The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1066-2243.htm

INTR
24,3
Understanding online shopping
intention: the roles of four types
of trust and their antecedents
332 Meng-Hsiang Hsu
Department of Information Management,
Received 19 January 2013
Revised 15 May 2013 National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology,
27 June 2013 Kaohsiung, Taiwan
29 June 2013
Accepted 29 June 2013 Li-Wen Chuang
Graduate School of Management,
National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology,
Kaohsiung, Taiwan, and
Cheng-Se Hsu
Graduate Institute of Applied Foreign Languages,
Da-Yeh University, Changhua County, Taiwan

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a better picture of factors influencing behavioral
decisions in online shopping by identifying different targets of trust and discussing their antecedents
and outcomes.
Design/methodology/approach – Online survey data from 242 ihergo members were used to test
the proposed model, and structural equation modeling with partial least squares was performed to
analyze the measurement and structural models.
Findings – The findings show that the four types of trust identified in this study are critical
determinants of perceived risk and attitude. In addition, the majority of the antecedents are found to be
associated with their respective types of trust.
Research limitations/implications – The research extends the theory of reasoned action and prior
research to discuss four types of consumer trust, as well as their respective antecedents and
subsequent consequences. The result is a more descriptive model that better explicates consumers’
decision-making processes in online shopping.
Practical implications – Given the intense competition between online shopping sites, web site
managers should strive to provide a safe and user-friendly shopping environment. In addition, the
vendor can enhance trust by encouraging satisfied customers to provide positive endorsements.
Originality/value – This study is possibly the first of its kind, in identifying the four types of trust
and their respective antecedents in the context of an online group-buying auction, and thus serves to
enrich the existing literature concerning trust-building factors.
Keywords Online shopping, Trust, Perceived risk, Antecedent, Online group-buying auction
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Nowadays, with the growth and associated advantages of e-commerce, online
group-buying auctions (hereafter OGBs) are experiencing what might be described
as a boom. Rapid, large-scale development of this simple commercial idea has attracted
Internet Research
Vol. 24 No. 3, 2014
consumers, as well as vendors, all over the world (Tsai et al., 2011; Underwood, 2010).
pp. 332-352 Offering benefits such as convenience and low prices, OGBs are able to accumulate
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1066-2243
consumers sharing similar interests and common goals. Moreover, OGBs, offering
DOI 10.1108/IntR-01-2013-0007 bargains on everything from gourmet food to travel packages, is catching on all over
the world as vendors harness the power of the OGBs to influence consumers’ Understanding
purchasing behavior. Examples of OGB marketplaces include eWinWin (ewinwin.com online shopping
in USA), Letsbuyit (www.letsbuyit.co.uk in Europe), Vapee (www.vapee.com in China),
and ihergo (www.ihergo.com in Taiwan). intention
In e-commerce, trust has long been regarded as playing an essential role in affecting
consumers’ online purchasing behavior (Pavlou and Fygenson, 2006). Specifically,
previous literature suggests that, depending on the stakeholders in an online 333
transaction, trust can be classified into a variety of types ( Jarvenpaa et al., 2000; Pavlou
and Fygenson, 2006). In the context of online shopping, there will typically be several
parties involved, resulting in there being different “targets of trust” to be investigated.
However, heretofore, relatively little specific attention has been paid to these different
types of trust in online shopping. Therefore, one of the particular interests of this study
is to identify the types of trust which are found in the context of online shopping.
Furthermore, understanding the antecedents to the different types of trust in online
shopping also constitutes an important research issue. Prior studies focussing on
different targets of trust have usually applied the “antecedents – trust – outcomes”
model to study trust formation (Lu et al., 2010; Shankar et al., 2002). For example,
Jarvenpaa et al. (2000) proposed that the size and reputation of an online store are
major determinants of consumer trust in the store. Likewise, Pavlou and Gefen (2004)
maintained that popular market-driven factors, such as feedback mechanisms and
trust in the intermediary, are significant predictors of the level of trust consumers have
in the community of sellers in an online marketplace. Therefore, it is believed that
understanding the antecedents to the different targets of trust in the online shopping
context merits our investigation, and will provide meaningful insights into the trust
formation process. Consequently, the purpose of this paper is to better understand
the factors influencing behavioral decisions in online shopping. To be more specific, the
current research tries to answer the following questions, which center on factors
contributing to the intention to purchase: first, what are the different types of trust
involved in online shopping, and do they exert any effect on consumers’ perceived
risk and attitude toward online shopping? Second, are the antecedents identified in this
study associated with their respective types of trust? To answer these questions,
we focus on an online group-buying site in Asia (i.e. www.ihergo.com) to examine our
proposed model.

2. Theoretical foundations and research model

In this section, the hypotheses that pertain to the new research model are developed.
The first two hypotheses specify the expected relationships among perceived risk,
attitude, and intention to purchase. H3a-H3d and H4a-H4d specify the expected
relationships among the different types of trust, perceived risk, and attitude. Finally,
the rest of the hypotheses specify the expected relationships between the antecedents
and their respective types of trust.

2.1 Attitude
Attitude is defined as the degree of one’s positive feelings about participating in
online shopping. A person with a more positive attitude is more likely to make an online
purchase. For example, Pavlou and Fygenson (2006) showed that attitude plays an
essential role in shaping intention to participate in online shopping. A significant volume
of prior literature on e-commerce and information systems has provided empirical
evidence for the positive association between attitude and intention (Chen and Dibb, 2010;
INTR Jalilvand and Samiei, 2012; Jarvenpaa et al., 2000; Li et al., 2008; Tsai et al., 2011;
24,3 Zimmer et al., 2010; Shu and Chuang, 2011). Therefore, in the context of online shopping,
it is believed that consumers with more positive attitudes will be more likely to shop
together as a group, which leads to the first hypothesis:

H1. Attitude toward online shopping has a positive effect on intention to purchase.
334
2.2 Perceived risk
Perceived risk refers to a “trustor’s belief concerning the likelihood of gains and losses
without considering the relationships with particular trustees” ( Jarvenpaa et al., 2000).
In an online setting, according to Forsythe and Shi (2003), perceived risk is regarded as
a barrier to successful transactions due to the fact that customers consciously and
unconsciously perceive risk when judging products and services online. In an OGB
where group transactions involve considerable risk and uncertainty, customers’
attitudes toward online shopping tends to be less positive. Similarly, some studies
have also noted a negative association between perceived risk and attitude toward
e-commerce (Hsu and Chiu, 2004; Zimmer et al., 2010). Based on the above arguments,
the next hypothesis is proposed:

H2. Perceived risk has a negative effect on attitude toward online shopping.

2.3 Trust
Trust refers to “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, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other
party” (Mayer et al., 1995). In other words, trust, dealing with integrity, competence and
benevolence of another party, is the belief held by actors regarding one another that in
an exchange relationship, no one will act opportunistically by taking advantage of the
situation (Qureshi et al., 2009). However, due to information asymmetry, uncertainty,
and fear of opportunism in online transactions (Gefen et al., 2003), trust has been
identified as the most crucial enabling factor in e-commerce (Qureshi et al., 2009).
According to Shankar et al. (2002), online trust should be viewed from the
perspective of multiple stakeholders, such as employees, suppliers, or distributors,
instead of solely from the perspective of customers, which is a common problem found
in most research on online trust. Thus far, an amount of research on trust has treated
it as a multidimensional concept, and categorized trust into several dimensions
depending on the referents of trust in online settings. For example, Morgan and
Hunt (1994) classified trust into trust in the salesperson and trust in the seller
organization. Another example is Teo et al. (2008-2009) who classified trust into trust in
government, trust in technology, and trust in e-government web site.
Extrapolating from the above arguments, the targets of trust in online shopping
can be categorized into four types, which are trust in the web site (Gefen et al., 2003;
Lu et al., 2010; Pavlou and Gefen, 2004; Shu and Chuang, 2011), trust in the vendor,
( Jarvenpaa et al., 2000; Lu et al., 2010; Pavlou and Gefen, 2004), trust in the auction’s
initiator (Kauffman et al., 2010; Tsvetovat et al., 2000), and trust in group members
(Lu et al., 2010; Mael and Ashforth, 1992; Shu and Chuang, 2011).
Based on the theory of reasoned action (TRA) (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975), beliefs
directly affect attitudes, and the higher the level of trust is, the more favorable the
attitude is ( Jarvenpaa et al., 2000). In particular, Jarvenpaa et al. (2000) found that trust
leads to positive attitudes toward transaction behavior. In addition, Chen and Dibb Understanding
(2010) maintained that trust in a web site is positively and significantly associated with online shopping
shoppers’ attitudes toward the site. Several empirical studies have also demonstrated
this positive relationship ( Jarvenpaa et al., 2000; Pennington et al., 2003). Following intention
a similar line of argument, in the context of OGBs, it is reasonable to state that the four
targets of trust will affect customers’ attitudes toward online shopping. Therefore, the
following hypotheses are proposed: 335
H3a. Trust in the web site has a positive effect on attitude toward online shopping.

H3b. Trust in the vendor has a positive effect on attitude toward online shopping.

H3c. Trust in the auction’s initiator has a positive effect on attitude toward online
shopping.

H3d. Trust in group members has a positive effect on attitude toward online
shopping.
Trust in the web site reflects the willingness of the customer to behaviorally depend on
the web site to carry out a transaction (Lu et al., 2010). However, when the web site is
less well known, or when the customer is unfamiliar with the site, there is considerable
risk involved, which may deter the customer from conducting transactions. Therefore,
as online shopping is facilitated by information technology, IT infrastructure with
sufficient security and privacy protection mechanisms should be implemented to
provide customers with a sense of security (Pavlou et al., 2007). Likewise, in the OGB
context, a trusted site can reduce the risk by providing customers with appropriate
mechanisms that may alleviate their concerns about security and privacy. Consistent
with this proposition, Zimmer et al. (2010) found that consumer trust in a web site
exerts a significant effect on risk in the context of free information disclosure.
As a result, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4a. Trust in the web site has a negative effect on perceived risk.

Trust in the vendor reflects a customer’s reliance on an online vendor that is capable of
providing its customers with the best products/services ( Jarvenpaa et al., 2000).
However, if customers do not trust that the vendor can provide such products/services,
they will believe that carrying out transactions with the vendor involve considerable
risk. Consequently, if the vendor can provide merchandise return policies or product
warranties, customers’ perceived risk can be significantly reduced (Shneiderman,
2000). Meanwhile, the ability of customers to make contact with human customer
service agents is also a crucial factor for successful transactions. In similar fashion, in
the OGB context, it is believed that if vendors can build trust by employing the above
mentioned strategies, customers’ level of perceived risk can be lowered. In support of
this view, prior literature shows that trust in the vendor affects purchase-related
behavior, such as perceived risk (Lu et al., 2010; Pavlou and Gefen, 2004). As a result,
the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4b. Trust in the vendor has a negative effect on perceived risk.
With online group-buying sites like ihergo, an auction initiator’s task is to bargain with
vendors over prices, recruit members, collect money from members, arrange deliveries
INTR of goods, and distribute goods to members (Kauffman et al., 2010; Pi et al., 2011; Ku,
24,3 2012). As such, trust in the auction initiator represents a belief that consumers will not
be cheated, and that the auction initiator will act fairly and honestly to reduce
consumers’ perceived risk and uncertainty. On the other hand, if customers do not trust
the initiator during the group-buying process, their perceptions of risk will be
heightened. Under such circumstance, trust in the auction initiator is a key factor in
336 every successful transaction (Kauffman et al., 2010; Tsvetovat et al., 2000). In view of
these considerations, the following hypothesis is suggested:
H4c. Trust in the auction initiator has a negative effect on perceived risk.
From the group members’ perspective, the main purpose of participating in the OGB is to
get bigger volume discounts (Tsai et al., 2011). Thus, the buying power of consumers will
gradually be increased with additional consumers joining buying groups, which leads to
an additional number of units being sold (Kauffman et al., 2010; Tsai et al., 2011). The
number of registered members on group-buying sites implies the amount of risk involved
(Kauffman et al., 2010), and therefore serves as a reference when prospective members
consider joining a buying group (Kauffman et al., 2010; Tsai et al., 2011). Consistent with
the foregoing, Kauffman et al. (2010) also suggested that the number of existing buying
groups signifies the number of participating members, which significantly affects
customers’ perceptions of trust and risk in an OGB. In addition, trust in other group
members will lead one to believe that other members will not drop out from group-buying
transactions, which may also alleviate their concerns about the risk involved. Building on
the preceding discussion, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4d. Trust in group members has a negative effect on perceived risk.
In addition to understanding the outcomes of the different types of trust in the context
of online shopping, an investigation of the antecedents to each type of trust also
constitutes an important research issue, as it can provide those involved in online
shopping with more practical and effective strategies which they can adopt to better
establish trust and reduce consumers’ perceived risk. To this end, we draw on the
“antecedents – trust – outcomes” research model to propose a number of antecedents
according to their respective types of trust.

2.4 Security and privacy

Collectively, security and privacy refer to a shopping site’s taking appropriate
measures to protect consumers’ personal information from being misused (Kim et al.,
2008). Those measures include security characters, defense mechanisms, and
information protection. Moreover, the site’s endeavors to provide consumers with
a safe shopping environment protect consumers against information leakage (Forsythe
and Shi, 2003; Kim et al., 2008; Lu et al., 2013; Weisberg et al., 2011). Under such
circumstances where the requirements for security and privacy are met, consumers will
trust the information protection mechanisms on the site while carrying out
transactions (Forsythe and Shi, 2003; Kim et al., 2008; Lu et al., 2013; Weisberg et al.,
2011). Once customers can feel a sense of security and are confident that their privacy
is being protected, their level of trust in the site will be enhanced accordingly.
As a result, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H5a. Security and privacy protection have a positive effect on trust in the web site.
2.5 IT quality Understanding
IT quality, based on the IS success model of Delone and McLean (2003), includes the online shopping
concepts of information quality, system quality, and service quality. Kuo (2003)
indicated that the quality of a web site is the pivotal factor for predicting consumers’ intention
intention to trust the site. Additionally, McKnight et al. (2002) found confirmatory
evidence that web site quality exerts a positive effect on customers’ trust in the site
(Everard and Galletta, 2006). Applying these views to the OGB context, it is believed 337
that the IT quality of the site will significantly affect customers’ trust in the site,
a proposition which finds support from prior literature (Kim et al., 2004; McKnight et al.,
2002; Prybutok et al., 2008). Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H5b. IT quality has a positive effect on members’ trust in the web site.

2.6 Size
Vendor size refers to consumers’ perceptions of the vendor’s global size and sales
volume (Doney and Cannon, 1997; Teo and Liu, 2007). In traditional marketing,
a trustor treats vendor size as an important signal when considering the
trustworthiness of that vendor ( Jarvenpaa et al., 2000; Ku, 2012). Moreover, some
studies have posited that the size of a vendor is positively associated with the level of
consumer trust in that vendor ( Jarvenpaa et al., 2000; Kim and Ahn, 2006). In other
words, the more uncertain consumers are about a vendor, the more concerned they
become about that vendor’s resources and competence. Applying the above arguments
to the OGB, large vendor size might be perceived as indicating that the vendor is able
to bear unexpected risk and will pay reasonable compensation in the event of an
unforeseen contingency. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H6a. Vendor size has a positive effect on members’ trust in the vendor.

2.7 Reputation
Vendor’s reputation refers to consumers’ belief that the vendor is professionally
capable, honest, and kind (Doney and Cannon, 1997; Teo and Liu, 2007). When earning
the trust of its consumers ( Jin et al., 2008), a vendor who enjoys a stellar reputation is
in an especially advantageous position. It is argued that in the OGB context, vendor
reputation is significantly associated with members’ trust in that vendor, in that an
impressive reputation indicates the vendor’s ability and honesty. Ample empirical
evidence can be found for the positive association between vendor reputation and
consumer trust (Kabadayi et al., 2011; Jarvenpaa et al., 2000; Teo and Liu, 2007).
Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H6b. Vendor reputation has a positive effect on members’ trust in the vendor.

2.8 Feedback mechanism

Following Pavlou and Gefen (2004), the term feedback mechanism refers to “the extent
to which a consumer believes that the feedback mechanism in an online marketplace is
able to provide accurate and reliable information about the past transaction behavior of
the marketplace’s sellers,” and having such a mechanism in place is believed to be
conducive to building consumer trust in an online marketplace. In a similar vein, in the
OGB context, the feedback mechanism provided by the site offers members an
opportunity to evaluate the initiator after joining a buying group. If the feedback from
INTR participating members is positive, the members’ trust in that initiator will accordingly
24,3 be enhanced. Several studies, through empirical investigation, have also demonstrated
this positive relationship (Kauffman et al., 2010; Pi et al., 2011). Therefore, the following
hypothesis is proposed:

H7a. Feedback mechanism has a positive effect on members’ trust in the auction
338 initiator.

2.9 Interaction
Interaction refers to consumers’ information retrieving and exchange experience when
making purchase decisions (Wei et al., 2011). Prior studies have indicated that web sites
which provide consumers with an interactive shopping experience are able to recruit
more consumers, and thus, make larger profits (Wei et al., 2011; Lim et al., 2006;
Chiu et al., 2006). In terms of the OGB, the site provides a perfect platform for the
initiator to interact with members and build long-term relationships with them.
Therefore, it is believed that more frequent interaction between members and the
auction initiator in online shopping will enhance the members’ trust in the auction
initiator. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H7b. Interaction has a positive effect on members’ trust in the auction initiator.

2.10 Identification
Following Chiu et al. (2006), we define consumers’ identification with others as
referring to their sense of belonging and favorable attitudes toward online shopping.
This has been regarded as a critical factor for the establishment of trust. In other
words, a customer’s identification with a group is positively related to his/her trust in
other group members (Güth et al., 2008). In the OGB context, if a member experiences
a sense of belonging and feels that he/she is a part of the group, he/she will tend
to trust the other members. Ample evidence can be found for the existence of
a relationship between identification and trust. For example, Ellemers et al. (1999)
proposed that emotional identification can promote loyalty and citizenship behaviors,
and maintain committed relationships with virtual communities in the group context.
Tsai et al. (2011) and Han and Harms (2010) also found that identification can not only
help build trust in other consumers, but can also reduce perceived risk. Taking these
views into consideration, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H8a. Identification has a positive effect on members’ trust in group members.

2.11 Shared vision

The concept of shared vision “embodies the collective goals and aspirations of the
members of an organization” (Chiu et al., 2006), and is indispensible to building trust
among leaders (Sendjaya and Pekerti, 2010). As far as group-buying members are
concerned, if the members share the same vision of shopping together for the benefits
of the entire group, they are more likely to trust other members due to the fact that
shared values and goals bring members of human networks and communities together,
make collaborative acts possible, and thus enhance member trust (Chiu et al., 2006;
Tsai et al., 2011). Specifically, shared vision can be viewed as the image of the group’s
future among members, a conceptualization which implies its status as a critical
determinant factor in members’ trust. Consistently, Tsai and Ghoshal (1998) also
indicated that a shared vision and common values can help to create trust in the Understanding
development of relationships. Based on the above evidence, the following hypothesis online shopping
is proposed:
intention
H8b. Shared vision has a positive effect on members’ trust in group members.

Following the above hypotheses, Figure 1 describes the proposed model of this study. 339
3. Research methodology
3.1 Data collection
We chose members of an OGB site, “ihergo” (found at www.ihergo.com), as our
research subjects, and used an online survey to collect data. The reason for choosing
this site is that it is one of the most well-known OGB sites in Asia. Following its
opening in March 2007, in the first five weeks, 400 deals were made successfully
(Kauffman et al., 2010). The site’s number of registered members has grown to 250,000,
and every day, more than 1,200 buying groups are organized, all of them calling for
members to join and make purchases. To date, the site’s sales volume has exceeded
US$38.6 million, with the highest sales in a single month exceeding US$2.3 million.
By the time the survey was completed, 242 valid questionnaires had been collected for
data analysis. Table I provides further details of the demographics of the respondents.

3.2 Measurement development

During the pretest, experts and scholars were invited to check the relevance, logic, and
readability of our questionnaire, which resulted in some minor modifications of the
original wording and item sequence. Thereafter, an online pilot test was conducted to
verify the final measurement scales.
In order to ensure the validity and reliability of the scales, measurement items were
adapted from prior literature whenever possible. Security and privacy was measured
using three items adapted from Kim et al. (2008). IT quality was assessed with three
Trust
Security and H5a
privacy
Trust in H4a
the
IT Quality website
H5b Perceived Risk
H3a
H6a H4b
Size Trust in
the H3b H2
Reputation vendor
Attitude Intention
H6b H1
H4c toward online to purchase
H7a Trust in H3c shopping
Feedback the
auction
initiator H4d
Interaction H7b

H8a Trust in H3d

Identification
group Figure 1.
Shared Vision members Research model
H8b
INTR Measurement item Frequency %
24,3
Age
19-24 49 20.24
25-35 127 52.48
36-45 52 21.49
340 Over 45 14 5.79
Education
High school or below 49 20.25
College (2- or 4-year) 173 71.49
Graduate school or above 20 8.26
Occupation
Students 25 10.33
Manufacturing industry 49 20.25
Service industry 67 27.69
Government employees 9 3.72
Freelancers 20 8.26
Retired or others 72 29.75
Monthly income (USD)
o667 90 37.19
1,000-1,333 123 50.83
1,667-2,000 14 5.79
42,000 15 6.19
Table I.
Demographics Note: n ¼ 242

items adapted from Delone and McLean (2003). Reputation was measured with three
items based on the work of Jarvenpaa et al. (2000) and Doney and Cannon (1997).
Three items for size were adapted from Jarvenpaa et al. (2000). Interaction was
measured with three items adapted from Doney and Cannon (1997). Feedback
mechanism was assessed with three items adapted from Pavlou and Gefen (2004).
The two items measuring identification were taken from Chiu et al. (2006). Similarly,
shared vision was measured using three scales developed by Chiu et al. (2006). With
respect to the different types of trust, trust in the vendor was measured using three
items adapted from Jarvenpaa et al. (2000). Trust in the web site was assessed using
three items adapted from Pennington et al. (2003). Measures for trust in the auction
initiator were based on work by Ba and Pavlou (2002) and Doney and Cannon (1997).
Trust in group members was assessed using four items adapted from Jarvenpaa et al.
(1998). The three items measuring perceived risk were taken from Gefen (2002).
Attitude toward online shopping was assessed using three items adapted from studies
by Jarvenpaa et al. (2000) and Lim et al. (2006). Finally, intention to purchase was
measured using the four scales developed by Jarvenpaa et al. (2000) and Lim et al.
(2006). As shown in Table II, all the items were measured using a five-point Likert scale
with anchors ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).

4. Data analysis and results

In statistical analysis, partial least square (PLS) regression is preferable to other
techniques in that it places minimum restrictions on sample size, measurement scales,
and residual distributions (Chin, 1998). It also combines the uses of multiple linear
regression and factor analysis for measuring model parameters and model structures
(Gefen, 2004). Moreover, it is a powerful tool by which to analyze complex relationships
Construct Item
Understanding
online shopping
Trust in the web site (TRW) On the web site, I believe the proper technology has been put into place
that would assure me of an error-free transaction
intention
On the web site, I believe the appropriate safeguards have been put into
place that would ensure me of a successful transaction
There is enough information on the web site to assure me that this
vendor is legitimate
341
Trust in the vendor (TRV) The vendor is trustworthy
The vendor keeps promises and commitments
This vendor’s behavior meets my expectations
Trust in the auction initiator The auction initiator wants to be known as one who keeps promises
(TRI) and commitments
The auction initiator could keep me informed of matters relating to
transaction
The auction initiator can meet my expectations
The auction initiator is trustworthy
Trust in group members I have confidence in other members in making transactions
(TRM) I believe other members will not drop out from group-buying auctions
I believe that other members do not have to be repeatedly reminded of
completing group-buying tasks
Other members will try their best to help me with transactions when I
encounter difficulties
Perceived risk (RI) I feel that group-buying transactions are not risky
I feel that I will not suffer a significant loss when carrying out
group-buying transactions
There will be no problems in carrying out group-buying
transactions
Attitude toward online I like the idea of using the internet to shop from this site
shopping (AT) Using the internet to shop from this site is a good idea
Purchasing goods from this site is a wise decision
Intention to purchase (INTT) I am considering purchasing from this site now
I would seriously contemplate buying from this site
It is likely that I am going to buy from this site
I am likely to make future purchases from this site
Security and privacy (SP) This site implements security measures to protect internet shopper in
online shopping
I feel safe in making transaction from this site
This site usually ensures that my personal information is protected
IT quality (IQ) I feel ease of use on the system of this site
I feel usefulness on the information of this site
I am satisfied with the service of this site
Reputation (REP) The vendor of this site has a good reputation
The vendor of this site is known to be concerned about customers
The vendor of this site has a reputation for being honest
Size (SIZ) The vendor of this site has a large size
The vendor of this site is a very large company
The vendor of this site is the industry’s biggest suppliers on the web
Interaction (INT) The auction initiator of this site can understand my needs
The auction initiator of this site is able to answer customers’ questions
correctly and appropriately
The auction initiator of this site could keep us informed of matters
relating to transaction Table II.
Items/scales of the
(continued) model variables
INTR Construct Item
24,3
Feedback mechanism (FB) This site could provide the correct feedback rating of the auction
initiator
I feel usefulness that this site could provide past trading records of the
auction initiator
I feel credibility that this site could provide the feedback rating of the
342 auction initiator
Identification (ID) I have a strong positive feeling toward this site
I am proud to be a member of this site
Shared vision (SV) On this site, members share the vision of helping others solve the
problems of transaction
On this site, members share the same goal of promoting transaction
more convenient from each other
On this site, members share the same value that seeking the benefits of
Table II. transaction is pleasant

and models under development (Fornell and Bookstein, 1982); thus, it is particularly
suitable for analyzing the data in the current study. Employing Smart PLS 2.0 M3
(Ringle et al., 2005) to test the research model, we first assessed the reliability and
construct validity of the proposed model, following the two-step sequence approach
recommended by Anderson and Gerbing (1988). Thereafter, we examined the
structural relationships among latent constructs in the second step.

4.1 Measurement model

To assess the internal consistency of each construct, composite reliability (CR) and
Cronbach’s a were calculated. Most scholars suggest that the commonly acceptable
threshold level for these tests is 0.7 (Chin, 1998; Fornell and Larcker, 1981; George and
Mallery, 2003). As shown in Table III, all the values of CR and Cronbach’s a exceed the
benchmark of 0.7, thus indicating adequate internal consistency (Chin, 1998; Fornell
and Larcker, 1981; George and Mallery, 2003).
In terms of validity, both convergent validity and discriminate validity tests were
performed. To demonstrate reasonable convergent validity, Fornell and Larcker (1981)
suggested that factor loading of each dimension should exceed 0.7, and AVE should
exceed 0.5. As indicated in Table III, all factor loadings ranged from 0.74 to 0.96 and
AVE ranged from 0.62 to 0.91, all of which meet the recommended criteria. Regarding
discriminant validity, testing was performed based on the criteria suggested by Fornell
and Larcker (1981). If the square root of the AVE is larger than its correlations with
other constructs, discriminant validity is proved (Chin, 1998; Fornell and Larcker,
1981). As shown in Table IV, all the diagonal values exceed the inter-construct
correlations, thus satisfying the criteria to establish discriminant validity.

4.2 Structural model

The proposed hypotheses were tested through the PLS structural model. To test
the significance for all paths, the bootstrap procedure with replacement using
500 was implemented (Chin, 1998; Ringle et al., 2005). Path estimates and t-statistics
were calculated for hypothesis testing. The results are presented in Table V and
Figure 2.
 Understanding
Factor Composite Cronbach’s
Construct Items Mean SD loading reliability a AVE online shopping
intention
Attitude toward online AT1 4.09 0.70 0.79
shopping AT2 3.74 0.72 0.87 0.88 0.80 0.72
AT3 4.07 0.62 0.88
Feedback mechanism FB1 3.95 0.72 0.89
343
FB2 4.12 0.70 0.93 0.94 0.90 0.84
FB3 4.03 0.71 0.93
Identification ID1 4.01 0.71 0.94 0.93 0.85 0.87
ID2 4.19 0.67 0.93
Interaction INT1 3.73 0.79 0.91
INT2 3.82 0.78 0.93 0.93 0.89 0.82
INT3 4.06 0.66 0.88
Intention to purchase INTT1 4.31 0.56 0.93
INTT2 4.34 0.54 0.95 0.97 0.95 0.88
INTT3 4.37 0.60 0.92
INTT4 4.38 0.58 0.94
IT quality IQ1 3.92 0.77 0.75
IQ2 3.90 0.72 0.84 0.86 0.76 0.67
IQ3 3.93 0.73 0.86
Security and privacy SP1 3.50 0.83 0.92
SP2 3.61 0.77 0.90 0.93 0.90 0.83
SP3 3.49 0.76 0.91
Reputation REP1 3.13 0.87 0.92
REP2 3.28 0.81 0.90 0.93 0.89 0.82
REP3 3.26 0.83 0.90
Perceived risk RI1 3.13 0.90 0.96
RI2 3.04 0.92 0.95 0.97 0.95 0.91
RI3 3.09 0.93 0.95
Size SIZ1 2.90 0.94 0.93
SIZ2 2.65 0.90 0.91 0.94 0.90 0.83
SIZ3 3.09 0.96 0.90
Shared vision SV1 4.02 0.71 0.90
SV2 4.22 0.64 0.91 0.91 0.86 0.78
SV3 4.36 0.63 0.83
Trust in group members TRM1 4.02 0.68 0.80
TRM2 3.60 0.94 0.81 0.89 0.84 0.68
TRM3 3.49 0.93 0.83
TRM4 3.65 0.88 0.84
Trust in the auction initiator TRI1 4.18 0.66 0.84
TRI2 4.10 0.72 0.84 0.92 0.89 0.75
TRI3 3.95 0.79 0.89
TRI4 4.08 0.70 0.91
Trust in the vendor TRV1 3.56 0.77 0.84
TRV2 3.82 0.69 0.83 0.88 0.79 0.70
TRV3 3.55 0.75 0.86
Trust in the web site TRW1 4.14 0.68 0.74
TRW2 3.60 0.78 0.81 0.83 0.70 0.62 Table III.
TRW3 3.65 0.89 0.80 Descriptive statistics
INTR Construct AT FB ID INT INTT IQ SP REP RI SIZ SV TRM TRI TRV TRW
24,3
AT 0.85
FB 0.48 0.92
ID 0.61 0.51 0.93
INT 0.37 0.59 0.49 0.91
344 INTT 0.56 0.43 0.56 0.31 0.94
IQ 0.55 0.43 0.55 0.34 0.38 0.82
SP 0.48 0.38 0.47 0.44 0.36 0.54 0.91
REP 0.52 0.30 0.40 0.38 0.27 0.46 0.49 0.91
RI 0.42 0.25 0.32 0.34 0.25 0.35 0.53 0.50 0.95
SIZ 0.41 0.27 0.32 0.30 0.20 0.35 0.38 0.58 0.50 0.91
SV 0.41 0.38 0.60 0.44 0.44 0.36 0.37 0.24 0.28 0.21 0.88
TRM 0.45 0.49 0.60 0.51 0.48 0.37 0.42 0.40 0.45 0.35 0.50 0.82
TRI 0.38 0.58 0.42 0.72 0.40 0.32 0.46 0.36 0.41 0.37 0.34 0.47 0.87
TRV 0.56 0.32 0.41 0.36 0.29 0.50 0.55 0.63 0.41 0.42 0.25 0.46 0.38 0.84
TRW 0.49 0.52 0.54 0.43 0.43 0.58 0.68 0.44 0.45 0.37 0.37 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.79
Notes: AT, attitude toward online shopping; FB, feedback mechanism; ID, identification; INT,
interaction; INTT, intention to purchase; IQ, IT quality; SP, security and privacy; TRW, trust in the
web site; REP, reputation; RI, perceived risk; SIZ, size; SV, shared vision; TRM, trust in group
Table IV. members; TRI, trust in the auction initiator; TRV, trust in the vendor. Diagonal: square root of AVEs
Discriminant validity reported along diagonal in italics. Off-diagonals: correlation between latent variables

Path coefficient
Hypothesis Path Supported (t-value) R2

H1 Attitude-Intention to purchase Yes 0.56 (10.41)*** 0.32

H2 Perceived risk-Attitude Yes 0.11 (2.04)** 0.42
H3a Trust in the web site-Attitude Yes 0.20 (3.30)***
H3b Trust in the vendor-Attitude Yes 0.35 (5.14)***
H3c Trust in the auction initiator-Attitude No 0.05 (0.86)
H3d Trust in group members-Attitude Yes 0.12 (1.82)*
H4a Trust in the web site-Perceived risk Yes 0.21 (3.84)*** 0.32
H4b Trust in the vendor-Perceived risk Yes 0.17 (2.11)**
H4c Trust in the auction initiator-Perceived risk Yes 0.16 (2.11)**
H4d Trust in group members-Perceived risk Yes 0.20 (2.34)**
H5a Security and privacy-Trust in the web site Yes 0.52 (10.24)*** 0.53
H5b IT quality-Trust in the web site Yes 0.30 (5.33)***
H6a Size-Trust in the vendor No 0.08 (1.32) 0.40
H6b Reputation-Trust in the vendor Yes 0.58 (9.33)***
H7a Feedback mechanism-Trust in the auction initiator Yes 0.23 (3.39)*** 0.56
H7b Interaction-Trust in the auction initiator Yes 0.59 (9.26)***
Table V. H8a Identification-Trust in group members Yes 0.47 (8.62)*** 0.40
Results of PLS analysis H8b Shared vision-Trust in group members Yes 0.22 (3.36)***
and summary of the
hypothesis test Notes: *,**,***Significant at the 0.1, 0.05 and 0.001 levels, respectively

In Table V and Figure 2, we see that all but two hypotheses (H3c and H6a) were
supported. As anticipated, members’ attitude toward online shopping significantly and
positively affects intention to purchase, with a path coefficient of 0.56 (t-value ¼ 10.41,
po0.001), supporting H1. Moreover, perceived risk negatively affects members’ attitude
toward online shopping, with a path coefficient of 0.11 (t-value ¼ 2.04, po0.05),
 Trust Understanding
Security and 0.52*** Trust in
online shopping
privacy
the web intention
–0.21***
site
IT quality R 2=0.53
0.30***
0.20*** Perceived Risk
–0.17**
R 2=0.32 345
0.08 Trust in
Size
the –0.11**
vendor 0.35***
Reputation R 2=0.40 Attitude
0.58*** Intention
–0.16** toward online
to purchase
Feedback 0.23*** 0.05 shopping
R 2=0.32
Trust in R 2=0.42
the
–0.20** 0.56***
auction
Interaction 0.59*** initiator
R 2=0.56 Not significant
Identification 0.47*** significant
Trust in
group 0.12*
members
Shared vision R 2=0.40
0.22***
Figure 2.
Results of path coefficients
Notes: *p < 0.1; **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001

thus supporting H2. As expected, trust in the web site, trust in the vendor and trust in
group members are all positively associated with members’ attitude toward online
shopping, with path coefficients of 0.20 (t-value ¼ 3.30, po0.001), 0.35 (t-value ¼ 5.14,
po0.001), and 0.12 (t-value ¼ 1.82, po0.1), respectively, supporting H3a, H3b, and H3d,
in that order. However, contrary to our expectations, the path from trust in the auction
initiator to members’ attitude toward online shopping is not significant, with a path
coefficient of 0.05 (t-value ¼ 0.86). As a result, H3c is not supported. In terms of perceived
risk, the four types of trust are all negatively associated with perceived risk, with path
coefficients of 0.21 (t-value ¼ 3.84, po0.001), 0.17 (t-value ¼ 2.11, po0.05), 0.16
(t-value ¼ 2.11, po0.05), and 0.20 (t-value ¼ 2.34, po0.05), respectively, thus supporting
H4a, H4b, H4c, and H4d, in that order.
Turning now to the antecedents to the four types of trust, security and privacy and
IT quality both exert a positive effect on members’ trust in the web site, with path
coefficients of 0.52 (t-value ¼ 10.24, po0.001) and 0.30 (t-value ¼ 5.33, po0.001),
respectively, supporting H5a and H5b. However, contrary to our expectations, the path
from size to trust in the vendor is not significant, with a path coefficient of 0.08
(t-value ¼ 1.32). Therefore, H6a was not supported. By contrast, reputation exhibits
a great influence on members’ trust in the vendor, with a path coefficient of 0.58
(t-value ¼ 9.33, po0.001), thus supporting H6b. As anticipated, feedback mechanism
and interaction are both positively associated with members’ trust in the auction
initiator, with path coefficients of 0.23 (t-value ¼ 3.39, po0.001) and 0.59
(t-value ¼ 9.26, po0.001), respectively, supporting H7a and H7b. Finally,
identification and shared vision are both positively related to members’ trust in
INTR group members, with path coefficients of 0.47 (t-value ¼ 8.62, po0.001) and 0.22
24,3 (t-value ¼ 3.36, po0.001), respectively, supporting H8a and H8b.
The explanatory power of the research model is also displayed in Figure 2.
The predictive power of a research model can be assessed by reference to the
percentage of total variance it explains (R2). Our research model explained 53 percent
of the variance in members’ trust in the web site, 40 percent of the variance in
346 members’ trust in the vendor, 56 percent of the variance in members’ trust in the
auction initiator, and 40 percent of the variance in members’ trust in group members,
suggesting that the antecedents to trust are strong predictors. Moreover, R2 was 32
percent when the four types of trust were used to predict perceived risk. In addition,
R2 values indicate that taken together, the four types of trust and perceived risk
explained 42 percent of the variance in members’ attitudes toward online shopping,
showing that they are powerful predictors. Further, R2 was 32 percent when members’
attitude toward online shopping was used to predict intention to purchase.
According to prior literature, when R2 values exceed 10 percent, acceptable
explanatory power is proved (Falk and Miller, 1992).

5. Discussion and implication

5.1 Key finding
The purpose of our study is to provide a better picture of factors influencing behavioral
decisions in the OGB. To be specific, the current study investigated the different types
of trust involved in the OGB and also identified their antecedents. Based on the TRA
and the model of “antecedents-trust-outcomes,” we proposed and empirically tested
a model of behavioral intention in a group-buying site, and, by doing so, underscored
the importance of the multidimensional concept of trust and the antecedents to each
type of trust. Overall, the results provide robust support for the fitness of the proposed
model, and a number of the findings are worth discussing.
First, the study, while confirming that trust is a focal concept in online shopping,
shows that the four dimensions of trust directly affect perceived risk, a finding which is
in congruence with prior studies (Kim et al., 2008; Pavlou, 2003). Thereafter, perceived
risk is found to be negatively associated with attitude, which, in turn, positively affects
intention. In particular, perceived risk is found to be a significant determinant of
attitude, implying that uncertainty reduction remains a major concern for online
customers, and therefore deserves serious attention. In other words, those vendors and
auction initiators involved in OGBs should undertake all practicable initiatives to
alleviate customers’ perceived risk.
Second, three out of the four types of trust were found to exert significant influence
on attitude. The only exception is the relationship between trust in the auction initiator
and member attitude, a finding which confounded our expectations. One possible
explanation for this is that members, having full control over their purchase decisions,
are always free to join buying groups formed by different auction initiators. In other
words, when consumers want to purchase the best-selling products from particular
vendors, it does not matter who forms the buying groups or who the auction’s initiator
is, as long as consumers are able to obtain their desired products.
Third, regarding the antecedents to the four types of trust, our results indicate that
both privacy and security, and IT quality are major enabling factors for members’ trust
in a web site. Additionally, reputation is found to have a positive effect on members’
trust in the vendor. To our surprise, vendor size does not influence members’ trust in
the vendor. One plausible explanation for this might be that consumers do not pay as
much attention to vendor size as they do to other factors such as price, delivery terms, Understanding
or product quality. As long as the vendor is able to satisfy their particular needs in online shopping
these other regards, vendor size is not a major concern for them when shopping online.
As for interaction and feedback mechanism, both were found to strongly influence intention
trust in the auction initiator, which is consistent with prior research (Kauffman et al.,
2010). Finally, the research results indicate that identification and shared vision both
positively affect trust in group members, which confirms the results of prior studies 347
(Chiu et al., 2006; Han and Harms, 2010).

5.2 Implications for theory and practice

The findings of this study have various implications for research, as well as for
practice. From a theoretical perspective, our research extends the TRA and prior
research to discuss trust-building factors according to different targets of trust.
The result of this endeavor is the enrichment of the existing literature concerning
trust-building factors. In addition, this study examines risk-related issues, based
upon which consumers make judgments as they consider joining a buying group.
This aspect of the present study distinguishes it significantly from the prior extant
literature. In sum, the current research identified four types of trust found in the
context of OGBs, as well as their respective antecedents and their subsequent
consequences, resulting in a more descriptive model that better explicates consumers’
decision-making processes in online shopping.
From a practical perspective, the results emphasize the trust-building factors that may
enhance successful online transactions. First, web site managers should exert every effort
to provide a safe and user-friendly shopping environment for consumers. Second, vendors
can enhance consumer trust by encouraging satisfied customers to provide positive
endorsements, which will definitely have the effect of building an instant positive
reputation for the vendors (McKnight et al., 1998). Third, one way to increase consumers’
trust in auction initiators is for the latter to put more emphasis on interaction with
members, such as providing the most relevant and updated purchase information.
In addition, providing an effective customer feedback mechanism can be of help, as well.
Finally, ample empirical evidence exists to suggest that customers who share common
characteristics similar to those of potential customers can serve as a proven source of
trust (Lim et al., 2006). To this end, auction initiators, when calling for members to join
a buying group, would be well advised to attempt to recruit members with common
characteristics and interests.

5.3 Limitations
Although our findings yield valuable insights into online shopping, certain shortcomings
of this study should be acknowledged.
First, data collection in this study was constrained to data pertaining to members of
a group-buying site which already enjoys a reputation as an established site. However,
ihergo is not unique in this respect. Other well-known group-buying sites with different
transaction mechanisms are also very popular, such as Groupon, Liker, and Gomaji in
Asia. Even so, the results should be treated with caution to avoid over-generalizing to
all group-buying sites accessible online. Hence, there is much room for future research
to replicate this study across a wider variety of group-buying sites to verify the
generalizability of our findings.
Another possible criticism of this study is that the data presented here are cross
sectional. As the development of behavioral intention is an ongoing phenomenon,
INTR a longitudinal study would perhaps be more appropriate. As a result, the lack of
24,3 longitudinal data constitutes a limitation of this study. Despite the fact that conducting
cross-sectional research is common in the IS field (Gefen et al., 2003), future researchers
are encouraged to collect longitudinal data with a view to faithfully capturing buyers’
behavioral intention.

348 6. Conclusions and suggestions for future research

Trust has long been regarded as a vital factor in online shopping (Kim et al., 2008),
as risks are involved in every online transaction. This study constitutes a significant
advance in the research into online shopping. Specifically, it broadens our understanding
of the relative importance of the four types of trust, as well as their respective antecedents.
This was made possible by a proposed model, based on prior literature, with the analysis
of data collected from members of an online group-buying site providing strong empirical
support for both the fitness of the model and the findings.
Finally, there exist great opportunities for future researchers to include other
possible factors affecting consumers’ intention to purchase, in addition to those
discussed in this study. Factors like social influence, agency, social capital, economic
circumstances, and the development of technology are all considered to be critical
when discussing consumer behavior. Additional benefit could be derived from
examining the influence of different countries or cultures on the relationship between
the four types of trust and their antecedents or their consequence. Without question,
the results will definitely have both important theoretical and practical implications for
those interested in online shopping and for those who wish to benefit from this
business model.
References
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and
recommended two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-423.
Ba, S. and Pavlou, P.A. (2002), “Evidence of the effect of trust building technology in electronic
markets: price premiums and buyer behavior”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 243-268.
Chen, J. and Dibb, S. (2010), “Consumer trust in the online retail context: exploring the
antecedents and consequences”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 323-346.
Chin, W.W. (1998), The Partial Least Squares Approach for Structural Equation Modeling,
Modern Methods for Business Research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ,
pp. 295-336.
Chiu, C.M., Hsu, M.H. and Wang, E.T.G. (2006), “Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual
communities: an integration of social capital and social cognitive theories”, Decision
Support Systems, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 1872-1888.
Delone, W.H. and McLean, E.R. (2003), “The DeLone and McLean model of information
systems success: a ten-year update”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 19
No. 4, pp. 9-30.
Doney, P.M. and Cannon, J.P. (1997), “An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller
relationships”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 61 No. 2, pp. 35-51.
Ellemers, N., Kortekaas, P. and Ouwerkerk, J.W. (1999), “Self-categorisation, commitment to the
group and group self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of social identity”, European
Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 29 Nos 2/3, pp. 371-389.
Everard, A. and Galletta, D.F. (2006), “How presentation flaws affect perceived site quality, trust,
and intention to purchase from an online store”, Journal of Management Information
Systems, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 56-95.
Falk, R.F. and Miller, N.B. (1992), A Primer for Soft Modeling, University of Akron Press, Akron, OH. Understanding
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to online shopping
Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA.
Fornell, C. and Bookstein, F.L. (1982), “Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied
intention
to consumer exit-voice theory”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 440-452.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with
unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 349
No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Forsythe, S.M. and Shi, B. (2003), “Consumer patronage and risk perceptions in internet
shopping”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 56 No. 11, pp. 867-875.
Gefen, D. (2002), “Nurturing clients’ trust to encourage engagement success during the
customization of ERP systems”, Omega, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 287-299.
Gefen, D. (2004), “What makes an ERP implementation relationship worthwhile: linking trust
mechanisms and ERP usefulness”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 21
No. 1, pp. 263-288.
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E. and Straub, D.W. (2003), “Trust and TAM in online shopping:
an integrated model”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 51-90.
George, D. and Mallery, M. (2003), Using SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and
Reference, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA.
Güth, W., Levati, M.V. and Ploner, M. (2008), “Social identity and trust – an experimental
investigation”, Journal of Socio-Economics, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 1293-1308.
Han, G. and Harms, P.D. (2010), “Team identification, trust and conflict a mediation model”,
International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 20-43.
Hsu, M.H. and Chiu, C.M. (2004), “Internet self-efficacy and electronic service acceptance”,
Decision Support Systems, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 369-381.
Jalilvand, M.R. and Samiei, N. (2012), “The impact of electronic word of mouth on a tourism
destination choice: testing the theory of planned behavior (TPB)”, Internet Research,
Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 591-612.
Jarvenpaa, S., Tractinsky, N. and Vitale, M. (2000), “Consumer trust in an internet store”,
Information Technology and Management, Vol. 1 Nos 1/2, pp. 45-71.
Jarvenpaa, S.L., Knoll, K. and Leidner, D.E. (1998), “Is anybody out there?: antecedents of trust in
global virtual teams”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 14 No. 4,
pp. 29-64.
Jin, B., Park, J.Y. and Kim, J. (2008), “Cross-cultural examination of the relationships among firm
reputation, e-satisfaction, e-trust, and e-loyalty”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 25
No. 3, pp. 324-337.
Kabadayi, E.T., Alan, A.K. and Erdebil, A.E. (2011), “The factors affecting the level of trust
between buyer seller: an example from household appliances sector”, Journal of Global
Strategic Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 31-39.
Kauffman, R.J., Lai, H. and Ho, C.T. (2010), “Incentive mechanisms, fairness and participation
in online group-buying auctions”, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 9
No. 3, pp. 249-262.
Kim, D.J., Ferrin, D.L. and Rao, H.R. (2008), “A trust-based consumer decision-making model in
electronic commerce: the role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents”, Decision
Support Systems, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 544-564.
Kim, H.W., Xu, Y. and Koh, J. (2004), “A comparison of online trust building factors between
potential customers and repeat customers”, Journal of the Association for Information
Systems, Vol. 5 No. 10, pp. 392-420.
INTR Kim, M. and Ahn, J. (2006), “Comparison of trust sources of an online market-maker in the
e-marketplace: buyer’s and seller’s perspectives”, Journal of Computer Information
24,3 Systems, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 84-94.
Ku, E.C.S. (2012), “Beyond price: how does trust encourage online group’s buying intention?”,
Internet Research, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 569-590.
Kuo, Y. (2003), “A study on service quality of virtual community websites”, Total Quality
350 Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 461-473.
Li, X., Hess, T.J. and Valacich, J.S. (2008), “Why do we trust new technology? A study of initial
trust formation with organizational information systems”, The Journal of Strategic
Information Systems, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 39-71.
Lim, K.H., Sia, C.L., Lee, M.K.O. and 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, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 233-266.
Lu, L., Chang, H. and Yu, S. (2013), “Online shoppers’ perceptions of e-retailers’ ethics, cultural
orientation, and loyalty: an exploratory study in Taiwan”, Internet Research, Vol. 23
No. 1, pp. 47-68.
Lu, Y., Zhao, L. and Wang, B. (2010), “From virtual community members to C2C e-commerce
buyers: trust in virtual communities and its effect on consumers’ purchase intention”,
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 346-360.
McKnight, D.H., Choudhury, V. and Kacmar, C. (2002), “Developing and validating trust measures
for e-commerce: an integrative typology”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 13 No. 3,
pp. 334-359.
McKnight, D.H., Cummings, L.L. and Chervany, N.L. (1998), “Initial trust formation in new
organizational relationships”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 473-490.
Mael, F. and Ashforth, B.E. (1992), “Alumni and their alma mater: a partial test of the
reformulated model of organizational identification”, Journal of Organizational Behavior,
Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 103-123.
Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H. and Schoorman, F.D. (1995), “An integrative model of organizational
trust”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 709-734.
Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D. (1994), “The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing”,
The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 20-38.
Pavlou, P.A. (2003), “Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: integrating trust and risk
with the technology acceptance model”, International Journal of Electronic Commerce,
Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 101-134.
Pavlou, P.A. and Fygenson, M. (2006), “Understanding and predicting electronic commerce
adoption: an extension of the theory of planned behavior”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 30 No. 1,
pp. 115-143.
Pavlou, P.A. and Gefen, D. (2004), “Building effective online marketplaces with institution-based
trust”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 37-59.
Pavlou, P.A., Liang, H. and Xue, Y. (2007), “Understanding and mitigating uncertainty in online
exchange relationships: a principal-agent perspective”, Management Information Systems
Quarterly, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 105-136.
Pennington, R., Wilcox, H.D. and Grover, V. (2003), “The role of system trust in business-to-consumer
transactions”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 197-226.
Pi, S.M., Liao, H.L., Liu, S.H. and Lee, I.S. (2011), “Factors influencing the behavior of online group-
buying in Taiwan”, African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 5 No. 16, pp. 7120-7129.
Prybutok, V.R., Zhang, X. and Ryan, S.D. (2008), “Evaluating leadership, IT quality, and net
benefits in an e-government environment”, Information & Management, Vol. 45 No. 3,
pp. 143-152.
Qureshi, I., Fang, Y., Ramsey, E., McCole, P., Ibbotson, P. and Compeau, D. (2009), “Understanding Understanding
online customer repurchasing intention and the mediating role of trust – an empirical
investigation in two developed countries”, European Journal of Information Systems, online shopping
Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 205-222. intention
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Will, S. (2005), “SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) Beta”, available at:
www.smartpls.de (accessed June 26, 2012).
Sendjaya, S. and Pekerti, A. (2010), “Servant leadership as antecedent of trust in organizations”, 351
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 643-663.
Shankar, V., Urban, G.L. and Sultan, F. (2002), “Online trust: a stakeholder perspective, concepts,
implications, and future directions”, The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Vol. 11
Nos 3-4, pp. 325-344.
Shneiderman, B. (2000), “Designing trust into online experiences”, Communications of the ACM,
Vol. 43 No. 12, pp. 57-59.
Shu, W. and Chuang, Y.-H. (2011), “The perceived benefits of six-degree-separation social
networks”, Internet Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 26-45.
Teo, T.S.H. and Liu, J. (2007), “Consumer trust in e-commerce in the United States, Singapore and
China”, Omega, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 22-38.
Teo, T.S.H., Srivastava, S.C. and Jiang, L. (2008-2009), “Trust and electronic government
success: an empirical study”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 25 No. 3,
pp. 99-132.
Tsai, M.T., Cheng, N.C. and 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, Vol. 22 No. 10, pp. 1091-1104.
Tsai, W. and Ghoshal, S. (1998), “Social capital and value creation: the role of intrafirm networks”,
The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 464-476.
Tsvetovat, M., Sycara, K., Chen, Y. and Ying, J. (2000), “Customer coalitions in electronic
marketplace”, available at: http://pdf.aminer.org/000/015/270/customer_coalitions_in_the_
electronic_marketplace.pdf (accessed February 7, 2014).
Underwood, R. (2010), “Groupon vs the world”, Inc, Vol. 32 No. 8, pp. 116-118.
Wei, Y., Straub, D.W. and Poddar, A. (2011), “The power of many: an assessment of managing
internet group purchasing”, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 12 No. 1,
pp. 19-43.
Weisberg, J., Te’eni, D. and Arman, L. (2011), “Past purchase and intention to purchase in
e-commerce: the mediation of social presence and trust”, Internet Research, Vol. 21 No. 1,
pp. 82-96.
Zimmer, J.C., Arsal, R.E., Al-Marzouq, M. and Grover, V. (2010), “Investigating online information
disclosure: effects of information relevance, trust and risk”, Information & Management,
Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 115-123.

Further reading
Barclay, D., Higgins, C. and Thompson, R. (1995), “The partial least squares (PLS) approach to
causal modeling: personal computer adoption and use as an illustration”, Technology
Studies, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 285-309.
Chen, J., Chen, X. and Song, X. (2002), “Bidder’s strategy under group-buying auction on the
internet”, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and
Humans, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 680-690.
Chen, J., Chen, X. and Song, X. (2007), “Comparison of the group-buying auction and the fixed
pricing mechanism”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 445-459.
INTR George, J.F. (2002), “Influences on the intent to make internet purchases”, Internet Research,
Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 165-180.
24,3
Gosling, S.D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S. and John, O.P. (2004), “Should we trust web-based studies?
A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires”, American
Psychologist, Vol. 59 No. 2, pp. 93-104.
Ifinedo, P. (2007), “Interactions between organizational size, culture, and structure and some IT
352 factors in the context of ERP success assessment: an exploratory investigation”, Journal of
Computer Information Systems, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 28-44.
Mach, M., Dolan, S. and Tzafrir, S. (2010), “The differential effect of team members’ trust on team
performance: the mediation role of team cohesion”, Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 3, pp. 771-794.
Sellin, N. and Keeves, J.P. (1994), “Path analysis with latent variables”, in Husen, T. and
Postlethwaite, T.N. (Eds), The International Encyclopedia of Education, Pergamon Press,
Oxford, pp. 4352-4359.
Stewart, K.J. (2006), “How hypertext links influence consumer perceptions to build and degrade
trust online”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 183-210.
Turel, O., Yuan, Y. and Connelly, C.E. (2008), “In justice we trust: predicting user acceptance of
e-customer services”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 24 No. 4,
pp. 123-151.

About the authors

Dr Meng-Hsiang Hsu is a Professor at the National Kaohsiung First University of Science and
Technology, Taiwan. He holds a PhD in information management from National Sun-Yat-Sen
University. Professor Hsu’s research interests include information ethics and electronic
commerce. He has published articles in Decision Support Systems, Journal of Business Ethics,
Behaviour and Information Technology, International Journal of Human – Computer Studies,
and others. Dr Meng-Hsiang Hsu is the corresponding author and can be contacted
at: [email protected]
Li-Wen Chuang is a PhD Candidate at the Graduate School of Management, National
Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology, Taiwan. He conducts research in
e-business, social media, knowledge management, online communities, and information literacy.
He has published articles in American Journal of Engineering and Technology Research and
Applied Mechanics and Materials.
Dr Cheng-Se Hsu is an Assistant Professor in the Graduate Institute of Applied Foreign
Languages at the Da-Yeh University, Taiwan. She holds a PhD in management from National
Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology, Taiwan. Her research interests include
electronic commerce, knowledge management, and virtual communities. Her research has
appeared in Behaviour & Information Technology, Advances in Information Sciences and Service
Sciences, and ICIC Express Letters.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints