Breaking the Ice in B2C Relationships: Understanding Pre-Adoption E-Commerce Attraction

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1120.0429

References

  • Agarwal R, Prasad J. A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Inform. Systems Res. (1998) 9(2):204–215LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (1991) 50(2):179–211CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Altman I, Taylor DA. Social Penetration (1973) (Holt, Rinehart, Winston, New York) Google Scholar
  • Anderson JC, Gerbing DW. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psych. Bull. (1988) 103:411–423CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Aronson E, Linder D. Gain and loss of esteem as determinants of interpersonal attractiveness. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. (1965) 1:156–172CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Arrowood AJ. Agreement, attraction, and self-esteem. Canadian J. Behav. Sci. (1973) 5:242–252CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Barocas R, Karoly P. Effects of physical appearance on social responsiveness. Psych. Rep. (1972) 31:495–500CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Benbasat I, Barki H. Quo vadis, TAM? J. Assoc. Inform. Systems (2007) 8(4):211–218Google Scholar
  • Bhattacherjee A. Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quart. (2001) 25(3):351–371CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Boyer KK, Hult GTM. Customer behavior in an online ordering application: A decision scoring model. Decision Sci. (2005) 36(4):569–598CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Brickmann P, Meyer P, Fredd S. Effects of varying exposure to another persona with familiar or unfamiliar thought processes. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. (1975) 33:261–270CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Brohan M. More customers doesn't translate into higher sales for Bidz.com. Internet Retailer (2011) November). http://www.internetretailer.com/2011/11/10/more-customers-doesnt-translate-higher-sales-bidzcomGoogle Scholar
  • Brown SA, Venkatesh V. Model of adoption of technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS Quart. (2005) 29(3):399–426CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Buston PM, Emlen ST. Cognitive processes underlying human mate choice: The relationship between self-perception and mate preference in Western society. Proc. National Acad. Sci. USA (2003) 100(15):8805–8810CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Byrne BM. Structural Equation Modeling with EQS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming (2006) (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ) Google Scholar
  • Byrne D. Attitudes and attraction. Adv. Experiment. Soc. Psych. (1969) 4:36–89Google Scholar
  • Campbell DE, Wells JD, Valacich JS. Diagnosing and managing online business-to-consumer (B2C) relationships: Toward an eCommerce B2C relationship stage theory. AIS Trans. Human-Comput. Interaction (2009) 1(4):108–132CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Cenfentelli RT, Benbasat I, Al-Natour S. Addressing the what and how of online services: Positioning supporting-services functionality and service quality for business-to-consumer success. Inform. Systems Res. (2008) 19(2):161–181LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Chau PYK, Hu PJ-H. Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: A model comparison approach. Decision Sci. (2001) 32(4):699–719CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Chelune GJ. Reactions to male and female disclosure at two levels. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1976) 34:1000–1003CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Chin WW, Marcoulides GA. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research (1998) (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ) 295–336Google Scholar
  • Clore GL, Byrne D, Huston TL. A reinforcement-affect model of attraction. Foundations of Interpersonal Attraction (1974) (Academic Press, New York) 143–170CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Cober RT, Brown DJ, Keeping LM, Levy PE. Recruitment on the net: How do organizational web site characteristics influence applicant attraction? J. Management (2004) 30(5):623–646CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Cober RT, Brown DJ, Levy PE, Cober AB, Keeping LM. Organizational websites: Web site content and style as determinants of organizational attraction. Internat. J. Selection and Assessment (2003) 11(2/3):158–169CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Coleman JS. Relational analysis: The study on social organization with survey methods. Human Organ. (1958) 17:28–36CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Compeau DR, Higgins CA. Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quart. (1995) 19(2):189–211CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Confetelli RT, Benbasat I, Al-Natour S. Addressing the what and how of online services: Positioning supporting-services functionality and service quality for business-to-consumer success. Inform. Systems Res. (2008) 19(2):161–181LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Cooper RB, Zmud RW. Information technology implementation research: A technological diffusion approach. Management Sci. (1990) 36(2):123–139LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Craig G, Duck SW. Similarity, interpersonal attitudes and attraction: The evaluative-descriptive distinction. The British J. Soc. Clinical Psych. (1977) 16:15–21CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Sci. (1989) 35(8):982–1003LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Dennis A, Valacich J. Conducting research in information systems. Commun. Assoc. Inform. Systems (2001) 7:1–40Google Scholar
  • Derlega VJ, Chaikin AL. Norms affecting self-disclosure in men and women. J. Consulting in Clinical Psych. (1976) 44:376–380CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dion KK, Berscheid E, Walster E. What is beautiful is good. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1972) 24:285–290CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dwyer RF, Schurr PH, Oh S. Developing buyer-seller relationships. J. Marketing (1987) 51:11–27CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Feingold A. Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the parental investment model. Psych. Bull. (1992) 112(1):125–139CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An introduction to Theory and Research (1975) (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA) Google Scholar
  • Fisher CD, Ilgen DR, Hoyer WD. Source credibility, information favorability, and job offer acceptance. Acad. Management J. (1979) 22:94–103CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable measurement error. J. Marketing Res. (1981) 18:39–50CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fung R, Lee M. EC-trust (trust in electronic commerce): Exploring the antecedent factors. AMCIS 1999 Proc. (1999) . Paper 179, http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis1999/179Google Scholar
  • Galletta DF, Henry RM, McCoy S, Polak P. When the wait isn't so bad: The interacting effects of website delay, familiarity, and breadth. Inform. Systems Res. (2006) 17(1):20–37LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Gefen D, Karahanna E, Straub DW. Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quart. (2003) 27(1):51–90CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC. Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings (1998) (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
  • Hanssens DM, Thorpe D, Finkbeiner C. Marketing when customer equity matters. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2008) 86(5):117–123Google Scholar
  • Heckathorn DD. Respondent-driven sampling: A new approach to the study of hidden populations. Soc. Problems (1997) 44(2):174–199CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Heckathorn DD. Respondent-driven sampling II: Deriving valid population estimates from chain-referral samples of hidden populations. Soc. Problems (2002) 49(1):11CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Heijden HVD. Factors influencing the usage of websites: The case of a generic portal in The Netherlands. Inform. Management (2003) 40:541–549CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Highhouse S, Lievens F, Sinar EF. Measuring attraction to organizations. Educational Psych. Measurement (2003) 63(6):986–1001CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling (1999) 6:1–55CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Huesmann LR, Levinger G, Berkowitz L, Walster E. Incremental exchange theory: A formal model for progression in dyadic social interaction. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (1976) 9(Academic press, New York) 191–229Google Scholar
  • Huston TL. Ambiguity of acceptance, social desirability, and dating choice. J. Experiment. Psych. (1973) 9:32–42Google Scholar
  • Huston TL. Foundations of Interpersonal Attraction (1974) (Academic Press, New York) Google Scholar
  • Huston TL, Levinger G. Interpersonal attraction and relationships. Ann. Rev. Psych. (1978) 29:115–156CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Ives B, Learmonth GP. The information systems as a competitive weapon. Commun. ACM (1984) 27(12):1193–1201CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Jarvis CB, Mackenzie SB, Podsakoff PM. A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. J. Consumer Res. (2003) 30:199–218CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Johnson M, Tesser A. Some interactive effects of evaluative similarity, structural similarity, and type of interpersonal situation on interpersonal attraction. J. Experiment. Res. Personality (1972) 6:154–161Google Scholar
  • Karahanna E, Agarwal R, Angst CM. Reconceptualizing compatibility beliefs in technology acceptance research. MIS Quart. (2006) 30(4):781–804CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Karahanna E, Straub DW, Chervany NL. Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post adoption beliefs. MIS Quart. (1999) 23(2):183–213CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kotler P. Atmospherics as a marketing tool. J. Retailing (1973–1974) 49(4):48–64Google Scholar
  • Kwon TH, Zmud RW, Boland RJ, Hirschheim RA. Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation. Critical Issues in Information Systems Research (1987) (John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK) 227–281Google Scholar
  • Landy D, Sigall H. Beauty is talent: Task evaluation as function of the performer's physical attractiveness. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1974) 29:299–304CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Laroche M, Bergeron J, Barbaro-Forleo G. Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. J. Consumer Marketing (2001) 18(6):503CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Leonard R. Self-concept and attraction for similar and dissimilar others. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1975) 31:926–929CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Levinger G. Toward the analysis of close relationships. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. (1980) 16(6):510–544CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Levinger G, Huesmann LR, Gergen KJ, Greenberg MS, Willis RH. An “incremental exchange” perspective on the pair relationship: Interpersonal reward and level of involvement. Social Exchange in Developing Relationships (1980) (Plenum, New York) 165–188CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Levinger G, Snoek JD. Attraction in Relationship: A New Look at Interpersonal Attraction (1972) (General Learning, Morristown, NJ) Google Scholar
  • Limayem M, Hirt SG, Cheung CMK. How habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of information systems continuance. MIS Quart. (2007) 31(4):705–737CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lindell MK, Whitney DJ. Accounting for method variance in cross-sectional research designs. J. Appl. Psych. (2001) 86(1):114–121CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lindgaard G, Fernandes G, Dudek C, Brown J. Attention Web designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression. Behav. Inform. Technol. (2006) 25(2):115–126CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Loiacono ET, Watson RT, Goodhue DL. WebQual: An instrument for consumer evaluation of Web sites. Internat. J. Electronic Commerce (2007) 11(3):51–87CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • MacKinnon DP, Warsi G, Dwyer JH. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate Behavioral Res. (1995) 30(1):41–62CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Martinez-Jerez FA, Narayanan VG, Brem L. Internet customer acquisition strategy at Bankinter. (2007) . Harvard Business School Case 103-021Google Scholar
  • Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman DF. An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Management Rev. (1995) 20(3):709–734CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • McKnight DH, Choudhury V, Kacmar C. Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Inform. Systems Res. (2002) 13(3):334–359LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Mick DG. Are studies of dark side variables confounded by socially desirable responding? The case of materialism. J. Consumer Res. (1996) 23(2):106–119CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Montoya RM, Horton RS. On the importance of cognitive evaluation as a determinant of interpersonal attraction. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (2004) 86(5):696–712CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Moore GC, Benbasat I. Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Inform. Systems Res. (1991) 2(3):192–222LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Odom MD, Kumar A, Saunders L. Web assurance seals: How and why they influence consumers' decisions. J. Inform. Systems (2002) 16(2):231–250CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Olson LM, Radecki L, Frintner MP, Weiss KB, Korfmacher J, Siegel RM. At what age can children report dependably on their asthma health status? Pediatrics (2007) 119(1):93–102CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Palmer JW, Griffith DA. An emerging model of Web site design for marketing. Commun. ACM (1998) 41(3):45–51CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Parsons A, Zeisser M, Waitman R. Organizing today for the digital marketing of tomorrow. J. Interactive Marketing (1998) 12(1):31–46CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Pavlou PA, Fygenson M. Understanding and predicting electronic commerce adoption: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. MIS Quart. (2006) 30(1):115–143CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Powers TL, Reagan WR. Factors influencing successful buyer-seller relationships. J. Bus. Res. (2007) 60:1234–1242CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations (1983) (Free Press, New York) Google Scholar
  • Salganik MJ, Heckathorn DD. Sampling and estimation in hidden populations using respondent-driven sampling. Sociol. Methodology (2004) 34:193–239CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Salisbury WD, Pearson RA, Pearson AW, Miller DW. Perceived security and World Wide Web purchase intention. Indus. Management and Data Systems (2001) 101(4):165–176CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Scanzoni J, Burgess RL, Huston TL. Social exchange and behavioral interdependence. Social Exchange in Developing Relationships (1979) (Academic Press Inc., New York) 61–98CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Segal MW. Varieties of interpersonal attraction and their interrelationships in natural groups. Soc. Psych. Quart. (1979) 42(3):253–261CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Segars A. Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: A paradigm and illustration within the context of information systems research. Omega (1997) 25(1):107–121CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Seligman C, Paschall N, Takata G. Effects of physical attractiveness on attribution of responsibility. Canadian J. Behavioral Sci. (1974) 6:290–96CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Shadish WR, Cook TD, Campbell DT. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference (2002) (Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston) Google Scholar
  • Shanteau J, Nagy G, Carol J, Payne J. Decisions made about other people: A human judgment analysis of dating choice. Cognition and Social Judgment (1976) (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ) 221–242Google Scholar
  • Siau K, Shen Z. Building customer trust in mobile commerce. Commun. ACM (2003) 46(4):91–94CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sigall H, Aronson E. Liking for an evaluator as a function of her physical attractiveness and the nature of the evaluations. J. Soc. Psych. (1969) 5:93–100Google Scholar
  • Simeon R. Evaluating domestic and international web-site strategies. Internet Res. (1999) 9(4):297–308CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Simeon R. Evaluating the projection of corporate culture online. Internat. Bus. Econom. Res. J. (2010) 9(8):79–94Google Scholar
  • Sussmann M, Davis J. Balance theory and the negative interpersonal relationship: Attraction and agreement in dyads and triads. J. Personality (1975) 43:560–581CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Thibaut JW, Kelley HH. The Social Psychology of Groups (1959) (Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
  • Thompson RL, Higgins CA, Howell JM. Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quart. (1991) 15(1):124–143CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Tractinsky N, Katz AS, Ikar D. What is beautiful is useable. Interacting with Comput. (2000) 13:127–145CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Turban DB, Keon TL. Organizational attractiveness; An interactionist perspective. J. Appl. Psych. (1993) 78:184–193CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Van der Heijden H. User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quart. (2004) 28(4):695–704CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Venkatesh V. Creation of favorable user perceptions: Exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Quart. (1999) 23(2):239–260CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Venkatesh V. Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Inform. Systems Res. (2000) 11(4):342–365LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Venkatesh V, Brown SA. A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: Adoption determinants and emerging challenges. MIS Quart. (2001) 25(1):71–102CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sci. (1996) 27(3):451–481CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Venkatesh V, Davis FD, Morris MG. Dead or alive? The development, trajectory, and future of technology adoption research. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems (2007) 8(4):267–286Google Scholar
  • Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quart. (2003) 27(3):425–278CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Watson RT, Akselsen S, Pitt LF. Attractors: Building mountains in the flat landscape of the World Wide Web. California Management Rev. (1998) 40(2):36–57CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wells JD, Fuerst WL, Choobineh J. Managing information technology (IT) for one-to-one customer interaction. Inform. Management (1999) 35(1):53–62CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Werts CE, Linn RL, Joreskog K. Interclass reliability estimates: Testing structural assumptions. Educational Psych. Measurement (1974) 34:25–33CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wilson DT. An integrated model of buyer-seller relationships. Acad. Marketing Sci. (1995) 23(4):335–345CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wu I-L, Chen J-L. An extension of trust and TAM model with TPB in the initial adoption of on-line tax: An empirical study. Internat. J. Human-Comput. Stud. (2005) 62(6):784–808CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Yang H-D, Yoo Y. It's all about attitude: Revisiting the technology acceptance model. Decision Support Systems (2004) 38:19–31CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zhang P, Sun H. The complexity of different types of attitudes in initial and continued ICT use. J. Amer. Soc. Inform. Sci. Technol. (2009) 60(10):2048–2063CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zhang P, Aikman SN, Sun H. Two types of attitudes in ICT acceptance and use. Internat. J. Human Comput. Interaction (2008) 24(7):1–21CrossrefGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.