Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 467–475

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

The effect of online information sources on purchase intentions between

consumers with high and low susceptibility to informational influence☆
Jie Chen a, Lefa Teng b,c,⁎, Ying Yu a, Xueer Yu d
a
Antai College of Economics and Management, Shanghai Jiaotong University, China
b
College of Business and Economics, University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada
c
Business School, Jiangnan University, Jiangsu, China
d
Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: By highlighting consumers' personal characteristics related to online brand information search, this study
Accepted 29 June 2014 sheds light on how information sources from eWOM (electronic word-of-mouth), neutral/third party,
Available online 23 June 2015 and manufacturer/retailer influence purchase intentions of consumers with high and low susceptibility to
informational influence. Based on a two-phase study, we discovered that online brand-related information
Keywords:
from these three sources has a positive influence on consumer attitude toward the brand and purchase in-
Online brand-related information
eWOM source
tention for that brand. Furthermore, our results show that the eWOM source is likely to be perceived as
Neutral/third source more useful by consumers with high susceptibility to informational influence than neutral/third party
Manufacturer/retailer source and manufacturer/retailer sources. Conversely, all three sources of brand-related information are perceived
to be useful by consumers with low susceptibility to informational influence. Implications for researchers
and managers are discussed.
© 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction ability to identify the perceived usefulness of various types of online

The last couple of decades have witnessed rapid technological
advancements, which have consequently caused dramatic changes
in the way we live, work, and play (Peterson, Balasubramanian, &
Bronnenberg, 1997). Likewise, it is of little doubt that the lives of con-
sumers and their purchase behavior have also undergone change. The
advent of the Internet has been increasingly considered as a unique
and interactive medium for conducting research on brand information
(Porter, 2001; Steckel et al., 2005). For example, imagine that Joe's cell
phone recently stopped working and now, Joe is in the market to buy
a new phone. Joe is not quite sure which cell phone brand is the most
popular and which brand is most likely to deliver what he is looking
for in a cell phone. To make an informed purchase decision, Joe may
consult with others using an online chat room or forum as a medium,
search online for brand recommendations from experts, or visit the
manufacture's website to get more brand-related information. Howev-
er, the type and sources of brand-related information will play an im-
portant and dominating role in influencing his purchase decision. The
☆ This study is supported by research grants from the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (71472124 & 71472076), Program for Changjiang Scholars and
Innovative Research Team in University (IRT13030), Shanghai Pujiang Program
(13PJC071), China Scholarship Council and from OMAFRA Research Programs (200261).
⁎ Corresponding author at: Business School, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, Jiangsu
Province, China. Tel.: +86 510 8591 3866; fax: +86 510 8591 3595.
brand-related information and understand how this information influ-
ences brand attitudes and purchase intention is critical for marketing
managers who are in the business of developing effective marketing
strategies aimed at targeting different consumers.
The online brand-related information that affects consumer's pur-
chase decisions has been the subject of extensive research in consumer
behavior and marketing. Prior research reveals that consumers may use
multiple sources (e.g., electronic word-of-mouth, or eWOM sources,
neutral/third party sources, and manufacturer/retailer sources) to ac-
quire information about a brand and product (Häubl & Trifts, 2000; Jin
& Phua, 2014; Park & Lee, 2009; Steckel et al., 2005; Zauberman,
2003). However, existing literature on the role of these online informa-
tion sources has revealed contradictory findings. For example, some re-
searchers suggest that consumers are more likely to rely on eWOM
sources as they deem customer-to-customer information as more reli-
able and less susceptible to commercial motives (Berger, 2014; Bickart
& Schindler, 2001; Gruen, Osmonbekov, & Czaplewski, 2007; Kim &
Gupta, 2012; van Beuningen de Ruyter, Wetzels, & Streukens, 2009).
Others, however, argue on the contrary and suggest that exchanging in-
formation with unknown people through customer-to-customer
sources is not perceived as trustworthy or even valuable to consumers
when making a purchase decision (Mathwick, Wiertz, & De Ruyter,
2008). In addition, Häubl and Trifts (2000) demonstrate that agent rec-
ommendations, those that are based on self-explicated information
about a consumer's desired utility and function, reduce the search effort

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.05.003
0148-2963/© 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
468 J. Chen et al. / Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 467–475
and aids in making purchase decisions. Contrarily, Steckel et al. (2005)
argue that if agents are neither autonomous nor believable, they may
lead to bias in consumer decision-making. Some studies also show
that consumers favor peer sources more than corporate information
(Bickart & Schindler, 2001; van Beuningen et al., 2009). Lastly, it is
also likely that consumers may not perceive all information sources as
equally valuable due to the characteristics of those sources (Lurie,
2004).
Although these studies have demonstrated that online information
sources influence consumer decision-making, research has yet to be con-
ducted that demonstrates the incorporation of the three types of online
information sources (eWOM, neutral/third party, and manufacturer/
retailer) and examines their effect on consumer's brand attitude and
purchase intention. In addition, a careful analysis of the existing litera-
ture reveals that the perceived usefulness of each type of online infor-
mation source remains unknown. In this study, we propose that
consumer's characteristics may influence their reactions toward online
sources of brand-related information while making a brand purchase
decision. Specifically, we suggest that consumer's level of susceptibility
to informational influence (Bearden, Netemeyer, & Teel, 1989; Lascu &
Zinkhan, 1999) is related to how influential they find different types
of online sources of brand-related information.
The purpose of this research is to simultaneously examine three infor-
mation sources – eWOM, neutral/third party, and manufacturer/retailer –
that act as predictors of brand attitude and purchase intention toward a
brand. In addition, this research is designed to determine whether there
are differences in the effects of online brand-related information on con-
sumer purchase intentions for consumers with high and low susceptibil-
ity to informational influence.
2. Conceptual framework and hypotheses
Research on consumer online information search suggests that con-
sumers may use different types of online information sources to search
for brand-related information when making purchase decisions (Häubl
& Trifts, 2000; Smith, Menon, & Sivakumar, 2005). However, a review of
the online information search and consumer behavior literature reveals
that previous research has not examined all of these sources within a
unified, single study (Bickart & Schindler, 2001; Steckel et al., 2005).
In this research, we suggest that online brand-related information
from eWOM, neutral/third party and manufacturer/retailer sources af-
fect consumer's brand attitude and intention. The specific hypotheses
related to the three sources of online information are discussed below.
2.1. eWOM sources
A large and growing body of research has shown that consumers are
likely to follow others when making purchase decisions (Berger &
Schwartz, 2011; Bickart & Schindler, 2001; Gruen et al., 2007; Murray,
1991; Smith et al., 2005). Recent research shows that online consumers
are increasingly driven by a need for social interaction, in addition to in-
strumental goals (Childers, Carr, Peck, & Carson, 2002). In the process of
online decision-making, consumers may engage in brand-related infor-
mation search by reading other consumer's brand and service ratings
and evaluations through an online eWOM source. For example, con-
sumers can exchange brand-related information with other users
through their trial experiences via chat rooms or web forums, thus mak-
ing it possible for them to share and facilitate their knowledge and ex-
periences with each other (Bei, Chen, & Widdows, 2004; Bickart &
Schindler, 2001; Dellarocas, 2003; Sweeney, Soutar & Mazzarol, 2011).
As the Internet is making information from eWOM sources more acces-
sible, consumers can easily find brand-related information that can im-
pact online consumer purchase intention.
There are two conflicting arguments regarding the credibility and
quality of information from an eWOM source. Some researchers argue
that exchanging or sharing information with unknown people on the
internet is unreliable and untrustworthy. As a result, it is less likely to
have an impact on consumer decision making (Mathwick et al., 2008).
In contrast, other researchers suggest that customer-to-customer or
C2C information is considered more credible and relevant than corpo-
rate information as it is less susceptible to commercial motives or bias
(e.g., increased profits or sales) (Bickart & Schindler, 2001). C2C ex-
changes impact the overall perceptions of the value of a firm's offering
(Gruen et al., 2007). Using eWOM sources can help consumers achieve
a sense of security when making a purchase decision. For example, con-
sumers may believe that other users have provided them with credible
information regarding a brand's value or worth. Thus, consumers will
buy the same brand as a safe means of avoiding risk or loss (Chen &
Xie, 2008). Recent research shows that the eWOM effect is greater for
negative eWOM than for positive eWOM (Park & Lee, 2009). In this
same vein, if a consumer purchases a certain brand's product and this
product successfully satisfies consumer's needs, consumers may then
recommend that brand or product to fellow consumers through online
eWOM sources. Conversely, sharing one's negative experience with a
brand may inhibit others to purchase that same brand (Maheswaran
& Meyers-Levy, 1990). Thus, it is expected that the information about
a brand from an eWOM source is likely to influence the formation of
consumer's brand attitude toward, and purchase intention for the
brand.
2.2. Neutral/third party sources
Senecal and Nantel (2004) suggest that product assessment
websites (e.g., consumerreports.org) are considered to be third party
websites. These sources provide consumers with information that in-
cludes brand comparisons with reference to its sales ranking (Chevalier
& Goolsbee, 2003), expert's opinions on brand recommendations and rel-
evant special reports (Senecal & Nantel, 2004). These third party sources
are highly regarded by consumers since they facilitate consumer's exter-
nal search effort by decreasing search costs (Alba et al., 1997; Lynch &
Ariely, 2000). Although third party sources claim to provide consumers
with an objective source of information, some researchers state that cer-
tain commercially linked recommendation agents may not be reliable be-
cause they can mislead consumers into making a biased decision (Steckel
et al., 2005). Consumers often discredit recommendations from a third
party source if they suspect that the third party has incentives to recom-
mend a brand or product (Folkes, 1988).
Other researchers argue that online product recommendations from
independent websites (e.g., neutral/third parties) are more influential
than those from less independent websites (e.g., manufacturers/retailers)
(Alba et al., 1997; Gershoff, Mukherjee, & Mukhopadhyay, 2003; Lynch &
Ariely, 2000). Put differently, online product recommendations from
neutral/third parties are perceived as being more useful in terms of pro-
viding accurate information. Many consumers are willing to search for in-
formation from neutral/third party sources to satiate the uncertainty they
feel toward information from manufacturers/retailers. For example, con-
sumers with a high motivation to process information in particular are
willing to accept recommendations from neutral/third parties (Gupta &
Harris, 2010). Further, an online brand recommendation can influence
the level of consumer satisfaction with the online shopping experience
(Szymanski & Hise, 2000). Thus, we expect that consumers are likely to
use brand-related information from a neutral/third party source to form
their attitude toward a brand. Consequently, the information gathered
from a neutral/third party source will positively impact consumers' pur-
chase intentions.
2.3. Manufacturer/retailer sources
Research suggests that online transactions indicate uncertainty to
consumers (Jacoby et al., 1994). Due to the nature of online transactions,
consumers are unable to investigate first-hand, the specific attributes
about a brand which may increase consumer's uncertainty to buy a
 J. Chen et al. / Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 467–475
brand's product. In order to reduce the uncertainty and perceived risk
associated with online purchases, consumers may turn to the
manufacturer's or retailer's website for more detailed information
(McCole, Ramsey, & Williams, 2010) including prices, promotional dis-
counts, product descriptions, ads (e.g., pop-up ads, banner ads, flash
ads and floating ads), after-purchase service, and atmospherics cues
(Richard, 2005; Ward & Lee, 2000). Consumers who seek manufactur-
er/retailer sources are interested in gaining factual, objective informa-
tion about the product and service attributes of a brand. Using a
manufacturer/retailer source provides consumers with the most
timely and extensive product information about a particular brand
and facilitates the decision making process (Steckel et al., 2005). For
example, consumers can use a manufacturer's website to find various
product alternatives and then use search engines to locate the ideal
product option (Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006). In addition, consumers
visiting a manufacturer's/retailer's website can also read extensive
reviews about its products from other consumers so that they can make
an informed choice. Thus, brand-related information from a manufactur-
er/retailer source acts as an extrinsic cue that consumers find trustworthy
in order to identify potential alternatives and form their respective brand
attitude.
The vast amount of brand-related information from a manufacturer/
retailer source is not only very helpful for consumers during the
decision-making process, but also increases the loyalty of consumers
who have been successfully attracted to the firm's offering (Srinivasan,
Anderson, & Ponnavolu, 2002). However, research to date concerning
the influence of manufacturer/retailer sources on consumer's brand atti-
tude and purchase intention has produced conflicting results. Some re-
searchers indicate that offering complicated information about
numerous alternatives, in addition to providing data related to product
features, prices and quality ratings may be overwhelming for consumers
and may even postpone or prevent purchase (Sismeiro & Bucklin, 2004;
Steckel et al., 2005). In contrast, others argue that although the informa-
tion from a manufacturer/retailer source may sometimes be too compli-
cated, consumers are capable of simplifying the vast amount of
information when perusing the website. More importantly, a manufactur-
er/retailer can structure information for consumers through the design of
personalized decision tools like comparison matrices (Häubl & Trifts,
2000). Therefore, we predict that online brand-related information,
such as brand attributes and advertisements from manufacturer/retailer
sources, impacts consumer's brand attitudes and, subsequently, brand
purchase intentions.
Based on the results of previous research in the information search
and consumer decision-making literature, we predict that consumers
are likely to combine brand-related information from three different
online sources in order to form their attitude toward a brand (Fig. 1).
We propose the following hypothesis:
H1. Online brand-related information from (1) eWOM, (2) neutral/
third party, and (3) manufacturer/retailer sources has a significant
eWOM Source
Neutral/Third Attitude Purchase
party Source Intention
Manufacturer/
Retailer Source
Fig. 1. A model of online brand-related information sources and purchase behavior.
469
impact on consumer attitude toward a brand and these brand attitudes
significantly influence purchase intentions for that brand.
2.4. Susceptibility to informational influence
Susceptibility to informational influence refers to the process in
which individual's attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors are influenced by
other people. In fact, individuals possess distinct levels of susceptibility
to informational influence. Some are more likely to be influenced by
others, also referred to as those with high susceptibility to informational
influence, while others are less likely, also regarded as those with low
susceptibility to informational influence (Bearden & Rose, 1990;
Bearden et al., 1989). Individuals with high susceptibility to informa-
tional influence construe themselves as dependent and informational,
whereas individuals with low susceptibility to informational influence
see themselves as independent and unique.
Consumer characteristics contribute significantly to the formation
of behavioral intentions (Bearden & Rose, 1990). Consumers rely on
others, neutral/third party and manufacturer/retailer sources when
making a purchase decision (Bearden et al., 1989; Furse, Punj, &
Stewart, 1984). However, these sources of different online brand-
related information may differ in their influence on consumer's pur-
chase behaviors. An individual's characteristics can determine the likely
information search behavior and preferences for types of information
sources (Furse et al., 1984). For example, some consumers with depen-
dent traits are likely to conform to other's suggestions when making a
purchase decision, while others with independent traits, may pride
themselves on making their own decision. Generally speaking, con-
sumers with high susceptibility to informational influence tend to fol-
low the lead of other users to achieve a sense of security. In terms of
information search, for instance, these individuals may believe that
others have provided them with credible information regarding a
brand value. They conform to buy the brand as a safe means of avoiding
risk or loss; thus, consumers with high susceptibility to informational
influence may prefer eWOM source of information when they believe
they have the capability to draw their own conclusions regarding
brand attributes and services, based on comments and suggestions
made by groups of knowledgeable and savvy individuals (Bickart &
Schindler, 2001; Herr, Kardes, & Kim, 1991). It is expected that the influ-
ence of others is an important determinant of one's decision-making.
Consumers with high susceptibility to informational influence are
more likely to take information from eWOM source into account over
information from a neutral/third party or a manufacturer/retailer
when forming their brand attitude.
In contrast, consumers with low susceptibility to informational in-
fluence tend to rely on more than a single source of information. For ex-
ample, consumers with low susceptibility to informational influence
may engage in a brand-related information search by researching
neutral/third party brand and service reviews in articles through eWOM
sources. They may also look for product descriptions, promotions, after-
purchase services, and other information from manufacturer/retailer
websites before making their own judgments. Although some consumers
with high or low susceptibility to informational influence spend a good
amount of effort in searching for information, consumers with low sus-
ceptibility to informational influence consider eWOM information less
than consumers with high susceptibility to informational influence. Be-
cause consumers with low susceptibility to informational influence also
perceive neutral/third party and manufacturer/retailer sources to be im-
portant, they are more likely to be influenced by these sources. Therefore,
the information sources that consumers use can affect the formation of
their brand attitude when making a purchase decision.
The effect of eWOM, neutral/third party, and manufacturer/retailer
sources may differ between consumers with high and low susceptibility
to informational influence (the moderating effect of the level of high
and low susceptibility to informational influence is illustrated in
470 J. Chen et al. / Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 467–475

Fig. 1). Specifically, consumers with high susceptibility to informational
influence are more likely to rely on the eWOM information source than
consumers with low susceptibility to informational influence when
making purchase decisions. We expect that the eWOM source is likely
to be perceived as more useful by consumers with high susceptibility
to informational influence than neutral/third party and manufacturer/
retailer sources, whereas all three sources are viewed as useful by con-
sumers with low susceptibility to informational influence. Thus, we hy-
pothesize that:
H2a. Consumers with high susceptibility to informational influence will
be more likely than consumers with low susceptibility to informational
influence, to be influenced by online brand-related information from an
eWOM source but not from neutral/third party and manufacture/retailer
sources in terms of brand attitude and purchase intention.
H2b. Consumers with low susceptibility to informational influence will
be more likely than consumers with high susceptibility to informational
influence to be influenced by online brand-related information from all
three sources — eWOM, neutral/third party, and manufacturer/retailer
in terms of brand attitude and purchase intention.
3. Research methodology
To test our set of hypotheses, a two-phase study was conducted
concerning cell phone brands in a mobile phone market in China. The pur-
pose of the first phase was to determine which cell phone brands best
represented the Chinese mobile phone market. The second phase of the
study was designed to determine the extent to which (a) consumers
used the three different types of online brand-related information,
(b) consumers believed these information sources were useful to them,
and (c) information from these sources impacted their brand attitudes
and purchase intentions. In addition, consumers' level of susceptibility
to informational influence was measured and demographic information
was collected.
intentions. These questions were repeated for each of the eleven mobile
phone brands. The questionnaire also included measurement items re-
lated to participants' level of susceptibility to informational influence
and demographic questions.
A total of 513 surveys were completed. The authors discarded
surveys which contained missing data or inappropriate responses
(e.g., participants who did not own or use a cell phone), resulting in
448 usable surveys. Of the 448 Chinese participants whose responses
were used in this study, most lived in central China, approximately
50% of participants were male, 70% of participants were between the
ages of 25 and 39 years old, 92% of participants had received some
form of post-secondary education, and over 60% of participants earned
less than $2000 per month (see Table 1 for a breakdown of sample char-
acteristics). Going by these characteristics, our sample is representative
of the Chinese population that owns and uses cell phones.
3.2. Measures
All measurement items were measured using 7-point Likert scales.
The items for each construct are shown in Table 2. These items mea-
sured the evaluations and comments on a focal brand and perceived
usefulness of information about that brand from three brand-related in-
formation sources. They were operationalized using three categories of
online brand-related information sources adopted from Bickart and
Schindler (2001), Steckel et al. (2005) and Smith et al. (2005). Three
statements (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) concerning
eWOM were adapted from previous research (Bei et al., 2004; Bickart
Table 1
Demographic characteristics of the sample.
Variable Frequency Percent

Gender
3.1. Questionnaire design and data collection Male 223 49.8
Female 225 50.2
Education
We first conducted a pretest in order to determine which brands of High school or less 37 8.3
mobile phones best represented the Chinese mobile phone market. College 118 26.3
We selected 86 participants from the same sample pool used for the University 195 43.5
main study (sample characteristics described below). Participants Post-graduate or above 98 21.9
Personal status
were interviewed and asked to list all the mobile phone brands they
Single 300 67.0
could think of. The researchers analyzed the data obtained from these Married with children 86 19.2
interviews to determine which brands were mentioned the most Single with children 3 0.7
often and then determined the market share for each brand. In the Separated/divorced with no children 6 1.3
end, 11 brands were chosen based on the frequency with which they Marred with no children 50 11.2
Separated/divorced with children 3 0.7
were mentioned in the open–ended interviews and also, because they Occupation
represented 90% of the mobile phone market. The brands were, in al- Retired 3 0.7
phabetical order, Apple, Changhong, Haier, Jingli, Lenovo, LG, Motorola, Manager 75 16.7
Nokia, Samsung, Sony and Tianyu. These 11 brands were used in our Professional 107 23.9
Skilled worker 13 2.9
study.
Student 119 26.6
Our study consisted of an online survey that was conducted on a sur- Others 131 29.2
vey website using a consulting firm panel from Shanghai and Nanjing in Age
2010. At the top of the survey was the list of the 11 mobile phone brands ≤18 5 1.1
that were shortlisted from the pretest. Participants were asked, “Do you 18–24 89 19.9
25–29 177 39.5
currently own a mobile phone?” (yes/no). After answering this ques- 30–39 137 30.5
tion, participants read a short hypothetical scenario that read, “Imagine 40–49 27 6
that your cell phone, which you had used a lot, has just died because of 50–59 11 2.4
overuse. You need to buy another cell phone but you are not quite sure ≥60 2 0.4
Income (per month)
which brand of cell phone you want to buy. Please indicate the extent to
b=$1000 140 31.2
which each of the following sources will influence your buying deci- $1000–1499 82 18.3
sion.” They were then directed to answer the survey items for eWOM, $1500–1999 52 11.6
neutral/third party, and manufacturer/retailer sources of information $2000–2499 21 4.7
scales in that order. They also completed four items that measured $2500–2999 23 5.1
N$3000 15 3.3
consumer's brand attitudes and four items that measured purchase
 J. Chen et al. / Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 467–475 471

Table 2
Assessment of reliability and validity for the scales.

Items Cronbach's α Component loading

eWOM source 0.830

High rating of the brand on the Internet by others 0.805
The brand is often recommended on the Internet by others 0.838
Others have good trial experiences with the brand 0.757
Neutral/third party source 0.722
High rating of the brand on the Internet by neutral parties 0.690
The brand is recommended by expert and authority websites 0.743
The news about the brand is positive 0.794
Manufacturer/retailer source 0.792
The information on the brand's website is abundant 0.736
The product information on the brand's website is abundant and performance parameters are detailed 0.837
After-sale service is very detailed on the brand's website/the retailers' website 0.841
Attitude toward the brand 0.902
I like the brand very much 0.769
The brand is a good brand 0.806
The brand is a satisfactory brand 0.778
The brand is a favorable brand 0.723
Purchase intention 0.921
I would intend to buy the brand 0.864
I would consider buying the brand 0.786
I would expect to buy the brand 0.844
I would plan to buy the brand 0.835
Susceptibility to informational influence 0.742
To make sure I buy the right product or brand, I often observe what others are buying and using. 0.773
If I have little experience with a product, I often ask my friends about the product. 0.676
I often consult other people to help choose the best alternative available from a product class. 0.812
I frequently gather information from friends or family about a product before I buy. 0.760

& Schindler, 2001; Murray, 1991; Smith et al., 2005) and are as follows:
(1) I pay attention to the brand that has a high rating on the Internet by
others; (2) I am aware of the brand that is often recommended on the
Internet by others; and (3) I am interested in the brand when others
have good trial experience with it. Neutral/third party source was mea-
sured with 3 items, using the following statements adapted from previ-
ous research (Alba et al., 1997; Chevalier & Goolsbee, 2003; Lynch &
Ariely, 2000; Steckel et al., 2005): (1) I pay attention to the brand that
has a high rating of online sales by neutral or authority websites; (2) I
am aware of the brand that is often recommended by expert and au-
thority websites; and (3) I am interested in the brand when the news
about it is positive. Manufacturer/retailer source was measured by the
following three statements adapted from Steckel et al. (2005) and
Ward and Lee (2000): (1) I pay attention to the brand that the informa-
tion on its website is abundant; (2) I am aware of the brand when the
product information on its website is abundant and performance pa-
rameters are detailed; and (3) I am interested in the brand when
after-sale service is very detailed on the brand's website or retailer's
websites. In addition, the following four items taken from previous re-
search (Teng & Laroche, 2007) measured attitude toward the brand:
(1) I like the brand very much; (2) The brand is a good brand; (3) The
brand is a satisfactory brand; and (4) The brand is a favorable brand.
The following four items: (1) I would intend to buy the brand; (2); I
would consider buying the brand; (3) I would expect to buy the
brand; and (4) I would plan to buy the brand; followed the four items
measuring brand attitude and were included to measure purchase in-
tention for the brand (Teng & Laroche, 2007). A focal brand was defined
as the brand in the consideration set, which was measured by asking the
following two questions: “Indicate your first choice from the 11 cell
phone brands,” and “Indicate other brands which you would consider
selecting when your first choice is not available.” Consumer susceptibil-
ity to informational influence was measured using four items adapted
from the informational subset of Bearden et al.'s (1989) Susceptibility
to Interpersonal Influence scale. These items were (1) To make sure I
buy the right product or brand, I often observe what others are buying
and using; (2) If I have little experience with a product, I often ask my
friends about the product; (3) I often consult other people to help
choose the best alternative available from a product class and (4) I fre-
quently gather information from friends or family about a product be-
fore I buy. The range of mean values to responses to the 21 items
varied between 2.3 and 6.2.
4. Results
4.1. Reliability and validity analyses
In order to provide greater insight into the results, several iterations
of factor and reliability analyses were undertaken to determine a re-
duced set of composite dimensions. Principal component analyses and
reliability analyses were used to simplify and purify the dimensions by
removing variables with less loadings. These analyses resulted in six fac-
tors with twenty-one variables (two variables were removed because of
low loadings (b .30), the two variables were “The brand is often
discussed on the Internet by others” and “the high ranking of the brand's
sales”) and all factors had eigenvalues greater than 1.00. The loadings
and the corresponding coefficient alphas of the six factors, as generated
with principal component extraction and rotation, are provided in
Table 2. We also conducted convergent and discriminant validity analy-
ses for the online brand-related information sources, brand attitude,
and purchase intention. As seen in Table 3, the average variances ex-
tracted for the factors were .80/.79 (eWOM source), .74/.77 (neutral/
third party source), .78/.77 (manufacturer/retailer source), .84/.87
(brand attitude) and .87/.90 (purchase intention), for samples with
low and high susceptibility to informational influence, respectively.
Thus, convergent validity was confirmed for all of these dimensions of
information sources, brand attitude, and purchase intention. Moreover,
the criterion was also met across all pairs of factors to support discrim-
inant validity (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
4.2. Structural equations analyses
The online brand-related information model in Fig. 1 was analyzed
by using the maximum likelihood method (i.e., ML), with LISREL 8
(Jöreskog & Sörbom, 2001). The proposed model provided a good fit
472 J. Chen et al. / Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 467–475

Table 3
Tests for convergent and discriminant validity across two groups.

eWOM source Neutral/third party source Manufacturer/retailer source Brand attitude Purchase intention

eWOM source 0.80 (0.79)

Neutral/third party source 0.12 (0.42) 0.74 (0.77)
Manufacturer/retailer source 0.04 (0.21) 0.11 (0.43) 0.78 (0.77)
Brand attitude 0.27 (0.31) 0.17 (0.17) 0.12 (0.10) 0.84 (0.87)
Purchase intention 0.13 (0.20) 0.08 (0.11) 0.06 (0.06) 0.48 (0.64) 0.87 (0.90)

Note: The first number represents respondents with low susceptibility to informational influence. The number in parentheses represents respondents with high susceptibility to informa-
tional influence.

to the data (c2 = 310.71, 112 df, CFI = .98, and RMSEA = .063). The
goodness of fit index, adjusted goodness of fit index, and comparative
fit index are all well above the accepted .90 cutoff (Hu & Bentler,
1999). These results suggest that the observed structure is consistent
with the proposed framework of the online brand-related information.
Further, the results show that online brand-related information
from eWOM (.43, p b .01), neutral/third party (.16, p b .01) and
manufacturer/retailer (.15, p b .01) sources all have strong positive in-
fluences on consumer's brand attitude toward the brand and positively
influences their purchase intention toward the brand (.75, p b .01).
These results are consistent with our hypothesis H1, which states that
online brand-related information from (1) eWOM, (2) neutral/third
party, and (3) manufacturer/retailer sources positively impact
consumer's brand attitude which consequently positively influences
purchase intention.
4.3. Testing the proposed model between consumers with high and low
susceptibility to informational influence
The first objective of our study was to identify a set of online brand-
related information sources that influence consumer's brand attitudes
and purchase intention. The second objective was to investigate wheth-
er the proposed model of online brand-related information sources
varies between consumers with high and low susceptibility to informa-
tional influence. Thus, we developed an index of consumer susceptibil-
ity to informational influence adapted from previous research (Bearden
et al., 1989). We used this index to split the sample size into two groups
based on the median score (4). Participants with an average score
higher than 4 were classified in the group with high susceptibility to
informational influence (163 participants), and participants with an av-
erage score lower than 4 classified in the group with low susceptibility
to informational influence (190 participants). Participants who did not
fit into either of these categories were excluded from the analyses
(e.g., 95 participants with the median of 4 were not included). Further,
a comparison of the characteristics of the participants in the high and
low groups revealed that they did not differ significantly from the
total sample of participants.
The proposed online brand-related information source model was
analyzed separately for consumers with high and low susceptibility to
informational influence. For the group with high susceptibility to infor-
informational influence suggests that the model fits the data (c2 =
211.35, 112 df, CFI = .97, and RMSEA = .069).
Based on these results (illustrated in Fig. 2), we concluded that, for
consumers with high susceptibility to informational influence, online
brand-related information from eWOM source solely, influences their
brand attitude and has a positive impact on their purchase intention.
This result is contrasted with that of consumers with low susceptibility
to informational influence who were positively influenced by all three
online sources in terms of brand attitude and purchase intention. The
structural relationship of the proposed online brand-related informa-
tion model varies across the two groups, thereby providing support
for H2a and H2b.
5. Discussion
This study is an initial effort to simultaneously examine three online
brand-related information sources, eWOM, neutral/third party, and
manufacturer/retailer sources, and demonstrate their solitary and com-
bined significance in predicting consumer purchase behaviors for con-
sumers with high and low susceptibility to informational influence.
This study resulted in four major findings. The first three findings are
consistent with what has been found in previous research and applies
to consumers irrespective of level of susceptibility to informational in-
fluence, while the fourth finding reveals the importance of susceptibility
to informational influence and highlights our study's unique contribu-
tion to the literature.
First, we found that brand information from eWOM sources posi-
tively influences consumer attitude toward the brand, which, in turn,
influences consumers' purchase intention toward the same brand.
These results are consistent with previous studies that argue that con-
sumers are likely to take others' recommendations into account since
peer-to-peer information is considered to be trustworthy and depend-
able (Bickart & Schindler, 2001; van Beuningen et al., 2009). However,
these findings do not support the idea that exchanging information
with unknown people is not valuable (Mathwick et al., 2008).
5.18(5.62)
eWOM Source
.41(.51)

mational influence, the results indicated that only online brand-related 5.11(5.55) 5.36(5.82) 4.83(5.51)
information from eWOM source had a positive impact on consumer's
attitude toward the brand (.51, p b .01) and neutral/third party and Neutral/Third .21(.05) Attitude .69(.80) Purchase
party Source Intention
manufacturer/retailer sources had no influence on consumer attitude
toward the brand (.05, p N .10; .05, p N .10). The values of indices for 4.57(5.00) .21(.05)
the model suggest that the proposed model regarding consumers with
high susceptibility to informational influence presents a good fit to the Manufacturer/
Retailer Source
data (c2 = 100.93, 42 df, CFI = .98, standardized RMR = .062, and
RMSEA = .092).
For the group with low susceptibility to informational influence, we Note: The first number represents respondents with low susceptibility to informational influence. The
number in parentheses represents respondents with high susceptibility to informational influence.
found that online brand-related information from all three sources had
a positive impact on attitude toward to the brand (.41, p b .01; .21,
Fig. 2. The proposed model between consumers with low and high susceptibility to infor-
p b .05; .21, p b .05, respectively). Consumer's brand attitude in turn pos- mational influence. Note: The first number represents respondents with low susceptibility
itively influenced their purchase intention (.69, p b .01). The overall fit to informational influence. The number in parentheses represents respondents with high
for the proposed model with consumers with low susceptibility to susceptibility to informational influence.
 J. Chen et al. / Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 467–475
Second, consistent with previous studies (Häubl & Trifts, 2000), our
research demonstrates that a neutral/third party source, such as brand
sales ranking, evaluations, and expert recommendations, has a positive
influence on consumer's brand attitude. This result does not support the
notion that a neutral/third party source is unreliable and may lead to a
bias in consumer decision-making (Steckel et al., 2005).
Third, we find that the impact of online manufacturer/retailer source
on consumer's brand attitude was significantly positive, consistent with
the studies by Häubl and Trifts (2000) and Trifts and Häubl (2003).
This result suggests that for consumers with low susceptibility to
informational influence, online brand-related information from a
manufacturer/retailer source, such as price promotions, product descrip-
tions, ads, after-purchase service, and other information, plays an impor-
tant role in the formation of consumer brand attitude and impacts
consumer decision-making (Bickart & Schindler, 2001; van Beuningen
et al., 2009).
Fourth, the most interesting and strongest finding of this study is
that consumers with high and low susceptibility to informational
influence differentiate between eWOM, neutral/third party, and
manufacturer/retailer sources and weigh associated evaluations differ-
ently between these sources when forming their brand attitudes. We
demonstrate that consumers with high susceptibility to informational
influence primarily depend on eWOM sources and do not consult
neutral/third party and manufacturer/retailer sources to form their
brand attitude. This finding implies that others' trial experience, chat
and evaluations about brands, impact consumers with high susceptibil-
ity to informational influence more than the information from neutral/
third party and manufacturer/retailer sources (Bickart & Schindler,
2001; van Beuningen et al., 2009). However, consumers with low sus-
ceptibility to informational influence tend to have a brand attitude
that is positively and significantly affected by all three information
sources. This finding implies that, in addition to the eWOM source, con-
sumers with low susceptibility to informational influence use more in-
formation sources to search for brand-related information in order to
form their brand attitude and are less likely to be influenced by only
one information source.
6. Research contributions
6.1. Theoretical contributions
This research aims to contribute to both, the information search and
consumer attitude literature. First, while previous research has addressed
eWOM sources, neutral/third party sources, and manufacturer/retailer
sources separately (Bickart & Schindler, 2001; Häubl & Trifts, 2000;
Steckel et al., 2005; van Beuningen et al., 2009; Zauberman, 2003), our
study examines the three online sources together in terms of their effects
on consumer decision-making. We focus specifically on how various on-
line brand-related information sources differentially affect the formation
of brand attitude. This study expands the single information source effect
to the combined effect. Thus, our research contributes to the field of con-
sumer information search by investigating the influence of multiple on-
line information sources on consumer purchase behavior.
Previous research has suggested that consumers with high suscepti-
bility to informational influence are dependent and seek information,
while consumers with low susceptibility to informational influence are
independent and unique (Bearden et al., 1989; Bearden & Rose, 1990;
Lascu & Zinkhan, 1999; Venkatesan, 1966), but research has not yet inves-
tigated the difference between the two groups in an online setting. Fur-
ther, although previous studies have demonstrated how eWOM sources,
neutral/third party sources, and manufacturer/retailer sources influence
consumer purchase behavior separately (Bickart & Schindler, 2001;
Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006; Senecal & Nantel, 2004), this influence has
been unexplored in relation to different kinds of consumers. There is little
research on how online brand-related information sources influence
consumer's brand attitude and purchase intentions between groups
473
with high and low susceptibility to informational influence. Our study ad-
dressed this gap by empirically demonstrating the role that susceptibility
to informational influence plays in terms of the effects of online brand-
related information sources on consumer purchase behavior. Importantly,
we find that consumers with high susceptibility to informational influ-
ence only rely on information from eWOM sources, whereas con-
sumers with low susceptibility to informational influence depend
not only on the information from eWOM sources but also on infor-
mation from neutral/third party and manufacturer/retailer sources
when making a purchase decision. This finding will aid researchers
in tapping into individual differences in consumer ratings on the
usefulness of online information sources.
6.2. Managerial implications
This study provides several managerial implications for online mar-
keters. First, this study suggests that online brand-related information
from eWOM sources plays a very important role in influencing consum-
er decision-making. We demonstrate that both, consumers with high
and low susceptibility to informational influence, are likely to consult
eWOM sources when searching for online brand-related information.
Thus, online marketers should pay close attention to the others' trial
experiences, ratings, and evaluations of their brands by including a hy-
perlink on their website that provides access to eWOM sources of infor-
mation (Bei et al., 2004; Bickart & Schindler, 2001; Dellarocas, 2003). In
addition, marketers can increase customer involvement by creating
more interesting or informed communities, such as chat rooms, forums,
or even blogs, so that consumers are able to interact with each other via
the web site (Armstrong & Hagel, 2000).
Consumers with low susceptibility to informational influence are
also likely to consult neutral/third party and manufacturer/retailer
sources when searching for online brand-related information. Thus, on-
line marketers should not only include a hyperlink on their website to
provide consumers with access to third parties' brand rankings and ex-
pert recommendations, but also pay special attention to the content of
their own website (van Beuningen et al., 2009).
To target consumers with low susceptibility to informational influ-
ence, online marketers can offer prizes or other incentives to encourage
them to have a more interactive relationship with their website. This
may lead to increased consumer involvement with the brand and in-
crease their interest in the offerings provided on the website (Richard,
2005).
6.3. Limitations and directions for future research
There are several limitations to this study. First, the argument can be
made that statistical significance is different from practical relevance. In
our study, we found that only eWOM sources were significantly related
to brand attitude and purchase intention for consumers with high sus-
ceptibility to informational influence. However, this does not necessar-
ily mean that consumers with high susceptibility to informational
influence never use other online brand-related information sources or
that these sources have absolutely no impact on brand attitudes or pur-
chase intention. Our results simply suggest that consumers with high
susceptibility to informational influence, when compared to consumers
with low susceptibility to informational influence, are more likely to
only use eWOM sources when forming brand attitudes.
Second potential limitation of the current study concerns how partic-
ipants conceptualized eWOM sources when they were responding to the
eWOM items. In our survey, we asked participants to think about how
much influence eWOM sources, in general, held for them. That is, we
did not explicitly provide a definition of eWOM sources that contained
all the different forms of eWOM sources we wanted participants to con-
sider, but we did provide examples within the eWOM items which may
have influenced the specific sources participants thought about. While
our goal was to get a measure of how influential eWOM sources are by
474 J. Chen et al. / Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 467–475
examining these sources in general, we acknowledge that different indi-
viduals may have conceptualized eWOM sources differently. For example,
some participants may have only considered internet platforms or online
chat while other participants may have only considered information gath-
ered from social networks. These three different sets of conceptualizations
may lead to three different impact factors. However, by leaving the defi-
nition open, we hoped that participants considered as many eWOM
sources as they could and that the individual differences in conceptualiza-
tion of eWOM sources varied randomly as opposed to systematically.
In addition, we chose to separate consumers categorically according
to two levels of susceptibility to informational influence: high and low.
For the purpose of this study we did not choose to look at consumers
along the entire continuum of susceptibility to informational influence.
Future research is required to determine whether consumers with me-
dium susceptibility to informational influence use one, two, or all three
sources of online brand-related information. This research would pro-
vide greater insight into how susceptibility to informational influence
affects consumers in all levels in terms of the sources they use to form
their brand attitudes and influence purchase intention.
Another limitation of the current study is that it was conducted in
China. Consumer characteristics may change across cultures and this
needs to be taken into consideration. It would be useful for this study
to be replicated in different countries to have greater reliability and ex-
ternal validity.
Our study examined how online brand-related information from
eWOM, neutral/third party, and manufacturer/retailer sources influ-
ence consumers' brand attitudes and intentions to purchase and found
that these sources (which vary in terms of consumer's level of suscepti-
bility to informational influence) positively affect brand attitudes and
intent to purchase. However, this study did not specifically look at
whether the information from these online sources was primarily posi-
tive or negative, or how the valence of the information from these
sources affects brand attitudes and purchase intention. Future experi-
ments could be designed which manipulate the valence (positive or
negative) of the information provided by each online source to deter-
mine how positive or negative information from different online
sources impacts brand attitudes and purchase intention.
In addition, future research should consider whether there are other
variables that influence consumers' selection of information sources
that might be consulted during their information search process as
well as variables that will affect the decision making process. For exam-
ple, variables may include specific personality characteristics such as
conscientiousness Furthermore, there are many different factors that
go beyond consumer characteristics that influence the buying decision
of mobile phones such as the contract offered by the service provider,
the number and type of applications the phone can support, the level
of compatibility the phone has with a previous models, and so on. Fu-
ture research could examine how these factors play a role in influencing
intention to purchase specific brands of mobile phones.
Consumer's brand attitude and purchase intention were dependent
variables in this study. These variables may be a function of consumer's
level of involvement with the internet and product (Laurent & Kapferer,
1985; Michaelidou and Dibb, 2008). Future research should investigate
whether online marketers' websites increase consumer's level of involve-
ment with the manufacturer/retailers source. Also, previous research has
suggested that service attributes such as ease of use and joy of surfing in-
fluence consumer purchase behavior (Pagani, 2004). Future research may
investigate the effects of neutral/third party and manufacturer/retailer
sources in relation to their service features on consumer's brand attitude
and purchase intention in the consumer decision-making process.
References
Alba, J., Lynch, J., Weitz, B., Janiszewski, C., Lutz, R., Sawyer, A., et al. (1997). Interactive
home shopping: Consumer, retailer, and manufacturer incentives to participate in
electronic marketplaces. The Journal of Marketing, 38–53.
Armstrong, A., & Hagel, J. (2000). The real value of online communities. Knowledge and
communities, 85–95.
Bearden, W.O., Netemeyer, R.G., & Teel, J.E. (1989). Measurement of consumer suscepti-
bility to interpersonal influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 473–481.
Bearden, W.O., & Rose, R.L. (1990). Attention to social comparison information: An indi-
vidual difference factor affecting consumer conformity. Journal of Consumer
Research, 461–471.
Bei, L.T., Chen, E.Y., & Widdows, R. (2004). Consumers' online information search behavior
and the phenomenon of search vs. experience products. Journal of Family and
Economic Issues, 25(4), 449–467.
Berger, J. (2014). Word of mouth and interpersonal communication: A review and direc-
tions for future research. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(4), 586–607.
Berger, J., & Schwartz, E. (2011). What drives immediate and ongoing word of mouth?
Journal of Marketing Research, 48(5), 869–880.
Bickart, B., & Schindler, R.M. (2001). Internet forums as influential sources of consumer
information. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15(3), 31–40.
Chen, Y., & Xie, J. (2008). Online consumer review: Word-of-mouth as a new element of
marketing communication mix. Management Science, 54(3), 477–491.
Chevalier, J., & Goolsbee, A. (2003). Measuring prices and price competition online:
Amazon.com and BarnesandNoble.com. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 1(2),
203–222.
Chevalier, J.A., & Mayzlin, D. (2006). The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book
reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(3), 345–354.
Childers, T.L., Carr, C.L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2002). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations
for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77(4), 511–535.
Dellarocas, C. (2003). The digitization of word of mouth: Promise and challenges of online
feedback mechanisms. Management Science, 49(10), 1407–1424.
Folkes, V.S. (1988). Recent attribution research in consumer behavior: A review and new
directions. Journal of Consumer Research, 548–565.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobserv-
able variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 39–50.
Furse, D.H., Punj, G.N., & Stewart, D.W. (1984). A typology of individual search strategies
among purchasers of new automobiles. Journal of Consumer Research, 417–431.
Gruen, T.W., Osmonbekov, T., & Czaplewski, A.J. (2007). Customer-to-customer exchange:
Its MOA antecedents and its impact on value creation and loyalty. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 35(4), 537–549.
Gupta, P., & Harris, J. (2010). How e-WOM recommendations influence product consider-
ation and quality of choice: A motivation to process information perspective. Journal
of Business Research, 63(9), 1041–1049.
Häubl, G., & Trifts, V. (2000). Consumer decision making in online shopping environ-
ments: The effects of interactive decision aids. Marketing Science, 19(1), 4–21.
Herr, P.M., Kardes, F.R., & Kim, J. (1991). Effects of word-of-mouth and product-attribute
information on persuasion: An accessibility–diagnosticity perspective. Journal of
Consumer Research, 454–462.
Hu, L.T., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure anal-
ysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
Jacoby, J., Jaccard, J.J., Currim, I., Kuss, A., Ansari, A., & Troutman, T. (1994). Tracing the im-
pact of item-by-item information accessing on uncertainty reduction. Journal of
Consumer Research, 291–303.
Jin, S. A., & Phua, J. (2014). Following celebrities’ Tweets about brands: The impact of
Twitter-based electronic word-of-mouth on consumers’ source credibility percep-
tion, buying intention, and social identification with celebrities. Journal of
Advertising, 43(2), 181–195.
Jöreskog, K.G., & Sörbom, D. (2001). LISREL 8: User's reference guide. Lincolnwood, IL: Sci-
entific Software International.
Kim, J., & Gupta, P. (2012). Emotional expressions in online user reviews: How they
influence consumers' product evaluations. Journal of Business Research, 65(7),
985–992.
Lascu, D.N., & Zinkhan, G. (1999). Consumer conformity: Review and applications for
marketing theory and practice. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 1–12.
Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J.N. (1985). Measuring consumer involvement profiles. Journal of
Marketing Research, 41–53.
Lurie, N.H. (2004). Decision making in information‐rich environments: The role of infor-
mation structure. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(4), 473–486.
Lynch, J.G., Jr., & Ariely, D. (2000). Wine online: Search costs affect competition on price,
quality, and distribution. Marketing Science, 19(1), 83–103.
Maheswaran, D., & Meyers-Levy, J. (1990). The influence of message framing and issue in-
volvement. Journal of Marketing Research, 361–367.
Mathwick, C., Wiertz, C., & De Ruyter, K. (2008). Social capital production in a virtual P3
community. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(6), 832–849.
McCole, P., Ramsey, E., & Williams, J. (2010). Trust considerations on attitudes towards
online purchasing: The moderating effect of privacy and security concerns. Journal
of Business Research, 63(9), 1018–1024.
Michaelidou, N., & Dibb, S. (2008). Consumer involvement: A new perspective. The
Marketing Review, 8(1), 83–99.
Murray, K.B. (1991). A test of services marketing theory: Consumer information acquisi-
tion activities. The Journal of Marketing, 10–25.
Pagani, M. (2004). Determinants of adoption of third generation mobile multimedia ser-
vices. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 46–59.
Park, C., & Lee, T.M. (2009). Information direction, website reputation and eWOM
effect: A moderating role of product type. Journal of Business Research, 62(1),
61–67.
Peterson, R.A., Balasubramanian, S., & Bronnenberg, B.J. (1997). Exploring the implications
of the Internet for consumer marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
25(4), 329–346.
 J. Chen et al. / Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 467–475
Porter, M. (2001). Strategy and the Internet. Harvard Business Review, 79, 62–78.
Richard, M.O. (2005). Modeling the impact of internet atmospherics on surfer behavior.
Journal of Business Research, 58(12), 1632–1642.
Senecal, S., & Nantel, J. (2004). The influence of online product recommendations on con-
sumers' online choices. Journal of Retailing, 80(2), 159–169.
Sismeiro, C., & Bucklin, R.E. (2004). Modeling purchase behavior at an e-commerce web
site: A task-completion approach. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(3), 306–323.
Smith, D., Menon, S., & Sivakumar, K. (2005). Online peer and editorial recommenda-
tions, trust, and choice in virtual markets. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(3),
15–37.
Srinivasan, S.S., Anderson, R., & Ponnavolu, K. (2002). Customer loyalty in e-commerce:
An exploration of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Retailing, 78(1),
41–50.
Steckel, J.H., Winer, R.S., Bucklin, R.E., Dellaert, B.G., Drèze, X., Häubl, G., et al. (2005).
Choice in interactive environments. Marketing Letters, 16(3–4), 309–320.
Sweeney, J., Soutar, G., & Mazzarol, T. (2011). Word of mouth: Measuring the power of
individual messages. European Journal of Marketing, 46(Nos 1/2), 1–37.
475
Szymanski, D.M., & Hise, R.T. (2000). E-satisfaction: An initial examination. Journal of
Retailing, 76(3), 309–322.
Teng, L., & Laroche, M. (2007). Building and testing models of consumer purchase inten-
tion in competitive and multicultural environments. Journal of Business Research,
60(3), 260–268.
Trifts, V., & Häubl, G. (2003). Information availability and consumer preference: Can on-
line retailers benefit from providing access to competitor price information? Journal
of Consumer Psychology, 13(1), 149–159.
van Beuningen, J., de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., & Streukens, S. (2009). Customer self-efficacy
in technology-based self-service assessing between- and within-person differences.
Journal of Service Research, 11(4), 407–428.
Venkatesan, M. (1966). Experimental study of consumer behavior conformity and inde-
pendence. Journal of Marketing Research, 384–387.
Ward, M.R., & Lee, M.J. (2000). Internet shopping, consumer search and product branding.
Journal of Product and Brand Management, 9(1), 6–20.
Zauberman, G. (2003). The intertemporal dynamics of consumer lock‐in. Journal of
Consumer Research, 30(3), 405–419.