Results of hypotheses testing and explained variance
| Hypothesized relationships | Standardized path coefficient | Hypothesis supported or not supported | R2 (construct) |
|---|---|---|---|
| H1: Anthropomorphism → Social presence | 0.65*** | Supported | 0.42 (Social presence) |
| H2: Anthropomorphism → Utilitarian value stronger than Anthropomorphism → Hedonic value | 0.49*** Utilitarian value | Supported | 0.57 (Utilitarian value) |
| 0.21* Hedonic value | |||
| H3: Social presence → Hedonic value stronger than Social presence → Utilitarian value | 0.33*** Utilitarian value | Not supported | 0.36 (Hedonic value) |
| 0.45*** Hedonic value | |||
| H4: Utilitarian value → Customer repatronage | 0.23* | Supported | 0.31 (Customer repatronage) |
| H5: Hedonic value → Customer repatronage | NS | Not supported | |
| H6: Moderation: FLE interaction quality on utilitarian value → customer repatronage | −0.26* | Supported | |
| H7: Moderation: FLE interaction quality on hedonic value → customer repatronage | NS | Not supported |
| Hypothesized relationships | Standardized path coefficient | Hypothesis supported or not supported | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.65*** | Supported | 0.42 (Social presence) | |
| 0.49*** Utilitarian value | Supported | 0.57 (Utilitarian value) | |
| 0.21* Hedonic value | |||
| 0.33*** Utilitarian value | Not supported | 0.36 (Hedonic value) | |
| 0.45*** Hedonic value | |||
| 0.23* | Supported | 0.31 (Customer repatronage) | |
| NS | Not supported | ||
| −0.26* | Supported | ||
| NS | Not supported |
Note(s): *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001; NS = not significant