The effect of offline brand trustand perceived internet confidence

on online shopping intentionin the integrated multi-channel

contextKim Hongyoun Hahn

Apparel and Communication Technologies Department,University of Wisconsin-Stout, Menomonie, Wisconsin, USA, and

Jihyun KimDepartment of Apparel, Housing, and Resource Management,

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this research is to examine the influences of consumer trust and perceivedinternet confidence on consumer apparel shopping intention via the online retailer operated by amulti-channel retailer.

Design/methodology/approach – A total of 261 students in a large US Midwestern Universityparticipated in the paper-based survey and provided usable responses. Structural equation modelingwas used to test hypotheses.

Findings – Consumer trust in an online retailer was a significant predictor of perceived internetconfidence and search intention for product information via the online retailer. Search intention forproduct information via the online store and perceived internet confidence were significant and strongpredictors of consumers’ behavioral intention toward the online retailer.

Research limitations/implications – Limitations of the present study include sampling, whichprevents the generalization of the results to all multi-channel shoppers.

Practical implications – The findings of the study suggest that retailers offer an internet channel aspart of a multi-channel retail strategy and provide consistent service throughout their various channels.

Originality/value – The paper finds that there are significant influences of consumer trust andperceived internet confidence on consumer apparel shopping intention via the online retailer operatedby a multi-channel retailer.

Keywords Brand image, Internet shopping, Consumer behaviour, Trust, United States of America,Retailing

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionOnline business is steadily increasing every year, not entirely because of pureweb-based retailers, but also due to multi-channel retailers conducting business bothonline and offline. According to comScore Networks, online retail sales in 2006 wereUS$102.1 billion, which was a 24 percent increase from 2005 (Burns, 2007). e-Commercesales increase is remarkable over time and will continue by 2010 (Perez, 2006).

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

www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-0552.htm

IJRDM37,2

126

Received 10 April 2008Revised 20 July 2008Accepted 27 August 2008

International Journal of Retail &Distribution ManagementVol. 37 No. 2, 2009pp. 126-141q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0959-0552DOI 10.1108/09590550910934272

According to Jupiter Research, e-commerce retail sales are expected to have a 12 percentannual increase and estimated sales of US$144 billion in 2010. Jupiter Research alsoemphasized that the multi-channel strategy would be more prevalent for a retailer’ssuccess (Evans, 2006).

A multi-channel strategy provides the retail company with a competitive edge byoperating two or more retail channels to distribute products to customers. Themulti-channel retailers generate greater revenue than single channel retail operatorbecause they attract more cross-shoppers (Levy and Weitz, 2004). For example,consumers may view the products online and visit the brick-and-mortar store for thepurchases or vice versa. Retailers can embrace the broader range of customers(Payne and Frow, 2004) and build more interactive customer relationships by offeringinformation, products, and customer support using a multi-channel strategy (Freed,2005; Shop Org., 2001). Multi-channel retailing also provides customers withconvenience of shopping, which is most sought after by the customer. According toSchramm-Klein and Morschett (2005), the goal of multi-channel retailing is to fulfill allthe needs and requirements of today’s consumers that no single purchasing channelcan comply with. As a result, more and more customers are adopting multi-channelretailing and are becoming multi-channel shoppers. According to the Direct MarketingAssociation’s 2005 Multi-channel Marketing Report, multi-channel shoppers spend30 percent more per year in stores than single-channel shopper as cited in Fanelli et al.(2006). Furthermore, in a survey conducted by the Aberdeen Group (2005), more than50 percent of retailers reported multi-channel shoppers are more profitable thansingle-channel customers. It has been proven in many studies that using various retailchannels, multi-channel shoppers search and purchase products more frequently aswell as spend more money than single channel customers (Dholakia et al., 2005;Rangaswamy and van Bruggen, 2005; Shankar and Winer, 2005).

In the multi-channel retail environment, consumer trust is the one of the keyelements that enables customers to adopt a multi-channel retail strategy (Schlosseret al., 2006; Winch and Joyce, 2006). Consumer trust has been acknowledged inmarketing literature as a crucial factor for successful business trades, and in turn, thedevelopment and management for a long-term customer relationship. Trust has beendefined as a willingness to rely on an exchange partner in whom one has confidence,reliability, and integrity (Morgan and Hunt, 1994; Moorman et al., 1992). The belief in aperson’s competence to perform a specific task under specific circumstances is alsopointed out as a facet of the trust concept. We believe that people, who trust atraditional brick-and-mortar retailer, will have a similar level of confidence in shoppingfor products at the online retailer, operated by the traditional store that she or he hasthe trusts. Especially, when consumers are uncertain about online shopping, they willlikely rely on the trusted retailer’s web site (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001).Purchasing products online often involves various level of risk/uncertainty, especiallywhen consumers need to provide an online retailer with their personal informationsuch as credit card numbers. In this vulnerable situation, consumer’s trust of acompany may reduce any uncertainty that consumers have about online shopping.Several studies investigated the issues of trust in the online environment (Gefen et al.,2003; Stewart, 2003; Winch and Joyce, 2006). There is little research investigating thepotential influence of pre-existing consumer trust in an offline brick-and-mortarretailer on consumer’s perceptions of internet shopping at the offline retailer’s web site

Perceivedinternet

confidence

127

(Lee et al., 2007; Kuan and Bock, 2007). Lee et al. (2007) examined the influence of trustin an offline banking system on consumers’ online banking perceptions. Kuan andBock (2007) investigated the factors affecting the formation of online trust forconsumers of a brick and mortar supermarket retailer. These studies focused on theoffline/online baking industry and supermarket retailing context; however, they didnot address the sensory and interactive nature of different types of shopping behaviorsuch as apparel shopping; where consumers are likely to physically examine thecharacteristics of the products (color, size, design, fabric and fit) (Ha and Stoel, 2004).Because of the nature of “hands-on” aspect of apparel shopping, apparel onlineshopping has been associated with a higher perceived risk (Bhatnagar et al., 2000;Hawes and Lumpkin, 1986) and this risk has been often linked to trust in onlineshopping behavior (Newholm et al., 2004). Therefore, it will be important to examine ifthere is a positive relationship between consumer trust in an offline retailer andperceived confidence while shopping at the retailer’s online store within amulti-channel retailing context for apparel products.

Converting online visitors into buyers is one of the biggest problems that manyonline businesses face in daily basis. Another significant issue with the onlineshopping is that online apparel shopping still lacks critical tactile aspects of an offlineshopping experience. The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of consumertrust and perceived confidence of internet shopping on their behavioral intentionstowards the online store. Through examining these relationships, this study providedsome ideas to solve several issues involved in both online and offline business formulti-channel retailers.

Literature review and theoretical frameworkConsumer trust and perceived confidence of internet shoppingAccording to Winch and Joyce (2006), trust is a strong influential factor for making apurchase in both offline and online environments; however, in the online environment,trust is built primarily in a person-to-web site manner rather than person-to-personcommunication, mediated through technology. Therefore, without having trust built, itis likely that business transactions would not be possible in an online environment, justas it would not be possible in the offline environment (Winch and Joyce, 2006; Bart et al.,2005). In the online business environment, consumers view the technology as a toolthat mediates the underlying process of obtaining a product, service, and/orinformation from an online business (Shim et al., 2001). During online shopping, trustcan be a vital factor for consumers to make purchase decision since consumers oftenperceive risks involved in online transactions such as financial risk, product risk andconcern for privacy and security (Winch and Joyce, 2006; Bart et al., 2005; Li andZhang, 2002).

When online shopping was first introduced to consumers, first time online shopperswere not comfortable using the internet for purchasing goods because they were notsure of their ability to shop for products over the internet (Bobbit and Dabholkar, 2001;Eastin and LaRose, 2000). Researchers found the importance of perceived behavioralcontrol (Ajzen, 1991) to be an important determinant to predict intentions andbehaviors of online consumers (Bobbit and Dabholkar, 2001; Cunningham et al., 2005).Bobbit and Dabholkar (2001) applied the perceived behavioral control in an internetshopping context and referred to it as having levels of ease or difficulty within the

IJRDM37,2

128

online shopping process. Bobbit and Dabholkar (2001) also claimed that perceivedbehavioral control is closely related to the consumer’s confidence in his/her ability toshop via the internet.

Consumers who have built trust in a brick-and-mortar retailer would be willing toaccept its new retail channel format, internet shopping site, for their shopping needs. Inturn, based on the previous shopping experience with the brick-and-mortar retailer,consumers may be more confident in shopping via the brick-and-mortar retailer’sinternet site. According to Li and Zhang (2002), consumers’ trust in a retailer canreduce perceived risk associated with context of online transactions. Therefore,Consumers perhaps are more confident shopping at the brick-and-click retailers’internet shopping sites because those online sites carry over the brand image thatthe retailers have previously established. In the same logic, consumers who do not havetrust built with an offline retailer would be less confident in shopping at the internetretailer due to the lack of shopping experience with the brick-and-mortar retailer. Parkand Stoel (2005) found a very strong positive effect of brand familiarity on theconsumer’s intentions to shop at retailer web sites. We believe that if consumers havetrust in a brick-and-mortar retailer, they will likely to be confident shopping at theretailer’s web site. Therefore, we propose:

H1. There is a positive relationship between consumers’ trust in an offline storeand their perceived internet confidence at the retailer’s online store.

Consumer trust and information search intentionConsumer trust of a brick-and-mortar retailer may influence his/her information searchbehavior using the retailer’s online store. Researchers found that consumer choseinformation sources they trusted when they searching for valid, accurate, and timelyinformation (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001; Pavlou and Eugenson, 2006). Similarly,Schlosser et al. (2006) found that consumers are likely to search information at the website offered by the company that they already trust because they expect the companythey trust and are familiar with will provide optimal information for them. For theinternet shopping case, these findings are applicable as well. For apparel productinformation, individuals look for the retailers they trust or are at least somewhatfamiliar with, instead of unknown retailers. Since apparel is a significant part of theindividual’s appearance presentation (Kaiser, 1990), he/she would search a trustedretailer’s websites for apparel information. Consequently, we expect that whenconsumers trust a brick-and-mortar retailer, they will have higher information searchintention using the retailer’s web site. Therefore, we hypothesize:

H2. There is a positive relationship between consumers’ trust in an offline retailerand their information search intention using the retailer’s online store.

Consumer trust and behavioral intentionsThe relationships between trust and behavioral intentions have been examinedfrequently in previous online shopping research. Lui et al. (2005) examined anindividual’s perceptions of privacy and how it related to his or her behavioral intentionto make an online transaction. Lui et al. (2005) found that trust was an important factorto predict consumers’ intention for online shopping. Kuan and Bock (2007) alsoconfirmed the positive relationship between online trust and online purchase intention

Perceivedinternet

confidence

129

in a grocery shopping context. In the multi-channel banking context, Lee et al. (2007)found that consumer trust in an offline bank was a significant predictor of theperceived future use of the online banking system of the offline bank. Furthermore,consumers perceptions of brand trust and repurchase intentions have been examinedby Zboja and Voorhees (2006). Zboja and Voorhees (2006) found that brand trust wasclearly linked to customers’ satisfaction levels and repeat purchase intentions.Therefore, based on previous studies, we propose that when consumers have anexisting trust in an offline store, they are willing to purchase the products online,willing to spend more time at the trusted retailer’s web site and willing to recommendthat same online store to others. Hence, we hypothesize that:

H3. There is a positive relationship between consumer trust in an offline store andbehavioral intention toward the online store.

Perceived internet confidence and information search intentionKoufaris and Hampton-Sosa (2002) studied how the web site experience can influencecustomer trust in the company itself through customer beliefs about the web site. Theydiscovered that if customers found a company’s web site easy to use and useful thenconsequently customers viewed the company more favorably and perceiveorganization as being more trustworthy. When consumers perceive a site as usefuland easy to use, they are more likely to search information from that particular website. For example, younger, rural consumers with prior internet experience had higherinformation search intention via the internet, compared to ones with no internetexperience (Worthy et al., 2004). As discussed earlier, if consumers have moreconfidence in using a web site for valid, credible, and accurate information, they willhave more intention to search for information from that particular web site as well.Thus, we propose:

H4. There is a positive relationship between consumers’ perceived internetconfidence of internet shopping at the online retailer and their informationsearch intention using the retailer’s online store.

Perceived internet confidence and behavioral intentionsThe importance of building trust or confidence in online shopping has been muchemphasized in literature (Constantinides, 2004; Koufaris and Hampton-Sosa, 2002).According to Wolfinbarger and Gilly (2000), online shopping gives consumers a greatdeal of freedom and control because it is convenient, accessible and allows productsand pricing comparisons. Koufaris and Hampton-Sosa (2002) proved that there was apositive relationship between perceived control, perceived usefulness, and perceivedease of use of a web site. If consumers find a company’s web site easy to use, useful,and safe to use, they may be more likely to make more purchases from that web site.Therefore, if consumers experience smooth transactions online overtime and feelconfident about online transactions and shopping at online retailers, they are morelikely to have higher purchase intention for the online retailer web site. Similar to thislogic, consumers who have more confidence in shopping online may stay longer at theweb site for shopping, compared to those who have lower confidence in internetshopping.

IJRDM37,2

130

Also, consumers with more confidence in internet shopping at an online store mayhave more experience with the online store. Based on their confidence and previousexperience with the online retailer, they may be more willing to recommend the onlinestore to others, compared to those with less confidence in internet shopping at theonline store. Therefore, we propose:

H5. There is a positive relationship between consumers’ perceived confidence ofinternet shopping at the online retailer and their behavioral intention towardthe online store.

Information search intention and behavioral intentionsIntention to purchase. The relationship between intention to use the internet forinformation search and intention to use the internet for purchasing was found in theonline pre-purchase intentions model developed by Shim et al. (2001). Individuals whohad greater intention to use the internet for information search were likely to havegreater intention to use the internet for purchasing. Klein’s (1998) economics ofinformation search model addressed that consumers would choose the least costly wayfor searching and purchasing goods and services. Searching and purchasing withinone channel (e.g. the internet) may be perceived as less costly than searching andpurchasing in multiple channels. Thus, consumers may choose a single channel toreduce shopping cost rather than use multiple channels for gathering information andpurchasing products. Empirical research studies also supported that consumers werelikely to search more information from the internet when purchasing productsonline (Kim and Park, 2005; Lohse et al., 2000; Ratchford et al., 2003; Rowley, 2000).The positive relationship between internet information search intention and internetpurchase intention was also found for apparel products in previous studies (Shim et al.,2001; Watchravesringkan and Shim, 2003).

Intention to spend more time at the online store. Research studies showed thatconsumers who use the internet for product information search were also likely tospend more time on the internet (Lohse et al., 2000; Kim and Park, 2005). Onlineshoppers expressed that they could fully examine various options for productpurchases through online shopping, compared to the offline shopping context(Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2000). Consumers not only compare prices but also compareproduct attributes offered within an online retailer or by different online retailers.Therefore, they may spend more time at the online retailer to explore alternatives or toexamine the detailed product information to fulfill their utilitarian needs (i.e. makingright decisions) and/or intrinsic motivations (i.e. enjoy searching for more product infofor itself).

Intention to recommend the online store to others. Positive word-of-mouth (WOM)for online retailers has been one of the most effective formats of advertising (Enos,2001). It has been demonstrated that WOM has a significant effect on online behavioralintentions. Kuan and Bock (2007) found that WOM of the retailer’s online operationshad the dominant effect on online trust and the effect was found to be much strongerthan offline trust. Holloway et al. (2005) also revealed that consumers with a low levelof online purchasing experience were more likely to engage in higher levels of negativeword of mouth, if they felt dissatisfied after a service failure incident. Although there islittle empirical research about a direct positive relationship between using the internetor an online retailer for information search and willingness to recommend to others,

Perceivedinternet

confidence

131

it is reasonable to expect that consumers who have greater search intention for productinformation via the online store are likely to have greater intention to recommend theonline store to others, compared to ones who have lower search intention for productinformation via the online store. Subsequently, the more experience on informationsearch consumers obtain, the more willing they would be, to recommend the onlineretailers to others. Therefore, we propose (Figure 1):

H6. There is a positive relationship between consumer’s information searchintention at the online retailer and their behavioral intention toward the onlinestore.

MethodSubjectsA total of 262 undergraduate students in a large US Midwestern Universityvolunteered to participate in this study. College students were selected for two reasons.From the practitioner’s perspective, these young adults are potential valuablecustomers for multi-channel retailers because they are likely to present strongpurchase power on both online and offline stores (Hogg et al., 1998; Silverman, 2000). Inaddition, from the theoretical perspective, college students are generally accepted formodel testing. Our major interest in this study is to build and test the sequential andmultivariate relationships among variables (Calder et al., 1981).

ProcedureWe employed a self-administered survey technique to acquire consumer’s responses tothe questionnaire. Respondents were first asked to recall their favorite traditionalretailer that also operates an online store. They were then asked to identify and writethe retailer’s name in the blank on the first page of the questionnaire. Next, respondentswere asked to answer questions based upon their prior experiences with the chosenretailer.

Figure 1.Proposed conceptualmodel explaining themediating role ofperceived internetconfidence in onlineshopping

Consumer trustin an offline

store

Perceivedconfidence of

shopping at theonline store

Informationsearch intention

at the onlinestore

Behavioralintention

toward theonline store

H1

H2

H3

H4

H5

H6

IJRDM37,2

132

InstrumentsThree items were developed by the researchers to measure consumer trust in an offlinestore and had Cronbach’s a of 0.93. To measure perceived confidence of shopping atthe online store, we adopted five items of the perceived confidence scale, developed byEastin and LaRose (2000). The items had Cronbach’s a of 0.91. Information searchintention via the online store was measured using three items, developed by Kim andPark (2005). The items had a Cronbach a of 0.90. To measure behavioral intentiontoward the online store, we adopted two items of willingness to purchase via the onlinestore developed by Kim and Park (2005), one item of willingness to spend more time atthe online retailer from Kim et al. (2007), and one item of willingness to recommend theonline retailer to others from Zeithaml et al. (1996). The items had Cronbach a of 0.89.All except consumer trust in an offline store were revised to reflect the internetshopping context. According to Nunnally and Bernstein (1994), all multi-item scalesused in the present study achieved acceptable construct reliabilities (Cronbach’sa . 0.7). A five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (stronglyagree) was used to measure the constructs. Multi-item scales for the model constructsare exhibited in the Table II with convergent validity test results and factor loadings.The model constructs had average variance extracted (AVE) values that ranged from0.64 to 0.81, which are above the cut-off value of 0.50 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).Therefore, all constructs achieved adequate convergent validity (Tables I and II).

Respondents were asked to provide some demographic information including age,ethnic background, and sex. Respondents were also asked to select one favorite retailerwho operates both offline and online channels and then, answer the questions related totheir past shopping experience, such as the number of shopping trips for apparelpurchase via the self-selected traditional retailer, the number of apparel purchasesmade in the past 12 months, and the amount of money spent in the self-selectedtraditional retailer for apparel purchase. The same questions were repeated for theonline version of the retailer.

ResultsPreliminary analysesThe mean age of respondents (n ¼ 261) was about 21 years. Approximately, 97 percentwere between the ages of 18 and 25 years. About 80 percent were female. Thus, oursample is limited to female college students. This demographic group is, however,meaningful to investigate for apparel multi-channel retailers due to the strong

CorrelationsModel constructs Mean SD 1 2 3 4

Consumer trust in an offline store 3.93 0.80 –Perceived Internet confidence shopping at the onlinestore 3.89 0.95 0.29 * * –Search intention of product information via theonline retailer 3.78 1.04 0.30 * * 0.59 * * –Behavioral intention toward the online store 3.68 1.07 0.26 * * 0.72 * * 0.66 * * –

Notes: *p , 0.05; * *p , 0.01

Table I.Descriptive statistics

and correlation matrixof model constructs

(n ¼ 261)

Perceivedinternet

confidence

133

consumer demand and buying power. According to the Youth/Harris InteractiveCollege Explorer study, college students spent about US$200 billion per year and anaverage of US$287 a month on discretionary items other than tuition, books/schoolfees, etc. (“Harris Interactive” 2002). Female students tended to show higher fashioninterest and spend more money on clothing than male students (Han et al., 1991). Inaddition, about 93 percent of college students accessed the internet (“HarrisInteractive” 2002).

The majority of respondents were Caucasian American (85.9 percent), followed byAsian heritage (8.8 percent) and African American (3.1 percent). More than 85 percent

Constructs/indicators

Standardizedfactor

loading (l) t-value

Averagevariance

extracted a

j1 (consumer trust in an offline store) 0.81x1 Offline store that I chose above would do the jobright 0.83 –x2 I trust the offline store that I chose above 0.96 19.83x3 I believe that offline store that I chose above istrustworthy 0.91 19.02h1 (perceived confidence of shopping at the onlinestore) 0.64I feel confident. . .y1 searching for apparel product information via thisonline store 0.83 –y2 browsing apparel products via this online store 0.76 16.69y3 making a purchase of apparel products via thisonline store 0.92 17.96y4 making a payment transaction via this online store 0.80 14.82y5 reporting my complaints about the purchase madefrom this online store 0.70 12.31h2 (information search intention at the online store) 0.76y6 I will visit this online store to search for apparelproduct information (e.g., new trend, productdescription) within six months 0.79 –y7 I would be willing to search for apparel productinformation (e.g., new trend, product description) viathis online store 0.90 16.41y8 How likely is that you will search for apparelproduct information (e.g., new trend, productdescription) via this online store? 0.92 16.82h3 (behavioral intentions toward the online store) 0.65y9 I would be wiling to buy apparel through thisonline store 0.88 –y10 How likely is that you will buy apparel from thisonline store when you find something you like? 0.82 16.95y11 I would spend more time shopping on this onlinestore than I planned 0.75 14.58y12 I would be willing to recommend this online storeto my friends 0.76 14.60

Note: aAVE was calculated as suggested by Fornell and Larcker (1981)

Table II.Measurement modelresults for modelconstructs (n ¼ 261)

IJRDM37,2

134

of respondents had purchased a product over the internet and more than 71 percentreported their previous purchase experience of apparel on the internet. About41 percent of respondents reported that they visited the self-selected offline store tosearch for clothing information in “every few month,” 24 percent reported “everymonth,” and another 21 percent reported “once or twice” in the past 12 months. About42 percent of respondents reported that they purchased clothing from the self-selectedoffline store for 2-5 times, 21 percent reported 6-10 times, and another 21 percentreported more than 10 times in the past 12 months. The averaged amount of moneythat they spent on purchasing during the past 12 months was about $200.

Less than half (46.1 percent) reported that they had searched clothing informationfrom the self-selected online store for every few month (28.2 percent) or every month(17.9 percent) in the past 12 months. About a quarter (26.3 percent) reported that theypurchased clothing from the self-selected online store for two to five times and 18.7percent reported they purchased once. About 44 percent reported that they had notmade any purchase for apparel via the online store. About 36 percent spent less than$200 on clothing purchase and 13.7 percent spent from $201 to 500 on clothingpurchase. This is consistent with the previous findings about college students’ internetpurchase behavior (Shop Org., 2003).

Structural equation modeling analysis: hypotheses testingStructural equation modeling was conducted to test the research hypotheses. AMOS7.0 was utilized to run the analysis using a maximum-likelihood estimation. Theoverall fit indices for the proposed model revealed a x 2 of 153.43 (df ¼ 81; p ¼ 0.001),goodness-of-fit index (GFI) of 0.93, adjust GFI (AGFI) of 0.90, relative fit index (RFI) of0.94, and RMR of 0.04. Fit statistics above 0.90 for GFI, AGFI, and RFI and below 0.05for RMR were used as an indicator of a good model fit to the data (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988;Hair et al., 1998). Following Bagozzi and Yi (1988), the x 2 statistic was not considered agood indicator for model fit because sample size is over 200 in this study. Therefore,the indices indicated that the proposed model fit the data well.

Figure 2 shows the final model with structural path coefficients and t-values foreach relationship as well as squared multiple correlations (R 2) for each endogenousconstruct. The results indicated that there were direct effects of:

. consumer trust in an offline retailer on perceived confidence of internet shopping(H1: g11 ¼ 0.28, t ¼ 4.25, p , 0.001); and

. consumer trust in an offline retailer on information search intention via theonline retailer (H2: g21 ¼ 0.17, t ¼ 3.04, p , 0.01).

The H3 proposing the direct effect of consumer trust in an offline retailer on theirbehavioral intention toward the online retailer was not statistically supported (H3:g31 ¼ 0.01, t ¼ 0.21, p , 0.83). H4 and H5 predicting the positive direct effects ofperceived confidence of shopping at the online store on information search intention atthe online store (H4: b 21 ¼ 0.58, t ¼ 8.65, p , 0.001) and behavioral intention towardthe online store (H5: b 31 ¼ 0.59, t ¼ 9.19, p , 0.001) received statistical support.Finally, the results showed the statistical support for the proposed positive direct effectof information search intention via the online retailer on behavioral intention towardthe online store (H6: b32 ¼ 0.37, t ¼ 6.00, p , 0.0001). Therefore, all hypotheses,except H3, were supported.

Perceivedinternet

confidence

135

Discussion and implicationsThe result of this study proved that consumer trust in an offline store was a significantpredictor of perceived internet confidence and search intention for product informationonline offered by the offline retailer. At times consumers may feel uncertain aboutpurchasing products online, if they need to give out their personal information such ascredit card numbers. In this vulnerable situation, consumer’s trust of a company canplay an important role in reducing any uncertainty that consumers have about onlineshopping (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001). As we predicted, consumers’ trust in anoffline store had a positive relationship with their perceived internet confidence. Thisinformation confirmed that consumers feel more confident with online shopping whenthey shop through the company they trust.

As expected, consumers are likely to search information online using the trustedcompany’s web site. Consumers expect the company they trust to provide optimuminformation and eventually reduce their uncertainty of the online transactions as well (Leeand Johnson, 2002). Therefore, it is suggested that well-known brand name offline storesshould maintain an up-to-date web site that is consistent with offline stores for consumers,in order to maintain consumers’ trust of their online store. However, the direct effect ofconsumer trust in an offline retailer on their behavioral intention toward the online retailerwas not supported in this study. This may suggest that consumer trust does not have adirect impact on the consumer’s behavioral intention but indirectly influences throughperceived internet confidence and search intentions for product information online.

This research demonstrates that increasing perceived confidence of shopping andincreasing search intention at the online retailer result in an increasing behavioralintention toward the online retailer. A common problem in many online businesses isconverting online browsers into online purchasers. By demonstrating the closerelationship between consumers’ confidence in online shopping and behavioral

Figure 2.A final model presentingstructural pathcoefficients, t-values, andR 2 for proposedhypotheses

R2 = 0.08*

R2 = 0.43*

R2 = 0.76*

n = 261X2

(81) = 153.43GFI = 0.93AGFI = 0.90RFI = 0.94RMR = 0.04 p = 0.001

Notes: Standardized path estimates are reported with t-values in parentheses. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

Consumer trustin an offline

store

Perceivedconfidence of

shopping at theonline store

Informationsearch intention

at the onlinestore

Behavioralintention

toward theonline store

0.01(0.21)

0.58*** (8.65)

0.59***(9.19)

0.17**(3.04)

0.28***(4.25)

0.37***(6.00)

IJRDM37,2

136

intention, this study gives an idea how to solve that problem. As our model shows, ifconsumers trust an offline retailer, not only do they feel confident using their web sitefor searching information, but they also feel confident purchasing products from thatretailer’s online store. Therefore, maintaining consumers’ trust both offline and onlinewill be a key for retailers to turn online browsers into online purchasers.

In order to retain consumers’ trust, retailers need to maintain smooth transactionsfrom offline to online, and online to offline using a multi-channel retailing strategy.Consumers often search information online, and then may buy products online or in aphysical store. Sometimes, consumers expect to return products in physical stores thatwere purchased online. At times consumers find products in physical stores, whichthey touch and physically handle, and then go home to buy products online. Therefore,it is vital for retailers to implement multi-channel retailing strategies seamlessly inorder to offer customers the ability to purchase and return merchandise using anychannel with a minimum amount of hassle, which will eventually cause consumers toretain their trust in the firm’s business and retail channels.

One facet of our conceptualization of behavioral intention toward the online storewas willingness to recommend the online store to others. This study shows that themore consumers feel confident with shopping at the online store, the higher behavioralintention will be toward the online store, indicating that consumers are more willing torecommend the online store to others. Online WOM is becoming an importantmarketing tool for retailers these days. According to Emergence Marketing (2007),online WOM is much more powerful than offline WOM because it affects many peopleover a short period of time. Consumers’ review of a retail firm’s products play animportant role for other consumers’ purchase decisions. Therefore, it is suggested forretailers to adopt advanced technologies such as dynamic product imagerepresentation (i.e. Scene7e zoom function, My Virtual Modele) and provide smartsearch engines for consumers to search for the product information conveniently. Inthat case, consumers will feel more confident searching information and purchasingproducts from the online store they trust and their trust in the retail firm will increase.

A strong positive relationship between information search intention online andbehavioral intention toward the online store found in this study and supports previousresearch. This indicates that consumers are integrating online shopping into their dailylives as they feel confident with online shopping. To increase online sales andconsumer trust level, it would be vital for retailers to provide these online shopperswith what they seek at the online store in a timely fashion, because most onlineshoppers are goal-oriented (Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2000). To fulfill theses onlineconsumers’ needs, retailers need to provide accurate, detailed representation of productinformation and timely responsive customer service.

In conclusion, our findings showed significant relationships between consumertrust in an offline retailer, perceived confidence of shopping at the online store,information search intention at the online store, and behavioral intentions toward theonline retailer operated by the offline retailer in the multi-channel retailing context. Inorder to encourage offline purchasers to adopt the online channel for productinformation search and purchases, the multi-channel retailers should provideconsistent customer service and product information throughout different channels.

This study is not without limitations. First, this study employed a convenientsampling of college students to test the proposed conceptual model. Therefore, the

Perceivedinternet

confidence

137

findings may not be generalized to other populations. Future research may adopt amore representative sampling technique to replicate this study. Secondly, this studyfocused on apparel as a product category. It may be interesting to see how consumersperceive and behave in other product categories. Therefore, we suggest future studiesto adopt different product categories to test the proposed conceptual model.

References

Aberdeen Group (2005), The Multi-channel Retail Benchmark Report: Where is the TrueMulti-channel Retailer?, available at: http://ftp.software.ibm.com/software/webserver/commerce/RA_Multichannel_PR_2500.pdf (accessed July 15, 2007).

Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human DecisionProcesses, Vol. 50, pp. 179-211.

Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Journal ofAcademy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 74-94.

Bart, Y., Shankar, V., Sultan, F. and Urban, G. (2005), “Are the drivers and role of online trust thesame for all web sites and consumers? A large-scale exploratory empirical study”, Journalof Marketing, Vol. 69, pp. 133-52.

Bhatnagar, A., Misra, S. and Rao, H.R. (2000), “On risk, convenience, and internet shoppingbehavior”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 43 No. 11, pp. 98-105.

Bobbit, L.M. and Dabholkar, P.A. (2001), “Integrating attitudinal theories to understand andpredict use of technology-base self-service”, International Journal of Service IndustryManagement, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 423-50.

Burns, E. (2007), “E-commerce spending up for 2007 holiday and year”, January 5, available at:www.clickz.com/showPage.html?page ¼ 3624408 (accessed February 2, 2007).

Calder, B.J., Philips, L.W. and Tybout, A.M. (1981), “Beyond external validity”, Journal ofConsumer Research, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 112-4.

Chaudhuri, A. and Holbrook, M. (2001), “The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect tobrand performance: the role of brand loyalty”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65, pp. 81-93.

Constantinides, E. (2004), “Influencing the online consumer’s behavior: the web experience”,Internet Research, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 111-26.

Cunningham, L.F., Gerlach, J.H., Harper, M.D. and Young, C.E. (2005), “Perceived risk and theconsumer buying process: internet airline reservations”, International Journal of ServiceIndustry Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 357-72.

Dholakia, R.R., Zhao, M. and Dholakia, N. (2005), “Multichannel retailing: a case study of earlyexperiences”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 63-74.

Eastin, M.S. and LaRose, R. (2000), “Internet self-efficacy and the psychology of the digitaldivide”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 6 No. 1, available at:jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue1/eastin.html (accessed February 1, 2007).

Emergence Marketing (2007), “Online word of mouth is much more powerful (or dangerous) thanoffline word of mouth”, January, available at: www.emergencemarketing.com/archives/2007/01/online_word_of_mouth_is_m.php (accessed February 13, 2007).

Enos, L. (2001), “Can word of mouth save e-commerce?”, E-Commerce Times, May, available at:www.ecommercetimes.com/story/9442.html (accessed January 15, 2003).

Evans, P. (2006), US Online Retail Forecast 2005-2010, available at: www.jupiterresearch.com/bin/item.pl/events:jupitertel/jup/id ¼ 97017 (accessed January 19, 2006).

IJRDM37,2

138

Fanelli, M., Hayes, J. and Schumacher, A. (2006), “Meeting multichannel consumer demands:a roadmap for implementing a customer centric model for retail marketing”, White Paper,Vol. 4 No. 6, available at: www.experianmarketingservices.com/downloads/retail_wp.pdf(accessed March 19, 2008).

Fornell, C.R. and Lacker, D.F. (1981), “Two structural equation models with unobservablevariables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.

Freed, L. (2005), “Customer satisfaction, loyalty, and buying behavior in the evolvingmulti-channel retail world”, Foresee Results/FGI Research Report, available at: www.brickmeetsbyte.com/images/uploads/FSRHoliday04E.pdf (accessed January 28, 2007).

Gefen, D., Karahanna, E. and Straub, D. (2003), “Trust and TAM in online shopping:an integrated model”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 51-90.

Ha, Y. and Stoel, L. (2004), “Internet apparel shopping behaviors: the influence of generalinnovativeness”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 32 No. 8,pp. 377-85.

Hair, J.F. Jr, Black, W.C., Babin, B., Anderson, R. and Tatham, R. (1998), Multivariate DataAnalysis, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Han, Y.K., Morgan, G.A., Kotsiopulos, A. and Kang-Park, J. (1991), “Impulse buying behavior ofapparel purchasers”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 15-21.

Harris Interactive (2002), “College students spend $200 billion per year”, available at: www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID ¼ 480 (accessed January 24, 2007).

Hawes, J. and Lumpkin, J. (1986), “Perceived risk and the selection of a retail patronage mode”,Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 37-42.

Hogg, M.K., Bruce, M. and Hill, A.J. (1998), “Fashion brand preferences among youngconsumers”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 26 No. 8,pp. 293-300.

Holloway, B.B., Wang, S. and Parish, J.T. (2005), “The role of cumulative online purchasingexperience in service recovery management”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 19No. 3, pp. 54-66.

Kaiser, S. (1990), The Social Psychology of Clothing: Symbolic Appearance in Context, 2nd ed.,Macmillan, New York, NY.

Kim, J. and Park, J. (2005), “A consumer shopping channel extension model: attitude shift towardthe online store”, Journal of Fashion Marketing & Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 106-21.

Kim, J., Fiore, A.M. and Lee, H.H. (2007), “Influences of online store perception, shoppingenjoyment, and shopping involvement on consumer patronage behavior towards an onlineretailer”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 95-107.

Klein, L. (1998), Principle and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, Guilford, New York, NY.

Koufaris, M. and Hampton-Sosa, W. (2002), “Customer trust online: examining the role of theexperience with the web site”, working paper, CIS Working Paper Series, New York, NY, May.

Kuan, H.H. and Bock, G.W. (2007), “Trust transference in brick and click retailers:an investigation of the before-online-visit phase”, Information & Management, Vol. 44No. 2, pp. 175-87.

Lee, K.C., Kang, I. and McKnight, D.H. (2007), “Transfer from offline trust to key onlineperceptions: an empirical study”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 54No. 4, pp. 729-41.

Lee, M.Y. and Johnson, K.K.P. (2002), “Exploring differences between internet apparel purchaser,browsers and non-purchasers”, Journal of Fashion Marketing &Management, Vol. 6 No. 2,pp. 146-57.

Perceivedinternet

confidence

139

Levy, M. and Weitz, B.A. (2004), Retailing Management, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York, NY.

Li, N. and Zhang, P. (2002), “Consumer online shopping attitudes and behavior: an assessment ofresearch”, Proceedings of 8th Americas Conference on Information System, 2002,pp. 508-17.

Lohse, G.L., Bellman, S. and Johnson, E.J. (2000), “Consumer buying behavior on the internet:findings from panel data”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 15-29.

Lui, C., Marchewka, J.T., Lu, J. and Yu, C.S. (2005), “Beyond concern-a privacy-trust-behavioralintention model of electronic commerce”, Information & Management, Vol. 42 No. 2,pp. 289-304.

Moorman, C., Zaltman, G. and Deshpande, R. (1992), “Relationships between providers and usersof market research: the dynamics of trust within and between organizations”, Journal ofMarketing Research, Vol. 29, pp. 314-28.

Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D. (1994), “The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing”,Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 20-38.

Newholm, T., McGoldrick, P., Keeling, K., Macaulay, L. and Doherty, J. (2004), “Multi-story trustand online retailer strategies”, International Review of Retail, Distribution & ConsumerResearch, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 437-56.

Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I.H. (1994), Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Park, J. and Stoel, L. (2005), “Effect of brand familiarity, experience and information on onlineapparel purchase”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 33No. 2, pp. 148-60.

Pavlou, P. and Eugenson, M. (2006), “Understanding and predicting electronic commerceadoption: an extension of the theory of planned behavior”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 30 No. 1,pp. 115-43.

Payne, A. and Frow, P. (2004), “The role of multichannel integration in customer relationshipmanagement”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 527-38.

Perez, J.C. (2006), “U.S. e-commerce sales to have brisk growth through 2010”, NetworkWorld,February 7, available at: www.networkworld.com/news/2006/020706-e-commerce.html(accessed January 10, 2007).

Rangaswamy, A. and van Bruggen, G.H. (2005), “Multichannel marketing”, Journal of InteractiveMarketing, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 5-11.

Ratchford, B.T., Lee, M. and Talukdar, D. (2003), “The impact of the internet on informationsearch for automobiles”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 40, pp. 193-209.

Rowley, J. (2000), “Product search in e-shopping: a review and research propositions”, Journal ofConsumer Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 20-35.

Schlosser, A.E., White, T.B. and Lloyd, S.M. (2006), “Converting web site visitors into buyers:how web site investment increases consumer trusting beliefs and online purchaseintentions”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70, pp. 133-48.

Schramm-Klein, H. and Morschett, D. (2005), “Multi-channel retailing”, Journal of Internet Bakingand Commerce, Vol. 10 No. 1.

Shankar, V. and Winer, R. (2005), “Interactive marketing goes multichannel”, Journal ofInteractive Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 2-3.

Shim, S., Eastlick, M.A., Lotz, S.L. and Warrington, P. (2001), “An online pre-purchase intentionsmodel: the role of intention to search”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 397-416.

IJRDM37,2

140

Shop Org. (2001), “Multi-channel retail report 2001: cross-channel shoppers are retailers’ mostvaluable and loyal customers”, October 4, available at: www.shop.org/ press/01/100401.asp (accessed January 10, 2007).

Shop Org. (2003), “Statistics: US online shoppers”, March 10, available at: www.shop.org/learn/stats_usshop_kids.html (accessed January 5, 2007).

Silverman, D. (2000), “More woman wardrobe online ever”, Women’s Wear Daily, Vol. 180 No. 19,p. 20.

Stewart, K. (2003), “Trust transfer on the world wide web”, Organizational Science, Vol. 14 No. 1,pp. 5-17.

Watchravesringkan, K. and Shim, S. (2003), “Information search and shopping intentionsthrough the internet for apparel products”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 21No. 1, pp. 1-7.

Winch, G. and Joyce, P. (2006), “Exploring the dynamics of building and losing consumer trust inB2C e-business”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 34 No. 7,pp. 541-55.

Wolfinbarger, M. and Gilly, M. (2000), “Shopping online for freedom, control and fun”, CaliforniaManagement Review, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 34-55.

Worthy, S.L., Hyllegard, K., Damhorst, M.L., Trautmann, J., Bastow-Shoop, H., Gregory, S.,Lakner, H., Lyons, N. and Manikowske, L. (2004), “Rural consumers’ attitudes toward theinternet for information search and product purchase”, Family and Consumer SciencesResearch Journal, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 517-35.

Zboja, J.J. and Voorhees, C.M. (2006), “The impact of brand trust and satisfaction on retailerrepurchase intentions”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 381-90.

Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996), “The behavioral consequences of servicequality”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60, pp. 31-46.

Further reading

Deutsch, M. (1990), “Sixty years of conflict”, The International Journal of Conflict Management,Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 237-63.

Ryan, K.M. (2006), “User reviews affect buying and search”, iMedia Connection, available at:www.imediaconnection.com/content/11522.asp (accessed October 4, 2006).

Corresponding authorJihyun Kim can be contacted at: jhkim@vt.edu

Perceivedinternet

confidence

141

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints