REPEAT PURCHASE THEORY AND WEBSITE …...could be argued that once a site is accessed and used, the role of trust is more probable as a reinforcer rather than a driver. Repeat Purchase:

REPEAT PURCHASE THEORY AND WEBSITE REVISITATIONFRAMEWORKS

Amalia E. Maulana and Margaret Craig-LeesUniversity of New South Wales

Track: Conceptual Papers / Marketing Theory

Keywords: website revisitation; repeat purchase theory; technology acceptancemodel; consumer satisfaction; consumer involvement

Abstract

Website revisitation as a specific field of study emerged in the late 1990s. To date,studieshave focused on attitudes to websites and/or attitudes to visiting and revisitingwebsites. This attitude-based approach appears to be historical in that it has grownout of research in the early 1990s that was concerned with examining consumerperceptions of websites. Website use and reuse represents complex behaviour and isnot sufficiently explained by the current models. None of the studies to date havegiven consideration to the fact that websites can perform very different functions thatdirectly affect revisitation behaviour. This means that revisitation behaviour needs tobe studied within specific website types. To do this we need a comprehensivetaxonomy of websites. Although the attitude-based frameworks provide someunderstanding, they have limited explanatory power. This paper argues for andpresents a website revisitation framework derived from the repeat purchase literatureand offers a comprehensive taxonomy of websites.

Introduction

Since its inception, the Internet has had exceptional growth in terms of both usage andthe range of activities that it offers. Recent estimates put the number of users at morethan 544 million in 2002 (Siegel 2004). Due to its singular nature and pervasiveness,the Internet has captured the attention of social science researchers, particularly inrelation to its impact on the behaviour of individuals and on society. The complexityand flexibility of the medium provides considerable room for researchers toinvestigate similar topics from different perspectives.

Numerous studies have examined motivations and benefits in the context ofcommercial websites (Eighmey and McCord 1998; Korgaonkar and Wolin 1999;Stafford and Stafford 2000; Teo 2001; Luo 2002; Novak et al 2001). Commercialwebsite revisitation became a focus of study in the late 1990s. At first, the topic wasindirectly explored through research that examined attitudes to website (Chen andWells 1999; Bruner and Kumar 2000; Ducoffe 1996; Dholakia and Rego 1998; Wellsand Chen 2000; Novak et al, 2001; Balanabis and Reynolds 2001; Gallagher et al2002). Only a few studies have specifically examined website revisitation behaviour(Supphellen and Nysveen 2001; Hackbarth 2001; van der Heiden 2003; Lee 2001;Huang and Hardie 2001).

Studies by Supphellen and Nysveen (2001), Hackbarth (2001) and van der Heijden(2003) examined attitudes and the behavioural intention to revisit the websites. Themodels developed in these three studies, depicted in Figures 1, 3 and 4, are based on

ANZMAC 2003 Conference Proceedings Adelaide 1-3 December 2003 443

Fishbein’s theory of reasoned action (TORA). Lee (2000) and Huang and Hardie(2001) used choice modelling to predict revisitation of specific websites. Choicemodelling may allow prediction but does not provide explanations for the action. Anattitude-based framework can deliver some understanding of attributes and theirvalues that are associated with a website, and, if normative data is included, canprovide an understanding of basic drivers.

However, website revisitation is a complex phenomenon affected by contextual andpersonal factors. To date, none of the studies have given consideration to the fact thatwebsites can perform very different functions. For example, the reasons for revisitinga transaction-based website are different to those for non-transaction-based websites.This means that revisitation behaviour needs to be studied within specific types. Todo this, we need a comprehensive taxonomy of websites. This is an area that has hadlimited attention.

Although the attitude-based frameworks provide some understanding, they havelimited explanatory power. Website revisitation is analogous to repeatpurchase/consumption behaviour, yet this literature has not featured in thedevelopment of the website revisitation models. The first part of this paper argues forand presents a website revisitation framework derived from the repeat purchaseliterature. The second part presents a comprehensive website taxonomy.

Website Revisitation Frameworks Revisited

The revisitation models proposed by van der Heijden (2003), Supphellen andNysveen (2001), Hackbarth (2001) shown in Figures 1, 3 and 4 are derived from theTheory of Reasoned Action/TORA (Fishbein 1967). The underlying premise of thesethree website revisitation models is that if a site is perceived to be useful, enjoyableand easy to use, then there is an increased likelihood that revisitation will occur.These attributes have been adopted from a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)developed by Davis (1989) - Figure 2. This model is widely used to explain theacceptance of information systems because it is considered parsimonious, andtheoretically and empirically justified. This model identifies perceived usefulness andperceived ease of use as the determining factors of how people accept or rejectinformation technology. Van der Heijden (2003) added perceived enjoyment as wellas perceived attractiveness to his revised TAM model (see Figure 1).

Conceptual Papers / Marketing Theory Track 444

PerceivedAttractiveness

PerceivedUsefulness

PerceivedEase-of-use

PerceivedEnjoyment

Attitude towards Use

Actual Usage

Intention to Use

Figure 1. Revised Tam conceptual framework (van der Heijden, 2003)

Figure 2. Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1989)

Although it does not show these three attributes in the model, Supphellen andNysveen (2000) lists them as attributes in the model description. Additionally,Suphellen and Nysveen (2000) have added brand loyalty (of the product the websitesupports) – see Figure 3.

Figure 3. Drivers of intention to revisit company's websites (Suphellen and Nysveen, 2001)

Attributes ofthe site

Attitude towards thesite

Intentions torevisit

Affective Brand Loyalty

PerceivedUsefulness

PerceivedEase of Use

ExternalVariables

Attitude towardUsing the

Technology

BehaviouralIntention to use the

Technology

SystemUsage


W ebsitereputation

T rust T ow ard the

w ebsite

W ebsiteInfo rm ation

qualityU sefu lness of T he w ebsite

AttitudeT ow ard

R evisitingA w ebsite

W ebsiteServiceQ uality

Ease o f useO f the w ebsite

B ehaviouralInten t toR evisit a w ebsite

S ubjectiveN orm of

R evisiting aw ebsite

Figure 4. W ebsite R evisitation M odel (H ackbarth , 2001)

Similar to van der Heijden (2003), Hackbarth’s model (2001) in Figure 4 includes usefulness and ease of use as the key drivers for revisitation but adds the notion of ‘trust’. Hackbarth (2001) argued that users trust a website because their experiences with the website in the past have resulted in satisfaction. The factor ‘trust towards the website’ is therefore a quasi- satisfaction measure. An aspect of the model that is somewhat problematic is the relationship between website reputation and trust towards the website. The model depicts reputation as an antecedent of ‘trust towards the website’ (see Figure 3). However, Hackbarth (2001) explains the role of reputation as increasing the website’s perceived trustworthiness. If this is so, then ‘reputation of the website’ is not an antecedent of trust but is an influencer/moderator on the level of trust engendered by the site. Hackbarth (2001: 65) describes website reputation as the ‘extent to which consumers believe a website (firm) is honest and is concerned with its customers’. Certainly, the reputation of a company (or a website) may influence the first time use of a product (or a website) as Hackbarth (2001) acknowledges. Although Hackbarth’s empirical study supported this trust variable, it could be argued that once a site is accessed and used, the role of trust is more probable as a reinforcer rather than a driver.

Repeat Purchase: Repeat Visit Analogy Explored As yet, there is no formal definition of ‘revisitation’ but it is commonly interpreted as a second or subsequent visit to a given website by a visitor in a specific period of time. Revisitation represents ongoing interest in the website for both transactional and non-transactional websites. Although no actual purchase occurs when a non-transactional website is revisited, there is still the element of voluntary repeated use of the site. Voluntary repeated use suggests that, a) positive benefits from the previous use have occurred, and b) there is a continuous need to reuse. Within the consumption literature (Oliver 1980; Howard and Seth 1969; Bearden and Etzel 1982; Russel and Muehling 1993; Craig-Lees et al 1995) the main influences on repeat purchase behaviour are set as: (1) satisfaction with prior experience, (2) product need


could be argued that once a site is accessed and used, the role of trust is moreprobable as a reinforcer rather than a driver.

Repeat Purchase: Repeat Visit Analogy Explored

As yet, there is no formal definition of ‘revisitation’ but it is commonly interpreted asa second or subsequent visit to a given website by a visitor in a specific period oftime. Revisitation represents ongoing interest in the website for both transactionaland non-transactional websites. Although no actual purchase occurs when a non-transactional website is revisited, there is still the element of voluntary repeated use ofthe site. Voluntary repeated use suggests that, a) positive benefits from the previoususe have occurred, and b) there is a continuous need to reuse. Within theconsumption literature (Oliver 1980; Howard and Seth 1969; Bearden and Etzel 1982;Russel and Muehling 1993; Craig-Lees et al 1995) the main influences on repeatpurchase behaviour are set as: (1) satisfaction with prior experience, (2) product needdue to product-based involvement and social relevance (social factors, represented bysocial norms or interpersonal influence).

Satisfaction

Under conditions of choice, the degree of satisfaction with prior purchase is afundamental influencer of repeat purchases. Satisfaction occurs when the customerfeels that he or she has been adequately rewarded for the sacrifices he or she has made(Howard and Seth 1969). An accepted measure of satisfaction is the size of the gapbetween expected outcomes and actual outcomes across salient attributes (Oliver1980). The website perception research offers strong support for at least threeevaluation criteria that can be considered salient attributes: ‘usefulness’, ‘enjoyment’and ‘easy of use’ (Davis et al 1992; Dholakia and Rego 1998; Chen and Wells 1999;Novak et al 2003; Balanabis and Reynolds 2001; Gallagher et al 2002; Hackbarth2001; Aladwani 2002; van der Heijden 2003;). There is a strong support for thesethree criteria and although it cannot be assumed they are definitive, they wouldcertainly need to be included in a model of site revisitation.

There is a substantial body of research that supports the notion that the user’scapability to use a product, in this instance a website, has an impact on how thesalient attributes are evaluated (Bruner and Kumar 2000; Balabanis and Reynolds2001; Koufaris 2002; Lazonder et al 2000). This suggests that an individual’s level ofexpertise with the technology or web skills/experiences will impact on how he or sheevaluates the ‘ease-of-use’ attribute.

In the context of consumer purchase decision-making, it is generally accepted that theimportant factors in attribute performance evaluation are benefit type and significanceof benefit expected. These are explained in detail below.

Benefit Type

Benefit type refers to whether the benefit is primarily functional/utilitarian or hedonic.In the context of website revisitation, Novak et al (2003) identified two basicsituational motivators: ‘goal-directed motivation’ where the purpose of use is problem


solving based (utilitarian) and ‘experiential motivation’ where the purpose of use isentertainment/enjoyment (hedonic). They argue that the situational motivators canaffect how the salient attributes are evaluated, which in turn, impacts on the level ofsatisfaction experienced. For example, if the purpose of using the website is to solvea problem, then the performance of the site is likely to be more pertinent. This wouldcause a user to be more sensitive to, and more critical of the website, and would affecthow the performance attributes are evaluated.

Benefit Significance

Benefit significance refers to the degree of risk attached to the outcome (direconsequences will follow if the product does not perform). When purchasing a high-ticket item, the level of importance of outcomes is significantly influenced by theperceived benefits of the attributes. In the context of website revisitation one wouldexpect a variation in levels of importance of the outcomes expected. Underconditions of high importance people would tend to be more critical of the website’sperformance.

Product Need

Repurchase will only occur if there is a continued need for the product. A continuedneed can be generated by two factors: product involvement (Kapferer and Laurent,1985; Mittal and Lee 1989; Ohanian 1990; Zaichkowsky 1986; Russel and Muehling1985; Craig-Lees 1995; Antil 1984; Peter and Olson 1999); and social grouprelevance (Bearden and Etzel 1982; Bearden et al 1989; Fishbein 1967; Fishbein andAjzen 1971; Englis and Solomon 1995; Wilson and MacGillivray 1998; Moschis andMoore 1979; Wooten and Reed 2002). These two concepts are explained below.

Involvement

Herbert Krugman introduced the notion of consumer involvement for the first time in1965 in the context of advertising (Shimp 2000). Since then, the importance ofinvolvement has been studied in many different settings, mostly in the purchasebehaviour area (Laurent and Kapferer 1985; Mittal and Lee 1989; Ohanian 1990 andZaichkowsky 1986). According to Russel and Muehling (1993) and Peter and Olson(1999), the involvement construct captures individual differences towards objects orsituations. The level of consumer involvement toward a product category or thebrand has a considerable impact on how consumers behave in the purchasing process(Craig-Lees et al 1995; Russel and Muehling 1993; Peter and Olson 1999; Schiffmanand Kanuk 2001).

In addition, within the consumer decision-making literature, involvement has beenconceptualised in two ways: situational involvement and ongoing or enduringinvolvement (Hawkins and Hoch 1992; Richins et al 1992; Schiffman and Kanuk2000). Situational involvement is linked to the importance of the decision-making,which is dependent on the level of risk the consumer associates with the purchase. Ina high-risk purchase situation, consumers are usually highly involved with the


decision-making process and engage in what has been termed as ‘extensive problemsolving‘ or ’complex decision making‘. In a low-risk purchase situation and/or wherethe product is frequently purchased, the degree of involvement with the decision islow and consumers do not engage in complex decision-making. Ongoing (enduringinvolvement) occurs when the product category, product and/or brand is personallyrelevant to the consumer. High ongoing involvement is characterised by continuousinterest in, continuous attention to, or preference for certain product categories versusother product categories (Richins et al 1992; Schiffman and Kanuk 2000; Hawkinsand Hoch 1992).

Within the communication literature, there is also the notion of advertisement andinvolvement in the medium. Where consumers have a high interest in the medium (inthis case the Internet) and/or a specific advertising message, the first will befrequently accessed and the second given close mental attention (Puto 1987;Woodside and Singer 1994; Aaker and Brown 1972; Cannon 1982; Eighmey 1998).

In the context of website revisitation, three distinct aspects of consumer involvementcan be identified that may impact on site revisitation: (1) involvement with theproduct category that the website supports, (2) involvement with the website category(analogous to involvement with a specific format of vehicles, for example,specific/favourite radio or television program or magazine types), and (3)involvement with the medium, in this case the attachment to a specific medium, suchas the Internet.

Social group relevance

The relevance of the social group to consumption behaviour has been long accepted(Moschis and Moore 1979; Bearden and Etzel 1982; Bearden et al 1989, Childers andRao 1992; Englis and Solomon 1995; Wilson and MacGillivray 1998;). It is alsofeatured significantly in behavioural intention models as theory of reasoned action(Fishbein 1967) and theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen 1991). Hackbarth (2001)incorporated social pressure in his framework but the empirical study did not findsupport for this element. Even so, it has a strong position in the purchase behaviourliterature. Until recently, there has been an assumption that reference groupinfluence has the most impact on decisions relating to products that can be classifiedas public luxuries (Bearden and Etzel 1982; Bearden et al 1989). However, studies byWooten and Reed (2002) indicate that even inconspicuous products have identityimplications as long as they offer benefits that are socially visible. This finding hasimportant implication for website revisitation because it suggests that, although thevisitation of certain websites might represent private consumption, a key benefit couldbe the social approval/acceptance of the peer group.


Proposed Website Revisitation Framework

Using the points described and discussed above, the proposed website revisitation frameworkshown in Figure 5 indicates that five key antecedents - satisfaction, interpersonal influenceand three ongoing motivation factors website category involvement, medium involvement andproduct category involvement - have a direct influence on revisitation behaviour.

Satisfaction with prior visitation

Measuring expected outcome requires identification the evaluation attributes. As discussedin the previous section, research has offered strong support for the three attributes, which wewill consider to be the core factors. They are, ‘perceived usefulness’, ‘perceived enjoyment’and ‘perceived ease of use’ (Eighmey 1999; Page and Uncles 2000; Lin and Lu 2000; Sandhuand Corbitt 2002, Aladwani 2002; van der Heijden 2003; Gefen et al 2003; Teo 2001;Koufaris 2002 ). Although, some researchers have suggested factors such as ’informationquality‘ (Hackbarth 2001; Lederer et al 2000; Lin and Lu 2000; Liu et al 2001); ’complexity‘,’novelty‘ and ’interactivity‘ (Huang 2003), ’perceived visual attractiveness‘ (van der Heijden2003), and ’playfulness‘ (Liu et al 2001; Moon and Kim 2001), some of these attributes arelikely to be captured by the enjoyment, usefulness and ease-of use criteria. Therefore, theyhave not been included in the proposed model. Obviously these three core factors are notmeant to be definitive; but to add extra variables into the model, an exploratory/confirmatorystudy is advisable.

Figure 5. Proposed website revisitation framework

Expectation vs performanceWebsite usefulness

Expectation vs performanceEnjoyable Experience

Expectation vs performanceWebsite Ease of Use

Satisfaction withPrior experience

Importance of Outcomes

InterpersonalInfluence

Website categoryInvolvement

Involvement with the medium

Product categoryInvolvement

WebsiteRevisitation

Web skills/experience

Ongoing motivation to use the website

Situational Motivation to use


Moderators of Satisfaction

Three moderator variables have been identified as having influences on how websiteattributes are evaluated, including: web skills/experiences, situational motivation andimportance of outcomes.

Web skills: While web skills/experiences are understood to have a direct effect on therelationship between the attributes ‘ease of use’ and ‘satisfaction’, both situational motivationand importance of outcome have a direct effect on the relationship between all attributes,‘usefulness’, ‘enjoyment’ and ‘ease of use’; and ‘satisfaction’.

Situational motivation: Where motivation to visit the website is problem solving orfunctional (utilitarian), the user is likely to be more conscious and critical towards websiteperformance, particularly the perceived usefulness and perceived ease-of-use attributes. Incontrast, for entertainment purposes (hedonic), the site visitor may be less critical. Researchhas shown that when people are relaxed or in a state of enjoyment, their critical faculties areoften suppressed (Aaker and Brown 1972). Therefore, it may be assumed that they would beless critical of website performance.

Importance of outcomes: Similarly perceived importance of use outcome will impact onthe degree of satisfaction experienced. For example, if a weather forecast were urgentlyrequired, the user would need to be able to easily access the site and would require accurate,useful information is useful. If this does not occur then a negative evaluation is probable.

Ongoing Motivation

Interpersonal Influence: The Internet has become central part of social life and its role inshaping a new social dimension is increasing. Some studies have explored how consumersuse this computer-mediated communication (CMC) in their social life (Taylor andMacDonalds 1996; Amaral and Monteiro 2002). Apart from the Hackbarth (2001) study, thishas not been studied in the context of website use. It is argued that the higher theinterpersonal or group pressure to use or visit certain websites, the more likely an individualis to revisit the website. In particular, this factor is thought to be more significant in non-transactional websites that feature lifestyle aspects than ones that feature product aspects;because lifestyle aspects are assumed to be more ‘talked about’ in the community.

Involvement with product category: Interest is one of the factors that significantly impactsthe degree of consumer involvement (Lamb et al 2003). Level of interest towards specificproduct categories can influence their behaviours towards associated product categories, aphenomenon that can be applied to website revisitation behaviour. This argument issupported by a study by Yoon and Kim (2001) that indicated the usage of certain productcategories influenced the visitation of the product websites, especially for the high-involvement product categories. For example, an individual with a strong interest in cars willdevelop a similar level of interest towards understanding anything about cars both forinformation and entertainment purposes. This may lead these consumers to visit any websitesassociated with cars and car related website communities.

Involvement with the website category: Research on conventional media has shown thatmedia context, or the programming or editorial environment, in which an advertisement isembedded, can have important effects on how a message is processed by recipients. Research


suggests that context can affect recipients' evaluations of the advertised products (Puto 1987;Woodside and Singer 1994). Within a medium, individuals who select a particular mediavehicle may regard content of the media that fits closely with the editorial environment to beof greater value because it addresses their particular interests (Aaker and Brown 1972;Cannon 1982). Eighmey (1998) found that personal involvement and continuing relationshipswere important factors in evaluating audience response to a website. This model, proposesthat revisiting behaviour is more likely to occur under conditions of high personal relevance(involvement with the website category).

Involvement with the medium: This relates to the extent to which the consumer views aspecific medium as a central part of his or her life. Translated to website use, individualswho access the Internet daily may have a greater tendency to revisitation behaviour.

As website use becomes more mainstream, website developers and organisations providingboth transactional and information-based websites will need to have a deeper understandingabout how consumers use websites to effectively design and manage website. Theframework proposed in this paper uses a comprehensive behavioural approach based onrepeat purchase behaviour to provide a richer understanding of this complex behaviour thancurrent attitude-based approaches. While a viable framework is essential to understandingrevisitation behaviour, website managers also need to take into account consumer usagecontexts. In so doing, they would benefit from an effective website classification systemsuch as that presented in the second part of this paper.

Commercial Website Taxonomy

The second part of this paper discusses a commercial website taxonomy. In a commercialcontext, user revisitation can be driven by the website type. While there has been no formalcategorisation of commercial websites, many researchers use the generic terms transactionaland non-transactional websites for differentiation.

The taxonomy depicted in Figure 6 identifies two different types of commercial websites:transactional and non-transactional. Transactional websites provide customers with theopportunity to purchase products. Obviously, the key function of a transaction-based site isto support online purchase. Within the transactional websites there are two subtypes: (1) thetype that facilitates ordering and payment of tangible goods with the delivery being theresponsibility of the company/organization such as www.amazon.com and (2) the type thatoffers a total marketing system, which facilitates online purchasing and delivery of a digitalproduct. An example of this website type is for digitized products such as downloadablereports, music or books, available through organizations as www.acnielsen.com. Such onlineproduct delivery is determined by the capability of the consumer’s own technology.

Dou et al (2002), Peterson et al (1997) and Geller (1998) defined non-transactional websitesas communication or relationship websites. In non-transactional websites, all interactionsbetween consumers and website owners are conducted without any sales involved. In thistaxonomy, it is identified two different type of non-transactional websites, which arecategorised based on the goals: (1) Type of site that provides product support in terms oftechnical support to supplement a tangible product, such as that provided by Hewlett Packardsite www.hp.com or product substitute, such as Sydney Morning Herald sitewww.smh.com.au and (2) Information/entertainment site type where product information orentertainment can be delivered online and, where applicable, can function as an augmented


benefit. Product-related examples are those that emphasize information/entertainment relatedto the brand/product category, such as www.pantene.com or www.blackmore.com.au. Thenon-product-related website offers lifestyle related information/entertainment such as theYowie, Pepsi or Coco Pops sites (www.yowiepower.com.au, www.pepsi.com,www.cocopops.com.au).

To date, most of the empirical studies into revisitation have focused on transactional sites(van der Heijden 2003; Supphellen and Nysveen 2001; Hackbarth 2001) but consumers dorevisit sites such as the Coca cola and Yowie sites for different reasons that affect how thethey perceive the sites, their frequency of visits and how they use the sites. This means thatcare needs to be taken to ensure that the different websites with different use contexts are notinadvertently compared.

Summary

This paper offers an alternative framework for examining website revisitation behaviour tothe existing attitude-based frameworks. It has presented a case for a more comprehensivebehavioural model with satisfaction as an ongoing motivation being a key component of theframework. Elements underpinning these components have been identified and their roles andfunctions discussed. The paper also contends that any investigation of website behaviour,including revisitation must take into account the influence of the use context. A taxonomydeveloped from the transaction/non-transaction dimension is proposed. These dimensionsrepresent a useful starting point but are somewhat crude. They have been expanded into amore comprehensive taxonomy that will allow for subtleties in behaviour to beacknowledged.

Figure 6. Commercial Website Taxonomy

Transactionalwebsites

Product delivered physically

Product delivered digitally

Product Support

Technical service

Product substitutes

Provide informationand Entertainment

Product related

Non-product related

Non-transactionalwebsites

CommercialWebsites

www.amazon.comwww.colesonline.com.au

www.acnielsen.com.au

www.hp.com

www.smh.com.au

www.pantene.comwww.kellogs.com

www.pepsi.comwww.cocopops.com.au


References

Aaker, D.A. and Brown, P.K. 1972. “Evaluating Vehicle Source Effects” Journal ofAdvertising Research, 12(4): 11.

Ajzen, I. 1991. “The Theory of Planned Behaviour”. Organizational Behaviour and HumanDecision Processes 50: 179-211.

Amaral, M.J. and Monteiro, M.B. 2002. “To be without being seen – Computer mediatedcommunication and social identity management”. Small Group Research 33(5): 575-589.

Antil, J.H. 1988. “New Product or Service Adoption: When does it happen?” Journal ofConsumer Marketing, Mar 5(2): 5-17.

Aladwani, A.M. 2002. “The Development of Two Tools for Measuring the Easiness andUsefulness of Transactional Websites”. European Journal of Information Systems 11(3): 223-234.

Balabanis, G. and Reynolds, N.L. 2001. “Consumer attitudes towards multi-channel retailers’websites: the role of involvement, brand attitude, internet knowledge and visit duration.”Journal of Business Strategies, 18(2): 105-132.

Bearden, W. and Etzel, M.J. 1982. “Reference Group Influence on Product and BrandPurchase Decisions.” Journal of Consumer Research 9(2): 183-193.

Bearden, W., Netemeyer, R.G. and Teel, J.E. 1989. “Measurement of ConsumerSusceptibility to Interpersonal Influence”. Journal of Consumer Research. 15(4): 473-482.

Bruner, II G.C. and Kumar, A. 2000. “Web Commercials and Advertising Hierarchy-of-Effects”. Journal of Advertising Research. Jan/Apr (2000): 35-42.

Cannon, H.M. 1982. “A New Method for Estimating the Effect of Media Context”. Journalof Advertising Research, 22(5): 41-49.

Chen, Q. and Wells, W.D. 1999. “Attitude toward the Site”. Journal of AdvertisingResearch. Sep/Oct (1999): 27-37.

Childers, T.L. and Rao, A.R. 1992. “The Influence of Familial and Peer-based ReferenceGroups on Consumer Decisions.” Journal of Consumer Research, 19: 198-211.

Craig-Lees, M., Joy, S. and B. Browne 1995. Consumer Behaviour. John Wiley & Sons.

Davis, F.D. 1989. “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance ofInformation Technology.” MIS Quarterly 13(2): 319-340.

Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. 1992. “Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation touse Computers in the Workplace” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 22(14): 1111-1132.

Dholakia, U.M. and Rego, L.L.1998. “What makes commercial Web pages Popular? AnEmpirical Investigation of Web Page Effectiveness. European Journal of Marketing, 32(7/8): 724-736.

Dou, W., Nielsen, U.O. and C.M. Tan 2002. “Using Corporate Websites for ExportMarketing.” Journal of Advertising Research. Sept-Oct 42 (5): 105-117.

Ducoffe, R. 1996. “Advertising Value and Advertising on the Web” Journal of AdvertisingResearch 36 (5): 21-35.


Eighmey, J. 1998. “Adding Value in the Information Age: Uses and Gratifications of Sites onthe World Wide Web” Journal of Business Research 41(3): 187-194.

Eighmey, J. and McCord, L. 1998. “Adding Value in the Information Age: Uses andGratifications of Sites on the World Wide Web.” Journal of Business Research, 41(3): 187-194.

Englis, B.G. and Solomon, M. 1995. “To be and not to be: Lifestyle Imagery, ReferenceGroups and the Clustering of America.” Journal of Advertising, Spring 24(1): 13-29.

Fishbein, M. 1967. “ A Consideration of Beliefs and Their Role in Attitude Measurement”Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement Ed-M.Fishbein John Wiley and Sons Inc,New York.

Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. 1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior. An Introduction toTheory and Research. Reading (MA): Addison-Wesley Massachussets.

Gallagher, K., Foster, K. and Parsons, J. 2001. “The Medium is Not the Message: AdvertisingEffectiveness and Consumer Evaluation in Print ad on the Web”. Journal of AdvertisingResearch Jul/Aug , 41(4): 57-67

Gefen, D., Karahanna, E. and D.W. Straub, 2003. “Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: AnIntegrated Model”. MIS Quarterly 27(1): 51-90.

Geller, L.K. 1998. “The Internet: The Ultimate Relationship Marketing Tool” DirectMarketing, September, 61(5): 36-38.

Hackbarth, 2001. Website Revisitation. Dissertation thesis.

Hawkins, S.A. and Hoch, S.J. 1992. “Low-involvement Learning: Memory withoutEvaluation” Journal of Consumer Research 19: 212-25.

Howard, J.A. and Sheth, J.N. 1969. The Theory of Buyer Behaviour., New York, London,Sydney, Toronto: John Wiley and Sons

Huang, M. 2003. “Designing website attributes to induce experiential encounters.”Computers in Human Behaviour, 9(4): 425-442.

Huang, C. and Hardie, B.G.S. 2001. “Come Often and Stay Longer, Please: Modelling aWebsite Stickiness”. Working paper. London Business School.

Kapferer, J.N. and Laurent, G. 1986. “Consumer Involvement Profiles: A New PracticalApproach to Consumer Involvement” Journal of Advertising Research 25(6): 48-56.

Korgaonkar, P.K. and Wolin, L.D. 1999. “A Multivariate Analysis of Web usage”. Journal ofAdvertising Research. Mar/Apr , 39(2): 53-68.

Koufaris, M. 2002. “Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and Flow Theory to OnlineConsumer Behaviour” Information Systems Research. 13(2): 205-223.

Lamb, C.W., Hair, J.F. and McDaniel, C. 2003. Essentials of Marketing. ThomsonLearning. Mason, Ohio.

Lazonder, A.W., Biemans, J.J.A and Wopereis, I.G.J.H. 2000. “Differences between Noviceand Experienced Users in Searching Information on the World Wide Web,” Journal of theAmerican Society for Information Science, 51 (6): 576-581.


Lederer, A.L., Maupin, D.J., Sena, M.P. and Zhuang, Y.L. 2000. “The TechnologyAcceptance Model and the World Wide Web”. Decision Support Systems. 29(3): 269-282.

Lee, S. 2001. Modelling Repeat Visit Behaviour. Dissertation thesis.

Lin, J.C.C. and Lu, H.P. 2000. “Towards an Understanding of the Behavioural Intention toUse a Website.” International Journal of Information Management, 20(3): 197-208.

Liu, C, Arnett, KP, Capella, LM and Taylor, RD. 2001. “Key Dimensions of Web DesignQuality as Related to Consumer Response” Journal of Computer Information Systems 42(1):70-82.

Luo, X. 2001. “Uses and Gratifications Theory and E-consumer behaviours: A StructuralEquation Modelling Study”. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 2(2).

Mittal, B. and Lee, M.S. 1989. “A causal Model of Consumer Involvement” Journal ofEconomic Psychology (10): 3: 363-389.

Moschis, G.P. and Moore, R.L. 1979. “Decision Making Among the Young: A SocializationPerspective.” Journal of Consumer Research 6(2): 101.

Moon, J.W. and Kim, Y.G. 2001. “Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context”.Information and Management. 38(4): 217-230.

Novak, T.P., Hoffman, D.L. and Duhachek, A. 2003. “The Influence of Goal-Directed andExperiential Activities on Online Flow Experiences” Journal of Consumer Psychology.13(1): 3-16.

Ohanian, R. 1990. “Construction and Validation of a Scale to Measure Celebrity Endorsers’Perceived Expertise, Trustworthiness and Attractiveness” Journal of Advertising; 19(3): 39-53.

Oliver, R. 1980. “A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of SatisfactionDecisions.” Journal of Marketing Research, 17 (November): 460-469.

Page, K. and Uncles, M. 2000. “Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness of the Web:Multi-item Scale Development” Anzmac Proceedings: 916- 920.

Peterson, R.A., Balasubramanian and Bronnenberg, B.J. 1997. “Exploring the Implicationsof the Internet for Consumer Marketing”. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science.25(4): 329-346.

Peter, J.P and Olson, J.C. 1999. Consumer and Marketing Strategy Behaviour. McGraw-HillInternational

Puto, C.P. 1987. “The Framing of Buying Decisions” Journal of Consumer Research, 14(3):301-316.


Russel, L. and Muehling, D. 1993. “Toward a Better Understanding of the Role ofAdvertising Message in Involvement in Ad processing” Psychology and Marketing. 10(4):301-320.

Richins, M.L., Bloch, P.H. and McQuarrie, E.F. 1992. “How Enduring and SituationalInvolvement Combine to Create Involvement Responses” Journal of Consumer Psychology1,2 : 143-53.

Sandhu, K. and Corbitt, K. 2002. Assessing Web-based Electronic Services Adoption Model(E-SAM). Working paper, Deakin School of Information Systems.

Schiffman and Kanuk, 2000. Consumer Behaviour. Seventh Edition. Prentice HallInternational,.

Shimp, T.A. 2000. Advertising Promotion. Supplemental Aspects of Integrated MarketingCommunications. The Dryden Press.

Siegel, C. 2004. Internet Marketing. Foundations and Applications. Boston, New York:Hougton Migglin

Stafford, T.F. and Stafford, M.R. 2000. “Identifying Motivations for the Use of Commercialwebsites”. Information Resources Management Journal Jan/Mar, 14(1): 22-30.

Supphellen, M. and Nysveen, H. 2001. “Drivers of Intention to Revisit the Websites of Well-known Companies”. International Journal of Market Research, 43(3): 341-352.

Taylor, J. and MacDonald, J. 2002. “The Effects of Asynchronous Computer-MediatedGroup Interaction on Group Processes.” Social Science Computer Review. 20(3): 260-274.

Teo, T.S.H. 2001. “Demographic and Motivation Variables Associated with Internet UsageActitivies.” Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 11(2).

Van der Heijden, H. 2003. “Factors Influencing the Usage of Websites: the case of a genericportal in the Netherlands” Information and Management 40: 541-549.

Wilson, J.D. and MacGillivray, M.S. 1998. “Self-perceived Influences of Family, Friends,and Media on Adolescent Clothing Choice.” Family and Consumer Sciences ResearchJournal 26(4): 425-444.

Woodside, A.G. and Singer, A. E. 1994. “Social Interaction effects in the framing of buyingdecision”, Psychology & Marketing, 11(1): 27-35.

Wooten, D. and Reed, A. 2002. “Susceptibility to Normative Influence and the IdentityImplications of Inconspicuous Products.” Working paper, University of Michigan BusinessSchool and the Wharton School.

Yoon, S.J. and Kim, J.H. 2001. “The effects of perceived consumer characteristics on thechoice and use of Internet ads”. The Journal of Brand Management 8(4/5): 346-364.

Zaichkowsky, J.L. 1985. “Measuring the Involvement Construct” Journal of ConsumerResearch 12(3): 341-353.


Documents

REPEAT PURCHASE THEORY AND WEBSITE …...could be argued that once a site is accessed and used, the role of trust is more probable as a reinforcer rather than a driver. Repeat Purchase: