MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952942083 · doi:10.1145/3314183.3323852

Shopping Motivation and the Influence of Perceived Product Quality and Relative Price in E-commerce

2019· article· en· W2952942083 on OpenAlexaff
Ifeoma Adaji, Kiemute Oyibo, Julita Vassileva

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Product (mathematics)MarketingVendorStructural equation modelingBusinessAdvertisingSample (material)Test (biology)Computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding a consumer's motivation to shop online with a vendor can help an e-business better understand the attitude of customers and what they look out for in their shopping decision-making process. Equally important in the shopping decision making process is the influence of the perceived quality of products and their price. Understanding how consumers are influenced by the perceived quality and price of products can help e-businesses to improve their customers' shopping experience. To contribute to ongoing research in this area, we investigate the influence of perceived product quality and price on the motivation of e-shoppers to shop online. In particular, we investigate which of perceived quality and price have a greater influence on the consumer's motivation to shop online. We also investigate the moderating effect of income and gender. Using a sample size of 241 e-commerce shoppers, we develop and test a global research model using Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Our results suggest that balanced buyers (shoppers who are moderately motivated by convenience and variety seeking but do not plan ahead and are impulse buyers) are more influenced by the relative price of products compared to their quality. In addition, balanced buyers who earn over $30,000 are influenced by the quality of the product compared to those who earn less than $30,000. Furthermore, male shoppers who are motivated by the convenience of online shopping (convenience shoppers) are also influenced by the perceived quality of products compared to female shoppers who are not.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207