DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Perceptions of Presence as Antecedents to E-tail Shopping - An Extended Technology Acceptance Model -

  • Received : 2012.04.27
  • Accepted : 2011.06.05
  • Published : 2012.06.30

Abstract

Drawing on the literature on TAM and presence, this study proposes a model of the extended TAM by identifying factors that affect the motivations to enhance our understanding of online consumers' acceptance of an e-tail website. This study conceptualizes that consumers' perceived presence variables such as telepresence and social presence are the antecedents to the motivations of TAM. Empirical tests using regression analyses generally supported the proposed model. The overall conclusion from the current data is that our integrated model is useful in understanding consumers' acceptance of an apparel e-tail website. The findings show that perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and perceived interest motivations act as strong determinants of consumers' attitude toward an e-tailer, which leads to their behavioral intentions about the e-tailer. This suggests that apparel e-tailers should consider these three motivations when they design their websites. As one way to influence these three factors, this study showed the role of perceived presence in the usage of an apparel e-tail website. The findings suggest that online consumers' perceptions of "being there" and "socialness" stimulate their perceptions of usefulness and interest in the website use. Thus, e-tailers should consider effective ways to increase consumers' perceived presence.

Keywords

References

  1. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M.(1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood: Prentice-Hall.
  2. Animesh, A., Pinsonneault, A., Yang, S.-B., & Oh, W.(2011). An odyssey into virtual worlds: Exploring the impacts of technological and spatial environments on intention to purchase virtual products. MIS Quarterly, 35(3), 789-810. https://doi.org/10.2307/23042809
  3. Bagozzi, R. P.(1981). Attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A test of some key hypotheses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(4), 607-627. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.4.607
  4. Barlow, A. K. J., Siddiqui, N. Q., & Mannion, M. (2004). Developments in information and communication technologies for retail marketing channels. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 32(3), 157-163. https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550410524948
  5. Bentler, P. M., & Speckart, G.(1979). Models of attitude-behavior relations. Psychological Review, 86(5), 452-464. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.86.5.452
  6. Biocca, F.(1997). The cyborgs dilemma: Progress embodiment in virtual environments. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2). Retrieved from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/
  7. Bitner, M. J.(1992). Servicescaptes: The impact of surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 37-71.
  8. Coyle, J. R., & Thorson, E.(2001). The effects of progressive levels of interactivity and vividness in Web marketing sites. Journal of Advertising, 30(3), 65-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2001.10673646
  9. Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1977). Beyond boredom and anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  10. Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
  11. Dabholkar, P. A., & Bagozzi, R. P.(2002). An attitudinal model of technology-based self-service: Moderating effects of consumer traits and situational factors. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(3), 184-201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070302303001
  12. Dabholkar, P. A.(1994). Incorporating choice into an attitudinal framework: Analyzing models of mental comparison processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 100-118. https://doi.org/10.1086/209385
  13. Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H.(1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554
  14. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R.(1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
  15. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R.(1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 22(14), 1111-1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x
  16. Gefen, D., & Straub, D. W.(2004). Consumer trust in B2C e-Commerce and the importance of social presence: Experiments in e-Products and e-Services. Omega, 32(6), 407-424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2004.01.006
  17. Gefen, D., & Straub, D.(2003). Managing user trust in B2C e-services. e-Service Journal, 2(2), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.2979/ESJ.2003.2.2.7
  18. Hassanein, K., & Head, M.(2006). The impact of infusing social presence in the web interface: An investigation across product types. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 10(2), 31-55. https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC1086-4415100202
  19. Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P.(1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 50-68 https://doi.org/10.2307/1251841
  20. Hopkins, C. D., Raymond, M. A., & Mitra, A.(2004). Consumer responses to perceived telepresence in the online advertising environment: The moderating role of involvement. Marketing Theory, 4(1/2), 137-162. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593104044090
  21. Hyun, M., & O'Keefe, R.(2012). Virtual destination image: Testing a telepresence model. Journal of Business Research, 65(1), 29-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.011
  22. Igbaria, M., Parasuraman, S., & Baroudi, J. J.(1996). A motivational model of microcomputer usage. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(1), 127-143. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.1996.11518115
  23. Keng, C., & Lin, H.(2006). Impact of telepresence levels on Internet advertising effects. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 9(1), 82-94. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.82
  24. Kim, T., & Biocca, F.(1997). Telepresence via television: Two dimensions of telepresence may have different connections to memory and persuasion. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2). Retrieved from http://www.blackwellsynergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00073.x
  25. Klein, L. R.(2003). Creating virtual product experiences: The role of telepresence. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 17(1), 41-55. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.10046
  26. Li, H., Daugherty, T., & Biocca, F.(2002). Impact of 3-D advertising on product knowledge, brand attitude, and purchase intention: The mediating role of presence. Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 43-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2002.10673675
  27. Lombard, M., & Ditton, T.(1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(2). Retrieved from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc
  28. Moon, J. W., & Kim, Y. G.(2001). Extending the TAM for a world-wide-web context. Information & Management, 38(4), 217-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(00)00061-6
  29. Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Yiu-Fai, Y.(2000). Measuring the customer experience in online environments: A structural modeling approach. Marketing Science, 19(1), 22-42. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.19.1.22.15184
  30. Oh, S. H., Kim, Y. M., Lee, C. W., Shim, G. Y., Park, M. S., & Jung, H. S.(2009). Consumer adoption of virtual stores in Korea: Focusing on the role of trust and playfulness. Psychology and Marketing, 26(7), 652-668. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20293
  31. Reeves, B., & Nass, C.(1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York: CSLI Publications.
  32. Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. R.(1988). The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 325-343. https://doi.org/10.1086/209170
  33. Short, J., & Williams, E.(1976). The social psychology of telecommunication. London: Wiley.
  34. Trevino, L. K., & Webster, J.(1992). Flow in computer- mediated eommunication: Electronic mail and voice mail evaluation and impacts. Communication Research, 19(5), 539-573. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365092019005001
  35. van der Heijden, H.(2003). Factors influencing the usage of websites: The case of a generic portal in the Netherlands. Information & Management, 40(6), 541-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(02)00079-4
  36. van der Heijden, H.(2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695- 704. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148660
  37. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D.(2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
  38. Wang, L. C., Baker, J., Wagner, J. A., & Wakefield, K.(2007). Can a retail Web site be social? Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 143-157. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.3.143
  39. Yadav, M. S., & Varadarajan, R.(2005). Interactivity in the electronic marketplace: An exposition of the concept and implications for research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 33(4), 585-603. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305278487

Cited by

  1. Telepresence and Interactivity in Mobile Learning System: Its Relation with Open Innovation vol.7, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010078
  2. Older Adults’ Online Shopping Continuance Intentions: Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and the Theory of Planned Behavior vol.37, pp.10, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1861419