Examining the Effects of eWOM, Trust Inclination, and Information Adoption on Purchase Intentions in an Accelerated Digital Marketing Context
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Electronic Word of Mouth (eWOM)
2.2. Perceived Risk
2.3. Trust Inclination
2.4. Information Adoption Model (IAM)
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
4.1. Model Estimation Using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM)
4.2. Assumptions of Structural Equation Modelling
4.2.1. Data Screening
4.2.2. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
4.2.3. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
4.2.4. Discriminant Validity
4.2.5. Path Analysis Outcomes
5. Discussion and Conclusions
6. Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Constructs and Items |
Information Quality |
i. The information about products which are shared by my friends in social media are understandable. |
ii. The information about products which are shared by my friends in social media are clear. |
iii. In general, I think the quality of them is high. |
Information Usefulness |
i. The information on social media platforms is valuable and informative ii. The information on social media platforms is informative iii. The information on social media platforms is helpful |
Perceived Risk |
i. Reading the reviews helps me reduce the uncertainty of shopping online. |
ii. Reading the reviews decreases my concerns about unpleasant experiences that may happen when I shop online. |
iii. Reading the reviews increases my confidence in online shopping choices |
Information Adoption |
i. I closely followed the suggestions of the positive comments and went to the recommended online retailing stores further |
ii. I agree with the opinion suggested regarding online retailing stores in the comments on the internet. |
Trust Inclination |
i. My online shopping website is reliable |
ii. My online shopping can be trusted; there are no uncertainties. |
iii. Anyone trusting my online shopping is not asking for trouble. |
Argument Quality |
i. The arguments provided on the social media are relevant |
ii. The arguments provided on the social media are appropriate |
iii. The arguments provided on the social media are applicable |
iv. The arguments provided on the social media are up-to-date |
v. The arguments provided on the social media are reliable |
vi. The arguments provided on the social media are sufficiently complete your need |
vii. The arguments provided on the social media are include all necessary values |
Purchase Intentions |
i. It is very likely that I will buy the product. |
ii. I will purchase the product next time I need a product. |
iii. I will definitely try the product. |
iv. I will recommend the product to my friends |
References
- Yao, B.; Shanoyan, A.; Peterson, H.H.; Boyer, C.; Baker, L. The use of new-media marketing in the green industry: Analysis of social media use and impact on sales. Agribus 2019, 35, 281–297. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, S.; Pauwels, K.; Peng, C. The impact of adding online-to-offline service platform channels on firms’ offline and total sales and profits. J. Int. Mktg 2019, 47, 115–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abedi, E.; Ghorbanzadeh, D.; Rahehagh, A. Influence of eWOM information on consumers’ behavioral intentions in mobile social networks. J. Adv. Manag. Res. 2019, 17, 84–109. [Google Scholar]
- Babic, A.; Sotgiu, F.; De Valck, K.; Bijmolt, T.H. The effect of electronic word of mouth on sales: A meta-analytic review of platform, product, and metric factors. J. Mark. Res. 2016, 53, 297–318. [Google Scholar]
- Lkhaasuren, M.; Nam, K.D. The Effect of Electronic Word of Mouth (eWOM) on Purchase Intention on Korean Cosmetic Products in the Mongolian Market. J. Int. Trade Commer. 2018, 14, 161–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamdani, N.A.; Abdul, G.; Maulani, F. The influence of E-WOM on purchase intentions in local culinary business sector. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2018, 7, 246–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erkan, I.; Evans, C. Social media or shopping websites? The influence of eWOM on consumers’ online purchase intentions. J. Mark. Commun. 2018, 24, 617–632. [Google Scholar]
- Kala, D.; Chaubey, D.S. The effect of eWOM communication on brand image and purchase intention towards lifestyle products in India. Int. J. Serv. Econ. Manag. 2018, 9, 143–157. [Google Scholar]
- Evgeniy, Y.; Lee, K.; Roh, T.W. The Effect of eWOM on Purchase Intention for Korean-brand Cars in Russia: The Mediating Role of Brand Image and Perceived Quality. J. Korea Trade 2019, 23, 102–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahmood, S.; Khwaja, M.G.; Jusoh, A. Electronic word of mouth on social media websites: Role of social capital theory, self-determination theory, and altruism. Int. J. Space Based Situat. Comput. 2019, 9, 74–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roy, G.; Datta, B.; Mukherjee, S. Role of electronic word-of-mouth content and valence in influencing online purchase behavior. J. Mark. Commun. 2019, 25, 661–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ek Styven, M.; Foster, T. Who am I if you can’t see me? The “self” of young travellers as driver of eWOM in social media. J. Tour. Futures 2018, 4, 80–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rao, K.S.; Rao, B. Examining eWOM Credibility-Consumer Purchase Intention Relationship in Facebook: A Mediation Analysis. Ind. J. Mark. 2019, 49, 7–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.J.; Wang, L.Y.; Wang, M.M. Understanding the effects of eWOM social ties on purchase intentions: A moderated mediation investigation. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2018, 28, 54–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, K.Z.K.; Cheung, C.M.K.; Lee, M.K.O. Examining the moderating effect of inconsistent reviews and its gender differences on consumers’ online shopping decision. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2014, 34, 89–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.J.; Wu, Y.; Li, Y. The Tendency of Trust in A Distrustful Environment: The Mediation Role of Contextual Perceptions in eWOM. J. Mark. Dev. Compet. 2019, 13, 45–63. [Google Scholar]
- Poulis, A.; Rizomyliotis, I.; Konstantoulaki, K. Do firms still need to be social? Firm generated content in social media. Inf. Technol. People 2019, 32, 387–404. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, Z.; Zheng, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Jiang, Y.; Chao, H.T.; Doong, S.C. Bipolar influence of firm-generated content on customers’ offline purchasing behavior: A field experiment in China. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2019, 35, 100844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Digitz. Digital Trend Pakistan—Industry Research Report. Available online: https://thedigitz.com/digital-trends-pakistan (accessed on 27 December 2019).
- Khan, S. The Booming Trend of Online Shopping in Pakistan. Available online: https://www.brecorder.com/2019/04/09/487237/the-booming-trend-of-online-shopping-in-pakistan/ (accessed on 18 August 2019).
- Farooq, M. 82% of Pakistani Urban Consumers Made an Online Purchase in 2018: Nielsen. Pakistan Today 2020. Available online: https://profit.pakistantoday.com.pk/2018/11/20/82-of-pakistani-urban-consumers-made-a-online-purchase-in-2018-nielsen/ (accessed on 18 August 2019).
- Hanif, U. Pakistan’s changing e-commerce landscape. The Express Tribune. Available online: https://tribune.com.pk/story/1934471/2-pakistans-changing-e-commerce-landscape/ (accessed on 3 October 2019).
- Khwaja, M.G.; Jusoh, A.; Nor, K.M. Does Electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) on Social Media leads to Information Adoption? Empirical Evidence from the Emerging Markets! Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng. 2019, 8, 3281–3288. [Google Scholar]
- Bashir, S.; Khwaja, M.G. Pakistani Hotels Industry: A New Paradigm to Investigate Visitors Decision-Making Process. Asia Proc. Soc. Sci. 2018, 2, 219–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oussous, A.; Benjelloun, F.Z.; Lahcen, A.A.; Belfkih, S. ASA: A framework for Arabic sentiment analysis. J. Inf. Sci. 2020, 46, 544–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bashir, S.; Khwaja, M.G.; Turi, J.A.; Toheed, H. Extension of planned behavioral theory to consumer behaviors in green hotel. Heliyon 2019, 5, 29–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dashtipour, K.; Gogate, M.; Li, J.; Jiang, F.; Kong, B.; Hussain, A. A hybrid Persian sentiment analysis framework: Integrating dependency grammar based rules and deep neural networks. Neurocomputing 2020, 380, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Khwaja, M.G.; Jusoh, A.; Nor, K.M. Does online social presence lead to purchase intentions? Int. J. Econ. Policy Emerg. Econ. 2019, 12, 198–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pelaez, A.; Chen, C.W.; Chen, Y.X. Effects of perceived risk on intention to purchase: A meta-analysis. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 2019, 59, 73–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dabrynin, H.; Zhang, J. The investigation of the online customer experience and perceived risk on purchase intention in China. J. Mark. Dev. Compet. 2019, 13, 16–30. [Google Scholar]
- Erkan, I.; Evans, C. The influence of eWOM in social media on consumers’ purchase intentions: An extended approach to information adoption. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 61, 47–55. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, J.; Ito, N.; Wu, W.; Li, Z. Exploring travel information adoption on social media in the Chinese context: An extended elm model with users’ social presence. Int. J. Mark. Soc. Policy 2017, 1, 41–54. [Google Scholar]
- Cho, V.; Chan, D. How social influence through information adoption from online review sites affects collective decision making. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2019, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussain, S.; Guangju, W.; Jafar, R.M.S.; Ilyas, Z.; Mustafa, G.; Jianzhou, Y. Consumers’ online information adoption behavior: Motives and antecedents of electronic word of mouth communications. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 80, 22–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shu, M.L.; Scott, N. Influence of social media on Chinese students’ choice of an overseas study destination: An information adoption model perspective. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2014, 31, 286–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Park, D.H.; Lee, J.; Han, I. The effect of on-line consumer reviews on consumer purchasing intention: The moderating role of involvement. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2007, 11, 125–148. [Google Scholar]
- Bailey, J.E.; Pearson, S.W. Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Manag. Sci. 1983, 29, 530–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bettman, J.R. Perceived risk and its components: A model and empirical test. J. Mark. Res. 1973, 184–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Corritore, C.L.; Marble, R.P.; Wiedenbeck, S.; Kracher, B.; Chandran, A. Measuring online trust of websites: Credibility, perceived ease of use, and risk. AMCIS Proc. 2005, 370, 2419–2427. [Google Scholar]
- Cheung, M.Y.; Luo, C.; Sia, C.L.; Chen, H. Credibility of electronic word-of-mouth: Informational and normative determinants of on-line consumer recommendations. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2009, 13, 9–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muthen, L.K.; Muthen, B.O. How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Struct. Equ. Mod. 2002, 9, 599–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. Multivariate Data Analysis; Pearson Prentice Hall.: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2010; Volume 5, pp. 207–219. [Google Scholar]
- Lowry, P.B.; Gaskin, J. Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modeling (SEM) for building and testing behavioral causal theory: When to choose it and how to use it. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 2014, 57, 123–146. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.F., Jr.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Gaskin, J. Confirmatory Factor Analysis; Gaskination’s StatWiki, 2016. Retrieved 15 November 2019. Available online: http://statwiki.kolobkreations.com/index.php?title=Confirmatory_Factor_Analysis (accessed on 18 August 2019).
Demographics | Category | Frequency | Percent |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 191 | 55.8% |
Female | 151 | 44.2% | |
Age | 18 years and below | 18 | 5.3% |
19–28 years | 278 | 81.3% | |
29–39 years | 36 | 10.5% | |
Above 40 years | 10 | 2.9% | |
Education | High School | 32 | 9.4% |
Bachelors | 169 | 49.4% | |
Master’s | 135 | 39.5% | |
Doctorate | 6 | 1.8% | |
Social Media Usage | 162 | 47.4% | |
47 | 20.8% | ||
Snapchat | 71 | 13.7% | |
48 | 14.0% | ||
Other Social Networking Sites SNS | 14 | 4.1% |
Variables | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | SD | Skewness | Kurtosis | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | Statistic | SE | Statistic | SE | |
PI | 1.00 | 5.00 | 3.1447 | 1.2473 | −0.285 | 0.132 | −1.187 | 0.263 |
IU | 1.00 | 5.00 | 3.8489 | 0.67462 | −0.752 | 0.132 | 1.641 | 0.263 |
AQ | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.9190 | 0.72695 | −0.136 | 0.132 | −0.064 | 0.263 |
IQ | 1.33 | 5.00 | 3.9581 | 0.68442 | −0.789 | 0.132 | 1.360 | 0.263 |
TI | 1.00 | 5.00 | 3.5166 | 0.81263 | −0.396 | 0.132 | 0.200 | 0.263 |
PR | 1.00 | 5.00 | 2.8197 | 0.80866 | 0.102 | 0.132 | −0.542 | 0.263 |
IA | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.9430 | 0.60820 | −0.606 | 0.132 | 1.408 | 0.263 |
Constructs and Items | Ρ | λ | α | C.R | AVE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Information Quality | |||||
IQ1 | 0.703 | 0.726 | 0.809 | 0.812 | 0.591 |
IQ2 | 0.758 | 0.758 | |||
IQ3 | 0.841 | 0.820 | |||
Information Usefulness | |||||
InUse1 | 0.867 | 0.882 | 0.876 | 0.883 | 0.716 |
InUse2 | 0.941 | 0.913 | |||
InUse3 | 0.651 | 0.733 | |||
Perceived Risk | |||||
PR1 | 0.717 | 0.742 | 0.773 | 0.775 | 0.536 |
PR2 | 0.797 | 0.773 | |||
PR3 | 0.668 | 0.677 | |||
Information Adoption | |||||
IA1 | 0.867 | 0.820 | 0.786 | 0.787 | 0.649 |
IA2 | 0.622 | 0.790 | |||
Trust Inclination | |||||
Trt1 | 0.743 | 0.784 | 0.870 | 0.872 | 0.694 |
Trt2 | 0.840 | 0.859 | |||
Trt3 | 0.881 | 0.855 | |||
Argument Quality | |||||
AQ1 | 0.616 | 0.645 | 0.910 | 0.906 | 0.581 |
AQ2 | 0.858 | 0.857 | |||
AQ3 | 0.716 | 0.776 | |||
AQ4 | 0.668 | 0.769 | |||
AQ5 | 0.863 | 0.777 | |||
AQ6 | 0.919 | 0.816 | |||
AQ7 | 0.676 | 0.676 | |||
Purchase Intentions | |||||
PI1 | 0.850 | 0.756 | 0.912 | 0.903 | 0.701 |
PI2 | 0.795 | 0.839 | |||
PI3 | 0.846 | 0.776 | |||
PI4 | 0.913 | 0.963 |
Constructs | Tolerance | VIF | MSV | AQ_al | PI_al | IU_al | TI_al | IQ_al | PR_al | IA_al |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AQ_al | 0.707 | 1.415 | 0.270 | 0.762 | ||||||
PI_al | 0.031 | 0.038 | 0.837 | |||||||
IU_al | 0.659 | 1.517 | 0.433 | 0.258 | 0.132 | 0.846 | ||||
TI_al | 0.667 | 1.500 | 0.270 | 0.519 | 0.144 | 0.403 | 0.833 | |||
IQ_al | 0.966 | 1.035 | 0.016 | −0.110 | 0.098 | 0.016 | 0.077 | 0.769 | ||
PR_al | 0.846 | 1.181 | 0.172 | 0.415 | 0.097 | 0.117 | 0.313 | −0.127 | 0.732 | |
IA_al | 0.620 | 1.613 | 0.433 | 0.367 | 0.177 | 0.658 | 0.498 | 0.002 | 0.297 | 0.805 |
Independent Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Results |
---|---|---|---|---|
TI | IA | PI | ||
Hypothesized direct effect paths | ||||
H1. IQ | 0.131 ** | Supported | ||
H2. IU | 0.317 ** | Supported | ||
H3. PR | 0.134 * | Supported | ||
H4. AQ | 0.404 ** | Supported | ||
R-Square | 0.401 ** | |||
Hypothesized indirect effect paths | ||||
H5. TI | 0.544 ** | Supported | ||
H6. IA | 0.190 ** | Supported | ||
R-Square | 0.307 ** | 0.049 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Khwaja, M.G.; Mahmood, S.; Zaman, U. Examining the Effects of eWOM, Trust Inclination, and Information Adoption on Purchase Intentions in an Accelerated Digital Marketing Context. Information 2020, 11, 478. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11100478
Khwaja MG, Mahmood S, Zaman U. Examining the Effects of eWOM, Trust Inclination, and Information Adoption on Purchase Intentions in an Accelerated Digital Marketing Context. Information. 2020; 11(10):478. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11100478
Chicago/Turabian StyleKhwaja, Muddasar Ghani, Saqib Mahmood, and Umer Zaman. 2020. "Examining the Effects of eWOM, Trust Inclination, and Information Adoption on Purchase Intentions in an Accelerated Digital Marketing Context" Information 11, no. 10: 478. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11100478