International Journal of Business Management

& Research (IJBMR)

ISSN 2249-6920
Vol. 3, Issue 2, Jun 2013, 131-136
© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

EFFECT OF SOCIAL MEDIA ON E-PURCHASE AMONGST YOUTH

KALPANA AGRAWAL & HUZEFA JALIWALA

Assistant Professor Prestige Institute of Management and Research, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT

In recent years social media has become more and more popular all around the world. E-purchase stands for
electronic purchase; it is buying of goods and services through the medium of internet and computer network. Social media
technologies take on many different forms including, magazines, Internet forums, weblogs, social blogs, micro
blogging, wikis, social networks, podcasts, photographs or pictures, video, rating and social bookmarking. As social media
becoming increasingly popular, online marketers are investing in ways that utilize social media and engage online
consumers. Online marketers’ adoption of new online marking trends is prompted by findings that indicate people are
spending significant amounts of time socializing online.

In addition to advertising and promoting on social media, online retailers have found that social network platforms
are a great place to interact and communicate with online consumers effectively and efficiently. As well, people are
constantly gaining new ways of experiencing online product search and recommendations, all of which influences online
buying decisions. This study aims to examine the influence of social media on the e-purchase and to find how it impacts
youth’s visit intention and purchase intention. This study will help the future e-commerce managers to understand the
prospective of the youth about the effect of social media in their businesses.

KEYWORDS: Social Media, E-Purchase, Online Shopping

INTRODUCTION

“Man receives continual information input from his environment and processes this information as an integral part
of making choices”(Bettman and Jones, 1972).The influence of social media on e-commerce has become more and more
important. If one shares information in social media, then it could be browsed by many people, thereby leading to many-to-
many spread of information. Product links in e- purchase websites are hard to be disseminated because there are not
enough interactions between users. Hence, most e-purchase malls have provided other customers’ reviews of products to
help potential customers choose the products they are looking for. But this kind of reviews could only be found in e-
commerce malls, and there are still not enough interactions between users because this is not based on social relationships.
Integrating social media with e-purchase may be a possible solution. Internet has brought significant changes to how we
operate today.

One of these changes is the moving of the classical word-of-mouth (WOM) to the electronic platform. Face-to-
face interactions are leaving their place to the virtual environment. Today many people write their opinions and reviews
about almost anything through forums, blogs, company web pages, emails, etc. The amount of information created online
by consumers is enormous today. One can type any product category, brand, key term to a search engine and find an
unlimited number of reviews about it. These reviews are generated by firms themselves or consumers.

Recent developments in social media have brought forward countless new social media applications and social
network sites (e.g. Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn) to allow people to connect, communicate and exchange different forms of
132 Kalpana Agrawal & Huzefa Jaliwala

content (e.g. conversations, text, presentations, pictures, videos). What sets social media apart from existing forms of
online communication (e.g. email) is the ability of users to easily create and share information with their networks in real
time, using not just computers, but also mobile devices (e.g. mobile phones, tablets). This has significant implications as
knowledge and information can reach wider audiences (e.g. suppliers, colleagues) much faster, capturing their attention
even when they are away from their computer screen.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Arndt (1967) states that positive word of mouth is more frequent compared to negative word of mouth and
consumers are eight times likely to receive favorable word of mouth vs. unfavorable word of mouth. For instance, it is
claimed that word of mouth has seven times the influence of print advertising, four times the effect of personal selling, and
twice that of radio advertising (Katz and Lazarsfeld, 1955).Katz and Lazarsfeld (1955) also state that personal influence
has more effect than media since it consists of active communication rather than one way as in other kinds of promotion.
Kaplan, A. M. and Haenlein, M. (2010) defined social media as a group of Internet-based applications that build on the
ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, which allows the creation and exchange of user-generated content.
Social media is also named consumer-generated media and refers to user-generated content. Stephen, A. T. and Toubia,
(2010) defined social commerce as a form of Internet-based social media that allows people to actively participate in the
marketing and selling of products and services in online marketplaces and communities. Jang, H. h., Olfman L., Ko I. S.,
Koh J. and Kim K. T. (2008) said Commitment to a website has been found as a key construct to impact online purchase
attitude and Seo, W. J. and Green B. C. (2007) said virtual community commitment was also considered to be important to
brand loyalty and consumer behavior. Jones (2008) said in article for PRweek,

“In traditional marketing, you speak directly to the customer. In traditional PR you speak to the customer through
the media. But today, the customer is media.” customer are blogging, uploading videos to YouTube, speaking their minds
on Twitter, and much more. “Social networks allow marketers to get closer to customer than ever before and get their
feedback on products or services that are being offered. It can be true two-way communication,” said David Wilson (2008).
Beth Mulhern, the director of social media strategy for Verizon Telecom, a communication and entertainment company,
said, “There is recognition this is the age of empowered consumer. Before, if there was an unhappy customer, he might tell
5 friends, but now, with a couple of clicks, he can tell X number of people”(personal communication, October 21,2009).
Michael Ley, the Vice President of e-business payment of The PNC Financial Services Group, said, “social media provides
a great forum to engage in customer conversation and to help customer with question they may have” (personal
communication, October 27, 2009).

The second part of that quote, helping customer, shows a more specific form of customer communication where
social media really shine – customer service and support. Andreas Roell (2009) from DM News said in an article about
Zappos.com, an online shoe store, “with all the social media forums, direct marketers can engage with users in a more
direct fashion. The hope is that this dialog will create a deep brand affinity and a group of brand evangelists.” In regard to
Zappos, she continues to say, “At checkout, consumers are asked how they would like to share their purchase information
with their Facebook friends.”

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

To study the interactive effect of gender and education on effect of social media on e-purchase.
Effect of Social Media on E-Purchase amongst Youth 133

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Type: Exploratory

Non probability Convenience
Sampling Techniques:
Sampling
College students and youth in the age
Sampling Unit:
group of 18-28 at indore (M.P.) region
Sample Size: 115 Respondents
Tools for Data Collection: Self designed Questionnaire
Tools for Data Analysis: Two-way ANOVA

RESULTS

Q.1: Do you know about on- Line Shopping?

100% of the respondents know about online shopping.

Q.2: How often do you use Internet for Shopping?

About 21% of the people use online shopping very often, 31% use often where as 32% use sometimes, 15% use
rarely and 1% has never used.

Q.3: How Many Products did you buy Online in the Last 3 Months?

8% of the respondents did not buy e- product, 33% bought1-2 products, 26% bought 3-4 products,13% bought 5-6
products,19% bought more than 6 product in the last three months.
134 Kalpana Agrawal & Huzefa Jaliwala

Q.4: Which Website you Mostly use for Online Shopping?

17% use snapdeal, 26% use flipkart, 17% use e-bay, 5% use bagittoday, 23% use yebhi’s 17% use and 12% use
of other web sites.

OBJECTIVE

To study the interactive effect of gender and education on effect of social media on e-purchase

Between-Subjects Factors
Gender N
1 67
2 49
Education
2 85
3 31

Descriptive Statistics
Dependent Dependent Std.
Mean N
Variable:Total Variable:Total Deviation
2 32.10 7.183 49
1 3 27.22 6.567 18
Total 30.79 7.306 67
2 32.78 6.525 36
2 3 30.77 6.597 13
Total 32.24 6.537 49
2 32.39 6.880 85
Total 3 28.71 6.709 31
Total 31.41 6.999 116

Tests of between-Subjects Effects

Dependent Variable:Total
Source Type III Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 411.826a 3 137.275 2.944 .036
Intercept 83565.633 1 83565.633 1.792E3 .000
Gender 98.700 1 98.700 2.117 .148
Education 262.639 1 262.639 5.633 .019
gender * education 45.633 1 45.633 .979 .325
Error 5222.131 112 46.626
Total 120043.000 116
Significant at 5% Level
Effect of Social Media on E-Purchase amongst Youth 135

H01: There is no significant effect of gender on effect of social media on e-purchase .

The F value (0.148) is not significant. It means that there is no significant difference between mean score of male
and female on effect of social media on e-purchase. In this context the null hypothesis namely, “there is no significant
effect of gender on effect of social media on e-purchase” is not rejected. Hence it may be concluded that gender did not
produce significant effect on social media’s effect on e-purchase.

H02: There is no significant effect of education on effect of social media on e-purchase .

The F value (0.019) is significant at 5% level of significance. It means that there is significant difference between
mean score of post graduate and graduate students on effect of social media on e-purchase. In this context the null
hypothesis namely, “there is no significant effect of education on effect of social media on e-purchase” is rejected. Hence it
may be concluded that education has produced significant effect on social media’s effect on e-purchase.

H03: There is no significant interactive effect of gender and education on effect of social media on e-purchase .

The F value (0.325) is not significant. It means that there is no significant difference between mean score on
interactive effect of social media on e-purchase. In this context the null hypothesis namely, “there is no significant
interactive effect of gender and education on effect of social media on e-purchase” is accepted . Hence it may be concluded
that interaction between gender and education did not produce significant effect on social media’s effect on e-purchase.

DISCUSSIONS

The importance of social media has been discussed at length for several years now. We know that in many
markets time spent online has surpassed that of TV and that daily social media usage is continuing to increase. We know
that the once linear and transaction-centric purchase funnel is now multi-directional, random and heavily influenced by
opinion and information gathered by consumers. And we know that because of social media and technology, consumers
can now enter the purchase cycle at various points, and spontaneously influence others as they travel along the path of the
purchase.

Today the world has become globalised and everyone is using internet. Many people use internet for the purpose
for buying and selling thing.

Through this study it was found that today social websites help students to get more and more information from
other educated people around the world. Social media has become very essential part from electronic-mails to education
and shopping. There is a very large community which uses social media and that influence consumer behavior. There are
many websites that are there for online shopping like in this study snapdeal, 26% use flipkart, 17% use e-bay, 5% use
bagittoday, 23% use yebhi’s17% use and 12% use of other web sites.

The majority of youth and teenagers using social media for taking e-buying decision also these social websites as
they are powered by many international companies because these website are centrally visited by millions of people thus
companies get benefit of advertisements. And these advertisements further generates awareness for product and services
among people. Further people post news, information including videos and picture. During the study it was understood
that social media plays an important role in influencing the consumer in their buying decision for online purchase.
Education also played a significant impact on effect of social media on e-purchase. Users who are more educated use more
e-purchase and social network to share and receive information by online links. In other words, information and knowledge
are constantly transferred in social networks; this means that social media users could get more information and
knowledge. Hence as per the research education has more impact on social networking users for e-purchase.
136 Kalpana Agrawal & Huzefa Jaliwala

CONCLUSIONS

The study tried to find out the difference among various set of people of the crucial factors which are concerned
with the “effect of social media on e-purchase among youth”. Issues have been identified through various reviews of
literatures. It was cross checked with the youth in the city. Like 100 percent respondents were found using internet. Also
through this study it was found that youth use online shopping like snapdeal’s 26% use flipkart’s 17% use e-bay’s 5% use
bagittoday’s 23% use yebhi17% use and 12% use of other web sites.

These factors may vary from place to place and there may be marked difference in rural area as compared to
urban area.In urban area young people are in conversation and communication with their peer groups using a wide variety
of different social media and other media devices every day. That is to say, informational social influence is transferred
from a social media context to an e-purchase context. Hence, social media has a high informational social influence, among
educated people which affects the users’ online behavior such as visit intention and purchase intention in e-purchase.

IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY

The present study is useful for e-marketers and social networking sites in showing their usefulness and also for the
students and researchers in further doing descriptive study on the same. Researchers can take larger samples to exlore
more.As in this study only one demographic variable was taken,other demographic variables too can be taken.

LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The study was done on a small sample size. So further study on larger sample size should be done.

REFERENCES

1. Arndt, J. (1967), “Role of Product-Related Conversations in the Diffusion of a New Product,” Journal of
Marketing Research, 4, 291-295.

2. Jang, H. h., Olfman L., Ko I. S., Koh J. and Kim K. T. 2008. “The Influence of Online Brand Community
Characteristics on Community Commitment and Brand Loyalty,” International Journal of Electronic
Commerce(12:3), pp.57-80.

3. Jones, J.. (2008,june). PR, marketing must blend together. PRweek, 11(26), 8. Retrieved November 1, 2009, from
ABI/INFORM Trade & Industery.

4. Katz E., Lazarfeld P.F. (1955). Personal Influence. Glencoe, IL’ Free Press.

5. Kaplan, A. M. and Haenlein, M. 2010. “Users of the World, Unite! The Challenges and Opportunities of Social
Media,” Business Horizons(53), pp. 59-68.

6. Kee-Young Kwahk and Xi Ge “The Effects of Social Media on E-commerce: A Perspective of Social Impact
Theory,” 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

7. Mina Seraj “ELECTRONIC WORD-OF-MOUTH IN SOCIAL MEDIA: IT HELPS OR CONFUSES?”

8. Seo, W. J. and Green B. C. 2007. "The Effect of Web Cohesion, Web Commitment, and Attitude toward the
Website on Intentions to Use NFL Teams' Websites," Sport Management Review(10:3), pp. 231-252.

9. Stephen, A. T. and Toubia, O. 2010. “Deriving Value from Social Commerce Networks,” Journal of Marketing
Research(47:2).