How Do Firms Manage Their Long-term Customer Relationship? The Role of Customer Experience and Constructive Mechanism on Customer Commitment from Utilitarian and Hedonic Perspectives

Abstract

Customer commitment has garnered the attention of industries and academics. Prior studies indicated that utilitarian and hedonic values are strongly connected to customer experience; they can offer a novel comprehension of how customer commitment is established. However, few studies unveiled such constructive mechanisms, and the scarcity of such studies has created a theoretical gap. Considering the research gap, this study explores a constructive mechanism, proposing a theoretical model from the utilitarian and hedonic values aspects. After collecting responses to 405 questionnaires from the majority of target customers and adopting several statistical methods to examine the theoretical model, this study reveals the concrete and constructive mechanism of customer experience on customer commitment from the utilitarian and hedonic value perspectives. The findings show that customer commitment is constructed from utilitarian and hedonic perspectives, mediated by customer experience. This study contributes to the customer relationship management research wherein we can better understand the roles played by customer experience in this constructive mechanism, and comprehend the function of utilitarian and hedonic values. Several practical implications are proposed. However, the scarcity of further studies on the distinction between utilitarian and hedonic aspects and a detailed discussion on customer commitment are limitations of this study, creating a new research gap and necessitating future studies to fill this gap.

Plain Language Summary

Building customer commitment : How customer experiences influence commitment utilitrianly and hedonically

Keywords

customer experience customer commitment utilitarian value hedonic value

Introduction

The rapidly changing market has fostered customer instability. A diverse range of products and brands provides customers an opportunity to choose, and continually change their minds. This change leads to a short-term relationship between customers and firms, impeding improvements in firm performance. Thus, sustaining a long-term relationship challenges the cognition of customer relationship marketing of a firm. Prior studies show that customer commitment is central to customer relationship management, providing an understanding of a firm’s maintenance of its long-term customer relationship (Lin & Chou, 2022; Patrucco et al., 2024; Roy et al., 2022). Consistent with these long-term and stable features of customer commitment, customer commitment is key to sustaining firms’ positions in this varied market (Khan et al., 2020).

In addition, customer relationship management requires advanced service marketing strategies. Many studies have revealed that customer experience is at the core of service marketing (Becker & Jaakkola, 2020; Siebert et al., 2020). Based on previous studies, if firms aim to enhance their quality of service, attract more customers, and sustain a stable long-term relationship with their customers, customer experience should not be ignored (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Based on this analysis, although numerous studies have discussed customer commitment from different perspectives, the scarcity of research on the constructive mechanism of customer commitment from the customer experience perspective limits the improvement of customer relationship management, especially hindering the construction of long-term customer relationships.

To address this research issue, we analyze the customer experience features and unveil the constructive mechanism of customer commitment. According to Gahler et al. (2023), customer experience incorporates functional and affective aspects. Moreover, based on product/brand values from Yuan et al. (2022), utilitarian and hedonic values fundamentally affect customer cognition and affection (Yuan et al., 2022). Thus, customer cognition and affection can represent and be associated with utilitarian and hedonic frameworks, respectively (Ham et al., 2019; Shahid Sameeni et al., 2022). In summary, introducing a utilitarian and hedonic framework is necessary and offers an appropriate viewpoint to explore the customer experience and commitment mechanisms.

Thus, a research gap is apparent. Given that service marketing impacts long-term customer relationship management, the function of customer experience in establishing customer commitment requires further discussion from utilitarian and hedonic perspectives (Khan et al., 2020; Waqas et al., 2021; Witell et al., 2020). Hence, to fill this theoretical gap, the following research question is proposed:

RQ: How do firms construct and maintain customer commitment through customer experience from utilitarian and hedonic perspectives?

Specifically, several steps are undertaken. First, a theoretical model is proposed after a systematic review. Second, this study employs a questionnaire survey to examine the theoretical model. Finally, in the data-processing stage, several statistical methods are adopted to test the theoretical model. Moreover, this study makes several theoretical contributions to customer experience and commitment. First, by extending the construction mechanism of customer commitment, we can determine how the utilitarian and hedonic customer commitment constructs make the first contribution. Second, this study clarifies the role of customer experience. Third, we identify the functions of utilitarian and hedonic values in this constructive mechanism. In addition, several practical implications are provided for customer relationship management and service marketing.

Theoretical Background and Research Model

Customer Long-Term Relationship Management and Customer Commitment

Establishing a long-term and stable customer relationship is a persistent goal of every firm. Customer commitment is regarded as a significant variable consistently in customer relationship management studies. Therefore, the primary challenge lies in building and maintaining customer commitment effectively, a concept initially explored in organizational studies. According to Šerić et al. (2020), commitment shapes the employees’ psychological attachment, reflecting the degree to which employees internalize or adopt the organizations’ beliefs and rewards. Thus, it can be inferred that customer commitment reflects a certain attachment between customers and firms. This attachment represents a relationship between customers and firms, encompassing long-term and stable features. Regarding the definition of customer commitment, it refers to customers’ willingness to maintain a long-term relationship with a firm (Lariviere et al., 2014; Patrucco et al., 2024; Roy et al., 2022). Based on this definition, customer commitment represents a long-term relationship between customers and firms. Therefore, to manage the relationship with customers, customer commitment cannot be ignored.

Previous studies on customer commitment emphasize its function and impact. For example, in their studies, Iglesias et al. (2019) support that customer commitment is the driver of customer loyalty (Iglesias et al., 2019). Further, Ali et al.’s (2022) studies suggested that customers would prefer positive word-of-mouth if they establish a commitment to firms. However, previous studies have paid more attention to the mediating function played by customer commitment rather than exploring how to build customer commitment (Khan et al., 2020; Šerić et al., 2020). This hinders understanding of customer long-term relationship management, creating a research gap on customer commitment.

Customer Experience Features and Its Association With Utilitarian and Hedonic Aspects

Customer experience forms cognitively and behaviorally (Akoglu & Özbek, 2022; Becker & Jaakkola, 2020). According to the customer experience dimension, it is a multidimensional construct that comprises behavioral and spiritual natures (H. Kim & So, 2022; C. K. H. Lee, 2022; Witell et al., 2020). Witell et al. (2020) suggested that, although customer experience plays a different role in B2B markets, it is essential to consider that customer experience is a multidimensional construct concentrating on sensory, affective, and behavioral responses. Siebert et al. (2020) view customer experience as a journey in which customers are involved. Generally, the sensory, affective, behavioral, and intelligent aspects are included in customer experience (Brakus et al., 2009).

Based on this dimension, customer experience encompasses a customer’s spiritual and behavioral state of the overall reaction to the stimuli provided by brands or products (Mano & Oliver, 1993). Becker and Jaakkola reconciled the definition of customer experience and its research extension (Becker & Jaakkola, 2020), illustrating that customer experience provides cognitive and affective stimuli. The cognitive and affective features of customer experience offer opportunities to detect its drivers from behavioral and psychological perspectives. These could be linked to the utilitarian and hedonic value of the product or brand.

Previous scholars have proposed that to understand the value of brands or products, utilitarian and hedonic values may offer an appropriate explanation (Ham et al., 2019; C.-H. Lee & Wu, 2017; Voss et al., 2003). The research on utilitarian and hedonic values can be traced back to the study by Holbrook & Hirschman (1982). These authors find that products can provide both utility and enjoyment to customers. Utilitarian products aim to provide functional value to customers, while hedonic products offer enjoyment and self-fulfilling value. Specifically, utilitarian value connects function to brands or products, and hedonic value provides affection linkage.

Based on these definitions, these two fold values, linking closely to the customer’s decision and feeling, impact customer cognition and affection. This assertion is supported by numerous studies conducted based on these principles. This study explores the impact of these two fold values. Rathee et al. (2022) explained the impact on consumers by the value of products/brands (Rathee et al., 2022). They argued that product type significantly influenced customers’ attitudes, and hedonic value triggers customers’ forgiveness. According to Kumagai and Nagasawa (2022), hedonic values always link with customers’ affection (Kumagai & Nagasawa, 2022). Regarding AI research, Yuan et al. (2022) found that customers accept AI facilitation in shopping if they have perceived utilitarian and hedonic values of AI (Yuan et al., 2022). Accordingly, these two values inevitably affect customer behavior and psychology. Thus, these two fold values strongly connect with customer cognition and affection. Consequently, they can influence customer behavior and psychology, providing us with an entry point to explore ways to improve customer experience.

Utilitarian and Hedonic Values Enrich Customer Experience

Based on the above analysis, if a firm aims to improve its customer experience, it must inevitably focus on utilitarian and hedonic values (Park & Ha, 2016; Rathee et al., 2022). To understand how these values improve customer experience, discussing how they behave and exert their effects is necessary. Therefore, some concepts may represent these two values per prior studies. On the one hand, for utilitarian value, perceived quality may offer an appropriate viewpoint. Perceived quality, aiming to describe product quality as perceived by customers, is a suitable representation of customer perception of a brand or product’s function (Park & Kim, 2022). Thus, perceived quality is always linked to the utility of brands or products. That is, perceived quality is an appropriate concept to represent utilitarian value (Akoglu & Özbek, 2022; Y. Kim et al., 2021; Sullivan & Kim, 2018). On the other hand, brand image is defined as helpful in describing the hedonic value of a brand or product. Brand image, as demonstrated by many studies, is a representation of the overall perception of information or brands’ knowledge, which has a close relationship with the beliefs or attitudes of customers (Ashraf et al., 2019; Park & Kim, 2022). From this perspective, brand image reflects a customer’s spiritual or psychological perception of brands.

Thus, brand image is sensory and affective. It can be concluded that brand image influences a customer’s spiritual world more than other factors. According to prior studies, the linkage of brand image to the hedonic value of brands or products has been demonstrated in contrast to perceived quality (Boukis, 2020; Y. Kim et al., 2021; Song et al., 2019). Most importantly, adopting a brand image to represent hedonic value is appropriate in this study. The perceived quality and brand image are significant components of brand equity, playing essential roles in marketing, especially in customer experience (Siebert et al., 2020; Witell et al., 2020).

In summary, to improve customer experience, utilitarian and hedonic values can be considered for providing a suitable starting point for evaluating the journey of customer experience. Hence, Hypotheses 1and its sub-hypotheses are proposed as follows.

H1. Utilitarian and hedonic value enrichment can help improve customer experience.

H1a. Perceived quality influences sensory, affective, behavioral, and intelligent experiences positively from the utilitarian viewpoint.

H1b. Brand image influences sensory, affective, behavioral, and intelligent experiences positively from the hedonic viewpoint.

The Constructive Mechanism of Customer Commitment by Customer Experience Utilitarianly and Hedonically

According to prior studies and the theoretical input of customer experience, it can be concluded that customer experience is a multidimensional construct focusing on customers’ sensory, affective, behavioral, and intelligent experiences(Brakus et al., 2009; Schmitt, 2009). Based on the definition of customer experience, it is evident that customer attachment depends critically on how firms manage customer experience. Srivastava and Kaul (2016) identified the positive effect of customer experience on customer loyalty (Srivastava & Kaul, 2016). According to Anshu et al. (2022), customer experience influences purchase intention and repurchase behavior of customers (Anshu et al., 2022). Prior studies have detected the impact of customer experience; however, they have neglected its utilitarian and hedonic features.

Regarding customer commitment, research on how customer experience affects customer commitment has garnered the attention of marketing scholars; nonetheless, studies that discuss this mechanism specifically are still lacking. That is, despite the significance of customer commitment, few studies link customer experience to customer commitment (Hoyer et al., 2022; Lin & Chou, 2022; Witell et al., 2020). Therefore, an insightful and comprehensive viewpoint is required to understand the effect of customer experience on the relationship with customers.

In summary, although scholars have explored the relationship between customer experience and customer behavior and attitude, previous studies may have ignored the function of customer experience features and their roles in the constructive mechanism of customer commitment. This study focuses on understanding how customer experience affects customer commitment utilitarianly and hedonically. Thus, Hypothesis 2 is proposed as follows.

H2. Customer experience facilitates establishing customer commitment utilitarianly and hedonically.

The Mediation Effect

To explore the overall constructive mechanism of customer commitment, we must identify the mediation effect. As shown in the above analysis of the dual value of brands or products, customer experience and commitment can provide insights for this study (Gahler et al., 2023; Patrucco et al., 2024). First, dual values of brands and products are overlooked since prior studies have demonstrated that these values perform fundamental functions in brands or products. Thus, utilitarian and hedonic values provide critical viewpoints to determining how to approach customer commitment. Second, a few recent studies have discussed how customer experience influences customer commitment from several viewpoints, but lack consideration of utilitarian and hedonic value aspects. Therefore, a research gap exists that should be addressed. Finally, it is necessary to determine whether the customer experience exerts a mediating effect on this mechanism in the context of the experience era. This study primarily focuses on the overall constructive mechanism generated collectively by utilitarian and hedonic values, customer experience and customer commitment. Furthermore, this meditation effect can help understand the entire mechanism by which customer commitment is established through customer experience utilitarianly and hedonically (Merlo et al., 2024; Verhoef et al., 2009).

More specifically, perceived quality, representing the utilitarian value in this study, facilitates an improved customer experience (Akoglu & Özbek, 2022). Moreover, the brand image helps to improve the customer experience from an aspect of hedonic value (Park & Kim, 2022). Therefore, customer experience can be enriched from utilitarian and hedonic value aspects. By analyzing the effect of customer experience on customer commitment, it can be concluded that customer experience may mediate the mechanism of establishing customer commitment from both utilitarian and hedonic points of view. Based on this deduction, Hypotheses 3 and its sub-hypotheses are proposed in this study. Their specific contents are organized as follows.

H3. Customer experience mediates the constructive mechanism of customer commitment utilitarianly and hedonically.

H3a. Customer experience mediates the relationship between perceived quality and customer commitment.

H3b. Customer experience mediates the relationship between brand image and customer commitment.

Research Model

Aligned with the above analysis, a theoretical model has been constructed, as shown in Figure 1. It can be seen that customer commitment can be approached via perceived quality and brand image through customer experience via aspects of utilitarian and hedonic value.

Figure 1.

Theoretical research model.

Several aspects of this theoretical model are explained: First, perceived quality influences customer experience from the utilitarian value aspect, while brand image influences it from the hedonic aspect. These two influences collectively aim to facilitate improving customers’ sensory, affective, behavioral, and intelligent experiences. Next, customer experience positively influences customer commitment. Sensory, affective, behavioral, and intelligent experience help to establish customer commitment. Finally, customer experience mediates the relationship between perceived quality, brand image, and customer commitment.

Research Method

To test the validity of this theoretical model, we utilized a questionnaire survey method. Questionnaires were distributed via different routes, including face-to-face and online surveys. Social media platforms were our main route of dissemination during the survey procedure, wherein we distributed the questionnaire and asked participants for their responses. Finally, 405 questionnaires were collected to test the research model (Das et al., 2016; Kadam & Bhalerao, 2010).

Questionnaire Design

The questionnaires were organized according to several variables in the research model. First, to ensure the survey context was appropriate, all participants were asked, “Which brands or products do you prefer most?” Then, participants were asked to answer the remaining questions in accordance with their answers to the first question.

The questionnaire consisted of four parts. The first part asked questions regarding the brands or products central to the customers’ answers. Subsequently, the second part measured the perceived quality and brand image based on the answers to the first question. The next section measured customer experience and commitment. At the end of the questionnaire, several questions were asked to collect demographic data of the participants as control variables. All measurement items of variables adopted a 5-point Likert scale for response (from “1—strongly disagree” to “5—strongly agree”).

Measurement of Variables

In this study, all the adopted items were tested for fitness. All items were ensured to fit this study owing to mature statistical methods. According to numerous prior research inputs, it is common to employ confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Cronbach’s α to test the validity and reliability of measurements. Moreover, to ensure the validity and reliability of the items, all the measurements of variables were derived from publications in top journals in related academic fields. The details of the questionnaire are as follows:

First, the questions on perceived quality and brand image adopted in our study were based on several requirements. After searching numerous related publications, this study referred to the perceived quality items offered by Snoj et al. (2004) and Yoo and Donthu (2001). A reliability analysis was used as this scale comprised two items. The result shows that the reliability of perceived quality is fit for this study ( $Cronbach' s α = 0.898$ ). For brand image, this study refers to the research of Keller, Yoo, and Donthu, as their research on brand image is classical and significant (Keller, 1993; Yoo & Donthu, 2001). The brand image was measured using six items. Moreover, after statistical analysis, the items included for brand image showed suitable validity $(\frac{χ^{2}}{df} = 2.823, P < 0.001; RMR = 0.010; TLI = 0.982; GFI = 0.984; CFI = 0.992; RMSEA = 0.067)$ and reliability ( $Cronbach' s α = 0.907$ ).

Many studies have provided diverse measurements for shifting attention to customer experience. This study reviewed several important research articles having a high degree of impact on customer experience. Finally, we used a customer experience scale following Brakus et al. (2009) and Schmitt (2009). In this study, the customer experience is a multidimensional concept with four dimensions. Sensory, affective, behavioral, and intelligence experiences were measured using three, two, two, and two items, respectively. To confirm that these items were suitable for this study, CFA and reliability analysis were both utilized. The results showed that this measurement has appropriate validity $(\frac{χ^{2}}{df} = 1.855, P < 0.001; RMR = 0.019; TLI = 0.982; GFI = 0.979; CFI = 0.990; RMSEA = 0.046)$ and reliability ( $Cronbach' s α = 0.833$ ).

Finally, in terms of customer commitment, this study adopted the items provided by Agyeiwaah et al. (2022) and Allen and Meyer (1990). It has been widely recognized that customer commitment is a psychological concept that can be traced back to research on organizational behavior; therefore, the measurement of customer commitment refers to research in both organizational and marketing scenarios. In this study, customer commitment was taken to be a single-dimensional concept measured by 11 items to highlight the focus of this study comprehensively. To ensure that the measurement of this variable was suitable for this study, validity, and reliability analyses were performed simultaneously. The results showed that it had suitable validity ( $\frac{χ^{2}}{d f} = 2.897, P < 0.001; R M R = 0.056; T L I = 0.959; G F I = 0.956 C F I = 0.973; R M S E A = 0.069$ ) and reliability ( $Cronbach' s α = 0.9$ ).

Furthermore, according to prior research that used questionnaire surveys, the main factors influencing consumer behavior were the basic social and statistical characteristics of the general population and society. Thus, this study adopted gender, age, education, occupation, and salary (monthly) as controls.

Survey Procedure

In the early stages of a survey, the explicit preparation of questionnaires must be considered. According to prior research, relying on surveys validity and reliability must be considered because they impact the study results. Thus, several approaches were adopted to ensure the validity and reliability of this study.

First, since this study aimed to explain customer commitment from the customer experience perspective, we adopted a sample of common customers in the survey process. The data were collected in China over several months. There were two waves of data collection. The first wave needed customers to fill in the instruments of perceived quality, brand image, and customer experience. The second wave required customers to fill in the instrument for customer commitment. An online survey was administered. The questionnaires were distributed in two ways. First, it was distributed on social media. Second, the research team employed third-party institutions to facilitate data collection. In total, 405 questionnaires were collected.

Second, as this study focused on customer attitudes and behaviors, the sample covered a large portion of the main consumer force. Table 1 presents the characteristics of the sample, indicating that the study has effectively covered a substantial part of the main consumer demographic.

Table 1.

Social Descriptive Statistics Characteristics of the Sample.

Category	Characteristics	N	%
Gender	Male	147	36.3
Gender	Female	259	63.7
Age	Under 18	2	0.5
	18–25	182	44.9
	26–30	51	12.6
	31–40	79	19.5
	41–50	62	15.3
	51–60	26	6.4
	Above 60	3	0.7
Education	High school or lower	55	13.6
	Junior college	137	33.8
	Bachelor’s degree	174	43
	Master’s degree or higher	39	9.6
Occupation	Government agency or public institution	9	2.2
	Enterprise employee	166	41
	Individual industrial and commercial households	14	3.5
	Students	142	35.1
	Other	74	18.3
Salary (monthly)	Under 1,000 CNY	83	20.5
	1,000 CNY−3,000 CNY	64	15.8
	3,000 CNY−5,000 CNY	66	16.3
	5,000 CNY−8,000 CNY	65	16
	Above 8,000 CNY	127	31.4

Note: N = 405; This study will assign a value to the control variable which has listed below. Gender: 1 = male; 0 = female. Age: 1 = under 18; 2 = 18~25; 3 = 26~30; 4 = 31~40; 5 = 41~50; 6 = 51~60; 7 = above 60. Education: 1 = high school or lower; 2 = junior college; 3 = bachelor’s degree; 4 = master’s degree or higher. Occupation: 1 = government agency or public institution; 2 = enterprise employee; 3 = individual industrial and commercial households; 4 = students; 5 = other. Salary (monthly): 1 = under 1,000 CNY; 2 = 1,000 CNY−3,000 CNY; 3 = 3,000 CNY−5,000 CNY; 4 = 5,000 CNY−8,000 CNY; 5 = above 8,000 CNY.

Third, adopting instruments leads to the question of whether a cultural context gap exists. Specifically, as all the questionnaires in this study were published in a reputed English journal, considering their cultural appropriateness was necessary. As a result, we decided to translate the questionnaires into Chinese and conduct a pretest. We gathered 107 questionnaires to test the fitness by using exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Based on the EFA results, we revised all questionnaires. Second, during the large-scale collection of questionnaires, we ensured that the participants were conscientious in completing the survey. First, we employed reverse- and same-direction items in the questionnaire. After the survey, these items provided the criteria for identifying those that were invalid. Next, we accommodated the time required to complete the questionnaires, regardless of face-to-face or online surveys. Questionnaires with short answer times were excluded ( $t < 240 s$ ). Finally, statistical methods were used to confirm the validity and reliability of the survey. The EFA, CFA, and reliability analyses were performed.

A total of 405 valid questionnaires were gathered to test the theoretical model after the above approaches were adopted. In the next section, we present the results of the data pretest based on these questionnaires.

Data Pre-Test

Psychometric Properties of the Survey

To ensure the validity and reliability of the survey procedure, it was necessary to identify samples from diverse aspects. At this stage, data processing confirmed that the sample met the general requirements of the survey. The details of the instrument were offered in Appendix 1.

First, it was necessary to determine the psychometric properties of the total sample. Table 1 presents the study results.

From Table 1, it can be concluded that the samples’ psychometric properties met the criteria for this study. First, in the large-scale survey, female respondents were more than male respondents ( $N_{female} = 259, M_{sex} = 0.454, S D_{sex} = . 0.208$ ). More females than males participated in this study. However, the difference between the two was still within an acceptable range. Regarding age, people aged 18 to 25 accounted for 44.9% of the total sample. This index shows that this study detected the current customer subjects ( $M_{age} = 3.26, S D_{age} = 1.908$ ). People with a bachelor’s degree accounted for 43% of the total sample ( $M_{edu} = 2.49, S D_{edu} = 0.716$ ). Regarding occupation, people from enterprises comprised 41% of the sample ( $M_{occupation} = 3.26, S D_{occupation} = 1.515$ ). Lastly, people whose salary (monthly) was above 8,000 CNY represented the majority, accounting for 31.4% of the total sample ( $M_{salary} = 3.22, S D_{salary} = 2.35$ ).

To check whether the data were affected by common method bias (CMB), we performed Harman’s single-factor test to identify sample data. In this study, CMB was controlled by the abovementioned statistical control, including procedural control of the survey. The analytical results illustrate that the CMB of this survey was within an acceptable range ( $Var %_{component 1} = 35.026, Cultimative %_{component 1} = 35.026$ ).

Descriptive Analysis and Multicollinearity Test

First, we identify the descriptive characteristics and validity of the data. The results are displayed in Table 2, which shows that the collected data ensured the validity of the theoretical model proposed in this study.

Table 2.

Descriptive Statistics, Convergent and Discriminant Validity.

Variables	Mean	SD	A.V.E	C.R.	1	2	3	4
Customer experience (1)	4.13	0.71	0.70	0.88	(0.84)
Customer commitment (2)	3.16	0.76	0.68	0.86	0.413**	(0.82)
Brand image (3)	4.04	0.66	0.69	0.93	0.641**	0.542**	(0.84)
Perceived quality (4)	3.98	0.71	0.91	0.95	0.510**	0.430**	0.616**	(0.95)

Note: N = 405; SD represents standard deviation; A.V.E. and C.R. provide evidence of validity of this model following testing; The diagonal value is the square root of A.V.E.

p < .01.

The results in Table 2 show the distribution of the variables and the relationships between them. The mean and standard deviations (SDs) show that all customers have a relatively positive customer experience and commitment to their chosen brand. Additionally, the variables are positively related according to the two-tailed test results. In addition, A.V.E. and C.R. provide evidences of the discriminant validity of this model. According to these results, the variables possessed discriminant validity ( $AVE > 0.5$ ; Chung et al., 2023; Wakita et al., 2012). Moreover, in preparation for the regression analysis, it is necessary to test the collinearity of all variables. Consequently, the VIF of all variables was calculated and proven to be less than 10 ( $VI F_{\max} = 2.509 < 10$ ). This result shows that the theoretical model proposed in this study can be examined using regression analysis.

Result

To examine the theoretical model proposed in this study, hierarchical regression analysis was used to explore the relationships between the variables. According to previous empirical studies, hierarchical regression has always been used to test hypotheses (Jia et al., 2024; Xu et al., 2022). In addition, several variables were used as controls in the regression analysis. The controls mainly include psychometric properties. The details and measurements are provided in the section below Table 1. Figure 2 presents the overall regression results. We also examined the overall model fitness, and the results show that the overall model had appropriate fitness ( $CMIN / DF = 2.606; RMR = 0.046; GFI = 0.889; TLI = 0.917; CFI = 0.933; RMSEA = 0.063$ ; Sarstedt et al., 2023).

Figure 2.

Results of hierarchy regression.

Improving Customer Experience From the Utilitarian and Hedonic Value Aspects

The improvement mechanism of the customer experience from the utilitarian and hedonic aspects was examined based on the regression results. The detailed results are presented in Table 3. This study constructed a multivariable regression to detect the overall impact of utilitarian and hedonic values on customer experience. Hence, the impacts of perceived quality and brand image were combined for the analysis. Undoubtedly, this study identified a strong positive impact of perceived quality and brand image on customer experience. More specifically, perceived quality positively influences the psychological ( $β_{PQs} = 0.186, P < 0.001$ ) and behavioral aspects ( $β_{PQb} = 0.193, P < 0.001$ ). However, perceived quality does not affect affective and intelligence experiences, as their $β$ values are not significant. Most importantly, H1a was partly supported and customer experience could be improved through utilitarian value.

Table 3.

The Regression Results of Customer Experience Improvement From Aspects of Utilitarian and Hedonic Value.

Variables	Outcome variable: Sensory experience		Outcome variable: Affective experience		Outcome variable: Behavioral experience		Outcome variable: Intelligent experience
Variables	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5	Model 6	Model 7	Model 8
(Constant)	3.914***	1.185***	3.402***	0.554	3.663***	1.292***	3.316***	2.17
Controls
Gender	0.071	0.028	0.075	0.029	0.177	0.14	0.087	0.069
Age	0.019	−0.026	0.041	−0.003	0.122**	0.083	0.074	0.055
Education	−0.028	−0.044	−0.019	−0.034	−0.01	−0.024	0.028	0.021
Occupation	0.002	0.013	0.044	0.058	−0.005	0.004	−0.007	−0.003
Salary(monthly)	0.062	0.022	0.095*	0.054	−0.035	−0.068	−0.066	−0.082
Independent variable
Utilitarian value: perceived quality		0.186***		0.082		0.193**		0.097
Hedonic value: brand image		0.563***		0.694***		0.46***		0.219**
$R^{2}$	0.033	0.436	0.06	0.44	0.058	0.326	0.1	0.056
$Δ R^{2}$	0.021	0.426	0.048	0.43	0.047	0.314	−.003	0.039
F	2.703	43.86	5.133	44.538	4.954	27.377	0.786	2.474

Note. N = 405. Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported in the table.

***p < .001. **p < .01. *p < .05.

Consistent with the results in Table 3, it can also be observed that H1b and its sub-hypotheses have been completely supported. The regression results show that customer experience can also be enriched by brand image, that is, hedonic value. Specifically, sensory experience( $β_{BIs} = 0.563, P < 0.001$ ), affective experience ( $β_{BIa} = 0.694, P < 0.001$ ), behavioral experience ( $β_{BIb} = 0.46, P < 0.001$ ), and intelligent experience ( $β_{BIi} = 0.219, P < 0.001$ ) can all be positively influenced by the hedonic value of brands or products.

Establishing Customer Commitment Through Customer Experience

Although some studies have detected a relationship between customer experience and commitment, we explored this further in this study. To evaluate how customer commitment is formed from the perspective of utilitarian and hedonic values, considering the critical relationship between customer experience and customer commitment is necessary. Table 4 presents the regression results for this relationship. Customer experience had a significant positive effect on customer commitment. In particular, sensory experience ( $β_{sensory} = 0.392, P < 0.001$ ), affective experience ( $β_{affection} = 0.422, P < 0.001$ ), behavioral experience ( $β_{behavior} = 0.482, P < 0.001$ ), and intelligent experience ( $β_{intelligence} = 0.169, P < 0.001$ ), all display a strong impact on customer commitment. Based on this analysis of the coefficients, H2 is supported.

Table 4.

The Regression Results of Establishment of Customer Commitment.

Variables	Outcome variable: customer commitment
Variables	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5
(Constant)	2.968***	1.435***	1.533	1.201***	2.407***
Controls
Gender	0.094	0.067	0.063	0.009	0.08
Age	0.129**	0.122***	0.112**	0.07	0.117**
Education	−0.127**	−0.116**	−0.119**	−0.123**	−0.132**
Occupation	−0.004	−0.005	−0.023	−0.002	−0.003
Salary(monthly)	0.016	−0.008	−0.024	0.033	0.027
Independent variable
Sensory experience		0.392***
Affective experience			0.422***
Behavioral experience				0.482***
Intelligent experience					0.169***
$R^{2}$	0.111	0.243	0.292	0.332	0.15
$Δ R^{2}$	0.1	0.232	0.281	0.322	0.137
F	9.942	21.298	27.321	32.91	11.679

Note. N = 405. Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported in the table.

***

p < .001. **p < .01.

The Mediation Effect

Following Preacher and Hayes (2004), this study relied on the bootstrap process to examine the mediating role of customer experience (Preacher & Hayes, 2004). The bootstrapping results are presented in Table 5.

Table 5.

The Mediation Effect of Customer Experience Based on Bootstrap.

Independent variable	Mediator	Dependent variable	Mediation category	CI (95%)	Effect	T	S.E
Utilitarian value: perceived quality	Customer experience	Customer commitment	Direct	[0.0924,0.2950]	0.1937	3.76	0.05
Utilitarian value: perceived quality			Indirect	[0.1784, 0.3353]	0.2516
Hedonic value: brand image			Direct	[0.2257, 0.4737]	0.3497	5.54	0.06
Hedonic value: brand image			Indirect	[0.1654, 0.3551]	0.257

Note. N = 405; CI (95%) represents confidence interval at 95% level.

The data presented in Table 5 indicate that customer experience functions as a mediator in the establishment mechanism of customer commitment from the utilitarian and hedonic aspects. In other words, customer experience mediates the relationship between perceived quality and customer commitment $(CI {(95 %)}_{direct} = [0.0924, 0.2950]; CI {(95 %)}_{indirect} = [0.1784, 0.3353]$ ). Customer experience acts as a mediator in how brand image influences the mechanism of customer commitment $(CI {(95 %)}_{direct} = [0.2257, 0.4737]; CI {(95 %)}_{indirect} = [0.1654, 0.3551]$ ). This finding indicates full mediation. Thus, the results highlight the importance of customer experience in establishing the mechanism of customer commitment. Hence, H3 and its sub-hypotheses are supported by the data collected.

General Discussion

This study examined the established mechanism of customer commitment from the perspective of utilitarian and hedonic customer experiences. At the beginning, we posed the main question of how customer commitment is formed. After a systematic literature review, a research gap was identified, and we developed a theoretical model. If a firm aims to build or maintain customer commitment, the dual values of brands or products and customer experience should not be overlooked. Consistent with these results, this study provides several theoretical contributions and practical implications.

Theoretical Contribution

First, this study contributes to research on customer commitment. Research on customer commitment is crucial in long-term customer relationship management studies and reflects customers’ stable psychological and behavioral states (Roy et al., 2022; Steinhoff et al., 2019; Youn & Jin, 2021). Prior studies lack emphasis on its psychological and behavioral states, and few studies have explored how these two features work in long-term customer relationship management (Agyeiwaah et al., 2022; Patrucco et al., 2024). Moreover, customer commitment shows features of affection concerning customer psychology and cognition in terms of customer behavior (Iglesias et al., 2019; Lin & Chou, 2022). With these characteristics of customer commitment, few studies have explored the impact of utilitarian and hedonic values on customer commitment. This study fills the research gap. The results of this study indicate that when accessing customer commitment by improving customer experience from the utilitarian and hedonic value viewpoints, it extends the approaches to customer commitment establishment associated with features of customer commitment. Overall, the findings of this study contribute to the research on establishing customer commitment by considering its features for long-term customer relationship management.

Second, several contributions have been made to research on customer experience. Since establishing customer commitment should be based on its features, it is necessary to examine the mechanism. Previous studies on customer commitment lack a relevant link to unveil such a construct provided by this study (Khan et al., 2020). Specifically, the constructive mechanism of customer commitment demonstrates the approaches to customer commitment and a fuller comprehension of the customer experience role. In the theoretical model proposed in this study, customer experience acts as a mediator, showing the channels through which customer commitment is built. Regarding data processing, several hypotheses were partly confirmed, revealing that the function exerts a weaker impact than affection on improving customer experience. In prior research, customer experience is a hybrid concept, described as a “multi-functional concept, mixed up with cognition, affection and behavior” (Brakus et al., 2009; Schmitt, 2009). Previous studies stated that customer experience can be easily influenced both cognitively and affectively (Gahler et al., 2023). However, the results of this study show that customer experience could be more easily influenced by affection rather than cognition because the utilitarian value cannot provide a complete mechanism to improve customer experience ( $β_{PQa}$ and $β_{PQi}$ are not statistically significant). This has resulted in the comprehension that customer experience is more than a “multi-functional” concept. More precisely, the customer experience may be an affectionate rather than a cognitive concept. Compared with improvement from a utilitarian perspective, hedonic value displays a stronger improving role ( $β_{PQ} < β_{BI}$ ). Therefore, based on these results, this study detected and compared different customer experience features, an additional finding beyond the entire constructive mechanism of customer commitment.

Finally, there are more contributions to research on utilitarian and hedonic values. Conventional studies of utilitarian and hedonic values indicate that these two aspects exert relatively balanced effects on outcomes (Arruda Filho et al., 2020; Shahid Sameeni et al., 2022). However, this study initially reveals that utilitarian value has a smaller effect on constructing customer commitment than hedonic value; the function of these two values is not as balanced as stated in previous studies. Thus, this study extends the utilitarian and hedonic values theory based on the data processing results. On the one hand, utilitarian and hedonic values provide new insights to explore establishing customer commitment. As past and present studies illustrate, the utilitarian and hedonic values of brands or products are of great importance to affect customer psychology and behavior. Specifically, when a customer first encounters a brand or product, the brand or product offers functional cognition. After some observation, a more sensory image is formed in customers’ minds. Thereby, the emotional connections between customers and brands or products are complete. This cognitive process of customers, from cognition to affection, indicates that utilitarian and hedonic values offer an appropriate starting point for constructing customer commitment. On the other hand, the results of this study demonstrate the effect of comparing utilitarian and hedonic values. This comparative effect suggests that the hedonic value may be more effective than the utilitarian value. In summary, this study makes two contributions to utilitarian and hedonic values.

Practical Implications

This study has several practical implications for marketing. First, managers must consider the relationship with customers because a stable relationship assists firms in enhancing their customers’ comprehension. Customer commitment is one of the most suitable representations of such relationships, owing to its irreplaceable position in customer relationship management. Since customer relationships are crucial, firms should pay more attention to customer commitment.

Second, firms should implement diverse approaches to construct and manage customer commitment. Customer experience offers one of the most appropriate solutions for addressing this problem. According to the results of this study, customer commitment is established through customer experience. This demonstrates that if a firm aims to enhance its customer commitment, customer experience should not be ignored.

Finally, providing utilitarian and hedonic values to customers is an easy starting point for improving customer experience and establishing customer commitment. Based on the results of this study, managers should focus on affection rather than customer cognition. Customer affection is a greater necessity than customer cognition in customer decision-making. Meanwhile, the function of brands or products must also be ensured because the utilitarian value is not entirely absent.

Conclusions, Limitaions and Future Research

Conclusions

Several conclusions can be drawn from the above analyses. First, when associating the customer experience features with customer commitment, it is necessary to consider the role of utilitarian and hedonic values in establishing customer commitment. The findings show that hedonic value exerts a greater effect than utilitarian value on constructing customer commitment mediated by customer experience. Second, by considering customer experience as a mediator, this study offers an opportunity to explore how the features of customer experience and customer commitment work from utilitarian and hedonic perspectives. Finally, utilitarian and hedonic values significantly impact the construction of customer commitment, which offers a convenient standpoint for long-term customer relationship management.

Limitations and Future Research

This study shows that customer commitment can be constructed through the customer experience with utilitarian and hedonic values. Nevertheless, this study has several limitations. First, it provides evidence of the different functions of utilitarian and hedonic values. However, it is necessary to discuss this distinction further. Second, the emotional features of the customer experience should be examined further. Next, regarding customer commitment as a single-dimensional construct, this study lacks a detailed discussion on customer commitment. Finally, some data and measurement problems remain. For instance, in the sample collected, females had a greater prevalence than males, although, in the follow-up regression analysis, gender did not significantly influence the results. Hence, future research should concentrate on the function of utilitarian and hedonic values in the experience era and on customers’ emotional experiences based on this study. In addition, customer commitment should be discussed further in terms of its dimensions in future studies.

Footnotes

Appendix

1. Measurements of the variables

(1) Brand image

BI1: I find this brand to be a unique brand.

BI2: I think this brand has a very distinctive brand personality.

BI3: I can quickly recall some features of this brand’s products/services.

BI4: I can quickly recall this brand’s symbol and logo.

BI5: I believe the intangible value of this brand gives me reasons to purchase and use it.

BI6: I find this brand’s products/services very appealing and likable.

(2) Perceived quality

PQ1: The quality of this brand’s products/services is likely particularly good.

PQ2: The functionality of this brand’s products/services is likely particularly good.

(3) Customer experience

Customer Experience - Sensory (ES) Items:

ES1: This brand/product leaves a strong visual or other sensory impression on me.

ES2: I find this brand/product very interesting from a sensory perspective.

ES3: This brand/product is very appealing to my senses.

Customer Experience - Affective (EA) Items:

EA1: Emotionally, I have a very strong feeling toward this brand/product.

EA2: This brand/product is able to evoke people’s emotions.

Customer Experience - Behavioral (EB) Items:

EB1: Using this brand/product allows me to engage in real activities and be mindful of my behavior.

EB2: This brand/product focuses on the user’s practical action experience.

Customer Experience - Intellectual (EI) Items:

EI1: I have given much consideration to whether to purchase this brand/product.

EI2: This brand/product often makes me think.

(4) Customer commitment

CC1. I consider the issues of this brand as my own issues.

CC2. I feel like I am part of this brand’s family.

CC3. I have an emotional attachment to this brand.

CC4. I want to choose products from other brands, but there are too few suitable options.

CC5. The disadvantage of stopping the purchase of this brand’s products now is that I cannot find suitable substitutes.

CC6. I choose to purchase this brand’s products because it provides me with the greatest benefits.

CC7. I feel uncomfortable using similar products from other brands.

CC8. Loyalty is important, and I will continue to purchase this brand’s products.

CC9. Even if offered some extra benefits, I would not buy similar products from other brands.

CC10. Maintaining loyalty to this brand aligns with my values.

CC11. Sticking with this brand’s products is better than frequently switching to other brands’ products.

2. Graphical guideline of the Abstract

Title: How do Firms Manage Their Long-period Customer Relationship? The Role of Customer Experience and Constructive Mechanism on Customer Commitment from Utilitarian and Hedonic Perspectives

Abstract:

(1) Research background: How to establish customer commitment always garners attention by industries and academics. However, prior studies indicated that utilitarian and hedonic values are strongly connecting to the customer experience, they can offer a novel comprehension on how customer commitment been established.

(2) Research gap: Unfortunately, current few studies unveiled such constructive mechanism, the scarcity of such studies provides theoretical gap for us. Based on abovementioned research gap, this study attempted to explore this constructive mechanism, thereby proposed a theoretical model from the aspects of utilitarian and hedonic values.

(3) Methods: After collecting 405 questionnaires within the majority of customers and then, adopting several statistical methods to examine the theoretical model, this study reveals the concrete constructive mechanism of customer experience on customer commitment from perspective of utilitarian and hedonic value.

(4) Findings and originality: The finding of this study shows that customer commitment is constructed from utilitarian and hedonic perspectives, mediated by customer experience. This study contributes to the customer relationship management research on the way in which we can better understand the roles played by customer experience in this constructive mechanism, and comprehension on the function of utilitarian and hedonic values. Simultaneously, several practical implications are proposed as well.

(5) Limitations and future research: However, scarcity of further study on the exploration on distinction between utilitarian and hedonic aspects and detailed discussion on customer commitment is the limitation of this study, thereby provides new research gap and necessitates future studies to fill up from these aspects.

Author Contributions

Yajing Duan contributed the conceptualization, methodology, data processing, and manuscript writing. Lingzhi Brian Fang contributed the conceptualization, methodology, data processing, data collection, and revsion. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was funded by Yunnan Provincial Department of Education, grant number 2024J0815.

Data Availability Statement

Data available on request due to restrictions.

ORCID iDs

Yajing Duan

Lingzhi Brian Fang

References

Agyeiwaah

Dayour

Zhou

(2022). How does employee commitment impact customers’ attitudinal loyalty? Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 5(2), 350–376. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-09-2020-0169

Akoglu

H. E.

Özbek

(2022). The effect of brand experiences on brand loyalty through perceived quality and brand trust: A study on sports consumers. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 34(10), 2130–2148. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-05-2021-0333

Ali

Wahyu

F. R. M.

Darmawan

Retnowati

Lestari

U. P.

(2022). Effect of electronic word of mouth, perceived service quality and perceived usefulness on Alibaba’s customer commitment. Business and Economics Research Journal, 3(2), 232–237. https://doi.org/10.47065/jbe.v3i2.1763

Allen

N. J.

Meyer

J. P.

(1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00506.x

Anshu

Gaur

Singh

(2022). Impact of customer experience on attitude and repurchase intention in online grocery retailing: A moderation mechanism of value Co-creation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 64, 102798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102798

Arruda Filho

E. J. M.

Simões

J. D. S.

De Muylder

C. F

. (2020). The low effect of perceived risk in the relation between hedonic values and purchase intention. Journal of Marketing Management, 36(1–2), 128–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2019.1697725

Ashraf

R. U.

Hou

Ahmad

(2019). Understanding continuance intention to use social media in China: The roles of personality drivers, hedonic value, and utilitarian value. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 35(13), 1216–1228. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1519145

Becker

Jaakkola

(2020). Customer experience: fundamental premises and implications for research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(4), 630–648. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00718-x

Boukis

(2020). Exploring the implications of blockchain technology for brand–consumer relationships: A future research agenda. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 29(3), 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-03-2018-1780

10.

Brakus

J. J.

Schmitt

B. H.

Zarantonello

(2009). Brand experience: What is it? How is it measured? Does it affect loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 52–68. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.73.3.052

11.

Chung

E. M.

Zhang

S. C.

Nguyen

A. T.

Atkins

K. M.

Sandler

H. M.

Kamrava

(2023). Feasibility and acceptability of ChatGPT generated radiology report summaries for cancer patients. Digital Health, 9, 20552076231221620. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076231221620

12.

Das

Mitra

Mandal

(2016). Sample size calculation: Basic principles. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia, 60(9), 652–656. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.190621

13.

Gahler

Klein

J. F.

Paul

(2023). Customer experience: Conceptualization, measurement, and application in Omnichannel environments. Journal of Service Research, 26(2), 191–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/10946705221126590

14.

Ham

Lee

Kim

Koo

(2019). Subjective perception patterns of online reviews: A comparison of utilitarian and hedonic values. Information Processing & Management, 56(4), 1439–1456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2019.03.011

15.

Holbrook

M. B.

Hirschman

E. C.

(1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132–140. https://doi.org/10.1086/208906

16.

Hoyer

W. D.

Kroschke

Schmitt

Kraume

Shankar

(2022). Transforming the customer experience through new technologies. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 51(1), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2020.04.001

17.

Iglesias

Markovic

Rialp

(2019). How does sensory brand experience influence brand equity? Considering the roles of customer satisfaction, customer affective commitment, and employee empathy. Journal of Business Research, 96, 343–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.05.043

18.

Jia

Luo

Fang

Liao

(2024). When and how artificial intelligence augments employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 67(1), 5–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2022.0426

19.

Kadam

Bhalerao

(2010). Sample size calculation. International Journal of Ayurveda Research, 1(1), 55–57. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7788.59946

20.

Keller

K. L.

(1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299305700101

21.

Khan

Hollebeek

L. D.

Fatma

Islam

J. U.

Riivits-Arkonsuo

(2020). Customer experience and commitment in retailing: Does customer age matter? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 57, 102219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102219

22.

Kim

K. K. F.

(2022). Two decades of customer experience research in hospitality and tourism: A bibliometric analysis and thematic content analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 100, 103082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.103082

23.

Kim

Wang

Roh

(2021). Do information and service quality affect perceived privacy protection, satisfaction, and loyalty? Evidence from a Chinese O2O-based mobile shopping application. Telematics and Informatics, 56, 101483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2020.101483

24.

Kumagai

Nagasawa

(2022). Hedonic shopping experience, subjective well-being and brand luxury: A comparative discussion of physical stores and e-retailers. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 34(9), 1809–1826. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-04-2021-0256

25.

Lariviere

Keiningham

T. L.

Cooil

Aksoy

Malthouse

E. C.

(2014). A longitudinal examination of customer commitment and loyalty. Journal of Service Management, 25(1), 75–100. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-01-2013-0025

26.

Lee

C.-H.

J. J.

(2017). Consumer online flow experience: The relationship between utilitarian and hedonic value, satisfaction and unplanned purchase. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117(10), 2452–2467. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-11-2016-0500

27.

Lee

C. K. H.

(2022). How guest-host interactions affect consumer experiences in the sharing economy: New evidence from a configurational analysis based on consumer reviews. Decision Support Systems, 152, 113634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2021.113634

28.

Lemon

K. N.

Verhoef

P. C.

(2016). Understanding customer experience throughout the customer journey. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 69–96. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.15.0420

29.

Lin

C.-Y.

Chou

E.-Y.

(2022). Investigating the role of customer forgiveness following a double deviation. Journal of Services Marketing, 36(8), 1042–1057. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-04-2021-0112

30.

Mano

Oliver

R. L.

(1993). Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption experience: Evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(3), 451–466. https://doi.org/10.1086/209361

31.

Merlo

Eisingerich

A. B.

Hoyer

W. D.

(2024). Immunizing customers against negative brand-related information. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 52(1), 140–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-023-00929-3

32.

Park

(2016). Co-creation of service recovery: Utilitarian and hedonic value and post-recovery responses. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 28, 310–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.01.003

33.

Park

Kim

R. B.

(2022). Importance of offline service quality in building loyalty of OC service brand. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 65, 102493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102493

34.

Patrucco

A. S.

Schoenherr

Moretto

(2024). Sustaining commitment in preferred buyer-supplier relationships: How to retain the ‘customer of choice’ status? International Journal of Production Economics, 270, 109165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2024.109165

35.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods Instruments & Computers, 36(4), 717–731. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03206553

36.

Rathee

Masters

T. M.

Yu-Buck

G. F.

(2022). So fun! How fun brand names affect forgiveness of hedonic and utilitarian products. Journal of Business Research, 139, 44–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.041

37.

Roy

S. K.

Gruner

R. L.

Guo

(2022). Exploring customer experience, commitment, and engagement behaviours. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 30(1), 1–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2019.1642937

38.

Sarstedt

Hair

J. F.

Jr. Ringle

C. M.

(2023). “PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet”-retrospective observations and recent advances. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 31(3), 261–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2022.2056488

39.

Schmitt

(2009). The concept of brand experience. Journal of Brand Management, 16(7), 417–419. https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2009.5

40.

Šerić

Ozretić-Došen Škare

(2020). How can perceived consistency in marketing communications influence customer–brand relationship outcomes? European Management Journal, 38(2), 335–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.08.011

41.

Shahid Sameeni

Ahmad

Filieri

. (2022). Brand betrayal, post-purchase regret, and consumer responses to hedonic versus utilitarian products: The moderating role of betrayal discovery mode. Journal of Business Research, 141, 137–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.019

42.

Siebert

Gopaldas

Lindridge

Simões

(2020). Customer experience journeys: Loyalty loops versus involvement spirals. Journal of Marketing, 84(4), 45–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920920262

43.

Snoj

Pisnik Korda

Mumel

(2004). The relationships among perceived quality, perceived risk and perceived product value. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 13(3), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420410538050

44.

Song

Wang

Han

(2019). Effect of image, satisfaction, trust, love, and respect on loyalty formation for name-brand coffee shops. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 79, 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.12.011

45.

Srivastava

Kaul

(2016). Exploring the link between customer experience–loyalty–consumer spend. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31, 277–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.04.009

46.

Steinhoff

Arli

Weaven

Kozlenkova

I. V.

(2019). Online relationship marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(3), 369–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-018-0621-6

47.

Sullivan

Y. W.

Kim

D. J.

(2018). Assessing the effects of consumers’ product evaluations and trust on repurchase intention in e-commerce environments. International Journal of Information Management, 39, 199–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.12.008

48.

Verhoef

P. C.

Lemon

K. N.

Parasuraman

Roggeveen

Tsiros

Schlesinger

L. A.

(2009). Customer experience creation: Determinants, dynamics and management strategies. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.001

49.

Voss

K. E.

Spangenberg

E. R.

Grohmann

(2003). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310–320. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.40.3.310.19238

50.

Wakita

Ueshima

Noguchi

(2012). Psychological distance between categories in the Likert scale: Comparing different numbers of options. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72(4), 533–546. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164411431162

51.

Waqas

Salleh

N. A. M.

Hamzah

Z. L.

(2021). Branded content experience in social media: Conceptualization, scale development, and validation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 56(1), 106–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2021.07.001

52.

Witell

Kowalkowski

Perks

Raddats

Schwabe

Benedettini

Burton

(2020). Characterizing customer experience management in business markets. Journal of Business Research, 116, 420–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.08.050

53.

Liu

Dong

C.-H.

(2022). Leader perfectionism—Friend or foe of employee creativity? Locus of control as a key contingency. Academy of Management Journal, 65(6), 2092–2117. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2019.0165

54.

Yoo

Donthu

(2001). Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based brand equity scale. Journal of Business Research, 52(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(99)00098-3

55.

Youn

Jin

S. V.

(2021). In AI we trust?” the effects of parasocial interaction and technopian versus luddite ideological views on chatbot-based customer relationship management in the emerging “feeling economy. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106721

56.

Yuan

Zhang

Wang

(2022). Social anxiety as a moderator in consumer willingness to accept AI assistants based on utilitarian and hedonic values. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 65, 102878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102878