I. INTRODUCTION
While maintaining and enhancing customer relationships is essential to gaining long-term profitability, it is not so simple to do in the competitive setting Brand loyalty is the repeated purchase of any consumer reflecting their deliberate choice to purchase the item continually and showing a favorable attitude towards the brand in the future. This is not all about a customer's psychological engagement with the brand (Rehman, Zia-ur-Rehman, & Akhtar, 2012). In the marketing environment, the importance of brand loyalty has acknowledged for at least three centuries. This research tries to define the impact on brand loyalty for mobile phone consumers in Bangladesh of brand experience and product participation. Brand loyalty is a special facet of relationship marketing, where the buyer has a remarkable psychological attachment to the brand entity consumed (Raj & Mohan, 2007). Brand experience is crucial in creating brand loyalty and attaining company sustainability, and customer loyalty is affected directly by buying conduct and indirectly by a brand's attitude. (ChuanHuat Ong & Ramayah, 2018). Some scholars have invented a four-dimensional brand experience scale: sensory, affective, mental, and behavioral (Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009).
In the mobile phone sector, customer expectations, needs, and desires are evolving, and sophisticated technology will innovate and invent continuously. Most mobile phone users are young, so it is essential to attract fresh generations as phone users are mainly young and achieve a strong marketplace to make them loyal. (Khundyz, 2018). Like other developing countries, the mobile telecommunications industry in Bangladesh has become one of the fastest sectors with the appearance of a several rivals, which in the last two to three years has dramatically increased the number of mobile subscribers. The significant reduction in the cost of mobile phones and enhanced disposable income also made Bangladesh's customers choose their preferred mobile phones at a cheaper and cheaper price (Dr. AbulKalam Azad & Shamsher, 2014).
Mobile phones are comparatively new, especially smartphones, which have become our inseparable companions today (uSwitch.com, 2019). Motorola published its first commercial mobile phone, known as the Motorola DynaTAC 8000X, in 1983. The handset provided 30 minutes speaking time, six hours standby, and stored 30 phone numbers. It also cost ยฃ2639 ($3995) (GOODWIN, 2019).
The first mobile phone service went through the town cell business in Bangladesh in 1993. At that time expense of a mobile phone was an enormous sum that was hard for an ordinary or middle-income individual to purchase a mobile phone. Still, now things are very much changing individuals can buy phones according to their decisions as well as their brand preferences. A significant factor that marketers increase is that brand loyalty helps lower the price of doing company, thus enhancing the profitability of both the brand and the company. This phenomenon results in free advertising through word of mouth. Brand faithful customers are the individuals who encourage your product. Loyal consumers will be the first to tell friends and family about their experiences regarded customer engagement as a precious organizational asset (Khundyz, 2018).
This research investigated the allegiance of the brand and its associated variables, namely brand experience and product participation. The mobile phone has become a foremost component of our lives for fast technological change, so this research enables companies to know the purchasing conduct of customers. Our study goal is to define the brand loyalty dimensions in the mobile phone sector and its developing markets. Furthermore, this study will equip telecom companies with enhancing comprehensive regarding the perception of the consumers.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
a) Brand Experience
Traditionally, marketing has concentrated on the physical elements of products and services such as functionality, cost, accessibility, or quality (Mascarenhas, 2006). A few years ago, marketing researchers started to point out that marketing should change its focus and consider other components, such as relationship leadership and value creation (Oriol Iglesias, 2011). In creating brand loyalty and attaining company sustainability, brand experiences are essential. Business efficiency is affected by customer loyalty directly through buying behavior, as well as indirectly through a brand approach (Chuan Huat Ong & Ramayah, 2018). Sensations, feelings, cognitions, and behavioral responses are the concepts of brand experience. The authors distinguish several experience dimensions and construct a brand experience scale that includes four dimensions: sensory, affective, intellectual, and behavioral. We conceptualize brand experience as subjective, internal consumer responses (sensations, feelings, and cognitions) and behavioral responses evoked by brand-related stimuli that are part of a brand's design and identity, packaging, communications, and environments (Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009). Brand experience is a tool that helps to develop customer awareness and build brand-faithful consumers. Brand experience is one kind of experiential marketing that includes a holistic set of conditions which develops by a company for influencing the feeling a customer has about a company name or product. The company must develop a relationship between the brand and a specific need or emotion of the consumer.
b) Product Involvement
Several studies have studied the connection between product involvement and brand loyalty where it demonstrates that product participation has a beneficial impact on brand loyalty. This improves the propensity of the same person to purchase the same brand when a person participates more in the product category. The interpretation of such a finding demonstrates that the participation of the product creates greater psychological engagement which also contributes to enhance brand loyalty (Bandyopadhyay & Martell, 2007). โResearch shows that when product involvement is high, buyer decision processes proceed through extended decision making, a series of sequential stages involving information search and evaluation of criteria consumers neither wish nor can exert a great deal of effort to process information in a low involvement situation thus when product involvement is high, consumers are more likely to put in more effort and are more capable of evaluatingโ(Xuemei Bian., 2011). Low involvement products are inexpensive or maybe moderately priced; they are low in value and risk commonly buying this item and being able to buy it as a routine. โExample, toothpaste, pen, soap, bread, tea, coffee, etc. The customer adds little thought and emotion to this kind of product. The extent of customer interest in consuming a product and the quantity of data the customer seeks to make a purchase decision has a connection with customer participation with a product. Product involvement includes a consumer's continuing dedication to thinking, feeling, and behavioral reaction to a product category (Renee Kim *, Dong Hyun Yoon, & Yan Chao, 2015). When the consumer has high involvement with the product, they are likely to search information about that products more intensively. They may compare advertisements, or experiment with different brands and select the best alternative product (Coulter, Price, & Feick, 2003). Involvement with products can help to develop a greater perception of attribute differences, greater product importance, and greater commitment to brand choice (Howard, John A, & Sheth, 1969). Customer satisfaction, brand attitudes, and loyalty may vary with the product involvement. Involvement considers one of the crucial moderators that determine purchase decisions (Celsi & Olson, 1988).
c) Brand Loyalty
Brand loyalty is a pattern of consumer's behavior where they continuously purchase one brand's products over another. Brand loyalty gets consumers committed to a specific brand or product. Businesses plan different creative marketing strategies like reward and loyalty programs, incentives, trials, and brand ambassadors to create brand loyalty. In addition, loyalty has been referred to in a variety of market-specific contexts, for example, service, store and vendor loyalty, an contexts that reflect the unit of measurement; customer and brand loyalty(Algesheimer, Rene, Dholakia, Uptal M., & Herrmann, 2005). "Brand experiences encourage loyalty by creating emotional connections through an engaging, compelling, and consistent context. The context is the environment in which the service encounter occurs; it encompasses the physical and relational characteristics of the setting in which the consumer consumes the service as well as everything that the customer interacts within that setting. This definition of context indicates two primary components of context, physical and relational. The physical context is made up of the "clues" generated by the sights, sounds, textures and smells of the environment; the relational context is composed of those "clues" that emanate from people and behaviors in which they engage"(Azize Sahin, Cemal Zehir, & Hakan, 2011). It is identified that the more positive experience perceived by customers toward a brand, they would be more loyal towards that brand. Brand loyalty has become a significant concept for retailers in managing revenue growth rate, serving a critical role in building customer relationships, and retaining customers (De Mesa, 2013). Most researchers said that brand loyalty could give firm advantages such as diminished advertising costs. Also, brand loyalty helps to achieve competitive edge in the market as it has good brand value among their loyal customers.
d) Industry Review
i. History of Mobile
The modern smartphone has taken a long 26-year journey to reach in this stage, and it has improved a lot over these years. There is no device in history which has ingrained in the lives of everyday customers more than the mobile phone (Pothitos, 2016).
In 1973 Motorola was the first company that produced the first handheld mobile phone. In 1983, Motorola DynaTAC 8000X was the first commercial mobile phone released by Motorola. In 1989 Nokia's first 'handheld' mobile phone, the MobiraCityman 900, launched 1989, weighed just 800g. The world's first digital mobile phone was The Motorola International 3200 invented in 1992. The IBM Simon was head held touchscreen device, which built in 1994. The world's first smartphone, The Nokia Communicator 9000, invented in 1996 as it ran on an Intel 24 MHz 1386 CPU and had 8MB of RAM. The first handset released by the BlackBerry brand. The BlackBerry 850 released in 1999 (GOODWIN, 2019). "The first camera cell phone introduced commercially was the J-SH04 in Japan and the Sharp Corporation in November 2000. The first MP3 player phone was the Siemens SL45. It had a memory expansion slot and an MP3 player. In the days before Samsung achieved world dominance, they released in 2002 the SGH-T100, the first mobile phone using a thin film transistor matrix LCD display. In 2005 the revolutionary Blackberry 7270 appeared featuring Wi-Fi leading to an addiction which jokingly referred to as Crackberry" (Stelladoradus, 2013). In 2007 the iPhone debuted with its high technology. The iPhone 3G was the sharpest mobile stick, however on out things would begin progressing even faster from here (GOODWIN, 2019).
There is such vital history of phones it is difficult to cover all the key events of mobile phones.
ii. Mobile phone industry in Bangladesh
The โMobile Phone Serviceโ came to Bangladesh in 1993. Bangladesh enters the mobile world through the City Cell Company. City cell company first launched mobile phone in Bangladesh. More than one lack Taka required for a mobile connection back then. Having a phone for middle and lower income group was like a dream in 1993 (assignmentpoint, n.d.). They try to do best of them, but they canโt. The mobile revolution in Bangladesh began in 1997 with the introduction of the Grameen Phone program. Grameen Telecom is one of the properties of Grameenphone and could be a subsidiary of the Grameen Bank, a recognized microfinance bank (buymobile, 2017).
"Now a day's technological innovation, change in market demand and intense competition of price reduction has made the mobile phone an indispensable part for most of the nations in the world. The wide adoption and uses of mobile phones have developed the communication and entertainment capacity to a greater extent through which people are now enjoying the facilities like Facebook, mobile chatting and lots of different services" (Dr. Abul Kalam Azad & Shamsher, 2014).
iii. Major mobile phone brands
a. APPLE
Apple is the most prominent company which expertise in designing, manufacturing mobile phones, computers, tablets, and other devices. Apple is famous because of its superiority with each of its products. The company has built the Apple brand as a top-of-the-line brand and therefore can demand premium prices for its products. The headquarter of Apple in Cupertino, California, was founded in 1976 as a computer company. The company now designs and manufacturers numerous electronic devices, including mobile phones, personal computers, watches, portable digital music players, and other media devices (Kerr, 2015). Steve Jobs is the most eminent individual for his devotion for Apple among all the founders of Apple company. Globally It is a well-known organization for iPods, iPhones, iPads, and MacBooks. Premium quality and unique specialized nature are the source of their popularity. It is the sole manufacturer in the world which has their operating system (iOS)(mobiledokan, 2019).
b. SAMSUNG
Samsung Electronics works in one of the world's most competitive industries. Sixty-seven new smartphone are launched each year, according to the U.S. Federal Communication Commission. Samsung focuses on low-price products for the economic segment of the market. Samsung's headquarters in Suwon, South Korea. Samsung became the world's second-biggest manufacturer of mobile devices (H.
Gayathri, Pandurangi, & Gowda, 2013). Companies in this industry have primarily used aggressive pricing advertising strategies to develop and achieve vital market share; Samsung is no exception. Samsung Electronics beat Nokia, the industry leader since 1998, to become the world's biggest mobile phone manufacturer through unit sales in the first quarter of 2012. Since 2012, for the number of units sold, Samsung has stayed the leader in the global smartphone industry (Chong).
c. WALTON
III. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
To evaluate the reliability of the constructs used in the study: three aspects of brand experience (sensory, affective and intellectual dimensions) and brand experience and brand loyalty. For that purpose, the Cronbach Alpha value will calculate for the aforementioned constructs.
To examine if the sensory aspect of brand experience varies across the brands considered in the study.
To examine if the affective aspect of brand experience varies across the brands considered in the study.
To examine if the intellectual aspect of brand experience varies across the brands considered in the study.
To see if brand satisfaction varies across the brands considered in the study.
To see if brand loyalty varies across the brands considered in the study.
To measure the impact of the various aspects of brand experience (sensory, affective and intellectual dimensions) on brand satisfaction.
To measure the impact of the various aspects of brand experience (sensory, affective and intellectual dimensions) on brand loyalty.
IV. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
To examine the effects of the brand experience and product involvement on brand loyalty, a non-probability sample technique with more specifically convenient sampling has applied in this project.
Total 120 participants included in the survey, with 81 from United International University and 39 from general consumers. The survey was conducted from June to September 2019 among 120 participants in Dhaka.
The study instruments were both primary and secondary data; we have taken information from secondary sources like- several journals, articles. The primary data for this study gathered through a structured questionnaire from customers, specifically from students of Dhaka City.
V. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
1. Sample Characteristics
Here the sample characteristics are described in terms of gender, education, profession, average monthly income and the considered in the study.
Gender A sample of 120 people who are participated in this survey study where 69 of the participants were male and 51 were female.
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | Male | 69 | 57.5 | 57.5 | 57.5 |
| Female | 51 | 42.5 | 42.5 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 120 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Education A sample of 120 people where 25%, 67.5%, and 7.5% belonged to HSC, Bachelors and Masters or equivalent.
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | HSC | 30 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 25.0 |
| Bachelor | 81 | 67.5 | 67.5 | 92.5 | |
| Masters or Equivalent | 9 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 120 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Profession
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | Student | 111 | 92.5 | 92.5 | 92.5 |
| Service Holder | 6 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 97.5 | |
| Business | 3 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 120 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
A sample of 120 people where 92.5%, 5% and 2.5% belonged to students, service holder and business. Average Monthly Family Income
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | 30,000 or below | 24 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 |
| 30,000 - 60,000 | 42 | 35.0 | 35.0 | 55.0 | |
| 60,000 - 90,000 | 3 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 57.5 | |
| 90,000 - 1,20,000 | 30 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 82.5 | |
| above 1,20,000 | 21 | 17.5 | 17.5 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 120 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
In this survey 20% people are belonged to 30,000 or below income group, 35% people are belonged to 30,000-60,000 income group, 2.5% are belonged to 60,000-90,000 income group, 25% are belonged to 90,000-1,20,000 income group and 17.5% people are belonged to above 1,20,000 income group.
Brand
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | iPhone | 40 | 33.3 | 33.3 | 33.3 |
| Samsung | 40 | 33.3 | 33.3 | 66.7 | |
| Walton | 40 | 33.3 | 33.3 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 120 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
For this survey I have chosen three brands which are Samsung, iPhone and Walton. We have chosen 40 participants for each of the brands.
2. Descriptive Characteristics of the Constructs
Descriptives
Descriptive Statistics
| N | Kurtosis | ||||||||
| Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Std. Error | Statistic | Std. Error | |
| S | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.8125 | 1.24189 | .155 | .221 | -1.070 | .438 |
| A | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.6625 | 1.11174 | .411 | .221 | -.476 | .438 |
| I | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.6875 | 1.09825 | .265 | .221 | -.628 | .438 |
| BS | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.8111 | 1.10827 | .131 | .221 | -.803 | .438 |
| BL | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.7479 | 1.06683 | .148 | .221 | -.596 | .438 |
| Valid N (listwise) | 120 | ||||||||
Sensory (S)
Here the basic descriptive statistics are used for evaluating the construct.
Maximum Mean Standard Deviation 1 5 2.81 1.24
Now assuming a 95% level of confidence, the following confidence interval can construct:
The confidence interval here is โbetween 2.59 and 3.03โ. Affective (A)
Maximum Mean Standard Deviation 1 5 2.66 1.11
Now assuming a 95% level of confidence, the following confidence interval can construct:
The confidence interval here is โbetween 2.46 and 2.86โ. Intellectual (I)
Here the basic descriptive statistics are used for evaluating the construct.
Maximum Mean Standard Deviation 1 5 2.68 1.10
The confidence interval here is โbetween 2.48 and 2.88โ.
Brand Satisfaction (BS)
Here the basic descriptive statistics are used for evaluating the construct.
Maximum Mean Standard Deviation 1 5 2.81 1.11
Now assuming a 95% level of confidence, the following confidence interval can construct:
The confidence interval here is โbetween 2.6 and 3.01โ. Brand Loyalty (BL)
Here the basic descriptive statistics are used for evaluating the construct.
Maximum Mean Standard Deviation 1 5 2.75 1.07
Now assuming a 95% level of confidence, the following confidence interval can be constructed:
= 0.19
The confidence interval here is โbetween 2.56 and 2.94โ.
3. Reliability Analysis of the Constructs
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's alpha is a method which can measure internal consistency among the items of a group (UCLA Institute for digital research and education, n.d.).
"A commonly accepted rule for describing internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha is as follows, though a greater number of items in the test can artificially inflate the value of alpha and a sample with a narrow range can deflate it, so this rule should use with caution" (Wikipedia, 2019).
| Cronbach's alpha | Internal consistency |
| 0.9 โค ฮฑ | Excellent |
| 0.8 โค ฮฑ < 0.9 | Good |
| 0.7 โค ฮฑ < 0.8 | Acceptable |
| 0.6 โค ฮฑ < 0.7 | Questionable |
| 0.5 โค ฮฑ < 0.6 | Poor |
| ฮฑ < 0.5 | Unacceptable |
Reliability of the Construct Sensory (S)
***** Method 1 (space saver) will use for this analysis
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS-SCALE (A L P H A)
Reliability Coefficients
N of Cases = 120.0 N of Items = 2
In our reliability test, the score of Cronbach's Alpha OF.8548 which shows that internal consistency is good here.
Reliability of the Construct Affective (A)
***** Method 1 (space saver) will use for this analysis
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS-SCALE (ALPHA)
N of Cases = 120.0 N of Items = 2
In our reliability test, the score of Cronbach's Alpha OF.7873 which shows that internal consistency is acceptable here.
Reliability of the Construct Intellectual (I)
***** Method 1 (space saver) will use for this analysis
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS-SCALE (ALPHA)
Reliability Coefficients
N of Cases = 120.0 N of Items = 2
In our reliability test, the score of Cronbach's Alpha OF.8102 which shows that internal consistency is good here.
Reliability of the Construct Brand Satisfaction (BS)
***** Method 1 (space saver) will use for this analysis
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS-SCALE (ALPHA)
N of Cases = 120.0 N of Items = 3
In our reliability test, the score of Cronbach's Alpha OF.8732 which shows that internal consistency is good here.
Reliability of the Construct Brand Loyalty (BL)
***** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis *****
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS-SCALE (ALPHA)
Reliability Coefficients
N of Cases = 120.0 N of Items = 4
Alpha =.8935
In our reliability test, the score of Cronbach's Alpha OF.8935 which shows that internal consistency is good here.
4. Variations in the Different Aspects of Brand Experience Across the Brands
a) Sensory (S)
The following hypothesis has developed here:
Ho:
Now, Focal = 8.975
The null hypothesis has rejected here because the value of significant is less than the value of alpha, . Now it shows that brand Samsung mobile is the best in sensory aspect (Mean=3.15) followed by iPhone (Mean=3.11) and Walton (Mean=2.18).
Oneway
Descriptive
S ANOVA
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||||
| iPhone | 40 | 3.1125 | 1.15185 | .18212 | 2.7441 | 3.4809 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Samsung | 40 | 3.1500 | 1.25167 | .19791 | 2.7497 | 3.5503 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Walton | 40 | 2.1750 | 1.08928 | .17223 | 1.8266 | 2.5234 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Total | 120 | 2.8125 | 1.24189 | .11337 | 2.5880 | 3.0370 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
S
| Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| Between Groups | 24.413 | 2 | 12.206 | 8.975 | .000 |
| Within Groups | 159.119 | 117 | 1.360 | ||
| Total | 183.531 | 119 |
b) Affective (A)
The following hypothesis has developed here:
Ho:
H1:
Now, Focal =3.566
The null hypothesis has rejected here because the value of significant is less than the value of alpha, . Now it shows that brand Samsung is the best in affective aspect (Mean=2.98) followed by iPhone (Mean=2.66) and Walton (Mean=2.34).
Oneway A Descriptives
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||||
| iPhone | 40 | 2.6625 | 1.04628 | .16543 | 2.3279 | 2.9971 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Samsung | 40 | 2.9875 | 1.20089 | .18988 | 2.6034 | 3.3716 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Walton | 40 | 2.3375 | 1.00886 | .15951 | 2.0149 | 2.6601 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Total | 120 | 2.6625 | 1.11174 | .10149 | 2.4615 | 2.8635 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Oneway Descriptives ANOVA A
| Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| Between Groups | 8.450 | 2 | 4.225 | 3.566 | .031 |
| Within Groups | 138.631 | 117 | 1.185 | ||
| Total | 147.081 | 119 |
c) Intellectual (I)
The following hypothesis has developed here:
Ho:
H1:
Now, Focal = 5.575
The null hypothesis has rejected here because the value of significant is less than the value of alpha, . Now it shows that brand Samsung mobile is the best in intellectual aspect (Mean=3.1) followed by iPhone (Mean=2.65) and Walton (Mean=2.31).
ANOVA
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||||
| iPhone | 40 | 2.6500 | .97534 | .15421 | 2.3381 | 2.9619 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Samsung | 40 | 3.1000 | 1.13341 | .17921 | 2.7375 | 3.4625 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Walton | 40 | 2.3125 | 1.06028 | .16765 | 1.9734 | 2.6516 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Total | 120 | 2.6875 | 1.09825 | .10026 | 2.4890 | 2.8860 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Sum of Squares | Df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| Between Groups | 12.488 | 2 | 6.244 | 5.575 | .005 |
| Within Groups | 131.044 | 117 | 1.120 | ||
| Total | 143.531 | 119 |
5. Variation in the Brand Satisfaction Across the Brands
The following hypothesis has developed here:
Ho:
H1:
Now, Focal = 7.832
Sig.=0.000
The null hypothesis has rejected here because the value of significant is less than the value of alpha, . Now shows that brand Samsung mobile is the best in brand satisfaction aspect (Mean=3.09) followed by iPhone (Mean=3.07) and Walton (Mean=2.28).
Oneway BS Descriptives
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||||
| iPhone | 40 | 3.0667 | .91894 | .14530 | 2.7728 | 3.3606 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Samsung | 40 | 3.0917 | 1.20063 | .18984 | 2.7077 | 3.4756 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Walton | 40 | 2.2750 | 1.00960 | .15963 | 1.9521 | 2.5979 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Total | 120 | 2.8111 | 1.10827 | .10117 | 2.6108 | 3.0114 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
BS ANOVA
| Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| Between Groups | 17.257 | 2 | 8.629 | 7.832 | .001 |
| Within Groups | 128.906 | 117 | 1.102 | ||
| Total | 146.163 | 119 |
- Variation in the Brand Loyalty Across the Brands The following hypothesis has developed here:
Ho:
H1:
Now, Focal =6.461
The null hypothesis has rejected here because the value of significant is less than the value of alpha, . Now it shows that brand Samsung mobile is the best in brand loyalty aspect (Mean=3.08) followed by iPhone (Mean=2.88) and Walton (Mean=2.29).
Oneway BL Descriptives ANOVA
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||||
| iPhone | 40 | 2.8813 | .96905 | .15322 | 2.5713 | 3.1912 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Samsung | 40 | 3.0750 | 1.10099 | .17408 | 2.7229 | 3.4271 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Walton | 40 | 2.2875 | .98799 | .15621 | 1.9715 | 2.6035 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Total | 120 | 2.7479 | 1.06683 | .09739 | 2.5551 | 2.9408 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
BL
| Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| Between Groups | 13.470 | 2 | 6.735 | 6.461 | .002 |
| Within Groups | 121.967 | 117 | 1.042 | ||
| Total | 135.437 | 119 |
Now the following multiple regression equation has identified here:
The following overall hypothesis has formulated here: H0: H1:
The null hypothesis has rejected here because the value of significant is less than the value of alpha, . Now the relative contribution of each independent variable can be identified. The beta value of sensory is high than other variables, so its says that the sensory aspect has more contribution to brand experience due to the associated beta value.
| Independent Variables | Beta |
| Sensory | .510 |
| Affective | .272 |
| Intellectual | .972 |
Variables Entered/Removed(b)
| Model | Variables Entered | Variables Removed | Method |
| 1 | I, S, A(a) | . | Enter |
Model Summary
| Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R Square | Std. Error of the Estimate |
| 1 | .798(a) | .637 | .627 | .67648 |
a. Predictors: (Constant), I, S, A
ANOVA(b)
| Model | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| 1 | Regression | 93.078 | 3 | 31.026 | 67.798 | .000(a) |
| Residual | 53.085 | 116 | .458 | |||
| Total | 146.163 | 119 |
b. Dependent Variable: BS
Coefficients(a)
| Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | ||
| B | Std. Error | Beta | ||||
| 1 | (Constant) | .562 | .175 | 3.220 | .002 | |
| S | .455 | .072 | .510 | 6.281 | .000 | |
| A | .271 | .097 | .272 | 2.797 | .006 | |
| I | .092 | .094 | .091 | .972 | .333 | |
a. Dependent Variable
8. The Impact of the Various Aspect of Brand Experience on Brand Loyalty
Regression
Now the following multiple regression equation has identified here:
Focal=67.925
The following overall hypothesis has formulated here: H0: H1:
Null hypothesis has rejected here because the value of significant is less than the value of alpha, . Now the relative contribution of each independent variable can be identified. The beta value of sensory is high than other variables so it is said that sensory aspect has more contribution to brand experience due to the associated beta value.
| Independent Variables | Beta |
| Sensory | .379 |
| Affective | .237 |
| Intellectual | ..271 |
Variables Entered/Removed(b)
| Model | Variables Entered | Variables Removed | Method |
| 1 | I, S, A(a) | . | Enter |
| Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R Square | Std. Error of the Estimate |
| 1 | .798(a) | .637 | .628 | .65080 |
ANOVA(b)
| Model | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| 1 | Regression | 86.307 | 3 | 28.769 | 67.925 | .000(a) |
| Residual | 49.130 | 116 | .424 | |||
| Total | 135.437 | 119 |
Coefficients(a)
| Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | ||
| B | Std. Error | Beta | ||||
| 1 | (Constant) | .518 | .168 | 3.083 | .003 | |
| S | .326 | .070 | .379 | 4.674 | .000 | |
| A | .227 | .093 | .237 | 2.437 | .016 | |
| I | .264 | .091 | .271 | 2.900 | .004 | |
VI. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The total duration of study is too short to carry out all the details about this project. In addition, this study can be more accurate if we got a long period to do it.
As we are student, this projects funded by us, so there was some financial constrained and for that the survey was conducted only Dhaka city.
We conducted my survey only on product industry we don't get any data about the service or other industry due to the lack of resources.
Future Research Scope
The scope of the research recognizes after and during the study. There was financial constraint due to that this study only limited to people who belong to Dhaka city. So, other cities should include in the near future. We conducted our survey in the product industry, so in the future other sectors should cover.
VII. CONCLUSION
A brand experience perceived by consumers as superior will only lead to actual brand satisfaction and brand loyalty if an affective engagement has established between the brand and its consumers.
The finding of this paper verify all the research hypotheses and the important link between brand experience on brand loyalty and brand satisfaction. This research gives an insight into the factors that how brand experience and product involvement affect brand satisfaction and brand loyalty. This research revealed that brand experience and product involvement has a positive impact on brand satisfaction and brand loyalty because when a customer has a positive experience, they reproduce that experience, and if they have a negative experience with the product, they will never choose the brand again. This research states how three independent variables (sensory, affective, and intellectual) affect brand satisfaction and brand loyalty.
Regression analysis shows that the sensory aspect has more contribution to brand experience. From the reliability test, it is found that there is internal consistency. In addition, from three angles (sensory, affective, and intellectual) Samsung brand has the highest effect on their mobile users.
APPENDIX
a) Questionnaire used in this study
An Academic Survey
(Examining Brand Experience, Brand Satisfaction, and Brand Loyalty)
Name (optional):
Phone Number (optional):
Gender: โกMale โกFemale
Education: โก SSC or below โก HSC โก Bachelor โก Masters or equivalent professional degree or above
Profession: โก Student โก Service Holder โก Business โก Others
Average Monthly Family Income: โก 30,000 or below โก 30,000โ60,000 โก 60,000โ90,000
โก 90,000 - 1,20,000 โก above 1,20,000
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements. Where 1 = highly disagreed, 2 = disagreed, 3 = neutral, 4 = agreed, and 5 = highly agreed.
| SN | Statements | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| S1 | iPhone makes a strong impression on my visual sense or other senses | |||||
| S2 | I find iPhone interesting in a sensory way | |||||
| A1 | iPhone induces feelings and sentiments | |||||
| A2 | I feel emotionally engaged with iPhone | |||||
| I1 | I engage in a lot of thinking when I encounter iPhone | |||||
| I2 | iPhone stimulates my curiosity and problem solving | |||||
| BS1 | I am satisfied with iPhone and its performance | |||||
| BS2 | My choice to get iPhone has been a wise one | |||||
| BS3 | I am quite happy with what I did with iPhone | |||||
| BL1 | In the future, I will be loyal to iPhone | |||||
| BL2 | I will buy iPhone again | |||||
| BL3 | iPhone will be my first choice in the future | |||||
| BL4 | I will recommend iPhone to others |
b) Basic statically outputs
Frequency Table
Gender
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | Male | 69 | 57.5 | 57.5 | 57.5 |
| Female | 51 | 42.5 | 42.5 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 120 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Education
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | HSC | 30 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 25.0 |
| Bachelor | 81 | 67.5 | 67.5 | 92.5 | |
| Masters or Equivalent | 9 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 120 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Profession
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | Student | 111 | 92.5 | 92.5 | 92.5 |
| Service Holder | 6 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 97.5 | |
| Business | 3 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 120 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Average Monthly Family Income
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | 30,000 or below | 24 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 |
| 30,000 - 60,000 | 42 | 35.0 | 35.0 | 55.0 | |
| 60,000 - 90,000 | 3 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 57.5 | |
| 90,000 - 1,20,000 | 30 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 82.5 | |
| above | 21 | 17.5 | 17.5 | 100.0 | |
| 1,20,000 | 120 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Brand Descriptives
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | iPhone | 40 | 33.3 | 33.3 | 33.3 |
| Samsung | 40 | 33.3 | 33.3 | 66.7 | |
| Walton | 40 | 33.3 | 33.3 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 120 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
| N | Kurtosis | ||||||||
| Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Std. Error | Statistic | Std. Error | |
| S | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.8125 | 1.24189 | .155 | .221 | -1.070 | .438 |
| A | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.6625 | 1.11174 | .411 | .221 | -.476 | .438 |
| I | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.6875 | 1.09825 | .265 | .221 | -.628 | .438 |
| BS | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.8111 | 1.10827 | .131 | .221 | -.803 | .438 |
| BL | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.7479 | 1.06683 | .148 | .221 | -.596 | .438 |
| Valid N (listwise) | 120 | ||||||||
| N | Kurtosis | ||||||||
| Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Std. Error | Statistic | Std. Error | |
| S | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.8125 | 1.24189 | .155 | .221 | -1.070 | .438 |
| A | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.6625 | 1.11174 | .411 | .221 | -.476 | .438 |
| I | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.6875 | 1.09825 | .265 | .221 | -.628 | .438 |
| BS | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.8111 | 1.10827 | .131 | .221 | -.803 | .438 |
| BL | 120 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.7479 | 1.06683 | .148 | .221 | -.596 | .438 |
| Valid N (listwise) | 120 | ||||||||
Reliability
***** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis *****
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS - SCALE (ALPHA)
Reliability Coefficients
N of Cases = 120.0
N of Items = 2
Alpha =.8548
Reliability
***** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis *****
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS - SCALE (ALPHA)
Reliability Coefficients
N of Cases = 120.0
N of Items = 2
Alpha =.7873
Reliability
***** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis *****
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS - SCALE (ALPHA)
Reliability Coefficients
N of Cases = 120.0
N of Items = 2
Alpha =.8102
Reliability
***** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis *****
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS - SCALE (ALPHA)
N of Cases = 120.0
N of Items = 3
Reliability
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS - SCALE (ALPHA)
Reliability Coefficients
N of Cases = 120.0
N of Items = 4
Alpha =.8935
Oneway
Descriptives
S ANOVA
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||||
| iPhone | 40 | 3.1125 | 1.15185 | .18212 | 2.7441 | 3.4809 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Samsung | 40 | 3.1500 | 1.25167 | .19791 | 2.7497 | 3.5503 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Walton | 40 | 2.1750 | 1.08928 | .17223 | 1.8266 | 2.5234 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Total | 120 | 2.8125 | 1.24189 | .11337 | 2.5880 | 3.0370 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
S
| Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| Between Groups | 24.413 | 2 | 12.206 | 8.975 | .000 |
| Within Groups | 159.119 | 117 | 1.360 | ||
| Total | 183.531 | 119 |
Oneway
Descriptives
A ANOVA
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||||
| iPhone | 40 | 2.6625 | 1.04628 | .16543 | 2.3279 | 2.9971 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Samsung | 40 | 2.9875 | 1.20089 | .18988 | 2.6034 | 3.3716 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Walton | 40 | 2.3375 | 1.00886 | .15951 | 2.0149 | 2.6601 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Total | 120 | 2.6625 | 1.11174 | .10149 | 2.4615 | 2.8635 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
A
| Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| Between Groups | 8.450 | 2 | 4.225 | 3.566 | .031 |
| Within Groups | 138.631 | 117 | 1.185 | ||
| Total | 147.081 | 119 |
Descriptives
ANOVA
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||||
| iPhone | 40 | 2.6500 | .97534 | .15421 | 2.3381 | 2.9619 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Samsung | 40 | 3.1000 | 1.13341 | .17921 | 2.7375 | 3.4625 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Walton | 40 | 2.3125 | 1.06028 | .16765 | 1.9734 | 2.6516 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Total | 120 | 2.6875 | 1.09825 | .10026 | 2.4890 | 2.8860 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
Oneway
| Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| Between Groups | 12.488 | 2 | 6.244 | 5.575 | .005 |
| Within Groups | 131.044 | 117 | 1.120 | ||
| Total | 143.531 | 119 |
Descriptives
BS ANOVA
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||||
| iPhone | 40 | 3.0667 | .91894 | .14530 | 2.7728 | 3.3606 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Samsung | 40 | 3.0917 | 1.20063 | .18984 | 2.7077 | 3.4756 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Walton | 40 | 2.2750 | 1.00960 | .15963 | 1.9521 | 2.5979 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Total | 120 | 2.8111 | 1.10827 | .10117 | 2.6108 | 3.0114 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
BS
| Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| Between Groups | 17.257 | 2 | 8.629 | 7.832 | .001 |
| Within Groups | 128.906 | 117 | 1.102 | ||
| Total | 146.163 | 119 |
Oneway Descriptives BL ANOVA
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | ||
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||||
| iPhone | 40 | 2.8813 | .96905 | .15322 | 2.5713 | 3.1912 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Samsung | 40 | 3.0750 | 1.10099 | .17408 | 2.7229 | 3.4271 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Walton | 40 | 2.2875 | .98799 | .15621 | 1.9715 | 2.6035 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
| Total | 120 | 2.7479 | 1.06683 | .09739 | 2.5551 | 2.9408 | 1.00 | 5.00 |
BL
| Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| Between Groups | 13.470 | 2 | 6.735 | 6.461 | .002 |
| Within Groups | 121.967 | 117 | 1.042 | ||
| Total | 135.437 | 119 |
Regression
Variables Entered/Removed(b)
| Model | Variables Entered | Variables Removed | Method |
| 1 | I, S, A(a) | . | Enter |
Model Summary
| Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R Square | Std. Error of the Estimate |
| 1 | .798(a) | .637 | .627 | .67648 |
ANOVA(b)
| Model | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| 1 | Regression | 93.078 | 3 | 31.026 | 67.798 | .000(a) |
| Residual | 53.085 | 116 | .458 | |||
| Total | 146.163 | 119 |
b Dependent Variable: BS
Coefficients(a)
| Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | ||
| B | Std. Error | Beta | ||||
| 1 | (Constant) | .562 | .175 | 3.220 | .002 | |
| S | .455 | .072 | .510 | 6.281 | .000 | |
| A | .271 | .097 | .272 | 2.797 | .006 | |
| I | .092 | .094 | .091 | .972 | .333 | |
Regression Variables Entered/Removed(b)
| Model | Variables Entered | Variables Removed | Method |
| 1 | I, S, A(a) | . | Enter |
b Dependent Variable: BL
| Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R Square | Std. Error of the Estimate |
| 1 | .798(a) | .637 | .628 | .65080 |
ANOVA(b)
| Model | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| 1 | Regression | 86.307 | 3 | 28.769 | 67.925 | .000(a) |
| Residual | 49.130 | 116 | .424 | |||
| Total | 135.437 | 119 |
Coefficients(a)
| Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | ||
| B | Std. Error | Beta | ||||
| 1 | (Constant) | .518 | .168 | 3.083 | .003 | |
| S | .326 | .070 | .379 | 4.674 | .000 | |
| A | .227 | .093 | .237 | 2.437 | .016 | |
| I | .264 | .091 | .271 | 2.900 | .004 | |