| Literature DB >> 36059728 |
Xuemei Xie1, Luyao Liu1.
Abstract
Frequent human-media interaction via the electronic word-of-mouth (e-wom) platform, trust is acknowledged as an ongoing challenge. This study aimed to understand users' trust in the e-wom platform based on uses and gratifications theory and stimulus-organism-response (S-O-R) paradigm. Utilitarian gratification (perceived information quality and perceived privacy protection) was regarded as stimulus, social gratification (sense of social belonging and sense of self-esteem) and positive emotion as organism, and platform trust as response. Data was acquired from 268 users in China using a questionnaire survey, and the PLS-SEM was used to further analyze the results. The results indicated that there is a hierarchy relationship between types of gratifications. That is, utilitarian gratification is a premise of social gratification. Moreover, sense of self-esteem and positive emotion have a mediating effect between perceived information quality and platform trust. Sense of social belonging and positive emotion have a mediating effect between perceived privacy protection and platform trust. This study not only broadened trust between human and media, but also purposed a hierarchy relationship of different types of gratifications in e-wom platform.Entities:
Keywords: S-O-R paradigm; e-wom platform; gratification; platform trust; positive emotion
Year: 2022 PMID: 36059728 PMCID: PMC9434003 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.953232
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1Theoretical model.
Item and source.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived information quality (PIQ) | PIQ1 | I think the word-of-mouth information within this platform is reliable | Kim et al., |
| PIQ2 | I think the word-of-mouth information within this platform is useful. | ||
| PIQ3 | I think the word-of-mouth information within this platform is of high quality. | ||
| Perceived privacy protection (PPP) | PPP1 | I think this platform will not use my personal information for other purposes without my authorization. | Kim et al., |
| PPP2 | I think this platform will not share my personal information with other entities without my authorization. | ||
| PPP3 | I think unauthorized persons have not access to my personal information. | ||
| Sense of social belonging (SSB) | SB1 | I enjoy being a member of this platform. | Lin, |
| SB2 | I am very committed to this platform. | ||
| SB3 | I enjoy this platform that has a high level of morale. | ||
| SB4 | I feel a strong sense of social belonging to this platform. | ||
| Sense of self-esteem (SSE) | SE1 | I more recognize myself in the process of using the e-wom platform. | Rosenberg, |
| SE2 | I feel good about myself in the process of using the e-wom platform. | ||
| SE3 | I earn respect for myself in the process of using the e-wom platform. | ||
| Positive emotion (PE) | PE1 | I feel happy in the process of using the e-wom platform. | Fredrickson, |
| PE2 | I feel positive in the process of using the e-wom platform. | ||
| PE3 | I feel interested in the process of using the e-wom platform. | ||
| Platform trust (PT) | TR1 | I believe that this platform keeps its promises and commitment. | Suh and Han, |
| TR2 | I believe that this platform meets users' expectations. | ||
| TR3 | I believe that this platform keeps users' best interests in minds. |
Demographic of respondents (N = 268).
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Male | 136 | 50.75 |
| Female | 132 | 49.25 |
|
| ||
| 18–25 years old | 135 | 50.37 |
| 26–35 years old | 123 | 45.90 |
| 36–45 years old | 10 | 3.73 |
|
| ||
| College and bachelor's degree | 124 | 46.27 |
| Master's degree | 114 | 42.54 |
| Doctor's degree | 30 | 11.20 |
|
| ||
| Once a day or more | 118 | 44.03 |
| 2–3 times a week | 83 | 30.97 |
| Once a week | 11 | 4.10 |
| 2–3 times a month | 28 | 10.45 |
| Once a month or less | 28 | 10.45 |
Measurement model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIQ | PIQ1 | 0.853 | 0.831 | 0.898 | 0.745 |
| PIQ2 | 0.840 | ||||
| PIQ3 | 0.896 | ||||
| PPP | PPP1 | 0.906 | 0.900 | 0.937 | 0.833 |
| PPP2 | 0.933 | ||||
| PPP3 | 0.899 | ||||
| SSB | SSB1 | 0.845 | 0.887 | 0.922 | 0.746 |
| SSB2 | 0.880 | ||||
| SSB3 | 0.881 | ||||
| SSB4 | 0.849 | ||||
| SSE | SSE1 | 0.939 | 0.927 | 0.954 | 0.873 |
| SSE2 | 0.947 | ||||
| SSE3 | 0.917 | ||||
| PE | PE1 | 0.898 | 0.834 | 0.900 | 0.749 |
| PE2 | 0.862 | ||||
| PE3 | 0.836 | ||||
| PT | PT1 | 0.882 | 0.830 | 0.898 | 0.746 |
| PT2 | 0.860 | ||||
| PT3 | 0.849 |
Analysis of discriminant validity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIQ | 0.863 | |||||
| PPP | 0.220 | 0.912 | ||||
| PT | 0.463 | 0.410 | 0.864 | |||
| PE | 0.403 | 0.160 | 0.418 | 0.866 | ||
| SSE | 0.289 | 0.214 | 0.381 | 0.554 | 0.934 | |
| SSB | 0.232 | 0.246 | 0.330 | 0.562 | 0.628 | 0.864 |
Hypothesis testing and strength of the model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| H1 | PIQ ->SSB | 0.187 | 0.193 | 0.073 | 2.581* | 0.008 | Supported |
| H2 | PIQ ->SSE | 0.255 | 0.258 | 0.070 | 3.646* | 0.000 | Supported |
| H3 | PPP ->SSB | 0.204 | 0.207 | 0.060 | 3.426* | 0.001 | Supported |
| H4 | PPP ->SSE | 0.158 | 0.161 | 0.060 | 2.625* | 0.008 | Supported |
| H5 | SSB ->PE | 0.353 | 0.357 | 0.054 | 6.580* | 0.000 | Supported |
| H6 | SSE ->PE | 0.332 | 0.330 | 0.054 | 6.164* | 0.000 | Supported |
| H7 | PE ->PT | 0.418 | 0.424 | 0.070 | 5.943* | 0.000 | Supported |
|
| |||||||
| H8a | PIQ ->SSB ->PE ->PT | 0.028 | 0.030 | 0.015 | 1.837 | 0.065 | Not supported |
| H8b | PIQ ->SSE ->PE ->PT | 0.035 | 0.037 | 0.016 | 2.200* | 0.026 | Supported |
| H9a | PPP ->SSB ->PE ->PT | 0.030 | 0.032 | 0.013 | 2.371* | 0.018 | Supported |
| H9b | PPP ->SSE ->PE ->PT | 0.028 | 0.022 | 0.011 | 1.911 | 0.055 | Not supported |
*t−value>1.96(p < 0.05).
R.
Q.
Figure 2Structural model results.
Figure 3Mediation model results.