Playing to win: the impact of gamified loyalty programs in grocery retail

Customer loyalty is vital for success in any retail industry, including the grocery sector. However, grocery retailers face intense competition due to low switching costs and numerous factors influencing customer behavior, making it essential to enhance loyalty programs (LPs). This challenge is intensified by the static nature of many existing programs (Meyer‐Waarden et al., 2013). A growing innovative strategy is gamification, which integrates game elements into non-game contexts to engage and motivate consumers (Deterding et al., 2011). Gamification has become a major driver of customer engagement, loyalty and retention, with its market expected to exceed USD 30 bn by 2026 (Bewicke, 2024) and triple by 2030 (Mordor Intelligence, 2025).

Retailers can strengthen consumer connection and loyalty by adding game-like features such as points, levels, challenges and rewards to the shopping experience (Bauer et al., 2020; Tobon et al., 2020). This approach enhances engagement and drives sales by motivating purchases through rewards and recognition. For example, customers may earn points for each purchase, redeemable for discounts or offers, promoting repeat purchases and retention. Gamification also appeals to competitiveness and achievement, making shopping more exciting and personalized (Poncin et al., 2017). Integrating game principles with retail strategies fosters an interactive, rewarding environment aligned with modern consumer expectations (Tobon et al., 2020).

Extensive research has explored gamification across various sectors like service and brand (Hamari and Koivisto, 2015), product adoption (Müller-Stewens et al., 2017), education (Putz et al., 2020), online brand communities (Xi and Hamari, 2020) and retail (Hwang and Choi, 2020). Gamification positively influences brand attitude (Yang et al., 2017), brand awareness (Lucassen and Jansen, 2014), brand engagement (Berger et al., 2018), brand involvement (Nobre and Ferreira, 2017) and brand love (Hsu and Chen, 2018). However, while traditional LPs have been well studied, gamified versions remain less well understood (Hollebeek et al., 2021). A research gap persists regarding the effects of gamification on LPs, especially in grocery retail. Prior studies often neglect customer perspectives and rely on experimental designs. The influence of gamified loyalty programs (GLPs) on satisfaction and loyalty in grocery retail remains underexplored (Xi and Hamari, 2019).

This study examines the perceived benefits of GLPs in grocery retail using the framework proposed by Mimouni-Chaabane and Volle (2010), which includes utilitarian, hedonic and symbolic benefits. It analyzes how these benefits influence satisfaction and loyalty. An online questionnaire was used and Covariance-based Structural Equation Modeling (CB-SEM) was used to test the hypotheses. The study aims to guide marketers in effectively applying gamification strategies for success.

Customer loyalty has attracted scholarly attention since the 1920s (Copeland, 1923). Although many academics have defined it, no single definition is universally accepted due to its complex, multifaceted nature. Conceptually, it is viewed from three angles: behavioral, attitudinal and composite perspectives (Cui et al., 2023).

The grocery retail sector falls within the “always a share” category (Jackson, 1985), in which customers face low switching costs and shop across multiple stores depending on factors such as context, promotions and LPs (Meyer-Waarden and Benavent, 2009). This study adopts the attitudinal perspective, defining “loyal” customers as those who hold positive feelings toward a supermarket chain, recommend it to others and repeatedly purchase from it (Hallikainen et al., 2022).

The likelihood of customers returning to a grocery store and making repeat purchases largely depends on satisfaction with prior experiences, often influenced by participation in a loyalty program (Rita et al., 2023). LPs are marketing systems using diverse communication strategies to encourage repeat purchases and strengthen customer loyalty.

These programs offer various types of rewards, including economic, hedonistic, informational, functional and social or relational, while increasing switching costs (Meyer‐Waarden et al., 2013; Zhou et al., 2023). Their main objectives are to create perceived benefits for customers, enhance economic decision-making and motivation and boost preferred purchasing behaviors such as loyalty (Chaudhuri et al., 2019; Meyer‐Waarden et al., 2013).

Card-based LPs are the most common in European grocery retailing (Sharp and Sharp, 1997) and globally, with 33% participation in 2024 (Statista, 2024). They usually operate by awarding points for purchases, recorded on a card and redeemable for rewards (Flacandji et al., 2023). However, because most programs offer similar rewards, retailers face competitive parity (Uncles et al., 2003) and must find new ways to differentiate. In 2023, Generation Z accounts for 55% of global consumers who benefit from grocery loyalty points, discounts or savings, while Millennials account for 57% (Statista, 2024). Moreover, 43% of Generation Z respondents joined a new loyalty program (Ozbun, 2024). A 2024 UK survey found that most shoppers owned a loyalty card or app, with 90% of those aged 18–34 reporting membership in supermarket LPs (Statista, 2024).

Customers enroll in LPs only when perceived benefits outweigh costs (Zhou et al., 2023). Initially, purchases may be driven by short-term “points pressure,” while long-term loyalty develops through “rewarded behavior,” as satisfaction from rewards reinforces buying habits (Taylor and Neslin, 2005). The perceived benefits of LPs are typically categorized as utilitarian, hedonic and symbolic (Loureiro et al., 2025; Mimouni-Chaabane and Volle, 2010).

Utilitarian benefits provide practical and functional value to customers (Bravo et al., 2023). Researchers agree that customers highly value these benefits for their tangible nature, ease of understanding and evaluability (Kyguoliene et al., 2017). Utilitarian motivation reflects a pragmatic, goal-driven orientation focused on functionality and efficient fulfillment of purchasing needs (Elmashhara et al., 2024), described as “enabling the self” (Loureiro et al., 2025). They include two key elements: monetary savings and convenience. A loyalty program’s capacity to deliver monetary savings is a major incentive (Kim et al., 2013). In grocery retailing, such benefits appear as discounts, coupons or cashback (Mimouni-Chaabane and Volle, 2010). Convenience benefits make shopping easier and more efficient by reducing search and decision costs through value-added services. Examples include quick payment counters, time-saving services and improved customer learning (Kyguoliene et al., 2017).

The second category, hedonic benefits, refers to the pleasurable aspects of exploratory consumer behavior, in which consumers seek stimulation that brings intrinsic gratification, arousal and emotion (Bravo et al., 2023; Kim et al., 2013). These benefits are expressed through exploration and entertainment dimensions and described as “enticing the self” (Loureiro et al., 2025). They are linked to experience-oriented, sensory-rich shopping that involves imaginative and multisensory elements (Elmashhara et al., 2024). Exploration benefits include trying new products and promotional offers, which may alter consumer behavior and habits (Kyguoliene et al., 2017). Entertainment benefits stem from the enjoyment of rewards, such as collecting or redeeming points, participating in member-exclusive events or competitions and engaging in other activities (Kyguoliene et al., 2017; Palamidovska-Sterjadovska et al., 2024). Because humans are naturally drawn to entertainment, grocery retailers should provide sources of enjoyment to satisfy these desires (Kim et al., 2019). Compared to utilitarian benefits, hedonic ones evoke stronger emotions and perform better in LPs with higher engagement requirements (Kaswengi and Lambey-Checchin, 2019). LPs themselves can serve as entertainment, as customers gain pleasure from collecting and redeeming points and may experience self-fulfillment through participation (Agarwal et al., 2022; Mimouni-Chaabane and Volle, 2010).

The third and final category of benefits is symbolic benefits, which are intangible, extrinsic and unrelated to products. They satisfy customers’ needs for recognition, personal expression, self-esteem and social approval (Agarwal et al., 2022). When loyalty program members perceive belonging to a privileged group, their sense of social benefit and emotional engagement with the organization increases (Agarwal et al., 2022; Mimouni-Chaabane and Volle, 2010).

Symbolic benefits can also be represented as “enriching the self” (Loureiro et al., 2025), encompassing the self’s temporal dimensions (past, present and future). Branded materials, such as apps, goals, stories or esthetics, provide symbolic benefits by fostering consumer–brand connection (Tseng et al., 2021) and enabling self-expression and value alignment (Loureiro et al., 2025). Product uniqueness often delivers these benefits (Calderón Urbina et al., 2021) and motivates technology adoption (Raj et al., 2024). Although less tangible, symbolic benefits are crucial for building brand trust and reputation (Raj et al., 2024).

Gamification is the use of game design elements in non-game contexts (Deterding et al., 2011). It is increasingly used in marketing as organizations seek to enhance the effectiveness of LPs through game-like features (Hollebeek et al., 2021). To succeed, gamification must create a positive, meaningful and contextually integrated experience that satisfies intrinsic needs, leading to long-term benefits such as customer loyalty (Hollebeek et al., 2021; Olsson et al., 2016).

The context of application is crucial to the effectiveness of gamification (Hamari et al., 2014). In grocery retail, largely experimental research has produced limited and mixed findings. Gaming does not always align with the utilitarian, task-oriented nature of grocery shopping, as it introduces unnecessary obstacles that may increase stress (Högberg, Ramberg et al., 2019). The extra gamified tasks add to the overall stressfulness of the shopping experience. However, intrinsic motivation to play is positively related to satisfaction (Olsson et al., 2016).

Despite gamification’s rising popularity, research on GLPs remains limited, particularly concerning their characteristics, behavioral outcomes and overall effectiveness (Hwang and Choi, 2020).

Davis et al. (1989) introduced the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), an adaptation of the Theory of Reasoned Action, to examine users’ attitudes and behavioral intentions toward software systems. TAM posits that technology adoption intention depends on two key factors: perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. Perceived ease of use refers to the belief that using a system requires minimal effort, while perceived usefulness is the extent to which it improves task performance (Sipone et al., 2023).

In this study, two technology acceptance variables are considered predictors of satisfaction in GLPs in grocery retail: (1) perceived usefulness which refers to the game’s ability to deliver utilitarian, hedonic and symbolic benefits to the shopping experience and (2) perceived ease of use, which relies on the game’s user-friendliness and simplicity of mechanics without complex instructions.

Although the original TAM proposed direct effects of ease of use and usefulness on attitudes (Davis, 1989), this study adopts an approach aligned with Alshammari and Babu (2025), integrating TAM with the Expectation-Confirmation Model (Bhattacherjee, 2001), which suggests that confirmation of technology usefulness drives user satisfaction.

Monetary savings can foster intrinsic motivation by encouraging customers to engage in GLPs for personal benefit, such as optimizing their budget (Meyer‐Waarden et al., 2013), while the prospect of earning discounts generates extrinsic motivation. Thus, perceived usefulness reflects the extent to which customers believe gamification rewards, particularly economic ones, help achieve financial goals:

Convenience benefits, such as effort reduction, can also create intrinsic motivation, prompting consumers to engage in GLPs for self-benefit (Meyer‐Waarden et al., 2013). Although grocery shopping is often stressful, introducing gamification can enhance satisfaction (Olsson et al., 2016). When GLPs are implemented conveniently, making shopping less demanding, customers are more likely to perceive gamified features as useful:

Exploration benefits from GLPs in grocery retail include useful information about new products, bargains and general offers. These benefits help customers feel more confident in their choices, fostering intrinsic motivation to engage with the games (Meyer‐Waarden et al., 2013). As they assist in making informed purchase decisions, exploration benefits are likely perceived as valuable:

Research emphasizes entertainment as key to enhancing gamification effectiveness (Hamari et al., 2014). Entertainment fosters emotional attachment between customers and the GLP, increasing its perceived usefulness. This link between entertainment and perceived usefulness has also been observed in other contexts, such as educational game design (Garris et al., 2002):

Recognition and social benefits from GLPs make customers feel valued, fostering intrinsic motivation to participate and strengthening trust and commitment to the brand (Meyer‐Waarden et al., 2013). Thus, perceived usefulness reflects the extent to which users believe gamification features offer recognition and social status benefits, such as feeling privileged or appreciated as customers:

GLP’s success depends significantly on its ease of use; users are more likely to engage when rules and interfaces are intuitive and straightforward (Hamari and Koivisto, 2015). Prior studies confirm that perceived ease of use significantly influences perceived usefulness (Rodrigues et al., 2016) and satisfaction (Tzavlopoulos et al., 2019). In online shopping, ease of use enhances the overall customer experience and increases happiness (Nuralam et al., 2024), consistent with findings by Calisir and Calisir (2004) in enterprise resource planning contexts:

The perceived usefulness of a gamified loyalty program (GLP) is expected to positively influence satisfaction, as prior studies have shown that perceived usefulness can explain satisfaction in contexts such as mobile commerce (Lee and Jun, 2007). Perceived usefulness and customer satisfaction are key determinants of attitudes and behaviors in technology adoption (Chiu et al., 2009; Martins et al., 2014; Nuralam et al., 2024) and are directly linked to users’ perceived value (Revels et al., 2010):

When customers perceive a product or service as useful, it strengthens their relationship with it and encourages continued use, fostering loyalty (Coelho et al., 2023). Conversely, if usefulness is not perceived, loyalty may decline. Thus, in the context of LPs, perceived usefulness plays a crucial role:

Research has consistently shown that satisfaction is a major driver of loyalty (Pereira et al., 2023). Meeting expectations increases satisfaction, which in turn boosts future purchase intentions (Parris and Guzmán, 2023). LPs in grocery retailing also demonstrate positive correlations between satisfaction and loyalty (Sreeram et al., 2017). Customers satisfied with program rewards tend to be more loyal and less price sensitive. This satisfaction strengthens loyalty toward both the program and the store (Filipe et al., 2017):

The hypothesized model is presented in Figure 1.

Continente is a leading Portuguese retail brand offering groceries, clothing, electronics and household goods. Its loyalty program, Cartão Continente (Continente Card), is the country’s top loyalty card, with over 4 million active users (MC Sonae, 2022). Customers earn balances from purchases, which are redeemable for discounts. They can use a mobile app to track points, access personalized offers and find nearby stores.

The program integrates gamification through “Jogos da Poupança” (Savings Games), where customers complete challenges to earn rewards such as coupons. In 2022, more than 2.2 million customers used the Continente Card App and over 11 million prizes were distributed through the Savings Games (MC Sonae, 2023).

The target population for this study comprised adults aged 18 or older who held a Continente loyalty card, used the mobile application and participated in the Savings Games at least once. Accordingly, the questionnaire included screening questions to exclude individuals who did not meet these criteria.

Developed in Qualtrics, the questionnaire adapted measurement items from previous studies on perceived retail loyalty benefits (Kim et al., 2013; Meyer‐Waarden et al., 2013; Mimouni-Chaabane and Volle, 2010), TAM (Davis, 1989; Hamari and Koivisto, 2015; Venkatesh and Davis, 2000), program satisfaction (Omar et al., 2015) and customer loyalty (Meyer‐Waarden et al., 2013). All 32 items used a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree), consistent with research on loyalty and gamification (Kim et al., 2013; Meyer‐Waarden et al., 2013). The complete questionnaire appears in  Appendix.

It included an introduction outlining the study’s objectives, data privacy, voluntary participation and assurances of anonymity. Participants confirmed informed consent, acknowledging voluntary participation and understanding of all provided details.

Before data collection, approval was obtained from the university’s ethics committee. Data collection began only after receiving a favorable opinion.

A convenience sampling method was used, a common non-probabilistic approach for social media data collection (Vicente, 2023). The questionnaire link was shared via Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp and respondents completed it independently.

Table 1 presents respondents’ demographics (n = 203). The sample was gender-balanced, with 53.2% female and 45.3% male participants. Most respondents were under 35 years old, representing 86.7% of the total sample.

When a single instrument is used for data collection, variance may stem from the measurement method rather than from the constructs, a phenomenon known as common method variance (CMV) (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Harman’s single-factor test assesses CMV by performing an EFA, loading all observed variables onto a single unrotated factor. In this study, the single factor explained 40.041% of the variance, below the 50% threshold (Aguirre-Urreta and Hu, 2019). Thus, CMV is not considered a concern in this research.

This study used exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and CB-SEM with maximum likelihood (ML) estimation, suitable for theory-driven and confirmatory research (Hair et al., 2019, 2022). SEM assesses models in two stages: (1) the measurement model, using CFA to test factor specification and (2) the structural model, validating relationships among constructs (Dash and Paul, 2021; Sarstedt et al., 2016). Data analysis was performed using SPSS 29, AMOS 29 and SmartPLS 4 (for preliminary data handling) (Ringle et al., 2024).

An EFA was conducted in SPSS 29 to confirm the factor structure (Hair et al., 2019; Kautish et al., 2025). The ML extraction method was used to ensure consistency with CFA and CB-SEM and the Promax oblique rotation allowed factor correlations. Bartlett’s test of sphericity produced a chi-square (χ²) of 4,164.45 with 378 degrees of freedom and p-value < 0.001, indicating suitability for factor analysis. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value was 0.911, above the 0.7 threshold, confirming sampling adequacy (Byrne, 2016).

CFA assessed the measurement model using ML estimation, testing construct reliability and validity (Hair et al., 2019; Sivarajah et al., 2024). Standardized factor loadings above 0.7 were required for reliability (Sarstedt et al., 2022). Items PEOU2 and PEOU4 did not meet this criterion and were removed (Table 2). Internal consistency was confirmed, as Cronbach’s alpha (CA) and composite reliability (CR$ρC$⁠) exceeded 0.7 (Hair et al., 2019). Thus, the scales demonstrated good reliability for the underlying constructs. Validity was supported by average variance extracted (AVE) values above the 0.5 threshold for all latent variables (Hair et al., 2019).

For discriminant validity evaluation, the Fornell–Larcker (FL) criterion was computed (Fornell and Larcker, 1981) and verified for all constructs, as the square root of every construct’s AVE is higher than its correlation with the remaining constructs in a model (see Table 3). Additionally, the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlations, proposed by Henseler et al. (2015), was used to assess discriminant validity, given its robustness and reliability relative to the FL criterion (Franke and Sarstedt, 2019). According to Table 4, the HTMT method corroborated the FL criterion’s conclusion regarding discriminant validity, as all HTMT ratios of correlations are below the recommended, more conservative threshold of 0.85 (Franke and Sarstedt, 2019).

The measurement model’s goodness of fit was evaluated using absolute, incremental and parsimonious fit measures based on CFA (Dash and Paul, 2021). The absolute indexes evaluate the theoretical model against observed data, while incremental fit measures compare the hypothesized model to a baseline with no meaningful relationships between constructs. As for parsimonious indexes, they introduce the tradeoff between model fit and degrees of freedom, penalizing complex models with more parameters. According to Table 5, the measures indicate reasonable model fit, as the index values fall within the recommended thresholds. Only the chi-square test is non-significant (p-value < 0.05) due to its sensitivity to sample size; therefore, model fit assessment should not rely solely on this test but should be complemented with other measures (Kline, 2023).

A similar reasonable structural model fit was obtained (see Table 5). According to the R² values, the model demonstrated good explanatory power, accounting for 94.9% of the variability in perceived usefulness, 64.4% of the variability in program satisfaction and 69.4% of the variability in customer loyalty.

A bootstrapping procedure with 10,000 resamples was conducted to estimate the model’s path coefficients (β), determine their significance and relevance and evaluate explanatory power (Hair et al., 2019). For the path’s significance analysis, the p -values were determined using a two-tailed test and analyzed against a significance level of 5%.

Monetary savings (β₁ = 0.365, p  = 0.011), convenience (β₂ = 0.489, p  = 0.005) and exploration (β₃ = −0.470, p  = 0.019) significantly affect perceived usefulness, supporting hypotheses H1, H2 and H3 (see Table 6). However, neither entertainment (β₄ = 0.175, p  = 0.461) nor recognition and social factors (β₅ = 0.110, p  = 0.331) were deemed significant. Hence, H4 and H5 were not supported in this study.

The path coefficient for the relationship between perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness (β₆ = 0.500, p  = 0.046) was found to be positive and statistically significant, supporting H6. Inversely, H7 was not supported as the relationship between perceived ease of use and program satisfaction was deemed not significant (β₇ = −0.022, p  = 0.948).

Hypothesis H8 was deemed positive and statistically significant (β₈ = 0.821, p  = 0.009), validating the relationship between perceived usefulness and program satisfaction. Moreover, the direct effect of perceived usefulness on customer loyalty (H9) was not significant (β₉ = 0.384, p  = 0.119), whereas the indirect effect mediated by program satisfaction was significant (9 = 0.384, p = 0.119). The relationship between program satisfaction and customer loyalty (H10) was positive and significant (β₁₀ = 0.493, p  = 0.048).

Hypotheses H1 and H2 were deemed significant. The utilitarian benefits of monetary savings and convenience positively influence the perceived usefulness of GLPs, serving as significant drivers of perceived benefits in GLPs. This emphasizes the greater value customers place on utilitarian benefits (Kyguoliene et al., 2017), which is justified by the product- and task-oriented nature of grocery shopping (Vieira et al., 2018).

Regarding the hedonic benefits, only exploration was found to have a significant yet negative influence on the perceived usefulness of GLPs, partially supporting H3. Even though this hypothesis was found to be significant, the relationship between exploration and perceived usefulness is symmetric with the hypothesized relationship. This suggests that exploring and discovering new information through GLPs may not directly contribute to customers perceiving them as valuable, leading to the opposite reaction. It is plausible that the utilitarian nature of this retailer may not align with the exploration obstacles introduced by gamification (Högberg, Shams et al., 2019), which can be perceived as barriers to achieving the shopping trip’s goal. Nevertheless, the influence of entertainment on perceived usefulness was deemed not significant, failing to support H4. This indicates that customers may prioritize utilitarian aspects over entertainment in grocery retail settings, which aligns with prior research (Kyguoliene et al., 2017). These findings are even more noteworthy, given that 86.7% of participants were under 35 years old. Contrary to previous studies indicating an inverse relationship between age and hedonic value (Carpenter and Moore, 2009), these young consumers demonstrated a higher preference for utilitarian benefits over hedonic ones.

The hypothesized relationship between recognition, social factors and perceived usefulness was not significant, which does not support H5. Therefore, a direct contribution to the perceived usefulness of gamified grocery retail LPs is absent, as was the case with entertainment. The grocery shopping context is predominantly utilitarian and task-oriented (Vieira et al., 2018), where customers focus on completing their shopping efficiently rather than seeking social recognition or status through a loyalty program.

The significance of the relationship between the two key TAM constructs, perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness, confirms H6 and corroborates the findings from extensive prior research (Davis, 1989; Rodrigues et al., 2016). Therefore, the gamification of grocery retail LPs is effective when the system is also perceived as easy to use.

H7 (PEOU → SAT) was deemed not significant. Customer satisfaction with a service or technology tends to be positively influenced by perceived ease of use (Revels et al., 2010). Still, it is also found to depend on how frequently a system is used (Nuralam et al., 2024). In our study, the significant representation of young individuals in the sample, who tend not to use retailers’ LPs, may strongly suggest a lack of alignment regarding the effect of perceived ease of use on program satisfaction.

The finding related to H8 (PU → SAT) is aligned with other studies (Calisir and Calisir, 2004; Lee, 2012; Nuralam et al., 2024). Consumers may become dissatisfied if they perceive that a gamified feature in a grocery retail program will not significantly improve their shopping experience (Sheetal et al., 2023).

Hypothesis H9 (PU → LOY) failed to be supported in our study but is still aligned with the findings by Al-Hattami et al. (2023). A possible reason for this result may be the unique context of grocery shopping, which is primarily driven by convenience, price, product quality and availability, rather than by the added value of gamification (Kaswengi and Lambey-Checchin, 2019).

Finally, H10 (SAT → LOY) revealed a statistically significant, positive correlation, aligning with the literature (Manyanga et al., 2022; Wilson et al., 2021). This suggests that customers who are satisfied with the gamified loyalty program are more likely to exhibit higher loyalty toward the retailer (Sheetal et al., 2023).

This research aimed to investigate the impact of GLPs on customer loyalty within the grocery retail industry. The study focused on elucidating the interplay among perceived benefits, usefulness, ease of use, program satisfaction and customer loyalty. The findings confirmed 6 out of the 10 proposed hypotheses, providing overall validation of the research model. To sum up, the major contributions of this research are as follows:

First, this study represents a pioneering effort in the field by focusing on the perceived benefits that matter to customers in the context of GLPs. While previous studies have explored the concept of GLPs (Hwang and Choi, 2020) or the role of customer engagement in GLP performance (Hollebeek et al., 2021), this study adopts a novel approach by examining the specific factors that influence program satisfaction and customer loyalty from the customer’s perspective. Second, it filled a crucial gap by focusing on a very particular context: grocery retail. While LPs have been extensively studied and proven successful in this sector (Zhou et al., 2023), the incorporation of gamification strategies has received limited attention. The results emphasize the significance of utilitarian benefits, such as savings and convenience, while underscoring the potential challenges of incorporating exploratory elements in this setting. Third, this study makes a valuable contribution to the existing body of knowledge by reinforcing the validity of the TAM framework. The findings underscore the importance of perceived usefulness and ease of use in shaping customer perceptions and promoting loyalty.

The study provides significant theoretical contributions to understanding GLPs in the grocery retail sector. It highlights the effectiveness of GLPs, emphasizing factors such as monetary savings and convenience that enhance their perceived usefulness, while noting the negative impact of exploration due to the task-oriented nature of grocery shopping. Additionally, it establishes a positive relationship between ease of use, program satisfaction and customer loyalty, underlining the importance of user-friendly interfaces. By adapting the TAM to this context, the study offers new insights into the perceived usefulness and ease of use of gamified systems. This research enriches the literature on gamification and customer loyalty in retail, providing practical implications for designing and implementing effective LPs in the grocery sector.

As digitalization increases, most retailers’ LPs are shifting from the physical to mobile apps, strengthening the analogy between LPs and technology adoption.

Table 7 summarizes the research conclusions and implications.

Our findings have significant implications for grocery retailers seeking to implement or effectively manage GLPs. First, managers should prioritize utilitarian benefits over hedonic or symbolic ones through the reward system (Behl and Pereira, 2021). While incorporating entertainment elements can enhance the program’s appeal, it is essential to ensure that it effectively meets customers’ needs, enhances their shopping experience and provides tangible benefits such as cost savings and convenience.

In addition, retailers should focus on optimizing the purchasing experience by streamlining the delivery of gamified information. It is crucial to provide relevant, tailored information that aligns with customers’ preferences and needs, rather than overwhelming them with excessive or irrelevant information in a stressful scenario. When incorporating informational and exploratory elements, it is crucial to prioritize practicality and efficiency while providing individuals with personalized, engaging, gamified experiences. The focus should be on creating a seamless and user-friendly interface that caters to each user’s needs and preferences. By balancing practicality and personalization, gamified experiences can be optimized to enhance program satisfaction and customer loyalty.

Despite the valuable contributions of this study, several limitations should be acknowledged and addressed in future research. First, the study focused on a specific gamified loyalty program in grocery retailing, limiting the generalizability of the findings. Future research should consider incorporating competitor programs and measuring their relative performance.

Second, the study relied on self-reported data, which may have introduced response biases or social desirability effects. Future research should explore alternative methods and data sources to complement self-reported data and mitigate these biases.

Third, the data collected for this research predominantly consisted of individuals under 35, which may compromise the generalizability of the study’s findings. The results and loyalty program adherence may differ somewhat with a more diverse sample, particularly with respect to age ranges. Additionally, no questions were included in the questionnaire to characterize participants’ shopping behavior by retailer, channel/platform or frequency. Future research should include a more diverse and representative sample, using a random sampling technique that encompasses a broader age range, to ensure the validity and robustness of inferences for the population.

Moreover, the research excluded all individuals who did not participate in any retailer’s loyalty program. Future research may compare individuals’ perceptions of these programs, segmenting the sample by shopping behaviors and program adherence.

Finally, the study did not consider the customers’ profiles (e.g. hedonic or utilitarian shoppers). Future research could explore how different customer profiles influence the effectiveness and perceived benefits of GLPs.

This research enriches the literature on gamification and customer loyalty in retail and provides practical implications for designing and implementing effective LPs in the grocery sector. It focuses on the effectiveness of GLPs, emphasizing factors such as monetary savings and convenience that enhance perceived usefulness, establishes a positive correlation between ease of use, program satisfaction and customer loyalty and offers new insights into the perceived usefulness and ease of use of gamified systems.