Online Customer Experience in E-Retailing: Implications For Web Entrepreneurship

International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal (2019) 15:651–675
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-019-00564-x
Online customer experience in e-retailing: implications

for web entrepreneurship
Angela Eliza Micu 1 & Olfa Bouzaabia 2 & Rym Bouzaabia 3 & Adrian Micu 4 &
Alexandru Capatina 4
Published online: 18 January 2019

# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019
Abstract
Providing consumers with unique experiences and immersing them in original contexts
are the goals of web entrepreneurs. Researchers and web entrepreneurs have expressed
a particular interest in the online customer experience, agreeing on its importance in
creating satisfaction, revisiting intention, e-trust and e-loyalty. This paper explores
customer experience in the online retail context. The online customer experience is
central in forming customers’ perceptions of expectations of online retailers because
this experience is highly personal. However, empirical research on the online customer
experience remains scarce. The objectives of this unique study are twofold. The first is
to compare the effect of online customer experience on the responses of Romanian and
Tunisian customers. The comparative analysis is based on two dimensions of the online
customer experience assessment tool. These dimensions are cognitive experiential state
(flow) and affective experiential state. The second objective is to examine the contri-
bution of each of these two dimensions in explaining overall perceived value, e-
satisfaction, e-trust and repurchase intention in the online context, as well as their
effects on web entrepreneurial initiatives. The findings reveal the impact of cultural
influences on the constructs embedded in the research framework. The implications for
practice relate to the increasing importance of online customer experience in tailoring
online marketing campaigns. The implications for web entrepreneurship are clearly
emphasised by the pathways from online customer experience to entrepreneurial
initiatives. These pathways capture the value of customer-generated content in design-
ing innovative business models.
Keywords Online customer experience . E-satisfaction . Perceived value . E-trust . Online

repurchase intention . E-retailing . Cross-cultural studies
* Alexandru Capatina
acapatana@ugal.ro
Extended author information available on the last page of the article

652 International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal (2019) 15:651–675
Introduction
The use of the Internet by consumers and businesses has transformed the retailing market-
place (Grewal et al. 2009). Internet users can talk to people who are on the other side of the
globe, send emails around the clock, search for information, play games with others, buy
things online (Katawetawaraks and Wang 2011) and make transactions like never before.
A host of web entrepreneurs have fully embraced the Internet as a sales channel, and
they now seek to capitalise on their experiences and identify new levers of value
creation to differentiate themselves, increase their commercial performance and en-
hance customer satisfaction (Fabrice 2012; Henri 2013). Consequently, competition
between online retailers in such services has escalated. This competition is currently
based on improving customers’ service experience (Allred and Money 2010). Accord-
ingly, companies must focus on providing positive experiences to win the hearts and
minds of consumers (Pine and Gilmore 1998).
Providing consumers with unique experiences and immersing them in original
contexts on the Internet are the goals of today’s web entrepreneurs. Consumers are
increasingly sensitive to the subjective and symbolic nature of commercial sites. They
seek to immerse themselves in experiential contexts rather than just buying products or
services (Carù and Cova 2006).
Service researchers have recently developed an interest in the online customer experi-
ence, most often centred on the online retail environment (Hoffman and Novak 2009; Luo
et al. 2011; Rose et al. 2012). The importance of experience to the growth of online
shopping has similarly been reported (Elliot and Fowell 2000). Customers must be satisfied
with their online experience; otherwise, they will not return (Kim and Stoel 2004).
The purpose of the present research is to compare the effect of online customer
experience on Romanian and Tunisian consumers. Tunisia and Romania have different
economic and cultural backgrounds. Culturally, Romania and Tunisia are different in some
aspects and similar in others, in terms of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions (Bouzaabia et al.
2013). The Tunisian culture values collectivism (Kim et al. 1998). The traditional family
model is centred on social issues (Camilleri 1967). The family structure remains the basic
frame of reference for interacting with the outside world. Because Tunisia is a collectivist
society, involvement in online communities is greater than in any other country from the
Maghreb. Tunisians spend more time on online communities but less time shopping
because Tunisians are less flexible in their decision-making processes and prefer to avoid
risks, unlike Romanians, who seek innovation and creativity (Bouzaabia et al. 2013),
accept change more rapidly and take greater risks.
Tunisia is ranked 65th out of 201 countries in the Internet User Ranking by Country
(2016) published by the Internet Live Stats website. In June 2017, Tunisia had a
penetration rate of 50.9%, and in March 2017, the Internet penetration rate was
50.5%, according to Internetworldstats.com (2017). The online payment
infrastructure has been in operation in Tunisia since 2005. Social networks are at the
top of the list of Tunisian activities on the Internet: 89.1% of Internet users connect to
social networks. In addition, 61.8% of Internet users download movies or music, and
45% use the Internet to check email and use instant chat sites.
Romania is one of the fastest-growing information technology (IT) markets in
Central and Eastern Europe. Although studies of online shopping in Romania are
becoming increasingly common, online customer behaviour has scarcely been
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal (2019) 15:651–675 653
researched (Bighiu et al. 2015). In Romania, the Internet penetration rate was 73.5% in
December 2017 (InternetWorld Stats 2017).
Consumers’ motivations and intentions to shop at e-retailers from the perspective of
their personal-level cultural orientations are highly important (Allal-Chérif and Bidan
2017; Ryu and Fortenberry 2017). This research takes into consideration the cultural
orientations of consumers from both target countries.
The objectives of this unique study are twofold. The first is to compare the effect of
online customer experience on the responses of Romanian and Tunisian consumers.
The comparative analysis is based on two dimensions of the online consumer experi-
ence assessment tool: cognitive experiential state (flow) and affective experiential state.
The second objective is to examine the contribution of each of the two dimensions in
explaining overall perceived value, e-satisfaction, e-trust and online repurchase inten-
tion in the web entrepreneurship context. To the best of our knowledge, little is known
about the effects of online customer experience that might condition the relationship
between web entrepreneurship initiatives and online customer discovery.
In this paper, we first present the concepts addressed, our research hypotheses and the
research model. We then describe the method and present the main results. We conclude with
a discussion of the findings, managerial implications, limitations and research opportunities.
Theoretical background and development of hypotheses
Customer experience
Customer experience is used to build a competitive advantage that is difficult to imitate

(Pine and Gilmore 1998). Customer experience is considered important in forming
customers’ perceptions of expectations of online retailers (Pappas et al. 2014). Accord-
ingly, customer experience is strictly personal and entails the customer’s involvement at
different levels. Evaluating customer experience depends on the comparison between a
customer’s expectations and the stimuli from the interaction with the company and its
offering at the different moments of contact or touch-points.
The customer experience concept has been defined in numerous ways by both
scholars and practitioners (Frow and Payne 2007). Meyer and Schwager (2007, p.
118) define customer experience as ‘the internal and subjective response customers
have to any direct or indirect contact with a company’. Customer experience is often
theorised as a psychological construct: The psychological constructs of cognition and
affect have been identified in numerous aspects of customer experience (Edvardsson
2005). Such definitions and explanations identify customer experience with an internal
psychological state. Customer experience can therefore be assumed to be multidimen-
sional and individual to each customer (Gentile et al. 2007). Researchers, marketing
practitioners and consultants have long expressed an interest in customer experience,
agreeing on its importance in creating satisfaction, revisiting intention, trust (Shobeiri
et al. 2014) and loyalty (Edvarsson 2005). The analyses performed by Jin et al. (2018)
confirmed customer experience mediating roles of marketing capability in the entre-
preneurial orientation performance. Customer experience and satisfaction could be
perceived as subjective variables that arises from feelings and a comparison of what
customers get with what they expect to get (Suchánek and Králová 2018).
Online customer experience and web entrepreneurship
The Internet acts as a powerful catalyst for business initiatives, enabling entrepreneurs
to develop a professional collaborative culture that embraces the benefits of Internet
technologies, adopts e-satisfaction, e-trust and e-loyalty best practices, and assesses the
impact of online business on gaining sustainable competitive advantages (Allal-Chérif
and Bidan 2017; Capatina and Rancati 2017; Petrakis et al. 2017).
It has been argued that entrepreneurial initiatives are even more emotionally driven than
initiatives in other organisational settings (Fodor and Pintea 2017; Markin et al. 2017).
Affective online customer experiences are increasingly being acknowledged as important
drivers of performance in web entrepreneurship (Davidson and Vaast 2010). Successful
web entrepreneurs are aware that online customers’ impressions and actions are greatly
influenced by emotions, atmosphere and other elements experienced during interaction
with a given website. These elements are meant to affect the outcome of the online
interaction (Constantinides 2004). According to Merigó et al. (2013), Web 2.0 has led to
a new entrepreneurial communication paradigm by determining what needs to be devel-
oped to create entrepreneurial value from the online customer experience perspective.
Online customer experience is therefore an important concept for web entrepreneurs
responsible for launching start-ups in the online business-to-consumer (B2C) environ-
ment, particularly in the context of online purchasing, given the growth in online sales
(Rose et al. 2011).
Novak et al. (2000, p. 22) define online customer experience as the ‘cognitive state
experienced during navigation’. Rose et al. (2012, p. 309) conceptualise the online
customer experience as a ‘psychological state manifested as a subjective response to the
website’. Thus, online customer experience can be considered a psychological state
manifested as a subjective response to the web entrepreneur’s value proposition
(Gentile et al. 2007; Meyer and Schwager 2007).
Gentile et al. (2007, p. 398) define the cognitive experiential state as ‘the component
of online customer experience connected with thinking or conscious mental processes’
and the affective experiential state as the component of online customer experience that
‘involves one’s affective system through the generation of moods, feelings and emo-
tions’. Rose et al. (2012) identify the affective state of the experience with the state of
mind, and reveal the emotions and feelings generated in online transactions.
Cognitive experiential state is defined in this study as a flow state. Csikszentmihalyi
(1990, p. 72) defines flow as ‘the state in which people are so intensely involved in an
activity that nothing else seems to matter, the experience itself is so enjoyable that
people will do it at great cost, for the sheer sake of doing it’. A consumer in a state of
flow has a feeling of happiness, a sense of confidence, a desire for exploration (Volle
and Charfi 2011) and a distorted perception of time, which often occurs in the absence
of time constraints when conducting a specific activity that provides positive feedback
(Chou and Ting 2003). Research findings have shown hedonic motivations to have
powerful influences on shopping behavior in online environments (Jiang and
Rosenbloom 2005).
The state of flow is reflected by a high level of concentration, control, challenge,
pleasure and curiosity (Bridges and Florsheim 2008; Hoffman and Novak 2009).
Consumers immersed in an online environment strongly focus their attention, and they
find themselves in a state of mind that is extremely rewarding. The state of flow is
characterised by a distortion of time and the exclusion of daily concerns: the individual
‘temporarily loses self-awareness; his psychic energy is stimulated and diverted from
what needs to be done’ (Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi 1988, p.33). Flow is
commonly expressed in all individuals by focused concentration ready for fusion with
activity (Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi 1988, p.32). Online customer experi-
ence has a moderating effect on certain perceptions that have traditionally defined
attitude and intention to buy, as Hernandez et al. (2009) have proven. Perceived quality,
brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand association are considered precursors of
online customer experience (Gutiérrez Rodríguez et al. 2017).
In synthesis, this concept can be considered two-dimensional. The first dimension is
playfulness. It relates to sensory and emotional pleasures and self-enrichment. This
playfulness is an intrinsic motivation. The second dimension is concentration, which
manifests itself through rigorous filtering of thoughts and perceptions to limit attention
exclusively to those relevant to the activity (Gharbi et al. 2002).
Web Entrepreneurship literature has flourished in the last years, being focused on
innovative, proactive, and risk-seeking attitudes of the online businesses while they
explore and capture opportunities in the global markets (Martin and Javalgi 2018). The
prospective web entrepreneurs should be encouraged to form social networking con-
tacts since the established online businesses already have done this step (Olugbola
2017). Government policies should encourage web entrepreneurial initiatives manage
that create ties between highly innovative firms and technological centres, facilitating
knowledge sharing through a network of online ventures (Mas-Verdu et al. 2010).
Openness, creativity, and innovation are pillars of the cultural values adopted by the
web entrepreneurs (Tansky et al. 2010).
Web entrepreneurs might use modified forms of planning, such as customer devel-
opment in their quest to explore online customer experience (Simon and Kim 2017). A
web-based business model reflects the relationships between customer experience,
customer loyalty and perceived corporate sustainability as a complex construct
(Moisescu 2018). Since the e-commerce world is by no means homogenous, the
contextual elements besides cultural dimensions have great influence on web entrepre-
neurship development (Kedmenec and Strašek 2017).
The relationship between online customer experience and perceived value
The experience that the consumer seeks to live offers her or him a source of benefits
and perceived value. According to Ouvry and Ladwein (2006), analysis of the content
of the online acquisition process only makes sense in terms of the value the consumer
may receive. Perceived value is a relevant concept because it embraces all affective,
cognitive and sensory dimensions and enables identification of the benefits that users
derive from their online experience.
According to Mencarelli (2008), customer value allows us to understand the expe-
rience in a multidimensional way and provides a general framework for analysing the
experience. In this study, we focus on Babin et al.’s (1994) classification, which states
that perceived customer value comprises two dimensions: utilitarian and hedonic.
The utilitarian dimension refers to situations where the consumer acts rationally and
with focus, purchasing in a fast, efficient and effective manner (Sherry Jr. 1990). The
hedonistic dimension of perceived value is emphasised in Holbrook and Hirschman’s
(1982) experiential approach, which postulates that the customer shopping experience
is in itself a source of hedonic reward (Aurier et al. 2004). It corresponds to the
subjective aspect of the shopping experience, which includes pleasure, fascination
and escape (Holbrook and Hirschman 1982).
Perceived customer value depends not only on the product consumed but also on the
way the experience takes place overall (Minvielle and Mars 2010). Therefore, we
propose the following:
H1: Online customer experience affects perceived value.
H1a: Cognitive state influences perceived value.
H1b: Affective experiential state influences perceived value.
The relationship between online customer experience and e-satisfaction
Anderson and Srinivasan (2003, p. 125) define online customer satisfaction as ‘the
perceived degree of contentment with regard to a customer’s prior purchase experience
with a given electronic commerce firm’. Meyer and Schwager (2007, p. 2) view
customer satisfaction as a measure of ‘the culmination of a series of customer experi-
ences or, one could say, the net result of the good ones minus the bad ones’.
Web entrepreneurs build their business models on the idea that online customers are
looking for unique experiences. Furthermore, online customers are looking for strate-
gies to reduce cognitive dissonance, which might occur, for example, when a consumer
purchases an item available on an online store and, shortly afterwards, is not fully
satisfied, wondering if another item might have brought greater e-satisfaction (Mir-
Bernal 2017).
Both cognition and affect have been identified in the formation of customer e-
satisfaction in cumulative experiences (Homburg et al. 2006). This finding indicates a
strong association between online customer experience and the level of customer e-
satisfaction. Therefore, we propose the following:
H2: Online customer experience affects e-satisfaction.
H2a: Affective experiential state influences e-satisfaction.
H2b: Cognitive experiential state influences e-satisfaction.
The relationship between online customer experience and e-trust
Morgan and Hunt (1994, p. 26) characterise trust as what occurs when ‘one party has
confidence in the exchange partner’s reliability and integrity’. Trust in web-based
vendors is a critical success factor in online commerce (Torkzadeh and Dhillon
2002). Customers must feel safe and secure if they are to shop online, and it is the
seller’s duty to develop and retain customers’ trust (Palvia 2009). Overall, trust
positively affects customers’ attitudes towards the company. Customers who trust a
company are more likely to buy from its website (Koufaris and Hampton-Sosa 2004).
Customers usually expect websites to offer them not only a message but also a
positive experience (Ha 2004). Indeed, Michell et al. (1998) view experience as an
important variable because it plays a role in trust by enabling the comparison of the
realities of the firm with pre-conceived expectations. Therefore, we propose the
following:
H3: Online customer experience influences e-trust.
H3a: Affective experiential state positively influences e-trust.

H3b: Cognitive experiential state positively influences e-trust.
The relationship between e-trust and online repurchase intention
Trust in websites plays an important role in e-commerce because consumers are

unlikely to shop online if they do not trust the seller’s website (Boyer and Nefzi
2008; Kim et al. 2008, 2011). Indeed, trust seems to be another important antecedent
of loyalty (Reichheld and Schefter 2000). It appears to be particularly important when
‘the perceived level of risk’ is high (Anderson and Srinivasan 2003, p. 127). This is the
case when customers make purchases online because they lack direct contact with the
company (i.e. the sales staff or store) (Reichheld and Schefter 2000). Morgan and Hunt
(1994) affirm that trust can (1) preserve long-term relationships, (2) resist competing
alternatives and (3) reduce terms-of-trade uncertainty. Trust even provides the founda-
tions for loyalty (Berry 1993).
Lee et al. (2000) report that loyalty depends directly on the degree of trust; the more
confident customers are, the more loyal they will be. Similarly, according to Reichheld
and Schefter (2000), consumer loyalty on the Internet is even more imperative than in
any other mode of distribution and, as always, requires earning customers’ trust.
Therefore, we propose the following:
H4: E-trust positively affects online repurchase intention.
The relationship between e-satisfaction and online repurchase intention
According to Allagui and Temessek (2005), the theoretical foundations of loyalty to an

Internet business are similar to those of traditional loyalty. Anderson and Srinivasan
(2003, p.25) define e-fidelity as ‘the customer’s favorable attitude towards an electronic
commerce leading to redemption behavior’. The marketing literature has placed a high
value on the relationship between consumer satisfaction and loyalty (Anderson and
Sullivan 1993). Scholars have suggested that consumer satisfaction is a prerequisite for
fidelity (Anderson et al. 1994; Bolton and Drew 1994; Fornell 1992; Oliver 1980; Rust
et al. 1995). A prominent role in consumer e-satisfaction assessments is determined by
website design and convenience (Szymanski and Hise 2000).
Indeed, the relationship between satisfaction and loyalty is a pillar of consumer
behaviour. The logic of this relationship is obvious: Satisfied customers are more likely
to buy things than unsatisfied customers are (Cho et al. 2002). According to numerous
studies reviewed by Ngobo (2000), improving satisfaction has certain effects on
consumer behaviour. Companies’ supportive attitudes lead to client satisfaction, which
is usually considered a primary driver of loyalty (Anderson et al. 1994; Ellinger et al.
1999; Oliver 1999).
Although gaining loyal customers on the Internet is difficult (Gommans et al. 2001),
several studies suggest that the relationship between satisfaction and loyalty is stronger
and more important in distance selling than in traditional services (Shankar et al. 2003;
Van Riel et al. 2001). Khalifa and Liu (2007) report a positive relationship between
online shopping experiences and online repurchase intention. Therefore, we propose
the following:
H5: E-satisfaction positively affects online repurchase intention.
Fig. 1 Conceptual model
The relationship between perceived value and e-trust
Trust in a commercial website is defined as the customer’s expectation that the

electronic merchant will not exploit the customer’s vulnerability and will honour the
commitments it promises on the site (Chouk and Perrien 2003). Perceived value is
induced by the profits and losses generated during the shopping experience. Babin et al.
(1994) affirm that consumption activities produce both hedonic and utilitarian out-
comes. Thus, consumers should trust an online website when it can provide high
utilitarian and hedonic value.
From a web entrepreneurial perspective, e-trust enables a better knowledge of
customer perceptions of a brand, a better fit between products and customers’ expec-
tations and a real transformation of a start-up into a truly customer-oriented firm (Dutot
and Castellano 2017). Therefore, we propose the following:
H6: Perceived value positively affects e-trust.
The relationship between perceived value and e-satisfaction
Cyr et al. (2008) point out that e-satisfaction is an overall assessment of the website’s
ability to meet the needs and expectations of online users. According to a study by
Table 1 Regression analysis with hedonic value as the dependent variable (Romanian sample)
Standardised coefficients t Sig.
AES .348 5.432 .000

CES .097 1.906 .154
Adjusted R squared .138
AES, affective experiential state; CES, cognitive experiential state

Table 2 Regression analysis with utilitarian value as the dependent variable (Romanian sample)
AES .359 5.226 .000

CES .041 0.598 .551
Anderson and Fornell (1994), perceived value, a variable that was previously predicted
to influence satisfaction, has direct causality with customer satisfaction. A similar
conclusion has also been reported in studies of online shopping websites and e-
commerce (Hsu 2006; Yang and Peterson 2004). Therefore, we propose the following:
H7: Perceived value positively affects e-satisfaction.
The relationship between perceived value and online repurchase intention
In recent years, perceived value has attracted considerable attention as an important

construct in predicting consumer buying behaviour (Anderson and Srinivasan 2003).
Babin et al. (1994) further suggest that hedonic value and utilitarian value are important
outcomes influencing future consumer decisions through feedback loops in consumer
decision processes. Similar empirical results have supported such a perspective by
demonstrating that perceived value leads to repurchase intentions (e.g. Chang and
Wildt 1994). Indeed, online shoppers develop repeat purchase intentions towards an
online shopping website if the website can provide high utilitarian and hedonic value.
Research has also shown the importance of utilitarian and hedonic value in driving
repeat purchase intention. Therefore, we propose the following:
H8: Perceived value positively affects online repurchase intention.
Figure 1 summarises the hypotheses in the form of a conceptual model.
Method
Sample and data collection
An online questionnaire was used to collect the data. We used convenience sampling.
The sample comprised 400 online shoppers (200 Tunisian online shoppers and 200
Table 3 Regression analysis with hedonic value as the dependent variable (Tunisian sample)
AES .361 5.323 .000

CES .071 1.040 .299

Table 4 Regression analysis with utilitarian value as the dependent variable (Tunisian sample)
AES .357 5.225 .000

CES .040 .589 .557
Romanian online shoppers). Given the limited sample size compared to the market
potential and the chosen sampling method (convenience), we must exercise caution
when generalising our findings. In both countries, we sent the invitation to complete the
online questionnaire to people with social media accounts.
In the Romanian sample, 63% of respondents were women and 37% were men. In terms
of age, 3% were aged over 55 years, 13.5% were aged between 45 and 54 years, 28.5%
were aged between 35 and 44 years, 29.5% were aged between 25 and 34 years, and 25.5%
were aged under 25 years. Most respondents (72.0%) had been enrolled in higher
education. Concerning the number of products purchased annually, 22.5% bought 1 to 6
products, 34.5% bought 7 to 10 products and 43% bought more than 10 products.
The Tunisian sample consisted of 53% women and 47% men. Regarding age, no
respondents were aged over 55 years, 0.5% were aged between 45 and 54 years, 8.5%
were aged between 35 and 44 years, 30.5% were aged between 25 and 34 years, and 60.5%
were aged under 25 years. Most respondents (68%) had been enrolled in higher education.
In terms of number of products purchased annually, 66% bought 1 to 6 products every year,
22.5% bought 6 to 10 products and 11.5% bought more than 10 products.
Measures
The model we tested had six constructs that were operationalised using seven-point
Likert scales ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Online customer
experience was measured using two components. We adopted measurement items that
have been consistently used in the literature. For the cognitive experiential state (flow),
we used Novak et al.’s (2000) scale based on a descriptive statement of flow to which
respondents were asked questions in relation to their own experiences. For affective
experiential state, we used eight items from the PAD (Pleasure, Arousal, Dominance)
scale by Mehrabian and Russell (1974), which has been used in several online shopping
studies (Eroglu et al. 2003; Novak et al. 2000; Rose et al. 2012).
Table 5 Regression analysis with e-satisfaction as the dependent variable (Tunisian sample)
AES .546 8.986 .000

CES .343 4.949 .000

Table 6 Regression analysis with e-satisfaction as the dependent variable (Romanian sample)
AES .443 6.853 .000

CES .325 4.68 .000
To measure perceived value, we used Babin et al.’s scale (1994) as adapted by Cottet
and Vibert (1999). This scale has six items. Three items measure utilitarian value and three
measure hedonic value. To measure e-satisfaction and online repurchase intention, we
adopted Khalifa and Liu’s scales (2007). Research has shown that these measurement tools
have satisfactory psychometric properties. Each measurement tool has four items. The e-
trust measurement scale was based on the work of Lee and Turban (2001). This scale has
four items. Appendix 1 shows the items that formed each measurement scale.
Findings
Results of the exploratory factor analysis
In what follows, we focus on the factor analysis of the conceptual model constructs and
the examination of their reliability. Principal component analysis (PCA) with Varimax
rotation allowed us to assess the constructs and test their reliability. The results indicate
that all variables had satisfactory reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha values greater than
0.7). For all constructs, the score for the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) test was between
0.6 and 0.8. Bartlett’s test was significant for all variables. Appendix 2 provides a
summary of the main results of the exploratory analysis.
Results of the confirmatory factor analysis
In the second phase, we conducted confirmatory factor analysis in AMOS 18.0 to test the
reliability and validity of each measurement scale. The examination of the skewness
coefficients, the kurtosis coefficients, Mardia’s multivariate kurtosis coefficients and the
Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Shapiro–Wilk tests indicate multivariate and univariate nor-
mality of the data. We therefore used the maximum likelihood bootstrap technique to
estimate our models. In each case, 1000 bootstraps were used (Cheung and Lau 2008).
Table 7 Regression analysis with e-trust as the dependent variable (Tunisian sample)
AES .476 7.608 .000

CES .323 6.504 .000

Table 8 Regression analysis with e-trust as the dependent variable (Romanian sample)
AES .322 4.377 .000

CES .313 5.504 .000
Examination of the absolute fit indices – goodness-of-fit index (GFI), adjusted goodness-
of-fit index (AGFI), root mean square residual (RMR) and root mean square error of
approximation (RMSEA) – showed these indices met the recommended thresholds (AGFI
>0.9; RMR and RMSEA <0.08). The Jöreskog ρ was greater than 0.75 for all constructs.
The values of ρ convergent validity were greater than 0.5 (Fornell and Larcker 1981),
thereby confirming convergent validity. Appendix 3 shows detailed results of these analyses.
Hypothesis testing
The relationship between online customer experience and perceived value
The results in Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4 show that affective experiential state significantly
explained perceived value. We observed that the contribution of affective experiential
state in the explanation of hedonic value was greater in the Tunisian sample (β = 0.361)
than in the Romanian sample (β = 0.348). Conversely, its contribution in the explana-
tion of utilitarian value was greater in the Romanian sample (β = 0.359) than in the
Tunisian sample (β = 0.357). These findings lend support to hypothesis H1b: Affective
experiential states influence perceived value.
These results also show that cognitive experiential state did not explain perceived value
in either the Romanian or the Tunisian sample. This finding implies that cognitive experi-
ential state does not influence perceived value. Thus, hypothesis H1 is partially confirmed.
The relationship between affective experiential state and e-satisfaction
Affective experiential state significantly explained e-satisfaction. However, the contribution

of affective experiential state in explaining e-satisfaction was greater in the Tunisian sample
(β = 0.546, t = 8.986) than in the Romanian sample (β = 0.443, t = 6.853), as shown in
Tables 5 and 6. The results also show that the contribution of cognitive experiential state in
explaining e-satisfaction was greater in the Tunisian sample (β = 0.343, t = 4.949) than in
Table 9 Regression analysis with online repurchase intention as the dependent variable (Romanian sample)
E-trust .441 6.918 .000

Table 10 Regression analysis with online repurchase intention as the dependent variable (Tunisian sample)
E-trust .792 18.234 .000

the Romanian sample (β = 0.325, t = 4. 68). These results support hypotheses H2a and H2b,
so H2 is validated: Online customer experience influences e-satisfaction.
The relationship between online customer experience and e-trust
Affective experiential state significantly explained e-trust. However, the contribution of

affective experiential state in explaining e-trust was greater in the Tunisian sample (β =
0.476, t = 7.608) than in the Romanian sample (β = 0.322, t = 4.377), as shown in
Tables 7 and 8. Similarly, the contribution of cognitive experiential state in explaining
e-trust was greater in the Tunisian sample (β = 0.323, t = 6.504) than in the Romanian
sample (β = 0.313, t = 5.504). These findings lend support to hypotheses H3a and H3b,
so H3 is validated: Online customer experience influences e-trust.
The relationship between e-trust and online repurchase intention
E-trust significantly explained online repurchase intention. However, the contribution

of e-trust in explaining online repurchase intention was greater in the Tunisian sample
(β = 0.792, t = 18.234) than in the Romanian sample (β = 0.441, t = 6.918), as shown in
Tables 9 and 10. This finding supports hypothesis H4: E-trust positively affects online
repurchase intention.
The relationship between e-satisfaction and online repurchase intention
E-satisfaction significantly explained online repurchase intention. However, the contri-

bution of e-satisfaction in explaining online repurchase intention was more significant
in the Tunisian sample (β = 0.854, t = 23.068) than in the Romanian sample (β = 0.612,
t = 10.881), as shown in Tables 11 and 12. This finding lends support to hypothesis H5:
E-satisfaction positively affects online repurchase intention.
The relationship between perceived value and e-trust
Perceived value by Tunisian online shoppers significantly explained e-trust. The adjusted R
squared value was 0.622, which indicates that the two dimensions explained 62.2% of the
E-satisfaction .612 10.881 .000

E-satisfaction .854 23.068 .000

variation in e-trust (Table 13). The two dimensions of perceived value had significant
effects on e-trust. In order of importance, these effects were: 1) utilitarian value (β = 0.564,
t = 12.957) and 2) hedonic value (β = 0.555, t = 12.731). Utilitarian value had a greater
effect on the trust of Tunisian online shoppers than did hedonic value.
Perceived value by Romanian online shoppers significantly explained e-trust. The
adjusted R squared value was 0.227 (Table 14). The two dimensions of perceived value
had significant effects on e-trust. In order of importance, these effects were: 1)
utilitarian value (β = 0.535, t = 10.543) and 2) hedonic value (β = 0.434, t = 6.968).
Utilitarian value had a greater effect on the trust of Romanian online shoppers than did
hedonic value. Therefore, H6 is supported.
The relationship between perceived value and e-satisfaction
Table 15 reveals that the adjusted R squared value was 0.713, which indicates that the
two dimensions explained 71.3% of the variation in e-satisfaction, in the case of the
Tunisian sample. The two dimensions of perceived value had significant effects on e-
satisfaction. In order of importance, these effects were: 1) utilitarian value (β = 0.639,
t = 14.611) and 2) hedonic value (β = 0.555, t = 16.836). Utilitarian value had a greater
effect on Tunisian online shoppers’ e-satisfaction than did hedonic value.
Table 16 shows the results for the Romanian sample. The adjusted R squared value was
0.320, which indicates that the two dimensions explained 32% of the variation in e-
satisfaction. The two dimensions of perceived value had significant effects on e-satisfac-
tion. In order of importance, these effects were: 1) utilitarian value (β = 0.340, t = 5.817)
and 2) hedonic value (β = 0.460, t = 7.863). In contrast to the results for the Tunisian
sample, hedonic value had a greater effect on Romanian online shoppers’ e-satisfaction
than did utilitarian value. This finding reflects the cross-cultural differences between online
shoppers from the selected target countries. The results therefore support H7.
The relationship between perceived value and online repurchase intention
For online repurchase intention amongst Tunisian online shoppers, the adjusted R
squared value was 0.675, which indicates that the two dimensions explained 67.5%
Table 13 Regression analysis with e-trust as the dependent variable (Tunisian sample)
Utilitarian value .564 12.957 .000

Hedonic value .555 12.731 .000
Table 14 Regression analysis with e-trust as the dependent variable (Romanian sample)

of the variation in online repurchase intention (Table 17). The two dimensions of
perceived value had significant effects on online repurchase intention. In order of
importance, these effects were: 1) utilitarian value (β = 0.563, t = 14.853) and 2)
hedonic value (β = 0.601, t = 13.923).
For online repurchase intention amongst Romanian online shoppers, the adjusted R
squared value was 0.187 (Table 18). The two dimensions of perceived value had significant
effects on online repurchase intention. In order of importance, these effects were: 1)
utilitarian value (β = 0.262, t = 4.100) and 2) hedonic value (β = 0.355, t = 5.558).
In both samples (Romanian and Tunisian), hedonic value had a greater effect on
online shoppers’ online repurchase intention than utilitarian value did. The results thus
support H8.
Discussion, conclusions and implications for web entrepreneurship
The web entrepreneurship literature calls for the examination of the roles of online
customer experience in e-commerce. In response to these calls, we investigated the
moderating effects of cognitive and affective experiential states on the relationships
between perceived value, e-satisfaction, e-trust and online repurchase intention. We
also conducted a cross-country study to gain valuable insights into the impact of
cultural differences in the online customer experience on perceived value.
In the context of fast-growing Internet-enabled start-ups, entrepreneurial opportunity
discovery and exploitation are two critical activities that depend heavily on the online
customer experience because web entrepreneurs are actively engaged in information and
value exchange with prospective customers (Ren et al. 2016). From this entrepreneurial
perspective, the results of this study are valuable for the process of online customer profiling,
which is the antecedent of a sound online value proposition, based on cognitive and
affective experiential states perceived in interactions with prospective online customers.
The empirical results generally support our predictions. Online customer experience
mediated the effects of e-satisfaction and e-trust on online repurchase intention. We
Table 15 Regression analysis with e-satisfaction as the dependent variable (Tunisian sample)

Table 16 Regression analysis with e-satisfaction as the dependent variable (Romanian sample)

hypothesised that the relationship between perceived value and e-trust, e-satisfaction
and online repurchase intention would be moderated by the utilitarian and hedonic
dimensions of perceived value. In both samples, utilitarian value had a greater effect on
online shoppers’ e-trust than did hedonic value, whereas hedonic value had a greater
effect on online shoppers’ online repurchase intention than did utilitarian value. The
cross-cultural gaps between Romanian and Tunisian online shoppers explained the fact
that, in the Romanian sample, hedonic value had a greater effect on online shoppers’ e-
satisfaction than did utilitarian value, whereas, in the Tunisian sample, utilitarian value
had a greater effect on online shoppers’ e-satisfaction than did hedonic value.
Our findings are consistent with those reported by Wang et al. (2007), who affirm
that the mechanisms that enable customers to gain online experience before purchasing
(based on experience simulation through multimedia content) significantly increase the
chances of buying from a specific online store, e-trust and the propensity to revisit the
online store. Our results are also similar to findings reported by Ling et al. (2010) and
Eggers et al. (2016), who emphasise that trustworthy information about the online
value proposition is strongly recommended to increase customer knowledge, boost e-
commerce start-ups’ brand image and, consequently, build long-term e-satisfaction, e-
trust and online repurchase intention. We have also found similarities of our findings
with the research conducted by Martin et al. (2015), who emphasize that e-retailers
concentrate their efforts on providing online retail environments that facilitate and
engage their customers in ways that achieve affective experiences.
The findings from this study have significant implications for web entrepreneurs
from the target countries because they will be able to design gain creators and pain
relievers in their value proposition maps based on the moderating effects of the
variables considered in our research framework.
Like any research, our study has certain limitations that are partly due to the convenience
sampling method that was chosen for reasons of accessibility and cost. However, this
sampling method has limitations in terms of generalising results. Furthermore, we consid-
ered only the consequences of the online consumer experience. It would have been
interesting to analyse the determinants of online consumer experience as well.


The present study opens further debate on the need to introduce new key perfor-
mance indicators (KPIs) as moderating variables that reflect the cross-culturally sensi-
tive context of the online customer experience. Future research should seek to replicate
the current research framework in other sectors to explore the cross-sector gaps.
Moreover, emerging machine learning algorithms focused on online customer experi-
ences contribute to the development of online predictive analytics. Our ambition is to
explore the implications of online customer experience for new artificial intelligence
software. This artificial intelligence software, developed using research project funding,
will embed deep learning algorithms and convolutional neural networks to recognise
logos of brands or companies involved in social media content.
Acknowledgments This research was supported by a grant from the Romanian Ministry of Research and
Innovation, CCCDI – UEFISCDI, project number PN-III-P1-1.2-PCCDI-2017-0800 / 86PCCDI/2018 -
FutureWeb, within PNCDI III.
Appendix 1
Table 19 Construct measurement and sources
Cognitive experiential state (flow) - Do you think you have ever experienced Novak et al. (2000)
flow on the Web?
- In general, how frequently would you say
you have experienced ‘flow’ when you
use the Web?
- Most of the time I use the Web I feel that
I am in flow.
Affective experiential state - Unhappy - Happy Mehrabian and Russell (1974)
- Melancholic - Contented
- Annoyed - Pleased
- Sluggish - Frenzied
- Calm - Excited
- Relaxed - Stimulated
- Guided - Autonomous
- Influenced - Influential
Perceived value - I found exactly the products or Babin et al. (1994)
information I needed on the website.
- I did exactly what I planned to do.
- I did not find exactly what I needed.
- The website allowed me to change my
mind.
- I felt the pleasure of discovery.
- Apart from the information or products I
found, visiting this website was a
pleasure.
Table 19 (continued)
E-satisfaction - I am satisfied with my overall Khalifa and Liu (2007)
experiences of Internet shopping.
- I am satisfied with the pre-purchase
experience of Internet shopping
websites (e.g. consumer education,
product search, quality of information
about products, product comparison).
- I am satisfied with the purchase
websites (e.g. ordering, payment
procedure).
- I am satisfied with the post-purchase
websites (e.g. customer support and
after sales support, handling of returns/
refunds, delivery care).
Online repurchase intention - It is likely that I will repurchase from Khalifa and Liu (2007)
Internet shopping websites in the near
future.
- Anticipate repurchasing from Internet
shopping websites in the near future.
- I regularly repurchase from the same
websites.
- I expect to repurchase from Internet
shopping websites in the near future.
E-trust - Internet shopping is reliable. Lee and Turban (2001)
- In general, I can rely on Internet vendors
to keep the promises that they make.
- Internet shopping can be trusted; there
are no uncertainties.
- Internet shopping is a trustworthy
experience.
Appendix 2
Table 20 Results of exploratory factor analysis
Measurement scale 1: Online repurchase intention

KMO = 0.730; rounded Chi square = 403.923; Ddl = 6; Factor contribution
significance of Bartlett = 0.000 Cronbach’s α = 0.840 F1: Online repurchase intention (ORI) %
explained variance = 69.312%
ORI.1 .891
ORI.2 .728
ORI.3 .865
ORI.4 .837
Measurement scale 2: Perception value
significance of Bartlett = 0.000. % explained variance =
88.707%
Table 20 (continued)
Utilitarian value Hedonic value
Cronbach’s α = Cronbach’s α =
0.889 0.924
PV1 .805 .333
PV2 .886 .488
PV3 .310 .893
PV4 .172 .799
PV5 .136 .756
Measurement scale 3: E-trust
significance of Bartlett = 0.000 Cronbach’s α = 0.857 F1: E-trust % explained variance = 70.489%
E-T.1 .772
E-T.2 .805
E-T.3 .884
E-T.4 .892
Measurement scale 4: E-satisfaction
significance of Bartlett = 0.000% explained variance = F1. E-satisfaction Cronbach’s α = 0. 812
64.383%
ES 1 .805
ES2 .828
ES3 .793
ES4 .782
Measurement scale 4: Affective experiential state
significance of Bartlett = 0.000% explained variance = F1. Affective experiential state Cronbach’s
44.593% α = 0. 733
AES 1 .705
AFS2 .699
AFS3 .753
AFS4 .569
AFS 5 .516
Appendix 3
Table 21 Results of confirmatory factor analysis
Construct Item Std. Squared Composite Convergent Discriminant

loading multiple reliability validity validity
factor correlation (Jöreskog rhô) ρvc > 0.5 ρvc > rij2
(SMC) ρ (A) > 0.7
E-satisfaction: X2/df = 2.114; CFI = 0.978; NFI = 0.973; GFI = 0.979; RMR = 0.044; RMSEA = 0.045
E-sat ES1 0.776 0.567 0.773 0.707
ES2 0.869 0.562
ES3 0.773 0.758
ES4 0.688 0.637
Perceived value: X2/df = 2.134; CFI = 0.977; NFI = 0.986; GFI = 0.976; RMR = 0.064; RMSEA = 0.064
Utilitarian value UT 1 0.774 0.548 0.732 0.564 yes
UT 2 0.664 0.654
Hedonic value HV 3 0.912 0.633 0.869 0.724 Yes
HV 4 0.978 0.669
HV 5 0.625 0.956
E-trust: X2/df = 1.236; CFI = 0.971; NFI = 0.964; GFI = 0.977; RMR = 0.045; RMSEA = 0.051
E-trust ET1 0.709 0.854 0.749 0.560 yes
ET2 0.832 0.769
ET3 0.789 0.675
ET4 0.706 0.656
Online customer experience: X2/df = 1.282; CFI = 0.966; NFI = 0.932; GFI = 0.960; RMR =0.057; RMSEA =
0.041
Affective experiential state AES 1 0.795 0.654 0.870 0.650 yes
AES 2 0.776 0.734
AES 3 0.774 0.778
AES 4 0.715 0.667
AES 5 0.725 0.687
Cognitive experiential state CES1 0.720 0.574 0.774 0.520 yes
Online repurchase intention: X2/df = 1.456; CFI = 0.981; NFI = 0.974; GFI = 0.987; RMR = 0.056; RMSEA =
0.041
ORI ORI 1 0.725 0.750 0.787 0.678 yes
ORI 2 0.829 0.687
ORI 3 0.777 0.634
ORI 4 0.767 0.695
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.
References
Allagui, A., & Temessek, A. (2005). Loyalty toward web portal: proposition and empirical testing of an
integrative model. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference of AFM, Bordeaux, France, May
(p. 6).
Allal-Chérif, O., & Bidan, M. (2017). Collaborative open training with serious games: Relations, culture,
knowledge, innovation, and desire. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 2(1), 31–38. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jik.2016.06.003.
Allred, C. R., & Money, R. B. (2010). The service hand-off: Effects of multivendor service performance on
customer satisfaction – An experimental study. Journal of Services Marketing, 24(3), 184–195.
https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041011040596.
Anderson, E. W., & Fornell, C. (1994). A customer satisfaction research prospectus. Service Quality, 12(3),
241–268.
Anderson, E. W., & Sullivan, M. W. (1993). The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for
firms. Marketing Science, 12(2), 125–143.
Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C., & Lehmann, D. R. (1994). Customer satisfaction, market share, and profitability:
Findings from Sweden. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 53–66.
Anderson, R. E., & Srinivasan, S. S. (2003). E-satisfaction and e-loyalty: A contingency framework.
Psychology and Marketing, 20(2), 123–138.
Aurier, P., Evrard, Y., & N’Goala, G. (2004). Comprendre et mesurer la valeur du point de vue du
consommateur. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 19(3), 1–20.
Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian
shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644–656.
Berry, L. L. (1993). Playing fair in retailing. Arthur Anderson Retailing Issues Newsletter, 5(2).
Bighiu, G., Manolică, A., & Roman, C. T. (2015). Compulsive buying behavior on the internet. Procedia
Economics and Finance, 20, 72–79.
Bolton, R. N., & Drew, J. H. (1994). Linking customer satisfaction to service operations and outcomes. In R.
T. Rust & R. L. Oliver (Eds.), Services quality, new directions in theory and practice (pp. 173–200).
London, UK: Sage Publications.
Bouzaabia, R., Bouzaabia, O., & Capatina, A. (2013). Retail logistics service quality: A cross-cultural survey
on customer perceptions. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 41(8), 627–647.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-02-2012-0012.
Boyer, A., & Nefzi, A. (2008). La relation entre la perception de la qualité et la fidélité. La Revue des Sciences
de Gestion, 234(6), 37–48.
Bridges, E., & Florsheim, R. (2008). Hedonic and utilitarian shopping goals: The online experience. Journal
of Business Research, 61(4), 309–314.
Camilleri, C. (1967). Modernity and the family in Tunisia. Journal of Marriage and Family, 29(3), 590–595.
Capatina, A., & Rancati, E. (2017). Key challenges and opportunities in web entrepreneurship. IGI Global.
Carù, A., & Cova, B. (2006). How to facilitate immersion in a consumption experience: Appropriation
operations and service elements. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 5(1), 4–14.
Chang, T. Z., & Wildt, A. R. (1994). Price, product information, and purchase intention: An empirical study.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22(1), 16–27.
Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables:
Bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 296–325.
Cho, Y., Im, I., Hiltz, R., & Fjermestad, J. (2002). The effects of post-purchase evaluation factors on online vs.
offline customer complaining behavior: Implications for customer loyalty. ACR North American
Advances.
Chou, T. J., & Ting, C. C. (2003). The role of flow experience in cyber-game addiction. Cyberpsycholgy &
Behavior, 6(6), 663–675. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493103322725469.
Chouk, I., & Perrien, J. (2003). Les déterminants de la confiance du consommateur lors d’un achat sur un site
marchand: Proposition d’un cadre conceptuel préliminaire. Actes du Congrès International de l’AFM,
Tunis (pp. 581–593).
Constantinides, E. (2004). Influencing the online consumer’s behavior: The web experience. Internet
Research, 14(2), 111–126.
Cottet, P., & Vibert, F. (1999). La valorisation hédonique et/ou utilitaire du shopping dans le magasin d’usines.
Actes du 15e Congrès de l’Association Française du Marketing, 93–116.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York, NY: Harper & row. ISBN 978–
0–06-016253–5.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (1988). Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in
consciousness. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Cyr, D., Kindra, G., & Dash, S. (2008). Web site design, trust, satisfaction and e-loyalty: The Indian
experience. Online Information Review, 32(6), 773–790.
Davidson, E., & Vaast, E. (2010). Digital entrepreneurship and its sociomaterial enactment. In System Sciences
(HICSS), 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference (pp. 1–10). IEEE.
Dutot, V., & Castellano, S. (2017). E-reputation in web entrepreneurship. In A. Capatina & E. Rancati (Eds.),
Key Challenges and Opportunities in Web Entrepreneurship (pp. 103–131) IGI Global.
Edvardsson, B. (2005). Service quality: Beyond cognitive assessment. Managing Service Quality, 15(2), 127–
131.
Eggers, F., Eggers, F., & Kraus, S. (2016). Entrepreneurial branding: Measuring consumer preferences through
choice-based conjoint analysis. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12(2), 427–
444.
Ellinger, A. E., Daugherty, P. J., & Plair, Q. J. (1999). Customer satisfaction and loyalty in supply chain: The
role of communication. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 35(2),
121–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1366-5545(99)00006-X.
Elliot, S., & Fowell, S. (2000). Expectations versus reality: A snapshot of customer experience on internet
retailing. International Journal of Information Management, 20(5), 323–337.
Eroglu, S. A., Machleit, K. A., & Davis, L. M. (2003). Empirical testing of a model of online store
atmospherics and shopper responses. Psychology & Marketing, 20(2), 139–150.
Fabrice, J. (2012). La digitalization du point de vente : mythe ou réalité.
Fodor, O. C., & Pintea, S. (2017). The “emotional side” of entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of the relation
between positive and negative affect and entrepreneurial performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 310.
Fornell, C. (1992). A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish experience. Journal of
Marketing, 56(1), 6–21.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
Frow, P., & Payne, A. (2007). Towards the ‘perfect’ customer experience. Journal of Brand Management,
15(2), 89–101.
Gentile, C., Spiller, N., & Noci, G. (2007). How to sustain the customer experience: An overview of
experience components that co-create value with the customer. European Management Journal, 25(5),
395–410.
Gharbi J., Ettis S., & Ben Mimoun S. (2002). L’impact de l’atmosphère perçue des sites commerciaux sur leur
performance. Actes des 1ères journées nantaises de recherche sur le e-marketing, Université de Nantes,
Septembre (pp. 181–219).
Gommans, M., Krishnan, K. S., & Scheffold, K. B. (2001). From brand loyalty to e-loyalty: A conceptual
framework. Journal of Economic and Social Research, 3(1), 43–58.
Grewal, D., Levy, M., & Kumar, V. (2009). Customer experience management in retailing: An organizing
framework. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 1–14.
Gutiérrez Rodríguez, P., Cuesta Valiño, P., & Vázquez Burguete, J. L. (2017). The effects of corporate social
responsibility on customer-based brand equity: Spanish hypermarket case. Economic research-
Ekonomska istraživanja, 30(1), 290–301.
Ha, H. Y. (2004). Factors affecting online relationships and impacts. Marketing Review, 4(2), 189–209.
Henri S. (2013). Les outils de la digitalisation des points de vente. Retrieved from: www.marketing-
professionnel.fr.
Hernandez, B., Jimenez, J., & José Martín, M. (2009). Adoption vs acceptance of e-commerce: Two different
decisions. European Journal of Marketing, 43(9/10), 1232–1245.
Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (2009). Flow online: Lessons learned and future prospects. Journal of
Interactive Marketing, 23(1), 23–34.
Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies,
feelings and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132–140.
Homburg, C., Koschate, N., & Hoyer, W. D. (2006). The role of cognition and affect in the formation of
customer satisfaction: A dynamic perspective. Journal of Marketing, 70(3), 21–31.
Hsu, H. (2006). An empirical study of web site quality, customer value, and customer satisfaction based on e-
shop. The Business Review, 5(1), 190–193.
Jiang, P., & Rosenbloom, B. (2005). Customer intention to return online: Price perception, attribute-level
performance, and satisfaction unfolding over time. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2), 150–174.
Jin, B., Jung, S., & Jeong, S. W. (2018). Dimensional effects of Korean SME’s entrepreneurial orientation on
internationalization and performance: The mediating role of marketing capability. International
Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14(1), 195–215.
Katawetawaraks, C., & Wang, C. L. (2011). Online shopper behavior: Influences of online shopping decision.
Asian Journal of Business Research, 1(2).
Kedmenec, I., & Strašek, S. (2017). Are some cultures more favourable for social entrepreneurship than
others? Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 30(1), 1461–1476.
Khalifa, M., & Liu, V. (2007). Online consumer retention: Contingent effects of online shopping habit and
online shopping experience. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(6), 780–792.
Kim, C., Weihong, Z., & Yang, K. H. (2008). An empirical study on the integrated framework of e-CRM in
online shopping: Evaluating the relationships among perceived value, satisfaction, and trust based on
customers’ perspectives. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 6(3), 1–19.
Kim, J., Lim, J. S., & Bhargava, M. (1998). The role of affect in attitude formation: A classical conditioning
approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(2), 143–152.
Kim, M. J., Chung, N., & Lee, C. K. (2011). The effect of perceived trust on electronic commerce: Shopping
online for tourism products and services in South Korea. Tourism Management, 32(2), 256-265.
Kim, S., & Stoel, L. (2004). Apparel retailers: Website quality, dimensions and satisfaction. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 11(2), 109–117.
Koufaris, M., & Hampton-Sosa, W. (2004). The development of initial trust in an online company by new
customers. Information & Management, 41(3), 377–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.08.004.
Lee J., Kim J., & Moon, J. Y. (2000). What makes Internet users visit cyber stores again? Key design factors
for customer loyalty. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI
2000, ACM, New York (pp. 305–312).
Lee, M. K. O., & Turban, E. (2001). A trust model for consumer internet shopping. Journal International
Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6(1), 75–91.
Ling, K. C., Chai, L. T., & Piew, T. H. (2010). The effects of shopping orientations, online trust and prior
online purchase experience toward customers’ online purchase intention. International Business
Research, 3(3), 63–76.
Luo, M., M., Chen, J. S., Ching, R. K. H., & Liu, C. C. (2011). An examination of the effects of virtual
experiential marketing on online customer intentions and loyalty. The Services Industries Journal, 31(13),
2163–2191.
Markin, E., Swab, R. G., & Marshall, D. R. (2017). Who is driving the bus? An analysis of author and
institution contributions to entrepreneurship research. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 2(1), 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2016.10.001.
Martin, J., Mortimer, G., & Andrews, L. (2015). Re-examining online customer experience to include
purchase frequency and perceived risk. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 25, 81–95.
Martin, S. L., & Javalgi, R. G. (2018). Epistemological foundations of international entrepreneurship.
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1–10.
Mas-Verdu, F., Ribeiro, D., & Dobón, S. R. (2010). Government policies and services: An approach to the
international context. The Service Industries Journal, 30(1), 1–10.
Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. The MIT Press.
Mencarelli, R. (2008). L’interaction lieu-objet comme conceptualisation de l’expérience vécue: test d’un
modèle intégrateur. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 23(3), 51–67.
Merigó, J. M., Rocha, C., & Garcia-Agreda, S. (2013). Entrepreneurial intervention in electronic markets: The
influence of customer participation. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 9(4), 521–
529.
Meyer, C., & Schwager, A. (2007). Understanding customer experience. Harvard Business Review, 85, 116–
126.
Michell, P., Reast, J., & Lynch, J. (1998). Exploring the foundation of trust. Journal of Marketing
Management, 14(1–3), 159–172.
Minvielle, N., & Mars, M. C. (2010). L’influence de la musique d'ambiance en environnement de services :
une étude exploratoire en contexte hôtelier. In Paper presented at the 9th international congress
marketing trends. Venice: Italy.
Mir-Bernal, P. (2017). Brand reputation in the Facebook era: The impact of user generated content in brand
reputation management brand reputation in the Facebook era. In I. A. Capatina & E. Rancati (Eds.), Key
Challenges and Opportunities in Web Entrepreneurship (pp. 171–187) IGI Global.
Moisescu, O. I. (2018). From perceptual corporate sustainability to customer loyalty: A multi-sectorial
investigation in a developing country. Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 31(1), 55–72.
Morgan, R., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of
Marketing, 58(3), 20–38.
Ngobo, P. V. (2000). Satisfaction des clients et part de marché de l’entreprise : un réexamen au regard de
récentes avancées théoriques. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 15(2), 21–41.
Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Yung, Y.-F. (2000). Measuring the customer experience in online environ-
ments: A structural modelling approach. Marketing Science, 19, 22–42.
Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decision. Journal
of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469.
Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63, 33–44.
Olugbola, S. A. (2017). Exploring entrepreneurial readiness of youth and startup success components:
Entrepreneurship training as a moderator. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 2(3), 155–171.
Ouvry, M., & Ladwein, R. (2006). Expérience vécue et représentations du centre commercial. Proceedings
from the 11th Journées de Recherche en Marketing de Bourgogne, Dijon (pp. 1–26).
Palvia, P. (2009). The role of trust in E-commerce relational exchange: A unified model. Information &
Management, 46(4), 213–220.
Pappas, I. O., Pateli, A. G., Giannakos, M. N., & Chrissikopoulos, V. (2014). Moderating effects of online
shopping experience on customer satisfaction and repurchase intentions. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 42(3), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-03-2012-0034.
Petrakis, P. E., Valsamis, D. G., & Kafka, K. I. (2017). From optimal to stagnant growth: The role of
institutions and culture. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 2(3), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jik.2016.01.011.
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). The experience economy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Reichheld, F. F., & Schefter, P. (2000). E-Loyalty. Harvard Business Review, 78(4), 105–113.
Ren, S., Shu, R., Bao, Y., & Chen, X. (2016). Linking network ties to entrepreneurial opportunity discovery
and exploitation: The role of affective and cognitive trust. International Entrepreneurship and
Management Journal, 12(2), 465–485.
Rose, S., Clark, M., Samouel, P., & Hair, N. (2012). Online customer experience in e retailing: An empirical
model of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Retailing, 88(2), 308–322.
Rose, S., Hair, N., & Clark, M. (2011). Online customer experience: A review of the business-to-consumer
online purchase context. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13, 24–39. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00280.xmr_280.
Rust, R. T., Zahorik, A. J., & Keiningham, T. L. (1995). Return on quality (ROQ): Making service quality
financially accountable. Journal of Marketing, 59(2), 58–70.
Ryu, J. S., & Fortenberry, S. (2017). Understanding young consumers' personal-level cultural orientation and
shopping intentions: Implications for small-town retailers. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 27(3), 1–8.
Shankar, V., Smith, A. K., & Rangaswamy, A. (2003). Customer satisfaction and loyalty in online and offline
environments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20(2), 153–175.
Sherry, J. F., Jr. (1990). A sociocultural analysis of a Midwestern American flea market. Journal of Consumer
Research, 17(1), 13–30.
Shobeiri, S., Mazaheri, E., & Laroche, M. (2014). Improving customer website involvement through
experiential marketing. The Service Industries Journal, 34(11), 885–900. https://doi.org/10.1080
/02642069.2014.915953.
Simon, M., & Kim, J. (2017). Two sources of overconfidence: Incorporating disconfirming feedback in an
entrepreneurial context. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 27(3), 9–24.
Suchánek, P., & Králová, M. (2018). Customer satisfaction and different evaluation of it by companies.
Economic Research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 31(1), 1330–1350.
Szymanski, D. M., & Hise, R. T. (2000). E-satisfaction: An initial examination. Journal of Retailing, 76(3),
309–322.
Tansky, J. W., Soriano, D. R., & Dobón, S. R. (2010). What's next? Linking entrepreneurship and human
resource management in globalization. Human Resource Management, 49(4), 689–692.
Torkzadeh, G., & Dhillon, G. (2002). Measuring factors that influence the success of internet commerce.
Information Systems Research, 13(2), 187–204.
Van Riel, A. C. R., Liljander, V., & Jurriens, P. (2001). Exploring consumer evaluations of e-services: A portal
site. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(4), 359–377.
Volle, P., & Charfi, A. A. (2011). Valeur perçue et comportements en ligne en état d’immersion: le rôle
modérateur de l'implication et de L’expertise. Paper presented at the 27th international conference of the
French Association of Marketing (27ième Congres international de l'Association Française du
Marketing), Brussels, 2011.
Wang, L. C., Baker, J., Wagner, J. A., & Wakefield, K. (2007). Can a retail web site be social? Journal of
Marketing, 71(3), 143–157.
Yang, Z., & Peterson, R. T. (2004). Customer perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty: The role of switching
costs. Psychology and Marketing, 21(10), 799–822.
Affiliations
Angela Eliza Micu 1 & Olfa Bouzaabia 2 & Rym Bouzaabia 3 & Adrian Micu 4 &
Alexandru Capatina 4
Angela Eliza Micu

angelaelizamicu@yahoo.com
Olfa Bouzaabia
olfabouzaabia@yahoo.fr
Rym Bouzaabia
rymb060@gmail.com
Adrian Micu
amicu@ugal.ro
1
Ovidius University of Constanta, Constanta, Romania
2
University of Gabes, Zrig Eddakhlania, Tunisia
3
University of Sousse, Susah, Tunisia
4
Dunarea de Jos University of Galati, Str. Domneasca, no 47, 800008 Galati, Romania
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner.
Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Online Customer Experience in E-Retailing: Implications For Web Entrepreneurship

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Online Customer Experience in E-Retailing: Implications For Web Entrepreneurship

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal (2019) 15:651–675

Online customer experience in e-retailing: implications

Published online: 18 January 2019

Keywords Online customer experience . E-satisfaction . Perceived value . E-trust . Online

Extended author information available on the last page of the article

Theoretical background and development of hypotheses

Customer experience is used to build a competitive advantage that is difficult to imitate

Online customer experience and web entrepreneurship

The relationship between online customer experience and perceived value

The relationship between online customer experience and e-satisfaction

The relationship between online customer experience and e-trust

H3a: Affective experiential state positively influences e-trust.

The relationship between e-trust and online repurchase intention

Trust in websites plays an important role in e-commerce because consumers are

The relationship between e-satisfaction and online repurchase intention

According to Allagui and Temessek (2005), the theoretical foundations of loyalty to an

Fig. 1 Conceptual model

The relationship between perceived value and e-trust

Trust in a commercial website is defined as the customer’s expectation that the

The relationship between perceived value and e-satisfaction

Standardised coefficients t Sig.

AES .348 5.432 .000

AES, affective experiential state; CES, cognitive experiential state

Standardised coefficients t Sig.

AES .359 5.226 .000

AES, affective experiential state; CES, cognitive experiential state

The relationship between perceived value and online repurchase intention

In recent years, perceived value has attracted considerable attention as an important

Sample and data collection

Standardised coefficients t Sig.

AES .361 5.323 .000

AES, affective experiential state; CES, cognitive experiential state

Standardised coefficients t Sig.

AES .357 5.225 .000

AES, affective experiential state; CES, cognitive experiential state

Standardised coefficients t Sig.

AES .546 8.986 .000

AES, affective experiential state; CES, cognitive experiential state

Standardised coefficients t Sig.

AES .443 6.853 .000

AES, affective experiential state; CES, cognitive experiential state

Results of the exploratory factor analysis

Results of the confirmatory factor analysis

Standardised coefficients t Sig.

AES .476 7.608 .000

AES, affective experiential state; CES, cognitive experiential state

Standardised coefficients t Sig.

AES .322 4.377 .000

AES, affective experiential state; CES, cognitive experiential state

The relationship between online customer experience and perceived value

The relationship between affective experiential state and e-satisfaction

Affective experiential state significantly explained e-satisfaction. However, the contribution

Standardised coefficients t Sig.

E-trust .441 6.918 .000

Standardised coefficients t Sig.

E-trust .792 18.234 .000

The relationship between online customer experience and e-trust

Affective experiential state significantly explained e-trust. However, the contribution of

The relationship between e-trust and online repurchase intention

E-trust significantly explained online repurchase intention. However, the contribution

The relationship between e-satisfaction and online repurchase intention

E-satisfaction significantly explained online repurchase intention. However, the contri-

The relationship between perceived value and e-trust