• No results found

Cultural differences within user experience and user interface : A qualitative study on how individualistic and collectivistic cultural differences affect users' attitudes towards food ordering applications

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Cultural differences within user experience and user interface : A qualitative study on how individualistic and collectivistic cultural differences affect users' attitudes towards food ordering applications"

Copied!
69
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES

WITHIN USER EXPERIENCE

AND USER INTERFACE

A qualitative study on how individualistic and collectivistic cultural differences affect users' attitudes towards food ordering applications BATISTIER, LOUISE

HOLMLUND, FELICIA

Supervisor: Konstantin Lampou Date: 2021-06-04

School of Business, Society & Engineering

Course: Master Thesis in Business Administration Course code: FOA403

(2)

ABSTRACT

Date: 2021-06-04

Level: Master Thesis in Business Administration, 15 cr

Institution: School of Business, Society and Engineering, Mälardalen University Authors: Louise Batistier Felicia Holmlund

(95/03/15) (96/12/18)

Title: Cultural differences within user experience and user interface

Tutor: Konstantin Lampou

Keywords: Attitude, Cultural differences, Online food ordering applications, User experience & User interface.

Research

questions: How do individualistic and collectivistic cultural differences affect the attitude towards user experience and user interface on online food ordering applications?

Purpose: The study's purpose is to present additional information about how individualistic and collectivistic cultural differences might affect the customer's attitude towards UX and UI on online food ordering applications.

Method: The authors decided to conduct a qualitative research method to investigate the study's area that aimed to measure attitudes of cultural differences and understand if there is an influence on user experience and user interface. The qualitative research intends to examine what happens in individuals' consciousness, where their opinions and perceptions are in focus. The empirical data was collected via focus groups based on a semi- structured interview guide and A/B testing.

Conclusion: The authors found that individuals' cultural background can in some cases have an impact on their attitude towards UX and UI on food ordering applications. The study's conclusion covered the themes; simplicity, information, experience and aesthetic. As a result, the study could be interpreted as potential guidelines to improve companies' applications and potentially attract a wider target group.

(3)

Table of content

1. Introduction ... 1 1.1 Background ... 1 1.2 Problematisation ... 3 1.3 Research Question ... 4 1.4 Purpose ... 4 2. Theoretical Framework ... 5 2.1 Dimension of Culture ... 5 2.2.1 Power Distance ... 5 2.2.2 Masculinity vs Femininity ... 6

2.2.3 Long-term vs Short-term Orientation ... 6

2.2.4 Individualism vs Collectivism ... 7 2.2.5 Uncertainty Avoidance ... 7 2.2.6 Indulgence vs Restrain ... 8 2.2 User Experience ... 9 2.3 Attitude ... 12 2.4 Research Model ... 14 3. Methodology ... 16 3.1 Choice of Method ... 16

3.2 Choice of Literature Collection ... 17

3.3 Empirical Data Collection ... 18

3.3.1 Choice of Informants ... 19 3.3.2 Ethical Issue ... 22 3.3.3 Construct of Questions ... 23 3.3.4 Semi-structured Approach ... 24 3.3.5 Operationalisation ... 24 3.3.6 Pre-test ... 25 3.3.7 Interview Opportunities ... 25 3.4 Processing of Data ... 27 3.4.1 Coding of Data ... 27 3.5 Quality Criteria ... 30 3.5.1 Trustworthiness ... 30 3.5.2 Authenticity ... 31 4. Empirical Data ... 33 4.1 Simplicity ... 33 4.1.1 Layout ... 33 4.1.2 Ease of Use ... 34 4.2 Information ... 35 4.2.1 Unnecessary ... 36 4.2.2 Reviews ... 36 4.3 Experience ... 37 4.3.1 Expectations ... 37

(4)

4.2. Aesthetic ... 40 4.2.1 Colours ... 40 4.2.2 Design ... 41 4.2.3 Photos ... 42 5. Analysis ... 44 5.1 Simplicity ... 44 5.2 Information ... 45 5.3 Experience ... 46 5.4 Aesthetic ... 47 6. Conclusion ... 49 7. Managerial Implications ... 51 8. Further Studies ... 52 References ... 53 Appendix ... I Appendix A ... I Appendix B ... III Appendix C ... IV Appendix D ... V

(5)

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

As for any enterprise that starts to be established in their home country, a need for further expansion might occur (de Sousa Santos, 2006). According to de Sousa Santos (2006), this means that companies will try to establish themselves in multiple nations for a better competitive advantage in their field. However, there are a few factors that need to be implemented for that to happen. The concept of expanding a business in multiple places around the world would entail that a company is trying to enter the market on a global scale. That concept is called globalisation. Westerlund (2020) mentioned that entering the global working market has become more achievable thanks to digitalisation. The concept of digitalisation has given new opportunities for companies to reach customers and potential partners. It has provided new ways for growing enterprises to become international by adapting themselves to customers abroad (Westerlund, 2020; Mihelj et al., 2018). New digital channels have been created in purpose to evolve companies, especially since the creation of the e-commerce system. That has triggered a completely different consumer behaviour on an international level (Li & Hölttä-Otto, 2020; Rezaei et al., 2016; Towers & Xu, 2016).

According to Li et al. (2020), the e-commerce market has grown enormously in the last decade as a result of increased access to the Internet among consumers. This new buying behaviour has been driven by several different factors where some became a result of global changes (Li et al., 2020; Rezaei et al., 2016; Towers & Xu, 2016). Today's intense use of technologies encourages customers to purchase more through mobile applications (Martins et al., 2019). As a result, people tend to search for alternative digital solutions that make everyday tasks easier and that can be adapted to their own lifestyle (Belanche et al., 2020).

(6)

One market that has experienced great success due to digitalisation is the online food ordering industry (Li et al., 2020). During the previous decades, the most common form of ordering food has been that customers call the restaurant to order and then wait for the restaurant to deliver (Kapoor & Vij, 2018). However, with the increase of digital technology, the market has been redefined. Today, customers use websites or applications to identify nearby restaurants, select the cuisine they want to eat, have a look at the menu and then order the food with a simple click (Kapoor & Vij, 2018). These accessible services on digital platforms guide the user through the potential buying process. In other words, a digital platform can lead the customer through the process by enhancing the experience that the user has while interacting with the platform through customised layout and interactions (Zhou, 2014). This is today more known as user experience (UX) (Kapoor & Vij, 2018). However, UX is not the only factor that has an impact on how the platform is perceived by the user. Kapoor and Vij (2018) mentioned that another important factor of the experience is the aesthetic aspect. This includes colours, shapes and other aspects of visual communication, known as user interface (UI). Companies have noticed that these factors of experience and interface can increase brand awareness. Kapoor and Vij (2018), and Zhou (2014) argue that this can improve the brand experience, and in the long run, increase sales.

Other studies have predicted more competition on the online food ordering market, due to these technological developments. Zhao and Bacao (2020) mentioned that this would entail a need for more culturally diverse adapted platforms for the purpose of attracting as many customers as possible. Hofstede (2001) mentioned in his work that some nationalities have some differences in how they perceive and process information, like individualistic and collectivistic cultures. The research explained that some individuals, from an individualistic culture, will put themselves in the centre of their decision making while collectivist cultures would tend to choose what is best for the group (Hofstede, 2001). On that note, according to Li et al. (2020),

(7)

it is important to know that populations around the world have different opportunities and preferences while purchasing food online due to cultural reasons. It is even believed that these differences can influence the customers' use of online food ordering platforms (Li et al., 2020).

1.2 Problematisation

According to Zhao and Bacao (2020), customers' continued intention of using online food ordering applications could be influenced by performance expectancy and social influence. Hargreaves and Tiggemann (2003), and Levina et al. (2000) have also been discussing that attitude are taught to individuals through an individual's environment. On that note, Li and Hölttä-Otto (2020) expressed in their study that some customers could have different experiences on the same platform, due to their different cultural backgrounds. Many companies have introduced the concept of applications to become more competitive on the market, which includes an understanding of their users and their cultural differences (Li & Hölttä-Otto, 2020). Liu et al. (2020), and de Souza and Bernardes (2016), highlight the importance of having cultural understanding when it comes to offering a user experience and user interface. However, there is still quite a limited amount of research on how cultural differences might affect the customer's attitude towards user experience and user interface (Kapoor & Vij, 2018). According to Kapoor and Vij (2018), the online food ordering industry is constantly evolving and getting more competitive each decade. Therefore, it is important that companies adapt their digital platform to attract as many potential customers as possible, which then creates a research gap (Kapoor & Vij, 2018). Hofstede (2001) mentioned that individualistic and collectivistic cultures tend to differ in their decision process, which could be in some circumstances a conclusive factor in the customer's buying process. Zhao and Bacao (2020) also mentioned in their study, that they recommend future research about cultural differences in user experience and user

(8)

1.3 Research Question

- How do individualistic and collectivistic cultural differences affect the attitude towards user experience and user interface on online food ordering applications?

1.4 Purpose

The purpose of the study is to present additional information about how cultural differences might affect the customer's attitude towards online food ordering applications. In this case, by implementing a qualitative approach, the study will be applied to a culturally diverse group of people with a total of thirteen nationalities representing individualistic and collectivistic cultures. The results of the study could be interpreted as potential guidelines to improve companies' applications and potentially attract a wider target group. This study contributes to understanding how cultural differences affect the customers' attitude towards their experience on online food ordering applications.

(9)

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1 Dimension of Culture

According to Minkov and Hofstede (2012), there are five main factors that need to be taken into account when it comes to defining culture which are; identity, power, gender, uncertainty, and time. Hofstede (2001) explained that these factors are part of six categories called cultural dimensions. These dimensions were created to explain how a national culture could be, to a certain extent, broken down, analysed and then be compared with each other. Hofstede's (2001) approach to national culture has turned out to be one of the most well-known and currently one of the most studied theories in the field (Minkov & Hofstede, 2012).

According to Hofstede (2001), culture is not something that an individual is born with. However, it is something that gets taught while an individual grows up in a certain society and then becomes an external factor in their behaviour. What that would entail, is that the environment that a person is surrounded by will affect how the individual will feel, think, react and even act. The theory is used to measure and compare cultures with each other, and to do so, it is broken down into six different cultural dimensions, to provide insights into norms and values of cultures in countries. The dimensions represent central areas that could lead to potential difficulties of understanding each other between different cultures. These are measured by an index value between 0 to 100. The higher or lower the number a country receives, the greater the tendency for the country to show a clear trend regarding that specific dimension (Hofstede, 2001).

2.2.1 Power Distance

(10)

accept social inequality and how much that exists in their own society (Hofstede, 2001). Hofstede (1994) explained more in-depth that a high degree of power distance would indicate that there is an acceptance of inequality and hierarchy in society. This entails that those nations would define individuals that are not highly ranked in their society to potentially have less power and those that are part of a high society have some form of privilege. Hofstede (1994) then explained that a nation with a low degree of power distance would have a social power distribution that is more equal. Those individuals strive to evenly distribute power between them and demand justification for differences in the distribution of power (Hofstede, 1994).

2.2.2 Masculinity vs Femininity

As mentioned earlier, the theory explained that one factor that needs to be understood is gender in the national culture (Minkov & Hofstede, 2012). Hofstede (2001) defines the second dimension as masculinity and femininity, which intends to describe how societies handle these gender roles and their consequences for human behaviour. In contrast to what the name of this dimension might evoke, it is not entirely intended to define the differences between men and women. Hofstede (2001) defines this measurement in that a society with high femininity entails prioritising social goals such as building relationships, helping one another, equality and protecting the environment. However, a nation that would have a high masculinity aspect, attach more importance to self-realisation where career and wealth are highly valued (Hofstede, 2001).

2.2.3 Long-term vs Short-term Orientation

Another of Hofstede's dimensions (2001) is long-term and short-term orientation. This refers to the time horizon in a society display. In other words, it indicates the extent to which people in a society accept new material, emotional and social needs. Long-term orientation refers to

(11)

how society demonstrates future potential values and how individuals in a nation tackle a long-term perspective. On the contrary, short-long-term orientation in society refers to more conservative and past or present values where people respect traditions and the social obligations to be fulfilled. Cultures with a long-term focus are not particularly open to new and unexpected changes since people tend to be careful (Hofstede, 2001).

2.2.4 Individualism vs Collectivism

This dimension tackles quite a personal factor when it comes to the national characteristics of a culture. According to the theory of Hofstede (2001), an individualistic culture describes a group of people that does not view themselves as a group but more as an individual. What that entails, is that people that come from an individualistic culture would potentially prefer to be out of the norm of a bigger crowd. These individuals in society refer to themselves as I

while individuals of a collectivistic culture would refer to themselves as we or us. An example of a difference could be the productivity that tends to increase in individualistic countries since feedback is usually given immediately. Another aspect that is common between individuals with an individualistic background, is that they tend to make decisions on purpose to stand out from the group and for personal objectives. However, collectivist cultures tend to perform better in groups where they apply collectivist decisions. They tend to make decisions that are most fitted for the group and do not prefer to be singled out (Hofstede, 2001).

2.2.5 Uncertainty Avoidance

When it comes to uncertainty avoidance, Hofstede (2001) means that this entails to what extent individuals in society feel uncomfortable with not knowing what might come in the future. In other words, there is uncertainty and ambiguity that might occur, by not being sure of how

(12)

they can control the future or just let things happen. Therefore, some nations have implementations in their infrastructure that are more controlled by, for example, laws, religion and technology. Some nations even create an infrastructure that is quite strict that it can be controlled by law and politics which then can be used to ensure uncertainty avoidance. This can restrict some human behaviour through both formal and informal rules. Religions in some nations can also sometimes be treated to comfort the fright of the unknown, and technology can prevent and create more certainty in society by developing new infrastructures (Hofstede, 2001). According to the theory, nations that do not have a high uncertainty avoidance tend to let the individuals have more freedom and are more tolerant to deviance if that were to happen. An example could be that a citizen commits a crime that would most likely be handled in a gentler way in a nation of low uncertainty avoidance rather than a nation that needs to have things highly under control.

2.2.6 Indulgence vs Restrain

Hofstede (2001) discussed in his theory the last dimension of the cultural aspect, which is indulgence and restraint. This part aims to measure individuals' indulgence in the sense of satisfaction in their society, such as the enjoyment of life or other human desires. In other words, it is perceived to be the measurement of gratification for the enjoyment of having fun. This can be measured by studying how society accepts some manners of gratification to be socially acceptable. An example could be that a nation with a high Indulgence degree could socially accept that some individuals spend a lot of money on themselves by treating themselves in an enjoyable manner. However, nations that have a higher restraint degree would potentially not enforce people to indulge themselves too much since it goes against the social norm (Hofstede, 2001).

(13)

2.2 User Experience

Many definitions of user experience (UX) have been presented over the years. However, one of the most used definitions has been made by Hassenzahl and Tractinsky (2006) which defines UX as being a consequence of a user's internal state (e.g., motivation, needs, expectations, mood), the characteristics of the system (e.g., usability, purpose, functionality) and the context where the interaction occurs (e.g., meaningfulness of the activity, social setting). A positive user experience is desirable by both the user and the company that presents the product or service (Hassenzahl & Tractinsky, 2006). According to Lee and Choi (2017), a captivating interaction experience fulfils both the user's instrumental (e.g., usability) and non-instrumental needs (e.g., aesthetic, motivational and symbolic). Hassenzahl and Tractinsky's (2006) studies indicated that a positive user experience can increase user satisfaction and loyalty, thus promoting the company's commercial success. In cases of products that do not fulfil the user expectations, the company can carry out user-research methods to improve the product's UX quality to satisfy the user's needs (Law et al., 2014).

Inspired by Hassenzahl and Tractinsky's (2006) study of the use of hedonic and pragmatic perceptions for product attributes to measure user experience, Park et al. (2013) evaluated several quantifying models that measure user experience. One of the promising methods evaluated in their study, covered the three UX elements usability, affect, and user value that examined different aspects of product experiences (Table 1). Usability is about the product's performance which can be evaluated to what extent the product is easy to use. This element consists of seven sub-elements (Park et al., 2013);

(14)

Directness - Degree of the user's perception of controlling the user interface of the product.

Efficiency - Degree to which the product is effective and effortless, that enables the user to complete a task successfully without wasting time or energy.

Informativeness - How the product distributes necessary information to the user.

Flexibility - How the product can adapt changes to tasks beyond the first specified.

Learnability - The amount of effort and time required the user needs in order to learn how to use a product.

User support - The user's ability to use the product easily throughout its lifecycle.

The second element in Park et al's., (2013) model is affect that covers the user's emotions that are influenced by the product's appearance. This element is also known as user interface (UI) that includes the visual design of the products overall look (Kapoor & Vij, 2018). This element consists of six sub-elements (Park et al., 2013);

Colour - To what degree the colour used in the product is likeable or vivid.

Delicacy - How the product is detailed, or attractive and skilfully made.

(15)

Luxuriousness - To what degree the product quality is perceived to be luxurious and superior.

Attractiveness - The user's perception that the product is appealing, interesting, enchanting and arousing.

Simplicity - How the product looks to be plain, simple, and uncomplicated.

The user value indicates a user's own subjective values associated with the product. This element consists of five sub-elements (Park et al., 2013);

Self-satisfaction - To what degree the product gives a user satisfaction with no effort or with small achievements.

Pleasure - How interaction with the product affects the user's feeling of being pleased or satisfied.

Customer need - How the product's functions or appearances satisfy the user's needs.

Sociability - To what degree the product satisfies the user's desire to be sociable.

Attachment - The user's ability to attach subjective value to the product including trustworthiness, novelty and preciousness.

(16)

Figure 1: Dimensions of User Experience (the authors own creation based on Park et al. (2013)).

2.3 Attitude

According to previous research by Glasman and Albarracín (2006), there are a few factors that need to be considered when it comes to defining the term attitude. They described attitude as something that is evaluated, which would mean preferences either for or against. An example of attitude can be expressed in terms such as prefer, like, dislike, hate, and love. The study described attitude to be an element of association towards another entity, like someone or something (Glasman & Albarracín, 2006).

The authors Glasman and Albarracín (2006), expressed in their study that every human can feel thousands of different attitudes towards different entities. These entities can vary between family, friends, political figures, abortion rights, terrorism, and much more. Each of these

(17)

attitudes has its own unique characteristics, and it is argued that these do not occur or get influenced the same way for every individual (Glasman & Albarracín, 2006). In fact, research by Olson et al. (2001) has found that some of our attitudes are inherited partly via genetic transmission from our parents. Other attitudes can be taught, mostly through direct and indirect experiences such as education or environment (Olson et al., 2001). Other similar studies by Hargreaves and Tiggemann, (2003) and Levina et al. (2000), have also been discussing that attitude are taught to individuals via the media or just like the previous study, through an individual's environment. The study expressed an emphasis on how our attitudes can be shared between social groups whereas other attitudes such as preferences are individualised including tastes, styles of music, art, et cetera. These factors, according to the research, can have an impact on social trends and potentially predict future behaviour. According to the studies of Hargreaves and Tiggemann, (2003) and Levina et al. (2000), to be able to analyse these different types of attitudes, they had to be categorised into three different groups; cognitive attitude, affective attitude and behavioural attitude. Cognitive is described as something a person thinks or believes in, for example, I believe that recycling is a good thing to do. Affect is described as something a person feels emotionally, for example, I feel good about recycling. Lastly, behaviour is described as something that a person does, for example, I recycle regularly. According to Hargreaves and Tiggemann (2003), and Levina et al. (2000), among others, these definitions are put in place to help researchers understand and define more specifically what kind of attitude is in the question of studying. Especially since it is such a broad term that can easily be confusing (Hargreaves & Tiggemann, 2003; Levina et al., 2000).

(18)

2.4 Research Model

Figure 2: Research Model (own creation).

In the purpose of investigating what kind of connection there is between the previously presented theories and the study's end purpose, the authors have illustrated their own dynamic research model that possibly can evolve over time (see Figure 2).

According to Hofstede (2001), different nationalities have differences in how they perceive and process information. This is what defines a nation's culture which will most likely affect how people feel, think, react and act (Hofstede, 2001). To be able to answer the study's research question, the authors decided to investigate cultural differences between individualistic and collectivistic cultures. The model's first step (1) therefore defines an individual's cultural background. This factor can be exposed when an individual puts a product in practice that will lead to user experience. According to Park et al. (2013), user experience (2) covers elements of a product's usability, affect and user value that all can vary in how they are perceived. Glasman and Albarracín (2006), describes that an individual's attitude can associate with another entity. Their study also showed that attitudes (3) have their own unique characteristics, and do not

(19)

influence individuals the same way. Therefore, the dashed line in the research model indicates the study's research area; How do individualistic and collectivistic cultural differences affect the attitude towards user experience and user interface on online food ordering applications? This results in the fourth step (4) of the model, where the individual has created an attitude towards the entity that an individual is exposed to, which in this study, is a food ordering application that could potentially lead to intention to buy and evolve to a habit.

(20)

3. Methodology

3.1 Choice of Method

According to Bryman and Bell (2015), a qualitative research method is better suited for studies that aim to measure attitudes. Therefore, the authors decided to conduct a qualitative research method in order to research the study's area that aimed to measure attitudes of cultural differences. Furthermore, Bryman and Bell (2015) mentioned that qualitative research intends to examine what happens in individuals' consciousness, where their opinions and perceptions are in focus. The authors believe that the result of this study can be analysed better with words since the research question is interpretation-based. In comparison with a quantitative research method, where its analysis is based on numbers and measured by statistics, it is seen to be more profound to use a qualitative method that aims to focus on soft values in the form of actions, interpretations and understandings (Meadows, 2003; Bryman and, 2015).

Sinkovics et al. (2008) emphasised the importance of understanding interpretations with a deeper observation, which gives both the reader and the researcher a deeper understanding of what the collected data really means. The information's validity does not depend on the result, however, it is more about the process of how it is delivered by analysing the decisions of the research process. This results in the reader getting a deeper understanding of what the analysed result entails. Sinkovics et al. (2008) also mentioned that there is a small chance of two researchers making the same interview would get different responses and results. Even if the process would have been the exact same. This can therefore be seen to be one of the perks of making a qualitative study since individuals do not perceive questions and information the same way, and therefore have different ways of creating viewpoints of the examined phenomenon. Therefore, this study will focus on the informant's responses and accuracy in their measurement

(21)

of results, especially since it has been a validated method of research by different studies throughout the years including Sinkovics et al. (2008), and Bell and Bryman (2007).

3.2 Choice of Literature Collection

In the literature collection, it was important for the authors to find out what previous researchers have investigated in the area of the study, and where there may be contradictions and grounds for further studies. According to Bryman and Bell (2015), a literature collection helps the authors with the process of choosing a method and research strategy. Through a detailed literature collection, the authors found inspiration within the areas to develop the study's research question, operationalisation and choice of theoretical framework. These areas included cultural differences, user experience and attitude.

According to Sinkovics et al. (2008), it is important to ensure the study's conceptual equivalence by the theoretical framework which needs to fit with the functional equivalence that entails collected empirical data. This helped the authors to construct the interview questions and connect them to the previously presented theories. Sinkovics et al. (2008) mentioned in their work that this also can ensure the study’s validity of the data. Due to this statement, the authors decided to choose literature that covers subjects that were believed to be the most relevant to the reseach. All literature was collected from research databases available at Mälardalen University's electronic library, where the platforms Primo and ProQuest were used. In the search process, the authors used the filter setting to make sure that all literature used was peer-reviewed. Furthermore, the following keywords were used to find relevant material for the study; user experience, user interface, cultural differences, attitude, mobile applications, cultural dimension, preferences, user experience attitude and online food ordering.

(22)

The authors of the study were aware of the potential drawbacks of using theories that were older than five years old and could be perceived as questionable to the research’s reliability and validity. However, the chosen theories that were considered to be old had been reused and revalidated repeatedly by other researchers throughout the years. Therefore, the authors chose to see them as reliable.

3.3 Empirical Data Collection

The authors decided to collect the study's empirical material through focus group sessions since, according to Bryman and Bell (2015), it gives the authors the opportunity to get closer to the informants to interpret the world in a similar way as they do. According to Breen (2006), focus groups are better suited for studies that aim to focus on the attitudes of the informants. Therefore, the authors' considered focus groups to be the most adequate for this study since the research focused on the informant's attitudes and perceptions of UX and UI on food ordering applications. To better understand the informant's attitudes towards the applications that the authors exposed them to, an A/B testing was made. According to Duivesteijn et al. (2017), A/B testing can be defined as a test involving two versions of one product, which then refers to as option A and option B. This method can be used as a comparison method to analyse an individual's difference of attitudes towards two presented options (Duivesteijn et al., 2017). Therefore, the informants were presented with two examples of platform layouts at the same time and chose which one they preferred (Appendix D). The author did this twice, which means that in total, the informants were exposed to four different platform layouts.

According to Duivesteijn et al. (2017), to be able to compare several platform layouts, the platforms have to expose a similar message and product with only a few detailed differences. The authors researched the market of food ordering applications and discovered that

(23)

McDonald's had different interfaces depending on the nation. Therefore, the authors got inspired by the company's applications since they offer the same core products but with different interfaces depending on the country. To decide which applications of what nations should be used in the A/B testing, the authors got inspired by Sinkovics et al. (2008) who mentioned that qualitative studies make it possible to analyse the informant's decision process. According to Hofstede (2001), individualistic cultures usually make decisions by themselves or prefer to stand out, while collectivistic cultures would tend to think about the community and take decisions together. Therefore, in the inspiration of Hofstede (2001), the authors chose to compare McDonald's applications from nations of individualistic and collectivistic cultures. The authors chose applications from Sweden and Germany to represent individualistic cultures, and Japan and Malaysia to represent collectivistic cultures.

To avoid the chance of letting the informants' attitude towards the user experience be affected by their attitude towards Mcdonald's as a brand, the branded content was deleted. For the same purpose, Mcdonald's pictures were exchanged with similar pictures retrieved from the websites Unsplash (n.d.) and Pexels (n.d.) which offer a wide range of copyright pictures. The updated version was then created via the prototyping tool named Figma (n.d.).

3.3.1 Choice of Informants

One of the main factors that the authors wanted to investigate was how individualistic and collectivistic cultural differences could affect individuals' attitudes towards UX and UI on online food ordering applications. In addition, the authors had to choose informants that would be most relevant to the research. Therefore, the authors decided to conduct a purposive sampling method where the informants were not randomly selected. In fact, they were selected for their relevance of the area of the study (Bryman & Bell, 2015). The criteria included that

(24)

requirement of them spending the majority of their lives in that nation. To fully understand how the informants' potential cultural differences could affect their attitude towards UX and UI on online food ordering applications, the authors decided to have culturally diverse groups. These informants represented highly individualistic and highly collectivistic cultures due to their potential difference in their decision process (Hofstede, 2001). One of the important aspects that the authors took into account was that all the informants needed to have some previous experience of ordering food via an application. By having some previous knowledge of the functionalities of food ordering applications, it helped the informants to focus on the study's main subject, which was the attitude that might differ on the user experience and user interface of the platforms.

In order to give all informants the opportunity to be able to fully express themselves and understand the questions and the other informants, they all needed to be comfortable to both speak and understand the English language. Otherwise, this could have created what Sinkovics et al. (2008) call to be a construct bias when there is an incomplete overlap of definitions of the construct across cultures. In other words, some terms could have triggered confusion between the different cultures. This would mainly have been a problem due to a language barrier, which turned out not to be the case in this study.

In addition, the authors applied convenience sampling which means that the informants were easily accessible during the implementation of the focus groups (Bryman & Bell, 2015). Since the study’s creation process timeline was limited, the authors decided that this would be the most relevant and achievable sampling method to apply. The authors chose to contact informants via LinkedIn and Facebook with the knowledge that they fulfilled the criteria. The written invitation to the focus groups was limited in information about the area of investigation to reduce the risk of influencing their responses at the time of the interviews (Appendix C).

(25)

In total, 18 informants took part in the study where they were divided into four focus groups. The choice of having these groups was inspired by Bryman and Bell (2015) who emphasized the importance of generating theoretical saturation. If theoretical saturation would still not be fulfilled, a fifth focus group was planned. The informants were between the age of 21 and 34 years old. In addition, the authors aimed to have focus groups that were as equal as possible between the number of men and women as well as a balanced distribution of

people from both individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Furthermore, the informants were distributed into groups where they did not know each other to eliminate the risk of triggering existing interaction patterns and status differences which could potentially affect the group discussion in a negative manner (Bryman & Bell, 2015). Due to last-minute changes of the circumstances for some of the informants, the distribution of the focus groups had to be reassigned. As a result, it was not completely equally distributed between the genders in all focus groups.

Table 1: List of Informants

Focus group 1 Focus group 2

Informant Age Cultural background Informant Age Cultural background

Woman 1 22 Unites States (Individualistic) Woman 4 27 Italy (Individualistic)

Woman 2 25 Croatia (Collectivistic) Woman 5 26 South Africa (Individualistic)

Woman 3 25 Spain (Individualistic) Man 3 34 South Africa (Individualistic)

Man 1 22 France (Individualistic) Man 4 32 India (Collectivistic)

(26)

Focus group 3 Focus group 4

Informant Age Cultural background Informant Age Cultural background

Woman 6 26 Norway (Individualistic) Woman 9 25 Croatia (Collectivistic)

Woman 7 24 United States (Individualistic) Woman 10 25 Sweden (Individualistic)

Woman 8 25 Czech Republic (Individualistic) Woman 11 26 Germany (Individualistic)

Man 5 25 Serbia (Collectivistic) Man 7 32 Sweden (Individualistic)

Man 6 26 Morocco (Collectivistic)

3.3.2 Ethical Issue

According to Bryman and Bell (2015), there are several aspects that are important to consider when conducting a study. These aspects include integrity, confidentiality and anonymity, which is a need to be implemented in the study. This entails how the informants are studied and how they should be treated throughout the process. It is also important that there is no lack of consent from the participants and that no important information is withheld (Bryman & Bell, 2015). On that note, the authors asked for the informants' permission to be audio recorded during the interview. Poortinga (2016) emphasised that subject by mentioning the two concepts of equivalence and bias. The authors express that it is highly important that each interview is performed in a neutral and unbiased place and manner where all informants are treated the same. Therefore, the authors of the study asked all the informants, during the interview on Zoom, not to have their cameras on to avoid creating any visual reactions that could affect the discussions in a negative manner. The goal was that all the informants would be confronted by

(27)

the same circumstances during each focus group, with the same stimuli and same questions (Sinkovics et al., 2008).

Bryman and Bell (2015) stressed the importance of treating the informants' personal information with the greatest possible confidentiality. It shall not be possible for unauthorised people to access the informant's information or identity. To ensure their anonymity, pseudonyms were used in discussion, coding and analysis of data, for example, Woman 1, Man 1, et cetera. Therefore, the real names of the informants were not included in the study.

3.3.3 Construct of Questions

Based on the study's theories, an interview guide was made to include all seven interview questions that the authors wanted to cover (Appendix B). These were implemented with appropriate follow-up questions linked to the investigated area (Bryman & Bell, 2015). The interview guide consisted of seven open-ended questions with a semi-structured approach, to give the informants the opportunity to freely share their opinions and elaborate their answers. Since the authors did not want the problem of construct bias to occur (Sinkovics et al., 2008) in terms of language barriers, the interview questions were constructed at an average linguistic level to make them easy to understand. Sinkovics et al. (2008) referred to a method of collecting data through interviews called multiple sources of evidence. This entails that the informants were introduced to an interview session where comments, observations of the interview setting, and the contextual factors were exchanged.

Each interview was introduced with an introductory question where the informants were asked to disclose their names, which Bryman and Bell (2015) describe as a personal factual question. The purpose of this was to let the informants know each other's names and make them feel

(28)

it possible to check that all informants' microphones were working and that they heard the moderators and the other informants since the focus groups were implemented via the digital platform Zoom.

3.3.4 Semi-structured Approach

The interview guide has been used for all focus groups with a semi-structured approach (Appendix B). That means that the authors asked follow-up questions in addition to the questions that were listed in the interview guide. These follow-up questions have been asked to generate more in-depth discussions that include more interesting statements presented by the informants (Bryman & Bell, 2015). During the focus group sessions, the authors also implemented why-questions to let the informants develop their statements. However, these questions were not included in the interview guide. By applying a semi-structured approach to this study, it increased the flexibility of the focus groups where the participants had the opportunity to discuss the questions presented more freely.

3.3.5 Operationalisation

Inspired by Bryman and Bell (2015), the authors created an operationalisation table to strengthen the interview questions´ credibility and reliability (Appendix A). The operationalisation table was created for the purpose of presenting the study's interview questions and their connections to the theoretical framework (Bryman & Bell, 2015). Since the authors decided to do a qualitative research including A/B testing, the first four interview questions were asked twice. This is because the informants were exposed to a total of four platform layouts, two at a time, to compare them with each other.

(29)

3.3.6 Pre-test

Once the questions had been formulated, a pre-test was conducted with the aim of ensuring that the questions were easy to understand and that there were no ambiguities on the part of the informants (Bryman & Bell, 2015). Before the focus groups took place, the interview guide was tested by four people representing the study's target group. This helped the authors to get an idea of how the questions could be interpreted. It was important that the informants of the pre-test were not included in the sample for the focus groups since the individuals' answers could be affected by their previous experience of the pre-test. This could have led to a potential impact on the credibility of the study´s result (Bryman & Bell, 2015). When the pre-test had been carried out, the interview questions that were hard to understand were reformulated before the actual focus groups took place.

3.3.7 Interview Opportunities

Four separate focus groups sessions were conducted with a total of 18 informants with different cultural backgrounds. The focus groups took place on the 29th of April and 2nd, 3rd and 4th of May, between 6.30 pm and 7.30 pm to give the informants the opportunity to participate after the end of the working day or school day. It was important that the interviews were made with respect to the restrictions due to the ongoing pandemic of Covid-19. Therefore, the interviews were conducted through group discussions via the digital platform Zoom. There are several advantages of conducting digital group conversations where, among other things, the itinerary is eliminated and its potential associated costs, for both the authors and the informants (Bryman & Bell, 2015).

(30)

These emails were sent to them about fifteen minutes before the focus group started, and the informants were informed to not look at the emails before the authors gave them permission during the interview. By sending the platform layouts to the informants, they had the opportunity to look at the layouts via their smartphones which resemble an interaction with a regular mobile application.

The two authors participated in all the four interview sessions, where one of the authors was chosen as chairman to distribute the word to the informants. The other author shared its screen in order and presented a PowerPoint where each slide showed the question. This made it easier for the informants to understand the questions that were asked. Furthermore, the authors took notes and recorded the discussions to an audio file to get an overall picture of the four interview sessions. The chairman assigned the word to one informant at a time to give everyone the opportunity to share their opinion. When the informants did not speak, they were asked to turn off their microphones to avoid disturbing noises in the background. The authors followed a schedule of speech for the informants to avoid feelings of injustice and to minimise the possible risk of being influenced by previous speakers. The authors encouraged the informants to intervene with their own opinions based on other informants' answers to create discussion, which they did.

As it has been previously mentioned, the authors chose to conduct the focus groups on Zoom with the cameras turned off, which meant that the informants could not see each other but only hear each other's voices. This decision minimised the risk that the informant's attitudes would be influenced by factors that may be judgmental during face-to-face meetings. This includes factors such as informants´ gender, age and ethnicity. However, the authors had to keep in mind that by conducting the focus groups digitally with the cameras turned off, there can be some disadvantages. It included eliminating the informants´ body language, where facial expressions

(31)

and gestures can be important for the interviewer to receive as information about discomfort and confusion (Bryman & Bell, 2017). Furthermore, the authors decided that the informants should only present themselves by their names and not present their age and cultural background to minimise the risk of influencing each other's attitudes. As a result, the method was still considered beneficial as the authors measured the informants' attitudes.

After the four focus groups were made, the authors had fulfilled a theoretical saturation and a fifth focus group did not need to be implemented.

3.4 Processing of Data

After all focus groups were completed, all data were transcribed. The transcript was completed via the transcription software tool Trint (n.d.) that transformed the audio files to text. In addition, the authors took their time to check the result of the digital aid and made sure that the transcripted text matched the recorded audio. A total of four transcripts were made, one for each focus group, where the focus groups were named Focus group 1, Focus group 2, Focus group 3 and Focus group 4.

3.4.1 Coding of Data

According to Bryman and Bell (2015), one of the most widely used methods of analysing qualitative data is thematic analysis. This approach is an interpretive process that makes it possible for the authors to identify patterns within the collected data through themes, with the aim to describe the phenomenon of interest (Bryman & Bell, 2015; Braun & Clarke, 2006). The authors decided to carry out the analysis by being inspired by the six steps of thematic analysis created by Braun and Clarke's (2006). However, Braun and Clarke (2006) believe that the steps

(32)

decided to use the steps as an inspiration and adapt each step to the study's purpose. The six used steps were;

The first step entailed that the authors become familiar with the collected data by transcribing the interviews of the four focus groups (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The authors read through the transcripts thoroughly multiple times where the informants´ use of words, expressions and pauses were observed.

The second step of the process involved the authors identifying and coding the collected data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The process included the authors reading the transcripts verbatim and taking notes of interesting quotes and observed details. These notes were then used as codewords which were considered valuable for the research question to be answered. Throughout this process, the authors had an analytical sensibility to understand the potential meaning behind the information. The codewords that were found were; layout, ease of use, unnecessary, reviews, expectations, social circumstances, convenience, colour, design and photos.

The third step of this process entailed that the authors arranged the codewords into clusters of potential themes (see Table 2) (Braun & Clarke, 2006). In this step of the process, the authors found that some codewords fitted within the same theme. These themes captured the key elements of the data related to the research question. The themes were either descriptive or abstract but maintained the aspects of what the informants shared about their experience.

The fourth step of the process entailed two phases of refining the themes in purpose of them being accurate and reflecting the collected data (Braun & Clarke, 2006) The first phase included the authors having a look at the codewords of each theme and considering whether they formed a coherent pattern that matched the theme. This process did not result in any changes in the

(33)

themes of the study, therefore, the authors moved on to the second phase. This phase began with the authors discussing whether the themes were related to the collected data. According to Braun and Clarke (2006), the coding process is an ongoing process, therefore, the authors reread the data to ensure that no codewords had been left out.

The fifth step in this thematic process entailed that the authors had to define and possibly rename the themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006). This step made it possible to identify the essence of the themes to ease the upcoming process of analysis. The authors decided that the themes should reflect the collected data, therefore, these following themes were decided; 1) Simplicity included the codewords; layout and ease of use. These codewords were linked to the informants' attitude towards the applications perceived usability. 2) Information included the codewords; unnecessary and reviews. These codewords were linked to the informants' attitude towards the amount of information presented on the application. 3) Experience included the codewords; expectations, social circumstances and convenience. These codewords were linked to the informants' attitude towards food ordering applications based on previous experience. 4) Aesthetic included the codewords; colours, design and photos. These concepts could be linked to the informants' attitude towards how they perceived the food ordering applications' appearance.

The sixth and last part of the thematic analysis process entailed the authors producing the study. The authors made sure that the data analysis was interesting, coherent, logical, concise and non-repetitive, and provided sufficient evidence of each theme using quotes from the collected data. This process resulted in sufficient information for the reader to evaluate the quality of the study.

(34)

Table 2: Example of Coding.

Quote

Complete

sentence

Codeword Theme Theory

[...] it is the picture of A because you, you want to eat, so you want to know what you are going to eat. (Man 2, Focus group 1)

Want to see a photo of the food before ordering.

Photos Aesthetic Cultural dimension of

uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede, 2001)

3.5 Quality Criteria

To assess the quality of the study, the authors followed Bryman and Bell (2015), and Lincoln & Guba's (1985) criteria that were specifically developed for qualitative studies. The criteria were trustworthiness and authenticity.

3.5.1 Trustworthiness

Trustworthiness covers the four aspects of credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability.

The credibility of a qualitative study aims to establish confidence that the collected results from the informants are true, believable and credible (Bryman & Bell, 2015; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Therefore, the authors decided to conduct four pre-tests to validate the interview questions to avoid misunderstandings. To further strengthen the study's credibility, the authors did a peer

(35)

debriefing, which means that a few colleagues of the authors read through the collected data to see it from different perspectives.

Transferability covers to what degree the results of a qualitative study can be generalised or transferred to other settings or contexts (Bryman & Bell, 2015; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Therefore, the authors provided detailed descriptions and documentation to ease the process for those who want to transfer the findings to their own study to then judge its transferability.

Dependability means to ensure that the findings of a qualitative study are repeatable if the study would be recreated within a similar context, use of codewords and group of informants (Bryman & Bell, 2015; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). To create a study of dependability, the authors made sure to compose well-documented descriptions of the study's method including detailed descriptions of the data collection process.

A study's confirmability is the degree of assurance that the study's results can be confirmed by other researchers (Bryman & Bell, 2015; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Therefore, the authors have been clear that they have not let personal values or theoretical inclinations influence the conduct of research and its results. It included clear connections to the study's results and the collected data, where explanations of conclusions and interpretations were well explained.

3.5.2 Authenticity

In addition to the four criteria of trustworthiness, the study also followed Bryman and Bell (2015), and Lincoln and Guba's (1985) criteria of authenticity that covers the informants' perspective of participation in the study. It included the four aspects of fairness, ontological authenticity, educative authenticity, catalytic authenticity, and tactical authenticity. These criteria cover issues concerning a wider political impact of research.

(36)

Fairness of a qualitative study means that all viewpoints are represented with an impartial perspective (Bryman & Bell, 2015; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). To achieve a higher level of fairness, the authors made sure that all the informants had the opportunity to express themselves by assigning the word to each informant during the focus groups. This approach worked well and resulted in that none of the informants were interrupted during the interviews. Furthermore, the authors did not exclude any of the informants in the analysis to consider everyone's point of view.

Ontological authenticity of a qualitative study covers how well the informants understand the social context of their participation in the study (Bryman & Bell, 2015; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). To achieve ontological authenticity, the authors shared the study's result to the informants when the study was done.

Educative authenticity means the degree informant learns more about other people's perspective on the area of the study (Bryman & Bell, 2015; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The level of educative authenticity was confirmed in this study by including focus groups of four to five informants per group. This resulted in them having the opportunity to get a broader perspective of other people's perspectives.

According to Bryman and Bell (2015), and Lincoln and Guba (1985), catalytic authenticity examines how the informants' participation in the study has generated a greater insight to the area that possibly can change the attitude of the informants. Furthermore, tactical authenticity examines how the informants' participation in the study has generated a potential change in their behaviour (Bryman & Bell, 2015; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). However, in order to confirm these two criteria, the authors had to demonstrate that the informants' participation in the study resulted in actions against change and authorisation. Since the authors value the ethical aspect of the informant's integrity, the authors considered it to be difficult to assess the criteria of catalytic authenticity and tactical authenticity.

(37)

4. Empirical Data

In this following chapter, the authors present the empirical data that was collected through the interviews. This chapter includes the four themes that the authors found to be the most relevant according to the study's thematic analysis process.

4.1 Simplicity

In the four focus groups that were interviewed, there was a repetitive discovered pattern, which included a preference for simplicity in the application. The authors coded the words layout and ease of use. Eleven out of eighteen informants responded to the interview while mentioning that simplicity influenced how they would appreciate the applications' layout, use and exposure.

4.1.1 Layout

Simplicity in the layout exposure came up as a pattern when the informants mentioned what a potential attractive application should entail. Two informants (Man 1 and Man 2, Focus group 1) with individualistic backgrounds, expressed during the interview that the simplicity of the design and layout took a significant part in their decision making when they were choosing which option they preferred. Man 1 (Focus group 1) even suggested that if an application that does not express well thought through layout, could throw off the customer while using it. Man 6 (Focus group 3), who has a collectivist background, mentioned the same criteria.

This pattern became recurring in multiple discussions and was brought up in all focus groups. Most of the informants that mentioned simplicity as an important factor, mentioned the importance of the layout design.

(38)

“[...] well, it is simplistic, it has all the essentials. I feel like the most valuable factor, they kind of. Not really used correctly, like I mentioned earlier, I would say that they should have the order on the top and I feel like they advertise their business rather than food. But other than that, I would just say that it is very simplistic. And I also like that they have that menu at the bottom. So it is easier to locate whatever you are looking for.” (Man 5, Focus group 3)

One of the most chosen application platforms in the A/B testing in part one was option B which included eleven out of eighteen informants, and in part two of the interview, all the informants chose option A. Part one, option B, was inspired by a collectivistic based application and part two, option A, was inspired by an individualistic based application. The eleven out of eighteen informants explained their choice to be based on getting their purpose fulfilled in the easiest way where some of the purposes differed.

“Hmm.. I mean, B is kind of easier... I just... there is two buttons. I am just going to look for my food, like, do not get me wrong, like all this stuff on A, like, super cool, but I am...I am not going to be looking for it like I am on the app to get food, so I am just going to get my food.” (Woman 1, Focus group 1)

An example of this is that four out of these eleven informants wanted to easily see what they were getting, where they wanted to be exposed easily to pictures of the food.

“[...] I could say for the B option, I think, because it is more organized. Regarding ordering and looking at the menu and checking your food. Um. I feel like for me, that is a convenient way to have this app on my phone.” (Woman 2, Focus group 1)

4.1.2 Ease of Use

Furthermore, other informants mentioned other aspects of the matter. Some of the informants mentioned platforms' ease of use. Three out of eleven informants wanted the ordering process to be simple. One informant (Woman 9, Focus group 4) expressed that if the application looks

(39)

easy to use, there will be a bigger chance that she would use it regularly. That statement also became a recurring subject of easier usage or request of better specific usage and was mentioned through all the focus groups.

“Yeah, I agree. So I prefer the second one B just because it's easier to just see where you can order. Actually not so much going on, but I don't really like the save up to 40 percent because it is like super huge. So that is what I prefer. But the other one. But if I had to decide, I would go with B.” (Woman 11, Focus group 4)

Four out of these eleven informants wanted it to be very simple to track orders and read reviews. Three out of these four informants represented a collectivistic culture. However, the one informant that represented an individualistic culture felt quite strongly about the matter.

“I think the most valuable factor for the B one is the easy access to all the information I need, especially like the track order. So I can tell where is the food on the way and when will it be there? When will it be delivered?” (Man 1, Focus group 1)

In the end, those individuals that mentioned anything about easier layout or ease of use included half of the individualistic and almost half of the collectivistic informants of the study.

4.2 Information

Another pattern that was noticed by the informant's answers were their different needs of exposure of information on the application. Therefore, the authors were able to code the words unnecessary and reviews. Eleven out of eighteen informants chose application B in the first part of the A/B testing and none of the informants chose B in the second part due to reasons of information exposure.

(40)

4.2.1 Unnecessary

Some of these informants explained their reasons of choice, due to messy layout or too much exposure of unnecessary information. What the informants defined as information could vary between promotions, core values exposures, reviews and company reports.

“I would pick B because. I do not care so much about the sustainability and the charities, I just do not order food. So it is more, uh, yeah, it is easier for me to just pick order now or if I have to order my order and push... order. I do not know. I like. It is just simple.” (Man 3, Focus group 2) “[...] I feel like there is just too much information there and I feel like B is way more simplistic. So if I want to order through it, I just press the ordinary button kind of, instead of going through all of the options in A. So, yeah, I definitely choose B.” (Man 5, Focus group 3)

However, out of the informants that chose A in the first part of the A/B testing, four informants believed that there was a need for a certain amount of information on the application. That information included pictures, promotions, clear guidelines on how to order and track the order. Those individuals that chose A included two informants of individualistic cultures and two informants of collectivistic cultures.

4.2.2 Reviews

Necessary information was described by the informants as pictures of what the customers are getting and reviews from previous customers. Other informants mentioned the fact that they appreciate when previous customers have shared their experiences to prevent any unpleasant surprises.

“[...] I do not know, I agree with everything, like with the reviews, I just want to check and I think it is helpful. The reviews, pictures sometimes are like these people posting just pictures,

(41)

sometimes it does not even have to be a lot of text, I just want to see and kind of judge for myself.” (Woman 2, Focus group 1)

One informant (Woman 1, Focus group 1) responded that the reviews are a factor that could dictate if she would actually consume anything from the application if there were any sign of a negative comment. This subject became recurring through all the focus groups. In fact, all collectivistic informants agreed on it being a necessity of knowing about the product and service beforehand which some of the individualistic informants also agreed with.

4.3 Experience

As the informants were talking about how they perceived the platforms of the A/B testing and their personal use of food ordering applications, the authors discovered the pattern of experience. All eighteen informants referred to their previous experiences where the authors were able to find the codewords expectations, social circumstances and convenience.

4.3.1 Expectations

In all four focus groups, the informants shared their previous experiences with food ordering applications. The authors were able to identify that these experiences have an impact on their expectations. Six out of eighteen informants mentioned that their previous experience has had an impact on how they perceive food ordering applications. However, the informants' experiences did vary. Woman 1 (Focus group 1) mentioned that she rarely uses food ordering applications because she was more used to drive-thrus, while Woman 10 (Focus group 4), instead referred to her experience by the fact that she does not need information beyond track and order when using a food ordering application. Both these informants had an individualistic

(42)

background. Man 6 (Focus group 3), who has a collectivistic background, also addressed situations that contributed to him having a negative attitude towards food ordering applications.

“I have a really bad experience using Uber eats and stuff like that because it is like always half an hour more than what they say on the app. So I kind of do not use it anymore because of that.” (Man 6, Focus group 3)

In the end, out of these six informants that mentioned that their past experience has affected their expectations on food ordering applications, half were individualistic and the other half were collectivistic.

4.3.2 Social Circumstances

In all four focus groups, it was mentioned that the use of food ordering applications is often linked to different social contexts. Therefore, the authors chose to use the word social circumstances as a codeword, where nine out of eighteen informants discussed the subject. Four out of these nine informants said that they started to use food ordering applications when they moved to another location, either a new city or a new country.

“Probably when I was 16, like 11 years ago, because I moved to another city and I did not know how to cook, so I would order too much from outside. And I think my first order would be Domino's as well.” (Man 4, Focus group 2)

“I think I tried it out for the first time when I was 24. I think at least... Because, it is just that I lived in a very small town before, so there is no food application here.” (Woman 11, Focus group 4)

Four out of these nine informants that mentioned social circumstances, explained that they also used food ordering applications due to the influence of people in their surroundings.

Figure

Figure  1:  Dimensions  of  User  Experience  (the  authors  own  creation  based  on  Park  et  al
Figure 2: Research Model (own creation).
Table 1: List of Informants
Table 2: Example of Coding.

References

Related documents

When looking at how age changes the way people process emotions, research on age-related motivational shifts suggests that emotional memory among older adults is

Since the conditions of a specific acquisition are unique, real cases often differ from the rationalized cases described in M&A- theory, conducted by Angwin (2007), Haspelagh

Corporate cultural differences, in combination with a weak integration process, quite rapidly caused the loss of a substantial number of skilled Chrysler people holding

19 Controllerhandboken, Samuelsson red, page 114.. motivating, Sickness can be the result, if the needs are not fulfilled. If transferring these theories to the business world,

We collected both negative influence/misunderstandings and positive influence of behavioral differences (caused by cultural differences) then we linked

Also, she found that participants felt more positively towards GA speakers, but most of them still desired to emulate RP speech, rather than GA (Carrie, 2016, p. It should be

Visitors will feel like the website is unprofessional and will not have trust towards it.[3] It would result in that users decides to leave for competitors that have a

Cultural difference, entrepreneurial leadership, entrepreneur, leadership, China, Russia, cultural background, business culture, education, family education, school education,