| Literature DB >> 35432063 |
Jiahua Wei1, Zhenyu Wang1, Zhiping Hou1, Yongheng Meng1.
Abstract
The service failure of online shopping has always plagued online stores, but the current academic circles still need to explore the service recovery of online shopping from the perspective of empathy and consumer forgiveness. Based on the service failure cases of real online shopping, this article uses the method of situational experiment to carry out empirical research, discusses the impact mechanism of service recovery effect from the perspective of empathy and consumer forgiveness, and tests the moderating role of online store reputation. The results show that in the online shopping service recovery scenario, empathy has a positive impact on consumer forgiveness, consumer forgiveness has a positive impact on consumer repurchase intention, and consumer forgiveness plays a mediating effect between empathy and consumer repurchase intention. Online store reputation plays a moderating role in the relationship between consumer forgiveness and consumer repurchase intention. The research conclusion of this article will help to expand the application of empathy and consumer forgiveness in the research of service recovery, enrich the theory of online shopping service recovery, improve the effect of online shopping service recovery, and promote the healthy development of online shopping business models.Entities:
Keywords: consumer forgiveness; consumers repurchase intention; empathy; online shopping; service recovery
Year: 2022 PMID: 35432063 PMCID: PMC9007167 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.842207
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
FIGURE 1Research model.
Sample statistics.
| One class indicators | Two class indicators | Sample size | Percentage | One class indicators | Two class indicators | Sample size | Percentage |
| Gender | Male | 121 | 48.98% | Education | Middle and primary school | 94 | 38.06% |
| Female | 126 | 51.02% | College degree | 68 | 27.53% | ||
| Age | 18–25 years | 53 | 21.46% | Bachelor | 53 | 21.46% | |
| 26–35 years | 64 | 25.91% | Master | 24 | 9.72% | ||
| 36–45 years | 68 | 27.53% | Doctor | 8 | 3.24% | ||
| 46–59 years | 43 | 17.41% | Occupation | Civil servant | 18 | 7.29% | |
| Over 60 years | 19 | 7.69% | Professional | 53 | 21.46% | ||
| Online shopping years | Under 1 years | 50 | 20.24% | Enterprise staff | 64 | 25.91% | |
| 1–3 years | 77 | 31.17% | Farmer | 58 | 23.48% | ||
| 4–5 years | 64 | 25.91% | Student | 39 | 15.79% | ||
| Over 5 years | 56 | 22.67% | Other | 15 | 6.07% |
Test for reliability, convergent, and construct validity.
| Variables | Item | Normalized Load factor | Cronbach’s α | CR | AVE | |
| Empathy | (1) I understand the reasons for mistakes in online stores | 0.823 | 6.133 | |||
| (2) I can understand the difficulties of online stores | 0.768 | 4.043 | ||||
| (3) I would imagine what would happen if it were an online store | 0.674 | 3.224 | 0.812 | 0.877 | 0.589 | |
| (4) The service failure of the online store is just a case | 0.801 | 6.776 | ||||
| (5) Online stores are thinking about consumers | 0.764 | 2.904 | ||||
| Consumer forgiveness | (6) I agree with the service recovery of the online store | 0.819 | 5.533 | |||
| (7) I agree with the material compensation of the online store | 0.711 | 4.166 | ||||
| (8) I agree with the online store’s apology | 0.702 | 4.427 | 0.732 | 0.850 | 0.588 | |
| (9) I forgive the mistakes of the online store | 0.826 | 6.781 | ||||
| Online store reputation | (10) The online evaluation of the online store is very high | 0.635 | 2.272 | |||
| (11) People around me have recommended this online store to me | 0.714 | 4.305 | 0.746 | 0.814 | 0.524 | |
| (12) The online store has a good reputation | 0.738 | 4.795 | ||||
| (13) There are few negative news from online stores | 0.799 | 6.167 | ||||
| Consumer repurchase intention | (14) I am satisfied with the service of the online store | 0.819 | 4.081 | |||
| (15) I will continue to buy the goods of the online store | 0.857 | 5.433 | ||||
| (16) I will recommend the online store to the people around me | 0.794 | 3.768 | 0.829 | 0.915 | 0.682 | |
| (17) I will trust the online store more | 0.877 | 6.726 | ||||
| (18) I will become a loyal consumer of the online store | 0.779 | 4.265 |
Test for discriminant validity.
| Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| (1) Empathy | 0.767 | |||
| (2) Consumer forgiveness | 0.616 | 0.766 | ||
| (3) Online store reputation | 0.101 | 0.094 | 0.724 | |
| (4) Consumer repurchase intention | 0.496 | 0.668 | 0.622 | 0.826 |
The value on the diagonal is the square root of AVE, and other data are the correlation coefficients between corresponding variables.
Research model fit.
| Fit index | χ 2 | DF | χ 2/DF | CFI | TLI | SRMR | RMSEA |
| Index value | 317.043 | 149 | 2.128 | 0.941 | 0.944 | 0.035 | 0.053 |
Multilevel regression analysis.
| Variable | Consumer forgiveness | Consumer repurchase intention | |||
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | |
| Intercept | 3.004 | 2.839 | 2.698 | 3.371 | 3.726 |
| Gender | 0.111 | –0.052 | 0.109 | 0.103 | 0.098 |
| Age | 0.119 | –0.097 | –0.136 | –0.159 | –0.127 |
| Online shopping year | 0.083 | 0.113 | 0.124 | 0.141 | 0.079 |
| Education | 0.127 | 0.129 | 0.138 | 0.115 | 0.119 |
| Occupation | 0.023 | 0.037 | –0.137 | 0.099 | 0.034 |
| Empathy | 0.659 | ||||
|
| 0.626 | ||||
| Online store reputation | 0.214 | ||||
| Consumer | 0.341 | ||||
|
| 0.061 | 0.307 | 0.139 | 0.534 | 0.421 |
| Δ | 0.071 | 0.068 | 0.033 | ||
|
| 2.984 | 3.899 | 4.976 | 3.409 | 4.436 |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
FIGURE 2Moderating effect diagram.
Test results of mediating effect.
| Mediating effect path | Indirect effect value | Standard error | Upper limit | Lower limit | Effect proportion |
| Empathy → Consumer forgiveness → Consumer repurchase intention | 0.264 | 0.009 | 0.102 | 0.452 | 38.77% |
| Total effect | 0.681 | 0.012 | 0.387 | 0.785 | 100% |