Understanding the Continuance Intention of Omnichannel: Combining TAM and TPB
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Background and Related Work
3. Theoretical Development and Research Hypotheses
3.1. Accessibility
3.2. Monetary Saving
3.3. Perceived Risk
3.4. Perceived Ease of Use
3.5. Perceived Usefulness
3.6. Relative Advantage
3.7. Attitude
3.8. Subjective Norm
3.9. Perceived Behavioral Control
4. Research Methodology
4.1. Measurement Instrument
4.2. Questionnaire Design and Data Collection
5. Results
5.1. Measurement Model
5.2. Structural Model
6. Discussion
6.1. Main Results
6.2. Demographics and Resultsthe
6.3. Interview
7. Conclusions
7.1. Implications for Theory
7.2. Implications for Practice
7.3. Limitations and Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Construct | Definition |
---|---|
Accessibility [29] | The degree to which consumers can access several channels using omnichannel (i.e., access timing, connection, and place) |
Monetary Saving [97] | The extent to which consumers save money using omnichannel (i.e., lower price and payment cost) |
Perceived Risk [40] | Consumers’ subjective assessment of the potential unclear negative values from an omnichannel (i.e., monetary transaction and promotional campaign) |
Perceived Ease of Use [26] | The extent to which consumers believe that using an omnichannel would be free of effort (i.e., clarity, mental effort, and easiness) |
Perceived Usefulness | The degree to which consumers believe that using an omnichannel may improve shopping performance (i.e., usefulness in life, speed, and efficiency) |
Relative Advantage [98] | Relative benefits of using omnichannel over other alternatives (i.e., discount, convenience, and variety) |
Attitude [34] | Level of positive judgment on omnichannel held by a consumer (i.e., good idea, smart idea, and positive idea) |
Subjective Norms [34] | Consumers’ belief that the majority of individuals who are significant to them believe they should or should not engage in the omnichannel (i.e., support, understanding, and agreement) |
Perceived Behavioral Control [34] | Consumers’ belief in their competence to carry out an omnichannel (i.e., ability, confidence, and resources) |
Continuance Intention [99] | Degree of intention to continue to use omnichannel (sustainability, increase, and willingness) |
Construct | Item | Mean |
---|---|---|
Accessibility [29] | ACS1 | I can easily access omnichannel at any time. |
ACS2 | Omnichannel service is well connected between online and offline. | |
ACS3 | I can get information or make an inquiry from anywhere I want. | |
Monetary Saving [97] | MOS1 | I chose omnichannel because I want to purchase a good quality product at a lower price. |
MOS2 | Using an omnichannel service helps me reduce my payment costs. | |
Perceived Risk [40] | PRS1 | I believe that monetary transactions performed on omnichannel services (e.g., payments over the Internet) are risky. |
PRS2 | I agree that using omnichannel services to purchase goods and services is risky. | |
PRS3 | I believe that getting information through omnichannel services and conducting promotional campaigns for products is highly risky. | |
Perceived Ease of Use [26] | PEU1 | Omnichannel services are clear and understandable. |
PEU2 | The process of using the omnichannel service does not require much mental effort. | |
PEU3 | I think the omnichannel service is easy to use | |
Perceived Usefulness [26] | PUS1 | I think omnichannel services are useful in everyday life. |
PUS2 | If I use omnichannel services, I can shop faster. | |
PUS3 | Using omnichannel services improves transaction efficiency. | |
Relative Advantage [98] | RLD1 | Omnichannel offers more discounts than regular shopping methods. |
RLD2 | Omnichannel is more convenient than regular shopping methods. | |
RLD3 | Omnichannel offers a wider variety of products when purchasing online than regular shopping methods. | |
Attitude [34] | ATT1 | I think it’s a good idea to participate in omnichannel. |
ATT2 | I think it’s a smart idea to join an omnichannel. | |
ATT3 | I think participating in omnichannel is a positive idea. | |
Subjective Norms [34] | SNO1 | People close to me support my use of omnichannel. |
SNO2 | People close to me understand my participation in omnichannel. | |
SNO3 | People close to me agree with my opinion of participating in omnichannel. | |
Perceived Behavioral Control [34] | PBC1 | I think I can participate in omnichannel. |
PBC2 | I am confident that I can use the omnichannel service if I want. | |
PBC3 | We have enough resources, time, and opportunities to do omnichannel. | |
Continuance Intention [99] | COI1 | I plan to continue using the omnichannel service in the future. |
COI2 | I plan to increase the utilization of omnichannel services in the future. | |
COI3 | I will continue to use the omnichannel service in the future. |
References
- Hole, Y.; Pawar, M.S.; Khedkar, E. Omni channel retailing: An opportunity and challenges in the Indian market. Proc. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1362, 012121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.; Cheung, C.M.; Tan, C.-W. Omnichannel business research: Opportunities and challenges. Decis. Support Syst. 2018, 109, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, E.; Libaque-Saenz, C.F.; Park, M.-C. Understanding shopping routes of offline purchasers: Selection of search channels (online vs. offline) and search-platforms (mobile vs. PC) based on product types. Serv. Bus. 2019, 13, 305–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, S.; Swait, J. Channels for search and purchase: Does mobile Internet matter? J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 39, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verhoef, P.C.; Kannan, P.K.; Inman, J.J. From multi-channel retailing to omni-channel retailing: Introduction to the special issue on multi-channel retailing. J. Retail. 2015, 91, 174–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Von Briel, F. The future of omnichannel retail: A four-stage Delphi study. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2018, 132, 217–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, A.; McClelland, R.; Hoang Thuan, N.; Hoang, T.G. Omnichannel marketing: Structured review, synthesis, and future directions. Int. Rev. Retail. Distrib. Consum. Res. 2022, 32, 221–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mosquera, A.; Pascual, C.O.; Ayensa, E.J. Understanding the customer experience in the age of omni-channel shopping. Icono14 2017, 15, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, S.; Wang, Y.; Chen, X.; Zhang, Q. Conceptualization of omnichannel customer experience and its impact on shopping intention: A mixed-method approach. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020, 50, 325–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belvedere, V.; Martinelli, E.M.; Tunisini, A. Getting the most from E-commerce in the context of omnichannel strategies. Ital. J. Mark. 2021, 2021, 331–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farah, M.F.; Ramadan, Z.B. Disruptions versus more disruptions: How the Amazon dash button is altering consumer buying patterns. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 39, 54–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramadan, Z.B.; Farah, M.F.; Kassab, D. Amazon’s approach to consumers’ usage of the Dash button and its effect on purchase decision involvement in the US market. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 47, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Busch, C. Does the Amazon Dash Button violate EU consumer law? Balancing consumer protection and technological innovation in the Internet of things. J. Eur. Consum. Mark. Law 2018, 7, 78–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polacco, A.; Backes, K. The amazon go concept: Implications, applications, and sustainability. J. Bus. Manag. 2018, 24, 79–92. [Google Scholar]
- Ives, B.; Cossick, K.; Adams, D. Amazon Go: Disrupting retail? J. Inf. Technol. Teach. Cases 2019, 9, 2–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wankhede, K.; Wukkadada, B.; Nadar, V. Just walk-out technology and its challenges: A case of Amazon Go. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Inventive Research in Computing Applications (ICIRCA), Coimbatore, India, 11–12 July 2018; pp. 254–257. [Google Scholar]
- Simone, A.; Sabbadin, E. The new paradigm of the omnichannel retailing: Key drivers, new challenges and potential outcomes resulting from the adoption of an omnichannel approach. Int. J. Bus. Manag. 2018, 13, 85–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vollero, A.; Sardanelli, D.; Siano, A. Exploring the role of the Amazon effect on customer expectations: An analysis of user-generated content in consumer electronics retailing. J. Consum. Behav. 2021, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, P.; Wang, Q.; Liu, H.; Li, Q. The value of buy-online-and-pickup-in-store in omni-channel: Evidence from customer usage data. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2020, 29, 995–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MarketResearchFuture. Omnichannel Retail Commerce Platform Market. Available online: https://www.marketresearchfuture.com/reports/omnichannel-retail-commerce-platform-market-6956 (accessed on 27 September 2022).
- Meyer, B. What We can learn From Omnichannel Statistics for 2022. Available online: https://www.omnisend.com/blog/omnichannel-statistics/ (accessed on 27 September 2022).
- ResearchLive. Retailers Struggling to Master Omnichannel. Available online: https://www.research-live.com/article/news/retailers-struggling-to-master-omnichannel/id/5031952 (accessed on 27 September 2022).
- Juaneda-Ayensa, E.; Mosquera, A.; Murillo, Y.S. Omnichannel customer behavior: Key drivers of technology acceptance and use and their effects on purchase intention. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, S.; Connerton, T.P.; Park, C. Transforming the automotive retail: Drivers for customers’ omnichannel BOPS (Buy Online & Pick up in Store) behavior. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 139, 411–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mosquera, A.; Juaneda-Ayensa, E.; Olarte-Pascual, C.; Pelegrín-Borondo, J. Key factors for in-store smartphone use in an omnichannel experience: Millennials vs. nonmillennials. Complexity 2018, 2018, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989, 13, 319–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, F.D. User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 1993, 38, 475–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V.; Morris, M.G.; Davis, G.B.; Davis, F.D. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Q. 2003, 27, 425–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsieh, Y.C.; Roan, J.; Pant, A.; Hsieh, J.K.; Chen, W.Y.; Lee, M.; Chiu, H.C. All for one but does one strategy work for all? Building consumer loyalty in multi-channel distribution. Manag. Serv. Qual. Int. J. 2012, 22, 310–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rangaswamy, A.; Van Bruggen, G.H. Opportunities and challenges in multichannel marketing: An introduction to the special issue. J. Interact. Mark. 2005, 19, 5–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sousa, R.; Voss, C.A. Service quality in multichannel services employing virtual channels. J. Serv. Res. 2006, 8, 356–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ertz, M.; Jo, M.-S.; Kong, Y.; Sarigöllü, E. Predicting m-shopping in the two largest m-commerce markets: The United States and China. Int. J. Mark. Res. 2022, 64, 249–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santosa, A.D.; Taufik, N.; Prabowo, F.H.E.; Rahmawati, M. Continuance intention of baby boomer and X generation as new users of digital payment during COVID-19 pandemic using UTAUT2. J. Financ. Serv. Mark. 2021, 26, 259–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sima, V.; Gheorghe, I.G.; Subić, J.; Nancu, D. Influences of the industry 4.0 revolution on the human capital development and consumer behavior: A systematic review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anastasiadou, E.; Anestis, M.C.; Karantza, I.; Vlachakis, S. The coronavirus’ effects on consumer behavior and supermarket activities: Insights from Greece and Sweden. Int. J. Sociol. Soc. Policy 2020, 40, 893–907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, S.; Lee, D. An empirical study on consumer online shopping channel choice behavior in omni-channel environment. Telemat. Inform. 2017, 34, 1398–1407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmed, M.E.; Samad, N.; Khan, M.M. Income, Social Class and Consumer Behavior a Focus on Developing Nations. Int. J. Appl. Bus. Econ. Res. 2016, 14, 6679–6702. [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, L.; Dai, L.; Zhang, D. Online shopping acceptance model-A critical survey of consumer factors in online shopping. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 2007, 8, 41–62. [Google Scholar]
- Silva, S.C.E.; Martins, C.C.; Sousa, J.M.D. Omnichannel approach: Factors affecting consumer acceptance. J. Mark. Channels 2018, 25, 73–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kazancoglu, I.; Aydin, H. An investigation of consumers’ purchase intentions towards omni-channel shopping: A qualitative exploratory study. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 2018, 46, 959–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, J.; Kim, R.B. The effects of integrated information & service, institutional mechanism and need for cognition (NFC) on consumer omnichannel adoption behavior. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2021, 33, 1386–1414. [Google Scholar]
- Pantano, E.; Rese, A.; Baier, D. Enhancing the online decision-making process by using augmented reality: A two country comparison of youth markets. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 38, 81–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, S.; Cha, J.; Knutson, B.J.; Beck, J.A. Development and testing of the Consumer Experience Index (CEI). Manag. Serv. Qual. Int. J. 2011, 21, 112–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gumussoy, C.A.; Kaya, A.; Ozlu, E. Determinants of mobile banking use: An extended TAM with perceived risk, mobility access, compatibility, perceived self-efficacy and subjective norms. In Industrial Engineering in the Industry 4.0 Era; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; pp. 225–238. [Google Scholar]
- Moon, M.; Khalid, M.; Awan, H.; Attiq, S.; Rasool, H.; Kiran, M. Consumer’s perceptions of website’s utilitarian and hedonic attributes and online purchase intentions: A cognitive–affective attitude approach. Span. J. Mark. -ESIC 2017, 21, 73–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, B. Understanding key antecedents of consumer loyalty toward sharing-economy platforms: The case of Airbnb. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, H.; Zhang, R.; Liu, B. Analysis on consumers’ purchase and shopping well-being in online shopping carnivals with two motivational dimensions. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, D.J.; Ferrin, D.L.; Rao, H.R. Trust and satisfaction, two stepping stones for successful e-commerce relationships: A longitudinal exploration. Inf. Syst. Res. 2009, 20, 237–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biswas, D.; Biswas, A. The diagnostic role of signals in the context of perceived risks in online shopping: Do signals matter more on the Web? J. Interact. Mark. 2004, 18, 30–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chong, A.Y.-L.; Chan, F.T.; Ooi, K.-B. Predicting consumer decisions to adopt mobile commerce: Cross country empirical examination between China and Malaysia. Decis. Support Syst. 2012, 53, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, W.; Stump, R.L.; Maddox, L.M. Factors influencing consumers’ online shopping in China. J. Asia Bus. Stud. 2013, 7, 214–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, Y.-H.; Huang, T.-Y. High speed rail passengers’ mobile ticketing adoption. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2013, 30, 143–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, T.-P.; Yeh, Y.-H. Effect of use contexts on the continuous use of mobile services: The case of mobile games. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 2011, 15, 187–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jo, H. Understanding the key antecedents of users’ continuance intention in the context of smart factory. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 2021, 35, 153–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, Z.; Filieri, R. Airline passengers’ continuance intention towards online check-in services: The role of personal innovativeness and subjective knowledge. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2015, 81, 158–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, J. Are personal innovativeness and social influence critical to continue with mobile commerce? Internet Res. 2014, 24, 134–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, F.; Mahajan, V.; Balasubramanian, S. An analysis of e-business adoption and its impact on business performance. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2003, 31, 425–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, K.; Kraemer, K.L. Post-adoption variations in usage and value of e-business by organizations: Cross-country evidence from the retail industry. Inf. Syst. Res. 2005, 16, 61–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Somali, S.A.; Gholami, R.; Clegg, B. A stage-oriented model (SOM) for e-commerce adoption: A study of Saudi Arabian organisations. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2015, 26, 2–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action Control; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1985; pp. 11–39. [Google Scholar]
- Belkhamza, Z.; Niasin, M.; Faris, A. The Effect of Privacy Concerns on Smartphone App Purchase in Malaysia: Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior. Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol. 2017, 11, 178–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jo, H. What drives university students to practice social distancing? Evidence from South Korea and Vietnam. Asia Pac Viewpoint 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pavlou, P.A.; Fygenson, M. Understanding and predicting electronic commerce adoption: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. MIS Q. 2006, 30, 115–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hajiheydari, N.; Ashkani, M. Mobile application user behavior in the developing countries: A survey in Iran. Inf. Syst. 2018, 77, 22–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, K. Consumer technology traits in determining mobile shopping adoption: An application of the extended theory of planned behavior. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2012, 19, 484–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mainardes, E.W.; de Souza, I.M.; Correia, R.D. Antecedents and consequents of consumers not adopting e-commerce. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 55, 102138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sombultawee, K.; Wattanatorn, W. The impact of trust on purchase intention through omnichannel retailing. J. Adv. Manag. Res. 2022, 19, 513–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fishbein, M.; Ajzen, I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
- Mutahar, A.M.; Daud, N.M.; Ramayah, T.; Putit, L.; Isaac, O. Examining the effect of subjective norms and compatibility as external variables on TAM: Mobile banking acceptance in Yemen. Sci. Int. 2017, 29, 769–776. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Debei, M.M.; Al-Lozi, E.; Papazafeiropoulou, A. Why people keep coming back to Facebook: Explaining and predicting continuance participation from an extended theory of planned behaviour perspective. Decis. Support Syst. 2013, 55, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, E.; Lee, J.-A.; Sung, Y.; Choi, S.M. Predicting selfie-posting behavior on social networking sites: An extension of theory of planned behavior. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 62, 116–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pujadas-Hostench, J.; Palau-Saumell, R.; Forgas-Coll, S.; Matute, J. Integrating theories to predict clothing purchase on SNS. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2019, 119, 1015–1030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bawack, R.E.; Wamba, S.F.; Carillo, K.D.A. Exploring the role of personality, trust, and privacy in customer experience performance during voice shopping: Evidence from SEM and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021, 58, 102309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Straub, D.; Boudreau, M.-C.; Gefen, D. Validation guidelines for IS positivist research. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2004, 13, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shao, P.; Lassleben, H. Determinants of consumers’ willingness to participate in fast fashion brands’ used clothes recycling plans in an omnichannel retail environment. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2021, 16, 3340–3355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DanielSoper.com. Free Statistics Calculators. Available online: https://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc/default.aspx. (accessed on 8 December 2021).
- Riaz, H.; Baig, U.; Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, I.; Ahmed, H. Factors effecting omnichannel customer experience: Evidence from fashion retail. Information 2021, 13, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Mena, J.A. An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2012, 40, 414–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nunnally, J.C. Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed; Mcgraw Hill Book Company: New York, NY, USA, 1978. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.; Anderson, R.; Tatham, B.R. Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Bagozzi, R.P.; Yi, Y.; Phillips, L.W. Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Adm. Sci. Q. 1991, 36, 421–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, H.-F. An empirical investigation of mobile banking adoption: The effect of innovation attributes and knowledge-based trust. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2011, 31, 252–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riquelme, H.E.; Rios, R.E. The moderating effect of gender in the adoption of mobile banking. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2010, 28, 328–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.; Song, S. Older adults’ online shopping continuance intentions: Applying the technology acceptance model and the theory of planned behavior. Int. J. Hum. –Comput. Interact. 2021, 37, 938–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verma, S.; Chaurasia, S.S.; Bhattacharyya, S.S. The effect of government regulations on continuance intention of in-store proximity mobile payment services. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2020, 38, 34–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, S.C.; Chen, H.H.; Chen, M.F. Determinants of satisfaction and continuance intention towards self-service technologies. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2009, 109, 1248–1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Armstrong-Mensah, E.; Ramsey-White, K.; Yankey, B.; Self-Brown, S. COVID-19 and distance learning: Effects on Georgia State University school of public health students. Front. Public Health 2020, 8, 576227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, B. An empirical investigation of mobile data service continuance: Incorporating the theory of planned behavior into the expectation–confirmation model. Expert Syst. Appl. 2010, 37, 7033–7039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhattacherjee, A. Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Q. 2001, 25, 351–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jo, H. Continuance intention to use artificial intelligence personal assistant: Type, gender, and use experience. Heliyon 2022, 8, e10662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jo, H. Determinants of continuance intention towards e-learning during COVID-19: An extended expectation-confirmation model. Asia Pac. J. Educ. 2022, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.; Forsythe, S. Sensory enabling technology acceptance model (SE-TAM): A multiple-group structural model comparison. Psychol. Mark. 2008, 25, 901–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lisha, C.; Goh, C.F.; Yifan, S.; Rasli, A. Integrating guanxi into technology acceptance: An empirical investigation of WeChat. Telemat. Inform. 2017, 34, 1125–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, W.Y.; Kim, S.H.; Vu, D.S.; Song, C.H.; Jung, H.S.; Jo, H. A Novel Traceback Technology for E-mail Sender Verification. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI), Hong Kong, China, 15–17 December 2021; pp. 812–816. [Google Scholar]
- Park, W.Y.; Kim, S.H.; Vu, D.-S.; Song, C.H.; Jung, H.S.; Jo, H. An Advanced Algorithm for Email Classification by Using SMTP Code; Springer: Cham, Germany, 2022; pp. 756–775. [Google Scholar]
- Mimouni-Chaabane, A.; Volle, P. Perceived benefits of loyalty programs: Scale development and implications for relational strategies. J. Bus. Res. 2010, 63, 32–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agag, G.; El-Masry, A.A. Understanding consumer intention to participate in online travel community and effects on consumer intention to purchase travel online and WOM: An integration of innovation diffusion theory and TAM with trust. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 60, 97–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashfaq, M.; Yun, J.; Yu, S.; Loureiro, S.M.C. I, Chatbot: Modeling the determinants of users’ satisfaction and continuance intention of AI-powered service agents. Telemat. Inform. 2020, 54, 101473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Demographics | Item | Subjects (N = 262) | |
---|---|---|---|
Frequency | Percentage (%) | ||
Gender | Male | 125 | 47.7 |
Female | 137 | 52.3 | |
Age | 20s | 83 | 31.7 |
30s | 71 | 27.1 | |
40s | 55 | 21.0 | |
50s | 53 | 20.2 | |
Device | Smartphone | 169 | 64.5 |
Tablet | 22 | 8.4 | |
Laptop | 71 | 27.1 | |
Frequency | Less than once a week | 122 | 46.6 |
Once a week | 109 | 41.6 | |
A few times a week | 25 | 9.5 | |
Once a day | 3 | 1.1 | |
A few times a day | 2 | 0.8 | |
Several times a day | 1 | 0.4 | |
Annual Income (million KRW) | <10 | 67 | 25.6 |
10–30 | 8 | 3.1 | |
30–50 | 146 | 55.7 | |
50–70 | 41 | 15.6 | |
Education | High school | 71 | 27.1 |
Bachelor | 178 | 67.9 | |
Master | 12 | 4.6 | |
Doctor | 1 | 0.4 |
Construct | Items | Mean | St. Dev. | Factor Loading | Cronbach’s Alpha | CR | AVE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Accessibility | ACS1 | 4.863 | 1.615 | 0.885 | 0.891 | 0.932 | 0.821 |
ACS2 | 4.553 | 1.598 | 0.905 | ||||
ACS3 | 4.622 | 1.567 | 0.928 | ||||
Monetary Saving | MOS1 | 4.821 | 1.527 | 0.921 | 0.844 | 0.928 | 0.865 |
MOS2 | 4.939 | 1.383 | 0.939 | ||||
Perceived Risk | PRS1 | 3.366 | 1.466 | 0.891 | 0.874 | 0.922 | 0.797 |
PRS2 | 3.817 | 1.474 | 0.884 | ||||
PRS3 | 3.630 | 1.540 | 0.904 | ||||
Perceived Ease of Use | PEU1 | 4.748 | 1.530 | 0.900 | 0.901 | 0.938 | 0.835 |
PEU2 | 4.405 | 1.559 | 0.900 | ||||
PEU3 | 4.653 | 1.610 | 0.940 | ||||
Perceived Usefulness | PUS1 | 5.069 | 1.463 | 0.922 | 0.913 | 0.945 | 0.852 |
PUS2 | 4.611 | 1.546 | 0.912 | ||||
PUS3 | 4.927 | 1.535 | 0.934 | ||||
Relative Advantage | RLD1 | 4.943 | 1.401 | 0.854 | 0.838 | 0.903 | 0.756 |
RLD2 | 4.569 | 1.493 | 0.862 | ||||
RLD3 | 4.813 | 1.430 | 0.892 | ||||
Attitude | ATT1 | 5.038 | 1.295 | 0.925 | 0.901 | 0.938 | 0.834 |
ATT2 | 4.515 | 1.469 | 0.878 | ||||
ATT3 | 4.821 | 1.431 | 0.937 | ||||
Subjective Norms | SNO1 | 4.958 | 1.439 | 0.877 | 0.867 | 0.919 | 0.790 |
SNO2 | 4.664 | 1.460 | 0.903 | ||||
SNO3 | 4.744 | 1.548 | 0.887 | ||||
Perceived Behavioral Control | PBC1 | 5.115 | 1.363 | 0.927 | 0.903 | 0.939 | 0.838 |
PBC2 | 4.756 | 1.597 | 0.899 | ||||
PBC3 | 4.805 | 1.542 | 0.920 | ||||
Continuance Intention | COI1 | 5.008 | 1.325 | 0.924 | 0.912 | 0.945 | 0.851 |
COI2 | 4.576 | 1.496 | 0.903 | ||||
COI3 | 4.802 | 1.448 | 0.939 |
Constructs | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Accessibility | 0.906 | |||||||||
2. Monetary Saving | 0.602 | 0.930 | ||||||||
3. Perceived Risk | −0.392 | −0.385 | 0.893 | |||||||
4. Perceived Ease of Use | 0.598 | 0.545 | −0.436 | 0.914 | ||||||
5. Perceived Usefulness | 0.700 | 0.630 | −0.358 | 0.617 | 0.923 | |||||
6. Relative Advantage | 0.645 | 0.642 | −0.443 | 0.602 | 0.640 | 0.870 | ||||
7. Attitude | 0.629 | 0.548 | −0.378 | 0.621 | 0.669 | 0.692 | 0.913 | |||
8. Subjective Norms | 0.644 | 0.565 | −0.433 | 0.617 | 0.646 | 0.687 | 0.714 | 0.889 | ||
9. Perceived Behavioral Control | 0.649 | 0.587 | −0.431 | 0.679 | 0.684 | 0.683 | 0.765 | 0.728 | 0.915 | |
10. Continuance Intention | 0.668 | 0.602 | −0.444 | 0.643 | 0.634 | 0.704 | 0.750 | 0.722 | 0.780 | 0.922 |
H | Cause | Effect | Coefficient | T-Value | Hypothesis |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1a | Accessibility | Perceived Ease of Use | 0.598 | 10.190 | Supported |
H1b | Accessibility | Perceived Usefulness | 0.700 | 15.883 | Supported |
H1c | Accessibility | Relative Advantage | 0.365 | 5.984 | Supported |
H2 | Monetary Saving | Relative Advantage | 0.361 | 6.116 | Supported |
H3 | Perceived Risk | Relative Advantage | −0.161 | 3.066 | Supported |
H4 | Perceived Ease of Use | Continuance Intention | 0.086 | 1.505 | Not Supported |
H5 | Perceived Usefulness | Continuance Intention | 0.005 | 0.072 | Not Supported |
H6 | Relative Advantage | Continuance Intention | 0.171 | 3.166 | Supported |
H7 | Attitude | Continuance Intention | 0.215 | 3.167 | Supported |
H8 | Subjective Norms | Continuance Intention | 0.163 | 2.718 | Supported |
H9 | Perceived Behavioral Control | Continuance Intention | 0.318 | 5.064 | Supported |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Song, H.G.; Jo, H. Understanding the Continuance Intention of Omnichannel: Combining TAM and TPB. Sustainability 2023, 15, 3039. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043039
Song HG, Jo H. Understanding the Continuance Intention of Omnichannel: Combining TAM and TPB. Sustainability. 2023; 15(4):3039. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043039
Chicago/Turabian StyleSong, Hyo Geun, and Hyeon Jo. 2023. "Understanding the Continuance Intention of Omnichannel: Combining TAM and TPB" Sustainability 15, no. 4: 3039. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043039
APA StyleSong, H. G., & Jo, H. (2023). Understanding the Continuance Intention of Omnichannel: Combining TAM and TPB. Sustainability, 15(4), 3039. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043039