Page 859 - MARSIUM'21 COMP OF PAPER

860

(Musa et al., 2015). KL also has semi-natural tourist sites. Zoo Negara, Malaysia's National Zoo, was described by Musa et al., (2015) as one
attraction that both visitors and residents have loved for several decades. Zoo Negara is one of Malaysia's leading wildlife tourist spots. It is
Malaysia's central zoological park, placed on 110 acres of land in Ulu Kelang. It all started on November 14th, 1963. The place is only 5
kilometers away from the heart of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur. Mr. V.M Hutson, the first Chairman of the Malaysian Zoological Society (MZS),
founded Zoo Negara. Zoo Negara is Malaysia's central attraction zoo, operated by a non-governmental agency, MZS (Zoo Negara, 2019). It
has all over 5137 animals from various species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish (Zoo Negara, 2019).

As explained by Botha et al. (2021) in their survey at the National Zoological Gardens in South Africa, vital information must be periodically
updated on the website. The firm's website introduces the species details and information for each living animal, and aligned websites give
better precise biological information for each creature (Fukano et al., 2020). The website needs to be updated with storylines about zoo
animals' lives and recommendations for a variety of valuable and feasible decisions that users can offer to improve wildlife preservation
(Ballantyne et al., 2018; Ballantyne et al., 2021). Regrettably, Zoo Negara does not have such detail about the animals' lives on the website
(Zoo Negara, 2019). However, Zoo Negara has limited exposure on the website. The website needs to be adapted for them and content needs
to be easily available. It is important to explore how well the website is since it also should be accessible and easily understood by the target
group.

In this era of the covid-19 pandemic, previous research has highlighted many problems that have arisen at Malaysia's National Zoo including
the website. After a quick observation of social media comments of Zoo Negara, many comments are on the website itself. According to
social media reading, the majority of prospective customers are unimpressed with the website's features. PokNikMe (2019), claiming to be
the Marketing Web Developer, stated a “slew of problems with the National Zoo's website, including pop-up messages on all page’s users
click, 404 errors, a lack of quality information, and much more”. Phoebe Shafinaz (2019) agreed with him, stating that Zoo Negara has a
horrendous website.

1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The core purpose of this paper is to study the address research questions:
i. What are the features of the website that are lacking on the National Zoo website as compared to the Chester Zoo website among
young visitors?
ii. What does the young visitor experience while browsing the website?

1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

This study listed two main objectives:

i. To identify the deficient website features of the National Zoo compared to the Chester Zoo website among young visitors for the
National Zoo can take action and improve their website in the future.
ii. To determine the young visitors’ experience while browsing the website.

■ 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 WEBSITE FEATURES

Website features is an additional advantage for customer to be more accessible with the website, and more user-friendly (Ubaidur, 2015).
According to Anubha et al. (2020), an organization can use a variety of unique features in a website to attract customers’ attention and
engagement. As mentioned by Soegaard (2019), if the website has been designed in such a way that helps the customers’ ease of use, the
website has the capability for engagement. Bilgihan & Bujisic (2015) describe that consumer purchasing decisions are usually based on the
website features elements, including quality information, website interactivity, and design. According to Floh & Madlberger (2013), quality
web features and convenient navigation foster shopping pleasure.

If a company uses strategies such as animated or cartoon characters, or events (eg. Upin Ipin) it will indirectly attract the children to stay on
the website longer (Gómez et al., 2021). According to Lööf et al. (2019), websites should have features that allow children to easily
understand the content.

Table 2.1 Features of the websites

Author/Study Website design Information Quality Interactivity

860