Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior

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

Factors affecting online group buying intention and satisfaction:

A social exchange theory perspective
Wen-Lung Shiau a, Margaret Meiling Luo b,⇑
a
Ming Chuan University, 5 De Ming Road, Gui Shan District, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan, ROC
b
Strayer University, 760 West Sproul Road #200, Springfield, PA 19064, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study investigates factors that affect consumer continuous use intention toward online group buying
Available online 15 August 2012 and the degree that reciprocity and reputation of social exchange, trust, and vendor creativity affect con-
sumer satisfaction and intention toward online purchasing. Data from 215 valid samples was obtained
Keywords: using an online survey. The research model is assessed using partial least squares (PLS) analysis. The
Online group buying results show that the intention to engage in online group buying is predicted collectively by consumer
Social exchange theory (SET) satisfaction, trust, and seller creativity. Consumer satisfaction with online group buying is predicted pri-
Reciprocity
marily by trust, followed by consumer reciprocity. The proposed research model explains 67.7% of vari-
Reputation
Trust
ance for satisfaction and 39.7% of variance for intention to engage in online group buying. The results
suggest that reciprocity, trust, satisfaction, and seller creativity provide considerable explanatory power
for intention to engage in online group buying behavior.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction experienced significant growth during 2010 and 2011. In the

The recent rapid growth of information technology (IT), the
Internet, and the e-commerce boom have created significant
opportunities that are characterized by a lack of spatial boundaries.
The Internet has an increasingly significant influence on people’s
everyday lives, in aspects such as communication, entertainment,
social activities, and shopping. Numerous businesses have also
changed their business model and shifted from physical sellers to
the virtual market because of the opportunities offered by an on-
line business model. A recent survey of over 27,000 Internet users
in 55 markets from the Asia Pacific, Europe, the Middle East, North
America, and South America showed that the Internet market of-
fers significant opportunities in emerging markets (Nielsen,
2010). This shows that the traditional forms of consumption have
transformed.
Online group buying has become popular with the emergence
of US-based sites such as Groupon, launched in 2008. The term
group shopping refers to social or collective buying where items
can be purchased at significantly reduced prices when enough buy-
ers participate in the purchase. The transaction proceeds only
when the required number of buyers is reached. Significant savings
can be made (CTVglobemedia, 2011) by purchasing more products
together to reduce the price. This popular trend in online shopping
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 215 391 2169.
E-mail addresses: mac@mail.mcu.edu.tw (W.-L. Shiau), margaret.luo@strayer.
edu (M.M. Luo).
United States and Europe, online group buying is highly popular
and successful, and is based on a simple but powerful concept:
consumers enjoy receiving significant discounts on premium prod-
ucts, although merchants are only willing to provide these dis-
counts if they can sell high quantities (Pressitt, 2010). A CNN
report in 2010 indicated that this concept has motivated a new cat-
egory of ‘‘group buying’’ websites, at least one of which may be val-
ued at more than US$1 billion. In Canada, local merchants offer
their services at a discount of between 30% and 90%. Online group
buying websites are also experiencing rapid growth in Asia (CNN,
2010). In China, more than 1215 group buying sites have been
launched and the total transaction value of the Groupon-type mar-
ket is projected to reach RMB$980 million (US$147.6 million). This
market is expected to grow by an annual average of 57% over the
next 3 years (NetworkWorld, 2010). Online group buying in Tai-
wan has also become increasingly popular. Shoppers are using on-
line group buying primarily because of incentives to save money.
Taiwan’s largest bulletin broad system site, PTT (http://ppt.cc),
and Ihergo website (http://www.ihergo.com/) are the most popu-
lar group buying websites. The revenue of one renowned group
buying website increased from NT$13 million in 2008 August to
NT$27 million at the end of 2008, and an average of more than
700 new groups are established everyday (Taipei Times, 2010).
Incentives to save money are frequently used to demonstrate
the consumer behavior of group buying. Over time, however, the
factors that influence consumers to engage in group buying behav-
ior have developed more multi-faceted dimensions because of the

0747-5632/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.030
2432 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444
growth of network communities and competitive market environ-
ments. Online group buying is a new business model that has not
been fully investigated. Previous studies have stressed the func-
tionality and usability of group buying systems (Tsai, Cheng, &
Chen, 2011; Zhu, Benbasat, & Jiang, 2010), although few studies
have focused on social and psychological factors and the business
perspective of online group buying. We believe that factors related
to consumer psychology and relation exchange have not been ad-
dressed by previous studies. These psychological and consumer
behaviors are crucial for marketers seeking to increase sales rates.
The phenomena are worthy of attention, given the potentially sig-
nificant market gains offered by this novel business model. This
study focuses on the application of social exchange theory (SET)
in the group buying context and identifies the issue in the context
of online group buying by incorporating factors such as reciprocity,
reputation, trust, satisfaction, and seller creativity. These factors
are identified as critical factors affecting both online and psychical
shopping. This study attempts to understand the most crucial fac-
tors influencing consumer continuous intention to engage in re-
peated online group buying. This research addresses the
questions of (1) whether trust, reciprocity, and reputation are ante-
cedents of satisfaction that influence consumer intention to engage
in online group buying; and (2) whether vendor creativity is a sig-
nificant factor affecting consumer intention to engage in online
group buying. This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 dis-
cusses SET and the theoretical background of satisfaction, trust,
and creativity; Section 3 presents the proposed research model
and hypotheses; Section 4 details the research methodology used
in this paper; Section 5 presents the data analysis results; Section
6 discusses the key findings of this research; and Section 7 presents
the conclusion and discusses limitations of this study.
2. Literature review
2.1. Social exchange theory
Originating in the 1950s and based on psychology, SET em-
braces the fundamental concepts of modern economics as a foun-
dation for analyzing human behavior and relationships to
determine social structure complexity. SET was initially developed
for analyzing human behavior (Homans, 1958) and was later
applied to understanding organizational behavior (Blau, 1964;
Emerson, 1962). For example, SET was extended to the organiza-
tional context with an emphasis on the significance of norms,
specifically social institutions and formal inter-organizational
exchange behavior. Individuals typically expect reciprocal benefits,
such as personal affection, trust, gratitude, and economic return
when they act according to social norms. Therefore, interpersonal
interactions from a cost-benefit perspective are an exchange where
actors acquire benefits (Blau, 1964). The social exchange model
states that people and organizations interact to maximize their
rewards and minimize their costs (Salam, Rao, & Pegels, 1998).
Related theories of exchange continued to emerge after the advent
of SET, including exchange behaviorism (Homans, 1958), the
exchange network theory (Emerson, 1962), exchange structuralism
(Blau, 1964), and the exchange outcome matrix (Tsai et al., 2011).
Table 1 summarizes prior studies on SET and shows subject
areas, purposes, factors, and results. The table also shows the appli-
cation of SET across different areas, such as sales performance,
adoption decisions, business commitment, and employee volun-
teerism. As can be seen in Table 1, SET has recently been adopted
in social networking research, although this application area has
not yet been fully examined. This study on online group buying
can be used to understand the novel business model and continu-
ously develop and refine SET.
This study adopts SET to understand the concept of knowledge
sharing at the enterprise- and task-oriented-level. Knowledge
sharing attitude is primarily determined by expectations (rewards,
social associations, and contributions) and anticipations (extrinsic
rewards and reciprocal relationships) (Bock & Kim, 2002). The mo-
tives (i.e., expectations and anticipations) of sharing behaviors
have been identified as egoistic and altruistic (Deci, 1975). The
egoistic perspective is based on the economic and social exchange
theories, which suggest that human behavior is driven by eco-
nomic rewards. The altruistic perspective assumes that an individ-
ual is willing to increase the welfare of others and does not expect
personal returns. With the recent rise of online social networking
sites, community websites have placed greater emphasis on the
exchange of information, interaction, and sharing. People interact-
ing with each other frequently believe they obtain benefits from
sharing and exchange (Hsu & Lin, 2008). Although the foundation
of a knowledge market is based on buyers and sellers who are will-
ing to trade knowledge, there are exceptions when an individual is
motivated by altruistic principles.
Motivated by SET, previous studies have developed several
knowledge factors based on the concept that knowledge sharing
and exchange can provide benefits. The significance of these fac-
tors has been ranked from high to low as follows: reciprocity, rep-
utation, and altruism (Davenport et al., 1998). In a blog study, the
knowledge sharing (altruism and reputation) factor contributed
significantly to user attitude (Hsu & Lin, 2008). This study primar-
ily uses knowledge sharing factors (namely, reciprocity, reputation,
and trust) to develop factors that determine intention toward on-
line group buying, and omits altruistic motives because group buy-
ing behaviors involve no intention of improving the welfare of
other buyers and no expectation of personal returns. Although
altruism has been shown to be a salient factor for knowledge shar-
ing of blog users (Hsu & Lin, 2008), this study argues otherwise
(this assumption in detailed in Section 2.4). However, online group
buyers provide knowledge and expect feedback from others; thus,
there is mutual benefit. Reciprocity, reputation, and trust are likely
to provide perceptions of social rewards.
2.1.1. Reciprocity
Reciprocity is frequently interpreted as quid pro quo behavior
(Frazier & Rody, 1991) and is well established in philosophical,
psychological, and sociological discourse. The concept is based on
how social exchange is made through interpersonal behavior. From
SET, a stable relationship is driven by exchange (Homans, 1958;
Pervan, Bove, & Johnson, 2009) and can be a more generalized ex-
change when returns are not necessarily immediate or in kind, but
where a balance of exchange is achieved over time (Homans,
1958). Research on organizational behavior has discussed reciproc-
ity within the exchange relationship between employees and
employers through the psychological contract (mutual beliefs, per-
ceptions, and informal obligations) framework (Coyle-Shapiro &
Kessler, 2002).
Information systems (IS) define reciprocity as the salient belief
that knowledge sharing results in a future request for knowledge
being obliged (Chen & Hung, 2010). The norms of reciprocity and
trust are the two most significant factors that drive knowledge
sharing (Davenport et al., 1998). Reciprocity has been considered
the most crucial factor affecting knowledge sharing within a com-
munity (Lechner & Hummel, 2002) and can further influence indi-
viduals’ perception of how a particular behavior will be performed.
For example, a greater level of reciprocity in knowledge sharing
influences the intention of knowledge contributors to use elec-
tronic knowledge repositories (EKR) (Kankanhalli, Tan, & Wei,
2005). In accord with previous IS studies, reciprocity in this study
is defined as the degree to which individuals believe they can ob-
tain mutual benefits through knowledge sharing (Hsu & Lin, 2008).
 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444
Table 1
SET related studies.
Study Area Purpose
Salam et al. (1998) Electronic commerce To use social exchange framework to
transactions understand how trust economic
incentive play roles in facilitation of
electronic commerce over the Internet
Gefen and Keil (1998) Adoption of expert To examine the adoption of an expert
system system by a combined TAM and SET
model where developer responsiveness
was not only found strongly influenced
both PU and PEOU, but also indirectly
affected actual behavior
Young-Ybarra and Information To utilize a framework wherein both
Wiersema (1999) technology alliances transaction cost economics and social
exchange theory are used to examine
two elements of strategic flexibility in
strategic alliances: the flexibility to
modify the alliance and the flexibility to
exit the alliance relationship
Gefen and Ridings CRM user evaluation To examine whether different degrees
(2002) of actual responsiveness in different
sites during CRM implementation result
in significant differences in the users’
favorable assessment of the correctness
and ultimately their approval of a new
CRM
Hsu and Lu (2004) Online game adoption To apply TAM that incorporates social
influences from SET and flow experience
to predict users’ acceptance of on-line
games
Dwyer et al. (2007) Social networking To compare perceptions of trust and
sites privacy concern, along with willingness
to share information and develop new
relationships in social networking sites
Hsu and Lin (2008) Acceptance of blog To incorporate TAM, knowledge sharing
usage and social influence factors to
understand blog usages
Pappas and Flaherty Strategic behavior and To examine the nature and extent of
(2008) sales performance strategy participation exhibited by
customer contact personnel
de Clercq and Entrepreneurs’ To identify a key mechanism that
Rangarajan (2008) commitment to explains relationship outcomes in
customers entrepreneur–customer dyads
Bunduchi (2008) B2B exchanges To analyze the outcome that the use of
Internet based electronic markets (EM)
has on the nature of inter-
organizational relationships
Hald, Cordón, and Buyer–supplier To explores how firms are attracted to
Factors based on SET
Trust
Economic incentive
Developer responsiveness
Trust
Influence
Alternatives
Importance
Perceived responsiveness
Social norms
Critical mass
Trust
Knowledge sharing factors:
Altruism, expected reciprocal
benefit, reputation, trust,
expected relationship
Social influence factors: Social
norms, Community
identification
Trust
Reliability of exchange:
Customer reputation
Procedural justice
Quality of exchange:
Communication intensity
Social interaction
Transaction costs
Trust dependency
Expected value
2433
Results
Trust ? Perceived riska
Economic incentive ? Perceived riska
Developer responsiveness ? Perceived
usefulness
Developer responsiveness ? Perceived
ease of use
Trust ? Modification flexibility
Influence ? Trusta
Influence ? Modification flexibility a
a
Alternatives ? Modification flexibility
Perceived
responsiveness ? Cooperative
intentions
Perceived
responsiveness ? Configuration
correctness
Social norms ? Intention
Critical mass ? Attitude
In online interaction, trust is not as
necessary in the building of new
relationships as it is in face to face
encounters; in an online site, the
existence of trust and the willingness to
share information does not
automatically translate into new social
interaction
Altruism ? Attitude
Reputation ? Attitude
Community identification ? Intention
Trust ? Willingness to participate
Involvement ? Rating of performance
Reliability of exchange ? Attitude
Quality of exchange ? Attitude
The nature of an inter-organizational
relationship depends on the interaction
between three relational features:
transaction costs, trust and dependency
Expected value, trust, and dependence
(continued on next page)
2434 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444

Table 1 (continued)

Study Area Purpose Factors based on SET Results

Vollmann (2009) relationships one another within buyer–supplier interact to draw dyadic parties closer
dyads together or push them apart
Trust dependence
Flaherty and Pappas Selling performance of This study empirically examines a Trust Trust ? Strategic communication
(2009) sales professionals model of salesperson participation in
strategic communication activities
Fu, Bolander, and Sales professionals’ Utilizing a three-component Trust Trust M POS
Jones (2009) organizational organizational commitment measure to
commitment identify ways for managers to drive
salesperson effort
Trust ? Job satisfaction
Perceived organizational POS ? Job satisfaction
support (POS)
Continuance commitment POS ? Continuance commitmenta
Normative commitment Job satisfaction ? Normative
commitment
Peloza, Hudson, and Employee To examine employee volunteerism in Altruist motive Egoistic motive ? Attitude
Hassay (2009) volunteerism the context of a co-ordinated, employer
sanctioned corporate philanthropy
program, or intra-organizational
volunteerism
Egoistic motive Organizational citizenship ? Attitude
Organizational citizenship
behavior motive
Thomas, Esper, and Supply chain To test how the imposition of time Time pressure Time pressure ? Collaborative
Stank (2010) relationship pressure (viewed as a relational cost behaviorsa
that could potentially outweigh the
benefits of the exchange) affects key
elements of retail supply chain
relationships
Time pressure ? Relationship loyaltya
Time pressure ? Relationship valuea
Tsai et al. (2011) Online group buying To examine the impact of technology Sense of virtual community Sense of virtual community ? Intention
acceptance acceptance factors and social factors on
online group buying
Trust in the virtual Trust in the virtual
community community ? Intention
Lusch, Brown, and Relational assets Using SET and other theories to Normative contract breach Normative contract
O’Brien (2011) investigate how to protect relational breach ? Propensity to exit
assets in a marketing channel when an
upstream horizontal business
combination between key suppliers
arises
Normative contract breach ? Channel
member performance
Normative contract breach ? Channel
member satisfactiona
Qin, Kim, Hsu, and Tan Online social To investigate the determinants of user Subjective norm Subjective norm ? Perceived usefulness
(2011) networks acceptance of online social networks,
with attention given to the effects of
social influence
Critical mass Critical mass ? Perceived usefulness
a
Negative correlation between constructs.

2.1.2. Reputation an outcome of knowledge sharing may be seen as a cognitive rep-

Reputation refers to the degree to which a person believes that
social interaction potentially enhances personal reputation. In the
majority of cases, a knowledge owner wanting to project create
an image of ‘‘a wise person’’ is often willing to share knowledge.
The knowledge provider enriches the knowledge of the recipient
while retaining their own knowledge. Thus, the knowledge pro-
vider obtains additional intangible assets, including a better repu-
tation, increased personal status, and an increased positive feeling
from being a provider. Previous studies have indicated that reputa-
tion is a crucial factor that significantly influences individual
knowledge sharing within a community (Wasko & Faraj, 2005).
Reputation acquired through knowledge sharing can further influ-
ence particular individual behavior, such as EKR usage (Kankanhalli
et al., 2005). Although many scholars believe that reputation as
resentation (or a belief), others have identified reputation as a pro-
cess that comprises a set of beliefs transmitted within a social
network (Bromley, 1993; Casare & Sichman, 2005; Conte & Paoluc-
ci, 2002). Reputation is a social product and a social process. In an
online context, a perceived increase in reputation is caused by
information sharing among other users or sellers (Constant,
Sproull, & Kiesler, 1996; Kollock, 1999). Blog user participation in
knowledge sharing potentially enhances personal reputation
(Hsu & Lin, 2008).
2.1.3. Trust
Trust is defined as ‘‘the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to
the actions of another party based on the expectation that the
other will perform a particular action important to the trustor,
 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444
irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party’’
(Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995). Trust has been widely studied
across various academic domains. It has been conceptualized as a
belief in an e-seller that results in behavioral intentions (Chiu,
Huang, & Yen, 2010; Doney & Cannon, 1997; Gefen & Straub,
2000) and has been viewed as a set of specific beliefs primarily
associated with benevolence, competence, and integrity of the
other party (Chen & Hung, 2010; Chiu et al., 2010; Doney & Cannon,
1997; Kankanhalli et al., 2005). Practitioners agree that trust has a
crucial role in human behavior. When people are confronted with
risks and are unable to control the behavior of others, the signifi-
cance of trust is apparent, particularly in the successful adoption
of new technologies such as e-commerce (Hoffman, Novak, &
Peralta, 1999). Trust is also required to connect the relationships
of retailers and consumers in an e-commerce environment (Gefen,
2000). A lack of trust is a barrier for e-commerce, particularly dur-
ing the development stage of e-commerce (Chang, Cheung, & Lai,
2005; McKnight, Choudhury, & Kacmar, 2002a). Therefore, it is
commonly believed that an absence of physical sellers and uncer-
tainty in the Internet environment makes trust a crucial factor for
attracting and retaining customers (Corbitt, Thanasankit, & Yi,
2003; Gefen, 2002; Gefen & Straub, 2004; Pavlou, 2003; Verhagen,
Meents, & Tan, 2006). Previous studies on online shopping empha-
sized that customer purchasing intentions, satisfaction, and loyalty
are based on trust (Ba & Pavlou, 2002; Li, Browne, & Wetherbe,
2006; Lim, Sia, Lee, & Benbasat, 2006). Trust and other factors
(dimensions of website design, reliability, responsiveness) collec-
tively affect overall service quality and customer satisfaction of
e-service quality of online shopping (Lee, Kim, Seock, & Cho,
2009). Previous research on customer motivations for online shop-
ping observed that distributive, procedural, and interactional fair-
ness are strong predictors of trust (Chiu, Lin, Sun, & Hsu, 2009).
Trust is also a central component of SET (Roloff, 1981). Previous
studies have shown that when managers exhibit respect, goodwill,
and trust toward employees, the behavior is reciprocated (Blau,
1964). As discussed, SET presents a cost benefit analysis with re-
spect to social interaction. For example, if an online exchange is
perceived to be beneficial, the individual is likely to enter an ex-
change relationship with other online users. In this case, trust is
believed to be used in calculating the perceived cost. Previous
studies on interpersonal exchange have also suggested that trust
is a precondition for self-disclosure because it reduces the per-
ceived risks involved in revealing personal information (Metzger,
2004).
2.2. Satisfaction
Marketing research has adopted satisfaction to measure cus-
tomer satisfaction after a purchase (Cardozo, 1964; Oliver, 1980).
Previous research has stressed the differences between consumer
expectations and actual satisfaction and how satisfaction affects
purchasing intention. Consumer satisfaction helps businesses
establish long-term relationships with consumers and has a signif-
icant influence on purchase intentions (Bai, Law, & Wen, 2008;
Bhattacherjee, 2001a; Kim, Ma, & Kim, 2006; Lee, Lee, Lee, & Babin,
2008). In IS, satisfaction is conceptualized as end user satisfaction
with systems and a crucial criterion for IS success. Satisfaction is
noted in many IS studies as the response of end-users toward sys-
tem attributes and service quality (Khalifa & Liu, 2003a, 2003b,
2004). Satisfaction and attitudes are both affective measures
(LaTour & Peat, 1979) that are used interchangeably. However,
scholars have argued that attitudes include a satisfaction measure
(Hong, Thong, & Tam, 2006), whereas others believe that satisfac-
tion is an attitude (Churchill & Surprenant, 1982; Lee, 2010). This
study focuses on consumer feelings about prior shopping experi-
ences with vendors that provide online group buying services over
2435
the group buying websites. Therefore, we define satisfaction as the
evaluation of online group buying vendors and an affective mea-
sure that is equivalent to attitude.
2.3. Creativity
Creativity is derived from the Latin word creatus. Webster’s dic-
tionary defines creativity as ‘‘given the existence’’ and ‘‘out of noth-
ing’’ and ‘‘originality.’’ Creative products often characterize novelty
and appropriateness; otherwise, they are general products. In a
marketing context, product creativity is defined as the concept of
novel ideas and a novel product with competitive advantage
(Couger & Dengate, 1996; Couger, Higgins, & McIntyre, 1993; Horn
& Salvendy, 2006a; Starko, 1995). Only creativity can go beyond
what already exists to maintain industry status and advantage
and foster its development. Creativity adds further value to con-
sumers’ overall product experiences to fulfill the ever-changing
market demand structure where a shift from product-based to
value-based competition is established (Horn & Salvendy, 2006a).
Today, businesses have to be innovative and creative to sustain
in the current highly competitive market environment.
Creativity has a key role in customer/user satisfaction and
shapes consumer intention toward product purchases (Horn &
Salvendy, 2006a, 2006b, 2009; Zeng, Salvendy, & Zhang, 2009).
When the concept of creativity is discussed in an online context,
it is a highly crucial element to foster online purchasing. Despite
the common characteristics between online and offline purchasing,
the online environment is more competitive because of the imme-
diate access to competitors. Therefore, this study infers that vendor
creativity, defined as generating new concepts and new products
to fulfill consumer demands (Zhou & George, 2001), has a direct ef-
fect on satisfaction and intention to engage in online group buying.
2.4. Purchase intention of online shoppers
Intention is defined as the degree of customer perception that a
particular online group buying behavior will be performed. This
study applies the theory of reasoned action (TRA), which asserts
that beliefs influence attitudes that subsequently influence inten-
tions (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). In TRA, beliefs influence people’s
overall attitude toward an object and guide individual intentions
that influence behavior toward a subject. Relationships that link
beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behaviors were examined in so-
cial media and organizational contexts (Hsu & Lin, 2008; Kolekof-
ski, 2003).
IS research suggesting that people use online IS to benefit other
online users is scarce (Hess, Joshi, & McNab, 2010; Lowry, Cao, &
Everard, 2011; Luo, 2002; McKnight, Choudbury, & Kacmar,
2002b; McLure-Wasko & Faraj, 2005). Numerous websites have
been designed for the purpose of information sharing and to help
others (e.g., http://www.ehow.com/ and www.yahoo.com). Altru-
ism in these cases is a particularly critical factor of IT acceptance
or purchase decision. This study identifies whether altruistic ben-
efits are significant factors for online group buying. The previous
studies offer few research findings on online group buying because
it is a relatively novel business model. Zhu et al. (2010) suggested
that people are more willing to collaborate in social circumstances
for mutual benefits. Altruism in this context was not addressed. To
provide empirical support for our assumption whether altruistic
benefits are critical factors in online group buying, this study con-
ducted two pre-data collection studies by recruiting undergradu-
ate students in their senior year, graduate students, and frequent
online group buying shoppers. In the first study, 30 students in a
400 level marketing research course were requested to report their
experiences, purposes, and the types of products they purchased
through online group buying. Fifteen students reported purchasing
2436 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444
foods and snacks. Female students primarily purchased clothes and
cosmetic items, whereas male students purchased sports equip-
ment and accessories. Their primary purpose for group buying
was for personal use. The second study obtained similar results.
Six graduate students, 11 undergraduate students, and four fre-
quent online group buyers were recruited. They reported similar
online group shopping experiences where home appliances and
foods (rice, hand-made soaps, and vegetables) and seasonal holi-
day items were purchased for personal use. They reported that
the advantage of group buying was exchanging information. Given
that, this study identifies the primary reason of group buying as
obtaining something for personal use, as opposed to benefitting
other online users. Conducting pre-data collection studies ruled
out altruistic benefits as a potential factor in the given context.
Thus, this study does not include altruistic benefits, but focuses
on reciprocity, reputation, trust, and creativity.
3. Research model and hypotheses
Based on SET, this study proposes that beliefs such as reciprocity,
reputation, and trust, as noted in the social exchange literature drive
intention. We propose that: (a) beliefs (reciprocity, reputation, and
trust) and vendor creativity collectively influence user satisfaction
toward websites and vendors; and (b) trust and vendor creativity
have a salient effect on behavioral intention toward online group
buying. Fig. 1 shows the proposed hypotheses and Table 2 summa-
rizes the core concepts underlying the proposed research model.
As discussed, reciprocity is one of the most significant factors
that drive knowledge sharing (Davenport et al., 1998). When users
develop reciprocal actions of knowledge sharing, they have posi-
tive attitudes toward sharing knowledge online (Bock & Kim,
2002; Bock, Zmud, Kim, & Lee, 2005). These findings are supported
by a study in which users who received mutual benefits through
knowledge sharing online reported feeling positive about their mu-
tual exchanges, encouraging these users to use an online system
(Hsu & Lin, 2008). Therefore, we propose that users who receive
mutual benefits through information sharing on online group buy-
ing have a positive attitude toward engaging in online group buy-
ing. Satisfaction is an attitudinal measure (Churchill & Surprenant,
1982; Lee, 2010) that has been shown to be influenced by reciproc-
ity (Dwyer, Lee, & Jankowski, 1994; Lee & Ellithorpe, 1982; McCul-
loch, 1990; Pervan et al., 2009). Thus, we hypothesize that:
H1. Consumer reciprocity is positively associated with consumer
satisfaction with vendors that provide online group buying
services.
Reputation is a component of identity defined by a group of
people or an organization according to specific criteria. It is a cru-
cial factor that influences consumer attitude. People with the per-
ception that participation enhances their professional reputation
tend to have a positive attitude toward knowledge sharing and fur-
ther contribute helpful responses more frequently to electronic
networks of practice (Wasko & Faraj, 2005). Reputation has been
considered as an incentive factor for knowledge sharing that posi-
tively affects user attitudes toward participating in a blog (Hsu &
Lin, 2008). Kankanhalli et al. indicated that when EKR usage con-
tributes to an increase in user reputation, users have positive feel-
ings toward using EKR, which subsequently affects their intention
to use EKR (Kankanhalli et al., 2005). Similarly, when online group
buying usage improves user reputation, users are pleased with
vendors that provide online group buying services. Other studies
have also shown that reputation affects satisfaction (Andreassen,
1994; Helm, 2007; Helm, 2011; Jin, Park, & Kim, 2008). Thus, the
following hypothesis is proposed:
H2. Consumer reputation is positively associated with consumer
satisfaction with online group buying.
Trust is the confidence that consumers have in an organization
or e-seller in an online context. Trust creates favorable feelings to-
ward online shopping and customer trust toward an e-seller has a
significant and positive effect on their satisfaction and loyalty
intentions (Chiu et al., 2009). The greater the feeling of trust to-
ward an e-seller, the greater satisfaction consumers have (Chiu
et al., 2009; Lee & Lin, 2005; Lee et al., 2009). Therefore, we
hypothesize:
H3. Consumer trust is positively associated with consumer satis-
faction with vendors that provide online group buying services.
Studies have emphasized that customer purchase intention, sat-
isfaction, and loyalty are associated with the establishment of cus-
tomer trust toward online shopping (Ba & Pavlou, 2002; Gefen,
Karahanna, & Straub, 2003; Li et al., 2006; Lim et al., 2006). Trust
has a positive influence on websites in relation to the effects of
web advertisements on customer purchase intentions. Consumers
spend greater amounts of time shopping on websites that they
trust (Kim, Kim, & Park, 2010). Numerous studies have shown a
relationship between trust and purchasing intention (Gefen,
2000; Gefen et al., 2003; Kim, Kim, & Shin, 2009). Collectively,
these studies support the following hypothesis:
H4. Consumer trust is positively associated with consumer inten-
tion to engage in online group buying.
Creativity is a crucial construct for understanding consumer
feelings toward goods and services (Erika, 1999). Sales become eas-
ier when creativity is used appropriately in the sales process. This
can lead to greater satisfaction of salespeople toward their work
(Weiss, 2002). Several studies have shown that creativity affects
job satisfaction (Gallivan, 2003; Kahai, Sosik, & Avolio, 2003).
Numerous studies have also shown that creativity has a key role
in user satisfaction (Horn & Salvendy, 2006a, 2006b, 2009; Zeng
et al., 2009). Thus, we hypothesize:
H5. Vendor creativity is positively associated with consumer
satisfaction with vendors that provide online group buying
services.
Creativity can serve as a significant source for adding further va-
lue to customers’ overall product experience. Customers are satis-
fied when they have positive feelings about their previous
purchasing experience (Horn & Salvendy, 2006a). Creativity has a
key role in user satisfaction and influences consumer intentions to-
wards product purchase (Horn & Salvendy, 2006a, 2006b, 2009;
Zeng et al., 2009). When a business displays higher sales process
creativity, consumers are more intent to engage in online group
buying. Therefore, we hypothesize:
H6. Vendor creativity is positively associated with consumer
intention to engage in online group buying.
Empirical evidence supported a positive relationship between
satisfaction and intention (Bhattacherjee, 2001b; Lin, Wu, & Tsai,
2005). Researchers have also conceptualized a model for the effect
of website quality on customer satisfaction and purchasing inten-
tions, indicating that satisfaction has a direct and positive effect
on purchasing intentions (Bai et al., 2008). Numerous studies have
also suggested that consumer satisfaction establishes long-term
relationships with consumers and businesses and is a key factor
 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444 2437

SET Beliefs Attitude Intention

Reciprocity
H1

H2 H7 Intention to
Reputation Satisfaction online group
buying
H3
H4
Trust
H5
H6

Vendor s
creativity

Fig. 1. Research model.

Table 2
Operationalization of constructs.

Construct Operational definition Source

Reciprocity The belief that sharing information to an online group buying vendor would lead to future Kankanhalli et al. (2005)
request for knowledge being met
Reputation The perception of an increase in reputation is due to the sharing information on an online Constant et al. (1996)
group buying vendor
Kollock (1999)
Trust Trust is a consumer’s confident belief in an online group buying vendors’ honesty towards Odekerken-Schroder, de Wulf, and
the consumer Schumacher (2003)
Vendor creativity Vendor creativity involves coming up with new ideas and new products to meet the Zhou and George (2001)
consumer demands
Satisfaction Consumer feelings about prior shopping experience on an online group buying vendor Bhattacherjee (2001a)
Intention to engage in online Intention to engage in online group buying is the perception of individuals that a particular Fishbein and Ajzen (1975)
group buying behavior will be performed

for obtaining consumer purchasing intention in an online shopping
context (Bhattacherjee, 2001a; Kim et al., 2006; Lee et al., 2008).
Thus, we hypothesize:
H7. Consumer satisfaction is positively associated with their
intention to engage in online group buying.
4. Research methodology
4.1. Data collection and subjects
Empirical data for this research was obtained using an online
survey that has several advantages over traditional paper-based
surveys, such as fast response time, cost-efficiency, and an absence
of geographical boundaries (Bhattacherjee, 2001a; Bhattacherjee,
2001b; Tan & Teo, 2000). The distributed survey was developed
using the Java programming language and distributed from Sep-
tember to November, 2010. A hyperlink to the survey was posted
on PTT and Ihergo website to reach a large number of consumers.
The hyperlink was accompanied by a message requesting partici-
pants who had experience with purchasing through Ihergo website
to participate in the survey. PTT was selected because users of this
bulletin board system frequently post group buying messages and
requests for other users who engage in group buying. Thus, all sur-
vey participants directed from Ihergo website or PTT were aware of
the relevance of Ihergo website when they completed the ques-
tionnaire. The participants were instructed to complete all ques-
tions in the survey website. There were no missing values in the
obtained data. Participants were requested to leave their email ad-
dress to eliminate multiple responses by the same user. To encour-
age participation, 10 tokens were provided from the PPT bulletin
board system and Ihergo website. A total of 215 valid responses
were obtained.
The strengths of online survey data collection are the potential
to collect large amounts of data in a relatively small amount of
time and the elimination of data entry and processing require-
ments. During data collection, if unacceptable data is entered by
a user, the web-based program returns an error message and re-
quests the user to enter the correct data before submitting the
questionnaire. Furthermore, data sets are complete.
Determining the composition of the base population was usu-
ally impossible for researchers. Previous IS studies conducted their
surveys by employing a convenient sampling approach (Hsu & Lin,
2008; Li, 2011; Neumann & Fink, 2007; Sledgianowski & Kulviwat,
2009). This is suitable when a population sample is difficult to
identify. Although the data collected in this study has potential
selection bias, it is impossible to select a random sample of users
because a complete directory of websites that allow online group
buying does not exist.
4.2. Measurement development
The following six constructs were measured using multiple-
item scales: reciprocity, reputation, vendor creativity, trust,
satisfaction, and intention to engage in online group buying. Pre-
validated items were used following a pre-test to ensure content
validity. Expert review of the questionnaire was performed by an
2438 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444

e-commerce researcher and three experienced online shoppers.
Prior to data collection, a pilot test was conducted with seven grad-
uate students, one college student, and two office workers who had
previous experiences with online group buying. They were re-
quested to review the items to evaluate the constructs, semantics,
length, and format of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was re-
vised according to their feedback. All items use a five-point Likert
type scales (strongly disagree = 1 to strongly agree = 5). Table 2
shows the operational definitions and Appendix lists the scale
items for these constructs.
5. Data analysis and results
5.1. Descriptive statistics
search, we assessed the data set using Harman’s one-factor test
to identify any potential common method bias (Podsakoff & Organ,
1986). The threat of common method bias is high if a single factor
accounts for more than 50% of variance (Harman, 1976; Mattila &
Enz, 2002; Pee, Kankanhalli, Ong, & Vu, 2010). Evidence of common
method bias exists when a general construct accounts for the
majority of covariance among all constructs. A principal compo-
nent factor analysis was performed and the results excluded the
potential threat of common methods bias. The combined six fac-
tors accounted for 77.9% of total variance; the first (largest) factor
accounted for 43.6% (the variances explained ranges from 3.08% to
43.63%) and no general factor accounted for more than 50% of var-
iance, indicating that common method bias may not be a serious
problem in the data set.

A total of 215 respondents were surveyed online. Of these 215 5.4. Measurement model
participants, 111 were men (51.6%) and 104 were women
(48.4%). The majority of respondents were aged between 23 and In contrast with LISREL, the partial least squares (PLS) method is
30 (73.0%), had post-secondary education (95.9%), and had en- an appropriate analytical tool in this case because it has minimal
gaged in group buying three times within the previous year demands on measurement scales, sample size, and residual distri-
(77.7%). The most recent group buying experience for the majority butions (Chin, Marcolin, & Newsted, 1996). The assessment of a
of respondents was within the previous 3 months (54.0%) and the measurement model should examine (1) individual item reliabil-
most common purchases were food items (61.0%). Table 3 shows ity, (2) internal consistency, and (3) discriminate validity (Barclay,
the respondent demographics. Higgins, & Thompson, 1995). This study employs the structural
equation modeling tool VisualPLS (version 1.04) for confirmatory
factor analysis to estimate the measurement model using PLS anal-
5.2. Non-response bias
ysis to test construct reliability and validity. Composite reliability
represents the internal consistency of the measurement model.
This study addressed the issue of non-response bias by compar-
The results in Table 4 show the factor loading of all items exceeds
ing the gender and age of early respondents to the later ones. The
0.5 (Nunnally, 1978; Wixom & Watson, 2001) and are significant
concept behind this approach is consistent with the procedure sug-
(p < .01) (Bock et al., 2005). Composite reliabilities ranged from
gested by Armstrong and Overton (1977), who suggested that late
0.87 to 0.95, all exceeding 0.7 (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988), and the AVE
respondents are more likely to resemble non-respondents than
of each construct ranged from 0.69 to 0.83, all exceeding 0.5 (Chin
early respondents. A total of 129 respondents who completed the
et al., 1996). Table 4 shows that all indices fit with heuristics.
survey during the early stage were considered earlier respondents
Discriminate validity is tested in the measurement model anal-
and 86 respondents completed the survey during the later stage.
ysis to determine the correlations between the latent variables and
The Chi-Square test for the early and late respondents shows they
other constructs. The convergent and discriminant validity were
did not differ significantly (p > .05) in gender or age. We therefore
assessed by checking whether the AVE (average variance ex-
excluded the possibility of non-response bias.
tracted) of each construct is larger than its correlation with the
other constructs, and whether each item had a higher loading on
5.3. Common method bias its assigned construct than on the other constructs (Fornell &
Larcker, 1981; Gefen, Straub, & Boudreau, 2000). The results indicate
All data were collected using the discussed survey method. Be- that the discriminate validity was achieved, as shown in Table 5.
cause common method bias may threaten the validity of this re-
5.5. Structural model
Table 3
Descriptive statistics of respondents’ characteristics (N = 215). Based on the discussed reliability and validity analysis of the
measurement model, the research model was assessed using PLS.
Measure Items Frequency Percent
The bootstrap resampling method (200 resamples) was applied
Gender Male 111 51.6 to determine the significance of the structural model paths. The
Female 104 48.4
path coefficient and significance of each hypothesis were exam-
Age <18 years old 2 0.9 ined. The explained variance (R2) of each dependent construct
19–22 years old 45 20.9
23–30 years old 157 73.0
was calculated. The results are shown in Fig. 2.
31–45 years old 10 4.7 The model explains 39.7% of variance for intention and 67.7% of
46 years old 1 0.5 variance for satisfaction. H1 examines the effects of reciprocity on
Education High school (below) 9 4.1 satisfaction. Reciprocity is significantly related to satisfaction
College 156 72.6 (b = 0.305, p < .001). H2 examines the effects of reputation on sat-
Master (above) 50 23.3 isfaction. Reputation is not significantly related to satisfaction
Frequency of group <3 times 167 77.7 (b = 0.031). H3 and H4 examine the effects of trust on satisfaction
purchase within 1 year 4–6 times 31 14.4 and intention to engage in online group buying. Trust is signifi-
7–9 times 6 2.8
cantly related to satisfaction (b = 0.568, p < .001), and was signifi-
>10 times 11 5.1
cantly related to intention to engage in online group buying
Most recent group <3 months 116 54.0
(b = 0.318, p < .01). H5 and H6 examine the effects of vendor crea-
purchase 3–6 months 29 13.5
6 months–1 year 34 15.8 tivity on satisfaction and intention to engage in online group buy-
>1 year 36 16.7 ing. Vendor creativity is significantly related to intention to engage
in online group buying (b = 0.139, p < .05), but not significantly
 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444 2439

Table 4
Scale properties of measurement model.

Construct Item Item mean Standard deviation Error loading Standardized item loading T-statistic
RECI RECI1 3.89 0.674 0.350 0.806 27.184
RECI2 3.97 0.693 0.323 0.823 24.362
RECI3 3.87 0.682 0.285 0.845 33.916
RECI4 3.92 0.689 0.244 0.869 46.512
RECI5 3.89 0.728 0.254 0.864 37.880
REPUT REPUT1 3.30 0.800 0.269 0.855 24.858
REPUT2 3.27 0.817 0.187 0.902 40.111
REPUT3 3.33 0.853 0.162 0.915 47.161
REPUT4 3.20 0.821 0.192 0.899 31.374
REPUT5 3.37 0.880 0.270 0.854 35.063
TRU TRU1 3.59 0.779 0.306 0.833 32.037
TRU2 3.71 0.684 0.204 0.892 48.205
TRU3 3.74 0.734 0.174 0.909 56.167
CRE CRE1 3.47 0.819 0.302 0.836 25.459
CRE2 3.56 0.806 0.243 0.870 33.576
CRE3 3.57 0.782 0.205 0.892 53.861
CRE4 3.73 0.804 0.294 0.841 33.102
SAT SAT1 3.87 0.746 0.203 0.893 41.263
SAT2 3.88 0.737 0.165 0.914 62.941
SAT3 3.86 0.706 0.154 0.920 69.962
SAT4 3.85 0.730 0.149 0.922 68.016
INT INT1 3.87 0.746 0.320 0.825 37.094
INT2 3.35 0.873 0.252 0.865 33.122
INT3 3.26 0.841 0.358 0.801 20.053

Table 5
Scale properties and correlations.

Construct Number of items Reliability AVE Factor correlations

RECI REPUT TRU SAT CRE INT
RECI 5 0.924 0.709 1.000
REPUT 5 0.948 0.784 0.387 1.000
TRU 3 0.910 0.772 0.620 0.383 1.000
CRE 4 0.919 0.739 0.480 0.279 0.516 1.000
SAT 4 0.952 0.832 0.682 0.374 0.783 0.475 1.000
INT 3 0.870 0.690 0.528 0.384 0.593 0.427 0.574 1.000

Note: RECI: Reciprocity, REPUT: Reputation, TRU: Trust, SAT: Satisfaction, CRE: Vendors’ Creativity, INT: Intention to Online group buying.

SET Beliefs Attitude Intention

Reciprocity
0.305***

Satisfaction Intention to
0.031 0.260**
Reputation 2 online group
R = 0.677
buying
0.568***
2
0.138** R = 0.397
Trust
0.027
0.139*

Vendor’s
creativity

*
p<0.05; **P<0.01; ***p<0.001 Dotted line represents insignificant path
Fig. 2. Results of structure model. p < 0.05; 
p < 0.01; 
p < 0.001. Dotted line represents insignificant path.

related to satisfaction (b = 0.027, p > .05). H7 examines the effects line group buying (b = 0.260, p < .01). Therefore, all hypotheses ex-
of satisfaction on the intention to engage in online group buying. cept H2 and H5 are supported. The direct, indirect, total effects,
Satisfaction is significantly related to the intention to engage in on- and explained variance of all factors are shown in Table 6.
2440 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444

5.6. Data analysis with potential customers
A data set was used to assess the potential customers of the on-
line group buying website. The respondents were recruited from a
major Taiwan university in June 2012. They received a notification
email to instruct them to fill out the online questionnaire regarding
their perceptions toward Ihergo website. Extra credits were
granted for participation. A total of 90 responses were collected
and 87 responses were usable for analysis. The 87 participants
who completed the questionnaire were composed of 49 (56.3%)
male and 38 (43.7%) female, range from 19 to 30 years of age.
The majority of them (69%) were between 23 and 30 years of
age. There are 73 undergraduate (83.9.1%) and 14 master (16.1%)
students. They have visited Ihergo website, although they did not
engage in group buying. Thus, they are considered potential Ihergo
customers.
With PLS analysis, our results show that reliability and validity
of measurements met criteria. Reciprocity (b = 0.054; p > .05) and
vendor creativity (b = 0.004; p > .05) were not significantly related
to satisfaction, although reputation (b = 0.299; p < .001) and trust
were (b = 0.612; p < .001). Vendor creativity (b = 0.144; p > .05)
and satisfaction (b = 0.268; p > .05) were not significantly related
to intention to engage in online group buying. Vendor creativity
was not significantly related to satisfaction (b = 0.004; p > .05). Sat-
isfaction was not significantly related to the intention to engage in
online group buying (b = 0.268; p > .05). Trust was significantly re-
lated to intention to engage in online group buying (b = 0.419;
p < .05). For potential customers, vendor creativity with novel con-
cepts and products perhaps were abstract to these respondents so
they could not respond how these vendors can fulfill consumer de-
mands. Thus, vendor creativity does not affect users’ satisfaction.
They also have not yet share or acquire information from other
users so they were not able to speculate how reciprocity can enable
to create favorable attitude toward the website. Nevertheless, it is
encouraging to see that trust is positively related to both satisfac-
tion and intention to engage online group buying. This is consistent
with earlier study suggested that trust is essential factor in the ini-
tial stage of electronic commerce (Chang et al., 2005). From the re-
sults we may conclude the trust is the most salient factor to
determine satisfaction and intention of potential customers. Future
research may provide a shopping scenario to respondents before
they fill out the survey questionnaire, so they can give specific re-
sponses to questionnaire items.
products and services that fulfill novelty-seeking needs, e-vendors
will find consumer acceptance of online group buying is achieved
easily.
Among the three knowledge sharing factors, trust and reciproc-
ity show significant effect toward satisfaction. Trust is the key con-
struct that explains customer satisfaction, followed by reciprocity.
A positive customer experience with online group buying creates
trust and gains experience about products or services. A higher le-
vel of customer trust represents a positive feeling toward shopping
experiences that induces high levels of satisfaction with online
group buying. Furthermore, the observed positive relationship be-
tween trust and intention to engage in online group buying con-
firms previous research that asserts consumer trust develops
slowly as experiences with online shopping increase (Chiu et al.,
2009). Reciprocity was observed to have a significant effect on con-
sumer satisfaction with online group buying. Reciprocity occurs
when consumers gain new information and purchase goods at
ideal prices in transactions that are quickly and collectively con-
firmed, to enhance consumer buying intention. Conversely, reputa-
tion and vendor creativity are not significantly related to
satisfaction. It is possible that the given contexts (PTT and Ihergo
websites) do not allow consumers to obtain intangible benefits
such as reputation, evaluation, and ratings because there is no
feedback mechanism for buyers similar to that found in e-com-
merce websites such as eBay. Feedback mechanisms provide con-
sumers with an incentive to initiate information sharing
behaviors and build consumer reputation, ultimately increasing
consumer satisfaction with the overall experience.
Finally, a non-significant relationship was observed between
vendor creativity and satisfaction. This may be caused by the
presence of infrequent buyers in the analyzed sample. Most
respondents are not frequent online group shoppers and may
have high or uncertain expectations. Based on previous research
on expectation confirmation theory, user satisfaction is influ-
enced by the confirmation of their expectations (Bhattacherjee,
2001a; Bhattacherjee, 2001b; Liao, Chen, & Yen, 2007; Liao,
Palvia, & Chen, 2009). Thus, if the novelty of a product or vendor
does not meet customer expectations, they do not report satisfac-
tion with online group buying experiences. The findings also indi-
cate that vendor creativity has a direct influence on intention
that is not been mediated by satisfaction.

6. Discussion Table 6
Effects of factors.

The results support satisfaction as the strongest predictor of Factors SAT INT
continuous intention to engage in online group buying, followed RECI Direct effects 0.305 –
by vendor creativity. If customers perceive value in online group Indirect effects – 0.079
buying, and the vendor satisfies their needs, the intention to en- Total effects 0.305 0.079
gage in online group buying is greater. Thus, product and service REPUT Direct effects 0.031 –
satisfaction have a crucial influence on intention to engage in on- Indirect effects – 0.008
line group buying. Total effects 0.031 0.008

The positive relationship between vendor creativity and the TRU Direct effects 0.568 0.318
intention to engage in online group buying is consistent with the Indirect effects – 0.148
Total effects 0.568 0.466
findings of research by Manning, Bearden, and Madden (1995),
which affirmed novelty-seeking has a pivotal role in decision for SAT Direct effects – 0.260
Indirect effects – –
consumers to adopt new products. Previous studies have also as- Total effects – 0.260
serted that novelty-seeking is a primary motive for tourists’ choice
CRE Direct effects 0.027 0.139
of travel destination and shopping behavior (Crompton & McKay, Indirect effects – 0.007
1997). From our findings, we conclude that e-vendors that provide Total effects 0.027 0.146
a higher level of vendor creativity for consumers create greater Variance explained (R2) 0.677 0.397
intention for shoppers to engage in online group buying. In this
case, vendor creativity refers to a diversified product range and ser- Note: RECI: Reciprocity, REPUT: Reputation, TRU: Trust, SAT: Satisfaction, CRE:
Vendors’ Creativity, INT: Intention to Online group buying.
vices that fulfill the specific needs of customers. By presenting
 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444 2441

Table A1
Measurement items.

Construct Measurement items Source

Reciprocity When I share my information about online group buying, I believe that I will receive other Kankanhalli et al. (2005)
information from online group buying vendors
When I share my information about online group buying, I expect to get respond when I need
from online group buying vendors
When I share my information about online group buying, I believe that my queries for
information will be answered in future on online group buying vendors
I find that my participation in the sharing of information about online group buying can be Hsu and Lin (2008)
advantageous to me and from online group buying vendors
I think that participating in the sharing of information on online group buying vendors can
improve the reciprocal benefit
Reputation Sharing my information on online group buying vendors improves my image Kankanhalli et al. (2005)
People in our life who share their information online group buying have more prestige than those
who do not
Sharing my information in online group buying vendors improves others recognition to me
I earn respect from others by sharing my information in online group buying vendors Hsu and Lin (2008)
Sharing my information about online group buying would enhance my personal reputation on
online group buying vendors
Trust Online group buying gives me a feeling of trust de Wulf and Iacobucci (2001),
I have trust in online group buying vendors Odekerken-Schroder et al. (2003)
The online group buying vendor gives me a trustworthy impression
Vendor creativity The online group buying vendor suggests new product ideas Zhou and George (2001)
The online group buying vendor often has new ideas about how to promote products
The online group buying vendor often has a new approach to sale products
The online group buying vendor develops new ways to meet consumer demands Add by this research
Satisfaction I feel very satisfied with my overall shopping experience on online group buying vendors Bhattacherjee (2001a)
I feel very pleased with my overall shopping experience on online group buying vendors
I feel very contented with my overall shopping experience on online group buying vendors
I feel absolutely delighted with my overall shopping experience on online group buying vendors
Intention to engage in I intend to engage in online group buying Shimp and Kavas (1984)
online group buying My intention to engage in online group buying is very high Ko, Kim, and Lee (2009)
I intend to engage in online group buying in the future

7. Conclusion group buying. Second, we examined two SET perspectives (reci-

This study investigates factors that affect consumer intention to
engage in online group buying and whether reciprocity, reputation,
trust, and vendor creativity affect consumer satisfaction, and con-
sequently intention to engage in online group buying. The results
show that consumer satisfaction with online group buying is pre-
dicted primarily by trust, followed by consumer reciprocity. Con-
sumer satisfaction and trust are the strongest predictors of
intention to engage in online group buying, followed by vendor
creativity. The research model explains 67.7% of satisfaction and
39.7% of intention to engage in online group buying. Therefore,
we advise vendors who provide online group buying services to
organize an online group buying community that promotes infor-
mation exchange. Vendors who provide online group buying ser-
vices could diversify the promotion and sales of products and
attempt to increase the impression of trustworthiness. This could
increase consumer satisfaction and intention to engage in online
group buying, as well as increase sales through online group
buying.
7.1. Contributions
This study provides several research contributions. First, it ex-
tends the research context from the purely business to customer
(B2C) e-commence model of a single vendor to many buyers for
one transaction. We observed that, in this context, consumer
behaviors are driven by reciprocity, defined as the belief that infor-
mation sharing with vendors who provide online group buying ser-
vices leads to the fulfillment of future requests for knowledge,
indicating that SET remains supported in this context. We also ob-
served that trust remains a significant factor for driving online
procity and reputation) relevant to assessing online group buying,
vendor creativity, and social factors. From a utilitarian perspective,
a successful e-commerce vendor should be able to provide novel
and creative products/services to entice customers to prolong web-
site use. From a sociological perspective, online group buying web-
sites need to provide functionality that enables reciprocity of
knowledge sharing. This study specifically tested the reciprocity
construct to represent customer demand of information sharing
when participating in group shopping with unknown group mem-
bers. Complementing the utilitarian perspective, the sociological
perspective accounts for the degree of collaboration that shoppers
experience during interaction with group members. This is consis-
tent with the findings of prior research that suggested shoppers
engage in online group shopping for products/service novelty, eco-
nomic incentives, and the fulfillment provided by social interaction
(Tauber, 1972).
By adopting SET, we observed that online customers react dif-
ferently between online and face-to-face transactions. Viewing
the Internet as a complete transaction medium, this work assumes
that the actor’s interactions are similar to that of face-to-face inter-
actions, such as organizational contexts where SET is frequently
adopted. However, factors that are typically salient to interper-
sonal exchange in a real world setting (reputation and altruism)
do not have a significant influence on continuous intention to en-
gage in online group buying. Similar findings in recent research on
social networking websites that suggest social factors predicting
offline human behaviors are not necessarily identical to those that
apply to an online environment. For example, online relationships
can develop in social network websites where perceived trust and
privacy safeguards are weak (Dwyer, Hiltz, & Passerini, 2007). The
difference between online and face-to-face settings is a new issue;
however, this is critical because of the wide use of the Internet as a
2442 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444
social and functional tool. In the case of online group buying, con-
sumers use the Internet to locate product- or service-related infor-
mation and engage in spontaneous transactions similar to those in
a traditional marketplace; we therefore believe that SET is an
appropriate theoretical ground and encourage further research in
adopting this approach to examine novel business models such
as online group buying. Our findings indicate that technological
infrastructure facilitates the completion of transactions over the
Internet where consumers can locate, select, and finalize transac-
tions for products or goods with the cooperation of numerous un-
known buyers. Sociological aspects should also be considered to
obtain a holistic view of the discussed novel business model. Fu-
ture opportunities to test the boundary condition of SET are prom-
ising. It is in the best interest of researchers and practitioners to
develop a greater understanding of online group buying from a
SET perspective. Context-specific factors shown in Table 1 may
be added to the proposed research model. Theorists can continu-
ously refine SET for online contexts where human interactions
may differ from the original theory. Understanding social factors
enables practitioners to develop system functionalities that en-
hance human interactions. System qualities and social aspects
are equally crucial because numerous IS studies indicate the insep-
arability of the social and technical aspects (Lamb & Kling, 2003).
7.2. Limitations
This study is subject to several limitations. First, because of the
time limitation, additional case-related data could not be obtained
from other data sources. Therefore, caution should be applied
when generalizing the results with other online consumer groups.
Additionally, data from convenient sampling approaches do not
represent entire populations and may limit the generalizability of
this study. Second, the user responses in this study are cross-sec-
tional data. Time and resource constraints did not allow the itera-
tion of data collection to observe customer intention over time and
determine any long-term effects of the discussed factors on user
intention and behavior. Future research should consider a longitu-
dinal approach to validate and extend the current research model
of online group buying behaviors.
7.3. Future research
This study shows that social exchange factors are salient factors
for intention to engage in online group buying and that vendor cre-
ativity is a crucial factor that contributes to intention to engage in
online group buying. We encourage future research to test the ef-
fect of vendor provisions of contextual cues (specifically, the ani-
mation effect of products for sale, and navigation supports that
enable positive shopping experiences) on the promotion of online
group sales. Similar features provided in a real-world shopping
context have been identified as essential to encourage purchasing
behavior. Marketing studies have shown that more contextual cues
facilitate product recall, thus inducing an experience of ease
(Schwarz, 2004). Future research should test whether different
product types affect intention in the context of online group
buying. Few reports have discussed the boundaries between online
and offline purchasing behavior and whether online shopping
online will become more like shopping in the real world setting
(e.g., Millwood, 2011). In real world settings, extant marketing
literature has shown that consumer selections vary among types
of products. Products categorized as low and high involvement de-
tailed in the elaborate likelihood model (Liebermann & Flint-Goor,
1996; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) have been widely used to identify
consumer decisions. Different product types (low and high involve-
ment) in the context of online group buying are worthy of further
discussion to better understand consumer intention to purchase. If
product types are best identified with online group buying, system
developers may develop functionalities that enable shoppers to
make judgments based on individual tastes and preferences.
Concepts such as reducing cognitive efforts (Deshpande & Hoyer,
1983; Hoyer, 1984) have also been successfully adopted, indicating
that consumers choose products that require the least amount of
effort to avoid cognitive load. Future research should investigate
factors that facilitate online purchase decisions, thereby reducing
cognitive load. If the factors can be realized, system developers
may provide functionalities that allow consumers to shop with
ease using methods such as sharing their consumption processes
with other people and evaluating online products with peers to
optimize their decision processes.
Appendix A. Appendix
See Table A1.
References
Andreassen, T. W. (1994). Satisfaction, loyalty and reputation as indicators of
customer orientation in the public sector. International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 7(2), 16–34.
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail
surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(3), 396–402.
Ba, S., & Pavlou, P. (2002). Evidence of the effect of trust building technology in
electronic markets: Price premiums, and buyer behavior. MIS Quarterly, 26(3),
243–268.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94.
Bai, B., Law, R., & Wen, I. (2008). The impact of website quality on customer
satisfaction, and purchase intentions: Evidence from Chinese online visitors.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27(3), 391–402.
Barclay, D., Higgins, C., & Thompson, R. (1995). The partial least square (PLS)
approach to casual modeling: Personal computer adoption and use as an
illustration. Technology, 2(2), 285–309.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001a). Understanding information systems continuance: An
expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351–370.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001b). An empirical analysis of the antecedents of electronic
commerce service continuance. Decision Support Systems, 32(2), 201–214.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange, and power in social life. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Bock, G. W., & Kim, Y. G. (2002). Breaking the myths of rewards: An exploratory
study of attitudes about knowledge sharing. Information Resources Management
Journal, 15(2), 14–21.
Bock, G. W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y. G., & Lee, J. N. (2005). Behavioral intention
formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators,
social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1),
87–111.
Bromley, D. B. (1993). Reputation, image, and impression management. Chilchester:
John Wiley & Sons.
Bunduchi, R. (2008). Trust, power, and transaction costs in B2B exchanges: A socio-
economic approach. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(5), 610–622.
Cardozo, R. (1964). Customer satisfaction: Laboratory study and marketing action.
Journal of Marketing Research, 2, 244–249.
Casare, S., & Sichman, J. (2005). Towards a functional ontology of reputation. In
Paper presented at the fourth international joint conference on autonomous agents,
and multiagent systems (pp. 505–511). ACM.
Chang, M., Cheung, W., & Lai, V. (2005). Literature derived reference models for the
adoption of online shopping. Information & Management, 42(4), 543–559.
Chen, C. J., & Hung, S. W. (2010). To give or to receive? Factors influencing members’
knowledge sharing and community promotion in professional virtual
communities. Information & Management, 47(4), 226–236.
Chin, W., Marcolin, B., & Newsted, P. (1996). A partial least squares latent variable
modeling app roach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a monte
carlo simulation study and voice mail emotion/adoption study. In Paper
presented at the 15th international conference on information systems (pp. 21–
41). Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Chiu, C. M., Huang, H. Y., & Yen, C. H. (2010). Antecedents of trust in online auctions.
Electronic Commerce Research and Application, 9(2), 148–159.
Chiu, C. M., Lin, H. Y., Sun, S. Y., & Hsu, M. H. (2009). Understanding customers’
loyalty intentions towards online shopping: An integration of technology
acceptance model and fairness theory. Behaviour, and Information Technology,
28(4), 347–360.
Churchill, G. A., Jr., & Surprenant, C. (1982). An investigation into the determinants
of customer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 491–504.
CNN (2010). Group buying: A billion-dollar web trend? http://articles.cnn.com/
2010-04-15/tech/cashmore.group.buying_1_web-buying-sites?_s=PM:TECH.
Last accessed on 05.02.10.
 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444
Constant, D., Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1996). The kindness of strangers: The
usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. Organization Science,
7(2), 119–135.
Conte, R., & Paolucci, M. (2002). Reputation in artificial societies: Social beliefs for
social order. Norwell, Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Corbitt, B., Thanasankit, T., & Yi, H. (2003). Trust and e-commerce: A study of
consumer perceptions. Electronic Commerce Research, and Applications, 2(3),
203–215.
Couger, J. D., & Dengate, G. (1996). Measurement of creativity of IS products.
Creativity and Innovation Management, 5(4), 262–272.
Couger, J. D., Higgins, L. F., & McIntyre, S. C. (1993). (Un)Structured creativity in
information systems organizations. MIS Quarterly, 17(4), 375–397.
Coyle-Shapiro, J. A. M., & Kessler, I. (2002). Exploring reciprocity through the lens of
the psychological contract: Employee, and employer perspectives. European
Journal of Work, and Organizational Psychology, 11(1), 69–86.
Crompton, J., & McKay, S. (1997). Motives of visitors attending festival events.
Annals of Tourism Research, 24(2), 425–439.
CTVglobemedia (2011). Online shopping trends with nicholas montgomery. <http://
www.marilyn.ca/Technology/TechSho ing.aspx> Last accessed on 06.02.11.
Davenport, T., Prusak, L., Wills, G., Alani, H., Ashri, R., Crowder, R., et al. (1998).
Working Knowledge. Harvard Business School Press.
de Clercq, D., & Rangarajan, D. (2008). The role of perceived relational support in
sntrepreneur – customer dyads. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 32(4),
659–683.
de Wulf, K., & Iacobucci, D. (2001). Investments in consumer relationships: A cross-
country, and cross-industry exploration. The Journal of Marketing, 65(4), 33–50.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Deshpande, R., & Hoyer, W. D. (1983). Consumer decision making: Strategies,
cognitive effort, and perceived risk. In P. E. Murphy et al. (Eds.), Paper presented
at The AMA educators’ proceedings (pp. 88–91). Chicago: American Marketing
Association.
Doney, P., & Cannon, J. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller
relationships. The Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 35–51.
Dwyer, C., Hiltz, S. R., & Passerini, K. (2007). Trust and privacy concern within social
networking sites: A comparison of facebook, and mySpace. In Paper presented at
proceedings of 2007 America conference on information systems. Keystone,
Colorado, USA.
Dwyer, J., Lee, G., & Jankowski, T. (1994). Reciprocity, elder satisfaction, and
caregiver stress, and burden: The exchange of aid in the family caregiving
relationship. Journal of Marriage, and the Family, 56(1), 35–43.
Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review,
27(1), 31–41.
Erika, R. (1999). The 10 traits of top salespeople. Sales, and Marketing Management,
151(8), 34–37.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An
introduction to theory, and research. Mass: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
Flaherty, K. E., & Pappas, J. M. (2009). Expanding the sales professional’s role: A
strategic re-orientation? Industrial Marketing Management, 38(7), 806–813.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with
unobservable variables, and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research,
18(1), 39–50.
Frazier, G. L., & Rody, R. C. (1991). The use of influence strategies in interfirm
relationships in industrial product channels. Journal of Marketing, 55(1), 52–69.
Fu, F. Q., Bolander, W., & Jones, E. (2009). Managing the drivers of organizational
commitment, and salesperson effort: An application of Meyer, and Allen’s
three-component model. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 17(4), 335–350.
Gallivan, M. (2003). The influence of software developers’ creative style on their
attitudes to and assimilation of a software process innovation. Information &
Management, 40(5), 443–465.
Gefen, D. (2000). E-commerce: The role of familiarity and trust. Omega, 28(6),
725–737.
Gefen, D. (2002). Reflections on the dimensions of trust, and trustworthiness among
online consumers. ACM SIGMIS Database, 33(3), 38–53.
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An
integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90.
Gefen, D., & Keil, M. (1998). The impact of developer responsiveness on perceptions
of usefulness, and ease of use: An extension of the technology acceptance
model. ACM SIGMIS Database, 29(2), 35–49.
Gefen, D., & Ridings, C. M. (2002). Implementation team responsiveness, and user
evaluation of customer relationship management: A quasi-experimental design
study of social exchange theory. Journal of Management Information Systems,
19(1), 47–69.
Gefen, D., & Straub, D. (2000). The relative importance of perceived ease of use in IS
adoption: A study of e-commerce adoption. Journal of the Association for
Information Systems, 1(8), 1–30.
Gefen, D., & Straub, D. (2004). Consumer trust in B2c e-commerce, and the
importance of social presence: Experiments in e-products, and e-services.
Omega, 32(6), 407–424.
Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M. (2000). Structural equation modeling
techniques and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications
of AIS, 7(7), 1–78.
Hald, K. S., Cordón, C., & Vollmann, T. E. (2009). Towards an understanding of
attraction in buyer-supplier relationships. Industrial Marketing Management,
38(8), 960–970.
Harman, H. H. (1976). Modern factor analysis (3rd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.
2443
Helm, S. (2007). The role of corporate reputation in determining investor
satisfaction, and loyalty. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(1), 22–37.
Helm, S. (2011). Employees’ awareness of their impact on corporate reputation.
Journal of Business Research, 64(7), 657–663.
Hess, T. J., Joshi, K., & McNab, A. L. (2010). An alternative lens for understanding
technology acceptance: An equity comparison perspective. Journal of
Organizational Computing, and Electronic Commerce, 20(2), 123–154.
Hoffman, D., Novak, T., & Peralta, M. (1999). Building consumer trust online.
Communications of the ACM, 42(4), 80–85.
Homans, G. (1958). Social Behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6),
597–606.
Hong, S., Thong, J. Y. L., & Tam, K. Y. (2006). Understanding continued information
technology usage behavior: A comparison of three models in the context of
mobile internet. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1819–1834.
Horn, D., & Salvendy, G. (2006a). Consumer based assessment of product creativity:
A review, and reappraisal. Human Factors, and Ergonomics in Manufacturing &
Service Industries, 16(2), 155–175.
Horn, D., & Salvendy, G. (2006b). Product creativity: Conceptual model,
measurement, and characteristics. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science,
7(4), 395–412.
Horn, D., & Salvendy, G. (2009). Measuring consumer perceptions of product
creativity: Impact on satisfaction, and purchasability. Human Factors, and
Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 19(3), 223–240.
Hoyer, W. D. (1984). An examination of consumer decision making for a common
repeat purchase product. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(3), 822–829.
Hsu, C., & Lin, J. (2008). Acceptance of blog usage: The roles of technology
acceptance, social influence, and knowledge sharing Motivation. Information &
Management, 45(1), 65–74.
Hsu, C. L., & Lu, H. P. (2004). Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM
with social influences, and flow experience. Information & Management, 41(7),
853–868.
Jin, B., Park, J., & Kim, J. (2008). Cross-cultural examination of the relationships
among firm reputation, e-satisfaction, e-trust, and e-loyalty. International
Marketing Review, 25(3), 324–337.
Kahai, S., Sosik, J., & Avolio, B. (2003). Effects of leadership style, anonymity, and
rewards on creativity-relevant processes, and outcomes in an electronic
meeting system context. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(4–5), 499–524.
Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B., & Wei, K. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic
knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 29(1),
113–143.
Khalifa, M., & Liu, V. (2003a). Determinants of satisfaction at different adoption
stages of internet-based services. Journal of the AIS, 4(5), 206–232.
Khalifa, M., & Liu, V. (2003b). Satisfaction with internet-based services: The role of
expectations, and desires. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7(2),
31–50.
Khalifa, M., & Liu, V. (2004). The state of research on information system
satisfaction. Journal of Information Technology Theory & Application, 5(4),
37–50.
Kim, J., Kim, W., & Park, S. (2010). Consumer perceptions on web advertisements,
and motivation factors to purchase in the online shopping. Computers in Human
Behavior, 26(5), 1208–1222.
Kim, H., Kim, T., & Shin, S. (2009). Modeling roles of subjective norms, and e-trust in
customers’ acceptance of airline B2C ecommerce websites. Tourism
Management, 30(2), 266–277.
Kim, W., Ma, X., & Kim, D. (2006). Determinants of Chinese hotel customers’ e-
satisfaction, and purchase intentions. Tourism Management, 27(5), 890–900.
Ko, E., Kim, E. Y., & Lee, E. K. (2009). Modeling consumer adoption of mobile
shopping for fashion products in Korea. Psychology & Marketing, 26(7), 669–687.
Kolekofski, K. E. (2003). Beliefs, and attitudes affecting intentions to share
information in an organizational setting. Information & Management, 40(6),
521–532.
Kollock, P. (1999). The economies of online cooperation: Gifts, and public goods in
cyberspace. In P. Kollock & M. A. Smith (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace
(pp. 220–239). New York: Routledge.
Lamb, R., & Kling, R. (2003). Reconceptualizing users as social actors in information
systems research. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 197–235.
LaTour, S. A., & Peat, N. C. (1979). Conceptual and methodological issues in
consumer satisfaction research. Advances in Consumer Research, 6(1), 431–437.
Lechner, U., & Hummel, J. (2002). Business models and system architectures of
virtual communities: From a sociological phenomenon to peer-to-peer
architectures. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6(3), 41–53.
Lee, H. S. (2010). Factors influencing customer loyalty of mobile phone service:
Empirical evidence from Koreans. Journal of Internet Banking, and Commerce,
15(2), 1–14.
Lee, G., & Ellithorpe, E. (1982). Intergenerational exchange, and subjective well-
being among the elderly. Journal of Marriage, and the Family, 44(1), 217–224.
Lee, Y., Kim, S., Seock, Y. K., & Cho, Y. (2009). Tourists’ attitudes towards textiles, and
apparel-related cultural products: A cross-cultural marketing study. Tourism
Management, 30(5), 724–732.
Lee, Y., Lee, C., Lee, S., & Babin, B. (2008). Festivalscapes and patrons’ emotions,
satisfaction, and loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 61(1), 56–64.
Lee, G., & Lin, H. (2005). Customer perceptions of e-service quality in online
shopping. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 33(2),
161–176.
Li, C. (2011). Online social network acceptance: A social perspective. Internet
Research, 21(5), 562–580.
2444 W.-L. Shiau, M.M. Luo / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 2431–2444
Li, D., Browne, G., & Wetherbe, J. (2006). Why do internet users stick with a specific
web site? A relationship perspective. International Journal of Electronic
Commerce, 10(4), 105–141.
Liao, C., Chen, J., & Yen, D. (2007). Theory of planning behavior (TPB), and customer
satisfaction in the continued use of e-service: An integrated model. Computers
in Human Behavior, 23(6), 2804–2822.
Liao, C., Palvia, P., & Chen, J. (2009). Information technology adoption behavior life
cycle: Toward a technology continuance theory (TCT). International Journal of
Information Management, 29(4), 309–320.
Liebermann, Y., & Flint-Goor, A. (1996). Message strategy by product-class type: A
matching model. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(3), 237–249.
Lim, K., Sia, C., Lee, M., & Benbasat, I. (2006). Do I trust you online, and if so, will I
buy? An empirical study of two trust-building strategies. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 23(2), 233–266.
Lin, C. S., Wu, S., & Tsai, R. J. (2005). Integrating perceived playfulness into
expectation-confirmation model for web portal context. Information &
Management, 42(5), 683–693.
Lowry, P. B., Cao, J., & Everard, A. (2011). Privacy concerns versus desire for
interpersonal awareness in driving the use of self-disclosure technologies: The
case of instant messaging in two cultures. Journal of Management Information
Systems, 27(4), 163–200.
Luo, X. (2002). Trust production, and privacy concerns on the internet-a framework
based on relationship marketing, and social exchange theory. Industrial
Marketing Management, 31(2), 111–118.
Lusch, R. F., Brown, J. R., & O’Brien, M. (2011). Protecting relational assets: A pre, and
post field study of a horizontal business combination. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 39(2), 175–197.
Manning, K. C., Bearden, W. O., & Madden, T. J. (1995). Consumer innovativeness,
and the adoption process. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 4(4), 329–345.
Mattila, A. S., & Enz, C. A. (2002). The role of emotions in service encounters. Journal
of Service Research, 4(4), 268–277.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of
organizational trust. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.
McCulloch, B. (1990). The relationship of intergenerational reciprocity of aid to the
morale of older parents: Equity, and exchange theory comparisons. Journal of
Gerontology, 45(4), 150–155.
McKnight, D. H., Choudbury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002b). Developing, and validating
trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems
Research, 13(3), 334–359.
McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002a). The impact of initial
consumer trust on intentions to transact with a web site: A trust building
model. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3–4), 297–323.
McLure-Wasko, M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital,
and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly,
29(1), 35–57.
Metzger, M. J. (2004). Privacy, trust, and disclosure: Exploring barriers to electronic
commerce. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 9(4). <http://
jcmc.indiana.edu/vol9/issue4/metzger.html>.
Millwood, J. (2011) Are marketers getting a clear picture of the digital consumer?
Adweek. <http://www.adweek.com/sa-article/are-marketers-getting-clear-
picture-digital-consumer-136152> Last accessed on 19.12.11.
NetworkWorld (2010). Online group buying taking off in China. <http://
www.networkworld.com/news/2010/112910-online-group-buying-taking-off.
html> Last accessed on 07.12.10.
Neumann, S. & Fink, L. (2007). Gaining agility through IT personnel CAPABILITIES:
The mediating role of IT infrastructure capabilities. Journal of the Association for
Information Systems, 8 (8) Article 25. <http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol8/iss8/25>.
Nielsen (2010). Global online shopping report. <http://blog.nielsen.com/
nielsenwire/consumer/global-online-shoing-report/> Last accessed on 07.10.10.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Odekerken-Schroder, G., de Wulf, K., & Schumacher, P. (2003). Strengthening
Outcomes of retailer-consumer relationships the dual impact of relationship
marketing tactics, and consumer personality. Journal of Business Research, 56(3),
177–190.
Oliver, R. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents, and consequences of
satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469.
Pappas, J. M., & Flaherty, K. E. (2008). The effect of trust on customer contact
personnel strategic behavior, and sales performance in a service environment.
Journal of Business Research, 61(9), 894–902.
Pavlou, P. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust,
and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of
Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 101–134.
Pee, L., Kankanhalli, A., Ong, L., & Vu, M. (2010). Antecedents, and impact of
knowledge management capability in public organizations. In Paper presented at
2010 Pacific Asia conference on information systems. Taipei, Taiwan.
Peloza, J., Hudson, S., & Hassay, D. (2009). The marketing of employee volunteerism.
Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 371–386.
Pervan, S., Bove, L., & Johnson, L. (2009). Reciprocity as a key stabilizing norm of
interpersonal marketing relationships: Scale development, and validation.
Industrial Marketing Management, 38(1), 60–70.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication, and persuasion: Central, and
peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Podsakoff, P., & Organ, D. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems,
and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544.
Pressitt (2010). Ubuyibuy.Com brings online ’group buying’ to consumers in Hong
Kong & Taiwan on June 28. <http://pressitt.com/smnr/uBuyiBuy.com-Brings-
Online-Group-Buying-to-Consumers-in-Hong-Kong-Taiwan-on-June-28-2010/
1737/>. Last accessed on 17.09.10.
Qin, L., Kim, Y., Hsu, J., & Tan, X. (2011). The effects of social influence on user
acceptance of online social networks. International Journal of Human-Computer
Interaction, 27(9), 85–899.
Roloff, M. E. (1981). Interpersonal communication: The social exchange approach.
Beverly Hills, CA.: Sage Publications, Inc..
Salam, A. F., Rao, H. R., & Pegels, C. C. (1998). An investigation of consumer-
perceived risk on electronic commerce transactions: The role of institutional
trust, and economic incentive in a social exchange framework. In Paper
presented at Americas conference on information systems. Baltimore, MD, USA.
Schwarz, N. (2004). Metacognitive experiences in metacognitive experiences in
consumer judgment, and decision making. Journal of Consumer Psychology,
14(4), 332–348.
Shimp, T. A., & Kavas, A. (1984). The theory of reasoned action a lied to coupon
usage. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(3), 795–809.
Sledgianowski, D., & Kulviwat, S. (2009). Using social network sites: The effects of
playfulness, critical mass and trust in a hedonic context. Journal of Computer
Information Systems, 49(4), 74–83.
Starko, A. J. (1995). Creativity in the classroom: Schools of curious delight. White
Plains, New York: Longman Publishers.
Taipei Times (2010). Online group buying – A great way to save money. <http://
www.taipeitimes.com/News/lang/archives/2009/03/26/2003439407/1>. Last
accessed on 15.01.10.
Tan, M., & Teo, T. (2000). Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking.
Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 1(1), 1–42.
Tauber, E. M. (1972). Marketing notes, and communications. Journal of Marketing,
36(4), 46–49.
Thomas, R. W., Esper, T. L., & Stank, T. P. (2010). Testing the negative effects of
time pressure in retail supply chain relationships. Journal of Retailing, 86(4),
386–400.
Tsai, M. T., Cheng, N. C., & Chen, K. S. (2011). Understanding online group buying
intention: The roles of sense of virtual community, and technology acceptance
factors. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 22(10), 1091–1104.
Verhagen, T., Meents, S., & Tan, Y. (2006). Perceived risk, and trust associated with
purchasing at electronic marketplaces. European Journal of Information Systems,
15(6), 542–555.
Wasko, M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital, and
knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29(1),
35–57.
Weiss, W. (2002). Demonstrating creativity and innovation. American Salesman,
47(2), 6–12.
Wixom, B., & Watson, H. (2001). An empirical investigation of the factors affecting
data warehousing success. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 17–41.
Young-Ybarra, C., & Wiersema, M. (1999). Strategic flexibility in information
technology alliances: The influence of transaction cost economics, and social
exchange theory. Organization Sciences, 10(4), 439–459.
Zeng, L., Salvendy, G., & Zhang, M. (2009). Factor structure of web site creativity.
Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 568–577.
Zhou, J., & George, J. (2001). When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity:
Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4),
682–696.
Zhu, L., Benbasat, I., & Jiang, Z. (2010). Let’s Shop online together: An empirical
investigation of online group buying support. Information Systems Research,
21(4), 872–891.