Page 71 - Azerbaijan State University of Economics

Maral Jamalova: Socıal Influence and Smartphone Adoptıon in Collectıvıstıc Country:
Evıdence from Azerbaıjan

SYMBOLIC BRAND IMAGE

The symbolic brand image was defined as “… the set of (symbolic) associations
linked to the brand that consumers hold in the memory” (Keller, 1993, p. 2). Taking
into account the extensive literature review, the author of the current study assumes
that the main symbolic association linked to smartphone purchase and use
demonstrates prestige (Kang & Jung, 2014; Sun et al., 2017) and status (Liao &
Hsieh, 2013; Salmi & Sharafutdinova, 2008). The indicator was measured using the
scale adopted from the study providing information about the relationship between
product attributes and purchase intention in the smartphone market (Chen, Liu, &
Ann, 2018). Based on previous publications in the field (Jamalova, 2020; Jamalova
& Constantinovits, 2020), the author assumes that in the case of Azeri smartphone
users, there will be a significant relationship between symbolic brand image and
social influence.

H2. The gender of respondents moderates the relationship between social influence
and symbolic brand image.

HEDONIC MOTIVATION

Hedonic motivation was firstly involved in consumer use context and explained as “fun
or pleasure derived from using a technology” (Venkatesh et al., 2012, p. 161). It is a
powerful indicator predicting behavioral intention toward consumer electronics
(Venkatesh et al., 2012). Previous studies in the field illustrated contradictory results;
some of the studies found a significant relationship between hedonic motivation and
behavioral intention (Alalwan, Dwivedi, Rana, & Algharabat, 2018; Macedo, 2017),
while the others reported that variables do not relate to each other (Gupta, Dogra, &
George, 2018; Merhi, Hone, & Tarhini, 2019). Moreover, the authors of the model
mentioned that hedonic motivation might be moderated by age, gender, and experience
of the technology owner. Usually, females connect with their social surroundings much
more than males (Anshari et al., 2016). Based on Hofstede’s estimate,
masculinity/femininity is around 50% (Hofstede Insights, 2021), the author expects to
see the same results for male and female subsamples.

H3. The gender of respondents moderates the relationship between social influence
and hedonic motivation.

71