A

WINTER PROJECT REPORT

ON

A STUDY ON THE RISK ASSOCIATED WITH ONLINE

PURCHASE/BUY IN VARCHHA REGION

Submitted By:

KEVIN R SAKARIYA

(19BBA113)

Guided By:

MR. ABHISHEK RANKAWAT

BBA PROGRAMME

(Year 2021-2022)

SHREE J.D. GABANI COMMERCE COLLEGE &

SHREE SWAMI ATMANAND SARASWATI COLLEGE OF
MANAGEMENT
VNSGU,SURAT
 COLLEGE CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that this winter training report has been prepared by Kevin
R Sakariya (19BBA113) under my guidance and supervision. This project is
the result of his own work and is of standard expected form a candidate for
the degree of Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA).

The report submitted towards the partial fulfilment of the requirement for
the degree of Bachelor of business administration (BBA) during the academic
year 2021-2022 has been found satisfactory.

MR. ABHISHEK RANKAWAT Dr. P. R. Patel

FACULTY GUIDE I/c Principal

DATE:

PLACE: SURAT

I
 DECLARATION
I, hereby declare that, this winter training report submitted to Shree J.D.
Gabani Commerce College & Shree Swami Aatmanand Saraswati College
of Management, in the fulfilment of requirement of Bachelor of Business
Administration (BBA) degree, is result of my own work carried out during
January-March 2022.

This project report is entirely an outcome of my own efforts and has not
been previously submitted to any other university or institute for any
other examination and for any purpose by any other person.

Kevin R Sakariya

(19BBA113)
Date: -

Place: - Surat

II
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First of all, I praise the almighty God for his abundant blessings
showered upon me without which this research work would never have
been possible.

I take opportunity to thank VEER NARAMAD SOUTH GUJARAT

UNIVERSITY, for keeping such making the project report as a part of my
B.B.A. programmed.

My debts are many and I acknowledge them with much pride and
delight. I am very much thankful to DR. P. R. Patel, Principal of J. D. G
& S. A. S. Collage of Management for ending to me in all consideration
and co-operating, which a student can wish.

I am very happy to express my sincere thanks to my project guide Mr.

Abhishek Rankawat for supporting and guiding me during of my project
work and sparing his valuable time for me.

Lastly, I thank all the faculty members and friends who directly or
indirectly helped me in completion of my project works.

III
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
I [Kevin Sakariya] am a student of sixth semester in Shree J.D. Gabani
Commerce College & Shree Swami Atmanand Saraswati College of
Management, Surat.

I here at completion of my Winter project report on the topic of “ A

STUDY ON THE RISK ASSOCIATED WITH ONLINE PURCHASE/BUY IN
VARACHHA REGION. This report is prepared with are the help of
secondary data. Secondary data are collected from the particular website.

This report is including 6 chapters.

The first chapter is introduction.

It shows information about perceived and basic knowledge of this

research.

The second chapter is industrial profile.

It shows the information about e- commerce industry, history of e-

commerce and future of e-commerce in India.

The third chapter is theoretical framework.

It include information about e- commerce, types of e-commerce,

perceived risk, and types of perceived risk.

The fourth chapter is literature review.

It shows the previous study done by someone about risk associated with
online purchase/buying from web platforms.

The fifth chapter is research methodology.

It include information about need for research, problem statement,

research objective, variables under study, research design, sample size,

IV
sampling design, sampling units, research instruments, sampling area,
techniques used for data analysis and limitations of research.

The sixth chapter is data analysis.

It collect information through excel and Ms word and this information are
shown through tables, charts, and interpretation of them.

The seventh chapter is findings.

Some important facts and aspects are explained in this chapter, which
fulfil the research objective.

The eighths chapter is conclusion.

It shows the very short explanations and result about this report risk
associated with online purchase/buy from web platforms.

V
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

SR. TOPIC PAGE

NO.
NO.

TITLE PAGE I

COLLEGE CERTIFICATE II

DECLARATION III

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IV

TABLE OF CONTENT V

01 INTRODUCTION 1

02 INDUSTRY PROFILE 5

03 COMPANY PROFILE 10

04 LITERATURE REVIEW 17

05 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 21

06 DATA ANALYSIS 24

07 FINDINGS 52

08 CONCLUSION 55

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX
Introduction:-

This research focuses on several potential factors that can influence

intention of people to shop via social networking sites. Social networking
is a virtual network that connects people worldwide, including Friendster,
Myspace, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and others, through a number of
websites. Risks in online shopping are higher than traditional out of
home shopping, whereby customers are not able to sense
products/services that they intend to purchase. In online contexts,
shoppers can not truly estimate trust cues of the e-vendor due to
incomplete web interaction in comparison to face-to-face dealings.

This research is going to analyse the risk associated with online

purchase/buy from web platforms. Perceived risk has central importance
for online buyers. Generally, buyers do not know who the seller is!
Perceived risk is a negative point and customers doubt about product in
their minds. Perceived risk was first examined in offline context. At early
stage, perceived risk consists of five dimensions including: psychological,
physical, social, performance and financial risk. After some time one
more dimension was added as time risk. In online shopping, three more
dimensions of perceived risk were added including: security risk, privacy
risk and source risk. studies indicate that there is a significant negative
effect of perceived risk on online shopping.

Study the risk associated with online purchase/buy from

web-platform.

Online shopping has become very common these days. In this busy
world, people love shopping online because of the convenience it offers. I
personally prefer online shopping to offline shopping, as I can buy
whatever I need, while still relaxing on my bed. We all know that online
shopping has got many advantages, but at the same time, it has also had
risks associated with it. Regular online shoppers might be in the habit of

1
saving card details on e-commerce websites for future purchases but
saving card details on websites is very risky and can lead to financial
frauds. According to recent reports, more than 7000 e-commerce
websites worldwide have been infected by a data-stealing malware. You
was be shocked to know that even people, who had not stored the card
details on websites for future purchases, were also at risk. The malware
steals information like username, passwords, credit card information and
other personal details. E-commerce websites have become targets for
hackers as they generally have access to huge volumes of customer's
data.

India’s top 10 companies.

1. Amazon.in

2.Flipkart.com

3.Myntra.com

2
4.Tatacliq.com

5.Jiomart.com

6.Ajio.com

7.Pepperfry.com

3
8.Snapdeal.com

9.Paytmmall.com

10.Shopcluse.com

4
E-commerce industry

When we think about shopping today, we immediately think of the

Internet. How did e-commerce get to be the future of buying and selling?
How did we go from buying: basic electronics to purchasing nearly every
product imaginable via the Internet? Well, e-commerce offers a variety of
solutions for both buyers and sellers that physical stores just simply
can't. E commerce offers a buying experience that is unrivalled by
traditional brick and mortar shopping, with traditional shopping, we get
dressed, go to the store, peruse the aisles and make a purchase
(regardless of whether it's the lowest price). The Internet gives us a much
more powerful alternative to brick and mortar.

Over the last decade, the Internet has changed the way people buy and
sell goods and services. Online retail or e-commerce is transforming the
shopping experience of customers. The sector has seen unprecedented
growth especially in the last two years. The adoption of technology is
enabling the e-commerce sector to be more reachable and efficient.
Devices like smartphones, tablets, and technologies like 3G, 4G, Wi-F
and high-speed broadband is helping to increase the number of online
customers. Banks and other players in e-commerce ecosystem are
providing a secured online platform to pay effortlessly via payments
gateways. The homegrown players have shown tremendous growth and
attracted some big investors. The entry of global biggies like Amazon and
Alibaba has taken the competition to a new level. E-tailers are
differentiating themselves by providing innovative service offerings like
one-day delivery, 30-day replacement warranty, cash on delivery,
cashback offers, mobile wallets, etc. The supply chain has improved
significantly, and e-tailers are even leveraging on the services of Indian
Post for greater reach across the country.

The Internet has also become a virtual small business incubator, where
millions of entrepreneurs can set up their online shops and reach
customers all over the globe. Prior to the advent of e-commerce, small
businesses all over the world could only operate in their immediate
geographical areas with smaller customer bases. Today, there are
approximately 24 million e-commerce sites that allow the little guys to
compete with the big box stores on a global scale.

E-commerce personalizes the entire shopping experience for both buyers

and sellers. E-commerce has been a boon for sellers, who can

5
programmatically display specific advertisements and products that
directly appeal to an individual customer. Using data on what sellers
have viewed or put into their online carts, sellers can then gently remind
buyers to purchase their recently viewed items. This type of information
has streamlined the selling process and has enabled online retailers to
grow their profits.

The personalization aspect of e-commerce enables buyers to see exactly

what they want and when they want it. Have you ever come across an ad
for a pair of shoes you were just looking at 5 minutes prior? What about
hotel deals to a city you were just doing some research on?
Personalization refines our choices, introduces us to products we most
likely want and helps us to make the most well-informed purchases. The
data gathered by e-commerce stores brings the right product to us,
saving us the time (and sometimes money) that we normally would spend
walking aimlessly around department stores.

Social media platforms are shaping the way people shop across the globe.
Social media channels are no longer just advertising channels. Since
social media shopping has never been more convenient, online shoppers
are gradually switching from native apps to social media shopping.
Brands that have embraced social selling are already reaping the
benefits. Social media giants like Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest,
and YouTube have enhanced their social selling features with the aim to
reduce the time and effort needed to make a purchase on social media.
The future of ecommerce already Jooks bright for the shopper

6
History:-

1969 CompuServe, the first e-Commerce company is founded by Dr John

R. Goltz and Jersey Wilkins by using a dial-up connection. This is the
first time e-Commerce was introduced.

1979 Michael Aldrich (also considered as the founder or inventor of

eCommerce) invented electronic shopping. This was achieved by
connecting a transaction-processing system via telephone link to a
changed TV. That was done for secure data transmission.

1982 Continued technology development, especially in electronics, has

led to Boston Computer Exchange launching its first eCommerce
platforms.

1992 Charles M. Stack launched Book Stacks Unlimited as an online

bookstore in 1992-three full years before the launch of Amazon by Jeff
Bezos.

1994 In October 1994, Marc Andreessen and Jim Clark co-created

Netscape Navigator as a web browsing tool, and formally announced its
release.

1995 In 1995 Jeff Bezos launched Amazon mainly as a book selling

ecommerce site. Pierre Omidyar launched Auction Web that same year
which would later become what we know as eBay today.

1995: Amazon and eBay launch. Amazon launches as an online book

seller. Arguably the online market maker, it leads the way for online
shopping. 1995 also sees the launch of eBay, creating a platform that
eventually introduces the auction mechanism into mainstream retailing.

1996 Email. other web, Hotmail launches, opening the world of online
communications. The service was purchased by Microsoft in 1997.

7
1997. both sides of the pond, The USA dominates internet usage, but
more users are coming online in Europe. For the second year in a row,
global Internet usage has doubled, with 1.7%, of the world population
now online. The term weblog is coined, later becoming simply blog.

1998 Just Google.it, Google incorporates and launches, later becoming

the most used search engine in the world. It gives shoppers almost
everywhere a fast and reliable source of pre-perchance information.

1999 Alibaba Online launched as an online marketplace in 1999 with

funding more than $25 million.

2000 In 2000 Google AdWords was launched as a way for e-commerce

companies to advertise to users using the Google search tool.

2005 Amazon introduces membership on Amazon Prime. Customers to

get free shipping for a annual fee. Etsy is launched. It allows craftsmen
and smaller sellers to sell online goods.

2009 Square was created by Jack Dorsey and Jim McKelvey in 2009.
Eddie Mahealani and Mitchell Harper co-founded BigCommerce and
introduced it as a 100 per cent bootstrapped storefront ecommerce site
that year.

2011 Google Wallet was launched as a digital method of payment.

Facebook started to roll out early advertising opportunities via sponsored
stories to Business Page owners. Stripe payment processing company
launched.

2014 Apple introduced Apple Pay as a mobile payment and digital wallet
tool which allowed users to pay with an Apple device for products or
services. Jet.com was founded in 2014.

2017 Instagram Shopping was launched with ecommerce partner

BigCommerce in 2017.

8
Future of e-commerce in India
India is developing rapidly towards e-commerce market trends day by
day. The internet user base in India might still be mere 300 million which
is much less as compared to the other developed countries but its surely
expanding day by day. India has third largest internet population after
US & China. Indian internet population was 205 million in 2013
projected to be second largest by 2016 with 330-370 million users. As per
the last three years there is a rapid change in the scenario of e-
commerce in India. More than 200 million users have been added during
last three years. Growth of internet users is increasing very rapidly in
India.

9
Ecommerce, also known as electronic commerce or internet commerce,
refers to the buying and selling of goods or services using the internet,
and the transfer of money and data to execute these transactions.
Ecommerce is often used to refer to the sale of physical products online,
but it can also describe any kind of commercial transaction that is
facilitated through the internet.

The history of ecommerce begins with the first ever online sale: on the
August 11, 1994, a man sold a CD by the band Sting to his friend
through his website Net Market, an American retail platform. This is the
first example of a consumer purchasing a product from a business
through the World Wide Web—or “ecommerce” as we commonly know it
today.

Since then, ecommerce has evolved to make products easier to discover

and purchase through online retailers and marketplaces. Independent
freelancers, small businesses, and large corporations have all benefited
from ecommerce, which enables them to sell their goods and services at a
scale that was not possible with traditional offline retail.

Global retail ecommerce sales are projected to reach $27 trillion by 2020

Types of E-commerce Models:-

There are four main types of ecommerce models that can describe almost
every transaction that takes place between consumers and businesses.

10
1. Business to Consumer (B2C):

When a business sells a good or service to an individual consumer (e.g.,

You buy a pair of shoes from an online retailer).

2. Business to Business (B2B):

When a business sells a good or service to another business (e.g., A

business sells software-as-a-service for other businesses to use)

3. Consumer to Consumer (C2C):

When a consumer sells a good or service to another consumer (e.g., You

sell your old furniture on eBay to another consumer).

4. Consumer to Business (C2B):

11
When a consumer sells their own products or services to a business or
organization (e.g., An influencer offers exposure to their online audience
in exchange for a fee, or a photographer licenses their photo for a
business to use).

PERCEIVED RISK/ASSOCIATED RISK WITH ONLINE

PURCHASE/BUY:-

According to Arrow (1950), Humphreys and Kenderdine (1979) (1975),

Perceived risk "represents an uncertain, probabilistic potential future
outlay". In simple terms, perceived risk is the ambiguity that consumers
have before purchasing any product or service. a term that is used in
Marketing and sales, Perceived Risk refers to the customer's the risks
associated with any purchase and perception of associated with products

12
that are expensive such as houses or cars or is mostly products that are
complex and have many features such as Computers or laptops. This
kind of risk occurs when a consumer perceives that the purchase
decision might cause a postritual hazard or chance of loss, It does not
matter whether the perceived risk exists or not. Perceived risk is always
subjective in nature and differs from people to people. It might also vary
from time to time. When buying products that have a higher perceived
risk, Consumers often consult experts, family or friends about the
product and then make their decision. A common observation is that for
products with high perceived risks, most consumers tend to favour the
market -which already has a good review.

Research has shown that online shopping poses something of a threat to

consumers. Numerous sources highlight the fact that consumers
continue to perceive that using the internet for purchasing is risky. It
seems that the uncertainty associated with online shopping makes it a
risky endeavour for consumers, Risk refers to the likelihood that actual
results was differ from Mitchell (1999) proposes that be Chalise
consumers are more often motivated to avoid losses than to maximize
utility in purchasing. perceived risk is powerful in explaining consumers'
behaviour. Perceived risk refers to the nature and amount of risk
perceived by a consumer in contemplating a particular purchase. Bauer
(1960) introduced the concept of perceived risk to marketing literature
(Dowling and Staelin, 1994). His work was expanded upon in a risk-
taking and information-handling in consumer behaviour by Cox (1967),
This EARLY work was then followed by several conceptual models of
consumer risk-perception and information handling.

13
Types of Perceived Risk.

1. Functional Risk
Functional Risk refers to the risks associated with the functioning
of the product. For example, a consumer who loves to bake cakes
for his family and friends might think “Was the oven be sufficient
to bake multiple batches of cakes?” The functional perceived risk is
associated with the product’s features, functioning and perceived
benefits and includes concerns regarding the quality of the
product.

Since it is related to the features of the product, this kind of risk

can be easy addresses by the parent firm of the product. Providing
adequate product information and addressing every query of the
consumer was go a long way in helping alleviate such kinds of
perceived risk.

14
2. Physical Risk
Doubts about the safe usage of the product come under Physical
risks. A consumer might be confused about how safe it is to use a
particular product or service and thus thinks multiple times before
making the purchase.

This kind of perceives risk too is easy to address by the parent firm
as they can easily alleviate the customer’s fears by providing them
information about the safety of the product. A simple example in
this regard would be the customer’s doubt about cooking in the
microwave oven. With multiple kinds of research pointing to the
harmful effect of radiation inside the microwave, it is quite natural
for consumers to worry whether cooking in the microwave is safe or
not. To put this fear to rest, the manufacturing firm can explain
how the food is safe when cooked in a particular material.

3. Financial Risk
Financial perceived risk arises when the consumer thinks about
their Return on Investment. Assessing whether the product they
intend to purchase is worth its price and whether the benefits of
the products outweigh the investment they make come under
Financial perceived risk. When a consumer worries that an impulse
buy might strip him of valuable cash, it also comes under financial
risk. An apt example here would be a customer thinking if the
dishwasher, costing USD 525, he intends to purchase is worth the
investment. This kind of risk too can be addressed by the
manufacturing firm by providing information – such as life – about
the product.

4. Social/Psychological Risk
It is a known fact that brand works extremely hard at creating an
identity and image that their customers can identify with.

15
 Customers too start relating to a particular brand and thus
hesitate to get associated with a newer or lesser priced brand. Such
perceived risks can be classified as the social risk. An example
would be a consumer’s reluctance to wear a certain brand of
clothes because it affects their social status. Another example of
perceived social risk can be a customer worrying whether a
particular high-priced dress would get his/her parent’s approval or
even worrying whether a particular brand of crockery would
complement his/her classy and expensive dining table.

5. Time Risk
This kind of risk refers to the consumer’s worry about time
consumption when purchasing a new product. The consumer here
worries about how much of his time as well as the effort the new
product would consumer. A common example here is when firms
switch from existing software to a new one. If using complex new
software, the firm would have to train their resources in the new
software and thus have to invest their time and effort when making
the switch. Companies, therefore, address this kind of concern by
pitching their products as a timesaving.

Since Perceived risks affect the consumer buying pattern,

Marketers across industries try to address the concerns of the
consumer in various ways. Some common methods of addressing
perceived risks are providing warranty or guarantee for their
product, including detailed information of every little detail about
their product or even taking the help of well-known celebrities to
address the perceived risks associated with their product and thus
encourage consumers to buy their products.

16
 (Lec & Tan, 2003; Tan, 1999, Samadi and Najadi, 2009) In the past
studies it was found that consumers accept the internet as new medium
of purchasing with number of benefits but still they realized that the
uncertainties involved with any purchase process influence their
purchase intention.

This is not surprising, since studies have consistently shown that

consumers perceive higher risks in non-store shopping formats, such as
telephone shopping (Akaah & Korgaonkar, 1988) mail order (Van den
Poel & Leunis, 1999), catalog (Eastlick & Feinberg, 1999), and direct
sales (Peterson, Albaum, & Ridgway, 1989).

Some researchers like Novak et al., 2000; Molina-Castillo and Lopez-

Nicolas., 2007; Vellido, et al., 2000) found that perceived risk has a
negative influence on consumers' attitudes or intentions to purchase
online.

(Bhatnagar, et al., 2000) These rescarchers suggested that computer

knowledge does moderate the relation between perceived risk in oniline
shopping and consumer purchase intention. Consumers with greater
computer experience are found to be more favorably inclined to shopping
in cybermalls in particular.

(Samadi and Najadi, 2009) A more positive online shopping experience

led to consumers' less perceived purchasing risk level in Internet and a
higher perceived risk led to less future purchasing intention from
Internet.

Perceived risk according to Samadi and Yaghoob-Nejadi (2009) is the

subjective belief of an individual on possible negative consequences from
his/her decision. It was also defined by Schiffman (2007) as the
uncertainty customers are liable to encounter if they do not anticipate
the consequences of their purchase decisions.

According to Schierz, Schilk and Wirtz (2010) perceived risk in the

expectations of losses, the larger the expectations of losses are, the
higher the degree of risk consumers was perceived. Perceived risk was
also defined by Flick (2009) as a two-dimensional construct comprising

17
the uncertainty involved ina purchase decision and the consequences of
taking an unfavorable action.

Online Shopping intention is defined by Pavlou (2003) as the wasingness

or intends of customers to purchase goods and services through the
website. It was also defined by Fygenson and Pavlou (2006) as a state or
situation when a customer desires or plans to purchase certain product
or service from an e-shop in future.

Since Bauer (1960) introduced risk-taking behaviour in marketing

literature as a possible measure of consumer attitude towards online
purchase, it had captivated the attention of numerous researchers and
many studies had been carried out to examine the influence of perceived
risk on shopping intension.

In 2011, a research by Almousa (2011) on 300 Saudi Arabian

customers investigated perceived risk in apparel online shopping by
conducting a webbased survey that measured the perception of
customers on the six types of risk connected with online apparel
shopping and their influence on purchase intention. Thus six variables
which are performance risk, financial risk, psychological risk, security
risk, time risk and privacy risk were conceptualized, it was found that
time risk and performance risk strongly and negatively influenced online
shopping intention; it was also found that privacy risk and security risk
have negative effects on online shopping intention.

This research by Almousa (2011) is a relevant study as it specified and

encapsulated perceived risk in apparel online shopping however, the
reliability and authenticity of the result cannot be ascertained because
the research used a nonprobability sampling techniques by conducting a
web- based survey which according to Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill,
(2009) cannot be used as a means of generalization to the population at
large.

In 2013, a study by Manoud (2013) investigated the elfect of perceived

risk on online shopping intention in Jordan using a nample size of 395
respondents, majorly customers who are online shoppers, an such, he
conceptualized five variables which are; time risk, financial rink,
information security risk, delivery risk and product rink. His study
revealed that financial risk, product risk, information security risk and

18
delivery risk negatively affect online shopping intention, and he
concludes that online merchants should be aware of customer's
perceived risk and strategies adequately to avert these risks.

Based on literature, the theoretical framework for this research would be

conceptualized based on the above-mentioned findings, using
information privacy risk, security risk, delivery risk, financial risk and
quality risk because these variables are vastly recognized as the
customers perceived risk variables that hinders purchase intention and
these variables had been mostly researched by experts in thin field, as
such, the variables are well suited for this research.

According to Lee and colleagues (2001), two main categories of

perceived risk emerge in the process of online shopping. The first is the
perceived risk associated with product/service and includes functional
loss, financial loss, time loss, opportunity loss, and product risk. The
second is the perceived risk associated with context of online
transactions, and includes risk of privacy, security, and nonrepudiation.

Senecal 2000; Borchers, 2001; Bhatnagar, et al., 2000, Shergil and

Chen, 2005). Among them, the influence of financial risk, product risk,
and concern for privacy and security is significant.

(Bhatnagar, et al, 2000).Higher product risk decreases Internet

purchasing and the product risk is higher for high priced products or
technically complex products like hardware, software, CDs, and books,
therefore these products are less likely to be purchased online.

JAzadavar, et. al.2011, Doolin et. al., 2005, Hoffman et al.1999)

Privacy and security risk was also discussed by previous researchers in
the context of online shopping. It was found that an anxiety regarding
security of personal information had a negative influence on online
shopping and decreases frequency of oline shopping.

(George 2002; Karweni 1999, Hoffman et al., 1999 and Wang et al,
1998) Customers are concerned about unauthorized acquisition of
personal information during Internet use or the provision of personal
information collected by companies to third parties.

19
(Adapa, S, 2008) Customer's especially Indian women are afraid in
disclosing their credit card number online.

Similarly for Malayasian consumers the issue of security and trust over
Internet is the most overwhelming barrier that limits the adoption of
clectronic commerce (Delafrooz, et al. 2011), where as in the context of
UK women who purchase apparel online are more wasting to provide
credit card and purchasing information over Internet if the retailers
weredeemed reliable and the perceived risk features like lack of security',
privacy of information' and "online fraud do not deter them from online
shopping. Hirst and Omar, 2006)

also considered risk Economic, social, and performance risk dimensions

(Jarvenpaa and Todd, 1996 1997). Performance risk was related to the
functional aspects of the product whereas psychological risk was
described him/herself. (Cases, 2002). was of individual's disappointment
in as reaction

Physical risk Related to safety or health of an individual whereas social

risk was described as s disappointment individual among friends.
Roselia’s (1971) identified four different forms of risk: hazard loss, money
loss, ego loss and time loss.

Perceived Risk and Gender:-

Perceived risk also differs according to gender. Garbarinoa and

Strahilevitzb (2004) observed in their study that compared to men,
women was be more likely to increase their wasingness to purchase
online if they receive a site recommendation from a friend and having a
site recommended by a friend leads to both a greater reduction in
perceived risk and a stronger increase in wasingness to buy online
among women than among men whereas Adapa, S (2008) studied that
security issues such as disclosure of credit card numbers were major
concerns for Indian women.

Hirst and Omar (2006) also observed that female internet users use
internet with interest and confidence as compared to male internet users.

20
1.Need of research:
To identify the problems which are faced by the customer and purpose of
this study is to investigate the effect of consumers perceived risk
associated with online buy. The perceived risk in online buy dimensions
employed in this study are which types of risk security because they are
found to negatively influence in the major risk associated with online
purchase/Buy.

2.Problem statement:
The research was be conducted to know “A study on the risk associated
with online purchase/buy”. These days a huge number of online web
venders are engaged in serious effort to define and integrate the level of
risk associated with their customer.

3.Research objective:
A. Primary :-

• To study on the risk associated with online purchase/buy.

B. Secondary :-

• To find out the solutions that have been helped to avoid certain
risk associated with online purchase/buy.

4.Variables under study:

• The researcher has been identified all variables which show risk
associated with online purchase/buy.

Financial risk :-

• Product risk
• Convenience risk
• Non-delivery risk
• Return policy
• Cultural differences

21
Any other risks :-

• Time risk
• Delivery risk
• Safety
• Service
• Trust
• Social risk
• Information security

5.Research design:

A. Types of research: -
The researcher has been used descriptive research design because the
primary study has been taken in this research.

B. Techniques for data collection: -

There are two types of technique for data collection...

• Primary data: -
Primary data has been collected directly from respondents
with the help of a questionnaire.

• Secondary data:-
Secondary data has been collected through literature
review with the help of books, magazines, newspaper, &
The internet.

C. Sample design: -

I.Sample unit: -
Sampling unit has been conducted from the respondents who are
doing online purchasing & have personal experience about many
platforms of online purchasing/buy.

II.Sampling size: -

22
 Sampling size has been 200 respondents.

III.Sampling technique :-

There are mainly two sampling technique was used.

1. Probability sampling.
2. Non-probability sampling.

6. Tools used for data analysis:

• Following the tools for data analysis below :-

• -Tables.
• -Graphs.
• -Charts.

7. Limitations:
In this research process so many limitations as below…

• The only limited area has been selected for research.

• Sampling size has been as per the idea and knowledge of the
researcher.
• Respondents may not provide the right information because of a
lack of knowledge about the risk.
• Sometime respondents have been not ready or able to give the
responses.
• Given period has been not enough for study.

23
Q-1. Gender:
Gender Frequency Percentages
Male 113 56.5
Female 87 43.5
Other 0 0
Total 200 100%

Frequency
Other
0%

Female
44%

Male
56%

Male Female Other

Interpretation:
From the above table and graph, it is to be interpreted that, out of 200
respondents 56% male, 44% female.

24
Q-2. Age:
Age Frequency Percentages
Up to18 37 18.5
18 to 30 124 62
31 to 50 32 16
50 or More 7 3.5
Total 200 100%

Percentages
50 or more
4%
Up to 18
30 to 50 18%
16%

18 to 30
62%
Up to 18 18 to 30 30 to 50 50 or more

Interpretation:
From the above table and graph, it is to be interpreted that, out of total
200 respondents in 62% people are up to 18- to 30-year-old, 18% people
are up to 18 years-old, 16% people are 30- to 50-year-old%, 4% people
are 50 or more-year-old.

25
Q-3. Academic Qualification:
Education Frequency Percentages
UP to SSC 28 14
HSC 42 21
Graduate 68 34
Post-graduate or more 56 28
Other 6 3
Total 200 100%

Frequency
Other
3% Up to SSC
14%

Post-graduate and
more
28%

HSC
21%

Graduate
34%
Up to SSC HSC Graduate Post-graduate and more Other

Interpretation:
From the above table and graph, it is to be interpreted that, out of total
200 respondents 34% people are Graduate and 28% people are Post
Graduate or more qualificator, 21% people are qualifications HSC,
whereas 14% people are up to SSC and only 3% people are others
education.

26
Q-4. Occupation
Occupation Frequency Percentages
Students 84 42
Professional 37 18.5
Service 33 16.5
Homemaker 22 11
Self employed 21 10.5
Unemployed 3 1.5
Total 200 100

frequency
Service
16%

Homemaker
11%
Professional
18%

Other
Self employed Unemployed
13% 11% 2%

Student
42%
Student Professional Service Homemaker Self employed Unemployed

Interpretation:
From the above table and graph, it is to be interpreted that, out of total
200 respondents, 42% are Student, 18.5% have professional occupation,
16.5% have service occupation, and 11% are homemaker, 21% are self-
employed, 3% are unemployed, and 14% are businessman.

27
Q-5. Annual income
Annual Income Frequency Percentages
less than 1Lakh ₹ 32 16
1Lakh ₹ to 2 Lakhs₹ 21 10.5
2 Lakhs ₹ to 3 Lakhs 45 22.5
3 Lakhs ₹ and above 102 51
Total 200 100

Frequency
less than 1Lakh ₹
16%

1Lakh ₹ to 2 Lakhs₹
10%

3 Lakhs ₹ and above

51%

2 Lakhs ₹ to 3 Lakhs
23%

less than 1Lakh ₹ 1Lakh ₹ to 2 Lakhs₹ 2 Lakhs ₹ to 3 Lakhs 3 Lakhs ₹ and above

Interpretation:
From the above table and graph, it is to be interpreted that, out of total
200 respondents, 51% people’s income are 3 Lakhs ₹ and above, 23%
people’s income are 2 Lakhs ₹ to 3 Lakhs ₹, 16% people’s income are Less
than 1 lakh ₹, 10.5% people’s income are 1Lakh ₹ to 2 Lakhs₹.

28
Q-1. which online e-commerce website do you mostly used
for online shopping?
parameters Frequency percentages
Amazon 97 48.5
Flipkart 58 29
Meesho 14 7
Snapdeal 24 12
Myntra 7 3.5
Total 200 100

Response
Myntra
4%
Snapdeal
12%

Meesho
7%

Amazon
48%

Flipkart
29%

Amazon Flipkart Meesho Snapdeal Myntra

Interpretation:
From the above table and graph, it is to be interpreted that, out of total
200 respondents 48% people are purchase from online shopping, 29%
people are purchase from online shopping, 12% people are purchase from
online shopping, and 7% people are purchase from online shopping, 4%
people are purchase from online shopping.

29
Q-2. What type of product do you generally Purchase/Buy
from e-commerce website?

Parameters Frequency Percentages

Clothing 23 11.5
Home-and-Kitchen 39 19.5
appliances

Electronics and Gadget 71 35.5

Beauty & Wellness 24 12
Footwear 29 14.5
Book & 3 1.5
Entertainments
Watches 6 3
Others 5 2.5
Total 200 100

Interpretation:

Book &
Percentages
WatchesOthers
Entertainments Clothing
3% 3%
2% 11%
Footwear
15%

Home & Kitchen

appliances
19%

Beauty & Wellness

12%

Electronic & gadget

35%
Clothing Home & Kitchen appliances Electronic & gadget
Beauty & Wellness Footwear Book & Entertainments
Watches Others

30
From the above table and graph, it is to be interpreted that, out of total
200 respondents, 35% respondents are purchasing electronic and
gadgets products more than other products. Then 19% respondents are
purchasing home & kitchen appliance, 15% respondents are purchasing
footwear, 12% respondents are purchasing beauty & wellness products,
and 11% respondents are purchased clothing, 3% respondents are
purchasing watches and other, 2% respondents are purchasing book &
entertainment

31
Q-3. Do you think that purchasing online products
associated with risk?
Parameter Frequency Percentages
Yes 105 52.5
No 95 47.5
Total 200 100

Frequency

No
48%
Yes
52%

Yes No

Interpretation:
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 200
respondents 52% respondents are yes for purchasing online products
associated with risk, whereas 48% of respondents have not any interest
with purchasing online products associated with risk.

32
Que-4. Risk associated with online Buy/Purchase.
4.1: - The product purchased from web platforms may not receive
as expected.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 71 70%
Disagree 11 9%
Neutral 4 4%
Agree 4 4%
Strongly agree 15 13%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
80%
70%
70%
Strongly disagree
60%
Disagree
50%
Neutral
40% Agree
30% Strongly agree

20%
13%
9%
10% 4% 4%
0%
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
disagree agree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 70% respondents are strongly disagree with above
statement,13% respondents are strongly agree with above statement, 9%
respondents are disagree with above statement and 4% respondents are
neutral with above statement, and 4% respondents are agree with above
statements.

33
4.2: - The Product purchased from web platform does match with
seller's description.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 9 10%
Disagree 69 65%
Neutral 7 7%
Agree 14 12%
Strongly agree 6 6%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
70% 65%

60%

50% Strongly disagree

Disagree
40%
Neutral

30% Agree
Strongly agree
20%
12%
10%
10% 7% 6%

0%
Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 65% respondents are disagree with above statement,12%
respondents are agree with above statement, 10% respondents are
strongly disagree with above statement and 7% respondents are neutral
with above statement, and 6% respondents are strongly agree with above
statements.

34
4.3: - Probability of losing money paid for a product because of
defective products received from web platforms.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 9 9%
Disagree 5 5%
Neutral 10 10%
Agree 37 35%
Strongly agree 44 41%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
50%
44%
45%
Strongly disagree
40% 37%
Disagree
35%
Neutral
30%
Agree
25%
Strongly agree
20%
15%
9% 10%
10%
5%
5%
0%
Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 41% respondents are strongly agree with above
statement,35% respondents are agree with above statement, 10%
respondents are neutral with above statement and 9% respondents are
strongly disagree with above statement, and 5% respondents are disagree
with above statements.

35
4.4: - Web platforms may misuse personal financial or non-financial
information.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 16 16%
Disagree 8 9%
Neutral 13 10%
Agree 59 55%
Strongly agree 9 10%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
60%
55%

50%

40%
Strongly disagree
Disagree
30%
Nautral

20% Agree
16%
Strongly agree
9% 10% 10%
10%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 55% respondents are agree with above statement,16%
respondents are strongly disagree with above statement, 10%
respondents are strongly agree with above statement and 10%
respondents are neutral with above statement, and 9% respondents are
disagree with above statements.

36
4.5: -There is a possibility to receive defective products from web
platforms.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 7 7%
Disagree 6 6%
Neutral 7 5%
Agree 19 20%
Strongly agree 66 62%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
25%

20%
20%

15% Strongly disagree

Disagree
10% Nautral
10%
7% Agree
6%
5% Strongly agree
5%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 62% respondents are strongly agree with above
statement,20% respondents are agree with above statement, 7%
respondents are strongly disagree with above statement and 6%
respondents are disagree with above statement, and 5% respondents are
neutral with above statements.

37
4.6: -The company may charge more than the agreed amount of
money.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 20 20%
Disagree 27 25%
Neutral 18 18%
Agree 34 31%
Strongly agree 6 6%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
35%
31%
30%
25%
25%
20% Strongly disagree
20% 18%
Disagree

15% Nautral
Agree
10%
Strongly agree
6%
5%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 31% respondents are agree with above statement, 25%
respondents are disagree with above statement, 20% respondents are
strongly disagree with above statement and 18% respondents are neutral
with above statement, and 6% respondents are strongly agree with above
statements.

38
4.7: -Online retailers may track my shopping habits and history
purchases.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 7 7%
Disagree 9 9%
Neutral 20 20%
Agree 55 50%
Strongly agree 14 7%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
60%

50%
50%

40%
Strongly disagree
Disagree
30%
Nautral
20%
20% Agree
Strongly agree
9%
10% 7% 7%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 50% respondents are agree with above statement, 20%
respondents are neutral with above statement, 9% respondents are
disagree with above statement and 7% respondents are strongly disagree
with above statement, and 7% respondents are strongly agree with above
statements.

39
4.8: -Sometimes fake information may be given by web platforms.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 6 6%
Disagree 12 12%
Neutral 24 20%
Agree 56 55%
Strongly agree 7 7%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
60%
55%

50%

40%
Strongly disagree
Disagree
30%
Nautral
20% Agree
20%
Strongly agree
12%
10% 7%
6%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 55% respondents are agree with above statement,20%
respondents are neutral with above statement, 12% respondents are
disagree with above statement and 7% respondents are strongly agree
with above statement, and 6% respondents are strongly disagree with
above statements.

40
4.9: -The design of the product may not attractive as seen at the
time of ordering from web platform.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 73 70%
Disagree 8 8%
Neutral 11 10%
Agree 5 5%
Strongly agree 8 7%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
80%
70%
70%

60%

50% Strongly disagree

Disagree
40%
Nautral
30%
Agree

20% Strongly agree

10%
8% 7%
10% 5%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 70% respondents are strongly disagree with above
statement,10% respondents are neutral with above statement, 8%
respondents are disagree with above statement and 7% respondents are
strongly agree with above statement, and 5% respondents are agree with
above statements.

41
4.10: -The product purchased from web platforms may fail to give
the desired level of satisfaction.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 7 7%
Disagree 71 70%
Neutral 8 8%
Agree 12 10%
Strongly agree 7 5%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
80%
70%
70%

60%

50% Strongly disagree

Disagree
40%
Nautral
30%
Agree

20% Strongly agree

10%
7% 8%
10% 5%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 70% respondents are disagree with above statement,10%
respondents are agree with above statement, 8% respondents are neutral
with above statement and 7% respondents are strongly disagree with
above statement, and 5% respondents are strongly agree with above
statements.

42
4.11: -Inability to compare prices while buying from web platforms.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 5 5%
Disagree 61 60%
Neutral 15 15%
Agree 11 10%
Strongly agree 13 10%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
70%
60%
60%

50%

Strongly disagree
40%
Disagree

30% Nautral
Agree
20% 15% Strongly agree
10% 10%
10% 5%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 60% respondents are disagree with above statement,15%
respondents are neutral with above statement, 10% respondents are
agree with above statement and 10% respondents are strongly agree with
above statement, and 5% respondents are strongly disagree with above
statements.

43
4.12: -While buying from web platforms I face the risk of making a
poor purchasing decisions.

Degree Frequency Percentages

Strongly disagree 2 3%
Disagree 4 4%
Neutral 11 11%
Agree 56 52%
Strongly agree 32 30%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
60%
52%
50%

40%
Strongly disagree
30% Disagree
30%
Nautral

20% Agree
Strongly agree
11%
10%
3% 4%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 52% respondents are agree with above statement,30%
respondents are strongly agree with above statement, 11% respondents
are neutral with above statement and 4% respondents are disagree with
above statement, and 3% respondents are strongly disagree with above
statements

44
4.13: -I may receive the unfavourable opinion of relatives and
friends after buying from web platforms.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 26 25%
Disagree 32 30%
Neutral 20 20%
Agree 16 15%
Strongly agree 11 10%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
35%
30%
30%
25%
25%
20% Strongly disagree
20%
Disagree
15%
15% Nautral

10% Agree
10%
Strongly agree

5%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 30% respondents are disagree with above statement,25%
respondents are strongly disagree with above statement, 20%
respondents are neutral with above statement and 15% respondents are
agree with above statement, and 10% respondents are strongly agree
with above statements.

45
4.14: -It is a potential possibility of losing status in a social group
as a result of purchasing from web platform.

Degree Frequency Percentages

Strongly disagree 62 60%
Disagree 9 11%
Neutral 9 8%
Agree 12 12%
Strongly agree 13 9%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
70%
60%
60%

50%

Strongly disagree
40%
Disagree

30% Nautral
Agree
20%
Strongly agree
11% 12%
8% 9%
10%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 60% respondents are strongly disagree with above
statement,12% respondents are agree with above statement, 11%
respondents are disagree with above statement and 9% respondents are
strongly agree with above statement, and 8% respondents are neutral
with above statements.

46
4.15: -While buying from web platforms I feel fear of not receiving
the product at a time.

Degree Frequency Percentages

Strongly disagree 11 11%
Disagree 10 7%
Neutral 12 12%
Agree 44 42%
Strongly agree 28 28%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
45% 42%
40%

35%

30% 28%
Strongly disagree
25%
Disagree
20% Nautral

15% Agree
11% 12%
Strongly agree
10% 7%
5%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 42% respondents are agree with above statement,28%
respondents are strongly agree with above statement, 12% respondents
are neutral with above statement and 11% respondents are strongly
disagree with above statement, and 7% respondents are disagree with
above statements.

47
4.16: -Web platforms may not provide facilities of free return,
refund, and replacement.
Degree Frequency Percentages
Strongly disagree 48 46%
Disagree 19 19%
Neutral 13 13%
Agree 13 10%
Strongly agree 12 12%
Total 105 100%

Percentage
50%
46%
45%

40%

35%

30% Strongly disagree

Disagree
25%
19% Nautral
20%
Agree
15% 13% 12%
10% Strongly agree
10%

5%

0%
Strongly Disagree Nautral Agree Strongly agree
disagree

Interpretation: -
From the above table and graph, it can be interpreted that out of 105
respondent 46% respondents are strongly disagree with above
statement,19% respondents are disagree with above statement, 13%
respondents are neutral with above statement and 12% respondents are
strongly agree with above statement, and 10% respondents are agree
with above statements.

48
Q-5:- What are the payment method you generally use for an online
purchase?

Parameter Frequency Percentages

Cash on delivery 76 38%
Debit card 58 29%
Credit card 29 14.5%
Net banking 37 18.5%
Total 200 100

Frequency
Net Banking
19%

Cash On Delivery
38%

Credit Card
14%

Debit Card
29%
Cash On Delivery Debit Card Credit Card Net Banking

Interpretation:-
The above pie chart shows that out of the 200 respondents 38%are
mostly using cash on delivery method of payment for their online
purchasing. Then 29% respondents are using debit card method, 19%
respondents are using net-banking method and only 14% respondents
are using credit card for online purchasing.

49
Table 1:- Factors that are important when customer are
purchase/buy from online platforms with associated risk.

No Questions Means/Average

1 The product purchased from web 1.866666667

platforms may not receive as expected.

2 The Product purchased from web 2.419048

platform does match with seller's
description.

3 Probability of losing money paid for a 3.971429

product because of defective products
received from web platforms

4 web platforms may misuse personal 3.352381

financial or non-financial information.

5 There is a possibility to receive defective 4.247619

products from web platforms.

6 The company may charge more than the 2.8

agreed amount of money.

7 Online retailers may track my shopping 3.571429

habits and history purchases.

8 Sometimes fake information may be 3.438095

given by web platforms.

9 The design of the product may not 1.733333

attractive as seen at the time of ordering
from web platform.

10 The product purchased from web 2.438095

platforms may fail to give the desired
level of satisfaction.

11 Inability to compare prices while buying 2.67619

from web platforms.

12 While buying from web platforms I face 4.066667

the risk of making a poor purchasing
decisions.

50
13 I May receive the unfavourable opinion 2.561905
of relatives and friends after buying from
web platforms.

14 It is a potential possibility of losing 2.095238

status in a social group as a result of
purchasing from web platform.

15 While buying from web platforms I feel 3.647619

fear of not receiving the product at a
time.

16 web platforms may not provide facilities 2.257143

of free return, refund, and replacement.

51
Respondents’ profile :
Age Frequency
Up to 18 year 37
19 – 30 year 124
31 – 50 year 32
More than 50 year 7
Gender Frequency
Male 113
Female 87
Qualification Frequency
Up to SSC 28
HSC 42
Graduate 68
Post-graduate & More 56
Other 6
Occupation Frequency
Student 84
Professional 37
Service 33
Home maker 22
Self Employed 21
Unemployed 3
Annual Family Income Frequency
Less than 1Lakh ₹ 32
1 Lakh ₹ to 2 Lakhs ₹ 21
2 Lakhs ₹ to 3 Lakhs ₹ 45
3 Lakhs ₹ and above 102

52
• The survey shows that out of the 200 respondents most of the
respondent use Amazon platform for their online shopping.
Flipkart is the second platform.

• The survey shows that most of the respondents used to purchase

clothing appearance, electronic gadgets, and footwear most out of
the other product list.

• The survey shows that out of the 200 respondents 105 respondents
visited websites/web platforms while shopping.

• In this survey number of respondents who perceived risk while

buying from online web platform is being taken as per average of
their different responses of statements.

• In this survey category of agree and strongly agree of different

statements is being taken for getting average number of respondent
for particular risk.

• Study shows that consumer risk is low influence rather quality

Around the 71 respondents feel quality risk like not getting same
product or fail to deliver desired satisfaction and around 61
respondents are feeling consumer risk like inability to compare the
price or risk of making poor purchasing decision.

• In the research the influence of social risk is very low. Around 20

respondents feel social risk because of unfavourable opinion of
relatives and friends or losing status in social group.

• The research shows that around 105 respondents feel performance

risk while buying from online web platforms because of not receive
product as per seller's description or product not functioning well.

• In this research security risk is higher than financial risk.

Respondents perceived risk of losing money and misuse of personal
information is more than risks of receive defective product and risk
of internal hackers steal credit card information.

53
• Research shows that 76 respondents generally use cash on delivery
method for their online purchase.

• In this research 113 respondents are male, and 87 respondents are

female.

• The research shows that out of the 200 respondents most of the
respondents are students. In this 124 number of respondents are
having in education category of U.G. and P.G. category.

• The product purchased from web platforms may not receive as

expected.

• The Product purchased from web platform does match with

seller's description.

• Probability of losing money paid for a product because of

defective products received from web platforms

• web platforms may misuse personal financial or non-financial

information.

54
• This study shows that perceived risk highly affect to the
respondents who unt know about online study and don’t have
experienced of shopping through web platforms.

• in this study while engaging with the shopping online, perceived

risk define as a potential for lows in purchasing desire outcomes.

• This study find out that perceived risk affect the customer while
buying from unfamiliar web platforms This study finds out specific
relative difference between different types of risk which affect the
respondents while buying from unfamiliar web platforms.

• Consumer online perceived risk and its dimensions were studied

by different authors since years. In this doctoral research,
consumer online perceived risk was studied in three parts
specifically for varachha region. In the first part, various
dimensions of perceived risk were studied through literature
review. It was found that there are six major types of perceived
risks, and these were Financial Risk, Performance Risk, Social
Risk, Psychological Risk, Time Risk and Privacy Risk.

• In the second part, influences of all six types of risk on consumers

purchase intentions were studied. It was found that there was a
statistically significant influence of perceived risk on purchase
intentions of online consumers. Statistically it was proved that
financial risk, social time risk and psychological risk has more
impact in compared to performance and privacy risk on
consumers" future intentions to shop online.

• In the third part, various factors were identified which have

influence on consumers' online perceived risk. These factors were
consumer innovativeness, consumers' self-efficacy, hedonic
shopping values and utilitarian shopping values. An empirical
model of online perceived risk developed based on it. This model
was further validated by confirmatory factor analysis. Impact of
these identified factors on perceived risk was studied with the help
of simple regression analysis. Based on statistical result, it was
found that performance risk, social risk, time risk and
psychological risk were highly influenced by hedonic shopping
values. Utilitarian shopping value has a great influence on

55
psychological risk and financial risk. Consumer self-efficacy has a
great influence of psychological risk. Consumer innovativeness has
also influenced.

56
Bibliography:-

• A.Bhatnagar,s.Mishra and H. R. Rao, “on risk, convenience an

internet shopping behaviour association for computing machinery” ,
Communicating of the ACM, vol, 43, no.11, pp.998-105,2000.

• Andres I. Nicolaou and D. Harrison McKnight. “Perceived

information quality in data exchanges: Effects on Risk, Trust, and
Intention to Use” , Information Systems Research,
Vol.17,No.4(December 2006), pp. 332-351

• Bakos JY (1997). Reducing implications electronic marketplaces.

Manage. Sci. 43: 1676 1692.

• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A

social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice Hall. 13.
Bentler, P. M. , and Douglas G. Bonett. 1980. "Significance Tests
and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures."
Psychological Bulletin 88:5 88-606.

• Bettman J.R. (1973),"Perceived risk and its components". Journal

of Consumer Research, Vol. 10. pp. 184-190

• Biswas, D. and Burman, B., 2009. The effects of product

digitalization and price dispersion on search intentions in offline
versus online settings: the mediating effects of perceived risks.
Journal of Product & Brand Management, 18(7), pp.477- 486.

• Brace, I. (2004) Questionnaire Design. How to Plan, Structure and

Write Survey Material for Effective Market Research. London:
Kogan Page.

• Bridges, E., and R. Florsheim. 2008. Hedonic and utilitarian

shopping goals: The online experience. Journal of Business
Research 61:309-314.

• Browne, M, W., &Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing

model fit. In K. A. Bollen& J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural
equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications.

• Bryman, A., Bell, E. (2007). Business Research Methods. 2nd ed.

Oxford University Press

57
 • Bobbitt, LM.& Dabholkar P. A (2001). "Integrating attitudinal
theories to understand and predict use of technology-based self-
service" International Journal of Service Industry Management,
Vol. 12, No.5, p423, 28.

• Bollen, K. A, 1986. "Sample Size and Bentler and Bonett's

Nonnormed Fit Index." Psychometrika 51:375-377.

Webliography:-

• https://www.shopify.com/encyclopedia/what-is-ecommerce

• https://builtin.com/e-commerce

• https://www.gtu.ac.in/uploads/1NIDHI%20SHARMA_THESIS.pd
f

• https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353718685_A_Histor
y_of_e-Commerce

• https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328774137_Consume
r_perceived_risk_in_online_shopping_environment_via_Facebook_
as_medium

• https://www.marketing91.com/perceived-risk/

58
 To study the risk associated with online
purchase/Buy in varachha region.

Respected Sir/Ma'am,

I am KEVIN SAKARIYA, a BBA student at Shree J.D.Gabani & S.A.S.

college of management and conducting a survey for "TO THE RISK
ASSOCIATED WIYH ONLINE PURCHASE/BUY IN VARACHHA REGION"
for my winter project. It would be great if you could spare some time
and complete this survey. I assure you that the information given will
be kept strictly confidential and will be used for academic purpose only.

Thank you.

1.Your Name
2.E-mail
3.Gender
o Male
o Female
o Other

4.Age
o Up to 18
o 18 to 30
o 30 to 50
o 50 or more

5.Academic Qualification
o Up to SSC
o HSC
o Graduate
o Postgraduate & More
o Other

6.Occupation
o Student

59
 o Professional
o Service
o Home Maker
o Self Employed
o Unemployed

7.Annual Family Income

o Less than 1Lakh ₹
o 1 Lakh ₹ to 2 Lakhs ₹
o 2 Lakhs ₹ to 3 Lakhs ₹
o 3 Lakhs ₹ and above

8. Which online e-commerce website do you mostly used

for online shopping?
o Amazon
o Flipkart
o Meesho
o Snapdeal
o Myntra
o Other:

9. What type of product do you generally Purchase/Buy

from e-commerce website?

o Clothing
o Home & Kitchen Appliances
o Electronics & Gadgets
o Beauty & Wellness
o Footwear
o Book & Entertainments
o Watches
o Others

10. Do you think that purchasing online products

associated with risk?

o YES
o NO

60
11. Risk associated with online Buy/Purchase.

Strongly Disagree Neutral Neutral Strongly

Disagree Agree
The product
purchased
from web
platforms
may not
receive as
expected.
The Product
purchased
from web
platform
does match
with seller's
description.
The Product
purchased
from web
platform
does match
with seller's
description.
Web
platforms
may misuse
personal
financial or
non-
financial
information.
There is a
possibility
to receive
defective
products
from web
platforms.
The
company

61
may charge
more than
the agreed
amount of
money.
Online
retailers
may track
my
shopping
habits and
history
purchases.

62