International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology

Vol. 29, No. 11s, (2020), pp. 975-984

Impact of Social Media Marketing on Consumer Buying Behaviour: An

Empirical Study
Dr. Manjit Kour, Associate professor, CGC Technical Campus, Jhanjeri
Dr. Rajinder Kaur, Associate professor, CGC Technical Campus, Jhanjeri
Abstract
Introduction-There has been a huge explosion in social media as a marketing tool. Social media is believed
to be highly efficacious in reaching consumers. This has been brought about by the remarkable increase in
the development and version of technology, demanding that businesses rethink their digital marketing
strategies. With the advent of technology, high speed internet and ease of shopping on internet, it is
observed that consumers are adapting to online marketing and their buying behavior is being influenced
accordingly. The aim of this paper is to study the impact of social media marketing on consumer buying
behaviour.
Research Methodology-For present study a questionnaire was developed on five point likert scale and
administered to 400 social media users located in Punjab region of India through online survey. 260
responses to online survey was received and used for analysis. For analysis statistical method of factor
analysis and Multiple Linear Regression analysis was used. Statistical Analysis was done by using software
SPSS 20.
Findings- It was found that trust, perceived value and positive reviews positively affect consumer buying
behavior on social media.
Keywords: Consumer buying behavior; Digital Marketing: Marketing tool, Online Marketing; Social
media marketing.
1. Introduction
In recent times, the online trends have emerged in a commercially environment as seen by users from a
different perspective. Its expansion has converted users into consumers. The role played by social media
has changed as to how consumers and marketers communicate with each other. (Hennig-Thurau et al.,
2004). Informational society affects the consumer decision processes and product evaluation. In modern
times consumers have access to different sources of information that in turn has been facilitated by other
customers ’recommendations. (Senecal & Nantel 2004).
Customer is a key factor in marketing through social media. (Do-Hyung et al. 2007). Social media provides
a different mode to acquire product information through peer communication, (Kozinets, 1999).Social
Media (SM) are web-based services also called "Social Networking Sites" which refers to a network of
interactions among different users (groups or individuals) (Kempe et al., 2003).Social Media such as
Facebook, Instagram and Twitter facilitates the costumer to maintain great relations among themselves and
with others (Ellison et al., 2007) by reaching more than one task and encouraging the way of communication
and sharing different information (comments, thoughts, videos and images) (Kietzmann et al., 2011).
In recent times, with the expansion of social media, a study of consumer behavior on these platforms is an
upcoming field of research (Liang & Turban 2011) because social media helps to develop marketing
strategies in companies through trust-building techniques and encourage customers’ to buy online products.
The motive of this research paper is to investigate the role of social media and how they can influence the
consumer’s intention to buy and impact on a user’s trust in a social commerce environment.
The paper is organized in the following way. First, a literature review is provided to lay theoretical
foundation of this study. The next section provides the research model and hypotheses. The paper continues
with research methodology and the structural model. Finally, theoretical and managerial implications for
the study are presented, along with limitations, future research directions and conclusions.

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 975

Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
 International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology
Vol. 29, No. 11s, (2020), pp. 975-984

2. Literature Review and Theoretical Background

With the increase in social networks, a new age of content creation has emerged, where individuals can
easily share experiences and information with other users (Chen et al. 2011a). The following generation of
online commerce will be based on communities - a good tool for new buyer attraction (Bagozzi & Dholakia
2002; Ridings & Gefen 2004). Online communities offer a chance to develop a better relationship between
Customers and managing system (Ridings & Gefen 2004), E.g. giving growth to a new development where
businesses can improve performance. Likewise, in these platforms, consumers have social interaction
members can become familiar with one additional, providing a possible source of expectation (Lu et al.
2010). This can immensely influence users ‘intention to buy (Gefen 2002).
Consumers using social media for the benefit of immediate access to information at their convenience
(Mangold and Faulds, 2009), that enables them to decide what to buy and to know in detail about new
products or brands, their use and need. (Powers et al., 2012). Examples are put forward by Goh et al. (2013)
and Xiang and Gretzel (2010). Social media has brought to light a ‘participatory culture’ where users
network with other like-minded people to engage in an unending process of sharing information, monitoring
updates, and requesting opinions and ratings products, services and activities (Ashman et al., 2015). Social
media is perceived as a reliable source of information compared to corporate communications and
advertisements.
Various authors have studied the effect of social media on consumer behaviour not only from the point of
opinion of the decision process but from other perspectives also (e.g., Xie and Lee, 2015; Chu and Kim,
2011). While, social commerce and social media are key phenomena in e-commerce and the marketing
literature, few studies have examined the concepts of trust and users’ intentional behavior. In the following
section, the literature related to the model of study maps out the theoretical foundation of the research.
Behavioural intention variables

Behavioural intention is the vital concept of TAM (Technology Acceptance Model) given by Davis (1989)
which implies the intention to use technology. Behavioural intention in m-commerce indicates the extent
to which an individual plans to actually use the technology. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) mentioned that
behaviour intention is one of the most vital factor in determining an individual’s actual behaviour. Two
main factors, i.e., perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use have been found to be crucial in predicting
users’ adoption of latest technology (Davis, 1989). But many other researchers (Chong et al., 2010; Kim et
al., 2010; Chong, 2013) has identified other factors of behavioural intention which affects m-commerce
adoption. So it is important to consider all these factors and study their impact on m-commerce usage
activities because very limited research has been conducted on the same.

Trust
Trust is a keystone in developing e-commerce. In a business-to-customer association, trust in the e-vendor
is a vital in assessing risk in the business (McCole et al. 2010). Trust plays a vital role in e-commerce
(Aljifri et al. 2003). There are different definitions of trust, which are based on different dimensions of
Validity and Reliability, benevolence, integrity, ability, competence and empathy (Gefen 2002; McKnight
et al. 2002; Gefen et al. 2003).
Trust is a significant factor which affects consumer behaviour. Over the years trust has been studied in
various literatures. Pavlou (2003) studied trust in the context of e-commerce and stated that it is the
willingness of consumers to become vulnerable to the online retailers. Wei et al. (2009) defined trust as the
level to which an individual believes that using e-commerce is secure and will have no privacy threats.

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 976

Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
 International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology
Vol. 29, No. 11s, (2020), pp. 975-984

Trust in online business plays an important part because the buyer and seller never meet face to face (Chong
et al., 2010). Gefen et al. (2003) also found that trust plays a vigorous role in influencing users’ online
purchasing intentions.

In this research, trust is viewed in the context of transactions over the internet through Social Networking
Service (SNSs) and online communities. Trust in peers on the network and trust in the Social Networking
Service (SNSs) themselves will also be considered. In the context of online communities, trust can
facilitate the interaction of individuals and inspire them to stick to their current network. So following
hypothesis is generated.
H1- Trust is positively related to consumer buying behaviour on social media.

Perceived Value
Perceived Value (PV) is one of the main constructs of the tools acceptance model (TAM) (Davis 1989).
Users’ acceptance of adding facilities was one of the preliminary developments of this theory (Davis et
al.1989). The concept has since been developed by many scholars in diverse areas (Adams et al. 1992;
Gefen & Straub 2000; Gefen et al. 2003; Pavlou 2003; Hajli 2013; Kim 2012).Zeithaml (1988:14).
definition of consumer perceived value is the most accepted in the literature. Woodruff and Gardial
(1996:54) simply said that "Value is as consumers perceive it", the products are a means to a finale.
However, value perception appears to be highly personal and individualistic. Lovelock (1991) says that
value perceived could be of a low price, it could be whatever a consumer desires in the product, it could be
the quality a consumer gets for the price he or she pays, or it could be what a consumer pays for what he/she
receives.
In the present study, only perceived value and intention to buy have been selected as main factors to develop
the proposed model. One of the main reasons for snubbing perceived ease of use from the present study is
that, it is argued, this theory has an indirect effect on user acceptance through perceived value (Gefen &
Straub 2000). Earlier researchers have been reliable in arguing that perceived value has a positive direct
effect on acceptance of a system (Gefen & Straub 2000; Pavlou 2003). There are diverse aspects that define
perceived value in an e-commerce environment. For example, the quality of a website in terms of system,
service and info quality has a significant impact on perceived usefulness, which in turn encourages
consumers to buy (Ahn et al. 2007).. So following hypothesis is generated.
H2- Perceived value is positively related to consumer buying behavior on social media.

Positive reviews
Positive reviews in social media can have a positive impact on the image of the brand. And further any
dialogue may not be feasible by the companies using social media for marketing (Ho-Dac, Carson, &
Moore, 2013; Kohli, Suri, & Kapoor, 2014). Simultaneously, consumers participate in the discussion and
exchanges that influence the branding process, all the period, giving very little attention to their
participation in the branding or marketing process (Kohli, Suri, & Kapoor, 2014).While companies see
Facebook as a means to promote brand awareness and gain consumer attention. Not necessary that all of
the responses to advertising in social media are positive. While brand-related content is being introduced at
an increasing rate in the Facebook platform, social media-based advertising is sometimes viewed as an
unwanted, undesired element, and companies have to be aware of how consumer responds to their
advertisements and what impact it adds or reduces to the value of that brand-related content (Laroche,
Habibi, & Richard, 2013). Researchers have reflected that it is essential for the companies to recognize the
process of introducing advertising and brand-related content in social media. Yet it requires a close scrutiny
of the content and a focus on brand-based community building (Laroche, Habibi, & Richard, 2013). The
quality of online products characterized by combine with related information along with the perceived
quantity of reviews, are found to have a significant positive influence on consumers’ purchase will and

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 977

Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
 International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology
Vol. 29, No. 11s, (2020), pp. 975-984

decision. (Zhou et al., 2013; zhang et al., 2014). So based on literature review, following hypothesis is
generated
H3- Positive reviews on social media positively affects consumer buying behavior on social media
4. Conceptual Model

The research model for this study is depicted in Figure 1. The study proposes aconceptual
model in which four m-commerce usage activities, i.e., content delivery, transactions, location
based services, and entertainment act as dependent variables. Demographic variables, i.e., age,
gender and education and behavioural intention variables are treated as independent variables. The
study proposes how these independent variable impact the dependent variables.
The research model for this study is depicted in Figure 1. The study proposes a conceptual model in
which three factors, i.e., trust, perceived value and positive reviews as dependent variables consumer buying
behavior on social media is treated as independent variables. The study proposes how these independent
variable impact the dependent variables.

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

5. Research Methodology

A 30 item questionnaire was designed based on previous studies .Questionnaire was developed on five
point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). For the study convenience
sampling method was used in which questionnaire was administered to a sample of 400 social media users
located in Punjab region of India. For filling of questionnaire google forms were used and sent to
respondents through e-mail and Whatsapp. Out of 400 questionnaires, a total of 260 responses were
received i.e. response rate of 65%, which is fair enough for online surveys. Factor analysis was done and
three main factors were identified namely-trust, perceived value and positive reviews. For analysis
statistical method of Multiple Linear Regression analysis was used. Statistical Analysis was done by using
software SPSS 20.

6. Analysis

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 978

Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
 International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology
Vol. 29, No. 11s, (2020), pp. 975-984

Demographic profile
The demographic profile of respondents is shown in Table 1. The demographic profile is categorized into
two categories- Gender and Age. Out of 260 respondents, 113 were male (i.e. 43%) and 147 were female
(i.e. 57%). So in this study both genders are almost equally represented. Out of 260 respondents, 128 were
less than 25 years of age ( i.e. 49%), 90 were between 25-45 years age(i.e. 355) and 42 were above 40 years
(i.e. 16%). So in this study majority of respondents belong to young category i.e. less than 25 years.

Table 1: Demographic profile of Respondents

Categories Frequency Percentage

Gender Male 113 43%

Female 147 57%

Less than 25 yrs 128 49%

Age 25-40 yrs 90 35%

Above 40 yrs 42 16%

Validity and Reliability of the data

Validity of the data was verified by applying exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis
to check the model fit. But before doing factor analysis adequacy of data set was also done. To test for
Measure of Sampling Adequacy, Bartlett’s Test of Spherecity and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of
Sampling Adequacy (KMO) was applied on the data. The results of the Bartlett’s Test of Spherecity and
KMO test are shown in table 2.
Table 2 : KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .784
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 3.028E3
df 185
Sig. .000

Table 2 show that Bartlett's Test of Spherecity (approx. Chi-Square is 3.028E3, Degree of Freedom is 185,
and significance is 0.000) and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (KMO) value is 0.784
which shows that data is adequate for factor analysis.
Factor Analysis
Principal Component Analysis by use of Varimax Rotation was done for extracting the underlying factors
and to check construct validity. The outcome of Principal component analysis is given in table 3.
Table 3: Factor Analysis
Construct No. of items Factor loadings Eigen Value
Trust 12 0.747-0.833 2.567
Perceived Value 10 0.693-0.798 2.017

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 979

Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
 International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology
Vol. 29, No. 11s, (2020), pp. 975-984

Positive reviews 8 0.644-0.801 1.446

Extraction method: Principal component analysis

Factor loading of 0.5 or more was considered for all the items and Eigen value of more than 1 was
considered for extraction of factors (Hair et al., 2010). Overall 3 factors were retained as their Eigen values
was greater than 1 and based on category of items in these factors they were named as-Trust, perceived
value and positive response.
Table 4: Reliability Analysis
Variables Cronbach’s Alpha
Trust 0.843
Perceived Value 0.807
Positive reviews 0.786
The reliability of the scale was tested by employing the Cronbach’s Alpha reliability statistics.
The computed reliability coefficient of Cronbach’s Alpha was more than 0.6 for all measures which
implies the high reliability for the measure used (Hair et al., 2010).
Multiple regression Analysis
To find relationship between consumer buying behaviour (dependent variable) and trust, perceived value
and positive reviews (independent variables) regression analysis was done.
The general linear regression model used is of the following form:
Y =βo+β1x1+β2x2+β3x3+e
Where Y is the dependent variable, the β’s are the parameter estimates, the x’s are the
Independent variables, and e is the residual term. Y-variable is consumer’s buying behavior on social
media. The independent variables are trust, perceived value and positive response.
Table 5: Regression Analysis

Independent β SE(β) t-value Sig.t R2 Model F- Sig. F

variables (α) value
Constant 1.643 0.209 7.592 0.000 0.60 47.83 0.000

Trust 0.496 0.049 7.220 0.000

Perceived 0.543 0.069 14.042 0.000
value
Positive 0.268 0.039 6.416 0.000
reviews

Table 5 shows that the variables trust, perceived value and positive review are all statistically significant
predictors (α ≤ 0.05) of consumers’ buying behavior on social media. R2 is 0.60, which explains 60 percent
of the variance in consumers’ buying behavior on social media. As seen in table 5 all variables i.e. trust,
perceived value and positive reviews are positively related to consumers’ buying behavior in social media.
Inspection of the β coefficients shows that perceived value is the most influential explanatory variable at
.543, followed by trust at .496 and positive reviews at .268 for consumers’ buying behaviour on social

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 980

Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
 International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology
Vol. 29, No. 11s, (2020), pp. 975-984

media. As seen in table 5, our hypothesis 1 is accepted i.e. trust is positively related to consumer buying
behavior on social media. Results of Regression analysis as depicted in table 5 also support hypothesis 2
i.e. perceived value is positively related to consumer buying behavior on social media. Hypothesis 3 is also
supported by our results as seen in table 5 i.e. positive reviews on social media positively affects consumer
buying behaviour on social media.
6. Discussion
The findings reveal that independent variables of our conceptual model i.e. Trust, perceived value and
positive reviews are positively related to consumer buying behavior on social media. Trust was found to be
having and significant effect on consumer buying behavior on social media. So, the results support results
of previous studies done by Gefen & Straub (2000) and Pavlou (2003) where it was found that perceived
value is positively related to consumer buying behavior on internet. The significance of perceived value in
e-commerce environment also comes from the fact that it is easy to link product features as well as prices
online, and easy to change suppliers. For example, Grewal et al (2003) say the search costs in electronic
marketplaces are less, resulting in more competitive prices to the consumer. Search costs represent the cost
of the consumer to search information about different supplier’s products and prices (Brynjoffson and
Smith, 2000). The reduction in search costs not only increases the probability that consumers will compare
prices but also enables consumers to compare the quality and other benefits they may derive from the
products and services that they buy. (Bakos, 1991).
It is also found that trust is significantly and positively related to consumer buying behavior on social media.
Similar results were found in previous studies by Aljifri et al. 92003) and Gefen et al. (2003) where trust
was found to positively influence buying behavior of consumers. If consumers trust a brand or website they
will definitely buy that on social media also.
Our findings also pointed that positive reviews have significant positive influence on consumer buying
behavior. Perceived quality of reviews were found to be positively influencing consumer buying behavior
in previous studies also. (Zhou et al., 2013; Zhang et al. 2014). So good reviews on social media helps in
marketing and promoting of goods and services. In fact many companies have started paying for positive
reviews also. But, again these companies are then not trusted. So net impact on consumer buying behavior
is neutral if there are positive reviews and lack of trust.
7. Implications of the study
This study studied the relationship between behavioural intention factors and consumer buying behavior on
social media. Some major implications of the study which will be useful to e-marketers, e-commerce
companies, SEO companies, SEM companies, e retailers, marketing managers, etc for making marketing
plan for their company are as follows:
It was found in the research that perceived value is the most important factor that influences consumer
buying behavior on social media. So marketing strategy of the companies should be as such that they
highlight the perceived value of their products or services. Consumers should be made aware about the
value proposition of the product/service.
Trust was also found to be a predictor of buying behavior on social media. So for making consumers to buy
products on social media, it is important that trust should be established. Companies should build up trust
by providing quality goods, money back guarantees, safety measures, etc,
Positive reviews of customers on social media is also found to positively impact buying behavior of
consumer. Reviews are given by those consumers who have used that product/service. So to influence
buying behavior of consumers on social media it is important to have positive reviews from existing
customers. Positive reviews can be earned only by providing quality goods / services at fair prices and by

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 981

Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
 International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology
Vol. 29, No. 11s, (2020), pp. 975-984

good customer care. So for this companies should focus on providing quality goods and services alongwith
good customer service.
Subsequently, it is important for companies to have a business agenda adapted to social commerce (Lorenzo
et al. 2007; Liang &c Turban 2011). Social commerce is a new stream in e-commerce, which encourages
and engages in social interaction of consumers through social media (Hajli 2013). Social media provide
opportunities for businesses to be more attractive universally (Chen et al. 2011b). Businesses can
concentrate on information, service and system quality to improve their websites, and also enhance
perceived Value in their consumers (Ahn et al. 2007)
References

1. Adams, D.A., Nelson, R.R. 8c Todd, P.A. (1992) Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of
information technology: a replication. MIS Quarterly, 16, 2, pp. 227-247.
2. Aljifri, H.A., Pons, A. & Collins, D. (2003) Global e-commerce: a framework for understanding
and overcoming the trust barrier. Information Management & Computer Security, 11, 3, p. 130.
3. Ashman, R., Solomon, M.R. and Wolny, J. (2015) ‘An old model for a new age: consumer
decision-making in participatory digital culture’, Journal of Customer Behaviour, Vol. 14, No. 2,
pp.127–146.
4. Bagozzi, R.P. & Dholakia, U.M. (2002) Intentional social action in virtual communities.Journal of
Interactive Marketing, 16, 2, pp. 2-21.
5. Bakos, J. Y. (1991). A strategic analysis of electronic marketplaces. MIS quarterly, 295-310.
6. Brynjolfsson, E., & Smith, M. D. (2000). Frictionless commerce? A comparison of Internet and
conventional retailers. Management Science, 46(4), 563-585.
7. Chen, J., Xu, H. 8c Whinston, A.B. (2011) Moderated online communities and quality of user-
generated content. Journal of Management Information Systems, 28, 2, pp. 237-268.
8. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.E & Warshaw, P.R. (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: a
comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 8, pp. 982-1003.
9. Do-Hyung, E, Jumin, L. 8c Ingoo, H. (2007). The effect of on-line consumer reviews on consumer
purchasing intention: the moderating role of involvement. International Journal of Electronic
Commerce, 11, 4, pp. 125-148.
10. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C. & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social
capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer‐Mediated
Communication, 12, 1143-1168.
11. Gefen, D. (2002) Reflections on the dimensions of trust and trustworthiness among online
consumers. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 33, 3, pp. 38-53.
12. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated
model. MIS quarterly, 27(1), 51-90.
13. Gefen, D. Sc Straub, D. (2000) The relative importance of perceived ease of use in is adoption: A
study of e-commerce adoption. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 1, 8, pp. 1-30
14. Goh, K.Y., Heng, C.S. and Lin, Z. (2013) ‘Social media brand community and consumer behavior:
quantifying the relative impact of user-and marketer-generated content’, Information Systems
Research, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp.88–107.
15. Grewal, D., Iyer, G. R., Krishnan, R., & Sharma, A. (2003). The Internet and the price–value–
loyalty chain. Journal of Business Research, 56(5), 391-398.
16. Grewal, D., Monroe, K. B., & Krishnan, R. (1998). The effects of price-comparison advertising on
buyers' perceptions of acquisition value, transaction value, and behavioral intentions. The Journal
of Marketing, 62(2), 46-
17. Hennig-Thurau T., Gwinner K., Walsh G. & Gremler D., (2004) Electronic Word-of-Mouth Via
Consumer Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the
Internet?, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18, 38–52.

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 982

Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
 International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology
Vol. 29, No. 11s, (2020), pp. 975-984

18. Ho-Dac, N., Carson, S., & Moore, W. (2013). The effects of positive and negative online customer
reviews: Do brand strength and category maturity matter? Journal of Marketing, 77, 37-53.
19. Hsiao, M.-H. 2009. Shopping mode choice: Physical store shopping versus e-shopping.
Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 45, 86-95.
20. Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., MCcarthy, I. P. & Silvestre, B. S. 2011. Social media? Get serious!
Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54, 241-251.
21. Kohli, C., Suri, R., & Kapoor, A. (2014). Will social media kill branding? Business Horizons, 1171,
1-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2014.08.004.
22. Kolter P, Keller K, Koshy A, Jha M (2009). Marketing Management 13th Edition. New Delhi:
Preason.
23. Kozinets, R. V., (1999). E-tribalized Marketing? The Strategic Implications of Virtual
Communities of Consumption, European Management Journal, 17(3), 252–64.
24. Laroche, M., Habibi, M., & Richard, M. (2013). To be or not to be in social media: How brand
loyalty is affected by social media? International Journal of Information Management, 33, 76–82.
25. Liang, T.-P., Ho, Y.-T., Li, Y.-W. Sc Turban, E. (2011) what drives social commerce: the role of
social support and relationship quality. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 16, 2, pp.
69-90.
26. Lorenzo, C., Constantinides, E., Geurts, P. Sc Gómez, M. (2007) Impact of web experience on e-
consumer responses, e-commerce and web technologies, in Psaila, G. Sc Wagner, R. (eds) E-
commerce and Web Technologies. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 191-200.
27. Lu, H.-P & Hsiao, K.-L. (2010) the influence of extro/introversion on the intention to pay for social
networking sites. Information & Management, 47, 3, pp. 150-157.
28. McCole, E, Ramsey, E. & Williams, J. (2010) Trust considerations on attitudes towards online
purchasing: the moderating effect of privacy and security concerns .Journal of Business Research,
63, 9-10, pp. 1018-1024.
29. McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures
for e-commerce: an integrative typology. Information systems research, 13(3), 334-359.
30. Park, C. & Jun, J.-K. 2003. A cross-cultural comparison of Internet buying behavior: Effects of
Internet usage, perceived risks, and innovativeness. International Marketing Review, 20, 534-553.
31. Pavlou, PA. (2003) Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: integrating trust and risk with
the technology acceptance model. International journal of Electronic Commerce, 7, 3, pp. 101-134.
32. Pennington, R., Wilcox, H. D., & Grover, V. (2003). The role of system trust in business-to-
consumer transactions. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(3), 197-226.
33. Powers, T., Advincula, D., Austin, M.S., Graiko, S. and Snyder, J. (2012) ‘Digital and social media
in the purchase decision process’, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp.479–489.
34. Riegner, C. 2007. Word of mouth on the web: the impact of Web 2.0 on consumer purchase
decisions. Journal of Advertising Research, 47, 436.
35. Ridings, C.M. ßc Gefen, D. (2004) Virtual community attraction: why people hang out online.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10, 1, pp. 1-10.
36. Senecal, S. & Nantel, J. (2004) the influence of online product recommendations on consumers’
online choices .journal of Retailing, 80, 2, pp. 159-169.
37. Teo, T. S. (2001). Demographic and motivation variables associated with Internet usage activities.
Internet Research, 11(2), 125-137.
38. Urban, G. L., Sultan, F., & Qualls, W. J. (2000). Placing trust at the center of your internet strategy.
Sloan Management Review, 42(1), 319-33.
39. Woodruff, R. B., & Gardial, S. F. (1996), Know Your Customer: New Approaches to
Understanding Customer Value and Satisfaction. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
40. Xiang, Z. and Gretzel, U. (2010) ‘Role of social media in online travel information search’, Tourism
Management, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp.179–188.

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 983

Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
 International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology
Vol. 29, No. 11s, (2020), pp. 975-984

41. Xie, K. and Lee, Y.J. (2015) ‘Social media and brand purchase: quantifying the effects of
exposures to earned and owned social media activities in a two-stage decision making model’,
Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp.204–238.
42. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and
synthesis of evidence. The Journal of Marketing, 2-22.
43. Zhang, K.Z., Zhao, S.J., Cheung, C.M. and Lee, M.K. (2014) ‘Examining the influence of online
reviews on consumers’ decision-making: a heuristic-systematic model’, Decision Support
Systems, Vol. 67, pp.78–89 [online] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article
/pii/S0167923614002097.
44. Zhou, M., Liu, M. and Tang, D. (2013) ‘Do the characteristics of online consumer reviews bias
buyers’ purchase intention and product perception? A perspective of review quantity, review
quality and negative review sequence’, International Journal of Services Technology and
Management, Vol. 11, Nos. 4–6, pp.166–186.

ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 984

Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC