4.6 Review

Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology

期刊

INFORMATION SYSTEMS RESEARCH
卷 13, 期 3, 页码 334-359

出版社

INFORMS
DOI: 10.1287/isre.13.3.334.81

关键词

trust; trusting beliefs; trusting intentions; institution-based trust; disposition to trust; e-commerce; measure; site quality; disposition; nomological network; web vendor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Evidence suggests that consumers often hesitate to transact with Web-based vendors because of uncertainity about vendor behavior or the perceived risk of having personal information stolen by hackers. Trust plays a central role in helping consumers overcome perceptions of risk and insecurity. Trust makes consumers comfortable sharing personal information, making purchases, and acting on Web vendor advice-behaviors essential to widespread adoption of e-commerce. Therefore, trust is critical to both researchers and practitioners. Prior research on e-commerce trust has used diverse, incomplete, and inconsistent definitions of trust, making it difficult to compare results across studies. This paper contributes by proposing and validating measures for a multidisciplinary, multidimensional model of trust in e-commerce. The model includes four high-level constructs-disposition to trust, institution-based trust, trusting beliefs, and trusting intentions-which are further delineated into 16 measurable, literature-grounded subconstructs. The psychometric properties of the measures are demonstrated through use of a hypothetical, legal advice Web site. The results show that trust is indeed a multidimensional concept. Proposed relationships among the trust constructs are tested (for internal nomological validity), as are relationships between the trust constructs and three other e-commerce constructs (for external nomological validity)-Web experience, personal innovativeness, and Web site quality. Suggestions for future research as well as implications for practice are discussed.

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