Trust in E-Commerce: Social Networks vs. Institutional Credibility

F. Unsal, Kurt Komaromi, G. Erickson
{"title":"Trust in E-Commerce: Social Networks vs. Institutional Credibility","authors":"F. Unsal, Kurt Komaromi, G. Erickson","doi":"10.4018/jea.2011100101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"E-Commerce’s virtuality poses questions concerning trust between buyer and seller. Web 2.0 formats have provided new complications for these questions. Companies are creating more social networking sites, experimenting with ways to use such networks for marketing purposes. This paper explores the issue of trust in social networking site transactions vs. those at more established e-commerce sites. The authors apply the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to assess the level of trust in different types of e-commerce sites. TAM measures trust along several dimensions and includes potential explanatory factors, such as ease of use, perceived usefulness, search and research capabilities, security, value of product recommendations, and value of customer reviews. The authors directed the respondents to assess amazon.com, Facebook, and eBay—sites with different levels of institutional credibility and social networking affiliations. The data suggest definite differences exist between the sites, perhaps explained by institutional credibility and social networking.","PeriodicalId":354119,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. E Adopt.","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Int. J. E Adopt.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/jea.2011100101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

E-Commerce’s virtuality poses questions concerning trust between buyer and seller. Web 2.0 formats have provided new complications for these questions. Companies are creating more social networking sites, experimenting with ways to use such networks for marketing purposes. This paper explores the issue of trust in social networking site transactions vs. those at more established e-commerce sites. The authors apply the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to assess the level of trust in different types of e-commerce sites. TAM measures trust along several dimensions and includes potential explanatory factors, such as ease of use, perceived usefulness, search and research capabilities, security, value of product recommendations, and value of customer reviews. The authors directed the respondents to assess amazon.com, Facebook, and eBay—sites with different levels of institutional credibility and social networking affiliations. The data suggest definite differences exist between the sites, perhaps explained by institutional credibility and social networking.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
电子商务中的信任:社会网络vs.机构信誉
电子商务的虚拟性给买卖双方之间的信任带来了问题。Web 2.0格式为这些问题提供了新的复杂性。公司正在创建更多的社交网站,尝试将这些网络用于营销目的。本文探讨了社交网站交易与更成熟的电子商务网站交易的信任问题。本文运用技术接受度模型(TAM)对不同类型电子商务网站的信任程度进行了评估。TAM沿着几个维度度量信任,并包括潜在的解释因素,例如易用性、感知有用性、搜索和研究能力、安全性、产品推荐的价值以及客户评论的价值。作者让受访者对亚马逊、Facebook和ebay这些网站进行评估,这些网站的机构可信度和社交网络隶属关系不同。数据表明,这些网站之间存在着明显的差异,或许可以用机构可信度和社交网络来解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Age in the Acceptance of Mobile Social Media: A Comparison of Generation Y and Baby Boomers Using UTAUT2 Model Teleophthalmology: A Case of Eye Care Delivery Metaverse!: Possible Potential Opportunities and Trends in E-Healthcare and Education Challenges in Adoption of Business Analytics by Small Retailers: An Empirical Study in the Indian Context E-Adoption of Emerging Technology in the Health Sector During COVID-19
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1