How Customer Self-Determination Influences Relational Marketing Outcomes: Evidence from Longitudinal Field Studies

131 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The role of self-determination theory in marketing science: An integrative review and agenda for research (2019, unknown): “This notion is consistent with the ﬁ ndings of Dholakia's (2006) study which revealed that reminder coupons and controlled marketing Note: CET ¼ Cognitive evaluation theory, OIT ¼ organismic integration theory, COT ¼ causality orientations theory, BPNT ¼ basic psychological needs theory, GCT ¼ goal…”
Managing rewards to enhance relational worth (2011, background): “Past research has indicated that intrinsically motivated consumers are more profitable to an organization and less likely to defect ( Dholakia 2006 ).”
Loyalty Programmes: Current Knowledge and Research Directions* (2012, background): “Heavy buyers, particularly those with high levels of attitudinal commitment, have the strongest motivation to enrol in an LP because they can reap the most benefits from the programme without having to change their purchase behaviour or substantially increase their effort (Demoulin and Zidda 2009; D”
Does gamification affect brand engagement and equity? A study in online brand communities (2020, unknown): “…rewards have been postulated to be less efficient in garnering long-term loyalty compared to strategies that may garner intrinsic need satisfaction (Dholakia, 2006; Dorotic, Bijmolt, & Verhoef, 2012) such as gamification (Hamari, 2019; Sailer, Hense, Mayr, & Mandl, 2017; Wolf, Weiger, &…”