The effect of digital payment on consumer behavior on food delivery applications
Authors:
Kandla Guru Balaji¹, Kakarlapudi Suryansh Varma ²
¹B. Tech Cse (Business Systems), Vit-AP University, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh, India.
²B. Tech Cse (Business Systems), Vit-AP University, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh, India.
a summary:
This article explores the deepening of the increasing role that digital technologies play in shaping consumer behavior, specifically in the world of rapid food delivery applications. It deeply explores how the interface design decisions can be apparently harmless and pasture, along with a group of behavioral sermon, a deep effect on food options, demanding people towards healthy food options, and ultimately contributing to achieving the wider sustainability goals. Depending on a mixture of new survey data and current literature in this field, the paper does not refer to the strength of manipulation techniques only and that facilitation in nature but also provides justified recommendations about its moral use in practical practice.
1. Introduction
With the use of use of online food, applications like Zomato, Swiggy and Uber have become part of modern eating habits. These platforms do more than connecting customers to restaurants, but they constitute food options. Digital payment, a concept of behavioral economics that includes the use of design elements to influence the user’s behavior without restricting freedom of choice. In food applications, this means using visual images, employment strategies, and tire technologies to push users towards some food or purchase behaviors. [1]
2. Types of digital payments
Digital effects are mainly of two types:
- Tampering effects: These tights are usually used to enhance user or revenue sharing. Typical examples include time sensitive deals, packages deals, or high margin products in the front and center position on the user interface.
- Useful payments: These antibiotics make people go to more healthy or environmentally friendly options, for example, encouraging low -calorie products, putting signs on vegetable products, or displaying carbon fingerprint stickers. It also highlights low -calorie meals, put signs of vegetable options, or display carbon fingerprint stickers.
Both types of bowl can significantly affect decisions, but their moral effects vary. [2]
3. Systematic
We conducted a survey on 40 people, most of them students and young professionals, to examine their awareness and their response to digital anti -digital in foodstuff applications. We have created a questionnaire consisting of 20 questions. These questions are included with Likert questions, yes/no questions, and open sections. The collected data is analyzed and then converted into numerical format to improve the interpretation. We have turned each answer into a group of 0-5. By converting it into numerical coordination, help us explain our results more efficiently.
4. Interpretation of data and results
We used the program of programming R to explain our data and the functions used such as the middle (), summary (), and table () to get
explanation. To draw our chart, we used the GGPLOT2 function.
For the manipulative strait, the participants showed a high medium agreement that distinguishes such a flash discounts, editing deals and narration on their options.
1. To what extent do you feel control of your decisions (4.3)
2. Do you feel that food delivery notifications are designed to buy food unnecessarily (3.7)
3. To what extent the limited time offers affect this (2.1)
For useful payments, users have responded more positively to features such as food information and virtual plant options.
1. How do notes affect your layout (3.6)
2. To what extent do you trust food delivery applications (3.2)
3. Are dining applications useful (3.0)
Most users believe that they were controlling their decisions, yet the average score showed a great effect through the design of the application.
1.
2. Useful: 1.7/5
Barplots of average responses referred to clear patterns: Users are more acceptable to anti -anti -personal goals (health and budget) and less resistance to those that do not manipulate publicly. [5]
5. Discussion
These accurate results are closely corresponding to a large and varied group of behavioral scientific studies that appear over, repeated and take even that the relatively small changes and it seems that they are not harmful are inserted into electronic interfaces-which are usually referred to as “payments”-capable of having significant and far-reaching effects on the user’s behavior in a full range of different methods. These vessels specifically use cognitive biases and prevailing inference in order to effectively push users to make certain decisions, often without awareness or deliberations [1]. Although this effect can definitely be used for good in stimulating desired behaviors – such as to encourage healthy lifestyle options, which leads to less energy use, or more useful financial options, for example – it is not worth noting that the vast majority of load methods applied to electronic platforms are the same as free of their own moral concerns.
It can be a manipulative or exploitation strait, which is referred to as “dark patterns”, effective in the short term to create clicks, sales or activity on the statute. However, such tactics also constitute long -term costs, such as low user confidence, high damage, and reputation damage [4]. Users will be deceived or coercive, especially when completed transparency or when the inclusion is clearly biased towards work measures on user health.
On the other hand, there are many useful awareness that can greatly improve the user experience, such as timely remarks that drive users when necessary, or assumptions that are carefully appointed according to the user’s individual preferences, or visual signals that already push options towards sustainability. These effects have the ability to improve the user experience in general and lead to long -term satisfaction. It is surprising that it is very surprising that users are often ignored by users because they simply feel very natural and are already built around the user’s needs and desires. The most important challenge that designers and business leaders face is to find the right balance between achieving their business goals successfully while maintaining this at the same time
High moral standards in their operations.
Transparency, in terms of its connection with beating – that is presented by providing users with the ability to cancel the subscription to some proposals or clarify the basis for the reason for a specific proposal version – can significantly enhance the legitimacy of platforms and enhance the feelings of users from independence. Finally, it is important that the moral digital body seek to enable decision -making users and not to try to pay their decisions or activities [3].
6. Recommendations
- Empowerment of allocationUsers must be allowed to change when and how the effects are displayed. Customization gives users a sense of control and improves user experience.
- Use health assumptions wisely: Making healthy food can lead to healthy options. But users should always be able to overcome these default settings without conflict.
- Ensure transparency in product modeThe platforms must explicitly inform users about the reason for the availability of more clarity to specific types of food, due to popularity, algorithm or propaganda. This makes users more confident than them and less processed.
- Providing user notes mechanisms: Assembled and regular analysis of user comments can improve payment strategies, which makes them suitable and increasingly respectable in the long run.
- Work with expertsWorking with public health professionals and behavioral scientists may help ensure that not only work for commercial purposes, but also for the public good.
7. Conclusion
The digital payment is a strong and strong force, which, when using it carefully and responsibly, can be accomplished useful in harmony between the interests of companies and individuals “and individual and individual desires of society. By examining the exact scanning results, we can appreciate both encouraging capabilities and the great capabilities that in the inclusion in forming and affect the options related to food consumption. Permanent and better design, it is important that future work include large -scale and long -term studies, as well as building a dedicated cannon based on artificial intelligence.
Reference
- Thaaleer, RH, & Sunstein, CR (2008). Payment: Improving decisions related to health, wealth and happiness. Yale University Press.
- Münscher, R., Vetter, M., & Scheuerle, T. (2016). Review and classification of architecture techniques. Behavioral Decisions Magazine, 29 (5-6), 511-524.
- Schmidt, AT, & English, B. (2020). Payment Ethics: Overview. Compass philosophy, 15 (4), e12658.
- Mills, S. (2022). Personal payment. Behavioral general policy. https://doi.org/10.1017/bp.2020.7
- Arno, A., & Thomas, S. (2016). The effectiveness of the theory of payment theory in influencing the food behavior of adults: a systematic review and a twinous analysis. BMC PUBLIC Health, 16 (1), 676.