The advent of smartphones revolutionized and took the market to a new level. Now a days, majority of internet users spend their maximum time on smartphones, specifically on mobile apps. The emergence of numerous apps in smartphones with games features has brought about a different trend, mobile app gamification. The emerging popularity of smartphone technologies and their mobile apps have led various companies to engage their consumers with mobile apps, specifically through gamification. Therefore, companies gain consumers attention integrate their mobile marketing into their overall marketing strategy. This study explores the domain of consumer engagement and their intentions through the gamification of mobile apps. The research focuses on how mobile app gamification drives consumer engagement and their intentions drawing upon SDT and TAM. Using survey method data collected from 270 respondents, data analysis was done with structure equation modeling (SEM). The findings assert that various features of gamification of mobile apps (perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and enjoyment) have a significant influence on consumer engagement. However, convenience was unexpectedly found not to be significantly associated with consumer engagement. Additionally, consumer engagement was found to be associated to smartphone user's intentions to use gamification of mobile apps. The results of present study have theoretical and practical implications.
This Essay examines a series of paradoxes that have rendered the international legal order's mechanisms for collective action powerless precisely when they are needed most to fight COVID-19. The “patriotism paradox” is that disengagement from the international legal order weakens rather than strengthens state sovereignty. The “border paradox” is that securing domestic populations by excluding noncitizens, in the absence of accompanying regulatory mechanisms to secure adherence to internal health measures, accelerates viral spread among citizens. The “equality paradox” is that while pandemics pose an equal threat to all people, their impacts compound existing inequalities.
The Covid-19 pandemic and related shutdowns created seismic shifts in the boundaries between public and private life, with lasting implications for human rights and international law. Arriving just as the international legal order was wobbling in the wake of a populist backlash and other great challenges, the pandemic intensified fault lines of marginalisation and state action, amplifying the forces that had already left the liberal international order in crisis and retreat. This article examines the pandemic’s impacts on the international legal order through a gendered lens. It argues that in the short-term, the pandemic has reinforced public-private divides in international law, reinvigorating previous debates over the role of the state in protecting its people from harm. It argues that in the long-term, these developments threaten to unravel the most recent gains in international law and global governance that have supported and expanded the recognition of human rights to marginalised groups. Left unaddressed, this unraveling will further entrench such divides and contribute to the further retreat of the liberal international order. Examining these fault lines and their implications can help us re-imagine a post-pandemic international legal order that offers more protection for human rights, even as multilateral institutions and cooperation sputter or fail.
One of five objectives listed to be "of fundamental importance to Australia's security and prosperity" is to "promote and protect the international rules that support stability and prosperity and enable cooperation to tackle global challenges." 2 The 2017 White Paper provides one succinct and authoritative summary of some of these trends, noting a period of "sharper challenge" to international rules and institutions (ibid, 1, 6).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.