EFFECTS ON THE BUYING BEHAVIOR AFTER THE INTRODUCTION OF

ECOMMERCE

By
Syed Hassan Ahmed Naqvi
MBA Student (14135)
Institute of Business Management

Erum Abdul Jabbar

BBA Student (23173)
Institute of Business Management

Areeba Motan
MBA Student (21570)
Institute of Business Management

To
Syed Muhammad Fahim
Assistant Professor
Department of Marketing
Institute of Business Management

1
 ABSTRACT

The aim of this study is to investigate the factors which affect online shopping in Pakistan.
The sample size of the consumers was 150. The data was collected through an online
questionnaire. The statistical technique that has been used to analyze this data and our
hypothesis is PLS-SEM (Partial Leased Square) technique. The independent variables of this
research were Convenience, Product Variety, Perceived Risks and the dependent variable was
online Buying Behavior. The moderating effect between the effect of Convenience and Perceived
Risk on online buying behavior was Attitude. The paper found the results of the positive impact
of independent variable on dependent variables. The research was conducted having a very small
sample and was limited to Karachi only. It has got huge potential for further research.

KEYWORDS: Convenience, Product Variety, Perceived Risk, Attitude and Online Buying Behavior.

2
Contents
ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................................... 2
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................ 4
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. 4
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 5
Research Questions .................................................................................................................................. 6
LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1. Hypothesis: ................................................................................................................................. 10
2.2. Theoretical Framework .............................................................................................................. 10
METHODOLOGY: ......................................................................................................................................... 11
3.1. Measurement .................................................................................................................................. 12
FINDINGS..................................................................................................................................................... 13
4.1. Data Analysis via PLS-SEM ............................................................................................................. 13
Fig. 4.1 Specified Model in Smart PLS.................................................................................................... 13
4.2. Measurement Model Evaluation .................................................................................................... 14
Table 4.1 Reliability Analysis of Reflective Constructs ......................................................................... 14
Table 4.2. Convergent Validity of Reflective Constructs ....................................................................... 15
Table 4.3 Discriminant Validity of Reflective Constructs ...................................................................... 15
4.1. Structural Model Evaluation ........................................................................................................... 16
Figure 4.2 T-values (level of sig=0.5)..................................................................................................... 16
Table 4.4 Path Coefficients of t-value & p-value ................................................................................... 16
CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................................... 17
Discussion: .............................................................................................................................................. 17
Limitations: ............................................................................................................................................. 17
Future Recommendation: ...................................................................................................................... 17
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................ 19
APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................................... 22

3
 List of Figures
Fig. 4.1 Specified Model in Smart PLS) ………………………………………………………………………………………………...13

Figure 4.2 T-values (level of sig=0.5) ......................................................... 16Error! Bookmark not defined.
List of Tables

Table 4.1 Reliability Analysis of Reflective Constructs………………………………………………………………………14

Table 4.2. Convergent Validity of Reflective Constructs............................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 4.3 Discriminant Validity of Reflective Constructs ..……………………….Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 4.4Path Co-efficients of T Value and P Value ................................................................................ 16

4
 INTRODUCTION
The introduction of the internet has changed the lives of the people and has also changed
businesses around the world (Adnan, 2014). The last decade saw a rapid growth in the use of
internet and e-commerce industry (Yörük et al. 2011). Consumers have got the need to use
internet for many genuine reasons such as Searching for different products and their prices or
reviews, selecting any product or service of their interest through Internet, placement of order,
making e-payments (Sinha, 2010).

Global studies are pointing out the fact that businesses are enhancing towards digitization (Olsen,
2010). In Pakistan online shopping is still at an initial stage compared to other developed
countries and even developing countries as the e-commerce industry has not yet hit the rural
areas of Pakistan. (Yousaf et. al., 2012). But is predicted in the near future, the trend of online
shopping will not only change the nature of businesses but also changing the human life style in
every aspect (Qin,2010).

In Pakistan, the acceptance of online shopping by General public is more challenging. People
usually do not have confidence in online shopping. But the young generation shows flexibility and
is more comfortable towards online shopping especially in ordering food items online (Ahmed et
al., 2017). Almost 77% of population is an active user of smart phones but around 2.07% of the
total population (i.e. 3.79 million) was using broadband in 2013-2014 according to a report
published by PTA on February 04, 2014. Furthermore, it was noticed that 3% of Pakistani
population is involved in online shopping due to misunderstanding and lack of trust in online
shopping, high security concerns regarding online transactions, low availability of technology,
restricted infrastructure, and low literacy rates in Pakistan

The aim of this study is to investigate the factors which affect online shopping in Pakistan (Ahmed
et al.,2017). Previous studies have examined lots of risks that affect online shopping in Pakistan
such as convenience risk, perceived risk, product risk, and attitude of consumers’ effect on online
shopping.

5
Research Questions
The following are the research questions which have been adopted by Anam, 2018:

1. Does perceived risk influence online shopping

2. Does attitude moderate the relationship between (convenience risk, product risk,
perceived risk) and online shopping

This study used the theory of planned behavior (TPB). Theory of TPB specifies that behavior of
consumer separately is examined in term of purchasing behavior as well as information behavior,
and these two behaviors were influenced by consumer’s attitude, perceived risk, trust, social
influence, technology, perceived usefulness, personal online skills, website characteristics, and
perceived ease of use (Ajzen, 1991).

6
 LITERATURE REVIEW
The concept of convenience in the marketing literature was introduced by Copeland
(1923) who referred to online shopping convenience as for those consumer who buy frequently
online. Much of the literature of consumer convenience in a traditional retailing environment has
disclosed the two factors of primary importance in convenient to consumer for online shopping
that is time saving and effort minimization, Yale (1986).

In today’s world marketing literature has emphasized online shopping the most convenient way
for a consumer to shop. Shopping online save time as well as cost saving and is very convenient
because where ever the store is located online shopping is the easiest way to get the product.
Before buying something online consumer can go through the reviews and the feedback of the
product before adding it into the shopping cart. It helps consumer in a way that consumer get
satisfied with the product before purchasing it and it’s the most convenient way to shop.
Although convenience is one of the major positive factors prompting consumers to shop online,
Jayawardhena et al., (2007), prior researches either treated convenience as an independent
variable that affects outcome variables like customer service for customer satisfaction (Colwell
et al., 2008), or as one of the facts regarding service quality online. Inability to touch, feel and try
good create concerns related to product quality. Shopping online can sometimes be risky, like it
can have chances of fraud such as credit card scam, hacking, bogus website and counterfeit
product.

The use of online shopping is increasing day by day in and the number of retail sales is also going
up, hence the spending patterns per son needs to be studied extensively. Before buying the
products online, the previous purchases made by the customers online should be up to the
satisfaction. To understand the need of the consumers, it is important that researchers analyze
and then validate metrics that can truly understand the feelings and attitudes of customers that
frequently shop online. (Straub & Watson, 2001). There are many research papers such as Lian &
Lin, 2008; who have insisted that there should be a varied range of products online when the
consumers are at a point of sale.

7
A quality of the product or service that is up for sale ca be a product factor. It has been noticed
quite often that the products bought online or from a store are always the same. Buying decision
is made by the customers after analyzing the factors of who is bestselling the products (Keeney
1999). Customizing the product, the overall value and the merchandising are some other factors
(Zhu & Kraemer, 2002). Researches like Szymanki and Hise (2000), Ahn et al., (2004) found that
product variety is a major factor when it comes to satisfaction in online buying. The main reason
that the customers are satisfied while purchasing online is the variety of the products available
(Ahn et al., 2004).

This should also be noted that sometimes having a variety of products confuses the customers
during a buying decision. Hence, the buying behavior of the consumer needs to be studied.

One of the major things that effects the online buyer is perceived risks (Doolin, 2007). Usually,
purchasers have no idea about the seller (Finch, 2007). Perceived risk brings a negative impact
on customers who have doubts about the product while shopping online (Dunn, Murphy, &
Skelly, 1986). The examining of perceived risk first took place in offline context (Cunningham,
1967; Jacoby & Kaplan, 1972). At an initial level, perceived risk had five proportions including:
psychological, physical, social performance and financial risk. In later stages, another proportion
was added known as time risk. In online shopping, three more proportions regarding perceived
risk were added including: security risk, privacy risk and source risk (Peter, 1975). According to
some research papers, it is specified that there is a substantial negative impact of perceived risk
on online shopping (Adnan et.al; 2014). As per, previous studies it is shown that there is a minor
impact of perceived risk on online shopping AadWeening, 2012).

Since the mid-1970s, the investigation of customer's attitudes has been related with consumer
buying behaviour. As indicated by the model of attitude change and behaviour (e.g., Fishbein and
Ajzen, 1975), consumer attitude is influenced by intention. At the point when this goal is applied
to web based shopping, the result of the buy behaviour can be seen. Attitude is a multi-
dimensional develop. One such measurement is the acknowledgment of the Internet as a
shopping channel (Jahng, Jain, and Ramamurthy, 2001). Past research has uncovered consumer

8
attitude towards online shopping as a critical indicator of making on the online shopping and
buying behaviour (George, 2004; Yang et al., 2007).

Studies show that attitude has significant impact on online shopping (Chih & Tang, 2005; Hirst &
Ashwin, 2008; Moshrefjavadi et al., 2012; Teo & Liu, 2007). Previous studies have examined lots
of risks that affect online shopping in Pakistan such as convenience risk, perceived risk, product
risk (Ariff et al. 2014, 2010; Bashir et al., 2015; Clemes et al., 2014; Moshrefjavadi et al,2012;
Tariq et al., 2016; Masoud, 2013; Iqbal and Hunjra ,2012). All these risks have negative effects on
consumer’s attitude towards online shopping. High perceived risk will reduce the repurchase
online (Lobb, Mazzocchi, & Traill, 2007), the research showed that by reducing this risk online
shopping can be enhanced, and perceived risk and convenience risk are needed to be eliminated
(Chen, Hsu, & Lin, 2010).

Attitude towards online shopping intention(ATOSI) is defined as positive or negative feelings of

consumers in the slope accomplishment or feeling that makes an inclination react decidedly or
contrarily to a better buying behavior on the Internet (Chiu et al, 2005, Schlosser, 2003). The
version given by Davis et al. (1989) includes the attitude, as an intermediary between perception
and behavior. The word “attitude” symbolizes the overall level of favorability or un-favorability
towards external stimulus. Attitude is an indicator that reflects the liking or disliking of a person
regarding any object (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). The ATOSI has a considerable impact on the
intent to web buying (Limayem et al. 2000). Different studies also confirm the similar results for
the link between attitude and OSI. Attitude makes it more convenient to shop online; those
people who have a complete trust on OS will show their positive ATOSI.

9
 2.1. Hypothesis:
H1: Convenience of Online Shopping is positively effecting the online buying behavior of
consumers.

H2: Variety of products on a website is positively effecting the online buying behavior of
consumers

H3: Perceived Risks is positively effecting the online buying behavior of consumers.

H4: Attitude act as a moderating variable between convenience and online buying behavior

H5: Attitude act as a moderating variable between Perceived Risks and online buying behavior.

H6: Attitude is positively effecting the online buying behavior of consumers

2.2. Theoretical Framework

10
 METHODOLOGY:
The philosophical theory that is being used in this research is positivism. Positivism is
“working with the observation of social reality and end results of research can be generalized to
the same products by physical and natural scientists” (Saunders et al., 2009). This research is
basically effecting the factors which drives the online shopping behavior of a consumer.
Therefore, the current design of the study is quantitative in nature so that it can examine the
factors which effect the online buying behavior, (Shahzad, H.,2015). Saunders et al. (2009) cited
that the availability of convenience sampling is the easiest way available to the researcher. This
study uses non-probability sampling as the sampling design and the convenience sampling as the
sampling technique.

In order to decide the required sample size, researchers should depend on power analyses that
consider the model structure, the anticipated significance level, and the expected effect sizes
(Marcoulides and Chin, 2013). Similarly, Hair et al. (2017a) have recognized power tables
specifying the required sample sizes for a diversed measurement and structural model
characteristics. The statistical technique used in this research is Partially leased square structured
equation modelling. It is a system which helps the researchers to solve complex research models
having many variables, different paths without any assumption on selected data, (Wold, 1982;
Sarstedt et al., 2017a). This technique helps in overcoming the seeming contrast between
explanation and prediction, (Hair et al., 2019).

11
3.1. Measurement

Item
Items Citation
Code

C1 Using the internet to shop online is useful.

Yu et al. (2005)
C2 Using Internet for online shopping is easy

C3 It is easy to judge the quality of product online

C4 I get to examine the product when I shop online

A1 I shop online as I can shop whenever I want

A2 I shop online as I can shop in privacy at home

A3 Online shopping makes my shopping easy

A4 It is easy to cancel orders when shopping online

PV1 I can get detailed product information online

PV2 I get broader selection of products online

PV3 I purchase online as I can exchange the product online

Moshrefjavadi et
PV4 Finding right product online is easy
al. (2012)
PR1 My credit-card details are safe if I shop online

PR2 The retailer may not overcharge me

PR3 I feel that my personal information is safe

PR4 I will get what I ordered online

PR5 If I shop online I cannot wait till the product arrives

BB1 I shop online because I have internet access

BB2 Online shopping gives me better control on my expenses

BB3 I find online shopping well-matched with my life-style

BB4 I shop online because I can make e- payments.

12
 FINDINGS
4.1. Data Analysis via PLS-SEM

Data analysis has been done through partial least squares method(Smart-PLS)

which is basically a variance-based structural equation modelling (SEM) technique

and deals with multiple regression modelling (Henseler et. al, 2016). It is considered

as the most develop variance based SEM method as it has the capability to model both

factors and composites (Risdon, 2012). It is defined by two models i.e. measurement

model which describes the relations between a construct and its observed indicators

and structural model which describes the relationships between the constructs

(Henseler, Hubona, & Ray, 2016). Furthermore, small sample size can easily be

handled by PLS (Hoyle, 1995).

Fig. 4.1 Specified Model in Smart PLS

13
4.2. Measurement Model Evaluation

The following table measures the reliability and validity. Reliability is measured through of
Cronbach alpha and composite reliability whereas validity is measured through Average Variance
Extracted.

The minimum value for Cronbach alpha is 0.7 (Taber, 2016) and the minimum value for composite
reliability is 0.700 (Hair et al., 2011). Since some of the values of Cronbach’s alpha and composite
reliability are below the minimum threshold, hence reliability of construct is not established.

Table 4.1 Reliability Analysis of Reflective Constructs

Composite
Cronbach's Alpha rho_A Reliability

Attitude 0.71 0.731 0.836

Attitude to Convenience 1 1 1

Attitude to Percieved Risk 1 1 1

Buying Behaviour 0.67 0.672 0.858

Convenience 0.69 0.692 0.827

Percieved Risk 0.786 0.788 0.875

Product Variety 0.708 0.714 0.837

14
 Convergent validity is measured by means of AVE. The threshold for AVE is 0.5 (Henseler

et. al.,2015). Convergent validity of reflective constructs is established as all values of

AVE are above the minimum threshold. Table 4.2 measures the convergent validity of

reflective constructs.

Table 4.2. Convergent Validity of Reflective Constructs

Average Variance Extracted
(AVE)

Attitude 0.63

Attitude to Convenience 1

Attitude to Percieved Risk 1

Buying Behaviour 0.751

Convenience 0.614

Percieved Risk 0.701

Product Variety 0.631

Discriminant validity is measured through HTMT ratio. The minimum value for HTMT is
0.85 (Henseler, Ringle, and Sarstedt, 2015). Table 4.3 Measures the discriminant validity
through HTMT Ratio.

Table 4.3 Discriminant Validity of Reflective Constructs

Attitude
to
Attitude to Percieved Buying Percieved Product
Attitude Convenience Risk Behaviour Convenience Risk Variety
Attitude
Attitude to Convenience 0.464
Attitude to Percieved
Risk 0.408 0.727
Buying Behaviour 0.993 0.387 0.394
Convenience 0.813 0.339 0.205 0.812
Percieved Risk 0.788 0.206 0.238 0.861 0.838
Product Variety 0.917 0.285 0.252 0.892 1.049 0.9

15
 4.1. Structural Model Evaluation
Figure 4.2 T-values (level of sig=0.5)

Table 4.4 indicates path coefficients of t-value & p-value. Since t-values are greater than 1.64 &
p-values are less than 0.05 (Hassan, Khurshid, &Mohammad,2001).Hence, hypotheses H3 and H6
are accepted.

Table 4.4 Path Coefficients of t-value & p-value

Original Sample Standard
Sample Mean Deviation T Statistics
(O) (M) (STDEV) (|O/STDEV|) P Values

Attitude -> Buying Behaviour 0.4 0.397 0.102 3.91 0

Attitude to Convenience -> Buying Behaviour 0.006 0.003 0.07 0.088 0.93
Attitude to Percieved Risk -> Buying Behaviour -0.074 -0.068 0.064 1.151 0.25
Convenience -> Buying Behaviour 0.086 0.088 0.089 0.97 0.332
Percieved Risk -> Buying Behaviour 0.237 0.24 0.083 2.859 0.004
Product Variety -> Buying Behaviour 0.114 0.116 0.103 1.111 0.266

16
 CONCLUSION
Discussion:
Our Hypothesis that the perceived risk is effecting the online buying behavior of the consumer is
supported and also that attitude creates a positive impact on buying behavior Rest of the
hypothesis such as convenience, product variety and the moderating effect of attitude and
convenience are creating a positive impact on online buying behavior are not supported.
Moreover, attitude does not significantly moderate the relationship between perceived risk and
online shopping. Hence, our hypothesis was not supported. Additionally, attitude has a significant
and positive influence on online shopping and supported our hypothesis. In this modern era of
competition, consumers are considered the king in the market. Organizations work hard to
attract consumers in offline as well as online stores. The current study contributes to the general
body of knowledge about online shopping in Pakistan. The main objective of the current study is
to test the hypotheses and provide evidence on the relationship between convenience, product
variety, perceived risk and attitude on the online buying behavior of the consumers.

Limitations:
The limitation to this analysis is that these responses are gathered from certain areas or cities
and certain age groups so it does not gather a wider range of perspective, hence the research is
not as accurate as it is supposed to be. Furthermore, the sample size was also relatively small.
Another limitation which the findings revealed is that attitude does not significantly moderate
the relationship between perceived risk and online shopping. The responses collected from
people were from a particular city so the opinion of the people living in different cities will
naturally vary from previous researches. The size of the sample was also relatively small
increasing the margin of error.

Future Recommendation:
Future researchers can study online shopping intention, online shopping adoption, and online
shopping behavior with the current study’s factors as well as with other factors e.g. financial risk,
privacy risk, social risk, quality risk, security risk, hacking information, and technological risk.
Moreover, future studies on online shopping (behavior, intention, and adoption) can use trust,

17
consumers’ purchase intention, government’s role, and culture as a mediating/moderating role.
Furthermore, future studies should be conducted in other developing and developed countries.

18
 REFERENCES
1. AadWeening, A. (2012). B2C Global E-commerce Overview: Interactive Media in Retail Group.

2. Adnan, H. (2014). An analysis of the factors affecting online purchasing behavior of Pakistani
consumers. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 6(5), 133.

3. Ahmed, Z., Su, L., Rafique, K., Khan, S. Z., & Jamil, S. (2017). A study on the factors affecting
consumer buying behavior towards online shopping in Pakistan. Journal of Asian Business
Strategy, 7(2), 44.

4. Aijaz, H., & Butt, F. S. (2009). Barriers in the development of electronic commerce: A study of
Pakistani environment.

5. Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting
interactions: Sage.

6. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision
processes, 50(2), 179- 211.

7. Ariff, M. S. M., Sylvester, M., Zakuan, N., Ismail, K., & Ali, K. M. (2014). Consumer Perceived
Risk, Attitude and Online Shopping Behaviour; Empirical Evidence from Malaysia. Paper
presented at the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering.

8. Bahar Ozdogan, F., & Hakan Altintas, M. (2010). Parent-adolescent interaction and the family's
effect on adolescent TV skepticism: An empirical analysis with Turkish consumers. Young
Consumers, 11(1), 24-35.

9. Bashir, R., Mehboob, I., & Bhatti, W. K. (2015). Effects of online shopping trends on consumer
buying behavior: An empirical study of Pakistan.

10. Chakraborty, D. (2016). Factors Affecting Consumer Purchase Decision towards Online
Shopping: a Study Conducted in Gangtok, Sikkim. Adarsh Business Review, 3(1), 11-18.

11. Chang, Y.-h. (2010). The Importance of e-Convenience in Modern Day e-Commerce.

19
12. Chaturvedi, S., Gupta, S., & Hada, D. S. (2016). Perceived Risk, Trust and Information Seeking
Behavior as Antecedents of Online Apparel Buying Behavior in India: An Exploratory Study in
Context of Rajasthan. International Review of Management and Marketing, 6(4).

13. Chaudary, S., Rehman, M. A., & Nisar, S. (2014). Factors influencing the acceptance of online
shopping in Pakistan.

14. Chen, Y.-H., Hsu, I.-C., & Lin, C.-C. (2010). Website attributes that increase consumer purchase
intention: A conjoint analysis. Journal of Business Research, 63(9), 1007-1014.

15. Chih, W., & Tang, T.-W. (2005). The role of trust in customer online shopping behavior:
Perspective of technology acceptance model. North American Association for Computational
Social and Organizational Science.

16. Clemes, M. D., Gan, C., & Zhang, J. (2014). An empirical analysis of online shopping adoption
in Beijing, China. Journal of retailing and consumer services, 21(3), 364-375.

17. Cunningham, M. S. (1967). The major dimensions of perceived risk. Risk taking and
information handling in consumer behavior.

18. Doolin, B., Dillons, S., Thompson, F., & Corner, J. L. (2007). Perceived risk, the Internet
shopping experience and online purchasing behavior: A New Zealand perspective. Electronic
commerce: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications, 324-345.

19. Dunn, M. G., Murphy, P. E., & Skelly, G. U. (1986). Research note: The influence of perceived
risk on brand preference for supermarket products. Journal of retailing.

20. Finch, B. J. (2007). Customer expectations in online auction environments: An exploratory

study of customer feedback and risk. Journal of Operations Management, 25(5), 985-997.

21. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 39-50.

22. Forsythe, S., Liu, C., Shannon, D., & Gardner, L. C. (2006). Development of a scale to measure
the perceived benefits and risks of online shopping. Journal of interactive marketing, 20(2), 55-
75.

20
23. George, J. F. (2004). The theory of planned behavior and Internet purchasing. Internet
Research, 14(3), 198-212.

21
 APPENDIX
Questionnaire:

GENDER?

o Male o Female

AGE

o Under 20 o 21-30

o 31-40 o 41-50

o 50+

Email Adress

Do you Shop Online

o Yes o No

Which Online Store Do you use for Shopping?

Section A: Independent Variables

22
 Strongly Disagree (SD) | Disagree (D) | Neutral (N) | Agree (A) | Strongly Agree (SA)

Convenience SD D N A SA

Adapted from Yu et. al., & Moshrefjavadi et al. (2012)

1 Using the internet to shop online is useful.

2 Using Internet for online shopping is easy

3 It is easy to judge the quality of product online

I get to examine the product when I shop online

4

Strongly Disagree (SD) | Disagree (D) | Neutral (N) | Agree (A) | Strongly Agree (SA)

Attitude SD D N A SA

Adapted from Moshrefjavadi et al. (2012)

1 I shop online as I can shop whenever I want

2 I shop online as I can shop in privacy at home

3 Online shopping makes my shopping easy

It is easy to cancel orders when shopping online

4

23
 Strongly Disagree (SD) | Disagree (D) | Neutral (N) | Agree (A) | Strongly Agree (SA)

Product variety SD D N A SA

Adapted from Moshrefjavadi et al. (2012)

1 I can get detailed product information online

2 I get broader selection of products online

3 I purchase online as I can exchange the product online

Finding right product online is easy

4

Strongly Disagree (SD) | Disagree (D) | Neutral (N) | Agree (A) | Strongly Agree (SA)

SD D N A SA
Perceived Risk

Adapted from Moshrefjavadi et al. (2012)

1 My credit-card details are safe if I shop online

2 The retailer may not overcharge me

3 I feel that my personal information is safe

I will get what I ordered online

4

If I shop online I cannot wait till the product arrives

5

24
Strongly Disagree (SD) | Disagree (D) | Neutral (N) | Agree (A) | Strongly Agree (SA)

SD D N A SA
Buying Behaviour

Adapted from Moshrefjavadi et al. (2012)

1 I shop online because I have internet access

2 Online shopping gives me better control on my expenses

3 I find online shopping well-matched with my life-style

I shop online because I can make e- payments.

4

25