries. In this study, the serviœ staff providing
services to customers are representatives of the firm. When the staff develop a social relationship
with customers, these customers will be more likely to revisit the store to make inquiries or look
for solutions. Under such circumstances, closer relationships between staff and consumers can be
developed. Such social relationships may enhanœ the consumers’ positive brand perceptions and
may ultimately increase the possibility of brand commitment Accordingly, it is inferred that social
benefits are induced by a positive impression of the service staff and consequently will enhance
customer brand commitment Thus, this following hypothesis is proposed:

H2b. Social benefits have a positive effect on brand commitment.

Confidence benefits stem from the service provider’s perceived reliability in regard to keeping its
promises (Ruiz-Molina et aL, 2017). Many studies have proven the relationship between
confidence benefits and customer commitment (e.g. Dimitriadis and Koritos, 2014; Yang et aL,
2017). In this study, confidence benefits are deemed important for smartphone customers because
the benefits are determined by the professionalism of the service staff who provide outstanding
service to consumers. Consumers will perceive higher confidence benefits when the service staff
are able to provide solutions for problems or can offer good suggestions for making a purchase
decision. A higher level of confidence in the customer-staff interaction will result in lower anxiety
concerning the services and more confidence in the service staffs ability to deliver services (Yang
et al., 2017). Thus, a higher level of confidence leads to a positive customer impression of the
professional services, and as a result, develops a continuous relationship (i.e. commitment) to the
brand. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H2c. Confidenœ benefits have a positive effect on brand commitment.

A high degree of special treatment benefits is associated with a high relationship benefit.
Dimitriadis and Koritos (2014) pointed out that special treatment from members of a service staff
(e.g. price cuts, faster serviœ or individualized additional services) results in long-lasting
relationships between the staff and customers. Prior studies have showr that special treatment
benefits have a positive relationship with commitment (Chang et al., 2015; Dagger et aL, 2011; Jin
et al., 2010). Because the employee—customer relationship is developed based on the frequency
and lengths of store visits, when consumers revisit the store more often, the employee—customer
relationship will be more positive (Chang et aL, 2016). This results in the staff and the customers
becoming closer as friends; thus, special treatment benefits will also be increased because it makes
sense that the staff will give priority to friends. Accordingly, it is inferred that smartphone
customers will continue to commit to the existing smartphone brand instead of switching to other
brands because they can obtain better service from the current brand retailer, such as better price
orindividualized special services. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H2d. Special treatment benefits have a positive effect on brand commitment.

3.3 Brand commitment and smartphone brand switching behauior (H3)
Um and Kim (2016) indicated that highly committed consumers are more likely to engage in the
biased processing of negative information about a brand; they will not be easily influenced by rival
brands. Thus, it is difficult for competitors to connect with them (Kuo and Hou, 2017; Um and
Kim, 2016). Shukla et al. (2016) indicated that a customer with a commitment towards a brand
will usually act as an advocate for the brand and is more likely to stay with the brand. That is,
when consumers are highly committed to a smartphone brand, they are less likely to accept
negative information about the brand in the diagnostic process (Urn and Kim, 2016). Thus, the
more committed the customers are, the lower their switching possibility will be (Sahay and
Sharma, 2010). The related hypothesis is, thus, proposed as follows:

H3. Brand commitment has a negative effect on smartphone brand switching behavior.

3.4 Moderating effect: switching cost (H4)

High switching costs hinder individual switching behavior. El-Manstrly (2016) pointed out that
switching costs can be thought of as barriers that hold customers in service relationships. Chang et
al. (2017) suggested that switching costs have a positive relationship with a variety of marketing
outcomes, such as switching barriers, customer loyalty and customer commitment, all of which
result in customer retention. In the switching behavior context, high switching costs, such as time
and effort, are consklered the mooring element in the pull-push-mooring model to prevent
switching behavior (Jung et aL, 2017). Different smartphone brands have different functions, and
their built-in apps interfaces can also be different. Therefore, consumers have to spend more time
and effort to learn and accommodate a new model more so than with an existing one, which will
hinder their switching to a new brand of smartphone. Based on the above discussion, it is inferred
that consumers with higher brand commitment will be expected to have higher familiarity with the
brand (Bui et al., 2015), which implies a higher switching cost. Under this circumstance, it is
predicted that the interaction effect between high brand commitment and high switching cost will
result in lower brand switching behavior as compared to when there is low brand commitment and
low switching cost because consumers who have low brand commitment and switching cost not
only put less effort in using all the functions of the existing brand, but also emotionally find it easy
to change to any other brand whenever they feel like it. Accordingly, the hypothesis around the
moderator effect is proposed as follows:

H4. Switching cost has negative moderating effects on the relationship between brand commitment
and smartphone brand switching behavior.

Based on the discussion above, Figure 1 illustrates the research framework of this study.

4. Research design and results

A quantitative research approach with an online questionnaire was adopted to conduct the study.
All construct scales were designed based on prior literature and definitions (see Table AI).
Consumers who owned at least one branded smartphone from Taiwan’s five most popular brands
were eligible to participate in the pilot test and the formal survey. According to eMarketer (2O16,
the top five smariphone brands in Taiwan market are Samsung (24.5 percent), ASUS 16.2 percent),
Apple (15.7 percent), HTC (15.0 percent) and Sony Mobile (7.7 percent). Participants weiv first
asked which brand of smartphone they use, how long they have used it, what their experiences
have been when making inquiries at the smartphone brand retail store, etc. There were 55 items in
the questionnaire, including experience items and demographic items. In total, 43 items were used
to measure the research constructs, and all were on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1
“strongly disagree” to 7 “strongly agree.” A pilot test with 133