| Literature DB >> 36185777 |
Manu Sharma1,2, Sudhanshu Joshi3,4, Sunil Luthra5, Anil Kumar2.
Abstract
The rising population of millennials, coupled with Digital Assistants (DA) and online purchasing trends among consumers have gained increasing attention by global marketers. The study evaluates the influence of DA attributes on the purchasing intention (PUI) of millennials. A combined approach of PLS-SEM, Artificial Neural Network (ANN) and Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) is used to predict the PUI of 345 millennials. Also, multi-group analysis is employed to uncover the influence of gender on the relationship between PUI and DA attributes. The findings suggest that DA attributes may amplify purchasing intention among millennials, especially through perceived interactivity and anthropomorphism. Further, the moderating role of gender was found significant on the inter-relationship of perceived interactivity and PUI. This research is a pioneer study in the area of artificial intelligence, conversational commerce, DA and AI-powered chatbots. This study will help marketers and practitioners to predict millennial purchasing intentions. An evaluation of this paper may help them to foster immersive and effective engagement through DA.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial intelligence; Artificial neural network; Chatbots; Conversational commerce; Customer purchase; Interactivity; Millennials
Year: 2022 PMID: 36185777 PMCID: PMC9510515 DOI: 10.1007/s10796-022-10339-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Inf Syst Front ISSN: 1387-3326 Impact factor: 5.261
Fig. 1Conceptual model
Fig. 2Proposed research model
Demographic profile of the sample
| Categories | Frequency | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 232 | 67.3 |
| Female | 113 | 32.7 | |
| Age group | 18 to 24 yrs | 213 | 61.7 |
| 25 to 30 yrs | 96 | 27.8 | |
| 30 to yrs | 36 | 10.4 | |
| Education | Undergraduate | 44 | 12.8 |
| Graduate | 105 | 30.4 | |
| Postgraduate | 98 | 28.4 | |
| Professional | 98 | 28.4 | |
| Undergraduate | 44 | 12.8 | |
| Purchase through e-commerce | Once in 15 days | 55 | 15.9 |
| Twice in 15 days | 54 | 15.7 | |
| Once in a month | 66 | 19.1 | |
| Twice a month | 96 | 27.8 | |
| Once a week | 74 | 21.4 | |
| Exposure to digital assistant | High | 45 | 13.0 |
| Medium | 194 | 56.2 | |
| Low | 106 | 30.7 |
Fig. 6Truth Table
Fig. 7A sorted truth table in fsQCA based on raw consistency after removing combinations with low frequency
Fig. 3Measurement model
Cronbach’s Alpha, CR and AVE
| Cronbach's Alpha | rho_A | CR | AVE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IQ | 0.849 | 0.852 | 0.899 | 0.690 |
| PA | 0.834 | 0.836 | 0.900 | 0.751 |
| PI | 0.706 | 0.722 | 0.837 | 0.634 |
| SP | 0.822 | 0.836 | 0.894 | 0.739 |
| PUI | 0.855 | 0.860 | 0.896 | 0.633 |
IQ Information Quality, PA perceived Anthropomorphism, PI Perceived Interactivity, SP Social presence, PUI Purchase intention
Discriminant validity
| IQ | PA | PI | PUI | SP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IQ | 0.831 | ||||
| PA | 0.227 | 0.867 | |||
| PI | 0.302 | 0.574 | 0.796 | ||
| SP | 0.252 | 0.623 | 0.687 | 0.796 | |
| PUI | 0.171 | 0.687 | 0.637 | 0.62 | 0.86 |
HTMT ratio
| IQ | PA | PI | PUI | SP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IQ | |||||
| PA | 0.271 | ||||
| PI | 0.394 | 0.738 | |||
| PUI | 0.291 | 0.728 | 0.879 | ||
| SP | 0.201 | 0.816 | 0.836 | 0.733 |
Collinearity stats
| Outer | VIF |
|---|---|
| IQ1 | 2.126 |
| IQ2 | 2.401 |
| IQ3 | 2.517 |
| IQ4 | 1.431 |
| PA1 | 2.091 |
| PA2 | 2.468 |
| PA3 | 1.699 |
| PI1 | 1.763 |
| PI2 | 1.612 |
| PI3 | 1.214 |
| PU1 | 2.101 |
| PU2 | 1.901 |
| PU3 | 2.023 |
| PU4 | 1.784 |
| PU5 | 1.690 |
| SP1 | 2.335 |
| SP2 | 2.525 |
| SP3 | 1.499 |
Bootstrapping results for structural model
| Original Sample (O) | Sample Mean (M) | Standard Deviation (STDEV) | Significance | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1: PA—> PUI | 0.257 | 0.257 | 0.055 | 4.705 | 0.000 | *** |
| H2: SP—> PUI | 0.170 | 0.171 | 0.052 | 3.234 | 0.000 | *** |
| H3: PI—> PUI | 0.420 | 0.420 | 0.049 | 8.495 | 0.000 | *** |
| H4: IQ—> PUI | 0.038 | 0.041 | 0.037 | 1.025 | 0.306 |
*** indicates p < 0.05; significant; IQ Information Quality, PA perceived Anthropomorphism, PI Perceived Interactivity, SP Social presence, PUI Purchase intention
A multi-group analysis
| Path Coefficients-diff (female—male) | p-Value original 1-tailed (female vs male) | p-Value new (female vs male) | Significance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PA—> PUI | -0.028 | 0.605 | 0.790 | |
| PI—> PUI | 0.0207 | 0.017 | 0.034 | *** |
| SP—> PUI | -0.095 | 0.813 | 0.374 | |
| IQ—> PUI | 0.007 | 0.462 | 0.923 |
*** indicates p < 0.05; significant; IQ Information Quality, PA perceived Anthropomorphism, PI Perceived Interactivity, SP Social presence, PUI Purchase intention
Fig. 4ANN model
Fig. 5RMSE values (training and test data)
ANN model results
| ANN models | IQ | PA | PI | SP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANN1 | 0.00 | 0.44 | 1.00 | 0.41 |
| ANN2 | 0.08 | 0.20 | 1.00 | 0.17 |
| ANN3 | 0.08 | 0.44 | 1.00 | 0.21 |
| ANN4 | 0.09 | 0.20 | 1.00 | 0.35 |
| ANN5 | 0.01 | 0.34 | 1.00 | 0.30 |
| ANN6 | 0.21 | 0.65 | 1.00 | 0.53 |
| ANN7 | 0.01 | 0.33 | 1.00 | 0.20 |
| ANN8 | 0.05 | 0.33 | 1.00 | 0.56 |
| ANN9 | 0.10 | 0.36 | 1.00 | 0.15 |
| ANN10 | 0.13 | 0.42 | 1.00 | 0.29 |
| Mean | 0.08 | 0.37 | 1.00 | 0.32 |
| Normalized | 8% | 37% | 100% | 32% |
IQ Information Quality, PA Perceived Anthropomorphism, PI Perceived Interactivity, SP Social presence, PUI Purchase intention
Fig. 8Complex solution. Note: IQ Information Quality, PA Perceived Anthropomorphism, PI Perceived Interactivity, SP Social presence, PUI Purchase intention
Fig. 9Parsimonious solution. Note: IQ Information Quality, PA Perceived Anthropomorphism, PI Perceived Interactivity, SP Social presence, PUI Purchase intention
Fig. 10Intermediate solution. Note: IQ Information Quality, PA Perceived Anthropomorphism, PI Perceived Interactivity, SP Social presence, PUI Purchase intention
fsQCA Results
| Solution | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Configuration | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Information Quality | ⊗ | ||
| Perceived Anthropomorphism | ⊗ | ||
| Perceived Interactivity | |||
| Social presence | ⊗ | ||
| Consistency | 0.887519 | 0.823859 | 0.928026 |
| raw coverage | 0.750329 | 0.238064 | 0.340561 |
| unique coverage | 0.451905 | 0.0103811 | 0.100131 |
| Overall solution coverage: | 0.877179 | ||
| Overall solution consistency: | 0.870052 | ||
black circle (●) indicates the presence of a condition; crossed-out circle ( ⊗) indicates the absence/negation whereas blank space denotes “do not care” condition
Comparative results of PLS-SEM, ANN and fsQCA
| PLS SEM findings | ANN findings | fsQCA findings |
|---|---|---|
| PA attribute of AI powered digital assistants has a significant effect on the PUI of the millennials | PA has a 37% relative importance and second highest for PUI of millennials | PA is present in one conditions out of three conditions that explains the PUI of the millennials |
| SP attribute of AI powered digital assistants has a significant effect on the PUI of the millennials | SP has a 32% relative importance and second highest for PUI of millennials | SP is present in one condition out of three conditions that explains the PUI of the millennials |
| PI attribute of AI powered digital assistants has a significant effect on the PUI of the millennials | PI has a 100% relative importance and second highest for PUI of millennials | PI is present in two conditions out of three conditions that explain the PUI of the millennials |
| IQ attribute of AI powered digital assistants has an insignificant effect on the PUI of the millennials | IQ has only 8% relative importance and least rated for PUI of millennials | IQ is present in one condition out of three conditions that explain the PUI of the millennials. Also, IQ is absent in the core conditions |
| The single solution obtained is the best solution | Multiple solutions are possible and may refer to different types of users | |