An online poker site is a good example of a dual-purposed information system that is used for both fun and making money. In this study, we address the platform selection problem associated with online poker sites by investigating the features online gamers value when selecting a platform. We test the differences in preferences for online gaming platforms between two types of users: primarily extrinsically-motivated and primarily intrinsically-motivated players. Surprisingly, when comparing the importance scores of the features (usability, enjoyment, functionalities, poker network, loyalty program, and reputation), we observe very little difference between the two user groups. The only difference was that loyalty programs were valued considerably more by extrinsically- motivated players. One would have expected that features such as functionalities, poker network, and reputation would dominate the choice calculus for extrinsically-motivated players and that features such as usability and enjoyment would dominate the choice calculus for intrinsically-motivated players. We interpret this surprising finding as providing support to the claim that utilitarian and hedonic values are becoming increasingly intertwined. In this article, we provide alternative interpretations for this surprising result and discuss its theoretical and managerial implications. Because this is an exploratory study, we also note several avenues for future research. . . . . Key words Extrinsicandintrinsicmotivation Platformselection Dual-purposedinformationsystems Onlinegaming Conjoint analysis . . JEL classification C11 BayesianAnalysis: General C44 OperationsResearch: Statistical DecisionTheory C83Survey Methods: Sampling Methods M00 General Responsible Editors: Christian Matt and Manuel Trenz Introduction * Esko Penttinen email@example.com Making choices in the digital environment is becoming in- creasingly complex due to the proliferation of digital plat- Merja Halme firstname.lastname@example.org forms and artifacts that often offer both utilitarian and hedonic value to users (Lee et al. 2005; Turel et al. 2010; Weiss and Pekka Malo Schiele 2013). Given this abundance of alternatives available email@example.com for individuals and the large variety of use situations and mo- Timo Saarinen tivations, it is of paramount importance to determine how firstname.lastname@example.org individuals make choices in digital environments, i.e., how Ville-Matias Vilén they make a selection among competing platform providers email@example.com and digital artifacts. Most of the extant literature addressing the various aspects of information systems (IS) use (such as Aalto University School of Business, Runeberginkatu 14, 00100 Helsinki, Finland assimilation, adoption, deployment, and continued use) has focused on utilitarian systems and outlined the salient factors Accenture Finland, Porkkalankatu 5, 00180 Helsinki, Finland that explain system use. Only relatively recently, researchers E. Penttinen et al. developed models to improve our understanding of hedonic on the decision-making problem associated with choosing the systems use (Lowry et al. 2013; van der Heijden 2004;Wu preferred electronic platform. and Lu 2013). It has been argued that extrinsic motivation We develop a research instrument based on relevant litera- drives the use of utilitarian systems and that intrinsic motiva- ture on technology assimilation and platforms enriched by in- tion drives the use of hedonic systems (Babin et al. 1994). depth interviews with online poker players. The final version Extrinsic motivation stems from the instrumental benefit of of our model included the following features that may affect usage through goal-driven actions. However, intrinsic motiva- the choice of an online poker platform: 1) Usability, 2) tion involves engaging in a behavior for its own sake — out of Enjoyment, 3) Functionalities, 4) Poker network, 5) Loyalty interest or for the pleasure and inherent satisfaction derived program, and 6) Reputation. We collected data from 332 on- from the experience (Lee et al. 2005;Wuand Lu 2013). line poker players via a web site call-for-participation and Increasingly, the intrinsic and extrinsic motivations to use probed the importance of these features on customer choice. systems are intertwined, meaning that many IS are used to Our sample included 222 primarily extrinsically-motivated fulfill a mixed range of needs and wants, which has led to the gamers and 110 primarily intrinsically-motivated gamers. emergence of studies on dual-purposed IS (Verhagen et al. Choice-based conjoint analysis was used as the preference 2012;Wuand Lu 2013). Dual-purposed systems are used for elicitation model. Unlike survey instruments based on Likert both productivity (utilitarian purposes) and pleasure (hedonic scales, we believe that conjoint analysis is particularly useful purposes). Examples addressed in previous literature include for studying the platform selection problem as it presents re- email systems, the Internet, and mobile communication tech- alistic choice tasks to the respondent and requires him/her to nologies (Wu and Lu 2013). Because of the increasing impor- make trade-offs between features. tance of dual-purposed systems, a new set of research problems Although our aim was not to identify and validate the most arises: given that users of dual-purposed systems are heteroge- salient features of online gaming sites, we did find that all six neous in their motivations, how should these systems be de- features were statistically significant in the aggregate level signed to cater to different motivations (extrinsic and intrinsic)? model for explaining the platform choice problem. Still outside In this article, we study online gamers and their selection of a the scope of our study, our analyses revealed that the ranking of site, i.e., a platform, to play poker on the Internet. An online the importance of features in the sample was as follows: repu- poker site is an excellent example of a system that can be used tation, size of network, loyalty programs, enjoyment, usability either for fun or to make money. Both the utilitarian and he- and functionalities. Regarding our research question, the com- donic values have an impact when users play games on these parison of the importance of the features between extrinsically- sites. Motivated by this interesting empirical setting and by a motivated players and intrinsically-motivated players revealed lack of understanding in the current literature related to the an interesting similarity in terms of platform feature prefer- potential differences in preferences across the two user groups, ences: the only feature that differed between the two user we address the following research question: BWhat are the groups was Bloyalty programs,^ which was more important differences between primarily extrinsically-motivated users to extrinsically-motivated gamers. This unexpected result of and primarily intrinsically-motivated users in terms of their only minor differences between the two gamer groups is selection of online platforms?^ In essence, we are interested discussed, and alternative interpretations of our results are ex- in determining whether extrinsically-motivated users value plored in the last part of the paper. We hope this exploratory some platform features differently from how intrinsically- study and discussion facilitates more research on the similari- motivated users value these features. ties and differences among different types of users. Instead of studying the awareness and adoption phases of the IS assimilation process (Bala and Venkatesh 2007), we study the deployment phase. We focus on the decision of Extrinsic and intrinsic motivations and online selecting a platform for IS usage (for either primarily utilitar- poker ian or primarily hedonic purposes) in a specific situation. We do not study the initial adoption factors associated with IS use; Understanding the intertwining nature of utilitarian and he- therefore, we do not make knowledge claims on any issues donic consumer values is vital, as these values have important related to adoption. Instead, in our study, the users have al- implications for consumer behavior (Hirschman and ready made the adoption decision, and we empirically focus Holbrook 1982), product design (Chitturi et al. 2008), brand attitude (Voss et al. 2003), shopping value (Babin et al. 1994), IS adoption (van der Heijden 2004), and systems design and We use the terms ‘online gaming internet site’ and ‘online gaming platform’ interchangeably in this paper. An online poker gaming site is essentially a development (Park and Sawy 2008). Next, we turn to relevant platform (Eisenmann et al. 2006) that allows multiple gamers to play on an literature on motivations (extrinsic and intrinsic) and system internet website. It is categorized as a one-sided platform, similar to an instant types (utilitarian, hedonic, and dual-purposed information sys- messaging platform where most of the value is derived from a single class of users (in this case poker players). tems). Then, we discuss online platforms and consumer Playing for fun or for profit: how extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players make the... selection, noting considerable lack of research probing the motivation types (extrinsic and intrinsic) discussed above. factors impacting consumers’ choice calculus. We conclude While previous research has found that extrinsic motivation our literature review with a section articulating the inherent drives the use of utilitarian systems and intrinsic motivation the characteristics of online poker, establishing the associated on- use of hedonic systems (Wu and Lu 2013), we find increasing line poker platforms as dual-purposed information systems. evidence of these motivations being intertwined. This is evi- denced by some recent studies highlighting the importance of Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use intrinsic motivation for even the most utilitarian systems dual-purposed information systems (Gerow et al. 2013). Similarly, in hedonic settings, systems would benefit from features geared towards ensuring a high level Utilitarian value includes the functional, instrumental, and of extrinsic motivation (Verhagen et al. 2012). practical benefits of the consumption offering, whereas he- In the realm of dual-purposed information systems, prior donic value includes the aesthetic, experiential, and literature has addressed the interrelated nature of extrinsic and enjoyment-related benefits (Chitturi et al. 2008). Consumers intrinsic motivations to use such systems (Table 1). Drawing purchase goods and services and engage in consumption be- on an extensive meta-analysis of utilitarian, hedonic, and dual- haviors for two basic reasons: (1) consummatory, affective purposed information systems examined in prior literature, (hedonic) gratification (from sensory attributes), and (2) in- Wu and Lu (2013) found extrinsic and intrinsic motivators strumental, utilitarian gain (Batra and Ahtola 1990). In the to evenly share predictive power to explain intention and ac- field of marketing, scholars have developed scales to measure tual usage of dual-purposed information systems. Studying the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer value and virtual worlds as dual-purposed systems, Verhagen et al. brand/product attitudes (Batra and Ahtola 1990;Vossetal. (2012) highlighted the interrelatedness of extrinsic and 2003). These dimensions include aspects such as effective/ intrinsic motivations and found perceptions of economic ineffective, helpful/unhelpful, functional/not functional, nec- value, ease of use and escapism to drive both extrinsic and essary/unnecessary, and practical/impractical for the utilitarian intrinsic motivation to spend time in virtual worlds. This dimension and items such as fun/not fun, exciting/dull, interrelatedness of extrinsic and intrinsic motivations was delightful/not delightful, thrilling/not thrilling, and supported in a case study on crowdsourcing, where Soliman enjoyable/unenjoyable for the hedonic dimension (Voss et al. and Tuunainen (2015) found the main drivers of 2003). These dimensions resonate well with the extrinsic and crowdsourcing to be a mix of extrinsic and intrinsic motiva- intrinsic motivations employed in the IS literature by Wu and tions. Closer to our primary research question concerning the Lu (2013): perceived usefulness, job relevance, image, affili- different types of users on dual-purposed information systems, ation motivation, reward, and punishment for extrinsic moti- Gu et al. (2010) studied instant messaging and identified pri- marily extrinsically-motivated users (employees) and primar- vations as well as enjoyment, flow, playfulness, pleasure, and arousal for intrinsic motivations. ily intrinsically-motivated (students) users. Their study re- Naturally, these utilitarian and hedonic consumer value di- vealed differences across the two user groups: employees mensions are reflected in IS design. Some IS are clearly geared were strongly affected by utilitarian usefulness, while students towards fulfilling hedonic requirements, whereas others are were more greatly affected by hedonic usefulness. designed to fulfill utilitarian purposes (Park and Sawy 2008; While we acknowledge that there are numerous empirical van der Heijden 2004). Typical examples include enterprise studies on systems that are used for both utilitarian and hedon- resource planning systems (ERPs) for utilitarian purposes ic purposes, here we focus on papers that discussed specifical- and computer games for hedonic purposes. Hedonic systems ly dual-purposed information systems (also labelled as mixed aim to provide self-fulfilling value to the user, in contrast to or multipurpose information systems) and/or identified pri- utilitarian systems, which aim to provide instrumental value to marily extrinsically- or intrinsically-motivated user groups. the user (van der Heijden 2004). Utilitarian systems focus on For a more complete literature listing of studies on utilitarian, efficiency, leading to productive use as the main design objec- hedonic, and dual-purposed information systems, we guide tive. Conversely, the main design objective of hedonic systems the reader to the meta-analyses provided in Wu and Lu is to encourage prolonged use (Li et al. 2015). (2013) and Gerow et al. (2013). Located in the intersection of utilitarian and hedonic systems, dual-purposed information systems (also labeled in extant litera- Online platforms and consumer selection – Uncharted ture as mixed or multipurpose information systems) are systems territory that provide both utilitarian and hedonic value to their users (Verhagen et al. 2012). It is challenging to make a clear demar- Increasingly, instead of distinct and separate IS, information cation between utilitarian, dual-purposed, and hedonic informa- goods and services are consumed through platforms tion systems, however, the figure below (Fig. 1) makes an at- (Eisenmann et al. 2006;Haile andAltmann 2016) where con- tempt to map these three types of information systems to the sumers and service providers (or consumers and consumers) E. Penttinen et al. Fig. 1 Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation and types of information systems interact to create value. Many of these platforms operate in a are relevant to at least some users of the platform from the virtual space, such as online platforms accessible through the outset. When these users become attracted to the platform, other Internet. Recently, many types of platforms have emerged users will follow. Other strategies focus on subsidies and product across industries enabling a wide range of interactions on plat- giveaways (Eisenmann et al. 2006; Parker and Van Alstyne forms. Thus far, researchers have spent considerable effort in 2005), which create traction and provide financial incentives to seeking to understand conditions that promote fast platform some users of the platform that also attract other users. The growth and underlie successful marketing strategies. The marquee strategy focuses on key users. The participation of these seeding strategy (Parker et al. 2016) and staged strategy users is deemed so important that their participation will make or (Hagiu and Eisenmann 2007) aim to create value units that break the growth of the platform (Parker et al. 2016). Through Table 1 Studies on extrinsic and intrinsic motivation of dual-purposed information systems Source System Method Main findings (Gerow et al. 2013) Multiple (review) Meta-analysis of Intrinsic motivation is important to understanding individuals’ existing research interaction with all types of information systems (utilitarian, hedonic, and mixed). (Gu et al. 2010) Instant messaging Structural equation Importance of utilitarian and hedonic factors is perceived modeling differently by different groups of users. Dual-purposed infor- mation systems should provide both hedonic and utilitarian features. (Hong and Tam 2006) Mobile data services Structural equation Determinants of multipurpose information appliance adoption modeling decisions are not only different from those in the work place, but also dependent on the nature of the target technology and its usage context. (Soliman and Tuunainen 2015) Crowdsourcing Case study Main drivers of crowdsourcing were found to be a mix of both extrinsic (monetary reward, developing one’ skill and career, and publicity) and intrinsic (curiosity, enjoyment, and altruism) motivational factors. (Verhagen et al. 2012) Virtual worlds (VW) Structural equation Highlighted the interrelatedness of extrinsic and intrinsic modeling motivations. Perceptions of economic value, ease of use and escapism drive both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use VW. (Wu and Lu 2013) Multiple (review) Meta-analysis of In dual-purposed systems, extrinsic and intrinsic motivators existing research evenly share predictive power, they nearly Baverage out^. Playing for fun or for profit: how extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players make the... platform envelopment (Eisenmann et al. 2011), an orchestrator in attempt to explain the differences between the behavior and one market can enter other markets by combining the function- attitudes of professional (extrinsically-motivated) and recrea- alities of the platform with that of the target platform and hence tional (intrinsically-motivated) poker players. The results of create a multi-platform hybrid that leverages the shared user base the study suggested that playing poker for a living is possible and the relationships of the users. but requires a set of specific characteristics. The skills found to All these strategies aim to fuel positive network effects. be important for a professional poker player include a mindset However, the other end influencing the growth logic largely for success, commitment, patience, self-control and an aptitude remains unstudied: what makes platform customers select be- for the game. Compared to recreational players, professionals tween competing platforms, what factors influence their appeared to spend considerably more time playing poker and choices, and how do various user groups differ in their pref- were less likely to take risks or gamble under the influence of erences? Two main types of consumers exist for these plat- drugs or alcohol. Additionally, professional players’ behavior forms: those who seek primarily utilitarian value and those was found to be more rational and cautious, while recreational who seek hedonic value, which makes designing the platform players appeared to have a greater tendency to engage in less more complex than developing IS specific to each user type rational and less disciplined behavior. In short, professional because the platform provider must cater to both the need for players appear to be more rational, logical and disciplined in instrumental value for utilitarian reasons and the need for self- their behavior, whereas recreational players are more impulsive fulfilling value for hedonic reasons. A question then arises: do risk-takers and their behavior is not always logical differences exist between the two types of consumers (extrin- (McCormack and Griffiths 2012). It appears that the inherent sically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated) in their plat- characteristics of professional and recreational gamers are clear- form selection? Selecting a platform is an inherently different ly distinct, and their attitudes towards playing online poker are problem from selecting an information system for performing very different. a task (whether utilitarian or hedonic), as the platform selec- tion problem portrays a more nuanced choice problem incor- porating choice factors, such as network effects, in addition to Identification and refinement of choice traditional factors related to usability, usefulness and enjoy- features ment. Surprisingly, we found no previous research that ad- dressed consumer platform selection in general (for a recent Although we focus on the differences between the two user study in organizational setting, see Penttinen et al. 2018)orthe groups (extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated problem of comparing two distinct user types and specifically, gamers), we wanted to carefully design the empirical study so extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated users. that the research instrument (features and their levels) reflects the actual decision-making process. Surprisingly, we found no avail- able academic studies addressing the choice problem related to Utilitarian vs. hedonic poker play digital platforms; therefore, our approach to building the research instrument was exploratory in nature. Thus, we proceeded in A great debate has been ongoing regarding whether poker is a three steps: first, we developed an initial set of features that game of skill or luck. More precisely, the question is whether potentially impact the consumer choice by reviewing the rele- poker is a game where skill has more impact than luck or vice vant literature on technology use (e.g. Nielsen 1993 and variants versa. One recent study conducted by Hannum and Cabot (2009) of TAM) and platform network effects (e.g. Parker et al. 2016). attempts to provide unambiguous evidence that poker truly is a Second, we conducted expert interviews to operationalize and game dominated by skill rather than by luck. Poker is played further validate the initial set of features to the context of online against other individual players instead of against the casino; poker. Third, we made an empirical study by collecting data therefore, skills may have an impact on the game. The authors through a web-based survey using conjoint analysis. These steps argue that poker requires skills in mathematics, psychology, eval- allowed us to iteratively identify six features: 1) Usability, 2) uating competition, and fund management. According to the Enjoyment, 3) Functionalities, 4) Poker network, 5) Loyalty study, practicing poker will increase one’s skill level against other program, and 6) Reputation, and empirically evaluate their re- players. In addition, they claim that in a game of pure luck, a spective impact on consumer choice calculus. Figure 2 illustrates player cannot lose or lose faster because of intentionally poor our research process. performance, which is possible in games of skill. After having identified an initial set of criteria from earlier Another recent study by McCormack and Griffiths (2012) literature on technology assimilation and platform network ef- attempts to provide an explanation for a fairly new phenome- fects, to operationalize the features in the context of online poker non: some users earn their living by playing poker. The authors and to further validate the features found in the literature, we conducted four interviews with online poker players. The pur- Appendix 1 provides a factsheet on poker, alternative ways of playing poker and information regarding the emergence of online poker. pose of the interviews was to confirm that the criteria found was E. Penttinen et al. Relevant literature Expert interviews Empirical study • Initial set of � Operationalizing � Actual criteria the criteria to instantiation of the context of the choice � Perceived online poker features in a performance, platforms and conjoint setup Enjoyment, developing the Network � Collecting data levels externalities, through a web- Trust, Loyalty � Defining scales: based survey program, developed 2 � Using SSIWeb Usability levels for each to collect the dimension (low, data high) Fig. 2 Research process relevant in the online poker context and discover any possible 2003; Nielsen 1993). Although ease of use is often employed new features that might have gone unnoticed in the literature in existing studies as an antecedent of both perceived usefulness review. Data were gathered through interviews with online poker and perceived enjoyment (van der Heijden 2004), recently, per- players who had different motivations for playing as well as ceived ease of use has been identified as a critical element to different backgrounds. The interviews followed an outline that ensure flow in the specific case of mobile games (Merikivi et al. is provided in Appendix 2. A summary of the interviews is 2017). Thus, in our study, we link system usability primarily to provided in the table below (Table 2), and the narratives of the intrinsic motivations. Concerning the operationalization of us- expert interviews are provided in Appendix 3. ability, ease of learning, ease of remembering, and low chance Next, we discuss each of the final six features and their of committing errors during system use have been considered origin, i.e. prior literature and expert interviews. We also take key components of system usability (Nielsen 1993). a stance whether each feature is linked primarily to extrinsic or intrinsic motivations (see summary of features in Table 3). Expert interviews All interviewees mentioned the usability of a poker site as a particularly important feature. It appears that all of Usability the interviewees preferred a poker site with ease to use functions and a clear and simple graphical interface. The interviewees in- Literature The majority of past literature on technology assim- dicated that essential information regarding players, pots, chips, et cetera, should be clearly presented. In addition, the poker site ilation has identified usability and ease of use as constructs that drive information technology use (Davis 1989; Gefen et al. should be reliable in the sense that it will not easily crash. Table 2 Summary of expert interviews Interviewee 1: online poker provides an extra source of income, plays approximately Interviewee 2: online poker is the main source of income, plays 10 h per week approximately 50 h per week Most important features: Most important features: � Large player base with good selection of different varieties of games at all times � Availability of games � Reliability and usability � Usability � Loyalty programs � Clear rules, e.g., minimum buy-in � Customization and appearance � Reputation and loyalty programs Interviewee 3: online poker is the main source of income, plays approximately 40 h Interviewee 4: purely recreational player, plays approximately per week 10 h per week Most important features: Most important features: � Right kind of games available, sufficiently large stake levels, types of players more � Availability of games important than number of players � Ease of use and appearance � Compatible with third-party software � Security � Appearance and usability � Reputation and loyalty programs Playing for fun or for profit: how extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players make the... Table 3 Final set of features mapped against the main motivation type Feature Description Extrinsic vs. intrinsic motivation Usability Ease of using the online poker site Primarily intrinsic Enjoyment Level of enjoyment factors such as graphics, sound and animation Primarily intrinsic Functionalities Number of useful functionalities Primarily extrinsic Poker network Size of the online poker site and number of suitable tables available Primarily extrinsic Loyalty program Nature of the loyalty program Primarily extrinsic Reputation Level of the reputation of the online poker site Primarily extrinsic Furthermore, extravagant sound effects and animations were Expert interviews Interviewees claimed that certain features, considered to be more annoying than pleasant, and they were such as bet-a-pot buttons, enhanced and improved the useful- perceived to hinder the usability and reliability of the poker site. ness of the online poker site, thus allowing primarily In short, the poker site should be easy to use, have a simple extrinsically-motivated gamers to generate more profits. interface and should not crash easily. According to the interviewees, perceived usefulness of a pok- er site was considered to be improved by features such as Final feature The original attribute of perceived usability was compatibility with third-party analysis software, hand history, labeled as BUsability^ and operationalized as ease of using the and similar features. online poker site. Final feature The original attribute of perceived usefulness Enjoyment was labeled as BFunctionalities^ and operationalized as the number and quality of functionalities. Literature Perceived enjoyment (van der Heijden 2004)is the extent to which a user experiences enjoyment while using the Poker network system, regardless of any performance improvements the sys- tem may provide. Hence, it focuses on measuring only intrin- Literature Network externalities theory is concerned with the sic motivation to use or not to use a certain system. impact of the size of a network on the perceived value of the Furthermore, in the context of online gaming, enjoyment is network by its user and acts as a foundation for the modern found to play a significant role in predicting player satisfaction day understanding of network externalities. This theory was (Wu 2014). first crafted in 1980s and has since been refined by various authors (Farrell and Saloner 1985; Katz and Shapiro 1985, Expert interviews As in the case of usability, enjoyment was 1986). Essentially, online poker sites provide a platform that mentioned by all interviewees as an especially important fea- connects poker players throughout the world and allows them ture. Pleasant sounds, graphics, and animations were cited as to play against one another. Thus, it is apparent that network enjoyment features associated with online poker sites; inter- externalities are present and are likely to play an important viewees were annoyed with software that had poor sounds, role in the factors affecting the choice behavior of online poker graphics, and animations, and preferred a site that had pleas- players. In the online poker context, the size of the network is ing graphical interface, sounds and animations. perceived to be one of the most important features for creating value for players (Sieroty 2011). Furthermore, it has been Final feature The original attribute of perceived enjoyment discovered that achieving a critical mass of players is essential was labeled as BEnjoyment^ and operationalized in terms of for the survival of the network. Since poker players want to be enjoyment factors such as graphics (Wu et al. 2008), sounds able to play at any time of the day and the system must be able and animation. to provide games at all times, a network must have critical mass. Functionalities Expert interviews When asked about the most important fea- Literature Perceived usefulness is defined as the degree to which ture of an online poker site, all interviewees mentioned the a person believes that using an information system would en- availability of the games they like to play. In practice, avail- hance his job or task performance (Davis 1989). It is typically the ability roughly translates to the number of players who are part main extrinsic motivator identified in empirical studies on dual- of the poker site network. For those players to whom playing purposed information systems (Wu and Lu 2013). poker constitutes an important source of income, the E. Penttinen et al. importance of the size of the network and types of games recent study focused on online trust indicated that in addition to appears to be of paramount importance. Thus, it appears to other factors, reputation is a significant factor that has an impact be justifiable to conclude that network size appears to be a on trust and ultimately on whether a transaction occurs or not significant factor for extrinsically-motivated gamers when (Salo and Karjaluoto 2007). they consider which online poker site to use. Expert interviews Internet security and the reliability of poker Final feature The original attribute of network externalities sites were also found to be significant factors influencing the was labeled as BPoker network^ and operationalized as the decisions of the interviewees. However, all interviewees size of the poker network. claimed that the reputation of a poker site was the only real way to evaluate the reliability of an online poker site. Loyalty program Therefore, reputation in terms of the security and trustworthi- ness of a poker site can be considered to have a significant Literature In the context of electronic commerce, loyalty in- influence on the decision to accept or reject a certain online centives have been found to have an impact on consumer poker site. behavior and choice provided that the system is useful (Bhattacherjee 2001). Members of loyalty programs are gen- Final feature The original attribute of trust was labeled as erally less sensitive to losses in the dimensions of overall BReputation^ and operationalized as reputation of the online quality rating and billing aspects when comparing the compa- platform. ny with competitors (Bolton et al. 2000). Thus, based on ear- The following table (Table 3) summarizes the features and lier literature on loyalty incentives, it appears to be safe to maps them against the main motivation type (extrinsic or assume that in the online poker context, loyalty programs intrinsic). potentially have an impact on the choice behavior of poker players. Empirical study Expert interviews Poker sites award points for players based on how much they play. These points can be exchanged to Choice-based conjoint analysis different rewards, such as t-shirts and motor cycles. Thus, they work much in the same way as an airline or hotel loyalty As discussed earlier, the aim of the empirical study was to program. Sometimes, a loyalty program is substantiated explore whether differences exist in how extrinsically- through Brake back^ which is a promotional scheme that sites motivated and intrinsically-motivated gamers choose a plat- use to attract players to their site. In essence, it means that the form for online poker. Generally, research related to technology poker site will return a certain percentage of the paid rake back acceptance utilizes Likert scale style surveys to study the per- to the gamer (see Appendix 1 for details, e.g., on rake). In ceived importance of different constructs (Chismar and Wiley- expert interviews, availability of a loyalty program was the Patton 2002;Hsu andLin 2008; Lee et al. 2003). Compared to factor that divided the opinions of the interviewees the most. conjoint analysis, Likert scale value measurements have at least Based on the interviews, it appears that the availability of a three shortcomings. First, Likert scales measure only one fea- loyalty program is an important factor for extrinsically- ture at a time and do not force the respondent to consider trade- motivated players who play medium stakes games. offs. Second, in Likert scales, the range is not normally fixed, Conversely, intrinsically-motivated players tend to consider which means that one can be asked about the importance of, for a loyalty program to be a somewhat less significant feature. example, usability, but typically, the scale does not specify the nature of the worst or best levels of usability. In conjoint anal- Final feature The original attribute of loyalty incentives was ysis, the range of the feature is fixed by assigning concrete labeled as BLoyalty program^ and operationalized as the level feature levels. Third, conjoint analysis facilitates the assessment of comprehensiveness of the loyalty program. of response consistency. In conjoint analysis, the root likeli- hood (RLH) measures the fit of the utility function estimated Reputation with the observed choices. Respondents with low fit can be omitted, as the low fit normally occurs because of neglect and Literature Trust is a significant factor related to transactions that a lack of attention when responding to the survey (provided that occur online (Eastlick et al. 2006; Hoffman et al. 1999;Siauetal. the survey design is appropriate). This kind of tool is not readily 2003). Trust elements have also been incorporated in theoretical available for traditional surveys. In addition, holdout questions models explaining information technology use. A study conduct- can be used to measure the predictive capacity of the utility ed by Gefen et al. (2003) found that for online transactions, trust function to be estimated. If the simple additive model most was as important as perceived usefulness and ease of use. A often used is insufficient, even interaction terms can be Playing for fun or for profit: how extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players make the... included to improve the fit. For further discussion of the use of moderate. Second, as our sample included non-professional conjoint analysis in preference estimation and comparison to gamers, the research instrument needed to be as simple as other methods, we refer the reader to (Johnson et al. 2006; possible. In professional settings where the decision-makers Phillips et al. 2002). are better-equipped for such choices (such as an IT manager Conjoint analysis allows us to assess respondents’ utility making a purchase decision concerning an IT-based enterprise functions related to e.g., a product or service, with their rele- information platform), the use of more features and levels is vant attributes (features) as arguments. The method has been feasible. Moreover, using two levels was considered adequate; used for decades in preference estimation (Green et al. 2001), recall that the comparison of the valuations of two groups is mostly in marketing research; currently, it is also increasingly the focus of this study. used in a number of other areas, including electronic markets No best practices or guidelines exist for how to create op- (Derikx et al. 2016), multichannel commerce (Trenz 2015), timal levels (Louviere et al. 2010). Therefore, careful consid- health care, food studies and transportation (Teichert and eration and testing the levels with three pilot respondents was Shehu 2010). Along with the estimation of the utility func- required before the analysis was finalized. One level was pre- tions, often measured at the segment or individual level, the sumed to indicate high preference, whereas the other level was relative importance scores of the features can be assessed. assumed to indicate strictly lower preference. Table 4 intro- Currently, the most popular conjoint analysis type is the duces the features and levels adopted. choice-based conjoint analysis (CBC). For this analysis, the respondents evaluate profiles of products or services, which Data collection and sample can be hypothetical, and the respondents indicate the most preferred one. These kinds of tasks simulate the actual deci- To create the questionnaire, we used SSI Web 7.0 (Sawtooth sions of the respondents. For more technical information on Software). The profiles were described verbally (Table 4), and the use of CBC analysis, we refer the reader to Appendix 4. the choice tasks were generated by the software’sdesign gen- erator with the option Bbalanced overlap^ (Chrzan and Orme 2000). This option generates a fractional factorial question Choice of feature levels design. The randomized design has the advantage of reducing bias due to order and learning effects. In total, there were 300 When applying conjoint analysis to a problem, the first step is to different versions of the questionnaire. We refer the reader to define the features and their levels (our instrument includes 6 Appendix 5 for a screenshot of the research instrument. features with 2 levels as discussed in detail above), the type of After the survey was created, it was piloted by three people conjoint analysis (our instrument employs CBC) and the form of familiar with online poker to ensure that the survey worked the utility function (our instrument is additive and later assesses properly and was comprehensible to respondents. The survey possible interactions). Then, one needs to define the specifics of began with questions related to the background of the respon- the conjoint analysis tasks: how many choice tasks to present dent. In the background section, demographic information, (our instrument included 12 random tasks and 2 fixed tasks such as age, gender, profession, and experience with online shared by all the respondents), how many profiles to present poker, was collected. The respondents were also asked to within each task (our instrument presented 3), and whether to identify the networks for which they currently had accounts. include BNo, I would not choose any of these^ (our instrument Respondents for this research were contacted using did not offer this option). In addition, the data collection method Pokerisivut.com, the largest poker website in Finland. At the must be chosen (our instrument was web-based, as it was the time of data collection, the website reported having more than most efficient way to reach the respondents). 37,000 registered members (Wikipedia.fi). The website The six features chosen to be included in the analysis were includes news, blogs, and discussion forums related to poker introduced in Table 2 above. Only two levels were defined for and online poker. In addition, the website operates as an each feature (Table 3) for two reasons. First, the choice of only affiliate site for most online poker rooms by providing two levels aimed to lower the cognitive burden the respon- different promotions to these rooms. The invitation to dents experienced and to assure that the level of difficulty of participate in the survey was presented in a new discussion the choice tasks offered to the respondents remained thread at Pokerisivut.com, where the purpose and background of the study was briefly explained, and a link to the survey was ISI Web of Knowledge lists 2612 references to articles or proceeding papers provided. A news article about the survey and the invitation (in December, 2015) with Bconjoint analysis^ in the title, abstract or keywords. were published on the front page of Pokerisivut.com by the Of these studies, 2269 (88%) were published in the past decade; 332 were related to business (ISI categorization, marketing), 71 were related to computer administrators of the website. By the time we downloaded the science and IS (see e.g., (Giessmann and Stanoevska-Slabeva 2013;Hann et data, the thread had been exposed to 1539 gamers. The al. 2007; Keil and Tiwana 2006; Kersten and Noronha 1999)) and 158 were number of respondents who successfully completed the related to operations research management science. Thus, the method has recently expanded outside the marketing field. survey was 332. Thus, the response rate for the survey is 21. E. Penttinen et al. Table 4 The final features and levels in the conjoint analysis Feature Level 1 Level 2 Usability Poker site is easy to use Poker site is difficult to use Enjoyment Graphics, sounds, and animations are enjoyable Graphics, sounds, and animations are plain Functionalities Poker site offers a comprehensive set of functionalities Poker site offers only basic functionalities Poker network Large number of players Limited number of players Loyalty program Comprehensive loyalty program Limited loyalty program Reputation Poker site has a proven reputation Poker site has no established reputation record 6%. The following table (Table 5) provides the background respondent was asked whether he/she played professionally information of the respondents (whole sample, extrinsically- or for fun. This step yielded 80 respondents indicating profes- motivated and intrinsically-motivated players). Next, we pro- sional play and 18 respondents playing for enjoyment. ceed to explain how the demarcation between extrinsically- Second, the remaining respondents were asked to indicate motivated and intrinsically-motivated players was done. whether they played online poker primarily to generate in- come or primarily for fun. This step produced 142 gamers primarily seeking to generate income from online poker and Treatment of extrinsically-motivated 92 respondents indicating that they play online poker primar- vs. intrinsically-motivated gamers ily for fun. The answers to these questions indicated whether the respondent was treated as an extrinsically-motivated or After the aforementioned background questions, using a two- intrinsically-motivated gamer in our empirical study (see step procedure, the respondent was asked to indicate whether Fig. 3). he/she plays professionally or recreationally. First, the Table 5 Demographic information of the respondents Total sample Extrinsically-motivated Intrinsically-motivated Number of % Number of % Number of % respondents respondents respondents Gender Male 330 99% 220 99% 110 100% Female 2 1% 2 1% 0 0% Age 18–25 157 48% 116 52% 41 37% 26–45 160 48% 100 45% 60 55% 46–65 14 4% 5 2% 9 8% 66–100 1 0% 1 1% 0 0% Occupation Employed 126 38% 60 27% 66 60% Student 108 33% 79 36% 29 27% Entrepreneur or self-employed 47 14% 41 19% 6 5% Retired 2 1% 1 0% 1 1% Unemployed 33 10% 25 11% 8 7% Other 16 5% 16 7% 0 0% Experience with online poker Less than 12 months 5 2% 1 0% 4 4% 1–2 years 23 7% 13 6% 10 9% 3–4 years 95 29% 63 28% 32 29% 5–6 years 161 48% 112 51% 49 45% 7 years or more 48 14% 33 15% 15 13% Total 332 100% 222 100% 110 100% Playing for fun or for profit: how extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players make the... Fig. 3 Operationalization of extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated gamers We acknowledge that whether a player considers himself/ indicating that they are non-zero (n = 332) (Table 6). herself extrinsically or intrinsically motivated is similar to a Although our objective was not to probe the ranking of the line drawn in the water. It is natural that the two roles are features, we found that reputation was the most important mixed to some extent. Hence, the underlying variable describ- feature for the respondents overall, followed by the poker ing the player’s mindset is inherently a fuzzy continuous var- network, loyalty program, enjoyment, usability and iable. However, a player will usually be able to indicate which functionalities. role is more dominant. Therefore, we consider that asking the Based on the conjoint task responses, the part-worths were player to indicate extrinsic or intrinsic motivation is sensible estimated for the two different player types to analyze the when the choice is interpreted as a description of the dominant importance of the different features for the two groups and role rather than being mutually exclusive options. Alternative to test whether differences exist in the valuations across the methods to distinguish between extrinsically-motivated and groups. The importance scores are presented in Table 7.We intrinsically-motivated gamers do exist; participants could note that the ranking of the importance of the features is al- have been asked about their motivations using a questionnaire most equal across the groups. Testing the equality of impor- consisting of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation items with as- tance scores resulted in only one significant difference: the sociated Likert scales. This approach would have resulted in a importance score of the loyalty program is greater for researcher-defined cutoff point between extrinsically- extrinsically-motivated players, with a confidence level of motivated and intrinsically-motivated gamers based on the 99.7%. Note that here, the estimation method was a hierarchi- values of the items. Instead, we decided to directly ask the cal Bayes method with covariates, where the statistical infer- respondent to indicate the dominant role in which he/she plays ence differs from that of classical statistical theory (Gelman et on the gaming site. We consider this approach to be well al. 2013). The next most prominent difference was that enjoy- justified for the difficult task of distinguishing between those ment was more important for the intrinsically-motivated users who primarily play for income purposes and those who players, with a confidence level of 76%, meaning that the primarily play for fun. confidence that the opposite is true is 24% (as indicated in Table 7). The additive utility model was applied in the calculations. Findings The confidence level a reported in the rightmost column is the Bayesian confidence that the importance for the Before analyzing the differences between extrinsically- extrinsically-motivated user is greater than that for the motivated and intrinsically-motivated users, we used the ag- gregate level model and found that all features influence the choice of an online poker platform, i.e., all the part-worths The significance of interactions was tested by adding them to the model one have a t-ratio of 3.9 in absolute value as the minimum, at a time, and none were significant at a risk level of 1%. E. Penttinen et al. Table 6 Part-worth utilities of the Feature Level Part-worth utility t-ratio aggregate model Reputation Poker site has a proven reputation 113.53641 35.44669 Poker site has no established −113.53641 −35.4467 reputation record Poker network Large number of players 75.41994 26.12372 Limited number of players −75.41994 −26.1237 Loyalty program Comprehensive loyalty program 59.75309 21.80816 Limited loyalty program −59.75309 −21.8082 Enjoyment Graphics, sounds, and animations 20.97837 8.23203 are enjoyable Graphics, sounds, and animations −20.97837 −8.23203 are plain Usability Poker site is easy to use 20.67606 8.23993 Poker site is difficult to use −20.67606 −8.23993 Functionalities Poker site offers a comprehensive 9.63613 3.90292 set of functionalities Poker site offers only basic −9.63613 −3.90292 functionalities intrinsically-motivated user and the confidence for the oppo- intrinsically motivated. In this study, we assumed that an on- site is 100-a . line poker site would represent an appropriate IT-based dual- As for reliability when estimating the individual utility func- purposed information system to study the differences among tions using hierarchical Bayes estimation, the aggregate fit users with different motives, since people who play for fun measure exceeded the fit for a respondent making choices ran- and people who play to make money use the same sites simul- domly by 118%. Thus, it appears that based on the responses, it taneously. However, our results were somewhat unexpected, is truly possible to estimate utility functions that predict the since only one significant difference in feature importance respondents’ choices. Next, we present our alternative interpre- scores was discovered across the player types: the importance tations of the results, followed by our discussion of the theoret- score for loyalty programs was statistically higher for ical and managerial implications of our study. extrinsically-motivated gamers. The most striking finding in our empirical study was that even the features that one would expect to be directly linked to extrinsic motivation such as functionalities, size of the poker network, and platform repu- Discussion tation were weighed evenly by both types of users. Similarly, features that would be expected to have more importance to New models for understanding and explaining IS use have hedonic usage, such as enjoyment and usability, were equally been introduced to include users who are extrinsically or Table 7 Relative importance Feature Extrinsically-motivated Intrinsically-motivated Confidence that score percentages across the user user, importance score user, importance score the extrinsically-motivated groups user sets higher importance Reputation 38.7 40.6 NS (56.1) Poker network 24.4 26.4 NS (43.9) Loyalty program 21.4 15.7 *** (99.7) Enjoyment 6.1 7.6 NS (24.0) Usability 6.4 6.9 NS (45.9) Functionalities 2.9 2.8 NS (59.8) Playing for fun or for profit: how extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players make the... important to both user groups. Next, we discuss some possible interface has lost its importance while the services have reasons and alternative interpretations for these results to ini- matured to offer satisfying experiences independent of tiate a discussion and present possible avenues for future the site. This interpretation of our results corroborates research. the thesis of Carr (2003) in claiming that IT services might be becoming commodities and thus not differen- Interpretation #1: Currently, many people do not make a tiable from each other. clear distinction between work time and leisure time – instead these periods of time are often mixed or intertwined. In the case of online poker, it may be possi- Theoretical implications ble that despite playing for utilitarian reasons, the players concurrently experience hedonic benefits. This outcome We note two main theoretical contributions. First, previous is similar to, for example, top athletes who enjoy what literature addressing the motivational aspects for using utili- they do although they earn a considerable amount of tarian, hedonic, and dual-purposed IS has found that extrinsic money while doing it. Initially, it would sound intuitively motivations drive the use of utilitarian systems and that intrin- obvious that people are often in different consumer states sic motivations drive the use of hedonic systems (Babin et al. depending, for example, on the time, place, and space. 1994;Li et al. 2015;Wuand Lu 2013). We find that when Further, this finding makes us assume that our utility selecting the dual-purposed platform for online gaming, both function would be different for these different states as groups of gamers (extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically- well. However, our study did not confirm such assump- motivated) appear to weigh the platform features equally. tions, but rather corroborates the analyses of earlier liter- Thus, our findings contradict the claim that the importance ature on blurring in the leisure-work nexus (Adler and of utilitarian or hedonic factors is perceived differently by Adler 1999). Overall, this interpretation of our findings different groups of users (Gu et al. 2010). Interestingly, in their calls for more in-depth studies to better understand when, study on utilitarian, hedonic, and dual-purposed IS, Wu and how, and why our preferences change towards a given IT Lu (2013) made a similar contradictory finding: Bin the con- service or services in general. Here, as boundary condi- text of dual-purposed information systems, extrinsic and in- tion, we must bear in mind that in our empirical setting trinsic motivators evenly share predictive power; they nearly we studied dual-purposed information systems which are Baverage out^^ (Wu and Lu 2013, p. 168). Our study supports probably more prone to this kind of blurring between this finding; in our case, the selection of the online gaming work time and leisure time. Purely utilitarian (e.g. ERP platform appears to be insulated from the motivation to play. systems) or hedonic (e.g. on-demand TV) systems might We claim that the interrelatedness and intertwining nature of yield more demarcated feature preferences. extrinsic and intrinsic motivations (Verhagen et al. 2012) Interpretation #2: It is possible that our participants do not might be accentuated in the context of dual-purposed IS com- consciously choose the site. Even if all respondents re- pared to strictly utilitarian or hedonic systems. ported that were familiar with a number of poker sites and Second, previous research on IS assimilation has identi- that they have at least tried to use them, it remains possi- fied distinct assimilation stages that include awareness, ble that they actively use only one of the sites. It is pos- adoption, and deployment (Bala and Venkatesh 2007)and sible that the players regularly use one of the sites regard- has called for more rigorous research on IS assimilation and less of whether they play for fun or to make money. Some its links to extrinsic and intrinsic motivations (Wu and Lu of them may have already developed a habit of 2013). We searched for studies that address the impacts of connecting to their favorite poker site. If sites are very extrinsic and intrinsic motivations on system selection and similar, it is not necessary to use different sites for differ- surprisingly found a lack of studies on this topic. To date, ent purposes. The fact that the only difference we found very little research has probed the decision associated with between the player types was the greater significance of selecting an IS or an IT-based platform and how different the loyalty program for the extrinsically-motivated types of motivational factors impact the choice. Our study players may further support this claim. provides a first attempt to make theoretical claims on con- Interpretation #3: Our results may indicate that all poker sumer choice calculus and customer preferences related to sites share roughly similar features and functionalities or this selection problem. Rather than relying on self-reported at least the players perceive them to be equally attractive. Likert scale responses on factors that may affect any part of If so, the site does not play a key role but the games or the assimilation stage, we decided to employ a somewhat tables provided by a site may play a key role. The size of uncommon method in conjoint analysis that requires the the player network was the second most important feature respondents to select a suitable platform profile and as a for both player types, which indicates that this specula- result make clear trade-offs between platform features. tion might be true and means that, in general, the user After studying the abovementioned stages of IS E. Penttinen et al. assimilation, we encourage researchers to acknowledge that software. However, many survey respondents reported that system selection is an important dimension to consider they are willing to learn to use even more difficult software when studying IS assimilation. if the games on the platform are perceived as good. As indi- cated by their comments, many respondents also appreciate Managerial implications the ability to modify the appearance of the software them- selves. Therefore, it appears that if the service provider is What should managers working in the field consider when unwilling to invest large sums in developing the software to making decisions, particularly regarding product develop- be as easy to use and as enjoyable as possible, it should, at a ment, strategy and communications? Next, we provide guide- minimum, keep the system open to allow modification by the lines for managers, first by analyzing the overall ranking of the users. However, one should bear in mind the fairly obvious features and second by noting the lack of differences between discovery that compared to other players, beginners place a the user groups. significant emphasis on the ease of use of poker sites. In the overall ranking of the features, reputation emerged as In general, it appears that the software currently provided the most important feature for all players. For an online poker by poker sites includes all of the useful functions and is easy to site, creating a strategy that aims to foster the reputation of the use and enjoyable. This fact could explain why reputation and site and a strong brand image are likely to improve the overall network size were considered such significant attributes. competitive advantage of the site. Managers should focus on However, as the industry is still fairly young, it is more than establishing effective communication practices between the likely that there is room for improvement, and many innova- service provider and customers, providing transparency re- tions may be added in the future. Therefore, we recommend garding business operations, and ensuring a consistent track- that managers actively seek ways to improve the customer record of seamless service without interruptions. Reputation experience on their online poker sites. probably correlates with platform size: as stated by one of the interviewees, large and well-known companies are preferred Limitations and avenues for further research over small and less known ones. The second most important feature overall was the network Our study is not without limitations. First, we consider one size of the poker site. Obviously, a primary objective for man- specific context of dual-purposed IS: online poker. Online agers of online poker sites should be to attract as many players poker is subject to significant network effects and possibly to the network as possible. The expert interviews indicated addictive behavior for both extrinsically-motivated and that the variety of games is an important issue. Therefore, intrinsically-motivated players, which may have distorted we suggest that managers should consider not only the size our findings. Further research should study other contexts of their online poker site network but also the heterogeneity of subject to varying degrees of network effects and proneness the players and games the site can offer. to addictive behavior. Second, our sample includes re- The great importance given to the loyalty program presum- sponses that were provided at one point in time and from ably has the most important implications from a marketing only one geographical area: Finland. Future research should perspective. It appears that a loyalty program is significantly assess whether the features are dynamic and change over more important to extrinsically-motivated players than to time. Similarly, there might be cultural differences in how intrinsically-motivated players. Therefore, managers respon- extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players sible for marketing and promotion should consider this issue make their choices. Our sample was heavily skewed to- as they make marketing investments and decisions concerning wards male gamers with very few responses from female segmenting their customers. Extrinsically-motivated players gamers. Although online poker gamers are predominantly are likely to be more interested in loyalty programs, whereas male, future research should ensure a healthier sample bal- intrinsically-motivated players may not perceive these pro- ance between male and female gamers. Furthermore, grams as important. readers of our study should bear in mind that the survey Our empirical study showed very few differences between was conducted in Finnish and that nuances in the transla- extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players; tion associated with the features and feature levels might the only statistically significant difference was the high impor- impact the results. Third, we relied on self-reporting of the tance of the loyalty programs for extrinsically-motivated player state (a four-scale classification of extrinsically- players. In terms of product development, it appears that both motivated and intrinsically-motivated players), and in the player types deem attributes related to the actual characteris- empirical study, we treated the player state as a dichoto- tics of the software as less important than, for instance, repu- mous concept. Further research should critically review tation. Because discrete choice experiments tend to provide these assumptions. Fourth, although our purpose was to results that focus on only two attributes, it is essential not to examine the potential differences between the two user ignore the importance of having well-functioning, easy-to-use groups and not to develop a ranking of the most important Playing for fun or for profit: how extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players make the... features, we wanted to ensure that the features used in the on previous literature on IS assimilation and by empirical study reflect the actual decision-making situation. conducting expert interviews to improve validity, we To establish the set of features, we used a limited number developed our research model, which includes six fea- of interviews to operationalize, validate, and develop the tures of online gaming platforms that might influence scale for each feature. Future research could attempt to users’ decisions related to selecting platforms. The fea- determine the most important features of platform selection. tures were usability, enjoyment, functionalities, poker Fifth, a common limitation in using conjoint analysis is network, loyalty program, and reputation. When com- related to developing the feature levels. We did not use a paring the preferences of the two groups of gamers, of middle level anchoring point; instead, we used two levels the six features, only the importance score of the loyalty (high-low). While we note that the selection of the levels program was significantly different between the two us- would be more relevant when studying the overall ranking er groups; this feature was more important for of the features, the selection of the levels may have had an extrinsically-motivated gamers. One would have expect- impact on the findings concerning the differences of the ed to see significant differences in the other features as two user groups. well. We interpret this surprising finding as providing support to the claim that extrinsic and intrinsic motiva- tions have shared predictive power for using dual- Conclusion purposed IS and to the overall intertwining nature of hedonic and utilitarian values. In the sections above, This study explored whether differences exist between we outlined several alternative interpretations for our extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated users findings, which we hope to open new avenues for stud- in terms of their selection of online platforms. Based ies on dual-purposed IS. Appendix 1 Table 8 Fact sheet on poker and alternative ways of playing poker (Vilen 2013) Definition Poker is: BA card game... played by two or more people who bet on the value of the hands dealt to them, one of whom wins the pool either by having the highest scoring combination of cards at the showdown, or by forcing all opponents to concede without a showing of the hand, sometimes by means of a bluff^ (The Oxford English dictionary). The most commonly known variants of poker are the classic five-card draw, Texas Hold’em, and Omaha. In all poker games, won or lost money transfers from the loser to the winner (Pokernews.com). Alternative ways of playing When the game occurs at a casino, the party responsible for facilitating the game (i.e., a casino or a poker room) takes a poker small percentage out of every pot, called ‘rake’, or charges an hourly fee for playing (Wikipedia). Stake levels vary significantly, from low to practically infinite, based on the wealth of the players. Generally, poker stake levels are divided into four groups: micro stakes, small stakes, medium stakes, and high stakes. Micro stakes are not generally available at traditional casinos because they are too small to generate sufficient income for the casino. Small stakes games are usually the smallest games available at brick and mortar casinos, and most casinos have no upper limit for the stake levels. Poker is most commonly played at casinos, in special poker rooms, and at gamers’ own homes. The problem with casinos and poker rooms is that for many people, they might be hard to reach, as casinos are generally in geographically distinct locations (Wood et al. 2007). For instance, in Finland, there is only one casino that is allowed to offer the full range of casino games. Some people may also feel that extra effort is required to get into a casino, as some places may require customers to dress according to certain guidelines, register as a customer or pay for membership. The first visit to a casino may seem particularly intimidating for many people. In addition, the stake levels available at casinos may also feel slightly high for a first timer who is learning how to play poker. It seems that numerous small obstacles exist, which may have keep potential players from going to a casino to try poker. Thus, it appears fairly logical that poker in its traditional form has not become as popular as it could have become due to these impeding factors, until the introduction of online poker. Online poker Online poker rooms function in the same way as traditional land-based poker rooms or casinos except everything occurs online. To be able to play, one must create an account, for which an email address is needed. Depositing money is not usually a requirement, as practically all known online poker rooms provide an opportunity to start playing with play money. Thus, investing money in the beginning is not necessary, which has probably been a significant factor for lowering the entry barriers into the world of poker. As people can access and practice poker from the safety of their own home without the fear of losing money, it is easy to see why an increasing number of people have been eager to try it, have gotten excited and then ultimately deposited real money into their account. Furthermore, unlike traditional brick E. Penttinen et al. Table 8 (continued) and mortar casinos, micro stakes poker games are available in online poker rooms. Thus, it is easy to start playing with real money, as one can start with very small stakes and proceed to larger games as skills and willingness to take risks increase. The first form of online poker emerged in the early 1990s, when online poker was played as a text only version over Internet Relay Chat (IRC). As the game was lacking a graphic user interface and real money. Mainly computer enthusiasts played it. In early 1998, Planet Poker was launched, which was the first real online poker room that intended to provide the land-based poker experience online. In late 1999, Paradise Poker was introduced, which provided a sleeker user interface with significantly faster software. In 2001, PartyPoker.com launched its poker room and a guaranteed one-million-dollar tournament (Flopturnriver.com). In 2004, Full Tilt Poker entered the market with a poker pro-led strategy and an emphasis on high quality software. In 2006, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act forced all public companies to pull out of the US market. As a result, only PokerStars and Full Tilt were left serving American online poker players, as they were both privately held (Pokerplayer.co.uk). In 2011, the remaining major operators were essentially wiped out of the market, as they were all charged by the FBI with money laundering and using defrauded banks to bypass the abovementioned gambling act (Sieroty 2011). However, lately, PokerStars and Absolute Poker have been able to return to the market. The exact number of poker networks or sites available is difficult to determine, as networks and poker sites tend to merge, disappear or appear rather quickly. However, pokerscout.com ranks known poker sites or networks according to their traffic. The listing claims that there are 68 existing poker sites (as of February 10, 2016). However, some of these poker sites appear to have no traffic at all, so they can be considered nonexistent. Only ten poker networks are truly global and appear to have traffic. When considering both global and local-only networks, the number of active networks increases to approximately forty. Appendix 2: Expert interview questions 4. At what stake level do you currently play? (Micro, small/ low, medium, or high) Each interview started by covering the background of 5. Do you think you play to a) to earn money or b) just for the interviewee and identifying whether the interviewee fun? wasconsideredtobeprimarily extrinsically-motivated 6. A question based on the answer to the previous question or intrinsically-motivated. The second part of the inter- views consisted of questions related to online poker a. Do you occasionally also play just for fun? sites, their attributes and whether the interviewees pre- b. Do you occasionallyalsoplayonlytoearnmoney? ferred various attributes of the poker sites. The second part started with questions that allowed the interviewees Poker software to freely state any features they felt to be important. The questions became more specific towards the end 1. What do you consider to be the most important feature of of the interview to gain a more profound understanding when choosing a poker site? about a number of essential issues important for this 2. What other features of a poker site do you consider to be survey and to confirm the criteria found in the literature important? review. To clarify, the questions at the beginning of the 3. Do you use more than one poker software at the moment? interview were broader to allow any criteria to emerge Why? that were not discovered during the literature review. 4. What features make a poker site useful? All of the questions in the interview were open-ended. 5. What features make a poker site pleasant to use? All interviews were recorded and transcribed. 6. Does the Internet security of a poker site influence your decision to use or not to use it? How do you recognize a secure/unsecure site? 7. Does the image or reputation of a poker site influence Background your decision to use it or not to use it? 8. Does the loyalty program/rakeback contract influ- 1. How long have you played online poker? ence your decision to use or not to use a particular 2. Is poker your main source of income? poker site? 3. How many hours, on average, do you spend playing pok- er per week? Playing for fun or for profit: how extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players make the... Appendix 3 Table 9 Narratives of the expert interviews Interviewee 1: Juuso Hytönen For Hytönen, the most important features of an online poker site are that the Hytönen is a 24-year-old Finnish business school student who has been site has a large player base and that there is a good selection of different playing online poker for six years. He says that online poker provides varieties of poker games available at all times. Secondary features that him an extra source of income, but he spends the majority of his time are important to him include reliability and usability. He wants to use a studying and claims that student aid is his main source of income. poker site that runs smoothly and does not crash. In addition, he thinks Hytönen estimates that he plays online poker approximately 10 h per that he is willing to play with a poker site that is slightly harder to use if week at the medium-stakes level. He states that he plays poker essen- the games available are very good. tially to earn money, but he admits that he might sometimes play online Hytönen thinks that a pleasant poker site should have a simple interface, so poker only for fun. that it is quick and easy to see what occurs at the tables, how much money each player has, et cetera. He also thinks that buttons that allow you to bet, for instance, ¾ pot make a poker site more pleasant to use, as they make playing more effortless. Such features also make the poker site more useful in his opinion, as it allows for quicker action and decision-making, which allows him to play more hands per hour and increase his expected profits. Hytönen claims that it is difficult to determine whether a poker site is secure or not and that he mainly relies on the reputation of a poker site, which he evaluates for safety and trustworthiness. However, he thinks that the security of a poker site is an important factor; therefore, the reputation of a poker site greatly influences his decision to use or not to use it. Finally, Hytönen thinks that loyalty programs are also a major factor influencing his decision-making. He says that if a poker site did not offer a rakeback contract, he would probably decide not to use it. He says that the amount he is able to receive through a rakeback is so significant that it would not be reasonable for him to play without such a contract. Interviewee 2: Aaro Valkila The most important feature of a poker site for Valkila is that the site would Valkila is a 24-year-old Finnish professional poker player who has been always have the games that he likes to play available. In other words, he playing online poker for approximately two years. He has been playing states that the availability of the right games, in essence, means that the professionally for a fairly short time. Poker winnings are his main source player base of the poker site is large enough. of income at the time of the interview, and he estimates that he spends Almost equally important for Valkila is the usability of the poker site. approximately 50 h playing poker per week. Valkila plays medium Valkila explains that there are significant differences among poker sites stakes poker games. He says that he plays primarily Texas Hold’em to in terms of their usability and that for him, the usability of a poker site is earn money, but he sometimes plays other poker games just for fun (e.g., very important. Omaha). Thus, he is considered to be a professional player who may Valkila thinks that, in general, having rules such as a minimum buy-in for a occasionally engage in recreational playing. table and enough time to think about each decision makes a poker site useful. Regarding the actual software, Valkila thinks that having bet sliders or buttons that allow you to bet, for instance, ½ pot is a very useful feature. In addition, Valkila thinks that an automatic buy-in feature makes his playing more efficient. Furthermore, having good waiting lists for ring games improves the usefulness of a poker site, in Valkila’s opinion. Valkila states that the same features that make a poker site useful also influence the enjoyment of its use. However, he mentions that the ability to customize the graphics or appearance of the poker site makes the use of the site more pleasant. Generally, he thinks that a poker site that is pleasant to use has a nice interface in terms of its appearance. Reputation is also an important factor determining whether Valkila chooses to use a particular poker site or not. According to him, reputation is the only way he can evaluate the security or reliability of a poker site. For this reason, he tends to prefer well-known poker sites that are used by his acquaintances and tries to avoid poker sites that may have a questionable reputation or no reputation at all. Finally, Valkila claims that a loyalty program is an important factor for him, and he always considers the rakeback-percentage before deciding which poker site he is going to use. In general, he says that a loyalty program is a significant factor for him. Interviewee 3: Sami Kelopuro The single most important feature for Kelopuro is that he can find the right Kelopuro is a 24-year-old professional poker player who has been playing kind of games on the online poker site, which practically means that he is online poker for six years. Kelopuro lives in Finland and plays poker able to find games that have large enough stake levels that have some both online and offline but mainly online. Poker is the main source of ‘value’ for him, meaning that he considers that he is capable of playing income for Kelopuro, and he estimates that he spends approximately the game profitably. He claims that the size of a network does not E. Penttinen et al. Table 9 (continued) 40 h per week playing online poker. Kelopuro plays high stakes poker unambiguously correlate with the availability of the right kind of games. games. According to Kelopuro, when he plays poker, his intention is to According to Kelopuro, it is more important to have the right kind of win money; therefore, he is considered to be purely professional and, players in the network than to have a vast number of players in the thus, primarily extrinsically motivated. network. The reason Kelopuro has fairly specific demands for the right kind of players is probably the fact that the number of players in the world who play the level of stakes that he prefers is fairly limited. In addition, most players of these games are professionals and among the best in the world. Therefore, for the games to be profitable, it is essential to find the weakest among these players. Another important feature of an online poker site important to Kelopuro is that the poker site is compatible with third-party poker tracking and analysis software (e.g., Hold’em manager, PokerTracker) and services (e.g., pokertableratings.com). In addition, Kelopuro considers the look and usability of the poker site to be important factors. He says that he becomes annoyed with software that has poor sounds, graphics, and animations and prefers a site that has a pleasing graphical interface, sounds and animations. In addition, he thinks that if the user can somehow modify a poker site’s appearance, it makes the site more pleasant. To conclude, Kelopuro considers simple sites that are easy and effortless to use to also be pleasant to use. Too many or overly complicated animations, sound effects and other types of effects may cause too much confusion and make a site too slow to use. Furthermore, Kelopuro notes that features that increase the usefulness of a poker site are important to him. In his opinion, features that increase the usefulness of a poker site include options such as a bet slider and buttons that allow you to automatically bet, for instance, 33% of the total pot and to review a past hand easily and quickly. In addition, he thinks that the filters in the poker site lobby that allow players to find the right games or tables are important and useful features, as they allow the player to quickly find and get into the best games available at any given moment. Kelopuro thinks that the reputation of a poker site is essentially the only way he can determine whether a poker site is secure and reliable. He thinks that security and reliability are important factors, but he also recognizes that online poker sites may have limited capabilities to prevent certain problems, such as someone accessing another player’s computer, seeing the other player’s cards and taking advantage of the situation. In practice, he thinks that a site’s Internet security is based on news and rumors, but such things do influence his decision to use or not to use a certain poker site. Finally, Kelopuro says that he always chooses the best available loyalty program for each poker network, as multiple skins are usually available for a poker network and all offer slightly different loyalty programs. Kelopuro claims that a loyalty program is not the only reason to use or not use a certain poker site as such, but once a decision has been made to use a specific poker network, he will choose the poker room on that network that offers the best loyalty program. The impact of a loyalty program per se is fairly small according to Kelopuro. Interviewee 4: Pasi Vilén The most important feature of poker site for Vilén is the availability of the Vilén is a 45-year-old IT consultant from Finland. Vilén has been playing games he wants to play, which in practice means that the poker site is part online poker for four years, and he considers himself to be a purely of a network that has a large player base. Other significant features that recreational player and plays only for fun. He estimates that he spends, Vilén considers important are that the software is easy to use, which on average, 10 h a week playing online poker. Vilén plays low and means that you can easily find and join the games you want to play, and medium stakes poker games. that the appearance of the software is neat. In Vilén’s opinion, useful features include options such as appropriate filters in the lobby that allow you to quickly find the right tables and that players are not given too much time to think about their decisions, which improves the flow of the game. In addition, he mentions that another useful feature of a poker site is the absence of excessive animations or graphics. Vilén thinks that a poker site that is pleasant to use should have pleasing colors and essential buttons and functions are easy to use and quick to find. In addition, important information, such as the amount of money in the pot or the amount each player has in chips, should be clearly Playing for fun or for profit: how extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players make the... Table 9 (continued) displayed. Generally, Vilén claims that a pleasant site is simple and easy to use. Vilén says that the security of a poker site is an important factor for him, but it is difficult to determine whether a site is secure. He says that one can identify that payments are made using a secure connection, but all other perceptions related to the security and reliability of a poker site are based on the reputation of the site. For this reason, Vilén says that he tends to prefer sites that are run by well-known companies. Finally, he says that loyalty programs may have some impact on his decision when he is choosing a poker site but that rakeback programs have little importance for him is very little. E. Penttinen et al. Appendix 4: Choice-based conjoint V are compared, the probability p that profile l is k l analysis chosen is e l In choice-based conjoint analysis (CBC), the total perceived util- pl ¼ : ∑ e s ity U is the sum of the total value V and a random error term ε s¼1 present in the valuation of a product: U=V+ε. In practice, V is quite frequently an additive function of the product features The estimation of the utility functions and aggregate or (sometimes with interaction terms). Each feature typically has individual utilities are carried out by hierarchical Bayes esti- between two and eight possible values that are referred to as mation (HB). The HB uses Markov chain Monte Carlo levels. If there are n features denoted by a ,a , …,a , then the 1 2 n (MCMC) simulations as a means of estimation and has proved total utility U is. to be very efficient (Halme and Kallio 2011). MCMC iterations in estimating the part-worths mean that starting from a priori part-worths, an a posteriori esti- mate is produced using sampling, and this process is repeated for a large number of iterations. The estimation where u is the utility function of an individual feature i, i = is an iterative process, where after convergence, the es- 1,…,n. The estimated values of u (a ) are often referred to as timates are calculated as the means of the last iterations i i part-worths or partial utilities. when convergence already occurred. The respondent evaluates some product profiles (typi- In our case, the hierarchical Bayes (Sawtooth Software, HB cally between three and six at a time), which include fea- 5.0) was used in the estimation. The Bayesian method for ture levels defined in the study for choosing the best profile conducting the statistical test, which compares the importance offered. In CBC analysis, the error term ε has a Gumbel scores of the features across the two groups, was employed. distribution (with a location parameter of zero and a We ran the dataset with HB supplementing the choice data variance of π/6). The Gumbel distribution is relatively with a priori information of the type of player group for each similar to the normal distribution and is used because respondent. That information is then used as a covariate in the the choice probabilities can be expressed in a simple HB estimation (see Orme and Howell 2009). The software closed form formula, unlike the case of a normal distri- produces draws of the a posteriori probability distribution bution. The evaluation of alternative profiles with inde- for the difference in the average scores across the two groups. pendent valuation errors results in the multinomial logit When viewing that distribution, if the confidence level is 95% choice model (McFadden 1974; Swait and Louviere (for the difference in averages to be positive), 95 of the obser- 1993): if k product profiles with total values V , …, vations were positive. Appendix 5 Table 10 Screenshot of the research instrument Playing for fun or for profit: how extrinsically-motivated and intrinsically-motivated players make the... Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http:// System Sciences (pp. 1035–1044). creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, Green, P., Krieger, A., & Wind, Y. (2001). Thirty Years of Conjoint distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give Analysis: Reflections and Prospects. Interfaces, 31(3– appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link Supplement), 56–73. to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Gu, J.-C., Fan, L., Suh, Y. H., & Lee, S.-C. (2010). Comparing utilitarian and hedonic usefulness to user intention in multipurpose informa- tion systems. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(3), 287–297. Hagiu, A., & Eisenmann, T. (2007). A staged solution to the Catch-22. References Harvard Business Review, 85(11), 25–26. Haile, N., & Altmann, J. (2016). Structural analysis of value creation in software service platforms. Electronic Markets, 26(2), 129–142. Adler, P.A., & Adler, P. (1999). Resort workers: Adaptations in the Halme, M., & Kallio, M. (2011). Estimation methods for choice-based leisure-work Nexus. Sociological Perspectives, 42(3), 369–402. conjoint analysis of consumer preferences. European Journal of Babin, B., Darden, W., Griffin, M., & Darden, R. (1994). Work and/or Operational Research, 214(1), 160–167. Fun : Shopping Measuring Value Hedonic and Utilitarian. Journal Hann, I.-H., Hui, K.-L., Lee, S.-Y., & Png, I. (2007). Overcoming online of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644–656. information privacy concerns: An information-processing theory Bala, H., & Venkatesh, V. (2007). Assimilation of Interorganizational approach. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(2), business process standards. Information Systems Research, 18(3), 13–42. 340–362. Hannum, R., & Cabot, A. (2009). Toward legalization of poker: the skill Batra, R., & Ahtola, O. T. (1990). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian vs. chance debate. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, sources of consumer attitudes. Marketing Letters, 2(2), 159–170. 13(1), 1–20. Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). An empirical analysis of the antecedents of Hirschman, E., & Holbrook, M. (1982). Hedonic consumption: Emerging electronic commerce service continuance. Decision Support concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), Systems, 32,201–214. 92–101. Bolton, R., Kannan, P., & Bramlett, M. (2000). Implications of loyalty Hoffman, D., Novak, T., & Peralta, M. (1999). Building consumer trust program membership and service experiences for customer retention online. Communications of the ACM, 42(4), 80–85. and value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 95– Hong, S., & Tam, K. (2006). Understanding the adoption of multipurpose information appliances: The case of mobile data services. Carr, N. (2003). IT doesn’t matter. Harvard Business Review, May 2003, Information Systems Research, 17(2), 162–179. 41-49. Hsu, C.-L., & Lin, J. (2008). Acceptance of blog usage: The roles of Chismar, W., & Wiley-Patton, S. (2002). Test of the Technology technology acceptance, social influence and knowledge sharing mo- Acceptance Model for the Internet Pediatrics. In AMIA Annual tivation. Information & Management, 45,65–74. Symposium Proceedings (pp. 155–159). Johnson, F., Hauber, A., Osoba, D., Hsu, M., Coombs, J., & Copley- Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2008). Delight by design: Merriman, C. (2006). Are chemotherapy patients’ HRQoL impor- The role of delight hedonic versus utilitarian benefits. Journal of tance weights consistent with linear scoring rules? A stated-choice Marketing, 72(3), 48–63. approach. Qualityof LifeResearch, 15(2), 285–298. Chrzan, K., & Orme, B. (2000). An overview and comparison of design Katz, M., & Shapiro, C. (1985). Network externalities, competition and strategies for choice-based conjoint analysis. WA: Sequim. compatibility. The American Economic Review, 75(3), 424–440. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user Katz, M., & Shapiro, C. (1986). Technology adoption in the presence of acceptance of information technology. MIS Quaterly, 13(3), 319– network externalities. Journal of Political Economy, 94(4), 822, Derikx, S., de Reuver, M., & Kroesen, M. (2016). Can privacy concerns Keil, M., & Tiwana, A. (2006). Relative importance of evaluation criteria for insurance of connected cars be compensated? Electronic for enterprise systems: A conjoint study. Information Systems Markets, 26(1), 73–81. Journal, 16(3), 237–262. Eastlick, M., Lotz, S., & Warrington, P. (2006). Understanding online B- Kersten, G., & Noronha, S. (1999). WWW-based negotiation support: to-C relationships: An integrated model of privacy concerns, trust, Design, implementation, and use. Decision Support Systems, and commitment. Journal of Business Research, 59(8), 877–886. 25(2), 135–154. Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. (2006). Strategies for two- Lee, J.-S., Cho, H., Gay, G., Davidson, B., & Ingraffea, A. (2003). sided markets. Harvard Business Review, 84(10), 92–101. Technology acceptance and social networking in distance learning. Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. (2011). Platform envelop- Educational Technology & Society, 6(2), 50–61. ment. Strategic Management Journal, 32(12), 1270–1285. Lee, M., Cheung, C., & Chen, Z. (2005). Acceptance of internet-based Farrell, J., & Saloner, G. (1985). Standardization, compatibility, and in- learning medium: The role of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. novation. The Rand Journal of Economics, 16(1), 70–83. Information Management, 42,1095–1104. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in Li, H., Liu, Y., Xu, X., Heikkilä, J., & Van Der Heijden, H. (2015). online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90. Modeling hedonic is continuance through the uses and gratifications Gelman, A., Carlin, J., Stern, H., Dunson, D., Vehtari, A., & Rubin, D. theory: An empirical study in online games. ComputersinHuman (2013). Bayesian data analysis, third edition. Boca Raton, FL: Behavior, 48,261–272. Chapman & Hall/CRC. Louviere, J., Flynn, T., & Carson, R. (2010). Discrete choice experiments Gerow, J., Ayyagari, R., Thatcher, J., & Roth, P. (2013). Can we have fun are not conjoint analysis. Journal of Choice Modelling, 3(3), 57–72. @ work? The role of intrinsic motivation for utilitarian systems. Lowry, P., Gaskin, J., & Hammer, B. (2013). Taking Bfun and games^ European Journal of Information Systems, 22(3), 360–380. seriously: Proposing the hedonic-motivation system adoption mod- el. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14(11), 617– Giessmann, A., & Stanoevska-Slabeva, K. (2013). What are developers’ preferences on platform as a service? An empirical investigation. In 671. E. Penttinen et al. McCormack, A., & Griffiths, M. (2012). What differentiates professional Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 10(1), 1– poker players from recreational poker players? A qualitative inter- view study. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, Swait, J., & Louviere, J. (1993). The role of the scale parameter in the 10,243–257. estimation and comparison of multinomial logit models. Journal of McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice Marketing Research, 30,305–314. behavior. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in Econometrics (pp. Teichert, T., & Shehu, E. (2010). Investigating research streams of con- 105–142). New York: Academic Press, Inc. joint analysis: A bibliometric study. Business Research, 3(1), 48–68. Merikivi, J., Tuunainen, V., & Nguyen, D. (2017). What makes continued Trenz, M. (2015). Multichannel Commerce - A Consumer Perspective on mobile gaming enjoyable? Computers in Human Behavior, 68,411– the Integration of Physical and Electronic Channels. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. Academic Press, Inc. Turel, O., Serenko, A., & Bontis, N. (2010). User acceptance of hedonic Orme, B., & Howell, J. (2009). Application of covariates within Sawtooth digital artifacts: A theory of consumption values perspective. Softwares CBC/HB program: Theory and practical example Information Management, 47(1), 53–59. Sawtooth software. van der Heijden, H. (2004). User acceptance of hedonic information Park, Y., & el Sawy, O. (2008). Towards a design theory for hedonic systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695–704. systems: Delivering superior user experience in the digital home Verhagen, T., Feldberg, F., Van Den Hooff, B., Meents, S., & Merikivi, J. entertainment context. In V. Vaishnavi & R. Baskerville (Eds.), (2012). Understanding users’ motivations to engage in virtual Proceedings of the third international conference on design science worlds: A multipurpose model and empirical testing. Computers in research in information systems and technology (pp. 323–328). Human Behavior, 28(2), 484–495. Atlanta, Georgia. Vilén, V. (2013). Choosing a website to play poker - A comparison be- Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. (2005). Two-sided network effects: A tween utilitarian and hedonic users, MSC thesis, Aalto University theory of information product design. Management Science, School of Business. 51(10), 1494–1504. Voss, K., Spangenberg, E., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the Parker, G., Van Alstyne, M., & Choudary, S. (2016). Platform revolution: Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Consumer Attitude. How Networked Markets Are Transforming the Economy–And How Journal of Marketing Research, XL(August 2003), 159–170. to Make Them Work for You. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Weiss, T., & Schiele, S. (2013). Virtual worlds in competitive contexts: Company Inc. Analyzing eSports consumer needs. Electronic Markets, 23,307– Penttinen, E., Halme, M., Lyytinen, K. & Myllynen, N. (2018) What influences choice of business-to-business connectivity platforms? International Journal of Electronic Commerce,22(4). Wood, R., Williams, R., & Lawton, P. (2007). Why do internet gamblers Phillips, K., Johnson, F., & Maddala, T. (2002). Measuring what people prefer online versus land-based venues? Some preliminary findings value: A comparison of Battitude^ and Bpreference^ surveys. Health and implications. Journal of Gambling Issues, 20,235–252. Services Research, 37(6), 1659–1679. Wu, J. (2014). Customer satisfaction in the context of online gaming Salo, J., & Karjaluoto, H. (2007). A conceptual model of trust in the service: The hedonic experience factor. International Journal of online environment. Online Information Review, 31(5), 604–621. Business Analytics, 1(3), 63–80. Siau, K., Sheng, H., Nah, F., & Davis, S. (2003). Development of a Wu, J., Li, P., & Rao, S. (2008). Why they enjoy virtual game worlds? An framework for Trust in Mobile Commerce. In Proceedings of the empirical investigation. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Second Annual Workshop on HCI Research in MIS, Seattle, WA, 9(3), 219–230. December 12-13, 2003 (pp. 85–89). Wu, J., & Lu, X. (2013). Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivators on Sieroty, C. (2011). Panel says critical mass matters for online poker. Las using utilitarian, hedonic, and dual-purposed information systems: Vegas Business Press, 20(20). A meta-analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Soliman, W., & Tuunainen, V. K. (2015). Understanding continued use of Systems, 14(3), 153–191. crowdsourcing systems: An interpretive study. Journal of
Electronic Markets – Springer Journals
Published: May 27, 2018
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera