2019
DOI: 10.1287/isre.2018.0831
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Personalized Mobile Targeting with User Engagement Stages: Combining a Structural Hidden Markov Model and Field Experiment

Abstract: Low engagement rates and high attrition rates have been formidable challenges to mobile apps and their long-term success. To date, little is known about how companies can scientifically detect user engagement stages and optimize corresponding personalized-targeting promotion strategies to improve business revenues. This paper proposes a new structural forward-looking hidden Markov model as combined with a randomized field experiment on app notification promotions. Our model can recover consumer latent engageme… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Rutz et al, 2019) points to considerable heterogeneity across apps. While consumer apps or other health apps can be optimised to fit the needs of a particular target group (Zhang et al, 2019), there can only be one set of specifications for tracing apps. That set must then succeed in convincing a majority of the populationpotentially even critics -to install and use the app (Morley et al, 2020).…”
Section: Research Context: the Nature Of Tracing Apps And Mass Acceptmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Rutz et al, 2019) points to considerable heterogeneity across apps. While consumer apps or other health apps can be optimised to fit the needs of a particular target group (Zhang et al, 2019), there can only be one set of specifications for tracing apps. That set must then succeed in convincing a majority of the populationpotentially even critics -to install and use the app (Morley et al, 2020).…”
Section: Research Context: the Nature Of Tracing Apps And Mass Acceptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies on the drivers of mobile app acceptance in general (Ghose & Han, 2014) and health apps in particular (Briz-Ponce & García-Peñalvo, 2015; Kim & Park, 2012) have highlighted the importance of identifying mobile app specifications that best meet the requirements of the target group (Zhang et al, 2019). However, the situation is more complex for the case of tracing apps, which must reach the majority of a country's population to work effectively.…”
Section: Different Propensities For App Acceptance and User-centred Dmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Enacting value-creating activities may require continued inducements, and that tends to take the form of promotional rewards (Li & Agarwal, 2017). By implementing platform designs such as recommendation, certification, and featuring (Dinerstein, Einav, Levin, & Sundaresan, 2018;He, Fang, Liu, & Li, 2019;Rietveld et al, 2019;Rietveld, Seamans, & Meggiorin, 2021;Sun, Fan, & Tan, 2020), platform owners can help selected complementors enhance their reputation, draw customers' attention, drive website traffic, and improve sales growth (Chen, Wei, & Zhu, 2018;Horton, 2019;Huang, Singh, & Srinivasan, 2014;Zhang, Li, Luo, & Wang, 2019b). In their study of mobile apps, Liang, Shi, and Raghu (2019) first show that offering editor recommendations has a positive influence on the sales of featured products.…”
Section: Taking Stock: Review Of Extant Research On the Governance And Design Of Digital Platformsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Wu et al [39] develop a framework to capture the underlying mechanism of mobile app usage. Zhang et al [40] identify user latent engagement states and proposed a personalized targeting strategy based on engagement states. While Huang et al [38] explore users' motivational factors, Wu et al [39] examine contextual factors, and Zhang et al [40] focus on the mobile app's pricing strategies, our study investigates an operational factor, i.e., network delay, in addition to a financial factor, users' prior spending.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%