Research Article |
Corresponding author: Marina Y. Sheresheva ( m.sheresheva@mail.ru ) © 2023 Marina Y. Sheresheva, Kristina M. Petrukhina.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Sheresheva MY, Petrukhina KM (2023) “Silver” users of marketplaces and the convenience of the mobile interface. Population and Economics 7(4): 1-23. https://doi.org/10.3897/popecon.7.e109447
|
This article addresses the enhancement of the appeal of Russian marketplaces for older consumers through mobile interface adaptation. It is noted that the overlooked potential of a substantial demographic of older Russians, presenting an underestimated target audience for marketplaces. The accumulated insights from research and development in mobile design for users aged 50 + are synthesized, incorporating considerations for age-related characteristics in interface adaptation. The article presents findings from empirical research, facilitating the identification of preferences and requirements among Russian consumers aged 50 + regarding the mobile interface of marketplaces. Key elements contributing to respondent satisfaction include addressing the overload of the main application page, ensuring the accessibility of main menu buttons, offering interface personalization options, and optimizing the search system. Proposed modifications aim to broaden the customer base among older demographics while preserving the interface’s usability for other customer segments, thereby potentially boosting the profitability of Russian marketplaces.
marketplace, silver consumers, older age, users 50+, mobile interface
The evolution of multilateral digital platforms, utilizing digital technologies as an intermediary between the demand and supply sides (
Volume of online sales in Russia from 2011 to 2022, in billion rubles. Source: (Data Insight, 2022).
As depicted in Fig.
According to research from Data Insight, Russia led in 2022 among the fastest-growing online retail sales markets, with a growth rate of 38%. Other leading countries, including the Philippines and India (26%), Indonesia (23%), Brazil (22%), Vietnam and Argentina (19%), also contributed to this upward trend (Data Insight 2022). Forecasts suggest that by the end of 2023, the market volume is expected to reach 7 trillion rubles (Data Insight 2023). The user base of Russian marketplaces, such as Wildberries, Ozon, Yandex.Market, AliExpress Russia, and SberMegaMarket
However, despite over a third of Russians falling into the age group over 50 (Rosstat 2023), the primary customer base of Russian marketplaces consists of individuals aged 18 to 45 (Data Insight 2023). In the authors’ perspective, one reason the potentially lucrative segment of older paying consumers, often referred to as ‘silver consumers’ (
The user interface plays an important role in modern marketplaces, being a key element that ensures interaction between the user and the platform. According to a number of empirical studies, the usability of the interface is a significant factor influencing the attractiveness of a mobile application for older users (Pattison & Stedmon 2006; Alshehri & Freeman 2012;
Given that currently, older Russians are active users of mobile applications (Sheresheva & Berezka 2017;
This article showcases the findings of a study focused on uncovering possibilities to improve the convenience and attractiveness of shopping on marketplaces by adjusting mobile interface elements for consumers aged 50 +. It provides an overview of research and development experiences in the realm of mobile design tailored for users aged 50 +, incorporating considerations for age-related characteristics in interface adaptation. The article presents the outcomes of empirical research, enabling the identification of preferences and requests from Russian consumers aged 50 + regarding the mobile interface of marketplaces. Additionally, it suggests modifications to mobile interface elements aimed at enhancing the appeal of Russian marketplaces for older consumers.
There are three main types of mobile applications: mobile web applications, native applications, and hybrid applications. Each type comes with its own set of advantages and drawbacks.
Mobile web applications operate within a browser and utilize web development technologies like HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. They don’t require installation on the user’s device, making them accessible on any device with a browser. However, they often have limited access to device functions such as the camera and microphone.
Native applications are tailored for a specific operating system, written in a language specific to that system (e.g., Swift for iOS or Java for Android). They have complete access to all device functions, utilizing them to their full capacity. Nevertheless, developing native applications for each platform is time-consuming and costly, which can be a challenge for small businesses or smaller development teams.
Hybrid applications leverage both web technologies and certain native application features, capable of running on multiple operating systems. They can be developed using popular frameworks
Mobile applications offer unique opportunities for companies aiming to enhance communication with customers, create innovative content, and improve product and service quality (
Moreover, there exists an additional opportunity to cultivate lasting benefits for customers (
Consequently, mobile applications have become an integral component of modern marketing. They enable companies to elevate the quality of their services and products, generate innovative content, and improve communication with customers, nurturing enduring relationships. Concurrently, the interface of mobile applications plays a pivotal role in influencing user interaction. A well-designed user interface can significantly enhance the usability and attractiveness of the marketplace, thereby boosting its competitiveness in the market.
An effective interface should be user-friendly and intuitive, enabling users to swiftly locate essential functions and use the application seamlessly. Additionally, it should boast an appealing design that keeps users engaged. However, empirical studies reveal that application designers do not always accurately assess what is most important for users.
A study by
Optimizing the interface of mobile applications becomes especially relevant when considering older generations, a target audience often overlooked by many Russian businesses, including marketplaces. However, the new age cohorts entering the aging period differ significantly from past perceptions of «older people» (
Nevertheless, when examining the preferences of older age groups, particular attention should be given to age-related limitations (
The characteristics of all types of memory also deteriorate with age (
From the perspective of using mobile interfaces, it is particularly important to consider the following challenges for older age groups:
The primary focus of studying the interaction of the older generation with touch screens is on the visual interface and interaction gestures (
In general, numerous studies indicate that the abilities required for proper and comfortable interaction with graphical interfaces are precisely those that deteriorate the most with age (
A.Correia et al. have identified several essential interface characteristics that can accommodate the physical limitations of the older generation (
As demonstrated in a study by
Studies emphasize the importance of font style, especially its size (
Despite the presence of numerous constraints, many developers appear to intentionally overlook the 50+ age category in their user base. However, we believe this approach is misguided, especially for marketplaces. Understanding a relatively short list of necessary improvements for the convenience of users aged 50 and above could significantly contribute to the growth of the customer base. Let’s delve into the results of our empirical research, which focuses on identifying the most crucial enhancements for the interface of mobile applications in Russian marketplaces for older consumers.
To gather empirical data, we employed several research methods, including synthesis, induction, deduction, comparative analysis, and both qualitative and quantitative statistical methods.
During the initial phase of the study, we conducted an analysis of user reviews
Subsequently, we utilized these keywords to identify negative reviews that could contribute to the characterization of a comfortable or uncomfortable mobile interface. Through the analysis of this feedback, we extracted key insights and trigger points related to interface usability. Following this, we tested the mobile interfaces of leading applications (Ozon and Wildberries) based on the identified user trigger points. This step aimed to validate the existence of problems raised by users.
Upon completing the initial stage, and considering insights from the literature review, we formulated hypotheses regarding the assessment of existing applications’ convenience for older consumers:
H1: Increasing font sizes and icons enhances the usability of the mobile interface for older users.
H2: Labeling the main buttons’ icons
H3: The incorporation of a voice assistant function, reducing reliance on the keyboard, enhances the usability of the mobile interface for older users.
At the second stage, we conducted an online survey utilizing a structured questionnaire through the Google Forms service to test our hypotheses.
The questionnaire comprised 10 questions, organized into the following sections:
All respondents independently completed the questionnaires online.
A total of 383 participants took part in the survey, constituting the target sample size. The necessary sample size was determined using the formula:
where Ss (Sample size) = sample size; N = volume of the population; E = error expressed as a decimal fraction; Z = deviation from the mean; P = percentage value.
According to Rosstat data as of 1.01.2023, the population of men and women aged 50 and over is 52,778,259 people (Rosstat 2023). Considering that 49.7% of people over 55 use the Internet, as per a Mediascope study for February-November 2020 (RBC 2021), we took this as the minimum percentage. Under these conditions, the volume of the target group is 26,525,278 people.
39,846 reviews from Google Play and 6,029 reviews from the AppStore were analyzed for the period April – March 2023.
According to the results of the study, the following general insights were identified:
After studying all the reviews on five marketplace applications, several trigger points of the mobile interface were identified:
The subsequent stage involved testing to verify the relevance of the issues highlighted by users. The testing process unfolded as follows: utilizing the trigger points (expressed as a percentage of mentions) for Wildberries and Ozon
Results of testing the relevance of problems for users of Wildberries and Ozon mobile applications
Wildberries | Ozon | |
1) Overload of the main page | Yes | Yes |
2) Accessibility of the main menu buttons | Depending on the phone’s theme settings (the buttons are more noticeable on a dark background) | Due to the overload of the lower menu, they do not perform their functionality to its utmost |
3) The ability to personalize the interface | ||
changing the background color in the app | No | Yes |
setting the font size in the application | No | No |
coordination of deferred items | Yes | Yes |
4) Search engine optimization | ||
voice assistant | Yes, there is an icon in the search bar, but voice dialing is currently executed by dictating text using the phone’s keyboard | No |
search by photo | Yes | No |
barcode search | No | Yes |
search filter | Yes, but the sample is minimal | Yes, the sample is sufficient |
Figure
An essential aspect for further analysis of responses was the inquiry about font size and icons on respondents’ mobile phones. This information proved crucial, as individuals frequently opt for a larger font size due to a decline in vision. It becomes imperative to consider this data during analysis, as individuals accustomed to a larger font may encounter challenges adjusting to applications with a smaller font size. Notably, the majority of respondents (68.4%) fall into the category of users who prefer an enlarged font.
The subsequent section of the article will unveil the primary findings of the quantitative study.
A) | B) | |||
Gender distribution | Percentage of respondents | Age distribution | Percentage of respondents | |
Women | 67% | 50-54 years old | 22% | |
Men | 33% | 55-59 years old | 24% | |
60-64 years old | 30% | |||
65-69 years old | 23% |
The majority of respondents are familiar with marketplaces and have experience purchasing goods on such platforms (Figure
For respondents with experience in such platforms, an additional query was introduced: «What device do you use to interact with the marketplace? (
Usage of Marketplaces (A) and Reasons for Declining Purchases on Marketplaces (B): (N=383). Source: compiled by the authors
Respondents were asked to evaluate the convenience of the marketplace application they use on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 signifies dissatisfaction, 2 is neutral, 3 is almost satisfied, 4 is satisfied, and 5 is absolutely satisfied (refer to
Distribution of Answers on Satisfaction with Mobile Application Convenience (N=383)
Degree of satisfaction | Aliexpress | Ozon | Wildberries | SberMegaMarket | Yandex.Market |
“absolutely satisfied” | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
“satisfied” | 0% | 35% | 12% | 0% | 17% |
“almost satisfied” | 33% | 49% | 66% | 50% | 33% |
“neutral” | 67% | 16% | 19% | 50% | 50% |
“not satisfied” | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
Analyzing the results in
To gauge respondents’ inclination toward using technological assistants, questions were posed regarding their experience with Bot assistants and the utilization of voice assistants (e.g., Siri, Alice, or dictation typing). The responses revealed that only 6% of respondents use a voice assistant, and merely 10% have interacted with a Bot assistant. Consequently, Hypothesis H3, suggesting that adding a voice assistant function minimizes keyboard use and enhances mobile interface usability, was not substantiated in this sample.
In the final set of questions accompanied by illustrations (see Figure
Source: https://www.wildberries.ru/
Photo Preference (Figure
Icon Size Preference (Figure
The obtained results provide confirmation for Hypothesis H1, suggesting that increasing the size of fonts and icons enhances the usability of the mobile interface. Similarly, Hypothesis H2, proposing that labeling the main buttons’ icons improves the usability of the mobile interface for older users, is also supported.
Final Hypothesis Testing Results (
№ | Hypothesis | Conclusion |
H1 | Increasing the size of fonts and icons enhances the usability of the mobile interface | Hypothesis confirmed |
H2 | Labeling the main buttons’ icons improves the usability of the mobile interface for older users | Hypothesis confirmed |
H3 | Adding a voice assistant function minimizes keyboard use and enhances mobile interface usability | The hypothesis was not confirmed due to respondents lacking sufficient experience of interacting with the technology of voice assistants |
It’s noteworthy that the type of interface may differ based on the application’s compatibility with the Android or iOS operating system. For instance, on the iOS platform, this characteristic is applicable in the Ozon application, whereas it might not be the case for an Android-based application
Based on the results of our research, we can formulate Key Recommendations for Adapting Mobile Interfaces for 50+ Users in Russian Marketplaces
These recommendations, as discussed with developers, are deemed feasible without requiring significant technological efforts. Implementing these enhancements is anticipated to extend user engagement, increase application visitation time, and boost order frequency among older consumers. The cumulative effect is expected to expand the customer base and drive additional revenue growth for marketplaces.
The research presented in this article sheds light on a critical aspect often overlooked by Russian marketplaces—the significance of user interface convenience, especially for the «silver» consumer demographic, comprising approximately one-third of the nation’s population. This demographic represents a promising segment, particularly with the emergence of financially capable and tech-savvy individuals from the «baby boomers» generation.
The primary objectives of a marketplace’s user interface are to facilitate easy navigation, selection, and purchase of goods or services. Surprisingly, enhancing the mobile application interface for the age-specific needs of Russian «silver» users demands minimal technological overhauls and financial investments. The study underscores the necessity for a relatively straightforward adaptation of the mobile interface, considering the age-related constraints of consumers aged 50 and above. This adaptation involves key measures such as labeling main button icons and allowing users to personalize the application through font and icon size adjustments. Crucially, this adaptation, when coupled with digital promotion strategies, holds the potential to significantly expand the customer base and foster behavioral loyalty in a relatively short period. The envisioned outcome includes heightened revenue growth for marketplaces achieved through the increased engagement and loyalty of the «silver» consumer segment.
While the research presented in this article provides valuable insights, certain limitations should be acknowledged. The study’s hypotheses were tested primarily on declarative data, relying on respondents’ self-reported information. To enhance the robustness of future research, there is a need for behavioral testing involving diverse interface modifications. Each hypothesis was tested using a limited number of survey questions, which may have constrained the ability to comprehensively assess consumer characteristics related to the interface. Future research endeavors should involve the development of a more detailed questionnaire to capture a broader spectrum of user experiences. Another limitation is the study’s sample composition, predominantly featuring women, deviates from the general population’s gender composition on Russian marketplaces where male users typically predominate (except for Wildberries). It is essential to highlight that, during the qualitative research and questionnaire testing, respondents aged 50 + emphasized the significance of enhancing the convenience of the mobile application interface. They acknowledged that such improvements could potentially lead to more frequent orders on the marketplace. However, it remains crucial, in subsequent research phases, to investigate the direct impact of interface quality on the purchasing activity within this user category. Moreover, attention must be directed towards understanding how the proposed interface modifications will impact the convenience for those buyer segments that contribute the most substantial revenue to the marketplace. To enhance the internal and external validity of future empirical results, a refinement of the study’s methodology and design is imperative. This will facilitate a more in-depth exploration and clarification of the information gathered by the authors regarding the imperative need and potential directions for enhancing the interface of mobile applications on Russian marketplaces, particularly with consideration for the unique characteristics of older consumers.
Data Insight (2022) Annual Data Insight Report «Internet Commerce in Russia 2022». URL: https://datainsight.ru/sites/default/files/DI_eCommerce_Russia_2022_0.pdf
Data Insight (2023) Online Sales 2023: trends and drivers. URL: https://datainsight.ru/DI-FedorVirin-OnlineSales2023_trends_drivers
E-commerce Index Top-100 (2022) URL: https://top100.datainsight.ru/
RBC (2021). The share of Internet users in Russia among young people has approached 100%. Technologies and media. URL: https://www.rbc.ru/technology_and_media/12/01/2021/5ffde01e9a79478eb5230426
Rosstat (2023) The population of the Russian Federation by gender and age as of January 1, 2023. URL: https://rosstat.gov.ru/compendium/document/13284
Virin F (2023) Online sales trends 2022-2023. Consumer behaviour, sales channels, development of marketplaces. URL: https://datainsight.ru/DI_Virin_Trends2022-23
In our effort to analyze mobile applications, we initially aimed to leverage available data from platforms like App Store, Google Play, and SimilarWeb. However, it became evident during the analysis that the data might not align with the specifics of our study. Consequently, we opted to focus on analyzing user reviews. Below, we elaborate on the reasons leading to this decision.
We initially considered the app’s rating on both App Store and Google Play as a primary metric (Table A1). The ranking of an app in these stores is influenced by various factors, including the total number of installations, revenue generated, and the frequency of app usage. Additionally, the application’s rating and the quantity of user reviews contribute to its overall ranking.
It’s crucial to note that an app’s rating alone may not always provide a clear understanding of the challenges the application is encountering. Nevertheless, when considered alongside other metrics, the rating serves as a valuable indicator, offering insights into the broader landscape of user interest in the application.
Table A2 provides insights into both the application usage rating and the store rating on the hosting platform. The usage rating is derived from the SimilarWeb algorithm, considering «Current installations» and «Active users» in the chosen country (Russia) within the category of «Free mobile shopping apps,» along with the rankings of leaders over the past 28 days. On the other hand, the store rating on the hosting platform is based on the app’s position in the selected store (either Google Play or AppStore) within the same country and category.
Wildberries and Ozon claimed the top two spots in the rankings on both Google Play and the AppStore. However, when considering the subsequent distribution, the scenario becomes less straightforward. On the Google platform, the usage rating reveals that “SberMegaMarket” holds the 31st position, indicating a notable gap from other applications in this category. Despite this distance, the gap seems justified in the broader context.
Table A3 highlights an average Google Play score of 3.4 points for this application, indicating potential customer dissatisfaction and its impact on the store’s reputation and profits. Despite this, the app claims the fourth spot among top free shopping apps, with an 84.4% increase in downloads among Android users since February 2023 (Table A2). On the AppStore, the application enjoys a significantly higher average score of 4.8 points, possibly owing to a more user-friendly interface, faster performance, and fewer bugs. However, it’s crucial to acknowledge the differing app markets of the AppStore and Google Play, recognizing that success on one platform may not necessarily translate to the other. On the AppStore, the store holds the ninth position in the rating. (Table A2)
Yandex.Market and Aliexpress consistently alternate positions in the rating, maintaining their presence in the top ranks. Both apps prioritize enhancing user experience through the introduction of new features and streamlined interfaces. Yandex.Market, for instance, introduced a photo-based product selection feature, enabling users to find items easily through images. Aliexpress expanded payment options, now including cash payment upon order receipt, offering increased flexibility and convenience for shoppers.
As noted earlier, the “store rating” and “usage rating” are multifactorial metrics that don’t directly indicate mobile application interface quality. However, the combined analysis of these metrics can shed light on potential issues. Consequently, the examination of user reviews serves as a logical extension of the study.
To gain deeper insights, we conducted a deductive analysis of user reviews. Initially, we examined all reviews of the application, and subsequently, we isolated those specifically addressing the user interface.
We analyzed a total of 39,846 reviews from Google Play and 6,029 reviews from the AppStore, covering the period from April to March 2023.
Tables A4 and A5 present the distribution of reviews, organized in ascending order of rating, ranging from negative (1 star) to positive (5 stars) for each of the leading marketplaces.
Data reveals that MegaMarket holds the highest percentage of negative reviews, accounting for 71.5% on Google Play and 77% on the AppStore.
However, the specific reasons for dissatisfaction are not provided by these figures. For instance, in the case of Wildberries, changes in order issuance policies and penalties during the study period led to a notable number of negative reviews.
Most users provide feedback on marketplaces either due to dissatisfaction with the marketplace services (e.g., price increases, cancellation of free refunds) or issues when using the application (e.g., non-functional buttons, slow loading, redirects).
This can lead to a disruption in the associative series of user feedback, resulting in an inaccurate assessment of the application. Users often leave service-related comments in app reviews, causing a decline in the app’s average rating. To address this, we concluded that it is essential to use keywords to distinguish between reviews of the application and reviews of the marketplace.
In this context, we conducted an online survey with 100 respondents, including two questions. The first question: “Have you ever left a review for a mobile application on either the AppStore or Google Play platforms?” The second question: “Which of the following words, in your opinion, best describe a convenient or inconvenient mobile interface? If there is no suitable word in this list, enter it below.”
The obtained results are as follows: 32% of respondents left reviews for the application, while 68% did not. Regarding the second question:
Respondents provided the words “Filter,” “Search,” and “Catalog,” while the rest were suggested options.
Thus, the analysis of reviews based on these keywords provided a comprehensive understanding of the reasons for user satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the MegaMarket, Aliexpress, Wildberries, Yandex.Market, and Ozon applications on both Google Play and the AppStore.
Google Play | AppStore | |
General level of installations | + | + |
Revenue for payment applications | + | + |
Opening the application | + | + |
Application opening frequency | + | - |
Number of reviews | + | + |
Rating | + | + |
Search Query Settings | + | + |
Recent updates | - | + |
Deleting an application | + | - |
Application usage rating and application rating on the placement platform
Name of marketplace | Placement platform | ||
Google Play | AppStore | ||
Usage Rating | Store rating | Store rating | |
Wildberries | 2 | 1 | 1 |
Ozon | 3 | 2 | 2 |
Aliexpress | 4 | 6 | 4 |
Yandex.market | 5 | 7 | 5 |
SberMegaMarket | 31 | 4 | 9 |
Device | Application Name | Placement platform | |||
Google Play | AppStore | ||||
Number of ratings, thousand | Average rating | Number of ratings, thousand | Average rating | ||
phones | Wildberries | 3000 | 4.8 | 3110 | 4.9 |
Ozon | 1000 | 4.8 | 2 731 | 4.9 | |
Aliexpress | 264 | 4.7 | 618 | 4.7 | |
Yandex.market | 274 | 4.4 | 359 | 4.8 | |
Megamarket | 16 | 3.4 | 264 | 4.8 | |
tablet | Wildberries | 43 | 4.8 | 3110 | 4.9 |
Ozon | 27 | 4.7 | 2 731 | 4.9 | |
Aliexpress | 31 | 4 | 618 | 4.7 | |
Yandex.market | 7 | 4 | 359 | 4.8 | |
Megamarket | 233 | 3.4 | 264 | 4.8 |
Percentages of reviews from the Google Play platform for the period April — March 2023
Google Play | Megamarket | Yandex Market | Aliexpress | Ozon | Wildberries |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 star | 71,5% | 42,7% | 59,0% | 17,0% | 41,3% |
2 stars | 7,4% | 8,4% | 11,4% | 3,8% | 4,6% |
3 stars | 3,5% | 8,0% | 7,7% | 4,2% | 4,8% |
4 stars | 2,4% | 7,6% | 5,9% | 6,7% | 4,9% |
5 stars | 15,1% | 33,2% | 16,0% | 68,2% | 44,4% |
Percentages of reviews from the AppStore site for the period April — March 2023
App Store | Megamarket | Yandex Market | Aliexpress | Ozon | Wildberries |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 star | 77,0% | 52,8% | 70,1% | 50,3% | 69,9% |
2 stars | 9,4% | 6,5% | 10,1% | 8,0% | 5,9% |
3 stars | 5,4% | 10,5% | 7,8% | 6,8% | 6,3% |
4 stars | 3,1% | 7,7% | 6,6% | 7,7% | 4,4% |
5 stars | 5,1% | 22,5% | 5,5% | 27,2% | 13,5% |
Results of the review analysis.
The data is collected and divided into two tables according to the placement platforms “App Store” (Table A5) and “Google Play” (Table A6).
Table A7 and Table A8 show the results of analyzing the app reviews by keywords. The reviews for each application were divided into two groups “total negative reviews”and “negative reviews about the interface” (negative reviews – all reviews with a rating of up to 3 stars inclusively).
Data collected from the Google Play using the Asomobile service, period under review April — March 2023
Number of reviews collected from the Google Play platform | |||||
Number of stars | Megamarket | Yandex Market | Aliexpress | Ozon | Wildberries |
1 | 2 017 | 906 | 5 809 | 1792 | 6 009 |
2 | 209 | 179 | 1 124 | 398 | 666 |
3 | 99 | 170 | 757 | 446 | 698 |
4 | 69 | 162 | 576 | 704 | 717 |
5 | 427 | 703 | 1 577 | 7 172 | 6 460 |
Total | 2 821 | 2 120 | 9 843 | 10 512 | 14 550 |
Data collected from the AppStore using the Asomobile service, period under review April — March 2023
Number of reviews collected from the AppStore | |||||
Number of stars | Megamarket | Yandex Market | Aliexpress | Ozon | Wildberries |
1 | 1 036 | 317 | 522 | 386 | 1 799 |
2 | 126 | 39 | 75 | 61 | 152 |
3 | 73 | 63 | 58 | 52 | 163 |
4 | 42 | 46 | 49 | 59 | 112 |
5 | 68 | 135 | 41 | 209 | 346 |
Total | 1 345 | 600 | 745 | 767 | 2 572 |
Data collected from the Google Play using the Asomobile service, period under review April — March 2023
Number of reviews collected from the Google Play platform | |||||
Megamarket | Yandex Market | Aliexpress | Ozon | Wildberries | |
Total negative reviews | 2 325 | 1 255 | 7 690 | 2 636 | 7 373 |
Negative reviews about the interface | 804 | 114 | 3 976 | 801 | 1580 |
Percentage of negative reviews about the interface | 35% | 12% | 52% | 31% | 21% |
Data collected from the AppStore using the Asomobile service, the period under review April — March 2023
Number of reviews collected from the AppStore | |||||
Megamarket | Yandex Market | Aliexpress | Ozon | Wildberries | |
Total negative reviews | 1 235 | 419 | 655 | 499 | 2 114 |
Negative reviews about the interface | 332 | 103 | 350 | 41 | 403 |
Percentage of negative reviews about the interface | 27% | 25% | 53% | 8% | 19% |
Ozon | Wildberries | |
Overload of the main page | 44% | 56% |
Accessibility of the main menu buttons | 32% | 40% |
Ability to personalize the interface | 25% | 36% |
Search engine optimization | 22% | 48% |
Ozon | Wildberries | |
Overload of the main page | 49% | 52% |
Accessibility of the main menu buttons | 44% | 58% |
Ability to personalize the interface | 36% | 45% |
Search engine optimization | 32% | 43% |
Reviews were divided according to keywords, for example, “pictures”; “catalog”; “design” were attributed to “overload of the main page”; in most reviews, users used several keywords at the same time, for this reason, percentages are used as metrics in these tables.
Sheresheva Marina Yurievna – Doctor of Economics, Head. laboratory of institutional analysis of the Faculty of Economics of Moscow State University, Moscow, 119234, Russia. Email: m.sheresheva@mail.ru
Petrukhina Kristina Maximovna – graduate of the Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, 119991, Russia. Email: kristina.petrukhina2812@gmail.com