The Impact of Utilitarian and Hedonic Gratification in Gamification to Continued Use Intentions of an E-Wallet Mobile Application

Using the Uses and Gratification Theory (UGT) framework, this study examines how utilitarian gratification (ease of use, self-presentation) and hedonic gratification (enjoyment, passing time) from gamification features affect user satisfaction and continued use intention of the DANA e-wallet app, among 131 undergraduate and postgraduate students at a public university in Malang.

It was unclear which gratification — ease-of-use/self-presentation (utilitarian) or enjoyment/passing-time (hedonic) — actually drives satisfaction and continued use intention for fintech apps' gamification features, while fintech companies need to know which aspect is worth prioritizing.

A 5-point Likert survey with 7 utilitarian-gratification items, 7 hedonic-gratification items, 4 satisfaction items, and 4 continued-use-intention items was distributed to DANA gamification users, yielding 131 valid samples from 210 initial respondents. Data was analyzed with a non-parametric Generalized Linear Model (GLM).

All variables' reliability was tested with Cronbach's alpha (acceptable to excellent), then the four gratification variables' effect on satisfaction, and satisfaction's effect on continued use intention, were analyzed with GLM and Nagelkerke's pseudo-R².

Ease of use and self-presentation (utilitarian gratification) significantly influenced satisfaction (R²=0.935), while enjoyment and passing time (hedonic gratification) did not have a significant effect. Satisfaction then strongly predicted continued use intention (R²=0.890, p<0.001).

Challenges the common assumption that the hedonic (enjoyment) aspect always dominates gamification effectiveness — in a fintech app context, the practical aspects (ease of use, self-presentation) turn out to be what most drives user satisfaction and retention.

The study population was limited to students at one public university in Malang with 131 respondents, potentially carrying voluntary bias, so the results should be interpreted and generalized with caution.