The push-pull-mooring model of consumer service switching: a meta-analytical review to guide future research

Abstract

Purpose For nearly 2 decades, the push-pull-mooring (PPM) model has been used frequently by scholars to explain consumers’ service switching intention and behavior. However, heterogeneity and incomparability between PPM model studies are prevalent issues: The chosen predictor variables, their categorization, their measurement, reported effect sizes, and effect directions vary considerably. By addressing these issues, the present meta-analytical review enables future researchers applying the PPM model to identify relevant variables and use valid measurements. Design/methodology/approach Based on 148 empirical studies employing the PPM model, the variables used to predict consumers’ service switching intention and behavior, their frequency of use, their categorization into push, pull, and mooring factors, and their measurement are assessed. The effect sizes and directions of the relationships between these variables and consumers’ service switching intention and behavior are analyzed using meta-analytic structural equation modeling. Additionally, the predictive capacity of this model and the influence of moderators are assessed. Findings Among the 148 empirical studies, 382 different independent variables were used. The three most frequently used and distinctly categorized independent variables are dissatisfaction (push), alternative attractiveness (pull), and switching costs (mooring). Overall, 152 unique sources were cited to measure these variables and the dependent variables. Dissatisfaction and alternative attractiveness increase switching intention, which positively affects switching behavior, while switching costs decrease switching intention. The model explains 30% of the variance in switching intention and 31% of the variance in switching behavior. Originality/value This study provides the first meta-analytical review of the PPM model to guide future research systematically.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.