The Smartphone Consumer Decision-Making
Process of University Students in Sweden: The Case
of iPhone
BACHELOR THESIS
THESIS WITHIN: BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
NUMBER OF CREDITS: 15
PROGRAMME OF STUDY: MARKETING
MANAGEMENT
AUTHOR: Alek Vladimirov Ivanov, Eric Adam George
Akiba, Konstantin Krasimirov Konov
JÖNKÖPING May 2021
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank our tutor MaxMikael Wilde Björling for his constructive feedback
and effective guidance throughout the development of this research. With his expertise and
valuable advice, we were able to gain very useful insights on this process and managed to
complete the thesis paper.
Secondly, we would like to send out our gratitude towards the participants who took time to
be a part of this research and provided us with valuable insights.
Thirdly, we would like to acknowledge the participants in the seminar groups. With
constructive criticism we received from them during seminars, we were able to polish this
paper and deliver high quality.
Lastly, we are thankful for the opportunity to test our knowledge gained through the
Bachelor’s program in Marketing Management.
1
Bachelor Thesis in Business Administration
Title: The smartphone consumer decision-making process of university students in Sweden:
The case of iPhone
Authors: Alek Vladimirov Ivanov, Konstantin Krasimirov Konov, Eric Adam George Akiba
Tutor: MaxMikael Wilde Björling
Date: 2021-05-18
Key terms: “Five-stage consumer decision-making process”, “iPhone”, “Purchase behaviour”,
“Smartphone usage”, “University Students in Sweden”.
Abstract
Background: The emergence of mobile phones today and in history proves to be
exceptionally unique in the consumer electronics market as well as the telecommunication
market. The reason behind the huge growth of the industry has been the exceptional evolution
of the technology used in the mobile devices in terms of performance and miniaturization.
Purpose: The purpose of the research is to investigate the different stages within the
consumer decision making process and the influencing factors that have a grip over
consumers and shape the consumer behaviour towards smartphones. The study is aimed at
exploring the main reasons that affect the buying decision of students regarding a specific
case, which is the iPhone product and its student users in the Swedish market. By focusing on
a specific segment of the iPhone consumers, the research will present more accurate and clear
results. The theoretical perspective of the study will be using the traditional five-stage
decision-making model as a backbone thus putting the main focus of the analysis on the
consumer behaviour of the respondents.
Method: Additionally, the paper will take the customers’ point of view in order to portray the
influencing factors that exist within the consumers’ decision-making. For the purpose of the
study, 12 iPhone users will be interviewed through semi-structured interviews and the
gathered data would be analysed and coded in order to find and synthesize the results into a
framework that will be developed specifically for the case.
Conclusion: According to findings that were made regarding the iPhone case, there were a
few factors that stood out as the most relevant when it comes to the students’ purchase
decision - brand loyalty, culture and society, perceived risk, financial influence, usage and
product features. After the initial purchase of an iPhone which is mainly influenced by social
influences, it can be concluded that brand loyalty plays a key role in the repurchase behaviour
of customers.
2
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Problem 2
1.3 Case of Research 4
1.4 Purpose 5
2. Frame of Reference 5
2.1 Consumer Decision-Making Process 7
2.1.1 Need Recognition 8
2.1.2 Information Search 9
2.1.3 Evaluation of Alternatives 10
2.1.4 Purchase decision 13
2.1.5 Post-purchase behaviour 14
2.2 Influencing factors 15
2.2.1 Social Factors 15
2.2.2 Price Factors 16
2.2.3 Perceived Risk 17
2.2.4 Brand Loyalty 18
2.2.5 Product Features 19
2.3 Smartphone usage and customers 20
3. Methodology, Method and Ethics 21
3.1 Methodology 21
3.1.1 Research Paradigm/Philosophy 21
3.1.2 Research Approach 22
3.1.3 Research Design 23
3.2 Method 23
3.2.1 Sampling Method 23
3.2.2 Interview design 24
3.2.3 Data Analysis 26
3.3 Ethics 27
3.3.1 Confidentiality 27
3.3.2 Credibility 27
3.3.3 Transferability 28
3.3.4 Dependability 28
3.3.5 Confirmability 29
3
4. Empirical Findings 29
4.1 Brand Influence 29
4.2 Cultural and Social Influence 31
4.3 Financial Influence 32
4.4 Product Features 33
4.5 Purchase Considerations 35
5. Analysis 35
5.1 Brand Loyalty 35
5.2 Culture and Society 37
5.2.1 Culture 37
5.2.2 Society 38
5.3 Financial Influence 39
5.4 Perceived Risk 40
5.5 Product Features and Usage 41
5.6 Adapted five-stage consumer decision-making model 43
6. Conclusion/Discussion 46
6.1 Conclusion 46
6.2 Contribution/Implications 47
6.3 Limitation 47
7. References 49
8. Appendices 59
8.1 Appendix A 59
8.2 Appendix B 59
1
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
The emergence of mobile phones today and in history proves to be exceptionally unique
in the consumer electronics market as well as the telecommunication market. With this
emergence, mobile phones have witnessed a massive influx in sales worldwide of about
450 million units just in 2013 alone. In comparison to television and PC sales this
proves to be nearly three times the size. Furthermore, what holds responsible for the
fuelling of this growth has been the exceptional evolution of the technology used in the
mobile devices in terms of performance and miniaturization. Consequently, in contrast
to many other technological appliances, consumers on average change their mobile
devices every two years and thus represent 80% of all mobile phones (Antoine, 2003).
According to one study (Shahzad, 2020) in 2013 the sales of smartphones with internet
connection outweighed the ones of the mobile phone devices that were more basic and
common. This fast growth was a clear indication that smartphones are the future and
would have a major market share in the industry of communicative technology. Due to
the great amount of benefits and features that smartphones offer, their sales have an
increase of 100% per year (Kenney & Pon, 2011). Cecere et al., (2015) states that the
emergence of smartphones revolutionized the market for mobile devices and
contributed to the innovation in technological development. Additionally, the
introduction of Apple and Samsung in the smartphone market combined with the
continuous development in technology helped it to establish a vast growth. All these
factors shaped the customers’ preferences towards smartphones and made them the
preferred mobile devices (Cecere et al., 2015).
2
1.2 Problem
Nowadays, smartphones have already become the most preferred mobile devices in
Sweden. According to Statista (2020), in the year 2018, the smartphone users in Sweden
accounted for almost 8.50 million of the whole population. It is also projected that by
2024 there will be almost 9.50 active smartphone users. Additionally, Svenskarna och
internet (n.d.), states that 92% of the population in Sweden owns a smartphone. These
statistics show a clear indication that the smartphone market in the country is growing
and presents a perfect opportunity for further study. Deloitte (2016), suggests that the
youth use their phones more than the seniors do thus presenting the opportunity to
further deepen the available research of the correlation between young people and the
purchase decisions of iPhones.
Morphitou (2014) suggests that with the emergence of smartphones and the rapid
increase in technology development, students view these mobile devices as essentials.
Smartphones have a huge impact on the lifestyle of students and they tend to interact
with their cell phones quite frequently. According to O’Donnell & Epstein (2019), a
college student spends five to nine hours a day scrolling through their mobile device on
average every day. O’Donnell & Epstein (2019), also claim that students choose to buy
smartphones due to the benefits the devices offer and they use them as tools for
entertainment, quick accessibility, relaxation, browsing the internet and connecting with
their friends through the various social media channels. Additionally, Chan et al. (2015)
suggest that students tend to incorporate their smartphones in diverse ways when it
comes to learning and studying. Because of the fact that mobile phones offer immediate
accessibility to various sources, students can check university databases instantly
(Morphitou, 2014). Due to the enormous number of benefits that these devices present,
students prefer to use cell phones rather than other technological devices like laptops,
PCs, etc. On the other hand, there are also some negative aspects that can affect the
student’s perception when it comes to smartphones. Moprhitou (2014) suggests that the
drawbacks associated with the devices can be a limitation when it comes to accessing
data and problems with their software and hardware. Despite the fact that the
advantages of using smartphones outweigh the accompanying disadvantages, it is
extremely important to note that the purchase of a mobile device should not result in an
unfavourable experience.
3
Peer influence plays a major role when it comes to the choices that students make. The
term is related to the interpersonal effect that the youth has among each other (Lee,
2014). Kim et al. (2014) identify that young college students are cautious when it comes
to monetary cost and social influence factors. Aspects like perceived value and
perceived prices also have a huge contribution to the decision-making of students when
it comes to smartphones due to the fact that this group is often regarded to have a lower-
income status compared to the older demographic groups. When it comes to social
influence, factors such as positive self-image and perceived popularity have a huge
influence on the adaption of cell phones by students (Kim et al. 2014). Additionally,
aspects like students’ financial constraints and perceived risk are major influencing
factors to the final decision-making process of electric goods such as smartphones
(Mitchell & Greatorex, 2006).
According to Prasad & Jha (2014), understanding the consumer decision making
process is key to identifying marketing challenges and opportunities. It is crucial to be
able to align the marketing efforts with the steps customers undertake to decide what to
buy. Nagarkoti (2009), stated that in today’s mature smartphone market, users’
behaviour is at least as important as technological capabilities. According to Antoine
(2003), as a result of the evolution of mobile phones, consumption has grown
exponentially alongside it. This growth demonstrates a massive influx in the purchasing
frequency of mobile phones across the globe as newer models are developed each year
thus presenting a challenge to businesses to adapt to consumer purchasing decisions and
tailor their products. Not only does this present a challenge to businesses but more
importantly, to customers. Consumers, on average, change their mobile devices every
two years and they must capture and internalize their next need of a phone before
committing to a decision (Ganlari, 2016).
Customers are extremely complicated thus it is essential for businesses to be able to
generate models that would help to dissect and analyse more efficiently and effectively
each individual part that takes place in the whole buying action. While the internal and
external factors affecting decision-making would vary from person to person and from
situation to situation, the study of consumer behaviour attempts to draw certain
generalizations (Prasad & Jha, 2014). According to Stankevich (2017), marketers and
4
consumers both can use a wide collection of varying forms of the consumers’ decision-
making process in order to deepen understanding on influences to product purchase.
The five-stage consumer decision-making process has been historically applicable and
has also served as a basis for a variety of marketing studies. In addition, it is of great
importance when it comes to the purchasing habits and preferences of the customers.
The model comprises five stages starting with the initial stage called need recognition,
followed by information search, evaluation of alternatives, purchase decision, and
finally post-purchase behaviour (Stankevich, 2017). That is why it acts as a backbone
for the theoretical framework of this study. The Swedish smartphone market was chosen
due to the fact that it is rapidly growing each year. Moreover, university students in
Sweden are an important market segment that presents a great opportunity for future
research.
1.3 Case of the Research
In 2007, the phone industry witnessed an event that revolutionized the. Apple Inc.
released their first smartphone which influenced and innovated the smartphone industry
(Boamah & Agbozo, 2017). Today, one of the most commonly seen smartphones across
the globe are Apple’s famous iPhones. With a sturdy build and a reliable operating
software similar to that of its counterparts in the Apple ecosystem, iPhones gradually
gained the respect and trust of its consumers. One of Apple’s identified core
competencies is product innovation (West & Mace, 2007). From a technology
perspective, Apple has used this core competency to develop highly functional and
usable mobile devices. Again, the iPhone has succeeded by focusing on personal use,
while technologically ensuring the iPhone is appealing to both personal and business
users (Liao, 2008). A survey shows that the iPhone is the most popular smartphone
among students compared to any of the other smartphones. From 124 respondents,
27.5% currently own an iPhone (Morphitou, 2014). One key differentiating aspect that
the iPhone holds which provides a level of exclusivity from other mobile phone brands
is their software. The iOS is the name of the operating software in each and every
iPhone today (Steele & Provazza, 2018). It provides an easy layout for users to navigate
through, which creates a large appeal for the average mobile device user. With the
iPhone currently enjoying the highest percentage of the entire profit in the smartphone
5
market (Boamah & Agbozo, 2017), they also provide their customers with various post-
purchase services such as the trade in program. Introduced firstly in 2013, iPhone
customers were able to return earlier iPhone models and exchange it for the then newly
introduced iPhone 5 at a certain discount price. This was done with the intention to
capture more demand for the product (Xiao et al., 2020). The consumer behaviour
towards smartphone brands is also a fundamental factor within the Swedish society.
Svenskarna och internet (n.d.) states that the majority of young people in Sweden use
iPhones. In addition, on their website (Statista, 2021) suggests that in 2019 the iPhone
was the most preferred choice of smartphone amongst the Swedish people.
1.4 Purpose
The purpose of this research is to explore the five-stage consumer-decision making
process of university students in Sweden when it comes to smartphones while using the
case of iPhones for the purpose of understanding this. The study is aimed at analysing
the different stages within the process while providing a deeper understanding of the
accompanying aspects that impact them. The paper obtains the customer's perspective,
which in this case are university students in Sweden, in order to better explain the
influencing factors within the different stages of the consumer decision-making process
and provide a deeper insight to the very elements that shape the students’ buying
decision for an iPhone. Since Apple as a company and its product line have been highly
studied, the gap that this paper tries to fill is the observation of the whole decision
making process of the customers regarding their pre-purchase, purchase and post-
purchase behaviour towards Apple’s iPhones. The research question that will be
answered through this research in order to fill the gap in the existing literature is:
“What are the relevant influencing factors that affect the purchasing decision towards
smartphones of university students in Sweden?”
2. Frame of Reference
The literature review of this paper was written with the purpose of providing data about
existing and previous research on the topics of the five-stage consumer decision-making
process of students and relationship between customers and smartphones. The data
gathered from previous studies was systematically summarized and drawn conclusions
6
upon while critically reviewing the academic information. The five-stage consumer
decision-making model serves as a backbone of the frame of references so that each part
of this process is thoroughly observed and explored. In addition, two subheadings were
included. One about the influencing factors in order to outline the repetitive behavioural
aspects that we aim to investigate and another one about the relationship between
smartphone products and their users.
The databases that were used to collect academic articles were Business Source
Premier, Google Scholar and Primo, which is a search engine connected to the library of
Jönköping University. These three approaches of gathering scientific materials for the
literature review were selected based on the convenience and familiarity of working
with them. Additionally, the features offered by the databases such as the option of
searching only for peer-reviewed journals contributed to making the literature review
trustworthy. The key search terms used for gathering credible data from previous
research were: “Factors within the consumer decision-making process”, “Smartphone
buying behaviour of students”, “Purchase behaviour of iPhone users”. Consequently,
the results generated were directly connected to the topic and problem of the research at
hand. The academic literature that was used in the paper was saved on an excel sheet
(appendix A)
As a method to increase the trustworthiness of the study, whenever possible, the
Academic Journal Guide by Chartered ABS was used. Journals and articles outside of
the ABS guideline were not excluded as sources of academic data only when the
information within the referenced arguments has been supported by other credible
sources.
The frame of reference that has been generated is based on articles and research in order
to be as accurate and timely as possible with the available information regarding the
specific subject. However, since the backbone of the paper is a model that was created
more than 30 years ago, there were some older articles and studies that were used as a
supporting role for the argumentation due to their valuable contribution to the topic.
7
2.1 Consumer decision-making process
Over many years, consumer decision making has become an increasingly appealing
issue within the marketing world. This is because, the ability of knowing the very
reasons to why and how consumers make decisions prior to a purchase aids companies
in developing their marketing strategies to better suit the market (Stankevich, 2017).
Among the wide variations of the consumer decision making process, the traditional
five-stage decision making model will serve as an efficient tool to break down the very
elements behind decision making (Figure 1). According to Stankevich (2017), the five-
stage model serves as a base for more modern concepts as it highlights the “moments
that matter” in the process of decision making for consumers. Additionally, it serves as
a backbone for marketers to understand steps required in moving the customer to
actually buying products and aids in the business transactions between customers and
businesses and proves to be an ideal model for use today. The idealized structure and
model of the process of each consumer's decision making is historically illustrated as
five basic stages beginning with the initial intent of purchasing a good to finally,
physiological factors that influence the consumer after purchase (Longart et al, 2016).
Figure 1
Traditional five-stage consumer decision-making model
Note: Adapted from “Explaining the consumer decision-making process: Critical
literature review” by A.Stankevich, 2017, Journal of International Business Research
and Marketing, 2(6). Copyright 2017 by Literature Publishers.
The initial stage of this complex process of decision making is a crucial stage to which
the consumer must initially distinguish their desire for a product to be either an actual
state or a desired state and determine what aspect are in the end affecting what they
want in the product (Stankevitch, 2017; Bruner & Pomazal, 1988). Once the first stage
has been determined, the second stage focuses on the information to which the
8
consumer will then acquire on the product (Longart et al, 2016). Here, during
information search, there are several elements that come into action and determine the
quality of the search; structure of the information search, the method and type of
information search, whether the search is external or internal and how extensive of a
search was done (Hoyer & Maclnnis, 2003). As said by Hauser (2014), then consumers
with the information gained from this stage must make a decision through a process
known as a consider-then-choose process which brings them to the third stage of their
decision making. The evaluation of alternatives stage is where consumers have the
ability to narrow down their selection set to which they are considering. Here, various
attributes of the set of products can be examined in order for the consumer to make a
clearer picture of which product to choose (Longart et al, 2016). With a decision of a
product made, consumers will then move forward with the decision of purchasing that
product and finally experiencing post-purchase behaviours. Schifferstein and
Zwartkruis-Pelgrim (2008), argue that once the product has been purchased, depending
on the strength of the bond to which consumers develop with the product (consumer-
product attachment), any further actions may be taken. With a weaker consumer-
product attachment, a consumer can fall into a state of cognitive dissonance which is a
state of mental discomfort (Kotler & Keller, 2012). To tackle this, consumers may
either pursue a journey to find information that motivates their purchase decision or
may return the product (Sharifi & Esfidani, 2014).
2.1.1 Need Recognition
As mentioned previously, the pre-purchase stage of the consumer decision making
process initiates with identification of the type of need to which the individual aims to
satisfy (Bakshi, 2012; Bruner & Pomazal, 1988). This initial stage of the process must;
by the consumer, be internalized and materialized in their minds before any decision is
made. Here, motivation is an important characteristic that affects consumer buying
behaviour. Every individual has varying needs which are specific to them, such as
physiological needs, social needs. Some may be more urgent in comparison to others
which may be less (Babin & Harris, 2015). Ultimately a distinguishing difference must
be identified between the actual state and the idealized state of their affairs in order to
aid the direction of the decision (Bakshi 2012; Hawkin et al., 2001).
9
In understanding one’s needs, there are three main factors that come into play.
According to (Bruner & Pomazal, 1988) and (Workman & Studak, 2006), there is one
subgroup of factors that affect the desired state of needs and a subgroup of factors that
affect the actual state of needs. Additionally, there is a third subgroup of factors that
affect in fact, both states of affairs. Consequently, once the individual has recognized
the problem and realized the state to which their need exists they have developed a
discrepancy between the two states and can then move forward with the process
(Workman & Studak, 2006; Bruner & Pomazal, 1988). Although an individual has
developed a discrepancy in between the two, for various psychological reasons, often
times they engage in a string of denial thinking such as “I do not need it at this moment”
or “The one I have works fine now so I don’t need a new one” and can distort their
perception on the decision or terminate the decision as a whole (Workman & Studak,
2006). Once the discrepancy has been identified and understood, only then can the
individual recognize this need and thus move forward to their actual consumer problem
recognition. This is also known as the initial stage of the consumer decision making
process and often occurs simultaneously with problem delineation (Workman & Studak,
2006; Bruner & Pomazal, 1988). An example of a problem delineation is when someone
realizes that (for the case of this study) their mobile device is broken, thus they need a
mobile device and are willing to buy a new one with an actual state or desired state thus
moving them forward to the next stage of the process “Information search”
(Stankevitch, 2017).
2.1.2 Information Search
After the consumer has successfully been able to identify and recognize their personal
needs whether it be actual or desirable, they begin with an internal form of information
search. This process is merely the consumer recollecting “decision relevant”
information in the form of memories before evaluating alternatives. These forms of
internal information may be acquired from sources such as repeated exposure to low
involvement marketing in the form of basic advertising. (Grant et al., 2007; Crotts,
1999). However, when a consumer is experiencing that internal information search is
proving to be inadequate, oftentimes they move towards a more external form of
information search. This type of information search relies on the level of initiative a
consumer is willing to put in for the purpose of gaining additional information on the
10
product in mind and can be obtained through various sources with the largest one being
the internet (Grant et al., 2007; Hawkins, 1995). The external information search
process of decision-making is in fact the most complex form of information search as
there are several factors affecting the information gathered. According to Peterson and
Merino (2003), external information search is portrayed as consisting of two major sets
of activities; (1) general, ongoing, continuous or regular activities and, (2) goal-
oriented, pre-purchase or problem-solving activities. They further state that external
information search is done with the purpose of minimizing risk and uncertainty in the
consumer’s mind.
In understanding the reasons for external search, it is important to explore what the cost
of online search is in regards to making a decision (Rose & Samouel, 2009). In the
model developed by Shim et al. (2001), the cost-benefit paradigm is viewed as a risk
reducing exercise. The higher the level of efficiency seen in the internet search
conducted by consumers, the lower the cost of a certain product they can reach upon,
thus creating an incentive for consumers to indulge in extensive external information
search. Although search costs online are perceived as next to nothing and even decrease
the final cost the consumer will pay from a vast number of alternatives, Punj and Staelin
(1983), state that search costs continue to have a negative effect. This is due to the fact
that search costs, in many cases, are looked at in terms of perception rather than reality.
Simply put, it is important to know whether it is essentially “worth it” putting in
extensive amounts of information search and investing one's time for certain products.
Once the consumer has satisfied their information search needs whether internally by
remembering repetitive advertising or through extensive online search, they can focus
on the set of products, to which they are willing to choose from with the consider-then-
choose method where they will be evaluating the alternatives (Hauser, 2014).
2.1.3 Evaluation of alternatives
Consumers who successfully identified key areas within the previous two stages of the
model often find themselves still faced with a relatively wide range of options to choose
from and require a tactic to narrow down these options to a select few in order to make
the decision simpler. This is most commonly done through a consider-then-choose
approach which involves them choosing a set of products, then considering a set/evoked
11
set for further evaluation, and finally making a decision from that set for purchase
(Hauser, 2014). As mentioned previously, this stage of the process highly involves
individual heuristic measures for the decisions they make.
First, looking at the utility that a consumer derives from each product in mind, prior to
further evaluation it is considered to be a variable that is random. If this process has
been done effectively, consumers will be able to create a consideration set so that better
and satisfying products would have a higher chance of being included (Hauser, 2014).
Taking a closer look into areas that affect the level of utility that a consumer may gain
from a product can be categorized into six areas of heuristics; conjunctive, disjunctive,
subset conjunctive, lexicographic, elimination by aspect, and disjunctions of
conjunctions (Hauser, 2014).
- Conjunctive: Here a consumer with a conjunctive view on consideration, tends to
identify products that meet at least one major satisfying aspect of a product. This view
applies to either a single aspect that a product “must have'' or rather a single aspect that
a product “must not have”, in order for the consumer to consider the product for their
set (Hauser, 2010). For example, in the case for mobile phones, a consumer with a
conjunctive view may decide that a phone they are aiming to purchase must include a
fingerprint scanner or vice versa.
- Disjunctive: A consumer with a disjunctive view on consideration, in contrast to
conjunctive, has a tendency to consider a product which instead has at least one major
element that satisfies the “excitement” aspect for the consumer. This view applies to
any form of product with at least one crossover element making the product unique
(Hauser, 2014). For example, a consumer with a disjunctive view may select mobile
phones that have been launched as limited editions where a celebrity’s signature may be
imprinted on or a limited colour may be applied.
- Subset Conjunctive: This view of consideration, similar to a conjunctive one,
involves consideration of a product that either has a “must have” or “must not have”
element. However, in contrast to the conjunctive view of having one, the subset
conjunctive view includes a number of either “must have” or “must not have” elements
but not a combination of them (Hauser 2014). For example, if a consumer is looking for
12
a mobile phone, they may have in mind that the phone must have a large size and must
have a yellow colour.
- Lexicographic: A lexicographic view on a consumers’ consideration revolves
around the element of ranking. Here, a consumer ranks each aspect of a product in a top
to bottom fashion. They start with the type of product and rank a variety of products
falling under that type, then the shape, colour, size, etc. (Hauser, 2014). For example, a
consumer using a lexicographic view for mobile phone consideration, may start with
ranking all phones in the fashionable group, then move forward to all that have the
colour red, then all that have high end cameras before finally making a decision.
- Elimination by aspect: A consumer that is using an elimination by aspect view of
consideration, will initiate this process by first selecting an aspect that the product they
wish should not have. They then eliminate all products with that aspect, and continue
the process by repeatedly selecting aspects and eliminating until they have reached a
final consideration set to which they can make a decision from (Hauser, 2014). For
example, a consumer with this view may begin with selecting a mobile phone aspect
such as colour and repeatedly eliminate phones with unwanted colours, then selecting
an aspect such as physical home buttons and repeat the process until they have reached
a consideration set of mobile devices to which they may choose from.
- Disjunction of Conjunctions: Finally, the disjunction of conjunction view of
consideration includes a consumer’s choice to include a combination of “must have”
and “must not have” elements in a product (Hauser, 2014). For example, a consumer
with this view may have in mind that a mobile phone they are looking for must have a
green colour, high quality front camera, and a home button, but must not have a wide
screen.
With a concrete understanding of each of the different heuristic views to consider, a
consumer ultimately narrows down their options to a select few in order to make the
most satisfactory decision. Once the consumer has been able to do this, they proceed by
selecting a product which matches all their needs and wants and can then move forward
to the purchase decision.
13
2.1.4 Purchase decision/behaviour
The purchase decision is mainly influenced by the previous stages of the consumer
decision-making process. In their book Kotler & Keller (2012), discuss the fact that it is
the evaluation of alternatives stage that has an impact on the purchase decision and
intention of consumers when it comes to different brands. Shrestha (2016) states that
this stage of the consumer decision-making model serves as the end goal of the
customer. According to Stankevich (2017), customers make purchases to satisfy their
needs and meet their demands. Additionally, a consumer can begin the process of
making a decision on a given product but change their mind. This is due to the fact that
customers usually make sub decisions. As identified by Kotler & Keller (2012), there
are several such decisions that consumers can go through which are brand, dealer,
timing, payment method and quantity. Mitchell (1992) gives a more thorough
explanation of these decisions while identifying the risk connected to them. For
example, it is identified that depending on the product these decisions will differ in
terms of their significance. When it comes to smartphones these five aspects can be
projected as follows: Brand (iPhone), Dealer (Apple store), Timing (during the week),
Quantity (one), Payment Method (Debit Card). These choices are evaluated by the
customers since each one of them carry some sort of problems that may arise. Since
smartphones are not considered nondurable products or products that require low
involvement and simple decision-making process, the time spent on shaping and
constructing the decision can take longer before the actual purchase of the product. For
more complex products consumers spend more time to come up with the most efficient
choice (Stankevich, 2017).
As described by Ganlari (2016), the purchase decision stage of the consumer decision-
making model can be influenced by preferences towards a specific brand and the
opinion of family, friends and reference groups of the customer. In addition, the study
also supports the notion that consumers often base their purchase decision towards
smartphones on the year the product was introduced to the market. According to one
study (Shrestha, 2016) potential buyers prefer to purchase the latest introduced
smartphones due to the technological development and advancement in the variety of
available features. Brand loyalty can have a huge impact on the decision-making due to
the fact that most consumers that are loyal to a given brand like Apple, are likely to go
14
back to it (Ganlari, 2016). Usually when it comes to smartphones people base their
buying decisions on the attributes and benefits that the product provides, however,
customers that are loyal to a brand feel that their needs are satisfied and hold on to its
offerings and services. A prior research suggests that the information based on prior
experience with a product and brand perception through advertising and ad-beliefs have
a significant influence on the customer’s buying decision. The way companies advertise
their products can also form unconscious beliefs that affect the buying behaviour
(Solomon et al., 2006; Smith, 1993).
Kotler & Keller (2012), identified two types of intervening factors that can influence the
transition from purchase intention to purchase decision. The first factor is based around
the attitudes of others. The level of influence of this factor depends on the degree to
which another person has negative views towards the brand or product selected by a
customer and the decision of this customer to agree and take into consideration the
opinion of the other person. In addition to that, Madinga & Dondolo (2018), suggest
that the people within the same social circle can influence each other's purchasing
decisions. Kotler & Keller (2012) discusses the second intervening factor as
unanticipated intervening situational factors. These are factors that arise from an
unexpected situation that changes the purchase intention of customers. Chen & Chang
(2012), identify time availability and cash flow problems to be unanticipated factors.
When it comes to smartphones, the both intervening factors have a high level impact on
the purchase decision. If the product can’t be purchased, there is an important risk to be
considered.
2.1.5 Post-purchase behaviour
Post-purchase behaviour is the final stage of the five-stage consumer decision-making
process and it is also known as the stage of customer satisfaction/dissatisfaction.
According to Stankevich (2017) it is at this part of the decision-making model where
consumers have already bought a product and then evaluate their purchase. Customers
review and analyse the item bought whether it met, exceeded their expectations or did
not fulfil their demands (Ganlari, 2016). Consumers incorporate the item purchased into
their daily routines while simultaneously assessing its usefulness and benefits (Solomon
et al., 2006). The post-purchase stage can have a substantial influence on both the
15
customer that owns the product and future potential consumers that are seeking
information for it. According to Stankevich (2017), the positive satisfaction of a
purchaser can lead to repurchasing. However, if the demands were not fulfilled and the
promises made were not kept this can result in negative consequences and affect the
decision-making process of potential clients. In addition to that, Ganlari (2016) suggests
that in a situation of disappointment customers will most likely seek alternatives to
minimize their dissatisfaction and can also replace the product. The author also includes
a smartphone perspective in their research. The feedback whether it is positive or
negative with regards to a purchase of a smartphone will have an impact on the buying
behaviour of other customers.
Kotler & Keller (2012) identified that the correlation between expectations and
performance can be referred to as a gap. The size of this gap determines the level of
satisfaction and dissatisfaction. In their after-purchase activities, consumers can also
experience cognitive dissonance. According to Sharifi & Esfidani (2014), cognitive
dissonance refers to the part when customers evaluate the alternative products after
purchase where there is probability that they may feel inconvenience since they had to
select among other products. This is applicable especially when it comes to expensive
and complex products. For example, when it comes to smartphones, a consumer may be
involved in activities where they compare different products, think of replacing the item
purchased with another one or just switching to another brand. In addition, emotions
connected to regret may arise. Previous research suggests that the feeling of regret has a
detrimental impact on the degree to which a customer is satisfied which leads to
negative consequences in terms of product repurchase (Bui et al., 2011). If experiencing
a cognitive dissonance, a customer will always try to minimize it.
2.2 Influencing Factors
2.2.1 Social Factors
In order to be satisfy their feelings of belonging, people tend to associated themselves
with certain groups. Individuals tend to look and mimic each other’s moves to fit into a
social group. These type of groups have norms and there are also sanctions to guarantee
stability. Additionally, rewards and punishments are used to make people follow the
norms and behave in a certain way (Nagarkoti, 2014).
16
Word-of-mouth (WOM) can have a huge impact on the decision making process when
it comes to external influences. According to Tuškej et al., (2013), a customer who
shares the same values as a given company tends to promote and recommend their
products to others which is an example of positive WOM. When it comes to social
groups there are many types, but the most common primary groups are family, friends,
neighbours and co-workers in which there are continuous but informal interactions. As
stated by Commuri and Gentry (2000): “Family as a consuming and decision-making
unit is a central phenomenon in marketing and consumer behaviour”. For many
consumers, family is the most important social institution that strongly influences the
buyer behaviour, values, attitudes and self-concept. Secondary social groups include
religious, professional and trade unions groups where there are more formal and less
regular interactions (Kotler & Keller, 2012). When it comes to Generation Y (82% of
smartphone users), a previous study (Madinga & Dondolo, 2018), found out that friends
within the same social circle have the highest impact on the purchase decisions of
individuals within this specific generation.
Reference groups are those groups that have a direct and indirect influence upon a
person’s attitudes, aspirations or behaviour. Within the reference groups, people who
exert influence on others because of special skills, knowledge, personality and other
characteristics are known to be opinion leaders (Kotler & Keller, 2012). Because of the
enormous growth of social media and other online content sharing platforms, nowadays,
opinion leaders (influencers) have even wider possibilities of affecting the consumers’
opinions regarding specific products. When talking about smartphones, there are
millions of so-called “Unboxing videos” in which many influencers analyse and even
contrast competing devices with all their features and give a suggestion at the end,
which one you should buy.
2.2.2 Price Factors
According to Samuelson (2009), the price is a factor that is determined by the
interaction between demand and supply in the factors of production. Price can
determine where the consumer will trade with a product and will always be the key
factor consumers will consider before making any purchase decision (Nagle et al.,
2016). There are two types of product price. The products that have high prices are
17
referred to as market brands. When it comes to low-priced brands, the focus shifts into
more of a utilitarian value, which means that the users pay attention to the perceived
value and the price that comes with it. Even though most typically, the case is that
consumers seek to find the lowest possible price that will correlate to the best value that
they aim to receive (Swani and Yoo, 2010). Price is considered by Karjaluoto et al.
(2005), as a critical factor affecting the choice of Smartphone among young people.
Similarly, Kabadayi & Aygün (2007), assert that mobile phone customers have
perceived price as a significant indicator of product quality, whereby high price
indicates advanced technology, design, and improved features. In a study carried out by
Malasi (2012), price is described as a determining factor in shaping the future purchase
habits of young consumers. Price could be said as the most influential factor affecting
the purchase of a new mobile phone (Singla, 2010; Worlu, 2011). As stated by Chow et
al. (2012), there is a positive effect that is observed between the price and the
behavioural intentions of the consumers because price has the capability of establishing
an image within the perception of the users.
2.2.3 Perceived Risk
Perceived risk can influence and cause changes in the decision-making of customers.
Previous literature claims that perceived risk can be identified as a consequence of
beliefs of uncertainty associated with negative outcomes. Thus, the customer’s views of
risk can be considered fundamental when it comes to purchasing behaviour (Campbell
& Goodstein, 2001; Liao et al., 2010). Solomon et al., (2006) explains that perceived
risk can be present if a product has a high level of involvement, if it is expensive and if
the potential buyer is unfamiliar with the brand at hand. Smartphones are complex
products, especially the ones that are more expensive and require extensive search.
Existing literature, identified six types of perceived risk. Firstly, the functional risk
which is connected to the performance of a product having negative results. Physical
risk which is related to the potential harm that a product may have on someone’s well-
being. Financial risk which is about the price of the product not matching the
expectations. Additionally, the social risk which can be a result of the negative
consequences a product can have on a person’s image and reputation. Psychological risk
which is connected to the unpleasant aspects of a product that can cause harm to the
mental health of a given person. Finally, the time risk which is related to the arising
18
inconvenience, waste of time on a product and potentially losing the opportunity of
finding a substitute which meets the demands of customers. (Kotler & Keller, 2012; Lin
& Chen, 2009). These six risks may not be applicable to all kinds of purchases.
However, for more complex products the majority of them can be taken into
consideration. Based on a previous study, it is important to mention two elements of
perceived risk in the case of smartphone adoption. Firstly, the perceived financial risk
refers to potential financial expenses that may arise during the process of adoption and
usage of the smartphone. Secondly, the perceived device risk which is connected to the
accompanying risks when it comes to the performance of the smartphone and its design
aspects (Kim et al., 2015). Despite the fact that those two elements of perceived risk can
affect the intention to use a smartphone device, they can also influence the intention to
purchase the device as they are found to be important factors that can negatively impact
the adoption process.
2.2.4 Brand Loyalty
Boakye et al., (2018) identifies customer satisfaction as the key means of achieving
loyalty and establishing relationships with buyers. In addition to that, the feeling
associated with this phenomenon is directly affected by the product quality, price and
personal aspects. As explained by Sharifi & Esfinadi (2014) customer satisfaction is a
prerequisite for brand loyalty. The cost connected to attracting new potential clients is
relatively higher than the one associated with customers that are already loyal to the
brand. Consequently, by constantly buying products from the preferred brand, loyal
consumers help expand the presence in the market of companies (Su & Chang, 2018).
In the existing literature about consumer behaviour, it has been discussed that higher
levels of satisfaction translate to higher levels of brand loyalty (Jamshidi & Rousta,
2021). It has been suggested that there are two types of brand loyalty. Behavioural
brand loyalty is related to the repurchase of products associated with a specific brand.
While attitudinal brand loyalty is connected to the customers' insights of psychological
commitment in the process of the purchase. The second notion emphasizes on the fact
that a customer may not repeat the purchase but instead can positively influence the
customer journey of other potential buyers (Su & Chang, 2018).
19
Users prefer widely accepted brands of smartphones as they reflect a unique status
symbol (Laugesen & Yuan, 2010). In recent light, a study conducted by Liaogang et al.
(2007), discovered that one of the key factors that shaped the purchasing behaviour of
the youth proved to be the brand. Additionally, Keller (2007), mentioned that branded
products success stems from creation of brand awareness by reaching the consumers
mind, thus leading to a preference of a specific brand. Stankevich (2017) states that if
the needs and expectations of a buyer are met, then they may become brand
ambassadors and have a positive impact on the consumer journey of other people when
it comes to that specific product. Previous research (Mugge et al., 2010) suggests that
there is an important distinction between customer satisfaction and product attachment.
Product attachment arises from the emotional connection that a customer has with a
given product which leads to the formation of a bond between them. While customer
satisfaction is identified as an evaluative tool based on the cognitive review of the
product and the consequences through the process of consumption.
2.2.5 Product Features
Product features are those attributes which are related directly to the product its self.
The level of satisfaction within the consumer is determined depending on how well
these product features met their needs and wants (Kotler and Armstrong, 2010). In
modern day, consumers have become more aware to the variations of product features
and how they affect the level of satisfaction differently among others (Chow et al.,
2012). Mobile phones are equipped with many useful features, including media players,
online banking, camera, web browsing, child-location, call-management, Bluetooth,
voice command and millions of applications that could please the needs of any
consumer (Mokhlis & Yaakop, 2012). Almost every smartphone nowadays possesses
the attributes mentioned above but it depends from the operating system of the device
on how they will be delivered. Operating systems of smartphones are of great
importance when customers are choosing amongst mobile devices since each operating
system has its own exclusive personality and background. Consumers select
smartphones based on the specific features that will give them benefits, which would
engender specific outcomes that are supportive of personal values. Consumers use
attributes (features) to make a comparison between competitive brands and marketers
20
should take cognizance of product features as it can determine consumers’ purchase
behaviour (Juwaheer et al.,2014).
2.3 Smartphone usage and customers
According to Rashid et al., (2020), smartphones have already established themselves as
a huge part of the modern culture due to the various ways an individual can use them.
The many different usage patterns of smartphone users are highly influenced by the fact
that these mobile devices support people’s daily routines. Previous research (Bruns &
Jacob, 2014) suggests that by having a more active role, smartphones allow consumers
to decide how to use their mobile phones themselves which leads to the creation of
different goals such as networking, entertainment, etc. It is interesting to understand that
a mobile device allows its consumers to engage with it in so many ways and according
to their preferences and taste, while providing beneficial outcomes.
The convenience provided by the smartphones also plays a key role in terms of usage.
Ting et al. (2011) claims that due to the fact that people can use their smartphone
wherever and whenever they want, it increases the usage rate of smartphones. In
addition, Barker (2018) suggests that smartphones are mainly used as sources of
communication. As the previous research indicated that sending messages and online
access are two of the most significant ways of using mobile devices. In addition to that,
it has been explained that social media plays an important role in the daily routine of the
teenagers. Social needs are the drivers of the communication between people. Based on
previous research (Ting et al., 2011), it is explained that smartphone usage is directly
connected to the level of needs a person expresses to socialize and communicate.
Despite the fact that it is applicable to society today, the way people use these mobile
devices are not strictly connected to the purposes of communication. Customer trends
play a major role when it comes to how people use their smartphones. It is explained
that these trends can be connected to acceptance of technology and affordability.
Additionally, the acceptance of new technology is based around the behaviour of the
customers, their socioeconomic status, influence of external and internal means of
communication, complexity and benefits offered of acceptance (Rashid et al., 2020).
Rashid et al., (2020) explains that when individuals grow up, their perceptions change
about smartphones as well as their usage patterns. As late as 2020, Rashid et al., found
21
out that smartphone users within age groups 18-24 and 25-34 mainly make use of their
mobile devices by networking and collecting information. According to the same study
(Rashid et al., 2020), gender also plays an important part when talking about
smartphone usage. The research found that generally males tend to prefer phone calls,
as well as means to connect with other people as the most often used features of their
smartphones. Additionally, this specific gender group does not regularly utilize all the
features within a mobile device. When it comes to the second gender group in the study,
females tend to use SMS, social media apps, camera and internet more than the males
(Rashid et al., 2020). Soukup (2015) identified several themes when it comes to
smartphone adoption. For example, the author explained that in the sectors of education,
business and health smartphones have already established themselves as beneficial. In
addition, journalism, gaming, and daily living are also influenced by the adoption of
mobile devices. All these themes can be viewed as a way of incorporating the use of
smartphones.
According to a research made by Saif et. al. (2012) regarding the factors that would
affect the choice of mobile phones, new technological features are the most important
motivational factor that affects the user to reach a purchase decision. Karjaluoto et al.
(2005), pointed out that price, brand, interface, and properties tend to have the most
influence that affects the actual choice when it comes to mobile phone brands.
Furthermore, Pakola et al. (2010) investigated consumer purchasing motives in cell
phone markets, and their study revealed that price and properties were the most
influential factors affecting the purchase of a new mobile phone.
3. Methodology, Method and Ethics
3.1 Methodology
3.1.1 Research paradigm/philosophy
According to Collis & Hussey (2014), the research paradigm is connected to the
philosophical nature of the way a research is directed. The authors also explained that
there are two main paradigms that are used when conducting a research which are
positivism and interpretivism. In the case of this research, the paradigm selected is
interpretivism in order to answer the research question in the most accurate and
22
effective manner. The notion of the chosen paradigm comes from the fact that the
reality is viewed as subjective by individuals. Additionally, interpretivism aims at
exploring a given phenomenon while providing a more in-depth interpretative
understanding about it (Collis & Hussey, 2014). The purpose of this study is related to
the nature of interpretivism as philosophy. It is focused on exploring the factors that
shape and influence the different stages within the consumer-decision making process
of university students in Sweden, while taking a qualitative method of data collection.
By doing that, the research will allow a better understanding of the phenomenon and
provide a subjective point of view based on the empirical findings.
3.1.2 Research approach
Furthermore, specific methodologies were used to provide the correct literature review
accurately. One of the more common approaches that is used within a qualitative study
is the abductive approach to reasoning. The reason behind that is that it aims to explore
and further modify the traditional five-stage consumer decision making process by
implementing influencing factors gathered in the findings into a model. This is
highlighted by Saunders et al. (2016), where they explain the abductive approach as a
way to explore and modify existing theories. The purpose behind using an abductive
approach was for utilizing the traditional five-stage consumer decision making model as
a base for understanding influences towards the purchase of smartphones in the case of
iPhones. This approach allowed for the paper to gain relevant data on these specific
factors and further implement them in the decision-making model thus modifying it
with a new light on its understanding.
As mentioned by Crowe et al. (2011), a case study approach to a research is useful
when there is an aim to obtain in-depth understanding of an issue, phenomenon or event
of interest in a real world context. In the case of this paper as the purpose states, the
consumer decision-making process would be investigated within a specific scenario, in
which the focus would be on gathering more information towards the purchase decision
of Swedish students using a single-case study approach. The data that is desired to be
obtained would be, what do students go through when buying Apple’s iPhone and,
through the empirical framework that is generated, the influencing factors within the
process stages would be discovered and analysed. The reason behind the choice of this
23
research approach is that as stated by George and Bennet (2005), a case study is very
well suited for understanding the sensitivity of a concept to context and is very well
suited for theory development due to its ability to process trace, the causes and the
outcomes.
Possible limitations that come with the case study approach according to Suryani (2017)
are that it is very hard to cover all the issues within a topic and offer a generalization
because they tend to have limited evidence, not as many as in a quantitative study.
Furthermore, the case studies often rely on subjective data, such as the statements of the
participants and the observations of the researchers, which are also factors that may lead
to questioning the credibility of the study.
3.1.3 Research Design
For the purpose of understanding purchase decision’s influences by analysing each of
the steps in the five-stage decision making model in-depth, the type of research that was
implemented was Qualitative research. The reason behind this is that, Qualitative
research can be defined as an orientation towards a discovery or a process. This
approach has a high validity and it is less concerned with generalizability. Its’ main
concern is towards finding a deeper understanding of the research question in its unique
context (Ulin et al., 2005). This is because the nature of this study and the purpose, is
aiming to find a meaningful explanation of the specific consumer behaviour.
3.2 Method
3.2.1 Sampling Method
In order to fulfil the purpose of the research the convenience sampling method chosen is
purposive sampling. According to Saunders et al. (2016), the use of a purposive
sampling method benefits the research because it gives the freedom to decide the type
of participants that are to be interviewed. That is why it was decided that this would be
the most beneficial method of sampling for this research and its purpose. Saunders et al.
(2016), further states that purposive sampling is not adequate for large scale sampling,
but rather for smaller sample sizes. With a smaller sample size, researchers are able to
24
focus more specifically on the vivid and profound information gained from the
participants.
The purposive sampling technique was conducted through initially contacting 20
students to find out whether they own an iPhone and have purchased one previously. A
handful of the individuals contacted unfortunately did not meet the requirements stated
above and were thus dropped from consideration. Here, other relevant information
regarding the interview was provided to the potential participants to see whether they
would be interested in taking part or not. As a result, the research landed upon 12
people that were willing to take part in the interview and had all met the requirements
for the research.
3.2.2 Interview Design
In order to answer the research question and fill the gap in the existing literature, the
preliminary research of this paper is based upon qualitative research methods and more
specifically interview questions were designed and built upon the theoretical
background and problem. According to Saunders et al. (2009) there are three types of
interviews that can be used in qualitative research: semi-structured, structured and
unstructured or in-depth interviews. This research uses semi-structured interviews to
obtain empirical data. In the semi-structured there are themes and questions that are
covered. Semi-structured interviews emphasize on a specific type of information which
is relevant for the study and then this information can be compared with the other
findings gathered throughout the interview process. In addition to that, despite the fact
that the same types of questions need to be asked, there is also a possibility for more
flexibility through the interviews where important information can arise. These types of
interviews also require an interview schedule which is then used for all the interviews.
However, more topics and questions can be added to it if they are relevant (Dawson,
2009).
The primary data for the study was gathered through qualitative methods including in-
depth interviews with 12 participants. This approach was selected due to the fact that it
enables the research to gain a better understanding of the feelings and purchase
intentions of students when it comes to iPhones. Additionally, the interviews allowed
the study to gather empirical data about the purchase behaviour of the participants by
25
having a discussion with them, thus exploring their true preferences and expectations
about Apple’s product. Initially, a pilot interview was conducted so that the interview
questions could be tested to see their usefulness and accuracy. After the interview a new
interview guide was developed based on the responses of the participant and the
theoretical background of the study. The new interview questions added, were mainly
concerning the way people use their smartphones and their overall views on iPhones
and Apple.
As stated above the type of interviews conducted were semi-structured. This allowed
the research to collect meaningful and subjective empirical data which was then deemed
accurate to draw conclusions on. An interview guide was developed which was then
used for all the interviews (appendix B). Some additional questions were asked during
the interviews based on the answers of the participants. The interview questions used in
the interview guideline were mostly open-ended in order to ensure that the interviews
were conducted in a form of a discussion and not just one sided. In addition, by asking
open-ended questions, information that is relevant for the research could be gathered.
The interview questions were based around the five-stage consumer decision making
process, smartphone usage and views towards Apple and iPhones. The participants in
the interviews were students that own an iPhone and went through the different stages
of the consumer-decision making process when making their purchase. Moreover, two
gender groups were identified in order to see the similarities and differences within the
responses. The fact about whether the participants were working or not was also taken
into consideration due to the fact that this could have influenced the empirical findings
(Figure 2). The duration of each interview was approximately 45-60 minutes long.
Before each interview the participants were informed about the topic of the study and
the research question. In addition, the qualitative research was conducted only with the
consent of the participants and they were told how long time the interview should last,
the fact that participation is voluntary and one can withdraw at any point of time during
the interview process, the fact that they may be contacted after the interview to be
questioned about their responses. The majority of the interviews were conducted online
through a platform named Zoom, due to the current situation with Covid-19 and when
they were conducted face-to-face it was ensured that the environment is safe from
spreading the infection.
26
Figure 2
Interview participants list:
3.2.3 Data analysis
For the purpose of the research, in order to analyse the empirical data collected, a
thematic analysis type approach was utilized. Here, Braun and Clarke (2006, p.6), state
that: “Thematic analysis is a method for identifying, analysing, and reporting patterns
(themes) within data”. With this, Braun and Clarke are attempting to portray thematic
analysis as a method that aims to find repeating similarities among responses in specific
categories of the interview and to then deem those as relevant factors. They further state
that, with a thematic approach to analysis, the research can take the empirical data and
process it in-depth, gaining detailed information regarding the topic.
Additionally, for the purpose of categorizing and ordering the empirical data that was
collected, open-coding serves as an efficient and effective tool to minimize confusion
and reinforce organization allowing for the researchers to be able to pick out specific
and relevant data from interviews (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). Here, with an open-coding
approach, the authors of this research divided the empirical data by question asked in
the interviews and used a colour code to categorize every response before proceeding
27
with the analysis. The colours used highlighted only relevant responses to the research
in terms of the five-stage consumer decision making process. Each colour illustrated
influencing factors that influence each of the stages giving the research a more
organized form of data.
3.3 Ethics
3.3.1 Confidentiality
According to Morse, et al., (2015), protecting the privacy of the study participants is a
core tenet of research ethics. It is stated that when conducting a study there are different
types of demographic tags or identifiers that the researchers document and it is essential
for the confidentiality of the participants that there is a minimal amount of those tags to
protect their identity. All these things were carefully taken into consideration while
conducting, gathering and analysing the primary data for this study. All of the
participants were thoroughly introduced to the nature of the research and how the
information that they give will be used and processed. Due to the nature of the study no
actual personal information was documented. All the participants were referred to as
numbers (Figure 2) within the interview transcripts and no names were mentioned
when quotes were used in the paper. The only distinctive variable that was documented
and taken into consideration was the gender of the respondents and their employment
status. Finally, all participants were told their interview transcripts would be deleted
after the thesis is evaluated.
3.3.2 Credibility
According to Bryman & Bell (2007), Credibility deals with the trustworthiness of the
conclusion drawn within the paper in relation to the reality. For a study to be considered
as credible, the gathered results should be able to be replicated if the same methods and
conditions are applied. Through the use of a semi-structured interview, the respondents
were presented with the opportunity to develop their own personalized answers and
arguments. Later on, the interviews were recorded and transcribed in order to avoid any
mistakes occurring during the coding and the analysis of the results. By having semi-
structured interviews, the credibility of the findings to some extent may be hindered due
28
to the inconsistency arising from between the various responses may cause a slight
unbalance. However semi-structured interviews have contributed in viewing the
problem from various perspectives and approach angles. This interviewing technique
has brought the respondents the opportunity to come up with their own answers and
arguments using their experience as a point of reference, thus giving the opportunity to
look at the specific problem from a more in-depth perspective.
3.3.3 Transferability
According to Collis & Hussey (2014), transferability refers to the extent to which
findings acquired from the research can be applied to any similar context. Thus, with a
higher level of transferability, the study can generalize throughout the context. As this
research focuses on a smaller segment of individuals who are all Swedish, the
transferability and the ability for the results to be generalized across a broader
population may be limiting. The results and findings that this research has come across
may not be able to define the motives of others across a vaster span in other cultures
across the world as it may not apply to their motives. Thus, the findings and the results
of this paper may only be viewed for what they are in the context to which they are set
in being “What are the relevant influencing factors that affect the purchasing decision
towards smartphones of university students in Sweden?”.
3.3.4 Dependability
Dependability is a tool that is used to observe whether the research and the topic and
hand is consistently conducted (Golafshani, 2003). According to Tong & Dew (2016),
reliability is often referred to as dependability when it comes to the qualitative research
and it shows if the research has been done in a transparent way. Additionally, the
authors suggest that the transcript of qualitative data should be done. In the case of this
study, all interviews were recorded and then transcribed. Zoom was used to record the
discussion with the interviewees and afterwards as stated above a thematic analysis was
implemented to analyse the empirical data. After transcribing the interviews, each
transcript was matched to the audio recording to make sure that the information
gathered was trustworthy and correct. The analysis of the empirical data and its
comparison to the frame of reference was done without any bias and the findings were
not fixed in any way to fulfil the purpose of the research. Due to the fact that the topic
29
of this research is about the purchase intentions of students, no sensitive information
was requested or provided which ensured unbiased opinions.
3.3.5 Confirmability
According to Given (2008), confirmability can be explained as the truthfulness of the
meanings that are asserted by a study. They further state that, the level of credibility can
be increased through the number of other researchers' works that can confirm one's
research or study and can be coupled with reliability and objectivity. For the purpose of
increasing the confirmability of this paper, only peer reviewed articles have been used
in order to provide a level of confirmability throughout the paper and the assumptions
were avoided at all costs and only included in the conclusion. This aids in decreasing
the biases of the paper as it only takes into consideration previous workings which have
been credibly mentioned. This is further backed up by Tobin & Begley (2004), where
they mention that the purpose of confirmability in a general sense is to generate an
understanding of the results and findings solely from view that has been derived from
gathered data and not imagination.
4. Empirical Findings
4.1 Brand Influence
When evaluating between phones, almost all participants mentioned that they only
considered iPhones and not any other brand and the majority of those stated the reason
for this to be because they either do not feel the need to switch and are used to iPhones
and their simplicity. Furthermore, when asked how aware they were of the differences
between an iPhone and an Android smartphone most of the respondents said that they
perceive buying an iPhone more as a personal preference and they were not even
interested in comparing the two options and finding out which one is best on paper.
Respondents acknowledged that there are smartphone brands that have good reputation
and quality products but the vast majority of them haven't considered switching from
iPhone. It has become a pattern throughout the interviews that individuals that owned
more than one Apple device seem to be highly dependent on this ecosystem and
switching to another brand is not an option due to the fact that it would cause
inconvenience. Here it is interesting to mention the role of the ecosystem when talking
30
about switching behaviour as during one of the interviews a comment was made that
“[...] I need my iPhone to use my Apple watch, so it would be a total waste of money
and like a waste of technology and waste in general of things that don't need to be
sold”.
The length of the relationship that the participants had with Apple, which began with
the first device they bought, varied a lot but none of them has been an Apple user for
less than 6 years. Which shows to some extent that they have a strong sense of loyalty
towards the Apple brand. When asked about their feelings after their purchase of an
iPhone, all the participants stated that they felt satisfied with their purchase, as some of
them even said that they were excited to receive their new phone. Regarding their
service expectations all of the participants except one said that they believe that that the
services that Apple is offering are very reliable and along the way they have only been
pleased when they have had encounters with the company. As praised by one individual
“They are just perfect! They have a great service, I have used it many times and I was
more than satisfied”. The level of satisfaction that the participants received from their
purchases and post-purchase activities mostly influenced their relationship with Apple
in a positive way or stabilized it.
Another individual that took part in the interviews admitted that “[…] I did have
negatives towards Apple. But then, because I did the research and stuff. I was like, well,
that's not probably the case. So I did feel good. And I did feel more positive about it”.
This shows that some individuals are prone to changing their stance on their view of
apple products once introduced to their offerings. It is important to note that another
person pointed that when it comes to his relationship with the company, he has never
been emotionally attached to the iPhone product but he has integrated the ecosystem
provided by Apple in his daily life and became in his words “brand loyal”. Moreover,
many of the participants stated that they would continue buying iPhones in the future,
which can also be referred to as a consequence of their experience with the product.
When discussing whether they would recommend the iPhone to someone else, all the
participants stated that they are willing to suggest the smartphone brand either to
everyone they know or to people that previously used an iPhone because of the easier
and smoother transition. Couple of those who were interviewed even influenced other
31
people to buy an Apple smartphone, as one of them stated “I remember, even when a
friend needed to change his phone and he had a Samsung, so he was debating whether
to get another Samsung or an iPhone. I think I definitely told him to get an iPhone. And
he did.”. There is a clear evidence that the experiences with the product turned their
customers into brand ambassadors.
4.2 Cultural and Social Influence
More than half of the interviewees believed that Sweden requires you to use your phone
more often due to the infrastructure built within the country, the technological
advancements and the culture. One of the participants stated that: “[...] because I would
say Sweden is an innovative country, which is, like a country that's really connected to
technology and everything that's up to date, regarding phones, and anything that has to
do with technology”. It is important to note that the cultural background and past
experiences in other countries of some participants haven’t changed the fact that they
believe smartphones in Sweden are more integrated in people’s daily lifestyle. The
technological advancements in the processes and activities connected to the daily
routines of people in Sweden, create an environment that requires a more extensive
usage of smartphones. Almost everyone pointed out that their finance related apps such
as Mobile BankID and Swish are of great importance to them and can only be accessed
through a smartphone device. Additionally, one of the participants stated that living in
Sweden requires a higher phone use compared to other countries due to internet
connectivity, “[...] Ireland they use less phones they still have the home lines and stuff
like that because there is not as good Internet connection as well countryside. And so
definitely Sweden because you have the constant internet and the need for it and it's like
something that's offered and taken”.
Furthermore, when it comes to social influence, the majority of the participants stated
that the initial reason for them wanting a smartphone was because they felt peer
pressured. Hare, it is important to take into consideration that by the time of their first
initial purchase of a smartphone most of the participants were younger thus more prone
to the influence of peer pressure. An interviewee stated, “I believe that I was greatly
influenced by friends and such when I was younger, I was almost one of the last people
32
in my friend groups that didn’t have a smartphone. So I wanted one in order to feel part
of the group.”
For their latest purchase, most participants acknowledged to be influenced by someone
else when making their purchase decision. However, this influence was less of a peer
pressure but more leaned towards recommendations from others. Interestingly, they also
all stated that the media played a major role in their purchase process. Here, two
patterns appeared in the answers from the question regarding the iPhone purchases of
students while having budget constraints. Firstly, some of the participants stated that the
social environment and external influences of other people contribute to that purchase
intention. Secondly, according to other participants, students keep on buying the
product because they are familiar with it and have used it before.
4.3 Financial Influence
When it comes to the financial/budget constraints when evaluating between alternatives,
half of the respondents mentioned that their budget situation at that time did not in fact
affect their final purchase decision. Here, one of the respondents stated, “At that point I
was working so I had enough budget to just like get the best option that is available so I
just got it.” Still, some of these people purchased an older or cheaper model together
with a few individuals who believed their budget did affect their decision. When
choosing which exact smartphone models to buy most of the respondents deemed it
necessary to conduct an in-depth information search because they perceived that the
purchase, they were making was risky due to its size. As mentioned in this statement,
“When I buy things that are a bit more expensive. I feel the need to do my investigations
a bit more thoroughly.” they preferred investing a lot of time in searching for data in
websites and forums in order to be able to find the best possible price and model they
could.
The majority of the participants acknowledged that iPhones have a higher price in
comparison to their competitors but still prefer it over the other options in the market
because they believe the value it gives is worth the price. “Well, I really like them and
they are really great. So when I myself purchase an Apple product, I see a very good
value from what I've paid.” But the situation is a bit different when it comes to their
evaluation of alternatives within different iPhone models, because the majority of the
33
participants mentioned that they do not see a point in buying the most expensive option
and preferred to buy an older or cheaper phone that would be as useful as the premium
one. “I would never buy the most expensive option, because I do not believe it is worth
it. There is just a small difference.” Although most of the participants acknowledged
that with iPhones high prices, comes high value, they still did not believe that in general
a high price always means a high quality.
The respondents that thought this, mentioned that in most of the cases, there were very
minimal differences between the expensive iPhone models and the more budget friendly
models, the differences were barely noticeable. The others believed that there was a
significant relation between the price and the quality, stating that elements such as the
camera were slightly better and that you would receive a better service with higher
price. From this, one can draw that most people believe that some iPhones are very
expensive due to how new they are. Additionally, the participants that believed that
there was no correlation between price and quality showed to have a negative response
to Apple's brand when mentioning new and expensive models. “[...]So, the price of the
previous phone goes down, because the changes are so small so I don't see the need for
buying a brand new iPhone that has just been released because I know that the price
will decrease in just a few months.”
When asking the participants about what they believe are some potential risks
associated with their phone almost all of them stated that physical damage to the phone
exists as a risk such as cracking the phone screen or causing damage that require
reparations. Interestingly, the majority of the participants added that with this, financial
risks are coupled with the damage risk due to the fact that they have to get it repaired
and this would cost a large sum of money. Finally, when asked how they go about
minimizing these risks, all of the participants that believed that physical risks existed,
all stated that they used some sort of protection for their phone such as a phone case or a
screen protector.
4.4 Product features
When asked about their opinion regarding the Apple products the majority of the
interviewees emphasized on the simplicity that comes with all of the devices. They
associate the Apple products mainly with “high-quality”, “functionality” and
34
“convenience”. “[...]My life is based around their products. They give a neat solution to
everything.” Most of them acknowledge the fact that the prices of Apple are rather high
in comparison to their competitors but perceive that initially they get what they pay for.
“Their products are definitely overpriced but without a doubt I would say they are
worth it because of how convenient and simple they are to use.” Additionally, when
evaluating between different phones, almost every participant stated that the technical
aspects of the phone played a major key in determining which phone to choose. In
addition, almost all female interviewees stated that the camera is a function that they
value a lot. However, storage and price are worth noting as a few participants suggested
those features as important factors.
When asking what features the participants valued the most in their iPhones, the
majority stated that these are the technical aspects of their phones. This shows that their
attention is drawn to the detailed elements in the Apple software and strikes them as
something that holds the most value over other aspects of the phone. Here, familiarity
with the Apple software and the ecosystem provided were of utmost common features
that were valued. One interviewee even became part of the ecosystem after purchasing
an iPhone offered by the company and acknowledged that “After that, it didn't take long
until I bought my first Apple Watch. And then as soon as I got the chance I bought the
MacBook when they released. Not long after that, I realized the feature with the
AirPods”. This shows that the participants not only valued iPhones because of their sole
ability to perform well but because of the collective service which Apple provides to its
customers that allow an ecosystem to form. The vast majority of people admitted that
the way they use smartphones affects their purchase decision when it comes to the
iPhone.
4.5 Purchase considerations
According to the results, every single participant has apparently purchased their iPhone
from retailers instead of official Apple stores. Some are network carriers while others
are large electronic stores such as Mediamarkt and Elgiganten. On further inspection,
this is mainly due to the contract payment service that these retailers offer. Furthermore,
retailers are providing additional post-purchase services, which also affect some
customers to prefer them instead of the Apple stores. “[...]I would personally go to ‘M
35
store’ because I feel like Apple can be very greedy in their trade ins. I feel, especially
being the actual company itself they should give out to customers because they're the
ones who should know better about how much the actual product is worth. And if
customers are going to other premium resellers and are getting a lot more. You can
definitely tell that Apple's doing something wrong.”
When asking the participants where they would or did feel the most comfortable buying
an iPhone from, the majority of them mentioned that they would in fact feel the most
comfortable buying an iPhone from a retailer. Coupled with this, the reason was due to
the post-purchase services that they received and this reinforces the previous answers
and proves that the after purchase services do in fact provide incentive and make the
customers feel more comfortable to purchase with them in the future. “[...] Mediamarkt
probably. My family has always bought things from there. They give good service and
help”. When asking the participants whether they experienced some sort of hesitation
during the purchasing process, most of them stated that they in fact did and this appears
to be because there were several other options of iPhones with different specifications
available. Those people also mentioned that in the end they did not change their mind
and continued by purchasing the phone they initially planned. When asked, only a small
number of the participants stated that the trade-in program offered by Apple does have
influence on the purchase intentions of their customers. The reason behind this is that as
already mentioned, all of them preferred buying their devices from retailers instead of
the official Apple Stores that offer the service.
5. Analysis
5.1 Brand loyalty
The brand loyalty factor can be seen throughout most of the stages within the consumer-
decision making process of individuals that have already been iPhone users and
especially during their post-purchase activities. If customers have prior experience with
a given product where their needs were satisfied, they are more likely to continue using
the brand and its product-line. Sharifi & Esfinadi (2014) identified satisfied customers
are more likely to turn brand loyal. The same pattern can be seen within the answers of
the interview participants. Since all of them were satisfied with their purchase and the
36
majority of the interviewees viewed their relationship with the company positively
affected and stabilized after their purchase, most of them are still sure that their next
smartphone will be an iPhone. In addition to that, it was interesting to find out that some
customers even change their perception of Apple after purchasing their products.
According to one study (Nazir et al., 2020), brand perception is strictly tied to the brand
choice that customers make. As seen in the empirical findings section one interviewee
admitted that “[…] I did have negatives towards Apple. But then, because I did the
research and stuff. I was like, well, that's not probably the case. So I did feel good. And
I did feel more positive about it. Because I had now opened up my mind. for them”. It is
evident that customer satisfaction can change the views of consumers and their opinions
about the brand and potentially turn them into loyal customers. Brand loyalty can also
be a prerequisite for individuals to start using other items part of the product-line of
brands. For example, the empirical findings showed that after the purchase of an iPhone
some participants became part of the Apple ecosystem. As pointed out by one
participant “[…] After that, it didn't take long until I bought my first Apple Watch. And
then as soon as I got the chance I bought the MacBook when they released. Not long
after that, I realized the feature with the AirPods”.
According to Stankevich (2017) customers that are satisfied with a product and have
fulfilled needs may immediately turn into brand ambassadors and influence the decision
of potential consumers. This can be seen through the findings from the interviews
conducted. For example, all of the participants claimed that they would recommend the
iPhone to someone else and some of them even willingly affected the decision-making
process of other people close to them by suggesting that iPhone should be their next
purchase. As stated by one of the interviewees “I remember, even when a friend needed
to change his phone and he had a Samsung, so he was debating whether to get another
Samsung or an iPhone. I think I definitely told him to get an iPhone. And he did. By
providing excellent smartphone experience, Apple manages to make their customers
brand loyal which then results in word-of-mouth promotion of their products and
potential attraction of new customers. The patterns seen in the empirical findings
connected to the willingness of the participants to recommend iPhones to other people
leads to major beneficial outcomes for the company. As stated by Su & Chang (2018),
brand loyalty leads to higher market share for the companies. They also identified two
37
types of brand loyalty which are behavioural and attitudinal brand loyalty. Based on the
empirical findings in correlation to the frame of references we can conclude that the
vast majority of the participants act as an example of behavioural brand loyalty. This
can be concluded on the fact that the interviewees expressed a desire to repurchase the
product and not just recommend it. It is also important to state that the participants did
not show any significant emotional connection to the brand but more of a bond that has
been formed through their cognitive evaluation of the products. This finding can also be
referred to as the distinction between product attachment and customer satisfaction
explained by Mugge et al. (2010).
5.2 Culture and society
5.2.1 Culture
The cultural influence was not part of the frame of reference of the study due to
uncertainty regarding its relevance to the research. However, the results of the empirical
findings showed that this factor in fact plays a major role in the decision-making
process of students in Sweden. It was a common belief throughout the interviews that
living in Sweden influences the purchase intentions of students and the main reasons
behind this were the technological improvements in the country, the established
infrastructure and the way the society is built. According to Ganlari (2016), the cultural
views and beliefs of a given consumer are linked to the way they perceive a product.
Additionally, a product that offers advantages similar to the ones the members of a
culture long for, is more likely to position and remain in the market. As stated by an
interviewee “[…] I don't know, they have kind of like developed their brand. That is
kind of like very implemented into the Swedish society…”. Based on this statement
research can draw conclusions that the iPhone and Apple in general satisfy the needs of
the Swedish consumers which led to their integration in their lifestyle. It can be even
speculated that the iPhone is so adept to the Swedish society that people unconsciously
distract themselves from other brands and go with the one they are most familiar with.
The infrastructure built in Sweden presents a suitable environment for the further
integration of smartphones into the daily routines of people. As stated in the empirical
findings “[...] because I would say Sweden is an innovative country, which is, like a
country that's really connected to technology and everything that's up to date, regarding
38
phones, and anything that has to do with technology”. Everything that is happening in
the daily activities of the participants is connected to the usage of their smartphone,
from walking down to the grocery store to self-entertainment and connectivity.
5.2.2 Society
When it comes to the decision-making process, social elements that influence people's
decisions have become apparent throughout the collection of empirical data. By nature,
people are sociable and have a strong need to belong to a certain group and fit in order
to satisfy needs. People tend to observe and imitate others around them in order to find a
fine line between being independent and fitting into a specific group of people
(Nagarkoti, 2014). Because of this it becomes apparent how one individual can be
highly influenced by others around them, especially when it comes to purchasing
decisions of mobile devices such as iPhones. Collected data from the interviews
suggests that students initially believed that they had a need for an iPhone due to their
popularity within the communities and social groups to which they resided. The
majority of the participants claimed that they felt a sense of belonging in groups of
individuals that had mobile devices such as iPhones and thus had the urge to purchase
that same product in order to fit in. This apparent behaviour is also reinforced by a study
made by Nagarkoti (2014) where people aim to seek out rewards such as social
acceptance through the conformity of the specific norms of a social group.
Interestingly, as time passed, the results show that this influence shifted towards a more
localized form and became more of a direct form of influence from other individuals as
they grew older. As stated by Madinga & Dondolo (2018), individuals within the same
social circle can intervene and affect each other’s decision making. The similarity in the
data suggests that, more recently, the participants were more influenced by specific
individuals such as a friend or a family member in their purchase decision with the
iPhone, and stated that their positive experience with the product was what drew their
attention to iPhones rather than fitting into a group and is mentioned in Commuri &
Gentry (2000) statement “Family as a consuming and decision making unit is a central
phenomenon in marketing and consumer behaviour”. Additionally, secondary influence
groups played a major role in their decision making process for iPhones such as media
and the internet.
39
5.3 Financial Influence
When it comes to the decision-making process of the iPhone among university students,
financial elements that influence people's decisions become apparent throughout the
analysis of empirical data. The term “budget constraint” plays a major role as it
highlights various areas of the students’ decision making based on their financial
situation as a student. “When I buy things that are a bit more expensive. I need to, I feel
the need to do my investigations a bit more thoroughly.” This goes in line with many of
the areas of the traditional five-stage consumer decision making model such as
information search phase, evaluation of alternatives phase and the purchase decision
phase. Throughout the purchase decision the product must serve as an end goal for the
consumer and this is because they are aiming to satisfy their needs and wants within a
reasonable price which falls within their budget (Shrestha, 2016). This is highlighted
throughout numerous responses received in the data collected where the majority of the
participants stated that their budget does in fact affect their information search process
of smartphones. However, on further inspection, at the very moment of purchase, half of
the participants stated that their considered budget did in fact affect their final decision
to which iPhone model they were to purchase and the other half stated that it did not.
This comes to show that by taking into consideration their budgets earlier on in the
decision-making process, students were able to deem which iPhone models to be
appropriate or not when considering their financial situation. Just as Shim et al. (2001)
states, the cost-benefit principle applies to consumers as considering a budget prior to
research, one is able to reduce the final cost they are to incur through the purchase of a
good. Here, it becomes apparent that by taking into consideration their budget and
conducting in depth searches prior to their purchase, as consumers, they have been able
to determine the specific models to purchase while at the same managing their financial
allowance.
Interestingly, the research has also been able to show that, although considering budget,
several of the participants claimed that the differences between the more expensive
models of iPhones and less expensive ones to be miniscule, thus pushing them forward
towards the inexpensive options at the time of purchase. This behaviour is highlighted
40
by Hauser (2014), in his claims of heuristic categories. The subset-conjunctive heuristic
illustrates this behaviour as students identify the phone model they wish for, with every
“must have” and “must not have” element but one area opens for evaluation such as the
price in this case. “I would never buy the most expensive option, because I do not
believe it is worth it. There is just a small difference.” The participants were presented
with the various models and deemed it unnecessary to buy a more expensive version of
the phone when characteristics varied minimally and price varied largely.
5.4 Perceived risk
While considering finance as an influential element to the decision-making process,
perceived risk is apparently another major cause in the determination of financial
consideration. According to Campbell & Goodstein (2001), the views of risk associated
with the considered product play a major role in the eyes of the consumer. Solomon et
al. (2006), illustrates how high involvement products may in many cases, hold a high
level of perceived risk from the view of the consumer and thus requires a high level of
consideration to their finance and decision. For example, if the product in mind is
expensive such as the latest mobile devices on the market which are complex, they
require a high amount of research from individuals with a lower amount of expendable
income such as students. Notably, the empirical data suggests that students consider
physical damage to their phones and functional risks such as the longevity of their
memory and battery capacity to be major issues to consider prior to the purchase. This
is because, although already expensive, reparations to iPhones from the view of students
is also a considerably high expense which can place them in a difficult situation. These
forms of perceived risks are also further stated by (Kotler & Keller, 2012; Lin & Chen,
2009), where they portray six types of perceived risk; functional, physical, financial,
social, psychological and time. From these mentioned risks two stand out in the
collected data. Firstly, functional risk, which is related to the product under performing
and not meeting standards, and also physical damage to the product which were stated
by the participants appears to play a major role in their purchase decision. Secondly,
financial risk which relates to the products also appears to be deemed as crucial in their
purchase decision.
41
5.5 Product features and usage
The abilities of the smartphones are broadening everyday through the vast amounts of
constantly emerging applications in the App stores, which help the users enhance their
lives, through connectivity, productivity and entertainment similarly to what was
explained by Ting et al. (2011). There are thousands of applications and it is all about
the consumer to customize their device according to their unique personal preferences.
The respondents believed that their smartphone device has become almost an
inseparable part of their life due to the many other functions it has other than calling and
texting. Some of them even said that they do not believe they can live in modern society
without owning such a device.
As Babin & Harris (2015) mentioned, everyone has different forms of needs which
must meet the nature of their requirements where some needs are more urgent and some
less. According to the empirical findings one of the first important aspects that a phone
should be able to do is to have the ability to call others as this is something universally
expected from all smartphones and it does not take a significant role in the evaluation of
alternatives. Later on, the participants underlined that the next thing they needed from
their device is to have a sufficient battery life, storage and a software that is developed
according to their needs. For example, the iOS software which aims to provide
simplicity and convenience had an essential role in the participants’ decision-making
process. According to them, the simplicity, convenience and connectivity that come
with their devices were one of the main driving forces that balanced the scale between
the perceived and the actual value of the product. As mentioned by Bakshi (2012) in
their definition of actual and desirable needs. The interviewees also stated that, when
evaluating between different iPhone models the main technical characteristics, they
were looking at were the battery life and the storage capacity.
According to Babin & Harris (2015), motivation is a very important characteristic that
affects the consumer buying behaviour and this could be supported from the results
gathered from the interviews. The vast majority of participants admitted that the way
they use their smartphone according to their daily needs and activities has in fact,
affected their purchase decision. Before buying a concrete mobile device, they take into
42
consideration what they mainly use their smartphone for in order to be able to choose
the exact model characteristic that they need. Most of the respondents stated that they
were not willing to pay excessively for any product characteristic, which they did not
deem necessary.
Ting et al. (2011), suggests that smartphone usage is directly connected to the level of
needs a person expresses to socialize and communicate. The participants clearly
emphasized the great importance of social networking applications like Instagram,
Messenger and Snapchat, that take up a significant amount of their daily smartphone
usage. Their internal need to sort of feel part of society has resulted in them perceiving
those mobile applications as one of the most essential features that their smartphone
has. As pointed out by both Karjaluoto et al. (2005) and Pakola et al. (2010) the
properties of the smartphone have a huge impact on the purchase decision of customers.
The most common feature that was mentioned throughout the interviews was the
camera of the smartphone. A lot of the participants said that one of the main
characteristics they were looking at in the device was the quality of the camera, which
correlates with their extensive usage of applications like Snapchat and Instagram that
require using this feature. A few other common mentioning’s were apps like Spotify,
YouTube, which give the ability to listen to and even watch online content and Google
Maps, which has enabled the users of needing any types of maps or GPS devices.
From the gathered findings of the interviews, it is clear that the majority of the
participants have developed a dependency towards their smartphone, and it has become
a tool with a great personal value. Undoubtedly the features and the usage of this device
have significant influence when it comes to the decision-making process because of the
big diversity of capabilities that the many brands and models within those brands have.
43
5.6 The adapted five-stage consumer decision-making model
Based on the empirical findings and the frame of references it has been concluded that
there are six relevant influencing factors that affect the different stages of the consumer
decision making process. In order to fulfil the purpose of the study, a framework was
developed which focuses on those six factors and how they pinpoint specific stages of
the purchase decision of university students and steers the outcome of it Figure 3.
The “Need Recognition” stage from the decision-making model of university students is
mainly influenced by the social, cultural, product features and usage factors. Peer-
pressure was one of the main social elements that impacted the initial reason of the
students to buy their first iPhone. It acted as the first aspect that fulfilled their needs
which at that time were focused around fitting in their social circle. The cultural
influence comes from the infrastructure built and how integrated Apple products and
especially iPhones are in the daily routines of people in Sweden. It can also be assumed
that the process of selection of a smartphone turned from “Which phone to buy?” to
“Which iPhone to buy?”. Since it is a common belief that this specific brand satisfies
the needs of their users in the most efficient way. In addition, the product features and
smartphone usage shape the purchase intentions of the students based on their needs of
a mobile phone and the way they use the device. These needs may arise from aspects
such as connectivity and entertainment.
The “Information Search” part of the decision-making process is highly dependent on
the effect on factors such as social, financial, product features and usage. The social
aspects impact the purchase decision of customers while searching for information by
taking into consideration opinions of people that are close to them and have prior
experience with the same brand or even product. For example, word-of-mouth can alter
the way potential consumers derive their information about a smartphone. Secondly the
product features they are looking for and the way they use their phones are strictly
related to each other. While searching for information students take into consideration
what functions and features, they would like to have and how that correlates to their
smartphone usage. For example, if an individual uses their phone to take pictures, they
will look for a smartphone with a good camera quality. The financial influence comes
44
from the fact that students have budget constraints and they seek to find the best
alternative possible while searching for information.
When it comes to the “Evaluation of alternatives” financial factors and product features
and usage are the most relevant elements that can trigger the purchase intention of
students. The financial or budget constraints can limit the evaluation of alternatives. By
considering the budget limitations or insufficient income they have, students eliminate
potential options that exceed their initial financial plans. The product features and usage
are connected to the financial factors within this stage of the consumer decision-making
process. Students look for the most suitable alternative at the best price point offered.
Consequently, they try to maximize the value they receive while still taking into
consideration their budget constraints.
The “Purchase Decision” is influenced by the perceived risk, financial influence and
the location where students purchase their mobile phones. The perceived risks
associated with their purchase intentions are financial and performance risks. It is
important to note that usually the risk that may arise from the performance of the phone
like physical damage can lead to the potential financial risk. Take for instance, if the
battery life of someone’s phone is going down and causes inconvenience then
immediately, they are faced with the issues of spending more money on getting their
phone fixed or even considering buying a new one. In addition, the location where
students purchase their iPhones is also of great importance. It is also connected to their
post-purchase behaviour in terms of customer service, etc. In general, the financial
influence comes from both the location students would prefer to buy their mobile device
and the perceived risks associated with their purchase. Moreover, the budget effect is
taken into consideration when evaluating potential risks and stores to make a purchase
decision.
Within the “post-purchase behaviour” the main influencing factor that has been
discussed is brand loyalty. The post-purchase intention of students, their future relation
with the company and their repurchase behaviour are all impacted by the level of
loyalty they possess towards the brand and in this case Apple. Once brand loyalty, the
customers even turn into brand ambassadors and can affect the decision of other
potential customers. This influencing factor even changes the perception of students
45
when it comes to buying a smartphone because they seem to look only into iPhone
models and not into any other smartphone brands.
Figure 3
The adapted five-stage consumer-decision making model
46
6. Discussion & Conclusion
6.1 Conclusion
When comparing the different evidence that have emerged in response to the pursuit of
the question “What are the relevant influencing factors that affect the purchasing
decision towards smartphones of university students in Sweden?” several conclusions
have been deemed the most relevant in terms of fulfilling the study. The research was
able to determine; within its scope, what processes Swedish students go through prior to
the purchase of iPhones which are highly expensive products. Many students do not
have large expendable incomes and thus big decisions, such as these, require an
extended number of decision-making capabilities. Here, the study can conclude that it
was able to tap into the very factors that drive these Swedish students and shape their
desires for iPhones. Additionally, the fact that each student lives in Sweden appears to
have had a major role. This illustrates how Sweden, which is a highly technologically
advanced country has adopted Apple products at a high rate and thus iPhones become
more normalized into Swedish society. Finally, noteworthy is that although the paper
originally included gender as a part of the research, according to the results, it was
found out that this in fact did not play any major role in the decision making of Swedish
students.
Based on the research findings and the product (iPhone) used as a case, the factors that
presented a relevant impact on the students’ purchase decision are: brand loyalty,
culture and society, perceived risk, financial influence, usage and product features. By
analysing the different phases of the traditional consumer-decision making process, the
study can conclude that one or more of the influencing factors have a continuous impact
on the five stages and developed a model that illustrates these in the discussion (Figure
3). Initially, the social factors and more precisely peer-pressure mainly brought Swedish
university students to the world of iPhones. However, Brand Loyalty can be considered
as the driving force behind the repurchase behaviour of the students after their initial
purchase. In addition, it is evident that product features and usage, as well as financial
influence are the influencing aspects that appeared most frequently throughout the five-
stage model.
47
6.2 Contributions/Implication
According to the research, the five-stage consumer decision making process proves to
still be a highly relevant framework that can be applied to society today. Especially, in
terms of the marketing environment, an efficient utilization and analysis of the model
can be highly beneficial to marketing in business to customer advertising campaigns.
The information search, evaluation of alternatives and purchase decision stages were
throughout the research shown to be the most highly influenced with elements such as
financial, social, perceived risks, product feature and usage influences. Thus, with close
examination by future marketers and organizations, they can refine their product and
market offerings in a way that delivers exceptional value to the consumers while
allowing the organizations to expand their consumer base and promote brand loyalty.
Additionally, when looked at from the consumer’s perspective, the research conducted
can serve as a major decision-making tool when it comes to future purchases with
products such as iPhone. As mentioned, because of the fact that the information search,
evaluation of alternatives and purchase decision are three of the most influenced stages
of the consumer decision making model it is essential for consumers to consider these
when purchasing iPhones. Thus, by reading and analysing this research, consumers may
be able to tap into their individual consumer capabilities and hone their purchasing
skills in order to make future purchases that allow them to gain the most value possible
in their eyes. Especially when it comes to students, it is critical that they be able to
identify key elements and areas of the purchasing decisions before making any financial
investments in products as many students not only in Sweden but worldwide, are
dependent on limited expendable incomes in the form of student loans or part time jobs.
6.3 Limitations
Throughout the research of the topic, several limitations came to light that either
slightly hindered or delayed various processes which were necessary to work around.
Initially, the research aimed to gather a large number of responses from individuals who
owned iPhones. However, due to the reach of the paper's ability, only a handful of
respondents were able to be reached. Although providing highly relevant and intriguing
information, the size of the sample had overall affected the level of repetitiveness that
could be seen within the responses. This proved to be critical throughout the analysis
48
and required an extended amount of time while also requiring a high focus on specific
areas of the responses to be mentioned in the research. Additionally, the selection
process of the sample proves to be a limiting factor throughout the research due to the
locality of the respondents. Because of the Covid-19 pandemic, reaching out to a larger
audience proved to be challenging and extremely time consuming as interview planning
was highly focused on digital platforms such as Zoom. This forced the research to take
a more local approach, by reaching out to acquaintances in order to gain responses with
a convenience sampling method. Furthermore, due to the Covid-19 pandemic limiting
the research to digital interviews, many digital errors in recordings and transcriptions
proved to be a limitation and required an extensive amount of time to refine prior to
analysis. This may have caused errors in the understanding of a few answers. Finally,
from the initial phases of the research, a single model was deemed the most necessary
and all focus was directed towards it as the main point of reference for the paper.
Although the model was selected as it served the main purpose of understanding
consumers decisions. This limited the research from broadening out its understanding in
different areas of the consumer decision making process and excluded other theories
and papers based around this phenomenon.
49
7. Reference List:
Antoine, P. (2003). Understanding the Mobile Phone Market Drivers. Alcatel
Telecommunications Review, 55-58.
Bakshi, S. (2012). Impact of gender on consumer purchase behaviour. Journal of
Research in Commerce and Management, 1(9), 1-8.
Babin, B. J., & Harris, E. (2015). CB7. Cengage Learning.
Barker, V. (2018). Text you pictures: The role of group belonging, race identity, race,
and gender in older adolescents’ mobile phone use. Social Sciences, 7(7), 115.
https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7070115
Boamah, K. A., & Agbozo, E. (2017). Technological Innovation Sensitivity Versus
Price Sensitivity of Smartphone Customers; Iphone Customers in Focus for the Past
Decade.
Boakye, K. G., Chiang, C. Y., & Tang, X. (2018). Toward an integrated decision-
making model for consumer electronic. Journal of Computer Information Systems,
58(3), 264-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2016.1235474
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative
research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Bruner, G. C., & Pomazal, R. J. (1988). Problem recognition: the crucial first stage of
the consumer decision process. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 5(1), 53-63.
https://doi.org/10.1108/eb024733
Bruns, K., & Jacob, F. (2014). Value-in-use and mobile technologies. Business &
Information Systems Engineering, 6(6), 349-359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-014-
0349-x
Bryman, A. & Bell, E. (2007). Business Research Methods. 2nd edition. New York,
USA: Oxford University Press 2007.
50
Bui, M., Krishen, A. S., & Bates, K. (2011). Modeling regret effects on consumer post‐
purchase decisions. European Journal of Marketing.
https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561111137615
Campbell, M. C., & Goodstein, R. C. (2001). The moderating effect of perceived risk
on consumers' evaluations of product incongruity: Preference for the norm. Journal of
consumer Research, 28(3), 439-449. https://doi.org/10.1086/323731
Cecere, G., Corrocher, N., & Battaglia, R. D. (2015). Innovation and competition in the
smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design?. Telecommunications Policy, 39(3-4),
162-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2014.07.002
Chan, N. N., Walker, C., & Gleaves, A. (2015). An exploration of students' lived
experiences of using smartphones in diverse learning contexts using a hermeneutic
phenomenological approach. Computers & Education, 82, 96-106.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.001
Chen, Y. S., & Chang, C. H. (2012). Enhance green purchase intentions. Management
Decision. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211216250
Chow, M.M., Chen, L.H., Yeow, J.A. & Wong, P.W. (2012). “Conceptual Paper:
Factors Affecting the Demand of Smartphones among Young Adults”, International
Journal of Social Science, Economics and Art.
Collis, J., & Hussey, R. (2014). Business research : a practical guide for undergraduate
& postgraduate students (4th edition). Palgrave Macmillan.
Commuri, S., & Gentry, J. W. (2000). “Opportunities for Family Research in
Marketing”. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 8, pp.1 – 34.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research (4th ed., p. 87, 239,).
Sage
Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A., & Sheikh, A. (2011). The
case study approach. BMC medical research methodology.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100
51
Crotts, J. (1999). Consumer decision making and prepurchase information search.
Consumer behavior in travel and tourism, 11(3), p149-168. The Haworth Hospitality
Press.
Dawson, C. (2009). Introduction to Research Methods 4th Edition: A Practical Guide
for Anyone Undertaking a Research Project. How To Content.
Deloitte. (2016). Global Mobile Consumer Survey 2016. The Swedish Cut. A study on
Swedish mobile consumer habits in the height of the smartphone era.
http://deloitte.se/mobile-trends/global-mobile-consumer-survey-2016-sv-se.pdf
Ganlari, D. (2016). A study on consumer buying behavior of mobile phones. Journal of
Management in Practice (Online Only), 1(1).
George, A. L. and Bennett, A. (2005). Case Studies and Theory Development in the
Social Science. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Given, L. M. (Ed.). (2008). The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods.
Sage publications.
Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The
qualitative report, 8(4), 597-607. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2003.1870
Grant, R., Clarke, R. J., & Kyriazis, E. (2007). A review of factors affecting online
consumer search behaviour from an information value perspective. Journal of
Marketing Management, 23(5-6), 519-533. https://doi.org/10.1362/026725707X212801
Hauser, J. R. (2014). Consideration-set heuristics. Journal of Business Research, 67(8),
1688-1699.
Hawkins, B. Coney.(1995). Consumer Behavior: Implications for Marketing Strategy,
5. Houghton Mifflin
Hawkin, D. L., Best, R. J., & Coney, K. A. (2001). Consumer behavior: Building
marketing strategy. (8 th Ed.), New York: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
52
Hoyer, W. D., & MacInnis, D. J. (2003). Consumer Behavior. 3rd edition. Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin.
Jamshidi, D., & Rousta, A. (2021). Brand commitment role in the relationship between
brand loyalty and brand satisfaction: phone industry in Malaysia. Journal of Promotion
Management, 27(1), 151-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2020.1809596
Juwaheer, T. D., Vencatachellum, I., Pudaruth, S., Ramasawmy, D., & Ponnusami, Y.
(2014). Factors influencing the selection of mobile phones in Mauritius. International
Journal of Innovation and Knowledge Management in the Middle East and North
Africa, 3(1), 65.
Kabadayi, E. T., & Aygün, İ. (2007). Determinants of brand loyalty and the link
between brand loyalty and price tolerance. Bogazici Journal of Economics and
Administrative Sciences, 21, 21-35.
Karjaluoto, H., Karvonen, C., Kesti, M., Koivumaki, T., Manninen, M., Pakola, J.,
Ristola, A., Salo, J. (2005). Factors Affecting Consumer Choice of Mobile Phones: Two
Studies from Finland. Journal of Euro Marketing.
Keller, E. (2007). Unleashing the power of word of mouth: Creating brand advocacy to
drive growth. Journal of advertising research, 47(4), 448-452.
10.2501/S0021849907070468
Kenney, M., & Pon, B. (2011). Structuring the smartphone industry: is the mobile
internet OS platform the key?. Journal of industry, competition and trade, 11(3), 239-
261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-011-0105-6
Kim, M., Chang, Y., Wong, S., & Park, M. (2015). The effect of perceived risks and
switching barriers on the intention to use smartphones among non-adopters in Korea.
Information Development, 31(3), 258–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666913513279
Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2010). Principles of marketing. Pearson education.
Kotler, P. & Keller, K. L. (2012). Marketing management. 14th Edition. Pearson
Education.
53
Kim, D., Chun, H., & Lee, H. (2014). Determining the factors that influence college
students' adoption of smartphones. Journal of the Association for information Science
and Technology, 65(3), 578-588. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22987
Laugesen, J., & Yuan, Y. (2010). What factors contributed to the success of Apple's
iPhone?. In 2010 Ninth International Conference on Mobile Business and 2010 Ninth
Global Mobility Roundtable (ICMB-GMR) (pp. 91-99). IEEE. 10.1109/ICMB-
GMR.2010.63
Lee, S. Y. (2014). Examining the factors that influence early adopters’ smartphone
adoption: The case of college students. Telematics and Informatics, 31(2), 308-318.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2013.06.001
Liaogang, H., Chongyan, G., & Zi'an, L. (2007). Customer-based brand equity and
improvement strategy for mobile phone brands: Foreign versus local in the Chinese
market. International Management Review, 3(3), 76.
Liao, C., Lin, H. N., & Liu, Y. P. (2010). Predicting the use of pirated software: A
contingency model integrating perceived risk with the theory of planned behavior.
Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2), 237-252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0081-5
Liao, J. (2008). "iPhone Usage Statistics," CNET. Retrieved March 25, 2021. From:
http://asia.cnet.com/blogs/infochat/post.htm?id=63004236.
Lin, L. Y., & Chen, Y. W. (2009). A study on the influence of purchase intentions on
repurchase decisions: the moderating effects of reference groups and perceived risks.
Tourism review. https://doi.org/10.1108/16605370910988818
Longart, P., Wickens, E. & Bakir A. (2016). CONSUMER DECISION PROCESS IN
RESTAURANT SELECTION: AN APPLICATION OF THE STYLIZED EKB
MODEL/PROCES ODLUCIVANJA POTROSACA O IZBORU RESTORANA:
PRIMJENA STILIZIRANOGA EKB MODELA. Tržište, 28(2), 173–.
Malasi, J. M. (2012). Influence of Product Attributes on Mobile Phone preference
among university students: A Case of Undergraduate students. International Journal of
Academic Research in Economics and Management Sciences, 1(6), 10.
54
Madinga, N., & Dondolo, H. (2018). Exploring motives behind Generation Y’s
smartphone purchase. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 16(1), 284–291.
https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.16(1).2018.28
Mitchell, V. W. (1992). Understanding consumers’ behaviour: can perceived risk theory
help?. Management Decision. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251749210013050
Mitchell, V., & Greatorex, M. (2006). Risk Perception and Reduction in the Purchase of
Consumer Services. The Service Industries Journal, 13(4), 179–200.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069300000068
Mokhlis, S., & Yaakop, A. Y. (2012). Consumer choice criteria in mobile phone
selection: An investigation of malaysian university students. International Review of
Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(2), 203-212.
Morphitou, R. N. (2014). The use of smartphones among students in relation to their
education and social life. In 2014 International Conference on Interactive Mobile
Communication Technologies and Learning (IMCL2014) (pp. 315-319). IEEE.
Morse, J. M., & Coulehan, J. (2015). Maintaining confidentiality in qualitative
publications. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732314563489
Mugge, R., Schifferstein, H. N., & Schoormans, J. P. (2010). Product attachment and
satisfaction: understanding consumers' post‐ purchase behavior. Journal of consumer
Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761011038347
Nagarkoti, B. (2009). Factors influencing consumer behavior of Smartphone users,
degree thesis. International Business, Arcada university, 16.
Nagle, T. T., Hogan, J., & Zale, J. (2016). The Strategy and Tactics of Pricing: New
International Edition. Routledge.
O'Donnell, S., & Epstein, L. H. (2019). Smartphones are more reinforcing than food for
students. Addictive behaviors, 90, 124-133.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.10.018
55
Pakola, J., Pietila, M., Svento, R., & Karjaluoto, H. (2010). An investigation of
consumer behavior in mobile phone markets in Finland. In Submission to the 32nd
EMAC conference, Track: New Technologies and E-Marketing.
Peterson, R. A., & Merino, M. C. (2003). Consumer information search behavior and
the Internet. Psychology & Marketing, 20(2), 99-121. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.10062
Prasad, R. K., & Jha, M. K. (2014). Consumer buying decisions models: A descriptive
study. International Journal of Innovation and Applied Studies, 6(3), 335-351.
Punj, G. N., and Staelin, R. (1983), “A model of consumer information search
behaviour for new automobiles”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 366-
380. https://doi.org/10.1086/208931
Rashid, A., Zeb, M. A., Rashid, A., Anwar, S., Joaquim, F., & Halim, Z. (2020).
Conceptualization of smartphone usage and feature preferences among various
demographics. Cluster Computing, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-020-03061-x
Rose, S., & Samouel, P. (2009). Internal psychological versus external market-driven
determinants of the amount of consumer information search amongst online shoppers.
Journal of Marketing Management, 25(1-2), 171-190.
https://doi.org/10.1362/026725709X410089
Samuelson, P. A. (2009). Macroeconomics. Seventeenth Edition. Nordhaus: McGraw-
Hill.
Saif, N., Razzaq, N., Amad, M., & Gul, S. (2012). Factors affecting consumers’ choice
of mobile phone selection in Pakistan. European Journal of Business and Management,
4(12), 16-26.
Singla, S. (2010). Mobile Phone Usage Patterns among Indian consumer–An
Exploratory Study.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2016). Research methods for business
students (7. ed.). Pearson Education.
56
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business
students. Fitfth Edition. In Pearson Education, UK.
Schifferstein, H.N.J., & Zwartkruis‐ Pelgrim, E.P.H. (2008), “Consumer‐ product
attachment: measurement and design implications”, International Journal of Design,
Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 1‐ 14.
Shahzad, M. H. (2020). Impacts of Brand Equity on Consumer Buying Behavior In
Smartphone Industry Among University Students of Bahawalpur.
Sharifi, S., & Esfidani, M. (2014). The impacts of relationship marketing on cognitive
dissonance, satisfaction, and loyalty: The mediating role of trust and cognitive
dissonance.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 42(6), 553–575.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-05-2013-0109
Shrestha, S. (2016). Influencing factors on consumer buying behaviour of smart phones:
a research on the buying behaviour of young consumer in Kathmandu, Nepal.
Shim, S., Eastlick, M. A., Lotz, S. L., and Warrington, P. (2001), “An online pre-
purchase intentions model: The role of intention to search”, Journal of Retailing, Vol.
77, No. 3, pp. 397-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00051-3
Smith, R. E. (1993). Integrating information from advertising and trial: Processes and
effects on consumer response to product information. Journal of marketing research,
30(2), 204-219. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379303000206
Solomon M., Bamossy G., Askegaard S., Hogg M.K. (2006). Consumer Behaviour. A
European Perspective, Third Edition. Prentice Hall Financial Times.
Soukup, P. A. (2015). Smartphones.
Swani, K., & Yoo, B. (2010). Interactions between price and price deal. Journal of
Product & Brand Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610421011033494
Steele, C., & Provazza, A. (2018). IPhone. SearchMobileComputing. Retrieved March
26, 2021: https://searchmobilecomputing.techtarget.com/definition/iPhone
57
Stankevich, A. (2017). Explaining the consumer decision-making process: Critical
literature review. Journal of International Business Research and Marketing, 2(6).
Statista. (2021). Apple iPhone sales worldwide 2007-2018. Retrieved 21, 2021, from:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/276306/global-apple-iphone-sales-since-fiscal-year-
2007/
Statista. (2020). Forecast of smartphone users in Sweden from 2018 to 2024. Retrieved
February 21, 2021, from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/494638/smartphone-users-
in-
sweden/#:~:text=This%20statistic%20displays%20the%20development,rate%20was%2
0at%2084.76%20percent.
Statista. (2021). Share of smartphone owners in Sweden in 2019, by smartphone type.
Retrieved February 21, 2021, from:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/649845/smartphone-ownership-in-sweden-by-model/
Su, J., & Chang, A. (2018). Factors affecting college students’ brand loyalty toward fast
fashion. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-01-2016-0015
Suryani, A. (2017). Comparing Case Study and Ethnography as Qualitative Research
Approaches. Jurnal ILMU KOMUNIKASI. https://doi.org/10.24002/jik.v5i1.221
Svenskarna och internet. (n.d.). Meaningful time online and the pros and cons of digital
society. Retrieved February 21, 2021, from:
https://svenskarnaochinternet.se/rapporter/svenskarna-och-internet-2019/the-swedes-
and-the-internet-2019-summary/
Svenskarna och internet. (n.d.). The Swedes and the internet 2016 – Summary.
Retrieved February 21, 2021, from:
https://svenskarnaochinternet.se/rapporter/svenskarna-och-internet-2016/the-swedes-
and-the-internet-2016-summary/
58
Tong, A., & Dew, M. A. (2016). Qualitative research in transplantation: Ensuring
relevance and rigor. Transplantation, 100(4), 710-712. 10.1097/TP.0000000000001117
Tobin, G. A., & Begley, C. M. (2004). Methodological rigour within a qualitative
framework. Journal of advanced nursing, 48(4), 388-396.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365- 2648.2004.03207.x
Ting, D. H., Lim, S. F., Patanmacia, T. S., Low, C. G., & Ker, G. C. (2011).
Dependency on smartphone and the impact on purchase behaviour. Young
consumers.https://doi.org/10.1108/17473611111163250
Tuškej, U., Golob, U., & Podnar, K. (2013). The role of consumer–brand identification
in building brand relationships. Journal of business research, 66(1), 53-59.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.022
Ulin, P. R., Robinson, E. T., & Tolley, E. E. (2005). Qualitative Methods in Public
Health: A Field Guide for Applied Research. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise.
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000172593.20181.14
West, J., & Mace, M. (2007). Entering a mature industry through innovation: Apple's
iPhone strategy. In DRUID Summer Conference (pp. 18-20).
Worlu, R. E. (2011). Consumer-purchasing Motives in Nigerian Cellular Phone Market:
An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Research in National Development, 9(1), 324-
330.
Workman, J. E., & Studak, C. M. (2006). Fashion consumers and fashion problem
recognition style. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(1), 75-84.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2005.00451.x
Xiao, Y., Wang, L., & Chen, J. (2020). Dynamic pricing in a trade‐ in program with
replacement and new customers. Naval Research Logistics (NRL), 67(5), 334-352.
https://doi.org/10.1002/nav.21911
59
8. Appendices
8.1 Appendix A
Extract from literature used in the research
8.2 Appendix B
Interview guide
The purpose of this interview is to gain an insightful view and deeper understanding of
the consumer decision-making process of university students in Sweden when
purchasing an iPhone. The interview will help the research to gather relevant
information about the influencing factors that impacted your purchase decision. The
research question that this study revolves around is: “What are the relevant influencing
factors that affect the purchasing decision towards smartphones of university students in
Sweden?”.
We would be happy if the interview unfolds into a discussion and not just one-sidedly
asking you questions. Every possible suggestion or thought you have regarding the
subject is more than welcome to be mentioned. Firstly, we would like to let you know
that your confidentiality is guaranteed and you will stay anonymous. You can withdraw
from the interview at any point of time if you don’t feel comfortable or experience
inconvenience. The participation in this interview is voluntary and we want to thank
you that you have agreed to take part in it. The interview is going to take approximately
60
45 minutes and it will be recorded. Are you okay with that? Please don’t hesitate to ask
us to elaborate if you don’t understand something regarding the format of the interview
questions, etc. We want to let you know that you may be contacted after the interview to
elaborate on some of your answers. Are you okay with that? We would also like to
guarantee you that the interview transcription will be deleted after the thesis is handed
in and evaluated. If you feel comfortable and don’t have any questions we can then
proceed with the questions.
Part 1: General questions about Apple and iPhone.
Are you a university student?
What is your gender?
Do you currently work?
If you had to summarize Apple as a company in one word what would it be?
What do you think of Apple products?
What are your expectations of Apple as a service and product provider?
How do you believe Apple fits into your lifestyle?
Have you purchased an iPhone?
For how long have you been an iPhone user?
How many iPhones have you had before?
How aware are you of the difference between iPhone and Android smartphones?
Part 2: Consumer decision-making process when purchasing smartphones and
especially iPhones.
Need recognition:
- Why do you have a smartphone?
- What was the initial reason for you to have a smartphone?
- What is the reason now and if it actually changed?
- How often do you switch phones?
- Why did you decide that you needed a new phone?
- Why did you decide that you needed an iPhone specifically?
61
Information search:
- Do you search for information before choosing which smartphone to buy?
If yes:
- Where did you search for information? (Internal or external)
- Did you conduct a one-time search or a further in-depth search and what
was the reason behind this?
- How have your personal budget constraints affected your information
search process? What were you looking for? (price, brand, time,etc.)
- Do you believe there is a correlation between the time spent searching
for information and the end price you pay or risk that you face and why?
If no:
- Why didn’t you search for information?
- What information did you rely on in this case? And why?
- How effective do you think it was to rely on this information?
- Would you change the way you gain information for your next purchase?
And how?
- If you have already decided on iPhones, what sort of information did you search for?
- Where did you search for this information?
Evaluation of Alternatives:
- When evaluating between phones what were the main characteristics (Technical/
physical/ price) that you were looking for?
- Were the alternatives that you considered, only between different iPhone models
or there were other smartphone brands too? If not why?
- What features do you value the most in “your” iPhone? And why?
- When evaluating between alternatives, how do you associate high prices with
quality?
- While evaluating between different smartphones/iPhones how did your budget
affect your decision?
- What were the reasons for the selection of your iPhone?
Purchase decision:
- Where did you buy your iPhone from?
62
- Where would/did you feel most comfortable buying an iPhone from?
- Was there a point in time when you changed/wanted to change your mind during
your purchase decision? What were the reasons behind this?
- When did you buy the iPhone? Was it released in the same year or was it an
older model?
- Was your purchase decision influenced by someone else and if so by whom?
- What do you perceive as potential risks associated with your iPhone?
(functional, social, financial, social, etc.)
- How do you go about minimizing these risks?
Post-Purchase Behaviour:
- How did you feel after you purchased your iPhone?
- How did your feelings after your purchase affect your view on Apple iPhones
and your future relationship with them?
- Have you experienced any change in your feelings after purchasing your
iPhone? If yes, what?
- (If not satisfied only) What did you do after realizing your needs were not met?
- What did this process involve?
- How did you try to make yourself feel better about your purchase?
- Have you tried to compare different smartphones and switch to another brand?
- Would you recommend an iPhone to someone else? And Why?
- Are you familiar with the trade-in program offered by Apple where you
exchange your old iPhone for a newly introduced one at a certain discount price?
- If yes, have you used it?
- How do you believe this might affect your purchasing decision with Apple in the
future?
- Why do you think students buy iPhone while having budget constraints?
Part 3: Smartphone usage questions.
- How much time do you think you roughly spend on your phone daily?
- What do you mainly use your smartphone for?
63
- Do you consider yourself as a tech-savvy person or not?
- Do you often use your phone in your daily activities? And which daily
activities?
- What is the main function/feature of your phone that you use and why?
- What are other functions/features that you use on a regular basis and why?
- What do you think is the most useful function/feature of your phone and why?
- Which are the applications in your phone that are most important?
- Do you think living in Sweden requires you to use your phone more often?
- How do you believe your phone use as a student is compared to a non-student?
- Do you think your phone usage is beneficial to your lifestyle and how?
- Do you believe that the way you use smartphones affects your purchase decision
when it comes to the iPhone?
