The fulfillment of consumer shopping needs
in the current online shop environment.
A study to the extent to which Dutch consumers experience physical
shopping needs while shopping online, and the effect on satisfaction.
Kirsten Groeneveld
10243534
Master thesis
Graduate School of Communication
Persuasive Communication Science
Barbara Schouten
2
Table of contents
Abstract 3
Introduction 3
Theoretical framework 7
Uses and gratifications theory 7
Individual differences theory 14
Method 16 Sample 16 Study procedure 17 Study design 17 Pilot test 18 Measures 18
Reliability and factor analysis 19
Data analysis 20 Results 21 Control variables 21 Hypothesis 21 Conclusion 23 Discussion 24
Implications for theory 24
Limitations and future research 26
Implications for practice 28
References 29
3
Abstract
The objective of this study is to examine whether Dutch consumers’ physical shopping needs are nowadays more fulfilled while shopping online in comparison with 3 years ago, and how this influences satisfaction with the shopping experience. Additionally, consumers’
demandingness was taken into account as a moderator for the relationship between the
fulfillment of needs and satisfaction. Data were gathered from 114 respondents who filled out an online survey. Results indicate that Dutch consumers nowadays do not experience a higher level of physical shopping needs fulfillment while shopping online as compared to 3 years ago. Also, a higher level of needs fulfillment did not lead to more satisfaction with the
shopping experience, and this relationship was not moderated by consumers’ demandingness. However, a positive significant effect was found for the influence of consumers’
demandingness on satisfaction directly. This indicates that a higher level of consumer demandingness leads to more satisfaction with the shopping experience. The information obtained in this study contributes to the existing academic knowledge as it adds findings that incorporate recent technical developments of online shops. Furthermore, suggestions for future research are given based on the limitations of this research aimed to investigate extensive explanations for the results.
Keywords: shopping needs, satisfaction, demandingness, needs fulfillment, online shops.
Introduction
A few weeks ago an announcement was made that all 64 V&D department stores in the Netherlands will officially disappear from the shopping streets (Metro, 2016). V&D is not the only retail chain that did not survive in the current shopping environment; more and more shops are already having or facing difficulties (Volkskrant, 2015). On the one hand, there seems to be a logical explanation for this; the number of online consumers increased
4
extremely in the past few years: the online revenue of 2014 increased with 11% in comparison with the year before. Additionally, statistical numbers show that over 10 million people have ever made an online purchase at least once nowadays and almost 8 million of them do so on a regular basis(CBS, 2015). Hence, there may be a switch going on from physical shopping to online shopping. On the other hand, there is another development going on that strongly weakens this assumption. Namely, there are several online shops that have decided to open physical shops as well, for example Amazon and Coolblue. According to experts this ‘from clicks to bricks’ switch might be the future of physical shops (Volkskrant, 2016).
These two different developments underline the fact that there is a contradiction going on in the shopping environment; the dividing line between online and physical shops becomes blurry, which results in one shopping environment without a clear difference between online and physical shops (NU, 2016). Online and physical shops seem to complement each other in the current environment (Into shopping, 2015). It can be expected that this new shopping environment also influences the shopping needs of the consumers. Some needs that first only have been fulfilled during physical shopping may now also be fulfilled during online
shopping, due to the online technological developments in the past few years (Frankwatching, 2014). Online shops really attempt to imitate a physical shopping environment in order to give consumers the same shopping experience, for example by offering virtual fitting rooms and catalogues (Frankwatching, 2014). This way, consumers have the opportunity to see how a specific dress looks when someone actually wears it or how a sofa fits in an actual living room. In addition, online shops currently offer a chat function to use for a situation in which the consumer needs help making a choice or wonders when a product will be in stock again (Marketingfacts, 2014). To achieve this real physical shopping experience even more, online shops use social media and forums to also establish and encourage interaction between consumers mutually (Marketingfacts, 2014). Consumers can now exchange advice or product
5
experiences with each other online as well.
It can be assumed that the fulfillment of shopping needs in the online shop
environment changed along with these developments in the past few years. Hence, the main question of this study focuses on the extent to which consumers acknowledge an increase in the fulfillment of physical shopping needs when shopping online, compared to a few years ago. Physical shopping needs refer to the consumer needs that first only were fulfilled during physical shopping, but due to technological developments now potentially will be fulfilled during online shopping as well. In addition, consumer shopping needs refer to consumers’ desires while shopping either physically or online (24K Marketing, 2011).
Research on the fulfillment of needs is clearly divided into studies that solely focused on either online shopping needs or physical shopping needs. Results of these studies offer a broad overview of the different needs in both shopping environments (Punj, 2011; Overby & Lee, 2006; Yu & Fu, 2010; Swinyard, 1998; Dawson, Bloch& Ridgway, 1990). However, these studies have been done at least a few years ago, which makes the results quite outdated keeping in mind that the online and physical shopping environment changed drastically over the past few years. Therefore, a retrospective comparison will be made with 3 years ago, because the discussed changes in the online shop environment were not extensively present yet during these earlier studies (Frankwatching, 2015). The current online shop environment is much more developed, which delineates a gap in comparison with 3 years ago. The research at hand attempts going into this gap by investigating the difference between now and 3 years ago in the extent to which consumers feel that physical shopping needs can be fulfilled during online shopping. Additionally, the potential impact this difference may have on satisfaction with the consumers’ shopping experience will be taken into account. This is an important factor to consider in this research, because achieving satisfaction does not only lead to favorable purchase intentions, but it impacts loyalty and trust towards the retailer as well (Ha
6
& Stoel, 2010; Roman, 2010; Martin & Camarero, 2008). Consumers’ demandingness will be incorporated as a moderator, because based on previous research this variable potentially influences the relationship between the fulfillment of shopping needs and satisfaction with the shopping experience (Moynagh & Worsley, 2011; Wang & Netemyer, 2002).
In this research the following research question is formulated:
‘To what extent do Dutch consumers acknowledge an increase in the fulfillment of physical shopping needs while shopping online compared to 3 years ago, does this change impact satisfaction, and what is the role of consumer demandingness as a moderator?’
Results contribute to the literature by providing an up-to-date research that takes into account the technological changes in the online shops over the last years, which offers new academic insights that can be added to the already existing scientific knowledge regarding the
fulfillment of consumer shopping needs. Moreover, de role of consumer demandingness has not been investigated yet when it comes to the impact of shopping needs’ fulfillment on satisfaction. Therefore, findings will bring to light the still unknown influence of consumer demandingness in the area of the specific topic in this research.
Subsequently, the study at hand offers a basefor future research. For example, if findings show that online shops nowadays have more potential to fulfill physical shopping needs compared to 3 years ago, it might be interesting to find out whether this potential is able to increase even more in the future and to what extent this difference in the fulfillment of online shopping needs influences the existence of physical shops. Such research suggestions will extend both the academic and practical knowledge.
Findings are also relevant for practice, because it gives insights in the aspects advertising agencies should think about to be effective in this new and changing online shopping environment. For example, if online shops turn out to now have the power to create a physical shopping experience by fulfilling more physical shopping needs compared to 3
7
years ago, then what does that mean for the communications in advertisements or commercials? It could for example be possible that advertising agencies must decide to change the key message in the advertising because the current message is not unique anymore, which may result in a decrease of consumers’ attention.
Theory
Uses and gratifications theory
When investigating the fulfillment of consumer needs, the uses and gratifications theory seems most applicable for the research because this theory focuses on particular needs that lead to satisfaction, which could also refer to the fulfillment of shopping needs (Kim & Eastin, 2011). In this context, uses refer to the extent to which one utilizes online shops and gratifications refer to the motivations one has to use online shops in terms of needs.
Originally, this theory goes back to the beginning of empirical mass communication research meant to get insights in consumer gratifications derived from the mass media (Katz, Blumler & Gurevitch, 1974). For example, what motives people had to watch television, to listen to the radio, or to read newspapers. In general, this theory states that a medium will be used more often when more needs are fulfilled, because this leads to higher satisfaction (De Boer & Brennecke, 2003).
In the context of this study, two main objectives can be derived from the uses and gratifications theory (De Boer & Brennecke, 2003). First, the theory can be used to explain how individuals use the online platform to satisfy their specific needs. An overview of the changes in spending types will be given to illustrate how consumers nowadays shop and how this may influence the fulfillment of shopping needs. Spending type is defined as purchases made within a particular product category (Van Dam & Kraaykamp, 1991). Second, the theory tries to discover the underlying needs where the decision to shop online is based on.
8
Insights in these needs will be acquired from previous studies. Hence, the first objective focuses on how consumers use online shops and the second objective builds on to this by going into the specific needs consumers have to shop online.
How online versus physical shops are used
Individuals have different shopping behaviors. Not only the frequency and the kind of shops someone uses differ, but also the type of spending. Three spending types can be distinguished: primary, secondary, and tertiary spending (Van Dam & Kraaykamp, 1991). Primary spending refers to the first life necessities, for example food, clothes and housing. Secondary spending focuses for instance on education and public transport. Lastly, all luxury products are part of the tertiary spending. These products are not necessary to survive, but are everything that makes your life a bit easier or more fun. In this study secondary spending will not be involved because expenditures within this spending type are not necessarily tangible and lasting
products that can be bought in online shops.
At first, all the product purchases made within these different spending types were made in physical shops, simply because online shops did not exist yet before 1994
(Marketingfacts, 2015). Soon after the first online purchase in 1994 the still well-known mega online shops Amazon and E-bay established. In the Netherlands the first online shop was Bol.com, which was introduced in 1999 (Marketingfacts, 2015). These first online shops only sell products within the tertiary spending type: fashion items, electronic products, books, etcetera (Emerce, 2015). Only recently Dutch supermarkets also entranced the online
shopping environment, among others, Albert Heijn, Jumbo, and Deen (Webshopblog, 2015). The advent of online supermarkets is accompanied with the ability for consumer to make online purchases within the primary spending type, namely food and drinks. This sector is growing even more and more. In 2015 online supermarket Picnic started competing with the physical supermarkets and their online web shops by not opening a physical store at all and
9
delivering the products for free (NOS, 2015). This recent event underlines the increasing character of online primary spending.
This development from online shops also illustrates the changes in online purchases within the different spending types over the past few years. In the beginning of online shops, it was only possible for consumers to buy products within the tertiary spending type.
However, nowadays it is possible to buy products within the primary spending type as well, due to the online supermarkets. This online sector is still evolving. CBS (2015) shows that purchases within the tertiary spending type are still most popular, but the purchases within the primary spending type are increasing faster. It can be expected that this trend continues in the future.
Online shopping motives
The increasing amount of online shoppers and the rising opportunities for consumers to shop online illustrate an online supply and demand environment. But why do people want to use online shops? And why do they want to use it increasingly? Several researches have been done that investigated the motives for consumers to shop online, which refer to the
motivations that support the decision for online shopping. One of those motivations focuses on the consumer needs, which are defined as the aspects consumers are looking for and want to have fulfilled.
Punj (2011) investigated the effect of consumer beliefs on online purchase behavior. In this research he distinguished three beliefs that consumers have when it comes to online shopping, which he considers most common. These beliefs are the fact that online shopping saves time, saves money, and helps finding the best suitable product after comparing the alternatives. This last belief is confirmed in research conducted by Häubl and Trifts (2000), who found that comparing available alternatives is seen as an opportunity in online shopping and has a favorable effect on consumer’s purchase decisions. Research of Overby and Lee
10
(2006) also focused on the effect of consumer beliefs, but they divided them into the categories utilitarian and hedonic beliefs. Utilitarian beliefs are defined as the overall
judgements of functional benefits and sacrifices of online shopping, and hedonic beliefs focus on the experiential benefits and sacrifices of online shopping (Koo, Kim & Lee, 2007; Overby & Lee, 2006). Findings of this study show that consumers mainly decide to shop online for utilitarian reasons, including time and money savings like Punj (2011) also mentioned.
Where Punj (2011) and Overby and Lee (2006) studied the reasons for online
shopping from a consumer’s perspective, Chen, Hsu, and Lin (2009) studied the reasons from the perspective of the online shops. They wanted to determine what attributes of online shops influenced the online purchase intentions of consumers. First of all, results demonstrate that security of the potential online transaction and personal data is of great importance. The online transaction should be safe and personal information should be handled in a confidential way. Second, usability of the online shop is vital. This refers to the design and functionality of the web shop in general, which consists of three main features: the online shop must be easy to use, offer a search option, and provide interactive mechanisms. Third, reliable and fast product delivery seems to be essential for the satisfaction of consumers. Fourth and last, consumers value convenience of the online shop, which refers to the website functions that reduce time and effort (Chen et al., 2009). This attribute corresponds with the utilitarian consumer reasons to shop online, outlined by Overby and Lee (2006). Ha and Stoel (2011) identified two more relevant online shop attributes, in addition to the ones Chen et al. (2009) already mentioned. They state that customer service and experiential qualities are considered valuable as well. Customer service should be supportive and responds quickly to consumers’ inquiries, and experiential qualities refer to the extent to which the online shop is unique and entertaining. Experiential qualities, such as the extent to which online shopping is considered fun, are in line with the hedonic beliefs in the research of Overby and Lee (2006), which they
11
found to be less influential compared to utilitarian beliefs. But, still these hedonic factors seem to play a powerful role in the consumers’ decision whether or not to shop online (Ha and Stoel, 2011).
Next to all the online shopping motives that are already mentioned, Yu and Fu (2010) came up with one more motive that has not been mentioned yet by other researchers, namely the need for non-interruption. This refers to the fact that online shopping offers an
environment in which consumers do not face interruptions of a salesperson who distracts them. Many consumers consider this annoying (Yu & Fu, 2010).
Putting all these findings together, it is possible to come up with a list of 4 main different online shopping motives:
1. Convenience – online shopping saves time
2. Making comparisons – online shopping helps you making the best personal choice 3. Economic benefit – online shopping saves money
4. No interruptions – online shopping does not have distracting salespersons
These shopping motives hold better when the online shop meets the following specific conditions:
1. Security of the transaction and personal information 2. User-friendly
3. Possibilities to quickly interact with customer service employees 4. Fast product delivery
5. Uniqueness
Physical shopping motives
In the past some research has been done on consumer motives to shop physically. What are those motives, and is there an overlap with the online shopping motives?
12
Farrag, Sayed, and Belk (2010) investigated the reasons for consumers to shop in shopping malls. As well as Overby and Lee (2006) they divided these physical shopping reasons into utilitarian and hedonic motives, which more or less correspond with the motives that are already identified for online shopping, among others, convenience – because
everything is under one roof (Farrag et al., 2010). Research conducted by Swinyard (1998) also focused on the physical shopping motives. However, the results of this study show two important differences with the online shopping motives, which may make these motives unique and typical for physical shopping. First, visiting physical shopping malls gives consumers a sense of belonging to a community. Second, visiting physical shopping malls makes it possible to build warm relationships with other people. Hence, both motives have something to do with the fact that shopping physically enables consumers to interact face-to-face with others. Findings found by Dawson et al. (1990) confirm this motive. They divided shopping motives into either product or experiential motives, in which product motives refer to consumers who came to the physical stores to look for and buy specific products and experiential motives refer to consumers who came to the physical stores just to see, hear, and be surrounded by other people. So again, it is about the ‘vivid experience’ physical shopping offers (Dawson et al., 1990).
Online shopping evolves fast and already took over many shopping motives people first solely had regarding physical shopping, for instance the possibility to compare different product before making a choice. However, the above-discussed findings suggest that there is one typical and unique characteristic of physical shopping that fulfills an important shopping motive for consumers, namely the vivid shopping experience. This experience consists of three separate components (Swinyard, 1998; Dawson et al., 1990):
1. Be surrounded by other people during shopping
13
3. Get a sense of belonging to a community during shopping
Because of the quick evolving character of online shopping, it might be possible that consumer nowadays acknowledge this vivid experience as well when shopping online, compared to a few year ago. In other words; is online shopping capable of taking over all the originally physical shopping needs? In this research the predicted answer to this question is ‘yes’, due to the technological changes in the online shopping environment that attempt to give consumers a physical shopping experience, for example the increasing possibility to online interact with other people during visiting online shops. This leads to the following hypothesis.
H1: Dutch consumers’ fulfillment of the physical shopping need ‘vivid experience’ while shopping online is higher compared to 3 years ago.
Satisfaction
Has the extent to which consumer shopping needs are fulfilled an influence on the overall satisfactory feeling consumers have regarding the shopping experience? In this research we use the definition of satisfaction by Oliver (1981), that refers to the degree to which the levels of needs fulfillment are experienced as pleasurable. Satisfaction has not only the power to significantly increase purchase intentions, but also to improve loyalty and trust towards the retailer (Ha & Stoel, 2010; Roman, 2010; Martin & Camarero, 2008), for instance higher satisfaction with the online shopping experience could mean that consumers will return to an online shop.
According to Schroder and Zaharia (2008) consumers choose the shopping channel where most of their needs will be fulfilled, because that leads to the optimal satisfied feeling. Ha and Stoel (2010) explored how the fulfillment of needs influences consumer shopping outcomes, among others satisfaction. Findings show that needs have the potential to positively
14
impact the degree of satisfaction when those needs are fulfilled. This result is confirmed in research conducted by Martin and Camarero (2008), who investigated consumers’ trust towards the online environment. They incorporated satisfaction as a determinant for trust and found that the fulfillment of specific needs has a favorable effect on the level of satisfaction. Lastly, Yu and Fu (2010) show a conclusion that is in line with the findings of Ha and Stoel (2010) and Martina and Camarero (2008). Their research to consumer needs and online shopping behavior also suggest that online shops should attempt to fulfill as many needs as possible, because the extent to which needs are fulfilled contribute to the degree of
satisfaction consumers experience while online shopping.
Since it is assumed that online shops now potentially not only fulfill typical online shopping needs but also physical shopping needs, it can be predicted that this shift also positively impacts the extent to which consumers are satisfied with the shopping experience. Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated.
H2: The higher the fulfillment of shopping needs, the higher the satisfaction with the shopping experience.
Individual differences theory
The extent to which consumers feel satisfied with the shopping experience may also differ for each individual. Imaginably, one may be satisfied sooner than someone else, and this also depends on the needs someone has. Following the individual differences theory (Kent, 2006), this assumption can be supported. Originally this theory states that individuals respond differently to the mass media due to different psychological needs, and that individuals use the mass media in order to satisfy those needs (Kent, 2006). However, if the theory is translated to a more general meaning, this could also be applicable for the research at hand. The main message of the theory focuses on the fact that people have different needs and react differently according to those needs. The findings of Moynagh and Worsley (2001) are in line
15
with this theory by confirming that it is generally harder to satisfy people who are more demanding, which refers to requiring generally more than is felt by others.
Wang and Netemyer (2002) investigated the effect of customer demandingness on the salesperson’s effort and performance. Results show that demanding customers affect the extent to which salespersons put effort in their work, because in a situation like that it is harder to do a good job and satisfy the customer. Research conducted by Jaramillo, Mulki and Boles (2013) support the findings of Wang and Netemyer (2002). They found that excessive customer demands can be perceived as overwhelming by the salespersons, because that means that it is a challenge to help those customers as desired.
In summary, these results suggest that the more demanding someone is, the harder it will be to achieve satisfaction. In this research it is about satisfaction with regards to the shopping experience, which leads to the third hypothesis.
H3: The extent to which Dutch consumers are demanding negatively influences the relation between the fulfillment of physical shopping needs while online shopping and satisfaction with the shopping experience.
All the hypotheses of this research are outlined in a conceptual framework (see figure 1).
16
Method
Sample
Data were collected from a convenience sample of 154 Dutch respondents. This sampling method was chosen because of the time -and budget restrictions for this research. However, due to this method the sample may not be representative for the whole population and it is not possible to identify how many people within the sample were reached. Therefore, the
response rate cannot be determined (Kanuk & Berenson, 1975). Respondents were recruited by means of a Facebook post and e-mail, in which they were asked to fill out the online survey in the accompanying URL link. Online distribution was used, because that is the most effective way to foster a high reach within a short amount of time. Of the 154 respondents, 1 was eliminated from the sample due to missing data. Additionally, it was a prerequisite for study inclusion that the respondents were able to make the online shop comparison between now and 3 years ago. Therefore, the 39 respondents who reported not to have made an online purchase in the last six months or approximately 3 years ago were also eliminated from the sample (18.83%). The final sample of 114 respondents consisted of 58.8 percent male and 41.2 percent female between the age of 18 and 59 (M=34.35, SD=11.98). The most frequent education level of the respondents was university (42.10%). This is mainly because of the recruitment method, in which university students were most likely to be approached.
The sample is not representative for the whole Dutch population, but because the respondents are capable to make the comparison between online shopping nowadays and 3 years ago, this sample is suitable for testing the hypotheses in this research. Therefore, results can be considered meaningful and valid.
17
Study procedure
As soon as respondents clicked on the URL link to the online survey a text was shown in which they were thanked for wanting to participate in the 5-minute survey about online shopping and made aware of the ethical statement (see appendix A). After the respondents gave their informed consent, the online survey started. The first few questions focused on the demographics of the respondent, followed by the questions measuring the study constructs (see Appendix A for the survey). Every section of questions had a short introduction to make sure that the respondents fully understood what to do and what to think of. The questions to measure demandingness were introduced by telling the respondents again that the answers are anonymous. This was done to comfort the respondents because of the personal nature of the questions. After finishing the survey, the respondents were thanked for their participation and shown the researchers’ email address in case they were interested in the results of the study. For most of the respondents the end of the survey was after answering the last question, but for some of them finished the survey earlier because they responded no to either one of the questions that focused on whether the respondent shopped online in the last 6 months and 3 years ago.
Study design
It was a cross sectional study due to the limited time. The use of this study design means that respondents were only approached once and there will therefore be no loss of respondents in follow-ups (Sedgwick, 2014). Respondents were asked to fill out the online survey
individually and based on self-report. Because respondents could fill out the questionnaire on multiple electronic devices such as mobile phones, tablets, and laptops, the environmental setting in which the survey was filled out differed for each individual.
18
Pilot test
To determine whether respondents were able to make the key comparison of this research, namely the difference between the current shopping experience and 3 years ago, 12 random people were asked whether they have made an online purchase in the past 6 months and 3 years ago. This comparison is difficult to measure because people might not remember how they experienced something in the past. Therefore, 12 random people were asked the
following question prior to the research: “Do you think it is possible for you to think back to a specific situation of approximately 3 years ago?”. Except for 1 person, everyone indicated to be able to do this when they are specifically asked to do so. To the question “would it be helpful for you if the imagination to a specific situation in the past is triggered before answering the question?” everyone responded positively. This outcome was incorporated in the survey by showing the respondents a short introductory text before answering the questions and let them think about what kind of product they purchased.
Measures
Dependent variables
To assess consumers’ vivid shopping experience, which consists of 3 components, 6 items were used. The components ‘be surrounded by other people’ (Dawson et al.) and ‘possibility to build relationships with others’ (Swinyard, 1998) were both measured with 1 item. The component ‘sense of belonging’ (Swinyard, 1998) consists of 4 items acquired from a valid sense of belonging scale constructed by Hagerty and Patusky (1995). All items were adapted to the specific research at hand and measured on a 7-point Likert scale based on Dawson et al. (1990) (1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree). Additionally, satisfaction was also assessed based on a 7-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree), consisting of 3 items (Ha and Stoel, 2011). These items were used because Ha and Stoel (2011) measured
19
specifically e-shopping satisfaction, which is in line with the kind of satisfaction in the
research at hand. Therefore, adaptation of these items was not needed. The scale items of each construct are outlined in the survey (see Appendix A).
Moderator
Demandingness was measured on a 4-item, 7-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree;
7=strongly agree). The items were based on previous research but modified in order to fit the research at hand. These scale items were considered reliable (Jaramillo et al., 2013). See appendix A for the items.
Demographic variables
Age, gender, education level, and product category were taken into account to function as control variables.
Reliability and factor analysis
In order to determine whether the items of the scales measure the same construct and whether the scales were reliable, factor and reliability analyses were conducted (see appendix B for the pattern – and component matrices of the factor analyses). For all factor analysis Direct
Oblimin rotation was used, because the items were expected to correlate with each other (Costello & Osborne, 2005). The variable ‘vivid shopping experience’ was composed with 6 different items, and measured two times: for the current shopping experience and the
experience 3 years ago. Factor analysis for the vivid shopping experience nowadays showed that the items measure two different components. The first component has an eigenvalue of 3.24 and consists of 4 items that focus on building relationships with other customers and the feeling of fitting in and being appreciated, in which the item ‘during the online purchase I felt like I was part of something’ had the highest loading (0.92). This first scale of vivid shopping experience nowadays is reliable; Cronbach’s alpha is 0.86 (M=2.48, SD=1.39). The second
20
component of this variable had an eigenvalue of 1.10 and consists of two items that focus on the extent to which the customers feel like they are surrounded by others, in which both items had an equal loading (0.89). The Cronbach’s alpha shows a reliable scale with a score of 0.75 (M=3.58, S=1.84). The same two components were distinguished for the vivid shopping experience of 3 years ago, which had an eigenvalue of 2.71 for the first component and 1.51 for the second in combination with a Cronbach’s alpha score of respectively 0.84 (M=2.38,
SD=1.25) and 0.67 (M=3.32, SD=1.72). Although the scale of the second component is
borderline reliable in this case, the scale was used because it is important for the comparison that the scales consist of the same items. The higher someone scores, the higher the extent to which someone experiences online shopping as vivid.
Factor analysis for satisfaction with the shopping experience both nowadays and 3 years ago shows that the item ‘it was fun to shop online’ has an extraction below the 0.4. Therefore, this item was deleted. The remaining two items loaded 0.93 for the measurement of current satisfaction with an eigenvalue of 2.17 and 0.76 for the measurement of 3 years ago with an eigenvalue of 1.90. Cronbach’s alpha reveals that the scales are reliable with an alpha of respectively 0.83 (M=6.15, SD=0.98) and 0.95 (M=5.97, SD=1.02). The higher the score, the more satisfied someone is with the shopping experience. The last variable
‘demandingness’ consisted of 4 items with an eigenvalue of 2.80, of which the item ‘in general I see myself as a demanding person’ loaded the highest (0.86). Cronbach’s alpha shows a score of 0.85, which indicated a reliable scale (M=5.45, SD=1.11). The higher someone scores, the more demanding someone is.
Data analysis
The first hypothesis was tested by means of a paired samples t-test, meant to compare two equal groups for different time periods. In this case a t-test was conducted to compare the mean difference of both the first and second component of vivid shopping experience between
21
now and 3 years ago. In addition, to test whether a higher extent of vivid shopping experience results in a higher level of satisfaction and whether this relationship is influenced by
demandingness, PROCESS macro analysis was used (Hayes, 2013). This program estimates both direct effects and moderation effects.
Results
Control variables
Regression analyses indicate that there is no predictive correlation between the control variables and the fulfillment of the physical shopping need ‘vivid experience’ (H1).Also PROCESS macro analysis shows that the control variables did not have a significant influence on the tested relation between the fulfillment of the physical shopping need ‘vivid experience’ and satisfaction with the shopping experience (H2), and the moderating effect of
demandingness (H3). Hence, the control variables age, gender, education level, and product category were not taken into account in testing the hypotheses. See Appendix C for the results of the control variables.
Hypothesis 1
A paired samples t-test was conducted to compare the vivid shopping experience nowadays and 3 years ago, in which a distinction has been made between the two components of this variable. The first component that focuses on the extent to which the respondents feel like it is possible to build relationships, fitting in, and being appreciated while shopping online shows a non-significant difference in scores for now (M=2.84, SD=1.39) and 3 years ago (M=2.38,
SD=1.25), t (113) = 1.14, p > 0.05, 95% CI [-0.08, 0.30]. The second component of vivid
shopping experience that focuses on the extent to which respondent feel like they are
surrounded by others while shopping online shows a marginal significant difference in scores for now (M=3.58, SD=1.84) and 3 years ago (M=3.32, SD=1.72), t (113) = 1.84, p < 0.10,
22
95% CI [-0.02, 0.55]. These results suggest that respondents do not necessarily experience a more vivid online shopping environment now in comparison with 3 years ago (see table 1). But, since the second component is nearly significant, it is possible to indicate that Dutch consumers potentially feel more surrounded by others while shopping online in comparison with 3 years ago.
Table 1. Results t-test hypothesis 1
Variable 95% BCCI
SE t LLCI ULCI p
Vivid shopping experience comp. 1 0.10 1.14 -0.08 0.30 0.257
Vivid shopping experience comp. 2 0.14 1.84 -0.20 0.55 0.068
Hypothesis 2
PROCESS macro analysis shows no significant result for the effect of the overall average vivid shopping experience on satisfaction with the shopping experience, b=-0.06, p > 0.05, 95% CI [-0.21, 0.08]. This finding suggest that the level of vivid shopping experience in general had no influence on the extent to which respondents are satisfied with the online shopping experience (see table 2).
Hypothesis 3
No significant result was found for the moderation effect of demandingness, b=-0.05, p > 0.05, 95% CI [-0.23, 0.12]. This result indicates that a higher score on the scale of
demandingness did not have a reinforcing or weakening effect on the relation between vivid shopping experience and satisfaction. However, demandingness has a positive significant direct effect on satisfaction with the online shopping experience, b=0.21, p=0.02, 95% CI [0.02, 0.40]. This means that the more demanding someone is, the more satisfied with the online shopping experience (see table 2).
23
In addition, a paired sample t-test shows that respondents score a bit higher on the scale for satisfaction with the shopping experience nowadays (M=6.15, SD=0.98) compared to 3 years ago (M=5.97, SD=1.02), but this difference is not significant, t (113) = 1.60, p > 0.05, 95% CI [-0.39, 0.04]. Hence, the respondents are in general equally satisfied with both the current and previous online shopping experience (see table 3).
Table 2. Results PROCESS hypotheses 2 and 3
Variable 95% BCCI
b SE LLCI ULCI p
Satisfaction (constant) 6.04 0.47 5.10 6.97 0.000
Demandingness 0.21 0.10 0.02 0.40 0.027
Vivid shopping experience -.0.6 0.07 -0.21 0.08 0.364
Moderation effect -0.05 0.09 -0.23 0.12 0.567
Table 3. Results t-test satisfaction
Variable 95% BCCI
SE t LLCI ULCI p
Satisfaction now vs 3 years ago 1.17 1.60 -0.04 0.39 0.112
Conclusion
To what extent do Dutch consumers acknowledge an increase in the fulfillment of physical shopping needs while shopping online compared to 3 years ago, does this change impact satisfaction, and what is the role of consumer demandingness as a moderator? This was the main question in this research. Results of this study indicate that all hypotheses are rejected. Dutch consumers’ fulfillment of the physical shopping need vivid experience while online shopping is in general not higher compared to 3 years ago (H1). However, they do potentially feel more surrounded by other people while shopping online in comparison with 3 years ago; this effect was marginally significant. Also, higher fulfillment of this shopping need does not
24
lead to higher satisfaction with the online shopping experience (H2), and the extent to which Dutch consumers are demanding does not moderate this relation (H3). However, results do show that demandingness positively impacts satisfaction with the shopping experience directly; the more demanding someone is, the more satisfied one is with the shopping experience. To generally answer the main question of this study: Dutch consumers do not acknowledge an increase in the fulfillment of physical shopping needs while shopping online compared to 3 years ago, and also the level of satisfaction did not change during this period of time. Additionally, consumer demandingness did not have a moderating role.
Discussion
Implications for theory
The findings of this study did not meet the expectations. First, due to technological developments in the past few years it was expected that the fulfillment of the need vivid shopping experience would have been higher nowadays compared to 3 years ago. This physical shopping need was identified by comparing previous studies in which online shopping needs (Punj, 2011; Häubl & Trifts, 2000; Overby & Lee, 2006) and physical shopping needs (Farrag et al., 2010; Swinyard, 1998; Dawson et al., 1990) were investigated and by determining the differences between these needs. As Dutch consumers do not seem to experience more vividness in the current online shop environment compared to 3 years ago, it is possible to carefully assume that the differences between the online and physical shopping needs are still intact and that recent online technological changes did not have a meaningful impact on these differences. But, the effect for the component ‘being surrounded by others while shopping online’ was marginally significant, which means that it could be possible to find significant results if for example a bigger sample was used.
25
Second, based on the uses and gratifications theory (Katz et al., 1974) and previous research (De Boer & Brennecke, 2003; Ha & Stoel, 2010; Martin & Camarero, 2008; Yu and Fu, 2010) it was expected that the higher the fulfillment of the physical shopping needs, the higher the satisfaction with the shopping experience would be. Since results do not confirm this, it is questionable to what extent Dutch consumers value the physical shopping needs in the online shopping environment; there might be a connection with the online need for non-interruption (Yu & Fu, 2010), which possibly contradicts with the physical shopping need vivid experience.It could for example be possible that the fulfillment of physical shopping needs does not contribute to consumers’ satisfaction, because they are not looking for the needs assessed in this study while shopping online. Also, the low scores on the scales that measured the fulfillment of physical shopping needs in this research could be an explanation for the fact that no relation has been found between the fulfillment of physical shopping needs and satisfaction.
Third, in this research demandingness did not have a moderating effect on the relationship between the fulfillment of needs and satisfaction with the shopping experience. However, results did show that demandingness has a direct positive effect on satisfaction. This finding is in contrast with previous research (Moynagh & Worsley, 2001; Jaramillo et al., 2013; Wang & Netemyer, 2002) in which a negative effect was found for the relationship between demandingness and satisfaction. An explanation for this could be that the research at hand tested another context of this relationship, and that demandingness may have different effects in this particular context.
Overall, the study at hand gives meaningful scientific insights and useful suggestions for future research because of the theory based hypothesis that were rejected, and the possible explanations for this that need further investigation for clarification. These suggestions for future research are outlined in the next section.
26
Limitations and future research
This research has some limitations, which are worth mentioning with regards to the results. First, the sample is not representative for the whole Dutch population because of the recruitment method. Respondents were only approached online, which can say something about their online behavior, including online shopping and the specific needs they have when it comes to online shopping. It might be possible that people who would have been
approached in another way respond differently to questions that were asked in the survey. Also, other results may have been found if the sample included more respondents.
Second, this research incorporated a retrospective comparison in a cross-sectional study. Although a pretest has been done, this design could still be questionable for the
trustworthiness of the research. To what extent can consumers honestly assess a situation of 3 years ago reliably? There is a chance that they would have responded in another way to the questions if they were asked 3 years ago instead of now, which could be a threat for the validity of the research (Tofthagen, 2012). However, in the study at hand this could not have been measured in another way. Therefore, the research at hand attempted to make the
consumers’ indications as reliable as possible by putting in specific introductions and questions to trigger the memory of the consumers in the survey. If there are no time
restrictions, longitudinal research would be an alternative to overcome the validity problem of retrospective research in the future.
Building on to the results and limitations of this research, several other valuable suggestions for future research can be outlined. First of all, it is needed to investigate whether Dutch consumers are looking for physical shopping needs in the online shopping
environment. This could be an explanation for the fact that respondents who scored higher on the scale of vivid shopping experience did not score higher on satisfaction with the shopping experience. Maybe consumers do not need vividness when shopping online to experience
27
satisfaction. From an academic point of view this assumption is useful to find out because recently no research has been done to what needs consumers have while shopping either online of physically. Keeping in mind the changes in both shopping environments, it could be possible that there has been a shift in the consumer shopping needs as well. If that is the case, this will also give meaningful insights for practice. Why trying to make the online shopping environment more like a physical shopping experience if consumers are not longing for that? This is an important question for marketers in order to make online and physical shops effectively attractive for consumers.
Second of all, further research into the relationship between demandingness and satisfaction could be useful as well. Findings of this research show a positive effect, which contradicts with results of previous studies. But why did this research find that
demandingness leads to higher satisfaction? It could for example be possible that demanding people are more satisfied because they know better what they are looking for and will
therefore be more content when it is achieved. Also, the relation between demandingness and satisfaction may depend on the context of satisfaction. Demandingness could have a different impact on satisfaction with the shopping experience than on satisfaction with other situations, for example satisfaction with the purchase in general. Knowing this could contribute to the literature, because it would give clear insight in the effect of demandingness on satisfaction in different situations. Consequently, marketers could use this information to determine to what extent they have to keep the consumers’ requirements in mind in order to reach the desired type of satisfaction.
Besides these two recommendations for future research that focus on finding
explanations for the results, it might also be an option to consider some additional variables as an extension for testing the central relationship in the study at hand. To give some
28
online shop. The quantity of online shopping may impact the extent to which consumers experience specific shopping needs and the extent to which they are satisfied with this. It is for example imaginable that the more someone shops online, the more satisfied this person is because he or she does so on a regular basis. In return, more online shopping could also lead to a decrease in satisfaction because the default of expectations gets higher every time
someone shops online. The type of online shop possibly has an effect, because not every web shop has the same features and fulfills the same needs. This subsequently may influence the extent to which satisfaction with the shopping experience is reached in a negative or positive way. To conclude, many different factors have the potential to influence the relationship between the fulfillment of shopping needs and satisfaction.
Implications for practice
In practice the results of this study are mainly useful for advertising agencies. Since the online shopping environment nowadays does not have the potential to create a physical shopping experience, marketers should keep this in mind while advertising for shopping physically. This can be done by focusing explicitly on the typical physical shopping needs. Namely, after the past 3 technological evolving years these shopping needs still seem to be unique for physical shops. This means that these particular physical shopping needs in the physical shopping environment has the potential to offer the consumers something that cannot be offered in the online shopping environment. In addition, the physical shopping needs do not impact satisfaction with the online shopping experience. This means that advertising agencies should not focus on these physical aspects while advertising online shopping, because it does not contribute to consumers’ satisfaction.
29
References
Bosnjak, M., Galesic, M., & Tuten, T. (2006). Personality determinants of online shopping: Explaining online purchase intentions using a hierarchical approach. Journal of
Business Research, 60(6), 597-605. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.06.008
CBS (2015). Ruim 10 miljoen online shoppers. Retrieved from: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2015/30/ruim-10-miljoen-online-shoppers
Chen, Y.H., Hsu, I.C., & Lin, C.C. (2010). Website attributes that increase consumer purchase intention: A conjoint analysis. Journal of Business Research, 63(9-10), 1007-1014. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.01.023
Costello, A.B., & Osborne, J.W. (2005). Best Practices in Exploratory Factor Analysis: Four Recommendations for Getting the Most From Your Analysis. Practical Assessment,
Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 2-9.
Dawson, S., Bloch, P., & Ridgway, N.M. (1990). Shopping motives, emotional states, and retail outcomes. Journal of Retailing, 66(4), 410-427.
De Boer, C., & Brennecke, S. (2009). Media en Publiek. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Boom.
Demangeot, C., & Broderick, A.J. (2010). Consumer Perceptions of Online Shopping Environments: A Gestalt Approach. Psychology and Marketing, 27(2), 117-140. doi:10.1002/mar.20323
Emerce (2015). Picnic houdt de consument uit de supermarkt. Retrieved from:
http://www.emerce.nl/interviews/picnic-houdt-de-consument-uit-de-supermarkt Farrag, D.A., El Sayed, I.M., & Belk, R.W. (2010). Mall Shopping Motives and Activities: A
Multimethod Approach. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 22(2), 95-115.doi: 10.1080/08961530903476113
30
Frankwatching (2014). 36% meer online shopping & 5 trends om daar op in te
spelen.Retrieved from:
http://www.frankwatching.com/archive/2014/11/10/36-meer-online-shopping-5-trends-om-daar-op-in-te-spelen/
Ha, S., & Stoel, L. (2012). Online apparel retailing: roles of e‐shopping quality and
experiential e‐shopping motives. Journal of Service Management, 23(2),
197-215.doi:10.1108/09564231211226114
Hagerty, B.M., & Patusky, K. (1995). Developing a measure of sense of belonging. PubMed,
44(1), 9-13.
Häubl, G., & Trifts, V. (2000). Consumer Decision Making in Online Shopping
Environments: The Effects of Interactive Decision Aids. Marketing Science, 19(1), 4-21.doi: 10.1287/mksc.19.1.4.15178
Heitz-Spahn, S. (2013). Cross-channel free-riding consumer behavior in a multichannel environment: An investigation of shopping motives, sociodemographics and product categories. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 20(6), 570-578.doi:
10.1016/j.jretconser.2013.07.006
Into shopping (2015). Het belang van fysieke winkels voor webshops. Retrieved from:
http://www.intoshopping.nl/blog/2473/het-belang-van-fysieke-winkels-voor-webshops Jaramillo, F., Mulki, J.P., & Boles, J.S. (2013). Bringing meaning to the sales job: The effect
of ethical climate and customer demandingness. Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 2301-2307.doi:10.1177/0092070302303003
Kanuk, L., & Berenson, C. (1975). Mail surveys and response rates: A literature review.
Journal of Marketing Research, 12(4), 440-453.doi: 10.2307/3151093
Katz, E., Blumler, J.G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Uses and Gratifications Research. The
31
Kent, M. (2007). The Oxford Dictionary of Sports Science & Medicine. Oxford University
Press, 3.
Kim, J.U., Kim, J.W., & Park, S.C. (2010). Consumer perceptions on web advertisements and motivation factors to purchase in the online shopping. Computers in Human Behavior,
26(5), 1208-1222.doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.032
Kim, S., & Eastin, M.S. (2011). Hedonic Tendencies and the Online Consumer: An
Investigation of the Online Shopping Process. Journal of Internet Commerce, 10 (1), 68-90.doi: 10.1080/15332861.2011.558458
Koo, D.M., Kim, J.J., & Lee, S.H. (2008). Personal values as underlying motives of shopping online, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 20(2),
156-173.doi:10.1108/13555850810864533
Lee, M.Y., Kim, Y.K., & Lee, H.J (2013). Adventure versus gratification: emotional shopping in online auctions, European Journal of Marketing, 47(1-2),
49-70.doi:10.1108/03090561311285457
Lennon, S.J., Kim, M., Johnson, K.K.P., Jolly, L.D., Damhorst, M.L., & Jasper, C.R. (2007). A Longitudinal Look at Rural Consumer Adoption of Online Shopping. Psychology
and Marketing, 24(4), 375-401.doi: 10.1002/mar.20165
Marketingfacts (2014). Customer service in 2015: opstomen naar de echte transformatie. Retrieved from: http://www.marketingfacts.nl/berichten/customer-service-in-2015-opstomen-naar-de-echte-transformatie
Marketingfacts (2014). Maak je webshop menselijker met deze 6 tips. Retrieved from:
http://www.marketingfacts.nl/berichten/maak-je-webshop-menselijker-met-deze-6-tips Marketingfacts (2015). De e-commerce geschiedenis in tien mijlpalen. Retrieved from:
32
Martin, S.S., & Camarero, C. (2008). Consumer Trust to a Web Site: Moderating Effect of Attitudes toward Online Shopping. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(5), 549-554.doi: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0097
Metro (2016). Geen doorstart voor V&D, warenhuis verdwijnt. Retrieved from
http://www.metronieuws.nl/nieuws/binnenland/2016/02/geen-doorstart-voor-vd-warenhuis-verdwijnt
Mooradian, T.A., & Olver, J.M. (1996). Shopping motives and the five factor model: an integration and preliminary study. Psychological reports, 78(2), 579-592.doi: 10.2466/pr0.1996.78.2.579
Moynagh, M., & Worsley, R. (2006). Tomorrow's consumer - the shifting balance of power.
Journal of Consumer Behavior, 1(3), 293-301.doi: 10.1002/cb.74
Mundorf, N., & Bryant, J. (2002). Realizing the social and commercial potential of interactive technologies. Journal of Business Research, 55(8), 665-570.doi: 10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00207-1
NOS (2015). Online supermarkt Picnic bezorgt boodschappen gratis. Retrieved from: http://nos.nl/artikel/2050450-online-supermarkt-picnic-bezorgt-boodschappen-gratis.html
NU (2016). Scheidslijn tussen online en fysieke winkel verdwijnt. Retrieved from:
http://www.nu.nl/nuzakelijk-overig/3010351/scheidslijn-tussen-online-en-fysieke-winkel-verdwijnt.html
Oliver, R.L. (1981). Measurement and evaluation of satisfaction processes in retail settings.
Journal of retailing, 57(3), 25-48.
Overby, J.W., & Lee, E.J. (2006). he effects of utilitarian and hedonic online shopping value on consumer preference and intentions. Journal of Business Research, 59(10-11), 1160-1166.doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.03.008
33
Punj, G. (2011). Effect of Consumer Beliefs on Online Purchase Behavior: The Influence of Demographic Characteristics and Consumption Values. Journal of Interactive
Marketing, 25(3), 14-144.doi: 10.1016/j.intmar.2011.04.004
Punj, G. (2012). Income effects on relative importance of two online purchase goals: Saving time versus saving money? Journal of Business Research, 65(5), 634-640.doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.03.003
Roman, S. (2010). Relational Consequences of Perceived Deception in Online Shopping: The Moderating Roles of Type of Product, Consumer’s Attitude Toward the Internet and Consumer’s Demographics. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(3), 373-391.
Salaun, Y., & Flores, K. (2001). Information quality: meeting the needs of the consumer.
International Journal of Information Management, 21(1), 21-37.doi:
10.1016/S0268-4012(00)00048-7
Schröder, H., & Zaharia, S. (2008). Linking multi-channel customer behavior with shopping motives: An empirical investigation of a German retailer. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 15(6), 452-468.doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2008.01.001
Sedgwick, P. (2014). Cross sectional studies: advantages and disadvantages. BMJ, 348, 1-2.doi:10.1136/bmj.g2276
Shim, S., & Eastlick, M.A. (1998). The Hierarchical Influence of Personal Values on Mall Shopping Attitude and Behavior. Journal of Retailing, 74(1), 139-160.doi:
10.1016/S0022-4359(99)80091-8
Swinyard, W.R. (1998). Shopping mall customer values: the national mall shopper and the list of values. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 5(3),
167-172.doi:10.1016/S0969-6989(97)00023-4
34
Valacich, S.J., Parboteeah, D.V., & Wells, J.D. (2007). The online consumer’s hierarchy of needs. Communications of the ACM, 50(9), 84-90.
Van Dam, M., & Kraaykamp, G. (1991). Consumptieongelijkheid: Consumptieve bestedingen als basis voor ongelijkheidsmeting in landenvergelijkend onderzoek. Acta Politica, 85-109.
Verkaik, L. (2011). Invloed van E-shoppen op het fysieke winkellandschap. Retrieved from: http://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/215890
Volkskrant (2015). Reeks winkelketens dreigt uit Nederlandse straatbeeld de verdwijnen. Retrieved from: http://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/reeks-winkelketens-dreigt-uit-nederlandse-straatbeeld-te-verdwijnen~a4213382/
Volkskrant (2016). Amazon breidt uit met 400 fysieke boekenwinkels. Retrieved from: http://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/-amazon-breidt-uit-met-400-fysieke-boekenwinkels~a4237402/
Wang, G., & Netemyer, R. (2002). The effects of job autonomy, customer demandingness, and trait competitiveness on salesperson learning, self-efficacy, and performance.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(3), 217-228.doi:
10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.03.013
Webshopblog (2015). Online boodschappen bestellen bij diverse supermarkten. Retrieved from:https://www.webshopblog.nl/online-boodschappen-bestellen-bij-diverse-supermarkten/
Yu, S.C., & Fu, F.L. (2010). Investigating Customer Needs and Evaluation Behavior in Online Shopping. Research Gate.doi: 10.1109/ICAMS.2010.5553124
24K Marketing (2011). What is a ‘consumer need’? Retrieved from: http://24kmarketing.com/2011/02/what-is-consumer-need.html
35
Appendices
Appendix A
Bedankt dat je mee wilt doen aan dit onderzoek! Dit korte onderzoek van maximaal 5 minuten wordt uitgevoerd in het kader van mijn afstudeerscriptie voor de Master Persuasieve
Communicatie, die ik volg aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Het onderzoek gaat over online shoppen en je ervaringen hiermee.
Als je akkoord gaat na het lezen van onderstaande tekst, zal het onderzoek van start gaan.
• Ik verklaar hierbij op een duidelijke wijze te zijn ingelicht over de aard en methode
van dit onderzoek.
• Ik besef dat mijn anonimiteit bij deelname aan dit onderzoek is gewaarborgd en dat
mijn persoonsgegevens nooit zonder mijn uitdrukkelijke toestemming aan derden zullen worden verstrekt. Indien mijn onderzoeksresultaten gebruikt worden in wetenschappelijke publicaties, of op een andere manier openbaar worden gemaakt, dan zal dit volledig geanonimiseerd gebeuren.
• Ik besef dat ik op elk moment mag stoppen met dit onderzoek zonder dat ik hiervoor
een reden hoef op te geven. Daarnaast kan ik achteraf (binnen 24 uur na deelname) mijn toestemming intrekken voor het gebruik van mijn antwoorden of gegevens voor dit onderzoek.
Wanneer ik op dit moment of in de toekomst meer informatie wens over dit onderzoek, kan ik mij wenden tot de onderzoeker, Kirsten Groeneveld (kirsten.groeneveld@student.uva.nl). Voor eventuele klachten of problemen omtrent dit onderzoek kan ik mij wenden tot het lid van de Commissie Ethiek van de afdeling Communicatiewetenschap, per adres: ASCoR
36
secretariaat, Commissie Ethiek, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG
Amsterdam; 020‐525 3680; ascor‐secr‐fmg@uva.nl. Een vertrouwelijke behandeling van mijn
klacht is hierbij gewaarborgd.
o Ik begrijp bovenstaande tekst en ga akkoord.
1. Wat is je leeftijd? ………....
2. Wat is je geslacht? o Man
o Vrouw
3. Wat is je hoogst voltooide opleiding?
o Geen opleiding o Lagere school/basisonderwijs o VMBO/MAVO/LBO o MBO o HAVO o VWO o WO o Anders, namelijk ….
37
4. Heb je de afgelopen 6 maanden een online aankoop gedaan?
o Ja
o Nee
Wanneer nee einde van het onderzoek!
5. Binnen welk productcategorie valt je online aankoop? Als het er meerdere zijn
geweest, neem dan een willekeurige aankoop in je hoofd. o Fashion o Cosmetica o Elektronica o Huishouden o Speelgoed/games o Sport/vrije tijd o Wonen/slapen o Tuin/klussen o Baby o Ander, namelijk….
Ik wil je vragen deze recente situatie waarin je een online aankoop hebt gedaan in gedachte te nemen en op basis daarvan onderstaande vragen zo goed mogelijk te beantwoorden.
6. In hoeverre ben je het eens met onderstaande stellingen? (schaal 1 t/m7 – helemaal
38
• Ik niet de enige ben die op dat moment aan het shoppen is. • Ik omringd wordt door andere consumenten.
• Ik een band zou kunnen opbouwen met andere mensen, als ik dat zou willen. • Ik ergens bij hoor.
• Mijn mening gewaardeerd wordt. • Ik ergens deel van uitmaak.
7. In hoeverre ben je het eens met onderstaande stellingen? (schaal 1 t/m 7 – helemaal
oneens t/m helemaal eens).
• Mijn keuze om deze online aankoop te doen was een goed idee.
• Ik ben achteraf tevreden met mijn keuze om deze aankoop online te doen. • Ik vond het online shoppen leuk.
Ik wil je vragen om terug te denken aan ongeveer 3 jaar geleden (2013).
8. Heb je 3 jaar geleden weleens een online aankoop gedaan?
o Ja
o Nee
Bij nee, vragenlijst stoppen
9. Binnen welk productcategorie valt deze online aankoop? Als het er meerdere zijn
geweest, neem dan een willekeurige aankoop in je hoofd. o Fashion
39 o Cosmetica o Elektronica o Huishouden o Speelgoed/games o Sport/vrije tijd o Wonen/slapen o Tuin/klussen o Baby o Ander, namelijk….
Ik wil je vragen zo bewust mogelijk terug te denken aan een situatie waarin je 3 jaar geleden een online aankoop hebt gedaan en op basis daarvan onderstaande vragen te beantwoorden.
10. In hoeverre ben je het eens met onderstaande stellingen? (schaal 1 t/m7 – helemaal
oneens t/m helemaal eens). Tijdens het online shoppen heb ik het gevoel gehad dat: • Ik niet de enige was die op dat moment aan het shoppen is geweest.
• Ik omringd werd door andere consumenten.
• Ik een band had kunnen opbouwen met andere mensen, als ik dat zou gewild zou hebben.
• Ik ergens bij hoorde.
• Mijn mening gewaardeerd werd. • Ik ergens deel van uitgemaakt heb.
40
11. In hoeverre ben je het eens met onderstaande stellingen? (schaal 1 t/m 7 – helemaal
oneens t/m helemaal eens). Als ik terugdenk aan een online shopsituatie van ongeveer 3 jaar geleden, kan ik zeggen dat:
• Mijn keuze om de online aankoop te doen een goed idee was.
• Ik achteraf tevreden was met mijn keuze om de aankoop online te doen. • Ik het leuk vond om online shoppen.
De volgende en laatste vraag gaat over hoe jij jezelf ziet. Ik wil je vragen deze zo eerlijk mogelijk te beantwoorden. Alle antwoorden die je geeft zijn en blijven anoniem.
12. Geef aan in hoeverre de volgende uitspraken van toepassing zijn op jou als persoon
(schaal 1t/m 7 – helemaal eens t/m helemaal oneens). In het algemeen ben ik iemand die:
• Hoge verwachtingen heeft in het leven.
• Ernaar streeft dat al m’n behoeftes vervuld worden. • De hoogst haalbare kwaliteit wil bereiken.
• Veeleisend is. Dit waren alle vragen van dit onderzoek. Druk alsjeblieft op nog één keer op ‘volgende’, zodat je antwoorden worden verstuurd.
Bedankt voor je deelname! Als je nog vragen hebt, of benieuwd bent naar de uitkomsten van dit onderzoek, stuur dan een mail naar kirstengroeneveld@hotmail.com.
41
Appendix B
Table 1. Pattern matrix vivid experience now
Variable
Component
1 2
Not being the only one -.011 0.95
Surrounded by others 0.20 0.80
Possible to build relation 0.73 0.11
Feeling of fitting in 0.90 -0.09
My opinion is valued 0.77 0.03
Being part of something 0.92 -0.03
Table 2. Pattern matrix vivid experience 3 years ago
Variable Component
1 2
Not being the only one -.018 0.97
Surrounded by others 0.37 0.61
Possible to build relation 0.89 -0.18
Feeling of fitting in 0.91 0.05
My opinion is valued 0.40 0.46
Being part of something 0.83 0.15
Table 3. Component matrix satisfaction now
Variable Component
1
Afterwards satisfied 0.93
Purchase was good idea 0.93
Table 4. Component matrix satisfaction 3 years ago
Variable Component
1
Afterwards satisfied 0.76
Purchase was good idea 0.76
Table 5. Component matrix satisfaction 3 years ago
42 1 High expectations 0.81 Fulfillment of needs 0.83 Highest quality 0.85 Demanding person 0.86 Appendix C
Table 1. Regression analysis, dependent variable 'vivid shopping
experience now' comp. 1
Variable
b SE p
Product category 3 years ago -0.04 0.04 0.334
Product category now 0.00 0.04 0.972
Gender 0.02 0.20 0.927
Age 0.00 0.01 0.623
Education 0.00 0.06 0.980
Table 2. Regression analysis, dependent variable 'vivid shopping
experience now' comp. 2
Variable
b SE p
Product category 3 years ago 0.08 0.05 0.151
Product category now -0.08 0.05 0.100
Gender -0.66 0.28 0.058
Age -0.10 0.01 0.457
Education -0.02 0.09 0.803
Table 3. Regression analysis, dependent variable 'vivid shopping
experience 3 years ago' comp. 1
Variable
b SE p
Product category 3 years ago 0.00 0.04 0.899
Product category now 0.02 0.03 0.602
Gender 0.10 0.18 0.597
Age 0.00 0.01 0.980
43
Table 4. Regression analysis, dependent variable 'vivid shopping
experience 3 years ago' comp. 2
Variable
b SE p
Product category 3 years ago -0.10 0.05 0.868
Product category now 0.07 0.05 0.053
Gender 0.38 0.27 0.152
Age 0.00 0.01 0.739
Education 0.12 0.08 0.143
Table 5. PROCESS macro H2 and H3 - no effect control variables
Variable 95% BCCI
b SE LLCI ULCI p
Gender 0.21 0.18 -0.15 0.56 0.249
Education -0.04 0.06 -.015 0.08 0.531
Age 0.01 0.01 -0.01 0.02 0.329
Product category 3 years ago -0.01 0.03 -0.06 0.04 0.743