4.6 Article

Online reviews and impulse buying behavior: the role of browsing and impulsiveness

期刊

INTERNET RESEARCH
卷 28, 期 3, 页码 522-543

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/IntR-12-2016-0377

关键词

Online reviews; Social influence; Browsing; Consumer value; Impulsiveness; Impulse buying behaviour

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71472172, 71671174]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Online reviews have shown important information that affects consumers' online shopping behavior. However, little research has examined how they may influence consumers' online impulse buying behavior. The purpose of this paper is to bring theoretical and empirical connections between them. Design/methodology/approach The framework of this study was tested on three popular online group shopping websites in China (ju.taobao.com, dianping.com, and meituan.com). An online survey with 315 participants who had experience using these websites was recruited to verify the effects of consumers' perceived value from reading online reviews on urge to buy impulsively and impulse buying behavior. Findings The empirical findings show that consumers' perceived utilitarian and hedonic value from reading online reviews enhance their browsing behavior. Browsing positively affects consumers' urge to buy impulsively and finally affects their impulse buying behavior. Further, this study finds that consumers with high impulsiveness focus more on hedonic value of online reviews, whereas consumers with low impulsiveness put more emphasis on utilitarian value. Browsing demonstrates a stronger effect on urge to buy impulsively for consumers with high impulsiveness. Originality/value This study is one of the early studies to investigate the relationship between social influence (e.g. influence of online reviews) and impulse buying. It draws upon the perspectives of browsing and consumer's perceived value from the literature. This research also considers consumer differences regarding the level of impulsiveness.

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

4.6
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