| Literature DB >> 35837618 |
Peng Gao1, Yuanyuan Zeng1, Yu Cheng2.
Abstract
It has been found in many cases that consumers are prone to exhibit impulsive buying behavior that is manifested as being immediate, emotional, and irresponsible especially under short video scenario. Supported by the customer inspiration theory, this study explores the psychological mechanism underlying impulse purchase in short videos that differentiates the traditional web shopping by the strong sense of presence in short video marketing. On the basis of a questionnaire survey and three laboratory experiments, this study examines the relationship among presence, customer inspiration, and impulse purchase intention. The empirical results point to the fact that social presence, co-presence, and physical presence have significant positive effects on impulse purchase intention, and customer inspiration mediates the effect of social presence, physical presence, and co-presence on impulse purchase intention. Furthermore, it is indicated that social and co-presence have stronger influences on impulse purchase intention than physical presence, thus proving a stronger effect of social factors on impulse purchase intention than physical factors in short video environment. The research results testify the impact of presence on consumer behavior in the upgrading short video marketing and provide valuable reference for marketing strategies to shorten consumers' decision-making time in short video purchase.Entities:
Keywords: customer inspiration; impulse purchase; presence; short video; social factors
Year: 2022 PMID: 35837618 PMCID: PMC9275553 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.870635
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Impact factors of impulse purchase.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Marketing incentive | Tactile | Peck and Childers, |
| Price discount | Hong and Zhe, | |
| Commodity price | Xiong, | |
| New product trial | Liu and Fan, | |
| Individual characteristic | Impulse purchase | Beatty and Ferrell, |
| Shopping pleasure | Dholakia, | |
| Self-discrepancy of consumers | Luna-Arocas, | |
| Income | Abratt and Goodey, | |
| Age | Rawlings et al., | |
| Consumption situation | Normative | Rook and Fisher, |
| Presence of others in shopping | Luo, | |
| Face threat | Yang et al., | |
| Authenticity, entertainment and visibility of online live-streaming | Liu et al., | |
| Sense of power | Liu, |
Figure 1Conceptual model.
Sample characteristics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0–18 | 2% | Gender | Male | 48.94% |
| 18–25 | 63% | Female | 51.06% | ||
| 26–30 | 10% | Number of online purchase | 0–3 | 48% | |
| 31–40 | 19% | 4–6 | 32% | ||
| 40+ | 6% | 7–10 | 9% | ||
| Education background | Master degree or above | 37% | 10+ | 11% | |
| Bachelor degree | 57% | Monthly | ¥0–3,000 | 56% | |
| Associate degree | 4% | ¥3,000–6,000 | 13% | ||
| High school degree or less | 2% | 6,000-10,000 | 18% | ||
| ¥10,000 | 13% | ||||
| Total | 100% |
Results of reliability analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Social presence | sp1 | 0.878 | 0.759 | 0.832 |
| sp2 | 0.776 | 0.817 | ||
| sp3 | 0.758 | 0.832 | ||
| Co-presence | cp1 | 0.845 | 0.703 | 0.792 |
| cp2 | 0.759 | 0.737 | ||
| cp3 | 0.674 | 0.821 | ||
| Physical presence | pp1 | 0.878 | 0.779 | 0.815 |
| pp2 | 0.821 | 0.778 | ||
| pp3 | 0.698 | 0.886 | ||
| Customer inspiration | ci1 | 0.937 | 0.742 | 0.930 |
| ci2 | 0.680 | 0.933 | ||
| ci3 | 0.770 | 0.929 | ||
| ci4 | 0.725 | 0.931 | ||
| ci5 | 0.642 | 0.935 | ||
| ci6 | 0.745 | 0.930 | ||
| ci7 | 0.786 | 0.928 | ||
| ci8 | 0.802 | 0.927 | ||
| ci9 | 0.773 | 0.929 | ||
| ci10 | 0.790 | 0.928 | ||
| Impulse purchase intention | ibm1 | 0.911 | 0.705 | 0.900 |
| ibm2 | 0.749 | 0.895 | ||
| ibm3 | 0.717 | 0.898 | ||
| ibm4 | 0.691 | 0.901 | ||
| ibm5 | 0.763 | 0.893 | ||
| ibm6 | 0.755 | 0.894 | ||
| ibm7 | 0.726 | 0.897 |
Results of KMO measure and bartlett test of sphericity.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Physical presence | 0.715 | 0.7 | 0.000 |
| Social presence | 0.743 | 0.000 | |
| Co-presence | 0.716 | 0.000 | |
| Customer inspiration | 0.915 | 0.000 | |
| Impulse purchase intention | 0.897 | 0.000 |
Convergence validity test of measurement model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Social presence | sp1 | 1 | 0.832 | 0.878 | 0.7063163 | |||
| sp2 | 0.979 | 0.065 | 15.144 | *** | 0.858 | |||
| sp3 | 0.968 | 0.065 | 14.834 | *** | 0.831 | |||
| Co-presence | cp1 | 1 | 0.788 | 0.845 | 0.650988 | |||
| cp2 | 1.152 | 0.09 | 12.86 | *** | 0.884 | |||
| cp3 | 0.998 | 0.082 | 12.098 | *** | 0.742 | |||
| Physical presence | pp1 | 1 | 0.858 | 0.878 | 0.7154763 | |||
| pp2 | 1.049 | 0.062 | 16.805 | *** | 0.928 | |||
| pp3 | 0.856 | 0.061 | 13.966 | *** | 0.741 | |||
| Customer inspiration | ci1 | 1 | 0.791 | 0.937 | 0.6780494 | |||
| ci2 | 0.961 | 0.081 | 12.445 | *** | 0.796 | |||
| ci3 | 0.926 | 0.084 | 12.99 | *** | 0.796 | |||
| ci4 | 0.964 | 0.078 | 11.746 | *** | 0.719 | |||
| ci5 | 0.933 | 0.075 | 11.886 | *** | 0.737 | |||
| ci6 | 0.992 | 0.078 | 10.179 | *** | 0.748 | |||
| ci7 | 1.238 | 0.092 | 13.389 | *** | 0.881 | |||
| ci8 | 1.261 | 0.092 | 13.774 | *** | 0.915 | |||
| ci9 | 1.285 | 0.095 | 13.54 | *** | 0.9 | |||
| ci10 | 1.329 | 0.096 | 13.8 | *** | 0.919 | |||
| Impulse purchase intention | ibm1 | 1 | 0.734 | 0.911 | 0.5935749 | |||
| ibm2 | 1.001 | 0.079 | 12.659 | *** | 0.781 | |||
| ibm3 | 0.974 | 0.081 | 12.068 | *** | 0.751 | |||
| ibm4 | 0.99 | 0.085 | 11.686 | *** | 0.719 | |||
| ibm5 | 1.191 | 0.092 | 12.926 | *** | 0.811 | |||
| ibm6 | 1.108 | 0.087 | 12.782 | *** | 0.81 | |||
| ibm7 | 1.047 | 0.085 | 12.337 | *** | 0.782 |
***Significant when p <0.001.
Discriminant validity test between variables.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||||
| Social presence |
| ||||
| Co-presence | 0.479*** |
| |||
| Physical presence | 0.470*** | 0.421*** |
| ||
| Customer inspiration | 0.264*** | 0.293*** | 0.454*** |
| |
| Impulse purchase intention | 0.333*** | 0.406*** | 0.316*** | 0.336*** |
|
.
Results of main effect calculation and goodness of fit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
| M1 | Social presence | Impulse purchase intention | 0.330*** | 0.079 | 3.939 | H1a | 2.706 | 0.912 | 0.893 | 0.943 | 0.943 | 0.080 |
| Co-presence | Impulse purchase intention | 0.373*** | 0.117 | 3.332 | H1b | |||||||
| Physical presence | Impulse purchase intention | 0.241** | 0.112 | 2.820 | H1c | |||||||
**Indicates significance level P <0.01, ***Indicates significance level P <0.001.
Results of mediating effect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
| M2 | H2a | Social presence | Impulse purchase intention | Total effect | 0.589 | 0.068 | 8.662 | 0.460 | 0.728 | 0.455 | 0.725 | Social presence → |
| Indirect effect | 0.364 | 0.068 | 5.353 | 0.243 | 0.509 | 0.237 | 0.503 | Impulse purchase | ||||
| M3 | H2b | Co-presence | Impulse purchase intention | Total effect | 0.702 | 0.078 | 9.000 | 0.553 | 0.860 | 0.547 | 0.857 | Co-presence → |
| Indirect effect | 0.410 | 0.084 | 4.881 | 0.260 | 0.586 | 0.257 | 0.583 | Impulse purchase | ||||
| M4 | H2c | Physical presence | Impulse purchase intention | Total effect | 0.557 | 0.069 | 8.072 | 0.418 | 0.693 | 0.423 | 0.700 | Physical presence → |
| Indirect effect | 0.411 | 0.076 | 5.408 | 0.278 | 0.579 | 0.276 | 0.573 | Impulse purchase | ||||
Figure 2A1 Screenshot of high social presence.
Figure 3A2 Screenshot of low social presence.
Figure 4Impact of social presence on impulse purchase intention.
Figure 5B1 Screenshot of high co-presence.
Figure 6B2 Screenshot of low co-presence.
Figure 7Impact of co-presence on impulse purchase intention.
Figure 8C1 Screenshot of high physical presence.
Figure 9C2 Screenshot of low physical presence.
Figure 10Impact of physical presence on impulse purchase intention.