| Literature DB >> 34204255 |
Jinxin Yang1, Din Jong2.
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to determine whether users' social interaction tie and trust have a mediating effect on the willingness to use the online healthcare community (OHC) platform on an ongoing basis to respond to food safety crises and monitor food safety practices. During the three-month survey, we conducted an online investigation of users who had experience sharing on the OHC platform and were concerned about food safety. Thereby, three hundred and fifty-two valid questionnaires were received and partial least squares was adopted in this study to test the proposed hypotheses. The empirical results show that perceived critical mass, image, and para-social interaction strengthen the social interaction tie between users and the food safety platform. In addition, this study found that social interaction tie and trust of OHC platform users increased users' willingness to continue using the OHC platform. This research provides OHC platform managers with an in-depth understanding of online social interactions on food safety pages. Moreover, the results of this study can help food business owners, government regulators, hospitals, and physicians to improve the way they use the Web for opinion-led food safety crises and provide insight into the intent of promoting the ongoing use of OHC platforms.Entities:
Keywords: food safety crisis; image; online healthcare community; para-social interaction; partial least squares; perceived critical mass; social interaction tie; trust
Year: 2021 PMID: 34204255 PMCID: PMC8296365 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18126514
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Research model.
Operational definition.
| Constructs | Operational Definition | Related Documents |
|---|---|---|
| Perceived | When the number of participants and users reaches a certain threshold, people will have a certain social tendency, i.e., a collective action that will influence this social activity. | Oliver et al. [ |
| Image (IM) | When the OHC platform responds to food safety crisis, users’ subjective attitudes, emotions, and impressions of the OHC platform based on the functional qualities and psychological feelings of the OHC platform’s authoritative doctors who answer food safety questions scientifically and the famous hospitals who guide food safety issues positively are one of the images. | Venkatesh et al. [ |
| Para-social Interaction (PSI) | The extent to which a person-to-person conversation and interpersonal involvement is facilitated by media features and conversations in a sensory or non-sensory manner as the health visitor navigates the information in the OHC environment. | Rubin [ |
| Social Interaction Tie (SIT) | OHC as an online health services social platform that allows people to build interpersonal networks where doctors quickly share food safety articles, hospitals guide the public in responding to food safety crises, and participants who care his/her health and food safetysearch for safety information. Such a platform allows members of the OHC to engage in social activities among themselves, interact and communicate with other communities of interest, and build and maintain social capital. | Huang et al. [ |
| Trust (TR) | Trust refers to the interpersonal relationships that develop over time as people interact with each other over time. The special relationships such as friendship, respect and trust that arise from the interaction between members of online communities influence people’s behavior and the accumulation of social capital. This study concluded that hospital doctors interacting and communicating with participants who care his/her health and food safety in the food safety area on the OHC platform, and responding to food safety crises with scientific and professional health knowledge, would increase the trust in the OHC platform for users. | Chen et al. [ |
| Continuance Intention (CI) | Continuance Intention refers to a situation in which an individual identifies a continuing use for an action or purpose that he or she has taken. This study defines the habit of members of the OHC platform to join and participate in this relational community, which is assessed by two attributes such as the frequency and number of times members participate in the OHC platform. | Chen et al. [ |
Measurement of sociodemographic variables and variables concerning information searching behavior towards OHC.
| Gender | 1 □Male 2 □ Female |
| Age | 1□<18 2□18–25 3□26–30 4□31–40 5□41–50 6□51–60 7□>60 |
| Education | 1□≤junior high school 2□ junior high school (including technical secondary school) 3□ junior college 4□ undergraduate 5□ Graduate above |
| Which online healthcare community website do you use usually? | 1□ PingAn Good Doctor 2□ChunYu Doctor 3□ Good Doctor Online 4□ One Medical website 5□ Microhospital 6□DingXiang Doctor 7□ Micropulse 8□ Ask Doctor 9□ XiaoWei healthcare |
| How often do you use your favorite healthcare community website? | 1□ daily 2□ 1–2 day 3□ 3–5 day 4□ 1 week 5□ 1–4 week 6□ 1–3 month 7□ 3 month above |
| Approximately how long do you visit your favorite healthcare community each time? | 1□ Under 30 min 2□ 30 min–1 h 3□ 1–3 h 4□ 3–6 h 5□ 6 h above |
| Occupation | 1□ Student 2□ Manufacturing 3□Sales 4□ Marketing/PR/Advertising 5□ Customer Service 6□ Administration/Logistics 7□ Human Resource 8□ Finance/Audit 9□ Civilian/Office 10□ Technician /Researchers 11□ Administrative 12□ Teachers 13□ Consultant 14□ Professionals (e.g., accountants, lawyers, architects, healthcare professionals, journalists, etc.) 15□ others |
| How long have you been using the Internet? | 1□ daily 2□ 1–2 day 3□ 3–5 day 4□ 1 week 5□ 1–4 week 6□ 1–3 month 7□ 3 month above |
Questionnaire Items.
| Perceived critical mass (scaling from ‘‘strongly disagree’’ to ‘‘strongly agree’’ on a seven-point scale) | |
| PCM1 | I have bought food safety service or green food on OHC according to my friend’s advice. How do I feel about this? |
| PCM2 | I like to buy food safety service or green food on OHC website with my family and friends. |
| PCM3 | I go to OHC because I see family and friends using them to buy food safety services and green foods. |
| PCM4 | On the OHC website, I always look for the doctor who answers the most questions or sends the most gifts to register and consult about food safety issues online |
| PCM5 | On OHC website, I will only seek for food safety consultation or purchase services from doctors with many comments and high praise. |
| PCM6 | On the OHC website, the doctors with more questions and answers, or the doctors with more gifts, the more I pay attention to them. |
| Image (scaling from ‘‘strongly disagree’’ to ‘‘strongly agree’’ on a seven-point scale) | |
| IM1 | It’s an outdated phenomenon if I can’t use the OHC to seek food safety advice among my relatives and friends. |
| IM2 | People in my relatives and friends who use the OHC have more prestige than those who do not. |
| IM3 | People among my relatives and friends who use the OHC have a high profile. |
| Para-social interaction(scaling from ‘‘strongly disagree’’ to ‘‘strongly agree’’ on a seven-point scale) | |
| PSI1 | Medical social networking sites are human when they are involved in the interaction with doctors and participants who care his/her health and food safety. |
| PSI2 | In the process of consultation and communication on medical social networking sites, my feeling is close and there is no distance. |
| PSI3 | If doctors and participants who care his/her health and food safety have been consulted and communicated with on medical social networks appear on other media, I will watch this program or report on it. |
| PSI4 | Participating in the consultation sessions on medical social networking sites made me feel comfortable, as if I were with friends. |
| PSI5 | In the process of consulting and communicating on medical social networking sites, I felt warm. |
| Social interaction tie (scaling from ‘‘strongly disagree’’ to ‘‘strongly agree’’ on a seven-point scale) | |
| SIT1 | I have a high degree of interaction with members of the medical social network. |
| SIT2 | I have spent a lot of time interacting with doctors and participants who care his/her health and food safety on medical social networking sites. |
| SIT3 | I often communicate with doctors and participants who care his/her health and food safety on medical social networking sites. |
| Trust (scaling from ‘‘strongly disagree’’ to ‘‘strongly agree’’ on a seven-point scale) | |
| TR1 | Doctors and participants who care his/her health and food safety will be willing and brave to solve the problems of other patients. |
| TR2 | Medical social networking sites can provide reliable food safety information |
| TR3 | In general, medical social networking sites are very trustworthy. |
| Continuance intention (scaling from ‘‘strongly disagree’’ to ‘‘strongly agree’’ on a seven-point scale) | |
| CI1 | I will continue to use medical social networking sites for food safety advice or green food shopping. |
| CI2 | In the future, I will continue to use medical social networking sites for food safety consultation or to buy green food. |
| CI3 | I would advise my friends to use medical social networking sites for food safety advice. |
Descriptive statistics and factor loadings for measurement items.
| Indicator | Mean | S.D. | Skewness | Kurtosis | Factor Loading | T-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IM1 | 5.009 | 1.728 | −0.843 | −0.133 | 0.765 | 60.664 |
| IM2 | 4.977 | 1.795 | −0.759 | −0.324 | 0.760 | 42.136 |
| IM3 | 5.048 | 1.694 | −0.805 | −0.229 | 0.783 | 46.586 |
| PCM1 | 4.807 | 1.816 | −0.663 | −0.630 | 0.777 | 33.784 |
| PCM2 | 4.670 | 1.748 | −0.573 | −0.711 | 0.773 | 58.668 |
| PCM3 | 4.790 | 1.834 | −0.661 | −0.672 | 0.786 | 42.416 |
| PCM4 | 4.861 | 1.836 | −0.668 | −0.606 | 0.816 | 59.835 |
| PCM5 | 4.540 | 1.987 | −0.527 | −0.861 | 0.794 | 44.414 |
| PCM6 | 4.665 | 1.718 | −0.518 | −0.784 | 0.760 | 41.312 |
| PI1 | 4.656 | 1.498 | −0.505 | −0.268 | 0.789 | 61.945 |
| PI2 | 4.645 | 1.681 | −0.550 | −0.392 | 0.727 | 37.809 |
| PI3 | 4.724 | 1.740 | −0.724 | −0.408 | 0.807 | 59.333 |
| PI4 | 4.884 | 1.687 | −0.764 | −0.163 | 0.780 | 50.330 |
| PI5 | 4.795 | 1.653 | −0.623 | −0.341 | 0.819 | 49.525 |
| SIT1 | 5.543 | 1.488 | −1.190 | 1.156 | 0.859 | 70.031 |
| SIT2 | 5.182 | 1.282 | −1.173 | 1.714 | 0.774 | 53.008 |
| SIT3 | 5.443 | 1.482 | −1.138 | 1.026 | 0.780 | 44.736 |
| TR1 | 4.804 | 1.753 | −0.690 | −0.449 | 0.694 | 38.390 |
| TR2 | 4.591 | 1.700 | −0.582 | −0.656 | 0.779 | 69.046 |
| TR3 | 4.884 | 1.820 | −0.803 | −0.355 | 0.823 | 54.616 |
| CI1 | 4.901 | 1.515 | −0.648 | 0.256 | 0.857 | 80.583 |
| CI2 | 5.082 | 1.640 | −0.723 | −0.269 | 0.817 | 74.336 |
| CI3 | 4.901 | 1.552 | −0.837 | 0.311 | 0.821 | 71.813 |
Reliability and convergent validity.
| Cronbach’s Alpha | rho_A | Composite Reliability | Average Variance Extracted (AVE) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IM | 0.813 | 0.813 | 0.813 | 0.592 |
| PCM | 0.906 | 0.906 | 0.906 | 0.616 |
| PSI | 0.889 | 0.890 | 0.889 | 0.616 |
| SIT | 0.846 | 0.849 | 0.847 | 0.649 |
| TR | 0.810 | 0.815 | 0.810 | 0.589 |
| CI | 0.871 | 0.871 | 0.871 | 0.692 |
Note: IM = Image; PCM = Perceived critical mass; PSI = Para-social interaction; SIT = Social interaction tie; TR = Trust; CI = Continuance intention.
Correlation matrix.
| Construct | IM | PCM | PSI | SIT | TR | CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IM |
| |||||
| PCM | 0.545 |
| ||||
| PSI | 0.565 | 0.570 |
| |||
| SIT | 0.706 | 0.736 | 0.725 |
| ||
| TR | 0.390 | 0.406 | 0.532 | 0.619 |
| |
| CI | 0.321 | 0.374 | 0.394 | 0.571 | 0.634 |
|
Note 1: IM = Image; PCM = Perceived critical mass; PSI = Para-social interaction; SIT = Social interaction tie; TR = Trust; CI = Continuance intention; Note 2: Diagonal elements in bold are the square root of average variance extracted (AVE) between the constructs and their indicators. Offdiagonal elements are correlations between the constructs.
HTMT matrix.
| Construct | IM | PCM | PSI | SIT | TR | CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IM | ||||||
| PCM | 0.545 | |||||
| PSI | 0.566 | 0.571 | ||||
| SIT | 0.708 | 0.735 | 0.725 | |||
| TR | 0.391 | 0.405 | 0.533 | 0.619 | ||
| CI | 0.321 | 0.373 | 0.394 | 0.568 | 0.634 |
Note: IM = Image; PCM = Perceived critical mass; PSI = Para-social interaction; SIT = Social interaction tie; TR = Trust; CI = Continuance intention.
Path coefficients and its significances.
| Path | Standardized Path Coefficient | Standard Deviation | T Statistics | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1: PCM -> SIT | 0.357 *** | 0.034 | 10.411 | 0.000 |
| H2: PCM -> CI | 0.024 | 0.051 | 0.464 | 0.643 |
| H3: IM -> SIT | 0.266 *** | 0.042 | 6.396 | 0.000 |
| H4: IM -> CI | −0.037 | 0.049 | 0.747 | 0.455 |
| H5: PSI -> SIT | 0.319 *** | 0.050 | 6.349 | 0.000 |
| H6: PSI -> CI | −0.017 | 0.055 | 0.308 | 0.758 |
| H7: SIT -> TR | 0.515 *** | 0.047 | 10.954 | 0.000 |
| H8: SIT -> CI | 0.309 *** | 0.079 | 3.892 | 0.000 |
| H9: TR -> CI | 0.387 *** | 0.050 | 7.778 | 0.000 |
Note 1: IM = Image; PCM = Perceived critical mass; PSI = Para-social interaction; SIT = Social interaction tie; TR = Trust; CI = Continuance intention; Note 2: *** p-value < 0.001.
Path coefficients and its significances.
| Mediation Path | Z-Value of Sobel Test | Indirect Effect (IE) | Direct Effect (DE) | Mediation Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SIT -> TR -> CI | 6.564 *** | 0.197 *** | 0.493 *** | Partial mediation |
| PCM -> SIT -> TR | 6.796 *** | 0.321 *** | 0.029 | Full mediation |
| PCM -> SIT -> CI | 6.242 *** | 0.308 *** | 0.025 | Full mediation |
| IM -> SIT -> TR | 7.459 *** | 0.294 *** | 0.025 | Full mediation |
| IM -> SIT -> CI | 6.601 *** | 0.298 *** | −0.027 | Full mediation |
| PSI -> SIT -> TR | 5.574 *** | 0.239 *** | 0.215 ** | Partial mediation |
| PSI -> SIT -> CI | 5.999 *** | 0.287 *** | 0.061 | Full mediation |
Note 1: IM = Image; PCM = Perceived critical mass; PSI = Para-social interaction; SIT = Social interaction tie; TR = Trust; CI = Continuance intention; Note 2: ** p-value< 0.01; *** p-value< 0.001.