Antecedents of Online Shopping Behavior in India: An Examination

This article was downloaded by: [Memorial University of Newfoundland]On: 01 August 2014, At: 17:59Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Internet CommercePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wico20

Antecedents of Online ShoppingBehavior in India: An ExaminationArpita Khare a & Sapna Rakesh ba Marketing Area, Indian Institute of Management, Rohtak , Rohtak ,Haryana , Indiab Department of Management , Institute of Technology and Science ,Ghaziabad , IndiaPublished online: 16 Nov 2011.

To cite this article: Arpita Khare & Sapna Rakesh (2011) Antecedents of Online ShoppingBehavior in India: An Examination, Journal of Internet Commerce, 10:4, 227-244, DOI:10.1080/15332861.2011.622691

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2011.622691

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wico20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/15332861.2011.622691

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2011.622691

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Antecedents of Online Shopping Behavior inIndia: An Examination

ARPITA KHAREMarketing Area, Indian Institute of Management, Rohtak, Rohtak, Haryana, India

SAPNA RAKESHDepartment of Management, Institute of Technology and Science, Ghaziabad, India

The current research was undertaken to understand Indianstudents’ intention to purchase through online shopping Web sites.A survey of 325 students studying in Indian universities wasconducted. The results indicate that Indian students’ intention topurchase online is influenced by utilitarian value, attitude towardonline shopping, availability of information, and hedonic values.Male students have a more positive attitude toward online shoppingcompared to female students.

KEYWORDS attitude toward online shopping, Indian students,intention to purchase, online shopping, utilitarian and hedonicvalues

INTRODUCTION

Expansion of the Internet has increased the popularity of electronic retailchannels. The changing demography of developing economies promises anumber of opportunities for Web-based retail models. Most companies areexploiting the Internet as an alternative channel for reaching out to custo-mers. As an emerging economy, India presents a potential market fore-retailers. Understanding the online purchase intentions of the Indian mar-ket can help online retailers in segmenting and targeting decisions. The cur-rent research focuses on understanding the shopping behavior of Indianstudents. Students present an attractive market segment as they a spend large

Address correspondence to Dr. Arpita Khare, IIM-Rohtak, Humanities Block, MDUCampus, Rohtak, Haryana, India. E-mail: [email protected]

Journal of Internet Commerce, 10:227–244, 2011Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1533-2861 print=1533-287X onlineDOI: 10.1080/15332861.2011.622691

227

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

amount of time browsing the Internet and are familiar with the onlinemedium. There are 51 million active Internet users in India; 97% of whichare regular users while 79% are daily users (Juxtconsult.com 2010). MostInternet users are between age groups 25–35 years. The Internet browsingpopulation in India is growing at an annual rate of 20%, which is expectedto touch 237 million by 2015 (The Economic Times 2010). Largely used byyouth, the Internet is fast catching up as an important media in the life of stu-dents. The online gaming industry is US$5 million and expected to touchUS$446 million. It is expected to grow at a CAGR of over 36% through2013 (KPMG Analysis 2009). The Internet has emerged as a popular mediafor higher income groups covering 16% of media exposure (Juxt IndianUrbanites 2010). The improvements in information technology and com-munication network infrastructure coupled with psychographic changesamong students are bound to influence their purchase behavior and incli-nation to use the Internet for shopping.

There has been growing interest among researchers toward studyingonline shopping behavior in developing countries (Park and Jun 2003; So,Wong, and Sculli 2005; Martınez-Lopez, Luna, and Martınez 2005; Haqueet al. 2007; Cho and Jialin 2008; Riley, Scarpi, and Manaresi 2009; Hashim,Ghani, and Said 2009; Hasan 2010). The current research examines the roleof hedonic and utilitarian values, attitude toward online shopping, and infor-mation availability on Indian youth’s intention to purchase online. Novak,Hoffman, and Yung (2000) suggest that the nature of the Web site influencescustomers’ online behavior. Engaging customers online requires presentingthem with challenging stimuli and excitement. If the Web sites do notintrigue the customers, they will lose interest in them. The Web sites shouldblend goal-directed and experiential qualities (Novak et al. 2000). In anotherresearch, Ha and Stoel (2009) suggest that customers’ perception and attitudetoward e-shopping is governed by factors like usefulness, trust, and enjoy-ment. Childers and colleagues (2001), in their research on hedonic and utili-tarian aspects of online shopping, suggest that immersive, hedonic, andutilitarian components of online medium influence customers’ online shop-ping behavior. The utilitarian components facilitate access to informationabout product features, prices, and promotional offers (Childers et al. 2001).

The research questions for this study were formulated as follows:

RQ1: Does Indian students’ intention to purchase online depend onhedonic and utilitarian shopping values?

RQ2: Does Indian students’ online shopping attitude influence theironline purchase intention?

RQ3: Does availability of information affect Indian students onlinepurchase intention?

RQ4: Does gender of Indian students affect their online purchaseintention?

228 A. Khare and S. Rakesh

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

LITERATURE REVIEW

In their research on Malaysian customers’ shopping behavior, Haque andcolleagues (2007) found that the Internet marketing environment, productcharacteristics, familiarity and confidence, and promotional offer influencedtheir online shopping behavior. Alba and colleagues (1997) state that theInternet has reduced product search costs. Zhou, Dai, and Zhang (2007)identified nine types of consumer factors that affect online shopping—demographics, Internet experience, normative beliefs, shopping orientation,shopping motivation, personal traits, online experience, psychologicalperception, and online shopping experience.

Attitude toward Online Shopping

Riley and colleagues (2009) compared online shopping behavior of custo-mers in Italy and the UK. Their results indicate that customers’ attitudetoward online shopping for services depends on familiarity with the serviceprovider and customers’ experience with the Internet. Monsuwe and collea-gues (2004) state that customers’ attitudes toward online shopping was notonly affected by ease of use, usefulness, and enjoyment, but also by exogen-ous factors like customer personality, situational factors, product characteris-tics, earlier online shopping experiences, and trust in online shopping. Shih(2004) posits that customers’ attitude toward online shopping is strongly cor-related with Internet acceptance. The perceived ease of use and perceivedusefulness determine customers’ attitudes toward online shopping, however,perceived usefulness did not affect user acceptance of online shoppingmodels. Bigne-Alcaniz and colleagues (2008) conducted research on Spanishcustomers who had never purchased online. Their results indicate that onlineshopping behavior can be improved if the Web sites are easy to navigate anduse. The customers’ ‘ease-of-use’ perception affects their attitude to shoponline.

Hsu and colleagues (2006) studied the theory of planned behavior(TPB) and Expectation Disconfirmation Theory (EDT) to examine the ante-cedents of customers’ intention to shop online. The results state that satisfac-tion with online shopping depends on prior use of online shopping Websites. Customers fear that online shopping involves exchange of confidentialdata. The security and confidentiality factors play a significant role in the useof online shopping Web sites. Kim and Park (2005) suggest that customers’use of online shopping Web sites is influenced by the attitude toward brickand mortar store. Customers are willing to try the online model if they arefamiliar with the brick and mortar store, and online Web sites are perceivedas an extension to the physical stores. In their research on Korean customers,Park and Kim (2003) found that information quality, user interface quality,

Online Shopping Behavior in India 229

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

and security perceptions affected customers’ attitude toward onlineshopping. Ahn, Ryu, and Han (2004) suggest that online and offline featuresof stores have an effect on the perceived usefulness, attitude, and intention touse the online shopping Web sites.

Hedonic and Utilitarian Shopping Motives

Childers and colleagues (2001) examined factors like usefulness, ease of use,and enjoyment in predicting customers’ attitude toward online shopping.Customers prefer enjoyment, interactivity, and flexibility in online media.Their findings suggest that instrumental and hedonic aspects are importantin online purchases. The online Web site design characteristics are importantin providing intrinsic enjoyment to the customers. Babin and Attaway (2000)found that online shopping Web sites encompassing both hedonic and utili-tarian aspects were perceived to generate greater shopping value and conse-quently affected customers’ purchase behavior. Online shopping wasaffected by Web site features that provide information about products, madetransactions easy, and combined the utilitarian aspects (Wolfinbargar andGilly 2001).

Mummalaneni (2005) found that pleasure and enjoyment are importantfor customer satisfaction with online shopping. Bridges and Florsheim (2008)suggest that increasing hedonic aspects on online Web sites does not neces-sarily mean that customers would purchase online. Making the shoppingWeb sites interactive and entertaining does not ensure online shoppingeither. Web sites should be informative and easy to navigate. Online shop-pers look for experiential, or hedonic, value through stimulation=arousaland playfulness. They get utilitarian value if the Web sites are goal-focused,convenient, accessible, and facilitate information availability. These factorsare associated with perceived ease of use, freedom, and control (Bridgesand Florsheim 2008).

Ganesh and colleagues (2010) examined online shopping motives ande-store attributes in influencing customers’ online shopping behavior. Theresults suggest that segmentation and marketing are as important in onlineformats as they are in traditional formats. Research posits that online shop-pers seek convenience and product information (Li, Ko, and Russell 1999;Syzmanski and Hise 2000; Evanschitzky et al. 2004), which are related to utili-tarian aspects. Ha and Stoel (2009) examined online shopping with factorslike enjoyment, Web site quality, and trust with respect to customers’ attitudetoward online shopping. Thus, customers’ online shopping behavior is influ-enced by Web site features, appearance, display of images and pictures, andnot only on product experiences (Lohse and Spiller 1998). In the onlineenvironment, enjoyment and interactivity were important in influencing cus-tomers’ perceptions toward online shopping Web sites (Cronin, Brady, andHult 2000; Fiore and Jin 2003; Joines, Scherer, and Scheufele 2003; Grewal,


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

Lindsey-Mullikin, and Munger 2004; Gefen 2004; Fiore, Jin, and Kim 2005;Overby and Lee 2006; Ha and Stoel 2009). As with physical stores, customersexpect enjoyment and excitement in online shopping Web sites (Hoffmanand Novak 1996; Mathwick, Malhotra, and Rigdon 2001; Kim 2002; Overbyand Lee 2006).

The utilitarian aspects are related to display quality, availability of infor-mation, ease of use, and transaction convenience. Liu, Gao, and Xie (2008),in their research on Chinese customers’ online shopping behavior, foundthat information quality, Web site design, product information, transactionfacility=convenience, security=privacy, payment mode, delivery, and servicewere important attributes to online shopping. Some researchers compareutilitarian aspects with convenience and time-saving attributes of onlineshopping (Teo 2001; Grewal et al. 2004; Overby and Lee 2006). Overbyand Lee (2006) found that utilitarian values were more important in onlineshopping Web sites as compared to hedonic values. Research suggests trustas an important attribute in online shopping (Suh and Han 2002; Ha and Stoel2009). Ha and Stoel (2009) state that customers give importance to trust=safety, service, and experiential aspects of online shopping. To, Liao, andLin (2007) conducted research to understand the Internet shopping motiveswith respect to utilitarian and hedonic shopping motives. The resultsrevealed that customers’ utilitarian motivation affects their intention to searchfor information and to purchase. Considering the importance of hedonic andutilitarian motives in shopping, it was assumed that Indian students’ onlineshopping behavior would be influenced by these motives. The hedonicmotives have a direct impact on customers’ intention to search for infor-mation and indirect impact on intention to purchase. The utilitarian motiveswere related with convenience, cost-saving, and information availability fac-tors. The hedonic motives were related to a sense of adventure, authority,and excitement. In the online shopping environment, customers look forconvenience, flexibility, and usefulness. These were linked to the utilitarianmotives and affected purchase decisions.

Information Search

Research states that customers seek easy information accessibility throughonline Web sites (Syzmanski and Hise 2000; Watchravesringkan and Shim2003; Kim, Kim, and Kumar 2003; Seock and Norton 2007). Bigne-Alcanizand colleagues (2008) found that information availability improves custo-mers’ perceptions about online Web sites. The ease-of-use facilitates custo-mers’ willingness to use online shopping Web sites. Vazquez and Xu (2009)posit that customers’ attitude, motivations, and information search behavioraffected their online purchase behavior. Chen (2009) conducted researchon customers’ online search behavior and purchase intentions. The studyresults indicate that customers show a tendency to search for product, price,


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

and promotional information on online shopping Web sites. Availability ofinformation about product influences their purchase intention in the firstphase, followed by pricing in the second phase. The decision to select thechannel is postponed and comparisons are made between traditional andonline formats. So and colleagues (2005) posit that online shopping inten-tions were directly affected by customers’ Web-search behavior. The onlineshopping adoption is indirectly affected by online shopping attitude and cus-tomers’ past online experience. The online search behavior was an importantfactor in adoption decision. The information about product and promotionswere critical in the information search.

Online environments offer access to product information. They facilitateproduct and service comparisons at customers’ convenience and reducesearch costs. It was assumed that product information through an online shop-ping Web site would encourage Indian students’ to adopt online shopping.

Gender

Cho and Jialin (2008) studied the online shopping behavior of Singaporeancustomers. The results suggest that emotional attributes, trust, and self-efficacy were important in predicting online shopping. Females were lesslikely to trust online shopping Web sites as compared to males. Hasan(2010) conducted a study to understand online shopping attitude comprisingof cognitive, affective, and behavioral attributes. He concluded that menexhibited more positive cognitive, affective, and behavioral online shoppingattitudes than women. Research suggests that men are more likely to shoponline than females and exhibit more confidence in online retail environ-ments (Venkatesh and Morris 2000; Kwak, Fox, and Zinkhan 2002; Volmanet al. 2005; Haque et al. 2007; Jayawardhena, Wright, and Dennis 2007;Cho and Jialin 2008; Hashim et al. 2009; Hasan 2010; Chou, Wu, and Chen2010).

Online Purchase Behavior of Students

Several studies have attempted to understand the online shopping behaviorof students. The reason for selecting students is that a large number of col-lege students are Internet users and spend a lot of time browsing onlineWeb sites (Comegys and Brennan 2003; Peng, Tsai, and Wu 2006; Lester,Forman, and Loyd 2006; Vij 2007; Gupta, Handa, and Gupta 2008; Joneset al. 2009; Chou et al. 2010). Comegys and Brennan (2003) suggest that col-lege students spend a lot of time online browsing and searching productinformation. The research findings revealed that though many students donot own credit cards, it did not affect their attitude toward online shopping.They develop loyalty for specific online Web sites and are likely to makerepeat purchases through those Web sites. Chou and colleagues (2010) tested


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

a 6-T model with reference to students’ online shopping behavior. The 6-Twas comprised of factors like ‘‘toy, tool, telephone, territory, treasure ofinformation, and trade.’’ The results suggest that ‘toy and tool’ were mostaccepted factors in online shopping. Male students had a positive attitudetoward toy and telephone attributes of the Internet than females. Lesterand colleagues (2006) found that college students were more likely to pur-chase services online than merchandise. The factors, such as easy to findproducts, convenience, flexibility, ability to compare prices, and fun, wasconsidered important in students’ online purchase decision. Gupta andcolleagues (2008), in their research on Indian students, found that most ofthe students did not trust the online shopping Web sites and preferred topurchase only low-cost items through the Internet.

From the literature review, it was assumed that the above-mentionedvariables would influence Indian youth’s online purchase intentions. Thereis limited research to understand Indian students’ online shopping behavior.The findings of the research can help online retailers target students. Sincemost students are comfortable with using the Internet, they would be likelyto exhibit a positive attitude toward online shopping Web sites. The researchobjectives are exhibited through figure 1.

METHODOLOGY

Sample

The purpose of the study was to identify the influence of online shoppingattitude, utilitarian and hedonic values, online information search, andgender on Indian students’ online purchase intention. The study sample

FIGURE 1 Research objectives for online shopping behavior.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

was comprised of 325 college students enrolled in undergraduate and postgraduate course in four different national universities in India. The studentswere selected in these universities through a national level examination andwere from different regions of the country. Each university was comprised ofa diverse mix of student population from different states and cities. Four cit-ies, viz. Ghaziabad, Allahabad, Lucknow, and Delhi, were selected so that across sectional mix of students would be available. Faculty members wererequested to help in administering the questionnaire during class hours.The students were all enrolled in management courses in the universities.A convenience sampling technique was used, and 100 filled questionnairesfrom each university were desired. However, only 325 usable questionnairescould be obtained and used for analysis (out of the desired 400). The age ofthe students varied between 18–24 years. The sample was comprised of 242male and 110 female students. All the students were aware of online shop-ping Web sites and had visited the Web sites for browsing and searchingfor product information. None of the students held part-time jobs.

Instrument Design

The survey instrument contained measures for gender, age, and householdincome. The questionnaire contained a total of 24 items that comprised offour items on online shopping attitude (adapted from Shim et al. 2001;Kim and Park 2005; Vazquez and Xu 2009); twelve items on utilitarian andhedonic online shopping motives (adapted from Bhatnagar, Misra, and Rao2000; Vazquez and Xu 2009); four items on online information search; andfour items on online purchase intention (Vazquez and Xu 2009). A 5-pointLikert scale was used with responses varying on the scale of 1 for stronglyagree and 5 for strongly disagree.

FINDINGS

The online shopping behavior scale was for the first time being administeredon an Indian student sample and, therefore, reliability testing of the scaleitems was considered necessary. Cronbach’s (1951) coefficient alpha mea-sures the extent to which the scale items cohere with each other. Cronbach’salpha was computed for each variable (table 1).

The Cronbach’s alpha values ranged between .838–.551 and fit thedesired criteria of scale validation (Nunnally 1978). According to Nunnally(1978), reliability coefficients of 0.70 or more are considered as a criterionfor an internally consistent scale construct; however, the use of a minimumalpha value of 0.50 is also considered appropriate for initial research instru-ment validation.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

An ANOVA test was administered to understand the gender differencesamong Indian students with respect to all five variables, viz., attitude towardonline shopping, utilitarian and hedonic shopping motives, informationsearch, and purchase intention (table 2).

The results are significant at .01 level for three variables, namely, atti-tude toward online shopping (F(1, 352)¼ 14.161, p¼ .000), utilitarian motive(F(1, 352)¼ 6.804, p¼ .009), purchase intention (F(1, 352)¼ 10.831, p¼ .001).The male and female students differed in their attitude toward online shop-ping, utilitarian motives, and purchase intention. The findings support earlierresearches, which indicate that men have more positive attitude towardonline shopping Web sites and are likely to purchase products online (Kwaket al. 2002; Volman et al. 2005; Haque et al. 2007; Jayawardhena et al. 2007;

TABLE 1 The Reliability Coefficients of Online Shopping Behavior Scale

Online shoppingitems Scale items

Chronbach’salpha (a)

Attitude variables I am interested in online shopping.I think online shopping is easy to use.I feel comfortable with online shopping.My attitude toward online shopping is positive. .838

Utilitarian shoppingmotive

I consider price when I buy online.Price is an important motivation for me when

I am shopping online.I use the Internet to buy at a lower price.I buy online because of the convenience.I think online shopping can save time.Convenience is one of the main reasons for

me to buy online.I shop on the Internet when pressed for time.I can buy products or services online when it is

difficult to buy from offline stores..783

Hedonic shoppingmotive

I feel the Internet is an exciting technology.Shopping online can provide a fun experience.I like the increased buying power when shopping

online.Accessing information about price is an important

reason to shop online..551

Information search Browsing for information online benefits me.Searching for information about products and

services is one of the most important thingsI would consider before purchasing online.

The Internet provides a rich amount of informationfor many products.

I often browse for information on products andservices via the Internet.

.588

Online purchaseintention

I like to shop online.I will buy online in the future.I have a strong intention to purchase online

in the future.I often consider buying online. .791


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

Cho and Jialin 2008; Hashim et al. 2009; Hasan 2010; Chou et al. 2010). Menare likely to perceive online shopping Web sites as convenient, flexible,enabling product=price comparisons, and easy to operate. Women are cau-tious and consider online Web sites difficult to navigate. The results can beinterpreted in the light that women prefer to physically examine products,window shop, enjoy excitement of ‘hunting’ for products, trying out pro-ducts, and looking for bargains. This is not possible through online shoppingWeb sites. For most women, shopping is a leisure activity whereas men per-ceive shopping as goal-directed. Men perceive shopping Web sites to betime-saving, convenient, and offering flexibility to shop at any time of theday (Hansen and Jensen 2009). Step wise regression analysis was run tounderstand the determinants of Indian students’ online purchase intention(table 3).

The stepwise regression results indicate five models as determinants toonline purchase intention. In the first model, utilitarian motive was the pre-dictor to Indian students’ online purchase intention. The R2 value of .345indicates that utilitarian motive contributes to 34.5% of students’ online pur-chase intention. Indian students’ intention to purchase through online shop-ping Web sites is primarily governed by convenience, possibility to makeproduct and price comparisons, ease in accessing the information, andflexibility.

In the second model, utilitarian motive and attitude toward online shop-ping emerge as predictors (R2¼ .432, p< 0.01), and both these variablesaccount for 43.2% of students’ online purchase intention. There is a changein the predictors and intention to purchase is positively affected by attitudeand utilitarian values. In the third model, information search is introduced.

TABLE 2 ANOVA: Gender Differences for Online Shopping Variables

Online shopping variables df Mean square F Sig.

Attitude 1 215.802 14.161 .000��

350 15.239351

Utilitarian motive 1 252.735 6.804 .009��

350 37.143351

Hedonic motive 1 7.380 .948 .331350 7.782351

Information search 1 17.316 1.210 .272350 14.307351

Purchase intention 1 143.710 10.831 .001��

350 13.268351

��Significant at .01 level.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

There are three predictors affecting students’ intention to purchase, i.e.,utilitarian value, attitude toward online shopping, and information search,which accounts for 48.4% of the variable (R2¼ .484). All b values are positive,which shows that all three variables have a positive influence on the depen-dent variable.

In the fourth model, hedonic value is introduced. Four variables (utili-tarian value, attitude toward online shopping, information search, andhedonic value) affect students’ intention to purchase and are significant at.01 level (R2¼ .503). The four variables together have a 50.3% influence onthe purchase intention. The b values are positive, implying that all variablesare positive predictors. In the fifth and the final model, gender is introduced.There are five predictor variables in this model, i.e., utilitarian value, attitudetoward online shopping, information search, hedonic value, and gender. Theb value for gender is negative, which suggests that men are likely to purchasethrough online shopping Web sites. The four variables have a 50.9% impacton the intention to purchase (R2¼ .509). The p value for utilitarian value,attitude to purchase, information search, and hedonic value is significant at.01 levels and for gender; the p value is significant at .05 levels.

TABLE 3 Step-Wise Regression for Online Shopping

Model Variable b R2 Adjusted R2 Significance

1 First regression (Dependent variable:Online purchase intention)

.345 .344

Utilitarian motive .588�� .000��

2 Second regression (Dependent variable:Online purchase intention)

.432 .429


Attitude toward online shopping .364�� .000��

3 Third regression (Dependent variable:Online purchase intention)

.484 .479



Information search .255�� .000��

4 Fourth regression (Dependent variable:Online purchase intention)

.503 .497

Utilitarian motive 4.288�� .000��

Attitude toward online shopping 6.816�� .000��

Information search 4.205�� .000��

Hedonic motive 3.609�� .000��

5 Fifth regression (Dependent variable:Online purchase intention)

.509 .502



Information search .189�� .000��

Hedonic motive .191�� .000��

Gender �.082� .036�

Note. N¼ 352.�Significant at .05 level. ��Significant at .01 level.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The Internet has become an integral part of student life in developingcountries like India. It is used by students in learning and social interaction.Students are heavy Internet users and have a positive attitude toward theInternet. They present an attractive segment for online retail. Research sug-gests that attitude toward online shopping behavior is positively related toInternet acceptance (Shih 2004). The current generation has been reared inthe Internet age and is comfortable with the latest technologies.

The purpose of the current research was to understand the determinantsof students’ online purchase intention. The results indicate that utilitarianshopping value for online shopping Web sites affects intention to purchasemost. The easy to use features of Web sites, ease in finding information aboutproducts=prices, make comparisons, convenience, and flexibility are antece-dents of utilitarian benefits students seek from online shopping. The vari-ables like attitude toward online shopping, information search capabilitiesof Web sites, and hedonic value comprise of other factors influencing stu-dents’ intention to purchase decisions. Male students have a positive attitudetoward online shopping as compared to females. The findings suggestthat either products offered online are largely targeted to men or not manycompanies online sell female-oriented products. The shopping behavior ofmen and women differ significantly and, therefore, companies may comeup with female-oriented products online. The research findings supportearlier research that men have a positive attitude toward online shopping(Kwak et al. 2002; Volman et al. 2005; Haque et al. 2007; Jayawardhenaet al. 2007; Cho and Jialin 2008; Hashim et al. 2009; Hasan 2010; Chouet al. 2010).

The online firms will do better if they can improve Web site segmen-tation, targeting, and positioning. Internet offers opportunity to marketersto customize Web site content and layout for different segments. Most ofthe shopping Web sites of banks, book sellers, and jewelry sellers are hom-ogenous for their target market and do not appeal to students. Among stu-dents, males are excited and willing to use new technology, while femalesshow resistance toward technology use. The navigation styles of men andwomen are different and e-retailers may keep in mind these differenceswhile designing shopping Web sites.

The findings can be helpful to theorists, marketers, and online retailers.Since most students are a part of the net-savvy generation and addicted to theInternet, they are likely to accept online shopping readily. They have accessto the Internet at their respective institutions. Most of them have their ownlaptops and computers and use the Internet for research; online chatting;browsing; job search; downloading music files, games, and movies; com-municating through e-mails; accessing banking services; and shopping.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

The utilitarian and hedonic values play a significant role in selecting a shop-ping Web site (Teo 2001; Grewal et al. 2004; Overby and Lee 2006, To et al.2007). The flexibility, ease-of-use, and convenience factors must be coupledwith an attractive layout of the Web pages. The findings revealed that theutilitarian values are an important attribute in determining online purchaseintention of students. The Web sites should enable product search and com-parisons. The findings support research, which suggest that intention to pur-chase online depends on information quality, functionality, responsiveness,usefulness, and Web site features (Ahn et al. 2004; Trabold, Heim, and Field2006; Bauer, Falk, and Hammerschmidt 2006; Soopramanien and Robertson2007; Liu et al. 2008; Bigne-Alcaniz et al. 2008; Ha and Stoel 2009). The con-venience and product information features of online shopping Web sitesshould be improved to attract students to browse the Web sites. The increasein R2 value in the second model (see table 3) suggests that a 9% increase indeterminants to intention to purchase can be attributed to students’ attitudetoward online purchasing. The findings support research by Park and Kim(2003) and Kim and Park (2005), which suggest that attitude toward onlineshopping influences purchase intention.

In the third model, the R2 increases by 0.5%, suggesting that search forinformation contributes to another 5% of students’ purchase intention. Thismay be understood in the light that students spend much time browsingthe Internet for gathering information about products, services and, newtechnologies. Earlier research supports the findings (Vij 2007; Gupta et al.2008). Improving information availability on Web sites would facilitate searchbehavior. The research supports other studies, which posit that easy access toinformation affects online shopping behavior (Bigne-Alcaniz et al. 2008;Vazquez and Xu 2009). The hedonic shopping value affects the intentionto purchase by 2% in the fourth model (R2¼ .503) and gender contributesto a .6% increase in intention to purchase in the fifth model. Online retailersshould improve convenience, quality of information, instructions, paymentconvenience, and offer detailed information about products. The instructionsshould be easy to understand and operate. Web pages should be vibrant,attractive, and easy to upload.The availability of correct information aboutproducts and services can affect their purchase intention.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

The study has two limitations. First, the scale was not developed for Indianstudents, and the items were adapted from previous research. There maybe differences in results if the scale was developed especially for Indiancontext as western and Asian cultures are different. Technology use andadaptation rates vary across developing and developed economies.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

The second limitation is that there were no measures to understand theactual Internet use per day and the shopping Web sites most frequently vis-ited by students. Information about services and products purchased onlinecan enable in designing the Web sites according to students’ requirements.Information about total money spent purchasing products or services onlinecan help in understanding students’ purchase patterns. Research can bedirected to understand the type of products or services purchased onlineby students. This can help to target students and offer appropriate promo-tions to encourage them to purchase online. The primary objective of select-ing online shopping Web sites for purchase decisions by students was ease ofuse, convenience, and flexibility to compare information. An Internet searchcan trigger purchase behavior, and managers should improve the interactivefeatures of Web sites. Research can be directed to understand the specificWeb site features given priority by students in selecting Web sites.

REFERENCES

Ahn, T., S. Ryu, and I. Han. 2004. The impact of the online and offline features on theuser acceptance of Internet shopping malls. Electronic Commerce Research andApplications 3:405–420.

Alba, J., J. Lynch, B. Weitz, C. Janiszewski, R. Lutz, A. Sawyer, and S. Wood.1997. Interactive home shopping: Consumer, retailer, and manufacturerincentives to participate in electronic marketplaces. Journal of Marketing61 (3): 38–53.

Babin, B. J., and J. S. Attaway. 2000. Atmospheric affect as a tool for creating valueand gaining share of customer. Journal of Business Research 49 (2): 91–99.

Bauer, H. H., T. Falk, and M. Hammerschmidt. 2006. e-TransQual: A transactionprocess-based approach for capturing service quality in online shopping.Journal of Business Research 59 (7): 866–875.

Bhatnagar, A., S. Misra, and H. R. Rao. 2000. On risk, convenience and internetshopping behavior. Communications of the ACM 43 (11): 98–105.

Bigne-Alcaniz, E., C. Ruiz-Mafe, J. Aldas-Manzano, and S. Sanz-Blas. 2008. Influenceof online shopping information dependency and innovativeness on internetshopping adoption. Online Information Review 32 (5): 648–667.

Bridges, E., and R. Florsheim. 2008. Hedonic and utilitarian shopping goals: Theonline experience. Journal of Business Research 61:309–314.

Chen, C.-A. 2009. Information-oriented online shopping behavior in electroniccommerce environment. Journal of Software 4 (4): 307–314.

Childers, T. L., C. L. Carr, J. Peck, and S. Carson. 2001. Hedonic and utilitarian moti-vations for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing 77:511–535.

Cho, H., and S. K. Jialin. 2008. Influence of gender on Internet commerce: Anexplorative study in Singapore. Journal of Internet Commerce 7 (1): 95–119.

Chou, C., H.-C. Wu, and C.-H. Chen. 2010. Re-visiting college students’ attitudestoward the Internet-based on a 6-T model: Gender and grade level difference.Computers and Education 56:939–947.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

Chronbach, L. J. 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psycho-metrika 16 (3): 297–334.

Comegys, C., and M. L. Brennan. 2003. Students’ online shopping behavior: Adual-country perspective. Journal of Internet Commerce 2 (2): 69–87.

Cronin, J. J., M. K. Brady, and T. M. Hult. 2000. Assessing the effects of quality, value,and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environ-ments. Journal of Retailing 76 (2): 193–205.

Evanschitzky, H., G. R. Iyer, J. Hesse, and D. Ahlert. 2004. E-satisfaction: Are-examination. Journal of Retailing 80 (3): 239–247.

Fiore, A. M., and H.-J. Jin. 2003. Influence of image interactivity on approachresponses towards an online retailer. Internet Research 13 (1): 38–48.

Fiore, A. M., H.-J. Jin, and J. Kim. 2005. For fun and profit: Hedonic value from imageinteractivity and responses toward an online store. Psychology & Marketing 22(8): 669–694.

Ganesh, J., K. E. Reynolds, M. Luckett, and N. Pomirleanu. 2010. Online shoppermotivations, and e-store attributes: An examination of online patronage beha-vior and shopper typologies. Journal of Retailing 86 (1): 106–115.

Gefen, D. 2004. What makes an ERP implementation relationship worthwhile: Link-ing trust mechanisms and ERP usefulness. Journal of Management InformationSystem 21 (1): 263–288.

Grewal, D., J. Lindsey-Mullikin, and J. Munger. 2004. Loyalty in e-tailing: A concep-tual framework. Journal of Relationship Marketing 2 (3=4): 31–49.

Gupta, N., M. Handa, and B. Gupta. 2008. Young adults of India—Online surfers oronline shoppers. Journal of Internet Commerce 7 (4): 425–444.

Ha, S., and L. Stoel. 2009. Consumer e-shopping acceptance: Antecedentsin a technology acceptance model. Journal of Business Research 62 (5):565–571.

Hansen, T., and J. M. Jensen. 2009. Shopping orientation and online clothingpurchases: The role of gender and purchase situation. European Journal ofMarketing 43 (9=10): 1154–1170.

Haque, H., A. K. Tarofder, S. A. Mahmud, and A. Z. Ismail. 2007. Internet advertise-ment in Malaysia: A study on attitudinal differences. The Electronic Journal onInformation Systems in Developing Countries 31 (9): 1–15.

Hasan, B. 2010. Exploring gender differences in online shopping attitude. Computersin Human Behavior 26:597–601.

Hashim, A., E. K. Ghani, and J. Said. 2009. Does consumers’ demographic profileinfluence online shopping? An examination using Fishbein’s Theory. CanadianSocial Science 5 (6): 19–31.

Hoffman, D., and T. Novak. 1996. Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediatedenvironments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing 60 (3): 50–68.

Hsu, M.-H., C.-H. Yen, C.-M. Chiu, and C.-M. Chang. 2006. A longitudinal investi-gation of continued online shopping behavior: An extension of the theory ofplanned behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64:889–904.

Jayawardhena, C., L. T. Wright, and C. Dennis. 2007. Consumers online: Intentions,orientations and segmentation. International Journal of Retail & DistributionManagement 35 (6): 515–525.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

Joines, J. L., C. W. Scherer, and D. A. Scheufele. 2003. Exploring motivations of con-sumer web use and their implications for e-commerce. Journal of ConsumerMarketing 20 (2): 90–108.

Jones, S., C. Johnson-Yale, S. Millermaier, and F. S. Perez. 2009. U.S. college students’Internet use: Race, gender and digital divides. Journal of Computer-MediatedCommunication 14 (2): 244–264.

Juxtconsult.com. 2010. Highlights of India online landscape report 2010. http://indiamicrofinance.com/india-online-landscape-2010-internet-usage-statistics-india.html (accessed November 18, 2010).

Juxt Indian Urbanites 2009 Study, Spending Patterns. 2010. Businessworld MarketingWhitebook 2010–2011, p. 75.

Kim, Y.-K. 2002. Consumer value: An application to mall and Internet shopping.International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management 30 (11=12):595–604.

Kim, J., and J. Park. 2005. A consumer shopping channel extension model: Attitudeshift toward online store. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management 9 (1):106–121.

Kim, Y., E. Y. Kim, and S. Kumar. 2003. Testing the behavioral intentions model ofonline shopping for clothing. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 21 (1): 32–40.

KPMG Analysis. 2010. The media and entertainment industry. BusinessworldMarketing Whitebook 2010–2011, p. 231.

Kwak, H., R. J. Fox, and G. M. Zinkhan. 2002. What products can be successfullypromoted and sold via the Internet? Journal of Advertising Research 42 (1):23–38.

Lester, D. H., A. M. Forman, and D. Loyd. Internet shopping and buying behavior ofcollege students. Services Marketing Quarterly 27 (2): 123–138.

Li, H., C. Ko, and M. G. Russell. 1999. The impact of perceived channel utilities,shopping orientations, and demographics on the consumer’s online buyingbehavior. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 5 (2). doi:10.1111=j.1083–6101.1999.tb00336.x.

Liu, X., M. He, F. Gao, and P. Xie. 2008. An empirical study of online shoppingcustomer satisfaction in China: A holistic perspective. International Journal ofRetail and Distribution Management 36 (11): 919–940.

Lohse, G. L., and P. Spiller. 1998. Electronic shopping. Communications of the ACM41 (7): 81–89.

Martınez-Lopez, F. J., P. Luna, and F. J. Martınez. 2005. Online shopping, the stan-dard learning hierarchy, and consumers’ internet expertise: An American-Spanish comparison. Internet Research 15 (3): 312–334.

Mathwick, C., N. Malhotra, and E. Rigdon. 2001. Experiential value: Conceptualiza-tion, measurement, and application in the catalog and Internet shoppingenvironment. Journal of Retailing 77:39–56.

Monsuwe, T., G. Benedict, C. Dellaert, and K. Ruyter. 2004. What drives consumersto shop online? A literature review. International Journal of Service IndustryManagement 15 (1): 102–121.

Mummalaneni, V. 2005. An empirical investigation of Web site characteristics, con-sumer emotional states and on-line shopping behaviors. Journal of BusinessResearch 58:526–532.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

Novak, T. P., D. L. Hoffman, and Y.-F. Yung. 2000. Measuring the customer experi-ence in online environments: A structural modeling approach. MarketingScience 19 (1): 22–42.

Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Overby, J. W., and E.-J. Lee. 2006. The effects of utilitarian and hedonic online shop-

ping value on consumer preference and intentions. Journal of BusinessResearch 59:1160–1166.

Park, C., and J.-K. Jun. 2003. A cross-cultural comparison of Internet buyingbehavior: Effects of Internet usage, perceived risks, and innovativeness.International Marketing Review 20 (5): 534–553.

Park, C.-H., and Y.-G. Kim. 2003. Identifying key factors affecting consumer pur-chase behavior in online shopping context. International Journal of Retailand Distribution Management 31 (1): 16–29.

Peng, H., C.-C. Tsai, and Y.-T. Wu. 2006. University students’ self-efficacy and theirattitudes toward the Internet: The role of students’ perceptions of the Internet.Educational Studies 32 (1): 73–86.

Riley, F. D., D. Scarpi, and A. Manaresi. 2009. Purchasing services online: Atwo-country generalization of possible influences. Journal of Services Marketing23 (2): 93–103.

Seock, Y.-K., and M. Norton. 2007. Attitude toward internet websites, onlineinformation search, and channel choices for purchasing. Journal of FashionMarketing and Management 11 (4): 571–586.

Shih, H.-P. 2004. An empirical study on predicting user acceptance of e-shopping onthe Web. Information and Management 41:351–368.

Shim, S., M. A. Eastlick, S. L. Lotz, and P. Warrington. 2001. An online prepurhcaseintentions model: The role of intention of search. Journal of Retailing77:397–416.

So, W. C. M., T. N. D. Wong, and D. Sculli. 2005. Factors affecting intentions topurchase via the internet. Industrial Management & Data Systems 105 (9):1225–1244.

Soopramanien, D. G. R., and A. Robertson. 2007. Adoption and usage of online shop-ping: An empirical analysis of the characteristics of ‘‘buyers,’’ ‘‘browsers’’ and‘‘non-internet shoppers.’’ Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 14:73–82.

Suh, B., and I. Han. 2002. Effect of trust on customer acceptance of Internet banking.Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 1 (3=4): 247–263.

Syzmanski, D. M., and R. T. Hise. 2000. E-satisfaction: An initial examination. Journalof Retailing 76 (3): 309–322.

Teo, T. 2001. Demographic and motivation variables associated with Internet usageactivities. Internet Research 11 (2): 125–137.

The Economic Times. 2010. 237 mn internet users in India by 2015: Report. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/infotech/internet/237-mn-internet-users-in-india-by-2015-report/articleshow/6479094.cms (accessed January 8, 2011).

To, P.-L., C. Liao, and T.-H. Lin. 2007. Shopping motivations on Internet: A studybased on utilitarian and hedonic value. Technovation 27:774–787.

Trabold, L. M., G. R. Heim, and J. M. Field. 2006. Comparing e-service performanceacross industry sectors drivers of overall satisfaction in online retailing. Inter-national Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 34 (4=5): 240–257.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

Vazquez, D., and X. Xu. 2009. Investigating linkages between online purchase beha-vior variables. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 37(5): 408–419.

Venkatesh, V., and M. Morris. 2000. Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions?Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usagebehavior. MIS Quarterly 24 (1): 115–139.

Vij, R. 2007. Above 45? Why marketers don’t age gracefully online. Digital & OnlineMarketing. http://digital.afaqs.com/perl/digital/news/index.html?sid=18801(accessed May 21, 2010).

Volman, M., E. van Eck, I. Heemskerk, and E. Kuiper. 2005. New technologies, newdifferences. Gender and ethnic differences in pupils’ use of ICT in primary andsecondary education. Computers & Education 45 (1): 35–45.

Watchravesringkan, K., and S. Shim. 2003. Information search and shopping inten-tions through internet for apparel products. Clothing and Textiles ResearchJournal 21 (1): 1–7.

Wolfinbargar, M., and M. G. Gilly. 2001. Shopping online for freedom, control, andfun. California Management Review 43 (2): 34–55.

Zhou, L., L. Dai, and D. Zhang. 2007. Online shopping acceptance model: A criticalsurvey of consumer factors in online shopping. Journal of Electronic CommerceResearch 8 (1): 41–62.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mem

oria

l Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewfo

undl

and]

at 1

7:59

01

Aug

ust 2

014

Documents

Antecedents of Online Shopping Behavior in India: An Examination