# Analyzing Determinants for Adoption of Intelligent Personal Assistant: An Empirical Study
## 3 Literature Review and Hypothesis Development
### Customer Loyalty  
The concept of customer loyalty has been discussed for a long time in the field of business, and different researchers provide diverse definitions and operationalization for the concept [69; 70; 71; 72]. In the early stage, customer loyalty was studied mainly based on either the behavioral or attitudinal approach [73; 74; 75; 76; 77; 78]. According to [PERSON] and [PERSON] [79], customer loyalty is the behavioral model whereby customers insist on purchasing the same brand/service for a period of time. Thus, loyalty can be considered as a commitment by customers who focus on a particular brand, product, or service even though other alternatives can be chosen. As product knowledge is the information used in the cognitive process that occurs after being exposed to a stimulus or before the obvious behaviors resulting from the stimulus, it can be measured using the dimensions of subjective knowledge and objective knowledge for the usage experience, with familiarity and expertise representing subjective and objective knowledge, respectively. [PERSON] [77] defined customer loyalty from the behavioral viewpoint. Compared to the total amount of purchases in a specific category, customer loyalty is their repeated patronage behavior in terms of the proportion of times customers decide to purchase the same product or service in that category [20; 78]. From the attitudinal perspective, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [79] defined customer loyalty as \"the strength of the relationship between an individual's relative attitude and repeat patronage\" and developed a framework for customer loyalty that combines both attitudinal and behavioral dimensions. However, in each perspective, the problem arises that the repeated patronage behaviors may not indicate customers' purchasing intention and that intention may not cause the purchasing decisions [72; 73; 74]. This shortcoming has led to further discussion on the aspects of both approaches, which exist simultaneously. Moreover, customers with high loyalty are less motivated to look for alternatives and insist on the current brand; in addition, they are more willing to communicate with other customers via positive word-of-mouth [75; 76]. There are four parts of the framework: true loyalty, latent loyalty, spurious loyalty, and no loyalty. True loyalty occurs when the high repeat purchase and alternative attitude coexist at the same time; this is based not only on the high level of repeated patronage behaviors but also on the relative attitudes toward the evaluation of the product or service [78; 79; 80]. Latent loyalty is the result of low repeat purchase and high relative attitude. As there is a strong relative attitude toward the brand but the repeat purchasing is not significantly exhibited, therefore, the situational and environmental variables affect the purchase decisions more than the attitudinal. Spurious loyalty exists where there is low alternative attitude with high repeat purchase [80]. In this category, the customers are not able to identify the differences among the brands, or their purchasing behaviors depend on their habits or past purchasing experience. No loyalty occurs when customers consider that there are few differences among the alternative competitors and have low repeat purchase as well. Some researchers suggest that companies should try to avoid targeting this segment as they will never become loyal customers. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [79] proposed a four-stage loyalty model, presenting the different aspects of customer loyalty that are consecutive and progressive rather than simultaneous. As this model is established based on the cognition-affect-conation pattern, the first stage is cognitive loyalty. Customers are loyal to the brand mainly based on the relative information for the offerings. This is the weakest type of loyalty as the customers might easily switch if the alternative perceived performance or the cost-benefit ratio is superior to the current one.