| Literature DB >> 33889034 |
Min Wang1, Lin-Lin Sun1, Jun-Dong Hou1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: On the basis of stimulus-organism-response (SOR) theory, this study extends the work of Lee and Kwon by examining the concept of perceived usefulness as a mediator between emotional interaction (familiarity and intimacy) and purchase intention. The consumer purchase decision model, in which product type plays a moderating role in the linking mechanism, is also explored.Entities:
Keywords: emotional interaction; perceived usefulness; purchase intention; social commerce
Year: 2021 PMID: 33889034 PMCID: PMC8055276 DOI: 10.2147/PRBM.S301286
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Psychol Res Behav Manag ISSN: 1179-1578
Figure 1Research model and hypotheses.
Variable Items
| Items | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| Familiarity (FAM) α = 0.875 | Ng, 2013; Frenzen & Nakamoto, 1993 | |
| FAM1 | I know my friends on social commerce platforms through information exchange. | |
| FAM2 | I know my friends on social commerce platforms by sharing photos. | |
| FAM3 | I interact with friends frequently on the social commerce platform. | |
| Intimacy (INT) α = 0.892 | Gilly, 1998 | |
| INT1 | I will discuss personal topics with friends on social commerce sites. | |
| INT2 | My friends on the social commerce platform are very sincere, and I believe them. | |
| INT3 | I hope to keep a long-term relationship with my friends on the social commerce platform. | |
| INT4 | Friends’ recommendations and reviews of goods are a very important to my consumption. | |
| Perceived usefulness (PU) α = 0.909 | Davis, 1989; Park, 2009 | |
| PU1 | The information I get from interactions on social commerce platforms is useful. | |
| PU2 | The interaction on the social commerce platform allows me to better understand purchase goals. | |
| PU3 | The interaction on the social commerce platform enables me to make purchase decisions faster. | |
| PU4 | The information I get from interaction on the social commerce platform is updated timely. | |
| Purchase intention (PI) α = 0.943 | Lee and Shin, 2014; Zhang, 1996 | |
| PI1 | I often want to buy something because of the emotional interaction with others on social commerce platform. | |
| PI2 | In social commerce, I want strongly to buy the product if it was recommended by my friends. | |
| PI3 | I will buy something because of product recommendations and reviews from my friends. | |
Discriminant Validity
| Research Construct | FAM | INT | PI | PU |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FAM | 0.865 | 0.732 | 0.729 | |
| INT | 0.856 | 0.705 | 0.726 | |
| PI | 0.718 | 0.704 | 0.700 | |
| PU | 0.728 | 0.714 | 0.701 |
Notes: N = 269; the elements below the diagonal are the correlations between the construct values, whereas the elements above the diagonal are the HTMT values.
Common Method Bias Analysis
| Construct | Indicator | Substantive Factor Loadings (R1) | R12 | Method Factor Loadings (R2) | R22 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FAM | FAM1 | 0.778 | 0.605 | −0.355 | 0.126 |
| FAM2 | 0.855 | 0.731 | −0.241 | 0.058 | |
| FAM3 | 0.898 | 0.806 | −0.271 | 0.073 | |
| INT | INT2 | 0.782 | 0.612 | −0.026 | 0.001 |
| INT3 | 0.817 | 0.667 | 0.048 | 0.002 | |
| INT4 | 0.865 | 0.748 | −0.331 | 0.110 | |
| PU | PU1 | 0.858 | 0.736 | −0.135 | 0.018 |
| PU2 | 0.844 | 0.712 | −0.394 | 0.155 | |
| PU3 | 0.832 | 0.692 | −0.236 | 0.056 | |
| PU4 | 0.827 | 0.684 | 0.168 | 0.028 | |
| PI | PI1 | 0.845 | 0.714 | 0.160 | 0.026 |
| PI2 | 0.900 | 0.810 | 0.080 | 0.006 | |
| PI3 | 0.882 | 0.778 | 0.023 | 0.001 | |
| Average | 0.715 | 0.051 | |||
Measurement Model Summary
| Research Construct | Items | Factor Loading | p | CR | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FAM | FAM1 | 0.772 | *** | 0.881 | 0.712 |
| FAM2 | 0.844 | *** | |||
| FAM3 | 0.910 | *** | |||
| INT | INT2 | 0.782 | *** | 0.893 | 0.737 |
| INT3 | 0.893 | *** | |||
| INT4 | 0.896 | *** | |||
| PU | PU1 | 0.871 | *** | 0.910 | 0.717 |
| PU2 | 0.858 | *** | |||
| PU3 | 0.842 | *** | |||
| PU4 | 0.815 | *** | |||
| PI | PI1 | 0.913 | *** | 0.944 | 0.849 |
| PI2 | 0.928 | *** | |||
| PI3 | 0.923 | *** |
Notes: ***p < 0.001 (two-tailed); N = 269.
Abbreviations: CR, composite reliability; AVE, average variance extracted.
Model Fit Indices of Model
| Fit Indices | Model Value | Reference Value | Overall Model Fit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bollen-Stine χ2 | 87.53 | The lesser. the better | Yes |
| DF | 59.00 | The larger, the better | Yes |
| Normed Chi-aqr (χ2/DF) | 1.48 | (1, 3) | Yes |
| Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) | 0.97 | > 0.9 | Yes |
| Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) | 0.94 | > 0.9 | Yes |
| Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation (RMSEA) | 0.04 | < 0.08 | Yes |
| Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) | 0.99 | > 0.9 | Yes |
| Comparative Fit Index (CFI) | 0.99 | > 0.9 | Yes |
Notes: N = 269; estimation of 5000 bootstrap sample.
Figure 2Structural model.
Descriptive Statistics and Correlations of Variables
| Research Construct | Mean | SD | FAM | INT | PU | PI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FAM | 3.098 | 0.965 | (0.875) | |||
| INT | 2.960 | 1.015 | 0.000 | (0.892) | ||
| PU | 3.515 | 0.804 | 0.500*** | 0.432*** | (0.909) | |
| PI | 3.140 | 1.081 | 0.465*** | 0.449*** | 0.613*** | (0.943) |
Notes: ***p < 0.001 (two-tailed); N = 269; figures in parentheses are Cronbach’s alpha values.
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation.
Standardized Direct, Indirect, and Total Effects of the Hypothesized Model
| Research Construct | Point Estimate (c) | Product of Coefficients | Bootstrapping | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Percentile 95% CI | Two-Tailed Significance | |||||
| SE | Z | Lower | Upper | |||
| FAM→PI | 0.299 | 0.146 | 2.048 | 0.034 | 0.602 | 0.041 (**) |
| INT→PI | 0.305 | 0.129 | 2.364 | 0.053 | 0.554 | 0.018 (**) |
| PU→PI | 0.332 | 0.111 | 2.991 | 0.090 | 0.522 | 0.003 (**) |
| FAM→PU | 0.500 | 0.125 | 4.000 | 0.262 | 0.736 | 0 0.000 (***) |
| INT→PU | 0.432 | 0.122 | 3.541 | 0.162 | 0.631 | 0 0.000 (***) |
| FAM→PI | 0.166 | 0.062 | 2.677 | 0.046 | 0.297 | 0.007 (**) |
| INT→PI | 0.143 | 0.062 | 2.306 | 0.025 | 0.271 | 0.021 (**) |
| FAM→PI | 0.465 | 0.125 | 3.720 | 0.214 | 0.691 | 0.000 (***) |
| INT→PI | 0.449 | 0.127 | 3.535 | 0.177 | 0.665 | 0 0.000 (***) |
| PU→PI | 0.332 | 0.111 | 2.991 | 0.090 | 0.522 | 0.003 (**) |
| FAM→PU | 0.500 | 0.125 | 4.000 | 0.262 | 0.736 | 0.000 (***) |
| INT→PU | 0.432 | 0.122 | 3.541 | 0.162 | 0.631 | 0.000 (**) |
Notes: **p < 0.005; ***p < 0.001 (two-tailed).
Abbreviation: SE, standard error.
Invariance Test of the Two-Group Structural Model and Testing the Moderating Effects
| Search Group (N = 120) | Experience Group (N = 149) | Unconstrained | Constrained | Δχ2 (Δdf = 1) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standardized Coefficients | Z-Value | Standardized Coefficients | Z-Value | Model Chi-Square (df = 120) | Model Chi-Square (df = 121) | ||
| FAM→PI | 0.255 | 1.393 | 0.257 | 1.736 | 616.104 | 633.644 | 17.540*** |
| INT→PI | 0.260 | 2.385* | 0.318 | 2.650* | 616.104 | 618.049 | 1.945 |
| PU→PI | 0.339 | 4.291* | 0.525 | 3.646* | 616.104 | 623.946 | 7.842*** |
Notes: Standardized estimation of 5000 bootstrap samples; *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001 (two-tailed).