CommIT (Communication & Information Technology) Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018
Factors Affecting Consumers’ Decision for
E-Hotel Booking
Ayesha Ayub Syed1 and Jarot Sembodo Suroso2
1−2 Information Systems Management Department, BINUS Graduate Program - Master of
Information Systems Management, Bina Nusantara University
Jakarta 11480, Indonesia
Email: ayeshaayubsyed@yahoo.com, 2 jsembodo@binus.edu
1
Abstract—With more accessibility to the Internet and
modernization of e-payment systems, the approach to
address the travel requirements has dramatically changed
over the years. The service offered by the Online Travel
Agents (OTAs) has a huge impact on a very competitive
online marketplace. The purpose of this research is
to observe, examine, and analyze key factors which a
consumers’ decision to use a particular travel agent
website for e-hotel booking can be predicted. The data
are compiled using IBM SPSS. The key methods are
applied for data analysis in addition to other statisti-
cal methods including factor analysis and multinomial
logistic regression analysis. The analysis of data reveals
a positive association of website quality factors, product
related factors, and consumer relationship factors with
consumers’ decision to book from a certain travel agent
website. Viewing the big picture, consumer relationship
factors are found to be more influential as compared to
website quality and product related factors. Moreover, the
researchers reveal product price as the most influential
variable, but it indicates no statistical significance with
consumers’ decision. There are many different price
products which are available across different travel
agent websites. The convenience of payment method is
found to be a significant attribute associated with the
consumers’ decision to book from a travel website. In
addition, attributes of travel products variety and online
reviews provided by the travel websites are observed
to be statistically significant. This research indicates the
trends of consumer decision-making for e-hotel booking
in Indonesia.
Index Terms—Online Travel Agent (OTA), Website
Quality, Product, Consumers Relationship, Consumer
Decision
I. I NTRODUCTION
T OURISM is one of the rapidly progressing in-
dustries by using e-commerce or more recently
m-commerce. Nowadays, the Internet is extensively
used for making hotel bookings due to the multiple
advantages it offers to consumers. For example, the
Internet provides convenience regarding saving time
Received: Jun. 11, 2018; received in revised form: Jul. 24, 2018;
accepted: Jul. 25, 2018; available online: Dec. 5, 2018.
for booking a hotel. It provides accessibility to travel
agent websites from any place and at any time. More-
over, it provides a good comparison of prices which
allows consumers to make informed choices.
Purchase of travel products, particularly hotel book-
ings, is among the top purchases that consumers make
online [1]. Current projections indicate the global rev-
enue of US$238.142 million in online travel booking
market [2]. Indonesia as an emerging economy among
other Asian economies, and with the rapid increase
in internet adoption [3], presents some e-commerce
opportunities. Currently, the revenue in online travel
booking for Indonesia aggregates to US$2.938 million.
Hotels are the largest market segment which occupies
a market volume of US$2.215 million [2]. Popular
brands in Indonesia which offer third-party online hotel
booking intermediator services to consumers are Trav-
eloka, Agoda, Pegipegi, Booking.com, and others [4].
Despite the increasing trend of hotel booking
through Online Travel Agents (OTAs), there is limited
research regarding the factors influencing the con-
sumers’ decision to purchase travel products through
online travel websites. There is a need to explore
further the factors that ultimately lead to online ho-
tel bookings. The objectives of this research are to
understand how the factors related to website quality,
travel product and consumers relationship influence the
consumers’ decision to book a hotel via a certain OTA
website.
II. L ITERATURE R EVIEW
A. Website Quality Factors
Shopping on an e-commerce website or booking a
hotel deal from an OTA website involves the inter-
action of the consumers with the website. Hence, the
website quality has played a certain part in consumers’
decision-making process. The existing research indi-
cates that the website quality is a logical foundation for
building consumers’ trust and forming their intention to
Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, “Factors Affecting Consumers’ Decision for E-Hotel
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology) Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.
purchase [5]. Previous research found that there were
several factors which contributed to the success of a
website. Those factors were secure payment methods
with built-in controls to protect consumers data; a
range of varying prices for the available products so
that consumers might have an option to make a choice
for product or service within their price limit; user
friendly websites which were easily accessible, easy
to use, organized in terms of information and content,
and offered good speed and navigation features to the
consumers [6].
The quality of an e-commerce website is measured
in available information quality on a website. It pro-
vides the consumers with latest and accurate informa-
tion about products and services [7]. It is suggested
that when consumers shop hospitality products, the
information quality about the product from the website
has a significant effect in determining their intention
to purchase that product [8]. The information quality
on a website which is also related with playfulness
(elements of information design in which a consumer
experiences involvement and engagement) and attrac-
tiveness feature increases consumers satisfaction and
tends to fulfill their expectations from a website. There-
fore, it contributes to the success of websites [9]. The
quality of written, graphical, or other content which
presents information on a website has been found to
be a factor contributing to consumers’ decision to book
a hotel from a particular website [10].
When it comes to booking from a hotel website or
a travel agent website, the interaction of consumers is
with the company’s website. In this case, the service
quality which the consumers experience is important.
The overall evaluation of quality regarding the func-
tionality of a website is known as service quality. The
layout of the website, the quality of website content,
and the way a website handles its consumers are
several factors which have an effect on service quality
of a website [11]. Website responsiveness describes
how well a website responds to consumers queries and
provides service to consumers and the navigational and
information search response [11, 12]. In addition, fast
loading, quick response, and timely and reliable service
are generally perceived to enhance the service quality
of the website.
Moreover, while shopping on the Internet, the con-
sumers are generally concerned with the security and
privacy of their data and information. Security issues
may cause many online shoppers to negate their in-
tentions to purchase products and leave the websites
without buying [13]. Security and privacy as the key
elements affecting consumers’ buying behavior are also
found to affect online sales [14]. A secure online
payment system enriches the quality of travel agent
112
websites to a large extent [15].
B. Product Related Factors
In booking a hotel deal, there are certain factors
which are solely related to the product, but it can
be the function of the information system. These
factors include price, availability of a variety of rooms,
brands and related options, hotel/room images, and the
product payment method.
Product price is a general term. However, in case
of this particular research, it is defined as the amount
of money to be given as payment for purchasing a
certain hotel deal from a travel agent website. In almost
all cases, consumers are concerned with the price of
the product which they consider to purchase from a
travel website including hotel accommodations [16].
While shopping online, consumers are exposed to
reference prices or competitor prices in addition to
the price offered by their selected vendor. This is
where consumers form their perceptions of a product
price by comparing the offered price with the available
reference prices across other shopping websites [17].
Consumers also tend to have an internal price standard
(memory based standard) which they often use as a
reference for comparing the offered prices and making
a judgment. Thus, if the product price offered by hotel
booking website is higher than their internal reference
standard, they will perceive the price as ‘high’ and be
more likely to leave the booking website [18] and move
to another travel agent website.
Product variety describes the existence of a vari-
ety of travel product on a travel agent website. It
can be the various types of hotel rooms and hotel
brands, flight tickets, car rentals, vacation packages,
and others. Many consumers are interested in finding
other travel related products on the same website while
booking a hotel online. This allows consumers to have
convenience [19] of finding various elements of their
trip on the same website. The more diversity of hotel
rooms, hotel brands, and other available travel products
on travel agent websites compared to hotel websites
results in an increased tendency of attracting potential
consumers [20].
Product design is perceived from a travel website in
the form of hotel images and room images. Usually, it
is the design which forms the initial impression of the
product on consumers. It defines both the appearance
and functionality of the product. Design plays a role
of a strategic device in developing an organization’s
branding strategies [21]. Consumer decisions in major-
ity purchases are not only based on a rational analysis
of the available choices but are also influenced by other
factors. The available images on the shopping websites
Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, “Factors Affecting Consumers’ Decision for E-Hotel
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology) Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.
trigger emotional states of the consumers [22] who
may also influence their purchase decision. The percep-
tion of hotel design from an aesthetic sense influences
consumers’ intention to book a reservation for a hotel
room and triggers their purchase behavior [23].
When the consumers interact with an e-commerce
website for purchasing a product, they go through a
series of steps in the buying process which requires
the consumers to pay for the product (product pay-
ment). Travel agent websites offer different currencies
for payment and various payment methods. Consumer
purchase intention which leads to the final purchase de-
cision increase when there are many available numbers
of payment options across a travel agent website [24].
Consumers likely choose a payment method which
is most convenient for them. Travel agent websites
have different payment policies. Some of the travel
agent websites do not charge the consumers at the
time of making a reservation. However, it requires the
consumers to provide their credit card information as it
is required by the hotel they book. Security statements
relating to product payment which are provided by
the travel agent website increase the perceptions of
security, trust, and influence consumers’ intention to
purchase [25].
C. Consumer Relationship Factors
The consumers’ experiences of a certain website
help in building their relationship with the company’s
website [20]. If this experience is positive in fulfilling
the expectations of consumers, the consumers will
return to the website again to make a purchase which
subsequently strengthens the consumers’ relationship.
In all business including online business, consumer
satisfaction is essential. Considering the online con-
text, Ref. [26] investigated three elements of website
design. Those are information design (organizing and
presenting information to the consumers), navigation
design (easy to use and concise navigation system),
visual design (aesthetic appeal and attractiveness of
a website), and the relationship with consumers trust
and satisfaction. The conclusion led to a significant
relationship between all three design elements and
consumers satisfaction across different cultures. The
website quality is the foundation for information satis-
faction as perceived by consumers. Therefore, it added
to the overall satisfaction with the website and leading
the intentions to purchase behavior [27].
Consumer loyalty exists when consumers decide to
repurchase from a certain website. Reference [28] gave
a concept of an interesting framework for consumers.
It incorporated trust (consumers certainty or confi-
dence in a product or brand) as a central attribute
113
influenced by perceived value (worth of product based
on consumers opinion), service quality (consumers’
functional expectation of an offered service), and con-
sumers satisfaction (degree of consumers’ fulfilment
of expected value of a product). There were direct
associations of service quality with perceived value,
satisfaction, and trust. Meanwhile, there was an indi-
rect association with consumer loyalty with trust as a
mediator.
Furthermore, the framework presented the direct
associations of perceived value, trust, and satisfaction
with consumer loyalty. Briefly, if the consumers experi-
ence a good service quality, they will develop a positive
perception about product value which builds their trust.
This trust leads to consumer satisfaction which raises
the repurchase intention or consumer loyalty. Many
travel websites offer loyalty programs to acquire and
retain their consumers [20].
Consumers purchase products, use them, and form
an opinion about the product which may be positive or
negative. Online reviews refer to consumers’ reviews
about their experience of a product or service. These
reviews help other consumers in making decisions to
purchase the product. The quality of online reviews
tends to affect consumers’ relationship. Exposure to
negative online review results in unfavorable con-
sumers’ attitudes towards a company or brand and
influences the consumers’ relationship [29]. In the
case of hotel booking, positive reviews develop a
favorable consumers’ attitude towards a hotel [30]
and have a positive consequence towards consumers’
buying behavior [31]. The way a travel agent website
presents and manages consumers’ reviews affects the
consumers’ booking decision.
D. Demographics
In this research, demographic factors are also con-
sidered. A business can be benefitted by targeting
consumers with a certain demographics such as gender
or age. Internet usage is influenced by gender, age, and
level of education [32, 33]. All businesses including
online are prone to be affected by demographics.
III. R ESEARCH M ETHOD
The proposed research framework for this research is
a modified version of research done by [20] in China.
The framework is modified in line with the research
objectives. Factors like product design and demograph-
ics are an addition to the proposed framework for this
research. Figure 1 shows the research framework.
All businesses including online are prone to be affected by One stop shopping [17]
Availability of hotel and room [21]
demographics. images
Pre-payment policies [6]
III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Variety of payment options [22]
CR Previous usage experience [18]
The proposed research framework for this research is a Positive reviews [27]
modified version of research done by [18] in China. The Loyalty program [26]
Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, “FactorsDFAffecting Consumers’
Gender, age, and level ofDecision for E-Hotel
[29], [30]
framework is modified in line with the research objectives.
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology)education
Factors like product design and demographics are an addition Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.
to the proposed framework for this research. Figure 1 shows
the research framework. B. Population, Sample, and Data Collection
TABLE I
The targeted
R ESEARCH population
VARIABLES of this research
, T HEIR I NDICATORS includes .
, AND R EFERENCES
consumers from Indonesia who have made online hotel
bookingsVariable
recently or formerly
Indicator through the travel agent
Reference
websites or other travel related websites. The sampling
Availability of details [8]
technique used is probability sampling in which the sample
Accuracy of information [7]
is
obtained by Quality
Website simple random
Bettersampling
post-purchase type. Reference[25]
service [31]
recommended sample sizeFast ofresponse
100 or tomore for factor analysis
inquiries [11]
to proceed. The sample sizeDataforprivacy and security
this research [20] a
is flexible from
minimum of 200 obtained Lowbyprice benefitsformula [32] up
Slovin’s [16]
to a
Required price on budget and [5]
maximum of the highestperceived
available sample
quality size to minimize
error. Product Related
A questionnaire is formulated
Several as the research
products for compari- [20]
instrument. Data are collected
son using online and offline
approach. The contents One stop shopping
of the questionnaire consist [19] of 17
Availability of hotel and room [23]
items for measuring factor related
images
variables as presented in
Figure 1. The framework of research.
Fig. 1. The framework of the research. Table 2. The questionnaire ends by policies
Pre-payment collecting information [6] for
demographic variables Variety and of some information [24]
payment options about
respondents’ previous experiences
Consumer Relationship
Previous usage ofexperience
online hotel booking.
[20]
Positive reviews [30]
A. Hypotheses Loyalty program [28]
Demographic Gender, age, and level of ed- [32, 33]
From the research framework in Fig. 1, five hypoth- ucation
esis statements are formulated for this research. Those
are:
H1: Website quality factors have a positive for this research is flexible from a minimum of 200
association with consumers’ decision to book a obtained by Slovin’s formula [35] up to a maximum of
hotel from a certain travel website. the highest available sample size to minimize error. A
questionnaire is formulated as the research instrument.
H2: Product related factors have a positive Data are collected using online and offline approach.
association with consumers’ decision to book from The contents of the questionnaire consist of 17 items
a certain travel website. for measuring factor related variables as presented in
Table II. The questionnaire ends by collecting informa-
H3: Consumer relationship factors have a positive tion for demographic variables and some information
association with consumers’ decision to book from about respondents’ previous experiences of online ho-
a certain travel website. tel booking. The level of importance of the factors is
measured on 5-point Likert scale. The scale varies as
H4: Website quality, product related, and consumer shown in Table III.
relationship factors, all have a positive association
with consumers’ decision to book from a certain IV. R ESULTS AND D ISCUSSION
travel website. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) soft-
ware is used as a tool for data analysis. Descriptive
H5: Consumers’ decision to book a hotel from Statistics are used to find out respondents’ demo-
a certain travel agent website differs across graphic characteristics. Reliability analysis is done by
demographics of gender, age, and level of calculating Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient value.
education. Meanwhile, the validity is tested using Bivariate
correlation. Sampling adequacy is tested using Kaiser-
Table I presents the variables with the identified Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test. Then, Bartlett’s test of
indicators and corresponding references. sphericity is conducted to indicate the strength of
the relationship between variables. Factor analysis
B. Population, Sample, and Data Collection is done for individual constructs using Confirmatory
Factor Analysis (CFA) in SPSS AMOS. Moreover,
The targeted population of this research includes
the complete model and hypothesis are tested using
consumers from Indonesia who have made online hotel
Multinomial Logistic Regression Analysis in SPSS.
bookings recently or formerly through the travel agent
websites or other travel related websites. The sampling
technique used is probability sampling in which the A. Demographic Profile
sample is obtained by simple random sampling type. The demographic profile of respondents is shown
Reference [34] recommended sample size of 100 or in Table IV. From 205 respondents, 59.5% are male
more for factor analysis to proceed. The sample size and 40.5% are female respondents. The majority of

114
Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, “Factors Affecting Consumers’ Decision for E-Hotel
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology) Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.

TABLE II
Q UESTIONNAIRE F ORMULATION .

Outcome variable: Consumer Decision

Dec Name of travel agent website Respondents are asked to indicate a hotel booking website which provides them
with the best experience.
Measures of Website Quality
WQ1 Information quality This website presents more clear and detailed information on products and
services.
WQ2 Information quality I can get more accurate and reliable information about travel products from this
website such as information on room availability, hotel location, and others.
WQ3 Service quality This website provides better post-purchase service such as confirmation email
and detail information like how to get to the hotel from the airport.
WQ4 Service quality This website is fast in responding to my inquiries.
WQ5 Security/privacy This website provides me with more satisfaction with my data privacy and
security.
Measures of Product Related Factors
PP1 Product price This website offers a good price.
PP2 Product price This website offers a good value for my money in terms of my needs and
perceived quality.
PV1 Product variety There are more available options on this website for my destination which also
meet my requirements on quality and budget.
PV2 Product variety I can get an opportunity of one-stop shopping on this website to fulfill my travel
requirements (hotel room, flight ticket, and car rental).
PM1 Product payment This website is more flexible in its pre-payment policies with a small amount
or no payment at the time of making a room reservation.
PM2 Product payment The payment method required by this website is more convenient for me.
PD Product design The website gives me more information through hotel images and traveler photos
provided to decide on a particular choice.
Measures of Consumer Relationship Factors
CR1 Consumer loyalty Being a registered member of this website, I book a hotel here more conveniently.
CR2 Consumers experience My previous experience of using this website makes me use it again.
CR3 Online reviews This website provides me with more genuine/trustworthy user feedback of the
hotels.
Please mention another factor that you consider important while booking a hotel online

TABLE III TABLE IV

L IKERT S CALE FOR THE Q UESTIONNAIRE . D EMOGRAPHIC P ROFILES OF THE R ESPONDENTS .

1 2 3 4 5 Demographic Profile Frequency Percentage (%)

Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Gender

Male 122 59.5
Female 83 40.5
Age
25 or Below 32 15.6
participants about 45.4% are 26 years to 35 years. In 26–35 93 45.4
36–45 48 23.4
the level of education, the majority of the respondents 46–55 26 12.7
about 42.9% have a university degree. Above 55 4 2.0
Level of Education
Travel agent websites that are stated by the re- Secondary 5 2.4
spondents as the most preferred or having the best Higher secondary 30 14.6
University Degree 88 42.9
experience for hotel booking are in Table V. Postgraduate Degree 71 34.6
Doctorate 6 2.9
It has been observed in Table V that from 205 re-
spondents, 111 respondents tend to book via Traveloka.
It is followed by 35 respondents choosing Agoda, 21
respondents choosing Booking.com, 11 respondents factors are more influential than other factors. It has a
choosing Pegipegi, 8 respondents choosing Trivago, high mean compared to website quality and product re-
and 3 respondents choosing Hotels.com. The rest of lated factors. Moreover, consumer relationship factors
the respondents mention the hotel’s websites. Figure 2 show greater variance in data than other factors.
represents the graphical output of the mean value and Table VI shows the ranking of factors which are
percentage of variance for website quality, product important when respondents book from the travel
related, and consumer relationship factor. agents websites. This ranking is in accordance with
In Fig. 2, it can be seen that consumer relationship the calculated mean value of the attributes.

115
Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, “Factors Affecting Consumers’ Decision for E-Hotel
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology) Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.

TABLE V TABLE VI
T HE P OPULARITY OF W EBSITES . T HE R ANKING OF ATTRIBUTES IN ORDER OF T HEIR L EVEL OF
I MPORTANCE .
Website Frequency Percentage(%)
Rank Attribute Mean
Traveloka 111 54.1
Agoda 35 17.1 1 This website offers a good price. 4.3
Booking.com 21 10.2 2 I can get more accurate and reliable information 4.3
Pegipegi 11 5.4 about travel products from this website such as
Trivago 8 3.9 information about room availability and hotel lo-
Hotels.com 3 1.5 cation.
Airy 2 1.0 3 The payment method required by this website is 4.3
Expedia 2 1.0 more convenient for me.
Google.com 2 1.0 4 My previous experience of using this website 4.2
Nusatrip 1 0.5 makes me want to use it again.
Orbitz.com 1 0.5 5 This website presents clearer and detail informa- 4.2
Priceline.com 1 0.5 tion on products and services.
Red doorz 1 0.5 6 There are more available options on this website 4.2
Swadee.com 1 0.5 for my destination which also meets my require-
Tiket.com 1 0.5 ments on quality and budget.
Trip.com 1 0.5 7 This website offers better value for my money in 4.2
TripAdvisor 1 0.5 terms of my needs and perceived quality.
Via.com 1 0.5 8 The website gives me more information through 4.1
Hotel’s websites 1 0.5 hotel images and traveler photos provided to de-
cide on a particular choice.
9 This website provides better post-purchase service 4.1
like confirmation email and information on how to
get to the hotel from the airport.
10 Being a registered member of this website, I book 4.0
a hotel here more conveniently.
11 This website provides me with more genuine/trust- 4.0
worthy user feedback of the hotels.
12 This website is fast in responding to my inquiries. 3.9
13 I can get an opportunity of one-stop shopping on 3.8
this website to fulfill my travel requirements (hotel
room, flight ticket, and car rental).
14 This website provides me with more satisfaction 3.8
with my data privacy and security.
15 This website is more flexible in its pre-payment 3.6
policies with a small amount or no payment at
Fig. 2. Mean value and variance of website quality, product related, the time of making a room reservation.
and consumers relationship factors.

Table VI indicates that the attribute price has the
highest mean value. This attribute is not directly related
to information technology. It represents the price of the
hotel room which the consumers find from travel agent
website. Among the information technology related
factors, the most influential attribute is the website
quality in accuracy and reliability of information about
travel products like room availability and location. The
second most influential attribute is the convenience
of the payment method offered by the travel agent
website.
B. Validity and Reliability
The validity of each item in the questionnaire is
tested by bivariate correlation. To identify whether
a questionnaire item is valid or not, the value of
significance for each item and the correlation value for
total item score is observed and compared with r-table.
For all items, a significance value of 0.000 < 0.05
and correlation value > r-table is observed. There-
fore, the items are concluded as valid. By calculating
Cronbach’s alpha, the researchers test the reliability
TABLE VII
C RONBACH ’ S A LPHA .
Factor No of items Cronbach’s Alpha
Website quality 5 0.715
Product related 7 0.712
Consumer relationship 3 0.674
Overall 15 0.842
for website quality, product related, and consumer
relationship factors. The result is in Table VII.
Reference [34] suggested the acceptable value of
Cronbach’s Alpha as 0.7 for confirmatory research and
0.6 for exploratory research. As seen in Table VII,
Cronbach’s Alpha values for all the factors are accept-
able. In consumer relationship factor, the value is 0.674
which is equal to 0.7.
Table VIII shows values for KMO and Barlett’s test
for all the constructs. KMO measures the sampling
adequacy. It examines whether the sample size is large
enough to contribute to the precision and accuracy of
results. Reference [36] recommended value of 0.5 for
KMO as the minimum. The values of KMO for all
factors in Table VIII are more than 0.5. It indicates an
acceptable level of sampling adequacy. Bartlett’s test of

116
 Figure 3. CFA for website quality factors.
Traveloka is specifie
Figure 4 shows the path diagram for CFA of product participants choose
related factors by describing a single latent variable, seven hotel booking. Thus
observed variables (PP1 - PD1) and seven unobserved error
variables (e1: e7). The values of standardized regression H1 Hypothesis Tes
weights are approximately equal to or greater than 0.4. These
Approx. Chi-Square 247.642 weights
Cite this article as: A. A. Df Syed and J. S. Suroso,
21 “Factors values are
Affecting approximately
lie within
Consumers’ equal or
the recommended greater
range
Decision instead
for than
of a 0.4.
E-Hotel singleThe Table 9. Model F
Bartlett's test of sphericity values of standardized
variable (PV2) with regression
regression weights
weight of (0.7It or
0.29. is higher)
shown onare
Booking”, CommIT (Communication Sig. & Information
0.000 Technology)
ideal
the[31].
Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.
linear dependency between latent variable and variable
Model Mod
Consumer Relationship Factors
KMO measure of sampling adequacy 0.641 (PV2). However, this variable is still retained for analysis due -2 Log
Approx. Chi-Square 99.162 to its theoretical significance.
Intercept 421.7
Bartlett's test of sphericity Df 3
TABLE Only
Sig.VIII 0.000
KMO AND BARLETT ’ S T EST OF S PHERICITY. Final 377.1
The values of KMO for all factors in Table 8 are more
than 0.5. It indicatesWebsitean Quality Factors level of sampling
acceptable
Figure 5. CFA for consumers relationship factors.
adequacy. Bartlett’s testofofsampling
KMO measure sphericity is significant in 0.688
adequacy all cases. Table 9 shows
Approx.of
Thus, it confirms the meaningfulness Chi-Square 203.067
factor analysis. analysis of website
Bartlett’s test of sphericity Df 10 D. Multinomial Regression Analysis
Table 9, -2 log
C. Confirmatory Factor Sig.
Analysis (CFA) 0.000 Multinomial logistic regression is conducted to know the independent variabl
CFA is done using SPSS
Product AMOS.
related The analysis measures
Factors effect of independent variables of website quality, product not. If -2 log likelih
the extent to which hypothesized data fits the model. Figure 3 related, and consumer relationship factors on the outcome of model are the same,
KMO measure of sampling Approx.adequacy
Chi-Square 0.742
247.642 weights are variable
approximately equal or greater thanof0.4. Thelikelihood value
represents the path diagram for CFA of website quality the dependent of consumer decision. The nature the log
Df Approx. Chi-Square 247.642
21 values of Figure 4. CFA for product related factors.
standardized regression weights (0.7 or higher) are
Bartlett's
factors. Thetestdiagram
Bartlett’s of
testsphericity
of sphericity
has oneSig. Df variable and five
latent 21
observed consumer decision variable, in
Fig. 4. CFA for product related factors.this case, is nominal. Decision computed as 421.7
0.000
variables (WQ1-WQ5). The Sig.circles
Consumer Relationship
0.000error
represent the
Factors
ideal Figure
variable[31].
represents
5 presentssixthe
categories.
path diagram These
for CFAsix of consumerare significance value o
categories
based on consumers’
relationship factors. Itdecision
describestoause different
single travel websites.
latent variable, three than 0.05. The hypo
variables
KMO measure which areConsumer
not directly
of sampling adequacy observed.
Relationship The numbers
Factors 0.641 on the
website quality with
linear dependencies between Approx.
the Chi-Square
latent variables99.162
and the Theobserved
order ofvariables
categories is relevant to the number
(CR1-CR3), and the corresponding error of responses
KMO measure of sampling adequacy
Bartlett's test
observed of sphericity
variables show the Df regression weights. The
0.641
3 values of obtained for (e1-e3).
variables each category. For example,
The values of standardized 1 represents through a certain OT
category regression
Approx. Chi-Square 99.162
standardized
Bartlett’s testregression Sig.Df
of sphericity weights 0.000 3 are
for all variables the decision for Traveloka (111 responses), category 2 for
approximately equal to or greater Sig. 0.000 all
than 0.4. Therefore, Agoda (35 responses), category 3 for Booking.com (21
The values
variables of KMO for
are considered all factors
for further in Table 8 are more
analysis. responses), category 4 for Pegipegi (11 responses), category 5
than 0.5. It indicates an acceptable level of sampling for Trivago (8 responses) and category 6 for others (all
remaining responses
Figure 5. =CFA19).for consumers relationship factors.
adequacy. Bartlett’s test of sphericity is significant in all cases. Fig. 5. CFA for consumers relationship factors.
Thus, it confirms the meaningfulness of factor analysis. D. Multinomial
Multinomiallogistic
Regression Analysis
regression provides a chance to
know Multinomial
whether the effect
logisticof regression
website quality, product related,
is conducted
C. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
andFigure
consumer 5 presents the
relationshipvariablespathsame
is the diagram for to
or different CFAknow
for allof the
CFA is done using SPSS AMOS. The analysis measures effect of independent of website quality, product
consumer
categories ofrelationship
related, and decision
consumer
factors.
variable. It isItbyfactors
relationship
describes
choosing a reference
on athe
single la-
outcome of
the extent to which hypothesized data fits the model. Figure 3 category
tent and making
variable, three a series variables
observed of comparisons
(CR1-CR3), of other
and
represents the path diagram for CFA of website quality the dependent variable of consumer decision. The nature of the
categories
the with the error
corresponding reference category.
variables Although
(e1–e3). The many
values
factors. The diagram has one latent variable and five observed consumer
categories decision
can variable,
be chosen as ain reference,
this case, is nominal.
in Decision
this research,
variables
Figure 3. CFA for website quality factors.
(WQ1-WQ5). The factors.
circles represent the error of standardized regression
six weights
categories. are
These approximately
Traveloka is specified as the reference category because many are
variable represents six categories
Fig. 3. CFA for website quality
variablesFigure
which4are not directly based on
equal or consumers’
participants greater
choose than decision
0.4. as
Traveloka totheir
The use different
values travel websites.
of standardized
preferred website for
shows the pathobserved.
diagram for TheCFA numbers on the
of product
linear dependencies The booking.
order ofweights
regression
hotel categories
Thus, (0.7is or
it depicts relevant
generaltotrend.
a higher) the
are number of responses
ideal [34].
related factors by between
describing the latentlatent
a single variables andseven
variable, the
observed variables show the-regression weights. The obtained for each category. For example, category 1 represents
observed
sphericity variables (PP1
is significant PD1)
in alland sevenThus,
cases. it values
unobserved of
error
confirms theHypothesis
decision for Traveloka (111 responses), category 2 for
standardized regression H1 Testing
variables
the (e1:
meaningfulnesse7). The ofweights
factor offorstandardized
values analysis. all variables are
regression
D. Multinomial
Agoda Regression
(35 responses), Analysis
category 3 for Booking.com (21
weights are approximately
approximately equal to than
equal to or greater or greater
0.4. than 0.4. These
Therefore, all
valuesare
lieconsidered
within the for
recommended range instead of a single Table 9. Model
responses), Fitting
category Information
4 for Pegipegi for
(11Website Quality
responses), category 5
variables further analysis. Multinomial logistic regression is conducted to
variable (PV2) withFactor
regression weight of 0.29. It is shown on for Trivago (8 responses) Factors
and category 6 for others (all
C. Confirmatory Analysis (CFA) know
Model the effect
Modelof independent
Fitting Criteria variables
Likelihood of
Ratio website
Tests
the linear dependency between latent variable and variable remaining responses = 19).
CFAHowever,
(PV2). is donethisusing SPSS
variable is stillAMOS. The
retained for analysis
analysis due quality, product related, and consumer
-2 Log Likelihood Chi-Square df relationship
Sig.
measures the extent
to its theoretical to which hypothesized data fits the
significance. factors on the outcome
Multinomial of the dependent
logistic regression provides a variable
chance to
Intercept 421.741
model. Figure 3 represents the path diagram for CFA of
know
Only consumer
whether decision.
the effect of Thewebsite
naturequality,
of theproduct
consumer related,
of website quality factors. The diagram has one latent and consumer
decision variable, relationship
in this is the is
case, same or different
nominal. Decision for all
Final 377.197
variable and five observed variables (WQ1–WQ5). The categoriesrepresents
variable of decision sixvariable.
categories.It is44.543
by choosing
These
25
a .009
reference
six categories
category and making a series of comparisons of other
circles represent the error variables which are not are based on consumers’ decision to use different travel
categories with the reference category. Although many
directly observed. The numbers on the linear depen- websites.
categories The be order of categories is relevant this toresearch,
the
Table 9 canshows thechosenresults as of athereference,
multinomial in regression
Figure 3. the
dencies between CFAlatent
for website quality factors.
variables and the observed number of responses obtained for each category. For
Traveloka
analysis of is specified
website as the
quality reference
across category
the decision becauseInmany
variable.
variables show the regression weights. The values of example,
participants
Table 9, -2category
choose 1Traveloka
represents
log likelihood as the
value their decision
decidespreferred for
whether Trav-
website
the for
Figure 4 shows the path diagram for CFA of product
standardized
related factors byregression
describing weights for allvariable,
a single latent variables are
seven eloka
independent(111 variable
hotel booking. responses),
Thus,affects category
it depicts 2 for
the adependent
general Agoda[38]
variable
trend. (35 orre-
approximately not. If -2 logcategory
sponses), likelihood3 values for intercepting(21
for Booking.com onlyresponses),
and final
observed variables equal
(PP1 -toPD1) or greater
and seven thanunobserved
0.4. Therefore,
error model are the same, the result is not significant. In this case, -2
all variables
variables are The
(e1: e7). considered
values for further analysis.
of standardized regression H1 Hypothesis Testing
category 4 for Pegipegi (11 responses), category 5 for
log likelihood values are different, and the chi-square value is
weights Figure 4.the
are approximately
Figure 4 shows CFA for product
equal
path to orrelated
diagram factors.
greater
for than of
CFA 0.4.product
These Trivago (8 responses) and category 6 for others (all
computed
Table as
9. Model – 377.197
421.741Fitting = 44.543.
Information Moreover,
for Website Qualitya
values lie within
related factorsthebyrecommended
describing range
a instead
single latent of variable,
a single remaining value
significance responses of 0.009= 19).
is noted. Since this value is less
Figure 5 presents the path diagram for CFA of consumer Factors
variable
seven (PV2) with regression
observed weight of 0.29.and It is seven
shown un-
on thanMultinomial
0.05. The hypothesis that there is a positive association of to
relationship factors.variables
It describes(PP1–PD1)
a single latent variable, three Model logistic
Model regression
Fitting Criteria provides a chance
Likelihood Ratio Tests
the observed
linear dependency between latent variable and variable website quality with consumers’ decision for booking the hotel
observed variables (CR1-CR3),
error variables and theThe
(e1–e7). corresponding
values of errorstan- know whether the effect of website quality, product
(PV2). However,
variables this variable
(e1-e3). Theweightsis still
values of retained for analysis
standardized due
regression through a certain -2 OTALogwebsite
Likelihood is accepted. Chi-Square df Sig.
dardized regression
to its theoretical significance. are approximately equal related, and consumer relationship is the same or
to or greater than 0.4. These values lie within the different
Intercept for all categories of decision variable. It is
421.741
Only
recommended range instead of a single variable (PV2) by choosing a reference category and making a series
with regression weight of 0.29. It is shown on the ofFinal
comparisons377.197 of other categories with 44.543the reference
25 .009
linear dependency between latent variable and variable category. Although many categories can be chosen as a
(PV2). However, this variable is still retained for reference, in this research, Traveloka is specified as the
analysis due to its theoretical significance. reference
Table category
9 shows the because
resultsmany
of theparticipants
multinomial choose
regression
analysis of website quality across the decision variable. In
Table 9, -2 log likelihood value decides whether the
independent variable affects the dependent variable [38] or
not. If -2 log likelihood values for intercepting only and final
117 model are the same, the result is not significant. In this case, -2
log likelihood values are different, and the chi-square value is
Figure 4. CFA for product related factors.
computed as 421.741 – 377.197 = 44.543. Moreover, a
Figure 5 presents the path diagram for CFA of consumer significance value of 0.009 is noted. Since this value is less
 5
Intercept 504.703
Only 0
Final 429.782 74.921 35 .000 interc
-5

Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, “Factors Affecting Consumers’ Decision for E-Hotel -10
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology) Table Journal 12(2),
10 presents the111–123,
results of2018.multinomial regression Agod
analysis of product related factors across the decision variable. Triva
Table 10 reports varying log likelihood values for intercept
TABLE IX only, and the final model TABLE giving X a chi-square value of 504.703
M ODEL F ITTING I NFORMATION FOR W EBSITE Q UALITY – 429.782
M ODEL= F74.921.
ITTING IThe significance
NFORMATION FOR Pvalue
RODUCT R ELATED
is 0.000. Since this Figure 8. Multi
FACTORS . value is less than 0.05, the FACTORS .
hypothesis that there is a positive
association of product related factors with consumers’ decision
Model Fitting Criteria Likelihood Ratio Tests Model Fitting Criteria Likelihood Ratio Tests Then, Fig
Model forModel
booking a hotel through a certain OTA website is accepted.
−2 Log Likelihood Chi-Square df Sig. −2 Log Likelihood
Figure 7 presents the regression model obtainedChi-Square df Sig.
from a estimates the
Intercept Only 421.741 parameter regarding multinomial
Intercept Only 504.703 logistic regression of product relationship
Final 377.197 44.543 25 0.009 Final
0.009)
related and PM2 (Sig. value
factors. 429.782
= 0.048);74.921
Pegipegi35 0.000
for PV1 (Sig. observed acro
value = 0.017), PM1 (Sig. value = 0.005), and PM2 (Sig. value value = 0.008)
5 = 0.004).
10 H4 Hypothes
0 5H3 Hypothesis Testing
intercept WQ1 WQ2 WQ3 WQ4 WQ5 Tabl
0
-5 Table 11. Model Fitting Information for Consumer Model
-5 Relationship Factor
-10 Model Model Fitting Criteria Likelihood Ratio Tests
-10
Agoda Booking.com Pegipegi -2 Log Likelihood Chi-Square Intercept
Agoda Booking.com Pegipegi df Sig.
Only
Trivago Others
Trivago
Intercept 231.042 Others
Only Final
Fig. 6. 6.Multinomial
Figure logisticregression
Multinomial logistic regression model
model of website
of website quality quality
factors. Final 202.242 28.800 15 .017
factors. Fig. 7. 7.Multinomial
Figure logisticregression
Multinomial logistic regressionmodel
model of product
of product related
related factors.
factors.
Moreover, Fig. 6 presents graphical model obtained from Table 12
parameter estimates the resulting in multinomial logistic Additionally, from the
Table 11 shows the output
results of multinomial
multinomial regression
logistic
Traveloka as their preferred website for hotel booking. TABLE XI analysis of al
regression of website quality factors. Furthermore, from the regression analysis ofofproduct
consumerrelated factors,
relationship statistical
factors
M ODEL F ITTING I NFORMATION FOR C ONSUMER R ELATIONSHIP
significance
across the is
decision
variable. The
Thus, ofit depicts a general
logistictrend.
regression of website quality, across decision
variable. Incategories:
Table 11, Booking.com
-2 log for PV2 (Sig. value =
output multinomial FACTOR . likelihood values with and
statistical significance (Sig. value = 0.013) is seen across the without taking consumers relationship variable into account
decision category ‘Others’
E. H1 Hypothesis for variable of WQ4.
Testing are different. Model
It is Fitting
a chi-square
Criteria value of 231.042
Likelihood – 202.242 =
Ratio Tests
Model
28.800 and significance value
−2 Log Likelihood
of 0.017. Since
Chi-Square
this
df
value
Sig.
is less
H2 Table IX shows
Hypothesis Testingthe results of the multinomial re- than 0.05, the hypothesis that there is a positive association
gression analysis of website quality across the decision Intercept Only 231.042
between consumers relationship
Final 202.242
factors
28.800
with 0.017
15
consumers
variable.
Table 10.InModel IX, −2
Table Fitting log likelihood
Information value Related
for Product decides decision for booking a hotel through a certain OTA website is
whether the independentFactors.variable affects the dependent accepted.
Model
variable [37] orModel
not.Fitting
If −2Criteria Likelihood
log likelihood Ratiofor
values Tests
in-
The significance value is 0.000. Since this value is
tercepting only andLikelihood
-2 Log final model are Chi-Square
the same, the
df result
Sig.
less than
5
0.05, the hypothesis that there is a positive
is not significant. In this case, −2 log likelihood values
Intercept 504.703 association of product related factors with consumers’
are different, and the chi-square value is computed as
Only 0 for booking a hotel through a certain OTA
decision
421.741 − 377.197 = 44.543. intercept CR1 CR2 CR3
Final 429.782 74.921 35 .000 website
-5 is accepted. Figure 7 presents the regression
Moreover, a significance value of 0.009 is noted.
model obtained from a parameter regarding multino-
Since this value is less than 0.05. The hypothesis that
mial-10
logistic regression of product related factors.
there is a positive association of website quality with
Table 10 decision
presents the Additionally, from the output of multinomial logistic
consumers’ for results
booking of the
multinomial regression
hotel through a Agoda Booking.com Pegipegi
analysis regression ofTrivago
product relatedOthers factors, statistical signif-
certain of product
OTA related
website is factors across the decision variable.
accepted.
Table 10 reports varying log likelihood values for intercept icance is across decision categories: Booking.com for
Moreover, Fig. 6 presents graphical model obtained
only, and the final model giving a chi-square value of 504.703 PV2 (Sig. value = 0.009) and PM2 (Sig. value = 0.048);
from
– 429.782 parameter
= 74.921.estimates the resulting
The significance in multino-
value is 0.000. Since this Figurefor
8. Multinomial logistic regression modelPM1
of consumers relationship
Pegipegi PV1 (Sig. value = 0.017), (Sig. value
value is less than 0.05, the hypothesis that there is factors.
mial logistic regression of website quality a positive = 0.005), and PM2 (Sig. value = 0.004).
factors.
Furthermore,
association from related
of product the output ofwith
factors multinomial
consumers’logistic
decision
regression
for booking aof website
hotel throughquality,
a certainstatistical
OTA website significance
is accepted. Then, Fig. 8 presents model obtained from parameter
Figure 7 presents
(Sig. value = 0.013) theis regression
seen acrossmodel obtained
the ‘others’ from a
decision estimates the multinomial logistic regression of consumer
G. H3 Hypothesis Testing
parameter relationship factors. Moreover, statistical significance is
category regarding
for variablemultinomial
of WQ4.logistic regression of product
related factors. Table XI across
observed showsdecision
the results of multinomial
category: regression
Booking.com for CR2 (Sig.
value =of0.008)
analysis and Others
consumer for CR3 (Sig.
relationship valueacross
factors = 0.012).
the
F. H2 Hypothesis Testing decision variable. In Table XI, −2 log likelihood
10 H4 Hypothesis Testing
Table X presents the results of multinomial regres- values with and without taking consumers relationship
5
sion analysis of product related factors across the de- variable into account
Table are different.
12. Overall It isInformation
Model Fitting a chi-square
0 of 231.042 − 202.242
cision variable. Table X reports varying log likelihood value
Model Model Fitting = 28.800 and
Criteria significance
Likelihood Ratio Tests
values
-5 for intercept only, and the final model giving a value of 0.017. Since this value is less than 0.05, the
-2 Log Likelihood Chi-Square df Sig.
chi-square
-10 value of 504.703 − 429.782 = 74.921. hypothesis that there is a positive association between
Intercept 533.922
Agoda Booking.com Pegipegi Only
Trivago Others
Final 478.131 55.791 25 .000

118
Figure 7. Multinomial logistic regression model of product related factors.

Table 12 presents the results of multinomial regression

Additionally, from the output of multinomial logistic
analysis of all factors (WQ + PF + CR) across the decision
regression of product related factors, statistical significance is
variable. The model fitting information in Table 12 shows
 seen across the without taking consumers relationship variable into account where FAC1_WQ is Website Quality (WQ), FAC2_PF is Between
4. are different. It is a chi-square value of 231.042 – 202.242Product
= related (PF), and FAC3_CR is Consumer Relationship Groups
(CR).
28.800 and significance value of 0.017. Since this value is less Within
Groups
than 0.05, the hypothesis that there is a positive association Total
Figure 9 gives a graphical representation of regression
between consumers relationship factors with consumers
Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, model
“Factors obtained
Affecting from parameter
Consumers’ estimates
Decision resulting from the
for E-Hotel
oduct Related decision for booking a hotel through a certain OTA websitemultinomial
is logistic regression of website quality, product T
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology)
accepted. Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.
related, and consumers relationship factors.
od Ratio Tests

re df Sig. Between
5 4 Groups
Within
0 2 Groups
intercept CR1 CR2 CR3 Total
35 .000 -5 0
intercept WQ PF CR
-2 Tabl
-10
less than
-4
mial regression Agoda Booking.com Pegipegi assumpti
ecision variable. Trivago Others Agoda Booking.com Pegipegi website
es for intercept Trivago Others 14 and 1
value of 504.703 not signi
Fig. 8. Multinomial logistic regression model of consumers rela- for a cert
0.000. Since this Multinomial logistic regression model of consumers relationshipFig. 9. The logistic regression model of website quality, product
Figure 8.factors.
tionship Figure 9. The logistic regression model of website quality, product factors, levels o
ere is a positive factors. factors, and consumers relationship factors.
and consumers relationship factors. presents
umers’ decision TABLE XII
bsite is accepted. Then, Fig.
O 8 presents model obtained from
VERALL M ODEL F ITTING I NFORMATION .
parameter TABLE XIII
estimates the multinomial logistic regression of consumer E. One-way ANOVA
btained from a T EST OF H OMOGENEITY OF VARIANCES .
ssion of product relationship
Model
factors. Moreover,
Model Fitting Criteria statistical significance
Likelihood Ratio Tests is Hypothesis Testing
H5
observed across decision category: Booking.com
−2 Log Likelihood Chi-Square df for CR2
Sig. (Sig.
Demographic factor Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig. W
H1
value = 0.008)
Intercept Only
and Others for CR3
533.922
(Sig. value = 0.012). Gender 6.095 1 203 0.014
To test hypothesis H5, a series of one-way ANOVA is
co
Age 2.243 4 198 0.066
Final 478.131 55.791 25 0.000
conducted
Level offor each of the selected
education 6.682 demographic
4 195 variables
0.000 of
H2
P
H4 Hypothesis Testing gender, age, and level of education. ANOVA is based on the co
notion of variance [36]. Before conducting ANOVA, it should C
Table
consumers 12. Overallfactors
relationship Model Fitting Informationdeci- be ensured that the assumptions of population normality and
with consumers H3
w
Model Model
sion for booking Fitting
a hotel Criteriaa certain
through Likelihood
OTA Ratio and
Tests homogeneity
website of variance are met. Table 13 gives the results of
the test of homogeneity of variances. W
is accepted. -2 Log Likelihood Chi-Square df Sig. Others = − 2.379 + 0.403 · WQ + 1.33 · PF H4 re
Then, Fig. 8 presents model obtained from pa- co
Intercept 533.922 + of
Table 13. Test 0.829 · CR, of Variances
Homogeneity (5)
egipegi rameter estimates the multinomial logistic regression
Only
of consumer relationship factors. Moreover, statisti- where WQ is website quality, PF is product related,
Final
cal significance478.131 55.791 category:
is observed across decision 25 .000and CR is consumer relationship.
Booking.com for CR2 (Sig. value = 0.008) and others Figure 9 gives a graphical representation of regres-
uct related factors. for CR3 (Sig. value = 0.012). sion model obtained from parameter estimates resulting
Table 12 presents the results of multinomial regression from the multinomial logistic regression of website
nomial logistic H. H4 ofHypothesis
analysis all factorsTesting
(WQ + PF + CR) across the decision quality, product related, and consumers relationship
l significance is
Table The
variable. XII presents the results
model fitting of multinomial
information in Tableregres-
12 shows factors.
V2 (Sig. value =
sion analysis of all factors (WQ + PF + CR) across
the decision variable. The model fitting information in
Table XII shows different values for −2 log likelihood I. One-Way ANOVA
and the significance value of 0.000. Since this value is 1) H5 Hypothesis Testing: To test hypothesis H5,
less than 0.05, the hypothesis that there is a positive a series of one-way ANOVA is conducted for each of
influence of website quality, product related, and con- the selected demographic variables of gender, age, and
sumer relationship factors on consumers’ decision to level of education. ANOVA is based on the notion of
book a hotel from a certain OTA website is accepted. variance [38]. Before conducting ANOVA, it should be
Multinomial regression estimates (number of cate- ensured that the assumptions of population normality
gories -1) the multiple linear regression functions. The and homogeneity of variance are met. Table XIII gives
result can be defined as follows: the results of the test of homogeneity of variances.
Agoda = − 1.178 + 1.165 · WQ + 1.4153 · PF The decision rule for Levene’s test is that if it is
p ≤ 0.05, the variances are significantly different.
+ 1.870 · CR, (1)
Meanwhile, if the value is p > 0.05, the values
Booking.com = − 2.095 + 1.166 · WQ + 1.249 · PF are not significantly different [39]. Table XIII reveals
+ 1.411 · CR, (2) that for age factor, it is p = 0.066 > 0.05. Hence,
Pegipegi = − 2.345 + 0.661 · WQ + 0.962 · PF the variances are not significantly different. It can be
seen that the population variances for each age group
+ 0.742 · CR, (3)
are approximately equal. Tables XIV–XVI present the
Trivago = − 3.087 + 0.887 · WQ + 1.496 · PF analysis of variance across gender, age, and level of
+ 0.958 · CR, (4) education.

119
Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, “Factors Affecting Consumers’ Decision for E-Hotel
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology) Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.

TABLE XIV are supported. The results of the hypothesis H1 are

O NE -WAY ANOVA T EST FOR THE G ENDER . consistent with the research conducted by Ref. [25].
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
The quality of e-commerce website design has a pos-
Squares itive effect on consumers’ online purchase intentions.
Between 4.777 1 4.777 1.780 0.184 Moreover, the results of H2 are consistent with the
Groups research of [20], who supported the same hypothesis
Within 544.911 203 2.684
Groups in hotel websites. Then, the results of H3 state that
Total 549.688 204 consumer relationship factors have a positive effect
on the purchase decision. This result is in line with
TABLE XV previous research of [40]. According to Ref. [40], if the
O NE -WAY ANOVA T EST FOR THE AGE . consumers are satisfied with the initial purchase, they
will show a positive attitude towards their intention to
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares repurchase from the same website.
Between 33.799 4 8.450 3.295 0.012
When means of data are compared, the price is
Groups found to be the most influential variable. It has the
Within 507.767 198 2.564
Groups
highest mean value. Although it is not hypothesized,
Total 541.567 202 variables of product price, product payment, product
variety, and online reviews are tested independently
TABLE XVI for statistical significance. It is noted that the factor
O NE -WAY ANOVA T EST FOR THE L EVEL OF E DUCATION . price is not significantly associated with consumers’
decision to book a hotel from a certain travel agent
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig. website. Instead, the product payment is found to be
Squares
a significant factor affecting consumers’ decision to
Between 20.396 4 5.099 1.943 0.105
Groups book from a certain travel agent website. This factor
Within 511.684 195 2.624 can be utilized by travel websites to increase the rate
Groups
Total 532.080 199 of bookings. Reference [6] stated that payment method
inuenced the consumers’ purchase intention.
In addition, product variety which is a dimension of
TABLE XVII
R ESULTS OF H YPOTHESES T ESTING . product related factors has a positive association with
consumers’ decision. This indicates the availability of
Results of Hypothesis Testing various options for rooms, travel packages, promotions,
H1 Website quality has a positive associa- Supported and other facilities like flight ticket or car rental across
tion with consumers’ decision
H2 Product related has a positive associa- Supported
different travel websites. It also differentiates them
tion with consumers’ decision from one another and influence consumers’ decision.
H3 Consumers relationship has a positive Supported
association with consumers’ decision
The online review is also positively associated with
H4 Website quality, product related, and Supported consumers’ decision to book from a certain travel web-
consumers relationship are positively as-
sociated with consumers’ decision
site. This is consistent with research done by Ref. [41],
H5 Consumers’ decision to book from a cer- Partially Supported who stated that online reviews provided a great deal
tain travel agent website differs across
demographic factors of gender, age, and
of information to consumers. It was meaningful and
level of education useful for them in deciding while booking a hotel
online.
Based on the results of this research, travel agent
Table XV reveals a significance value of 0.012 which websites are suggested to give considerable importance
is less than 0.05. Hence, it is significant. Consequently, to the factors according to the order of their influ-
the assumption that consumers’ decision for a certain ence on consumer’s decision related to their statistical
travel agent website differs across different age groups significance. The quality of the travel agent website
is accepted. Tables XIV and XVI reveal a greater is an important information technology related factor.
significance value than 0.05 and is not significant. Products and services which are purchased online
Thus, the assumption that consumers decision for a cannot be felt or touched, so consumers only depend
certain travel website differs across different genders on the available information on the website. If this
and levels of education is not accepted. Moreover, information is clear, detail, and closer to consumers’
Table XVII presents the summary of hypothesis testing expectation, they will likely intend to purchase from
results. that website. Thus, an improvement in the naviga-
As noted in Table XVII, H1, H2, H3, and H4 tional structure of websites, functionality, informa-

120
Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, “Factors Affecting Consumers’ Decision for E-Hotel
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology) Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.
tion/content quality and reliability, and data security
and privacy may result in an increased number of
consumers for a travel website. Another important and
significant factor which is suggested to travel agent
websites is the payment method. It is a factor that
many travel websites can utilize to increase the rate of
bookings because the whole process between potential
consumers and the third party concludes with the due
payment. As observed from the results of data analysis,
from 205 respondents, about 54% are Traveloka users.
In addition to other factors, this increased number of
respondents compared to other websites may be a rea-
son of various payment options provided by Traveloka.
Therefore, a travel agent website may be benefitted
with an increase in potential consumers by offering a
range of payment methods through various credit and
debit cards to alternative payment methods.
V. C ONCLUSION
This research proposes a model giving an insight
into the relationship of factors that the consumers
consider important in booking a hotel online and their
decision to book via a certain travel agent website. The
results of data analysis and hypothesis testing indicate
that website quality, product related, and consumer re-
lationship is positively associated with consumers’ de-
cision for hotel booking through a travel agent website.
Moreover, consumers relationship factors are found to
be more influential followed by product related and
website quality. At the attribute level, the price is
found to be the key attribute followed by the attributes
of information quality and convenience of payment
method. Among the demographic factors, consumers’
decision to book from a travel agent website is found
to differ across different categories of age.
This research has some limitations. Therefore, it is
appropriate to offer some recommendation that may
be beneficial for future research on this topic. The
first limitation of this research is the sample size. In
this research, it is 205 and can be increased further to
minimize the error. Larger sample size can lead to more
conclusive results by minimizing the probability of
error. The second limitation is that there may be other
factors related to consumers’ decision to use a certain
travel agent website for online hotel booking. During
the survey, the respondents are asked to mention the
additional factors that may affect decision making for
online hotel booking. The respondents mention factors
like free cancellation or refund on cancellation, local
currency and availability of more options for pay-
ment, consumers care, promotions, offers, and discount
coupons as additional factors that can affect decision-
making. The future work can recognize and indicate
121
more factors which influence consumers’ decision. The
future researcher can consider the factors as mentioned
by the participants of this research. Another recom-
mendation is to model product related factors as indi-
vidual factors and find more indicators. It is because
grouping it under one factor creates complexity as the
theoretical interrelation between these factors is less
obvious.
R EFERENCES
[1] K. Cassedy, “Know your online customer:
Forrester research creates technographics,” 2002.
[Online]. Available: https://www.hospitalitynet.
org/news/4010740.html
[2] Statista: The Statistics Portal, “On-
line travel booking.” [Online]. Avail-
able: https://www.statista.com/outlook/262/120/
online-travel-booking/indonesia#market-revenue
[3] United Nations Global Pulse, “Pulse Lab Jakarta.”
[Online]. Available: https://www.unglobalpulse.
org/jakarta
[4] Nusaresearch, “Online hotel & ticket booking
sites in Indonesia: Omnibus popular brand
index 2014,” 2014. [Online]. Available:
https://nusaresearch.com/upload/userfiles/files/
Topline Online%20Hotel%20%26%20Ticket%
20Booking%20Site(1).pdf
[5] C.-H. Lien, M.-J. Wen, L.-C. Huang, and K.-L.
Wu, “Online hotel booking: The effects of brand
image, price, trust and value on purchase inten-
tions,” Asia Pacific Management Review, vol. 20,
no. 4, pp. 210–218, 2015.
[6] J. Wong and R. Law, “Analysing the intention to
purchase on hotel websites: A study of travellers
to Hong Kong,” International Journal of Hospi-
tality Management, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 311–329,
2005.
[7] H.-F. Lin, “The impact of website quality di-
mensions on customer satisfaction in the B2C
e-commerce context,” Total Quality Management
and Business Excellence, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 363–
378, 2007.
[8] J. Jaevelaeinen, “Preferring offline bookings: An
empirical study of channel choice motives of
online information seekers,” in 16th Bled eCom-
merce Conference, Bled, Slovenia, June 9–11,
2003, pp. 80–94.
[9] C. Liu, K. P. Arnett, L. M. Capella, and R. D.
Taylor, “Key dimensions of web design quality
as related to consumer response,” Journal of
Computer Information Systems, vol. 42, no. 1, pp.
70–82, 2001.
[10] R. R. Perdue, “Internet site evaluations: The in-
fluence of behavioral experience, existing images,
Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, “Factors Affecting Consumers’ Decision for E-Hotel
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology) Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.
and selected website characteristics,” Journal of
Travel & Tourism Marketing, vol. 11, no. 2-3, pp.
21–38, 2002.
[11] A. Ahmad, O. Rahman, and M. N. Khan, “Con-
sumer’s perception of website service quality: An
empirical study,” Journal of Internet Commerce,
vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 125–141, 2016.
[12] G.-G. Lee and H.-F. Lin, “Customer perceptions
of e-service quality in online shopping,” Interna-
tional Journal of Retail & Distribution Manage-
ment, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 161–176, 2005.
[13] G. J. Udo, “Privacy and security concerns as
major barriers for e-commerce: A survey study,”
Information Management & Computer Security,
vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 165–174, 2001.
[14] C. Ranganathan and E. Grandon, “An ex-
ploratory examination of factors affecting online
sales,” Journal of Computer Information Systems,
vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 87–93, 2002.
[15] R. Law and K. Leung, “Online airfare reserva-
tion services: A study of Asian-based and North
American-based travel web sites,” Information
Technology & Tourism, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 25–33,
2002.
[16] R. Law and T. Chung, “Website performance:
Hong Kong hotels,” Hospitality Review, vol. 21,
no. 1, pp. 33–46, 2003.
[17] H.-W. Kim, Y. Xu, and S. Gupta, “Which is
more important in internet shopping, perceived
price or trust?” Electronic Commerce Research
and Applications, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 241–252,
2012.
[18] S. Steinbrink, “Consumer response to travel site
performance,” 2010. [Online]. Available: https:
//www.phocuswright.com/Free-Travel-Research/
Consumer-Response-to-Travel-Site-Performance
[19] P. O’connor and G. Piccoli, “Marketing hotels us-
ing global distribution systems revisited,” Cornell
Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly,
vol. 44, no. 5-6, pp. 105–114, 2003.
[20] J. N. Liu and E. Y. Zhang, “An investigation
of factors affecting customer selection of online
hotel booking channels,” International Journal
of Hospitality Management, vol. 39, pp. 71–83,
2014.
[21] R. Brunner, S. Emery, and R. Hall, Do you
matter? How great design will make people love
your company. Upper Saddle River: FT Press,
2008.
[22] P. Desmet, “Designing emotions,” phdthesis,
Delft University of Technology, 2002, unpub-
lished.
[23] J. Baek and C. M. Ok, “The power of design:
122
How does design affect consumers’ online hotel
booking?” International Journal of Hospitality
Management, vol. 65, pp. 1–10, 2017.
[24] Y.-H. Chen, I.-C. Hsu, and C.-C. Lin, “Website
attributes that increase consumer purchase inten-
tion: A conjoint analysis,” Journal of Business
Research, vol. 63, no. 9-10, pp. 1007–1014, 2010.
[25] I. Wen, “An empirical study of an online travel
purchase intention model,” Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 18–39,
2012.
[26] D. Cyr, “Modeling web site design across cul-
tures: Relationships to trust, satisfaction, and e-
loyalty,” Journal of Management Information Sys-
tems, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 47–72, 2008.
[27] M. Gregoire, M. Jeong, and H. Oh, An Internet
marketing strategy study for the lodging industry.
Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University, 2001.
[28] L. C. Harris and M. M. Goode, “The four levels
of loyalty and the pivotal role of trust: A study
of online service dynamics,” Journal of Retailing,
vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 139–158, 2004.
[29] S. H. Lee, H. Ro et al., “The impact of online re-
views on attitude changes: The differential effects
of review attributes and consumer knowledge,”
International Journal of Hospitality Management,
vol. 56, pp. 1–9, 2016.
[30] C. M. Cheung and D. R. Thadani, “The impact
of electronic word-of-mouth communication: A
literature analysis and integrative model,” Deci-
sion Support Systems, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 461–470,
2012.
[31] I. Ajzen and M. Fishbein, The handbook of at-
titudes. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Publishers, 2005, ch. The Influence of
Attitudes on Behavior, pp. 173–221.
[32] S. Beldona, A. M. Morrison, and J. O’Leary,
“Online shopping motivations and pleasure travel
products: A correspondence analysis,” Tourism
Management, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 561–570, 2005.
[33] M. A. Bonn, H. L. Furr, and A. M. Susskind, “Us-
ing the internet as a pleasure travel planning tool:
An examination of the sociodemographic and
behavioral characteristics among internet users
and nonusers,” Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 303–317, 1998.
[34] J. F. Hair, R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham, W. C.
Black, and B. J. Babin, Multivariate data analy-
sis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2010.
[35] S. Ellen, Slovin’s formula sampling techniques.
Fort Worth: Dryden Press, 2012.
[36] S. Glen, “Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test
for sampling adequacy,” 2016. [On-
Cite this article as: A. A. Syed and J. S. Suroso, “Factors Affecting Consumers’ Decision for E-Hotel
Booking”, CommIT (Communication & Information Technology) Journal 12(2), 111–123, 2018.

line]. Available: https://www.statisticshowto.

datasciencecentral.com/kaiser-meyer-olkin/
[37] A. Schippers, “A multinomial logistic
regression analysis,” 2009. [Online].
Available: http://www.let.rug.nl/nerbonne/
teach/rema-stats-meth-seminar/presentations/
Multinomial-Log-Regr-Schippers-2009.pdf
[38] M. Khelifa, “One-way ANOVA: SPSS
for windows intermediate & ad-
vanced applied statistics.” [Online]. Avail-
able: https://www.zu.ac.ae/main/files/contents/
research/training/One-WayANOVA.pdf
[39] R. D. J. Crifo, “Levene’s test.” [Online].
Available: http://biotoolbox.binghamton.
edu/Biostatistics/Biostatistics%20Student%
20Tutorials/Levene%20Test/Levene.pdf
[40] C. Kim, R. D. Galliers, N. Shin, J.-H. Ryoo,
and J. Kim, “Factors influencing internet shop-
ping value and customer repurchase intention,”
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,
vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 374–387, 2012.
[41] I. C. C. Chan, L. W. Lam, C. W. Chow, L. H. N.
Fong, and R. Law, “The effect of online re-
views on hotel booking intention: The role of
reader-reviewer similarity,” International Journal
of Hospitality Management, vol. 66, pp. 54–65,
2017.

123