4.7 Article

Exploring the role of personality, trust, and privacy in customer experience performance during voice shopping: Evidence from SEM and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102309

关键词

Voice shopping; Personality; Trust; Privacy; Prior experience; Customer experience; Smart speaker; Personalization; Artificial intelligence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines how personality, trust, privacy concerns, and prior experiences influence customer experience in voice shopping. The research reveals that trust and privacy concerns mediate the relationship between personality and perceptions of customer experience performance.
Voice shopping is becoming increasingly popular among consumers due to the ubiquitous presence of artificial intelligence (AI)-based voice assistants in our daily lives. This study explores how personality, trust, privacy concerns, and prior experiences affect customer experience performance perceptions and the combinations of these factors that lead to high customer experience performance. Goldberg?s Big Five Factors of personality, a contextualized theory of reasoned action (TRA-privacy), and recent literature on customer experience are used to develop and propose a conceptual research model. The model was tested using survey data from 224 US-based voice shoppers. The data were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). PLS-SEM revealed that trust and privacy concerns mediate the relationship between personality (agreeableness, emotional instability, and conscientiousness) and voice shoppers? perceptions of customer experience performance. FsQCA reveals the combinations of these factors that lead to high perceptions of customer experience performance. This study contributes to voice shopping literature, which is a relatively understudied area of e-commerce research yet an increasingly popular shopping method.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据