Gamified Feedback and Customer Stickiness: A Case Study of Meituan and DoorDash
Research Article
Open Access
CC BY

Gamified Feedback and Customer Stickiness: A Case Study of Meituan and DoorDash

Yingbo Sun 1*
1 Queen's University
*Corresponding author: 20ys90@queensu.ca
Published on 27 August 2025
Volume Cover
LNEP Vol.112
ISSN (Print): 2753-7056
ISSN (Online): 2753-7048
ISBN (Print): 978-1-80590-339-0
ISBN (Online): 978-1-80590-340-6
Download Cover

Abstract

The explosive growth of food-delivery platforms has shifted the focus of competition from user acquisition to user retention. However, most platforms still rely on a one-time five-star rating system, whose weak incentive mechanism and linear dispute process cannot build long-term loyalty or obtain high-quality feedback. This paper compares the "gamification + crowdsourced review" model (Meituan) and the traditional star rating model (DoorDash). Drawing on the literature, Self-Determination Theory (SDT) and procedural justice, this paper constructs a three-stage framework-design layer → psychological/operational layer → outcome layer-to explain how hierarchical badges, points, and user arbitration can simultaneously meet the needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness, and resolve disputes in parallel. The findings indicate that gamified crowdsourced review feedback is not just an embellishment of the user experience but a sustainable strategy that integrates user engagement, data assets, and governance efficiency. This paper finally proposes actionable design guidelines and an experimental agenda for cross-cultural replication and longitudinal causal testing.

Keywords:

Gamification feedback, crowd-jury mechanism, user loyalty, Meituan jury, platform governance

View PDF
Sun,Y. (2025). Gamified Feedback and Customer Stickiness: A Case Study of Meituan and DoorDash. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media,112,1-7.

References

[1]. Goyal, S., Chauhan, S., Gajpal, Y., & Bhardwaj, A. K. (2023). Examining Consumers' Continuance and Sharing Intention Toward Food-Delivery Apps. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 36(6), 1677-1707.

[2]. Meituan. (2024). Meituan 2023 Corporate Social Responsibility Report. Meituan.

[3]. Meituan Research Institute. (2025). Annual Observation and Big Data of China's Catering 2025: Industry Change from Price Competition to Quality Competition. Meituan Research Institute.

[4]. Meituan. (2023). Meituan 2022 Corporate Social Responsibility Report. Meituan.

[5]. DoorDash. (2025). 2025 DoorDash Delivery Trends Report. DoorDash.

[6]. Kwan, A. P., Yang, S. A., & Zhang, A. H. (2024). Crowd-Judging on Two-Sided Platforms: An Analysis of In-Group Bias. Management Science, 70(4), 2459-2476.

[7]. Statista Research Department. (2024). DoorDash vs. Uber Eats: Quarterly Marketplace GMV in the United States (Q1 2022-Q4 2024). Statista.

[8]. Lee, J., & Kim, H. (2025). Structural Relationship between Service Quality, Habit, and App Loyalty Toward O2O Food-Delivery Applications. Global Business & Finance Review, 29(3), 136-148.

[9]. Su, Y., Kunkel, T., & Liu, C. (2022). How does Quality of Mobile Food-Delivery Apps Affect Repurchase Intention? Telematics and Informatics Reports, 18, 100212.

[10]. Liang, T. (2023). Study on the Crowdsourcing Dispute Resolution on Network Platforms (Master's thesis). Communication University of China.

[11]. Ramdhansya, A. F., Vernanda, S. M., Budi, I., Putra, P. K., & Santoso, A. B. (2025). Customer Satisfaction Evaluation in Online Food-Delivery Services: A Systematic Literature Review. Jurnal RESTI, 9(2), 303-313.

[12]. Zhang, Z. (2015). Study on Strategies of Internet Products Design in Perspective of Gamification (Master's Thesis). Jiangnan University.

[13]. Moon, J., & Ji, Y. (2024). Attributes of Corporate Social Responsibility, Trust, and Positive Emotion in a Food-Delivery Application System. Global Business & Finance Review, 30(1), 22-35.

References

[1]. Goyal, S., Chauhan, S., Gajpal, Y., & Bhardwaj, A. K. (2023). Examining Consumers' Continuance and Sharing Intention Toward Food-Delivery Apps. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 36(6), 1677-1707.

[2]. Meituan. (2024). Meituan 2023 Corporate Social Responsibility Report. Meituan.

[3]. Meituan Research Institute. (2025). Annual Observation and Big Data of China's Catering 2025: Industry Change from Price Competition to Quality Competition. Meituan Research Institute.

[4]. Meituan. (2023). Meituan 2022 Corporate Social Responsibility Report. Meituan.

[5]. DoorDash. (2025). 2025 DoorDash Delivery Trends Report. DoorDash.

[6]. Kwan, A. P., Yang, S. A., & Zhang, A. H. (2024). Crowd-Judging on Two-Sided Platforms: An Analysis of In-Group Bias. Management Science, 70(4), 2459-2476.

[7]. Statista Research Department. (2024). DoorDash vs. Uber Eats: Quarterly Marketplace GMV in the United States (Q1 2022-Q4 2024). Statista.

[8]. Lee, J., & Kim, H. (2025). Structural Relationship between Service Quality, Habit, and App Loyalty Toward O2O Food-Delivery Applications. Global Business & Finance Review, 29(3), 136-148.

[9]. Su, Y., Kunkel, T., & Liu, C. (2022). How does Quality of Mobile Food-Delivery Apps Affect Repurchase Intention? Telematics and Informatics Reports, 18, 100212.

[10]. Liang, T. (2023). Study on the Crowdsourcing Dispute Resolution on Network Platforms (Master's thesis). Communication University of China.

[11]. Ramdhansya, A. F., Vernanda, S. M., Budi, I., Putra, P. K., & Santoso, A. B. (2025). Customer Satisfaction Evaluation in Online Food-Delivery Services: A Systematic Literature Review. Jurnal RESTI, 9(2), 303-313.

[12]. Zhang, Z. (2015). Study on Strategies of Internet Products Design in Perspective of Gamification (Master's Thesis). Jiangnan University.

[13]. Moon, J., & Ji, Y. (2024). Attributes of Corporate Social Responsibility, Trust, and Positive Emotion in a Food-Delivery Application System. Global Business & Finance Review, 30(1), 22-35.

Cite this article

Sun,Y. (2025). Gamified Feedback and Customer Stickiness: A Case Study of Meituan and DoorDash. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media,112,1-7.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.

About volume

Volume title: Proceedings of ICILLP 2025 Symposium: Digital Governance: Inter-Firm Coopetition and Legal Frameworks for Sustainability

ISBN: 978-1-80590-339-0(Print) / 978-1-80590-340-6(Online)
Editor: Renuka Thakore, Tonejit Gad-Harry
Conference website: https://2025.icillp.org/Bristol.html
Conference date: 18 September 2025
Series: Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media
Volume number: Vol.112
ISSN: 2753-7048(Print) / 2753-7056(Online)

© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who publish this series agree to the following terms:

1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this series.

2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this series.

3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See Open access policy for details).

For authors
For editors
For reviewers

Cookies are used by this site.
Copyright © 2024 EWA Publishing, its licensors, and contributors. All rights reserved, including text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.