Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electronic Commerce Research and Applications

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecra

Does social climate matter? On friendship groups in social commerce

Yi Sun a,b, Kwok Kee Wei b, Chaobin Fan c, Yaobin Lu a,, Sumeet Gupta d
a

School of Management, Huazhong University of Science & Technology, Wuhan, China

Department of Information Systems, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Shenzhen Jindi Industry and Trade Co., China
Indian Institute of Management, Raipur, India

c
d

a b s t r a c t
a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received
Received
Accepted
Available

16 December 2015
in revised form 15 June 2016
15 June 2016
online 16 June 2016

Keywords:
Collaborative shopping
Friendship group
Member intention
Purchase behavior
Social climate
Social commerce
WeChat

This article contributes to e-commerce research by providing an enriched understanding of how social
climate of friendship group affects members intention to purchase and their actual purchase behavior.
Data collected from 215 group members within a WeChat friendship group show that social climate
signicantly affects group members social value, hedonic value, self-discovery value, informational value
and their member intention to purchase together. This study highlights the importance of the proximal
social network in voluntary settings, illustrating that social climate inuences friendship group members
purchase behavior through affective channels rather than through cognitive channels.
2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.

1. Introduction
Social commerce the delivery of business and commercial
activities in an online social environment has attracted attention
for shaping emerging online commercial channels (Liang and
Turban, 2011; Zhou et al., 2013). According to Business Insider,
the top 500 retailers earned $2.69 billion from online social commerce in 2013, a 60% increase over the past year (Workman and
Adler, 2014). Commercial features are included within social networking services, such as Facebook, Weibo and WeChat is an
example of social commerce. Facebook is a leading social commerce platform and accounts for 64% of total social revenue in
the U.S. (Smith, 2015). This massive growth of sales through social
networking services and the corresponding massive increase in
prot generated by vendors implies that social commerce deserves
attention and research should be conducted to understand
consumer purchase behavior in such an environment.
Social commerce is different from e-commerce and groupbuying. In social commerce, consumers always bond together in
the form of social groups and purchase collectively rather than
shopping on an e-commerce website separately (Zhu et al.,
2010). Social groups are specic social networks that enable
assembled members to gather together as an intangible circle for
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: luyb@mail.hust.edu.cn (Y. Lu).
ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2016.06.002
1567-4223/ 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.

sharing information and providing social support (Dholakia et al.,

2004). According to Chi et al. (2010), online customers prefer communicating with other customers, discussing about particular
products, seeking feedback from shopping partners, and enjoying
leisure time with friends. Since Social Media facilitates such
discussion with others customers, social commerce has come into
vogue and promotes collaborative shopping whereby globally dispersed consumers shop online simultaneously (Zhu et al., 2010).
Collaborative shopping is also different from group-buying. In
group-buying, consumers gather together online temporarily to
form a group and bargain for a lower price. Group-buying consumers make purchase decisions separately and may not communicate or collaborate with one another. However, consumers in a
collaborative shopping group have a sense of belonging. They feel
themselves as one of the group members and carry a commitment
towards their group. Furthermore, collaborative shopping is more
enjoyable as customers communicate among themselves informally and crack jokes. Table 1 lists differences among collaborative
shopping, traditional e-commerce and group buying.
A number of studies (Kim et al., 2013; Zhu et al., 2006, 2010)
assert that consumers act jointly (such as searching information
together, and exchanging personal experiences collectively) within
a collaborative shopping process. In the collaborative process,
members of the group possess an intention for acting collectively.
This is we-intention, the commitment of group members to join a
collective action (Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2002). We here reects

38

Y. Sun et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

Table 1
Comparison between collaborative shopping, e-commerce and group buying.
Collaborative shopping

E-commerce

Group buying

Actor

Collective

Personal

Collective

Interaction
Decision

Simultaneously
Group-level

Asynchronous
Individual-level

Enjoyment

Asynchronous
Individual-level

Self-identity
p

group
members
awareness of membership.
For
the purpose of

clarity, this study uses the term member intention to characterize

we-intention that represents collaborative purchase behavior
whereby consumers shop together in an online social group.
Due to the paucity of research on collaborative purchase behavior in the context of social media, little is known about the factors
that inuence members intention to purchase. Since collaborative
shopping is different from other form of shopping, antecedents of
purchase behavior in this context may be different. Most of the
previous studies (Kim et al., 2013; Zhu et al., 2006, 2010) investigate the antecedents of members shopping intention from the perspective of supporting tools and personal experiences. However,
the social-side of consumption and the group-level antecedents
have been neglected in previous studies on collaborative shopping.
Social inuence in a group depends on the entire atmosphere
among members and reects the nature of the entire group.
According to Bagozzi (2000), the social consumer behavior can
be scrutinized as the effect of social features on interpersonal
process, interactive behavior and relationships among social collectives. Social climate is an important source of environmental
features of a social group (Chen and Huang, 2007; Liang et al.,
2010). It refers to the perception of individuals about the atmosphere and general socio-emotional tone of the group (Koo and
Ju, 2010; Liang et al., 2010). Prior studies (e.g. Bagozzi, 2000;
Johnson et al., 2005; Kivlighan and Tarrant, 2001) postulate that
social climate affects members intention and ultimately their
behavior. However, few empirical studies test the inuence of climate on members purchase intention and behavior within an
online social group. Therefore, the objective of this study is to
examine the inuence of social climate on members intention of
purchasing. Specically, the research question address is this study
is: How does the social climate bring about members intention of
purchasing?
This study makes two important contributions to IS research
and practice. First, it examines collaborative shopping activity as
a members intention of purchasing. Second, it introduces the
social climate into IS research and specify it within a friendship
group context. A friendship group is a specic online social group
where members develop friendship with each other (Tsai and
Bagozzi, 2014). We argue that the social climate of the friendship
group can affect the purchase intention of group members and
thereby inuence their purchase behavior.

categorized into two main types. In the rst type, traditional

e-commerce websites include social shopping features. For
example, eBay launched a function Help Me Shop (www.ebay.
com/helpmeshop), which enabled consumers invite their friends
join the online shopping and sharing opinions. Similarly, the
Chinese traditional e-commerce platform, Taobao, also added a
social feature which called Tao Jianghu (jianghu.taobao.com) in
its website to facilitate collaborative social shopping. In the second
type, the social media platform adds commercial features (Fang,
2015; Geeks Operation, 2014). For example, companies set up
WeChat groups and communicate with customers in the group
who are interested in product choices. Companies, as group members, also encourage consumers within the group to discuss and
purchase together.
Researchers also have concentrated on guring out ways to
implement collaborative tools across social networks. For example,
Zhu et al. (2010) examine the impact of two different design features of supporting tools, namely, navigation support and communication support, on consumers collaborative performance and
their perceptions of social presence. Ye et al. (2005) propose a collaborative virtual shopping system to facilitate real interaction and
communication between consumers who are interested in similar
products. A number of studies propose prototypes that enable consumers to navigate through virtual environment and conduct
shopping collaboratively (Puglia et al., 2000; Shen et al., 2002;
Zhu et al., 2006). In addition to implementation issues, interest is
burgeoning in examining the impact of collaborative shopping
factors on consumers perception and behavior. For example, Zhu
et al. (2010) explore the inuence of shared navigation and chat
on shopping partners coordination performance. Kim et al.
(2013) also propose two design features, namely, embodiment
and media richness, and examine their impacts on consumers perception of social presence.
However, recent studies have mainly been focusing on the role
of supporting technologies in facilitating collaborative shopping.
From a social inuence perspective, consumers behavior is largely
inuenced by their surroundings. In the social network context,
consumers immediate social environment is the social group with
which they interact and communicate frequently. Prior research
reveals that social inuence occurs within social groups and has
a signicant impact on group members perceptions and behavior.
Few studies have investigated the contextual factors that inuence
the social and relational perspectives of collaborative shopping
though.
Because of the lack of knowledge about these emerging collaborative technologies, as well as the social nature of the friendshipbased collaborative shopping group, it may be inappropriate to
apply the previous ndings on the use and impact of collaborative
shopping in e-commerce to a social commerce context. Therefore,
additional research effort is needed to analyze and evaluate collaborative shopping intention and behavior theoretically and empirically to advance our knowledge concerning this important and

expanding buying channel.

2. Theoretical development
2.2. Uses and gratications theory (UGT)
2.1. Collaborative shopping
Generally speaking, shopping is often a social process in which
consumers go shopping with others, such as friends or family
members. The ubiquity of social networks provides collaborative
platforms for shoppers to overcome the physical dissociation that
happens in online purchases (Zhu et al., 2010).
Collaborative shopping, a type of social shopping, has received
substantial amount of attention from both practitioners and
researchers. Companies have tried various techniques to build a
collaborative online shopping environment, which can be

UGT focuses on explaining the psychological values that

motivate media users to participate in specic media use behaviors
(Luo, 2002). UGT helps researchers to explicate various user values
when they are engaged with media, allowing for a better understanding of different behaviors and perceptions (Smock et al.,
2011). UGT has been widely used in understanding users IT adoption behavior. Previous studies have noted that motivations affect
user perceptions of the contextual stimuli and they shape their
intention and behavior. For example, Shin (2010) utilizes the uses
and gratication (U&G) approach to understand users motivations

Y. Sun et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

39

and perception of the e-book service, and then predict their intention to adopt such service. Smock et al. (2011) explore users motivations and perceptions of specic features of Facebook, and
provides insights into users intention of SNS use. Huang (2008)
highlights that psychological motivations and perception of the
web are important predictors of an online consumers adoption
of particular websites. Luo (2002) also examines the inuence of
three U&G antecedents: entertainment, informativeness and irritation, on consumers web usage and satisfaction.
Although UGT has been mainly used for explaining users IT
adoption in social commerce, recent studies have also examined
consumers purchase behavior using a UGT framework. UGT
assumes that media users should be actively involved in media
usage and interact frequently (Luo, 2002). The interactive nature
of social media leads to frequent involvement of users. Moreover,
collaborative shopping is supported by IT platforms such as social
networking services that allow consumers to collaborate in realtime, jointly purchase to obtain discounted group price, and
exchange product knowledge (Grange and Benbasat, 2013).
Collaborative shopping within a social media-based friendship
group is a new way to consume social media services. This study
presents a research model based on UGT and prior research on
social climate and inuence. Fig. 1 depicts the research model.
Consumers with high gratication tend to have favorable
perceptions of online shopping contexts, which leads to stronger
purchase intentions (Ko et al., 2005). Jahn and Kunz (2012) used
the UGT to investigate the effect of consumer value perceptions
for a brand fan page on customer brand management, including
consumer brand loyalty, brand commitment, brand wordof-mouth (WOM), and brand purchase. They highlighted three
types of value that motivate consumers fan page-usage patterns:
content-oriented value, relationship-oriented value and selforiented value. They found that most of content-oriented and
relationship-oriented value have signicant impact on consumers
fan page usage intensity except for social interaction value.
Meanwhile, the relationship-oriented value and self-concept
oriented value have signicant impact on consumers fan page
engagement. Ho et al. (2013) used a qualitative approach to reconrm the realtionship between needs and purchase intention. They
found that content-oriented value inuenced consumer engagement and indirectly inuenced consumer purchase intention.
These studies indicate that UGT is well-suited for explaining the
decision-making process, particularly purchase decisions in social
commerce. However, previous studies have focused on the
relationship between customer and companies within
a
company-centered online community, such as social interactions
within a brand fan page (Ho et al., 2013; Jahn and Kunz, 2012).

Moreover, it is a one-to-many relationship between a company

and its customers. Customer-centered online communities, such
as friendship-based online social groups have not been examined
in previous studies. Moreover, UGT pertains only to individuallevel motivations and seldom covers the contextual factors of a
social community. Finally, previous studies focused on purchase
intentions for a particular brand, rather than purchase behavior
within online social communities. Considering these gaps, this
study uses UGT to illustrate the relationship between contextual
factors, individual value perceptions and observed purchase
behavior within an online social group.
2.3. Value perception
People who decide on whether to take a specic action within a
social group and the amount of effort to exert are dependent on the
match between their needs and social benets provided by the
group (Bogaert et al., 2012). This study uses corresponding values
to indicate the needs that are satised by using social media: informational value, hedonic value, self-discovery value and social
value (Flanagin and Metzger, 2001). In contrast to virtual experiences obtained by using media to watch lms or play games, social
media acts as a convenient tool for social interactions with real
people. So social media users are not looking to escape. Thus, we
chose only four values that can be attained by using social media.
Each of these four values is displayed in Table 2 and is discussed in
the following sections.
Social value refers to the social benets acquired from building
and maintaining connections with other group members, such as
enhanced friendship and maintaining guanxi (Dholakia et al.,
2004). Motivations for shopping have been categorized at the
individual and social levels, and shopping is more than a simple
process of satisfying material needs. It is also a means to provide
consumers with a way to build and maintain social relationships,
and to enjoy the process. When consumers shop with companions,
they can discuss similar interests, evaluate products, and
strengthen social relationships. So the process of shopping with
friends or other familiar members is a part of building social relationships. Compared to traditional shopping, which is a lonelier
process, the social value obtained from shopping with others
encourages the consumer to use more time and spend more money
in this social process.
Hedonic value is derived from having fun and becoming relaxed
through interacting with other members, such as telling jokes or
sharing interesting ideas with each other. According to studies on
humancomputer interaction, high levels of intrinsic enjoyment
and pleasure in computer-mediated environments are important

Fig. 1. Research model. Note: H1-4 = Social Climate Hypotheses 1-4, H5 = Social Value Hypothesis, H6 = Hedonic Value Hypothesis, H7 = Self-discovery Value Hypothesi
s,
H8 = Informational Value Hypothesis, H9-10 = Member Intention Hypotheses 1-2.

40
Table 2

Y. Sun et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

Needs gratied by media.

Type

Description

In this study

Cognitive

Obtain information, knowledge

Informational value

Affective
Personal integrative
Social integrative
Tension release

Emotional, pleasant, or aesthetic experience

Enhancing credibility, condence, and status
Enhancing connections with family, friends, and so forth
Escape and diversion

Hedonic value
Self-discovery value
Social value

Source: Katz et al. (1973).

and essential dimensions of social climate for their online social

factors that produce a positive attitude, and increase a users
intention to continuously perform a task. A positive subjective
experience is considered as a particularly important factor in inuencing consumer behavior.
Self-discovery value involves understanding oneself or discovering ones ability through social interactions. Dholakia et al. (2004)
points out that self-discovery focuses on an individuals intrinsic
concerns and guring out ones embedded cognitions, such as ones
own preferences, perceptions, and values, by interacting with other
people.
We employ friendship-based collaborative shopping groups as an
informational source of product-related information, which
satises an individuals informational value. Considering that
product-related information is based on attributes and customer
experience associated with the product, social communication
and information exchange within a collaborative shopping group
can serve as an important source to capture these elements of a
product (Nam and Kannan, 2014).
2.4. Social climate of friendship groups
Online social groups have become increasingly popular, as
social networks offer venues where people can assemble electronically to communicate with each other (Ridings and Wasko, 2010).
Social inuence of a group comes from the atmosphere among its
members and reects the nature of the entire group (Choi et al.,
2003). Moreover, social groups that have more social interactions
and mutual activities are likely to exert greater social inuence
on members and shape their perceptions and behaviors (Tsai and
Bagozzi, 2014). The term friendship group refers to a social network
in which members regard themselves as part of a group of friends.
Based on frequent interactions and emotional social support, a
friendship group tends to form a social climate (Li and Lai, 2014).
From a social inuence perspective, social climate is an important
source of environmental features of a social group (Chen and
Huang, 2007; Liang et al., 2010). The social climate of a friendship
group refers to an implicit frame that includes the general
atmosphere or socio-emotional tone of the friendship group (Koo
and Ju, 2010; Liang et al., 2010).
So in order to identify the factors that inuence consumer purchase intention within an online friendship group, we introduced
the perceived social climate of a friendship group. Previous studies
proposed several dimensions of climate. (See Appendix 1) To select
appropriate dimensions that t the social media context, we conducted interviews within the friendship-based group. We collected
our data by carrying out semi-structured interviews from several
group members. The interview protocols are presented in
Appendix 1. Each interview lasted for about an hour. The interviewees were selected based on their activity level to ensure they had
experience with the collaborative shopping process in the group.
The interview results revealed the important role of social interaction, social support and social trust in facilitating the formation
of social climate within the group. The interviewees selected two
features of social climate from the referenced dimension lists in
Appendix 1, which in their opinion were the two most common

group: social support and social interaction. Meanwhile, we also

encouraged interviewees to add more features of the social climate. Both added an social trust as a necessary dimension of social
climate. They stated:
The social climate of the group is very good. We chat frequently.
The group begins to bustle at six oclock every day. Every time I
post, many friends follow to support me. Other group members
trust me, they are willing to interact with me. Another interviewee
also stated the importance of these three dimensions. Sometimes, if
a newcomer post, fewer people respond. Thats because we are not
familiar with him. Few members chatting in a group make it really
look desolate and it is to some extent, embarrassing. However, once
trustworthy people talk, other followers gradually participate into
the discussion, by actively interacting with others or just
supporting. At that time, the social climate of the group becomes
comfortable and relaxing.
Social support, social trust and social interaction have also been
regarded as crucial features of environmental cues of a social group
(Huang and Lin, 2011). So we choose these three dimensions for
social climate: social support, social trust, and social interactions.
According to the principles proposed by Jarvis et al. (2003) for
specifying formative constructs, we modeled social climate as a
formative second-order construct with these three reective
rst-order constructs. Table 3 presents their denitions.
Interactive environments are useful for building relationships
that enhance individual social value. An interactive environment
indicates a higher rate of socializing and community experiences.
The interactive relations among members of an online social group
develop into stronger ties, such as friendship, and enhance individual social value in the online community (Seraj, 2012). In an online
social group, consumers who perceive a reliable and interactive
social climate will have higher social value. So we hypothesize:
Social Climate Hypothesis 1. A group members perceptions of
social climate in the friendship group positively affect his or
her perceptions of social value.
Fiore et al. (2005) found that in an online retailers website,
environmental stimuli, such as the interactivity of the environment, has positive inuence on consumers emotional states, particularly, the hedonic value. In other words, consumers who feel
that the online environment has an interactive and positive social
climate will easily obtain hedonic value. So we assert:
Social Climate Hypothesis 2. A group members perceptions of
social climate in the friendship group positively affect his or
her perceptions of hedonic value.
Social climate as the psychosocial environment of online settings has been considered to affect participants self-concept. The
positive social climate of an online social group, which contains
harmonious social interactions, mutual social support and trust,
help participants understand and deepen salient aspects about

Y. Sun et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

Table 3
Measurements and denitions.
Constructs

Denition and measures

41

Social value (Cheung and Lee, 2009; Dholakia et al Social value refers to the social benets derived from establishing and maintaining connections with other people
1. I participated in collective activities to have something to do with other group members

.,
2004; Hung, 2014)

2. I participated in collective activities to stay in touch with other group members

3. I joined collective activities to make new friends
4. I joined collective activities to expand my social network
Hedonic value (Dholakia et al., 2004; Hung, 2014)

Hedonic value derives from fun and relaxation through socializing or interacting with others
1.
2.
3.
4.

Self-discovery value (Dholakia et al., 2004)

I participated in collective actions in order to relax

I participated in collective actions because it is interesting
I participated in collective actions to arouse my emotions and feelings
Participating in collective actions is very exciting

Self-discovery refers to apprehend and heighten protruding aspects of ones self through social interactions
How
1. I
2. I
3. I

Informational value (Dholakia et al., 2004)

often do you
participated in
participated in
participated in

Informational value is one that the participant derives from getting and sharing information in the virtual
community, and
1. I participated
2. I participated
3. I participated
4. I participated
5. I participated

Social support (Hajli and Sims, 2015)

use friendship group to gratify the following values

collective activities to learn about others and myself
collective activities to gain insight into myself
collective activities to know my preference

from knowing what others think

in collective activities to get information
in collective activities to learn how to do things
in collective activities to exchange information
in collective activities to provide others with information
in collective activities to contribute to a pool of information

Social support is the social resources that produced by informal relationships

1. Other members and I share emotion with each other
2. Other members and I are concerned about each other
3. Other members often agree with each others points of view
4. When I encountered a problem, some people in the group would give me information to help me overcome
the problem
5. To what extent members would like to give suggestions to others when others value help
6. To what extent members can get help from other members

Social interaction (Huang and Lin, 2011)

The social interaction focus on close relationship and frequent interaction

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Social trust (Huang and Lin, 2011)

I feel that my friends mean to maintain close social relationships with each other
I feel that my friends mean to spend a lot of time interacting with each other
I feel that my friends mean to frequent communication with each other
Measures how active members are in the day-to-day interaction
Members put a lot of energy into communication

Trust is an important social cue that arouses peoples social responses to other members
1.
2.
3.
4.

Member intention (Dholakia et al., 2004; Tsai and

Bagozzi, 2014)

I
I
I
I

feel
feel
feel
feel

that
that
that
that

my
my
my
my

friends
friends
friends
friends

mean to keep the promises to each other

know we can count on each other
behave in a consistent manner
are truthful in dealing with each other

Member intentions are formulated by regarding oneself as a member of the whole group and deciding to act
collectively within the group
1. I intend that our group (the group of community friends you identied above) purchase together during the
period of sale
2. We (the group of community friends identied above) intend to purchase together during the period of sale

Purchase behavior (Guo and Barnes, 2011)

Actual purchase behavior

1. How much money in average do you spend on buying products each month in the friendship group? (cost)
2. Every month in average, how many times did you purchase products in the friendship group? (frequency)

themselves and enhance the self-discovery value (Dholakia et al.,

2004). Thus:

2.5. Members intention and purchase behavior

Members of online social groups often form collective

intentions to act jointly within the group (Bagozzi, 2000). Such colSocial Climate Hypothesis 3. A group members perceptions of
lective intention reects the shared view of the entire group rather
social climate of friendship group positively affect his or her
than that of any specic person (Tsai and Bagozzi, 2014). Eagly and
perception of self-discovery value.
Chaiken (1993) conceptualizes this group-oriented intention as
members intention and differentiates this concept from personal
An individuals thinking and behavior within a social media platintention, which refers to individual motivations that arise from
form depends not only on the persons traits, but also on the netpersonal consciousness alone. Members intention is formulated
worked environment. Sohn (2014) indicate that in a tightly-bound
within a collective entity (e.g., a friendship group) in which a group
friendship group, which has a higher rate of social interaction,
member is regarded as part of the entity and is required to act in its
mutual trust and social support, individuals perceive relatively
interests (Tsai and Bagozzi, 2014).
stable and stronger informational value. We hypothesize:
Bagozzi et al. (2006) rened this denition within the social
science context, and regarded members intention as the collective
Social Climate Hypothesis 4. A group members perceptions of
intention that stems from an individuals self-concept as a member
social climate of friendship group positively affect his or her
of a social group, and the relevant behavior is the common group
perception of informational value.

42

Y. Sun et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

decision. Based on this premise, we focus on people who are members of a friendship group and conceptualize their intention to purchase together within the group as its members intention.
Research in social psychology has revealed that individual

social value partly inuences how people behave in situations of

interdependence (Bogaert et al., 2012). In addition, social value is
an important motivation that stimulates purchase behavior. In Chinese culture, individuals prefer harmonious social relationships. So
it is reasonable to propose a positive relationship between social

value and members intention to purchase within an online social

group. So we wish to state:
Social Value Hypothesis. A group members social value positively affects his or her members intention.
Previous research on hedonic value indicates it as a necessary
motivation for group members to participate in online social interactions and to complete collective activities or social challenges
(McKenna and Bargh, 1999). We suggest:
Hedonic Value Hypothesis. A group members hedonic value positively affects his or her members intention.
Compared to business-to-business companies, businessto-consumer or consumer-to-consumer communities provide
more opportunities for consumers to express themselves and thus
provide more opportunities for direct consumption (Bhattacharya
and Sen, 2003). Algesheimer et al. (2005) also state that group
action can be regarded as congruent to the expression of personal
values. We hypothesize:
Self-Discovery Value Hypothesis. A

group

members self-

discovery value positively affects his or her members intention.

The main value for users who post content or engage in social
networking activities is informational value (Shriver et al., 2013).
For instance, when people post information to interact with members in SNSs, they produce various information, which is an antecedent of follow-up intention (He and Wei, 2009). Informational
value is a property that makes information meaningful for media
users and that has the potential to impact their intentions or
behavior (Rudat et al., 2014). We hypothesize:
Informational Value Hypothesis. A group members informational
value positively affects his or her member intention.
This study measures actual purchase behavior from two perspectives: purchase cost and frequency. According to standard
attitude-theoretic formulations, we expected that the members
intention to purchase would predict subsequent purchase behavior
(Dholakia et al., 2004). Hence, we hypothesize:
Member Intention Hypothesis 1. A members intention positively
affects his or her purchase cost.
Member Intention Hypothesis 2. A members intention positively
affects his or her purchase frequency

of friends or among people in a friendship group (Dan and Zhou,

2014).
We selected a friendship group in WeChat as appropriate for
this study for three reasons. First, the group was an independent
online social group with a constant number of members so this
eliminated some effects of irrelevant factors. For example, online
social groups with group members who join and leave frequently
may have members who do not understood the group social
climate very well. Second, the group members came from the same
university in China, and the members regarded themselves as
friends of other members within the group, which made the online
social group a reliable friendship group. Finally, in most online
social groups, members are active in social interaction and information exchange, but few conduct commercial activities within
the social group. However, members in this friendship group sold
grocery goods regularly every week. So the group was suitable to
support the discovery of an underlying mechanism for food purchases in this online social group.
3.2. Survey
The survey was conducted within the WeChat-supported online
social group. In this group, group members can post and read messages for purposes of social communication or commercial activities. Although this is a social-oriented group and that no one
needs to be obedient to others, there are a few active members that
lead the group discussion. We posted an online questionnaire in a
famous Chinese online survey platform called Sojump. We sent
the hyperlink to one of the group leaders (as this is a private
WeChat group, we could not contact all other group members
directly), and asked him to spread the questionnaire in the WeChat
group. The inuential leader posted a hyperlink in the group and
appealed the crowd to ll in the questionnaire. No additional
incentives were provided. As this was an anonymous survey, participants could ll in the questionnaire with no worries about
inuential people.
A total of 215 active friendship group members, with 31.3%
females, participated in this study. The respondents ranged from
26 to 70 years old, with a mean of 48. All respondents were
Chinese residents and their average annual income was USD 9000.
The online WeChat social group in this study was established in
2011. By the time of data collection, the group had conducted commercial activities a number of times. Thus, we assumed that most
of the participants already had experience with online purchased
via the online social group. Moreover, all group members were past
MBA students who graduated from the same university in China.
3.3. Measurement

3. Method and analysis

3.1. Study context
WeChat is the most popular instant messaging tool in China. It
enables efcient and convenient online social interaction among
individuals. The primary feature that differentiates WeChat from
other social media is the privacy protection mechanism, which
enables individuals to spread information within a reliable circle

Table 3 presents the measures used in the survey. Value perception measures were adopted from previous studies (Dholakia et al.,
2004; Flanagin and Metzger, 2001). Measures of members intention were adapted from Dholakia et al. (2004) and Tsai and
Bagozzi (2014), and measures of purchase behavior were adapted
from Guo and Barnes (2011). This study adopted Hajli and Simss
(2015) measures of three social climate dimensions: social support,
social interaction, and social trust. Some items were modied to
make them appropriate for this study. All items were measured
on a seven-point scale and were translated into Chinese by the
researchers before the survey.
4. Data analysis
We tested the model through structural equation modeling
using SmartPLS (Liang et al., 2010). We used PLS over covariance-

Y. Sun et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

based modeling techniques (e.g., AMOS or LISREL) for various reasons. First, PLS estimates the measurement and structural models
simultaneously (Gefen et al., 2000). Second, PLS avoids inadmissi-

43

ble solutions and factor indeterminacy, sp it is suitable for testin

g
complicated relationships. Third, PLS can handle second-order f
or-

mative constructs, whereas LISREL has restrictions on formative

measurement (Goodhue et al., 2012). Last, PLS is good at dealing
with small sample size (Chin et al., 2003), whereas covariancebased techniques require larger sample sizes.

Second, we used variance ination factors (VIFs) to test for multicollinearity. The VIFs for social support, social interaction, and
social trust were 2.38, 3.38, and 3.37. A VIF less than 10 is indicative of inconsequential multicollinearity (Hair et al., 2006). We also
tested for common-method bias since the constructs were measured by using a single-source survey (Podsakoff et al., 2003). We
conducted Harmans single-factor test to check whether commonmethod variance was a serious problem. No single dominant factor
emerged, which indicates that this kind of bias was not a serious
issue.

4.1. Evaluation measurement model

First, we examined the data for convergent and discriminant
validity and reliability. Table 4 shows the results of the measurement scales for the reective constructs. All loadings of the
measurement items were above 0.70. The composite reliability
and Cronbachs alpha were both above 0.70, which indicates
acceptable convergent validity (see Table 5). The square root of
the AVE of each construct was greater than its correlation with
all other constructs indicating adequate discriminant validity
(Hair et al., 2003). Also the item loadings on their assigned factors
were greater than their cross-loading on other constructs, which
indicates satisfactory discriminant validity (Hair et al., 2003).
The traditional approaches that assess construct validity and
reliability are unsuitable for formative constructs where causal
relationships ow from the measures to the constructs
(Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer, 2001). Following the guidelines
for formative measure assessment by Petter et al. (2007), we evaluated the construct validity and the reliability of social climate.
First, the PLS analysis showed that three of the rst-order constructs for social climate had signicant weights, which provides
evidence for construct validity.

4.2. Testing the hypotheses

The results of structural model testing are shown in Fig. 2. Most
of the hypotheses were supported. Social climate signicantly
inuenced all value perceptions, thus supporting the Social Climate
Hypothesis 14. Social value, hedonic value, self-discovery value,
and informational value affected the groups members intention
for purchasing and inuence their purchase cost and frequency,
thus supporting Social Value Hypothesis, Hedonic Value
Hypothesis, Self-Discovery Value Hypothesis, and Members Intention Hypothesis 12. However, the Informational Value Hypothesis
was not supported. About 40% of members intention for purchasing was explained by the model.
5. Discussion
This study investigated the role of social climate in inuencing
the purchase intentions and observed behavior of members in a
collaborative shopping group. In contrast to previous studies that
address individual intentions (concerned with actions that group

Table 4
Factor loadings and cross-loadings.
Social value

Hedonic value

Self discovery

Informational value

Social interaction

Social trust

Social support

Member intention

SV_1

.73

.42

.42

.52

.43

.44

.36

.38

SV_2
SV_4
SV_5
HV_1
HV_2
HV_3
HV_5
SD_1
SD_2
SD_3
INFV_1
INFV_2
INFV_3
INFV_4
INFV_5
SOC_1
SOC_2
SOC_3
SOC_4
SOC_5
TRU_1
TRU_2
TRU_3
TRU_4
SUP_2
SUP_5
SUP_6
SUP_7
SUP_8
SUP_9
MEI_1
MEI_2

.89
.92
.90
.39
.45
.40
.50
.52
.54
.50
.59
.54
.60
.59
.56
.47
.47
.50
.43
.39
.49
.45
.43
.46
.46
.38
.37
.33
.36
.33
.43
.52

.49
.45
.39
.85
.92
.85
.80
.51
.56
.44
.43
.47
.47
.51
.51
.42
.38
.45
.38
.41
.47
.48
.51
.50
.55
.46
.42
.41
.43
.40
.41
.47

.50
.52
.50
.42
.48
.48
.50
.91
.93
.92
.56
.57
.63
.65
.60
.48
.49
.52
.46
.42
.52
.50
.48
.48
.43
.37
.37
.34
.37
.37
.49
.62

.58
.60
.56
.39
.48
.44
.53
.65
.64
.61
.83
.85
.90
.93
.87
.43
.43
.42
.45
.39
.43
.40
.38
.43
.41
.37
.35
.38
.38
.36
.42
.51

.47
.43
.46
.33
.42
.39
.45
.52
.52
.48
.40
.41
.41
.43
.46
.88
.91
.92
.84
.80
.70
.69
.68
.67
.54
.52
.48
.54
.52
.54
.60
.60

.44
.43
.37
.39
.47
.39
.50
.47
.55
.42
.35
.36
.34
.41
.44
.67
.65
.65
.52
.65
.95
.94
.95
.95
.62
.56
.57
.65
.59
.60
.61
.64

.42
.38
.31
.40
.51
.36
.48
.41
.45
.32
.40
.35
.32
.38
.44
.64
.55
.52
.42
.49
.65
.66
.65
.68
.81
.84
.84
.86
.92
.90
.50
.49

.47
.48
.42
.35
.41
.38
.43
.53
.59
.51
.44
.35
.44
.45
.46
.55
.57
.58
.50
.53
.65
.62
.64
.60
.45
.37
.46
.49
.45
.48
.94
.96

Note: HN = hedonic
interaction,

value,

SUP = social

SD = self-discovery

value, INFV = informational

support,

TRU = social

value,

trust,

MEI = member intention. Bold values (> 0.7) means signicant.

44
Table 5
Correlations among constructs.

Y. Sun et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

SN = social value,

SOC = social

AVE

CR

Social value

.74

.92

.88

.86

Hedonic value
Self discovery value
Informational value
Social interaction
Social trust
Social support
Social climate
Member intention

.73
.85
.77
.76
.90
.74

.90

.92
.94
.94
.94
.97
.95

.95

.88
.91
.93
.92
.96
.93

.89

.51
.57
.65
.52
.49
.43
.54
.51

Note: CR = composite reliability,

.86
.55
.55
.47
.52
.52
.57
.46

.92
.69
.55
.52
.43
.56
.59

.88
.48
.43
.43
.51
.49

.87
.72
.61
.87
.63

.95
.69
.90
.66

.86
.88
.52

.68

.95

= Cronbachs alpha, AVE square roots are in the diagonal cells (bold values means signicant), 1 = social value, 2 = hedonic value, 3 =

selfdiscovery value, 4 = informational value, 5 = social interaction, 6 = social trust, 7 = social support, 8 = social climate, 9 = member intention.

Fig. 2. Results.

members perform separately), this study examined group-level

intentions, especilally members intention (Bagozzi and Dholakia,
2002; Bagozzi and Lee, 2002). Members intention captures
group-level actions in the form of I intend that we act collectively
or I intend that our group [will perform this] activity jointly
(Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2002). The results of this study support
our proposed model of members intention in the online friendship
group.
The ndings revealed that social climate of friendship group
had a signicant effect on consumers perceptions of individual
values. This was consistent with studies on social inuence that
asserted that contextual features and surrounding environment
typically inuence individual perceptions (Li and Lai, 2014; Tsai
and Bagozzi, 2014). Meanwhile, our results also indicated that consumer perceptions of individual values social, hedonic, and selfdiscovery value affected members intention to purchase within
the collaborative shopping group.
The impact of informational value on members intention to
purchase was not signicant, as we expected. The Hofstede cultural
dimensions provide ve variables to explain individual decisions
across different countries (Yoon, 2009). Two of them can serve as
complements to the illustration of these results and are suitable
for explaining why informational value did not inuencing consumer purchase decisions in Chinese online social groups.

Moreover, people in collectivistic society give priority to group

interests over their (Michailova and Hutchings, 2006). Going
against ones group has been regarded as losing face, which
destroys ones reputation and even brings shame (Michailova and
Hutchings, 2006). Therefore, compared to individualistic societies,
Chinese people would rather sacrice for the benet of the group
rather than look for individual benets. This phenomenon also
occurs in online social groups: some consumers purchase products
not because they need them but because they want to follow the
crowd. Thus, they need relatively less product information to make
a purchase decision.
(b) Long-term and short-term orientation. The online social group
in this study was long-term oriented and focused on fostering
future rewards. Group members believed that relationships
created over long periods of time and built on frequent
exchanges were more benecial than present income
(Michailova and Hutchings, 2006). So the main purpose of
their decisions was to build and maintain relationships
within the group. This was also highlighted by an interview
cthat onducted within the online social group. The interview
results showed that group members were less concerned
about product information when purchasing within the
group.
For exmple, one interviewee said:

(a) Individualism and collectivism. In a collectivistic society such

as China, people are integrated into cohesive social groups,
and their decisions are inuenced by group environmental
cues, such as the groups culture or climate (Michailova
and Hutchings, 2006). So group members consumption
decisions are shaped by the social climate. This matches
the results of this study that social climate inuences members purchase behavior by shaping their value perceptions.

We are friends and familiar with each other. I believe that those
products he sold are good. Selling bad things within the group will
damage their fame. Meanwhile, those things are inexpensive, and
they are almost some daily commodity, like meat, oil, fruit or
wines. These are necessary in daily life. I dont really care about
where to buy them. If I can buy those necessities, my friends will

Y. Sun et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

be happy. Why not? I buy just because I want to support them or

just because I am happy.

And also, another interviewee said:

45

Fourth, previous research has noted the factors that inuence

the usage of various media services, such as gathering information,
relationship. Actually, we are not a pure commercial group. I also
using SNSs, and subscribing to e-books. However, the purchasing
dont want others to regard us as a utilitarian. So the aim of our
services associated with social media have received little attention.
communications is not to gain some material benets, such as disWe introduced UGT into the online friendship group context and
counts. Actually, I dont care much about money. And I also can buy
used U&G theory to explain user purchase behavior in a popular
strawberries or other products from other platforms. In fact, I have
Chinese social media setting, WeChat. Our research extends the
another channel to get fresh vegetables and fruits. I just want to be
boundary of UGT and provides insights for researchers to underbenevolent and want to enhance our relationship.
stand individual behavior within social media more deeply.
We join the friendship group in order to build and maintain our

Our results suggest that consumers within the friendship-based

group were not worried about the product quality issues. At the
same time, the products were cheap, relative to group member
income. So people needed less information to support the
decision-making process when purchasing low-price products.
These may be a few of the reasons why informational value not signicant in inuencing member intentions to purchase in this
study.
5.1. Implications for research
This study enriches e-commerce research in three ways. First, it
introduced collaborative shopping into a social media context and
used member intentions to purchase to specify the purchase
behavior within the collaborative shopping process. Social shopping with friends and family is an important part of daily shopping
and sometimes it is also a main motivation for consumers to purchase. For example, shopping is a socially-promoted action that
individuals engage in more when accompanied by others. Few
empirical studies have studied collaborative purchase behavior
within an online social group. So in the light of the rapid progress
of collaborative shopping research, it is important for researchers
as well as practitioners to view collaborative shopping as a new
paradigm in social commerce, and the impact of social groups on
collaborative shoppers purchase behavior.
Second, this study determined the important role of social
climate in shaping group members perception of individual values.
We proposed that individuals are adaptive organisms in their proximal environment, and this study describes the process of grouplevel purchase. We expect this investigation to draw attention to
the role of social climate as part of the polymorphic nature of social
inuence. Social inuence can operate through both cognitive and
affective channels. Other research on social inuence has indicated
that individual cognitive structure is altered by the trade-off of
social inuences, such as compliance behavior based on the consideration of environmental pressures or identications that arise
from cognitive perceptual changes based on scrutinizing external
information. This study emphasizes that individual intention and
behavior can also be shaped or reshaped through emotional channels, such as the perception of social climate in a friendship group.
Given that the existing concept of social inuence in IS research is
framed as normative and informative inuence, highlighting the
importance of social climate of friendship groups extends
e-commerce researchs understanding of social inuence and provides a deeper understanding of this concept.
Third, apart from advocating the role of social climate, we have
provided new evidence to support the role of individual values in
inuencing collaborative purchase behavior. Our results suggest
that social, hedonic, and self-discovery values inuence individual
social actions within a group. Consequently, this perception shapes
member intention and behavior. We have highlighted the role of
value perceptions in social commerce and provided new insights
on social inuence.

46

5.2. Implications for practice

This study provides practical implications for companies and
enterprises. As our results demonstrate, group member values
(social, hedonic, and self-discovery) affect consumers collective
purchase intention and behavior. Unlike the purpose for joining
interest-based groups, such as fan pages or brand communities,
the main purpose for joining friendship groups and participating
in group-level activities is to attain social benets rather than commercial benets, such as acquiring more brand information or product discount. Hence, commercial activities may conict with the
routines of the group unless an appropriate proximal environment
is developed. In such cases, strategies should be adopted to help
group members adapt commercial actions within a friendship
group. For instance, group members nd accepting the sudden
appearance of products in their group difcult, especially when
the product is pushed to them rather than sought by them on their
own. Frequent and direct social interaction by using @ (a method
to remind a specic person of the dialogue) to conduct dialogues
with other group members before mentioning products could
reduce the repulsion to accept product promotion within a friendship group.
Moreover, posting jokes or news more regularly as well as chatting about interests and preferences can make group members feel
that the vendor cares about them and is not utilitarian. More entertainment information can also make group members relaxed and
happy and make them accept commercial activities more readily.
In addition, a quick response to questions from other group
members and helping them gure out their favorite product is necessary. These strategies will make group members feel that the
vendor is reliable and trustworthy.
5.3. Limitations
The ndings should be interpreted in light of its limitations.
First, the respondents of this study are from a Chinese university.
Caution should be taken when generalizing the ndings to
friendship groups in other countries because diverse cultural backgrounds may affect the susceptibility of group members to the
inuence of social climate.
Second, this study focuses on an online friendship group. Thus,
caution should be taken when generalizing the ndings to other
online social groups that are not mainly focused on friendship,
such as interest-based groups. Group members within an
interest-based group may be more focused on attaining product
information from the vendor rather than maintaining friendships
with one another. This relationship may also affect their susceptibility to the inuence of social climate. We acknowledge that generalizability concerns are an issue for this survey-based research,
because obtaining a sample that represents all populations is difcult. Future research should examine the effect of social climate in
other settings to validate our ndings.
Third, this study does not include utilitarian motives in the
research model because commodities in the group are grocery
goods, such as fruits, oil, meat, and wine. These commodities are
necessary for daily life. Moreover, respondents have a high income,

Y. Sun et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

which affects their purchase behavior. Therefore, group members

focus relatively less on the price and also do not scrutinize whether
the product is necessary for them. Future research may choose a

sample with a relatively lower income and different commodities

to validate our ndings. Fourth, the survey data were selfreported from a single source. Although common-method bias is
not a serious issue in this study, using multiple methods or

collecting data from multiple sources is suggested to eliminate

common-method variance.

Semi-structured research questions. The questions were translated into Chinese before the interview:

Acknowledgments

(1) What are the factors that you consider when you buy products within the WeChat group?
(2) Does product information matter when you purchase other
group members products?
(3) Why do you give less care to product information when you
purchase in the group?

This work was partially supported by a grant from the National

Natural Science Foundation of China China (No. 71332001).
Appendix 1. Interview protocols
Interview 1
Research purpose. Understanding the appropriate dimensions of
social climate within an online social group.
Research objects. We interviewed two active members of a particular WeChat-supported online social group. We choose these
two interviewers because they are patriarch of this social group
and participate actively in daily group chats. They are also the
sponsors of those commercial activities and the rst two to sell
products within the group. It is reasonable to assume that they
are familiar with this group as well as the commercial activities
within the group.
Semi-structured research questions. The questions were translated into Chinese before the interview:
(1) Does the social climate actually exist in your WeChat group?
(2) How does the social climate inuence the commercial activities, such as sales transaction, within the group?
(3) Can you give us some concrete features of the social climate?
The construct, Climate, has been widely used in social groups
(clinical groups, training groups) and organizational team groups,
but rarely in online social groups that have commercial activities.
So we borrowed those dimensions and intend to select appropriate
dimensions for online social group in this study. The dimensions
are as follows:
Spontaneity (Moos and Otto, 1972; Wilkinson, 1973)
Support (Chen et al., 2010; Hajli and Sims, 2015; Moos and Otto,
1972; Patrick et al., 2011)
Afliation (Chen et al., 2010; Wilkinson, 1973)
Order (Moos and Otto, 1972; Wilkinson, 1973)
Interaction (Moos and Otto, 1972; Patrick et al., 2011)
Aggression (Moos and Otto, 1972)
Variety (Chen et al., 2010; Wilkinson, 1973)
Autonomy (Moos and Otto, 1972; Wilkinson, 1973)
Personal problem orientation (Moos and Otto, 1972)
Staff control (Moos and Otto, 1972)
Interview 2
Research purpose. Understanding why consumers care less
about product information when they purchase within the online
social group.
Research objects. We interviewed two consumers of the same
WeChat group as for Interview 1. We asked one interviewee of
the rst interview to recommend two consumers of his customer
list to us. These two purchased products recently within the
WeChat group.

References
Algesheimer, R., Dholakia, U.M., Herrmann, A., 2005. The social inuence of brand
community: evidence from European car clubs. J. Mark. 69, 1934.
Bagozzi, R.P., 2000. On the concept of intentional social action in consumer
behavior. J. Consum. Res. 27 (3), 388396.
Bagozzi, R.P., Dholakia, U.M., 2002. Intentional social action in virtual communities.
J. Interact. Mark. 16 (2), 221.
Bagozzi, R.P., Dholakia, U.M., Mookerjee, A., 2006. Individual and group bases of
social inuence in online environments. Media Psychol. 8, 95126.
Bagozzi, R.P., Lee, K.H., 2002. Multiple routes for social inuence: the role of
compliance, internalization, and social identity. Soc. Psychol. Q. 65 (3), 226247.
Bhattacharya, C.B., Sen, S., 2003. Consumer-company identication: a framework
for understanding consumers relationships with companies. J. Mark. 67, 7688.
Bogaert, S., Boone, C., van Witteloostuijn, A., 2012. Social value orientation and
climate strength as moderators of the impact of work group cooperative climate
on affective commitment. J. Manage. Stud. 49 (5), 918944.
Chen, C.J., Huang, J.W., 2007. How organizational climate and structure affect
knowledge management: the social interaction perspective. Int. J. Inf. Manage.
27 (2), 104118.
Chen,
C.J.,
Huang,
J.W.,
Hsiao,
Y.C.,
2010.
Knowledge
management
and
innovativeness:
the
role
of
organizational
climate
and
structure.
Int.
J.
Manpower 31 (8), 848870.
Cheung, C.M.K., Lee, M.K.O., 2009. Understanding the sustainability of a virtual
community: model development and empirical test. J. Inf. Sci. 35 (3), 279298.
Chi, L., Ravichandran, T., Andrevski, G., 2010. Information technology, network
structure, and competitive action. Inf. Syst. Res. 21 (3), 543570.
Chin, W.W., Marcolin, B.L., Newsted, P.R., 2003. A partial least squares latent
variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: results from a
Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study.
Inf. Syst. Res. 14 (2), 189217.
Choi, J.N., Price, R.H., Vinokur, A.D., 2003. Self-efcacy changes in groups: effects of
diversity, leadership, and group climate. J. Organizational Behav. 24, 357372.
Dan, L., Zhou, Q., 2014. Development model of agricultural e-commerce in the
context of social commerce. J. Chem. Pharm. Res. 6 (7), 13411345.
Dholakia, U.M., Bagozzi, R.P., Pearo, L.K., 2004. A social inuence model of consumer
participation in network- and small-group-based virtual communities. Int. J.
Res. Mark. 21 (3), 241263.
Diamantopoulos, A., Winklhofer, H.M., 2001. Index construction with formative
indicators. J. Mark. Res. 38 (2), 269277.
Eagly,
A.H.,
Chaiken,
S.,
1993.
The
Psychology
of
Attitudes.
Harcourt
Brace
Jovanovich College Publishers, New York, NY.
Fang, C., 2015. How I started a protable side business by selling on WeChat.
October 25.
Fiore, A.M., Jin, H.J., Kim, J., 2005. For fun and prot: hedonic value from image
interactivity and responses toward an online store. Psychol. Mark. 22 (8), 669
694.
Flanagin,
A.J.,
Metzger,
M.J.,
2001.
Internet
use
in
the
contemporary
media
environment. Hum. Commun. Res. 27 (1), 153181.
Geeks Operation, 2014. Micro-channel marketing, real group: let the group add
more people to the explosion (-). Available at
www.geeky.com, December 28.
Gefen, D., Straub, D.W., Boudreau, M.C., 2000. Structural equation modeling and
regression: guidelines for research practice. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. (4:1), 7
Goodhue, D.L., Lewis, W., Thompson, R., 2012. Comparing PLS to regression and
LISREL: a response to Marcoulides, Chin, and Saunders. MIS Q. 36 (3), 703716.
Grange, C., Benbasat, I., 2013. Foundations for investigating the drivers of the value
captured
by
consumers
embedded
within
social
shopping
networks.
In:
Sprague, R. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 46th Hawaii International Conference on
System Sciences. IEEE Comp. Soc. Press, Washington, DC.
Guo, Y., Barnes, S., 2011. Purchase behavior in virtual worlds: an empirical
investigation in Second Life. Inf. Manage. 48 (7), 303312.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., 2006. Multivariate Data Analysis.
Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ (Vol. 6).
Hair, J.F., Bush, R.P., Ortinau, D.J., 2003. Marketing Research: Within a Changing
Information Environment, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York, NY.
Hajli, N., Sims, J., 2015. Social commerce: the transfer of power from sellers to
buyers. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 94, 350358.
He,
W.,
Wei,
K.K.,
2009.
What
drives
continued
knowledge
sharing?
An
investigation of knowledge-contribution and seeking beliefs. Decis. Support
Syst. 46, 826838.

Y. Sun et al. / Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 18 (2016) 3747

Ho, K.K.W., See-To, E.W.K., Chiu, G.T.C., 2013. How does a social network site fan
page inuence purchase intention of online shoppers: a qualitative analysis. Int.
J. Soc. Organizational Dyn. IT 3 (4), 1942.

47

Huang, E., 2008. Use and gratication in e-consumers. Internet Res. 18

(4), 405426.
Huang, J.W., Lin, C.P., 2011. To stick or not to stick: the social response t
heory in the
development of continuance intention from organizational crosslevel

Petter, S., Straub, D., Rai, A., 2007. Specifying formative constructs in information
perspective. Comput. Hum. Behav. 27, 19631973.
systems research. MIS Q. 31, 623656.
Hung, H.Y., 2014. Attachment, identication, and loyalty: examining mediating
mechanisms across brand and brand community contexts. J. Brand Manage. 21 Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method
biases
in
behavioral
research:
a
critical
review
of
the
literature
a
(78), 594614.
Jahn, B., Kunz, W., 2012. How to transform consumers into fans of your bran nd
recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol.
d. J.
Puglia, S., Carter, R., Jain, R., 2000. MultECommerce: a distributed architecture for
Serv. Manage. 23 (3), 344361.
collaborative
shopping
on
the
WWW.
In:
Proceedings
of
the
2nd
AC
Jarvis, C.B., MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M., 2003. A critical review of constr
M
uct
Conference on Electronic Commerce. ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 215224.
indicators and measurement model misspecication in marketing and
Ridings, C., Wasko, M., 2010. Online discussion group sustainability: investigating
consumer research. J. Consum. Res. 30 (2), 199218.
the interplay between structural dynamics and social dynamics over time. J.
Johnson, J.E., Burlingame, G.M., Olsen, J.A., Davies, D.R., Gleave, R.L., 2005.
Assoc. Inf. Syst. 11, 95121.
Group
climate, cohesion, alliance, and empathy in group psychotherapy: multilevel Rudat, A., Buder, J.r., Hesse, F.W., 2014. Audience design in Twitter: retweeting
behavior between informational value and followers interests. Comput. Hum.
structural equation models. J. Couns. Psychol. 52 (3), 310321.
Behav. 35, 132139.
Katz, E., Haas, H., Gurevitch, M., 1973. On the use of the mass media for importa
Seraj, M., 2012. We create, we connect, we respect, therefore we are: intellectual,
nt
social, and cultural value in online communities. J. Interact. Mark. 26, 209222.
things. Am. Sociol. Rev. 38 (2), 164181.
Shen, X., Radakrishnan, T., Georganas, N.D., 2002. VCOM: electronic commerce in a
Kim, H., Suh, K.S., Lee, U.K., 2013. Effects of collaborative online shopping on
collaborative virtual world. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 1, 281300.
shopping experience through social and relational perspectives. Inf. Manage. 50,
Shin, D.H., 2010. Understanding e-book users: uses and gratication expectancy
169180.
model. New Media Soc. 13 (2), 260278.
Kivlighan Jr., D.M., Tarrant, J.M., 2001. Does group climate mediate the group
Shriver, S.K., Nair, H.S., Hofstetter, R., 2013. Social ties and user-generated content:
leadership-group member outcome relationship? A test of Yaloms hypotheses
evidence from an online social network. Manage. Sci. 59 (6), 14251443.
about leadership priorities. Group Dyn.: Theory, Res. Pract. 5 (3), 220234.
Ko, H., Cho, C.H., Roberts, M.S., 2005. Internet uses and gratications: a structural Smith, C., 2015. Facebook is leading the way in social commerce. BusinessInsider,
October 25, 2015.
equation model of interactive advertising. J. Advertising 34 (2), 5770.
Koo, D.M., Ju, S.H., 2010. The interactional effects of atmospherics and perceptual Smock, A.D., Ellison, N.B., Lampe, C., Wohn, D.Y., 2011. Facebook as a toolkit: a uses
and gratication approach to unbundling feature use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 27
curiosity on emotions and online shopping intention. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26
(6), 23222329.
(3), 377388.
Li, Y.M., Lai, C.Y., 2014. A social appraisal mechanism for online purchase decision Sohn, D., 2014. Coping with information in social media: the effects of network
structure and knowledge on perception of information value. Comput. Hum.
support in the micro-blogosphere. Decis. Support Syst. 59, 190205.
Behav. 32, 145151.
Liang, H., Xue, Y., Ke, W., Wei, K.K., 2010. Understanding the inuence of t
Tsai, H.T., Bagozzi, R.P., 2014. Contribution behavior in virtual communities:
eam
cognitive, emotional, and social inuences. MIS Q. 38 (1), 143163.
climate on it use. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 11 (8), 414432.
Liang, T.P., Turban, E., 2011. Introduction to the special issue on social commerce: Wilkinson, L., 1973. An assessment of the dimensionality of Moos social climate
scale. Am. J. Community Psychol. 1 (4), 250342.
a
research framework for social commerce. Int. J. Electron. Commerce 16 (2), 5 Workman, B., Adler, E., 2014. The social-commerce report: social networks are
driving more online sales and inuencing ofine purchases. BusinessInsider,
14.
December 27, 2014.
Luo, X., 2002. Uses and gratications theory and e-consumer behaviors. J. Interact.
Ye, L., Xu, B., Ji, Q., Pan, Z., Yang, H., 2005. Design and Implementation
Advertising 2 (2), 3441.
McKenna, K.Y.A., Bargh, J.A., 1999. Causes and consequences of social interaction o of a
Collaborative Virtual Shopping System. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany.
n
Yoon, C., 2009. The effects of national culture values on consumer acceptance of ethe internet: a conceptual framework. Media Psychol. 1 (3), 249269.
commerce: online shoppers in China. Inf. Manage. 46, 294301.
Michailova, S., Hutchings, K., 2006. National cultural inuences on knowledge
sharing: a comparison of China and Russia. J. Manage. Stud. 43 (3), 383405. Zhou, L., Zhang, P., Zimmermann, H.D., 2013. Social commerce research: an
integrated view. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 12 (2), 6168.
Moos, R., Otto, J., 1972. The community-oriented programs environment scale:
Zhu,
L.,
Benbasat,
I.,
Jiang,
Z.J.,
2006.
Investigating
the
role
of
presen
a
in
methodology for the facilitation and evaluation of social change. Communi ce
collaborative
online
shopping.
In:
Proceedings
of
the
Twelfth
Americas
ty
Conference on Information Systems. Acapulco, Mexico.
Ment. Health J. 8 (1), 2837.
Nam, H., Kannan, P.K., 2014. The informational value of social tagging networks. J. Zhu, L., Benbasat, I., Jiang, Z., 2010. Lets shop online together: an empiri
cal
Mark., 2140 (78:July)
investigation of collaborative online shopping support. Inf. Syst. Res. 21 (4),
Patrick, H., Kaplan, A., Ryan, A.M., 2011. Positive classroom motivational
872891.
environments: convergence between mastery goal structureand classroom
social climate. J. Educ. Psychol. 103 (2), 367382.